0000065984etr:EntergyLouisianaMemberetr:VariableInterestEntityNotesPayableThreePointNinetyTwoPercentSeriesHDueFebruaryTwoThousandTwentyOneMember2020-12-310000065984etr:FinancialTransmissionRightsFTRsMemberus-gaap:NondesignatedMemberetr:PrepaymentsAndOtherMemberetr:EntergyTexasMember2019-12-31false2023FY0000065984CHXFALSE0000007323FALSE0001348952FALSE0000066901FALSE0000071508FALSE0001427437FALSE0000202584FALSE2028-12-312037-12-312028-12-312042-12-312024-12-312037-12-312024-12-312043-12-312035-12-312037-12-312037-12-312028-12-312040-12-312028-12-312032-12-312042-12-312038-12-312035-12-312038-12-312037-12-312039-12-312029-12-312043-12-312043-12-312043-12-312043-12-312043-12-312043-12-312024-12-312027-12-312024-12-312026-12-312033-12-312027-12-312024-04-302028-06-302028-06-302025-07-312024-6-302028-06-302025-06-302025-06-302025-06-302025-06-30http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PublicUtilitiesPropertyPlantAndEquipmentPlantInServicehttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PublicUtilitiesPropertyPlantAndEquipmentPlantInServicehttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PublicUtilitiesPropertyPlantAndEquipmentPlantInServicehttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PublicUtilitiesPropertyPlantAndEquipmentPlantInServicehttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#DeferredCreditsAndOtherLiabilitieshttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#DeferredCreditsAndOtherLiabilitieshttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#DeferredCreditsAndOtherLiabilitieshttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#DeferredCreditsAndOtherLiabilitieshttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherAssetsNoncurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTaxhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTaxhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherAssetsNoncurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#PrepaidExpenseAndOtherAssetsCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#OtherLiabilitiesCurrenthttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpenseFuelUsedhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPowerhttp://fasb.org/us-gaap/2023#UtilitiesOperatingExpensePurchasedPower
Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 20202023
OR

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13
OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from ____________ to ____________


Commission
File Number
Registrant, State of Incorporation or Organization, Address of Principal Executive Offices, Telephone Number, and IRS Employer Identification No.

Commission
File Number
Registrant, State of Incorporation or Organization, Address of Principal Executive Offices, Telephone Number, and IRS Employer Identification No.
1-11299ENTERGY CORPORATION1-35747ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC
(a Delaware corporation)
639 Loyola Avenue
New Orleans, Louisiana 70113
Telephone (504) 576-4000
(a Texas limited liability company)
1600 Perdido Street
New Orleans, Louisiana 70112
Telephone (504) 670-3700670-3702
72-122975282-2212934
1-10764ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC1-34360ENTERGY TEXAS, INC.
(a Texas limited liability company)
425 West Capitol Avenue
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Telephone (501) 377-4000
(a Texas corporation)
10055 Grogans Mill Road2107 Research Forest Drive
The Woodlands, Texas 77380
Telephone (409) 981-2000
83-191866861-1435798
1-32718ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC1-09067SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
(a Texas limited liability company)
4809 Jefferson Highway
Jefferson, Louisiana 70121
Telephone (504) 576-4000
(an Arkansas corporation)
1340 Echelon Parkway
Jackson, Mississippi 39213
Telephone (601) 368-5000
47-446964672-0752777
1-31508ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
(a Texas limited liability company)
308 East Pearl Street
Jackson, Mississippi 39201
Telephone (601) 368-5000
83-1950019



Table of Contents



Table of Contents
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

RegistrantTitle of ClassTrading
Symbol
Name of Each Exchange
on Which Registered
Entergy CorporationCommon Stock, $0.01 Par ValueETRNew York Stock Exchange
Common Stock, $0.01 Par ValueETRNYSE Chicago, Inc.
   
Entergy Arkansas, LLCMortgage Bonds, 4.875% Series due September 2066EAINew York Stock Exchange
   
Entergy Louisiana, LLCMortgage Bonds, 4.875% Series due September 2066ELCNew York Stock Exchange
   
Entergy Mississippi, LLCMortgage Bonds, 4.90% Series due October 2066EMPNew York Stock Exchange
   
Entergy New Orleans, LLCMortgage Bonds, 5.0% Series due December 2052ENJNew York Stock Exchange
Mortgage Bonds, 5.50% Series due April 2066ENONew York Stock Exchange
   
Entergy Texas, Inc.5.375% Series A Preferred Stock, Cumulative, No Par Value (Liquidation Value $25 Per Share)ETI/PRNew York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
RegistrantTitle of Class
Entergy Texas, Inc.Common Stock, no par value



Table of Contents
Indicate by check mark if the registrants are well-known seasoned issuers, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
 YesNo
Entergy Corporationü 
Entergy Arkansas, LLCü
Entergy Louisiana, LLCü 
Entergy Mississippi, LLCü
Entergy New Orleans, LLC ü
Entergy Texas, Inc.
ü
System Energy Resources, Inc. ü

Indicate by check mark if the registrants are not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
 YesNo
Entergy Corporation ü
Entergy Arkansas, LLC ü
Entergy Louisiana, LLC ü
Entergy Mississippi, LLC ü
Entergy New Orleans, LLC ü
Entergy Texas, Inc. ü
System Energy Resources, Inc. ü

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes þ No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants have submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to submit such files).  Yes þ No o

Indicate by check mark whether each registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Act.
Large Accelerated FilerAccelerated
Filer
Non-accelerated FilerSmaller
reporting
company
Emerging
growth
company
Entergy Corporationü
Entergy Arkansas, LLCü
Entergy Louisiana, LLCü
Entergy Mississippi, LLCü
Entergy New Orleans, LLCü
Entergy Texas, Inc.ü
System Energy Resources, Inc.ü



Table of Contents
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrants have elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.

Entergy Corporationü
Entergy Arkansas, LLC0
Entergy Louisiana, LLC0
Entergy Mississippi, LLC0
Entergy New Orleans, LLC0
Entergy Texas, Inc.0
System Energy Resources, Inc.0

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrants included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements.

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrants’ executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to § 240.10D-1(b).

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are shell companies (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.)  Yes  No þ

Common Stock OutstandingOutstanding at January 29, 202131, 2024
Entergy Corporation($0.01 par value)200,479,995213,237,552

System Energy Resources, Inc. meets the requirements set forth in General Instruction I(1) of Form 10-K and is therefore filing this Form 10-K with reduced disclosure as allowed in General Instruction I(2).  System Energy Resources, Inc. is reducing its disclosure by not including Part III, Items 10 through 13 in its Form 10-K.

The aggregate market value of Entergy Corporation Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value, held by non-affiliates as of the end of the second quarter of 20202023 was $18.8$20.6 billion based on the reported last sale price of $93.81$97.37 per share for such stock on the New York Stock Exchange on June 30, 2020.2023.  Entergy Corporation is the sole holder of the common stock of Entergy Texas, Inc. and System Energy Resources, Inc.  Entergy Corporation is the direct and indirect holder of the common membership interests of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, which is the sole holder of the common membership interests of Entergy Arkansas, LLC, Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, LLC, and Entergy New Orleans, LLC.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Proxy Statement of Entergy Corporation to be filed in connection with its Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be held May 7, 2021,3, 2024, are incorporated by reference into Part III hereof.


Table of Contents





























(Page left blank intentionally)



Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 SEC Form 10-K Reference NumberPage Number
   
 
 
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries  
Part II. Item 7.
Part II. Item 6.
 
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Notes to Financial StatementsPart II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Note 6. Preferred Equity and Noncontrolling Interests
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Entergy’s BusinessPart I. Item 1.
Part I. Item 1.
Part I. Item 1.
Part I. Item 1.
 
 
 
Part I. Item 1A.
Part I. Item 1B.
i

Table of Contents
Part I. Item 1A.1C.
Unresolved Staff CommentsPart I. Item 1B.None
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries  
Part II. Item 7.
 
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 6.
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries  
Part II. Item 7.
 
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 6.
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries  
Part II. Item 7.
 
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 6.
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries  
Part II. Item 7.
 
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 6.
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries  
Part II. Item 7.
 
Part II. Item 8.
ii

Table of Contents
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
ii

Table of Contents
Part II. Item 6.
System Energy Resources, Inc.  
Part II. Item 7.
 
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 6.
Part I. Item 2.
Part I. Item 3.
Part I. Item 4.
Part I. and Part III. Item 10.
Part II. Item 5.
Part II. Item 6.
Part II. Item 7.
Part II. Item 7A.
Part II. Item 8.
Part II. Item 9.
Part II. Item 9A.
Part II. Item 9A.
Part II. Item 9B.
Part II. Item 9C.
Part III. Item 10.
Part III. Item 11.
Part III. Item 12.
Part III. Item 13.
Part III. Item 14.
Part IV. Item 15.
Part IV. Item 16.
 
 
 
 
 

This combined Form 10-K is separately filed by Entergy Corporation and its six “RegistrantRegistrant Subsidiaries: Entergy Arkansas, LLC, Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, LLC, Entergy New Orleans, LLC, Entergy Texas, Inc., and System Energy Resources, Inc.  Information contained herein relating to any individual company is filed by such company on its own behalf.  Each company makes representations only as to itself and makes no other representations whatsoever as to any other company.

The report should be read in its entirety as it pertains to each respective reporting company.  No one section of the report deals with all aspects of the subject matter.  Separate Item 6, 7 and 8 sections are
iii

Table of Contents
provided for each reporting company, except for the Notes to the financial statements.  The Notes to the financial statements for all of the reporting companies are combined.  All Items other than 6, 7 and 8 are combined for the reporting companies.
iviii

Table of Contents
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION

In this combined report and from time to time, Entergy Corporation and the Registrant Subsidiaries each makes statements as a registrant concerning its expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, projections, strategies, and future events or performance.  Such statements are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  Words such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “project,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “goal,” “commitment,” “expect,” “estimate,” “continue,” “potential,” “plan,” “predict,” “forecast,” and other similar words or expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements but are not the only means to identify these statements.  Although each of these registrants believes that these forward-looking statements and the underlying assumptions are reasonable, it cannot provide assurance that they will prove correct.  Any forward-looking statement is based on information current as of the date of this combined report and speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made.  Except to the extent required by the federal securities laws, these registrants undertakeeach registrant undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

Forward-looking statements involve a number of risks and uncertainties.  There are factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements, including (a) those factors discussed or incorporated by reference in Item 1A. Risk Factors, (b) those factors discussed or incorporated by reference in Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis, and (c) the following factors (in addition to others described elsewhere in this combined report and in subsequent securities filings):

resolution of pending and future rate cases and related litigation, formula rate proceedings and related negotiations, including various performance-based rate discussions, Entergy’s utility supply plan, and recovery of fuel and purchased power costs, as well as delays in cost recovery resulting from these proceedings;
continuing long-term risks and uncertainties associated with the termination of the System Agreement in 2016, including the potential absence of federal authority to resolve certain issues among the Utility operating companies and their retail regulators;
regulatory and operating challenges and uncertainties and economic risks associated with the Utility operating companies’ participation in MISO, including the benefits of continued MISO participation, the effect of current or projected MISO market rules, market design and market and system conditions in the MISO markets, the absence of a minimum capacity obligation for load serving entities in MISO and the consequent ability of some load serving entities to “free ride” on the energy market without paying appropriate compensation for the capacity needed to produce that energy, the allocation of MISO system transmission upgrade costs, delays in developing or interconnecting new generation or other resources or other adverse effects arising from the volume of requests in the MISO transmission interconnection queue, the MISO-wide base rate of return on equity allowed or any MISO-related charges and credits required by the FERC, and the effect of planning decisions that MISO makes with respect to future transmission investments by the Utility operating companies;
changes in utility regulation, including, with respect to retail and wholesale competition, the ability to recover net utility assets and other potential stranded costs, and the application of more stringent return on equity criteria, transmission reliability requirements, or market power criteria by the FERC or the U.S. Department of Justice;
changes in the regulation or regulatory oversight of Entergy’s owned or operated nuclear generating facilities, and nuclear materials and fuel, including with respect to the planned or actual shutdown and sale of each of the nuclear generating facilities owned or operated by Entergy Wholesale Commodities, and the effects of new or existing safety or environmental concerns regarding nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel;
resolution of pending or future applications, and related regulatory proceedings and litigation, for license modifications or other authorizations required of nuclear generating facilities and the effect of public and political opposition on these applications, regulatory proceedings, and litigation;
the performance of and deliverability of power from Entergy’s generation resources, including the capacity factors at Entergy’s nuclear generating facilities;
increases in costs and capital expenditures that could result from changing regulatory requirements, changing economic conditions, and emerging operating and industry issues, and the risks related to recovery of these costs and capital expenditures from Entergy’s customers (especially in an increasing cost environment);
the commitment of substantial human and capital resources required for the safe and reliable operation and maintenance of Entergy’s utility system, including its nuclear generating facilities;
iv

Table of Contents
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION (Continued)

Entergy’s ability to develop and execute on a point of view regarding future prices of electricity, natural gas, and other energy-related commodities;
v

Table of Contents
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION (Continued)

prices for power generated by Entergy’s merchant generating facilities and the ability to hedge, meet credit support requirements for hedges, sell power forward or otherwise reduce the market price risk associated with those facilities, including the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants, especially in light of the planned shutdown and sale of each of these nuclear plants;
the prices and availability of fuel and power Entergy must purchase for its Utility customers, particularly given the recent and ongoing significant growth in liquified natural gas exports and the associated significantly increased demand for natural gas and resulting increase in natural gas prices, and Entergy’s ability to meet credit support requirements for fuel and power supply contracts;
volatility and changes in markets for electricity, natural gas, uranium, emissions allowances, and other energy-related commodities, and the effect of those changes on Entergy and its customers;
changes in law resulting from federal or state energy legislation or legislation subjecting energy derivatives used in hedging and risk management transactions to governmental regulation;
changes in environmental laws and regulations, agency positions, or associated litigation, including requirements for reduced emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, greenhouse gases, mercury, particulate matter and other regulated air emissions, heat and other regulated discharges to water, requirements for waste management and disposal, and for the remediation of contaminated sites, wetlands protection and permitting, and reporting, and changes in costs of compliance with environmental laws and regulations;
changes in laws and regulations, agency positions, or associated litigation related to protected species and associated critical habitat designations;
the effects of changes in federal, state, or local laws and regulations, and other governmental actions or policies, including changes in monetary, fiscal, tax, environmental, trade/tariff, domestic purchase requirements, or energy policies;policies and related laws, regulations, and other governmental actions, including as a result of prolonged litigation over proposed legislation or regulatory actions;
the effects of full or partial shutdowns of the federal government or delays in obtaining government or regulatory actions or decisions;
uncertainty regarding the establishment of interim or permanent sites for spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste storage and disposal and the level of spent fuel and nuclear waste disposal fees charged by the U.S. government or other providers related to such sites;
variations in weather and the occurrence of hurricanes and other storms and disasters, including uncertainties associated with efforts to remediate the effects of hurricanes, (including from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta), ice storms, wildfires, or other weather events and the recovery of costs associated with restoration, including accessingthe ability to access funded storm reserves, federal and local cost recovery mechanisms, securitization, and insurance, as well as any related unplanned outages;
effects of climate change, including the potential for increases in extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, drought or wildfires, and sea levels or coastal land and wetland loss;
the risk that an incident at any nuclear generation facility in the U.S. could lead to the assessment of significant retrospective assessments and/or retrospective insurance premiums as a result of Entergy’s participation in a secondary financial protection system and a utility industry mutual insurance company, and industry self-insurance programs;
effects of climate change, including the potential for increases in extreme weather events and sea levels or coastal land and wetland loss;company;
changes in the quality and availability of water supplies and the related regulation of water use and diversion;
Entergy’s ability to manage its capital projects, including completion ofby completing projects timely and within budget, and to obtain the anticipated performance or other benefits of such capital projects, and to manage its capital and operation and maintenance costs;
the effects of supply chain disruptions, including those driven by geopolitical developments or trade-related governmental actions, on Entergy’s ability to complete its capital projects in a timely and cost-effective manner;
Entergy’s ability to purchase and sell assets at attractive prices and on other attractive terms;
the economic climate, and particularly economic conditions in Entergy’s Utility service area and the northern United States and events and circumstances that could influence economic conditions in those areas, including power prices and inflation, and the risk that anticipated load growth may not materialize;
changes to federal income tax laws, regulations, and regulations,interpretive guidance, including the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and the continued impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, and itsany related intended andor unintended consequences on financial results and future cash flows;
the effects of Entergy’s strategies to reduce tax payments;
v

Table of Contents
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION (Continued)

the effect of increased interest rates and other changes in the financial markets and regulatory requirements for the issuance of securities, particularly as they affect access to and cost of capital and Entergy’s ability to refinance existing securities execute share repurchase programs, and fund investments and acquisitions;

vi

Table of Contents
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION (Concluded)

actions of rating agencies, including changes in the ratings of debt and preferred stock, changes in general corporate ratings, and changes in the rating agencies’ ratings criteria;
changes in inflation and interest rates;rates and the impacts of inflation or a recession on our customers;
the effects of litigation, including the outcome and resolution of the proceedings involving System Energy currently before the FERC and any appeals of FERC decisions in those proceedings;
the effects of government investigations, proceedings, or proceedings;audits;
changes in technology, including (i) Entergy’s ability to effectively assess, implement, and manage new or emerging technologies, including its ability to maintain and protect personally identifiable information while doing so, (ii) the emergence of artificial intelligence (including machine learning), which may present ethical, security, legal, operational, or regulatory challenges, (iii) the impact of changes relating to new, developing, or alternative sources of generation such as distributed energy and energy storage, renewable energy, energy efficiency, demand side management, and other measures that reduce load and government policies incentivizing development or utilization of the foregoing, and (iii)(iv) competition from other companies offering products and services to Entergy’s customers based on new or emerging technologies or alternative sources of generation;
Entergy’s ability to effectively formulate and implement plans to increase its carbon-free energy capacity and to reduce its carbon emission rate and aggregate carbon emissions, including its commitment to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and the related increasing investment in renewable power generation sources, and the potential impact on its business and financial condition of attempting to achieve such objectives;
the effects, including increased security costs, of threatened or actual terrorism, cyber-attackscyber attacks or data security breaches, physical attacks on or other interference with facilities or infrastructure, natural or man-made electromagnetic pulses that affect transmission or generation infrastructure, accidents, and war or a catastrophic event such as a nuclear accident or a natural gas pipeline explosion;
impacts of perceived or actual cybersecurity or data security threats or events on Entergy and its subsidiaries, its vendors, suppliers or other third parties interconnected through the grid, which could, among other things, result in disruptions to its operations, including but not limited to, the loss of operational control, temporary or extended outages, or loss of data, including but not limited to, sensitive customer, employee, financial or operations data;
the effects of a catastrophe, pandemic (or other health-related event), or a global event or pandemic,geopolitical event such as the COVID-19 global pandemic,military activities between Russia and Ukraine, or Israel and Hamas, including resultant economic and societal disruptions; fuel procurement disruptions; volatility in the capital markets (and any related increased cost of capital or any inability to access the capital markets or draw on available bank credit facilities); reduced demand for electricity, particularly from commercial and industrial customers; increased or unrecoverable costs; supply chain, vendor, and contractor disruptions;disruptions, including as a result of trade-related sanctions; delays in completion of capital or other construction projects, maintenance, and other operations activities, including prolonged or delayed outages; impacts to Entergy’s workforce availability, health, or safety; increased cybersecurity risks as a result of many employees telecommuting; increased late or uncollectible customer payments; regulatory delays; executive orders affecting, or increased regulation of, Entergy’s business; changes in credit ratings or outlooks as a result of any of the foregoing; or other adverse impacts on Entergy’s ability to execute on its business strategies and initiatives or, more generally, on Entergy’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity;
Entergy’s ability to attract and retain talented management, directors, and employees with specialized skills;
Entergy’s ability to attract, retain, and manage an appropriately qualified workforce;
changes in accounting standards and corporate governance;governance best practices;
declines in the market prices of marketable securities and resulting funding requirements and the effects on benefits costs for Entergy’s defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits plans;

vi

Table of Contents
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION (Concluded)

future wage and employee benefitbenefits costs, including changes in discount rates and returns on benefit plan assets;
changes in decommissioning trust fund values or earnings or in the timing of, requirements for, or cost to decommission Entergy’s nuclear plant sites and the implementation of decommissioning of such sites following shutdown;
the decision to cease merchant power generation at all Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants by mid-2022, including the implementation of the planned shutdowns and sales of Indian Point 2, Indian Point 3, and Palisades;
the effectiveness of Entergy’s risk management policies and procedures and the ability and willingness of its counterparties to satisfy their financial and performance commitments;
the potential for the factors listed herein to lead to the impairment of long-lived assets; and
Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to successfully execute on their business strategies, including their ability to complete strategic transactions that Entergythey may undertake.
vii

Table of Contents
DEFINITIONS

Certain abbreviations or acronyms used in the text and notes are defined below:
Abbreviation or AcronymTerm
  
AFUDCAllowance for Funds Used During Construction
ALJAdministrative Law Judge
ANO 1 and 2Units 1 and 2 of Arkansas Nuclear One (nuclear), owned by Entergy Arkansas
APSCArkansas Public Service Commission
ASUAccounting Standards Update issued by the FASB
BoardBoard of Directors of Entergy Corporation
CajunCajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
capacity factorActual plant output divided by maximum potential plant output for the period
City CouncilCouncil of the City of New Orleans, Louisiana
COVID-19The novel coronavirus disease declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in March 2020
D.C. CircuitU.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
DOEUnited States Department of Energy
EntergyEntergy Corporation and its direct and indirect subsidiaries
Entergy CorporationEntergy Corporation, a Delaware corporation
Entergy Gulf States, Inc.Predecessor company for financial reporting purposes to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana that included the assets and business operations of both Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas
Entergy Gulf States LouisianaEntergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C., a Louisiana limited liability company formally created as part of the jurisdictional separation of Entergy Gulf States, Inc. and the successor company to Entergy Gulf States, Inc. for financial reporting purposes.  The term is also used to refer to the Louisiana jurisdictional business of Entergy Gulf States, Inc., as the context requires. Effective October 1, 2015, the business of Entergy Gulf States Louisiana was combined with Entergy Louisiana.
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana, LLC, a Texas limited liability company formally created as part of the combination of Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and the company formerly known as Entergy Louisiana, LLC (Old Entergy Louisiana) into a single public utility company and the successor to Old Entergy Louisiana for financial reporting purposes.
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas, Inc., a Texas corporation formally created as part of the jurisdictional separation of Entergy Gulf States, Inc.  The term is also used to refer to the Texas jurisdictional business of Entergy Gulf States, Inc., as the context requires.
Entergy Wholesale CommoditiesPrior to January 1, 2023, one of Entergy’s reportable business segments consisting of non-utility business segmentactivities primarily comprised of the ownership, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, the ownership of interests in non-nuclear power plants, and the sale of the electric power produced by its operating power plants to wholesale customerscustomers.
EPAUnited States Environmental Protection Agency
ERCOTElectric Reliability Council of Texas
FASBFinancial Accounting Standards Board
FERCFederal Energy Regulatory Commission
FitzPatrickJames A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (nuclear), previously owned by an Entergy subsidiary in the Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesas part of Entergy’s non-utility business, segment, which was sold in March 2017
GAAPGenerally Accepted Accounting Principles
Grand GulfUnit No. 1 of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (nuclear), 90% owned or leased by System Energy
viii

Table of Contents
DEFINITIONS (Continued)

Abbreviation or AcronymTerm
GWhGigawatt-hour(s), which equals one million kilowatt-hours
HLBVHypothetical liquidation at book value
IndependenceIndependence Steam Electric Station (coal), owned 16% by Entergy Arkansas, 25% by Entergy Mississippi, and 7% by Entergy Power, LLC
Indian Point 2Unit 2 of Indian Point Energy Center (nuclear), previously owned by an Entergy subsidiary in the Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesas part of Entergy’s non-utility business, segment, which ceased power production in April 2020 and was sold in May 2021
Indian Point 3Unit 3 of Indian Point Energy Center (nuclear), previously owned by an Entergy subsidiaryas part of Entergy’s non-utility business, which ceased power production in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business segmentApril 2021 and was sold in May 2021
IRSInternal Revenue Service
ISOIndependent System Operator
kVKilovolt
kWKilowatt, which equals one thousand watts
kWhKilowatt-hour(s)
LDEQLouisiana Department of Environmental Quality
LPSCLouisiana Public Service Commission
LURCLouisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation
Mcf1,000 cubic feet of gas
MISOMidcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., a regional transmission organization
MMBtuOne million British Thermal Units
MPSCMississippi Public Service Commission
MWMegawatt(s), which equals one thousand kilowatts
MWhMegawatt-hour(s)
Nelson Unit 6Unit No. 6 (coal) of the Nelson Steam Electric Generating Station, 70% of which is co-owned by Entergy Louisiana (57.5%) and Entergy Texas (42.5%) and 10.9% of which is owned by an Entergy subsidiary in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business segmentEAM Nelson Holding, LLC
Net debt to net capital ratioGross debt less cash and cash equivalents divided by total capitalization less cash and cash equivalents,
Net MW in operationInstalled capacity owned and operated which is a non-GAAP measure
NRCNuclear Regulatory Commission
NYPANew York Power Authority
PalisadesPalisades Nuclear Plant (nuclear), previously owned by an Entergy subsidiaryas part of Entergy’s non-utility business, which ceased power production in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business segmentMay 2022 and was sold in June 2022
Parent & OtherThe portions of Entergy not included in the Utility or Entergy Wholesale Commodities segments,segment, primarily consisting of the activities of the parent company, Entergy Corporation, and other business activity, including Entergy’s non-utility operations business which owns interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers and also provides decommissioning services to nuclear power plants owned by non-affiliated entities in the United States
PilgrimPilgrim Nuclear Power Station (nuclear), previously owned by an Entergy subsidiary in the Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesas part of Entergy’s non-utility business, segment, which ceased power production in May 2019 and was sold in August 2019
PPAPurchased power agreement or power purchase agreement
PRPPotentially responsible party (a person or entity that may be responsible for remediation of environmental contamination)
PUCTPublic Utility Commission of Texas

ix

Table of Contents
DEFINITIONS (Concluded)

Abbreviation or AcronymTerm
Registrant SubsidiariesEntergy Arkansas, LLC, Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, LLC, Entergy New Orleans, LLC, Entergy Texas, Inc., and System Energy Resources, Inc.
River BendRiver Bend Station (nuclear), owned by Entergy Louisiana
RTORegional transmission organization
SECSecurities and Exchange Commission
System AgreementAgreement, effective January 1, 1983, as modified, among the Utility operating companies relating to the sharing of generating capacity and other power resources. The agreement terminated effective August 2016.
System EnergySystem Energy Resources, Inc.
TWhTerawatt-hour(s), which equals one billion kilowatt-hours
Unit Power Sales AgreementAgreement, dated as of June 10, 1982, as amended and approved by the FERC, among Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and System Energy, relating to the sale of capacity and energy from System Energy’s share of Grand Gulf
UtilityEntergy’s businessreportable segment that generates, transmits, distributes, and sells electric power, with a small amount of natural gas distribution in portions of Louisiana
Utility operating companiesEntergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas
Vermont YankeeVermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (nuclear), previously owned by an Entergy subsidiary in the Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesas part of Entergy’s non-utility business, segment, which ceased power production in December 2014 and was disposed of in January 2019
Waterford 3Unit No. 3 (nuclear) of the Waterford Steam Electric Station, owned by Entergy Louisiana
weather-adjusted usageElectric usage excluding the effects of deviations from normal weather
White BluffWhite Bluff Steam Electric Generating Station, 57% owned by Entergy Arkansas


x

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Entergy operates primarily through two business segments:a single reportable segment, Utility. The Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities.

The Utility business segment includes the generation, transmission, distribution, and sale of electric power in portions of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana, including the City of New Orleans; and operation of a small natural gas distribution business.
The Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesbusiness segment includes the ownership, operation, and decommissioningin portions of nuclear power plants located in the northern United States and the sale of the electric power produced by its operating plants to wholesale customers. Entergy Wholesale Commodities also provides services to other nuclear power plant owners and owns interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers.Louisiana. See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power BusinessPlanned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” below for discussion of the operation and planned shutdown and sale of each of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants.New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana gas distribution businesses.

Following areEntergy completed its multi-year strategy to exit the percentagesmerchant nuclear power business in 2022 and upon completion of all transition activities, effective January 1, 2023, Entergy Wholesale Commodities is no longer a reportable segment. Remaining business activity previously reported under Entergy Wholesale Commodities is now included under Parent & Other. Historical segment financial information presented herein has been restated for 2022 and 2021 to reflect the change in reportable segments. The change in reportable segments had no effect on Entergy’s consolidated revenues generated by its operating segments andfinancial statements or historical segment financial information for the percentage of total assets held by them. Net income or loss generated by the operating segments is discussed in the sections that follow.
 % of Revenue% of Total Assets
Segment202020192018202020192018
Utility91 88 87 96 96 93 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities12 13 11 
Parent & Other (a)— — — (3)(4)(4)

Utility reportable segment. See Note 13 to the financial statements for furtherdiscussion of and financial information regarding Entergy’s business segments.segment.

Results of Operations

2023 Compared to 2022

Following are income statement variances for Utility, Parent & Other, and Entergy comparing 2023 to 2022 showing how much the line item increased or (decreased) in comparison to the prior period.
 UtilityParent & Other (a)Entergy
 (In Thousands)
2022 Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Entergy Corporation$1,406,605 ($303,439)$1,103,166 
Operating revenues(1,397,860)(218,965)(1,616,825)
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale(878,601)(52,670)(931,271)
Purchased power(573,937)(19,571)(593,508)
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net(807,872)— (807,872)
Other operation and maintenance(61,702)(78,544)(140,246)
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits)79,962 126,181 206,143 
Taxes other than income taxes35,951 (13,915)22,036 
Depreciation and amortization92,806 (8,826)83,980 
Other income (deductions)145,999 (5,415)140,584 
Interest expense66,468 27,701 94,169 
Other expenses23,324 (46,611)(23,287)
Income taxes(340,584)(310,973)(651,557)
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interests11,802 — 11,802 
2023 Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Entergy Corporation$2,507,127 ($150,591)$2,356,536 

(a)Parent & Other includes eliminations, which are primarily intersegment activity.

The COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic and the measures to control it have adversely affected economic activity and conditions worldwide and have affected the demand for the products and services of many businesses in Entergy’s service area. Entergy experienced a decline in sales volume in 2020 compared to 2019 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in the commercial and industrial sectors. In addition, Entergy experienced negative changes to its customers’ payment patterns and its operating cash flow activity in 2020 compared to 2019 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These negative changes include an increase in uncollectible accounts.

Entergy provides critical services to its customers and has implemented its comprehensive incident response plan, which contemplates major events such as storms or pandemics. Entergy’s focus during the COVID-19 pandemic has been on the safety and wellness of its employees; providing safe, reliable service for its customers; analyzing and addressing the financial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic; and continuing its plans for the future. Entergy implemented precautionary measures for safety on and off the job for employees and contractors working at plants and in the field and implemented telecommuting practices for employees who can work from home. Entergy temporarily suspended service disconnections for customers and is working with regulators to address routine and non-routine matters and allow continuation of capital spending plans. The Utility operating companies have received accounting orders to defer costs associated with COVID-19. To date, Entergy has not had material effects to its major projects or capital spending plans. Entergy is working with suppliers and contractors for continued availability of resources, equipment, and supplies to keep operations and major projects going forward and on schedule. Entergy implemented expense-related spending reductions in 2020, which did not affect safety or service reliability, in order to offset some of the financial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
1

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Although Entergy has taken these actions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, uncertainty exists regarding the full depth and length of the effects of COVID-19 on Entergy’s sales volume, revenue, collections and cash flows, expenses, liquidity, and capital needs. Entergy will continue to monitor actively the COVID-19 pandemic and related developments affecting its workforce, customers, suppliers, operations, and financial condition.

Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta

In August and October 2020, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to portions of the Utility’s service territories in Louisiana, including New Orleans, Texas, and to a lesser extent, in Arkansas and Mississippi. The storms resulted in widespread power outages, significant damage to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the outages. Additionally, as a result of Hurricane Laura’s extensive damage to the grid infrastructure serving the impacted area, large portions of the underlying transmission system required nearly a complete rebuild. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of the electrical system damaged by Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta are currently estimated to be approximately $2.4 billion, including approximately $1.98 billion in capital costs and approximately $420 million in non-capital costs. The majority of the costs were incurred by Entergy Louisiana, with a substantial portion also incurred by Entergy Texas. The estimate includes all costs to restore power and repair or replace the damages from the hurricanes, except for the cost to repair or replace damage incurred to an Entergy Louisiana transmission line in southeast Louisiana, and the amount of that cost could be significant. The restoration plan for this transmission line and the related cost estimate is still being evaluated. Also, Utility revenues were adversely affected in 2020, primarily due to power outages resulting from the hurricanes.

Entergy recorded accounts payable and corresponding construction work in progress and regulatory assets for the estimated costs incurred that were necessary to return customers to service. Entergy recorded the regulatory assets in accordance with its accounting policies and based on the historic treatment of such costs in its service area because management believes that recovery through some form of regulatory mechanism is probable. There are well-established mechanisms and precedent for addressing these catastrophic events and providing for recovery of prudently incurred storm costs in accordance with applicable regulatory and legal principles. Because Entergy has not gone through the regulatory process regarding these storm costs, there is an element of risk, and Entergy is unable to predict with certainty the degree of success it may have in its recovery initiatives, the amount of restoration costs that it may ultimately recover, or the timing of such recovery.

The Utility operating companies are considering all available avenues to recover storm-related costs from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta, including accessing funded storm reserve escrows and securitization. In November 2020, Entergy Louisiana drew $257 million from its funded storm reserves. Each Utility operating company is responsible for its restoration cost obligations and for recovering or financing its storm-related costs. Storm cost recovery or financing will be subject to review by applicable regulatory authorities.

In October 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed an application at the LPSC seeking approval of certain ratemaking adjustments to facilitate issuance of shorter-term bonds to provide interim financing for restoration costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta. Subsequently, Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff filed a joint motion seeking approval to exclude from the derivation of Entergy Louisiana’s capital structure and cost rate of debt for ratemaking purposes, including the allowance for funds used during construction, shorter-term debt up to $1.1 billion issued by Entergy Louisiana to fund costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta on an interim basis. In November 2020 the LPSC issued an order approving the joint motion, and Entergy Louisiana issued $1.1 billion of 0.62% Series mortgage bonds due November 2023.

In December 2020, Entergy Louisiana provided the LPSC with notification that it intends to initiate a storm cost recovery proceeding in the near future, which will permit the LPSC to retain any outside consultants and counsel needed to review the storm cost recovery application. In February 2021 the LPSC voted to retain outside
2

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
counsel and consultants to assist in the review of Entergy Louisiana’s upcoming storm cost recovery application, which is expected to be filed in March 2021.

February 2021 Winter Storms

In February 2021, the United States experienced winter storms and extreme cold temperatures, including in Entergy’s service area. The impact of the storms and the extreme cold temperatures affected Entergy’s operational assets and the availability of generation across the area. In order to balance the system, MISO directed Entergy to conduct rolling power outages. Entergy’s system is now back to normal operations. The severe weather event also affected the market for natural gas due to the severe cold’s effects on the gas supply system and increased demand for gas to support electricity loads. Entergy’s preliminary estimate for the cost of mobilizing crews and restoring power is approximately $125 million to $140 million, primarily at Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Mississippi. Natural gas purchases for February 1st through 25th, 2021, for Entergy were approximately $510 million, including $105 million for Entergy Arkansas, $190 million for Entergy Louisiana, $45 million for Entergy Mississippi, $15 million for Entergy New Orleans, and $155 million for Entergy Texas. This compares to natural gas purchases for February 2020 for Entergy of $80 million, including $10 million for Entergy Arkansas, $39 million for Entergy Louisiana, $14 million for Entergy Mississippi, $7 million for Entergy New Orleans, and $10 million for Entergy Texas.

The Utility operating companies each have fuel recovery mechanisms in place to recover their natural gas costs. With the potential effect of the higher natural gas costs on customers, the Utility operating companies plan to work with their retail regulators to recover these costs in a manner that mitigates the effects on customer bills. The Utility operating companies also expect to work with their regulators as the regulators review other effects of the winter storm.

3

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Results of Operations

2020 Compared to 2019

Following are income statement variances for Utility, Entergy Wholesale Commodities, Parent & Other, and Entergy comparing 2020 to 2019 showing how much the line item increased or (decreased) in comparison to the prior period.
 UtilityEntergy Wholesale CommoditiesParent & Other (a)Entergy
 (In Thousands)
2019 Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Entergy Corporation$1,410,813 $146,682 ($316,269)$1,241,226 
Operating revenues(413,271)(351,850)84 (765,037)
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale(434,394)(30,900)27 (465,267)
Purchased power(297,505)8,940 (27)(288,592)
Other regulatory charges (credits)40,829 — — 40,829 
Other operation and maintenance(84,548)(177,945)(7,262)(269,755)
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges— (263,404)— (263,404)
Taxes other than income taxes15,743 (6,987)339 9,095 
Depreciation and amortization179,298 (46,119)(109)133,070 
Other income(23,947)(151,832)37,047 (138,732)
Interest expense59,456 (7,018)(9,200)43,238 
Other expenses(4,863)(34,848)— (39,711)
Income taxes(301,945)266,232 84,032 48,319 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries1,301 — — 1,301 
2020 Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Entergy Corporation$1,800,223 ($64,951)($346,938)$1,388,334 

(a)Parent & Other includes eliminations, which are primarily intersegment activity.

Refer to “SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON OF ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES” which accompanies Entergy Corporation’s financial statements in this report for further information with respect to operating statistics.

Results of operations for 2020 include resolution of the 2014-2015 IRS audit, which resulted2023 include: (1) a $568 million reduction, recorded at Utility, and a $275 million reduction, recorded at Parent & Other, in a reduction in deferred income tax expense of $230 million that includes a $396 million reduction in deferred income tax expense at Utility related to the basis of assets contributed in the 2015 Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana business combination, including the recognition of previously uncertain tax positions, and deferred income tax expense of $105 million at Entergy Wholesale Commodities and $61 million at Parent and Other resulting from the revaluation of net operating losses as a result of the releaseresolution of the reserves.2016-2018 IRS audit, partially offset by $98 million ($72 million net-of-tax) of regulatory charges, recorded at Utility, to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers by Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit; (2) the reversal of a $106 million regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, recorded at Utility, as part of the settlement of Entergy Louisiana’s test year 2017 formula rate plan filing; (3) a $129 million reduction in income tax expense as a result of the Hurricane Ida securitization in March 2023, which also resulted in a $103 million ($76 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge, recorded at Utility, to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceeding; and (4) write-offs of $78 million ($59 million net-of-tax), recorded at Utility, as a result of Entergy Arkansas’s approved motion to forgo recovery of identified costs resulting from the 2013 ANO stator incident. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the IRS audit resolution.

Results of operations for 2019 include: 1) a loss of $190 million ($156 million net-of-tax) as a resultresolution of the sale of2016-2018 IRS audit. See Note 2 to the Pilgrim plant in August 2019; 2) a $156 million reduction in income tax expense recognized by Entergy Wholesale Commodities as a result of an internal restructuring; and 3) impairment charges of $100 million ($79 million net-of-tax) due to costs being charged directly to expense as incurred as a result of the impaired valuefinancial statements for further discussion of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants’ long-lived assets due to the significantly reduced remaining
4

Louisiana formula rate plan global settlement. Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
estimated operating lives associated with management’s strategy to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant power business. See NoteNotes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the internal restructuring. Entergy Louisiana March 2023 storm cost securitization. See Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” below for discussion of management’s strategy to shut down and sell all of the remaining plants in Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant nuclear fleet and see Note 148 to the financial statements for further discussion of the impairmentANO stator incident and the approved motion to forgo recovery.

Results of operations for 2022 include: (1) a regulatory charge of $551 million ($413 million net-of-tax), recorded at Utility, as a result of System Energy’s partial settlement agreement and offer of settlement related to pending proceedings before the FERC; (2) a $283 million reduction in income tax expense as a result of the Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida May 2022 securitization financing, which also resulted in a $224 million ($165 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge, recorded at Utility, to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceeding; and (3) a gain of $166 million ($130 million net-of-tax), reflected in “Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges and(credits),” as a result of the sale of the PilgrimPalisades plant in June 2022. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the System Energy settlement agreement with the MPSC. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the Entergy Louisiana May 2022 storm cost securitization. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Palisades plant.

Operating Revenues

Utility

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenues comparing 20202023 to 2019:2022:
Amount
(In Millions)
20192022 operating revenues$9,58413,421 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income(792)(1,801)
Storm restoration carrying costs(23)
Volume/weather(164)
System Energy provision for rate refundRetail one-time bill credit(25)37 
Return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers19453 
Retail electric price374331 
20202023 operating revenues$9,17112,023 

2

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
The Utility operating companies’ results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

Storm restoration carrying costs, representing the equity component of storm restoration carrying costs, includes $22 million recognized by Entergy Texas as part of its April 2022 storm cost securitization, $37 million recognized by Entergy Louisiana as part of its May 2022 storm cost securitization, $31 million recognized by Entergy Louisiana as part of its March 2023 storm cost securitization, and $5 million recognized by Entergy New Orleans as part of the City Council’s approval of the Entergy New Orleans storm cost certification report in December 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of storm cost securitizations.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to decreasedthe effect of more favorable weather on commercial sales and an increase in industrial usage, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects of Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta, in addition tosubstantially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential and commercial sales, partially offset bysales. The increase in industrial usage is primarily due to an increase in residential usagedemand from new customers and expansion projects, primarily in the primary metals, industrial gases, and chemicals industries, and an increase in demand from small industrial customers, substantially offset by a decrease in demand from cogeneration customers.

The retail one-time bill credit represents the disbursement of settlement proceeds in the form of a one-time bill credit provided to Entergy Mississippi’s retail customers during the September 2022 billing cycle as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The decrease in industrial usage is partially offset by an increase in demand from expansion projects, primarily in the transportation and chemicals industries. See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” above for discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic. See “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta” above for discussion of the storms.

The System Energy provision for rate refund variance is due to a provision for rate refund recorded in 2020 to reflect a one-time credit of $25 million provided for insettlement agreement with the Federal Power Act section 205 filing made by System Energy in December 2020.MPSC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings involving System Energy atsettlement agreement and the FERC.MPSC directive related to the disbursement of settlement proceeds.

The return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers resulted from activity at the Utility operating companies in response to the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes began in second quarter 2018. In 2020, $682022, $53 million was returned to customers through reductions in operating revenues as compared to $262 million in 2019.revenues. There iswas no return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes for Entergy or the Utility operating companies for 2023. There was no effect on net income as the reductions in operating revenues were offset by reductions in income tax expense. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

5

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

The retail electric price variance is primarily due to:

interim an increase in Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan rates effective January 2023;
increases in Entergy Louisiana’s formula rate plan revenues, effective June 2019 due to the inclusion of the first-year revenue requirement for the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) and effective April 2020 due to the inclusion of the first-year revenue requirement for the Lake Charles Power Station andincluding increases in formula rate plan revenuesthe distribution and transmission recovery mechanisms, effective September 20192022 and September 2020;2023;
increases in Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycles ofAugust 2022, April 2023, and July 2019 and April 2020 and an interim capacity rate adjustment to the formula rate plan effective January 2020 to recover non-fuel related costs of acquiring and operating the Choctaw Generating Station;2023;
an increase in Entergy Arkansas’sNew Orleans’s formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycle of January 2020;
the implementation of a vegetation management rider at Entergy Mississippi effective with the April 2020 billing cycle;September 2022; and
increasesan increase in Entergy Texas’sbase rates, including the realignment of the costs previously being collected through the distribution and transmission cost recovery factor rider effective January 2020 riders and distributionthe generation cost recovery factor rider to base rates, effective October 2020.

The increase was partially offset by the effects ofJune 2023, at Entergy New Orleans’s rate reduction implemented with April 2020 bills that was effective August 2019 in accordance with the City Council resolution and related agreement in principle reached in the 2018 base rate case.Texas.

See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the regulatory proceedings discussed above.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities

Operating revenues for Entergy Wholesale Commodities decreased from $1,295 million for 2019 to $943 million for 2020 primarily due to the shutdown of Indian Point 2 in April 2020 and the shutdown of Pilgrim in May 2019.

Following are key performance measures for Entergy Wholesale Commodities for 2020 and 2019:
20202019
Owned capacity (MW) (a)2,2463,274
GWh billed20,58128,088
Entergy Wholesale Commodities Nuclear Fleet
Capacity factor93%93%
GWh billed18,86325,928
Average energy price ($/MWh)$40.33$39.10
Average capacity price ($/kW-month)$1.92$4.25
Refueling outage days:
Indian Point 329
Palisades52

(a)The reduction in owned capacity is due to the shutdown of the 1,028 MW Indian Point 2 plant in April 2020.

63

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Total electric energy sales for Utility for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
20232022% Change
(GWh)
Residential36,372 37,134 (2)
Commercial28,221 27,982 
Industrial52,807 52,501 
Governmental2,458 2,512 (2)
Total retail119,858 120,129 — 
Sales for resale15,189 15,968 (5)
Total135,047 136,097 (1)

See Note 19 to the financial statements for additional discussion of operating revenues.

Other Income Statement Items

Utility

Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased from $2,563$2,900 million for 20192022 to $2,478$2,838 million for 20202023 primarily due to:

a decrease of $42 million in nuclear generation expenses primarily due to lower nuclear labor costs, including contract labor, and a lower scope of work performed in 2020 as compared to 2019, in part as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic;
a decrease of $25 million primarily due to contract costs in 2019 related to initiatives to explore new customer products and services;
a decrease of $20 million in non-nuclear generation expenses due to a lower scope of work performed during plant outages in 2020 as compared to prior year, including a delay in plant outages as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and lower long-term service agreement expenses, partially offset by higher expenses associated with plants placed in service, including the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station), which began commercial operation in May 2019, the Choctaw Generating Station, which was purchased in October 2019, and the Lake Charles Power Station, which began commercial operation in March 2020;
higher nuclear insurance refunds of $18 million; and
an $11 million write-off in 2019 of specific costs related to the potential construction of scrubbers at the White Bluff plant at Entergy Arkansas. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the write-off.

The decrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $10$59 million in compensation and benefits costs primarily due to an increaselower health and welfare costs, including higher prescription drug rebates in second quarter 2023, a decrease in net periodic pension and other postretirement benefits service costs as a result of a decreasean increase in the discount raterates used to value the benefitbenefits liabilities, partially offset by lower incentive-basedand a revision to estimated incentive compensation accrualsexpense in 2020 as compared to prior year.first quarter 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for further discussion of pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits costs;
a decrease of $51 million in transmission costs allocated by MISO. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further information on the recovery of these costs;
a decrease of $21 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work, including during plant outages, performed in 2023 as compared to 2022;
a decrease of $17 million in nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work performed in 2023 as compared to 2022 and lower nuclear labor costs;
a decrease of $11 million in customer service center support costs primarily due to lower contract costs; and
the effects of recording a final judgment in first quarter 2023 to resolve claims in the ANO damages case against the DOE related to spent nuclear fuel storage costs. The damages awarded include the reimbursement of approximately $10 million of spent nuclear fuel storage costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation.

The decrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $43 million in contract costs related to operational performance, customer service, and organizational health initiatives;
an increase of $15 million in power delivery expenses primarily due to higher vegetation maintenance costs;
an increase of $5$11 million in insurance expenses primarily due to lower nuclear insurance refunds received in 2023; and
several individually insignificant items.

4

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits) includes the 2019 deferral byeffects of Entergy New OrleansArkansas forgoing recovery of identified costs resulting from the 2013 ANO stator incident. In third quarter 2023, Entergy Arkansas recorded write-offs of its regulatory asset for deferred fuel of $68.9 million and the undepreciated balance of $9.5 million in capital costs related to its 2018the ANO stator incident. See Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of the ANO stator incident and the approved motion to forgo recovery.

Taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to increases in ad valorem taxes resulting from higher assessments.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to:

additions to plant in service;
an increase in depreciation rates at Entergy Texas, effective in June 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the 2022 base rate case at Entergy Texas; and
a system conversion for Algiers customers as a result ofreduction in depreciation expense at System Energy in 2022 related to the 2018 combined rate case resolution approved byGrand Gulf sale-leaseback property, which resulted from the City Council.FERC order on the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint in December 2022. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case resolution; and
several individually insignificant items.Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint.

DepreciationThe increase was partially offset by a reduction in depreciation expense of $41 million in 2023 at System Energy as a result of the approval by the FERC in August 2023 of the settlement establishing updated depreciation rates used in calculating Grand Gulf plant depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily dueunder the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See Note 2 to additions to plant in service, including the J. Wayne Leonardfinancial statements for discussion of the Unit Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station), the Lake Charles Power Station, and the Choctaw Generating Station, and newSales Agreement depreciation rates at Entergy Mississippi, as approved by the MPSC.amendment proceeding.

Other regulatory charges (credits) - net for 2020 included includes:

a provisionregulatory charge of $43.5$103 million, recorded by Entergy Louisiana in first quarter 2023, to reflect the 2019 historical year netting adjustment includedits obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued in the APSC’s December 2020 order in Entergy Arkansas’s 2020 formula rate planHurricane Ida securitization regulatory proceeding. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the Entergy Arkansas’s 2020 formula rate plan proceedings.

Other income decreased primarily due to:

Louisiana March 2023 storm cost securitization;
a decreaseregulatory charge of $224 million, recorded by Entergy Louisiana in second quarter 2022, to reflect its obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued in the allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2019, including the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) projectHurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and the Lake Charles Power Station project, partially offset by construction work in progress in 2020 relatedHurricane Ida securitization regulatory proceeding. See Note 2 to the Montgomery County Power Station project;financial statements for discussion of the Entergy Louisiana May 2022 storm cost securitization;
a regulatory charge of $38 million, recorded by Entergy Louisiana in fourth quarter 2023, to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit. See Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit;
regulatory credits of $23 million, recorded by Entergy Mississippi in third quarter 2022, to reflect the effects of the joint stipulation reached in the 2022 formula rate plan filing proceeding. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the Entergy Mississippi 2022 formula rate plan filing;
regulatory credits of $18 million, recorded by Entergy Mississippi in fourth quarter 2022, to reflect that the 2022 estimated earned return was below the formula bandwidth. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan filings;
a regulatory charge of $60 million, recorded by Entergy New Orleans in fourth quarter 2023, to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit. See Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit;
the reversal in third quarter 2023 of $22 million of regulatory liabilities to reflect the recognition of certain receipts by Entergy Texas under affiliated PPAs that have been resolved. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy Texas’s 2022 base rate case; and
75

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

an increasea regulatory charge of $551 million, recorded by System Energy in net periodic pensionsecond quarter 2022, to reflect the effects of the partial settlement agreement and other postretirement benefits non-service pension costs as a resultoffer of a decrease insettlement related to pending proceedings before the discount rate used to value the benefits liabilities.FERC. See Critical Accounting Estimates” below and Note 112 to the financial statements for further discussion of pension and other postretirement benefit costs.the partial settlement agreement with the MPSC.

In addition, Entergy records a regulatory charge or credit for the difference between asset retirement obligation-related expenses and nuclear decommissioning trust earnings plus asset retirement obligation-related costs collected in revenue.
The decrease was partially offset
Other income increased primarily due to:

an increase of $113 million in intercompany dividend income from affiliated preferred membership interests related to storm cost securitizations. The intercompany dividend income on the affiliate preferred membership interests is eliminated for consolidation purposes and has no effect on net income since the investment is in another Entergy subsidiary;
an increase in the allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2023, including the Orange County Advanced Power Station project at Entergy Texas;
a $32 million charge, recorded by Entergy Louisiana in second quarter 2022, for the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest in the storm trust I established as part of the May 2022 storm cost securitization as compared to a $15 million charge, recorded by Entergy Louisiana in first quarter 2023, for the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest in the storm trust II established as part of the March 2023 storm cost securitization; and
changes in decommissioning trust fund activity.activity, including portfolio rebalancing of decommissioning trust funds in 2022.

This increase was partially offset by:

a decrease of $21 million in the amount of storm restoration carrying costs recognized in 2023 as compared to 2022, primarily related to Hurricane Ida; and
lower interest income from carrying costs related to deferred fuel balances.

See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the Entergy Louisiana storm cost securitizations.

Interest expense increased primarily due to:

the issuancesissuance by Entergy Arkansas of $425 million of 5.15% Series mortgage bonds in January 2023;
the issuance by Entergy Louisiana of $500 million of 4.75% Series mortgage bonds in August 2022;
the issuance by Entergy Texas of $300$325 million in September 2019 and $175 million in March 2020 of 3.55%5.00% Series mortgage bonds;bonds in August 2022;
the issuancesissuance by Entergy LouisianaTexas of $300$350 million of 4.20%5.80% Series mortgage bonds in August 2023; and $350
the issuance by System Energy of $325 million of 2.90% Series mortgage bonds, each in March 2020, and $525 million of 4.20%6.00% Series mortgage bonds in March 2019;2023.

The increase was partially offset by the issuancesrepayment by Entergy ArkansasLouisiana of $350$200 million of 4.20%3.30% Series mortgage bonds in March 2019December 2022 and $100the repayment by System Energy of $250 million of 4.0%4.10% Series mortgage bonds in March 2020; and
the issuances by Entergy Mississippi of $135 million of 3.85% Series mortgage bonds in November 2019 and $170 million of 3.50% Series mortgage bonds in May 2020.April 2023.

See Note 5 to the financial statements for a discussion of long-term debt.

Noncontrolling interests reflects the earnings or losses attributable to the noncontrolling partner of Entergy Wholesale Commodities

Other operationArkansas’s tax equity partnership for the Searcy Solar facility and maintenance expenses decreased from $678Entergy Mississippi’s tax equity partnership for the Sunflower Solar facility, both under HLBV accounting, and to the LURC’s beneficial interest in the Entergy Louisiana storm trusts. Entergy Mississippi recorded regulatory charges of $9 million for 2019in 2023 compared to $500$21 million for 2020 primarily due to:

a decreasein 2022 to defer the difference between the losses allocated to the tax equity partner under the HLBV method of $154 million resulting from the absence of expenses from the Pilgrim plant after it was shut down in May 2019accounting and the Indian Point 2 plant after it was shut down in April 2020; and
a decrease of $23 million in severance and retention expenses. Severance and retention expenses were incurred in 2020 and 2019 due to management’s strategy to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities merchant power business.

See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” below for a discussion of management’s strategy to shut down and sell all of the remaining plants in Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant nuclear fleet. See Note 13earnings/loss that would have been allocated to the financial statements for further discussion of severance and retention expenses resulting from management’s strategy to shut down and sell all of the remaining plants in Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant nuclear fleet. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the sale of the Pilgrim plant.

Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges for 2020 include impairment charges of $19 million ($15 million net-of-tax) primarily as a result of expenditures for capital assets. Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges for 2019 include a loss of $190 million ($156 million net-of-tax) as a result of the sale of the Pilgrim plant in August 2019 and impairment charges of $100 million ($79 million net-of-tax) primarily related to nuclear refueling outage spending and expenditures for capital assets. These costs were charged to expense as incurred as a result of the impaired fair value of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants’ long-lived assets due to the significantly reduced remaining estimated operating lives associated with management’s strategy to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities merchant power business. See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” below for a discussion of management’s strategy to shut down and sell all of the remaining plants in Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant nuclear fleet. See Note 14 to the financial statements for a discussion of the impairment of long-lived assets and the sale of the Pilgrim plant.

tax equity partner under its
86

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Depreciation and amortization expenses decreased primarily due torespective ownership percentage in the absence of depreciation expense from the Indian Point 2 plant, after it was shut down in April 2020.

Other income decreased primarily due to lower gains on decommissioning trust fund investments and a decrease in intercompany interest income resulting from repayment in second quarter 2020 of an intercompany loan to Entergy Corporation.partnership. See Notes 15 and 16Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of decommissioning trust fund investments.the HLBV method of accounting.

Other expenses decreased primarily due to the absence of decommissioning expense from the Pilgrim plant, after it was sold in August 2019. See Note 14 to the financial statements for a discussion of the sale of the Pilgrim plant.

Parent and Other

Other income increasedOperating revenues decreased primarily due to the absence of revenues from Palisades, after it was shut down in May 2022.

Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to the absence of expenses from Palisades, after it was shut down in May 2022.

Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits) includes a gain of $166 million as a result of the sale of the Palisades plant in June 2022 and the effects of recording a final judgment of $40 million in third quarter 2023 to resolve claims in the Indian Point 2 fourth round and Indian Point 3 third round combined damages case against the DOE. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation.

Taxes other than income taxes decreased primarily due to decreases in employment taxes due to the absence of expenses from Palisades, after its sale in June 2022.

Depreciation and amortization expenses decreased primarily due to the absence of depreciation expense from Palisades, after it was shut down in May 2022.

Other income decreased primarily due to the elimination for consolidation purposes of intercompany dividend income of $113 million from affiliated preferred membership interests, as discussed above, substantially offset by losses on Palisades decommissioning trust fund investments in 2022, the timing of charitable donations, and higher non-service pension income. See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for discussion of pension and other income atpostretirement benefits costs.

Interest expense increased primarily due to higher variable interest rates on commercial paper and credit facilities in 2023 and higher commercial paper balances, partially offset by the redemption by Entergy Wholesale Commodities after repayment of an intercompany loan$650 million of 4.00% Series senior notes in June 2022. See Note 4 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy’s commercial paper program and credit facilities. See Note 5 to the financial statements for a discussion of long-term debt.

Other expenses decreased primarily due to the absence of decommissioning expense and nuclear refueling outage expense as a result of the shutdown and sale of Palisades in second quarter 20202022.

See Note 14 to the financial statements for a discussion of the shutdown and a $15 million charitable donation made in 2019 to fundsale of the Entergy Charitable Foundation for three years.Palisades plant.

Income Taxes

The effective income tax rates were (41.3%) for 2023 and (3.7%) for 2022. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory rate of 21% to the effective income tax rates and for additional discussion regarding income taxes.

The effective income tax rate for 2020 was (9.5%). The difference in the effective income tax rate versus the federal statutory rate of 21% was primarily due to completion of the 2014-2015 IRS audit effectively settling the tax positions for those years. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of the 2014-2015 IRS audit.

The effective income tax rate for 2019 was (15.6%). The difference in the effective income tax rate versus the federal statutory rate of 21% was primarily due to amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes, recognition of a deferred tax asset associated with a previously unrecognized net operating loss carryover, a charitable tax deduction, and the effects of restructuring transactions within Entergy Wholesale Commodities, partially offset by valuation allowances recorded against deferred tax assets associated with the disposition of Vermont Yankee and the carryover of business interest expense. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of the effects and regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of the internal restructuring at Entergy Wholesale Commodities. See Note 14 to the financial statements for a discussion of the tax effects of the Vermont Yankee disposition.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20192022, filed with the SEC on February 21, 202024, 2023, for discussion of results of operations for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

7
Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business

Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership of the following nuclear reactors as of December 31, 2020:
LocationMarketCapacityStatus
Indian Point 2Buchanan, NYNYISO1,028 MWShut down in April 2020
Indian Point 3Buchanan, NYNYISO1,041 MWPlanned shutdown in April 2021
PalisadesCovert, MIMISO811 MWPlanned shutdown in May 2022
9

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


Entergy sold its FitzPatrick plant to Exelon in March 2017Income Tax Legislation and as discussed below, transferred its Vermont Yankee plant to NorthStar in January 2019 and sold its Pilgrim plant to Holtec in August 2019. The Palisades and Indian Point plants are under contract to be sold, subject to certain conditions, after they are shut down. Entergy also sold the Rhode Island State Energy Center, a natural gas-fired combined cycle generating plant, in December 2015.Regulation

These plant salesThe Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), signed into law on August 16, 2022, significantly expanded federal tax incentives for clean energy production, including the extension of production tax credits to solar projects and contractscertain qualified nuclear power plants. Additionally, the IRA enacted a 1% excise tax on the buyback of public company stock and a new corporate alternative minimum tax (CAMT). Effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2022, the CAMT imposes a 15% tax on the Adjusted Financial Statement Income (AFSI) on each corporation in a group of corporations that averages greater than $1 billion in AFSI over a three-year period. Taxpayers subject to sellthe CAMT regime must pay the greater of 15% of AFSI or their regular federal tax liability. In December 2022 the IRS issued a notice which provided guidance regarding the application of the CAMT. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are closely monitoring any potential impact associated with the expansion of federal tax incentives, the 1% excise tax, and CAMT. Based on initial guidance and current internal forecasts, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries may be subject to the CAMT beginning in the next two to four years. The United States Treasury Department is expected to issue further guidance that will clarify how the tax credit provisions and CAMT provisions will be interpreted and applied. This guidance will determine the amount of tax credits and incremental cash tax payments Entergy expects in the future as a result of a strategy thatthe legislation. Prior to receiving this guidance, Entergy has undertakencannot adequately assess the expected future effects on its results of operations, financial position, and cash flows. There are no effects on the financial statements of Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries as of and for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022.

In June 2023 the IRS issued temporary and proposed regulations related to manageapplicable tax credit transferability and reduce the riskdirect pay provisions of the IRA. In August 2023 the IRS issued proposed regulations related to the prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements under the IRA. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are closely monitoring any potential effects associated with such federal tax incentives to assess the expected future effects on their results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition. There are no effects on the financial statements of Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries as of and for the year ended December 31, 2023.

In April 2023 the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2023-15, which provides a safe harbor method of accounting that taxpayers may use to determine whether expenses to repair, maintain, replace, or improve natural gas transmission and distribution property must be capitalized and provides procedures for taxpayers to obtain automatic consent to change their method of accounting. Entergy intends to adopt this new method of income tax accounting under the safe harbor in accordance with Revenue Procedure 2023-15, which is not expected to have a significant effect on the results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition of Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, including exitingExit from the merchant power business. Management evaluated the challenges for each of the plants based on a variety of factors such as their market for both energy and capacity, their size, their contracted positions, and the amount of investment required to continue to operate and maintain the safety and integrity of the plants, including the estimated asset retirement costs. Changes to current assumptions regarding the remaining operating life of a plant, the decommissioning timeline and process, or the length of time that Entergy will continue to own a plant could result in revisions to the asset retirement obligations and affect compliance with certain NRC minimum financial assurance requirements for meeting obligations to decommission the plants. Increases in the asset retirement obligations are likely to result in an increase in operating expense in the period of a revision. The possibility that a plant may have an operating life shorter than previously assumed could result in the need for additional contributions to decommissioning trust funds, or the posting of parent guarantees, letters of credit, or other surety mechanisms.Merchant Power Business

Entergy Wholesale Commodities also includescompleted its multi-year strategy to exit the ownership of two non-operating nuclear facilities, Big Rock Point in Michigan and Indian Point 1 in New York, that were acquired when Entergy purchased the Palisades and Indian Point 2 nuclear plants, respectively. Big Rock Point is under contract to be sold with the Palisades plant and Indian Point 1 is under contract to be sold with the Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3 plants. In addition, Entergy Wholesale Commodities provides operations and management services, including decommissioning-related services, tomerchant nuclear power plants owned by non-affiliated entitiesbusiness in the United States. A relatively minor portion of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business is the ownership of interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers.

Shutdown and Disposition of Vermont Yankee

On December 29, 2014, the Vermont Yankee plant ceased power production and entered its decommissioning phase.In November 2016, Entergy entered into an agreement to transfer 100% of the membership interests in Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC to a subsidiary of NorthStar. Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee was the owner of the Vermont Yankee plant. The transaction included the transfer of the nuclear decommissioning trust fund and the asset retirement obligation for the spent fuel management and decommissioning of the plant.

In March 2018, Entergy and NorthStar entered into a settlement agreement and a Memorandum of Understanding with State of Vermont agencies and other interested parties that set forth the terms on which the agencies and parties supported the Vermont Public Utility Commission’s approval of the transaction. The agreements provided additional financial assurance for decommissioning, spent fuel management and site restoration, and detailed the site restoration standards. In October 2018 the NRC issued an order approving the application to transfer Vermont Yankee’s license to NorthStar for decommissioning. In December 2018 the Vermont Public Utility Commission issued an order approving the transaction consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding’s terms. On January 11, 2019, Entergy and NorthStar closed the transaction.

Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee had an outstanding credit facility that was used to pay for dry fuel storage costs. This credit facility was guaranteed by Entergy Corporation. A subsidiary of Entergy assumed the obligations under the credit facility, and it remains outstanding. At the closing of the sale transaction, NorthStar caused Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, renamed NorthStar Vermont Yankee, to issue a $139 million promissory note to the Entergy subsidiary that assumed the credit facility obligations. The amount of the note includes the
10

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
balance outstanding on the credit facility, as well as borrowing fees and costs incurred by Entergy in connection with the credit facility.

With the receipt of the NRC and Vermont Public Utility Commission approvals and the resolution among the parties of the significant conditions of the sale, Entergy concluded that as of December 31, 2018 Vermont Yankee was in held for sale status. Entergy accordingly evaluated Vermont Yankee’s asset retirement obligation in light of the terms of the transaction and evaluated the remaining values of the Vermont Yankee assets. These evaluations resulted in an increase in the asset retirement obligation and $173 million of related asset impairment and other charges in the fourth quarter 2018.2022. See Note 9 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the asset retirement obligation. See Note 1413 to the financial statements for discussion of the closing ofexit from the Vermont Yankee transaction.merchant nuclear power business.

Shutdown and Sale of Pilgrim

In October 2015, Entergy determined that it would close the Pilgrim plant, and Pilgrim ceased operations in May 2019. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the impairment charges associated with the decision to cease operations earlier than expected.

On July 30, 2018, Entergy entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Holtec International to sell to a Holtec subsidiary 100% of the equity interests in Entergy Nuclear Generation Company, LLC, the owner of Pilgrim, for $1,000 (subject to adjustments for net liabilities and other amounts). On August 22, 2019, the NRC approved the transfer of Pilgrim’s facility licenses to Holtec. At that time, hearing requests filed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Pilgrim Watch challenging Holtec’s financial qualifications and the sufficiency of the NRC’s review of the associated environmental impacts of the license transfer were pending with the NRC commissioners. The NRC approval order included a condition acknowledging the NRC’s longstanding authority to modify, condition, or rescind the license transfer order as a result of any hearing that may be conducted.  On August 26, 2019, as permitted by the August 22 order, Entergy and Holtec closed the transaction.

On September 25, 2019, Massachusetts filed a petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, asking the court to vacate the NRC’s August 22 license transfer approval order and related approvals. On November 22, 2019, Entergy and Holtec filed a motion to dismiss Massachusetts’ petition; the NRC also filed a motion to dismiss on the same date. On January 22, 2020, Massachusetts filed a second petition with the D.C. Circuit asking the court to review the NRC’s December 17, 2019 order denying its stay motion. On June 16, 2020, Holtec and Massachusetts reached a settlement to resolve issues related to the Pilgrim transaction. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, Massachusetts withdrew its hearing request pending before the NRC and withdrew both of its petitions for review before the D.C. Circuit, thereby terminating Massachusetts’s pending legal challenges to the Pilgrim transfer. The NRC denied Pilgrim Watch’s hearing request in November 2020, and Pilgrim Watch did not file a judicial appeal of the NRC’s denial order.

The sale of Entergy Nuclear Generation Company, LLC to Holtec included the transfer of the nuclear decommissioning trust and obligation for spent fuel management and plant decommissioning. The transaction resulted in a loss of $190 million ($156 million net-of-tax) in 2019. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the closing of the Pilgrim transaction.

Planned Shutdown and Sale of Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3

In April 2007, Entergy submitted to the NRC a joint application to renew the operating licenses for Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3 for an additional 20 years. In January 2017, Entergy reached a settlement with New York State, several State agencies, and Riverkeeper, Inc., under which Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3 would cease commercial operation by April 30, 2020 and April 30, 2021, respectively, subject to certain conditions, including New York State’s withdrawal of opposition to Indian Point’s license renewals and issuance of contested permits and similar authorizations. Operations could be extended up to four additional years for each unit by
11

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

mutual agreement of Entergy and New York State based on an exigent reliability need for Indian Point generation. In September 2018 the NRC issued renewed operating licenses for Indian Point 2 through April 2024 and for Indian Point 3 through April 2025. Pursuant to the January 2017 settlement agreement, Indian Point 2 ceased commercial operations on April 30, 2020, and Indian Point 3 is expected to cease commercial operations on April 30, 2021. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the impairment charges associated with the decision to shut down the Indian Point plants.

Other provisions of the settlement include termination of all then-existing investigations of Indian Point by the parties to the agreement, which include the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the New York State Department of State, the New York State Department of Public Service, the New York State Department of Health, and the New York State Attorney General. The settlement recognizes the right of New York State agencies to pursue new investigations and enforcement actions with respect to new circumstances or existing conditions that become materially exacerbated.

Another provision of the settlement obligates Entergy to establish a $15 million fund for environmental projects and community support. Apportionment and allocation of funds to beneficiaries are to be determined by mutual agreement of New York State and Entergy. The settlement recognizes New York State’s right to perform an annual inspection of Indian Point, with scope and timing to be determined by mutual agreement.

In April 2019, Entergy entered into an agreement to sell, directly or indirectly, 100% of the equity interests in the subsidiaries that own Indian Point 1, Indian Point 2, and Indian Point 3, after Indian Point 3 has been shut down and defueled, to a Holtec subsidiary for decommissioning the plants. The sale will include the transfer of the licenses, spent fuel, decommissioning liabilities, and nuclear decommissioning trusts for the three units.

The transaction is subject to closing conditions, including approval from the NRC. In November 2019, Entergy and Holtec submitted a license transfer application to the NRC. The NRC issued an order approving the application in November 2020, subject to the NRC’s authority to condition, revise, or rescind the approval order based on the resolution of four pending hearing requests. A substantially identical condition was imposed in the NRC’s August 2019 order approving the license transfer for Pilgrim. In January 2021 the NRC issued an order denying all four hearing requests challenging the license transfer application. In January 2021, New York State filed a petition for review with the D.C. Circuit asking the court to vacate the NRC’s January 2021 order denying the State’s hearing request, as well as the NRC’s November 2020 order approving the license transfers. In January 2021 the D.C. Circuit issued a scheduling order, setting deadlines for initial procedural filings in March 2021. Any other petitioners seeking judicial review of the January 2021 NRC order must file their petitions by March 16, 2021.

Entergy and Holtec also submitted a petition to the New York State Public Service Commission in November 2019 seeking an order from the New York Public Service Commission disclaiming jurisdiction or abstaining from review of the transaction or, alternatively, approving the transaction. Closing is also conditioned on obtaining from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation an agreement related to Holtec’s decommissioning plan as being consistent with applicable standards. The transaction closing is targeted for May 2021, following the defueling of Indian Point 3.

As consideration for the transfer to Holtec of its interest in Indian Point, Entergy will receive nominal cash consideration. The Indian Point transaction is expected to result in a loss based on the difference between Entergy’s adjusted net investment in the subsidiaries at closing and the sale price net of any agreed adjustments. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy’s adjusted net investment in the Indian Point units was $255 million. The primary variables in the ultimate loss that Entergy will incur are the values of the nuclear decommissioning trusts and the asset retirement obligations at closing, the financial results from plant operations until the closing, and the level of any unrealized deferred tax balances at closing. The terms of the transaction include limitations on withdrawals from the nuclear decommissioning trusts to fund decommissioning activities and controls on how Entergy manages the investment of nuclear decommissioning trust assets between signing and closing; however, the agreement does not require a minimum level of funding in the nuclear decommissioning trusts as a condition to closing.
12

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Planned Shutdown and Sale of Palisades

Almost all of the Palisades output is sold under a power purchase agreement with Consumers Energy, entered into when the plant was acquired in 2007, that is scheduled to expire in 2022. The PPA prices currently exceed market prices. In December 2016, Entergy reached an agreement with Consumers Energy to amend the existing PPA to terminate early, on May 31, 2018. Pursuant to the agreement to amend the PPA, Consumers Energy would pay Entergy $172 million for the early termination of the PPA. The PPA amendment agreement was subject to regulatory approvals, including approval by the Michigan Public Service Commission. Separately, Entergy intended to shut down the Palisades nuclear power plant permanently on October 1, 2018, after refueling in the spring of 2017 and operating through the end of that fuel cycle.

In September 2017 the Michigan Public Service Commission issued an order conditionally approving the PPA amendment transaction, but only granting Consumers Energy recovery of $136.6 million of the $172 million requested early termination payment. As a result, Entergy and Consumers Energy agreed to terminate the PPA amendment agreement. Entergy continues to operate Palisades under the existing PPA with Consumers Energy, instead of shutting down in the fall of 2018 as previously planned. Entergy intends to shut down the Palisades nuclear power plant permanently no later than May 31, 2022. As a result of the increase in the expected operating life of the plant, the expected probability-weighted undiscounted net cash flows as of September 30, 2017 exceeded the carrying value of the plant and related assets. Accordingly, nuclear fuel spending, nuclear refueling outage spending, and expenditures for capital assets incurred at Palisades after September 30, 2017 are no longer charged to expense as incurred, but recorded as assets and depreciated or amortized, subject to the typical periodic impairment reviews prescribed in the accounting rules.

On July 30, 2018, Entergy entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Holtec International to sell to a Holtec subsidiary 100% of the equity interests in the subsidiary that owns Palisades and the Big Rock Point Site. The sale will include the transfer of the nuclear decommissioning trust and obligation for spent fuel management and plant decommissioning. In February 2020 the parties signed anSite, with a subsequent amendment to the purchase and sale agreement to remove the closing condition that the nuclear decommissioning trust fund must have a specified amount and Entergy agreed to contribute $20 million to the nuclear decommissioning trust fund at closing, among other amendments. At the closing of the sale transaction, the Holtec subsidiary will pay $1,000 (subject to adjustment for net liabilities and other amounts) for the equity interests in the subsidiary that owns Palisades and the Big Rock Point Site.

The Palisades transaction is subject to certain closing conditions, including: the permanent shutdown of Palisades and the transfer of all nuclear fuel from the reactor vessel to the spent nuclear fuel pool; NRC regulatory approval for the transfer of the Palisades and Big Rock Point operating and independent spent fuel storage installation licenses; receipt of a favorable private letter ruling from the IRS; and, the Pilgrim transaction having closed.February 2020. In December 2020, Entergy and Holtec submitted a license transfer application to the NRC requesting approval to transfer the Palisades and Big Rock Point licenses from Entergy to Holtec. The NRC has indicated that it expects to complete its review of the application by January 2022. In February 2021 the Michigan Attorney General; the Environmental Law & Policy Center; and Beyond Nuclear, Michigan Safe Energy Future, and Don’t Waste Michiganseveral parties filed with the NRC petitions to intervene and requests for hearing challenging the license transfer application. In March 2021, Entergy and Holtec filed answers opposing the petitions to intervene and hearing requests, and the petitioners filed replies. In March 2021 an additional party also filed a petition to intervene and request for hearing. Entergy and Holtec filed an answer to the March 2021 petition in April 2021. The NRC issued an order approving the application in December 2021, subject to the NRC’s authority to condition, revise, or rescind the approval order based on the resolution of
8

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
four pending requests for hearing. These petitions and requests for hearing remained pending with the NRC at the time of the closing of the Palisades transaction in June 2022. In July 2022 the NRC issued an order granting the Michigan Attorney General’s petition hearing request. The hearing was held in February 2023. A decision from the NRC is pending. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Palisades plant.

Subject to the above conditions, the Palisades transaction is expected to close by the end
Planned Sale of 2022. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy’s adjusted net investment in Palisades was $75 million. The primary variables in the ultimate loss or gain that Entergy will incur on the transaction are the values of the nuclear decommissioning trust and the asset retirement obligations at closing, the financial results from plant operations until the closing, and the level of any unrealized deferred tax balances at closing. Palisades completed its final refueling outage in October 2020.Gas Distribution Businesses

On October 28, 2023, Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana each entered into separate purchase and sale agreements with respect to the sale of their respective regulated natural gas local distribution company businesses to two separate affiliates of Bernhard Capital Partners Management LP. Under the purchase and sale agreements, Entergy New Orleans has agreed to sell its regulated natural gas local distribution company business serving customers in the Parish of Orleans, Louisiana, and Entergy Louisiana has agreed to sell its regulated natural gas local distribution company business serving customers in the Parish of East Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

The base purchase price to be paid by the buyer of the Entergy New Orleans gas business is $285.5 million, and the base purchase price to be paid by the buyer of the Entergy Louisiana gas business is $198 million, in each case subject to certain adjustments at the closing of the transactions. Each purchase and sale agreement contains customary representations, warranties, and covenants related to the applicable business and the respective transactions. Between the date of the purchase and sale agreements and the completion of the transactions, Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana have each agreed to operate the respective gas businesses in the ordinary course of business and subject to certain operating covenants.

The transactions will proceed in two phases: (1) an “Initial Phase” prior to regulatory approvals in connection with both transactions; and (2) a “Second Phase” following regulatory approvals in connection with both transactions to the extent that certain conditions are satisfied or, where permissible, waived for both transactions. Required regulatory approvals include the approval of the City Council for the sale of the Entergy New Orleans gas business and the approval of the LPSC and the Metropolitan Council for the City of Baton Rouge and Parish of East Baton Rouge for the sale of the Entergy Louisiana gas business. Additionally, while approval of the transactions is generally not required from the FERC, the parties will seek a waiver of the FERC’s capacity release rules, as applicable. In December 2023, Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana and the respective buyers filed their joint applications with the City Council and the LPSC, respectively, seeking approval for the proposed transactions. The applications request a decision by June 2024. In February 2024 the City Council adopted a procedural schedule in which the hearing officer shall certify the record of the proceeding for City Council consideration no later than September 2024.

The purchase and sale agreements may be terminated by any party if the Second Phase does not start within 15 months of October 28, 2023, or within 18 months if the only remaining conditions to starting the Second Phase are obtaining the regulatory approvals. The consummation of each of the transactions is subject to satisfaction of certain customary closing conditions, including the receipt of the regulatory approvals, clearance under the Hart-Scott Rodino Act, and the concurrent closing of the other transaction. Under the purchase and sale agreements, the closing of the transactions is not required to occur earlier than the later of six months following the initiation of the Second Phase and July 28, 2025, and the purchase and sale agreements may be terminated by either party in the event the closing has not occurred prior to October 28, 2025. Neither transaction is subject to a financing condition for the applicable buyer.

The purchase and sale agreements are subject to customary termination provisions. If the purchase and sale agreements are terminated in certain circumstances, each seller may be liable to the applicable buyer for a portion of the buyer’s transition costs incurred in connection with transitioning the applicable business. Entergy New Orleans’s and Entergy Louisiana’s aggregate liability for such transaction costs shall not exceed $7.5 million if termination occurs during the Initial Phase or $12.5 million if termination occurs during the Second Phase, with responsibility allocated between the sellers pro rata based on the relative purchase price. If the purchase and sale agreements are terminated in certain circumstances, each buyer may be liable to the corresponding seller for a
13
9

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Costs Associated with Exitreverse termination fee, equal to 7% of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities Business

Entergy incurred approximately $71 million in costs in 2020, $91 million in costs in 2019, and $139 million in costs in 2018 associated with management’s strategy to exitapplicable base purchase price if termination occurs during the Entergy Wholesale Commodities merchant power business, primarily employee retention and severance expenses and other benefits-related costs, and contracted economic development contributions. Entergy expects to incur employee retention and severance expenses of approximately $40 million in 2021 and $15 million in 2022 associated with the exit from the merchant power business. See Note 13 to the financial statements for further discussion of these costs.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities incurred $19 million in 2020, $100 million in 2019, and $532 million in 2018 of impairment charges related to nuclear fuel spending, nuclear refueling outage spending, expenditures for capital assets, and asset retirement obligation revisions. These costs were charged to expense as incurred as a resultInitial Phase, or 10% of the impaired value of certain ofapplicable base purchase price if the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants’ long-lived assets due totermination occurs in the significantly reduced remaining estimated operating lives associated with management’s strategy to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities merchant power business. Entergy expects to continue to charge Indian Point Energy Center capital asset costs to expense as incurred because Entergy expects its value to continue to be impaired. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the impairment charges.Second Phase.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

This section discusses Entergy’s capital structure, capital spending plans and other uses of capital, sources of capital, and the cash flow activity presented in the cash flow statement.

Capital Structure

Entergy’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The increasedecrease in the debt to capital ratio is primarily due to the net issuance of debtincome in 2020. See Note 5 to the financial statements for a discussion of long-term debt.2023.
December 31,
2020
December 31,
2019
December 31,
2023
December 31,
2022
Debt to capitalDebt to capital68.3%65.5%Debt to capital63.8%66.9%
Effect of excluding securitization bondsEffect of excluding securitization bonds(0.2%)(0.4%)Effect of excluding securitization bonds(0.3%)(0.3%)
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)68.1%65.1%
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)63.5%66.6%
Effect of subtracting cashEffect of subtracting cash(1.7%)(0.5%)Effect of subtracting cash(0.1%)(0.1%)
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)66.4%64.6%
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)63.4%66.5%

(a)Calculation excludes the Arkansas, Louisiana, New Orleans and Texas securitization bonds, which are non-recourse to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Texas, respectively.

21.4%As of December 31, 2023, 19.6% of the debt outstanding at December 31, 2020 is at the parent company, Entergy Corporation, 78.0%and 79.9% is at the Utility, and 0.6% is at Entergy Wholesale Commodities.Utility. The remaining 0.5% of the debt outstanding relates to the Vermont Yankee credit facility, as discussed in Note 4 to the financial statements herein. Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents. Debt consists of notes payable and commercial paper, finance lease obligations, and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion. Capital consists of debt, common shareholders’ equity, and subsidiaries’ preferred stock without sinking fund. Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents. The debt to capital ratio excluding securitization bonds and net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds are non-GAAP measures. Entergy uses the debt to capital ratios excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes they provide useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy’s financial condition because the securitization bonds are non-recourse to Entergy, as more fully described in Note 5 to the financial statements. Entergy also uses the net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.
14

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

The Utility operating companies and System Energy seek to optimize their capital structures in accordance with regulatory requirements and to control their cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings. To the extent that their operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a dividend to their parent, to the extent funds are legally available to do so, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure. To the extent that their operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, the Utility operating companies and System Energy may issue incremental debt or reduce dividends, or both, to maintain their capital structures. In addition, Entergy may make equity contributions to the Utility operating companies and System Energy to maintain their capital structures in certain circumstances such as financing of large transactions or payments that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reduced dividends.

Long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion, makes up most of Entergy’s total debt outstanding. Following are Entergy’s long-term debt principal maturities and estimated interest payments as of
10

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
December 31, 2020.2023. To estimate future interest payments for variable rate debt, Entergy used the rate as of December 31, 2020.2023. The amounts below include payments on System Energy’s Grand Gulf sale-leaseback transaction, which are included in long-term debt on the balance sheet.

Long-term debt maturities and estimated interest paymentsLong-term debt maturities and estimated interest payments2021202220232024-2025after 2025Long-term debt maturities and estimated interest payments2024202520262027-2028after 2028
(In Millions) (In Millions)
UtilityUtility$1,761 $1,166 $2,938 $2,800 $20,943 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities142 — — — — 
Parent and Other99 737 73 1,102 2,589 
Parent & Other
TotalTotal$2,002 $1,903 $3,011 $3,902 $23,532 

Note 5 to the financial statements provides more detail concerning long-term debt outstanding.

Entergy Corporation has in place a credit facility that has a borrowing capacity of $3.5 billion and expires in September 2024.June 2028. The facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $20 million of the total borrowing capacity of the credit facility. The commitment fee is currently 0.225% of the undrawn commitment amount. Commitment fees and interest rates on loans under the credit facility can fluctuate depending on the senior unsecured debt ratings of Entergy Corporation. The weighted averageweighted-average interest rate for the year ended December 31, 20202023 was 2.35%6.52% on the drawn portion of the facility.

As The following is a summary of December 31, 2020,the amounts outstanding and capacity available under the $3.5 billion credit facility are:as of December 31, 2023:
CapacityCapacityBorrowingsLetters of CreditCapacity AvailableCapacityBorrowingsLetters of CreditCapacity Available
(In Millions)(In Millions)(In Millions)
$3,500$3,500$165$6$3,329$3,500$—$3$3,497

A covenant in Entergy Corporation’s credit facility requiresincludes a covenant requiring Entergy to maintain a consolidated debt ratio, as defined, of 65% or less of its total capitalization.  The calculation of this debt ratio under Entergy Corporation’s credit facility is different than the calculation of the debt to capital ratio above. One such difference is that it excludes the effects, among other things, of certain impairments related to the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear generation assets. Entergy is currently in compliance with the covenant and expects to remain in compliance with this covenant. If Entergy fails to meet this ratio, or if Entergy Corporation or one of the Utility operating companiesRegistrant Subsidiaries (except Entergy New Orleans)Orleans and System Energy) defaults on other indebtedness or is in bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, an acceleration of the Entergy Corporation credit facility’s maturity date may occur.
15

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


Entergy Corporation has a commercial paper program with a Board-approved program limit of up to $2 billion. As of December 31, 2020,2023, Entergy Corporation had $1.627 billion$1,138.1 million of commercial paper outstanding. The weighted-average interest rate for the year ended December 31, 20202023 was 1.39%5.44%.

Finance lease obligations are a minimal part of Entergy’s overall capital structure. Following are Entergy’s payment obligations under those leases.
 2021202220232024-2025after 2025
 (In Millions)
Finance lease payments$14$13$12$18$17

Leases are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas each had credit facilities available as of December 31, 20202023 as follows:
CompanyExpiration DateAmount of FacilityInterest Rate (a)Amount Drawn
as of
December 31, 20202023
Letters of Credit
Outstanding as of
December 31, 20202023
Entergy ArkansasApril 20212024$25 million (b)1.27%7.29%
Entergy ArkansasSeptember 2024June 2028$150 million (c)1.27%6.58%
Entergy LouisianaSeptember 2024June 2028$350 million (c)1.27%6.71%
Entergy MississippiApril 2021July 2025$10150 million (d)1.65%6.58%
Entergy MississippiApril 2021$35 million (d)1.65%
Entergy MississippiApril 2021$37.5 million (d)1.65%
Entergy New OrleansNovember 2021June 2024$25 million (c)1.42%7.08%$0.8 million
Entergy TexasSeptember 2024June 2028$150 million (c)1.65%6.71%$1.31.1 million

11

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

(a)The interest rate is the estimated interest rate as of December 31, 20202023 that would have been applied to outstanding borrowings under the facility.
(b)Borrowings under this Entergy Arkansas credit facility may be secured by a security interest in its accounts receivable at Entergy Arkansas’s option.
(c)The credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against a portion of the borrowing capacity of the facility as follows: $5 million for Entergy Arkansas; $15 million for Entergy Louisiana; $10 million for Entergy New Orleans; and $30 million for Entergy Texas.
(d)Borrowings under the Entergy Mississippi credit facilities may be secured by a security interest in its accounts receivable at Entergy Mississippi’s option.

Each of the credit facilities requires the Registrant Subsidiary borrower to maintain a debt ratio, as defined, of 65% or less of its total capitalization. Each Registrant Subsidiary is in compliance with this covenant.

16

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
In addition, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas each entered into one or morehave an uncommitted standby letter of credit facilitiesfacility as a means to post collateral to support itstheir obligations to MISO. FollowingMISO and for other purposes. The following is a summary of the uncommitted standby letter of credit facilities as of December 31, 2020:2023:
CompanyAmount of Uncommitted FacilityLetter of Credit FeeLetters of Credit Issued as of December 31, 20202023
(a) (b)
Entergy Arkansas$25 million0.78%$15.8 million
Entergy Louisiana$125 million0.78%$2.217.1 million
Entergy Mississippi$65 million0.78%$120.0 million
Entergy New Orleans$15 million1.00%1.625%$10.5 million
Entergy Texas$5080 million0.70%1.250%$6.276.5 million

(a)As of December 31, 2020,2023, letters of credit posted with MISO covered financial transmission rightrights exposure of $1.2 million for Entergy Arkansas, $0.5 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.3 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.2 million for Entergy Mississippi, $0.2 million for Entergy New Orleans, and $0.5$0.1 million for Entergy Texas. See Note 15 to the financial statements for discussion of financial transmission rights.
(b)As of December 31, 2020,2023, in addition to the $1$20 million in MISO letterletters of credit, Entergy Mississippi has $1 million ofin non-MISO letters of credit outstanding under this facility.

Finance lease obligations are a minimal part of Entergy’s overall capital structure. Following are Entergy’s payment obligations under those leases.
 2024202520262027-2028after 2028
 (In Millions)
Finance lease payments$20$18$16$25$34

Finance leases are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.

Operating Lease Obligations and Guarantees of Unconsolidated Obligations

Entergy has a minimal amount of operating lease obligations and guarantees in support of unconsolidated obligations. Entergy’s guarantees in support of unconsolidated obligations are not likely to have a material effect on Entergy’s financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Following are Entergy’s payment obligations as of December 31, 20202023 on non-cancelable operating leases with a term over one year:
 2021202220232024-2025after 2025
 (In Millions)
Operating lease payments$66$57$47$59$21

Leases are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.

Summary of Contractual Obligations of Consolidated Entities

Contractual Obligations20212022-20232024-2025after 2025Total
 (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)$2,002 $4,914 $3,902 $23,532 $34,350 
Finance lease payments (b)$14 $25 $18 $17 $74 
Operating leases (b) (c)$66 $104 $59 $21 $250 
Purchase obligations (d)$1,182 $2,076 $1,651 $3,541 $8,450 

(a)Includes estimated interest payments. Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.
(c)Does not include power purchase agreements that are accounted for as leases that are included in purchase obligations.
(d)Purchase obligations represent the minimum purchase obligation or cancellation charge for contractual obligations to purchase goods or services. Almost all of the total are fuel and purchased power obligations.
 2024202520262027-2028after 2028
 (In Millions)
Operating lease payments$67$53$45$47$14

1712

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Operating leases are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.

Other Obligations
In addition to the contractual obligations stated above,
Entergy currently expects to contribute approximately $356$270 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $39.9$45.9 million to its other postretirement plans in 2021,2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024. See “Critical Accounting Estimates - Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Also in addition to the contractual obligations, Entergy has $979$279 million of unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes plus interest for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

In addition, the Registrant Subsidiaries enter into fuel and purchased power agreements that contain minimum purchase obligations. The Registrant Subsidiaries each have rate mechanisms in place to recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs incurred under these purchase obligations.

Capital Expenditure Plans and Other Uses of Capital

Following are the amounts of Entergy’s planned construction and other capital investments by operating segment for 20212024 through 2023.
Planned construction and capital investments202120222023
 (In Millions)
Utility:   
Generation$1,080 $1,155 $2,030 
Transmission720 610 675 
Distribution1,180 1,350 1,560 
Utility Support495 440 335 
Total3,475 3,555 4,600 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities and Other10 
Total$3,485 $3,560 $4,605 
2026.

In addition to the planned spending in the table above, the Utility also expects to pay for $1,055 million of capital investments in 2021 related to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta restoration work that have been accrued as of December 31, 2020.
Planned construction and capital investments202420252026
 (In Millions)
Generation$2,270 $2,675 $3,135 
Transmission1,190 1,385 1,880 
Distribution2,110 2,125 1,940 
Utility Support350 315 380 
Total$5,920 $6,500 $7,335 

Planned construction and capital investments refer to amounts Entergy plans to spend on routine capital projects that are necessary to support reliability of its service, equipment, or systems and to support normal customer growth. In addition to routine capital projects, they also refer to amounts Entergy plans to spend on non-routine capital investments for which Entergy is either contractually obligated, has Board approval, or otherwise expects to make to satisfy regulatory or legal requirements. Amounts include the following types of construction and capital investments:

Investments in renewablesgeneration projects to modernize, decarbonize, and other generation,diversify Entergy’s portfolio, including the Sunflower Solar Facility, Searcy Solar Facility, Walnut Bend Solar, Facility, West Memphis Solar, Facility, LibertyDriver Solar, Orange County Solar Facility, and Hardin County Peaking Facility,Advanced Power Station, and potential construction of additional generation.generation;
Investments in Entergy’s Utility nuclear fleet.fleet;
Transmission spending to enhanceimprove reliability reduce congestion, and enable economic growth.resilience while also supporting renewables expansion and customer growth; and
Distribution and Utility support spending to enhanceimprove reliability, resilience, and improve service to customers, including investment to support advanced metering.
Entergy Wholesale Commodities investments such as component replacements, softwarecustomer experience through projects focused on asset renewals and security,enhancements and dry cask storage.grid stability.

For the next several years, the Utility’s owned and contracted generating capacity is projected to be adequate to meet MISO reserve requirements; however, in the longer-term additional supply resources will be needed, andMISO recently implemented changes to its supply plan initiativeresource adequacy
1813

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

construct, and continues to pursue other changes, that generally move from an annual to a seasonal design and that change the way that resources are assigned capacity credit. As a result of these changes, there may be seasonal variations in the capacity credit afforded to the Utility operating companies’ resources by MISO. Entergy is monitoring the evolution and application of these rules, which may require the Utility operating companies to procure additional capacity credits from the MISO market and in the longer-term may impact the incremental additional supply resources needed. The Utility’s supply plan initiative will continue to seek to transform its generation portfolio with new generation resources.  Opportunities resulting from the supply plan initiative, including new projects or the exploration of alternative financing sources, could result in increases or decreases in the capital expenditure estimates given above. Estimated capital expenditures are also subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of business restructuring, regulatory constraints and requirements, government actions, environmental regulations, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital.

Renewables

Sunflower Solar Facility

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi announced that it signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW solar photovoltaic facility that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi.  The estimated base purchase price is approximately $138.4 million.  The estimated total investment, including the base purchase price and other related costs, for Entergy Mississippi to acquire the Sunflower Solar Facility is approximately $153.2 million. The purchase is contingent upon, among other things, obtaining necessary approvals, including full cost recovery, from applicable federal and state regulatory and permitting agencies.  The project is being built by Sunflower County Solar Project, LLC, an indirect subsidiary of Recurrent Energy, LLC. Entergy Mississippi will purchase the facility upon mechanical completion and after the other purchase contingencies have been met.  In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed a joint petition with Sunflower Solar Project with the MPSC for Sunflower Solar Project to construct and for Entergy Mississippi to acquire and thereafter own, operate, improve, and maintain the solar facility.  Entergy Mississippi proposed revisions to its formula rate plan that would provide for a mechanism, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, in the formula rate plan to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi, including the annual ownership costs of the Sunflower Solar Facility.  In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for an interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism. Recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment requires MPSC approval for each new resource. In August 2019 consultants retained by the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed a report expressing concerns regarding the project economics. In March 2020, Entergy Mississippi filed supplemental testimony addressing questions and observations raised by the consultants retained by the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and proposing an alternative structure for the transaction that would reduce its cost. A hearing before the MPSC was held in March 2020. In April 2020 the MPSC issued an order approving certification of the Sunflower Solar Facility and its recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, subject to certain conditions including: (i) that Entergy Mississippi pursue a partnership structure through which the partnership would acquire and own the facility under the build-own-transfer agreement and (ii) that if Entergy Mississippi does not consummate the partnership structure under the terms of the order, there will be a cap of $136 million on the level of recoverable costs. Closing is targeted to occur by the end of 2021.

Searcy Solar Facility

In March 2019, Entergy Arkansas announced that it signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW solar energy facility that will be sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas.  The purchase is contingent upon, among other things, obtaining necessary approvals from applicable federal and state regulatory and permitting agencies.  The project is being constructed by a subsidiary of NextEra Energy Resources.  Entergy Arkansas will purchase the facility upon mechanical completion and after the other purchase contingencies have been met.  Closing is expected to occur by the end of 2021. In May 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the transaction is in the public interest and requesting all necessary approvals. In September 2019 other parties filed testimony largely supporting the resource acquisition but disputing Entergy Arkansas’s proposed method of cost recovery. Entergy Arkansas filed its rebuttal testimony in October 2019. In February 2020, Entergy Arkansas, the Attorney General, and the APSC general staff filed a partial settlement agreement asking the APSC to approve, based on the record in the proceeding, all issues except certain issues that are submitted to the APSC for determination. In April 2020 the APSC issued an order
19

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

approving Entergy Arkansas’s acquisition of the Searcy Solar facility as being in the public interest, but declined to approve Entergy Arkansas’s preferred cost recovery rider mechanism, finding instead, based on the particular facts and circumstances presented, that the formula rate plan rider was a sufficient recovery mechanism for this resource.

Liberty County Solar Facility

In September 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application seeking PUCT approval to amend Entergy Texas’s certificate of convenience and necessity to acquire the 100 MW Liberty County Solar Facility and a determination that Entergy Texas’s acquisition of the facility through a tax equity partnership is in the public interest. In its preliminary order, the PUCT determined that, in considering Entergy Texas’s application, it would not specifically address whether Entergy Texas’s use of a tax equity partnership is in the public interest. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing on the merits scheduled in April 2021. Closing is expected to occur in 2023.

Walnut Bend Solar Facility

In October 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 100 MW Walnut Bend Solar Facilityfacility is in the public interest. Entergy Arkansas requested a decision by the APSC by June 15, 2021 and primarily requestsrequested cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. A proceduralIn July 2021 the APSC granted Entergy Arkansas’s petition and approved the acquisition of the resource and cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. In addition, the APSC directed Entergy Arkansas to file a report within 180 days detailing its efforts to obtain a tax equity partnership. In January 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed its tax equity partnership status report and will file subsequent reports until a tax equity partnership is obtained or a tax equity partnership is no longer sought. The counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was terminating the project, though it was willing to consider an alternative for the site. Entergy Arkansas disputed the right of termination. Negotiations were conducted, including with respect to cost and schedule was establishedand to updates arising as a result of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. In April 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed an application for an amended certificate of environmental compatibility and public need with the APSC seeking approval by June 2023 for the updates to the cost and schedule that were previously approved by the APSC. In June 2023, Entergy Arkansas, the APSC general staff, and the Arkansas Attorney General filed a hearing scheduledunanimous settlement supporting that the approval of the Walnut Bend Solar facility is in April 2021. Closingthe public interest based on the terms in the settlement, including the treatment for the production tax credits associated with the facility. In July 2023, after requesting further testimony and purporting to modify several terms in the settlement and upon rehearing, the APSC approved the settlement largely on the terms submitted, including a 30-year amortization period for the production tax credits. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of approximately $169.7 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is expectedcompleted and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to occurachieve commercial operation in 2022.the first half of 2024, at which time a substantial completion payment of approximately $20 million is expected.

West Memphis Solar Facility

In January 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 180 MW West Memphis Solar Facilityfacility is in the public interest. Entergy Arkansas requested a decision byIn October 2021 the APSC by September 7, 2021granted Entergy Arkansas’s petition and primarily requestsapproved the acquisition of the West Memphis Solar facility and cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. ClosingIn addition, the APSC directed Entergy Arkansas to file a report within 180 days detailing its efforts to obtain a tax equity partnership. In April 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed its tax equity partnership status report and will file subsequent reports until a tax equity partnership is obtained or a tax equity partnership is no longer sought. In March 2022 the counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was seeking changes to certain terms of the build-own-transfer agreement, including both cost and schedule. In January 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a supplemental application with the APSC seeking approval for a change in the transmission route and updates to the cost and schedule that were previously approved by the APSC. In March 2023 the APSC approved Entergy
14

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Arkansas’s supplemental application. The project is currently expected to achieve commercial operation by the end of 2024.

Driver Solar

In April 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 250 MW Driver Solar facility is in the public interest and requested cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. The APSC established a procedural schedule with a hearing scheduled in June 2022, but the parties later agreed to waive the hearing and submit the matter to the APSC for a decision consistent with the filed record. In August 2022 the APSC granted Entergy Arkansas’s petition and approved the acquisition of Driver Solar and cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. In addition, the APSC directed Entergy Arkansas to inform the APSC as to the status of a tax equity partnership once construction is commenced. The parties are evaluating the effects of certain matters related to the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, including the viability of a tax equity partnership. The project is expected to occur in 2023.achieve commercial operation as early as mid-2024.

2021 Solar Certification and the Geaux Green Option

In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC seeking certification of and approval for the addition of four new solar photovoltaic resources with a combined nameplate capacity of 475 megawatts (the 2021 Solar Portfolio) and the implementation of a new green tariff, the Geaux Green Option (Rider GGO). The 2021 Solar Portfolio consists of four resources that are expected to provide $242 million in net benefits to Entergy Louisiana’s customers. These resources, all of which would be constructed in Louisiana, include (i) the Vacherie Facility, a 150 megawatt resource in St. James Parish; (ii) the Sunlight Road Facility, a 50 megawatt resource in Washington Parish; (iii) the St. Jacques Facility, a 150 megawatt resource in St. James Parish; and (iv) the Elizabeth Facility, a 125 megawatt resource in Allen Parish. The St. Jacques Facility would be acquired through a build-own-transfer agreement; the remaining resources involve power purchase agreements. The Sunlight Road Facility and the Elizabeth Facility have estimated in service dates in 2024, and the Vacherie Facility and the St. Jacques Facility originally had estimated in service dates in 2025, but are now expected to be no sooner than 2027. The filing proposed to recover the costs of the power purchase agreements through the fuel adjustment clause and the formula rate plan and the acquisition costs through the formula rate plan.

The proposed Rider GGO is a voluntary rate schedule that will enhance Entergy Louisiana’s ability to help customers meet their sustainability goals by allowing customers to align some or all of their electricity requirements with renewable energy from the resources. Because subscription fees from Rider GGO participants are expected to help offset the cost of the resources, the design of Rider GGO also preserves the benefits of the 2021 Solar Portfolio for non-participants by providing them with the reliability and capacity benefits of locally-sited solar generation at a discounted price.

In March 2022 direct testimony from Walmart, the Louisiana Energy Users Group (LEUG), and the LPSC staff was filed. Each party recommended that the LPSC approve the resources proposed in Entergy Louisiana’s application, and the LPSC staff witness indicated that the process through which Entergy Louisiana solicited or obtained the proposals for the resources complied with applicable LPSC orders. The LPSC staff and LEUG’s witnesses made recommendations to modify the proposed Rider GGO and Entergy Louisiana’s proposed rate relief. In April 2022 the LPSC staff and LEUG filed cross-answering testimony concerning each other’s proposed modifications to Rider GGO and the proposed rate recovery. Entergy Louisiana filed rebuttal testimony in June 2022. In August 2022 the parties reached a settlement certifying the 2021 Solar Portfolio and approving implementation of Rider GGO. In September 2022 the LPSC approved the settlement. Following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities until the later of March 2023 or the completion of an environmental and economic impact study. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparties to the Vacherie and St. Jacques facilities regarding amendments to the respective agreements to
15

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facilities are expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027, depending upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments. In September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported to the LPSC that it also entered into amended agreements related to the Sunlight Road and Elizabeth facilities. Both facilities are still expected to achieve commercial operation in 2024.

2022 Solar Portfolio and Expansion of the Geaux Green Option

In February 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC seeking certification of the Iberville/Coastal Prairie facility, which will provide 175 MW of capacity through a PPA with a third party, and the Sterlington facility, a 49 MW self-build project located near the deactivated Sterlington power plant (the 2022 Solar Portfolio). Entergy Louisiana is seeking to include these resources within the portfolio supporting the Rider GGO rate schedule to help fulfill customer interest in access to renewable energy. Entergy Louisiana has requested the costs of these facilities, as offset by Rider GGO revenues, be deemed eligible for recovery in accordance with the terms of the formula rate plan and fuel adjustment clause rate mechanisms that exist at the time the facilities are placed into service. In January 2024, the parties filed an uncontested stipulated settlement agreement on the key issues in the case, which stated that the 2022 Solar Portfolio should be constructed, found that Entergy Louisiana’s proposed cost recovery mechanisms were appropriate, and confirmed the resources’ eligibility for inclusion in Rider GGO. The settlement was approved by the LPSC in January 2024. The Sterlington facility is expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2026.

Alternative RFP and Certification

In March 2023, Entergy Louisiana made the first phase of a bifurcated filing to seek approval from the LPSC for an alternative to the requests for proposals (RFP) process that would enable the acquisition of up to 3 GW of solar resources on a faster timeline than the current RFP and certification process allows. The initial phase of the filing established the need for the acquisition of additional resources and the need for an alternative to the RFP process. The second phase of the filing, which contains the details of the proposal for the alternative competitive procurement process and the information necessary to support certification, was filed in May 2023. In addition to the acquisition of up to 3 GW of solar resources, the filing also seeks approval of a new renewable energy credits-based tariff, Rider Geaux ZERO. Several parties have intervened, and a procedural schedule was established in May 2023 with a hearing scheduled for March 2024. In October 2023 the LPSC staff and intervenors filed testimony, with the LPSC staff supporting the amount of solar resources to be acquired and the alternative RFP process. The LPSC staff also supported, subject to certain recommendations, the proposed framework for evaluation and certification of the solar resources by the LPSC and the proposed tariff.

Other Generation

Orange County Advanced Power Station

In September 2021, Entergy Texas filed an application seeking PUCT approval to amend Entergy Texas’s certificate of convenience and necessity to construct, own, and operate the Orange County Advanced Power Station, a new 1,215 MW combined-cycle combustion turbine facility to be located in Bridge City, Texas at an initially-estimated expected total cost of $1.2 billion inclusive of the estimated costs of the generation facilities, transmission upgrades, contingency, an allowance for funds used during construction, and necessary regulatory expenses, among others. The project includes combustion turbine technology with dual fuel capability, able to co-fire up to 30% hydrogen by volume upon commercial operation and upgradable to support 100% hydrogen operations in the future. In December 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In March 2022 certain intervenors filed testimony opposing the hydrogen co-firing component of the proposed project and others filed testimony opposing the project outright. Also in March 2022 the PUCT staff filed testimony opposing the hydrogen co-firing component of the proposed project, but otherwise taking no specific position on the merits of the project. The PUCT staff also proposed that the PUCT establish a maximum amount that Entergy Texas may recover in rates attributable to the project. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed rebuttal testimony addressing and
16

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
rebutting these various arguments. The hearing on the merits was held in June 2022, and post-hearing briefs were submitted in July 2022. In September 2022 the ALJs with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued a proposal for decision recommending the PUCT approve Entergy Texas’s application for certification of Orange County Advanced Power Station subject to certain conditions, including a cap on cost recovery at $1.37 billion, the exclusion of investment associated with co-firing hydrogen, weatherization requirements, and customer receipt of any contractual benefits associated with the facility’s guaranteed heat rate. In October 2022 the parties in the proceeding filed exceptions and replies to exceptions to the proposal for decision. Also in October 2022, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT information regarding a new fixed pricing option for an estimated project cost of approximately $1.55 billion associated with Entergy Texas’s issuance of limited notice to proceed by mid-November 2022. In November 2022 the PUCT issued a final order approving the requested amendment to Entergy Texas’s certificate of convenience and necessity to construct, own, and operate the Orange County Advanced Power Station without the investment associated with hydrogen co-firing capability, without a cap on cost recovery, and subject to certain conditions, including weatherization requirements and customer receipt of any contractual benefits associated with the facility’s guaranteed heat rate.

In December 2022, Texas Industrial Energy Consumers and Sierra Club filed motions for rehearing of the PUCT’s final order alleging the PUCT erred in granting the certification of the Orange County Advanced Power Station, in not imposing a cost cap, in including certain findings related to the reasonableness of Entergy Texas’s request for proposals from which the Orange County Advanced Power Station was selected, and in other regards. Also in December 2022, Entergy Texas filed a response to the motions for rehearing refuting the points raised therein. In January 2023 the PUCT issued letters noting that it voted to consider Texas Industrial Energy Consumers’ motion for rehearing at its upcoming January 2023 open meeting and voted not to consider Sierra Club’s motion for rehearing at an open meeting. At the January 2023 open meeting, the PUCT voted to grant Texas Industrial Energy Consumers’ motion for rehearing for the limited purpose of issuing an order on rehearing that excludes three findings related to Entergy Texas’s request for proposals. The order on rehearing does not change the PUCT’s certification of the Orange County Advanced Power Station or the conditions placed thereon in the PUCT’s November 2022 final order. Construction is in progress, and subject to receipt of required permits, the facility is expected to be in service by mid-2026.

System Resilience and Storm Hardening

Entergy Louisiana

In December 2022, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC seeking a public interest finding regarding Phase I of Entergy Louisiana’s Future Ready resilience plan and approval of a rider mechanism to recover the program’s costs. Phase I reflects the first five years of a ten-year resilience plan and includes investment of approximately $5 billion, including hardening investment, transmission dead-end structures, enhanced vegetation management, and telecommunications improvement. In April 2023 a procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled for January 2024. The LPSC staff and certain intervenors filed direct testimony in August, September, and October 2023. The LPSC staff filed cross-answering testimony in October 2023. The testimony largely supports implementation of some level of accelerated investment in resilience, but raises various issues related to the magnitude of the investment, the cost recovery mechanism applicable to the investment, and the ratemaking for the investment. In January 2024 the hearing in this matter was rescheduled to April 2024.

The LPSC had previously opened a formal rulemaking proceeding in December 2021 to investigate efforts to improve resilience of electric utility infrastructure. In April 2023 the LPSC staff issued a draft rule in the rulemaking proceeding related to a requirement to file a grid resilience plan. The procedural schedule entered in the rulemaking proceeding contemplated adoption of a final rule in October 2023, but this did not occur, and a new date has not been set. The LPSC also has pending rulemakings addressing issues related to pole viability and grid maintenance practices. In December 2023, in those rulemakings, the LPSC staff issued a report and recommendation proposing to impose significant new reporting and compliance obligations related to jurisdictional utilities’ distribution and transmission operations, including new obligations related to grid hardening plans, pole
17

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

inspections, pole replacement, vegetation management, storm restoration plans, new reliability metrics, software for handling customer complaints and complaint resolution, required use of drone technology, and new penalties and incentives for reliability performance and for compliance with the new obligations. In February 2024, Entergy Louisiana and other parties filed comments on the LPSC staff’s report.

Entergy New Orleans

In October 2021 the City Council passed a resolution and order establishing a docket and procedural schedule with respect to system resiliency and storm hardening. The docket will identify a plan for storm hardening and resiliency projects with other stakeholders. In July 2022, Entergy New Orleans filed with the City Council a response identifying a preliminary plan for storm hardening and resiliency projects, including microgrids, to be implemented over ten years at an approximate cost of $1.5 billion. In February 2023 the City Council approved a revised procedural schedule requiring Entergy New Orleans to make a filing in April 2023 containing a narrowed list of proposed hardening projects, with final comments on that filing due July 2023. In April 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed the required application and supporting testimony seeking City Council approval of the first phase (five years and $559 million) of a ten-year infrastructure hardening plan totaling approximately $1 billion. Entergy New Orleans also sought, among other relief, City Council approval of a rider to recover from customers the costs of the infrastructure hardening plan. In July 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed comments in support of its application. In February 2024 the City Council approved a resolution authorizing Entergy New Orleans to implement a resilience project to be partially funded by $55 million of matching funding through the Department of Energy’s Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships program. The resolution also requires Entergy New Orleans to submit, no later than July 2024, a revised resilience plan consisting of projects in three-year intervals. Entergy New Orleans continues to seek approval of its application.

Dividends and Stock Repurchases

Declarations of dividends on Entergy’s common stock are made at the discretion of the Board. Among other things, the Board evaluates the level of Entergy’s common stock dividends based upon earnings per share from the Utility operating segment and the Parent and Other portion of the business, financial strength, and future investment opportunities. At its January 20212024 meeting, the Board declared a dividend of $0.95$1.13 per share. Entergy paid $748$918 million in 2020, $7122023, $842 million in 2019,2022, and $648$775 million in 20182021 in cash dividends on its common stock.

In accordance with Entergy’s stock-based compensation plans, Entergy periodically grants stock options, restricted stock, performance units, and restricted stock unit awards to key employees, which may be exercised to obtain shares of Entergy’s common stock. According to the plans, these shares can be newly issued shares, treasury stock, or shares purchased on the open market. Entergy’s management has been authorized by the Board to repurchase on the open market shares up to an amount sufficient to fund the exercise of grants under the plans.

In addition to the authority to fund grant exercises, the Board has authorized share repurchase programs to enable opportunistic purchases in response to market conditions. In October 2010 the Board granted authority for a $500 million share repurchase program. As of December 31, 2020,2023, $350 million of authority remains under the $500 million share repurchase program. The amount of repurchases may vary as a result of material changes in business results or capital spending or new investment opportunities, or if limitations in the credit markets continue for a prolonged period.

20

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Sources of Capital

Entergy’s sources to meet its capital requirements and to fund potential investments include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand ($1,759133 million as of December 31, 2020)2023);
storm reserve escrow accounts;
18

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
debt and equity issuances in the capital markets, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
bank financing under new or existing facilities or commercial paper; and
sales of assets.

Circumstances such as weather patterns, fuel and purchased power price fluctuations, and unanticipated expenses, including unscheduled plant outages and storms, could affect the timing and level of internally generated funds in the future. In addition to the financings necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, the Registrant Subsidiaries expect to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher-cost debt and replace it with lower-cost debt if market conditions permit.

Provisions within the organizational documents relating to preferred stock or membership interests of certain of Entergy Corporation’s subsidiaries could restrict the payment of cash dividends or other distributions on their common and preferred equity. All debt and preferred equity issuances by the Registrant Subsidiaries require prior regulatory approval and their debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in bond indentures and other agreements. Entergy believes that the Registrant Subsidiaries have sufficient capacity under these tests to meet foreseeable capital needs.needs for the next twelve months and beyond.

The FERC has jurisdiction over securities issuances by the Utility operating companies and System Energy. The City Council has concurrent jurisdiction over Entergy New Orleans’s securities issuances with maturities longer than one year. The APSC has concurrent jurisdiction over Entergy Arkansas’s issuances of securities secured by Arkansas property, including first mortgage bond issuances. No regulatory approvals are necessary for Entergy Corporation to issue securities. The current FERC-authorized short-term borrowing limits and long-term financing authorization for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas and System Energy are effective through July 2022.April 2025. The FERC-authorized short-term borrowing limit for System Energy is effective through March 2025. Entergy Arkansas has obtained first mortgage bond/secured financing authorization from the APSC that extends through December 2022.2025. Entergy New Orleans also has obtained long-term financing authorization from the City Council that extends through July 2022.December 2025. Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana and System Energy each havehas obtained long-term financing authorization from the FERC that extends through July 2022April 2025 for issuances by the nuclear fuel company variable interest entities. System Energy has obtained long-term financing authorization from the FERC that extends through March 2025 for issuances by its nuclear fuel company variable interest entity. In addition to borrowings from commercial banks, the Registrant Subsidiaries may also borrow from the Entergy Systemsystem money pool and from other internal short-term borrowing arrangements. The money pool is an intercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing and lending arrangements, and the money pool and the other internal borrowing arrangements are inter-company borrowing arrangements designed to reduce Entergy’s subsidiaries’ dependence on external short-term borrowings. Borrowings from internal and external short-term borrowings combined may not exceed the FERC-authorized limits. See Notes 4 and 5 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy’s borrowing limits, authorizations, and amounts outstanding.

Equity Issuances and Equity Distribution Program

Entergy Corporation currently expects to issue approximately $2.5 billion of equity through 2024. Entergy is considering various methods, including, among others, at the market distributions, block trades, and preferred equity issuances. In January 2021, Entergy Corporation entered into an equity distribution sales agreement with several counterparties establishing an at the market equity distribution program, pursuant to which Entergy Corporation may offer and sell from time to time shares of its common stock. The sales agreement provides that, in addition to the issuance and sale of shares of Entergy Corporation common stock, Entergy Corporation may also enter into forward sale agreements for the sale of its
21

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

common stock. The aggregate number of shares of common stock sold under this sales agreement and under any forward sale agreement may not exceed an aggregate gross sales price of $2 billion. Through 2021, 2022, and 2023, Entergy Corporation utilized the equity distribution program either to sell or to enter into forward sale agreements with respect to shares of common stock with an aggregate gross sales price of approximately $1.5 billion, of which approximately $1.3 billion of aggregate gross sales price was the subject of forward sale agreements and was subject to adjustment pursuant to the forward sale agreements. Entergy Corporation settled the forward sales agreements for cash proceeds of $853 million in November 2022, $48 million
19

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

in November 2023, and $83 million in December 2023. Entergy Corporation currently expects to issue approximately $1.4 billion of equity through 2026 under the at the market equity distribution program, with approximately $280 million already contracted under forward sales agreements as of December 31, 2023. See Note 7 to the financial statements for discussion of the forward sales agreements and common stock issuances and sales under the equity distribution program.

Hurricane Ida (Entergy Louisiana)

As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, in August 2020 and October 2020, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to portions of Entergy Louisiana’s service area. In February 2021 two winter storms (collectively, Winter Storm Uri) brought freezing rain and ice to Louisiana. In August 2021, Hurricane Ida caused extensive damage to Entergy Louisiana’s distribution and, to a lesser extent, transmission systems resulting in widespread power outages.

In April 2022, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC relating to Hurricane Ida restoration costs. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Ida were estimated to be approximately $2.54 billion, including approximately $1.96 billion in capital costs and approximately $586 million in non-capital costs. Including carrying costs of $57 million through December 2022, Entergy Louisiana was seeking an LPSC determination that $2.60 billion was prudently incurred and, therefore, eligible for recovery from customers. As part of this filing, Entergy Louisiana also was seeking an LPSC determination that an additional $32 million in costs associated with the restoration of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta as well as Winter Storm Uri was prudently incurred. This amount was exclusive of the requested $3 million in carrying costs through December 2022. In total, Entergy Louisiana was requesting an LPSC determination that $2.64 billion was prudently incurred and, therefore, eligible for recovery from customers. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, in March 2022 the LPSC approved financing of a $1 billion storm escrow account from which funds were withdrawn to finance costs associated with Hurricane Ida restoration. In June 2022, Entergy Louisiana supplemented the application with a request regarding the financing and recovery of the recoverable storm restoration costs. Specifically, Entergy Louisiana requested approval to securitize its restoration costs pursuant to Louisiana Act 55 financing, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021. In October 2022 the LPSC staff recommended a finding that the requested storm restoration costs of $2.64 billion, including associated carrying costs of $59.1 million, were prudently incurred and eligible for recovery from customers. The LPSC staff further recommended approval of Entergy Louisiana’s plans to securitize these costs, net of the $1 billion in funds withdrawn from the storm escrow account described above. The parties negotiated and executed an uncontested stipulated settlement which was filed with the LPSC in December 2022. The settlement agreement contains the following key terms: $2.57 billion of restoration costs from Hurricane Ida, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, and Winter Storm Uri were prudently incurred and eligible for recovery; carrying costs of $59.2 million were recoverable; and Entergy Louisiana was authorized to finance $1.657 billion utilizing the securitization process authorized by Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293. A procedural motion to consider the uncontested settlement at the December 2022 LPSC meeting did not pass and the settlement was not voted on. In January 2023 an ALJ with the LPSC conducted a settlement hearing to receive the uncontested settlement and supporting testimony into evidence and issued a report of proceedings, which allows the LPSC to consider the uncontested settlement without the procedural motion that did not pass in December. In January 2023, the LPSC approved the stipulated settlement subject to certain modifications. These modifications include the recognition of accumulated deferred income tax benefits related to damaged assets and system restoration costs as a reduction of the amount authorized to be financed utilizing the securitization process authorized by Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, from $1.657 billion to $1.491 billion. These modifications did not affect the LPSC’s conclusion that all system restoration costs sought by Entergy Louisiana were reasonable and prudent. In February 2023 the Louisiana Bond Commission voted to authorize the Louisiana Local Government Facilities and Community Development Authority (LCDA) to issue the bonds authorized in the LPSC’s financing order.

20

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
In March 2023 the Hurricane Ida securitization financing closed, resulting in the issuance of approximately $1.491 billion principal amount of bonds by the LCDA and a remaining regulatory asset of $180 million to be recovered through the exclusion of the accumulated deferred income taxes related to damaged assets and system restoration costs from the determination of future rates. The securitization was authorized pursuant to the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation Act, Part VIII of Chapter 9 of Title 45 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021. The LCDA loaned the proceeds to the LURC. Pursuant to Act 293, the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to a State legislatively authorized and LURC-sponsored trust, Restoration Law Trust II (the storm trust II).

Pursuant to Act 293, the net proceeds of the bonds were used by the storm trust II to purchase 14,576,757.48 Class B preferred, non-voting membership interest units (the preferred membership interests) issued by Entergy Finance Company, LLC, a majority owned indirect subsidiary of Entergy. Entergy Finance Company is required to make annual distributions (dividends) commencing on December 15, 2023 on the preferred membership interests issued to the storm trust II. These annual dividends received by the storm trust II will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana and the LURC, as beneficiaries of the storm trust II. Specifically, 1% of the annual dividends received by the storm trust II will be distributed to the LURC for the benefit of customers, and 99% will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana, net of storm trust expenses. The preferred membership interests have a stated annual cumulative cash dividend rate of 7.5% and a liquidation price of $100 per unit. The terms of the preferred membership interests include certain financial covenants to which Entergy Finance Company is subject. Semi-annual redemptions of the preferred membership interests, subject to certain conditions, are expected to occur over the next 15 years.

Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on their balance sheets because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA. The bonds are secured by system restoration property, which is the right granted by law to the LURC to collect a system restoration charge from customers. The system restoration charge is adjusted at least semi-annually to ensure that it is sufficient to service the bonds. Entergy Louisiana collects the system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee. Entergy Louisiana began collecting the system restoration charge effective with the first billing cycle of April 2023 and the system restoration charge is expected to remain in place for up to 15 years. Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the collections as revenue because Entergy Louisiana is merely acting as a billing and collection agent for the LCDA and the LURC. In the remote possibility that the system restoration charge, as well as any funds in the excess subaccount and funds in the debt service reserve account, are insufficient to service the bonds resulting in a payment default, the storm trust II is required to liquidate Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests in an amount equal to what would be required to cure the default. The estimated value of this indirect guarantee is immaterial.

From the proceeds from the issuance of the preferred membership interests, Entergy Finance Company loaned approximately $1.5 billion to Entergy, which was indirectly contributed to Entergy Louisiana as a capital contribution.

As discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, the securitization resulted in recognition of a net reduction of income tax expense of approximately $133 million, after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax positions, by Entergy Louisiana. Entergy’s recognition of reduced income tax expense was offset by other tax charges resulting in a net reduction of income tax expense of $129 million, after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax positions. In recognition of its obligations described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceeding, Entergy Louisiana recorded in first quarter 2023 a $103 million ($76 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect its obligation to provide credits to its customers.

As discussed in Note 6 and Note 17 to the financial statements, Entergy Louisiana consolidates the storm trust II as a variable interest entity and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in
21

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

the financial statements. In first quarter 2023, Entergy Louisiana recorded a charge of $14.6 million in other income to reflect the LURC’s beneficial interest in the storm trust II.

Cash Flow Activity

As shown in Entergy’s Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 were as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of periodCash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$426 $481 $781 
Net cash provided by (used in):Net cash provided by (used in):   
Net cash provided by (used in):
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities
Operating activities
Operating activitiesOperating activities2,690 2,817 2,385 
Investing activitiesInvesting activities(4,772)(4,510)(4,106)
Financing activitiesFinancing activities3,415 1,638 1,421 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents1,333 (55)(300)
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents at end of periodCash and cash equivalents at end of period$1,759 $426 $481 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities decreased by $127increased $1,709 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

an increase of $224 million in storm spending in 2020 as compared to 2019 primarily due to spending in 2020 on Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta,lower fuel costs and Hurricane Zeta restoration. See “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta” above for discussion of storm restoration efforts;
the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs in 2020 as compared to the prior year.costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of fuel and purchased power cost recovery;
lower collectionsa decrease of receivables from customers,$210 million in partstorm spending primarily due to the COVID-19 pandemic;Hurricane Ida restoration efforts in 2022;
a decrease of $203 million in pension contributions in 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the effectfinancial statements for a discussion of less favorable weather on billed Utility sales in 2020; qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding;
an increase of $32$57 million in incentive-based compensation payments in 2020.

The decrease was partially offset by:

the decrease in the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to Utility customers.interest received, including shorter-term financing interest earnings at Entergy Louisiana and interest on storm reserve escrow accounts. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts Entergy Louisiana’s shorter-term financing interest earnings; and Jobs Act;
a decrease of $86 million in severance and retention payments of $40 million in 2020 as compared2022 related to 2019. See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities ExitEntergy’s exit from the Merchant Power Business” above for a discussion of management’s strategy to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant power business;
a decrease of $83 million in pension contributions in 2020 as compared to 2019.business. See Critical Accounting Estimates” below and Note 1113 to the financial statements for further discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding;Entergy’s exit from the merchant power business.

The increase was partially offset by:

an increaselower collections from Utility customers;
net proceeds of $71$202 million in proceeds received from the DOE resultingLURC in December 2022 from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously expensed.the Entergy New Orleans storm cost securitization. See Note 82 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation;Entergy New Orleans storm cost securitization; and
the timingan increase of payments to vendors;$85 million in interest paid.
a decrease of $34 million in spending on nuclear refueling outages; and
22

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
an increase of $25 million of nuclear insurance refunds.

Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities increased by $262decreased $1,081 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

an increasea decrease of $942$595 million in storm spending in 2020,distribution construction expenditures primarily on Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta restoration. See “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta” abovedue to lower capital expenditures for discussion of storm restoration efforts;in 2023. The decrease in storm restoration expenditures is primarily due to Hurricane Ida restoration efforts in 2022;
net receipts from storm reserve escrow accounts of $79 million in 2023 compared to net payments to storm reserve escrow accounts of $369 million in 2022;
a decrease of $86 million in information technology capital expenditures primarily due to decreased spending on various technology projects in 2023;
the initial payment of approximately $105 million in 2022 as compared to the substantial completion and final payments totaling approximately $35 million in 2023 for the purchase of Washington Parish Energy Centerthe Sunflower Solar facility by the Entergy Louisiana in November 2020 for approximately $222 million.Mississippi tax equity partnership. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the Washington Parish Energy CenterSunflower Solar facility purchase; and
a decrease of $57 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to lower capital expenditures for storm restoration in 2023. The decrease in storm restoration expenditures is primarily due to Hurricane Ida restoration efforts in 2022.

The decrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $140$98 million in distributionnon-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to investmenthigher spending at Entergy Texas on the Orange County Advanced Power Station project, partially offset by a lower scope of work on projects performed, including during plant outages, in the reliability and infrastructure of the distribution system, including increased spending on advanced metering infrastructure;2023 as compared to 2022;
an increase of $87$47 million in nuclear fuel purchases due to variations from year to year in the timing and pricing of fuel reload requirements, materials and services deliveries, and the timing of cash payments during the nuclear fuel cycle; and
an increase of $43 million primarily due to changes in collateral posted to provide credit support to secure its obligations under agreements to sell power produced by Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ power plants; and
$25$30 million in plant upgrades for the Choctaw Generating Station in March 2020. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the Choctaw Generating Station purchase.

The increase was partially offset by:

a decrease of $309 million of non-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to higher spending in 2019 on the Montgomery County Power Station, Lake Charles Power Station, and J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) projects;
the purchase of the Choctaw Generating Station in October 2019 for approximately $305 million;
an increase of $303 million in net receipts from storm reserve escrow accounts;
a decrease of $141 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to the timing of work performed in 2020 as compared to 2019;
an increase of $70 million in proceeds received from the DOE in 2020 as compared to the prior year resulting from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously capitalized. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation;
a decrease of $44 million in information technology construction expenditures primarily due to decreased spending on various technology projects; and
a decrease of $23 million in nuclear construction expenditures primarily due to a lower scope of work performed on various nuclear projects in 2020 as compared to 2019.decommissioning trust fund investment activity.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided by financing activities increased by $1,777decreased $2,662 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

proceeds from securitization of $1.5 billion received by the storm trust II at Entergy Louisiana in 2023 compared to proceeds from securitization of $3.2 billion received by the storm trust I at Entergy Louisiana in 2022;
long-term debt activity providingusing approximately $4,467$862 million of cash in 20202023 compared to providing approximately $1,685$24 million of cash in 2022;
a decrease of $722 million in 2019;net proceeds from the issuance of common stock under the at the market equity distribution program in 2023 as compared to 2022; and
an increase of $77 million in common stock dividends paid in 2023 as a result of an increase in the repurchasedividend paid per share and an increase in first quarter 2019the number of $50shares outstanding.

The decrease was partially offset by net issuances of $311 million of Class A mandatorily redeemable preferred membership unitscommercial paper in 2023 as compared to net repayments of $374 million of commercial paper in 2022 and an increase of $110 million in prepaid deposits related to contributions-in-aid-of-construction primarily for customer and generator interconnection agreements.

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the Entergy Holdings Company LLC, a wholly-owned Entergy subsidiary, that were held by a third party.Louisiana storm cost securitizations. See Note 4 to the financial statements for details of Entergy’s commercial paper program. See Note 5 to the financial statements for details of long-term debt. See Note 7 to the financial statements for discussion of the equity distribution program.

23

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

The increase was partially offset by:

proceeds of $608 million from the issuance of common stock in May 2019 as a result of the settlement of equity forwards. See Note 7 to the financial statements for discussion of the equity forward sale agreements;
an increase of $324 million in net repayments of commercial paper in 2020 compared to 2019;
a decrease of $52 million in treasury stock issuances in 2020 due to a larger amount of previously repurchased Entergy Corporation common stock issued in 2019 to satisfy stock option exercises;
an increase of $37 million in common stock dividends paid as a result of an increase in the number of shares outstanding and an increase in the dividend paid per share in 2020 compared to 2019; and
the issuance of $35 million aggregate liquidation value 5.375% Series A preferred stock in September 2019 by Entergy Texas.

For the details of Entergy’s commercial paper program, see Note 4 to the financial statements. See Note 5 to the financial statements for details of long-term debt.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow Activity” in Item 7 of Entergy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20192022, filed with the SEC on February 21, 202024, 2023, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation

State and Local Rate Regulation and Fuel-Cost Recovery

The rates that the Utility operating companies charge for their services significantly influence Entergy’s financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. These companies are regulated, and the rates charged to their customers are determined in regulatory proceedings. Governmental agencies, including the APSC, the LPSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and the PUCT, are primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers. Following is a summary of the Utility operating companies’ authorized returns on common equity:

CompanyAuthorized Return on Common Equity
  
Entergy Arkansas9.25%9.15% - 10.25%10.15%
Entergy Louisiana9.2%9.0% - 10.4%10.0% Electric; 9.3% - 10.3% Gas
Entergy Mississippi8.89%9.74% - 10.93%11.88%
Entergy New Orleans8.85% - 9.85%
Entergy Texas9.65%9.57%

The Utility operating companies’ base rate,Rate regulation and related regulatory proceedings and fuel and purchased power cost recovery and storm cost recovery proceedings for the Utility operating companies are discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements.

Federal Regulation

The FERC regulates wholesale sales of electricity rates and interstate transmission of electricity, including rates for System Energy’s sales of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The current return on equity and capital structure of System Energy are currently the subject of complaints filed by certain of the Utility operating companies’ retail regulators. The current return on equity under the Unit Power Sales Agreement is 10.94%. for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans and 9.65% for Entergy Mississippi as a result of the System Energy settlement with the MPSC. If the System Energy settlement with the APSC is approved by the FERC, the authorized rate of return on equity under the Unit Power Sales Agreement for Entergy Arkansas will be adjusted to 9.65% in accordance with the settlement terms. Prior to each Utility operating company’scompanies’ termination of participation in the System Agreement (Entergy
24

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Arkansas in December 2013, Entergy Mississippi in November 2015, and Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas, each in August 2016), the Utility operating companies engaged in the coordinated planning, construction, and operation of generating and bulk transmission facilities under the terms of the System Agreement, which was a rate schedule approved by the FERC. Certain of the Utility operating companies’ retail regulators are pursuing or have settled litigation involving the System Agreement at the FERC and in federal courts. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the complaints filed with the FERC, challengingincluding challenges with respect to System Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of System Energy’s sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, and the Grand Gulf sale leaseback arrangement, and a separate request for the FERC to initiate a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period, as well as System Energy formula rate annual protocols formal challenges
24

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
concerning 2020 and 2021 calendar year bills and discussion of the System Energy settlements with the MPSC and the APSC.

Market and Credit Risk Sensitive Instruments

Market risk is the risk of changes in the value of commodity and financial instruments, or in future net income or cash flows, in response to changing market conditions. Entergy holds commodity and financial instruments that are exposed to the following significant market risks.

The commodity price risk associated with the sale of electricity by the Entergy Wholesale CommoditiesEntergy’s non-utility operations business.
The interest rate and equity price risk associated with Entergy’s investments in qualified pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits trust funds. See Note 11 to the financial statements for details regarding Entergy’s qualified pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits trust funds.
The interest rate and equity price risk associated with Entergy’s investments in nuclear plant decommissioning trust funds, particularly in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business.funds. See Note 16 to the financial statements for details regarding Entergy’s decommissioning trust funds.
The interest rate risk associated with changes in interest rates as a result of Entergy’s outstanding indebtedness. Entergy manages its interest rate exposure by monitoring current interest rates and its debt outstanding in relation to total capitalization. See Notes 4 and 5 to the financial statements for the details of Entergy’s debt outstanding.

The Utility has limited exposure to the effects of market risk because it operates primarily under cost-based rate regulation. To the extent approved by their retail regulators, the Utility operating companies use commodity and financial instruments to hedge the exposure to price volatility inherent in their purchased power, fuel, and gas purchased for resale costs that are recovered from customers.

Entergy’s commodity and financial instruments are also exposed to credit risk. Credit risk is the risk of loss from nonperformance by suppliers, customers, or financial counterparties to a contract or agreement. Entergy is also exposed to a potential demand on liquidity due to credit support requirements within its supply or sales agreements.

Commodity Price Risk

Power Generation

As a wholesale generator, Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ core business is selling energy, measured in MWh, to its customers.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities enters into forward contracts with its customers and also sells energy in the day ahead or spot markets.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities also sells unforced capacity, which allows load-serving entities to meet specified reserve and related requirements placed on them by the ISOs in their respective areas.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ forward physical power contracts consist of contracts to sell energy only, contracts to sell capacity only, and bundled contracts in which it sells both capacity and energy.  While the terminology and payment mechanics vary in these contracts, each of these types of contracts requires Entergy Wholesale Commodities to deliver MWh of energy, make capacity available, or both. In addition to its forward physical power contracts, Entergy Wholesale Commodities may also use a combination of financial contracts,
25

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

including swaps, collars, and options, to manage forward commodity price risk. The sensitivities may not reflect the total maximum upside potential from higher market prices. The information contained in the following table represents projections at a point in time and will vary over time based on numerous factors, such as future market prices, contracting activities, and generation. Following is a summary of Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ current forward capacity and generation contracts as well as total revenue projections based on market prices as of December 31, 2020.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities Nuclear Portfolio
20212022
Energy
Percent of planned generation under contract (a):
Unit-contingent (b)98%99%
Planned generation (TWh) (c) (d)9.62.8
Average revenue per MWh on contracted volumes:
Expected based on market prices as of December 31, 2020$54.5$47.1
Capacity
Percent of capacity sold forward (e):
Bundled capacity and energy contracts (f)68%97%
Capacity contracts (g)29%—%
Total97%97%
Planned net MW in operation (average) (d)1,158338
Average revenue under contract per kW per month (applies to capacity contracts only)$0.1$—
Total Energy and Capacity Revenues (h)
Expected sold and market total revenue per MWh$54.0$46.8
Sensitivity: -/+ $10 per MWh market price change$53.8 - $54.2$46.7 - $47.0

(a)Percent of planned generation output sold or purchased forward under contracts, forward physical contracts, forward financial contracts, or options that mitigate price uncertainty. Positions that are not classified as hedges are netted in the planned generation under contract.
(b)Transaction under which power is supplied from a specific generation asset; if the asset is not operating, the seller is generally not liable to the buyer for any damages. Certain unit-contingent sales include a guarantee of availability. Availability guarantees provide for the payment to the power purchaser of contract damages, if incurred, in the event the seller fails to deliver power as a result of the failure of the specified generation unit to generate power at or above a specified availability threshold. All of Entergy’s outstanding guarantees of availability provide for dollar limits on Entergy’s maximum liability under such guarantees.
(c)Amount of output expected to be generated by Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear resources considering plant operating characteristics and outage schedules.
(d)Assumes the planned shutdown of Indian Point 3 on April 30, 2021 and planned shutdown of Palisades on May 31, 2022. For a discussion regarding the planned shutdown of the Indian Point 3 and Palisades plants, see “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” above.
(e)Percent of planned qualified capacity sold to mitigate price uncertainty under physical or financial transactions.
(f)A contract for the sale of installed capacity and related energy, priced per megawatt-hour sold.
(g)A contract for the sale of an installed capacity product in a regional market.
26

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
(h)Includes assumptions on converting a portion of the portfolio to contracted with fixed price and excludes non-cash revenue from the amortization of the Palisades below-market purchased power agreement, mark-to-market activity, and service revenues.

Some of the agreements to sell the power produced by Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ power plantsthe non-utility operations business contain provisions that require an Entergy subsidiary to provide credit support to secure its obligations under the agreements. The Entergy subsidiary is required to provide credit support based upon the difference between the current market prices and contracted power prices in the regions where Entergy Wholesale Commodities sells power. The primary form of credit support to satisfy these requirements is an Entergy Corporation guarantee.  Cash and letters of credit are also acceptable forms of credit support. At December 31, 2020,2023, based on power prices at that time, Entergy had liquidity exposure of $62$9 million under the guarantees in place supporting Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesits non-utility operations business transactions and $6$8 million of posted cash collateral. In the event of a decrease in Entergy Corporation’s credit rating to below investment grade, based on power prices as of December 31, 2020, Entergy would have been required to provide approximately $30 million of additional cash or letters of credit under some of the agreements. As of December 31, 2020, the liquidity exposure associated with Entergy Wholesale Commodities assurance requirements, including return of previously posted collateral from counterparties, would increase by $22 million for a $1 per MMBtu increase in gas prices in both the short- and long-term markets.

As of December 31, 2020, substantially all the credit exposure associated with the planned energy output under contract for Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants through 2022 is with counterparties or their guarantors that have public investment grade credit ratings.

Nuclear Matters

Entergy’s Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities businesses includebusiness includes the ownership and operation of nuclear generating plants and are,is, therefore, subject to the risks related to such ownership and operation. These include risks related to: the use, storage, and handling and disposal of high-level and low-level radioactive materials; the substantial financial requirements, both for capital investments and operational needs, including the financial requirements to address emerging issues like stress corrosion cracking of certain materials within the plant systemsrelated to equipment reliability, to position Entergy’s nuclear fleet to meet its operational goals; the performance and capacity factors of these nuclear plants; the risk of an adverse outcome to an expecteda challenge to the prudence of operations at Grand Gulf; the implementation of plans to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities merchant power business by 2022 and the post-shutdown decommissioning of these plants; regulatory requirements and potential future regulatory changes, including changes affecting the regulations governing nuclear plant ownership, operations, license amendments, and decommissioning; the availability of interim or permanent sites for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste, including the fees charged for such disposal; the sufficiency of nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets
25

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

and earnings to complete decommissioning of each site when required; and limitations on the amounts and types of insurance commercially availablerecoveries for losses in connection with nuclear plant operations and catastrophic events such as a nuclear accident.

NRC Reactor Oversight Process

The NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process is a program to collect information about plant performance, assess the information for its safety significance, and provide for appropriate licensee and NRC response. The NRC evaluates plant performance by analyzing two distinct inputs: inspection findings resulting from the NRC’s inspection program and performance indicators reported by the licensee. The evaluations result in the placement of each plant in one of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix columns: “licensee response column,” or Column 1, “regulatory response column,” or Column 2, “degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 3, and “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 4.4, and “unacceptable performance,” or Column 5. Plants in Column 1 are subject to normal NRC inspection activities. Plants in Column 2, Column 3, or Column 4 are subject to progressively increasing levels of inspection by the NRC with, in general, progressively increasing levels of associated costs. NuclearContinued plant operation is not permitted for plants in Column 5. All of the nuclear generating
27

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

plants owned and operated by Entergy’s Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities businessesbusiness are currently in Column 1, except for Grand Gulf,River Bend, which is in Column 2.

In November 2020July 2023 the NRC placed Grand GulfRiver Bend in Column 2, effective April 2023, based on failure to inspect wiring associated with the incidencehigh pressure core spray system. In August 2023 the NRC issued a finding and notice of three unplanned plant scrams during the second and third quarters of 2020. Two of the scram events related to new turbine control system components that failed, and a thirdviolation related to a feedwater valve positioner that failed, all of which had been replacedradiation monitor calibration issue at River Bend. In December 2023, River Bend successfully completed the inspection on the high pressure core spray system issue and in a refueling outage that ended in May 2020. The NRC plans to conduct aFebruary 2024, River Bend successfully completed the supplemental inspection of Grand Gulf in accordance with its inspection procedures for nuclear plantsthe radiation monitor calibration issue involving radiation monitor calibrations. River Bend will remain in Column 2. As a consequence2 pending receipt of two additional Grand Gulf scrams during the fourthformal report on the inspection, which is expected in first quarter 2020, System Energy expects Grand Gulf to be placed into Column 3 based on plant performance indicators for the four quarters ended December 31, 2020. This will involve an additional supplemental NRC inspection of Grand Gulf in accordance with its inspection procedures for nuclear plants in Column 3.2024.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of Entergy’s financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Management has identified the following accounting estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and the potential for future changes in these assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that would have a material effect on the presentation of Entergy’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Nuclear Decommissioning Costs

Entergy subsidiariesCertain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy own nuclear generation facilities in both the Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities operating segments.facilities. Regulations require these Entergy subsidiaries to decommission the nuclear power plants after each facility is taken out of service, and cash is deposited in trust funds during the facilities’ operating lives in order to provide for this obligation. Entergy conducts periodic decommissioning cost studies to estimate the costs that will be incurred to decommission the facilities. The following key assumptions have a significant effect on these estimates.

Timing - In projecting decommissioning costs, two assumptions must be made to estimate the timing of plant decommissioning. First, the date of the plant’s retirement must be estimated for those plants that do not have an announced shutdown date. The estimate may include assumptions regarding the possibility that the plant may have an operating life shorter than the operating license expiration. Second, an assumption must be made regarding whether all decommissioning activity will proceed immediately upon plant retirement, or whether the plant will be placed in SAFSTOR status. SAFSTOR is decommissioning a facility by placing it in a safe, stable condition that is maintained until it is subsequently decontaminated and dismantled to levels that permit license termination, normally within 60 years from permanent cessation
26

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
of operations. A change of assumption regarding either the period of continued operation, the use of a SAFSTOR period, or whether Entergy will continue to hold the plant or the plant is held for sale can change the present value of the asset retirement obligation.
Cost Escalation Factors - Entergy’s current decommissioning cost studies include an assumption that decommissioning costs will escalate over present cost levels by factors ranging from approximately 2% to 3% annually. A 50-basis point change in this assumption could change the estimated present value of the decommissioning liabilities by approximately 6%10% to 18%17%. The timing assumption influences the significance of the effect of a change in the estimated inflation or cost escalation rate because the effect increases with the length of time assumed before decommissioning activity ends.
Spent Fuel Disposal - Federal law requires the DOE to provide for the permanent storage of spent nuclear fuel, and legislation has been passed by Congress to develop a repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The DOE has not yet begun accepting spent nuclear fuel and is in non-compliance with federal law. The DOE
28

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
continues to delay meeting its obligation and Entergy’s nuclear plant owners are continuing to pursue damage claims against the DOE for its failure to provide timely spent fuel storage. Until a federal site is available, however, nuclear plant operators must provide for interim spent fuel storage on the nuclear plant site, which can require the construction and maintenance of dry cask storage sites or other facilities. The costs of developing and maintaining these facilities during the decommissioning period can have a significant effect (as much as an average of 20% to 30% of total estimated decommissioning costs). Entergy’s decommissioning studies include cost estimates for spent fuel storage. These estimates could change in the future, however, based on the expected timing of when the DOE begins to fulfill its obligation to receive and store spent nuclear fuel. See Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy’s spent nuclear fuel litigation.
Technology and Regulation - Over the past several years, more practical experience with the actual decommissioning of nuclear facilities has been gained and that experience has been incorporated into Entergy’s current decommissioning cost estimates. Given the long duration of decommissioning projects, additional experience, including technological advancements in decommissioning, could be gained and affect current cost estimates. In addition, if regulations regarding nuclear decommissioning were to change, this could affect cost estimates.
Interest Rates - The estimated decommissioning costs that are the basis for the recorded decommissioning liability are discounted to present value using a credit-adjusted risk-free rate. When the decommissioning liability is revised, increases in cash flows are discounted using the current credit-adjusted risk-free rate. Decreases in estimated cash flows are discounted using the credit-adjusted risk-free rate used previously in estimating the decommissioning liability that is being revised. Therefore, to the extent that a revised cost study results in an increase in estimated cash flows, a change in interest rates from the time of the previous cost estimate will affect the calculation of the present value of the revised decommissioning liability.

Revisions of estimated decommissioning costs that decrease the liability also result in a decrease in the asset retirement cost asset. For the non-rate-regulated portions of Entergy’s business for which the plant’s value is impaired, these reductions will immediately reduce operating expenses in the period of the revision if the reduction of the liability exceeds the amount of the undepreciated plant asset at the date of the revision. Revisions of estimated decommissioning costs that increase the liability result in an increase in the asset retirement cost asset, which is then depreciated over the asset’s remaining economic life. For a plant in the non-rate-regulated portions of Entergy’s business for which the plant’s value is impaired, however, including a plant that is shutdown, or is nearing its shutdown date, the increase in the liability is likely to immediately increase operating expense in the period of the revision and not increase the asset retirement cost asset. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of impairment of long-lived assets and Note 9 to the financial statements for further discussion of asset retirement obligations.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

Entergy’s Utility operating companies and System Energy are subject to retail regulation by their respective state and local regulators and to wholesale regulation by the FERC. Because these regulatory agencies set the rates the Utility operating companies and System Energy are allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, the Utility operating companies and System Energy apply accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. Regulatory assets represent incurred costs that have been deferred because they are probable of future recovery from customers through regulated rates. Regulatory liabilities represent the excess recovery of costs(1) revenue or gains that have been deferred because it is probable such amounts will be returnedcredited to customers through future regulated rates.rates or (2) billings in advance of expenditures for approved regulatory programs. See Note 2 to the
27

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

financial statements for a discussion of rate and regulatory matters, including details of Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities.

For each regulatory jurisdiction in which they conduct business, the Utility operating companies and System Energy assess whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This
29

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. If the assessments made by the Utility operating companies and System Energy are ultimately different than actual regulatory outcomes, it could materially affect the results of operations, financial position, and cash flows of Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

Entergy has significant investments in long-lived assets in both of its operating segments, and Entergy evaluates these assets against the market economics and under the accounting rules for impairment when there are indications that an impairment may exist. This evaluation involves a significant degree of estimation and uncertainty. In the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, Entergy’s investments in merchant generation assets are subject to impairment if adverse market or regulatory conditions arise, particularly if it leads to a decision or an expectation that Entergy will operate or own a plant for a shorter period than previously expected; if there is a significant adverse change in the physical condition of a plant; or, if capital investment in a plant significantly exceeds previously-expected amounts.

If an asset is considered held for use, and Entergy concludes that events and circumstances are present indicating that an impairment analysis should be performed under the accounting standards, the sum of the expected undiscounted future cash flows from the asset are compared to the asset’s carrying value. The carrying value of the asset includes any capitalized asset retirement cost associated with the decommissioning liability; therefore, changes in assumptions that affect the decommissioning liability can increase or decrease the carrying value of the asset subject to impairment. If the expected undiscounted future cash flows exceed the carrying value, no impairment is recorded. If the expected undiscounted future cash flows are less than the carrying value and the carrying value exceeds the fair value, Entergy is required to record an impairment charge to write the asset down to its fair value. If an asset is considered held for sale, an impairment is required to be recognized if the fair value (less costs to sell) of the asset is less than its carrying value.

The expected future cash flows are based on a number of key assumptions, including:

Future power and fuel prices - Electricity and gas prices can be very volatile. This volatility increases the imprecision inherent in the long-term forecasts of commodity prices that are a key determinant of estimated future cash flows.
Market value of generation assets - Valuing assets held for sale requires estimating the current market value of generation assets. While market transactions provide evidence for this valuation, these transactions are relatively infrequent, the market for such assets is volatile, and the value of individual assets is affected by factors unique to those assets.
Future operating costs - Entergy assumes relatively minor annual increases in operating costs. Technological or regulatory changes that have a significant effect on operations could cause a significant change in these assumptions.
Timing and the life of the asset - Entergy assumes an expected life of the asset. A change in the timing assumption, whether due to management decisions regarding operation of the plant, the regulatory process, or operational or other factors, could have a significant effect on the expected future cash flows and result in a significant effect on operations.

See Note 14 to the financial statements for a discussion of impairment conclusions related to the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

Management exercises significant judgment in evaluating the potential tax effects of Entergy’s operations, transactions, and other events. Entergy accounts for uncertain income tax positions using a recognition model under
30

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
a two-step approach with a more likely-than-not recognition threshold and a measurement approach based on the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon settlement. Management evaluates each tax position based on the technical merits and facts and circumstances of the position, assuming the position will be examined by a taxing authority having full knowledge of all relevant information. Significant judgment is required to determine whether available information supports the assertion that the recognition threshold has been met. Additionally, measurement of unrecognized tax benefits to be recorded in the consolidated financial statements is based on the probability of different potential outcomes. Income tax expense and tax positions recorded could be significantly affected by events such as additional transactions contemplated or consummated by Entergy as well as audits by taxing authorities of the tax positions taken in transactions. Management believes that the financial statement tax balances are accounted for and adjusted appropriately each quarter, as necessary, in accordance with applicable authoritative guidance; however, the ultimate outcome of tax matters could result in favorable or unfavorable effects on the consolidated financial statements.

Certain Entergy subsidiaries have elected to apply the mark-to-market method of accounting for income tax return purposes to wholesale power purchase agreements as appropriate under the Internal Revenue Code and U.S. Treasury Regulations. The mark-to-market tax gain or loss computed each year is based on an estimated fair market valuation which includes analyses of market prices and conditions. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ mark-to-market gain or loss could be affected by federal and state income tax audits should taxing authorities challenge such valuations.

Entergy’s income taxes, including unrecognized tax benefits, open audits, and other significant tax matters, are discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements.
See “
Included in the IRS examination of Entergy’s 2015 tax returns is the tax effect of the October 2015 combination of two Entergy utility companies, Entergy Gulf States LouisianaIncome Tax Legislation and Entergy Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana maintained a carryover tax basis in the assets received and the tax consequences provided for an increase in tax basis as well. This resulted in recognition in 2015 of a $334 million permanent difference and income tax benefit, net of the uncertain tax position recorded on the transaction. As discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, the IRS completed its examination of the 2014 and 2015 tax years and issued its 2014-2015 Revenue Agent Report in November 2020. Entergy Louisiana reversed the provision for uncertain tax positions with respect to the business combination.RegulationSee additional discussion of the 2014 and 2015 IRS audit in Note 3 to the financial statements.

In addition, as discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, in 2015, System Energy and Entergy Louisiana adopted a new method of accounting for income tax return purposes in which nuclear decommissioning liabilities are treated as production costs of electricity includable in cost of goods sold. The new method resulted in a reduction of taxable income of $1.2 billion for System Energy and $2.2 billion for Entergy Louisiana in 2015. In the third quarter 2020 the IRS issued Notices of Proposed Adjustment concerning this uncertain tax position allowing System Energy to include $102 million of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold and Entergy Louisiana to include $221 million of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold. The Notices of Proposed Adjustment will not be appealed.

As a result of System Energy being allowed to include part of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold, System Energy and Entergy recorded a deferred tax liability of $26 million. System Energy also recorded federal and state taxes payable of $402 million; on a consolidated basis, however, Entergy utilized tax loss carryovers to offset the federal taxable income adjustment and accordingly did not record federal taxes payable as a result of the outcome of this uncertain tax position.

As a result of Entergy Louisiana being allowed to include part of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy recorded a deferred tax liability of $60 million. Both Entergy Louisiana and Entergy utilized tax loss carryovers to offset the taxable income adjustment and accordingly did not record taxes payable as a result of the outcome of this uncertain tax position.

The partial disallowance of the uncertain tax position to include the decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold resulted in a $1.5 billion decrease in the balance of unrecognized tax benefits related to federal and state taxes for Entergy. Additionally, both System Energy and Entergy Louisiana recorded a reduction to their balances of unrecognized tax benefits for federal and state taxes of $461 million and $1.1 billion, respectively.

The tax treatment of Entergy Louisiana’s accrued regulatory liabilities associated with the Vidalia purchased power agreement and business combination guaranteed customer credits, which are discussed in Note 2
31

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

to the financial statements, has been resolved in a manner that results in a $190 million increase to previously reported taxable income. Entergy Louisiana and Entergy utilized tax loss carryovers to offset the taxable income adjustment, however, which allowed both Entergy Louisiana and Entergy to reduce their balances of federal and state unrecognized tax benefits by $74 million.

See Note 3 to the financial statements” above for discussion of the effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the federal income tax legislation enacted in December 2017.and regulation.

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy sponsors qualified, defined benefit pension plans, that cover substantially all employees, including cash balance plans and final average pay plans. Generally, plan participation is determined based on the employee’s most recent date of hire and collective bargaining agreement, where applicable. Additionally, Entergy currently provides other postretirement health care and life insurance benefits for substantially all full-time employees whose most recent date of hire or rehire is before July 1, 2014, and who reach retirement age and meet certain eligibility requirements while still working for Entergy.

Entergy’s reported costs of providing these benefits, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are affected by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms. Because of the complexity of these calculations,
28

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate for Entergy and the Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities segments.Registrant Subsidiaries.

Assumptions

Key actuarial assumptions utilized in determining qualified pension and other postretirement health care and life insurance costs include discount rates, projected healthcare cost rates, expected long-term rate of return on plan assets, rate of increase in future compensation levels, retirement rates, expected timing and form of payments, and mortality rates.

Annually, Entergy reviews and, when necessary, adjusts the assumptions for the qualified pension and other postretirement plans. Every three-to-five years, a formal actuarial assumption experience study that compares assumptions to the actual experience of the qualified pension and other postretirement health care and life insurance plans is conducted. The interest rate environment over the past few years and volatility in the financial equity markets have affected Entergy’s funding and reported costs for these benefits.

Discount rates

In selecting an assumed discount rate to calculate benefit obligations, Entergy uses a yield curve based on high-quality corporate debt with cash flows matching the expected plan benefit payments. In estimating the service cost and interest cost components of net periodic benefit cost, Entergy discounts the expected cash flows by the applicable spot rates.

Projected health care cost trend rates

Entergy’s health care cost trend is affected by both medical cost inflation and, with respect to capped costs under the plan, the effects of general inflation. Entergy reviews actual recent cost trends and projected future trends in establishing its health care cost trend rates.

Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets

In determining its expected long-term rate of return on plan assets used in the calculation of benefit plan costs, Entergy reviews past performance, current and expected future asset allocations, and capital market
32

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
assumptions of its investment consultant and some of its investment managers. Entergy conducts periodic asset/liability studies in order to set its target asset allocations.

In 2017,2023, Entergy confirmed its liability-driven investmentimplemented a new asset allocation strategy for its pension assets, which recommended that the target asset allocation adjust dynamically over time, based on the funded status of each plan within the trust. The new strategy no longer focuses on targeting an overall asset allocation for the trust, but rather a target asset allocation for each plan to an ultimate allocation of 35% equity securities and 65% fixed income securities.within the trust that adjusts dynamically based on the funded status. The ultimate asset allocation for each plan is expected to be attained when the plan is 100%110% funded. The 2023 weighted-average target pension asset allocation for 2020 was 58%is 49% equity and 42%51% fixed income securities.securities, of which 43% is long duration fixed income.

In 2017, Entergy implemented a new asset allocation strategy for its non-taxable and taxable other postretirement assets, based on the funded status of each sub-account within each trust. The new strategy no longer focuses on targeting an overall asset allocation for each trust, but rather a target asset allocation for each sub-account within each trust that adjusts dynamically based on the funded status. The 2020 weighted average2023 weighted-average target postretirement asset allocation is 44%42% equity and 56%58% fixed income securities.

See Note 11 to the financial statements for discussion of the current asset allocations for Entergy’s pension and other postretirement assets.

Costs and Sensitivities

The estimated 2021 and actual 2020 qualified pension and other postretirement costs and related underlying assumptions and sensitivities are shown below:

CostsEstimated 20212020
(In millions)
Qualified pension cost$360.1$373.8 (a)
Other postretirement income($25.6)($17.2)
Assumptions20212020
Discount rates
Qualified pension
Service cost2.81%3.42%
Interest cost2.08%2.99%
Other postretirement
Service cost2.98%3.27%
Interest cost1.86%2.41%
Expected long-term rates of return
Qualified pension assets6.75%7.00%
Other postretirement - non-taxable assets6.00% - 6.75%6.25% - 7.00%
Other postretirement - taxable assets - after tax rate5.00%5.25%
Weighted-average rate of increase in future compensation3.98% - 4.40%3.98% - 4.40%
Assumed health care cost trend rates
Pre-65 retirees5.87%6.13%
Post-65 retirees6.31%6.25%
Ultimate rate4.75%4.75%
Year ultimate rate is reached and beyond
Pre-65 retirees20302027
Post-65 retirees20282027
3329

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Costs and Sensitivities

The estimated 2024 and actual 2023 qualified pension and other postretirement costs and related underlying assumptions and sensitivities are shown below:
CostsEstimated 20242023
(In Millions)
Qualified pension cost$52.6$253.7 (a)
Other postretirement income($24.3)($13.8)
Assumptions20242023
Discount rates
Qualified pension
Service cost5.08%5.26%
Interest cost4.97%5.16%
Other postretirement
Service cost4.82%5.00%
Interest cost4.91%5.09%
Expected long-term rates of return
Qualified pension assets6.75%7.00%
Other postretirement - non-taxable assets6.50% - 7.25%6.00% - 7.00%
Other postretirement - taxable assets - after tax rate5.25%5.25%
Weighted-average rate of increase in future compensation3.98% - 4.40%3.98% - 4.40%
Assumed health care cost trend rates
Pre-65 retirees6.95%6.65%
Post-65 retirees7.88%7.50%
Ultimate health care cost trend rate4.75%4.75%
Year ultimate health care cost trend rate is reached and beyond
Pre-65 retirees20322032
Post-65 retirees20322032

(a)    In 20202023, qualified pension cost included settlement costs of $36.9$160.4 million.

Actual asset returns have an effect on Entergy’s qualified pension and other postretirement costs. In 2020,2023, Entergy’s actual annual return on qualified pension assets was approximately 16%15% and foron other postretirement assets was approximately 12%13%, as compared withto the 20202023 expected long-term rates of return discussed above.

30

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension cost and qualified pension projected benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in millions):
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2020 Qualified Projected Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2023 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
Increase/(Decrease) Increase/(Decrease)
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$25$260Discount rate(0.25%)$4$145
Rate of return on plan assetsRate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$16$—Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$14$—
Rate of increase in compensationRate of increase in compensation0.25%$9$46Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$4$24

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefitbenefits cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in millions):
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Postretirement Benefit CostImpact on 2020 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Postretirement Benefits CostImpact on 2023 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
Increase/(Decrease) Increase/(Decrease)
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$2$39Discount rate(0.25%)$1$21
Health care cost trendHealth care cost trend0.25%$2$26Health care cost trend0.25%$2$14

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Accounting Mechanisms

In accordance with pension accounting standards, Entergy utilizes a number of accounting mechanisms that reduce the volatility of reported pension costs. Differences between actuarial assumptions and actual plan results are deferred and are amortized into expense only when the accumulated differences exceed 10% of the greater of the projected benefit obligation or the market-related value of plan assets. If necessary, the excess is amortized over the average remaining service period of active employees oremployees. If almost all of the averageplan participants are inactive, as is the case for certain qualified pension plans, the excess is amortized over the remaining life expectancy of plan participants if almost all are inactive.participants. Additionally, accounting standards allow for the deferral of prior service costs/credits arising from plan amendments that attribute an increase or decrease in benefits to employee service in prior periods. Prior service costs/credits are then amortized into expense over the average future working life of active employees. Certain decisions, including workforce reductions, plan amendments, and plant shutdowns, may significantly reduce the expense amortization period and result in immediate recognition of certain previously-deferred costs and gains/losses in the form of curtailment gains or losses. Similarly, payments made to settle benefit obligations, including lump sum benefit payments, can also result in accelerated recognition in the form of settlement losses or gains. Several Entergy subsidiaries received regulatory approval to defer the expense portion of settlement charges and amortize into expense over time. See Note 11 to the financial statements for further discussion.

Entergy calculates the expected return on pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits plan assets by multiplying the long-term expected rate of return on assets by the market-related value (MRV) of plan assets. In general, Entergy determines the MRV of its pension plan assets, except for the long duration fixed income assets, by calculating a value that uses a 20-quarter phase-in of the difference between actual and expected returnsreturns. For the long duration fixed income assets in the pension trust and for its other postretirement benefitbenefits plan assets, Entergy uses fair value.value as the MRV.

34

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Accounting standards require an employer to recognize in its balance sheet the funded status of its benefit plans. See Note 11 to the financial statements for a further discussion of Entergy’s funded status.

31

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Employer Contributions

Entergy contributed $316.3$267 million to its qualified pension plans in 2020.2023. Entergy estimates pension contributions will be approximately $356$270 million in 2021;2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024, valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.

Minimum required funding calculations as determined under Pension Protection Act guidance, as amended by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, are performed annually as of January 1 of each year and are based on measurements of the assets and funding liabilities as measured at that date. Any excess of the funding liability over the calculated fair market value of assets results in a funding shortfall that under the Pension Protection Act, must be funded over a seven-yearfifteen-year rolling period. The Pension Protection Act also imposes certain plan limitations if the funded percentage, which is based on calculated fair market values of assets divided by funding liabilities, does not meet certain thresholds. For funding purposes, asset gains and losses are smoothed in tointo the calculated fair market value of assets. The funding liability is based upon a weighted averageweighted-average 24-month corporate bond rate published by the U.S. Treasury which is generally subject to a corridor of the 25-year average of prior segment rates. Periodic changes in asset returns and interest rates can affect funding shortfalls and future cash contributions.

Entergy contributed $48.2$49.1 million to its postretirement plans in 20202023 and plans to contribute $39.9$45.9 million in 2021.2024.

Other Contingencies

As a company with multi-state utility operations, Entergy is subject to a number of federal and state laws and regulations and other factors and conditions in the areas in which it operates, which potentially subjects it to environmental, litigation, and other risks. Entergy periodically evaluates its exposure for such risks and records a provision for those matters which are considered probable and estimable in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.GAAP.

Environmental

Entergy must comply with environmental laws and regulations applicable to air emissions, water discharges, solid waste (including coal combustion residuals), hazardous waste, toxic substances, protected species, and other environmental matters. Under these various laws and regulations, Entergy could incur substantial costs to comply or address any impacts to the environment. Entergy conducts studies to determine the extent of any required remediation and has recorded liabilities based upon its evaluation of the likelihood of loss and expected dollar amount for each issue. Additional sites or issues could be identified which require environmental remediation or corrective action for which Entergy could be liable. The amounts of environmental liabilities recorded can be significantly affected by the following external events or conditions.

Changes to existing federal, state, or local regulation by governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.
The identification of additional impacts, sites, issues, or the filing of other complaints in which Entergy may be asserted to be a potentially responsible party.
The resolution or progression of existing matters through the court system or resolution by the EPA or relevant state or local authority.

35

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Litigation

Entergy is regularly named as a defendant in a number of lawsuits involving employment, customers, and injuries and damages issues, among other matters. Entergy periodically reviews the cases in which it has been named as defendant and assesses the likelihood of loss in each case as probable, reasonably possible, or remote and records liabilities for cases that have a probable likelihood of loss and the loss can be estimated. Given the
32

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
environment in which Entergy operates, and the unpredictable nature of many of the cases in which Entergy is named as a defendant, the ultimate outcome of the litigation to which Entergy is exposed has the potential to materially affect the results of operations, financial position, and cash flows of Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Complaints Against System Energy

System Energy’s operating revenues are derived from the allocation of the capacity, energy, and related costs associated with its 90% ownership/leasehold interest in Grand Gulf. System Energy sells its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement.  System Energy and the Unit Power Sales Agreement are currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit). See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of these proceedings.

New Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 1 to the financial statements for discussion of new accounting pronouncements.


3633

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
REPORT OF MANAGEMENT

Management of Entergy Corporation and its subsidiaries has prepared and is responsible for the financial statements and related financial information included in this document.  To meet this responsibility, management establishes and maintains a system of internal controls over financial reporting designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. This system includes communication through written policies and procedures, an employee Code of Entegrity, and an organizational structure that provides for appropriate division of responsibility and training of personnel. This system is also tested by a comprehensive internal audit program.

Entergy management assesses the design and effectiveness of Entergy’s internal control over financial reporting on an annual basis. In making this assessment, management uses the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control - Integrated Framework. The 2013 COSO Framework was utilized for management’s assessment. Management acknowledges, however, that all internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations and can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.

Entergy Corporation’s independent registered public accounting firm, Deloitte & Touche LLP, has issued an attestation report on the effectiveness of Entergy Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020.2023.

In addition, the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, composed solely of independent Directors, meets with the independent auditors, internal auditors, management, and internal accountants periodically to discuss internal controls, and auditing and financial reporting matters. The Audit Committee appoints the independent auditors annually, seeks shareholder ratification of the appointment, and reviews with the independent auditors the scope and results of the audit effort. The Audit Committee also meets periodically with the independent auditors and the chief internal auditor without management present, providing free access to the Audit Committee.

Based on management’s assessment of internal controls using the 2013 COSO criteria, management believes that Entergy and each of the Registrant Subsidiaries maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020.2023. Management further believes that this assessment, combined with the policies and procedures noted above, provides reasonable assurance that Entergy’s and each of the Registrant Subsidiaries’ financial statements are fairly and accurately presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

LEO P. DENAULT
Chairman
ANDREW S. MARSH
Chair of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Corporation
ANDREW S. MARSHKIMBERLY A. FONTAN
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, LLC, Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, LLC, Entergy New Orleans, LLC, Entergy Texas, Inc., and System Energy Resources, Inc.
 
LAURA R. LANDREAUX
Chair of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Arkansas, LLC
 
PHILLIP R. MAY, JR.
Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Louisiana, LLC

HALEY R. FISACKERLY
Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Mississippi, LLC
 
DAVID
DEANNA D. ELLISRODRIGUEZ
ChairmanChair of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy New Orleans, LLC
ELIECER VIAMONTES
SALLIE T. RAINER
Chair
Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Texas, Inc.
 
RODERICK K. WEST
Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of System Energy Resources, Inc.

37

Table of Contents

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON
 20202019201820172016
 (In Thousands, Except Percentages and Per Share Amounts)
Operating revenues$10,113,636 $10,878,673 $11,009,452 $11,074,481 $10,845,645 
Net income (loss)$1,406,653 $1,258,244 $862,555 $425,353 ($564,503)
Earnings (loss) per share:  
Basic$6.94 $6.36 $4.68 $2.29 ($3.26)
Diluted$6.90 $6.30 $4.63 $2.28 ($3.26)
Dividends declared per share$3.74 $3.66 $3.58 $3.50 $3.42 
Return on common equity13.13 %13.02 %10.08 %5.12 %(6.73 %)
Book value per share, year-end$54.56 $51.34 $46.78 $44.28 $45.12 
Total assets$58,239,212 $51,723,912 $48,275,066 $46,707,149 $45,904,434 
Long-term obligations (a)$21,477,974 $17,351,449 $15,758,083 $14,535,077 $14,695,422 

(a) Includes long-term debt (excluding currently maturing debt), non-current finance lease obligations, and subsidiary preferred stock without sinking fund that is not presented as equity on the balance sheet.
 20202019201820172016
 (Dollars In Millions)
Utility electric operating revenues:     
Residential$3,550 $3,532 $3,566 $3,355 $3,288 
Commercial2,293 2,476 2,426 2,480 2,362 
Industrial2,331 2,541 2,499 2,584 2,327 
Governmental212 228 226 231 217 
Total billed retail8,386 8,777 8,717 8,650 8,194 
Sales for resale296 286 300 253 236 
Other365 367 367 376 437 
Total$9,047 $9,430 $9,384 $9,279 $8,867 
Utility billed electric energy sales (GWh):   
Residential35,173 36,094 37,107 33,834 35,112 
Commercial26,466 28,755 29,426 28,745 29,197 
Industrial47,117 48,483 48,384 47,769 45,739 
Governmental2,414 2,579 2,581 2,511 2,547 
Total retail111,170 115,911 117,498 112,859 112,595 
Sales for resale13,658 13,210 11,715 11,550 11,054 
Total124,828 129,121 129,213 124,409 123,649 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities:     
Operating revenues$943 $1,295 $1,469 $1,657 $1,850 
Billed electric energy sales (GWh)20,581 28,088 29,875 30,501 35,881 


3834

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholdersshareholders and Board of Directors of
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “Corporation”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, cash flows, and changes in equity for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and the related notes (collectively, referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Corporation as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020,2023, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 26, 2021,23, 2024, expressed an unqualified opinion on the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Corporation’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Corporation’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Corporation in accordance with the US federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matters

The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Rate and Regulatory Matters —Entergy— Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries—Subsidiaries — Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Corporation is subject to rate regulation by the Arkansas Public Service Commission, Louisiana Public Service Commission, Mississippi Public Service Commission, City Council of New Orleans, Louisiana,their respective state utility regulatory agencies and Public Utility Commission of Texas (the “Commissions”), which have jurisdiction with respect to the rates of electric companies in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and the City of New Orleans, and to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”(collectively, the “Commissions”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying
39

Table of Contents
the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures, such as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets and liabilities; income taxes; operating revenues; operation and maintenance expense; and depreciation and amortization expense.disclosures.
35

Table of Contents

The Corporation’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the Commissions and the FERC set the rates, the Corporation is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, and the Corporation applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Corporation assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Corporation has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the Commissions and the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the significant judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the (1) likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs and the (2) likelihood of refunds to customers, and (3) ongoing complaints filed with the FERC against System Energy.customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the Commissions, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and the FERCrefunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate-setting process.process due to its inherent complexities and auditor judgment to evaluate management estimates and the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the Commissions, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and the FERCrefunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of costs incurred as property, plant, and equipment and deferred as regulatory assets; and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets or liabilities;liabilities and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.

We evaluated the Corporation’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.

We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the Commissions and the FERC for the Corporation and other public utilities, regulatory statutes, interpretations, procedural memorandums, filings made by intervenors, and other publicly available information to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the Commissions’ and the FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated the external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.

For regulatory matters in process, we inspected the Corporation’s and intervenors’ filings with the Commissions, initial Administrative Law Judge decisions and the FERC, including the annual formula rate plan filings, base rate case filings,orders issued, and open complaints filedsettlement offers and agreements with the FERC against System Energy, and considered the filings with the Commissions and the FERC by intervenors that may impact the Corporation’s future rates, for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.

We obtained an analysis from management and support from the Corporation’s internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order, including the complaints filed with the FERC against System Energy, to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.

We obtained representation from management regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery, refund, or a future reduction in rates.

40
36

Table of Contents
Securitization Financing — Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators — Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries — Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

Hurricane Ida in 2021 caused significant damage to portions of the Corporation’s service area within the state of Louisiana. In January 2023, the Louisiana Public Service Commission (“LPSC”) issued a Financing Order authorizing financing of $1.491 billion of system restoration costs utilizing the securitization process authorized by Louisiana Act 55 financing, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021 (“Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293”). In March 2023, the securitization financing closed, resulting in the issuance of $1.491 billion principal amount bonds by Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority (“LCDA”), a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana. The LCDA loaned the proceeds to the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation (“LURC”), and the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to a State legislatively authorized and LURC-sponsored trust, Restoration Law Trust II (the “storm trust II”). The Corporation and the LURC each hold beneficial interests in the storm trust II.

The Corporation does not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on its balance sheet because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA. The bonds are secured by system restoration property, which is the right granted by law to the LURC to collect a system restoration charge from customers. The Corporation collects the system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee. The Corporation does not report the collection of system restoration charges as revenue because the Corporation is merely acting as a billing and collection agent for the LCDA and the LURC. In the remote possibility that the system restoration charge, as well as any funds in the excess subaccount and funds in the debt service reserve account, are insufficient to service the bonds resulting in a payment default, the storm trust II is required to liquidate Entergy Finance Company preferred interests in an amount equal to what would be required to cure the default. The estimated value of this indirect guarantee is immaterial. The Corporation consolidates the storm trust II as a variable interest entity and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is shown as a noncontrolling interest in the financial statements.

We identified management’s conclusion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA as a critical audit matter due to the judgments made by management to support its conclusion. Auditing management’s judgments involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for securitization financing transactions.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, securitization financing included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the accounting impact of this securitization financing transaction, including the conclusion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA.

We evaluated the Corporation’s disclosures related to the impacts of the Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, securitization financing, including the balances recorded.

We read relevant regulatory and financing orders issued by the LPSC for the Corporation, the LURC, and the LCDA, and evaluated external information to compare to management’s conclusions.

We obtained an analysis from management and support from the Corporation’s internal and external legal counsel regarding the legal status of the bonds issued by the LCDA and the system restoration property granted to the LURC to assess management’s assertion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA.

With the assistance of professionals in our firm having expertise and experience in addressing the accounting for securitization financing transactions by regulated utilities, we evaluated the Company’s conclusion, including the conclusion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA.

37

Table of Contents
Uncertain Tax Positions—Positions — Entergy Wholesale Commodities—Corporation and Subsidiaries — Refer to Note 3 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Corporation accounts for uncertain income tax positions under a two-step approach with a more likely-than-not recognition threshold and a measurement approach based on the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than fifty percent likely of being realized upon settlement. The Corporation has uncertain tax positions which require management to make significant judgments and assumptions to determine whether available information supports the assertion that the recognition threshold is met, particularly related to the technical merits and facts and circumstances of each position, as well as the probability of different potential outcomes. These uncertain tax positions could be significantly affected by events such as additional transactions contemplated or consummated by the Corporation as well as audits by taxing authorities of the tax positions. The net unrecognizedpositions and changes to relevant tax law. There is an uncertain tax position related to the March 2023 securitization financing that provided for a tax benefit in the first quarter of $979 million at December 31, 2020, includes uncertain tax positions related to Entergy Wholesale Commodities.2023 of approximately $129 million.

Given the subjectivityjudgments made by management, we identified management’s conclusion that the securitization uncertain tax position met the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold as a critical audit matter. Auditing management’s judgments regarding this uncertain tax position involved specialized knowledge of estimating these uncertain tax positions auditingand auditor judgment to evaluate the uncertain tax positions involved especially subjective judgment.subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the securitization uncertain tax positionsposition included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of controls related to the securitization uncertain tax positions,position, including those over the recognition and measurement of the income tax benefits.benefit.

We evaluated the Corporation’s disclosures, and the balances recorded, related to the securitization uncertain tax positions.position.

We evaluated the methods and assumptions used by management to estimate the securitization uncertain tax positionsposition by testing the underlying data that served as the basis for the uncertain tax position.

With the assistance of our income tax specialists, we tested the technical merits of the securitization uncertain tax positionsposition and management’s key estimates and judgments made by:

Assessing the technical merits of the uncertain tax positionsposition by comparing to similar cases filed with the Internal Revenue Service.

EvaluatingObtaining an opinion from the reasonablenessCorporation’s external legal counsel regarding certain federal income tax consequences related to the Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, securitization financing and consistencyevaluating whether the analysis was consistent with our interpretation of the probabilities applied to the uncertain tax position by comparing to probabilities used on similar uncertain tax positions.relevant laws and circumstances.

Considering the impact of changes or settlements in the tax environment on management’s methods and assumptions used to estimate the uncertain tax positions.

Nuclear Decommissioning Costs—Entergy Wholesale Commodities—Refer to Note 9 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Corporation owns nuclear generation facilities in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities operating segment where regulation requires the Corporation to decommission its nuclear power plants after each facility is taken out of service. The Corporation periodically conducts decommissioning cost studies, which requires management to make significant judgments and assumptions, specifically related to future dismantlement, site restoration, spent fuel management, and license termination costs. The liability for Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear decommissioning was $2.6 billion at December 31, 2020.

Auditing management’s judgments regarding the nuclear decommissioning costs, including estimates for future dismantlement, site restoration, spent fuel management, and license termination costs, involved especially subjective judgment in evaluating the appropriateness of the estimates and assumptions.

41

Table of Contents
How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the underlying costs for nuclear decommissioning included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of the control over nuclear decommissioning where management evaluates whether estimates and assumptions need to be updated for each of the nuclear power plants.

We evaluated the Corporation’s disclosures related to the estimated nuclear decommissioning costs, including the balances recorded.

We evaluated management’s ability to accurately estimate the costs for nuclear decommissioning by comparing the cost estimates to actual nuclear decommissioning costs of similar asset retirement obligations at the Corporation.

With the assistance of our environmental specialists, we completed a search of environmental regulations to evaluate any regulatory changes that may affect the nuclear decommissioning cost estimates.position.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024

We have served as the Corporation’s auditor since 2001.




4238

Table of Contents

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 
  (In Thousands, Except Share Data)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$9,046,643 $9,429,978 $9,384,111 
Natural gas124,008 153,954 156,436 
Competitive businesses942,985 1,294,741 1,468,905 
TOTAL10,113,636 10,878,673 11,009,452 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale1,564,371 2,029,638 2,147,793 
Purchased power904,268 1,192,860 1,658,799 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses184,157 204,927 153,826 
Other operation and maintenance3,002,626 3,272,381 3,346,397 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges26,623 290,027 532,321 
Decommissioning381,861 400,802 388,508 
Taxes other than income taxes652,840 643,745 641,952 
Depreciation and amortization1,613,086 1,480,016 1,369,442 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net14,609 (26,220)301,049 
TOTAL8,344,441 9,488,176 10,540,087 
OPERATING INCOME1,769,195 1,390,497 469,365 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction119,430 144,974 129,602 
Interest and investment income392,818 547,912 63,864 
Miscellaneous - net(210,633)(252,539)(129,754)
TOTAL301,615 440,347 63,712 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense837,981 807,382 768,322 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(52,318)(64,957)(60,974)
TOTAL785,663 742,425 707,348 
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES1,285,147 1,088,419 (174,271)
Income taxes(121,506)(169,825)(1,036,826)
CONSOLIDATED NET INCOME1,406,653 1,258,244 862,555 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries18,319 17,018 13,894 
NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO ENTERGY CORPORATION$1,388,334 $1,241,226 $848,661 
Earnings per average common share:   
Basic$6.94 $6.36 $4.68 
Diluted$6.90 $6.30 $4.63 
Basic average number of common shares outstanding200,106,945 195,195,858 181,409,597 
Diluted average number of common shares outstanding201,102,220 196,999,284 183,378,513 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   


ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 
  (In Thousands, Except Share Data)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$11,842,454 $13,186,845 $10,873,995 
Natural gas180,490 233,920 170,610 
Other124,468 343,472 698,291 
TOTAL12,147,412 13,764,237 11,742,896 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale2,801,580 3,732,851 2,458,096 
Purchased power968,036 1,561,544 1,271,677 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses150,147 156,032 172,636 
Other operation and maintenance2,898,213 3,038,459 2,968,621 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits)42,679 (163,464)263,625 
Decommissioning206,674 224,076 306,411 
Taxes other than income taxes755,574 733,538 660,290 
Depreciation and amortization1,845,003 1,761,023 1,684,286 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net(138,469)669,403 111,628 
TOTAL9,529,437 11,713,462 9,897,270 
OPERATING INCOME2,617,975 2,050,775 1,845,626 
OTHER INCOME (DEDUCTIONS)   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction98,493 72,832 70,473 
Interest and investment income (loss)162,726 (75,581)430,466 
Miscellaneous - net(201,013)(77,629)(201,778)
TOTAL60,206 (80,378)299,161 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense1,046,164 940,060 863,712 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(39,758)(27,823)(29,018)
TOTAL1,006,406 912,237 834,694 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES1,671,775 1,058,160 1,310,093 
Income taxes(690,535)(38,978)191,374 
CONSOLIDATED NET INCOME2,362,310 1,097,138 1,118,719 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interests5,774 (6,028)227 
NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO ENTERGY CORPORATION$2,356,536 $1,103,166 $1,118,492 
Earnings per average common share:   
Basic$11.14 $5.40 $5.57 
Diluted$11.10 $5.37 $5.54 
Basic average number of common shares outstanding211,569,931 204,450,354 200,941,511 
Diluted average number of common shares outstanding212,376,495 205,547,578 201,873,024 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
4339

Table of Contents
























(Page left blank intentionally)

44
40

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
Net Income$2,362,310 $1,097,138 $1,118,719 
Other comprehensive income   
Cash flow hedges net unrealized gain (loss)   
(net of tax benefit of $—, $—, and ($7,935))— 1,035 (29,754)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities   
(net of tax expense of $9,248, $46,789, and $55,161)29,294 146,893 195,929 
Net unrealized investment loss   
(net of tax benefit of $—, ($2,231), and ($28,435))— (7,154)(49,496)
Other comprehensive income29,294 140,774 116,679 
Comprehensive Income2,391,604 1,237,912 1,235,398 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interests5,774 (6,028)227 
Comprehensive Income Attributable to Entergy Corporation$2,385,830 $1,243,940 $1,235,171 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
Net Income$1,406,653 $1,258,244 $862,555 
Other comprehensive income (loss)   
Cash flow hedges net unrealized gain (loss)   
(net of tax expense (benefit) of ($14,776), $28,516, and $5,830)(55,487)115,026 22,098 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities   
(net of tax expense (benefit) of $5,600, ($6,539), and $30,299)22,496 (25,150)90,143 
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)   
(net of tax expense of $17,586, $14,023, and $6,393)30,704 27,183 (28,771)
Other comprehensive income (loss)(2,287)117,059 83,470 
Comprehensive Income1,404,366 1,375,303 946,025 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries18,319 17,018 13,894 
Comprehensive Income Attributable to Entergy Corporation$1,386,047 $1,358,285 $932,131 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
41

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Consolidated net income$2,362,310 $1,097,138 $1,118,719 
Adjustments to reconcile consolidated net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization2,244,479 2,190,371 2,242,944 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued(707,822)(47,154)248,719 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits)42,679 (163,464)263,599 
Changes in working capital:   
Receivables101,801 (157,267)(84,629)
Fuel inventory(45,166)6,943 18,359 
Accounts payable(135,048)(102,013)269,797 
Taxes accrued10,122 4,263 (21,183)
Interest accrued18,933 4,113 (10,640)
Deferred fuel costs759,361 (393,746)(466,050)
Other working capital accounts(210,038)(157,235)(53,883)
Changes in provisions for estimated losses(68,631)374,079 (85,713)
Changes in regulatory assets435,877 576,859 (536,707)
Changes in other regulatory liabilities463,805 (266,559)43,631 
Effect of securitization on regulatory asset(491,150)(941,035)— 
Changes in pension and other postretirement liabilities(610,479)(699,261)(897,167)
Other123,295 1,259,458 250,917 
Net cash flow provided by operating activities4,294,328 2,585,490 2,300,713 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction/capital expenditures(4,440,652)(5,065,126)(6,087,296)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction98,493 72,832 70,473 
Nuclear fuel purchases(270,973)(223,613)(166,512)
Payment for purchase of assets(35,094)(106,193)(168,304)
Net proceeds (payments) from sale of assets11,000 (1,195)17,421 
Insurance proceeds received for property damages19,493 — — 
Litigation proceeds from settlement agreement— 9,829 — 
Changes in securitization account5,493 15,514 13,669 
Payments to storm reserve escrow accounts(19,780)(1,494,048)(25)
Receipts from storm reserve escrow accounts98,529 1,125,279 83,105 
Decrease (increase) in other investments(16,733)(3,328)2,343 
Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs23,655 32,367 49,236 
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales1,082,722 1,636,686 5,553,629 
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds(1,185,130)(1,708,901)(5,547,015)
Net cash flow used in investing activities(4,628,977)(5,709,897)(6,179,276)
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
42

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of:   
Long-term debt4,273,297 6,019,835 8,308,427 
Treasury stock9,823 32,042 5,977 
Common stock130,649 852,555 200,776 
Retirement of long-term debt(5,135,753)(5,995,903)(4,827,827)
Changes in commercial paper - net310,550 (373,556)(426,312)
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interests25,708 24,702 51,202 
Proceeds received by storm trusts related to securitization1,457,676 3,163,572 — 
Other107,595 42,761 43,221 
Dividends paid:   
Common stock(918,193)(841,677)(775,122)
Preferred stock(18,319)(18,319)(18,319)
Net cash flow provided by financing activities243,033 2,906,012 2,562,023 
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents(91,616)(218,395)(1,316,540)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period224,164 442,559 1,759,099 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$132,548 $224,164 $442,559 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$987,252 $901,884 $843,228 
Income taxes$42,821 $28,354 $98,377 
Noncash investing activities:
Accrued construction expenditures$487,439 $461,748 $722,622 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

43

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$71,609 $115,290 
Temporary cash investments60,939 108,874 
Total cash and cash equivalents132,548 224,164 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer699,411 788,552 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(25,905)(30,856)
Other225,334 241,702 
Accrued unbilled revenues494,615 495,859 
Total accounts receivable1,393,455 1,495,257 
Deferred fuel costs169,967 710,401 
Fuel inventory - at average cost192,799 147,632 
Materials and supplies - at average cost1,418,969 1,183,308 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs140,115 143,653 
Prepayments and other213,016 190,611 
TOTAL3,660,869 4,095,026 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Decommissioning trust funds4,863,710 4,121,864 
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)418,546 366,405 
Storm reserve escrow accounts323,206 401,955 
Other69,494 102,259 
TOTAL5,674,956 4,992,483 
PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT  
Electric66,850,474 64,646,911 
Natural gas717,503 691,970 
Construction work in progress2,109,703 1,844,171 
Nuclear fuel707,852 582,119 
TOTAL PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT70,385,532 67,765,171 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization26,551,203 25,288,047 
PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT - NET43,834,329 42,477,124 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $250,830 as of December 31, 2023 and $282,886 as of December 31, 2022)5,669,404 6,036,397 
Deferred fuel costs172,201 241,085 
Goodwill374,099 377,172 
Accumulated deferred income taxes16,367 84,100 
Other301,171 291,804 
TOTAL6,533,242 7,030,558 
TOTAL ASSETS$59,703,396 $58,595,191 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
44

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$2,099,057 $2,309,037 
Notes payable and commercial paper1,138,171 827,621 
Accounts payable1,566,745 1,777,590 
Customer deposits446,146 424,723 
Taxes accrued434,213 424,091 
Interest accrued214,197 195,264 
Deferred fuel costs218,927 — 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities59,508 104,845 
Sale-leaseback/depreciation regulatory liability— 103,497 
Other219,528 202,779 
TOTAL6,396,492 6,369,447 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued4,245,982 4,818,837 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits205,973 211,220 
Regulatory liability for income taxes-net1,033,242 1,258,276 
Other regulatory liabilities3,116,926 2,324,590 
Decommissioning and asset retirement cost liabilities4,505,782 4,271,531 
Accumulated provisions462,570 531,201 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities648,413 1,213,555 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $263,007 as of December 31, 2023 and $292,760 as of December 31, 2022)23,008,839 23,623,512 
Other1,116,661 688,720 
TOTAL38,344,388 38,941,442 
Commitments and Contingencies
Subsidiaries preferred stock without sinking fund
219,410 219,410 
 EQUITY  
Preferred stock, no par value, authorized 1,000,000 shares in 2023 and 2022; issued shares in 2023 and 2022 - none— — 
Common stock, $0.01 par value, authorized 499,000,000 shares in 2023 and 2022; issued 280,975,348 shares in 2023 and 279,653,929 shares in 20222,810 2,797 
Paid-in capital7,795,411 7,632,895 
Retained earnings11,940,384 10,502,041 
Accumulated other comprehensive loss(162,460)(191,754)
Less - treasury stock, at cost (68,126,778 shares in 2023 and 68,477,429 shares in 2022)4,953,498 4,978,994 
Total shareholders' equity14,622,647 12,966,985 
Subsidiaries preferred stock without sinking fund and noncontrolling interests
120,459 97,907 
TOTAL14,743,106 13,064,892 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$59,703,396 $58,595,191 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

45

Table of Contents

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Consolidated net income$1,406,653 $1,258,244 $862,555 
Adjustments to reconcile consolidated net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization2,257,750 2,182,313 2,040,555 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued(131,114)193,950 (256,848)
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges26,379 226,678 491,739 
Changes in working capital:   
Receivables(139,296)(101,227)98,546 
Fuel inventory(27,458)(28,173)45,839 
Accounts payable137,457 (71,898)97,312 
Taxes accrued207,556 (20,784)39,272 
Interest accrued7,662 937 5,220 
Deferred fuel costs(49,484)172,146 (25,829)
Other working capital accounts(143,451)(3,108)(164,173)
Changes in provisions for estimated losses(291,193)19,914 35,706 
Changes in other regulatory assets(784,494)(545,559)189,193 
Changes in other regulatory liabilities238,669 (14,781)(803,323)
Changes in pensions and other postretirement liabilities50,379 187,124 (304,941)
Other(76,149)(639,149)34,424 
Net cash flow provided by operating activities2,689,866 2,816,627 2,385,247 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction/capital expenditures(4,694,076)(4,197,667)(3,942,010)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction119,430 144,862 130,195 
Nuclear fuel purchases(215,664)(128,366)(302,584)
Payment for purchase of plant or assets(247,121)(305,472)(26,623)
Proceeds from sale of assets28,932 24,902 
Insurance proceeds received for property damages7,040 18,270 
Changes in securitization account5,099 3,298 (5,844)
Payments to storm reserve escrow account(2,273)(8,038)(6,551)
Receipts from storm reserve escrow account297,588 
Decrease (increase) in other investments(12,755)30,319 (54,500)
Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs72,711 2,369 59,643 
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales3,107,812 4,121,351 6,484,791 
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds(3,203,057)(4,208,870)(6,485,676)
Net cash flow used in investing activities(4,772,306)(4,510,242)(4,105,987)
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
   Shareholders’ Equity 
 Subsidiaries’ Preferred Stock and Noncontrolling InterestsCommon StockTreasury StockPaid-in CapitalRetained EarningsAccumulated Other Comprehensive LossTotal
 (In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2020$35,000 $2,700 ($5,074,456)$6,549,923 $9,897,182 ($449,207)$10,961,142 
Consolidated net income (a)227 — — — 1,118,492 — 1,118,719 
Other comprehensive income— — — — — 116,679 116,679 
Common stock issuances and sales under the at the market equity distribution program— 20 — 204,194 — — 204,214 
Common stock issuance costs— — — (3,438)— — (3,438)
Common stock issuances related to stock plans— — 34,757 15,560 — — 50,317 
Common stock dividends declared— — — — (775,122)— (775,122)
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest51,202 — — — — — 51,202 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries (a)(18,319)— — — — — (18,319)
Balance at December 31, 2021$68,110 $2,720 ($5,039,699)$6,766,239 $10,240,552 ($332,528)$11,705,394 
Consolidated net income (loss) (a)(6,028)— — — 1,103,166 — 1,097,138 
Other comprehensive income— — — — — 140,774 140,774 
Common stock issuances and sales under the at the market equity distribution program— 77 — 861,916 — — 861,993 
Common stock issuance costs— — — (9,438)— — (9,438)
Common stock issuances related to stock plans— — 60,705 14,178 — — 74,883 
Common stock dividends declared— — — — (841,677)— (841,677)
Beneficial interest in storm trust31,636 — — — — — 31,636 
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interests24,702 — — — — — 24,702 
Distributions to noncontrolling interests(2,194)— — — — — (2,194)
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries (a)(18,319)— — — — — (18,319)
Balance at December 31, 2022$97,907 $2,797 ($4,978,994)$7,632,895 $10,502,041 ($191,754)$13,064,892 
Consolidated net income (a)5,774 — — — 2,356,536 — 2,362,310 
Other comprehensive income— — — — — 29,294 29,294 
Common stock issuances and sales under the at the market equity distribution program— 13 — 132,404 — — 132,417 
Common stock issuance costs— — — (1,768)— — (1,768)
Common stock issuances related to stock plans— — 25,496 31,880 — — 57,376 
Common stock dividends declared— — — — (918,193)— (918,193)
Beneficial interest in storm trust14,577 — — — — — 14,577 
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest25,708 — — — — — 25,708 
Distributions to noncontrolling interests(5,188)— — — — — (5,188)
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries (a)(18,319)— — — — — (18,319)
Balance at December 31, 2023$120,459 $2,810 ($4,953,498)$7,795,411 $11,940,384 ($162,460)$14,743,106 
See Notes to Financial Statements.      
(a) Consolidated net income (loss) and preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries include $16 million for 2023, 2022, and 2021 of preferred dividends on subsidiaries’ preferred stock without sinking fund that is not presented as equity.
46

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of:   
Long-term debt12,619,201 9,304,396 8,035,536 
Preferred stock of subsidiary33,188 73,330 
Treasury stock42,600 93,862 103,315 
Common stock607,650 499,272 
Retirement of long-term debt(8,152,378)(7,619,380)(6,965,738)
Repurchase / redemptions of preferred stock(50,000)(53,868)
Changes in credit borrowings and commercial paper - net(319,238)4,389 364,031 
Other(7,524)(7,732)26,453 
Dividends paid:   
Common stock(748,342)(711,573)(647,704)
Preferred stock(18,502)(16,438)(14,185)
Net cash flow provided by financing activities3,415,817 1,638,362 1,420,442 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents1,333,377 (55,253)(300,298)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period425,722 480,975 781,273 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$1,759,099 $425,722 $480,975 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid (received) during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$803,923 $778,209 $734,845 
Income taxes($31,228)($40,435)$19,825 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

47

Table of Contents

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$128,851 $34,242 
Temporary cash investments1,630,248 391,480 
Total cash and cash equivalents1,759,099 425,722 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer833,478 595,509 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(117,794)(7,404)
Other135,208 219,870 
Accrued unbilled revenues434,835 400,617 
Total accounts receivable1,285,727 1,208,592 
Deferred fuel costs4,380 
Fuel inventory - at average cost172,934 145,476 
Materials and supplies - at average cost962,185 824,989 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs179,150 157,568 
Prepayments and other196,424 283,645 
TOTAL4,559,899 3,045,992 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Decommissioning trust funds7,253,215 6,404,030 
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)343,328 332,864 
Other214,222 496,452 
TOTAL7,810,765 7,233,346 
PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT  
Electric59,696,443 54,271,467 
Natural gas610,768 547,110 
Construction work in progress2,012,030 2,823,291 
Nuclear fuel601,281 677,181 
TOTAL PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT62,920,522 58,319,049 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization24,067,745 23,136,356 
PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT - NET38,852,777 35,182,693 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $119,238 as of December 31, 2020 and $239,219 as of December 31, 2019)6,076,549 5,292,055 
Deferred fuel costs240,422 239,892 
Goodwill377,172 377,172 
Accumulated deferred income taxes76,289 64,461 
Other245,339 288,301 
TOTAL7,015,771 6,261,881 
TOTAL ASSETS$58,239,212 $51,723,912 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

48

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$1,164,015 $795,012 
Notes payable and commercial paper1,627,489 1,946,727 
Accounts payable2,739,437 1,499,861 
Customer deposits401,512 409,171 
Taxes accrued441,011 233,455 
Interest accrued201,791 194,129 
Deferred fuel costs153,113 197,687 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities61,815 66,184 
Current portion of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes63,683 76,457 
Other206,640 201,780 
TOTAL7,060,506 5,620,463 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued4,361,772 4,401,190 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits212,494 207,113 
Regulatory liability for income taxes-net1,521,757 1,633,159 
Other regulatory liabilities2,323,851 1,961,005 
Decommissioning and asset retirement cost liabilities6,469,452 6,159,212 
Accumulated provisions242,835 534,028 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities2,853,013 2,798,265 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $174,635 as of December 31, 2020 and $297,981 as of December 31, 2019)21,205,761 17,078,643 
Other807,219 852,749 
TOTAL39,998,154 35,625,364 
Commitments and Contingencies00
Subsidiaries preferred stock without sinking fund
219,410 219,410 
 EQUITY  
Common stock, $0.01 par value, authorized 500,000,000 shares; issued 270,035,180 shares in 2020 and in 20192,700 2,700 
Paid-in capital6,549,923 6,564,436 
Retained earnings9,897,182 9,257,609 
Accumulated other comprehensive loss(449,207)(446,920)
Less - treasury stock, at cost (69,790,346 shares in 2020 and 70,886,400 shares in 2019)5,074,456 5,154,150 
Total common shareholders' equity10,926,142 10,223,675 
Subsidiaries preferred stock without sinking fund
35,000 35,000 
TOTAL10,961,142 10,258,675 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY$58,239,212 $51,723,912 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

49

Table of Contents

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
  Common Shareholders’ Equity 
 Subsidiaries’ Preferred StockCommon StockTreasury StockPaid-in CapitalRetained EarningsAccumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)Total
 (In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2017$$2,548 $(5,397,637)$5,433,433 $7,977,702 $(23,531)$7,992,515 
Implementation of accounting standards0000576,257 (632,617)(56,360)
Balance at January 1, 2018$0 $2,548 ($5,397,637)$5,433,433 $8,553,959 ($656,148)$7,936,155 
Consolidated net income (a)13,894 848,661 862,555 
Other comprehensive income83,470 83,470 
Settlement of equity forwards through common stock issuance68 499,932 500,000 
Common stock issuance costs(728)(728)
Common stock issuances related to stock plans123,918 18,794 142,712 
Common stock dividends declared(647,704)(647,704)
Subsidiaries' capital stock redemptions(1,723)(1,723)
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries (a)(13,894)(13,894)
Reclassification pursuant to ASU 2018-02(32,043)15,505 (16,538)
Balance at December 31, 20182,616 (5,273,719)5,951,431 8,721,150 (557,173)8,844,305 
Implementation of accounting standards6,806 (6,806)
Balance at January 1, 20192,616 (5,273,719)5,951,431 8,727,956 (563,979)8,844,305 
Consolidated net income (a)17,018 1,241,226 1,258,244 
Other comprehensive income117,059 117,059 
Settlement of equity forwards through common stock issuance84 607,566 607,650 
Common stock issuance costs(7)(7)
Common stock issuances related to stock plans119,569 5,446 125,015 
Common stock dividends declared(711,573)(711,573)
Subsidiary's preferred stock issuance35,000 35,000 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries (a)(17,018)(17,018)
Balance at December 31, 201935,000 2,700 (5,154,150)6,564,436 9,257,609 (446,920)10,258,675 
Implementation of accounting standards(419)0(419)
Balance at January 1, 202035,000 2,700 (5,154,150)6,564,436 9,257,190 (446,920)10,258,256 
Consolidated net income (a)18,319 1,388,334 1,406,653 
Other comprehensive loss(2,287)(2,287)
Common stock issuances related to stock plans79,694 (14,513)65,181 
Common stock dividends declared(748,342)(748,342)
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries (a)(18,319)(18,319)
Balance at December 31, 2020$35,000 $2,700 ($5,074,456)$6,549,923 $9,897,182 ($449,207)$10,961,142 
See Notes to Financial Statements.      
(a) Consolidated net income and preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries include $16.5 million for 2020, $16.5 million for 2019, and $13.9 million for 2018 of preferred dividends on subsidiaries’ preferred stock without sinking fund that is not presented as equity.

50

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1.  SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Entergy Corporation and its subsidiaries.  As required by generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP in the United States of America, all intercompany transactions have been eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.  Entergy’s Registrant Subsidiaries (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy) also include their separate financial statements in this Form 10-K.  Certain previously reported amounts in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform to current classification, with no effect on results of operations, financial positions, or cash flows. The Registrant Subsidiaries and many other Entergy subsidiaries also maintain accounts in accordance with FERC and other regulatory guidelines.

Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements

In conformity with generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP in the United States of America, the preparation of Entergy Corporation’s consolidated financial statements and the separate financial statements of the Registrant Subsidiaries requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities.  Adjustments to the reported amounts of assets and liabilities may be necessary in the future to the extent that future estimates or actual results are different from the estimates used.

Revenues and Fuel Costs

See Note 19 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ revenues and fuel costs.

Property, Plant, and Equipment

Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost less regulatory disallowances and impairments.  Depreciation is computed on the straight-line basis at rates based on the applicable estimated service lives of the various classes of property.  For the Registrant Subsidiaries, the original cost of plant retired or removed, less salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation.  Normal maintenance, repairs, and minor replacement costs are charged to operating expenses.  Certain combined-cycle gas turbine generating units are maintained under long-term service agreements with third-party service providers. The costs under these agreements are split between operating expenses and capital additions based upon the nature of the work performed. Substantially all of the Registrant Subsidiaries’ plant is subject to mortgage liens.

Electric plant includes the portion of Grand Gulf that was sold and leased back in a prior period.  For financial reporting purposes, this sale and leaseback arrangement is reported as a financing transaction.

5147

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Net property, plant, and equipment for Entergy (including property under lease and associated accumulated amortization) for Entergy by business segment and functional category, as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, is shown below:
2020EntergyUtilityEntergy Wholesale CommoditiesParent & Other
202320232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
ProductionProduction    Production 
NuclearNuclear$7,526 $7,493 $33 $0 
OtherOther6,346 6,270 76 
TransmissionTransmission8,758 8,758 
DistributionDistribution10,805 10,805 
OtherOther2,804 2,792 
Construction work in progressConstruction work in progress2,012 2,008 
Nuclear fuelNuclear fuel601 548 53 
Property, plant, and equipment - netProperty, plant, and equipment - net$38,853 $38,674 $171 $7 

2019EntergyUtilityEntergy Wholesale CommoditiesParent & Other
 (In Millions)
Production    
Nuclear$7,439 $7,369 $70 $0 
Other5,253 5,139 114 
Transmission7,383 7,383 
Distribution8,972 8,972 
Other2,636 2,620 
Construction work in progress2,823 2,814 
Nuclear fuel677 614 63 
Property, plant, and equipment - net$35,183 $34,911 $264 $8 

Depreciation rates on average depreciable property for Entergy approximated 2.9% in 2023, 2.8% in 2020, 2.8% in 2019,2022, and 2.8% in 2018.  Included in these rates are the depreciation rates on average depreciable Utility property of 2.7% in 2020, 2.6% in 2019, and 2.6% in 2018, and the depreciation rates on average depreciable Entergy Wholesale Commodities property of 12.7% in 2020, 18.3% in 2019, and 18.6% in 2018. The depreciation rates for Entergy Wholesale Commodities reflect the significantly reduced remaining estimated operating lives associated with management’s strategy to shut down and sell all of the remaining plants in Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant nuclear fleet. The decrease in the depreciation rate in 2020 for Entergy Wholesale Commodities is due to the shutdown of Indian Point 2 in April 2020.2021.

Entergy amortizes nuclear fuel using a units-of-production method.  Nuclear fuel amortization is included in fuel expense in the income statements. Because the values of their long-lived assets are impaired, and their remaining estimated operating lives significantly reduced, the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants, except for Palisades, charge nuclear fuel costs directly to expense when incurred because their undiscounted cash flows are insufficient to recover the carrying amount of these capital additions.

Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation) for Entergy is reported net of accumulated depreciation of $191$193 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $184$208 million as of December 31, 2019.2022.

Net property, plant, and equipment (including property under lease and associated accumulated amortization) for the Registrant Subsidiaries by functional category, as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, is shown below:
2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
Production      
Nuclear$1,859 $4,153 $— $— $— $1,932 
Other892 3,583 958 386 1,177 — 
Transmission2,102 4,283 1,483 143 1,882 32 
Distribution3,395 4,371 2,272 692 2,197 — 
Other571 1,156 395 370 311 38 
Construction work in progress341 593 140 25 858 131 
Nuclear fuel214 333 — — — 161 
Property, plant, and equipment - net$9,374 $18,472 $5,248 $1,616 $6,425 $2,294 

5248

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable is $745 million as of December 31, 2020 and $406 million as of December 31, 2019.

Net property, plant, and equipment for the Registrant Subsidiaries (including property under lease and associated accumulated amortization) by company and functional category, as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, is shown below:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
Production      
Nuclear$1,622 $3,980 $0 $0 $0 $1,891 
Other803 3,660 868 416 523 
Transmission2,053 3,756 1,235 111 1,566 37 
Distribution2,666 4,130 1,651 576 1,782 
Other506 984 325 326 273 26 
Construction work in progress234 667 135 12 880 60 
Nuclear fuel163 210 175 
Property, plant, and equipment - net$8,047 $17,388 $4,214 $1,441 $5,023 $2,189 

2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
20222022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Millions) (In Millions)
ProductionProduction      Production 
NuclearNuclear$1,611 $4,042 $0 $0 $0 $1,716 
OtherOther785 2,789 845 192 528 
TransmissionTransmission1,966 2,944 1,136 96 1,202 39 
DistributionDistribution2,457 3,078 1,489 505 1,443 
OtherOther454 884 309 270 256 30 
Construction work in progressConstruction work in progress198 1,384 88 202 760 165 
Nuclear fuelNuclear fuel196 268 150 
Property, plant, and equipment - netProperty, plant, and equipment - net$7,667 $15,389 $3,867 $1,265 $4,189 $2,100 

Depreciation rates on average depreciable property for the Registrant Subsidiaries are shown below:
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
20202.6%2.4%3.5%3.1%3.1%2.1%
20192.5%2.4%3.2%3.2%3.0%2.1%
20182.5%2.3%3.2%3.5%2.7%1.9%
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
20232.7%2.6%3.6%3.3%4.0%1.6%
20222.7%2.4%3.6%3.2%3.1%2.0%
20212.7%2.4%3.6%3.2%3.2%1.9%

Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation) for Entergy Arkansas is reported net of accumulated depreciation of $0.1 million as of December 31, 2023 and $0.1 million as of December 31, 2022. Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation) for Entergy Louisiana is reported net of accumulated depreciation of $179.8$187.2 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $168.5$202.2 million as of December 31, 2019.2022. Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation) for Entergy Mississippi is reported net of accumulated depreciation of $0.5 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $0.5 million as of December 31, 2019.  Non-utility2022.

5349

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation) for Entergy Texas is reported net of accumulated depreciation of $4.9 million as of December 31, 2019.

As of December 31, 2020, construction expenditures included in accounts payable are $59.7 million for Entergy Arkansas, $460.5 million for Entergy Louisiana, $31.4 million for Entergy Mississippi, $9.2 million for Entergy New Orleans, $116.8 million for Entergy Texas, and $17.7 million for System Energy. As of December 31, 2019, construction expenditures included in accounts payable are $67.9 million for Entergy Arkansas, $115.1 million for Entergy Louisiana, $34.2 million for Entergy Mississippi, $18.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $88.1 million for Entergy Texas, and $23.2 million for System Energy.

Jointly-Owned Generating Stations

Certain Entergy subsidiaries jointly own electric generating facilities with affiliates or third parties. All parties are required to provide their own financing.  The investments, fuel expenses, and other operation and maintenance expenses associated with these generating stations are recorded by the Entergy subsidiaries to the extent of their respective undivided ownership interests.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, the subsidiaries’ investment and accumulated depreciation in each of these generating stations were as follows:

54

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements
Generating StationsFuel TypeTotal Megawatt Capability (a)OwnershipInvestmentAccumulated Depreciation
     (In Millions)
Utility:      
Entergy Arkansas -      
  IndependenceUnit 1Coal824 31.50 %$145 $108 
  IndependenceCommon FacilitiesCoal 15.75 %$42 $31 
  White BluffUnits 1 and 2Coal1,244 57.00 %$593 $404 
  Ouachita (b)Common FacilitiesGas66.67 %$173 $159 
  Union (c)Common FacilitiesGas25.00 %$29 $12 
Entergy Louisiana -      
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6Coal514 40.25 %$299 $224 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6 Common FacilitiesCoal 22.04 %$22 $11 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3Coal548 24.15 %$149 $136 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3 Common FacilitiesCoal8.05 %$5 $3 
  Ouachita (b)Common FacilitiesGas33.33 %$91 $79 
  AcadiaCommon FacilitiesGas50.00 %$22 $3 
  Union (c)Common FacilitiesGas50.00 %$59 $14 
Entergy Mississippi -     
  IndependenceUnits 1 and 2 and Common FacilitiesCoal1,666 25.00 %$293 $182 
Entergy New Orleans -
  Union (c)Common FacilitiesGas25.00 %$30 $10 
Entergy Texas -      
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6Coal514 29.75 %$211 $141 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6 Common FacilitiesCoal 16.30 %$8 $4 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3Coal548 17.85 %$112 $101 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3 Common FacilitiesCoal5.95 %$4 $2 
  Montgomery CountyUnit 1Gas91592.44 %$745 $54 
System Energy -      
  Grand Gulf (d)Unit 1Nuclear1,383 90.00 %$5,499 $3,494 
Other:      
  IndependenceUnit 2Coal842 14.37 %$79 $59 
  IndependenceCommon FacilitiesCoal 7.18 %$21 $15 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6Coal514 10.90 %$120 $74 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6 Common FacilitiesCoal 5.97 %$3 $1 

Generating StationsFuel TypeTotal Megawatt Capability (a)OwnershipInvestmentAccumulated Depreciation
     (In Millions)
Utility business:      
Entergy Arkansas -      
  IndependenceUnit 1Coal822 31.50 %$142 $105 
  IndependenceCommon FacilitiesCoal 15.75 %$43 $30 
  White BluffUnits 1 and 2Coal1,640 57.00 %$585 $383 
  Ouachita (b)Common FacilitiesGas66.67 %$173 $154 
  Union (c)Common FacilitiesGas25.00 %$29 $7 
Entergy Louisiana -      
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6Coal524 40.25 %$291 $209 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6 Common FacilitiesCoal 20.98 %$21 $9 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3Coal558 24.15 %$151 $128 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3 Common FacilitiesCoal8.05 %$5 $3 
  Ouachita (b)Common FacilitiesGas33.33 %$90 $77 
  AcadiaCommon FacilitiesGas50.00 %$21 $1 
  Union (c)Common FacilitiesGas50.00 %$59 $8 
Entergy Mississippi -     
  IndependenceUnits 1 and 2 and Common FacilitiesCoal1,664 25.00 %$284 $173 
Entergy New Orleans -
  Union (c)Common FacilitiesGas25.00 %$29 $7 
Entergy Texas -      
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6Coal524 29.75 %$206 $119 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6 Common FacilitiesCoal 15.52 %$7 $3 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3Coal558 17.85 %$113 $82 
  Big Cajun 2Unit 3 Common FacilitiesCoal5.95 %$4 $1 
System Energy -      
  Grand Gulf (d)Unit 1Nuclear1,396 90.00 %$5,310 $3,280 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities:      
  IndependenceUnit 2Coal842 14.37 %$74 $55 
  IndependenceCommon FacilitiesCoal 7.18 %$20 $14 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6Coal524 10.90 %$117 $67 
  Roy S. NelsonUnit 6 Common FacilitiesCoal 5.68 %$3 $1 
(a)“Total Megawatt Capability” is the dependable summer load carrying capability as demonstrated under actual operating conditions based on the primary fuel (assuming no curtailments) that each station was designed to utilize.
5550

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




(b)Ouachita Units 1 and 2 are owned 100% by Entergy Arkansas and Ouachita Unit 3 is owned 100% by Entergy Louisiana.  The investment and accumulated depreciation numbers above are only for the common facilities and not for the generating units.
(c)Union Unit 1 is owned 100% by Entergy New Orleans, Union Unit 2 is owned 100% by Entergy Arkansas, Union Units 3 and 4 are owned 100% by Entergy Louisiana.  The investment and accumulated depreciation numbers above are only for the specified common facilities and not for the generating units.
(d)Includes a leasehold interest held by System Energy.  System Energy’s Grand Gulf lease obligations are discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.

Nuclear Refueling Outage Costs

Nuclear refueling outage costs are deferred during the outage and amortized over the estimated period to the next outage because these refueling outage expenses are incurred to prepare the units to operate for the next operating cycle without having to be taken off line. Because the value of their long-lived assets are impaired, and their remaining estimated operating lives significantly reduced, the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants, except for Palisades, charge nuclear refueling outage costs directly to expense when incurred because their undiscounted cash flows are insufficient to recover the carrying amount of these costs.

Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC)

AFUDC represents the approximate net composite interest cost of borrowed funds and a reasonable return on the equity funds used for construction by the Registrant Subsidiaries.  AFUDC increases both the plant balance and earnings and is realized in cash through depreciation provisions included in the rates charged to customers.

Income Taxes

Entergy Corporation and the majority of its subsidiaries file a United States consolidated federal income tax return.  In September 2019, Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC and its regulated wholly-owned subsidiaries including Entergy Arkansas, LLC, Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, LLC, and Entergy New Orleans, LLC became eligible to join and joined the Entergy Corporation consolidated federal income tax group. These changes do not affect the accrual or allocation of income taxes for the Registrant Subsidiaries.  Each tax-paying entity records income taxes as if it were a separate taxpayer and consolidating adjustments are allocated to the tax filing entities in accordance with Entergy’s intercompany income tax allocation agreements.  Deferred income taxes are recorded for temporary differences between the book and tax basis of assets and liabilities, and for certain losses and credits available for carryforward.

Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance when, in the opinion of management, it is more likely than not that some portion of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.  Deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted for the effects of changes in tax laws and rates in the period in which the tax or rate was enacted. See the “Other Tax Matters - Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” section in Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the effects of the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in December 2017.

The benefits of investment tax credits are deferred and amortized over the average useful life of the related property, as a reduction of income tax expense, for such credits associated with rate-regulated operations in accordance with ratemaking treatment.

5651

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Earnings (Loss) per Share

The following table presents Entergy’s basic and diluted earnings per share calculationcalculations included on the consolidated statements of operations:income statements:
For the Years Ended December 31, For the Years Ended December 31,
202020192018 202320222021
(In Millions, Except Per Share Data) (Dollars In Thousands, Except Per Share Data; Shares in Millions)
 $/share $/share $/share  $/share $/share $/share
Consolidated net income
Less: Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interests
Less: Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interests
Less: Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interests
Net income attributable to Entergy Corporation
Net income attributable to Entergy Corporation
Net income attributable to Entergy CorporationNet income attributable to Entergy Corporation$1,388.3  $1,241.2  $848.7  $2,356,536   $1,103,166   $1,118,492   
Basic shares and earnings per average common shareBasic shares and earnings per average common share200.1 $6.94 195.2 $6.36 181.4 $4.68 
Average dilutive effect of:Average dilutive effect of:      Average dilutive effect of:  
Stock optionsStock options0.5 (0.02)0.6 (0.02)0.3 (0.01)
Other equity plansOther equity plans0.5 (0.02)0.8 (0.03)0.7 (0.02)
Equity forwardsEquity forwards0.4 (0.01)1.0 (0.02)
Diluted shares and earnings per average common shares201.1 $6.90 197.0 $6.30 183.4 $4.63 
Diluted shares and earnings per average common share

The calculation of diluted earnings per share excluded 523,9991,179,962 options outstanding at December 31, 2020, 173,2902023, 931,453 options outstanding at December 31, 2019,2022, and 956,5501,013,320 options outstanding at December 31, 20182021 because they were antidilutive. In addition, as discussed further in Note 7 to the financial statements, at December 31, 2023, 1,762,709 shares under a forward sale agreement were not included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share because their effect would have been antidilutive, and at December 31, 2021, 1,158,917 shares under then-outstanding forward sale agreements were not included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share because their effect would have been antidilutive.

Stock-based Compensation Plans

Entergy grants stock options, restricted stock, performance units, and restricted stock unit awards to key employees of the Entergy subsidiaries under its Equity Ownership Plans, which are shareholder-approved stock-based compensation plans.  These plans are described more fully in Note 12 to the financial statements.  The cost of the stock-based compensation is charged to income over the vesting period.  Awards under Entergy’s plans generally vest over three years. Entergy accounts for forfeitures of stock-based compensation when they occur. Entergy recognizes all income tax effects related to share-based payments through the income statement.

Accounting for the Effects of Regulation

Entergy’s Utility operating companies and System Energy are rate-regulated enterprises whose rates meet three criteria specifiedentities that are required to reflect the effects of rate regulation in accounting standards.  Thetheir financial statements, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities, as the Utility operating companies and System Energy have rates that (i)meet the following three criteria: (1) are approved by a body (its regulator) empoweredthird-party regulator; (2) are designed to set rates that bind customers; (ii) are cost-based;recover the entities’ cost of providing the regulated services or products; and (iii)(3) can reasonably be assumed will be charged to and collected from customers.  These criteria may also be applied to separable portions of a utility’s business, such as the generation or transmission functions, or to specific classes of customers.  Because the Utility operating companies and System Energy meet these criteria, each of them capitalizes costs that would otherwise be charged to expense if the rate actions of its regulator make it probable that those costs will be recovered in future revenue.  Such capitalized costs are reflected as regulatory assets in the accompanying financial statements.  When an enterprise concludes that recovery of a regulatory asset is no longer probable, the regulatory asset must be removed from the entity’s balance sheet.

An enterpriseRegulatory assets represent incurred costs that ceases to meet the three criteria for allhave been deferred because they are probable of future recovery from customers through regulated rates. Regulatory liabilities represent (1) revenue or part of its operations should reportgains that event in its financial statements.  In general, the enterprise no longer meeting the criteria should eliminate from its balance sheet all regulatory assets and liabilities related to the applicable operations.  Additionally, if it is determined that a regulated enterprise is no longer recovering all of its costs, it is possible that an impairment may exist that could require further write-offs of plant assets.

have
5752

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


been deferred because it is probable such amounts will be credited to customers through future regulated rates or (2) billings in advance of expenditures for approved regulatory programs. To the extent that all or portions of the Utility operating companies or System Energy’s operations cease to be subject to rate regulation, or future recovery or settlement is no longer probable as a result of changes in regulation or other reasons, the related regulatory assets and liabilities are eliminated from the balance sheet and the impact is recognized on the income statement.

In addition, regulatory accounting requires recognition of an impairment loss if it becomes probable that part of the cost of a recently completed plant asset will be disallowed for rate-making purposes and a reasonable estimate of the amount of the disallowance can be made.

Entergy Louisiana does not apply regulatory accounting standards to the Louisiana retail deregulated portion of River Bend, the 30% interest in River Bend formerly owned by Cajun or its steam business, unless specific cost recovery is provided for in tariff rates.  The Louisiana retail deregulated portion of River Bend is operated under a deregulated asset plan representing a portion (approximately 15%) of River Bend plant costs, generation, revenues, and expenses established under a 1992 LPSC order.  The plan allows Entergy Louisiana to sell the electricity from the deregulated assets to Louisiana retail customers at 4.6 cents per kWh or off-system at higher prices, with certain provisions for sharing incremental revenue above 4.6 cents per kWh between customers and shareholders.

Regulatory Asset or Liability for Income Taxes

Accounting standards for income taxes provide that a regulatory asset or liability be recorded if it is probable that the currently determinable future increase or decrease in regulatory income tax expense will be recovered from or returnedcredited to customers through future rates. There are two main sources of Entergy’s regulatory asset or liability for income taxes. There is a regulatory asset related to the ratemaking treatment of the tax effects of book depreciation for the equity component of AFUDC that has been capitalized to property, plant, and equipment but for which there is no corresponding tax basis. Equity-AFUDC is a component of property, plant, and equipment that is included in rate base when the plant is placed in service. There is a regulatory liability related to the adjustment of Entergy’s net deferred income taxes that was required by the enactment in December 2017 of a change in the federal corporate income tax rate, which is discussed in Note 2 and 3 to the financial statements.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Entergy considers all unrestricted highly liquid debt instruments with an original maturity of three months or less at date of purchase to be cash equivalents.

Securitization Recovery Trust Accounts

The funds that Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Texas hold in their securitization recovery trust accounts are not classified as cash and cash equivalents or restricted cash and cash equivalents because of their nature, uses, and restrictions. These funds are classified as part of other current assets and other investments, depending on the timeframe within which the Registrant Subsidiary expects to use the funds.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

The allowance for doubtful accounts reflects Entergy’s best estimate of expected losses on theits accounts receivable balances.  The allowance is calculated as the historical rate of customer write-offs multiplied by the current accounts receivable balance, taking into account the length of time the receivable balances have been outstanding. Although the rate of customer write-offs has historically experienced minimal variation, management monitors the current condition of individual customer accounts to manage collections and ensure bad debt expense is recorded in a timely manner. The Utility operating companycompanies’ customer accounts receivable are written off consistent with approved regulatory requirements. See Note 19 to the financial statements for further details on the allowance for doubtful accounts.
53

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Investments

Entergy records decommissioning trust funds on the balance sheet at their fair value. Unrealized gains and losses on investments in equity securities held by the nuclear decommissioning trust funds are recorded in earnings as they occur rather than in other comprehensive income. Because of the ability of the Registrant Subsidiaries to recover decommissioning costs in rates and in accordance with the regulatory treatment for decommissioning trust funds, the Registrant Subsidiaries have recorded an offsetting amount offor unrealized gains/(losses) on investment securities, the Registrant Subsidiaries record an offsetting amount in other regulatory liabilities/assets.  For the 30% interest in River Bend formerly owned by Cajun,
58

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy Louisiana records an offsetting amount in other deferred credits for the unrealized trust earnings not currently expected to be needed to decommission the plant.  Decommissioning trust funds for the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants dopreviously owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations, all of which have been sold as of June 2022, did not meet the criteria for regulatory accounting treatment. Accordingly, unrealized gains/(losses) recorded on the equity securities in the trust funds arefor these plants were recognized in earnings.earnings with no offsetting regulatory liability/asset amount. Unrealized gainsgains/(losses) recorded on the available-for-sale debt securities in the trust funds arewere recognized in the accumulated other comprehensive income component of shareholders’ equity. Unrealized losses (where cost exceeds fair market value) on the available-for-sale debt securities in the trust funds are also recorded in the accumulated other comprehensive income component of shareholders’ equity unless the unrealized loss is other than temporary and therefore recorded in earnings.  A portion of Entergy’s decommissioning trust funds were held in a wholly-owned registered investment company, and unrealized gains and losses on both the equity and debt securities held in the registered investment company were recognized in earnings. In December 2020, Entergy liquidated its interest in the registered investment company. The assessment of whether an investment in an available-for-sale debt security has suffered an other-than-temporary impairment is based on whether Entergy has the intent to sell or more likely than not will be required to sell the debt security before recovery of its amortized costs.  Further, if Entergy does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the debt security, an other-than-temporary impairment is considered to have occurred and it is measured by the present value of cash flows expected to be collected less the amortized cost basis (credit loss).  Effective January 1, 2020, with the adoption of ASU 2016-13, Entergy estimates the expected credit losses for its available for sale securities based on the current credit rating and remaining life of the securities. To the extent an expected credit loss is realized, the individual security comprising the loss is written off against this allowance. Entergy’s trusts are managed by third parties who operate in accordance with agreements that define investment guidelines and place restrictions on the purchases and sales of investments. See Note 16 to the financial statements for details on the decommissioning trust funds.

Equity Method InvestmentsPartnerships with Disproportionate Allocation of Earnings and Losses in Relation to an Investor’s Ownership Interest

Entergy owns investmentsArkansas and Entergy Mississippi, as managing members, each control a tax equity partnership with a third party tax equity investor and consolidate the partnerships for financial reporting purposes. For each respective partnership, the limited liability company agreement with the tax equity investor stipulates a disproportionate allocation of tax attributes, earnings, and cash flows between the Registrant Subsidiary and the tax equity investor with the tax equity investor being allocated a significant portion of the tax attributes, earnings, and cash flows until it receives its target return, at which point the earnings and cash flows will primarily be allocated to the Registrant Subsidiary. Each Registrant Subsidiary has the option to purchase, at a future date specified in their respective partnership agreement, the tax equity investor’s interests at the then-current fair market value, plus an amount that are accountedresults in the tax equity investor reaching its target return, if needed.

Because of this disproportionate allocation, each Registrant Subsidiary accounts for its earnings in the partnership using the HLBV method of accounting. Under the HLBV method, the amounts of income and loss attributable to both the Registrant Subsidiary and the tax equity investor reflect changes in the amount each would hypothetically receive at the balance sheet date under the respective liquidation provisions of the limited liability company agreement, assuming the net assets of the partnership were liquidated at book value, after consideration of contributions and distributions, between the Registrant Subsidiary and the tax equity investor. Once the tax equity investor reaches its target return in the hypothetical liquidation, the remaining proceeds are primarily allocated to the Registrant Subsidiary. This allocation may result in fluctuations of income on a periodic basis that differ significantly from what would otherwise be recognized if the earnings were allocated under the relative ownership percentages between the Registrant Subsidiary and the tax equity investor. Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi have determined these differences are primarily due to timing, and both the APSC and the MPSC have approved that, for purposes of ratemaking, each Registrant Subsidiary reflect its interest in its respective partnership using its relative ownership percentage and disregard the effects of the HLBV method of accounting. Because of this, each Registrant Subsidiary has recorded a regulatory liability for the difference between the earnings allocated to it under the HLBV method of accounting because Entergy’sand the earnings that would have been allocated to it under its respective ownership level resultspercentage in significant influence, but not control, over the investee and its operations.  Entergy records its share of the investee’s comprehensive earnings and losses in income and as an increase or decrease to the investment account. Any cash distributions are charged against the investment account. Entergy discontinues the recognition of losses on equity investments when its share of losses equals or exceeds its carrying amount for an investee plus any advances made or commitments to provide additional financial support.partnership.

Derivative Financial Instruments and Commodity Derivatives

The accounting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities require that all derivatives be recognized at fair value on the balance sheet, either as assets or liabilities, unless they meet various exceptions
54

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

including the normal purchase/normal sale criteria.  The changes in the fair value of recognized derivatives are recorded each period in current earnings or other comprehensive income, depending on whether a derivative is designated as part of a hedge transaction and the type of hedge transaction. Due to regulatory treatment, an offsetting regulatory asset or liability is recorded for changes in fair value of recognized derivatives for the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Contracts for commodities that will be physically delivered in quantities expected to be used or sold in the ordinary course of business, including certain purchases and sales of power and fuel, meet the normal purchase, normal sales criteria and are not recognized on the balance sheet.  Revenues and expenses from these contracts are reported on a gross basis in the appropriate revenue and expense categories as the commodities are received or delivered.

For other contracts for commodities in which Entergy is hedging the variability of cash flows related to a variable-rate asset, liability, or forecasted transactions that qualify as cash flow hedges, the changes in the fair value of such derivative instruments are reported in other comprehensive income.  To qualify for hedge accounting, the relationship between the hedging instrument and the hedged item must be documented to include the risk
59

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




management objective and strategy and, at inception and on an ongoing basis, the effectiveness of the hedge in offsetting the changes in the cash flows of the item being hedged.  Gains or losses accumulated in other comprehensive income are reclassified to earnings in the periods when the underlying transactions actually occur.  Prior to 2019, the ineffective portions of all hedges are recognized in current-period earnings. Effective January 1, 2019 with the adoption of ASU 2017-12 there will no longer be separate recognition of the ineffective portion of highly effective hedges.  Changes in the fair value of derivative instruments that are not designated as cash flow hedges are recorded in current-period earnings on a mark-to-market basis.

Entergy has determined that contracts to purchase uranium do not meet the definition of a derivative under the accounting standards for derivative instruments because they do not provide for net settlement and the uranium markets are not sufficiently liquid to conclude that forward contracts are readily convertible to cash.  If the uranium markets do become sufficiently liquid in the future and Entergy begins to account for uranium purchase contracts as derivative instruments, the fair value of these contracts would be accounted for consistent with Entergy’s other derivative instruments. See Note 15 to the financial statements for further details on Entergy’s derivative instruments and hedging activities.

Fair Values

The estimated fair values of Entergy’s financial instruments and derivatives are determined using historical prices, bid prices, market quotes, and financial modeling.  Considerable judgment is required in developing the estimates of fair value.  Therefore, estimates are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that Entergy could realize in a current market exchange.  Gains or losses realized on financial instruments other than those instruments held by the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business are reflected in future rates and therefore do not affect net income.  Entergy considers the carrying amounts of most financial instruments classified as current assets and liabilities to be a reasonable estimate of their fair value because of the short maturity of these instruments.  See Note 15 to the financial statements for further discussion of fair value.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

Entergy periodically reviews long-lived assets held in all of its business segments whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that recoverability of these assets is uncertain.  Generally, the determination of recoverability is based on the undiscounted net cash flows expected to result from such operations and assets.  Projected net cash flows depend on the expected operating life of the assets, the future operating costs associated with the assets, the efficiency and availability of the assets and generating units, and the future market and price for energy and capacity over the remaining life of the assets. Because the values of the long-lived assets are impaired, and the remaining estimated operating lives significantly reduced, the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants, except for Palisades, are charging additional expenditures for capital assets directly to expense when incurred.  See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussions of the impairments of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants.

River Bend AFUDC
55

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The River Bend AFUDC gross-up is a regulatory asset that represents the incremental difference imputed by the LPSC between the AFUDC actually recorded by Entergy Louisiana on a net-of-tax basis during the construction of River Bend and what the AFUDC would have been on a pre-tax basis.  The imputed amount was only calculated on that portion of River Bend that the LPSC allowed in rate base and is being amortized through August 2025.

Reacquired Debt

The premiums and costs associated with reacquired debt of Entergy’s Utility operating companies and System Energy (except that portion allocable to the deregulated operations of Entergy Louisiana) are included in
60

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

regulatory assets and are being amortized over the life of the related new issuances, or over the life of the original debt issuance if the debt is not refinanced, in accordance with ratemaking treatment.

Taxes Imposed on Revenue-Producing Transactions

Governmental authorities assess taxes that are both imposed on and concurrent with a specific revenue-producing transaction between a seller and a customer, including, but not limited to, sales, use, value added, and some excise taxes.  Entergy presents these taxes on a net basis, excluding them from revenues, unless required to report them differently by a regulatory authority.

New Accounting Pronouncements

The accounting standard-setting process is ongoing, and the FASB is currently working on several projects that have not yet resulted in final pronouncements. Final pronouncements that result from these projects could have a material effect on Entergy’s future results of operations, financial positions, or cash flows.

In December 2019November 2023 the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-12, “Income Taxes2023-07, “Segment Reporting (Topic 740)280): Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes.Improvements to Reportable Segment Disclosures.” The ASU removes certain exceptionsis intended to improve reportable segment disclosure requirements, primarily through enhanced disclosures about significant segment expenses. In addition, the ASU requires enhanced interim disclosures, provides new segment disclosure requirements for recognizing deferred taxesentities with a single reportable segment, and contains other new disclosure requirements. ASU 2023-07 is effective for investments, performing intra-period allocation,Entergy for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2023, and calculating income taxes infor interim periods. The ASU also adds guidance to reduce complexity in certain areas, including allocating taxes to members of a consolidated group. Entergy adopted ASU 2019-12 in the first quarter 2021 on a prospective basis.periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2024. Entergy does not expect that the adoption of ASU 2019-12 will2023-07 to materially affect its results of operations, financial position,positions, or cash flows.

In December 2023 the FASB issued ASU 2023-09, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Improvements to Income Tax Disclosures.” The ASU is intended to enhance the transparency and decision usefulness of income tax disclosures. The amendments in the ASU require enhanced income tax disclosures, primarily related to consistent categorization and disaggregation of information in the rate reconciliation and income taxes paid disaggregated by jurisdiction. The ASU also removes certain disclosures that are no longer considered cost beneficial or relevant. ASU 2023-09 is effective for Entergy for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2024. Entergy does not expect ASU 2023-09 to materially affect its results of operations, financial positions, or cash flows.


56

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

NOTE 2.  RATE AND REGULATORY MATTERS (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Regulatory Assets and Regulatory Liabilities

Regulatory assets represent probable future revenues associated withincurred costs that Entergy expects to recoverhave been deferred because they are probable of future recovery from customers through the regulatory ratemaking process under which the Utility business operates.regulated rates. Regulatory liabilities represent (1) revenue or gains that have been deferred because it is probable future reductions in revenues associated withsuch amounts that Entergy expectswill be credited to benefit customers through thefuture regulated rates or (2) billings in advance of expenditures for approved regulatory ratemaking process under which the Utility business operates.programs. In addition to the regulatory assets and liabilities that are specifically disclosed on the face of the balance sheets, the tables below provide detail of “Other regulatory assets” and “Other regulatory liabilities” that are included on Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ balance sheets as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019:2022:

61

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Other Regulatory Assets

Entergy
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
$3,027.5 $2,942.4 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
1,018.9 920.4 
Removal costs (Note 9)
893.8 421.0 
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta and Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators and Note 5 - Securitization Bonds)
379.2 372.8 
Retired electric and gas meters - recovered through retail rates as determined by retail regulators
192.1 205.6 
Opportunity Sales - recovery will be determined after final order in proceeding (Note 2 - Entergy Arkansas Opportunity Sales Proceeding) (b)
131.8 116.3 
Deferred COVID-19 costs recovery period to be determined (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
105.7 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
79.2 66.6 
Retail rate deferrals - recovered through rate riders as rates are redetermined by retail regulators
66.0 15.7 
Attorney General litigation costs - recovered over a six-year period through March 2026 (b)
25.3 29.5 
New nuclear generation development costs - recovery through formula rate plan December 2014 through November 2022 (b)
14.2 21.6 
Little Gypsy costs – recovered through securitization (Note 5 - Entergy Louisiana Securitization Bonds - Little Gypsy)
7.5 29.9 
Other135.3 150.3 
Entergy Total$6,076.5 $5,292.1 
62

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


Entergy Arkansas
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
$831.5 $796.5 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
479.3 433.0 
Removal costs (Note 9)
212.6 168.9 
Opportunity sales - recovery will be determined after final order in proceeding (Note 2 - Entergy Arkansas Opportunity Sales Proceeding) (b)
131.8 116.3 
Retired electric meters - recovered over 15-year period through March 2034
46.9 50.4 
Storm damage costs - recovered either through securitization or retail rates (Note 5 - Entergy Arkansas Securitization Bonds)
42.7 46.1 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
24.7 18.3 
Retail rate deferrals - recovered through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually (b)
12.6 2.3 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovery period to be determined (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
10.5 
ANO Fukushima and Flood Barrier costs - recovered through retail rates through February 2026 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
9.1 10.9 
Other30.7 24.2 
Entergy Arkansas Total$1,832.4 $1,666.9 
20232022
 (In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
$1,655.5 $1,968.5 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or shutdown of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
1,285.0 1,103.2 
Removal costs (Note 9)
1,010.7 1,058.9 
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators and Note 5 - Securitization Bonds)
536.9 841.3 
Qualified Pension Settlement Cost Deferral - recovered through October 2034 (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Settlement Cost)
250.9 194.7 
Retail rate deferrals - recovered through formula rates or rate riders as rates are redetermined by retail regulators
248.6 160.0 
Retired electric and gas meters - recovered through retail rates as determined by retail regulators (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
153.8 166.8 
Opportunity Sales - recovery will be determined after final order in proceeding (Note 2 - Entergy Arkansas Opportunity Sales Proceeding) (b)
131.8 131.8 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovered through retail rates as determined by retail regulators (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
118.0 120.9 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
63.1 68.4 
Pension & postretirement benefits expense deferral - recovered through retail rates (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings and Note 11 - Entergy Texas Reserve)
32.7 30.6 
Rate case depreciation relate back deferral - will be recovered over a six-month period beginning January 2024 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
27.6 — 
Attorney General litigation costs - recovered over a six-year period through March 2026 (b)
10.9 15.7 
Formula rate plan historical year rate adjustment (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
— 18.2 
Other143.9 157.4 
Entergy Total$5,669.4 $6,036.4 

6357

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Entergy LouisianaArkansas
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
$799.4 $787.7 
Removal costs (Note 9)
302.5 
Asset Retirement Obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
299.0 262.5 
Retired electric meters - recovered over a 22-year period through July 2041
96.4 101.1 
Storm damage costs - recovered through retail rates (Note 2 - Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta and Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators)
94.0 45.7 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovery period to be determined (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
48.8 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
26.6 20.4 
New nuclear generation development costs - recovery through formula rate plan December 2014 through November 2022 (b)
14.0 21.2 
Business combination external costs deferral - recovery through formula rate plan December 2015 through November 2025 (b)
9.2 10.8 
River Bend AFUDC - recovered through August 2025 (Note 1 - River Bend AFUDC)
7.2 9.1 
Little Gypsy costs – recovered through securitization (Note 5 - Entergy Louisiana Securitization Bonds - Little Gypsy)
5.1 27.6 
Other23.9 29.1 
Entergy Louisiana Total$1,726.1 $1,315.2 
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or shutdown of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
$639.1 $562.7 
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
536.6 597.6 
Removal costs (Note 9)
319.7 267.1 
Opportunity sales - recovery will be determined after final order in proceeding (Note 2 - Entergy Arkansas Opportunity Sales Proceeding) (b)
131.8 131.8 
Qualified Pension Settlement Cost Deferral - recovered through October 2034 (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Settlement Cost)
84.1 67.1 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovered over a 10-year period through December 2033
39.0 39.0 
Retired electric meters - recovered over 15-year period through March 2034
36.3 39.8 
Storm damage costs - recovered through retail rates
33.1 35.9 
Retail rate deferrals - recovered through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually (b)
24.9 26.4 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
19.9 21.4 
ANO Fukushima and Flood Barrier costs - recovered through retail rates through February 2026 (b)
3.8 5.6 
Other17.1 15.9 
Entergy Arkansas Total$1,885.4 $1,810.3 

Entergy MississippiLouisiana
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
$242.7 $234.4 
Removal costs (Note 9)
107.3 80.8 
Retail rate deferrals - returned through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
44.3 7.5 
Attorney General litigation costs - recovered over a six-year period through March 2026 (b)
25.3 29.5 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovery period to be determined (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
19.2 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
13.5 14.9 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
7.9 7.8 
Other7.1 3.1 
Entergy Mississippi Total$467.3 $378.0 
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
$412.0 $481.7 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or shutdown of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
408.7 346.3 
Removal costs (Note 9)
262.3 418.8 
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators)
202.6 472.8 
Qualified Pension Settlement Cost Deferral - recovered through October 2034 (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Settlement Cost)
123.0 93.9 
Retired electric and gas meters - recovered over a 22-year period through July 2041
83.2 88.0 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovery period to be determined (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (a)
47.8 47.8 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
23.4 25.1 
Other85.9 81.8 
Entergy Louisiana Total$1,648.9 $2,056.2 

6458

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy New OrleansMississippi
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
$75.7 $85.9 
Removal costs - (Note 9)
63.2 52.9 
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta and Note 5 - Entergy New Orleans Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Isaac)
55.2 59.6 
Retired meters - recovered over a 12-year period through July 2031 (b)
21.7 24.6 
Deferred COVID-19 costs recovery period to be determined (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
14.3 
Rate case costs - recovered over a three-year period through July 2022 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
5.7 7.0 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
5.2 4.9 
New Orleans Power Station deferral – recovered over a five-year period through October 2025 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
5.0 
Algiers customer migration costs - recovered over a five-year period through July 2024 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
3.9 4.9 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
1.9 2.3 
Other15.0 17.3 
Entergy New Orleans Total$266.8 $259.4 
 20232022
(In Millions)
Retail rate deferrals - recovered through formula rates or rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
$192.8 $111.1 
Removal Costs (Note 9)
188.0 159.4 
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
127.6 148.8 
Qualified Pension Settlement Cost Deferral - recovered through October 2034 (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Settlement Cost)
32.0 24.3 
Attorney General litigation costs - recovered over a six-year period through March 2026 (b)
10.9 15.7 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
10.0 10.9 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of shutdown of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (a)
6.8 6.3 
Formula rate plan historical year rate adjustment (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
— 18.2 
Other11.0 24.8 
Entergy Mississippi Total$579.1 $519.5 

Entergy TexasNew Orleans
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta and Note 5 - Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds)
$187.3 $221.4 
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
140.1 167.7 
Removal costs (Note 9)
115.3 42.5 
Retired electric meters - recovered over 13-year period through February 2032
26.0 28.4 
Neches and Sabine costs - recovered over a 10-year period through September 2028 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
18.8 21.2 
Deferred COVID-19 costs recovery period to be determined (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
12.9 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
10.5 7.7 
Transition to competition costs - recovered over a 15-year period through February 2021
2.1 14.9 
Other11.7 8.8 
Entergy Texas Total$524.7 $512.6 
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Removal costs (Note 9)
$61.1 $56.3 
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
41.4 51.4 
Retired electric and gas meters - recovered over a 12-year period through July 2031 (b)
15.5 17.6 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovered over a five-year period through August 2028 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
13.0 13.9 
Qualified Pension Settlement Cost Deferral - recovered through October 2034 (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Settlement Cost)
11.8 9.4 
Gas cross-boring costs - recovered through formula rates as rates are redetermined by retail regulators
10.9 9.9 
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators and Note 5 - Entergy New Orleans Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Isaac)
3.9 17.2 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
0.8 1.2 
Other24.0 25.2 
Entergy New Orleans Total$182.4 $202.1 

6559

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Entergy Texas
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators and Note 5 - Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Ike and Gustav and Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri)
$297.3 $315.4 
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (a)
85.6 100.5 
Removal costs (Note 9)
77.5 62.9 
Pension & postretirement benefits expense deferral - recovered through retail rates (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings and Note 11 - Entergy Texas Reserve)
32.7 30.6 
Rate case depreciation relate back deferral - will be recovered over a six-month period beginning January 2024 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
27.6 — 
Advanced metering system (AMS) surcharge for residential customers - recovered through December 2029
20.2 — 
Retired electric meters - recovered through retail rates (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
18.8 21.4 
Neches and Sabine costs - recovered over a 10-year period through September 2028
11.6 14.0 
Deferred COVID-19 costs - recovered through retail rates (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (b)
8.4 10.4 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
8.3 9.1 
Other8.6 14.4 
Entergy Texas Total$596.6 $578.7 

System Energy
20202019 20232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (a)
$226.3 $210.9 
Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear unit (Note 9) (b)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans and Other Postretirement Benefits) (a)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 - Qualified Pension Plans and Other Postretirement Benefits) (a)
217.8 200.3 
Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9)
Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9)
92.9 75.9 
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
2.0 3.0 
System Energy TotalSystem Energy Total$539.0 $490.1 

(a)Does not earn a return on investment, but is offset by related liabilities.
(b)Does not earn a return on investment.

Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta

In August and October 2020, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to portions of the Utility’s service territories in Louisiana, including New Orleans, Texas, and, to a lesser extent, in Arkansas and Mississippi. The storms resulted in widespread power outages, significant damage to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the outages. Additionally, as a result of Hurricane Laura’s extensive damage to the grid infrastructure serving the impacted area, large portions of the underlying transmission system required nearly a complete rebuild. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of the electrical system damaged by Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta are currently estimated to be approximately $2.4 billion, including $2.0 billion at Entergy Louisiana, $300 million at Entergy Texas, and $40 million at Entergy New Orleans. The estimate includes approximately $1.98 billion in capital costs, including $1.67 billion at Entergy Louisiana, $245 million at Entergy Texas, and $30 million at Entergy New Orleans and approximately $420 million in non-capital costs, including $330 million at Entergy Louisiana, $55 million at Entergy Texas, and $10 million at Entergy New Orleans. This estimate includes all costs to restore power and repair or replace the damages from the hurricanes, except for the cost to repair or replace damage incurred to an Entergy Louisiana transmission line in southeast Louisiana, and the amount of that cost could be significant. The restoration plan for this transmission line and the related cost estimate is still being evaluated.

Entergy recorded accounts payable and corresponding construction work in progress and regulatory assets for the estimated costs incurred that were necessary to return customers to service. Entergy recorded the regulatory assets in accordance with its accounting policies and based on the historic treatment of such costs in its service area because management believes that recovery through some form of regulatory mechanism is probable. There are well-established mechanisms and precedent for addressing these catastrophic events and providing for recovery of prudently incurred storm costs in accordance with applicable regulatory and legal principles. Because Entergy has not gone through the regulatory process regarding these storm costs, there is an element of risk, and Entergy is unable to predict with certainty the degree of success it may have in its recovery initiatives, the amount of restoration costs that it may ultimately recover, or the timing of such recovery.

The Utility operating companies are considering all available avenues to recover storm-related costs from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta including accessing funded storm reserve escrows and securitization. In November 2020, Entergy Louisiana drew $257 million from its funded storm reserves. Each Utility operating company is responsible for its restoration cost obligations and for recovering or financing its storm-related costs. Storm cost recovery or financing will be subject to review by applicable regulatory authorities.

In October 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed an application at the LPSC seeking approval of certain ratemaking adjustments to facilitate issuance of shorter-term bonds to provide interim financing for restoration costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta. Subsequently, Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff
6660

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

filed a joint motion seeking approval to exclude from the derivation of Entergy Louisiana’s capital structure and cost rate of debt for ratemaking purposes, including the allowance for funds used during construction, shorter-term debt up to $1.1 billion issued by Entergy Louisiana to fund costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta costs on an interim basis. In November 2020 the LPSC issued an order approving the joint motion, and Entergy Louisiana issued $1.1 billion of 0.62% Series mortgage bonds due November 2023.

In December 2020, Entergy Louisiana provided the LPSC with notification that it intends to initiate a storm cost recovery proceeding in the near future, which will permit the LPSC to retain any outside consultants and counsel needed to review the storm cost recovery application. In February 2021 the LPSC voted to retain outside counsel and consultants to assist in the review of Entergy Louisiana’s upcoming storm cost recovery application, which is expected to be filed in March 2021.

Other Regulatory Liabilities

Entergy
 20202019
(In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
$1,694.1 $1,300.1 
Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation (Note 3) (b)
144.3 97.1 
Vidalia purchased power agreement (Note 8) (b)
115.7 127.3 
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
75.1 62.3 
Grand Gulf sale-leaseback - (Note 5 - Grand Gulf Sale-Leaseback Transactions)
55.6 55.6 
Entergy Arkansass accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - will be returned to customers when approved by the APSC and the FERC
44.4 44.4 
Future formula rate plan revenue reductions (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
43.5 51.1 
Asset retirement obligation - return to customers dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (a)
29.7 37.2 
Internal restructuring guaranteed tax credits (Note 2 - Internal Restructuring)
26.4 33.0 
Business combination guaranteed customer benefits - returned to customers through retail rates and fuel rates December 2015 through November 2024
21.5 35.7 
Advanced metering system (AMS) surcharge - return to customers dependent upon AMS spend
20.1 25.3 
Excess decommissioning recovery for Willow Glen - (Note 14 - Dispositions)
21.2 
Entergy Mississippis accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - amortized and credited through the Unit Power Sales Agreement
10.7 17.8 
Income tax rate change - returned to electric and gas customers through retail rates (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
7.3 13.9 
Other35.5 39.0 
Entergy Total$2,323.9 $1,961.0 
20232022
(In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
$1,826.2 $1,237.9 
Securitization financing savings obligation (Note 3)
405.2 327.7 
Complaints against System Energy - potential future refunds (Note 2) (b)
177.9 249.8 
Retail rate over-recovery - refunded through formula rate or rate riders as rates are redetermined by retail regulators
138.0 180.2 
Credits expected to be shared with customers from resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit (Note 3)
98.0 — 
Refund from System Energy settlement with the APSC - return to customers to be determined (Note 2)
93.0 — 
Vidalia purchased power agreement (Note 8)
82.5 95.4 
Deferred tax equity partnership earnings (Note 1)
57.9 43.8 
Entergy Arkansass accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - will be returned to customers when approved by the APSC and the FERC
44.4 44.4 
Asset retirement obligation - return to customers dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (a)
44.3 43.5 
Other149.5 101.9 
Entergy Total$3,116.9 $2,324.6 

Entergy Arkansas
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
$621.6 $428.2 
Refund from System Energy settlement with the APSC - return to customers to be determined (Note 2)
93.0 — 
Deferred tax equity partnership earnings (Note 1)
27.4 22.4 
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
10.6 3.9 
Internal restructuring guaranteed customer credits - returned to customers over a six-year period through December 2024
6.6 13.2 
Other— 8.1 
Entergy Arkansas Total$759.2 $475.8 

6761

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Entergy Arkansas
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
$597.4 $460.3 
Future formula rate plan revenue reductions (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
43.5 46.6 
Internal restructuring guaranteed customer credits (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
26.4 33.0 
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
19.6 19.7 
Entergy Arkansas Total$686.9 $559.6 

Entergy Louisiana
20202019 20232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
$567.7 $436.5 
Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation (Note 3)
144.3 97.1 
Securitization financing savings obligation (Note 3)
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are determined annually
Vidalia purchased power agreement (Note 8) (b)
Vidalia purchased power agreement (Note 8) (b)
115.7 127.3 
Asset Retirement Obligation - return to customers dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (a)
29.7 37.1 
Business combination guaranteed customer benefits - returned to customers through retail rates and fuel rates December 2015 through November 2024
21.5 35.7 
Asset retirement obligation - return to customers dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (a)
Credits expected to be shared with customers from resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit (Note 3)
Shorter-term financing interest earnings (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (a)
Hurricane Ida insurance proceeds - refunded through rate rider as rates are determined periodically
Sale-leaseback and depreciation refunds - returned to customers September 2023 through August 2024
Excess decommissioning recovery for Willow Glen - returned over one-year period through retail rates (Note 14 - Dispositions)
21.2 
Other
Other
OtherOther39.4 39.2 
Entergy Louisiana TotalEntergy Louisiana Total$918.3 $794.1 

Entergy Mississippi
202320232022
20202019 (In Millions)
Deferred tax equity partnership earnings (Note 1)
(In Millions)
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
$14.2 $14.6 
Grand Gulf Over-Recovery - returned to customers through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
1.0 2.4 
Future formula rate plan revenue reductions (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
4.5 
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
OtherOther0.6 
Entergy Mississippi TotalEntergy Mississippi Total$15.8 $21.5 

Entergy New Orleans
20232022
 (In Millions)
Credits expected to be shared with customers from resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit (Note 3)
$60.0 $— 
Retail rate rider over-recovery - refunded through rate riders as rates are redetermined annually
20.1 19.5 
Sale-leaseback and depreciation refunds - returned to customers over a 10-year period beginning September 2023 (Note 2)
9.8 — 
Other0.5 1.2 
Entergy New Orleans Total$90.4 $20.7 

6862

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy Texas
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Advanced metering system (AMS) surcharge - returned to customers dependent upon AMS spend
$20.1 $25.3 
Income tax rate change - refunded through a rate rider (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
6.5 10.4 
Transition to competition costs - returned to customers through rate riders when rates are redetermined periodically
3.2 3.8 
Other2.5 2.6 
Entergy Texas Total$32.3 $42.1 
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Retail rate rider over-recovery - return to customers to be determined
$23.8 $10.9 
Rate case settlement relate back - will be amortized over a six-month period beginning January 2024 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
10.3 — 
Retail refunds - return to customers to be determined
6.2 25.5 
Securitization over-recovery - return to customers to be determined (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators and Note 5 - Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Rita and Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Ike and Hurricane Gustav)
0.3 8.8 
Other2.4 — 
Entergy Texas Total$43.0 $45.2 

System Energy
20202019 20232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 16) (a)
$529.0 $403.3 
Grand Gulf sale-leaseback - (Note 5 - Grand Gulf Sale-Leaseback Transactions)
55.6 55.6 
Complaints against System Energy - potential future refunds (Note 2) (b)
Entergy Arkansass accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - will be returned to customers when approved by the APSC and the FERC
Entergy Arkansass accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - will be returned to customers when approved by the APSC and the FERC
44.4 44.4 
Grand Gulf sale-leaseback accumulated deferred income taxes (a)
25.7 12.3 
Entergy Mississippis accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - amortized and credited through the Unit Power Sales Agreement
10.7 17.8 
System Energy TotalSystem Energy Total$665.4 $533.4 
System Energy Total
System Energy Total

(a)Offset by related asset.
(b)As discussed in “Complaints Against System Energy” below, there was an additional $103.5 million classified as a result of the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, in December 2017, and the lowering of the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21% effective January 2018, the Vidalia purchased power agreementcurrent regulatory liability was reduced by $30.5 million and the Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation regulatory liabilities were reduced by $25 million, with corresponding increases to Other regulatory credits on the income statement. The effectsas of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are discussed further in Note 3 to the financial statements.December 31, 2022.

Regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

See the “Other Tax Matters - Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” section in Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the effects of the December 2017 enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Tax Act), including its effects on Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ regulatory asset/liability for income taxes.

Entergy Arkansas

Consistent with its previously stated intent to return unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers as expeditiously as possible, Entergy Arkansas initiated a tariff proceeding in February 2018 proposing to establish a tax adjustment rider to provide retail customers with certain tax benefits of $467 million associated with the Tax Act. For the residential customer class, unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes were returned to customers over a 21-month period from April 2018 through December 2019. For all other customer classes, unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes were returned to customers over a nine-month period from April 2018 through December 2018. A true-up provision also was included in the rider, with any over- or under-returned unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes credited or billed to customers during the billing month of January 2020, with any residual amounts of over- or under-returned unprotected excess
69

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




accumulated deferred income taxes to be flowed through Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider. In March 2018 the APSC approved the tax adjustment rider effective with the first billing cycle of April 2018.

As discussed below, inIn July 2018, Entergy Arkansas made its formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2019 calendar year. A hearing was held in May 2018 regarding the APSC’s inquiries into the effects of the Tax Act, including Entergy Arkansas’s proposal to utilize its formula rate plan rider for its customers to realize the remaining benefits
63

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



of the Tax Act. Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan rider included a netting adjustment that compared actual annual results to the allowed rate of return on common equity. In July 2018 the APSC issued an order agreeing with Entergy Arkansas’s proposal to have the effects of the Tax Act on current income tax expense flow through Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan rider and with Entergy Arkansas’s treatment of protected and unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes. The APSC also directed Entergy Arkansas to submit in the tax adjustment rider proceeding, discussed above, the adjustments to all other riders affected by the Tax Act and to include an amendment for a true up mechanism where a rider affected by the Tax Act does not already contain a true-up mechanism. Pursuant to a 2018 settlement agreement in Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan proceeding, Entergy Arkansas also removed the net operating loss accumulated deferred income tax asset caused by the Tax Act from Entergy Arkansas’s tax adjustment rider. Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff filings were accepted by the APSC in October 2018. In February 2021, pursuant to its 2020 formula rate plan evaluation report settlement, Entergy Arkansas flowed $5.6 million in credits to customers through the tax adjustment rider based on the outcome of certain federal tax positions and a decrease in the state tax rate;rate. In the October 2023 settlement agreement filed in the 2023 formula rate plan proceeding, discussed below in “Retail Rate Proceedings - Filings with the APSC (Entergy Arkansas) - Retail Rates - 2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing”, Entergy Arkansas included recovery of $34.9 million related to the resolution of the 2016 and 2017 IRS audits from previous tax adjustment rider will be closed afterpositions that are no longer uncertain, partially offset by $24.7 million in excess accumulated deferred income taxes from reductions in state income tax rates, each before consideration of their respective tax gross-up. The settlement was approved by the credits are issued.APSC in December 2023. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit and the State of Arkansas corporate income tax rate changes.

Entergy Louisiana

In an electric formula rate plan settlement approved by the LPSC in April 2018, the parties agreed that Entergy Louisiana would return to customers one-half of its eligible unprotected excess deferred income taxes from May 2018 through December 2018 and return to customers the other half from January 2019 through August 2022. In addition, the settlement provided that in order to flow back to customers certain other tax benefits created by the Tax Act, Entergy Louisiana established a regulatory liability effective January 1, 2018 in the amount of $9.1 million per month to reflect these tax benefits already included in retail rates until new base rates under the formula rate plan were established in September 2018, and this regulatory liability was returned to customers over the September 2018 through August 2019 formula rate plan rate-effective period. The LPSC staff and intervenors in the settlement reserved the right to obtain data from Entergy Louisiana to confirm the determination of excess accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the Tax Act and the analysis thereof as part of the formula rate plan review proceeding for the 2017 test year filing which, asfiling. As discussed below Entergy Louisiana filed in June 2018.

Retail Rate Proceedings
Entergy Mississippi

-
Entergy Mississippi filed its 2018 formula rate plan in March 2018 and includedFilings with the LPSC (Entergy Louisiana) - Retail Rates - Electric - Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement”, a proposalglobal settlement resolving the outstanding issues related to return all of its unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers through rates or in exchange for other assets, or a combination of both, by the end of 2018. In June 2018 the MPSC approved a stipulation filed by Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff in Entergy Mississippi’s2017 formula rate plan filing that addressed Entergy Mississippi’s 2018 formula rate plan evaluation reportwas reached in October 2023 and approved by the ratemaking effects of the Tax Act. The stipulation provided for incorporating the reduction of the statutory federal income tax rate through Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan. The stipulation approvedLPSC in June 2018 provided for the flow-back of protected excess accumulated deferred income taxes over the remaining lives of the assets through the formula rate plan. The stipulation also provided for the offset of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes of $127.2 million against net utility plant and $2.2 million against other regulatory assets, and the return to customers of the remaining balance of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes as recovery of a portion of fuel oil inventory and customer bill credits over a three-month period from July 2018 through September 2018, with an insignificant true-up reflected in the November 2018 power management rider filing. Entergy Mississippi recorded the reduction against net utility plant and other regulatory assets in June 2018. In third quarter 2018, Entergy Mississippi returned
70

Table of Contents2023.
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes of $25.8 million through customer bill credits and $5.8 million through the sale of fuel oil inventory.

Entergy New Orleans

After enactment of the Tax Act the City Council passed a resolution ordering Entergy New Orleans to, effective January 1, 2018, record deferred regulatory liabilities to account for the Tax Act’s effect on Entergy New Orleans’s revenue requirement and to make a filing by mid-March 2018 regarding the Tax Act’s effects on Entergy New Orleans’s operating income and rate base and potential mechanisms for customers to receive benefits of the Tax Act. The City Council’s resolution also directed Entergy New Orleans to request that Entergy Services file with the FERC for revisions of the Unit Power Sales Agreement and MSS-4 replacement tariffs to address the return of excess accumulated deferred income taxes. Entergy submitted filings of this type to the FERC.

In March 2018, Entergy New Orleans filed its response to the resolution stating that the Tax Act reduced income tax expense from what was then reflected in rates by approximately $8.2 million annually for electric operations and by approximately $1.3 million annually for gas operations. In the filing, Entergy New Orleans proposed to return to customers from June 2018 through August 2019 the benefits of the reduction in income tax
64

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

expense and its unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes through a combination of bill credits and investments in energy efficiency programs, grid modernization, and Smart City projects. Entergy New Orleans submitted supplemental information in April 2018 and May 2018. Shortly thereafter, Entergy New Orleans and the City Council’s advisors reached an agreement in principle that provides for benefits that will be realized by Entergy New Orleans customers through bill credits that started in July 2018 and offsets to future investments in energy efficiency programs, grid modernization, and Smart City projects, as well as additional benefits related to the filings made at the FERC. The agreement in principle was approved by the City Council in June 2018. In April 2023, Entergy New Orleans completed the bill credits necessary to comply with the 2018 agreement in principle.

Entergy Texas

After enactment of the Tax Act the PUCT issued an order requiring most utilities, including Entergy Texas, beginning January 25, 2018, to record a regulatory liability for the difference between revenues collected under existing rates and revenues that would have been collected had existing rates been set using the new federal income tax rates and also for the balance of excess accumulated deferred income taxes. Entergy Texas had previously provided information to the PUCT staff and stated that it expected the PUCT to address the lower tax expense as part of Entergy Texas’s rate case expected to be filed in May 2018.

In May 2018, Entergy Texas filed its 2018 base rate case with the PUCT. Entergy Texas’s proposed rates and revenues reflected the inclusion of the federal income tax reductions due to the Tax Act. The PUCT issued an order in December 2018 establishing that 1)(1) $25 million be credited to customers through a rider to reflect the lower federal income tax rate applicable to Entergy Texas from January 2018 through the date new rates were implemented, 2)implemented; (2) $242.5 million of protected excess accumulated deferred income taxes be returned to customers through base rates under the average rate assumption method over the lives of the associated assets,assets; and 3)(3) $185.2 million of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes be returned to customers through a rider. The unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes rider includesincluded carrying charges and iswas in effect over a period of 12 months for larger customers and over a period of four years for other customers.

System Energy

In a filing made with the FERC in March 2018, System Energy proposed revisions to the Unit Power Sales Agreement to reflect the effects of the Tax Act.In the filing System Energy proposed to return identified quantities of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to its customers by the end of 2018.In May 2018 the FERC accepted System Energy’s proposed tax revisions with an effective date of June 1, 2018, subject to refund and the outcome of settlement and hearing procedures. Settlement discussions were terminated in April 2019, and a hearing was held in March 2020.The retail regulators of the Utility operating companies that are parties to the Unit
71

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Power Sales Agreement challenged the treatment and amount of excess accumulated deferred income tax liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions related to nuclear decommissioning. In July 2020 the presiding ALJ in the proceeding issued an initial decision finding that there is an additional $147 million in unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes related to System Energy’s uncertain decommissioning tax deduction. The initial decision determined that System Energy should have included the $147 million in its March 2018 filing. System Energy had not included credits related to the effect of the Tax Act on the uncertain decommissioning tax position because it was uncertain whether the IRS would allow the deduction. The initial decision rejected both System Energy’s alternative argument that any crediting should occur over a ten-year period and the retail regulators’ argument that any crediting should occur over a two-year period. Instead, the initial decision concluded that System Energy should credit the additional unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes in a single lump sum revenue requirement reduction following a FERC order addressing the initial decision.

The ALJ initial decision is an interim step in the FERC litigation process. In September 2020, System Energy filed a brief on exceptions with the FERC, re-urging its positions and requesting the reversal of the ALJ’s initial decision. In December 2020, the LPSC, APSC, MPSC, City Council, and FERC trial staff filed briefs opposing exceptions. The FERC will review the case and issue an order in the proceeding, and the FERC may accept, reject, or modify the ALJ’s initial decision in whole or in part. Credits, if any, that might be required will only become due after the FERC issues its order reviewing the initial decision.

65

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



As discussed below in Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue,” in September 2020 the IRS issued a Notice of Proposed Adjustment (NOPA) and Entergy executed it. In September 2020, System Energy filed a motion to lodge the NOPA into the record in the FERC proceeding. In October 2020 the LPSC, APSC, MPSC, City Council, and FERC trial staff filed oppositions to System Energy’s motion. As a result of the NOPA, System Energy filed, in October 2020, a new Federal Power Act section 205 filing at the FERC to credit the excess accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the decommissioning uncertain tax position. System Energy proposesproposed to credit the entire amount of the excess accumulated deferred income taxes arising from the successful portion of the decommissioning uncertain tax position by issuing a one-time credit of $17.8 million. In November 2020, the LPSC, APSC, MPSC, and City Council filed a protest to the filing, and System Energy responded.

In November 2020 the IRS issued the Revenue Agent’s Report (RAR) for the 2014-2015 tax years and in December 2020 Entergy executed it.In December 2020, System Energy filed a motion to lodge the RAR into the record in the FERC proceeding addressing the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.In January 2021 the LPSC, APSC, MPSC, and City Council filed a joint answer opposing System Energy’s motion, and the FERC trial staff also filed an answer opposing System Energy’s motion.

As a result of the RAR, in December 2020, System Energy also filed an amendment to its Federal Power Act section 205 filing to credit excess accumulated deferred income taxes arising from the successful portion of the decommissioning uncertain tax position.The amendment proposed the inclusion of the RAR as support for the filing.In December 2020 the LPSC, APSC, and City Council filed a protest in response to the amendment, reiterating objections to the filing to credit excess accumulated deferred income taxes arising from the successful portion of the decommissioning uncertain tax position. position. In February 2021 the FERC issued an order accepting System Energy’s Federal Power Act section 205 filing subject to refund, setting it for hearing, and holding the hearing in abeyance.

In November 2020, System Energy filed a motion to vacate the ALJ’s decision, arguing that it had been overtaken by changed circumstances because of the IRS’s determination resulting from the NOPA and RAR.In January 2021 the LPSC, APSC, MPSC, and City Council filed a joint answer opposing System Energy’s motion, and the FERC trial staff also filed an answer opposing System Energy’s motion. Additional responsive pleadings were filed in February and March 2021.

In December 2022 the FERC issued an order addressing the ALJ’s initial decision and denying System Energy’s motion to vacate the initial decision. The FERC disagreed with the ALJ’s determination that $147 million should be credited to customers in the same manner as the excess accumulated deferred income taxes addressed in System Energy’s March 2018 filing, which had included a stated amount of excess accumulated deferred income taxes to be returned pursuant to a specified methodology and had not included any excess accumulated deferred income taxes associated with the decommissioning tax position. There isInstead, the FERC ordered System Energy to compute the amount of excess accumulated deferred income taxes associated with the decommissioning tax position with consideration for the resolution of the tax position by the IRS. System Energy had previously issued a one-time credit for the excess accumulated deferred income taxes associated with the decommissioning tax position, and System Energy believes no formal deadlinefurther refunds are required under the methodology provided in the order. The FERC further ordered System Energy to submit a compliance filing within 60 days addressing the justness and reasonableness of the Unit Power Sales Agreement, with respect to its provisions for excess accumulated deferred income taxes. In February 2023, System Energy filed the compliance filing with the FERC, which provided the calculation of the excess accumulated deferred income taxes associated with the decommissioning tax position with consideration for the resolution of the tax position by the IRS. System Energy confirmed that this amount of excess accumulated deferred income taxes had already been credited to rule oncustomers, and therefore concluded that no further modifications to the motion.Unit Power Sales Agreement are needed to address excess accumulated deferred income taxes associated with the Tax Act.

7266

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

In June 2023 the FERC issued a deficiency letter requesting additional information about the IRS’s resolution of the tax position for 2016 and 2017.In July 2023, System Energy provided the additional information.

Fuel and purchased power cost recovery

The Utility operating companies are allowed to recover fuel and purchased power costs through fuel mechanisms included in electric and gas rates that are recorded as fuel cost recovery revenues.  The difference between revenues collected and the current fuel and purchased power costs is generally recorded as “Deferred fuel costs” on the Utility operating companies’ financial statements.  The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 that Entergyeach Utility operating company expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review.

20202019 20232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas (a)Entergy Arkansas (a)$15.2 $14.0 
Entergy Louisiana (b)Entergy Louisiana (b)$170.4 $112.5 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi($14.7)($70.4)
Entergy New Orleans (b)Entergy New Orleans (b)$6.2 ($0.8)
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas($85.4)($13.0)

(a)Includes $68.2$68.9 million in 2020 and $67.7 million in 20192022 of fuel and purchased power costs whose recovery periods areperiod was indeterminate but arewas expected to be recovered over a period greater than twelve months. In 2023, Entergy Arkansas recorded a write-off of its regulatory asset for deferred fuel of $68.9 million as a result of Entergy Arkansas’s approved motion to forgo recovery of identified costs resulting from the 2013 ANO stator incident. See Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of the 2013 ANO stator incident.
(b)Includes $168.1 million in both years for Entergy Louisiana and $4.1 million in both years for Entergy New Orleans of fuel, purchased power, and capacity costs, which do not currently earn a return on investment and whose recovery periods are indeterminate but are expected to be recovered over a period greater than twelve months.

Entergy Arkansas

Energy Cost Recovery Rider

Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates include an energy cost recovery rider to recover fuel and purchased energy costs in monthly customer bills.  The rider utilizes the prior calendar-year energy costs and projected energy sales for the twelve-month period commencing on April 1 of each year to develop an energy cost rate, which is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over- or under-recovery, including carrying charges, of the energy costs for the prior calendar year.  The energy cost recovery rider tariff also allows an interim rate request depending upon the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.

In January 2014, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion with the APSC relating to its upcoming energy cost rate redetermination filing that was made in March 2014. In that motion, Entergy Arkansas requested that the APSC authorize Entergy Arkansas to exclude from the redetermination of its 2014 energy cost rate $65.9 million of incremental fuel and replacement energy costs incurred in 2013 as a result of the ANO stator incident. Entergy Arkansas requested that the APSC authorize Entergy Arkansas to retain that amount in its deferred fuel balance, with recovery to be reviewed in a later period after more information was available regarding various claims associated with the ANO stator incident. In February 2014 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s request to retain that amount in its deferred fuel balance. In July 2017, Entergy Arkansas filed for a change in rates pursuant to its formula rate plan rider. In that proceeding, the APSC approved a settlement agreement agreed upon by the parties, including a provision that requires Entergy Arkansas to initiate a regulatory proceeding for the purpose of recovering funds currently withheld from rates and related to the stator incident, including the $65.9 million of deferred fuel and purchased energy costs previously noted, subject to certain timelines and conditions set forth in the settlement agreement. See the “ANO Damage, Outage, and NRC Reviews” section in Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of the ANO stator incident.

7367

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



recovering funds currently withheld from rates and related to the stator incident, including the $65.9 million of deferred fuel and purchased energy costs and costs related to the incremental oversight previously noted, subject to certain timelines and conditions set forth in the settlement agreement. In October 2023, Entergy Arkansas made a commitment to the APSC to make a filing to forgo its opportunity to seek recovery of the incremental fuel and purchased energy expense, among other identified costs, resulting from the ANO stator incident. As a result, in third quarter 2023, Entergy Arkansas recorded a write-off of its regulatory asset for deferred fuel of $68.9 million, which includes interest, related to the ANO stator incident. Consistent with its October 2023 commitment, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion to forgo recovery in November 2023, and the motion was approved by the APSC in December 2023. See the “ANO Damage, Outage, and NRC Reviews” section in Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of the ANO stator incident and the approved motion to forgo recovery.

In March 2017, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected an increase in the rate from $0.01164 per kWh to $0.01547 per kWh. The APSC staff filed testimony in March 2017 recommending that the redetermined rate be implemented with the first billing cycle of April 2017 under the normal operation of the tariff. Accordingly, the redetermined rate went into effect on March 31, 2017 pursuant to the tariff. In July 2017 the Arkansas Attorney General requested additional information to support certain of the costs included in Entergy Arkansas’s 2017 energy cost rate redetermination.

In March 2018, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected an increase in the rate from $0.01547 per kWh to $0.01882 per kWh. The Arkansas Attorney General filed a response to Entergy Arkansas’s annual redetermination filing requesting that the APSC suspend the proposed tariff to investigate the amount of the redetermination or, alternatively, to allow recovery subject to refund. Among the reasons the Attorney General cited for suspension were questions pertaining to how Entergy Arkansas forecasted sales and potential implications of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Entergy Arkansas replied to the Attorney General’s filing and stated that, to the extent there are questions pertaining to its load forecasting or the operation of the energy cost recovery rider, those issues exceed the scope of the instant rate redetermination. Entergy Arkansas also stated that potential effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are appropriately considered in the APSC’s separate proceeding regarding potential implications of the tax law. The APSC general staff filed a reply to the Attorney General’s filing and agreed that Entergy Arkansas’s filing complied with the terms of the energy cost recovery rider. The redetermined rate became effective with the first billing cycle of April 2018. Subsequently in April 2018 the APSC issued an order declining to suspend Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider rate and declining to require further investigation at that time of the issues suggested by the Attorney General in the proceeding. Following a period of discovery, the Attorney General filed a supplemental response in October 2018 raising new issues with Entergy Arkansas’s March 2018 rate redetermination and asserting that $45.7 million of the increase should be collected subject to refund pending further investigation. Entergy Arkansas filed to dismiss the Attorney General’s supplemental response, the APSC general staff filed a motion to strike the Attorney General’s filing, and the Attorney General filed a supplemental response disputing Entergy Arkansas and the APSC staff’s filing. Applicable APSC rules and processes authorize its general staff to initiate periodic audits of Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider. In late-2018 the APSC general staff notified Entergy Arkansas it has initiated an audit of the 2017 fuel costs. The time in which the audit will be complete is uncertain at this time.

In March 2019,2021, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected a decrease from $0.01882$0.01052 per kWh to $0.01462$0.00959 per kWh andkWh. The redetermined rate calculation also included an adjustment to account for a portion of the increased fuel costs resulting from the February 2021 winter storms. The redetermined rate became effective with the first billing cycle in April 2019. In March 20192021 through the Arkansas Attorney General filed a response to Entergy Arkansas’s annual adjustment and included with its filing a motion for investigation of alleged overcharges to customers in connection with the FERC’s October 2018 order in the opportunity sales proceeding. Entergy Arkansas filed its response to the Attorney General’s motion in April 2019 in which Entergy Arkansas stated its intent to initiate a proceeding to address recovery issues related to the October 2018 FERC order. In May 2019, Entergy Arkansas initiated the opportunity sales recovery proceeding, discussed below, and requested that the APSC establish that proceeding as the single designated proceeding in which interested parties may assert claims related to the appropriate retail rate treatmentnormal operation of the FERC October 2018 order and related FERC orders in the opportunity sales proceeding. In June 2019 the APSC granted Entergy Arkansas’s request and also denied the Attorney General’s motion in the energy cost recovery proceeding seeking an investigation into Entergy Arkansas’s annual energy cost recovery rider adjustment and referred the evaluation of such matters to the opportunity sales recovery proceeding.tariff.

In March 2020,2022, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected a decreasean increase from $0.01462$0.00959 per kWh to $0.01052$0.01785 per kWh. The redeterminedprimary reason for the rate became effective withincrease was a large under-recovered balance as a result of higher natural gas prices in 2021, particularly in the first billing cycle in April 2020 throughfourth quarter 2021. At the normal operationrequest of the tariff.

APSC general staff, Entergy Arkansas deferred its
7468

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

request for recovery of $32 million from the under-recovery related to the February 2021 winter storms until the 2023 energy cost rate redetermination, unless a request for an interim adjustment to the energy cost recovery rider is necessary. This resulted in a redetermined rate of $0.016390 per kWh, which became effective with the first billing cycle in April 2022 through the normal operation of the tariff. In February 2023 the APSC issued orders initiating proceedings with the utilities under its jurisdiction to address the prudence of costs incurred and appropriate cost allocation of the February 2021 winter storms. With respect to any prudence review of Entergy Arkansas fuel costs, as part of the APSC’s draft report issued in its February 2021 winter storms investigation docket, the APSC included findings that the load shedding plans of the investor-owned utilities and some cooperatives were appropriate and comprehensive, and, further, that Entergy Arkansas’s emergency plan was comprehensive and had a multilayered approach supported by a system-wide response plan, which is considered an industry standard. In September 2023 the APSC issued an order in Entergy Arkansas's company-specific proceeding and found that Entergy Arkansas’s practices during the winter storms were prudent.

In March 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected an increase from $0.01639 per kWh to $0.01883 per kWh. The primary reason for the rate increase is a large under-recovered balance as a result of higher natural gas prices in 2022 and a $32 million deferral related to the February 2021 winter storms consistent with the APSC general staff’s request in 2022. The under-recovered balance included in the filing was partially offset by the proceeds of the $41.7 million refund that System Energy made to Entergy Arkansas in January 2023 related to the sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation as calculated in System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report filed with the FERC. See “Complaints Against System Energy - Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue” below for discussion of the compliance report filed by System Energy with the FERC in January 2023. The redetermined rate of $0.01883 per kWh became effective with the first billing cycle in April 2023 through the normal operation of the tariff.

Entergy Louisiana

Entergy Louisiana recovers electric fuel and purchased power costs for the billing month based upon the level of such costs incurred two months prior to the billing month. Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustments include estimates for the billing month adjusted by a surcharge or credit that arises from an annual reconciliation of fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

In July 2014February 2021, Entergy Louisiana incurred extraordinary fuel costs associated with the February 2021 winter storms. To mitigate the effect of these costs on customer bills, in March 2021, Entergy Louisiana requested and the LPSC approved the deferral and recovery of $166 million in incremental fuel costs over five months beginning in April 2021. The incremental fuel costs remain subject to review for reasonableness and eligibility for recovery through the fuel adjustment clause mechanism. The final amount of incremental fuel costs is subject to change through the resettlement process. At its April 2021 meeting, the LPSC authorized its staff to initiate an auditreview the prudence of the February 2021 fuel adjustment clause filingscosts incurred by Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, whose business was combined with Entergy Louisianaall LPSC-jurisdictional utilities, including both gas and electric utilities. At its June 2021 meeting, the LPSC approved the hiring of consultants to assist its staff in 2015. The audit includes a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause for the period from 2010 through 2013.this review. In January 2019May 2022 the LPSC staff consultant issued its audit report. In its report, the LPSC staff consultant recommended that Entergy Louisiana refund approximately $900,000, plus interest, to customers based upon the imputation of a claim of vendor fault in servicing its nuclear plant. Entergy Louisiana recorded a provision in the first quarter 2019 for the potential outcome of the audit. In August 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed direct testimony challenging the basis for the LPSC staff’s recommended disallowance and providing an alternative calculation of replacement power costs should it be determined that a disallowance is appropriate. Entergy Louisiana’s calculation would require no refund to customers.

In July 2014 the LPSC authorized its staff to initiate an audit ofreport regarding Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings. The audit includes a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed by Entergy Louisiana through(for its fuel adjustment clause for the period from 2010 through 2013. In January 2019 the LPSC staff issued its audit reportelectric operations) recommending that Entergy Louisiana refund approximately $7.3 million, plus interest, to customers based upon the imputation of a claim of vendor fault in servicing its nuclear plant. Entergy Louisiana recorded a provision in the first quarter 2019 for the potential outcome of the audit. In August 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed direct testimony challenging the basis for the LPSC staff’s recommended disallowance and providing an alternative calculation of replacement power costs should it be determined that a disallowance is appropriate. Entergy Louisiana’s calculation would require a refund to customers of approximately $4.3 million, plus interest, as compared to the LPSC staff’s recommendation of $7.3 million, plus interest.no financial disallowances, but including several prospective recommendations. Responsive testimony was filed by one intervenor and the parties agreed to suspend any procedural schedule and move toward settlement discussions to close the matter. Also in May 2022 the LPSC staff and intervenors in September 2019; all parties either agreed with or did not oppose Entergy Louisiana’s alternative calculation of replacement power costs.

In November 2019 the pending LPSC proceedings for the 2010-2013 Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana audits were consolidated to facilitate a settlement of both fuel audits. In December 2019issued an unopposed settlement was reached that requires a refund to legacy Entergy Louisiana customers of approximately $2.3 million, including interest, and no refund to legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana customers. The LPSC approved the settlement in January 2020. A one-time refund was made in February 2020.

In June 2016 the LPSC issued notice of audits of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings for the period 2014 through 2015 and purchased gas adjustment clause filings for the period 2012 through 2015. In recognition of the business combination that occurred in 2015, the audit notice was issued to Entergy Louisiana and also includes a review of charges to legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana customers prior to the business combination. The audits include a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause for the period from 2014 through 2015 and charges flowed throughreport regarding Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause for the period from 2012 through 2015. Regarding the fuel adjustment clause filing, the LPSC staff issued a report in January 2021charges (for its gas operations) that did not recommend a disallowance for the period 2014 through 2015 recoveries, but did propose various reporting requirements.any financial disallowances. The LPSC staff and Entergy Louisiana is currently reviewingsubmitted a joint report on the audit report and draft order to the LPSC staff recommendations regarding reporting requirements. Regardingconcluding that Entergy Louisiana’s gas distribution operations and fuel costs were not significantly adversely affected by the purchasedFebruary 2021 winter storms and the resulting increase in natural gas adjustment clause filings, the LPSC staff issued a report in February 2020 that did not recommend a disallowance for the period 2012 through 2015 recoveries.prices. The LPSC issued an order approving the joint report in September 2020 accepting the LPSC staff’s report.October 2022.

In May 2018March 2021 the LPSC staff provided notice of auditsan audit of Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause filings.filings covering the period January 2018 through December 2020. The audit includesincluded a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s
7569

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause for that period. In August 2023 the LPSC submitted its audit report and found that materially all costs recovered through the purchased gas adjustment filings were reasonable and eligible for recovery through the purchased gas adjustment clause. The LPSC approved the report in December 2023.

To mitigate high electric bills, primarily driven by high summer usage and elevated gas prices, Entergy Louisiana deferred approximately $225 million of fuel expense incurred in April, May, June, July, August, and September 2022 (as reflected on June, July, August, September, October, and November 2022 bills). These deferrals were included in the over/under calculation of the fuel adjustment clause, which is intended to recover the full amount of the costs included on a rolling twelve-month basis.

In January 2023 the LPSC staff provided notice of an audit of Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause filings. The audit includes a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause for the period from 20162021 through 2017. In February 2020 the LPSC staff issued an2022. Discovery is ongoing, and no audit report recommending a disallowance of approximately $29 thousand. Entergy Louisiana submitted a letter disputing the basis of the proposed disallowance but indicated that due to the amount at issue it would not oppose the recommended refund. The LPSC staff and Entergy Louisiana submitted a joint report noting each party’s position on the substantive issues in the matter and recommending resolution of the matters. The LPSC issued an order in September 2020 resolving the matter and ordering a refund of approximately $29 thousand. In January 2021 the LPSC issued a notice closing the matter.has been filed.

In March 2020January 2023 the LPSC staff provided notice of an audit of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings. The audit includes a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause for the period from 20162020 through 2019.2022. Discovery commenced in September 2020is ongoing, and is ongoing.no audit report has been filed.

Entergy Mississippi

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include an energy cost recovery rider that isand a power management rider, both of which are adjusted annually to reflect accumulated over- or under-recoveries. Entergy Mississippi recovers fuel and purchased energy costs through its energy cost recovery rider and recovers costs associated with natural gas hedging and capacity payments through its power management rider. Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC.

In January 2017 the MPSC certified to the Mississippi Legislature the audit reports of its independent auditors for the fuel year ending September 30, 2016. In November 2017 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff separately engaged a consultant to review the September 2016 outage at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station and to review ongoing operations at Grand Gulf. This engagement continues, and subsequently, was expanded to include all outages at Grand Gulf that occurred through 2019.

In November 2017, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an under-recovery of approximately $61.5 million as of September 30, 2017. In January 2018 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factors effective for February 2018 bills.

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an under-recovery of approximately $57 million as of September 30, 2018. In January 2019 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor effective for February 2019 bills.

In November 2019, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation included $39.6 million of prior over-recovery flowing back to customers beginning February 2020. Entergy Mississippi’s balance in its deferred fuel account did not decrease as expected after implementation of the new factor. In an effort to assist customers during the COVID-19 pandemic, in May 2020, Entergy Mississippi requested an interim adjustment to the energy cost recovery rider to credit approximately $50 million from the over-recovered balance in the deferred fuel account to customers over four consecutive billing months. The MPSC approved this interim adjustment in May 2020 effective for June through September 2020 bills.

In November 2020, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an over-recovery of approximately $24.4 million as of September 30, 2020. In January 2021 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor effective for February 2021 bills.

In November 2021, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an under-recovery of approximately $80.6 million as of September 30, 2021. In December 2021, at the request of the MPSC, Entergy Mississippi submitted a proposal to mitigate the impact of rising fuel costs on customer bills during 2022. Entergy Mississippi proposed that the deferred fuel balance as of December 31, 2021, which was $121.9 million, be amortized over three years and that the MPSC authorize Entergy Mississippi to apply its weighted-average cost of capital as the carrying cost for the unamortized fuel balance. In January 2022 the MPSC approved the amortization of $100 million of the deferred fuel balance over two years and authorized Entergy Mississippi to apply its weighted-average cost of capital as the carrying cost for the unamortized fuel balance. The MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor effective for February 2022 bills.

SeeComplaints Against System Energy - System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below for discussion of the settlement agreement filed with the FERC in June 2022. The settlement, which was approved by the FERC in November 2022, provided for a refund of $235 million from System Energy to Entergy Mississippi. In July 2022 the MPSC directed the disbursement of settlement proceeds, ordering Entergy Mississippi to provide a one-time $80 bill credit to each of its approximately 460,000 retail customers to be effective during the September 2022 billing cycle and to apply the remaining proceeds to Entergy Mississippi’s under-recovered deferred fuel balance. In accordance with the MPSC’s directive, Entergy Mississippi provided approximately $36.7 million in customer bill credits as a result of the settlement. In November 2022, Entergy Mississippi applied the remaining
76
70

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

settlement proceeds in the amount of approximately $198.3 million to Entergy Mississippi’s under-recovered deferred fuel balance.

Entergy Mississippi had a deferred fuel balance of approximately $291.7 million under the energy cost recovery rider as of July 31, 2022, along with an over-recovery balance of $51.1 million under the power management rider. Without further action, Entergy Mississippi anticipated a year-end deferred fuel balance of approximately $200 million after application of a portion of the System Energy settlement proceeds, as discussed above. In September 2022, Entergy Mississippi filed for interim adjustments under both the energy cost recovery rider and the power management rider. Entergy Mississippi proposed five monthly incremental adjustments to the net energy cost factor designed to collect the under-recovered fuel balance as of July 31, 2022 and to reflect the recovery of a higher natural gas price. Entergy Mississippi also proposed five monthly incremental adjustments to the power management adjustment factor designed to flow through to customers the over-recovered power management rider balance as of July 31, 2022. In October 2022 the MPSC approved modified interim adjustments to Entergy Mississippi’s energy cost recovery rider and power management rider. The MPSC approved dividing the energy cost recovery rider interim adjustment into two components that would allow Entergy Mississippi to (1) recover a natural gas fuel rate that is better aligned with current prices; and (2) recover the estimated under-recovered deferred fuel balance as of September 30, 2022 over a period of 20 months. The MPSC approved six monthly incremental adjustments to the net energy cost factor designed to reflect the recovery of a higher natural gas price. The MPSC also approved six monthly incremental adjustments to the power management adjustment factor designed to flow through to customers the over-recovered power management rider balance. In accordance with the order of the MPSC, Entergy Mississippi did not file an annual redetermination of the energy cost recovery rider or the power management rider in November 2022.

In June 2023 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation agreement between Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff for Entergy Mississippi’s 2023 formula rate plan filing. The stipulation directed Entergy Mississippi to make a compliance filing to revise its power management cost adjustment factor, to revise its grid modernization cost adjustment factor, and to include a revision to reduce the net energy cost factor to a level necessary to reflect an average natural gas price of $4.50 per MMBtu. The MPSC approved the compliance filing in June 2023, effective for July 2023 bills. See “Retail Rate Proceedings - Filings with the MPSC (Entergy Mississippi) - Retail Rates - 2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing” below for further discussion of the 2023 formula rate plan filing and the joint stipulation agreement.

In November 2023 Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redeterminations of the energy cost factor and the power management cost adjustment factor. The calculation of the annual factor for the energy cost recovery rider included a projected over-recovery balance of approximately $142 million at the end of January 2024. The calculation of the annual factor for the power management rider included a projected under-recovery of $47 million at the end of January 2024. In January 2024 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor and the proposed power management cost factor effective for February 2024 bills.

Entergy New Orleans

Entergy New Orleans’s electric rate schedules include a fuel adjustment tariff designed to reflect no more than targeted fuel and purchased power costs, adjusted by a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel and purchased power costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Entergy New Orleans’s gas rate schedules include a purchased gas adjustment to reflect estimated gas costs for the billing month, adjusted by a surcharge or credit similar to that included in the electric fuel adjustment clause, including carrying charges.

71

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Entergy Texas

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, not recovered in base rates.  Semi-annualHistorically, semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor arehave been made in March and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. AIn 2023 the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to provide that material over- and under-recovered fuel reconciliation is requiredbalances are to be refunded or surcharged through interim fuel adjustments and that fuel reconciliations must be filed at least once every three years and outsidetwo years. Entergy Texas expects the PUCT to undertake a rulemaking to effectuate the new legislation by the end of a base rate case filing.2024.

In December 2017,May 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application for awith the PUCT to implement an interim fuel refundsurcharge to collect the cumulative under-recovery of approximately $30.5$51.7 million, forincluding interest, of fuel and purchased power costs incurred from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2021. The under-recovery balance is primarily attributable to the impacts of Winter Storm Uri, including historically high natural gas prices, partially offset by settlements received by Entergy Texas from MISO related to Hurricane Laura. Entergy Texas proposed that the interim fuel surcharge be assessed over a period of six months beginning with the first billing cycle after the PUCT issues a final order, but no later than the first billing cycle of May 2017 through October 2017.September 2022. Also in December 2017,May 2022, the PUCT’sPUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In July 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement resolving all issues in the proceeding. In addition, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties a motion to admit evidence, to approve interim rates as requested in the initial application, and to remand the proceeding to the PUCT to consider the unopposed settlement. In August 2022 the ALJ approvedwith the refund onState Office of Administrative Hearings issued an order granting Entergy Texas’s motion, approving interim basis. For most customers,rates effective with the refunds flowed through bills from January 2018 through March 2018.first billing cycle of September 2022, and remanding the case to the PUCT for final approval. The interim fuel refundsurcharge was approved by the PUCT in March 2018.January 2023.

In September 2019,2022, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to reconcile its fuel and purchased power costs for the period from April 20162019 through March 2019.2022. During the reconciliation period, Entergy Texas incurred approximately $1.6$1.7 billion in Texas jurisdictional eligible fuel and purchased power expenses, net of certain revenues credited to such expenses and other adjustments. As of the end of the reconciliation period, Entergy Texas estimated anTexas’s cumulative under-recovery balance ofwas approximately $25.8$103.1 million, including interest, which Entergy Texas requested authority to carry over as the beginning balance for the subsequent reconciliation period beginning April 2019.2022, pending future surcharges or refunds as approved by the PUCT. In March 2020 an intervenor filed testimony proposing thatNovember 2022 the PUCT disallow: (1) $2referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In May 2023, Entergy Texas filed, and the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings granted, a joint motion to abate the proceeding to give parties additional time to finalize a settlement. In July 2023, Entergy Texas filed an unopposed settlement, supporting testimony, and an agreed motion to admit evidence and remand the proceeding to the PUCT. Pursuant to the unopposed settlement, Entergy Texas would receive no disallowance of fuel costs incurred over the three-year reconciliation period and retain $9.3 million in replacement power costs associated with generation outagesmargins from off-system sales made during the reconciliation period; and (2) $24.4period, resulting in a cumulative under-recovery balance of approximately $99.7 million, associated with the operationincluding interest, as of the Spindletop natural gas storage facility duringend of the reconciliation period. In April 2020, Entergy Texas filed rebuttal testimony refuting all points raised byJuly 2023 the intervenor.  In June 2020ALJ with the parties filed a stipulationState Office of Administrative Hearings granted the motion to admit evidence and settlement agreement, which included a $1.2 million disallowance not associated with any particular issue raised by any party.remanded the proceeding to the PUCT for consideration of the unopposed settlement. The PUCT approved the settlement in August 2020.

In July 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to implement an interim fuel refund of $25.5 million, including interest. Entergy Texas proposes that the interim fuel refund be implemented beginning with the first August 2020 billing cycle over a three-month period for smaller customers and in a lump sum amount in the billing month of August 2020 for transmission-level customers. The interim fuel refund was approved in July 2020, and Entergy Texas began refunds in August 2020.

In February 2021, Entergy Texas filed an application to implement a fuel refund for a cumulative over-recovery of approximately $75 million that is primarily attributable to settlements received by Entergy Texas from MISO related to Hurricane Laura. Entergy Texas planned to issue the refund over the period of March through August 2021. On February 22, 2021, Entergy Texas filed a motion to abate its fuel refund proceeding to assess how the February 2021 winter storm impacted Entergy Texas’s fuel over-recovery position.September 2023.

7772

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Retail Rate Proceedings

Filings with the APSC (Entergy Arkansas)

Retail Rates

2018 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2018, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2018 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2019 calendar year. The filing showed Entergy Arkansas’s projected earned return on common equity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019 test period to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. Additionally, the filing included the first netting adjustment under the current formula rate plan for the historical test year 2017, reflecting the change in formula rate plan revenues associated with actual 2017 results when compared to the allowed rate of return on equity. The filing included a projected $73.4 millionrevenue deficiency for 2019 and a $95.6 million revenue deficiency for the 2017 historical test year, for a total revenue requirement of $169 million for this filing. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a 4 percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to 4 percent of total revenue, which originally was $65.4 million but was increased to $66.7 million based upon the APSC staff’s updated calculation of 2018 revenue. In October 2018, Entergy Arkansas and the parties to the proceeding filed joint motions to approve a partial settlement agreement as to certain factual issues and agreed to brief contested legal issues. In November 2018 the APSC held a hearing and was briefed on a contested legal issue. In December 2018 the APSC issued a decision related to the initial legal brief, approved the partial settlement agreement and $66.7 million revenue requirement increase, as well as Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan, with updated rates going into effect for the first billing cycle of January 2019.

2019 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2019 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2020 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2020 and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2018.  The total proposed formula rate plan rider revenue change designed to produce a target rate of return on common equity of 9.75% is $15.3 million, which is based upon a deficiency of approximately $61.9 million for the 2020 projected year, netted with a credit of approximately $46.6 million in the 2018 historical year netting adjustment. During 2018 Entergy Arkansas experienced higher-than expected sales volume, and actual costs were lower than forecasted.  These changes, coupled with a reduced income tax rate resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, resulted in the credit for the historical year netting adjustment. In the fourth quarter 2018, Entergy Arkansas recorded a provision of $35.1 million that reflected the estimate of the historical year netting adjustment that was expected to be included in the 2019 filing. In 2019, Entergy Arkansas recorded additional provisions totaling $11.5 million to reflect the updated estimate of the historical year netting adjustment included in the 2019 filing.  In October 2019 other parties in the proceeding filed their errors and objections requesting certain adjustments to Entergy Arkansas’s filing that would reduce or eliminate Entergy Arkansas’s proposed revenue change. Entergy Arkansas filed its response addressing the requested adjustments in October 2019. In its response, Entergy Arkansas accepted certain of the adjustments recommended by the General Staff of the APSC that would reduce the proposed formula rate plan rider revenue change to $14 million. Entergy Arkansas disputed the remaining adjustments proposed by the parties. In October 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed a unanimous settlement agreement with the other parties in the proceeding seeking APSC approval of a revised total formula rate plan rider revenue change of $10.1 million. In its July 2019 formula rate plan filing, Entergy Arkansas proposed to recover an $11.2 million regulatory asset, amortized over five years, associated with specific costs related to the potential construction of scrubbers at the White Bluff plant. Although Entergy Arkansas does not concede that the regulatory asset lacks merit, for purposes of reaching a settlement on the total formula rate plan rider amount, Entergy Arkansas agreed not to include the White Bluff scrubber regulatory asset cost in the 2019 formula rate plan filing or future filings. Entergy Arkansas recorded a write-off in 2019 of the $11.2 million White Bluff scrubber regulatory asset. In December 2019 the APSC approved the settlement as being
78

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

in the public interest and approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the first billing cycle of January 2020.

2020 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2020 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2021 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2021, as amended through subsequent filings in the proceeding, and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2019. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2021 projected year iswas 8.22% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $64.3 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2019 historical year was 9.07% resulting in a $23.9 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2021 projected year and 2019 historical year netting adjustment was $88.2 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a 4four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $74.3 million. In October 2020 other parties in the proceeding filed their errors and objections recommending certain adjustments, and Entergy Arkansas filed responsive testimony disputing these adjustments. As part of the formula rate plan tariff the calculation for the revenue constraint was updated based on actual revenues which had the effect of reducing the initially-proposed $74.3 million revenue requirement increase to $72.6 million. In October 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a unanimous settlement agreement reached with the other parties that resolved all but one issue. As a result of the settlement agreement, Entergy Arkansas’s requested revenue increase was $68.4 million, including a $44.5 million increase for the projected 2021 year and a $23.9 million netting adjustment. The remaining issue litigated concerned the methodology used to calculate the netting adjustment within the formula rate plan. In December 2020 the APSC issued an order rejecting the netting adjustment method used by Entergy Arkansas. Applying the approach ordered by the APSC changed the netting adjustment for the 2019 historical year from a $23.9 million deficiency to $43.5 million excess. Overall, the decision reduced Entergy Arkansas’s revenue adjustment for 2021 to $1 million. In December 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition for rehearing of the APSC’s decision in the 2020 formula rate plan proceeding regarding the 2019 netting adjustment, and in January 2021 the APSC granted further consideration of Entergy Arkansas’s petition. Based on the progress of the proceeding to date,at that point, in December 2020, Entergy Arkansas recorded a regulatory liability of $43.5 million to reflect the netting adjustment for 2019, as included in the APSC’s December 2020 order, which would be returned to customers in 2021. Also with the formula rate plan filing, Entergy Arkansas is requestingalso requested an extension of the formula rate plan rider for a second five-year term. Decisions byIn March 2021 the APSC onArkansas Governor signed HB1662 into law (Act 404). Act 404 clarified aspects of the original formula rate plan legislation enacted in 2015, including with respect to the extension of a formula rate plan, the methodology for the netting adjustment, rehearing and debt and equity levels; it also reaffirmed the extension are expected in March 2021.

COVID-19 Orders

In April 2020, in lightcustomer protections of the COVID-19 pandemic,original formula rate plan legislation, including the APSC issued an order requiring utilities,cap on annual formula rate plan rate changes. Pursuant to the extent they had not already done so, to suspend service disconnections during the remaining pendency of the Arkansas Governor’s emergency declaration or until the APSC rescinds the directive. The order also authorizes utilities to establishAct 404, Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan rider was extended for a regulatory asset to record costs resulting from the suspension of service disconnections, directs that in future proceedings the APSC will consider whether the request for recovery of these regulatory assets is reasonable and necessary, and requires utilities to track and report the costs and any savings directly attributable to suspension of disconnects. In May 2020 the APSC approvedsecond five-year term. Entergy Arkansas expanding deferred payment agreementsfiled a compliance tariff in its formula rate plan docket in April 2021 to assist customers duringeffectuate the COVID-19 pandemic. Quarterly reporting begannetting provisions of Act 404, which reflected a net change in August 2020 andrequired formula rate plan rider revenue of $39.8 million, effective with the APSC ordered additional reporting in October 2020 regarding utilities’ transitional plans for ending the moratorium on service disconnects.first billing cycle of May 2021. In FebruaryApril 2021 the APSC issued an order findingapproving the compliance tariff and recognizing the formula rate plan extension. Also in April 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed for approval of modifications to the formula rate plan tariff incorporating the provisions in Act 404, and the APSC approved the tariff modifications in April 2021. Given the APSC general staff’s support for the expedited approval of these filings by the APSC, Entergy Arkansas supported an amendment to Act 404 to achieve a reduced return on equity from 9.75% to 9.65% to apply for years applicable to the extension term; that itamendment was signed by the Arkansas Governor in April 2021 and is notnow Act 894. Based on the APSC’s order issued in April 2021, in the public interestfirst quarter 2021, Entergy Arkansas reversed the remaining regulatory liability for the netting adjustment for 2019. In June 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed another compliance tariff in its formula rate plan proceeding to immediately lifteffectuate the moratorium on service disconnects, but to announce a target dateadditional provisions of May 3, 2021. In March 2021Act 894, and the APSC will issue an order either confirmingapproved the lifting of the moratorium on service disconnects or extending the moratorium. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy Arkansas recorded a regulatory asset of $10.5 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.second compliance tariff filing in July 2021.

7973

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Internal Restructuring2021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In November 2017,July 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed an application with the APSC seeking authorizationits 2021 formula rate plan filing to undertakeset its formula rate for the 2022 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2022 and a restructuringnetting adjustment for the historical year 2020. The filing showed that would resultEntergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2022 projected year was 7.65% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $89.2 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2020 historical year was 7.92% resulting in a $19.4 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2022 projected year and 2020 historical year netting adjustment was $108.7 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $72.4 million. In October 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a settlement agreement reached with other parties resolving all issues in the transfer of substantially allproceeding. As a result of the assetssettlement agreement, the total proposed revenue change was $82.2 million, including a $62.8 million increase for the projected 2022 year and operationsa $19.4 million netting adjustment. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $72.1 million. In December 2021 the APSC approved the settlement as being in the public interest and approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the first billing cycle of January 2022.

2022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2022 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2023 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy ArkansasArkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2023 and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2021. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2023 projected year was 7.40% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $104.8 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2021 historical year was 8.38% resulting in a $15.2 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2023 projected year and 2021 historical year netting adjustment was $119.9 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a new entity, which would ultimately be owned by an existingfour percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy subsidiary holding company.Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $79.3 million. In July 2018,October 2022 other parties filed their testimony recommending various adjustments to Entergy Arkansas’s overall proposed revenue deficiency, and Entergy Arkansas filed a response including an update to actual revenues through August 2022, which raised the constraint to $79.8 million. In November 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a settlement agreement reached bywith other parties resolving all partiesissues in the APSC proceeding, resolving all issues. Theproceeding. As a result of the settlement agreement, the total revenue change was $102.8 million, including a $87.7 million increase for the 2023 projected year and a $15.2 million netting adjustment. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $79.8 million. In December 2022 the APSC approved the settlement agreement as being in the public interest and restructuring in August 2018. Pursuant toapproved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the settlement agreement, Entergy Arkansas will credit retail customers $39.6 million over six years, beginning in 2019. Entergy Arkansas also received the required FERC and NRC approvals.
In November 2018, Entergy Arkansas undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:first billing cycle of January 2023.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $32.7 million.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. converted from an Arkansas corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Arkansas, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Arkansas Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Arkansas Power), and Entergy Arkansas Power assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Arkansas, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Arkansas, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Arkansas Power is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In December 2018,July 2023, Entergy Arkansas Inc. changedfiled with the APSC its name2023 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2024 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Utility Property, Inc.,Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2024 and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2022. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2024 projected year was 8.11% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $80.5 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2022 historical year was 7.29% resulting in a $49.8 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2024 projected year and 2022 historical year netting adjustment is $130.3 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $88.6 million. The APSC general staff and intervenors filed their errors and objections in October 2023, proposing certain adjustments, including the APSC general staff’s update to annual filing year revenues which lowers the
74

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

constraint to $87.7 million. Entergy Arkansas Power then changedfiled its name torebuttal in October 2023. In October 2023, Entergy Arkansas LLC.filed with the APSC a settlement agreement reached with other parties resolving all issues in the proceeding, none of which affected Entergy Arkansas, LLC holds substantially allArkansas’s requested recovery up to the cap constraint of $87.7 million. The settlement agreement provided for amortization of the assets, and assumed substantially allapproximately $39 million regulatory asset for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic over a 10-year period as well as recovery of $34.9 million related to the resolution of the liabilities,2016 and 2017 IRS audits from previous tax positions that are no longer uncertain, partially offset by $24.7 million in excess accumulated deferred income taxes from reductions in state income tax rates, each before consideration of their respective tax gross-up. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit and the State of Arkansas corporate income tax rate changes. In December 2023 the APSC approved the settlement agreement as being in the public interest and approved Entergy Arkansas, Inc. The transaction was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the first billing cycle of January 2024.

Filings with the LPSC (Entergy Louisiana)

Retail Rates - Electric

2017 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In June 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2017 calendar year operations. The 2017 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on equity of 8.16%, due in large part to revenue-neutral realignments to other recovery mechanisms. Without these realignments, the evaluation report produces an earned return on equity of 9.88% and a resulting base rider formula rate plan revenue increase of $4.8 million. Excluding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act credits provided for by the tax reform adjustment mechanisms, total formula rate plan revenues were further increased by a total of $98 million as a result of the evaluation report due to adjustments to the additional capacity and MISO cost recovery mechanisms of the formula rate plan, and implementation of the transmission recovery mechanism. In August 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed a supplemental formula rate plan evaluation report to reflect changes from the 2016 test year formula rate plan proceedings, a decrease to the transmission recovery mechanism to reflect lower actual capital additions, and a decrease to evaluation period expenses to reflect the terms of a new power sales agreement. Based on the August 2018 update, Entergy Louisiana recognized a total decrease in formula rate plan revenue of approximately $17.6 million. Results of the updated 2017 evaluation report filing were implemented with the September 2018 billing month subject to refund and review by the LPSC staff and intervenors. In accordance with the terms of the formula rate plan, in September 2018 the LPSC staff filed its report of objections/reservations and intervenors submitted their responses to Entergy Louisiana’s original formula rate plan evaluation report and supplemental compliance updates. TheIn August 2021 the LPSC staff assertedissued a letter updating its objections/reservations
80

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

regarding 1) Entergy Louisiana’s proposed rate adjustments associated with for the return of excess accumulated deferred income taxes pursuant to the Tax Act and the treatment of accumulated deferred income taxes related to reductions of rate base; 2) Entergy Louisiana’s reservation regarding treatment of a regulatory asset related to certain special orders by the LPSC; and 3)2017 test year expenses billed from Entergy Services to Entergy Louisiana. Intervenors also objected to Entergy Louisiana’s treatment of the regulatory asset related to certain special orders by the LPSC. A procedural schedule has not yet been established to resolve these issues.

Entergy Louisiana also included in its filing a presentation of an initial proposal to combine the legacy Entergy Louisiana and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana residential rates, which combination, if approved, would be accomplished on a revenue-neutral basis intended not to affect the rates of other customer classes.

Commercial operation at J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) commenced in May 2019. In May 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed an update to its 2017 formula rate plan evaluation reportreport. In its letter, the LPSC staff reiterated its original objections/reservations. The LPSC staff further reserved its rights for future proceedings and to include the estimated first-year revenue requirement of $109.5 million associated with the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of June 2019. In June 2020, Entergy Louisiana submitted informationdispute future proposed adjustments to the 2017 test year formula rate plan evaluation report. The LPSC staff withdrew all other objections/reservations.

In November 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to review the prudence of Entergy Louisiana’s management2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the project. In August 2020 discovery commenced and a procedural schedule was established with a hearing in July 2021.settlement.

2018 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2018 calendar year operations. The 2018 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 10.61% leading to a base rider formula rate plan revenue decrease of $8.9 million. While base rider formula rate plan revenue will decreasedecreased as a result of this filing, overall formula rate plan revenues will increaseincreased by approximately $118.7 million. This outcome iswas primarily driven by a reduction to the credits previously flowed through the tax reform adjustment mechanism and an increase in the transmission recovery mechanism, partially offset by reductions in the
75

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



additional capacity mechanism revenue requirements and extraordinary cost items. The filing iswas subject to review by the LPSC. Resulting rates were implemented in September 2019, subject to refund.

Entergy Louisiana also included in its filing a presentation of an initial proposal to combine the legacy Entergy Louisiana and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana residential rates, which combination, if approved, would be accomplished on a revenue-neutral basis intended not to affect the rates of other customer classes. Entergy Louisiana contemplates that any combination of residential rates resulting from this request would be implemented with the results of the 2019 test year formula rate plan filing.

Several parties intervened in the proceeding and the LPSC staff filed its report of objections/reservations in accordance with the applicable provisions of the formula rate plan. In its reportAugust 2021 the LPSC staff re-urged issued a letter updating its objections/reservations with respectfor the 2018 test year formula rate plan evaluation report. In its letter, the LPSC staff reiterated its original objection/reservation pertaining to thetest year expenses billed from Entergy Services to Entergy Louisiana and outstanding issues from the 2017 test year formula rate plan filing and disputed the inclusion of certain affiliate costs for test years 2017 and 2018.evaluation report. The LPSC staff objected to Entergy Louisiana’s proposal to combine residential rates but proposed the setting of a status conference to establish a procedural schedule to more fully address the issue. The LPSC staff also reserved its right to object to the treatment of the sale of Willow Glen reflected in the evaluation report and to the August 2019 compliance update, which was made primarily to update the capital additions reflected in the formula rate plan’s transmission recovery mechanism, based on limited time to review it. Additionally, since the completion of certain transmission projects, the LPSC staff issued supplemental data requests addressing the prudence of Entergy Louisiana’s expenditures in connection with those projects. Entergy Louisiana has responded towithdrew all such requests.other objections/reservations.

Commercial operation at Lake Charles Power Station commenced in March 2020. In March 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed an update to its 2018 formula rate plan evaluation report to include the estimated first-year revenue requirement of $108 million associated with the Lake Charles Power Station. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of April 2020.
81

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements





In an effortNovember 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to narrow the remaining issues in2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan test years 2017filings and 2018, Entergy Louisiana provided noticeresolved certain issues with respect to the parties in October 2020 that it was withdrawing its request to combine residential rates. Entergy Louisiana noted thatand 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the withdrawal is without prejudice to Entergy Louisiana’s right to seek to combine residential rates in a future proceeding.settlement.

2019 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2019 calendar year operations. The 2019 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 9.66%. As such, no change to base rider formula rate plan revenue is required. Although base rider formula rate plan revenue willdid not change as a result of this filing, overall formula rate plan revenues will increaseincreased by approximately $103 million. This outcome is driven by the removal of prior year credits associated with the sale of the Willow Glen Power Station and an increase in the transmission recovery mechanism. Also contributing to the overall change iswas an increase in legacy formula rate plan revenue requirements driven by legacy Entergy Louisiana capacity cost true-ups and higher annualized legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana revenues due to higher billing determinants, offset by reductions in MISO cost recovery mechanism and tax reform adjustment mechanism revenue requirements. In August 2020 the LPSC staff submitted a list of items for which it needs additional information to confirm the accuracy and compliance of the 2019 test year evaluation report. The LPSC staff objected to a proposed revenue neutral adjustment regarding a certain rider as being beyond the scope of permitted formula rate plan adjustments. Rates reflected in the May 2020 filing, with the exception of thea revenue neutral rider adjustment, and as updated in an August 2020 filing, were implemented in September 2020, subject to refund. In August 2021 the LPSC staff issued a letter updating its objections/reservations for the 2019 test year formula rate plan filing. In its letter, the LPSC staff disputed Entergy Louisiana’s exclusion of approximately $251 thousand of interest income allocated from Entergy Operations and Entergy Services to Entergy Louisiana isto the extent that there are other adjustments that would move Entergy Louisiana out of the formula rate plan deadband. The LPSC staff reserved the right to further contest the issue in future proceedings. The LPSC staff further reserved outstanding issues from the process of providing additional information2017 and details on the May 2020 filing as requested by the LPSC staff.2018 formula rate plan evaluation reports and withdrew all other remaining objections/reservations.

In November 2020, Entergy Louisiana accepted ownership of2023 the Washington Parish Energy CenterLPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and filed an update to its 2019 formula rate plan evaluation reportfilings and resolved certain issues with respect to include the estimated first-year revenue requirement of $35 million associated with the Washington Parish Energy Center. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of December 2020. In January2020 and 2021 Entergy Louisiana filed an update to its 2019 formula rate plan evaluation report to includefilings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the implementation of a scheduled step-up in its nuclear decommissioning revenue requirement and a true-up for under-collections of nuclear decommissioning expenses. The total rate adjustment would increase formula rate plan revenues by approximately $1.2 million. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of February 2021.settlement.

76

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Request for Extension and Modification of Formula Rate Plan

In May 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC its application for authority to extend its formula rate plan. In its application, Entergy Louisiana seekssought to maintain a 9.8% return on equity, with a bandwidth of 60 basis points above and below the midpoint, with a first-year midpoint reset. The parties reached a settlement in April 2021 regarding Entergy Louisiana’s proposed formula rate plan extension. In May 2021 the LPSC approved the uncontested settlement. Key terms of the settlement include: a three year term (test years 2020, 2021, and 2022) covering a rate-effective period of September 2021 through August 2024; a 9.50% return on equity, with a smaller, 50 basis point deadband above and below (9.0%-10.0%); elimination of sharing if earnings are outside the deadband; a $63 million rate increase for test year 2020 (exclusive of riders); continuation of existing riders (transmission, additional capacity, etc.); addition of a distribution recovery mechanism permitting $225 million per year of distribution investment above a baseline level to be recovered dollar for dollar; modification of the tax mechanism to allow timely rate changes in the event the federal corporate income tax rate is changed from 21%; a cumulative rate increase limit of $70 million (exclusive of riders) for test years 2021 and 2022; and deferral of up to $7 million per year in 2021 and 2022 of expenditures on vegetation management for outside of right of way hazard trees.

2020 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2020 calendar year operations. The 2020 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 8.45%, with a base formula rate plan revenue increase of $63 million. Certain reductions in formula rate plan revenue driven by lower sales volumes, reductions in capacity cost and net MISO cost, and higher credits resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act offset the base formula rate plan revenue increase, leading to a net increase in formula rate plan revenue of $50.7 million. The report also seeksincluded multiple new adjustments to maintainaccount for, among other things, the calculation of distribution recovery mechanism revenues. The effects of the changes to total formula rate plan revenue were different for each legacy company, primarily due to differences in the legacy companies’ capacity cost changes, including the effect of true-ups. Legacy Entergy Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $27 million and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $23.7 million. Subject to LPSC review, the resulting changes became effective for bills rendered during the first billing cycle of September 2021, subject to refund. Discovery commenced in the proceeding. In August 2021, Entergy Louisiana submitted an update to its existing additional capacity mechanism, tax reform adjustment mechanism,evaluation report to account for various changes. Relative to the June 2021 filing, the total formula rate plan revenue increased by $14.2 million to an updated total of $64.9 million. Legacy Entergy Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $32.8 million and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $32.1 million. The results of the 2020 test year evaluation report bandwidth calculation were unchanged as there was no change in the earned return on common equity of 8.45%. In September 2021 the LPSC staff filed a letter with a general statement of objections/reservations because it had not completed its review and indicated it would update the letter once its review was complete. Should the parties be unable to resolve any objections, those issues will be set for hearing, with recovery of the associated costs subject to refund.

In November 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the settlement.

2021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2022, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2021 calendar year operations. The 2021 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 8.33%, with a base formula rate plan revenue increase of $65.3 million. Other increases in formula rate plan revenue driven by reductions in Tax Cut and Jobs Act credits and additions to transmission and distribution plant in service reflected through the transmission recovery mechanism and distribution recovery mechanism are partly offset by an increase
77

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



in net MISO revenues, leading to a net increase in formula rate plan revenue of $152.9 million. The effects of the MISOchanges to total formula rate plan revenue are different for each legacy company, primarily due to differences in the legacy companies’ capacity cost recovery mechanism.changes, including the effect of true-ups. Legacy Entergy Louisiana also seeksformula rate plan revenues increased by $86 million and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $66.9 million. In August 2022 the LPSC staff filed a list of objections/reservations, including outstanding issues from the test years 2017-2020 formula rate plan filings, utilizing the extraordinary cost mechanism to addaddress one-time changes such as state tax rate changes, and failing to include an adjustment for revenues not received as a distribution costresult of Hurricane Ida. Subject to LPSC review, the resulting changes to formula rate plan revenues became effective for bills rendered during the first billing cycle of September 2022, subject to refund.

In November 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the settlement.

2022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2022 calendar year operations. The 2022 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 8.33%, requiring an approximately $70.7 million increase to base rider revenue. Due to a cap for the 2021 and 2022 test years, however, base rider formula rate plan revenues are only being increased by approximately $4.9 million, resulting in a revenue deficiency of approximately $65.9 million and providing for prospective return on common equity opportunity of approximately 8.38%. Other changes in formula rate plan revenue driven by increases in capacity costs, primarily legacy capacity costs, additions eligible for recovery mechanism which operates in substantially the same manner asthrough the transmission recovery mechanism seeksand distribution recovery mechanism, and higher sales during the test period are offset by reductions in net MISO costs as well as credits for FERC-ordered refunds. Also included in the 2022 test year distribution recovery mechanism revenue requirement is a $6 million credit relating to utilize endthe distribution recovery mechanism performance accountability standards and requirements. In total, the net increase in formula rate plan revenues, including base formula rate plan revenues inside the formula rate plan bandwidth and subject to the cap, as well as other formula rate plan revenues outside of periodthe bandwidth, is $85.2 million. In August 2023 the LPSC staff filed a list of objections/reservations, including outstanding issues from the test years 2017-2021 formula rate baseplan filings, the calculation of certain refunds from System Energy, and certain calculations relating to calculatethe tax reform adjustment mechanism. Subject to LPSC review, the resulting net increase in formula rate plan revenues of $85.2 million became effective for bills rendered during the first billing cycle of September 2023, subject to refund.

2023 Entergy Louisiana Rate Case and Formula Rate Plan Extension Request

In August 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application for approval of a regulatory blueprint necessary for it to strengthen the electric grid for the State of Louisiana, which contains a dual-path request to update rates through either: (1) extension of Entergy Louisiana’s current formula rate plan (with certain modifications) for three years (the Rate Mitigation Proposal), which is Entergy Louisiana’s recommended path; or (2) implementation of rates resulting from a cost-of-service study (the Rate Case path). The application complies with Entergy Louisiana’s previous formula rate plan extension order requiring that for Entergy Louisiana to obtain another extension of its formula rate plan that included a rate reset, Entergy Louisiana would need to submit a full cost-of-service/rate case. Entergy Louisiana’s filing supports the need to extend Entergy Louisiana’s formula rate plan with credit supportive mechanisms to facilitate investment in the distribution, transmission, and generation functions.

The Rate Case path proposes a 2024-2026 test year formula rate plan with an initial revenue requirement increase of $430 million, net of $17 million of one-time credits, and a return on common equity of 10.5%. Depreciation rates would be updated for all asset classes. The Rate Mitigation Proposal proposes a 2023-2025 test year formula rate plan with an expected initial revenue requirement increase of $173 million, also net of $17 million
78

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

of one-time credits, based on a 2023 formula rate plan test year, and a return on common equity of 10.0%. Depreciation rates would be updated only for nuclear assets and would be phased in over three years.

Under both paths, Entergy Louisiana’s filing proposes removing the cap on amounts allowed to be recovered through the distribution recovery mechanism and continuing the distribution recovery mechanism performance accountability targets, which tie Entergy Louisiana’s ability to fully recover its distribution recovery mechanism investments to its reliability performance. Entergy Louisiana’s filing also includes new customer-centric programs specifically focused on affordability, including reducing late fees and certain other fees assessed to customers, lowering additional facilities charge rates, providing eligible low-income seniors with monthly discounts on their electric bill, and adding new voluntary customer options to support new transportation electrification technologies. A status conference was held in October 2023 at which a procedural schedule was adopted that includes three technical conferences, the last of which is in March 2024, and a hearing date in August 2024.

Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement

In October 2023 the LPSC staff and Entergy Louisiana reached a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. The settlement was approved by the LPSC in November 2023. The settlement resulted in a one-time cost of service credit to customers of $5.8 million, allowed Entergy Louisiana to retain approximately $6.2 million of securitization over-collection as recovery of a regulatory asset associated with late fees related to the 2016 Baton Rouge flood, and requestsresulted in Entergy Louisiana recording the reversal of a deferral$105.6 million regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of certain expenses incurredthe Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. See Note 3 to the financial statements for outsidefurther discussion of right-of-way vegetation programs. Settlement discussions are ongoing.the reversal of the regulatory liability.

Investigation of Costs Billed by Entergy Services

In November 2018 the LPSC issued a notice of proceeding initiating an investigation into costs incurred by Entergy Services that are included in the retail rates of Entergy Louisiana. As stated in the notice of proceeding, the LPSC observed an increase in capital construction-related costs incurred by Entergy Services. Discovery was issued and included efforts to seek highly detailed information on a broad range of matters unrelated to the scope of the audit. There has been no further activity in the investigation since May 2019.
82

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


COVID-19 Orders

In April 2020 the LPSC issued an order authorizing utilities to record as a regulatory asset expenses incurred from the suspension of disconnections and collection of late fees imposed by LPSC orders associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, utilities may seek future recovery, subject to LPSC review and approval, of losses and expenses incurred due to compliance with the LPSC’s COVID-19 orders. The suspension of late fees and disconnects for non-pay was extended until the first billing cycle after July 16, 2020. In January 2021, Entergy Louisiana resumed disconnections for customers in all customer classes with past-due balances that havehad not made payment arrangements. Utilities seeking to recover the regulatory asset must formally petition the LPSC to do so, identifying the direct and indirect costs for which recovery is sought. Any such request is subject to LPSC review and approval. In April 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application proposing to utilize approximately $1.6 billion in certain low interest debt to generate earnings to apply toward the reduction of the COVID-19 regulatory asset, as well as to conduct additional outside right-of-way vegetation management activities and fund the minor storm reserve account. In that filing, Entergy Louisiana proposed to delay repayment of certain shorter-term first mortgage bonds that were issued to finance storm restoration costs until the costs could be securitized, and to invest the funds that otherwise would be used to repay those bonds in the money pool to take advantage of the spread between prevailing interest rates on investments in the money pool and the interest rates on the bonds. The LPSC approved Entergy Louisiana’s requested relief in June 2023. A subsequent filing will be required to permit the LPSC to review the COVID-19 regulatory asset. As of December 31, 2020,2023, Entergy Louisiana recordedhad a regulatory
79

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



asset of $48.8$47.8 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.pandemic and a regulatory liability of $36.8 million for the deferred earnings related to the approximately $1.6 billion in low interest debt.

Filings with the MPSC (Entergy Mississippi)

Retail Rates

20182021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In March 2018,2021, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 20182021 test year filing and 20172020 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return for the historical 20172020 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 20182021 calendar year in large part asto be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2021 test year filing showed a result$95.4 million rate increase was necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equity to the specified point of the lower federal corporate income taxadjustment of 6.69% return on rate effective in 2018, to bebase, within the formula rate plan bandwidth, resulting in nobandwidth. The change in rates. formula rate plan revenues, however, was capped at 4% of retail revenues, which equated to a revenue change of $44.3 million. The 2021 evaluation report also included $3.9 million in demand side management costs for which the MPSC approved realignment of recovery from the energy efficiency rider to the formula rate plan. These costs were not subject to the 4% cap and resulted in a total change in formula rate plan revenues of $48.2 million. The 2020 look-back filing compared actual 2020 results to the approved benchmark return on rate base and reflected the need for a $16.8 million interim increase in formula rate plan revenues. In addition, the 2020 look-back filing included an interim capacity adjustment true-up for the Choctaw Generating Station, which increased the look-back interim rate adjustment by $1.7 million. These interim rate adjustments totaled $18.5 million. In accordance with the provisions of the formula rate plan, Entergy Mississippi implemented a $22.1 million interim rate increase, reflecting a cap equal to 2% of 2020 retail revenues, effective with the April 2021 billing cycle, subject to refund, pending a final MPSC order. The $3.9 million of demand side management costs and the Choctaw Generating Station true-up of $1.7 million, which were not subject to the 2% cap of 2020 retail revenues, were included in the April 2021 rate adjustments.

In June 2018,2021, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed the 2021 test year filing that resulted in a total rate increase of $48.2 million. Pursuant to the joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s earned returns for both the 20172020 look-back filing and 2018 testreflected an earned return on rate base of 6.12% in calendar year were within2020, which was below the respectivelook-back bandwidth, resulting in a $17.5 million increase in formula rate plan bandwidths.revenues on an interim basis through June 2022. This included $1.7 million related to the Choctaw Generating Station and $3.7 million of COVID-19 non-bad debt expenses. The joint stipulation also included Entergy Mississippi’s quantification and methodology for calculating incremental COVID-19 bad debt expenses and provided for Entergy Mississippi to continue to defer these incremental COVID-19 bad debt expenses through December 2021. In June 20182021 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation which resulted in no change in rates. See “Regulatory activity regardingwith rates effective for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” above for additional discussion regarding the treatmentfirst billing cycle of July 2021. In June 2021, Entergy Mississippi recorded regulatory credits of $19.9 million to reflect the effects of the lower federal corporate income tax rate.joint stipulation.

Formula Rate Plan Revisions

In October 2018, Entergy Mississippi proposed revisions to its formula rate plan that would provide for a mechanism in the formula rate plan, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi, including the non-fuel annual ownership costs of the Choctaw Generating Station, as well as to allow similar cost recovery treatment for other future capacity acquisitions, such as the Sunflower Solar Facility, that are approved by the MPSC. In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for an interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism to recover the $59 million first-year annual revenue requirement associated with the non-fuel ownership costs of the Choctaw Generating Station, which Entergy Mississippi began billing in January 2020. The MPSC must approve recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment for each new resource. In addition, the MPSC approved revisions to the formula rate plan which allows Entergy Mississippi to begin billing rate adjustments effective April 1 of the filing year on a temporary basis subject to refund or credit to customers, subject to final MPSC order. The MPSC also authorized Entergy Mississippi to remove vegetation management costs from the formula rate plan and recover these costs through the establishment of a vegetation management rider. Effective with the April 2020 billing cycle, Entergy Mississippi implemented a rider to recover $22 million in vegetation management costs.

20192022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In March 2019,2022, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 20192022 test year filing and 20182021 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return for the historical 20182021 calendar year to be abovebelow the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 2022 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2022 test year filing showed a $69 million rate increase was necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equity to the specified point of adjustment of 6.70% return on rate base, within the formula rate plan bandwidth. The change in formula rate plan revenues, however, was capped at 4% of retail revenues, which equated to a revenue change of $48.6 million. The 2021 look-back filing compared actual 2021 results to the approved benchmark return on rate base and reflected the need for a $34.5 million interim increase in formula rate plan revenues. In fourth quarter 2021, Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory asset of $19 million to reflect the then-current estimate in connection with the look-back feature of the formula rate plan. In
80

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

accordance with the provisions of the formula rate plan, Entergy Mississippi implemented a $24.3 million interim rate increase, reflecting a cap equal to 2% of 2021 retail revenues, effective in April 2022. With the implementation of the interim formula rate plan rates, Entergy Mississippi began recovery of the bad debt expense deferral resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic over a three-year period.

In June 2022, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed the 2022 test year filing that resulted in a total rate increase of $48.6 million. Pursuant to the joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 2021 look-back filing reflected an earned return on rate base of 5.99% in calendar year 2021, which was below the look-back bandwidth, resulting in a $34.3 million increase in the formula rate plan revenues on an interim basis through June 2023. In July 2022 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effective in August 2022. In July 2022, Entergy Mississippi recorded regulatory credits of $22.6 million to reflect the effects of the joint stipulation. In August 2022 an intervenor filed a statutorily-authorized direct appeal to the Mississippi Supreme Court seeking review of the MPSC’s July 2022 order approving the joint stipulation confirming Entergy Mississippi’s 2022 formula rate plan filing. Formula rate plan rates are not stayed or otherwise impacted while the appeal is pending.

In July 2022 the MPSC directed Entergy Mississippi to flow $14.1 million of the power management rider over-recovery balance to customers beginning in August 2022 through December 2022 to mitigate the bill impact of the increase in formula rate plan revenues.

2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In March 2023, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 2023 test year filing and 2022 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on rate base for the historical 2022 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 2023 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2023 test year filing showed a $39.8 million rate increase was necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on rate base to the specified point of adjustment of 6.67%, within the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2022 look-back filing compared actual 2022 results to the approved benchmark return on rate base and reflected the need for a $19.8 million temporary increase in formula rate plan revenues, including the refund of a $1.3 million over-recovery resulting from the demand-side management costs true-up for 2022. In fourth quarter 2022, Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory asset of $18.2 million in connection with the look-back feature of the formula rate plan to reflect that the 2022 estimated earned return was below the formula rate plan bandwidth. In accordance with the provisions of the formula rate plan, Entergy Mississippi implemented a $27.9 million interim rate increase, reflecting a cap equal to 2% of 2022 retail revenues, effective in April 2023.

In May 2023, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed a 2023 test year filing resulting in a total revenue increase of $26.5 million for 2023. Pursuant to the joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 2022 look-back filing reflected an earned return on rate base of 6.10% in calendar year 2022, which was below the look-back bandwidth, resulting in a $19.0 million increase in the formula rate plan revenues on an interim basis through June 2024. Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory credit of $0.8 million in June 2023 to reflect the increase in the look-back regulatory asset. In addition, certain long-term service agreement and conductor handling costs were authorized for realignment from the formula rate plan to the annual power management and grid modernization riders effective January 2023, resulting in regulatory credits recorded in June 2023 of $4.1 million and $4.3 million, respectively. Also, the amortization of Entergy Mississippi’s COVID-19 bad debt expense deferral was suspended for calendar year 2023 and will resume in 2024. In June 2023 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effective in July 2023.

81

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Filings with the City Council (Entergy New Orleans)

Retail Rates

2021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2021, Entergy New Orleans submitted to the City Council its formula rate plan 2020 test year filing. The 2020 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on equity of 6.26% compared to the authorized return on equity of 9.35%. Entergy New Orleans sought approval of a $64 million rate increase based on the formula set by the City Council in the 2018 rate case. The formula resulted in an increase in authorized electric revenues of $40 million and an increase in authorized gas revenues of $18.8 million. Entergy New Orleans also sought to commence collecting $5.2 million in electric revenues and $0.3 million in gas revenues that were previously approved by the City Council for collection through the formula rate plan. The filing was subject to review by the City Council and other parties over a 75-day review period, followed by a 25-day period to resolve any disputes among the parties. In October 2021 the City Council’s advisors filed a 75-day report recommending a reduction of $10 million for electric revenues and a reduction of $4.5 million for gas revenues, along with one-time credits funded by certain electric regulatory liabilities currently held by Entergy New Orleans for customers. On October 26, 2021, Entergy New Orleans provided notice to the City Council that it intends to implement rates effective with the first billing cycle of November 2021, with such rates reflecting an amount agreed-upon by Entergy New Orleans including adjustments filed in the City Council’s 75-day report, per the approved process for formula rate plan implementation. The total formula rate plan increase implemented was $49.5 million, with an increase of $34.9 million in electric revenues and $14.6 million in gas revenues. Also, credits of $17.4 million funded by certain regulatory liabilities currently held by Entergy New Orleans for customers will be issued over a five-month period from November 2021 through March 2022. Resulting rates went into effect with the first billing cycle of November 2021 pursuant to the formula rate plan tariff.

2022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In April 2022, Entergy New Orleans submitted to the City Council its formula rate plan 2021 test year filing. The 2021 test year evaluation report, subsequently updated in a July 2022 filing, produced an earned return on equity of 6.88% compared to the authorized return on equity of 9.35%. Entergy New Orleans sought approval of a $42.1 million rate increase based on the formula set by the City Council in the 2018 rate case. The formula resulted in an increase in authorized electric revenues of $34.1 million and an increase in authorized gas revenues of $3.3 million. Entergy New Orleans also sought to commence collecting $4.7 million in electric revenues that were previously approved by the City Council for collection through the formula rate plan. In July 2022 the City Council’s advisors issued a report seeking a reduction to Entergy New Orleans’s proposed increase of approximately $17.1 million in total for electric and gas revenues. Effective with the first billing cycle of September 2022, Entergy New Orleans implemented rates reflecting an amount agreed upon by Entergy New Orleans and the City Council including adjustments filed in the City Council’s advisors’ report, per the approved process for formula rate plan implementation. The total formula rate plan increase implemented was $24.7 million, which includes an increase of $18.2 million in electric revenues, $4.7 million in previously approved electric revenues, and an increase of $1.8 million in gas revenues. Additionally, credits of $13.9 million funded by certain regulatory liabilities currently held by Entergy New Orleans for customers were issued over an eight-month period beginning September 2022.

2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In April 2023, Entergy New Orleans submitted to the City Council its formula rate plan 2022 test year filing. The 2022 test year evaluation report produced an electric earned return on equity of 7.34% and a gas earned return on equity of 3.52% compared to the authorized return on equity for each of 9.35%. Entergy New Orleans sought approval of a $25.6 million rate increase based on the formula set by the City Council in the 2018 rate case. The formula would result in an increase in authorized electric revenues of $17.4 million and an increase in
82

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

authorized gas revenues of $8.2 million. Entergy New Orleans also sought to commence collecting $3.4 million in electric revenues that were previously approved by the City Council for collection through the formula rate plan. In July 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a report to decrease its requested formula rate plan revenues by approximately $0.5 million to account for minor errors discovered after the filing. The City Council advisors issued a report seeking a reduction in the requested formula rate plan revenues of approximately $8.3 million, combined for electric and gas, due to alleged errors. The City Council advisors proposed additional rate mitigation in the amount of $12 million through offsets to the formula rate plan rate increase by certain regulatory liabilities. In September 2023 the City Council approved an agreement to settle the 2023 formula rate plan filing. Effective with the first billing cycle of September 2023, Entergy New Orleans implemented rates reflecting an amount agreed upon by Entergy New Orleans and the City Council, per the approved process for formula rate plan implementation. The agreement provides for a total increase in electric revenues of $10.5 million and a total increase in gas revenues of $6.9 million. The agreement also provides for a minor storm accrual of $0.5 million per year and the distribution of $8.9 million of currently held customer credits to implement the City Council advisors’ mitigation recommendations.

Request for Extension and Modification of Formula Rate Plan

In September 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a motion seeking City Council approval of a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas formula rate plans. In October 2023 the City Council granted Entergy New Orleans’s request for an extension, subject to minor modifications which included a 55% fixed capital structure for rate setting purposes.

Filings with the PUCT and Texas Cities (Entergy Texas)

Retail Rates

2022 Base Rate Case

In July 2022, Entergy Texas filed a base rate case with the PUCT seeking a net increase in base rates of approximately $131.4 million. The base rate case was based on a 12-month test year ending December 31, 2021. Key drivers of the requested increase were changes in depreciation rates as the result of a depreciation study and an increase in the return on equity. In addition, Entergy Texas included capital additions placed into service for the period of January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2021, including those additions reflected in the then-effective distribution and transmission cost recovery factor riders and the generation cost recovery rider, all of which have been reset to zero as a result of this proceeding. In July 2022 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In October 2022 intervenors filed direct testimony challenging and supporting various aspects of Entergy Texas’s rate case application. The key issues addressed included the appropriate return on equity, generation plant deactivations, depreciation rates, and proposed tariffs related to electric vehicles. In November 2022 the PUCT staff filed direct testimony addressing a similar set of issues and recommending a reduction of $50.7 million to Entergy Texas’s overall cost of service associated with the requested net increase in base rates of approximately $131.4 million. Entergy Texas filed rebuttal testimony in November 2022. In December 2022 the ALJs with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued two orders, one adopting the parties’ joint proposal that issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure be decided exclusively on written evidence and briefing, and one adopting a joint proposed briefing outline and schedule with deadlines in January 2023 for the parties to submit briefing on issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure and admitting evidence related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure issues. In January 2023 the parties filed initial and reply briefs addressing issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

In May 2023, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement resolving all issues in the proceeding, except for issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and Entergy Texas filed an agreed motion for interim rates, subject to refund or surcharge to the extent that the interim rates differ from the final approved rates. The unopposed settlement reflected a net base rate increase to be effective and relate back to
83

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




formulaDecember 2022 of $54 million, exclusive of, and incremental to, the costs being realigned from the distribution and transmission cost recovery factor riders and the generation cost recovery rider and $4.8 million of rate plan bandwidthcase expenses to be recovered through a rider over a period of 36 months. The net base rate increase of $54 million includes updated depreciation rates and projected earned returna total annual revenue requirement of $14.5 million for the 2019 calendar yearaccrual of a self-insured storm reserve and the recovery of the regulatory assets for the pension and postretirement benefits expense deferral, costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, and retired non-advanced metering system electric meters. In May 2023 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings granted the motion for interim rates, which became effective in June 2023. Additionally, the ALJ remanded the proceeding, except for the issues related to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2019 test year filing shows a $36.8 million rate increase is necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equityelectric vehicle charging infrastructure, to the specified point of adjustment of 6.94% return on rate base, withinPUCT to consider the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2018 look-back filing compares actual 2018 resultssettlement. In June 2023 the ALJ issued a proposal for decision related to the approved benchmark return on rate baseelectric vehicle charging infrastructure issues and shows a $10.1 million interim decreasewhich noted recent legislation enacted which permits electric utilities to own and operate such infrastructure. The ALJ’s proposal for decision deferred to the PUCT regarding whether it is appropriate for any vertically integrated electric utility, or Entergy Texas specifically, to own electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and in formula rate plan revenuesthe event that the PUCT decided ownership is necessary. Inpermissible, the fourth quarter 2018, Entergy Mississippi recorded a provision of $9.3 million that reflected the estimateALJ recommended approval of the difference betweenproposed tariff to charge host customers for utility-owned and operated electric vehicle charging infrastructure sited on customer premises and denial of the 2018 expected earned rate of return on rate baseproposed tariff to temporarily adjust billing demand charges for separately metered electric vehicle charging infrastructure, citing cost-shifting concerns. In July 2023 the parties filed exceptions and replies to exceptions to the proposal for decision. In August 2023 the PUCT issued an established performance-adjusted benchmark rate of return underorder approving the formula rate plan performance-adjusted bandwidth mechanism. Inunopposed settlement and also issued an order severing the first quarter 2019, Entergy Mississippi recorded a $0.8 million increaseissues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure addressed in the provisionALJ’s proposal for decision to a separate proceeding. Concurrently, Entergy Texas recorded the reversal of $21.9 million of regulatory liabilities to reflect the amount shownrecognition of certain receipts by Entergy Texas under affiliated PPAs that have been resolved.

Following the PUCT’s approval of the unopposed settlement in August 2023, Entergy Texas recorded a regulatory liability of $10.3 million, which reflects the look-back filing. Innet effects of higher depreciation and amortizations for the relate back period, partially offset by the relate back of base rate revenues that would have been collected had the approved rates been in effect for the period from December 2022 through June 2019, Entergy Mississippi and2023, the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed thatdate the 2019 test year filing showed that a $32.8 million rate increase is necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equity to the specified point of adjustment of 6.93% return on ratenew base within the formula rate plan bandwidth. Additionally, pursuant to the joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 2018 look-back filing reflected an earned return on rate base of 7.81% in calendar year 2018 which is above the look-back benchmark return on rate base of 7.13%, resulting in an $11 million decrease in formula rate plan revenuesrates were implemented on an interim basis through May 2020.basis. In the second quarter 2019,October 2023, Entergy Mississippi recordedTexas filed a relate back surcharge rider to collect over six months beginning in January 2024 an additional $0.9approximately $24.6 million, increasewhich is the revenue requirement associated with the relate back of rates from December 2022 through June 2023, including carrying costs, as authorized by the PUCT’s August 2023 order. In November 2023, Entergy Texas filed an amended relate back surcharge rider to collect approximately $24.1 million based on a revised carrying cost rate. The amended relate back surcharge rider was approved by the PUCT in the provision to reflect the $11 million shown in the look-back filing. In June 2019 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effectiveDecember 2023. The higher depreciation and amortizations for the first billing cyclerelate back period will also be recognized over the six months beginning in January 2024, resulting in no effect on net income from the collection of July 2019.

2020 Formula Rate Plan Filingthe relate back surcharge rider.

In March 2020, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 2020 test year filing and 2019 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return forDecember 2023 the historical 2019 calendar yearPUCT referred the separate proceeding to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 2020 calendar yearresolve issues related to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2020 test year filing shows a $24.6 million rate increase is necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equityelectric vehicle charging infrastructure to the specified pointState Office of adjustment of 6.51% return on rate base, withinAdministrative Hearings. In January 2024, the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2019 look-back filing compares actual 2019 results to the approved benchmark return on rate base and reflects the need for a $7.3 million interim increase in formula rate plan revenues. In accordanceALJ with the MPSC-approved revisions toState Office of Administrative Hearings adopted a procedural schedule setting a hearing on the formula rate plan, Entergy Mississippi implemented a $24.3 million interim rate increase, reflecting a cap equal to 2% of 2019 retail revenues, effective with themerits for April 2020 billing cycle, subject to refund. In June 2020, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed that the 2020 test year filing showed that a $23.8 million rate increase is necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equity to the specified point of adjustment of 6.51% return on rate base, within the formula rate plan bandwidth. Pursuant to the joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 2019 look-back filing reflected an earned return on rate base of 6.75% in calendar year 2019, which is within the look-back bandwidth. As a result, there is no change in formula rate plan revenues in the 2019 look-back filing. In June 2020 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effective for the first billing cycle of July 2020. In the June 2020 order the MPSC directed Entergy Mississippi to submit revisions to its formula rate plan to realign recovery of costs from its energy efficiency cost recovery rider to its formula rate plan. In November 2020 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan providing for the realignment of energy efficiency costs to its formula rate plan, the deferral of energy efficiency expenditures into a regulatory asset, and the elimination of its energy efficiency cost recovery rider effective with the January 2022 billing cycle.2024.

COVID-19 OrdersDistribution Cost Recovery Factor (DCRF) Rider

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The amended rider was designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $26.3 million annually, or $6.8 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s then-effective DCRF rider based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2020. In February 2021 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings approved Entergy Texas's agreed motion for interim rates, which went into effect in March 20202021. In March 2021 the MPSCparties filed an unopposed settlement recommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested DCRF revenue requirement and resolving all issues in the proceeding. In May 2021 the PUCT issued an order suspending disconnections for a period of sixty days. The MPSC extendedapproving the order on disconnections through May 26, 2020. settlement.

In April 2020 the MPSC issued an order authorizing utilities to defer incremental costs and expenses associated with COVID-19 compliance and to seek future recovery through rates of the prudently incurred incremental costs and expenses. In December 2020, Entergy Mississippi resumed disconnections to commercial, industrial, and governmental customers with past-due balances that have not made payment arrangements. In JanuaryAugust 2021, Entergy Mississippi resumed disconnecting service for residentialTexas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The amended rider was designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $40.2 million annually, or
84

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

customers with past-due balances that have not made arrangements with the company. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory asset of $19.2 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Internal Restructuring

In March 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed an application with the MPSC seeking authorization to undertake a restructuring that would result in the transfer of substantially all of the assets and operations of Entergy Mississippi to a new entity, which would ultimately be held by an existing Entergy subsidiary holding company. In September 2018, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into and filed a joint stipulation regarding the restructuring filing. In September 2018 the MPSC issued an order accepting the stipulation in its entirety and approving the restructuring and credits of $27 million to retail customers over six years, consisting of annual payments of $4.5 million for the years 2019-2024. Entergy Mississippi also received the required FERC approval.

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Mississippi, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock, at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $21.2 million.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. converted from a Mississippi corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Mississippi, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Mississippi Power and Light), and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Mississippi, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Mississippi, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Enterprises, Inc., and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light then changed its name to Entergy Mississippi, LLC. Entergy Mississippi, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Mississippi, Inc. The restructuring was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed its notice of intent to implement the restructuring credit rider to allow Entergy Mississippi to return credits of $27 million to retail customers over six years. In January 2019 the MPSC approved the proposed restructuring credit adjustment factor, which is effective for bills rendered beginning February 2019.

Filings with the City Council (Entergy New Orleans)

Retail Rates

Energy Efficiency

In December 2019, Entergy New Orleans filed an application with the City Council seeking approval of an implementation plan for the Energy Smart program from April 2020 through December 2022. Entergy New Orleans proposed to recover the costs of the program through mechanisms previously approved by the City Council or through the energy efficiency cost recovery rider, which was approved in the 2018 combined rate case resolution. In January 2020 the City Council’s advisors recommended that, beginning with Program Year 10, the City Council allow Entergy New Orleans to earn a utility performance incentive of 7% of Energy Smart costs for each year in
85

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




which Entergy New Orleans achieves 100% of the City Council’s savings targets for Energy Smart. In February 2020 the City Council approved Entergy New Orleans’s application.

2018 Base Rate Case

In September 2018, Entergy New Orleans filed an electric and gas base rate case with the City Council. The filing requested a 10.5% return on equity for electric operations with opportunity to earn a 10.75% return on equity through a performance adder provision of the electric formula rate plan in subsequent years under a formula rate plan and requested a 10.75% return on equity for gas operations. The proposed electric rates in the revised filing reflect a net reduction of $20.3 million. The reduction in electric rates includes a base rate increase of $135.2 million, of which $131.5 million is associated with moving costs currently collected through fuel and other riders into base rates, plus a request for an advanced metering surcharge to recover $7.1 million associated with advanced metering infrastructure, offset by a net decrease of $31.1 million related to fuel and other riders. The filing also included a proposed gas rate decrease of $142 thousand. Entergy New Orleans’s rates reflected the inclusion of federal income tax reductions due to the Tax Act and the provisions of a previously-approved agreement in principle determining how the benefits of the Tax Act would flow. Entergy New Orleans included cost of service studies for electric and gas operations for the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and the projected twelve months ending December 31, 2018. In addition, Entergy New Orleans included capital additions expected to be placed into service for the period through December 31, 2019. Entergy New Orleans based its request for a change in rates on the projected twelve months ending December 31, 2018.

The filing’s major provisions included: (1) a new electric rate structure, which realigns the revenue requirement associated with capacity and long-term service agreement expense from certain existing riders to base revenue, provides for the recovery of the cost of advanced metering infrastructure, and partially blends rates for Entergy New Orleans’s customers residing in Algiers with customers residing in the remainder of Orleans Parish through a three-year phase-in; (2) contemporaneous cost recovery riders for investments in energy efficiency/demand response, incremental changes in capacity/long-term service agreement costs, grid modernization investment, and gas infrastructure replacement investment; and (3) formula rate plans for both electric and gas operations. In February 2019 the City Council’s advisors and several intervenors filed testimony in response to Entergy New Orleans’s application. The City Council’s advisors recommended, among other things, overall rate reductions of approximately $33 million in electric rates and $3.8 million in gas rates. Certain intervenors recommended overall rate reductions of up to approximately $49 million in electric rates and $5 million in gas rates. An evidentiary hearing was held in June 2019, and the record and post-hearing briefs were submitted in July 2019.

In October 2019 the City Council’s Utility Committee approved a resolution for a change in electric and gas rates for consideration by the full City Council that included a 9.35% return on common equity, an equity ratio of the lesser of 50% or Entergy New Orleans’s actual equity ratio, and a total reduction in revenues that Entergy New Orleans initially estimated to be approximately $39 million ($36 million electric; $3 million gas). At its November 7, 2019 meeting, the full City Council approved the resolution that had previously been approved by the City Council’s Utility Committee. Based on the approved resolution, in the fourth quarter 2019 Entergy New Orleans recorded an accrual of $10 million that reflects the estimate of the revenue billed in 2019 to be refunded to customers in 2020 based on an August 2019 effective date for the rate decrease. Entergy New Orleans also recorded a total of $12 million in regulatory assets for rate case costs and information technology costs associated with integrating Algiers customers with Entergy New Orleans’s legacy system and records. Entergy New Orleans will also be allowed to recover $10 million of retired general plant costs over a 20-year period.

The resolution directed Entergy New Orleans to submit a compliance filing within 30 days of the date of the resolution to facilitate the eventual implementation of rates, including all necessary calculations and conforming rate schedules and riders. The electric formula rate plan rider includes, among other things, 1) a provision for forward-looking adjustments to include known and measurable changes realized up to 12 months after the evaluation period; 2) a decoupling mechanism; and 3) recognition that Entergy New Orleans is authorized to make an in-service adjustment to the formula rate plan to include the non-fuel cost of the New Orleans Power Station in
86

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

rates, unless the two pending appeals in the New Orleans Power Station proceeding have not concluded. Under this circumstance, Entergy New Orleans shall be permitted to defer the New Orleans Power Station non-fuel costs, including the cost of capital, until Entergy New Orleans commences non-fuel cost recovery. After taking into account the requirements for submission of the compliance filing, the total annual revenue requirement reduction required by the resolution was refined to approximately $45 million ($42 million electric, including $29 million in rider reductions; $3 million gas). In January 2020 the City Council’s advisors found that the rates calculated by Entergy New Orleans and reflected in the December 2019 compliance filing should be implemented, except with respect to the City Council-approved energy efficiency cost recovery rider, which rider calculation should take into account events to be determined by the City Council in the future. Also in response to the resolution, Entergy New Orleans filed timely a petition for appeal and judicial review and for stay of or injunctive relief alleging that the resolution is unlawful in failing to produce just and reasonable rates. A hearing on the requested injunction was scheduled in Civil District Court for February 2020, but by joint motion of the City Council and Entergy New Orleans, the Civil District Court issued an order for a limited remand to the City Council to consider a potential agreement in principle/stipulation at its February 20, 2020 meeting. On February 17, 2020, Entergy New Orleans filed with the City Council an agreement in principle between Entergy New Orleans and the City Council’s advisors. On February 20, 2020, the City Council voted to approve the proposed agreement in principle and issued a resolution modifying the required treatment of certain accumulated deferred income taxes. As a result of the agreement in principle, the total annual revenue requirement reduction will be approximately $45 million ($42 million electric, including $29 million in rider reductions; and $3 million gas). Entergy New Orleans fully implemented the new rates in April 2020. In January 2021, pursuant to the agreement in principle approved by the City Council in October 2020, Entergy New Orleans filed with Civil District Court a motion seeking to dismiss its petition for judicial review of the City Council’s resolution in the 2018 combined rate case.

Commercial operation of the New Orleans Power Station commenced in May 2020. In accordance with the City Council resolution issued in the 2018 base rate case proceeding, Entergy New Orleans had been deferring the New Orleans Power Station non-fuel costs pending the conclusion of the appellate proceedings. In October 2020 the Louisiana Supreme Court denied all writ applications relating to the New Orleans Power Station. With those denials, Entergy New Orleans began recovering New Orleans Power Station costs in rates in November 2020. As of December 31, 2020 the regulatory asset for the deferral of New Orleans Power Station non-fuel costs was $5 million. Entergy New Orleans is recovering the costs over a five-year period that began in November 2020. In December 2020 the Alliance for Affordable Energy and Sierra Club filed a joint motion with the City Council to institute a prudence review to investigate the costs of the New Orleans Power Station. On January 28, 2021, the City Council passed a resolution giving parties 30 days to respond to the motion. Entergy New Orleans plans to respond to the motion.

2020 Formula Rate Plan Filing

Entergy New Orleans’s first annual filing under the three-year formula rate plan approved by the City Council in November 2019 was originally due to be filed in April 2020. The authorized return on equity under the approved three-year formula rate plan is 9.35% for both electric and gas operations. The City Council approved several extensions of the deadline to allow additional time to assess the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the New Orleans community, Entergy New Orleans customers, and Entergy New Orleans itself. In October 2020 the City Council approved an agreement in principle filed by Entergy New Orleans that results in Entergy New Orleans foregoing its 2020 formula rate plan filing and shifting the three-year formula rate plan to filings in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Key provisions of the agreement in principle include: changing the lower of actual equity ratio or 50% equity ratio approved in the rate case to a hypothetical capital structure of 51% equity and 49% debt for the duration of the three-year formula rate plan; changing the 2% depreciation rate for the New Orleans Power Station approved in the rate case to 3%; retention of over-recovery of $2.2 million in rider revenues; recovery of $1.4 million of certain rate case expenses outside of the earnings band; recovery of the New Orleans Solar Station costs upon commercial operation; and Entergy New Orleans’s dismissal of its 2018 rate case appeal.

87

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




COVID-19 Orders

In March 2020, Entergy New Orleans voluntarily suspended customer disconnections for non-payment of utility bills through May 2020. Subsequently, the City Council ordered that the moratorium be extended to August 1, 2020. In May 2020 the City Council issued an accounting order authorizing Entergy New Orleans to establish a regulatory asset for incremental COVID-19-related expenses. In January 2021, Entergy New Orleans resumed disconnecting service to commercial and small business customers with past-due balances that have not made payment arrangements. In February 2021 the City Council adopted a resolution suspending residential customer disconnections for non-payment of utility bills and suspending the assessment and accumulation of late fees on residential customers with past-due balances through May 15, 2021. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy New Orleans recorded a regulatory asset of $14.3 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

In June 2020 the City Council established the City Council Cares Program and directed Entergy New Orleans to use the approximately $7 million refund received from the Entergy Arkansas opportunity sales FERC proceeding, currently being held in escrow, and approximately $15 million of non-securitized storm reserves to fund this program, which is intended to provide temporary bill relief to customers who become unemployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The program became effective July 1, 2020, and offers qualifying residential customers bill credits of $100 per month for up to four months, for a maximum of $400 in residential customer bill credits. As of December 31, 2020, credits of $3.4 million have been applied to customer bills under the City Council Cares Program.

Filings with the PUCT and Texas Cities (Entergy Texas)

Retail Rates

2018 Base Rate Case

In May 2018, Entergy Texas filed a base rate case with the PUCT seeking an increase in base rates and rider rates of approximately $166 million, of which $48 million is associated with moving costs currently being collected through riders into base rates such that the total incremental revenue requirement increase is approximately $118 million. The base rate case was based on a 12-month test year ending December 31, 2017. In addition, Entergy Texas included capital additions placed into service for the period of April 1, 2013 through December 31, 2017, as well as a post-test year adjustment to include capital additions placed in service by June 30, 2018.

In October 2018 the parties filed an unopposed settlement resolving all issues in the proceeding and a motion for interim rates effective for usage on and after October 17, 2018. The unopposed settlement reflects the following terms: a base rate increase of $53.2 million (net of costs realigned from riders and including updated depreciation rates), a $25 million refund to reflect the lower federal income tax rate applicable to Entergy Texas from January 25, 2018 through the date new rates are implemented, $6 million of capitalized skylining tree hazard costs will not be recovered from customers, $242.5 million of protected excess accumulated deferred income taxes, which includes a tax gross-up, will be returned to customers through base rates under the average rate assumption method over the lives of the associated assets, and $185.2 million of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes, which includes a tax gross-up, will be returned to customers through a rider. The unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes rider will include carrying charges and will be in effect over a period of 12 months for large customers and over a period of four years for other customers. The settlement also provides for the deferral of $24.5 million of costs associated with the remaining book value of the Neches and Sabine 2 plants, previously taken out of service, to be recovered over a ten-year period and the deferral of $20.5 million of costs associated with Hurricane Harvey to be recovered over a 12-year period, each beginning in October 2018. The settlement provides final resolution of all issues in the matter, including those related to the Tax Act. In October 2018 the ALJ granted the unopposed motion for interim rates to be effective for service rendered on or after October 17, 2018. In December 2018 the PUCT issued an order approving the unopposed settlement.

88

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Distribution Cost Recovery Factor (DCRF) Rider

In March 2019, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to set a new DCRF rider. The proposed new DCRF rider is designed to collect approximately $3.2 million annually from Entergy Texas’s retail customers based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018. In September 2019 the PUCT issued an order approving rates, which had been effective on an interim basis since June 2019, at the level proposed in Entergy Texas’s application.

In March 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The proposed rider is designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $23.6 million annually, or $20.4$13.9 million in incremental annual DCRF revenuerevenues beyond Entergy Texas’s then-effective DCRF rider based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019. In May and June 2020 intervenors filed testimony recommending reductions in Entergy Texas’s annual revenue requirement of approximately $0.3 million and $4.1 million. The parties briefed the contested issues in this matter and a proposal for decision was issued in September 2020 recommending a $4.1 million revenue reduction related to non-Advanced Metering System meters included in the DCRF calculation. The parties filed exceptions to the proposal for decision and replies to those exceptions in September 2020. In October 2020 the PUCT issued a final order approving a $16.3 million incremental annual DCRF revenue increase.

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The proposed rider is designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $26.3 million annually, or $6.8 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s currently effective DCRF rider based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2020.June 30, 2021. In FebruarySeptember 2021 the administrative law judgePUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled in December 2021. In December 2021 the parties filed an unopposed settlement recommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested DCRF revenue requirement and resolving all issues in the proceeding, including a motion for interim rates to take effect for usage on and after January 24, 2022. Also, in December 2021, the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings approved Entergy Texas's agreedissued an order granting the motion for interim rates, which will gowent into effect in January 2022, admitting evidence, and remanding the proceeding to the PUCT to consider the settlement. In March 2021. The administrative law judge also adopted a procedural schedule setting a hearing on2022 the merits, if necessary, in April 2021.PUCT issued an order approving the settlement.

Transmission Cost Recovery Factor (TCRF) Rider

In December 2018, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to set a new TCRF rider. The proposed new TCRF rider iswas designed to collect approximately $2.7 million annually from Entergy Texas’s retail customers based on its capital invested in transmission between January 1, 2018 and September 30, 2018. In April 2019 parties filed testimony proposing a load growth adjustment, which would fully offset Entergy Texas’s proposed TCRF revenue requirement. In July 2019 the PUCT granted Entergy Texas’s application as filed to begin recovery of the requested $2.7 million annual revenue requirement, rejecting opposing parties’ proposed adjustment; however, the PUCT found that the question of prudence of the actual investment costs should be determined in Entergy Texas’s next rate case similar to the procedure used for the costs recovered through the DCRF rider. In October 2019 the PUCT issued an order on a motion for rehearing, clarifying and affirming its prior order granting Entergy Texas’s application as filed. Also in October 2019 a second motion for rehearing was filed, and Entergy Texas filed a response in opposition to the motion. The second motion for rehearing was overruled by operation of law. In December 2019, Texas Industrial Energy Consumers filed an appeal to the PUCT order in district court alleging that the PUCT erred in declining to apply a load growth adjustment.

In August 2019, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its TCRF rider. The amended TCRF rider is designed to collect approximately $19.4 million annually from Entergy Texas’s retail customers based on its capital invested in transmission between January 1, 2018 and June 30, 2019, which is $16.7 million in incremental annual revenue above the $2.7 million approved in the prior pending TCRF proceeding. In January 2020 the PUCT issued an order approving an unopposed settlement providing for recovery of the requested revenue requirement. Entergy Texas implemented the amended rider beginning with bills covering usage on and after January 23, 2020.

89

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its TCRF rider. The proposedamended rider iswas designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $51 million annually, or $31.6 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s currently effectivethen-effective TCRF rider based on its capital invested in transmission between July 1, 2019 and August 31, 2020. A procedural schedule was establishedIn March 2021 the parties filed an unopposed settlement recommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested TCRF revenue requirement with interim rates effective March 2021 and resolving all issues in the proceeding. In March 2021 the ALJ granted the motion for interim rates, admitted evidence, and remanded the case to the PUCT for consideration of a hearing scheduled in March 2021.final order at a future open meeting. In FebruaryJune 2021 the PUCT issued an order approving the settlement.

In October 2021, Entergy Texas filed an agreed motionwith the PUCT a request to abateamend its TCRF rider. The amended rider was designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $66.1 million annually, or $15.1 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Energy Texas’s then-effective TCRF rider based on its capital invested in transmission between September 1, 2020 and July 31, 2021 and changes in approved transmission charges. In January 2022 the procedural schedule, noting thatPUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In February 2022 the parties had reached afiled an unopposed settlement in principle, andrecommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested TCRF revenue requirement with interim rates effective March 2022. In February 2022 the administrative law judgeALJ granted the motion for interim rates, admitted evidence, and remanded the case to abate.

COVID-19 Orders

In March 2020 the PUCT authorized electric utilities to record asfor consideration of a regulatory asset expenses resulting from the effects of COVID-19.final order at a future open meeting. In future proceedingsJune 2022 the PUCT will consider whether each utility's request for recovery of these regulatory assets is reasonable and necessary,issued an order approving the appropriate period of recovery, and any amount of carrying costs thereon. In March 2020 the PUCT ordered a moratorium on disconnections for nonpayment for all customer classes, but, in April 2020, revised the disconnect moratorium to apply only to residential customers. The PUCT allowed the moratorium to expire on June 13, 2020, but on July 17, 2020, the PUCT re-established the disconnect moratorium for residential customers until August 31, 2020. In January 2021, Entergy Texas resumed disconnections for customers with past-due balances that have not made payment arrangements. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy Texas recorded a regulatory asset of $12.9 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.settlement.

Generation Cost Recovery Rider

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application to establish a generation cost recovery rider with an initial annual revenue requirement of approximately $91 million to begin recovering a return of and on its generation capital investment in the Montgomery County Power Station through August 31, 2020. In December 2020, Entergy Texas filed an unopposed settlement supporting a generation cost recovery rider with an annual revenue requirement of approximately $86 million.The settlement revenue requirement iswas based on a
85

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



depreciation rate intended to fully depreciate Montgomery County Power Station over 38 years and the removal of certain costs from Entergy Texas’s request.Under the settlement, Entergy Texas retainsretained the right to propose a different depreciation rate and seek recovery of a majority of the costs removed from its request in its next base rate proceeding.proceeding, and such depreciation rate was revised to fully depreciate Montgomery County Power Station over 40 years and all requested capital additions were approved as prudent in the 2022 base rate case proceeding discussed above. On January 14, 2021, the PUCT approved the generation cost recovery rider settlement rates on an interim basis and abated the proceeding. Within 60 days of Montgomery County Power Station being placed in service on January 1,In March 2021, Entergy Texas will filefiled to update its generation cost recovery rider to include its generation capital investment in Montgomery County Power Station after August 31, 2020. The current estimated costIn April 2021 the ALJ issued an order unabating the proceeding and in May 2021 the ALJ issued an order finding Entergy Texas’s application and notice of the application to be sufficient. In May 2021, Entergy Texas filed an amendment to the application to reflect the PUCT’s approval of the sale of a 7.56% partial interest in the Montgomery County Power Station including transmission interconnectionto East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc., which closed in June 2021. In June 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In July 2021 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings adopted a procedural schedule setting a hearing on the merits for September 2021. In July 2021 the parties filed a motion to abate the procedural schedule noting they had reached an agreement in principle and network upgrades, is approximately $921 million. Of this investment, approximately $765 million is eligible to begin being recovered throughallow the parties time to finalize a settlement agreement, which motion was granted by the ALJ. In October 2021, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement agreement that would adjust its generation cost recovery rider.rider to recover an annual revenue requirement of approximately $88.3 million related to Entergy Texas’s investment in the Montgomery County Power Station through January 1, 2021, with Entergy Texas will addressable to seek recovery of the remainder of its investment in its next base rate case, and all requested capital additions were approved as prudent in the 2022 base rate case proceeding discussed above. Also in October 2021 the ALJ granted a motion to admit evidence and remand the proceeding to the PUCT. In January 2022 the PUCT issued an order approving the unopposed settlement. In February 2022, Entergy Texas filed a relate-back rider to collect over five months an additional approximately $5 million, which is the difference between the interim revenue requirement approved in January 2021 and the revenue requirement approved in January 2022 that reflects Entergy Texas’s full generation capital investment and ownership in Montgomery County Power Station investmenton January 1, 2021, plus carrying costs from January 2021 through other rate mechanisms.January 2022 when the updated revenue requirement took effect. In April 2022, Entergy Texas and the PUCT staff filed a joint proposed order supporting approval of Entergy Texas’s as-filed request. The PUCT approved the relate-back rider consistent with Entergy Texas’s as-filed request, and rates became effective over a five-month period, in August 2022.

In December 2020, Entergy Texas also filed an application to amend its generation cost recovery rider to reflect its acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility, which is expectedclosed in June 2021. Because Hardin was to closebe acquired in April 2021.Thethe future, the initial generation cost recovery rider rates proposed in the application representrepresented no change from the generation cost recovery rider rates to be established in Entergy Texas’Texas’s previous generation cost recovery rider proceeding.Once In July 2021 the PUCT issued an order approving the application. In August 2021, Entergy Texas has acquiredfiled an update application to recover its actual investment in the acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility,Facility. In September 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled in April 2022. In January 2022, Entergy Texas filed an update to its application to align the requested revenue requirement with the terms of the generation cost recovery rider settlement approved by the PUCT in January 2022. In March 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed motion, which motion was granted by the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings, to abate the procedural schedule indicating that the parties had reached an agreement in principle. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties a unanimous settlement agreement that would adjust its generation cost recovery rider to recover an annual revenue requirement of approximately $92.8 million, which is $4.5 million in incremental annual revenue above the $88.3 million approved in January 2022, related to Entergy Texas’s actual investment in the facility will be reflected in the updated filing to Entergy Texas’ application, which will be made within 60 daysacquisition of the acquisition’s closing.

Hardin County Peaking Facility. Concurrently with filing of the unanimous settlement agreement, Entergy Texas submitted an agreed motion to admit evidence and remand the case to the PUCT for review and consideration of the settlement agreement, which motion was granted by the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings. The PUCT approved the settlement agreement and rates became effective in August 2022. In September 2022, Entergy Texas filed a relate-back rider designed to collect over three months an additional approximately $5.7 million, which is the revenue requirement, plus carrying
9086

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

costs, associated with Entergy Texas’s acquisition of Hardin County Peaking Facility from June 2021 through August 2022 when the updated revenue requirement took effect. In April 2023 the PUCT approved Entergy Texas’s as-filed request with rates effective over three months beginning in May 2023. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the Hardin County Peaking Facility purchase.

Entergy Arkansas Opportunity Sales Proceeding

In June 2009 the LPSC filed a complaint requesting that the FERC determine that certain of Entergy Arkansas’s sales of electric energy to third parties: (a) violated the provisions of the System Agreement that allocated the energy generated by Entergy System resources; (b) imprudently denied the Entergy System and its ultimate consumers the benefits of low-cost Entergy System generating capacity; and (c) violated the provision of the System Agreement that prohibited sales to third parties by individual companies absent an offer of a right-of-first-refusal to other Utility operating companies.  The LPSC’s complaint challenged sales made beginning in 2002 and requested refunds.  In July 2009 the Utility operating companies filed a response to the complaint arguing among other things that the System Agreement contemplates that the Utility operating companies may make sales to third parties for their own account, subject to the requirement that those sales be included in the load (or load shape) for the applicable Utility operating company.  The FERC subsequently ordered a hearing in the proceeding.

After a hearing, the ALJ issued an initial decision in December 2010.  The ALJ found that the System Agreement allowed for Entergy Arkansas to make the sales to third parties but concluded that the sales should be accounted for in the same manner as joint account sales.  The ALJ concluded that “shareholders” should make refunds of the damages to the Utility operating companies, along with interest.  Entergy disagreed with several aspects of the ALJ’s initial decision and in January 2011 filed with the FERC exceptions to the decision.

The FERC issued a decision in June 2012 and held that, while the System Agreement is ambiguous, it does provide authority for individual Utility operating companies to make opportunity sales for their own account and Entergy Arkansas made and priced these sales in good faith.  The FERC found, however, that the System Agreement does not provide authority for an individual Utility operating company to allocate the energy associated with such opportunity sales as part of its load but provides a different allocation authority.  The FERC further found that the after-the-fact accounting methodology used to allocate the energy used to supply the sales was inconsistent with the System Agreement.  The FERC in its decision established further hearing procedures to quantify the effect of repricing the opportunity sales in accordance with the FERC’s June 2012 decision. The hearing was held in May 2013 and the ALJ issued an initial decision in August 2013. The LPSC, the APSC, the City Council, and FERC staff filed briefs on exceptions and/or briefs opposing exceptions. Entergy filed a brief on exceptions requesting that the FERC reverse the initial decision and a brief opposing certain exceptions taken by the LPSC and FERC staff.

In April 2016 the FERC issued orders addressing requests for rehearing filed in July 2012 and the ALJ’s August 2013 initial decision. The first order denied Entergy’s request for rehearing and affirmed the FERC’s earlier rulings that Entergy’s original methodology for allocating energy costs to the opportunity sales was incorrect and, as a result, Entergy Arkansas must make payments to the other Utility operating companies to put them in the same position that they would have been in absent the incorrect allocation. The FERC clarified that interest should be included with the payments. The second order affirmed in part, and reversed in part, the rulings in the ALJ’s August 2013 initial decision regarding the methodology that should be used to calculate the payments Entergy Arkansas is to make to the other Utility operating companies. The FERC affirmed the ALJ’s ruling that a full re-run of intra-system bills should be performed but required that methodology be modified so that the sales have the same priority for purposes of energy allocation as joint account sales. The FERC reversed the ALJ’s decision that any payments by Entergy Arkansas should be reduced by 20%. The FERC also reversed the ALJ’s decision that adjustments to other System Agreement service schedules and excess bandwidth payments should not be taken into account when calculating the payments to be made by Entergy Arkansas. The FERC held that such adjustments and excess bandwidth payments should be taken into account but ordered further proceedings before an ALJ to address
87

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



whether a cap on any reduction due to bandwidth payments was necessary and to implement the other adjustments to the calculation methodology.

In May 2016, Entergy Services filed a request for rehearing of the FERC’s April 2016 order arguing that payments made by Entergy Arkansas should be reduced as a result of the timing of the LPSC’s approval of certain contracts. Entergy Services also filed a request for clarification and/or rehearing of the FERC’s April 2016 order
91

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




addressing the ALJ’s August 2013 initial decision. The APSC and the LPSC also filed requests for rehearing of the FERC’s April 2016 order. In September 2017 the FERC issued an order denying the request for rehearing on the issue of whether any payments by Entergy Arkansas to the other Utility operating companies should be reduced due to the timing of the LPSC’s approval of Entergy Arkansas’s wholesale baseload contract with Entergy Louisiana. In November 2017 the FERC issued an order denying all of the remaining requests for rehearing of the April 2016 order. In November 2017, Entergy Services filed a petition for review in the D.C. Circuit of the FERC’s orders in the first two phases of the opportunity sales case. In December 2017 the D.C. Circuit granted Entergy Services’ request to hold the appeal in abeyance pending final resolution of the related proceeding before the FERC. In January 2018 the APSC and the LPSC filed separate petitions for review in the D.C. Circuit, and the D.C. Circuit consolidated the appeals with Entergy Services’ appeal.

The hearing required by the FERC’s April 2016 order was held in May 2017. In July 2017 the ALJ issued an initial decision addressing whether a cap on any reduction due to bandwidth payments was necessary and whether to implement the other adjustments to the calculation methodology. In August 2017 the Utility operating companies, the LPSC, the APSC, and FERC staff filed individual briefs on exceptions challenging various aspects of the initial decision. In September 2017 the Utility operating companies, the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and FERC staff filed separate briefs opposing exceptions taken by various parties.

Based on testimony previously submitted in the case and its assessment of the April 2016 FERC orders, in the first quarter 2016, Entergy Arkansas recorded a liability of $87 million, which included interest, for its estimated increased costs and payment to the other Utility operating companies, and a deferred fuel regulatory asset of $75 million. Following its assessment of the course of the proceedings, including the FERC’s denial of rehearing in November 2017 described above, in the fourth quarter 2017, Entergy Arkansas recorded an additional liability of $35 million and a regulatory asset of $31 million.

In October 2018 the FERC issued an order addressing the ALJ’s July 2017 initial decision. The FERC reversed the ALJ’s decision to cap the reduction in Entergy Arkansas’s payment to account for the increased bandwidth payments that Entergy Arkansas made to the other operating companies. The FERC also reversed the ALJ’s decision that Grand Gulf sales from January through September 2000 should be included in the calculation of Entergy Arkansas’s payment. The FERC affirmed on other grounds the ALJ’s rejection of the LPSC’s claim that certain joint account sales should be accounted for as part of the calculation of Entergy Arkansas’s payment. In November 2018 the LPSC requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2018 decision. In December 2019 the FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing. In January 2020 the LPSC appealed the December 2019 decision to the D.C. Circuit.

88

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

In December 2018, Entergy made a compliance filing in response to the FERC’s October 2018 order. The compliance filing provided a final calculation of Entergy Arkansas’s payments to the other Utility operating companies, including interest. No protests were filed in response to the December 2018 compliance filing. The December 2018 compliance filing is pending FERC action. Refunds and interest in the following amounts were paid by Entergy Arkansas to the other operating companies in December 2018:

 Total refunds including interest
Payment/(Receipt)
 (In Millions)
PrincipalInterestTotal
Entergy Arkansas$68$67$135
Entergy Louisiana($30)($29)($59)
Entergy Mississippi($18)($18)($36)
Entergy New Orleans($3)($4)($7)
Entergy Texas($17)($16)($33)

92

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy Arkansas previously recognized a regulatory asset with a balance of $116 million as of December 31, 2018 for a portion of the payments due as a result of this proceeding.

As described above, the FERC’s opportunity sales orders have beenwere appealed to the D.C. Circuit. In February 2020 all of the appeals were consolidated and in April 2020 the D.C. Circuit established a briefing schedule. Briefing was completed in September 2020 and oral argument was heard in December 2020. In July 2021 the D.C. Circuit issued a decision denying all of the petitions for review filed in response to the FERC’s opportunity sales orders.

In February 2019 the LPSC filed a new complaint relating to two issues that were raised in the opportunity sales proceeding, but that, in its October 2018 order, the FERC held were outside the scope of the proceeding. In March 2019, Entergy Services filed an answer and motion to dismiss the new complaint. In November 2019 the FERC issued an order denying the LPSC’s complaint. The order concluded that the settlement agreement approved by the FERC in December 2015 terminating the System Agreement barred the LPSC’s new complaint. In December 2019 the LPSC requested rehearing of the FERC’s November 2019 order, and in July 2020 the FERC issued an order dismissing the LPSC’s request for rehearing. In September 2020 the LPSC appealed to the D.C. Circuit the FERC’s orders dismissing the new opportunity sales complaint. In November 2020 the D.C. Circuit issued an order establishing that briefing will occur in January 2021 through April 2021. Oral argument was held in September 2021. In December 2021 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s Petition for Review of the new opportunity sales complaint. The opportunity sales cases are complete at FERC and at the D.C. Circuit and no additional refund amounts are owed by Entergy Arkansas.

In May 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed an application and supporting testimony with the APSC requesting approval of a special rider tariff to recover the costs of these payments from its retail customers over a 24-month period.  The application requested that the APSC approve the rider to take effect within 30 days or, if suspended by the APSC as allowed by commission rule, approve the rider to take effect in the first billing cycle of the first month occurring 30 days after issuance of the APSC’s order approving the rider. In June 2019 the APSC suspended Entergy Arkansas’s tariff and granted Entergy Arkansas’s motion asking the APSC to establish the proceeding as the single designated proceeding in which interested parties may assert claims related to the appropriate retail rate treatment of the FERC’s October 2018 order and related FERC orders in the opportunity sales proceeding. In January 2020 the APSC adopted a procedural schedule with a hearing in April 2020. In January 2020 the Attorney General and Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed a joint motion seeking to dismiss Entergy Arkansas’s application alleging that the APSC, in a prior proceeding, ruled on the issues addressed in the application and determined that Entergy Arkansas’s requested relief violates the filed rate doctrine and the prohibition against retroactive ratemaking. Entergy Arkansas responded to the joint motion in February 2020 rebutting these
89

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



arguments, including demonstrating that the claims in this proceeding differ substantially from those the APSC addressed previously and that the payment resulting from a FERC tariff violation for which Entergy Arkansas seeks retail cost recovery in this proceeding differs materially from the refunds resulting from a FERC tariff amendment that the APSC previously rejected on filed rate doctrine and the retroactive ratemaking grounds. In addition, in January 2020 the Attorney General and Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed testimony opposing the recovery by Entergy Arkansas of the opportunity sales payment but also claiming that certain components of the payment should be segregated and refunded to customers. In March 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed rebuttal testimony.

In July 2020 the APSC issued a decision finding that Entergy Arkansas’s application is not in the public interest. The order also directed Entergy Arkansas to refund to its retail customers within 30 days of the order the FERC-determined over-collection of $13.7 million, plus interest, associated with a recalculated bandwidth remedy. In addition to these primary findings, the order also denied the Attorney General’s request for Entergy Arkansas to prepare a compliance filing detailing all of the retail impacts from the opportunity sales and denied a request by the Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers to recalculate all costs using the revised responsibility ratio. Entergy Arkansas filed a motion for temporary stay of the 30-day requirement to allow Entergy Arkansas a reasonable opportunity to seek rehearing of the APSC order, but in July 2020 the APSC denied Entergy Arkansas’s request for a stay and directed Entergy Arkansas to refund to its retail customers the component of the total FERC-determined opportunity sales payment that was associated with increased bandwidth remedy payments of $13.7 million, plus interest. The refunds were issued in the August 2020 billing cycle. While the APSC denied Entergy Arkansas’s stay request, Entergy Arkansas believes its actions were prudent and, therefore, the costs, including the $13.7 million, plus interest, are recoverable. In July 2020, Entergy Arkansas requested rehearing of the APSC
93

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




order, which rehearing was denied by the APSC in August 2020. In September 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a complaint in the U. S.U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas challenging the APSC’s order denying Entergy Arkansas’s request to recover the costs of these payments. In October 2020 the APSC filed a motion to dismiss Entergy Arkansas’s complaint, to which Entergy Arkansas responded. Also in December 2020, Entergy Arkansas and the APSC held a pre-trial conference, and filed a report with the court in January 2021. The court scheduledheld a hearing forin February 26, 2021 regarding issues addressed in the pre-trial conference report.report, and in June 2021 the court stayed all discovery until it rules on pending motions, after which the court will issue an amended schedule if necessary. In March 2022 the court denied the APSC’s motion to dismiss, and, in April 2022, issued a scheduling order including a trial date in February 2023. In June 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion asserting that it is entitled to summary judgment because Entergy Arkansas’s position that the APSC’s order is pre-empted by the filed rate doctrine and violates the Dormant Commerce Clause is premised on facts that are not subject to genuine dispute. In July 2022, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc., an industrial customer association, filed a motion to intervene and to hold Entergy Arkansas’s motion for summary judgment in abeyance pending a ruling on the motion to intervene. Entergy Arkansas filed a consolidated opposition to both motions. In August 2022 the APSC filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the APSC is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In September 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed an opposition to the motion. In October 2022 the APSC filed a motion asking the court to hold further proceedings in abeyance pending a decision on the motions for summary judgment filed by Entergy Arkansas and the APSC. Also in October 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed an opposition to the motion, and the APSC filed a reply in support of its motion for summary judgment. In January 2023 the judge assigned to the case, on her own motion, identified facts that may present a conflict and recused herself; a new judge was assigned to the case, but he also recused due to a conflict. The case again was reassigned to a new judge. In January 2023 the court denied all pending motions (including those described above) except for a motion by the APSC to exclude certain testimony and further ruled that the matter would proceed to trial. In January 2023, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed a notice of appeal of the court’s order denying its motion to intervene to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and a motion with the district court to stay the proceedings pending the appeal, which was denied. In February 2023, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed a motion with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth District to stay the proceedings pending the appeal, which also was denied. The trial was held in February 2023. Following the trial, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth District to expedite the appeal filed by Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. The United States Court of Appeals for
90

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

the Eighth District granted Entergy Arkansas’s request, and oral arguments were held in June 2023. In August 2023 the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth District affirmed the order of the court denying Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc.’s motion to intervene. An order from the district court is pending and is anticipated in 2024.

Complaints Against System Energy

System Energy’s operating revenues are derived from the allocation of the capacity, energy, and related costs associated with its 90% ownership/leasehold interest in Grand Gulf.  System Energy sells its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. System Energy and the Unit Power Sales Agreement are currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including challenges with respect to System Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period. The settlement with the MPSC described in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below, and the settlement in principle with the APSC described in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC” below, if approved by the FERC, substantially reduce the aggregate amount of exposure resulting from these claims. The claims in these proceedings include claims for refunds and claims for rate adjustments; the aggregate amount of refunds claimed in these proceedings, after reduction for settlements reached with the MPSC and the APSC (subject in the latter case to approval by the FERC), exceeds the current net book value of System Energy. Following are discussions of the proceedings.

Return on Equity and Capital Structure Complaints

In January 2017 the APSC and MPSC filed a complaint with the FERC against System Energy. The complaint seeks a reduction in the return on equity component of the Unit Power Sales Agreement pursuant to which System Energy sells its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans. Entergy Arkansas also sells some of its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans under separate agreements. The current return on equity under the Unit Power Sales Agreement is 10.94%, which was established in a rate proceeding that became final in July 2001. As discussed below in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC,” beginning with the July 2022 service month, bills issued to Entergy Mississippi under the Unit Power Sales Agreement reflect a return on equity of 9.65%.

The APSC and MPSC complaint alleges that the return on equity is unjust and unreasonable because capital market and other considerations indicate that it is excessive. The complaint requests proceedings to investigate the return on equity and establish a lower return on equity, and also requests that the FERC establish January 23, 2017 as a refund effective date. The complaint includes return on equity analysis that purports to establish that the range of reasonable return on equity for System Energy is between 8.37% and 8.67%. System Energy answered the complaint in February 2017 and disputes that a return on equity of 8.37% to 8.67% is just and reasonable. The LPSC and the City Council intervened in the proceeding expressing support for the complaint. In September 2017 the FERC established a refund effective date of January 23, 2017 and directed the parties to engage in settlement proceedings before an ALJ. The parties have beenwere unable to settle the return on equity issue and a FERC hearing judge was assigned in July 2018. The 15-month refund period in connection with the APSC/MPSC complaint expired on April 23, 2018.

In April 2018 the LPSC filed a complaint with the FERC against System Energy seeking an additional 15-month refund period.  The LPSC complaint requests similar relief from the FERC with respect to System Energy’s return on equity and also requests the FERC to investigate System Energy’s capital structure.  The APSC, MPSC,
91

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



and City Council intervened in the proceeding, filed an answer expressing support for the complaint, and asked the FERC to consolidate this proceeding with the proceeding initiated by the complaint of the APSC and MPSC in January 2017. System Energy answered the LPSC complaint in May 2018 and also filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. In August 2018 the FERC issued an order dismissing the LPSC’s request to investigate System Energy’s capital structure and setting for hearing the return on equity complaint, with a refund effective date of April 27, 2018. The 15-month refund period in connection with the LPSC return on equity complaint expired on July 26, 2019.

The portion of the LPSC’s complaint dealing with return on equity was subsequently consolidated with the APSC and MPSC complaint for hearing. The parties addressed an order (issued in a separate FERC proceeding involving New England transmission owners) that proposed modifying the FERC’s standard methodology for determining return on equity. In September 2018, System Energy filed a request for rehearing and the LPSC filed a request for rehearing or reconsideration of the FERC’s August 2018 order. The LPSC’s request referenced an amended complaint that it filed on the same day raising the same capital structure claim the FERC had earlier dismissed. The FERC initiated a new proceeding for the amended capital structure complaint, and System Energy submitted a response in October 2018. In January 2019 the FERC set the amended complaint for settlement and hearing proceedings. Settlement proceedings in the capital structure proceeding commenced in February 2019. As noted below, in June 2019, settlement discussions were terminated and the amended capital structure complaint was
94

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

consolidated with the ongoing return on equity proceeding. The 15-month refund period in connection with the capital structure complaint was from September 24, 2018 to December 23, 2019.

In January 2019 the LPSC, and the APSC, and the MPSC filed direct testimony in the return on equity proceeding. For the refund period January 23, 2017 through April 23, 2018, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.81% and the APSC and the MPSC argue for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.24%. For the refund period April 27, 2018 through July 27, 2019, and for application on a prospective basis, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.97% and the APSC and the MPSC argue for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.41%. In March 2019, System Energy submitted answering testimony. For the first refund period, System Energy’s testimony argues for a return on equity of 10.10% (median) or 10.70% (midpoint). For the second refund period, System Energy’s testimony shows that the calculated returns on equity for the first period fall within the range of presumptively just and reasonable returns on equity, and thus the second complaint should be dismissed (and the first period return on equity used going forward). If the FERC nonetheless were to set a new return on equity for the second period (and going forward), System Energy argues the return on equity should be either 10.32% (median) or 10.69% (midpoint).

In May 2019 the FERC trial staff filed its direct and answering testimony in the return on equity proceeding. For the first refund period, the FERC trial staff calculates an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 9.89% based on the application of FERC’s proposed methodology. The FERC trial staff’s direct and answering testimony noted that an authorized return on equity of 9.89% for the first refund period was within the range of presumptively just and reasonable returns on equity for the second refund period, as calculated using a study period ending January 31, 2019 for the second refund period.

In June 2019, System EntergyEnergy filed testimony responding to the testimony filed by the FERC trial staff. Among other things, System Energy’s testimony rebutted arguments raised by the FERC trial staff and provided updated calculations for the second refund period based on the study period ending May 31, 2019. For that refund period, System Energy’s testimony shows that strict application of the return on equity methodology proposed by the FERC staff indicates that the second complaint would not be dismissed, and the new return on equity would be set at 9.65% (median) or 9.74% (midpoint). System Energy’s testimony argues that these results are insufficient in light of benchmarks such as state returns on equity and treasury bond yields, and instead proposes that the calculated returns on equity for the second period should be either 9.91% (median) or 10.3% (midpoint). System Energy’s testimony also argues that, under application of its proposed modified methodology, the 10.10% return on equity calculated for the first refund period would fall within the range of presumptively just and reasonable returns on equity for the second refund period.
92

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


Also in June 2019, the FERC’s Chief ALJ issued an order terminating settlement discussions in the amended complaint addressing System Energy’s capital structure. The ALJ consolidated the amended capital structure complaint with the ongoing return on equity proceeding and set new procedural deadlines for the consolidated hearing.

In August 2019 the LPSC, and the APSC, and the MPSC filed rebuttal testimony in the return on equity proceeding and direct and answering testimony relating to System Energy’s capital structure. The LPSC re-argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.81% for the first refund period and 7.97% for the second refund period. The APSC and the MPSC argue for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.26% for the first refund period and 8.32% for the second refund period. With respect to capital structure, the LPSC proposes that the FERC establish a hypothetical capital structure for System Energy for ratemaking purposes. Specifically, the LPSC proposes that System Energy’s common equity ratio be set to Entergy Corporation’s equity ratio of 37% equity and 63% debt. In the alternative, the LPSC argues that the equity ratio should be no higher than 49%, the composite equity ratio of System Energy and the other Entergy operating companies who purchase under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The APSC and the MPSC recommend that 35.98% be set as the common equity ratio for System Energy. As an alternative, the APSC and the MPSC propose that System Energy’s common equity be set at 46.75% based on the median equity ratio of the proxy group for setting the return on equity.
95

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements





In September 2019 the FERC trial staff filed its rebuttal testimony in the return on equity proceeding. For the first refund period, the FERC trial staff calculates an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 9.40% based on the application of the FERC’s proposed methodology and an updated proxy group. For the second refund period, based on the study period ending May 31, 2019, the FERC trial staff rebuttal testimony argues for a return on equity of 9.63%. In September 2019 the FERC trial staff also filed direct and answering testimony relating to System Energy’s capital structure. The FERC trial staff argues that the average capital structure of the proxy group used to develop System Energy’s return on equity should be used to establish the capital structure. Using this approach, the FERC trial staff calculates the average capital structure for its proposed proxy group of 46.74% common equity, and 53.26% debt.

In October 2019, System Energy filed answering testimony disputing the FERC trial staff’s, the LPSC’s, and the APSC’s and MPSC’s arguments for the use of a hypothetical capital structure and arguing that the use of System Energy’s actual capital structure is just and reasonable.

In November 2019, in a proceeding that did not involve System Energy, the FERC issued an order addressing the methodology for determining the return on equity applicable to transmission owners in MISO. Thereafter, the procedural schedule in the System Energy proceeding was amended to allow the participants to file supplemental testimony addressing the order in the MISO transmission owner proceeding (Opinion No. 569).

In February 2020 the LPSC, the MPSC and APSC, and the FERC trial staff filed supplemental testimony addressing Opinion No. 569 and how it would affect the return on equity evaluation for the two complaint periods concerning System Energy.For the first refund period, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the Opinion No. 569 methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.44%; the MPSC and APSC argue for an authorized return on equity of 8.41%; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 9.22%.For the second refund period and on a prospective basis, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the Opinion No. 569 methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.89%; the MPSC and APSC argue that an authorized return on equity of 8.01% may be appropriate; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 8.66%.

In April 2020, System Energy filed supplemental answering testimony addressing Opinion No. 569.System Energy argues that the Opinion No. 569 methodology is conceptually and analytically defective for purposes of establishing just and reasonable authorized return on equity determinations and proposes an alternative approach.As its primary recommendation, System Energy continues to support the return on equity determinations
93

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



in its March 2019 testimony for the first refund period and its June 2019 testimony for the second refund period.Under the Opinion No. 569 methodology, System Energy calculates a “presumptively just and reasonable range” for the authorized return on equity for the first refund period of 8.57% to 9.52%, and for the second refund period of 8.28% to 9.11%.System Energy argues that these ranges are not just and reasonable results.Under its proposed alternative methodology, System Energy calculates an authorized return on equity of 10.26% for the first refund period, which also falls within the presumptively just and reasonable range calculated for the second refund period and prospectively.

In May 2020 the FERC issued an order on rehearing of Opinion No. 569 (Opinion No. 569-A).In June 2020 the procedural schedule in the System Energy proceeding was further revised in order to allow parties to address the Opinion No. 569-A methodology.Pursuant to the revised schedule, in June 2020, the LPSC, MPSC and APSC, and the FERC trial staff filed supplemental testimony addressing Opinion No. 569-A and how it would affect the return on equity evaluation for the two complaint periods concerning System Energy.For the first refund period, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the Opinion No. 569-A methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.97%; the MPSC and APSC argue for an authorized return on equity of 9.24%; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 9.49%.For the second refund period and on a prospective basis, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the
96

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Opinion No. 569-A methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.78%; the MPSC and APSC argue that an authorized return on equity of 9.15% may be appropriate if the second complaint is not dismissed; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 9.09% if the second complaint is not dismissed.

Pursuant to the revised procedural schedule, in July 2020, System Energy filed supplemental testimony addressing Opinion No. 569-A.System Energy argues that strict application of the Opinion No. 569-A methodology produces results inconsistent with investor requirements and does not provide a sound basis on which to evaluate System Energy’s authorized return on equity.As its primary recommendation, System Energy argues for the use of a methodology that incorporates four separate financial models, including the constant growth form of the discounted cash flow model and the empirical capital asset pricing model.Based on application of its recommended methodology, System Energy argues for an authorized return on equity of 10.12% for the first refund period, which also falls within the presumptively just and reasonable range calculated for the second refund period and prospectively.Under the Opinion No. 569-A methodology, System Energy calculates an authorized return on equity of 9.44% for the first refund period, which also falls within the presumptively just and reasonable range calculated for the second refund period and prospectively.

The parties and FERC trial staff filed final rounds of testimony in August 2020. The hearing before a FERC ALJ occurred in late-September through early-October 2020, post-hearing briefing took place in November and December 2020,2020.

In March 2021 the FERC ALJ issued an initial decision. With regard to System Energy’s authorized return on equity, the ALJ determined that the existing return on equity of 10.94% is no longer just and reasonable, and that the replacement authorized return on equity, based on application of the Opinion No. 569-A methodology, should be 9.32%. The ALJ further determined that System Energy should pay refunds for a fifteen-month refund period (January 2017-April 2018) based on the difference between the current return on equity and the replacement authorized return on equity. The ALJ determined that the April 2018 complaint concerning the authorized return on equity should be dismissed, and that no refunds for a second fifteen-month refund period should be due. With regard to System Energy’s capital structure, the ALJ determined that System Energy’s actual equity ratio is excessive and that the just and reasonable equity ratio is 48.15% equity, based on the average equity ratio of the proxy group used to evaluate the return on equity for the second complaint. The ALJ further determined that System Energy should pay refunds for a fifteen-month refund period (September 2018-December 2019) based on the difference between the actual equity ratio and the 48.15% equity ratio. If the ALJ’s initial decision is due in Mupheld, the estimated refund for this proceeding is approximately $41 million, which includes interest through December 31, 2023, and the estimated resulting annual rate reduction would be approximately $25 million. arch 2021.As a result of the
94

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2022 settlement agreement with the MPSC, both the estimated refund and rate reduction exclude Entergy Mississippi's portion. See “System Energy recordedSettlement with the MPSC” below for discussion of the settlement. The estimated refund will continue to accrue interest until a provisionfinal FERC decision is issued.

The ALJ initial decision is an interim step in the FERC litigation process, and an ALJ’s determinations made in an initial decision are not controlling on the FERC. In April 2021, System Energy filed its brief on exceptions, in which it challenged the initial decision’s findings on both the return on equity and capital structure issues. Also in April 2021 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff filed briefs on exceptions. Reply briefs opposing exceptions were filed in May 2021 by System Energy, the FERC trial staff, the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council. Refunds, if any, that might be required will only become due after the FERC issues its order reviewing the initial decision.

As discussed in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below, beginning with the July 2022 service month, bills issued to Entergy Mississippi under the Unit Power Sales Agreement were adjusted to reflect a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity.

In August 2022 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order addressing appeals of FERC’s Opinion No. 569 and 569-A, which established the methodology applied in the ALJ’s initial decision in the proceeding against revenueSystem Energy discussed above. The appellate order addressed the methodology for determining the potential outcomereturn on equity applicable to transmission owners in MISO. The D.C. Circuit found the FERC’s use of this proceeding.the Risk Premium model as part of the methodology to be arbitrary and capricious, and remanded the case back to the FERC. The remanded case is pending FERC action.

Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue

In May 2018 the LPSC filed a complaint against System Energy and Entergy Services related to System Energy’s renewal of a sale-leaseback transaction originally entered into in December 1988 for an 11.5% undivided interest in Grand Gulf Unit 1. The complaint alleges that System Energy violated the filed rate and the FERC’s ratemaking and accounting requirements when it included in Unit Power Sales Agreement billings the cost of capital additions associated with the sale-leaseback interest, and that System Energy is double-recovering costs by including both the lease payments and the capital additions in Unit Power Sales Agreement billings. The complaint also claims that System Energy was imprudent in entering into the sale-leaseback renewal because the Utility operating companies that purchase Grand Gulf’s output from System Energy could have obtained cheaper capacity and energy in the MISO markets. The complaint further alleges that System Energy violated various other reporting and accounting requirements and should have sought prior FERC approval of the lease renewal. The complaint seeks various forms of relief from the FERC. The complaint seeks refunds for capital addition costs for all years in which they were recorded in allegedly non-formula accounts or, alternatively, the disallowance of the return on equity for the capital additions in those years plus interest. The complaint also asks that the FERC disallow and refund the lease costs of the sale-leaseback renewal on grounds of imprudence, investigate System Energy’s treatment of a DOE litigation payment, and impose certain forward-looking procedural protections, including audit rights for retail regulators of the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rates. The APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council intervened in the proceeding.

In June 2018, System Energy and Entergy Services filed a motion to dismiss and an answer to the LPSC complaint denying that System Energy’s treatment of the sale-leaseback renewal and capital additions violated the terms of the filed rate or any other FERC ratemaking, accounting, or legal requirements or otherwise constituted double recovery. The response also argued that the complaint is inconsistent with a FERC-approved settlement to which the LPSC is a party and that explicitly authorizes System Energy to recover its lease payments. Finally, the response argued that both the capital additions and the sale-leaseback renewal were prudent investments and the LPSC complaint fails to justify any disallowance or refunds. The response also offered to submit formula rate protocols for the Unit Power Sales Agreement similar to the procedures used for reviewing transmission rates under
95

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



the MISO tariff. In September 2018 the FERC issued an order setting the complaint for hearing and settlement proceedings. The FERC established a refund effective date of May 18, 2018.
97

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements





In February 2019 the presiding ALJ ruled that the hearing ordered by the FERC includes the issue of whether specific subcategories of accumulated deferred income tax should be included in, or excluded from, System Energy’s formula rate. In March 2019 the LPSC, the MPSC, the APSC and the City Council filed direct testimony. The LPSC testimony sought refunds that include the renewal lease payments (approximately $17.2 million per year since July 2015), rate base reductions for accumulated deferred income tax associated with uncertain tax positions, and the cost of capital additions associated with the sale-leaseback interest, as well as interest on those amounts.

In June 2019 System Energy filed answering testimony arguing that the FERC should reject all claims for refunds.  Among other things, System Energy argued that claims for refunds of the costs of lease renewal payments and capital additions should be rejected because those costs were recovered consistent with the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rate, System Energy was not over or double recovering any costs, and ratepayers will save costs over the initial and renewal terms of the leases.  System Energy argued that claims for refunds associated with liabilities arising from uncertain tax positions should be rejected because the liabilities do not provide cost-free capital, the repayment timing of the liabilities is uncertain, and the outcome of the underlying tax positions is uncertain.  System Energy’s testimony also challenged the refund calculations supplied by the other parties.

In August 2019 the FERC trial staff filed direct and answering testimony seeking refunds for rate base reductions for liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions. The FERC trial staff also argued that System Energy recovered $32 million more than it should have in depreciation expense for capital additions. In September 2019, System Energy filed cross-answering testimony disputing the FERC trial staff’s arguments for refunds, stating that the FERC trial staff’s position regarding depreciation rates for capital additions is not unreasonable, but explaining that any change in depreciation expense is only one element of a Unit Power Sales Agreement re-billing calculation. Adjustments to depreciation expense in any re-billing under the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rate will also involve changes to accumulated depreciation, accumulated deferred income taxes, and other formula elements as needed. In October 2019 the LPSC filed rebuttal testimony increasing the amount of refunds sought for liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions.  The LPSC seeks approximately $512 million plus interest, which is approximately $191$310 million through December 31, 2020.  The2023.The FERC trial staff also filed rebuttal testimony in which it seeks refunds of a similar amount as the LPSC for the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions.  The LPSC testimony also argued that adjustments to depreciation rates should affect rate base on a prospective basis only.

A hearing was held before a FERC ALJ in November 2019.In April 2020 the ALJ issued anthe initial decision.Among other things, the ALJ determined that refunds were due on three main issues.First, with regard to the lease renewal payments, the ALJ determined that System Energy is recovering an unjust acquisition premium through the lease renewal payments, and that System Energy’s recovery from customers through rates should be limited to the cost of service based on the remaining net book value of the leased assets, which is approximately $70 million.The ALJ found that the remedy for this issue should be the refund of lease payments (approximately $17.2 million per year since July 2015) with interest determined at the FERC quarterly interest rate, which would be offset by the addition of the net book value of the leased assets in the cost of service.The ALJ did not calculate a value for the refund expected as a result of this remedy.In addition, System Energy would no longer recover the lease payments in rates prospectively.prospectively. Second, with regard to the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions, the ALJ determined that the liabilities are accumulated deferred income taxes and that System Energy’s rate base should have been reduced for those liabilities.If the ALJ’s initial decision is upheld, the estimated refund for this issue through December 31, 2020, is approximately $422 million, plus interest, which is approximately $110 million through December 31, 2020.The The ALJ also found that System Energy should include liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions as a raterate base reduction going forward.Third, with regard to the depreciation expense adjustments, the ALJ found that System Energy should correct for the error in re-billings retroactively and prospectively, but that System Energy should not be permitted to recover interest on any retroactive return on enhanced rate base resulting from such corrections.
If the initial decision is affirmed on this issue, System Energy estimates refunds of approximately $19 million, which includes interest through December 31, 2020.
9896

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


The ALJ initial decision is an interim step in the FERC litigation process, and an ALJ’s determinations made in an initial decision are not controlling on the FERC.The ALJ in the initial decision acknowledges that these are issues of first impression before the FERC.In June 2020, System Energy, the LPSC, and the FERC trial staff filed briefs on exceptions, challenging several of the initial decision’s findings.System Energy’s brief on exceptions challenged the initial decision’s limitations on recovery of the lease renewal payments, its proposed rate base refund for the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions, and its proposal to asymmetrically treat interest on bill corrections for depreciation expense adjustments.The LPSC’s and the FERC trial staff’s briefs on exceptions each challenged the initial decision’s allowance for recovery of the cost of service associated with the lease renewal based on the remaining net book value of the leased assets, its calculation of the remaining net book value of the leased assets, and the amount of the initial decision’s proposed rate base refund for the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions.The LPSC’s brief on exceptions also challenged the initial decision’s proposal that depreciation expense adjustments include retroactive adjustments to rate base and its finding that section 203 of the Federal Power Act did not apply to the lease renewal.The FERC trial staff’s brief on exceptions also challenged the initial decision’s finding that the FERC need not institute a formal investigation into System Energy’s tariff.In October 2020, System Energy, the LPSC, the MPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed briefs opposing exceptions. System Energy opposed the exceptions filed by the LPSC and the FERC trial staff. The LPSC, the MPSC, the APSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff opposed the exceptions filed by System Energy. Also in October 2020 the MPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed briefs adopting the exceptions of the LPSC and the FERC trial staff. The case is pending before the FERC, which will review the case and issue an order on the proceeding, and the FERC may accept, reject, or modify the ALJ’s initial decision in whole or in part.Refunds, if any, that might be required will only become due after the FERC issues its order reviewing the initial decision.

In addition, in September 2020, the IRS issued a Notice of Proposed Adjustment (NOPA) and Entergy executed it.The NOPA memorializes the IRS’s decision to adjust the 2015 consolidated federal income tax return of Entergy Corporation and certain of its subsidiaries, including System Energy, with regard to the uncertain decommissioning tax position.Pursuant to the audit resolution documented in the NOPA, the IRS allowed System Energy’s inclusion of $102 million of future nuclear decommissioning costs in System Energy’s cost of goods sold for the 2015 tax year, roughly 10% of the requested deduction, but disallowed the balance of the position. In September 2020, System Energy filed a motion to lodge the NOPA into the record in the FERC proceeding. In October 2020 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff filed oppositions to System Energy’s motion. As a result of the NOPA issued by the IRS in September 2020, System Energy filed, in October 2020, a new Federal Power Act section 205 filing at FERC to establish an ongoing rate base credit for the accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the decommissioning uncertain tax position. On a prospective basis beginning with the October 2020 bill, System Energy proposes to include the accumulated deferred income taxes arising from the successful portion of the decommissioning uncertain tax position as a credit to rate base under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. In November 2020 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council filed a protest to the filing, and System Energy responded.

In November 2020 the IRS issued a Revenue Agent’s Report (RAR) for the 2014/2015 tax year and in December 2020 Entergy executed it. The RAR contained the same adjustment to the uncertain nuclear decommissioning tax position as that which the IRS had announced in the NOPA. In December 2020, System Energy filed a motion to lodge the RAR into the record in the FERC proceeding addressing the uncertain tax position rate base issue. In January 2021 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council filed a protest to the motion.

As a result of the RAR, in December 2020, System Energy filed amendments to its new Federal Power Act section 205 filings to establish an ongoing rate base credit for the accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the decommissioning uncertain tax position and to credit excess accumulated deferred income taxes arising from the successful portion of the decommissioning uncertain tax position. The amendments both propose the inclusion of the RAR as support for the filings. In December 2020 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed a protest in response to the amendments, reiterating their prior objections to the filings. In February 2021 the FERC issued an
99

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




order accepting System Energy’s Federal Power Act section 205 filings subject to refund, setting them for hearing, and holding the hearing in abeyance.

In December 2020, System Energy filed a new Federal Power Act section 205 filing to provide a one-time, historical credit of $25.2 million for the accumulated deferred income taxes that would have been created by the decommissioning uncertain tax position if the IRS’s decision had been known in 2016. In January 2021 the LPSC,
97

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



APSC, MPSC, and City Council filed a protest to the filing.In February 2021 the FERC issued an order accepting System Energy’s Federal Power Act section 205 filing subject to refund, setting it for hearing, and holding the hearing in abeyance. The one-time credit was made during the first quarter 2021.

In December 2022 the FERC issued an order on the ALJ’s initial decision, which affirmed it in part and modified it in part. The FERC’s order directed System Energy to calculate refunds on three issues, and to provide a compliance report detailing the calculations. The FERC’s order also disallows the future recovery of sale-leaseback renewal costs, which is estimated at approximately $11.5 million annually for purchases from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans through July 2036. The three refund issues are rental expenses related to the renewal of the sale-leaseback arrangements; refunds, if any, for the revenue requirement impact of including accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the decommissioning uncertain tax positions from 2004 through the present; and refunds for the net effect of correcting the depreciation inputs for capital additions attributable to the portion of plant subject to the sale-leaseback.

As a result of the FERC order’s directives regarding the recovery of the sale-leaseback transaction, in December 2022 System Energy reduced the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback regulatory liability by $56 million, reduced the related accumulated deferred income tax asset by $94 million, and reduced the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback accumulated deferred income tax regulatory liability by $25 million, resulting in an increase in income tax expense of $13 million. In addition, the FERC determined that System Energy recognized excess depreciation expense related to property subject to the sale-leaseback. As a result, in December 2022, System Energy recorded a reduction in depreciation expense and the related accumulated depreciation of $33 million.

In January 2023, System Energy filed its compliance report with the FERC. With respect to the sale-leaseback renewal costs, System Energy calculated a refund of $89.8 million, which represented all of the sale-leaseback renewal rental costs that System Energy recovered in rates, with interest. With respect to the decommissioning uncertain tax position issue, System Energy calculated that no additional refunds are owed because it had already provided a one-time historical credit (for the period January 2016 through September 2020) of $25.2 million based on the accumulated deferred income taxes that resulted from the IRS’s partial acceptance of the decommissioning tax position, and because it has been providing an ongoing rate base credit for the accumulated deferred income taxes that resulted from the IRS’s partial acceptance of the decommissioning tax position since October 2020. With respect to the depreciation refund, System Energy calculated a refund of $13.7 million, which is the net total of a refund to customers for excess depreciation expense previously collected, plus interest, offset by the additional return on rate base that System Energy previously did not collect, without interest. See “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below for discussion of the regulatory charge and corresponding regulatory liability recorded in June 2022 related to these proceedings. The $103.5 million in total refunds calculated in the compliance filing were reclassified from long-term other regulatory liabilities to a current regulatory liability as of December 31, 2022. In January 2023, System Energy paid the refunds of $103.5 million, which included refunds of $41.7 million to Entergy Arkansas, $27.8 million to Entergy Louisiana, and $34 million to Entergy New Orleans.

In February 2023 the LPSC, Authorizationthe APSC, and the City Council filed protests to System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report, in which they challenged System Energy’s calculation of the refunds associated with the decommissioning tax position but did not protest the other components of the compliance report. Each of them argued that System Energy should have paid additional refunds for the decommissioning tax position issue, and the City Council estimated the total additional refunds owed to customers of Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Arkansas for that issue as $493 million, including interest (and without factoring in the $25.2 million refund that System Energy already paid in 2021).

In January 2023, System Energy filed a request for rehearing of the FERC’s determinations in the December 2022 order on sale-leaseback refund issues and future lease cost disallowances, the FERC’s prospective policy on uncertain tax positions, and the proper accounting of System Energy’s accumulated deferred income taxes adjustment for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017; and a motion for confirmation of its interpretation of the
98

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

December 2022 order’s remedy concerning the decommissioning tax position. In January 2023 the retail regulators filed a motion for confirmation of their interpretation of the refund requirement in the December 2022 FERC order and a provisional request for rehearing. In February 2023 the FERC issued a notice that the rehearing requests have been deemed denied by operation of law. The deemed denial of the rehearing request initiates a sixty-day period in which aggrieved parties may petition for federal appellate court review of the underlying FERC orders; however, the FERC may issue a substantive order on rehearing as long as it continues to have jurisdiction over the case. In March 2023, System Energy filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit a petition for review of the December 2022 order. In March 2023, System Energy also filed an unopposed motion to stay the proceeding in the Fifth Circuit pending the FERC’s disposition of the pending motions, and the court granted the motion to stay.

In February 2023, System Energy submitted a tariff compliance filing with the FERC to clarify that, consistent with the releases provided in the MPSC settlement, Entergy Mississippi will continue to be charged for its allocation of the sale-leaseback renewal costs under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below for discussion of the settlement. In March 2023 the MPSC filed a protest to System Energy’s tariff compliance filing. The MPSC argues that the settlement did not specifically address post-settlement sale-leaseback renewal costs and that the sale-leaseback renewal costs may not be recovered under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. Entergy Mississippi’s allocated sale-leaseback renewal costs are estimated at $5.7 million annually for the remaining term of the sale-leaseback renewal.

In August 2023 the FERC issued an order addressing arguments raised on rehearing and partially setting aside the prior order (rehearing order). The rehearing order addresses rehearing requests that were filed in January 2023 separately by System Energy and the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council.

In the rehearing order, the FERC directs System Energy to recalculate refunds for two issues: (1) refunds of rental expenses related to the renewal of the sale-leaseback arrangements and (2) refunds for the net effect of correcting the depreciation inputs for capital additions associated with the sale-leaseback. With regard to the sale-leaseback renewal rental expenses, the rehearing order allows System Energy to recover an implied return of and on the depreciated cost of the portion of the plant subject to the sale-leaseback as of the expiration of the initial lease term. With regard to the depreciation input issue, the rehearing order allows System Energy to offset refunds so that System Energy may collect interest on the rate base recalculations that were part of the overall depreciation rate recalculations. The rehearing order further directs System Energy to submit within 60 days of the date of the rehearing order an additional compliance filing to revise the total refunds for these two issues. As discussed above, System Energy’s January 2023 compliance filing calculated $103.5 million in total refunds, and the refunds were paid in January 2023. In October 2023, System Energy filed its compliance report with the FERC as directed in the August 2023 rehearing order. The October 2023 compliance report reflected recalculated refunds totaling $35.7 million for the two issues resulting in $67.8 million in refunds that could be recouped by System Energy. As discussed below in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC,” System Energy reached a settlement in principle with the APSC to resolve several pending cases under the FERC’s jurisdiction, including this one, pursuant to which it has agreed not to recoup the $27.3 million calculated for Entergy Arkansas in the compliance filing. As a result of the FERC’s rulings on the sale-leaseback and depreciation input issues in the August 2023 rehearing order, in third quarter 2023, System Energy recorded a regulatory asset and corresponding regulatory credit of $40 million to reflect the portion of the January 2023 refunds to be recouped from Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans. Consistent with the compliance filing, in October 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans paid recoupment amounts of $18.2 million and $22.3 million, respectively, to System Energy.

On the third refund issue identified in the rehearing requests, concerning the decommissioning uncertain tax positions, the rehearing order denied all rehearing requests, re-affirmed the remedy contained in the December 2022 order, and did not direct System Energy to recalculate refunds or to submit an additional compliance filing. On this issue, as reflected in its January 2023 compliance filing, System Energy believes it has already paid the refunds due under the remedy that the FERC outlined for the uncertain tax positions issue in its December 2022 order. In August 2023 the LPSC issued a media release in which it stated that it disagrees with System Energy’s determination that the rehearing order requires no further refunds to be made on this issue.
99

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




In September 2023, System Energy filed a protective appeal of the rehearing order with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The appeal was consolidated with System Energy’s prior appeal of the December 2022 order.

In September 2023 the LPSC filed with the FERC a request for rehearing and clarification of the rehearing order. The LPSC requests that the FERC reverse its determination in the rehearing order that System Energy may collect an implied return of and on the depreciated cost of the portion of the plant subject to the sale-leaseback, as of the expiration of the initial lease term, as well as its determination in the rehearing order that System Energy may offset the refunds for the depreciation rate input issue and collect interest on the rate base recalculations that were part of the overall depreciation rate recalculations. In addition, the LPSC requests that the FERC either confirm the LPSC’s interpretation of the refund associated with the decommissioning uncertain tax positions or explain why it is not doing so. In October 2023 the FERC issued a notice that the rehearing request has been deemed denied by operation of law. In November 2023 the FERC issued a further notice stating that it would not issue any further order addressing the rehearing request. Also in November 2023 the LPSC filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit a petition for review of the FERC’s August 2023 rehearing order and denials of the September 2023 rehearing request.

In December 2023 the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit lifted the abeyance on the consolidated System Energy appeals and it also consolidated the LPSC’s appeal with the System Energy appeals. In February 2024 the parties filed a proposed briefing schedule under which briefing will occur from March 2024 through July 2024.

LPSC Additional Complaints

In May 2020 the LPSC authorized its staff to file additional complaints at the FERC related to the rates charged by System Energy for Grand Gulf energy and capacity supplied to Entergy Louisiana under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The LPSC directive notesnoted that the initial decision issued by the presiding ALJ in the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback complaint proceeding did not address, for procedural reasons, certain rate issues raised by the LPSC and declined to order further investigation of rates charged by System Energy. The LPSC directive authorizesauthorized its staff to file complaints at the FERC “necessary to address these rate issues, to request a full investigation into the rates charged by System Energy for Grand Gulf power, and to seek rate refund, rate reduction, and such other remedies as may be necessary and appropriate to protect Louisiana ratepayers.” The LPSC directive further stated that the LPSC has seen “information suggesting that the Grand Gulf plant has been significantly underperforming compared to other nuclear plants in the United States, has had several extended and unexplained outages, and has been plagued with serious safety concerns.” The LPSC expressed concern that the costs paid by Entergy Louisiana's retail customers may have been detrimentally impacted, and authorized “the filing of a FERC complaint to address these performance issues and to seek appropriate refund, rate reduction, and other remedies as may be appropriate.”

Unit Power Sales Agreement Complaint

The first of the additional complaints was filed at the FERC by the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council in September 2020. The newfirst complaint raises two sets of rate allegations: violations of the filed rate and a corresponding request for refunds for prior periods; and elements of the Unit Power Sales Agreement are unjust and unreasonable and a corresponding request for refunds for the 15-month refund period and changes to the Unit Power Sales Agreement prospectively. Several of the filed rate allegations overlap with the previous complaints. The filed rate allegations not previously raised are that System Energy: failed to provide a rate base credit to customers for the “time value” of sale-leaseback lease payments collected from customers in advance of the time those payments were due to the owner-lessors; improperly included certain lease refinancingsale-leaseback transaction costs in rate base as prepayments; improperly included nuclear decommissioningrefueling outage costs in rate base; failed to includewrongly included categories of accumulated deferred income taxes as a reductionincreases to rate base; charged customers based on a higher equity ratio than would be
100

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

appropriate due to excessive retained earnings; and did not correctly reflect money pool investments and imprudently invested cash into the money pool. The elements of the Unit Power Sales Agreement that the complaint alleges are unjust and unreasonable include: the current cash working capital allowance of zero, uncapped recovery of incentive and executive compensation, lack of an equity re-opener, and recovery of lobbying and private airplane travel.travel expenses. The new complaint also requests a rate investigation into the Unit Power Sales Agreement and System Energy’s billing practices pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act, including any issue relevant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement and its inputs. System Energy filed its answer opposing the new complaint in November 2020. In its answer, System Energy argued that all of the claims raised in the complaint should be dismissed and agreed that bill adjustment with respect to two discrete issues were justified.System Energy argued that dismissal is warranted because all claims fall into one or more of the following categories: the claims have been raised and are being litigated in another proceeding; the claims do not present a prima facie case and do not satisfy the threshold burden to establish a complaint proceeding; the claims are premised on a theory or request relief that is incompatible with federal law or FERC policy; the claims request relief that is inconsistent with the filed rate; the claims are barred or waived by the legal doctrine of laches; and/or the claims have been fully addressed and do not warrant further litigation. In December 2020, System Energy filed a bill adjustment report indicating that $3.4 million had been credited to customers in connection with the two discrete issues concerning the inclusion of certain accumulated deferred income taxes balances in rates.In January 2021 the
100

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

complainants filed a response to System Energy’s November 2020 answer, and in February 2021, System Energy filed a response to the complainant’s response.

In May 2021 the FERC issued an order addressing the complaint, establishing a refund effective date of September 21, 2020, establishing hearing procedures, and holding those procedures in abeyance pending the FERC’s review of the initial decision in the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint discussed above. System Energy agreed that the hearing should be held in abeyance but sought rehearing of FERC’s decision as related to matters set for hearing that were beyond the scope of FERC’s jurisdiction or authority. The complainants sought rehearing of FERC’s decision to hold the hearing in abeyance and filed a motion to proceed, which motion System Energy subsequently opposed. In June 2021, System Energy’s request for rehearing was denied by operation of law, and System Energy filed an appeal of FERC’s orders in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The appeal was initially stayed for a period of 90 days, but the stay expired. In November 2021 the Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal as premature.

In August 2021 the FERC issued an order addressing System Energy’s and the complainants’ rehearing requests. The FERC dismissed part of the complaint seeking an equity re-opener, maintained the abeyance for issues related to the proceeding addressing the sale-leaseback renewal and uncertain tax positions, lifted the abeyance for issues unrelated to that proceeding, and clarified the scope of the hearing.

In November 2021 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed direct testimony and requested the FERC to order refunds for prior periods and prospective amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The LPSC’s refund claims include, among other things, allegations that: (1) System Energy should not have included certain sale-leaseback transaction costs in prepayments; (2) System Energy should have credited rate base to reflect the time value of money associated with the advance collection of lease payments; (3) System Energy incorrectly included refueling outage costs that were recorded in account 174 in rate base; and (4) System Energy should have excluded several accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 from rate base. The LPSC is also seeking a retroactive adjustment to retained earnings and capital structure in conjunction with the implementation of its proposed refunds. In addition, the LPSC seeks amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement going forward to address below-the-line costs, incentive compensation, the working capital allowance, litigation expenses, and the 2019 termination of the capital funds agreement. The APSC argues that: (1) System Energy should have included borrowings from the Entergy system money pool in its determination of short-term debt in its cost of capital; and (2) System Energy should credit customers with System Energy’s allocation of earnings on money pool investments. The City Council alleges that System Energy has maintained excess cash on hand in the money pool and that retention of excess cash was imprudent. Based on this allegation, the City Council’s witness recommends a refund of approximately $98.8 million for the period 2004-September 2021 or other alternative relief. The City Council
101

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



further recommends that the FERC impose a hypothetical equity ratio such as 48.15% equity to capital on a prospective basis.

In January 2022, System Energy filed answering testimony arguing that the FERC should not order refunds for prior periods or any prospective amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. In response to the LPSC’s refund claims, System Energy argues, among other things, that: (1) the inclusion of sale-leaseback transaction costs in prepayments was correct; (2) that the filed rate doctrine bars the request for a retroactive credit to rate base for the time value of money associated with the advance collection of lease payments; (3) that an accounting misclassification for deferred refueling outage costs has been corrected, caused no harm to customers, and requires no refunds; and (4) that its accounting and ratemaking treatment of specified accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 has been correct. System Energy further responds that no retroactive adjustment to retained earnings or capital structure should be ordered because there is no general policy requiring such a remedy, and there was no showing that the retained earnings element of the capital structure was incorrectly implemented. Further, System Energy presented evidence that all of the costs that are being challenged were long known to the retail regulators and were approved by them for inclusion in retail rates, and the attempt to retroactively challenge these costs, some of which have been included in rates for decades, is unjust and unreasonable. In response to the LPSC’s proposed going-forward adjustments, System Energy presents evidence to show that none of the proposed adjustments are needed. On the issue of below-the-line expenses, during discovery procedures System Energy identified a historical allocation error in certain months and agreed to provide a bill credit to customers to correct the error. In response to the APSC’s claims, System Energy argues that the Unit Power Sales Agreement does not include System Energy’s borrowings from the Entergy system money pool or earnings on deposits to the Entergy system money pool in the determination of the cost of capital; and accordingly, no refunds are appropriate on those issues. In response to the City Council’s claims, System Energy argues that it has reasonably managed its cash and that the City Council’s theory of cash management is defective because it fails to adequately consider the relevant cash needs of System Energy and it makes faulty presumptions about the operation of the Entergy system money pool. System Energy further points out that the issue of its capital structure is already subject to pending FERC litigation.

In March 2022 the FERC trial staff filed direct and answering testimony in response to the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council’s direct testimony. In its testimony, the FERC trial staff recommends refunds for two primary reasons: (1) it concluded that System Energy should have excluded specified accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 associated with rate refunds; and (2) it concluded that System Energy should have excluded specified accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 associated with a deemed contract satisfaction and reissuance that occurred in 2005. The FERC trial staff recommends refunds of $84.1 million, exclusive of any tax gross-up or FERC interest. In addition, the FERC trial staff recommends the following prospective modifications to the Unit Power Sales Agreement: (1) inclusion of a rate base credit to recognize the time value of money associated with the advance collection of lease payments; (2) exclusion of executive incentive compensation costs for members of the Office of the Chief Executive and long-term performance unit costs where awards are based solely or primarily on financial metrics; and (3) exclusion of unvested, accrued amounts for stock options, performance units, and restricted stock awards. With respect to issues that ultimately concern the reasonableness of System Energy’s rate of return, the FERC trial staff states that it is unnecessary to consider such issues in this proceeding, in light of the pending case concerning System Energy’s return on equity and capital structure. On all other material issues raised by the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council, the FERC trial staff recommends either no refunds or no modification to the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

In April 2022, System Energy filed cross-answering testimony in response to the FERC trial staff’s recommendations of refunds for the accumulated deferred income taxes issues and proposed modifications to the Unit Power Sales Agreement for the executive incentive compensation issues. In June 2022 the FERC trial staff submitted revised answering testimony, in which it recommended additional refunds associated with the accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 associated with a deemed contract satisfaction and reissuance that occurred in 2005. Based on the testimony revisions, the FERC trial staff’s recommended refunds total $106.6 million, exclusive of any tax gross-up or FERC awarded interest. Also in June 2022, System Energy
102

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

filed revised and supplemental cross-answering testimony to respond to the FERC trial staff’s testimony and oppose its revised recommendation.

In May 2022 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed rebuttal testimony. The LPSC’s testimony asserts new claims, including that: (1) certain of the sale-leaseback transaction costs may have been imprudently incurred; (2) accumulated deferred income taxes associated with sale-leaseback transaction costs should have been included in rate base; (3) accumulated deferred income taxes associated with federal investment tax credits should have been excluded from rate base; (4) monthly net operating loss accumulated deferred income taxes should have been excluded from rate base; and (5) several categories of proposed rate changes, including executive incentive compensation, air travel, industry dues, and legal costs, also warrant historical refunds. The LPSC’s rebuttal testimony argues that refunds for the alleged tariff violations and other claims must be calculated by rerunning the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rate; however, it includes estimates of refunds associated with some, but not all, of its claims, totaling $286 million without interest. The City Council’s rebuttal testimony also proposes a new, alternate theory and claim for relief regarding System Energy’s participation in the Entergy system money pool, under which it calculates estimated refunds of approximately $51.7 million. The APSC’s rebuttal testimony agrees with the LPSC’s direct testimony that retained earnings should be adjusted in a comprehensive refund calculation. The testimony quantifies the estimated impacts of three issues: (1) a $1.5 million reduction in the revenue requirement under the Unit Power Sales Agreement if System Energy’s borrowings from the money pool are included in short-term debt; (2) a $1.9 million reduction in the revenue requirement if System Energy’s allocated share of money pool earnings are credited through the Unit Power Sales Agreement; and (3) a $1.9 million reduction in the revenue requirement for every $50 million of refunds ordered in a given year, without interest. In total, excluding the settled issues noted below, the claims seek more than $700 million in refunds and interest, based on charges to all Unit Power Sales Agreement purchasers including Entergy Mississippi.

In June 2022 a new procedural schedule was adopted, providing for additional rounds of testimony and for the hearing to begin in September 2022. The hearing concluded in December 2022.

In November 2022, System Energy filed a partial settlement agreement with the APSC, the City Council, and the LPSC that resolved the following issues raised in the Unit Power Sales Agreement complaint: advance collection of lease payments, aircraft costs, executive incentive compensation, money pool borrowings, advertising expenses, deferred nuclear refueling outage costs, industry association dues, and termination of the capital funds agreement. The settlement provided that System Energy would provide a black-box refund of $18 million (inclusive of interest), plus additional refund amounts with interest to be calculated for certain issues to be distributed to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans as the Utility operating companies other than Entergy Mississippi purchasing under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The settlement further provided that if the APSC, the City Council, or the LPSC agrees to the global settlement System Energy entered into with the MPSC (discussed below), and such global settlement includes a black-box refund amount, then the black-box refund for this settlement agreement shall not be incremental or in addition to the global black-box refund amount. The settlement agreement addressed other matters as well, including adjustments to rate base beginning in October 2022, exclusion of certain other costs, and inclusion of money pool borrowings, if any, in short-term debt within the cost of capital calculation used in the Unit Power Sales Agreement. In April 2023 the FERC approved the settlement agreement. The refund provided for in the settlement agreement was included in the May 2023 service month bills under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

In May 2023 the presiding ALJ issued an initial decision finding that System Energy should have excluded multiple identified categories of accumulated deferred income taxes from rate base when calculating Unit Power Sales Agreement bills. Based on this finding, the initial decision recommended refunds; System Energy estimates that those refunds for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans would total approximately $116 million plus $152 million of interest through December 31, 2023. The initial decision also finds that the Unit Power Sales Agreement should be modified such that a cash working capital allowance of negative $36.4 million is applied prospectively. If the FERC ultimately orders these modifications to cash working capital be implemented, the estimated annual revenue requirement impact is expected to be immaterial. On the other non-settled issues for
103

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



which the complainants sought refunds or changes to the Unit Power Sales Agreement, the initial decision ruled against the complainants.

The operational prudence-relatedinitial decision is an interim step in the FERC litigation process, and an ALJ’s determination made in an initial decision is not controlling on the FERC. System Energy disagrees with the ALJ’s findings concerning the accumulated deferred income taxes issues and cash working capital. In July 2023, System Energy filed a brief on exceptions to the initial decision’s accumulated deferred income taxes findings. Also in July 2023, the APSC, the LPSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff filed separate briefs on exceptions. The APSC’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations on the money pool interest and retained earnings issues. The LPSC’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations regarding the sale-leaseback transaction costs, legal fees, and retained earnings issues. The City Council’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations on the money pool and cash management issues. The FERC trial staff’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations on the cash working capital issue as well as certain of the accumulated deferred income taxes issues. In August 2023 all parties filed separate briefs opposing exceptions. System Energy filed a brief opposing the exceptions of the APSC, the LPSC, and the City Council. The APSC, the LPSC, and the City Council filed separate briefs opposing the exceptions raised by System Energy and the FERC trial staff. The FERC trial staff filed its own brief opposing certain exceptions raised by System Energy, the APSC, the LPSC, and the City Council. The case is now pending a decision by the FERC. Refunds, if any, that might be required will become due only after the FERC issues its order reviewing the initial decision.

Grand Gulf Prudence Complaint

The second of the additional complaints was filed at the FERC in March 2021 by the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council against System Energy, Entergy Services, Entergy Operations, and Entergy Corporation. The second complaint contains two primary allegations. First, it alleges that, based on the plant’s capacity factor and alleged safety performance, System Energy and the other respondents imprudently operated Grand Gulf during the period 2016-2020, and it seeks refunds of at least $360 million in alleged replacement energy costs, in addition to other costs, including those that can only be identified upon further investigation. Second, it alleges that the performance and/or management of the 2012 extended power uprate of Grand Gulf was imprudent, and it seeks refunds of all costs of the 2012 uprate that are determined to result from imprudent planning or management of the project. In addition to the requested refunds, the complaint asks that the FERC modify the Unit Power Sales Agreement to provide for full cost recovery only if certain performance indicators are met and to require pre-authorization of capital improvement projects in excess of $125 million before related costs may be passed through to customers in rates. In April 2021, System Energy and the other respondents filed their motion to dismiss and answer to the complaint. System Energy requested that the FERC dismiss the claims within the complaint. With respect to the claim concerning operations, System Energy argues that the complaint does not meet its legal burden because, among other reasons, it fails to allege any specific imprudent conduct. With respect to the claim concerning the uprate, System Energy argues that the complaint fails because, among other reasons, the complainants’ own conduct prevents them from raising a serious doubt as to the prudence of the uprate. System Energy also requests that the FERC dismiss other elements of the complaint, including the proposed modifications to the Unit Power Sales Agreement, because they are not warranted. Additional responsive pleadings were filed by the complainants and System Energy during the period from March through July 2021. In November 2022 the FERC issued an order setting the complaint for settlement and hearing procedures. In February 2023 the FERC issued an order denying rehearing and thereby affirming its order setting the complaint for settlement and hearing procedures. In July 2023 the FERC chief ALJ terminated settlement procedures and appointed a presiding ALJ to oversee hearing procedures. In September 2023 a procedural schedule for hearing procedures was established. Pursuant to that schedule, the complainant’s testimony was filed in December 2023. System Energy’s answering testimony is due April 2024, and additional rounds of testimony are due through October 2024. The hearing is scheduled to begin in January 2025, with the presiding ALJ’s initial decision due in July 2025.

In September 2023 the LPSC authorized its staff to file an additional complaint concerning the prudence of System Energy’s operation and management of Grand Gulf in the year 2022. In October 2023 the LPSC, the
104

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

APSC, and the City Council filed what they styled as an amended and supplemental complaint with the FERC against System Energy, Entergy Services, and Entergy Operations. As discussed below in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC”, the APSC has settled all of its claims related to this proceeding. The amended complaint states that it is being filed for three primary purposes: (1) to include System Energy’s performance in 2021-2022 in the scope of the hearing; (2) to explicitly allege that System Energy’s inadequate performance, excessive costs, unplanned outages, and costs attributable to safety violations violate the contractual obligation to maintain and operate the plant in accordance with “good utility practice”; and (3) to provide and substantiate allegations concerning the damages attributable to the alleged breach of contractual obligations. The amended complaint alleges that potentially more than $1 billion in damages may be due. In November 2023, System Energy and the other Entergy respondents filed an answer and motion to dismiss the amended and supplemental complaint.

System Energy Settlement with the MPSC

In June 2022, System Energy, Entergy Mississippi, and additional named Entergy parties involved in thirteen docketed proceedings before the FERC filed with the FERC a partial settlement agreement and offer of settlement. The settlement memorializes the Entergy parties’ agreement with the MPSC to globally resolve all actual and potential claims between the Entergy parties and the MPSC associated with those FERC proceedings and with System Energy’s past implementation of the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is a FERC-jurisdictional formula rate tariff for sales of energy and capacity from System Energy’s owned and leased share of Grand Gulf to Entergy Mississippi, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans. Entergy Mississippi purchases the greatest single amount, nearly 40% of System Energy’s share of Grand Gulf, after its additional purchases from affiliates are considered. The settlement therefore limits System Energy’s overall refund exposure associated with the identified proceedings because they will be resolved completely as between the Entergy parties and the MPSC.

The settlement provided for a black-box refund of $235 million from System Energy to Entergy Mississippi, which was to be paid within 120 days of the settlement’s effective date (either the date of the FERC approval of the settlement without material modification, or the date that all settling parties agree to accept modifications or otherwise modify the settlement in response to a proposed material modification by the FERC). In addition, beginning with the July 2022 service month, the settlement provided for Entergy Mississippi’s bills from System Energy to be adjusted to reflect: an authorized rate of return on equity of 9.65%, a capital structure not been filedto exceed 52% equity, a rate base reduction for the advance collection of sale-leaseback rental costs, and the exclusion of certain long-term incentive plan performance unit costs from rates. The settlement was approved by the MPSC in June 2022 and the FERC in November 2022.

System Energy previously recorded a provision and associated liability of $37 million for elements of the applicable litigation. In June 2022, System Energy recorded a regulatory charge of $551 million ($413 million net-of-tax), increasing the regulatory liability to $588 million, which consisted of $235 million for the settlement with the MPSC and $353 million for potential future refunds to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans. System Energy paid the black-box refund of $235 million to Entergy Mississippi in November 2022. See “System Energy Regulatory Liability for Pending Complaints” below for discussion of the regulatory liability related to complaints against System Energy as of this date,December 31, 2023.

System Energy Settlement with the APSC

In October 2023, System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, and additional named Entergy parties involved in multiple docketed proceedings pending before the FERC reached a settlement in principle with the APSC to globally resolve all of their actual and potential claims in those dockets and with System Energy’s past implementation of the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The settlement also covers the amended and supplemental complaint, discussed above in “Grand Gulf Prudence Complaint,” filed at the FERC in October 2023. System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, additional Entergy parties, and the APSC filed the settlement agreement and supporting materials with the FERC in November 2023. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is a FERC-jurisdictional formula
105

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



rate tariff for sales of energy and capacity from System Energy’s owned and leased share of Grand Gulf to Entergy Mississippi, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans. As discussed above in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC,” System Energy previously settled with the MPSC with respect to these complaints before the FERC. Entergy Mississippi has nearly 40% of System Energy’s share of Grand Gulf’s output, after its additional purchases from affiliates are considered. The settlements with both the APSC and the MPSC represent almost 65% of System Energy’s share of the output of Grand Gulf.

The terms of the settlement with the APSC align with the $588 million global black box settlement reached between System Energy and the MPSC in June 2022 and provide for Entergy Arkansas to receive a black box refund of $142 million from System Energy, inclusive of $49.5 million already received by Entergy Arkansas from System Energy. In November 2022 the FERC approved the System Energy settlement with the MPSC and stated that the settlement “appears to be fair and reasonable and in the public interest.”

In addition to the black box refund of $142 million described above, beginning with the November 2023 service month, the settlement provides for Entergy Arkansas’s bills from System Energy to be adjusted to reflect an authorized rate of return on equity of 9.65% and a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity.

In December 2023 the FERC trial staff and the LPSC directive did not set a date forfiled comments. The FERC trial staff commented that it “believes that the filing.settlement is fair, and in the public interest,” and neither it nor the LPSC oppose the settlement. In December 2023 the $93 million black box refund to Entergy Arkansas was reclassified from long-term other regulatory liabilities to accounts payable - associated companies on System Energy’s balance sheet. If the FERC approves the filed settlement in accordance with its terms, it will become binding upon the Entergy parties and the APSC.

System Energy Regulatory Liability for Pending Complaints

Prior to June 2022, System Energy recorded a provision and associated liability of $37 million for elements of the complaints against System Energy. In June 2022, as discussed in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” above, System Energy recorded a regulatory charge of $551 million ($413 million net-of-tax), increasing System Energy’s regulatory liability to $588 million, which consisted of $235 million for the settlement with the MPSC and $353 million for potential future refunds to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Louisiana. The $142 million of refunds for Entergy Arkansas, discussed above in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC” is covered within the $353 million previously recorded. System Energy paid the black-box refund of $235 million to Entergy Mississippi in November 2022. As discussed above in “Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue,” in January 2023 System Energy paid refunds of $103.5 million as a result of the FERC’s order in December 2022 in that proceeding and recouped $40.5 million of the $103.5 million from Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans in October 2023. In addition, as discussed above in “Unit Power Sales Agreement Complaint,” a black-box refund of $18 million was made by System Energy in 2023 in connection with a partial settlement in that proceeding.

Based on analysis of the pending complaints against System Energy and potential future settlement negotiations with the LPSC and the City Council, in third quarter 2023, System Energy recorded a regulatory charge of $40 million to increase System Energy’s regulatory liability related to complaints against System Energy. As discussed above, in December 2023 the $93 million black box refund to Entergy Arkansas was reclassified from the regulatory liability to accounts payable - associated companies on System Energy’s balance sheet. System Energy’s remaining regulatory liability related to complaints against System Energy as of December 31, 2023 is $178 million. This regulatory liability is consistent with the settlement agreements reached with the MPSC and the APSC, as described above, taking into account amounts already or expected to be refunded.

106

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Unit Power Sales Agreement

System Energy Formula Rate Annual Protocols Formal Challenge Concerning 2020 Calendar Year Bills

System Energy’s Unit Power Sales Agreement includes formula rate protocols that provide for the disclosure of cost inputs, an opportunity for informal discovery procedures, and a challenge process. In August 2017,February 2022, pursuant to the protocols procedures, the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed with the FERC a formal challenge to System Energy’s implementation of the formula rate during calendar year 2020. The formal challenge alleges: (1) that it was imprudent for System Energy to accept the IRS’s partial acceptance of a previously uncertain tax position; (2) that System Energy should have delayed recording the result of the IRS’s partial acceptance of the previously uncertain tax position until after internal tax allocation payments were made; (3) that the equity ratio charged in rates was excessive; (4) that sale-leaseback rental payments should have been excluded from rates; and (5) that all issues in the ongoing Unit Power Sales Agreement complaint proceeding should also be reflected in calendar year 2020 bills. While System Energy disagrees that any refunds are owed for the 2020 calendar year bills, the formal challenge estimates that the financial impact of the first through fourth allegations is approximately $53 million; it does not provide an estimate of the financial impact of the fifth allegation. However, $17 million of the $53 million is attributable to the sale-leaseback rental payments. These were refunded to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans in January 2023 as a result of the FERC order received in the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint and uncertain tax position rate base issue. Entergy Mississippi’s portion of the refund was included within the settlement with the MPSC, as discussed below.

In March 2022, System Energy filed an answer to the formal challenge in which it requested that the FERC deny the formal challenge as a matter of law, or else hold the proceeding in abeyance pending the resolution of related dockets.

System Energy Formula Rate Annual Protocols Formal Challenge Concerning 2021 Calendar Year Bills

In March 2023, pursuant to the protocols procedures discussed above, the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed with the FERC a formal challenge to System Energy’s implementation of the formula rate during calendar year 2021. The formal challenge alleges: (1) that it was imprudent for System Energy to accept the IRS’s partial acceptance of a previously uncertain tax position; (2) that System Energy used incorrect inputs for retained earnings that are used to determine the capital structure; (3) that the equity ratio charged in rates was excessive; and (4) that all issues in the ongoing Unit Power Sales Agreement complaint proceeding should also be reflected in calendar year 2021 bills. The first, third, and fourth allegations are identical to issues that were raised in the formal challenge to the calendar year 2020 bills. The formal challenge to the calendar year 2021 bills states that the impact of the first allegation is “tens of millions of dollars,” but it does not provide an estimate of the financial impact of the remaining allegations.

In May 2023, System Energy filed an answer to the formal challenge in which it requested that the FERC deny the formal challenge as a matter of law, or else hold the proceeding in abeyance pending the resolution of related dockets.

Depreciation Amendment Proceeding

In December 2021, System Energy submitted to the FERC proposed amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement pursuant to which System Energy sells its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans. The filing proposes limited amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement to adopt (1) updated rates for use in calculating Grand Gulf plant depreciation and amortization expenses and (2) updated nuclear decommissioning cost annual revenue requirements, both of which are recovered through the Unit Power Sales Agreement rate formula.expenses. The proposed amendments would result in lowerhigher charges to the Utility operating companies that buy capacity and energy from System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The changes were based on updated depreciation and nuclear decommissioning studies that take into account the renewal of Grand Gulf’s operating license for a term through November 1, 2044.

In September 2017February 2022 the FERC accepted System Energy’s proposed Unit Power Sales Agreement amendments, subject to further proceedings to consider the justness and reasonablenessincreased depreciation rates with an effective date of the amendments. Because the amendments proposed a rate decrease, the FERC also initiated an investigation under section 206 of the Federal Power Act to determine if the rate decrease should be lower than proposed. The FERC accepted the proposed amendments effective OctoberMarch 1, 2017,2022, subject to refund pending the outcome of the further settlement and/or hearing proceedings, and established a refund effective date of October 11, 2017 with respect to the rate decrease.procedures. In June 2018,2023 System Energy filed with the FERC an uncontestedunopposed offer of settlement relatingthat it had negotiated with intervenors to the updated depreciation rates and nuclear decommissioning cost annual revenue requirements.proceeding. In August 20182023 the FERC issued an order accepting
107

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



approved the settlement.settlement, which resolves the proceeding. In the third quarter 2018,2023, System Energy recorded a reduction in depreciation expense of approximately $26$41 million representing the cumulative difference in depreciation expense resulting from the depreciation rates used from October 11, 2017March 2022 through September 30, 2018June 2023 and the depreciation rates included in the settlement filing acceptedapproved by the FERC. In October 2023, System Energy filed a refund report with the FERC. The refund provided for in the refund report was included in the September 2023 service month bills under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. No comments or protests to the refund report were filed.

Pension Costs Amendment Proceeding

In October 2021, System Energy submitted to the FERC proposed amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement to include in rate base the prepaid and accrued pension costs associated with System Energy’s qualified pension plans. Based on data ending in 2020, the increased annual revenue requirement associated with the filing is approximately $8.9 million. In March 2022 the FERC accepted System Energy’s proposed amendments with an effective date of December 1, 2021, subject to refund pending the outcome of the settlement and/or hearing procedures. In August 2023 the FERC chief ALJ terminated settlement procedures and designated a presiding ALJ to oversee hearing procedures. In October 2023, System Energy filed direct testimony in support of its proposed amendments. Under the procedural schedule, testimony will be filed through April 2024, and the hearing is scheduled to begin in May 2024. The presiding ALJ’s initial decision is expected to be due in September 2024.

Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators

Entergy Louisiana

Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida

In August 2020 and October 2020, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to portions of Entergy Louisiana’s service area. The storms resulted in widespread outages, significant damage to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the outages. Additionally, as a result of Hurricane Laura’s extensive damage to the grid infrastructure serving the impacted area, large portions of the underlying transmission system required nearly a complete rebuild.

In October 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed an application at the LPSC seeking approval of certain ratemaking adjustments in connection with the issuance of shorter-term mortgage bonds to provide interim financing for restoration costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta. Subsequently, Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff filed a joint motion seeking approval to exclude from the derivation of Entergy Louisiana’s capital structure and cost rate of debt for ratemaking purposes, including the allowance for funds used during construction, shorter-term debt up to $1.1 billion issued by Entergy Louisiana to fund costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta costs on an interim basis. In November 2020 the LPSC issued an order approving the joint motion, and Entergy Louisiana issued $1.1 billion of 0.62% Series mortgage bonds due November 2023. Also in November 2020, Entergy Louisiana withdrew $257 million from its funded storm reserves.

In February 2021 two winter storms (collectively, Winter Storm Uri) brought freezing rain and ice to Louisiana. Ice accumulation sagged or downed trees, limbs, and power lines, causing damage to Entergy Louisiana’s transmission and distribution systems. The additional weight of ice caused trees and limbs to fall into power lines and other electric equipment. When the ice melted, it affected vegetation and electrical equipment, causing additional outages. As discussed above in “Fuel and purchased power cost recovery,” Entergy Louisiana recovered the incremental fuel costs associated with Winter Storm Uri over a five-month period from April 2021 through August 2021.

In April 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC relating to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, and Winter Storm Uri restoration costs and in July 2021, Entergy Louisiana made a
108

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

supplemental filing updating the total restoration costs. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by these storms were estimated to be approximately $2.06 billion, including approximately $1.68 billion in capital costs and approximately $380 million in non-capital costs. Including carrying costs through January 2022, Entergy Louisiana sought an LPSC determination that $2.11 billion was prudently incurred and, therefore, was eligible for recovery from customers. Additionally, Entergy Louisiana requested that the LPSC determine that re-establishment of a storm escrow account to the previously authorized amount of $290 million was appropriate. In July 2021, Entergy Louisiana supplemented the application with a request regarding the financing and recovery of the recoverable storm restoration costs. Specifically, Entergy Louisiana requested approval to securitize its restoration costs pursuant to Louisiana Act 55 financing, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021.

In August 2021, Hurricane Ida caused extensive damage to Entergy Louisiana’s distribution and, to a lesser extent, transmission systems resulting in widespread power outages. In September 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed an application at the LPSC seeking approval of certain ratemaking adjustments in connection with the issuance of approximately $1 billion of shorter-term mortgage bonds to provide interim financing for restoration costs associated with Hurricane Ida, which bonds were issued in October 2021. Also in September 2021, Entergy Louisiana sought approval for the creation and funding of a $1 billion restricted escrow account for Hurricane Ida related restoration costs, subject to a subsequent prudence review.

After filing of testimony by the LPSC staff and intervenors, which generally supported or did not oppose Entergy Louisiana’s requests in regard to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida, the parties negotiated and executed an uncontested stipulated settlement which was filed with the LPSC in February 2022. The settlement agreement contained the following key terms: $2.1 billion of restoration costs from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, and Winter Storm Uri were prudently incurred and eligible for recovery; carrying costs of $51 million were recoverable; a $290 million cash storm reserve should be re-established; a $1 billion reserve should be established to partially pay for Hurricane Ida restoration costs; and Entergy Louisiana was authorized to finance $3.186 billion utilizing the securitization process authorized by Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293. The LPSC issued an order approving the settlement in March 2022. As a result of the financing order, Entergy Louisiana reclassified $1.942 billion from utility plant to other regulatory assets.

In May 2022 the securitization financing closed, resulting in the issuance of $3.194 billion principal amount of bonds by Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority (LCDA), a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana. The securitization was authorized pursuant to the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation Act, Part VIII of Chapter 9 of Title 45 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana legislature approved in 2021. The LCDA loaned the proceeds to the LURC. Pursuant to Act 293, the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to a State legislatively authorized and LURC-sponsored trust, Restoration Law Trust I (the storm trust I).

Pursuant to Act 293, the net proceeds of the bonds were used by the storm trust I to purchase 31,635,718.7221 Class A preferred, non-voting membership interest units (the preferred membership interests) issued by Entergy Finance Company. Entergy Finance Company is required to make annual distributions (dividends) commencing on December 15, 2022 on the preferred membership interests issued to the storm trust I. These annual dividends received by the storm trust I will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana and the LURC, as beneficiaries of the storm trust I. Specifically, 1% of the annual dividends received by the storm trust I will be distributed to the LURC, for the benefit of customers, and 99% will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana, net of storm trust expenses. The preferred membership interests have a stated annual cumulative cash dividend rate of 7% and a liquidation price of $100 per unit. The terms of the preferred membership interests include certain financial covenants to which Entergy Finance Company is subject. Semi-annual redemptions of the preferred membership interests, subject to certain conditions, are expected to occur over the next 15 years.

Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on their balance sheets because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA. The bonds are secured by system restoration property, which is the right
109

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



granted by law to the LURC to collect a system restoration charge from customers. The system restoration charge is adjusted at least semi-annually to ensure that it is sufficient to service the bonds. Entergy Louisiana collects the system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee. Entergy Louisiana began collecting the system restoration charge effective with the first billing cycle of June 2022 and the system restoration charge is expected to remain in place for up to 15 years. Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the collections as revenue because Entergy Louisiana is merely acting as a billing and collection agent for the LCDA and the LURC. In the remote possibility that the system restoration charge, as well as any funds in the excess subaccount and funds in the debt service reserve account, are insufficient to service the bonds resulting in a payment default, the storm trust I is required to liquidate Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests in an amount equal to what would be required to cure the default. The estimated value of this indirect guarantee is immaterial.

From the proceeds from the issuance of the preferred membership interests, Entergy Finance Company distributed $1.4 billion to its parent, Entergy Holdings Company, LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy. Subsequently, Entergy Holdings Company liquidated, distributing the $1.4 billion it received from Entergy Finance Company to Entergy Louisiana as holder of 6,843,780.24 units of Class A, 4,126,940.15 units of Class B, and 2,935,152.69 units of Class C preferred membership interests. Entergy Louisiana had acquired these preferred membership interests with proceeds from previous securitizations of storm restoration costs. Entergy Finance Company loaned the remaining $1.7 billion from the preferred membership interests proceeds to Entergy which used the cash to redeem $650 million of 4.00% Series senior notes due July 2022 and indirectly contributed $1 billion to Entergy Louisiana as a capital contribution.

Entergy Louisiana used the $1 billion capital contribution to fund its Hurricane Ida escrow account and subsequently withdrew the $1 billion from the escrow account. With a portion of the $1 billion withdrawn from the escrow account and the $1.4 billion from the Entergy Holdings Company liquidation, Entergy Louisiana deposited $290 million in a restricted escrow account as a storm damage reserve for future storms, used $1.2 billion to repay its unsecured term loan due June 2023, and used $435 million to redeem a portion of its 0.62% Series mortgage bonds due November 2023.

As discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, the securitization resulted in recognition of a reduction of income tax expense of approximately $290 million by Entergy Louisiana. Entergy’s recognition of reduced income tax expense was partially offset by other tax charges resulting in a net reduction of income tax expense of $283 million. In recognition of obligations described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceeding, Entergy Louisiana recorded a $224 million ($165 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect its obligation to provide credits to its customers.

As discussed in Note 17 to the financial statements, Entergy Louisiana consolidates the storm trust I as a variable interest entity and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in the financial statements. In second quarter 2022, Entergy Louisiana recorded a charge of $31.6 million in other income to reflect the LURC’s beneficial interest in the storm trust I.

In April 2022, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC relating to Hurricane Ida restoration costs. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Ida were estimated to be approximately $2.54 billion, including approximately $1.96 billion in capital costs and approximately $586 million in non-capital costs. Including carrying costs of $57 million through December 2022, Entergy Louisiana was seeking an LPSC determination that $2.60 billion was prudently incurred and, therefore, eligible for recovery from customers. As part of this filing, Entergy Louisiana also was seeking an LPSC determination that an additional $32 million in costs associated with the restoration of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta as well as Winter Storm Uri was prudently incurred. This amount was exclusive of the requested $3 million in carrying costs through December 2022. In total, Entergy Louisiana was requesting an LPSC determination that $2.64 billion was prudently incurred and, therefore, eligible for recovery from customers. As discussed above, in March 2022 the LPSC approved
110

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

financing of a $1 billion storm escrow account from which funds were withdrawn to finance costs associated with Hurricane Ida restoration. In June 2022, Entergy Louisiana supplemented the application with a request regarding the financing and recovery of the recoverable storm restoration costs. Specifically, Entergy Louisiana requested approval to securitize its restoration costs pursuant to Louisiana Act 55 financing, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021. In October 2022 the LPSC staff recommended a finding that the requested storm restoration costs of $2.64 billion, including associated carrying costs of $59.1 million, were prudently incurred and eligible for recovery from customers. The LPSC staff further recommended approval of Entergy Louisiana’s plans to securitize these costs, net of the $1 billion in funds withdrawn from the storm escrow account described above. The parties negotiated and executed an uncontested stipulated settlement which was filed with the LPSC in December 2022. The settlement agreement contains the following key terms: $2.57 billion of restoration costs from Hurricane Ida, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, and Winter Storm Uri were prudently incurred and eligible for recovery; carrying costs of $59.2 million were recoverable; and Entergy Louisiana was authorized to finance $1.657 billion utilizing the securitization process authorized by Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293. A procedural motion to consider the uncontested settlement at the December 2022 LPSC meeting did not pass and the settlement was not voted on. In January 2023 an ALJ with the LPSC conducted a settlement hearing to receive the uncontested settlement and supporting testimony into evidence and issued a report of proceedings, which allows the LPSC to consider the uncontested settlement without the procedural motion that did not pass in December. In January 2023, the LPSC approved the stipulated settlement subject to certain modifications. These modifications include the recognition of accumulated deferred income tax benefits related to damaged assets and system restoration costs as a reduction of the amount authorized to be financed utilizing the securitization process authorized by Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, from $1.657 billion to $1.491 billion. These modifications did not affect the LPSC’s conclusion that all system restoration costs sought by Entergy Louisiana were reasonable and prudent. In February 2023 the Louisiana Bond Commission voted to authorize the LCDA to issue the bonds authorized in the LPSC’s financing order.

In March 2023 the Hurricane Ida securitization financing closed, resulting in the issuance of approximately $1.491 billion principal amount of bonds by the LCDA and a remaining regulatory asset of $180 million to be recovered through the exclusion of the accumulated deferred income taxes related to damaged assets and system restoration costs from the determination of future rates. The securitization was authorized pursuant to the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation Act, Part VIII of Chapter 9 of Title 45 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021. The LCDA loaned the proceeds to the LURC. Pursuant to Act 293, the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to a State legislatively authorized and LURC-sponsored trust, Restoration Law Trust II (the storm trust II).

Pursuant to Act 293, the net proceeds of the bonds were used by the storm trust II to purchase 14,576,757.48 Class B preferred, non-voting membership interest units (the preferred membership interests) issued by Entergy Finance Company. Entergy Finance Company is required to make annual distributions (dividends) commencing on December 15, 2023 on the preferred membership interests issued to the storm trust II. These annual dividends received by the storm trust II will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana and the LURC, as beneficiaries of the storm trust II. Specifically, 1% of the annual dividends received by the storm trust II will be distributed to the LURC for the benefit of customers, and 99% will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana, net of storm trust expenses. The preferred membership interests have a stated annual cumulative cash dividend rate of 7.5% and a liquidation price of $100 per unit. The terms of the preferred membership interests include certain financial covenants to which Entergy Finance Company is subject. Semi-annual redemptions of the preferred membership interests, subject to certain conditions, are expected to occur over the next 15 years.

Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on their balance sheets because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA. The bonds are secured by system restoration property, which is the right granted by law to the LURC to collect a system restoration charge from customers. The system restoration charge is adjusted at least semi-annually to ensure that it is sufficient to service the bonds. Entergy Louisiana collects the system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee. Entergy Louisiana began collecting the system restoration charge effective with the first billing cycle of April 2023 and the
111

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



system restoration charge is expected to remain in place for up to 15 years. Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the collections as revenue because Entergy Louisiana is merely acting as a billing and collection agent for the LCDA and the LURC. In the remote possibility that the system restoration charge, as well as any funds in the excess subaccount and funds in the debt service reserve account, are insufficient to service the bonds resulting in a payment default, the storm trust II is required to liquidate Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests in an amount equal to what would be required to cure the default. The estimated value of this indirect guarantee is immaterial.

From the proceeds from the issuance of the preferred membership interests, Entergy Finance Company loaned approximately $1.5 billion to Entergy, which was indirectly contributed to Entergy Louisiana as a capital contribution.

As discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements, the securitization resulted in recognition of a net reduction of income tax expense of approximately $133 million, after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax positions, by Entergy Louisiana. Entergy’s recognition of reduced income tax expense was offset by other tax charges resulting in a net reduction of income tax expense of $129 million, after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax positions. In recognition of its obligations described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceeding, Entergy Louisiana recorded in first quarter 2023 a $103 million ($76 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect its obligation to provide credits to its customers.

As discussed in Note 6 and Note 17 to the financial statements, Entergy Louisiana consolidates the storm trust II as a variable interest entity and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in the financial statements. In first quarter 2023, Entergy Louisiana recorded a charge of $14.6 million in other income to reflect the LURC’s beneficial interest in the storm trust II.

Hurricane Isaac

In August 2012, Hurricane Isaac caused extensive damage to Entergy Louisiana’s service area.  In June 2014 the LPSC authorized Entergy Louisiana to utilize Louisiana Act 55 financing for Hurricane Isaac system restoration costs.  Entergy Louisiana committed to pass on to customers a minimum of $30.8 million of customer benefits through annual customer credits of approximately $6.2 million for five years. Approvals for the Act 55 financings were obtained from the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation (LURC)LURC and the Louisiana State Bond Commission.

In August 2014 the Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority (LCDA)LCDA issued $314.85 million in bonds under Louisiana Act 55.  From the $309 million of bond proceeds loaned by the LCDA to the LURC, the LURC deposited $16 million in a restricted escrow account as a storm damage reserve for Entergy Louisiana and transferred $293 million directly to Entergy Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana used the $293 million received from the LURC to acquire 2,935,152.69 Class C preferred, non-voting, membership interest units of Entergy Holdings Company LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy, that carry a 7.5% annual distribution rate. Distributions arewere payable quarterly commencing on September 15, 2014, and the membership interests havehad a liquidation price of $100 per unit. The preferred membership
101

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




interests arewere callable at the option of Entergy Holdings Company LLC after ten years under the terms of the LLC agreement. The terms of the membership interests includeincluded certain financial covenants to which Entergy Holdings Company LLC iswas subject, including the requirement to maintain a net worth of at least $1.75 billion. As discussed above in “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida”, in May 2022, Entergy Holdings Company liquidated and distributed cash to Entergy Louisiana as holder of the 2,935,152.69 units of Class C preferred membership interests.

Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on their balance sheets because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA and there is no recourse against Entergy or Entergy Louisiana in the event of a bond default.  To service the bonds, Entergy Louisiana collects a system restoration charge on behalf of the
112

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee.  Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the collections as revenue because Entergy Louisiana is merely acting as the billing and collection agent for the state.

In the first quarter 2020, Entergy and the IRS agreed upon and settled on the treatment of funds received by Entergy Louisiana in conjunction with the Act 55 financing of Hurricane Isaac storm costs, which resulted in a net reduction of income tax expense of approximately $32 million. As a result of the settlement, the position was partially sustained and Entergy Louisiana recorded a reduction of income tax expense of approximately $58 million primarily due to the reversal of liabilities for uncertain tax positions in excess of the agreed-upon settlement. Entergy recorded an increase to income tax expense of $26 million primarily resulting from the reduction of the deferred tax asset, associated with utilization of the net operating loss as a result of the settlement. This adjustment recorded by Entergy also accounted for the tax rate change of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. As a result of the IRS settlement, Entergy Louisiana recorded a $29 million ($21 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect its obligation to customers pursuant to the LPSC Hurricane Isaac Act 55 financing order.

Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike

In September 2008, Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike caused catastrophic damage to Entergy Louisiana’s service territory.  In December 2009, Entergy Louisiana entered into a stipulation agreement with the LPSC staff regarding its storm costs.  In March and April 2010, Entergy Louisiana and other parties to the proceeding filed with the LPSC an uncontested stipulated settlement that included Entergy Louisiana’s proposal to utilize Act 55 financing, which included a commitment to pass on to customers a minimum of $43.3 million of customer benefits through a prospective annual rate reduction of $8.7 million for five years.  In April 2010 the LPSC approved the settlement and subsequently issued financing orders and a ratemaking order intended to facilitate the implementation of the Act 55 financings.  In June 2010 the Louisiana State Bond Commission approved the Act 55 financing. The settlement agreement allowed for an adjustment to the credits if there was a change in the applicable federal or state income tax rate. As a result of the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, in December 2017, and the lowering of the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, the Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation regulatory liability related to Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike was reduced by $2.7 million, with a corresponding increase to Other regulatory credits on the income statement. The effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are discussed further in Note 3 to the financial statements.

In July 2010 the LCDA issued two series of bonds totaling $713.0 million under Act 55.  From the $702.7 million of bond proceeds loaned by the LCDA to the LURC, the LURC deposited $290 million in a restricted escrow account as a storm damage reserve for Entergy Louisiana and transferred $412.7 million directly to Entergy Louisiana.  From the bond proceeds received by Entergy Louisiana from the LURC, Entergy Louisiana used $412.7 million to acquire 4,126,940.15 Class B preferred, non-voting, membership interest units of Entergy Holdings Company LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy, that carry a 9% annual distribution rate. Distributions arewere payable quarterly commencing on September 15, 2010, and the membership interests havehad a liquidation price of $100 per unit. The preferred membership interests arewere callable at the option of Entergy Holdings Company LLC after ten years under the terms of the LLC agreement.  The terms of the membership interests includeincluded certain financial covenants to which Entergy Holdings Company LLC iswas subject, including the requirement to maintain a net worth of at least $1 billion. As discussed above in “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida”, in May 2022, Entergy Holdings Company liquidated and distributed cash to Entergy Louisiana as holder of the 4,126,940.15 units of Class B preferred membership interests.

102

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The bonds were repaid in 2022. Entergy and Entergy Louisiana dodid not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on their balance sheets because the bonds arewere the obligation of the LCDA, and there iswas no recourse against Entergy or Entergy Louisiana in the event of a bond default.  To service the bonds, Entergy Louisiana collectscollected a system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remitsremitted the collections to the bond indenture trustee.  Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the collections as revenue because Entergy Louisiana is merely acting as the billing and collection agent for the state.

Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita

In August and September 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused catastrophic damage to Entergy Louisiana’s service territory. In March 2008, Entergy Louisiana and the LURC filed at the LPSC an application requesting that the LPSC grant a financing order authorizing the financing of Entergy Louisiana storm costs, storm reserves, and issuance costs pursuant to Louisiana Act 55.  Entergy Louisiana also filed an application requesting LPSC approval for ancillary issues including the mechanism to flow charges and savings to customers via a storm cost offset rider.  In April 2008 the Louisiana Public Facilities Authority (LPFA), which is the issuer of the bonds pursuant to the Act 55 financing, approved requests for the Act 55 financing.  Also in April 2008, Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff filed with the LPSC an uncontested stipulated settlement that included Entergy Louisiana’s proposal under the Act 55 financing, which included a commitment to pass on to customers a minimum
113

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



of $40 million of customer benefits through a prospective annual rate reduction of $8 million for five years.  The LPSC subsequently approved the settlement and issued two financing orders and one ratemaking order intended to facilitate implementation of the Act 55 financing.  In May 2008 the Louisiana State Bond Commission granted final approval of the Act 55 financing. The settlement agreement allowed for an adjustment to the credits if there was a change in the applicable federal or state income tax rate. As a result of the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, in December 2017, and the lowering of the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, the Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation regulatory liability related to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita was reduced by $22.3 million, with a corresponding increase to Other regulatory credits on the income statement. The effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are discussed further in Note 3 to the financial statements.

In July 2008 the LPFA issued $687.7 million in bonds under the aforementioned Act 55.  From the $679 million of bond proceeds loaned by the LPFA to the LURC, the LURC deposited $152 million in a restricted escrow account as a storm damage reserve for Entergy Louisiana and transferred $527 million directly to Entergy Louisiana.  From the bond proceeds received by Entergy Louisiana from the LURC, Entergy Louisiana invested $545 million, including $17.8 million that was withdrawn from the restricted escrow account as approved by the April 16, 2008 LPSC orders, in exchange for 5,449,861.85 Class A preferred, non-voting, membership interest units of Entergy Holdings Company LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy, that carry a 10% annual distribution rate.  In August 2008 the LPFA issued $278.4 million in bonds under the aforementioned Act 55.  From the $274.7 million of bond proceeds loaned by the LPFA to the LURC, the LURC deposited $87 million in a restricted escrow account as a storm damage reserve for Entergy Louisiana and transferred $187.7 million directly to Entergy Louisiana.  From the bond proceeds received by Entergy Louisiana from the LURC, Entergy Louisiana invested $189.4 million, including $1.7 million that was withdrawn from the restricted escrow account as approved by the April 16, 2008 LPSC orders, in exchange for 1,893,918.39 Class A preferred, non-voting, membership interest units of Entergy Holdings Company LLC that carry a 10% annual distribution rate.  Distributions arewere payable quarterly commencing on September 15, 2008 and havehad a liquidation price of $100 per unit.  The preferred membership interests arewere callable at the option of Entergy Holdings Company LLC after ten years under the terms of the LLC agreement.  The terms of the membership interests includeincluded certain financial covenants to which Entergy Holdings Company LLC iswas subject, including the requirement to maintain a net worth of at least $1 billion.  In February 2012, Entergy Louisiana sold 500,000 of its Class A preferred membership units in Entergy Holdings Company to a third party. Those preferred membership units were subsequently repurchased by Entergy Holdings Company in March 2019. As discussed above in “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida”, in May 2022, Entergy Holdings Company liquidated and distributed cash to Entergy Louisiana as holder of the remaining 6,843,780.24 units of Class A preferred membership interests.

The bonds were repaid in 2018. Entergy and Entergy Louisiana did not report the bonds issued by the LPFA on their balance sheets because the bonds arewere the obligation of the LPFA, and there was no recourse against Entergy or Entergy Louisiana in the event of a bond default.  To service the bonds, Entergy Louisiana collected a system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remitted the collections to the bond indenture trustee.  Entergy
103

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




and Entergy Louisiana did not report the collections as revenue because Entergy Louisiana was merely acting as the billing and collection agent for the state.

Entergy Mississippi

Entergy Mississippi has approval from the MPSC to collect a storm damage provision of $1.75 million per month. If Entergy Mississippi’s accumulated storm damage provision balance exceeds $15 million, the collection of the storm damage provision ceases until such time that the accumulated storm damage provision becomes less than $10 million. Entergy Mississippi’s storm damage provision balance has been less than $10 million since May 2019, and Entergy Mississippi has been billing the monthly storm damage provision since July 2019.

In December 2023 Entergy Mississippi filed a Notice of Storm Escrow Disbursement and Request for Interim Relief notifying the MPSC that Entergy Mississippi had requested disbursement of approximately $34.5 million of storm escrow funds from its restricted storm escrow account. The filing also requested
114

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

authorization from the MPSC, on a temporary basis, that the $34.5 million of storm escrow funds be credited to Entergy Mississippi’s storm damage provision, pending the MPSC’s review of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs, and that Entergy Mississippi continue to bill its monthly storm damage provision without suspension in the event the storm damage provision balance exceeds $15 million, in anticipation of a subsequent filing by Entergy Mississippi in this proceeding. The storm damage reserve exceeded $15 million upon receipt of the storm escrow funds. Because the MPSC had not entered an order on Entergy Mississippi’s filing on the requested relief to continue billing this provision, Entergy Mississippi suspended billing the monthly storm damage provision effective with February 2024 bills.

Entergy New Orleans

Hurricane Zeta

In October 2020, Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to Entergy New Orleans’s service area. The storm resulted in widespread power outages, significant damage to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the power outages. In March 2021, Entergy New Orleans withdrew $44 million from its funded storm reserves. In May 2021, Entergy New Orleans filed an application with the City Council requesting approval and certification that its system restoration costs associated with Hurricane Zeta of approximately $36 million, which included $7 million in estimated costs, were reasonable and necessary to enable Entergy New Orleans to restore electric service to its customers and Entergy New Orleans’s electric utility infrastructure. In May 2022 the City Council advisors issued a report recommending that the City Council find that Entergy New Orleans acted prudently in restoring service following Hurricane Zeta and approximately $33 million in storm restoration costs were prudently incurred and recoverable. Additionally, the advisors concluded that approximately $7 million of the $44 million withdrawn from its funded storm reserve was in excess of Entergy New Orleans’s costs and should be considered in Entergy New Orleans’s application for certification of costs related to Hurricane Ida. In September 2022 the City Council issued a resolution finding that Entergy New Orleans’s system restoration costs were reasonable and necessary, and that Entergy New Orleans acted prudently in restoring electricity following Hurricane Zeta. The City Council also found that approximately $33 million in storm costs were recoverable.

Hurricane Ida

In August 2021, Hurricane Ida caused significant damage to Entergy New Orleans’s service area, including Entergy’s electrical grid. The storm resulted in widespread power outages, including the loss of 100% of Entergy New Orleans’s load and damage to distribution and transmission infrastructure, including the loss of connectivity to the eastern interconnection. In September 2021, Entergy New Orleans withdrew $39 million from its funded storm reserves. In June 2022, Entergy New Orleans filed an application with the City Council requesting approval and certification that storm restoration costs associated with Hurricane Ida of approximately $170 million, which included $11 million in estimated costs, were reasonable, necessary, and prudently incurred to enable Entergy New Orleans to restore electric service to its customers and to repair Entergy New Orleans’s electric utility infrastructure. In addition, estimated carrying costs through December 2022 related to Hurricane Ida restoration costs were $9 million. Also, Entergy New Orleans is requesting approval that the $39 million withdrawal from its funded storm reserve in September 2021 and $7 million in excess storm reserve escrow withdrawals related to Hurricane Zeta and prior miscellaneous storms are properly applied to Hurricane Ida storm restoration costs, the application of which reduces the amount to be recovered from Entergy New Orleans customers by $46 million.

Additionally, in February 2022, Entergy New Orleans and the LURC filed with the City Council a securitization application requesting that the City Council review Entergy New Orleans’s storm reserve and increase the storm reserve funding level to $150 million, to be funded through securitization. In August 2022 the City Council’s advisors recommended that the City Council authorize a single securitization bond issuance to fund Entergy New Orleans’s storm recovery reserves to an amount sufficient to: (1) allow recovery of all of Entergy New Orleans’s unrecovered storm recovery costs following Hurricane Ida, subject to City Council review and certification; (2) provide initial funding of storm recovery reserves for future storms to a level of $75 million; and
115

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



(3) fund the storm recovery bonds’ upfront financing costs. In September 2022, Entergy New Orleans and the City Council’s advisors entered into an agreement in principle, which was approved by the City Council along with a financing order in October 2022, authorizing Entergy New Orleans and the LURC to proceed with a single securitization bond issuance of approximately $206 million (subject to further adjustment and review pursuant to the Final Issuance Advice Letter process set forth in the financing order), with $125 million of that total to be used for interim recovery, subject to City Council review and certification, to be allocated to unrecovered Hurricane Ida storm recovery costs; $75 million of that total to provide for a storm recovery reserve for future storms; and the remainder to fund the recovery of the storm recovery bonds’ upfront financing costs.

In December 2022, Entergy New Orleans and the LURC filed with the City Council the Final Issuance Advice Letter for a securitization bond issuance in the amount of $209.3 million, the final structuring, terms, and pricing of which were approved by the City Council in accordance with the financing order. Also in December 2022 the LCDA issued $209.3 million in bonds pursuant to the Louisiana Electric Utility Storm Recovery Securitization Act, Part V-B of Chapter 9 of Title 45 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Regular Session of 2021. The LCDA loaned $201.8 million of bond proceeds, net of certain debt service and issuance costs, to the LURC. The LURC used the proceeds to purchase from Entergy New Orleans the storm recovery property, which is the right to collect storm recovery charges sufficient to pay the storm recovery bonds and associated financing costs, and Entergy New Orleans deposited $200 million in a restricted storm reserve escrow account as a storm damage reserve for Entergy New Orleans and received directly $1.8 million in estimated upfront financing costs. Subsequently, Entergy New Orleans withdrew $125 million from the newly securitized storm reserve to cover Hurricane Ida storm recovery costs, subject to a final determination from the City Council regarding the prudency of the storm recovery costs.

Entergy and Entergy New Orleans do not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on their balance sheets because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA, and there is no recourse against Entergy or Entergy New Orleans in the event of a bond default. To service the bonds, Entergy New Orleans collects a storm recovery charge on behalf of the LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee. Entergy and Entergy New Orleans do not report the collections as revenue because Entergy New Orleans is merely acting as the billing and collection agent for the LURC.

In August 2023 the City Council advisors issued a report recommending that the City Council find that Entergy New Orleans prudently incurred approximately $164.1 million in storm restoration costs and $7.5 million in carrying charges and that such costs have already been properly recovered by Entergy New Orleans through withdrawals from the storm reserve escrow account. The City Council advisors also recommended that the City Council find that approximately $1.2 million in storm restoration costs had already been recovered through Entergy New Orleans’s base rates and that approximately $0.9 million in unused credits be applied against future storm costs. In August 2023 the City Council hearing officer certified the evidentiary record. In December 2023 the City Council approved a resolution adopting the advisors’ report and recommendations.

Entergy Texas

Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri

In August 2020 and October 2020, Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta caused extensive damage to Entergy Texas’s service area. In February 2021, Winter Storm Uri also caused damage to Entergy Texas’s service area. The storms resulted in widespread power outages, significant damage primarily to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the power outages. In April 2021, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT requesting a determination that approximately $250 million of system restoration costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri, including approximately $200 million in capital costs and approximately $50 million in non-capital costs, were reasonable and necessary to enable Entergy Texas to restore electric service to its customers and Entergy Texas’s electric utility infrastructure. The filing also included the projected balance of approximately $13 million of a regulatory asset containing previously approved
116

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

system restoration costs related to Hurricane Harvey. In September 2021 the parties filed an unopposed settlement agreement, pursuant to which Entergy Texas removed from the amount to be securitized approximately $4.3 million that will instead be charged to its storm reserve, $5 million related to no particular issue, of which Entergy Texas would be permitted to seek recovery in a future proceeding, and approximately $300 thousand related to attestation costs. In December 2021 the PUCT issued an order approving the unopposed settlement and determining system restoration costs of $243 million related to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri and the $13 million projected remaining balance of the Hurricane Harvey system restoration costs were eligible for securitization. The order also determines that Entergy Texas can recover carrying costs on the system restoration costs related to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri.

In July 2021, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT an application for a financing order to approve the securitization of the system restoration costs that are the subject of the April 2021 application. In November 2021 the parties filed an unopposed settlement agreement supporting the issuance of a financing order consistent with Entergy Texas’s application and with minor adjustments to certain upfront and ongoing costs to be incurred to facilitate the issuance and serving of system restoration bonds. In January 2022 the PUCT issued a financing order consistent with the unopposed settlement. As a result of the financing order, Entergy Texas reclassified $153 million from utility plant to other regulatory assets.

In April 2022, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II, LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, issued $290.85 million of senior secured system restoration bonds (securitization bonds). With the proceeds, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II purchased from Entergy Texas the transition property, which is the right to recover from customers through a system restoration charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. Entergy Texas began cost recovery through the system restoration charge effective with the first billing cycle of May 2022 and the system restoration charge is expected to remain in place up to 15 years. See Note 5 to the financial statements for a discussion of the April 2022 issuance of the securitization bonds.


NOTE 3.  INCOME TAXES (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Income taxes for 2020, 2019,Entergy for 2023, 2022, and 2018 for Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries2021 consist of the following:
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
Current:   
Federal$5,807 ($14,416)$36,848 
State57,939 6,535 7,274 
Total63,746 (7,881)44,122 
Deferred and non-current - net(190,635)(155,956)(1,074,416)
Investment tax credit adjustments - net5,383 (5,988)(6,532)
Income taxes($121,506)($169,825)($1,036,826)

Income taxes for 2020, 2019, and 2018 for Entergy’s Registrant Subsidiaries consist of the following:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Current:Current:      Current:  
FederalFederal($44,627)$62,728 ($14,580)$293 ($5,603)$372,206 
State
State
StateState(2,563)4,457 (1,316)(303)2,658 55,551 
TotalTotal(47,190)67,185 (15,896)(10)(2,945)427,757 
Deferred and non-current - netDeferred and non-current - net96,195 (444,647)43,640 (18,153)6,619 (405,928)
Investment tax credit adjustments - net(1,228)(4,862)(554)13,956 (632)(1,286)
Investment tax credits - net
Income taxesIncome taxes$47,777 ($382,324)$27,190 ($4,207)$3,042 $20,543 

104

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Current:      
Federal($14,549)($20,173)($8,939)($5,822)$16,035 $16,256 
State(714)(735)5,823 1,856 663 (2,831)
Total(15,263)(20,908)(3,116)(3,966)16,698 13,425 
Deferred and non-current - net(30,278)147,453 34,579 4,248 (69,963)422 
Investment tax credit adjustments - net(1,228)(4,922)(597)(96)(631)1,502 
Income taxes($46,769)$121,623 $30,866 $186 ($53,896)$15,349 

2018Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Current:      
Federal($23,638)($15,841)($11,275)($10,813)$16,190 ($9,786)
State(1,617)(1,122)(1,066)545 3,205 (1,821)
Total(25,255)(16,963)(12,341)(10,268)19,395 (11,607)
Deferred and non-current - net(270,586)(32,725)(114,738)7,943 (44,817)(35,329)
Investment tax credit adjustments - net(1,226)(4,923)1,306 (111)(821)(739)
Income taxes($297,067)($54,611)($125,773)($2,436)($26,243)($47,675)

105117

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Income taxes for the Registrant Subsidiaries for 2023, 2022, and 2021 consist of the following:

2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Thousands)
Current:      
Federal$33,100 ($142,253)$20,328 ($99,343)$2,851 $337 
State(4,201)(6,397)4,142 (5,854)3,719 (1,570)
Total28,899 (148,650)24,470 (105,197)6,570 (1,233)
Deferred and non-current - net(126,878)(52,451)30,690 (84,744)57,066 31,005 
Investment tax credits - net(1,231)(4,680)(796)(32)(764)2,260 
Income taxes($99,210)($205,781)$54,364 ($189,973)$62,872 $32,032 

2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Current:      
Federal$8,015 ($79,079)$9,242 $1,074 $37,471 ($11,720)
State(1,066)(1,773)(6,486)6,221 2,260 581 
Total6,949 (80,852)2,756 7,295 39,731 (11,139)
Deferred and non-current - net74,802 (77,223)48,443 16,814 11,520 (83,369)
Investment tax credits - net(855)(4,778)3,665 168 (630)1,680 
Income taxes$80,896 ($162,853)$54,864 $24,277 $50,621 ($92,828)

2021Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Current:      
Federal($20,285)($24,053)($5,868)($6,724)($189)$29,416 
State529 2,459 (11,506)(413)1,261 (10,258)
Total(19,756)(21,594)(17,374)(7,137)1,072 19,158 
Deferred and non-current - net96,180 146,786 60,861 12,870 25,087 (25,229)
Investment tax credits - net(1,229)(4,783)1,836 203 (633)4,094 
Income taxes$75,195 $120,409 $45,323 $5,936 $25,526 ($1,977)

118

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Total income taxes for Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries differ from the amounts computed by applying the statutory income tax rate to income before income taxes.  The reasons for the differences for the years 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 are:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Net income attributable to Entergy CorporationNet income attributable to Entergy Corporation$1,388,334 $1,241,226 $848,661 Net income attributable to Entergy Corporation$2,356,536$1,103,166$1,118,492
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries18,319 17,018 13,894 
Preferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interestsPreferred dividend requirements of subsidiaries and noncontrolling interests5,774(6,028)227
Consolidated net incomeConsolidated net income1,406,653 1,258,244 862,555 Consolidated net income2,362,3101,097,1381,118,719
Income taxesIncome taxes(121,506)(169,825)(1,036,826)Income taxes(690,535)(38,978)191,374
Income (loss) before income taxes$1,285,147 $1,088,419 ($174,271)
Computed at statutory rate (21%)$269,881 $228,568 ($36,597)
Income before income taxesIncome before income taxes$1,671,775$1,058,160$1,310,093
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)$351,073$222,214$275,120
Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:   Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:  
State income taxes net of federal income tax effectState income taxes net of federal income tax effect60,087 61,791 21,398 State income taxes net of federal income tax effect70,14461,36879,273
Regulatory differences - utility plant itemsRegulatory differences - utility plant items(53,229)(45,336)(37,507)Regulatory differences - utility plant items(27,901)(32,143)(57,556)
Equity component of AFUDCEquity component of AFUDC(25,080)(30,444)(27,216)Equity component of AFUDC(20,172)(14,156)(14,799)
Amortization of investment tax creditsAmortization of investment tax credits(8,386)(8,093)(8,304)Amortization of investment tax credits(7,978)(7,740)(7,695)
Flow-through / permanent differencesFlow-through / permanent differences11,099 (2,059)439 Flow-through / permanent differences(1,374)1,011(5,585)
Amortization of excess ADIT (a)Amortization of excess ADIT (a)(59,629)(205,614)(577,082)
Revisions of the 2017 tax legislation enactment regulatory liability accrual, including the effect of the Entergy Texas 2018 base rate proceeding(40,494)
Utility restructuring (b)(169,918)
Settlement on treatment of regulatory obligations (c)(52,320)
State income tax audit conclusion(23,425)
IRS audit adjustment (e)(301,041)(8,404)
Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear decommissioning trust restructuring (d)(106,833)
Entergy Wholesale Commodities restructuring (d)(9,223)(173,725)
Amortization of excess ADIT (a)
Amortization of excess ADIT (a)9,102(34,899)(66,478)
Stock compensation (f)(25,591)
Charitable contribution (d)(19,101)
Net operating loss recognition(41,427)
Arkansas and Louisiana rate changes (b)
Arkansas and Louisiana rate changes (b)
Arkansas and Louisiana rate changes (b)(27,108)
IRS audit resolution (c)
IRS audit resolution (c)
IRS audit resolution (c)(842,769)
Reversal of regulatory liability for Hurricane Isaac (d)
Reversal of regulatory liability for Hurricane Isaac (d)
Reversal of regulatory liability for Hurricane Isaac (d)(105,649)
Entergy Louisiana securitization (e)Entergy Louisiana securitization (e)(129,034)(282,620)
System Energy sale-leaseback order (f)System Energy sale-leaseback order (f)12,662
Provision for uncertain tax positionsProvision for uncertain tax positions15,208 7,332 24,569 Provision for uncertain tax positions18,88434,42316,533
Valuation allowanceValuation allowance59,345 2,211 Valuation allowance(8,697)(2,754)(2,600)
Other - netOther - net4,398 (1,062)2,657 Other - net3,8363,6562,269
Total income taxes as reportedTotal income taxes as reported($121,506)($169,825)($1,036,826)Total income taxes as reported($690,535)($38,978)$191,374
Effective Income Tax RateEffective Income Tax Rate(9.5 %)(15.6)%595.0 %Effective Income Tax Rate(41.3 %)(3.7 %)14.6 %

(a)See “Other Tax Matters - Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” below for discussion of the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes (ADIT) in 2018, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20202021 and the tax legislation enactment in 2017.
(b)See “Other Tax Matters - Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi Internal RestructuringLouisiana Corporate Income Tax Rate Changes” below for discussion of the Utility restructuring.details.
(c)See “Income Tax Audits - 2012-20132016-2018 IRS Audit” below for discussion of the resolution of the audit.2016-2018 IRS audit in 2023.
(d)See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s reversal of a regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
(e)See Other Tax Matters - – Act 293 SecuritizationsEntergy Wholesale Commodities Restructuring” below for discussion of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear decommissioning trust restructuring in 2018, the Entergy Wholesale Commodities restructurings in 2017Louisiana May 2022 and 2019, the ownership of Palisades restructuring in 2020, and the charitable contribution in 2019.March 2023 storm cost securitizations.
(e)(f)See Income Tax Audits - 2014-2015 IRS Audit” belowNote 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the resolution ofDecember 2022 FERC order related to the audit in 2020.Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint.

106119

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

(f)See “Other Tax Matters - Stock Compensation” below for discussion of excess tax deductions

Total income taxes for the Registrant Subsidiaries differ from the amounts computed by applying the statutory income tax rate to income before taxes.  The reasons for the differences for the years 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 are:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
20232023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Net incomeNet income$245,232 $1,082,352 $140,583 $49,338 $215,073 $99,131 Net income$396,850$1,273,370$181,969$228,938$291,273$108,772
Income taxesIncome taxes47,777 (382,324)27,190 (4,207)3,042 20,543 Income taxes(99,210)(205,781)54,364(189,973)62,87232,032
Pretax income$293,009 $700,028 $167,773 $45,131 $218,115 $119,674 
Computed at statutory rate (21%)$61,532 $147,006 $35,232 $9,478 $45,804 $25,132 
Income before income taxesIncome before income taxes$297,640$1,067,589$236,333$38,965$354,145$140,804
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)$62,504$224,194$49,630$8,183$74,370$29,569
Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:     Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:  
State income taxes net of federal income tax effectState income taxes net of federal income tax effect16,256 38,182 6,917 2,606 1,460 5,524 State income taxes net of federal income tax effect13,29151,89911,1331,9072,5745,798
Regulatory differences - utility plant itemsRegulatory differences - utility plant items(8,034)(23,819)(7,441)(3,442)(7,673)(2,821)Regulatory differences - utility plant items(8,812)(5,535)(5,290)(1,353)(6,394)(517)
Equity component of AFUDCEquity component of AFUDC(3,154)(8,012)(1,412)(1,331)(9,255)(1,916)Equity component of AFUDC(4,093)(6,754)(1,796)(309)(5,920)(1,301)
Amortization of investment tax creditsAmortization of investment tax credits(1,201)(4,811)(540)(61)(617)(1,155)Amortization of investment tax credits(1,201)(4,625)(223)(25)(748)(1,155)
Flow-through / permanent differencesFlow-through / permanent differences(2,219)1,404 (102)498 766 (421)Flow-through / permanent differences1,1051263,534(1,913)1,493(191)
IRS audit resolution (a)IRS audit resolution (a)(159,588)(179,111)(3,291)(198,424)(3,112)(1,575)
Amortization of excess ADIT (b)Amortization of excess ADIT (b)(6,095)14,0321,14717
Amortization of excess ADIT (b)(6,011)(26,293)18 (4,564)(22,780)
Stock compensation (e)(4,952)(9,004)(2,763)(1,526)(2,842)(1,300)
IRS audit adjustment (d)(6,351)(471,702)(3,768)(6,819)(2,091)(2,925)
Entergy Louisiana securitization (c)
Entergy Louisiana securitization (c)
Entergy Louisiana securitization (c)(133,443)
Reversal of regulatory liability for Hurricane Isaac (d)Reversal of regulatory liability for Hurricane Isaac (d)(105,649)
Non-taxable dividend incomeNon-taxable dividend income(26,795)Non-taxable dividend income(62,116)
Provision for uncertain tax positionsProvision for uncertain tax positions1,200 300 800 800 300 Provision for uncertain tax positions2,600(400)3006002111,200
Other - net
Other - net
Other - netOther - net711 1,220 249 154 270 125 1,0791,601367214381204
Total income taxes as reportedTotal income taxes as reported$47,777 ($382,324)$27,190 ($4,207)$3,042 $20,543 Total income taxes as reported($99,210)($205,781)$54,364($189,973)$62,872$32,032
Effective Income Tax RateEffective Income Tax Rate16.3 %(54.6)%16.2 %(9.3)%1.4 %17.2 %Effective Income Tax Rate(33.3%)(19.3%)23.0%(487.5%)17.8%22.7%
120

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net income$292,887$855,870$176,267$64,101$303,327($276,593)
Income taxes80,896(162,853)54,86424,27750,621(92,828)
Income before income taxes$373,783$693,017$231,131$88,378$353,948($369,421)
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)$78,494$145,534$48,538$18,559$74,329($77,578)
Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:
State income taxes net of federal income tax effect17,98144,2449,6596,7332,175(16,727)
Regulatory differences - utility plant items(12,466)(6,347)(7,726)(1,908)(3,010)(686)
Equity component of AFUDC(3,437)(5,513)(1,286)(174)(2,841)(905)
Amortization of investment tax credits(1,201)(4,720)(223)175(614)(1,155)
Flow-through / permanent differences1063,4674,837230765(641)
Amortization of excess ADIT (b)(13,164)(752)(20,983)
System Energy sale-leaseback order (e)12,662
Entergy Louisiana securitization (c)(289,609)
Non-taxable dividend income(38,735)
Provision for uncertain tax positions1,6004007001,200420(8,000)
Valuation allowance(1,258)
Other - net1,0771,590365214380202
Total income taxes as reported$80,896($162,853)$54,864$24,277$50,621($92,828)
Effective Income Tax Rate21.6%(23.5%)23.7%27.5%14.3%25.1%
107121

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net income$262,964 $691,537 $119,925 $52,629 $159,397 $99,120 
Income taxes(46,769)121,623 30,866 186 (53,896)15,349 
Pretax income$216,195 $813,160 $150,791 $52,815 $105,501 $114,469 
Computed at statutory rate (21%)$45,401 $170,764 $31,666 $11,091 $22,155 $24,039 
Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:
State income taxes net of federal income tax effect15,954 42,854 5,563 3,443 360 5,134 
Regulatory differences - utility plant items(10,627)(19,421)(5,556)(1,532)(1,987)(6,213)
Equity component of AFUDC(3,255)(15,545)(1,755)(2,088)(5,973)(1,829)
Amortization of investment tax credits(1,201)(4,871)(160)(88)(617)(1,155)
Flow-through / permanent differences696 439 160 (741)560 (500)
Amortization of excess ADIT (b)(90,921)(28,531)203 (11,724)(69,091)(5,550)
Non-taxable dividend income(26,795)
Provision for uncertain tax positions(3,517)1,519 500 1,672 430 1,300 
Other - net701 1,210 245 153 267 123 
Total income taxes as reported($46,769)$121,623 $30,866 $186 ($53,896)$15,349 
Effective Income Tax Rate(21.6 %)15.0 %20.5 %0.4 %(51.1 %)13.4 %

108

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2018Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
20212021Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Net incomeNet income$252,707 $675,614 $126,078 $53,152 $162,235 $94,109 Net income$298,484$653,984$166,834$31,798$228,824$106,814
Income taxesIncome taxes(297,067)(54,611)(125,773)(2,436)(26,243)(47,675)Income taxes75,195120,40945,3235,93625,526(1,977)
Pretax income($44,360)$621,003 $305 $50,716 $135,992 $46,434 
Computed at statutory rate (21%)($9,316)$130,411 $64 $10,650 $28,558 $9,751 
Income before income taxesIncome before income taxes$373,679$774,393$212,157$37,734$254,350$104,837
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)
Income taxes computed at statutory rate (21%)$78,473$162,623$44,553$7,924$53,413$22,016
Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from:      Increases (reductions) in tax resulting from: 
State income taxes net of federal income tax effectState income taxes net of federal income tax effect(794)26,031 (1,747)2,322 2,576 2,812 State income taxes net of federal income tax effect19,63341,0309,3052,5791,5535,385
Regulatory differences - utility plant itemsRegulatory differences - utility plant items(14,916)(12,604)(4,103)(1,502)(1,872)(2,510)Regulatory differences - utility plant items(16,078)(14,123)(8,133)(4,332)(2,115)(12,776)
Equity component of AFUDCEquity component of AFUDC(3,477)(16,784)(1,829)(1,248)(2,042)(1,837)Equity component of AFUDC(3,207)(6,016)(1,701)(498)(2,077)(1,300)
Amortization of investment tax creditsAmortization of investment tax credits(1,201)(4,871)(160)(109)(808)(1,155)Amortization of investment tax credits(1,201)(4,729)64(56)(617)(1,155)
Flow-through / permanent differencesFlow-through / permanent differences570 3,203 1,893 (4,222)1,038 2,815 Flow-through / permanent differences(814)(2,655)1241,559(475)(1,235)
Revisions of the 2017 tax legislation enactment regulatory liability accrual, including the effect of the Entergy Texas 2018 base rate proceeding (a)933 (2,810)(556)884 (43,799)(3,565)
Amortization of excess ADIT (b)Amortization of excess ADIT (b)(271,570)(104,313)(120,831)(9,878)(11,519)(58,971)
Settlement on treatment of regulatory obligations (c)(52,320)
IRS audit adjustment1,290 1,097 1,018 (96)524 (12)
Amortization of excess ADIT (b)
Amortization of excess ADIT (b)(5,845)(24,323)(1,028)(21,929)(13,354)
Arkansas and Louisiana rate changes (f)Arkansas and Louisiana rate changes (f)398(6,126)395(1,569)216115
Non-taxable dividend income
Non-taxable dividend income
Non-taxable dividend incomeNon-taxable dividend income(26,795)(26,801)
Provision for uncertain tax positionsProvision for uncertain tax positions724 3,949 240 613 839 4,876 Provision for uncertain tax positions3533004651,200(2,716)200
Valuation allowanceValuation allowance2,766
Other - netOther - net690 1,195 238 150 262 121 Other - net7171,229251157273127
Total income taxes as reportedTotal income taxes as reported($297,067)($54,611)($125,773)($2,436)($26,243)($47,675)Total income taxes as reported$75,195$120,409$45,323$5,936$25,526($1,977)
Effective Income Tax RateEffective Income Tax Rate669.7 %(8.8 %)(41,237.0 %)(4.8 %)(19.3 %)(102.7 %)Effective Income Tax Rate20.1%15.5%21.4%15.7%10.0%(1.9%)

(a)See Note 2 to the financial statementsIncome Tax Audits - 2016-2018 IRS Audit” below for discussion of the Entergy Texas rate case settlement.resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit in 2023.
(b)See “Other Tax Matters - Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” below for discussion of the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes (ADIT)ADIT in 2018, 2019, and 20202023, 2022, 2021 and the tax legislation enactment in 2017.
(c)See “IncomeOther Tax AuditsMatters - 2012-2013 IRS AuditAct 293 Securitizations below for discussion of the resolution of the audit for Entergy Louisiana.
(d)See “Income Tax Audits - 2014-2015 IRS Audit” below for discussion of the resolutionEntergy Louisiana May 2022 and March 2023 storm cost securitizations.
(d)See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s reversal of a regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of the audit in 2020.Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
(e)See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the December 2022 FERC order related to the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint.
(f)See “Other Tax Matters - Stock Compensation” Arkansas and Louisiana Corporate Income Tax Rate Changesbelow for discussion of excess tax deductions

details.

109122

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Significant components of accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued for Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are as follows:
20202019 20232022
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities:Deferred tax liabilities:  Deferred tax liabilities:  
Plant basis differences - netPlant basis differences - net($4,795,422)($4,111,761)
Regulatory assetsRegulatory assets(429,996)(389,573)
Nuclear decommissioning trusts/receivablesNuclear decommissioning trusts/receivables(1,188,235)(1,015,542)
Pension, net funding(327,445)(348,260)
Pension, net regulatory asset
Combined unitary state taxesCombined unitary state taxes(7,723)(11,519)
Unbilled/deferred revenues(9,152)(10,218)
Power purchase agreements
Accumulated storm damage provision
Deferred fuelDeferred fuel(7,667)(8,360)
OtherOther(549,355)(445,378)
TotalTotal(7,314,995)(6,340,611)
Deferred tax assets:Deferred tax assets:  Deferred tax assets:  
Nuclear decommissioning liabilities968,464 929,251 
Nuclear and other decommissioning liabilities
Regulatory liabilitiesRegulatory liabilities791,927 806,777 
Pension and other post-employment benefitsPension and other post-employment benefits278,486 297,272 
Sale and leaseback102,477 102,420 
CompensationCompensation89,279 87,355 
Accumulated deferred investment tax creditAccumulated deferred investment tax credit57,379 56,013 
Provision for allowances and contingenciesProvision for allowances and contingencies71,598 126,886 
Power purchase agreements352,019 231,502 
Unbilled/deferred revenues
Net operating loss carryforwardsNet operating loss carryforwards1,580,109 1,133,197 
Capital losses and miscellaneous tax creditsCapital losses and miscellaneous tax credits21,291 22,597 
Valuation allowanceValuation allowance(328,581)(303,307)
OtherOther230,291 289,557 
TotalTotal4,214,739 3,779,520 
Non-current accrued taxes (including unrecognized tax benefits)Non-current accrued taxes (including unrecognized tax benefits)(1,185,227)(1,775,638)
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accruedAccumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued($4,285,483)($4,336,729)

Entergy’s estimated tax attributes carryovers and their expiration dates as of December 31, 20202023 are as follows:
Carryover DescriptionCarryover AmountYear(s) of expiration
Federal net operating losses before 1/1/2018$6.14.2 billion2023-20372028-2037
Federal net operating losses - 1/1/2018 forward$14.613.8 billionN/A
State net operating losses$19.73.9 billion2021-20402028-2042
FederalState net operating losses with no expiration$11.1 billionN/A
Other federal and state charitable contributionscarryforwards$449523.6 million2021-20252024-2037
Miscellaneous federal and state credits$77.5124.9 million2021-20402024-2043

110

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

As a result of the accounting for uncertain tax positions, the amount of the deferred tax assets reflected in the financial statements is less than the amount of the tax effect of the federal and state net operating loss carryovers, tax credit carryovers, and other tax attributes generated and reflected on income tax returns. Entergy evaluates the available positive and negative evidence to estimate whether sufficient future taxable income of the appropriate character will be generated to realize the benefits of existing deferred tax assets. When the evaluation
123

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



indicates that Entergy will not be able to realize the existing benefits, a valuation allowance is recorded to reduce deferred tax assets to the realizable amount.

Because it is more likely than not that the benefits from certain state net operating losslosses and other deferred tax assets will not be utilized, valuation allowances totaling $329$372 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $303$372 million as of December 31, 20192022 have been provided on the deferred tax assets related to federal and state jurisdictions in which Entergy does not currently expect to be able to utilize certain separate company tax return attributes, preventing realization of such deferred tax assets. Certain accelerated tax deductions which generated taxable losses in various taxing jurisdictions, and which have a limited term carryover period, have resulted in the impairment of the realizability of such carryovers and are reflected in the valuation allowance disclosed above.

Significant components of accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued for the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities:      
Plant basis differences - net($1,421,272)($2,639,079)($810,120)($272,187)($671,072)($450,559)
Regulatory assets(241,427)(500,395)(41,519)(23,618)(104,562)(76,522)
Nuclear decommissioning trusts/receivables(154,106)(173,402)— — — (139,858)
Pension, net regulatory asset(96,853)(82,305)(24,342)(9,216)(17,522)(18,895)
Deferred fuel— (17,065)(21,137)(1,563)(29,194)(37)
Accumulated storm damage provision— — — — (1,387)— 
Power purchase agreements15,993 (112,292)1,140 (12,516)(4,551)— 
Other(21,187)(126,952)(6,844)(4,270)(3,301)(9,051)
Total(1,918,852)(3,651,490)(902,822)(323,370)(831,589)(694,922)
Deferred tax assets:      
Regulatory liabilities296,278 575,459 54,586 42,921 41,137 240,310 
Nuclear and other decommissioning liabilities118,301 9,055 — — 97 19,259 
Pension and other post-employment benefits(28,868)46,837 (10,064)(19,354)(21,977)(2,641)
Accumulated deferred investment tax credit6,761 27,902 3,446 4,431 1,672 11,717 
Provision for allowances and contingencies23,956 70,297 10,072 25,846 8,659 225 
Unbilled/deferred revenues5,962 (20,375)6,194 1,045 8,365 — 
Compensation4,054 6,078 3,649 1,268 2,181 406 
Net operating loss carryforwards94,321 459,553 8,375 26,227 61 35,089 
Capital losses and miscellaneous tax credits7,137 13,073 7,613 15,684 1,655 13,211 
Other17,072 52,438 1,556 (235)1,740 — 
Total544,974 1,240,317 85,427 97,833 43,590 317,576 
Non-current accrued taxes (including unrecognized tax benefits)(63,175)19,731 (4,349)29,922 (26,906)(28,398)
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued($1,437,053)($2,391,442)($821,744)($195,615)($814,905)($405,744)
124

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities:      
Plant basis differences - net($1,181,456)($2,513,138)($691,675)($115,841)($614,134)($448,010)
Regulatory assets(244,624)(457,102)(44,358)(24,738)(95,717)(68,742)
Nuclear decommissioning trusts/receivables(107,858)(118,172)— — — (92,527)
Pension, net regulatory asset(93,139)(82,891)(22,256)(9,604)(18,111)(17,889)
Deferred fuel(35,205)(49,792)(37,333)(2,560)(54,204)(128)
Accumulated storm damage provision— (31,337)— — (3,876)— 
Power purchase agreements(8,296)(11,181)— (9,372)(22,014)— 
Other(76,813)(126,350)(26,752)(21,977)(4,126)(14,364)
Total(1,747,391)(3,389,963)(822,374)(184,092)(812,182)(641,660)
Deferred tax assets:      
Regulatory liabilities236,318 508,594 54,454 27,438 47,248 237,452 
Nuclear and other decommissioning liabilities139,499 12,883 — 97 18,940 
Pension and other post-employment benefits(28,463)52,414 (9,196)(18,114)(20,867)(2,481)
Accumulated deferred investment tax credit7,171 29,271 3,641 4,438 1,829 11,151 
Provision for allowances and contingencies26,432 15,741 10,300 26,671 7,755 — 
Unbilled/deferred revenues6,211 (2,405)5,826 4,090 7,572 — 
Compensation3,361 5,207 2,316 1,107 1,712 308 
Net operating loss carryforwards10,491 307,175 10,140 12,146 27,620 20,639 
Capital losses and miscellaneous tax credits719 2,774 5,152 11,006 3,728 8,261 
Other24,969 41,310 6,849 11,105 729 — 
Total426,708 972,964 89,483 79,887 77,423 294,270 
Non-current accrued taxes (including unrecognized tax benefits)(177,551)42,121 (47,139)(281,054)(9,468)(28,680)
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued($1,498,234)($2,374,878)($780,030)($385,259)($744,227)($376,070)

111125

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Significant components of accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued for the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 are as follows:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities:      
Plant basis differences - net($1,117,948)($2,481,976)($623,796)($83,457)($620,669)($407,125)
Regulatory assets(188,284)(95,135)(22,381)(20,276)(47,684)(56,496)
Nuclear decommissioning trusts/receivables(156,123)(148,040)(131,985)
Pension, net funding(93,486)(95,854)(24,922)(11,564)(19,481)(20,330)
Deferred fuel(4,210)(1,706)(1,393)(314)
Other(54,753)(76,735)(27,565)(26,334)(141)(12,521)
Total(1,610,594)(2,901,950)(700,370)(143,024)(687,975)(628,771)
Deferred tax assets:      
Regulatory liabilities273,774 218,278 56,022 31,248 47,991 163,534 
Nuclear decommissioning liabilities123,319 7,767 (419)121 29,916 
Pension and other post-employment benefits(24,747)72,724 (6,763)(13,997)(17,132)(1,344)
Sale and leaseback102,477 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credit7,971 31,155 2,261 4,197 2,088 9,706 
Provision for allowances and contingencies22,179 7,071 16,799 24,529 (4,094)
Power purchase agreements9,662 3,381 1,140 (5,324)(30,932)
Unbilled/deferred revenues4,242 (23,382)2,989 877 5,909 
Compensation2,264 3,240 1,670 761 1,308 48 
Net operating loss carryforwards119,555 363,806 54,262 26,564 53,052 
Capital losses and miscellaneous tax credits9,309 12,317 7,014 
Other16,036 6,958 3,507 8,128 2,232 
Total554,255 700,307 131,887 88,881 60,543 311,353 
Non-current accrued taxes (including unrecognized tax benefits)(229,784)63,121 (78,191)(284,571)(11,990)(42,417)
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued($1,286,123)($2,138,522)($646,674)($338,714)($639,422)($359,835)

112

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Deferred tax liabilities:      
Plant basis differences - net($979,033)($1,987,025)($565,202)($133,073)($551,365)($380,594)
Regulatory assets(170,949)(79,117)(10,528)(16,867)(59,745)(52,662)
Nuclear decommissioning trusts/receivables(120,306)(113,830)(100,621)
Pension, net funding(102,685)(98,743)(27,325)(11,859)(19,961)(21,609)
Deferred fuel(2,637)(609)(666)(4,380)(55)
Other(82,682)(94,139)(27,905)(25,909)2,059 (7,350)
Total(1,455,655)(2,375,491)(631,569)(188,374)(633,392)(562,891)
Deferred tax assets:      
Regulatory liabilities250,410 283,507 53,421 33,258 65,602 121,011 
Nuclear decommissioning liabilities111,078 56,300 52,633 
Pension and other post-employment benefits(21,828)74,881 (5,844)(12,666)(15,406)(898)
Sale and leaseback102,480 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credit8,285 32,534 2,396 556 2,217 10,025 
Provision for allowances and contingencies5,365 77,298 12,963 24,022 4,024 
Power purchase agreements(15,087)18,004 1,147 7,961 26 
Unbilled/deferred revenues5,897 (28,081)4,715 1,428 5,544 
Compensation2,550 3,670 1,625 496 1,282 75 
Net operating loss carryforwards112,658 65,178 21,492 5,056 
Capital losses and miscellaneous tax credits45 7,857 
Other12,541 35,401 999 9,027 2,004 
Total471,869 618,692 92,959 69,138 65,293 293,186 
Non-current accrued taxes (including unrecognized tax benefits)(199,340)(707,714)(56,222)(235,300)(17,314)(544,235)
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued($1,183,126)($2,464,513)($594,832)($354,536)($585,413)($813,940)

113

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The Registrant Subsidiaries’ estimated tax attributes carryovers and their expiration dates as of December 31, 20202023 are as follows:

 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
Federal net operating losses before 1/1/2018$0— million$0.8 billion$1.7— million$0.1 billion$0 billion— million$0.9 billion$0 billion$0 billion— million
Year(s) of expirationN/A2035-2037N/A2037N/AN/A
Federal net operating losses - 1/1/2018 forward$4.40.5 billion$1.42.8 billion$1.910.8 million$17.7 million$1.8 billion$0.3 billion$2.7 billion$00.1 billion
Year(s) of expirationN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A
State net operating losses$4.50.4 billion$45.7 billion$20.1 billion$1.30.2 billion$01 million$00.2 billion
Year(s) of expiration2028-2032N/A2040-2042N/A2028N/A
Misc. federal credits$10 million$16.9 million$3.9 million$16.1 million$0.8 million$4.8 million
Year(s) of expiration2023-20252038-20432035-20402035-20432038-20402038-20432037-20402037-2043N/A2039-2043N/A2029-2043
Misc. federalState credits$2.9 million$9.3 million$1.28 million$14.8 million$2.61.6 million$1.319 million
Year(s) of expiration2038-20402035-20402038-20402037-20402029-20402029-2040
State credits$0 million$0 million$0 million$0million$2.9 million$13.1 million
Year(s) of expirationN/AN/A2024-2026N/AN/A2027-203320262021-20232024-2027

As a result of the accounting for uncertain tax positions, the amount of the deferred tax assets reflected in the financial statements is less than the amount of the tax effect of the federal and state net operating loss carryovers and tax credit carryovers.

Unrecognized tax benefits

Accounting standards establish a “more-likely-than-not” recognition threshold that must be met before a tax benefit can be recognized in the financial statements.  If a tax deduction is taken on a tax return but does not meet the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold, an increase in income tax liability, above what is payable on the tax return, is required to be recorded.  A reconciliation of Entergy’s beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Gross balance at January 1Gross balance at January 1$7,383,154 $7,181,482 $4,871,846 
Additions based on tax positions related to the current yearAdditions based on tax positions related to the current year669,207 731,276 2,276,614 
Additions for tax positions of prior yearsAdditions for tax positions of prior years98,591 151,628 506,142 
Reductions for tax positions of prior years(935,735)(681,232)(274,600)
Settlements(1,515,878)(198,520)
Reductions for tax positions of prior years (a)
Settlements (a)
Gross balance at December 31Gross balance at December 315,699,339 7,383,154 7,181,482 
Gross balance at December 31
Gross balance at December 31
Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:   Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:  
Carryovers and refund claims(4,710,214)(5,831,587)(5,957,992)
Loss and tax credit carryovers
Cash paid to taxing authoritiesCash paid to taxing authorities(10,000)(10,000)(10,000)
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes, refund claims and payments (a)$979,125 $1,541,567 $1,213,490 
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes and payments (b)

114

Table(a)Amounts in 2023 are primarily related to the resolution of Contentsthe 2016-2018 IRS audit as discussed in “Income Tax Audits - 2016-2018 IRS Audit” below.
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

(a)(b)Potential tax liability above what is payable on tax returnsreturns.

The balances of unrecognized tax benefits include $2,208$1,899 million, $2,421$3,254 million, and $2,161$2,256 million as of December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, respectively, which, if recognized, would lower the effective income tax rates.  Because of the effect of deferred tax accounting, the remaining balances of unrecognized tax benefits of $3,491$541 million, $4,962$3,140 million, and $5,020$3,504 million as of December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, respectively, if
126

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

disallowed, would not affect the annual effective income tax rate but would accelerate the payment of cash to the taxing authority to an earlier period.

Entergy accrues interest expense, if any, related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense.  Entergy’s December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 accrued balance for the possible payment of interest is approximately $44$39 million, $48$50 million, and $44$52 million, respectively. Interest (net-of-tax) of $(4)($11) million, $4$8 million, and $7($4) million was recorded in 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, respectively.

A reconciliation of the Registrant Subsidiaries’ beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits for 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 is as follows:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Gross balance at January 1, 2020$1,341,242 $2,381,653 $566,287 $716,773 $21,406 $473,331 
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year9,403 35,681 5,619 2,430 504,362 4,013 
Additions for tax positions of prior years13,400 10,508 1,156 294 799 4,606 
Reductions for tax positions of prior years(11,346)(679,601)(24,173)(80,267)(5,559)(41,466)
Settlements11,936 (1,107,946)828 316 924 (418,832)
Gross balance at December 31, 20201,364,635 640,295 549,717 639,546 521,932 21,652 
Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:      
Loss carryovers(1,112,628)(640,295)(465,679)(451,922)(507,720)(7,413)
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes and payments$252,007 $0 $84,038 $187,624 $14,212 $14,239 
2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Gross balance at January 1, 2023$1,452,819 $1,350,836 $547,548 $638,726 $389,366 $23,702 
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year (a)2,249 332,320 209 78 196 752 
Additions for tax positions of prior years— — — — 94,793 — 
Reductions for tax positions of prior years (b)(148,558)(458,072)(16,853)(191,336)(67,156)(9,532)
Settlements (b)(1,237,313)(361,041)(525,251)(428,137)(1,994)(621)
Gross balance at December 31, 202369,197 864,043 5,653 19,331 415,205 14,301 
Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:      
Loss and tax credit carryovers(34,683)(735,612)(3,778)(11,721)(381,561)(14,301)
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes$34,514 $128,431 $1,875 $7,610 $33,644 $— 

2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Gross balance at January 1, 2019$1,298,662 $2,400,171 $508,765 $686,687 $17,802 $467,487 
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year (a)84,335 28,705 68,594 40,676 2,312 5,496 
Additions for tax positions of prior years20,399 25,090 1,651 489 1,299 2,186 
Reductions for tax positions of prior years(62,154)(72,313)(12,723)(11,079)(7)(1,838)
Gross balance at December 31, 20191,341,242 2,381,653 566,287 716,773 21,406 473,331 
Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:      
Loss carryovers(1,134,187)(1,573,257)(506,976)(445,430)(3,944)(8,392)
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes and payments$207,055 $808,396 $59,311 $271,343 $17,462 $464,939 
2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Gross balance at January 1, 2022$1,408,494 $604,628 $549,569 $639,497 $552,295 $23,356 
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year (a)40,502 750,320 185 72 173 690 
Additions for tax positions of prior years6,233 10,262 1,122 393 801 761 
Reductions for tax positions of prior years(2,410)(14,374)(3,328)(1,236)(163,903)(1,105)
Gross balance at December 31, 20221,452,819 1,350,836 547,548 638,726 389,366 23,702 
Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:      
Loss and tax credit carryovers(1,277,414)(1,328,916)(504,940)(455,928)(377,054)(23,702)
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes$175,405 $21,920 $42,608 $182,798 $12,312 $— 

115127

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




2018Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Gross balance at January 1, 2018($117,716)$2,518,457 $15,122 $679,544 $16,399 $445,511 
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year (a)1,430,828 30,577 493,039 2,261 1,978 18,271 
Additions for tax positions of prior years31,612 77,372 3,878 12,972 1,722 7,255 
Reductions for tax positions of prior years(21,619)(158,510)(3,253)(8,081)(2,262)(3,253)
Settlements(24,443)(67,725)(21)(9)(35)(297)
Gross balance at December 31, 20181,298,662 2,400,171 508,765 686,687 17,802 467,487 
Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:      
Loss carryovers(1,173,839)(1,597,826)(478,268)(420,813)(3,199)(42,228)
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes and payments$124,823 $802,345 $30,497 $265,874 $14,603 $425,259 
2021Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Gross balance at January 1, 2021$1,364,635 $640,295 $549,717 $639,546 $521,932 $21,652 
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year30,419 13,437 684 1,050 32,616 1,753 
Additions for tax positions of prior years15,013 9,304 1,504 2,315 1,897 
Reductions for tax positions of prior years(1,573)(58,408)(2,336)(1,105)(4,568)(1,946)
Gross balance at December 31, 20211,408,494 604,628 549,569 639,497 552,295 23,356 
Offsets to gross unrecognized tax benefits:      
Loss and tax credit carryovers(992,643)(604,628)(388,728)(484,899)(540,694)(8,576)
Unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes$415,851 $— $160,841 $154,598 $11,601 $14,780 

(a)The primary additions for Entergy TexasLouisiana in 20202022 and Entergy Mississippi in 20182023 are related to the mark-to-market treatmentEntergy Louisiana securitizations as discussed in “Other Tax Matters - Tax Accounting MethodsAct 293 Securitizationsbelow. The primary additions for Entergy Arkansas
(b)Amounts in 20182023 are primarily related to the nuclear decommissioning costs treatment andresolution of the mark-to-market treatment2016-2018 IRS audit as discussed in “OtherIncome Tax MattersAudits - Tax Accounting Methods2016-2018 IRS Audit” below.

The Registrant Subsidiaries’ balances of unrecognized tax benefits included amounts which, if recognized, would have reduced income tax expense as follows:
December 31,
December 31,December 31,
202020192018 202320222021
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas$259.3 $203.3 $85.4 
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana$63.8 $556.3 $594.0 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$50.7 $1.9 $1.5 
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans$203.5 $242.7 $246.2 
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas$6.1 $5.7 $5.1 
System EnergySystem Energy$0.5 $0 $0 

Accrued balances for the possible payment of interest related to unrecognized tax benefits for the Registrant Subsidiaries are as follows:
December 31,
December 31,December 31,
202020192018 202320222021
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas$2.3 $3.1 $1.7 
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana$3.4 $14.2 $17.9 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$1.9 $1.7 $1.2 
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans$3.9 $4.7 $2.7 
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas$0.9 $1.1 $0.9 
System EnergySystem Energy$11.9 $14.5 $13.2 

116128

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The Registrant Subsidiaries record interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense.  No penalties were recorded in 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018.2021. Interest (net-of-tax) was recorded as follows:
202020192018
(In Millions)
2023202320222021
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas($0.8)$1.4 $0.2 
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana($10.8)($3.7)$3.8 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$0.2 $0.5 $0.2 
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans($0.8)$2.0 $0.6 
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas($0.2)$0.2 $0.5 
System EnergySystem Energy($2.6)$1.3 $4.7 

Income Tax Audits

Entergy and its subsidiaries file U.S. federal and various state income tax returns.  IRS examinations are complete for years before 2016.2019. All state taxing authorities’ examinations are complete for years before 2015.2014. Entergy regularly defends its positions and works with the IRS to resolve audits.  The resolution of audit issues could result in significant changes to the amounts of unrecognized tax benefits in the next twelve months.

2012-20132016-2018 IRS Audit

The IRS completed its examination of the 2012 and 20132016 through 2018 tax years and issued its 2012-2013a Revenue Agent Report (RAR) for each federal filer under audit in June 2018.November 2023. Entergy agreed to all proposed adjustments contained in the RAR.RARs. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries recorded all the material effects resulting from the RARs in the fourth quarter of these adjustments in June 2018.2023.

As a result of the issuance of the RAR, Entergy Louisiana was able to recognize previously unrecognized tax benefits of $52 million related to the Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita contingent sharing obligation associated with the Louisiana Act 55 financing.Utility Restructurings

2014-2015 IRS Audit

The IRS completed its examination of the 2014In 2017, Entergy New Orleans undertook an internal restructuring, and 2015 tax years and issued its 2014-2015 RAR in November 2020.2018, Entergy agreed to all proposed adjustments contained in the RAR.Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries recorded the effects of the adjustments associated with the audit in 2020.

In October 2015 two of Entergy’s Louisiana utilities, Entergy Gulf States LouisianaArkansas and Entergy Louisiana, combined their businesses into a legal entityMississippi also participated in internal restructurings under which is identified asthese three Utility operating companies joined Entergy Louisiana herein.as wholly-owned subsidiaries of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC. The structure of the business combinationchange in ownership required Entergy to recognize a gainEntergy Arkansas’s nuclear decommissioning liabilities for income tax purposes, which resulted in anrecognition of a gain for income tax purposes and a corresponding increase in the tax basis of assets, in accordance with the assetsInternal Revenue Code and Treasury Regulations. Entergy determined that there was uncertainty regarding the treatment of certain aspects of the restructurings and recorded provisions for uncertain tax positions which are now considered to be effectively settled in accordance with accounting standards. The reversal of such provisions for uncertain tax positions results in a reduction of income tax expense of $156 million for Entergy Louisiana. This resulted in recognition in 2015 of a $334Arkansas, $1 million permanent differencefor Entergy Mississippi, and income tax benefit, net of the uncertain tax position recorded on the transaction.$6 million for Entergy New Orleans.

Primarily relatedThe IRS also required Entergy New Orleans to resolutionreverse a tax gain associated with the 2017 restructuring that had been previously recognized, allowing Entergy New Orleans to reduce its tax expense by $39 million.

After the restructuring, Entergy Arkansas adopted a new method of the business combination issues, completion of the 2014-2015 IRS audit in 2020 resulted in a $230 million reduction to deferredaccounting for income tax expense for Entergy. This reduction to deferred income tax expense includes: Entergy Louisiana reversingpurposes in which its provision for uncertain tax position with respect to the business combination,nuclear decommissioning costs are treated as production costs of electricity includable in cost of goods sold, which resulted in a $1.8 billion reduction to deferredin taxable income on its 2018 tax expense of $383 million; Entergy Corporation recordingreturn that was treated as an increase to deferredunrecognized tax expense of $61 million and Entergy Wholesale Commodities recording an increase to deferred tax expense of $105 million from the re-measurement of deferred tax assets associatedbenefit. In conjunction with the resolved uncertainaudit, Entergy agreed with the IRS adjustments concerning the nuclear decommissioning tax position; and miscellaneous other individually insignificant benefits totaling $13 million.position allowing Entergy Arkansas to include $102 million of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold.

The completion of the 2014-2015 tax audit also resulted in a $31 million reduction to income tax expense associated with Entergy Louisiana’s method of accounting related to the adoption of tangible property regulations.
117129

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




As a resultMark-to-Market Method of the settlement of the tangible property regulation tax position, Entergy Louisiana was required to record a $33 million ($24 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect its obligation to customers pursuant to a prior regulatory settlement.

Finally, upon completion of the 2014-2015 tax audit, Entergy New Orleans recorded a reduction to income tax expense of $8 million associated with claims for mark-to-market deductions.Accounting

In the first quarter 2020, Entergy and the IRS agreed on the treatment of funds received by2016, Entergy Louisiana in conjunction withelected mark-to-market income tax treatment for various wholesale electric power purchase and sale agreements, including Entergy Louisiana’s contract to purchase electricity from the Act 55 financing of Hurricane Isaac storm costs, whichVidalia hydroelectric facility and from System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement as well as other intercompany power purchase agreements. The election resulted in a $2 billion deductible temporary difference. The IRS allowed the mark-to-market tax method of accounting associated with the Vidalia contract and various other third-party and intercompany wholesale electric power purchase and sale agreements. The IRS disallowed the net reduction of incomedeductions associated with the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which did not have an effect on net tax expense of approximately $32 million. Asexpense. The net allowance resulted in a result of the settlement, the position was partially sustained, and Entergy Louisiana recorded a reduction of income tax expense of approximately $58 million primarily due to the reversal of a provision for uncertain tax positions of $132 million and a corresponding reduction of income tax expense primarily associated with the effect of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act rate reduction discussed below.

In 2017, Entergy New Orleans also elected mark-to-market income tax treatment for the Unit Power Sales Agreement and various intercompany wholesale electric contracts which resulted in a $1 billion deductible temporary difference. The IRS allowed the mark-to-market tax method of accounting associated with various intercompany and third-party wholesale electric contracts. The IRS disallowed the net deductions associated with the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which did not have an effect on net tax expense. The net allowance resulted in a reversal of a provision for uncertain tax positions of $139 million and a corresponding reduction of income tax expense.

In 2018, Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi each accrued approximately $2 billion in deductible temporary differences related to mark-to-market tax accounting for the Unit Power Sales Agreement and various wholesale electric contracts. The IRS allowed the mark-to-market tax method of accounting associated with various intercompany and third-party wholesale electric contracts. The IRS disallowed the net deductions associated with the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which did not have an effect on net tax expense. The effective settlement of the mark-to-market tax position for Entergy Arkansas resulted in the accrual of an increase to tax expense of $40 million, which was offset by approximately $5 million of miscellaneous excess ADIT recognized as a result of the 2016-2018 IRS audit resolution. The net increase to tax expense is deferred as a regulatory asset, as discussed within the “Regulatory and Other Matters” section below.

Restructuring of Entergy’s Non-Utility Operations Business

During the 2016 to 2018 audit period, the ownership of certain of Entergy’s non-utility operations business nuclear power plants (previously reported as part of Entergy Wholesale Commodities) was restructured. Such restructuring transactions required Entergy to recognize the plants’ nuclear decommissioning liabilities for income tax purposes. The accrual of the nuclear decommissioning liabilities also required Entergy to recognize a gain for income tax purposes, a significant portion of which resulted in an increase in the tax basis of the assets. Because certain aspects of the restructuring transactions involved uncertainty, Entergy recorded a provision for uncertain tax positions. The IRS did not propose adjustments to the tax treatment of the restructuring transactions resulting in a net decrease to income tax expense of $288 million from the reversal of the provision for uncertain tax positions in fourth quarter 2023.

Reduction of Net Operating Loss Carryovers

The IRS audit reduced Entergy’s net operating loss carryover by $8 billion. A portion of Entergy’s audit adjustments were not offset by losses which resulted in a tax liability of $79 million, which was fully offset by prior deposits made by Entergy. Entergy received an assessment of interest in excess of prior deposits of $13 million in December 2023, and such interest was paid in January 2024.

Net operating loss carryovers were reduced by $4 billion for Entergy Arkansas, $1 billion for Entergy Louisiana, $2 billion for Entergy Mississippi, $1 billion for Entergy New Orleans, and $40 million for System
130

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Energy. The IRS audit adjustments were also factored into the agreed-upon settlement.settle-up required under Entergy’s intercompany income tax allocation agreement, and such amounts were settled in the fourth quarter of 2023.

Regulatory and Other Matters

Additional customer credits related to the audit outcome may be due in accordance with prior regulatory agreements associated with the Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana business combination and Entergy New Orleans restructuring and general rate-making principles. A regulatory liability and associated regulatory charge of $38 million and $60 million ($28 million and $44 million net-of-tax) were recorded for Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans, respectively. The inclusion of the effects of the audit on customer rates is subject to the review and approval of the retail regulators. Additionally, a regulatory asset for income tax associated with deficient ADIT of $35 million, $2 million, and $3 million, was recorded for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy Mississippi, respectively. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy Arkansas’s regulatory activity related to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and for discussion of the settlement of Entergy Arkansas’s 2023 formula rate plan.

As noted above, Entergy accrues interest expense related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense. As a result of the IRS settlement,audit resolution, Entergy Louisiana recorded a $29reversed approximately $24 million ($21 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect its obligation to customers pursuantof interest related to the LPSC Hurricane Isaac Act 55 financing order.allowance of previously unrecognized tax benefits.

Additional effectsReversal of net deferred credits associated with the accounting for income taxes upon the resolution of the completionIRS audit resulted in a reduction/(increase) of the 2014-2015 IRSincome tax audit are discussed below within Tax Accounting Methods.expense of $9 million, $42 million, ($2) million, $2 million, $2 million, and $1 million for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy, respectively.

Included in the effect of the IRS audit on the results of operations was the measurement of deferred tax assets and liabilities influenced by the 2017 enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act income tax rate change discussed below. With the conclusion of the audit, there are no remaining federal unrecognized tax benefits affected by the rate differential which could impact income tax expense and the regulatory liability for income taxes in future periods.

State Income Tax Audits

As a result of income tax audit adjustments proposed by the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration, an Entergy subsidiary in the non-utility operations business recorded a provision in third quarter 2022 for uncertain tax positions of approximately $21 million, which includes interest expense.

Other Tax Matters

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)

Deferred tax liabilities and assets have been adjusted for the effect of the enactment of the TCJA, signed by President Trump on December 22, 2017.The most significant effect of the TCJA for Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries was the change in the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018. Other significant provisionsEntergy had remaining regulatory liabilities of $1.0 billion and their effect on Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are summarized below.

The TCJA limited the deduction for net business interest expense to 30 percent$1.3 billion as of adjusted taxable income, which is similar to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. The limitation does not apply to interest expense that is properly allocable to a trade or business classified as a regulated public utility.This was further modified by a temporary provision of the CARES Act resulting in an increase of the adjusted taxable income limitation from 30% to 50% for tax years that begin in 2019 or 2020.

The IRS issued proposed regulations relating to this limitation in November 2018 and July 2020.The IRS issued certain final regulations in July 2020 and January 2021, which were published in the Federal Register in September 2020 and January 2021, respectively.The proposed regulations are generally to be effective for taxable years ending after the date Treasury adopted the regulations as final. The final regulations will be effective for Entergy beginning with the 2021 tax year. Taxpayers may apply the rules of the proposed regulations to a taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017, as long as taxpayers consistently apply the rules of the proposed regulations.The proposed and final regulations provide that if 90% of a tax group’s consolidated assets consist of regulated utility property, the entire consolidated tax group will be treated as a regulated public utility and all of the consolidated group’s interest expense will be currently tax deductible.

As a result of the limitation under TCJA, Entergy recorded limitations in 2018 and 2019 and recorded a deferred tax asset on the nondeductible portion, as it has an unlimited carryover period. Entergy recorded a valuation allowance of $24 million due to a lack of earnings from sources other than the Utility. No limitation was recorded in 2020.

The TCJA limited the net operating loss (NOL) deduction for a given year to 80% of taxable income, effective with respect to losses arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017.Only NOLs generated after December 31, 2017 are subject to the 80% limitation. A temporary provision of the CARES Act (discussed below) removes this limitation and allows corporate taxpayers to fully offset taxable income with NOLs carried to tax years
118

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

beginning before 2021.Prior law generally provided a two-year carryback and 20-year carryforward for NOLs. The TCJA does not allow a carryback period but does provide for the indefinite carryforward of NOLs arising in tax years ending after December 31, 2017.However, with the enactment of the CARES Act, a temporary provision allows for a five-year carryback of 2018-2020 NOLs. Because of the indefinite carryforward, the new limitations on NOL utilization are not expected to have a material effect on Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

The TCJA also modified Internal Revenue Code section 162(m), which limits the deduction for compensation with respect to certain covered employees to no more than $1 million per year. The IRS issued proposed regulations relating to this limitation in December 2019 and final regulations in December 2020. The significant provisions of the TCJA and associated proposed and final regulations require inclusion of performance-based compensation and an expanded definition of “covered employees” in the annual computation of the section 162 limitation. The TCJA amendments and associated proposed regulations resulted in an increase in disallowed compensation expense, but this limitation does not have a material effect on Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

With respect to the federal corporate income tax rate change from 35% to 21% in 2017, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries recorded a regulatory liability associated with the decrease in the net accumulated deferred income tax liability, which is often referred to as “excess ADIT,” a significant portion of which has been paid to customers in 2019 and 2020 in the form of lower rates. Entergy’s December 31, 20202023 and December 31, 2019 balance sheets reflect a regulatory liability of $1.6 billion and $1.7 billion,2022, respectively, as a result ofmainly associated with the re-measurement of deferred tax assets and liabilities from the income tax rate change, subsequent amortization of excess ADIT, and payments to customers during 2019since the enactment of the TCJA. In addition to the protected and 2020. unprotected excess ADIT amounts, the net regulatory liability for income taxes includes other regulatory assets and liabilities for income taxes mainly for AFUDC, which is described in Note 1 to the financial statements.

Entergy’s regulatory liability for income taxes includes a gross-up at the applicable tax rate because of the effect that excess ADIT has on the ratemaking formula. The regulatory liability for income taxes includes the effect
131

Table of a)Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



of (1) the reduction of the net deferred tax liability resulting in excess ADIT, b)and (2) the tax gross-up of excess ADIT, and c) the effect of the new tax rate on the previous net regulatory asset for income taxes. For the same reasons, theADIT. The Registrant Subsidiaries’ December 31, 20202023 and December 31, 20192022 balance sheets reflect net regulatory liabilities for income taxes as follows:
20202019
(In Millions)
202320232022
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas$467 $487 
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana$479 $531 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$224 $237 
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans$59 $59 
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas$205 $253 
System EnergySystem Energy$152 $143 

Excess ADIT is generally classified into two categories: 1)(1) the portion that is subject to the normalization requirements of the TCJA, i.e.,referred to as “protected”, and 2)(2) the portion that is not subject to such normalization provisions, referred to as “unprotected”. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s $106 million reversal of a regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of the TCJA, recorded in fourth quarter 2023. The majority of the remaining unamortized Excess ADIT as of December 31, 2023 is classified as protected. The TCJA provides that the normalization method of accounting for income taxes is required for excess ADIT associated with public utility property. The TCJA provides for the use of the average rate assumption method (ARAM) for the determination of the timing of the return of excess ADIT associated with such property. Under ARAM, the excess ADIT is reduced over the remaining life of the asset. Remaining asset lives vary for each Registrant Subsidiary, but the average life of public utility property is typically 30 years or longer. Entergy will amortize the protected portion of the excess ADIT in conformity with the normalization requirements. The Registrant Subsidiaries’ net regulatory liability for income taxes as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, includes protected excess ADIT as follows:
119

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




20202019
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas$490 $490 
Entergy Louisiana$721 $797 
Entergy Mississippi$248 $261 
Entergy New Orleans$61 $62 
Entergy Texas$215 $228 
System Energy$173 $186 

During the second quarter of 2018, the Registrant Subsidiaries began payingreturning unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes, associated with the effects of the Act,TCJA, to their customers through rate riders and other means approved by their respective regulatory commissions. Paymentauthorities. Return of the unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes results in a reduction in the regulatory liability for income taxes and a corresponding reduction in income tax expense. This has a significant effect onmanner of regulatory accounting affects the effective tax rate for the period as compared to the statutory tax rate. The Registrant Subsidiaries’ net regulatory liability forThere was no return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes as offor Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2020 and2023. For the year ended December 31, 2019, includes unprotected excess ADIT as follows:
20202019
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas$11 $9 
Entergy Louisiana$223 $242 
Entergy New Orleans$3 $9 
Entergy Texas$54 $83 
System Energy$16 $0 

The2022, the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes reduced Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ regulatory liability for income taxes as followsby $53 million for 2020Entergy, including $25 million for Entergy Louisiana, $1 million for Entergy New Orleans, and 2019:
20202019
(In Millions)
Entergy$74 $273 
Entergy Arkansas$8 $126 
Entergy Louisiana$31 $39 
Entergy New Orleans$6 $14 
Entergy Texas$29 $87 
System Energy$0 $7 
$27 million for Entergy Texas.

In addition to the protected and unprotected excess ADIT amounts, the net regulatory liability for income taxes includes other regulatory assets and liabilities for income taxes associated with AFUDC, which is described in Note 1 to the financial statements.

For a discussionInflation Reduction Act of the proceedings commenced or other responses by Entergy’s regulators to the Act, see Note 2 to the financial statements.2022

Included inThe Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, signed into law on August 16, 2022, significantly expanded federal tax incentives for clean energy production, including the effectextension of production tax credits to solar projects and certain qualified nuclear power plants. Additionally, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 enacted a 1% excise tax on the buyback of public company stock and a new corporate alternative minimum tax. There are no effects on the financial statements of Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries as of and for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 related to the enactment of the computationlaw. See the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for additional discussion of the changes in deferred tax assets and liabilities iseffects of the recognition threshold and measurementInflation Reduction Act of uncertain tax positions resulting in unrecognized tax benefits.2022.
The final economic outcome of such unrecognized tax benefits is generally the result of a negotiated settlement with the IRS that often differs from the amount that is recorded as realizable under GAAP.The intrinsic uncertainty with respect to all such tax positions means that the difference between current estimates of such amounts likely to be realized
120132

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

and actual amounts realized upon settlement may have an effect on income tax expense and the regulatory liability for income taxes in future periods.

Entergy anticipates that the TCJA, including the federal corporate income tax rate change, may continue to have ramifications that require adjustments in the future as certain events occur.These events include: 1) the evaluation by regulators in allRestructuring of Entergy’s jurisdictions regarding the ratemaking treatment of TCJA and excess ADIT; 2) IRS audit adjustments to or amendments of federal and state income tax returns that include modifications to the computation of taxable income resulting from TCJA; and 3) additional guidance, interpretations, or rulings by the U.S. Department of the Treasury or the IRS.The potential exists for these types of events to resultNon-Utility Operations Business in future tax expense adjustments because of the difference in the federal corporate income tax rate between past and future periods and the effect of the tax rate change on ratemaking.In turn, these items also could potentially affect the regulatory liability for income taxes.

Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act

In response to the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, President Trump signed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) into law on March 27, 2020. The CARES Act provisions that result in the most significant opportunities for tax relief to Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are (i) permitting a five-year carryback of 2018-2020 NOLs, (ii) removing the 80 percent limitation on NOLs carried to tax years beginning before 2021, (iii) increasing the limitation on interest expense deductibility for 2019 and 2020 (iv) accelerating available refunds for minimum tax credit carryforwards, modifying limitations on charitable contributions during 2020, and (v) delaying the payment of employer payroll taxes. Entergy deferred approximately $64 million of 2020 payroll tax payments, which will be payable in two installments of $32 million on December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2022.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities Restructuring

In the third quarter 2018, Entergy completed a restructuring of the investment holdings in one of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plant decommissioning trusts that resulted in an adjustment to tax basis for the trust.The accounting standards provide that a taxable temporary difference does not exist if the tax law provides a means by which an amount can be recovered without incurrence of tax.The restructuring allows Entergy to recover assets from the trust without incurring tax.As such, the tax basis recognized resulted in the reversal of a deferred tax liability and reduction of income tax expense of approximately $107 million.

In the fourth quarter 2019, two separate events occurred resulting in a reduction of tax expense of $174 million. In November 2019 an Entergy Wholesale Commodities subsidiary recognized a reduction in income tax expense of $18 million in connection with the accounting method on power contracts associated with the Palisades nuclear power station. Additionally,2020, Entergy’s ownership of Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3Palisades was restructured. The restructuring required Entergy to recognize Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3Palisades’ nuclear decommissioning liabilitiesliability for income tax purposes resulting in a tax accounting permanent difference that reduced income tax expense, net of unrecognized tax benefits, by $156$9.2 million. The accrual of the nuclear decommissioning liabilitiesliability also required Entergy to recognize a gain for income tax purposes, a portion of which resulted in an increase in the tax basis of the assets. Recognition of the gain and the increase in the tax basis of the assets represents a tax accounting temporary difference.

Immediately prior to the restructuring, through its ownership of Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3, Entergy donated property to Stony Brook University and recognized an associated tax deduction resulting in a decrease to tax expense of $19 million.

In the fourth quarter 2020, Entergy’s ownership of Palisades was restructured.The restructuring required Entergy to recognize Palisades’ nuclear decommissioning liability for income tax purposes resulting in a tax accounting permanent difference that reduced income tax expense, net of unrecognized tax benefits, by
121

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




$9.2 million.The accrual of the nuclear decommissioning liability also required Entergy to recognize a gain for income tax purposes, a portion of which resulted in an increase in the tax basis of the assets.Recognition of the gain and the increase in the tax basis of the assets represents a tax accounting temporary difference.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities Tax Audit

A state income tax audit involving Entergy Wholesale Commodities was concluded during the third quarter 2018. Upon conclusion of the audit, subsidiaries within Entergy Wholesale Commodities reversed a portion of the provision for uncertain tax positions totaling approximately $23 million, net of tax and interest paid.

Tax Accounting Methods

InCertain Entergy subsidiaries have elected to apply the fourth quarter 2015, System Energy and Entergy Louisiana adopted a newmark-to-market method of accounting for income tax return purposes into wholesale power purchase agreements as appropriate under the Internal Revenue Code and U.S. Treasury Regulations. The mark-to-market tax gain or loss computed each year is based on an estimated fair market valuation which their nuclear decommissioning costs will be treated as production costsincludes analyses of electricity includable in cost of goods sold. The new method resulted in a reduction of taxable income of $1.2 billion for System Energymarket prices and $2.2 billion for Energy Louisiana.conditions.

In conjunction with the 2014-2015 IRS audit discussed above, the IRS issued proposed adjustments concerning the nuclear decommissioning tax position allowing System Energy to include $102 million of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold, and Entergy Louisiana to include $221 million of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold. Entergy, System Energy, and Entergy Louisiana agreed to the proposed adjustments included in the RAR.

As a result of System Energy being allowed to include part of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold, System Energy and Entergy recorded a deferred tax liability of $26 million. System Energy also recorded federal and state taxes payable of $402 million.However, on a consolidated basis, Entergy utilized tax loss carryovers to offset the federal taxable income adjustment and did not record federal taxes payable as a result of the outcome of this uncertain tax position.

As a result of Entergy Louisiana being allowed to include part of its decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy recorded a deferred tax liability of $60 million. Both Entergy Louisiana and Entergy utilized tax loss carryovers to offset the taxable income adjustment and accordingly did not record taxes payable as a result of the outcome of this uncertain tax position.

The partial disallowance of this uncertain tax position to include the decommissioning liability in cost of goods sold resulted in a $1.5 billion decrease in the balance of unrecognized tax benefits related to federal and state taxes for Entergy. Additionally, both System Energy and Entergy Louisiana recorded a reduction to their balances of unrecognized tax benefits for federal and state taxes of $461 million and $1.1 billion, respectively.

Entergy Arkansas adopted the same method of accounting for its nuclear decommissioning costs which resulted in a $1.8 billion reduction in taxable income on its 2018 tax return.

The tax treatment of Entergy Louisiana’s accrued regulatory liabilities associated with the Vidalia purchased power agreement and business combination guaranteed customer credits, which are discussed further in Note 2, has been resolved with the IRS in a manner that results in a $190 million increase to previously reported taxable income. Entergy Louisiana and Entergy utilized tax loss carryovers to offset the taxable income adjustment, however, which allowed both Entergy Louisiana and Entergy to reduce their balances of federal and state unrecognized tax benefits by $74 million.

In 2016, Entergy Louisiana elected mark-to-market income tax treatment for various wholesale electric power purchase and sale agreements, including Entergy Louisiana’s contract to purchase electricity from the Vidalia hydroelectric facility and from System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The election resulted in a
122

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

$2.2 billion deductible temporary difference. In 2017, Entergy New Orleans also elected mark-to-market income tax treatment for wholesale electric contracts which resulted in a $1.1 billion deductible temporary difference. In 2018, Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi accrued deductible temporary differences related to mark-to-market tax accounting for wholesale electric contracts of $2.1 billion and $1.9 billion, respectively. Additionally, in 2020, Entergy Texas elected mark-to-market income tax treatment for wholesale electric power purchase and sale agreements which resulted in a $2.5 billion deductible temporary difference.

Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi Internal Restructuring

In the fourth quarter 2018, Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi became wholly-owned subsidiaries of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC. The change in ownership required Entergy to recognize Entergy Arkansas’s nuclear decommissioning liabilities for income tax purposes resulting in a tax accounting permanent difference that reduced income tax expense, net of unrecognized tax benefits, by $165 million. The accrual of the nuclear decommissioning liabilities also required Entergy to recognize a gain for income tax purposes, a portion of which resulted in an increase in the tax basis of the assets. Recognition of the gain and the increase in the tax basis of the assets represents a tax accounting temporary difference. Additionally, Entergy recorded a $5 million reduction of income tax expense associated with state income tax effects resulting in a total reduction of income tax expense of $170 million from the restructuring. Entergy recorded a regulatory liability of $40 million ($30 million net-of-tax) which partially offsets the reduction of income tax expense. Entergy Arkansas’s member’s equity increased by $94 million as a result of the restructuring. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the internal restructuring.

ArkansasLouisiana Corporate Income Tax Rate ReductionChanges

In AprilSince 2019, the State of Arkansas has enacted corporate income tax law changes that phasephased in an Arkansas tax rate reductionreductions from the currentformer rate of 6.5% to 6.2% in 2021, and 5.9% in 2022.  The2022, 5.1% in 2023, and 4.8% in 2024.  Legislation in 2022 accelerated the rate reduction will eventually reduce Entergy Arkansas’s combined federal and state applicableto 5.3% for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2023, accelerating the rate by less than 0.5% once fully adopted.reductions that were originally scheduled to take effect in the 2025 tax year. As a result of the rate reduction,reductions, Entergy Arkansas computed a finalhas recorded regulatory liabilityliabilities for income taxes of approximately $26 million, $15 million, $11 million, and $21 million which includesin 2023, 2022, 2021, and 2020, respectively. The regulatory liabilities include a tax gross-up related to the treatment of income taxes in the retail and wholesale ratemaking formulas. Duringformulas and have been or are scheduled to be included in the first quarter of 2021, Entergy Arkansas refunded $7.5 million to Arkansas retail customers which represents the retail portion of the $21 million referenced above offset by the effect of adjustments to the regulatory liability for TCJA excess accumulated deferred income taxes.approved rate mechanisms. The Arkansas tax law enactment also phases in an increase to the net operating loss carryover period from five to ten years.

Consolidated Income Tax ReturnPursuant to legislation enacted in 2021 and approved by Louisiana citizens by amendment to the state constitution, beginning January 1, 2022, federal income taxes paid are no longer deductible for state income tax purposes, and the top Louisiana corporate income tax rate has been reduced from 8% to 7.5%. As a result of this change in Louisiana tax law, the Louisiana applicable tax rate increased by 0.85%. Accordingly, deferred tax assets and liabilities were adjusted to reflect the new applicable federal and state rates. In fourth quarter 2021, Entergy Corporation

In September 2019, Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC andrecorded a net increase to its regulated, wholly-owned subsidiaries including Entergy Arkansas,deferred tax asset of $27 million. Entergy Louisiana Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans became eligiblerecorded net increases to and joined the Entergy Corporation consolidated federal income tax group.  As a result of these four Utility operating companies re-joining the Entergy Corporation consolidated tax return group, Entergy was able to recognize a $41 milliontheir deferred tax assetliabilities before consideration of the tax gross-up of $77 million and $8 million, respectively, which were offset by regulatory assets for income taxes. Therefore, these increases had no effect on tax expense. However, the increase of deferred tax assets associated with a previously unrecognized Arkansascertain assets reduced tax expense for Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans by $6 million and $2 million, respectively. The legislation enacted in 2021 also provided that Louisiana net operating loss carryover.losses generally have an indefinite carryover period.

Additionally,Act 293 Securitizations

As described in September 2019, Entergy Texas issued $35 million of 5.375% Series A preferred stock with a liquidation value of $25 per share resulting in the disaffiliation and de-consolidation of Entergy Texas from the consolidated federal income tax return of Entergy Corporation.  These changes will not affect the accrual or allocation of income taxes for the Registrant Subsidiaries. See Note 62 to the financial statements, for discussionEntergy Louisiana has implemented two separate securitization transactions authorized under Act 293 of the preferred stock issuance.

Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021. The first transaction occurred in May of 2022 and the second occurred in March of 2023. Act 293 provides that the LURC contribute the net bond proceeds to a LURC-sponsored trust. Over the 15-year term of the Act 293 bonds, the respective storm trusts will make distributions to Entergy Louisiana, a beneficiary of the storm trusts, that will not be taxable to Entergy Louisiana. Additionally, Entergy Louisiana will not include the receipt of the system
123133

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Vermont Yankeerestoration charges in taxable income because the right to receive the system restoration charges has been granted directly to the LURC, and Entergy Louisiana only acts as an agent to collect those charges on behalf of the LURC.

The Vermont Yankee transaction resultedAccordingly, the securitizations provided for a tax accounting permanent difference resulting in net reductions of income tax expense for Entergy generatingLouisiana of approximately $133 million in March 2023 and $290 million in May 2022, both after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax positions. Entergy’s recognition of reduced income tax expense was offset by other tax changes resulting in a net deferredreduction of income tax assetexpense for Entergy of approximately $129 million in January 2019.  The deferredMarch 2023 and $283 million in May 2022, both after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax asset could not be fully realized bypositions.

In recognition of its obligations described in LPSC ancillary orders issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceedings, Entergy Louisiana recorded regulatory liabilities of $103 million ($76 million net-of-tax) in the first quarter 2019; accordingly, Entergy accrued a net tax expense of $292023 and $224 million on the disposition of Vermont Yankee.($165 million net-of-tax) in second quarter 2022 to reflect its obligation to provide credits to its customers. See Note 142 to the financial statements for further discussion of the Vermont Yankee transaction.

Stock Compensation

In accordance with stock compensation accounting rules, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries recognized excess tax deductions as a reduction of income tax expense in the first quarter 2020. Due to the vesting and exercise of certain Entergy stock-based awards, Entergy recorded a permanent tax reduction of approximately $24.7 million, including $4.8 million for Entergy Arkansas, $8.6 million for Entergy Louisiana $2.7 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.5 million for Entergy New Orleans, $2.7 million for Entergy Texas,March 2023 and $1.3 million for System Energy.May 2022 storm cost securitizations.


NOTE 4.  REVOLVING CREDIT FACILITIES, LINES OF CREDIT, AND SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Entergy Corporation has in place a credit facility that has a borrowing capacity of $3.5 billion and expires in September 2024.June 2028.  The facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $20 million of the total borrowing capacity of the credit facility.  The commitment fee is currently 0.225% of the undrawn commitment amount.  Commitment fees and interest rates on loans under the credit facility can fluctuate depending on the senior unsecured debt ratings of Entergy Corporation.  The weighted averageweighted-average interest rate for the year ended December 31, 20202023 was 2.35%6.52% on the drawn portion of the facility.  FollowingThe following is a summary of the borrowingsamounts outstanding and capacity available under the credit facility as of December 31, 2020.2023:
CapacityCapacityBorrowingsLetters of CreditCapacity AvailableCapacityBorrowingsLetters of CreditCapacity Available
(In Millions)(In Millions)(In Millions)
$3,500$3,500$165$6$3,329$3,500$—$3$3,497

Entergy Corporation’s credit facility requiresincludes a covenant requiring Entergy to maintain a consolidated debt ratio, as defined, of 65% or less of its total capitalization.  Entergy is in compliance with this covenant.  If Entergy fails to meet this ratio, or if Entergy Corporation or one of the Utility operating companiesRegistrant Subsidiaries (except Entergy New Orleans)Orleans and System Energy) defaults on other indebtedness or is in bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, an acceleration of the facilityEntergy Corporation credit facility’s maturity date may occur.

Entergy Corporation has a commercial paper program with a Board-approved program limit of up to $2 billion.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, Entergy Corporation had $1.627 billion$1,138.1 million of commercial paper outstanding.  The weighted-average interest rate for the year ended December 31, 20202023 was 1.39%5.44%.

124134

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas each had credit facilities available as of December 31, 20202023 as follows:
CompanyExpiration DateAmount of FacilityInterest Rate (a) Amount Drawn as of December 31, 2020Letters of Credit Outstanding as of December 31, 2020
Entergy ArkansasApril 2021$25 million (b)1.27%00
Entergy ArkansasSeptember 2024$150 million (c)1.27%00
Entergy LouisianaSeptember 2024$350 million (c)1.27%00
Entergy MississippiApril 2021$10 million (d)1.65%00
Entergy MississippiApril 2021$35 million (d)1.65%00
Entergy MississippiApril 2021$37.5 million (d)1.65%00
Entergy New OrleansNovember 2021$25 million (c)1.42%0$0.8 million
Entergy TexasSeptember 2024$150 million (c)1.65%0$1.3 million
CompanyExpiration DateAmount of FacilityInterest Rate (a) Amount Drawn
as of
December 31, 2023
Letters of Credit Outstanding as of December 31, 2023
Entergy ArkansasApril 2024$25 million (b)7.29%
Entergy ArkansasJune 2028$150 million (c)6.58%
Entergy LouisianaJune 2028$350 million (c)6.71%
Entergy MississippiJuly 2025$150 million6.58%
Entergy New OrleansJune 2024$25 million (c)7.08%
Entergy TexasJune 2028$150 million (c)6.71%$1.1 million

(a)The interest rate is the estimated interest rate as of December 31, 20202023 that would have been applied to outstanding borrowings under the facility.
(b)Borrowings under this Entergy Arkansas credit facility may be secured by a security interest in its accounts receivable at Entergy Arkansas’s option.
(c)The credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against a portion of the borrowing capacity of the facility as follows: $5 million for Entergy Arkansas; $15 million for Entergy Louisiana; $10 million for Entergy New Orleans; and $30 million for Entergy Texas.
(d)Borrowings under the Entergy Mississippi credit facilities may be secured by a security interest in its accounts receivable at Entergy Mississippi’s option. 

The commitment fees on the credit facilities range from 0.075% to 0.275%0.375% of the undrawn commitment amount.amount for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Texas, and of the entire facility amount for Entergy New Orleans. Each of the credit facilities requires the Registrant Subsidiary borrower to maintain a debt ratio, as defined, of 65% or less of its total capitalization. Each Registrant Subsidiary is in compliance with this covenant.

In addition, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas each entered into one or morehas an uncommitted standby letter of credit facilitiesfacility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO. FollowingMISO and for other purposes. The following is a summary of the uncommitted standby letter of credit facilities as of December 31, 2020:2023:
CompanyAmount of Uncommitted FacilityLetter of Credit FeeLetters of Credit Issued as of
December 31, 20202023
(a) (b)
Entergy Arkansas$25 million0.78%$15.8 million
Entergy Louisiana$125 million0.78%$2.217.1 million
Entergy Mississippi$65 million0.78%$120 million
Entergy New Orleans$15 million1.00%1.625%$10.5 million
Entergy Texas$5080 million0.70%1.250%$6.276.5 million

(a)As of December 31, 2020,2023, letters of credit posted with MISO covered financial transmission rightrights exposure of $1.2 million for Entergy Arkansas, $0.5 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.3 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.2 million for Entergy Mississippi, $0.2 million for Entergy New Orleans, and $0.5$0.1 million for Entergy Texas. See Note 15 to the financial statements for discussion of financial transmission rights.
(b)As of December 31, 2020,2023, in addition to the $1$20 million MISO letterletters of credit, Entergy Mississippi hashad $1 million ofin a non-MISO lettersletter of credit outstanding under this facility.

The short-term borrowings of the Registrant Subsidiaries are limited to amounts authorized by the FERC. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas have FERC-authorized short-term borrowing limits effective through April 2025. The FERC-authorized short-term borrowing
125135

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The short-term borrowings of the Registrant Subsidiaries are limited to amounts authorized by the FERC. The current FERC-authorized limitslimit for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy areis effective through July 14, 2022.March 2025. In addition to borrowings from commercial banks, these companies may also borrow from the Entergy Systemsystem money pool and from other internal short-term borrowing arrangements.  The money pool is an intercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing and lending arrangements, and the money pool and the other internal borrowing arrangements are inter-company borrowing arrangements designed to reduce the Utility subsidiaries’Registrant Subsidiaries’ dependence on external short-term borrowings.  Borrowings from internal and external short-term borrowings combined may not exceed the FERC-authorized limits.  The following are the FERC-authorized limits for short-term borrowings and the outstanding short-term borrowings as of December 31, 20202023 (aggregating both internal and external short-term borrowings) for the Registrant Subsidiaries:
AuthorizedBorrowings AuthorizedBorrowings
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas$250$0Entergy Arkansas$250$145
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana$450$0Entergy Louisiana$450$156
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$175$17Entergy Mississippi$200$74
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans$150$10Entergy New Orleans$150$22
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas$200$0Entergy Texas$200$—
System EnergySystem Energy$200$0System Energy$200$12

Vermont Yankee Credit Facility (Entergy Corporation)

In January 2019, Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee was transferred to NorthStar and its credit facility was assumed by Entergy Assets Management Operations, LLC (formerly Vermont Yankee Asset Retirement, LLC), Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee’s parent company that remains an Entergy subsidiary after the transfer. The credit facility has a borrowing capacity of $139 million and expires in December 2021.2024. The commitment fee is currently 0.20% of the undrawn commitment amount.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, $139 million in cash borrowings were outstanding under the credit facility.  The weighted averageweighted-average interest rate for the year ended December 31, 20202023 was 2.46%6.61% on the drawn portion of the facility. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the transfer of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee to NorthStar.

Variable Interest Entities (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy)

See Note 17 to the financial statements for a discussion of the consolidation of the nuclear fuel company variable interest entities (VIE)(VIEs).  To finance the acquisition and ownership of nuclear fuel, the nuclear fuel company VIEs have credit facilities and three of the four VIEs also issue commercial paper, details of which follow as of December 31, 2020:2023:
CompanyCompanyExpiration DateAmount of FacilityWeighted Average Interest Rate on Borrowings (a)Amount Outstanding as of December 31, 2020CompanyExpiration DateAmount of FacilityWeighted-Average Interest Rate on Borrowings (a)Amount Outstanding as of December 31, 2023
(Dollars in Millions) (Dollars in Millions)
Entergy Arkansas VIEEntergy Arkansas VIESeptember 2022$801.94%$12.2Entergy Arkansas VIEJune 2025$806.10%$70.2
Entergy Louisiana River Bend VIEEntergy Louisiana River Bend VIESeptember 2022$1051.95%$18.9Entergy Louisiana River Bend VIEJune 2025$1056.17%$46.6
Entergy Louisiana Waterford VIEEntergy Louisiana Waterford VIESeptember 2022$1051.72%$39.3Entergy Louisiana Waterford VIEJune 2025$1056.07%$29.5
System Energy VIESystem Energy VIESeptember 2022$1201.63%$0System Energy VIEJune 2025$1205.91%$21.5

(a)Includes letter of credit fees and bank fronting fees on commercial paper issuances by the nuclear fuel company variable interest entitiesVIEs for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy. The
126

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

nuclear fuel company variable interest entityVIE for Entergy Louisiana River Bend does not issue commercial paper, but borrows directly on its bank credit facility.

The commitment fees on the credit facilities are 0.125%0.100% of the undrawn commitment amount for the Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy VIEs. Each credit facility requires the respective lessee
136

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

of nuclear fuel (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, or Entergy Corporation as guarantor for System Energy) to maintain a consolidated debt ratio, as defined, of 70% or less of its total capitalization. Each lessee is in compliance with this covenant.

The nuclear fuel company variable interest entitiesVIEs had notes payable that arewere included in debt on the respective balance sheets as of December 31, 20202023 as follows:
CompanyDescriptionAmount
Entergy Arkansas VIE3.65%1.84% Series LN due July 20212026$90 million
Entergy Arkansas VIE3.17% Series M due December 2023$40 million
Entergy Louisiana River Bend VIE2.51% Series V due June 2027$70 million
Entergy Louisiana Waterford VIE5.94% Series J due September 20263.92% Series H due February 2021 (a)$40 million
Entergy Louisiana Waterford VIE3.22% Series I due December 2023$2070 million
System Energy VIE3.42% Series J due April 2021 (a)$100 million
System Energy VIE2.05% Series K due September 2027$90 million

(a)    Redeemed in February 2021.

In accordance with regulatory treatment, interest on the nuclear fuel company variable interest entities’VIEs’ credit facilities, commercial paper, and long-term notes payable is reported in fuel expense.

As of December 31, 2023, Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana and System Energy each havehas obtained financing authorizationsauthorization from the FERC that extendextends through July 14, 2022April 2025 for issuances by its nuclear fuel company variable interest entities.VIEs. System Energy has obtained financing authorization from the FERC that extends through March 2025 for issuances by its nuclear fuel company VIEs.


127137

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




NOTE 5.  LONG - TERM DEBT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Long-term debt for Entergy Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 consisted of:
Type of Debt and MaturityType of Debt and MaturityWeighted Average Interest Rate December 31, 2020Interest Rate Ranges at December 31,Outstanding at
December 31,
Type of Debt and MaturityWeighted-Average Interest Rate December 31, 2023Interest Rate Ranges at December 31,Outstanding at
 December 31,
20202019202020192023202220232022
   (In Thousands)  (In Thousands)
Mortgage BondsMortgage Bonds     Mortgage Bonds 
2020-20243.23%0.62% - 5.59%2.55% - 5.59%$4,400,000 $3,575,000 
2025-20293.35%2.14% - 4.44%2.4% - 4.44%4,113,000 3,735,000 
2030-20403.38%1.6% - 4.52%3.05% - 4.52%2,552,000 1,590,000 
2023-2027
2028-2032
2033-2041
2044-20662044-20664.12%2.65% - 5.5%3.55% - 5.625%6,380,000 5,170,000 
Governmental Bonds (a)Governmental Bonds (a)     Governmental Bonds (a) 
2021-20222.50%2.375% - 2.5%2.375% - 2.5%179,000 179,000 
2028-20303.45%3.375% - 3.5%3.375% - 3.5%198,680 198,680 
2023-2044
Securitization BondsSecuritization Bonds     Securitization Bonds 
2022-20273.59%2.04% - 5.93%2.04% - 5.93%177,522 302,145 
2023-2036
Variable Interest Entities Notes Payable (Note 4)Variable Interest Entities Notes Payable (Note 4)    Variable Interest Entities Notes Payable (Note 4)  
2021-20272.45%2.05% - 3.92%3.17% - 3.92%450,000 360,000 
2023-2027
Entergy Corporation NotesEntergy Corporation Notes     Entergy Corporation Notes 
due September 2020n/a0%5.125%450,000 
due July 2022n/a4.00%4.00%650,000 650,000 
due September 2025due September 2025n/a0.9%0800,000 
due September 2026due September 2026n/a2.95%2.95%750,000 750,000 
due June 2028
due June 2030due June 2030n/a2.80%0600,000 
due June 2031
due June 2050due June 2050n/a3.75%0600,000 
Entergy New Orleans Unsecured Term Loan due May 2022n/a3.00%3.00%70,000 70,000 
Entergy New Orleans Unsecured Term Loan due May 2023
Entergy New Orleans Unsecured Term Loan due June 2024
Entergy Mississippi Unsecured Term Loan due December 2023
System Energy Term Loan due November 2023 (b)
5 Year Credit Facility (Note 4)5 Year Credit Facility (Note 4)n/a2.35%3.77%165,000 440,000 
Entergy New Orleans Credit Facility (Note 4)n/a02.92%20,000 
Entergy Louisiana Credit Facility (Note 4)
Vermont Yankee Credit Facility (Note 4)
Vermont Yankee Credit Facility (Note 4)
Vermont Yankee Credit Facility (Note 4)Vermont Yankee Credit Facility (Note 4)n/a2.46%3.93%139,000 139,000 
Entergy Arkansas VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)Entergy Arkansas VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)n/a1.94%3.33%12,200 15,100 
Entergy Louisiana River Bend VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)Entergy Louisiana River Bend VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)n/a1.95%3.23%18,900 70,300 
Entergy Louisiana Waterford VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)Entergy Louisiana Waterford VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)n/a1.72%3.30%39,300 49,900 
System Energy VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)System Energy VIE Credit Facility (Note 4)n/a1.63%3.34%31,600 
Long-term DOE Obligation (b)192,018 191,114 
Long-term DOE Obligation (c)
Grand Gulf Sale-Leaseback ObligationGrand Gulf Sale-Leaseback Obligationn/a34,336 34,346 
Unamortized Premium and Discount - NetUnamortized Premium and Discount - Net  3,665 (16,124)
Unamortized Debt Issuance CostsUnamortized Debt Issuance Costs(160,420)(143,502)
OtherOther   5,575 12,096 
Total Long-Term DebtTotal Long-Term Debt   22,369,776 17,873,655 
Less Amount Due Within One YearLess Amount Due Within One Year  1,164,015 795,012 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One YearLong-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year $21,205,761 $17,078,643 
Fair Value of Long-Term DebtFair Value of Long-Term Debt $24,813,818 $19,059,950 

128138

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


(a)Consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds, some of which are secured by collateral mortgage bonds.
(b)The debt is secured by a series of collateral mortgage bonds.
(c)Pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the DOE for spent nuclear fuel disposal service.  The contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to April 7, 1983.  Entergy Arkansas is the only Entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee, plus accrued interest, in long-term debt.

The annual long-term debt maturities (excluding lease obligations and long-term DOE obligations) for debt outstanding as of December 31, 2020,2023, for the next five years are as follows:
 Amount
 (In Thousands)
2021$1,164,000 
2022$1,141,878 
2023$2,452,194 
2024$1,340,000 
2025$1,378,000 
 Amount
 (In Thousands)
2024$2,100,275 
2025$1,546,940 
2026$2,375,720 
2027$916,965 
2028$2,195,627 

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas and System Energy have obtained long-term financing authorizations from the FERC that extend through July 2022.April 2025.  The FERC-authorized long-term borrowing limit for System Energy is effective through March 2025. Entergy New Orleans has obtained long-term financing authorization from the City Council that extends through July 2022.December 2025. Entergy Arkansas has also obtained first mortgage bond/secured financing authorization from the APSC that extends through December 2022.

2025.

129139

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Long-term debt for the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 consisted of:
20202019 20232022
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas  Entergy Arkansas 
Mortgage Bonds:Mortgage Bonds:  Mortgage Bonds: 
3.75% Series due February 2021$350,000 $350,000 
3.05% Series due June 20233.05% Series due June 2023250,000 250,000 
3.7% Series due June 2024375,000 375,000 
3.70% Series due June 2024
3.5% Series due April 20263.5% Series due April 2026600,000 600,000 
4.0% Series due June 2028350,000 250,000 
4.00% Series due June 2028
5.15% Series due January 2033
5.30% Series due September 2033
4.95% Series due December 20444.95% Series due December 2044250,000 250,000 
4.20% Series due April 20494.20% Series due April 2049350,000 350,000 
2.65% Series due June 20512.65% Series due June 2051675,000 
4.90% Series due December 2052200,000 
4.75% Series due June 2063125,000 
3.35% Series due June 2052
4.875% Series due September 20664.875% Series due September 2066410,000 410,000 
Total mortgage bondsTotal mortgage bonds3,610,000 3,160,000 
Governmental Bonds (a):  
2.375% Series due 2021, Independence County (c)45,000 45,000 
Total governmental bonds45,000 45,000 
Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facility (Note 4):Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facility (Note 4):  
3.65% Series L due July 202190,000 90,000 
Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facility (Note 4):
Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facility (Note 4): 
3.17% Series M due December 20233.17% Series M due December 202340,000 40,000 
Credit Facility due September 2022, weighted avg rate 1.94%12,200 15,100 
3.17% Series M due December 2023
3.17% Series M due December 2023
1.84% Series N due July 2026
Credit Facility due June 2025, weighted-average rate 6.10%
Total variable interest entity notes payable and credit facilityTotal variable interest entity notes payable and credit facility142,200 145,100 
Securitization Bonds:  
2.30% Series Senior Secured due August 20217,259 
Total securitization bonds7,259 
Other:
Other:
Other:Other:   
Long-term DOE Obligation (b)Long-term DOE Obligation (b)192,018 191,114 
Unamortized Premium and Discount – NetUnamortized Premium and Discount – Net6,938 1,664 
Unamortized Debt Issuance CostsUnamortized Debt Issuance Costs(30,638)(34,936)
OtherOther1,989 2,007 
Total Long-Term DebtTotal Long-Term Debt3,967,507 3,517,208 
Less Amount Due Within One YearLess Amount Due Within One Year485,000 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One YearLong-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$3,482,507 $3,517,208 
Fair Value of Long-Term DebtFair Value of Long-Term Debt$4,355,632 $3,747,914 

130140

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

 20202019
 (In Thousands)
Entergy Louisiana  
Mortgage Bonds:  
3.95% Series due October 2020$0 $250,000 
4.8% Series due May 2021200,000 200,000 
3.3% Series due December 2022200,000 200,000 
4.05% Series due September 2023325,000 325,000 
0.62% Series due November 20231,100,000 
5.59% Series due October 2024300,000 300,000 
5.40% Series due November 2024400,000 400,000 
3.78% Series due April 2025110,000 110,000 
3.78% Series due April 2025190,000 190,000 
4.44% Series due January 2026250,000 250,000 
2.40% Series due October 2026400,000 400,000 
3.12% Series due September 2027450,000 450,000 
3.25% Series due April 2028425,000 425,000 
1.60% Series due December 2030300,000 
3.05% Series due June 2031325,000 325,000 
4.0% Series due March 2033750,000 750,000 
5.0% Series due July 2044170,000 170,000 
4.95% Series due January 2045450,000 450,000 
4.20% Series due September 2048900,000 600,000 
4.20% Series due April 2050525,000 525,000 
2.90% Series due March 2051650,000 
5.25% Series due July 2052200,000 
4.70% Series due June 2063100,000 
4.875% Series due September 2066270,000 270,000 
Total mortgage bonds8,690,000 6,890,000 
Governmental Bonds (a):  
3.375% Series due 2028, Louisiana Public Facilities Authority (c)83,680 83,680 
3.50% Series due 2030, Louisiana Public Facilities Authority (c)115,000 115,000 
Total governmental bonds198,680 198,680 
Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facilities (Note 4):  
3.38% Series R due August 202070,000 
3.92% Series H due February 202140,000 40,000 
3.22% Series I due December 202320,000 20,000 
2.51% Series V due June 202770,000 
Credit Facility due September 2022, weighted avg rate 1.95%18,900 70,300 
Credit Facility due September 2022, weighted avg rate 1.72%39,300 49,900 
Total variable interest entity notes payable and credit facilities188,200 250,200 
Securitization Bonds:  
2.04% Series Senior Secured due September 202310,980 34,185 
Total securitization bonds10,980 34,185 
Other:  
Unamortized Premium and Discount - Net(2,863)(17,372)
Unamortized Debt Issuance Costs(61,132)(58,089)
Other3,586 6,065 
Total Long-Term Debt9,027,451 7,303,669 
Less Amount Due Within One Year240,000 320,002 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$8,787,451 $6,983,667 
Fair Value of Long-Term Debt$10,258,294 $7,961,168 

 20232022
 (In Thousands)
Entergy Louisiana  
Mortgage Bonds:  
4.05% Series due September 2023$— $325,000 
0.62% Series due November 2023— 665,000 
5.59% Series due October 2024— 300,000 
0.95% Series due October 20241,000,000 1,000,000 
5.40% Series due November 2024400,000 400,000 
3.78% Series due April 2025110,000 110,000 
3.78% Series due April 2025190,000 190,000 
4.44% Series due January 2026250,000 250,000 
2.40% Series due October 2026400,000 400,000 
3.12% Series due September 2027450,000 450,000 
3.25% Series due April 2028425,000 425,000 
1.60% Series due December 2030300,000 300,000 
3.05% Series due June 2031325,000 325,000 
2.35% Series due June 2032500,000 500,000 
4.00% Series due March 2033750,000 750,000 
3.10% Series due June 2041500,000 500,000 
5% Series due July 2044170,000 170,000 
4.95% Series due January 2045450,000 450,000 
4.20% Series due September 2048900,000 900,000 
4.20% Series due April 2050525,000 525,000 
2.90% Series due March 2051650,000 650,000 
4.75% Series due September 2052500,000 500,000 
4.875% Series due September 2066270,000 270,000 
Total mortgage bonds9,065,000 10,355,000 
Governmental Bonds (a):  
2.00% Series due June 2030, Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority (c)16,200 16,200 
2.50% Series due April 2036, Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority (c)182,480 182,480 
Total governmental bonds198,680 198,680 
Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facilities (Note 4):  
3.22% Series I due December 2023— 20,000 
5.94% Series J due September 202670,000 — 
2.51% Series V due June 202770,000 70,000 
Credit Facility due June 2025, weighted-average rate 6.17%46,600 13,100 
Credit Facility due June 2025, weighted-average rate 6.07%29,500 60,800 
Total variable interest entity notes payable and credit facilities216,100 163,900 
Other:  
Credit Facility due June 2027, weighted-average rate 7.75%— 50,000 
Unamortized Premium and Discount - Net(6,478)(8,482)
Unamortized Debt Issuance Costs(56,101)(63,698)
Other3,488 3,522 
Total Long-Term Debt9,420,689 10,698,922 
Less Amount Due Within One Year1,400,000 1,010,000 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$8,020,689 $9,688,922 
Fair Value of Long-Term Debt$8,414,512 $9,444,665 
131141

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




20202019 20232022
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi  Entergy Mississippi 
Mortgage Bonds:Mortgage Bonds:  Mortgage Bonds:  
3.1% Series due July 2023$250,000 $250,000 
3.10% Series due July 2023
3.75% Series due July 20243.75% Series due July 2024100,000 100,000 
3.25% Series due December 20273.25% Series due December 2027150,000 150,000 
2.85% Series due June 20282.85% Series due June 2028375,000 375,000 
5.0% Series due September 2033
2.55% Series due December 2033
4.52% Series due December 20384.52% Series due December 203855,000 55,000 
3.85% Series due June 20493.85% Series due June 2049435,000 435,000 
3.50% Series due June 20513.50% Series due June 2051170,000 
4.90% Series due October 20664.90% Series due October 2066260,000 260,000 
Total mortgage bondsTotal mortgage bonds1,795,000 1,625,000 
Other:Other:  Other: 
Unsecured Term Loan due December 2023, weighted-average rate 4.082%
Unamortized Premium and Discount – NetUnamortized Premium and Discount – Net3,685 6,127 
Unamortized Debt Issuance CostsUnamortized Debt Issuance Costs(18,108)(16,998)
Total Long-Term DebtTotal Long-Term Debt1,780,577 1,614,129 
Total Long-Term Debt
Total Long-Term Debt
Less Amount Due Within One YearLess Amount Due Within One Year
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One YearLong-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$1,780,577 $1,614,129 
Fair Value of Long-Term DebtFair Value of Long-Term Debt$2,021,432 $1,709,505 

 20202019
 (In Thousands)
Entergy New Orleans  
Mortgage Bonds:  
5.10% Series due December 2020$0 $25,000 
3.9% Series due July 2023100,000 100,000 
3.0% Series due March 202578,000 
4.0% Series due June 202685,000 85,000 
4.51% Series due September 203360,000 60,000 
3.75% Series due March 204062,000 
5.0% Series due December 205230,000 30,000 
5.50% Series due April 2066110,000 110,000 
Total mortgage bonds525,000 410,000 
Securitization Bonds:
2.67% Series Senior Secured due June 202742,850 54,443 
Total securitization bonds42,850 54,443 
Other:  
3.0% Unsecured Term Loan due May 202270,000 70,000 
Credit Facility due November 2021, weighted avg rate 2.92%20,000 
Payable to associated company due November 203512,529 14,367 
Unamortized Premium and Discount – Net(91)(129)
Unamortized Debt Issuance Costs(8,055)(7,775)
Total Long-Term Debt642,233 560,906 
Less Amount Due Within One Year1,618 26,838 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$640,615 $534,068 
Fair Value of Long-Term Debt$620,634 $523,846 

 20232022
 (In Thousands)
Entergy New Orleans  
Mortgage Bonds:  
3.90% Series due July 2023$— $100,000 
3.0% Series due March 202578,000 78,000 
4.0% Series due June 202685,000 85,000 
4.19% Series due November 203190,000 90,000 
4.51% Series due September 203360,000 60,000 
4.51% Series due November 203670,000 70,000 
3.75% Series due March 204062,000 62,000 
5.0% Series due December 205230,000 30,000 
5.50% Series due April 2066110,000 110,000 
Total mortgage bonds585,000 685,000 
Securitization Bonds:
2.67% Series Senior Secured due June 20276,245 18,770 
Total securitization bonds6,245 18,770 
Other:  
2.5% Unsecured Term Loan due May 2023— 70,000 
6.25% Unsecured Term Loan due June 202485,000 — 
Payable to associated company due November 20358,279 9,585 
Unamortized Premium and Discount – Net(6)(25)
Unamortized Debt Issuance Costs(7,068)(7,698)
Total Long-Term Debt677,450 775,632 
Less Amount Due Within One Year86,275 171,306 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$591,175 $604,326 
Fair Value of Long-Term Debt$602,716 $707,872 
132142

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

20202019 20232022
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas  Entergy Texas 
Mortgage Bonds:Mortgage Bonds:  Mortgage Bonds: 
2.55% Series due June 2021$125,000 $125,000 
4.1% Series due September 202175,000 75,000 
1.50% Series due September 2026
3.45% Series due December 20273.45% Series due December 2027150,000 150,000 
4.0% Series due March 20294.0% Series due March 2029300,000 300,000 
1.75% Series due March 20311.75% Series due March 2031600,000 
4.5% Series due March 20394.5% Series due March 2039400,000 400,000 
5.15% Series due June 20455.15% Series due June 2045250,000 250,000 
3.55% Series due September 20493.55% Series due September 2049475,000 300,000 
5.625% Series due June 2064135,000 
5.00% Series due September 2052
5.80% Series due September 2053
Total mortgage bondsTotal mortgage bonds2,375,000 1,735,000 
Securitization Bonds:Securitization Bonds:  Securitization Bonds: 
5.93% Series Senior Secured, Series A due June 202217,478 50,289 
4.38% Series Senior Secured, Series A due November 2023106,214 155,969 
3.051% Series Senior Secured, Series A Tranche A-1 due December 2028
3.051% Series Senior Secured, Series A Tranche A-1 due December 2028
3.051% Series Senior Secured, Series A Tranche A-1 due December 2028
3.697% Series Senior Secured, Series A Tranche A-2 due December 2036
Total securitization bondsTotal securitization bonds123,692 206,258 
Other:Other:  Other: 
Unamortized Premium and Discount - NetUnamortized Premium and Discount - Net14,064 (4,814)
Unamortized Debt Issuance CostsUnamortized Debt Issuance Costs(19,048)(17,510)
Other4,022 
Total Long-Term Debt
Total Long-Term Debt
Total Long-Term DebtTotal Long-Term Debt2,493,708 1,922,956 
Less Amount Due Within One YearLess Amount Due Within One Year200,000 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One YearLong-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$2,293,708 $1,922,956 
Fair Value of Long-Term DebtFair Value of Long-Term Debt$2,765,193 $2,090,215 

 20232022
 (In Thousands)
System Energy  
Mortgage Bonds:  
4.10% Series due April 2023$— $250,000 
2.14% Series due December 2025200,000 200,000 
6.00% Series due April 2028325,000 — 
Total mortgage bonds525,000 450,000 
Governmental Bonds (a):  
2.375% Series due June 2044, Mississippi Business Finance Corp. (c)83,695 83,695 
Total governmental bonds83,695 83,695 
Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facility (Note 4):  
2.05% Series K due September 202790,000 90,000 
Credit Facility due June 2025, weighted-average rate 5.91%21,500 72,600 
Total variable interest entity notes payable and credit facility111,500 162,600 
Other:  
Term Loan due November 2023, weighted-average rate 3.721% (c)— 50,000 
Grand Gulf Sale-Leaseback Obligation34,260 34,297 
Unamortized Premium and Discount – Net(10,451)(50)
Unamortized Debt Issuance Costs(5,545)(2,637)
Total Long-Term Debt738,459 777,905 
Less Amount Due Within One Year57 300,037 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$738,402 $477,868 
Fair Value of Long-Term Debt$696,168 $702,473 

(a)Consists of pollution control revenue bonds.
133
143

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




 20202019
 (In Thousands)
System Energy  
Mortgage Bonds:  
4.1% Series due April 2023$250,000 $250,000 
2.14% Series due December 2025200,000 
Total mortgage bonds450,000 250,000 
Governmental Bonds (a):  
2.5% Series due 2022, Mississippi Business Finance Corp.134,000 134,000 
Total governmental bonds134,000 134,000 
Variable Interest Entity Notes Payable and Credit Facility (Note 4):  
3.42% Series J due April 2021100,000 100,000 
2.05% Series K due September 202790,000 — 
Credit Facility due September 2022, weighted avg rate 1.63%31,600 
Total variable interest entity notes payable and credit facility190,000 131,600 
Other:  
Grand Gulf Sale-Leaseback Obligation34,336 34,346 
Unamortized Premium and Discount – Net(165)(144)
Unamortized Debt Issuance Costs(2,897)(1,697)
Other
Total Long-Term Debt805,274 548,107 
Less Amount Due Within One Year100,015 10 
Long-Term Debt Excluding Amount Due Within One Year$705,259 $548,097 
Fair Value of Long-Term Debt$840,540 $565,209 

(a)Consists of pollution control revenue bonds and environmental revenue bonds.
(b)Pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have contracts with the DOE for spent nuclear fuel disposal service.  The contracts include a one-time fee for generation prior to April 7, 1983.  Entergy Arkansas is the only Entergy company that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and includes the one-time fee, plus accrued interest, in long-term debt.
(c)The bonds aredebt is secured by a series of collateral mortgage bonds.

The annual long-term debt maturities (excluding lease obligations and long-term DOE obligations) for debt outstanding as of December 31, 2020,2023, for the next five years are as follows:

 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Thousands)
2021$485,000 $240,000 $0 $1,618 $200,000 $100,000 
2022$12,200 $258,200 $0 $71,326 $17,478 $134,000 
2023$290,000 $1,455,980 $250,000 $101,306 $106,214 $250,000 
2024$375,000 $700,000 $100,000 $1,275 $0 $0 
2025$0 $300,000 $0 $79,140 $0 $200,000 
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Thousands)
2024$375,000 $1,400,000 $100,000 $86,275 $— $— 
2025$70,200 $376,100 $— $79,140 $— $221,500 
2026$690,000 $720,000 $— $85,720 $130,000 $— 
2027$— $520,000 $150,000 $6,965 $150,000 $90,000 
2028$350,000 $425,000 $375,000 $719 $69,908 $325,000 

134

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Securitization Bonds

Entergy Arkansas Securitization Bonds

In June 2010 the APSC issued a financing order authorizing the issuance of bonds to recover Entergy Arkansas’s January 2009 ice storm damage restoration costs, including carrying costs of $11.5 million and $4.6 million of up-front financing costs.  In August 2010, Entergy Arkansas Restoration Funding, LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Arkansas, issued $124.1 million of storm cost recovery bonds, with a coupon of 2.30%.  Although the principal amount was not due until August 2021, Entergy Arkansas Restoration Funding made principal payments on the bonds in the amount of $7.3 million in 2020, after which the bonds were fully repaid.

Entergy Louisiana Securitization Bonds – Little Gypsy

In August 2011 the LPSC issued a financing order authorizing the issuance of bonds to recover Entergy Louisiana’s investment recovery costs associated with the canceled Little Gypsy repowering project.  In September 2011, Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding I, L.L.C., a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Louisiana, issued $207.2 million of senior secured investment recovery bonds.  The bonds havehad an interest rate of 2.04%.  Although the principal amount iswas not due until September 2023, Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding expects to makemade principal payments on the bonds in the amount of $11 million forin 2021, after which the bonds will bewere fully repaid.  With the proceeds, Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding purchased from Entergy Louisiana the investment recovery property, which is the right to recover from customers through an investment recovery charge amounts sufficient to service the bonds.  In accordance with the financing order, Entergy Louisiana will apply the proceeds it received from the sale of the investment recovery property as a reimbursement for previously-incurred investment recovery costs.  The investment recovery property is reflected as a regulatory asset on the consolidated Entergy Louisiana balance sheet.  The creditors of Entergy Louisiana do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding, including the investment recovery property, and the creditors of Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana has no payment obligations to Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding except to remit investment recovery charge collections.

Entergy New Orleans Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Isaac

In May 2015 the City Council issued a financing order authorizing the issuance of securitization bonds to recover Entergy New Orleans’s Hurricane Isaac storm restoration costs of $31.8 million, including carrying costs, the costs of funding and replenishing the storm recovery reserve in the amount of $63.9 million, and approximately $3 million of up-front financing costs associated with the securitization. In July 2015, Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding I, L.L.C., a company wholly owned and consolidated by Entergy New Orleans, issued $98.7 million of storm cost recovery bonds. The bonds have a coupon of 2.67%. Although the principal amount is not due until June 2027, Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding expects to make principal payments on the bonds over the next four yearsin 2024 in the amountsamount of $11.9 million for 2021, $12.2 million for 2022, $12.5 million for 2023, and $6.2 million, for 2024.after which the bonds will be fully repaid. With the proceeds, Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding purchased from Entergy New Orleans the storm recovery property, which is the right to recover from customers through a storm recovery charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. The storm recovery property is reflected as a regulatory asset on the consolidated Entergy New Orleans balance sheet. The creditors of Entergy New Orleans do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding, including the storm recovery property, and the creditors of Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy New Orleans. Entergy New Orleans has no payment obligations to Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding except to remit storm recovery charge collections.

135144

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Rita

In April 2007 the PUCT issued a financing order authorizing the issuance of securitization bonds to recover $353 million of Entergy Texas’s Hurricane Rita reconstruction costs and up to $6 million of transaction costs, offset by $32 million of related deferred income tax benefits.  In June 2007, Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding I, LLC, a company that is now wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, issued $329.5 million of senior secured transition bonds (securitization bonds). As of December 31, 2020, $17.5 million at 5.93% remain outstanding.Although the principal amount was not due until June 2022, Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding expects to makemade principal payments on the bonds in the amount of $17.5 million for 2021.

Within 2021, after which the proceeds, Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding purchased from Entergy Texas the transition property, which is the right to recover from customers through a transition charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds.  The transition property is reflected as a regulatory asset on the consolidated Entergy Texas balance sheet.  The creditors of Entergy Texas do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding, including the transition property, and the creditors of Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Texas.  Entergy Texas has no payment obligations to Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding except to remit transition charge collections.bonds were fully repaid.

Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Ike and Hurricane Gustav

In September 2009 the PUCT authorized the issuance of securitization bonds to recover $566.4 million of Entergy Texas’s Hurricane Ike and Hurricane Gustav restoration costs, plus carrying costs and transaction costs, offset by insurance proceeds.  In November 2009, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding, LLC (Entergy Texas Restoration Funding), a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, issued $545.9 million of senior secured transition bonds (securitization bonds). As of December 31, 2020, $106.2 million at 4.38% remain outstanding.Although the principal amount was not due until November 2023, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding made principal payments on the bonds in the amount of $54.3 million in 2022, after which the bonds were fully repaid.

Entergy Texas Securitization Bonds - Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri

In January 2022 the PUCT authorized the issuance of securitization bonds to recover $242.9 million of Entergy Texas’s Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri restoration costs, plus carrying costs, plus approximately $13.3 million relating to a system restoration regulatory asset related to Hurricane Harvey, plus up-front qualified costs. In April 2022, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II, LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, issued $290.85 million of senior secured system restoration bonds (securitization bonds), as follows:
Amount
(In Thousands)
Senior Secured System Restoration Bonds:
Tranche A-1 (3.051%) due December 2028$100,000 
Tranche A-2 (3.697%) due December 2036190,850 
Total senior secured system restoration bonds$290,850 

Although the principal amount of each tranche is not due until the dates given above, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II expects to make principal payments on the securitization bonds over the next twofour years in the amountamounts of $52$18.3 million for 2021 and $54.32024, $18.8 million for 2022.2025, $19.4 million for 2026, and $13.4 million for 2027 for Tranche A-1, after which Tranche A-1 will be fully repaid. Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II expects to begin principal payments for Tranche A-2 in 2027 with payments of $6.6 million in 2027 and $20.5 million in 2028.

With the proceeds, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II purchased from Entergy Texas the transition property, which is the right to recover from customers through a transitionsystem restoration charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. The transition property is reflected as a regulatory asset on the consolidated Entergy Texas balance sheet.expects to use the proceeds to reduce its outstanding debt. The creditors of Entergy Texas do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II, including the transition property, and the creditors of Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Texas. Entergy Texas has no payment obligations to Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II except to remit transitionsystem restoration charge collections.

145

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Grand Gulf Sale-Leaseback Transactions

In 1988, in two separate but substantially identical transactions, System Energy sold and leased back undivided ownership interests in Grand Gulf for the aggregate sum of $500 million.  The initial term of the leases expired in July 2015.  System Energy renewed the leases in December 2013 for fair market value with renewal terms expiring in July 2036. At the end of the new lease renewal terms, System Energy has the option to repurchase the leased interests in Grand Gulf or renew the leases at fair market value.  In the event that System Energy does not renew or purchase the interests, System Energy would surrender such interests and their associated entitlement of Grand Gulf’s capacity and energy.

System Energy is required to report the sale-leaseback as a financing transaction in its financial statements.  As such, it has recognized debt for the lease obligation and retained the portion of the plant subject to the sale-leaseback on its balance sheet. For financial reporting purposes, System Energy has recognized interest expense on the debt balance and depreciation on the applicable plant balance.  The lease payments are recognized as principal and interest payments on the debt balance. However, operating revenues include the recovery of the lease payments because the transactions are accounted for as a sale and leaseback for ratemaking purposes.  Consistent
136

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

with a recommendation contained in a FERC audit report, System Energy initially recorded as a net regulatory asset the difference between the recovery of the lease payments and the amounts expensed for interest and depreciation and continues to record this difference as a regulatory asset or liability on an ongoing basis, resulting in a 0 net balance for the regulatory asset at the end of the lease term.  The amount was a net regulatory liability of $55.6 million as of December 31, 2020 and 2019.

As of December 31, 2020,2023, System Energy, in connection with the Grand Gulf sale and leaseback transactions, had future minimum lease payments that are recorded as long-term debt, as follows, which reflects the effect of the December 2013 renewal:
Amount Amount
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
 
2021$17,188 
202217,188 
202317,188 
2024202417,188 
2025202517,188 
2026
2027
2028
Years thereafterYears thereafter189,063 
TotalTotal275,003 
Less: Amount representing interestLess: Amount representing interest240,667 
Present value of net minimum lease paymentsPresent value of net minimum lease payments$34,336 


NOTE 6.  PREFERRED EQUITY AND NONCONTROLLING INTERESTS (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Texas)

In May 2021, Entergy’s certificate of incorporation was amended and restated to provide authority to issue up to 1,000,000 shares of preferred stock, no par value per share, and to decrease from 500,000,000 to 499,000,000 the number of shares of common stock, par value of $0.01 per share, authorized for issuance. As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, no preferred stock has been issued.

137
146

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




NOTE 6.   PREFERRED EQUITY (Entergy Corporation and Entergy Texas)

The number of shares and units authorized and outstanding and dollar value of preferred stock, preferred membership interests, and non-controlling interestnoncontrolling interests for Entergy Corporation subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are presented below.
 Shares/Units
Authorized
Shares/Units
Outstanding
  
 202020192020201920202019
Entergy Corporation(Dollars in Thousands)
Utility:      
Preferred Stock or Preferred Membership Interests without sinking fund:      
Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, 7.5% Series (a)110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 $107,425 $107,425 
Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, 6.25% Series (b)15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 14,366 14,366 
Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, 6.75% Series (c)75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 73,370 73,370 
Entergy Texas, 5.375% Series1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 35,000 35,000 
Total Utility Preferred Stock or Preferred Membership Interests without sinking fund1,600,000 1,600,000 1,600,000 1,600,000 230,161 230,161 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities:      
Preferred Stock without sinking fund:      
Entergy Finance Holding, Inc. 8.75% (d)250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 24,249 24,249 
Total Subsidiaries’ Preferred Stock or Preferred Membership Interests without sinking fund1,850,000 1,850,000 1,850,000 1,850,000 $254,410 $254,410 

 Shares/Units
Authorized
Shares/Units
Outstanding
  
 202320222023202220232022
(Dollars in Thousands)
Preferred stock or preferred membership interests without sinking fund presented between liabilities and equity:      
Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, 7.5% Series (a)110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 $107,425 $107,425 
Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, 6.25% Series (b)15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 14,366 14,366 
Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, 6.75% Series (c)75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 73,370 73,370 
Entergy Finance Holding, Inc. 8.75% (d)250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 24,249 24,249 
Total preferred stock or preferred membership interests without sinking fund presented between liabilities and equity450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 219,410 219,410 
Preferred stock without sinking fund and noncontrolling interests presented as equity:
Entergy Texas, 5.375% Series1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 35,000 35,000 
Entergy Texas, 5.10% Series (e)150,000 150,000 — — — — 
Entergy Arkansas Noncontrolling Interest— — — — 21,599 27,825 
Entergy Louisiana Noncontrolling Interests— — — — 45,107 31,735 
Entergy Mississippi Noncontrolling Interest— — — — 18,753 3,347 
Total preferred stock without sinking fund and noncontrolling interests presented as equity1,550,000 1,550,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 120,459 97,907 
Total subsidiaries’ preferred stock or preferred membership interests without sinking fund and noncontrolling interests2,000,000 2,000,000 1,850,000 1,850,000 $339,869 $317,317 

(a)In October 2015, Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC issued 110,000 units of $1,000 liquidation value 7.5% Series A Preferred Membership Interests, all of which are outstanding as of December 31, 2020.2023. The distributions are cumulative and payable quarterly. These units are redeemable on or after January 1, 2036, at Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC’s option, at the fixed redemption price of $1,000 per unit. Dollar amount outstanding is net of $2,575 thousand of preferred stock issuance costs.
(b)In November 2017, Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC issued 15,000 units of $1,000 liquidation value 6.25% Series B Preferred Membership Interests, all of which are outstanding as of December 31, 2020.2023. The distributions are cumulative and payable quarterly. These units are redeemable on or after February 28, 2038, at Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC’s option, at the fixed redemption price of $1,000 per unit. Dollar amount outstanding is net of $634 thousand of preferred stock issuance costs.
(c)In November 2018, Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC issued 75,000 units of $1,000 liquidation value 6.75% Series C Preferred Membership Interests, all of which are outstanding as of December 31, 2020.2023. The distributions are cumulative and payable quarterly. These units are redeemable on or after February 28, 2039, at Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC’s option, at the fixed redemption price of $1,000 per unit. Dollar amount outstanding is net of $1,630 thousand of preferred stock issuance costs.
147

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



(d)In December 2013, Entergy Finance Holding, Inc. issued 250,000 shares of $100 par value 8.75% Series Preferred Stock, all of which are outstanding as of December 31, 2020.2023. The dividends are cumulative and payable quarterly. The preferred stock is redeemable on or after December 16, 2023, at Entergy Finance Holding, Inc.’s option, at the fixed redemption price of $100 per share. Dollar amount outstanding is net of $751 thousand of preferred stock issuance costs.
138

Table of Contents(e)
Currently, all shares are held by Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial StatementsCorporation.

The number of shares authorized and outstanding and dollar value of preferred stock for Entergy Texas as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are presented below.

Shares
Authorized
and Outstanding
Call Price per
Share as of
December 31,
Shares
Authorized
and Outstanding
Call Price per
Share as of
December 31,
20202019202020192020 20232022202320222023
Entergy Texas Preferred StockEntergy Texas Preferred Stock  (Dollars in Thousands) Entergy Texas Preferred Stock (Dollars in Thousands) 
Without sinking fund:Without sinking fund:     Without sinking fund: 
Cumulative, $25 par value:Cumulative, $25 par value:     Cumulative, $25 par value: 
5.375% Series (a)5.375% Series (a)1,400,000 1,400,000 $35,000 $35,000 $0 
5.10% Series (b)
Total without sinking fundTotal without sinking fund1,400,000 1,400,000 $35,000 $35,000  
Total without sinking fund
Total without sinking fund1,550,000 1,550,000 $38,750 $38,750  

(a)In September 2019, Entergy Texas issued $35 million of 5.375% Series A Preferred Stock, a total of 1,400,000 shares with a liquidation value of $25 per share, all of which are outstanding as of December 31, 2020.2023. The dividends are cumulative and payable quarterly. The preferred stock is redeemable on or after October 15, 2024 at Entergy Texas’s option, at a fixed redemption price of $25 per share.
(b)In November 2021, Entergy Texas issued $3.75 million of 5.10% Series B Preferred Stock, a total of 150,000 shares with a liquidation value of $25 per share, all of which are outstanding and held by Entergy Corporation as of December 31, 2023. The dividends are cumulative and payable quarterly. The preferred stock is redeemable at Entergy Texas’s option at a fixed redemption price of $25.50 per share prior to November 1, 2026 and at a fixed redemption price of $25 per share on or after November 1, 2026.

Dividends and distributions paid on all of Entergy Corporation’s subsidiaries’ preferred stock and membership interests series may be eligible for the dividends received deduction.

The dollar value of noncontrolling interest for Entergy Arkansas as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 is presented below.
20232022
(In Thousands)
Entergy Arkansas Noncontrolling Interest
AR Searcy Partnership, LLC (a)$21,599 $27,825 
Total Noncontrolling Interest$21,599 $27,825 

(a)AR Searcy Partnership, LLC is a tax equity partnership between Entergy Arkansas and a tax equity investor which was formed to acquire and own the Searcy Solar facility. Entergy Arkansas, as the managing member, consolidates AR Searcy Partnership, LLC and the tax equity investor’s interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in the financial statements. Entergy Arkansas uses the HLBV method of accounting for income or loss allocation to the tax equity investor’s noncontrolling interest. See Note 1 to the financial statements for further discussion on the presentation of the tax equity investor’s noncontrolling interest and the HLBV method of accounting.

148

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The dollar value of noncontrolling interests for Entergy Louisiana as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 are presented below.
20232022
(In Thousands)
Entergy Louisiana Noncontrolling Interests
Restoration Law Trust I (a)$30,488 $31,735 
Restoration Law Trust II (b)14,619 — 
Total Noncontrolling Interests$45,107 $31,735 

(a)Restoration Law Trust I (the storm trust I) was established in 2022 as part of the Act 293 securitization of Entergy Louisiana’s Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, and Winter Storm Uri restoration costs, as well as to establish a storm reserve to fund a portion of Hurricane Ida storm restoration costs. The storm trust I holds preferred membership interests issued by Entergy Finance Company, and Entergy Finance Company is required to make annual distributions (dividends) on the preferred membership interests. These annual dividends paid on the Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests are distributed 1% to the LURC and 99% to Entergy Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana, as the primary beneficiary, consolidates the storm trust I and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in the consolidated financial statements for Entergy Louisiana and Entergy. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the Entergy Louisiana May 2022 storm cost securitization.
(b)Restoration Law Trust II (the storm trust II) was established in 2023 as part of the Act 293 securitization of Entergy Louisiana’s remaining Hurricane Ida storm restoration costs. The storm trust II holds preferred membership interests issued by Entergy Finance Company, and Entergy Finance Company is required to make annual distributions (dividends) on the preferred membership interests. These annual dividends paid on the Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests are distributed 1% to the LURC and 99% to Entergy Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana, as the primary beneficiary, consolidates the storm trust II and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in the consolidated financial statements for Entergy Louisiana and Entergy. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the Entergy Louisiana March 2023 storm cost securitization.

The dollar value of noncontrolling interest for Entergy Mississippi as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 is presented below.
20232022
(In Thousands)
Entergy Mississippi Noncontrolling Interest
MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC (a)$18,753 $3,347 
Total Noncontrolling Interest$18,753 $3,347 

(a)MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC is a tax equity partnership between Entergy Mississippi and a tax equity investor which was formed to acquire and own the Sunflower Solar facility. Entergy Mississippi, as the managing member, consolidates MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC and the tax equity investor’s interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in the consolidated financial statements for Entergy Mississippi and Entergy. Entergy Mississippi uses the HLBV method of accounting for income or loss allocation to the tax equity investor’s noncontrolling interest. See Note 1 to the financial statements for further discussion on the presentation of the tax equity investor’s noncontrolling interest and the HLBV method of accounting.

Presentation of Preferred Stock without Sinking Fund

Accounting standards regarding non-controllingnoncontrolling interests and the classification and measurement of redeemable securities require the classification of preferred securities between liabilities and shareholders’ equity on the balance sheet if the holders of those securities have protective rights that allow them to gain control of the board
149

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



of directors in certain circumstances.  These rights would have the effect of giving the holders the ability to potentially redeem their securities, even if the likelihood of occurrence of these circumstances is considered remote.  The outstanding preferred stock of Entergy Texas has protective rights with respect to unpaid dividends but provides for the election of board members that would not constitute a majority of the board, and the preferred stock of Entergy Texas is therefore classified as a component of equity.

The outstanding preferred securities of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC (a Utility subsidiary) and Entergy Finance Holding, Inc. (an Entergy Wholesale Commodities subsidiary)subsidiary in the non-utility operations business), whose preferred holders have protective rights, are presented between liabilities and equity on Entergy’s consolidated balance sheets.  The preferred dividends or distributions paid by all subsidiaries are reflected for all periods presented outside of consolidated net income.


139

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




NOTE 7.  COMMON EQUITY (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Common Stock

Common stock and treasury stock shares activity for Entergy for 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 is as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
Common
Shares
Issued

Treasury
Shares
Common
Shares
Issued
 
Treasury
Shares
Common
Shares
Issued
 
Treasury
Shares
Common
Shares
Issued

Treasury
Shares
Common
Shares
Issued
 
Treasury
Shares
Common
Shares
Issued
 
Treasury
Shares
Beginning Balance, January 1Beginning Balance, January 1270,035,180 70,886,400 261,587,009 72,530,866 254,752,788 74,235,135 
Issuances:Issuances:      
Equity forwards settled— 8,448,171 — 6,834,221 — 
Issuances:
Issuances:  
Equity Distribution Program
Employee Stock-Based Compensation Plans
Employee Stock-Based Compensation Plans
Employee Stock-Based Compensation PlansEmployee Stock-Based Compensation Plans— (1,076,511)— (1,624,358)— (1,683,174)
Directors’ PlanDirectors’ Plan— (19,543)— (20,108)— (21,095)
Ending Balance, December 31Ending Balance, December 31270,035,180 69,790,346 270,035,180 70,886,400 261,587,009 72,530,866 

Entergy Corporation reissues treasury shares to meet the requirements of the Stock Plan for Outside Directors (Directors’ Plan), the fourthree equity plans of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries, and certain other stock benefit plans.  The Directors’ Plan awards to non-employee directors a portion of their compensation in the form of a fixed dollar value of shares of Entergy Corporation common stock.

In October 2010 the Board granted authority for a $500 million share repurchase program.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, $350 million of authority remains under the $500 million share repurchase program.

Dividends declared per common share were $3.74$4.34 in 2020, $3.662023, $4.10 in 2019,2022, and $3.58$3.86 in 2018.

(System Energy)

System Energy paid its parent, Entergy Corporation, distributions out of its common stock of $56.5 million in 2018.2021.

Equity Forward Sale AgreementsDistribution Program

In January 2021, Entergy Corporation entered into an equity distribution sales agreement with several counterparties establishing an at the market equity distribution program, pursuant to which Entergy Corporation may offer and sell from time to time shares of its common stock. The sales agreement provides that, in addition to the issuance and sale of shares of Entergy Corporation common stock, Entergy Corporation may enter into forward
150

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

sale agreements for the sale of its common stock. The aggregate number of shares of common stock sold under this sales agreement and under any forward sale agreement may not exceed an aggregate gross sales price of $2 billion. As of December 31, 2023, an aggregate gross sales price of approximately $1.5 billion has been sold under the at market equity distribution program.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, Entergy Corporation issued 1,930,330 shares of common stock under the at the market equity distribution program. The net sales proceeds from these shares totaled $200.8 million, which includes the gross sales price of $204.2 million received by Entergy Corporation less $1.4 million of general issuance costs and $2.0 million of aggregate compensation to the agents with respect to such sales. During the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, there were no shares of common stock issued under the at the market equity distribution program.

In June, 2018,August, and October 2021, Entergy marketed an equity offering of 15.3 million shares of common stock. In lieu of issuing equity at the time of the offering, EntergyCorporation entered into forward sale agreements for 416,853 shares, 1,692,555 shares, and 250,743 shares of common stock, respectively. No amounts were recorded on Entergy’s balance sheet with various investment banks.respect to the equity offerings until settlements of the equity forward sale agreements occurred in November 2022. The equity forwardsforward sale agreements required Entergy Corporation to, at its election prior to June 7, 2019,September 29, 2023, either (i) physically settle the transactions by issuing the total of 15.3 million416,853 shares, 1,692,555 shares, and 250,743 shares, respectively, of its common stock to the investment banksforward counterparties in exchange for net proceeds at the then-applicable forward sale price specified by the agreements (initially $74.45approximately $106.87, $111.16, and $100.35 per share)share, respectively) or (ii) net settle the transactions in whole or in part through the delivery or receipt of cash or shares. TheEach forward sale price was subject to adjustment on a daily basis based on a floating interest rate factor and decreased by other fixed amounts specified in the agreements. In connection with the forward sale agreements, the forward seller, or its affiliates, borrowed from third parties and sold 416,853 shares, 1,692,555 shares, and 250,743 shares, respectively, of Entergy Corporation’s common stock. The gross sales price of these shares totaled approximately $45 million, $190.1 million, and $25.4 million, respectively. In connection with the sales of these shares, Entergy Corporation paid to the forward sellers fees of approximately $0.5 million, $1.9 million, and $0.3 million, respectively, which have not been deducted from the gross sales prices. Entergy Corporation did not receive any proceeds from such sales of borrowed shares.

In March, June, and September 2022, Entergy Corporation entered into forward sale agreements for 1,538,010 shares, 2,124,086 shares, and 1,666,172 shares of common stock, respectively. No amounts were recorded on Entergy’s balance sheet with respect to the equity offerings until settlements of the equity forward sale agreements occurred in November 2022. The forward sale agreements required Entergy Corporation to, at its election prior to September 29, 2023 for the March 2022 agreements and prior to December 2018,29, 2023 for the June and September 2022 agreements, either (i) physically settle the transactions by issuing the total of 1,538,010 shares, 2,124,086 shares, and 1,666,172 shares, respectively, of its common stock to the forward counterparties in exchange for net proceeds at the then-applicable forward sale price specified by the agreements (initially approximately $108.12, $116.94, and $115.46 per share, respectively) or (ii) net settle the transactions in whole or in part through the delivery or receipt of cash or shares. Each forward sale price was subject to adjustment on a daily basis based on a floating interest rate factor and decreased by other fixed amounts specified in the agreements. In connection with the forward sale agreements, the forward seller, or its affiliates, borrowed from third parties and sold 1,538,010 shares, 2,124,086 shares, and 1,666,172 shares, respectively, of Entergy Corporation’s common stock. The gross sales price of these shares totaled approximately $168 million, $250.9 million, and $194.2 million, respectively. In connection with the sales of these shares, Entergy Corporation paid the forward sellers fees of approximately $1.7 million, $2.5 million, and $1.9 million, respectively, which have not been deducted from the gross sales prices. Entergy Corporation did not receive any proceeds from such sales of borrowed shares.

In November 2022, Entergy Corporation physically settled a portion of its obligations under the then-outstanding forward sale agreements by delivering 6,834,2217,688,419 shares of common stock in exchange for cash proceeds of $500$853.3 million. The forward sale price used to determine the cash proceeds received by Entergy Corporation was calculated based on the initial forward sale price of $112.50 per share as adjusted in accordance with the forward sale agreements. Entergy Corporation incurred an aggregate amount of approximately $0.7 million of general
151

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



issuance costs with the settlement. Entergy Corporation used the net proceeds for general corporate purposes, which included repayment of commercial paper, outstanding loans under Entergy Corporation’s revolving credit facility, and other debt.

In June 2023, Entergy Corporation entered into forward sale agreements for 102,995 shares and 365,307 shares of common stock, and in November 2023, Entergy Corporation entered into a forward sale agreement for 853,117 shares of common stock. No amounts were recorded on Entergy’s balance sheet with respect to the equity offerings until settlements of the equity forward sale agreements occurred in November and December 2023. The forward sale agreements required Entergy Corporation to, at its election prior to May 31, 2024 and June 28, 2024, respectively, for the June 2023 agreements and prior to August 11, 2024 for the November 2023 agreement, either (i) physically settle the transactions by issuing the total of 102,995 shares, 365,307 shares, and 853,117 shares, respectively, of its common stock to the forward counterparties in exchange for net proceeds at the then-applicable forward sale price specified by the agreements (initially approximately $101.36, $101.39, and $97.48 per share, respectively) or (ii) net settle the transactions in whole or in part through the delivery or receipt of cash or shares. Each forward sale price was subject to adjustment on a daily basis based on a floating interest rate factor and decreased by other fixed amounts specified in the agreements. In connection with the forward sale agreements, the forward seller, or its affiliates, borrowed from third parties and sold 102,995 shares, 365,307 shares, and 853,117 shares, respectively, of Entergy Corporation’s common stock. The gross sales price of these shares totaled approximately $10.5 million, $37.4 million, and $84 million, respectively. In connection with the sales of these shares, Entergy Corporation paid the forward sellers fees of approximately $0.1 million, $0.4 million, and $0.8 million, respectively, which have not been deducted from the gross sales prices. Entergy Corporation did not receive any proceeds from such sales of borrowed shares.

In November 2023, Entergy Corporation physically settled its obligations under the June 2023 forward sale agreements, and in December 2023, Entergy Corporation physically settled its obligations under the November 2023 forward sale agreement, by delivering 468,302 shares and 853,117 shares of common stock, respectively, in exchange for cash proceeds of $47.8 million and $83.3 million, respectively. The forward sale price used to determine the cash proceeds received by Entergy was calculated based on the initial forward sale price of $74.45$101.38 and $97.48 per share, respectively, as adjusted in accordance with the forward sale agreements. Entergy Corporation incurred an aggregate amount of approximately $728 thousand$0.4 million of common stockgeneral issuance costs with the settlement.settlements. Entergy Corporation used the net proceeds for general corporate purposes, which included repayment of commercial paper, outstanding loans under Entergy Corporation’s revolving credit facility, and other debt.

In December 2023, Entergy Corporation entered into a forward sale agreement for 2,753,246 shares of common stock. No amounts have been or will be recorded on Entergy’s balance sheet with respect to the equity offering until settlement of the equity forward sale agreement occurs. The forward sale agreement requires Entergy Corporation to, at its election prior to May 30, 2025, either (i) physically settle the transaction by issuing the total of 2,753,246 shares of its common stock to the forward counterparty in exchange for net proceeds at the then-applicable forward sale price specified by the agreement (initially approximately $101.11 per share) or (ii) net settle the transaction in whole or in part through the delivery or receipt of cash or shares. The forward sale price is subject to adjustment on a daily basis based on a floating interest rate factor and will decrease by other fixed amounts specified in the agreement. In connection with the forward sale agreement, the forward seller, or its affiliates, borrowed from third parties and sold 2,753,246 shares of Entergy Corporation’s common stock. The gross sales price of these shares totaled approximately $280.5 million. In connection with the sale of these shares, Entergy Corporation paid the forward sellers fees of approximately $2.8 million which have not been deducted from the gross sales price. Entergy Corporation did not receive any proceeds from such sales of borrowed shares.

Until settlement of the forward sale agreements, earnings per share dilution resulting from the agreements, if any, were determined under the treasury stock method. Share dilution occurs when the average market price of Entergy Corporation’s common stock is higher than the average forward sales price. At December 31, 2023, 1,762,709 shares under the forward sale agreement were not included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share because their effect would have been antidilutive, and at December 31, 2021, 1,158,917 shares under the then-
140152

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


In May 2019, Entergy physically settled its remaining obligations under theoutstanding forward sale agreements by delivering 8,448,171 shareswere not included in the calculation of common stock in exchange for cash proceeds of $608 million. The forward sale price used to determine the cash proceeds received by Entergy was calculated based on the initial forward sale price of $74.45diluted earnings per share as adjusted in accordance with thebecause their effect would have been antidilutive. At December 31, 2022, there were no forward sale agreements. Entergy incurred approximately $7 thousand of common stock issuance costs with the settlement.share agreements outstanding.

Entergy used the net proceeds for general corporate purposes, which included repayment of commercial paper, outstanding loans under Entergy’s revolving credit facility, and other debt.

Retained Earnings and Dividends

Entergy implemented ASU No. 2016-01 “Financial Instruments (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” effective January 1, 2018. The ASU requires investments in equity securities, excluding those accounted for under the equity method or resulting in consolidation of the investee, to be measured at fair value with changes recognized in net income. Entergy implemented this standard using a modified retrospective method, and recorded an adjustment increasing retained earnings and reducing accumulated other comprehensive income by $633 million as of January 1, 2018 for the cumulative effect of the unrealized gains and losses on investments in equity securities held by the decommissioning trust funds that do not meet the criteria for regulatory accounting treatment. See Note 16 to the financial statements for further discussion of effects of the new standard.

Entergy implemented ASU No. 2016-16, “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory” effective January 1, 2018. The ASU requires entities to recognize the income tax consequences of intra-entity asset transfers, other than inventory, at the time the transfer occurs. Entergy implemented this standard using a modified retrospective method, and recorded an adjustment decreasing retained earnings by $56 million as of January 1, 2018 for the cumulative effect of recording deferred tax assets on previously-recognized intra-entity asset transfers.

Entergy adopted ASU No. 2018-02, “Income Statement - Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income,” in the first quarter 2018. The ASU allows a one-time reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings for certain tax effects resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that would otherwise be stranded in accumulated other comprehensive income. Entergy’s policy for releasing income tax effects from accumulated other comprehensive income for available-for-sale securities is to use the portfolio approach. Entergy elected to reclassify the $15.5 million of stranded tax effects in accumulated other comprehensive income resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to retained earnings ($32 million decrease) or the regulatory liability for income taxes ($16.5 million increase). Entergy’s reclassification only includes the effect of the change in the federal corporate income tax rate on accumulated other comprehensive income.

Entergy implemented ASU No. 2017-12 “Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities” effective January 1, 2019. The ASU makes a number of amendments to hedge accounting, most significantly changing the recognition and presentation of highly effective hedges. Entergy implemented this standard using a modified retrospective method, and recorded an adjustment increasing retained earnings and increasing accumulated other comprehensive loss by approximately $8 million as of January 1, 2019 for the cumulative effect of the ineffectiveness portion of designated hedges on nuclear power sales.

Entergy implemented ASU 2017-08 “Receivables (Topic 310): Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs” effective January 1, 2019. The ASU amends the amortization period for certain purchased callable debt securities held at a premium to the earliest call date. Entergy implemented this standard using the modified retrospective approach, and recorded an adjustment decreasing retained earnings and decreasing accumulated other
141

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




comprehensive loss by approximately $1 million as of January 1, 2019 for the cumulative effect of the amended amortization period.

Entergy Corporation received dividend payments and distributions from subsidiaries totaling $113$189 million in 2020, $1242023, $301 million in 2019,2022, and $27$136 million in 2018.2021.

Comprehensive Income

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) is included in the equity section of the balance sheets of Entergy and Entergy Louisiana. The following table presents changes in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for Entergy for the year ended December 31, 2020 by component:2023:
 Cash flow
hedges
net
unrealized
gain (loss)
Pension
and
other
postretirement
liabilities

Net
unrealized
investment
gain (loss)
Total
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
(In Thousands)
Beginning balance, January 1, 2020$84,206 ($557,072)$25,946 ($446,920)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications60,928 (49,113)41,354 53,169 
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(116,415)71,609 (10,650)(55,456)
Net other comprehensive income (loss) for the period(55,487)22,496 30,704 (2,287)
Ending balance, December 31, 2020$28,719 ($534,576)$56,650 ($449,207)
Pension and Other Postretirement Liabilities
(In Thousands)
Beginning balance, January 1, 2023($191,754)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications36,404 
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(7,110)
Net other comprehensive income (loss) for the period29,294 
Ending balance, December 31, 2023($162,460)

142

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The following table presents changes in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for Entergy for the year ended December 31, 20192022 by component:
 Cash flow
hedges
net
unrealized
gain (loss)
Pension
and
other
postretirement
liabilities

Net
unrealized
investment
gain (loss)
Total
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
(In Thousands)
Ending balance, December 31, 2018($23,135)($531,922)($2,116)($557,173)
Implementation of accounting standards(7,685)879 (6,806)
Beginning balance, January 1, 2019($30,820)($531,922)($1,237)($563,979)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications191,147 (93,696)32,914 130,365 
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(76,121)68,546 (5,731)(13,306)
Net other comprehensive income (loss) for the period115,026 (25,150)27,183 117,059 
Ending balance, December 31, 2019$84,206 ($557,072)$25,946 ($446,920)
 Cash flow
hedges
net
unrealized
gain (loss)
Pension
and
other
postretirement
liabilities

Net
unrealized
investment
gain (loss)
Total
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
(In Thousands)
Beginning balance, January 1, 2022($1,035)($338,647)$7,154 ($332,528)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications908 112,944 (12,997)100,855 
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)127 33,949 5,843 39,919 
Net other comprehensive income (loss) for the period1,035 146,893 (7,154)140,774 
Ending balance, December 31, 2022$— ($191,754)$— ($191,754)

The following table presents changes in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for Entergy Louisiana for the year ended December 31, 2020:
Pension and Other
Postretirement Liabilities
(In Thousands)
Beginning balance, January 1, 2020$4,562 
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications3,002 
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(3,237)
Net other comprehensive income (loss) for the period(235)
Ending balance, December 31, 2020$4,327 

143153

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The following table presents changes in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for Entergy Louisiana for the yearyears ended December 31, 2019:2023 and 2022:
Pension and Other
Postretirement Liabilities
(In Thousands)
Beginning balance, January 1, 2019($6,153)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications14,591 
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)(3,876)
Net other comprehensive income (loss) for the period10,715 
Ending balance, December 31, 2019$4,562 
Pension and Other Postretirement Liabilities
20232022
(In Thousands)
Beginning balance, January 1, $55,370 $8,278 
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications5,603 48,087 
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (6,175)(995)
Net other comprehensive income (loss) for the period (572)47,092 
Ending balance, December 31, $54,798 $55,370 

Total reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) for Entergy for the years ended December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are as follows:
Amounts reclassified from AOCIIncome Statement Location
2023
 Amounts reclassified from AOCIIncome Statement Location
20202019(In Thousands) 
Cash flow hedges net unrealized loss
 (In Thousands) 
Cash flow hedges net unrealized gain (loss) 
Power contracts$147,554 $96,549 Competitive business operating revenues
Interest rate swapsInterest rate swaps(194)(194)Miscellaneous - net
Total realized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges147,360 96,355 
Interest rate swaps
Interest rate swaps$— ($161)Miscellaneous - net
Total realized loss on cash flow hedges
Income taxesIncome taxes(30,945)(20,234)Income taxes
Total realized gain (loss) on cash flow hedges (net of tax)$116,415 $76,121 
Income taxes
Income taxes— 34 Income taxes
Total realized loss on cash flow hedges (net of tax)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities
Pension and other postretirement liabilities
Pension and other postretirement liabilitiesPension and other postretirement liabilities   
Amortization of prior-service costsAmortization of prior-service costs $20,769 $21,300 (a)
Amortization of prior-service costs
Amortization of prior-service costs $13,586 $15,337 (a)
Amortization of loss(110,185)(83,246)(a)
Amortization of net gain (loss)
Amortization of net gain (loss)
Amortization of net gain (loss)6,590 (33,859)(a)
Settlement lossSettlement loss(243)(25,155)(a)Settlement loss(10,848)(25,321)(25,321)(a)(a)
Total amortization and settlement lossTotal amortization and settlement loss(89,659)(87,101)
Income taxes
Income taxes
Income taxesIncome taxes18,050 18,555 Income taxes(2,218)9,894 9,894 Income taxesIncome taxes
Total amortization and settlement loss (net of tax)Total amortization and settlement loss (net of tax)($71,609)($68,546)
Net unrealized investment gain (loss)Net unrealized investment gain (loss)
Realized gain (loss)$16,851 $9,069 Interest and investment income
Net unrealized investment gain (loss)
Net unrealized investment gain (loss)
Realized loss
Realized loss
Realized loss$— ($9,245)Interest and investment income
Income taxesIncome taxes(6,201)(3,338)Income taxesIncome taxes— 3,402 3,402 Income taxesIncome taxes
Total realized investment gain (loss) (net of tax)$10,650 $5,731 
Total realized investment loss (net of tax)
Total reclassifications for the period (net of tax)Total reclassifications for the period (net of tax) $55,456 $13,306 
Total reclassifications for the period (net of tax)
Total reclassifications for the period (net of tax)

(a)These accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) components are included in the computation of net periodic pension and other postretirement cost. See Note 11 to the financial statements for additional details.

144154

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Total reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) for Entergy Louisiana for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
Amounts reclassified from AOCIIncome Statement Location
2023 2022 
(In Thousands)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities 
Amortization of prior-service costs $3,804  $4,630 (a)
Amortization of net gain (loss)6,263 (927)(a)
Settlement loss(1,617)(2,342)(a)
Total amortization and settlement loss8,450 1,361 
Income taxes(2,275)(366)Income taxes
Total amortization and settlement loss (net of tax)6,175 995 
Total reclassifications for the period (net of tax) $6,175  $995 

(a)These accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) components are included in the computation of net periodic pension and other postretirement cost. See Note 11 to the financial statements for additional details.

Total reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) for Entergy Louisiana for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 are as follows:
Amounts reclassified from AOCIIncome Statement Location
2020 2019 
(In Thousands)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities 
Amortization of prior-service costs $6,179  $7,349 (a)
Amortization of loss(1,557)(2,106)(a)
Settlement loss(243)(a)
Total amortization4,379 5,243 
Income taxes(1,142)(1,367)Income taxes
Total amortization (net of tax)3,237 3,876 
Total reclassifications for the period (net of tax) $3,237  $3,876 

(a)These accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) components are included in the computation of net periodic pension and other postretirement cost. See Note 11 to the financial statements for additional details.
    

NOTE 8.  COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are involved in a number of legal, regulatory, and tax proceedings before various courts, regulatory commissions,authorities, and governmental agencies in the ordinary course of business.  While management is unable to predict with certainty the outcome of such proceedings, management does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on Entergy’s results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition.  Entergy discusses regulatory proceedings in Note 2 to the financial statements and discusses tax proceedings in Note 3 to the financial statements.

Vidalia Purchased Power Agreement

Entergy Louisiana has an agreement extending through the year 2031 to purchase energy generated by a hydroelectric facility known as the Vidalia project.  Entergy Louisiana made payments under the contract of approximately $132.7$100.4 million in 2020, $135.52023, $117.2 million in 2019,2022, and $137.6$128.5 million in 2018.2021.  If the maximum percentage (94%) of the energy is made available to Entergy Louisiana, current production projections would require estimated payments of approximately $141$137.4 million in 2021,2024 and a total of $1.41 billion$958.8 million for the years 20222025 through 2031.  Entergy Louisiana currently recovers the costs of the purchased energy through its fuel adjustment clause.

In an LPSC-approved settlement related to tax benefits from the tax treatment of the Vidalia contract, Entergy Louisiana agreed to credit rates by $11 million each year for up to 10 years, beginning in October 2002.  In
145

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




October 2011 the LPSC approved a settlement under which Entergy Louisiana agreed to provide credits to customers by crediting billings an additional $20.235 million per year for 15 years beginning January 2012.  Entergy Louisiana recorded a regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect this obligation.  The settlement agreement allowed for an adjustment to the credits if, among other things, there was a change in the applicable federal or state income tax rate. As a result of the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, in December 2017, and the lowering of the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, the Vidalia purchased power regulatory liability was reduced by $30.5 million, with a corresponding increase to Other regulatory credits on the income statement. TheSee Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the effects of
155

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are discussed further in Note 3 toand discussion of the financial statements.resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit, which included the tax treatment of the Vidalia contract.

ANO Damage, Outage, and NRC Reviews

In March 2013, during a scheduled refueling outage at ANO 1, a contractor-owned and operated heavy-lifting apparatus collapsed while moving the generator stator out of the turbine building.  The collapse resulted in the death of an ironworker and injuries to several other contract workers, caused ANO 2 to shut down, and damaged the ANO turbine building.  The total cost of assessment, restoration of off-site power, site restoration, debris removal, and replacement of damaged property and equipment was approximately $95 million.  Entergy Arkansas has pursued its options for recovering damages that resulted from the stator drop, including its insurance coverage and legal action. Entergy Arkansas collected $50 million in 2014 from Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), a mutual insurance company that provides property damage coverage to the members’ nuclear generating plants. EntergyEntergy Arkansas also collected a total of $21 million in 2018 as a result of stator-related settlements.

In addition, Entergy Arkansas incurred replacement power costs for ANO 2 power during its outage and incurred incremental replacement power costs for ANO 1 power because the outage extended beyond the originally-planned duration of the refueling outage.  In February 2014 the APSC authorized Entergy Arkansas to retain the $65.9 million in its deferred fuel balance with recovery to be reviewed in a later period after more information regarding various claims associated with the ANO stator incident iswas available.

In March 2015, after several NRC inspections and regulatory conferences, arising from the stator incident, the NRC placed ANO into the “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 4, of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. Entergy Arkansas incurred incremental costs of approximately $53 million in 2015 to prepare for the NRC inspections that began in early 2016 in order to address the issues required to move ANO back to “licensee response” or Column 1 of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix. Excluding remediation and response costs that resulted from the additional NRC inspection activities, Entergy Arkansas incurred approximately $44 million in 2016 and $7 million in 2017 in support of NRC inspection activities and to implement Entergy Arkansas’s performance improvement initiatives developed in 2015. In June 2018 the NRC moved ANO 1 and ANO 2 into the “licensee response column,” or Column 1, of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix.

In July 2017, Entergy Arkansas filed for a change in rates pursuant to its formula rate plan rider. In that proceeding, the APSC approved a settlement agreement agreed upon by the parties, including a provision that requires Entergy Arkansas to initiate a regulatory proceeding for the purpose of recovering funds currently withheld from rates and related to the stator incident, including the $65.9 million of deferred fuel and purchased energy costs and costs related to the incremental oversight previously noted, subject to certain timelines and conditions set forth in the settlement agreement.

In October 2023, Entergy Arkansas made a commitment to the APSC to make a filing to forgo its opportunity to seek recovery of the identified costs resulting from the ANO stator incident, specifically all incremental fuel and purchased energy expense, capital and incremental non-fuel operations and maintenance costs, and costs of any judgment that may be rendered against Entergy Arkansas in civil litigation that is not covered by insurance. As a result, in third quarter 2023, Entergy Arkansas recorded write-offs of its regulatory asset for deferred fuel of $68.9 million, which includes interest, and the undepreciated balance of $9.5 million in capital costs related to the ANO stator incident. Consistent with its October 2023 commitment, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion to forgo recovery in November 2023, and the motion was approved by the APSC in December 2023.

Spent Nuclear Fuel Litigation

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the DOE is required, for a specified fee, to construct storage facilities for, and to dispose of, all spent nuclear fuel and other high-level radioactive waste generated by domestic
156

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

nuclear power reactors.  Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have been charged fees for the estimated future disposal costs of spent nuclear fuel in accordance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.  The affected
146

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy companies entered into contracts with the DOE, whereby the DOE is to furnish disposal services at a cost of one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983, plus a one-time fee for generation prior to that date.  Entergy considers all costs incurred for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, except accrued interest, to be proper components of nuclear fuel expense.  Provisions to recover such costs have been or will be made in applications to regulatory authorities for the Utility plants.  Following the defunding of the Yucca Mountain spent fuel repository program, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and others sued the government seeking cessation of collection of the one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983 fee. In November 2013 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the DOE to submit a proposal to Congress to reset the fee to 0zero until the DOE complies with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act or Congress enacts an alternative waste disposal plan. In January 2014 the DOE submitted the proposal to Congress under protest, and also filed a petition for rehearing with the D.C. Circuit. The petition for rehearing was denied. The zero spent fuel fee went into effect prospectively in May 2014.

Because the DOE has not begun accepting spent fuel, it is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and has breachedis in partial breach of its spent fuel disposal contracts. As a result of the DOE’s failure to begin disposal of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and the spent fuel disposal contracts, Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have incurred and will continue to incur damages. Beginning in November 2003 these subsidiaries have pursued litigation to recover the damages caused by the DOE’s delay in performance. Following are details of final judgments recorded by Entergy in 2018, 2019,2021, 2022, and 20202023 related to Entergy’s nuclear owner owner/licensee subsidiaries’ litigation with the DOE.

In September 2018 the DOE submitted an offer of judgment to resolve claims in the second round Entergy Nuclear Generation Company case involving Pilgrim. The $62 million offer was accepted by Entergy Nuclear Generation Company, and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a judgment in that amount in favor of Entergy Nuclear Generation Company. Entergy received payment from the U.S. Treasury in October 2018. The effect in 2018 of recording the judgment was a reduction to plant and other operation and maintenance expenses. The Pilgrim damages awarded included $60 million related to costs previously capitalized and $2 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expense. Of the $60 million, Entergy recorded $4 million as a reduction to previously-recorded depreciation expense, a $10 million reduction to bring its remaining Pilgrim plant asset balance to 0, and the excess $46 million as a reduction to other operation and maintenance expense because Pilgrim’s plant asset balance is fully impaired.

In August 2019January 2021 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a final judgment in the amount of $19 million in favor of Entergy Louisiana against the DOE in the second round River Bend damages case. Entergy Louisiana received payment from the U.S. Treasury in September 2019. The effects in 2019 of recording the judgment were reductions to plant, nuclear fuel expense, and other operation and maintenance expense. The River Bend damages awarded included $12 million related to costs previously recorded as nuclear fuel expense, $5 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expense, and $2 million in costs previously capitalized.

In December 2019 the DOE submitted an offer of judgment to resolve claims in the third round ANO damages case.  The $80 million offer was accepted by Entergy Arkansas, and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a judgment in that amount in favor of Entergy Arkansas and against the DOE. Entergy Arkansas received payment from the U.S. Treasury in January 2020. The effects in 2019 of recording the judgment were reductions to plant, nuclear fuel expense, other operation and maintenance expense, depreciation expense, and taxes other than income taxes. The ANO damages awarded included $55 million in costs previously capitalized, $12 million related to costs previously recorded as nuclear fuel expense, $12 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expense, and $1 million related to costs previously recorded as taxes other than income taxes. Of the $55 million, Entergy Arkansas, recorded $5 million as a reduction to previously-recorded depreciation expense.

In December 2019 the Entergy FitzPatrick Properties (formerly Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick) and the DOE entered into a settlement agreement and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a judgment in the amount of $7
147

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




million in favor of Entergy FitzPatrick Properties against the DOE in the second round FitzPatrick damages case. Entergy received payment from the U.S. Treasury in January 2020. Substantially all of the FitzPatrick damages awarded relate to costs previously expensed as asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges, and in December 2019 Entergy recorded $7 million as a reduction to asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges.

In April 2020 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a final judgment in the amount of $33 million in favor of Entergy Louisiana against the DOE in the second round Waterford 3 damages case. Entergy Louisiana received payment from the U.S. Treasury in June 2020. The effects of recording the judgment were reductions to plant, nuclear fuel expense, and other operation and maintenance expense. The Waterford 3 damages awarded included $20 million related to costs previously recorded as nuclear fuel expense, $8 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses, and $5 million in costs previously capitalized.

In October 2020 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a final judgment in the amount of $40.5 million in favor of System Energy and against the DOE in the third round Grand Gulf damages case. System Energy received payment from the U.S. Treasury in December 2020. The effects of recording the judgment were reductions to plant, nuclear fuel expense, and other operation and maintenance expense. The amounts of Grand Gulf damages awarded related to System Energy’s 90% ownership of Grand Gulf included $5 million related to costs previously capitalized, $21 million related to costs previously recorded as nuclear fuel expense, and $10 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expense.

In January 2021 the U.S. Court of Federal Clams issued a final judgment in the amount of $23.1$23 million in favor of Entergy Nuclear Palisades and against the DOE in the second round Palisades damages case. Entergy received payment from the U.S. Treasury in February 2021. The effects of recording the judgment were reductions to plant, other operation and maintenance expense,expenses, and taxes other than income taxes. The Palisades damages awarded included $15.7$16 million related to costs previously recorded as plant and $7 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses. Of the $16 million previously capitalized, $7.1Entergy recorded $9 million as a reduction to previously-recorded depreciation expense.

In August 2021 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a final judgment in the amount of $37.6 million in favor of Holtec Pilgrim, LLC against the DOE in the third round Pilgrim damages case. Holtec Pilgrim, LLC received the payment from the U.S. Treasury in September 2021. The judgment proceeds were subsequently transferred to Entergy pursuant to the terms of the Pilgrim sale. The receipt of the proceeds was recorded as a deferred credit because Entergy has an indemnity obligation to Holtec related to pre-sale DOE litigation involving Pilgrim that remains outstanding.

In August 2021 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a final judgment in the amount of $21 million in favor of Entergy Louisiana against the DOE in the third round River Bend damages case. Entergy Louisiana received the payment from the U.S. Treasury in September 2021. The effects of recording the judgment were reductions to plant, nuclear fuel expense, and other operation and maintenance expenses. The River Bend damages awarded included $9 million in costs previously recorded as plant, $8 million related to costs previously recorded as nuclear fuel expense, and $4 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses.

In October 2021 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a final judgment in the amount of $83 million in favor of Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC against the DOE in the Indian Point 2 third round and Indian Point 3 second round combined damages case. Entergy received payment from the U.S. Treasury in January 2022. The effect in 2021 of recording the judgment was a reduction to asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits). The damages awarded included $32 million related to costs previously recorded as plant, $47 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses, and $0.3$4 million related to costs previously recorded as taxes other than income taxes. Of
157

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




In March 2023 the $15.7DOE submitted an offer of judgment to resolve claims in the fourth round ANO damages case. The $41 million offer was accepted by Entergy Arkansas, and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a judgment in that amount in favor of Entergy Arkansas and against the DOE. Entergy Arkansas received payment from the U.S. Treasury in April 2023. The effects of recording the judgment were reductions to plant, nuclear fuel expense, other operation and maintenance expenses, materials and supplies, and taxes other than income taxes. The ANO damages awarded included $18 million related to costs previously capitalized,recorded as plant, $10 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses, $8 million related to costs previously recorded as nuclear fuel expense, $3 million related to costs previously recorded as materials and supplies, and $2 million related to costs previously recorded as taxes other than income taxes.

In July 2023 the DOE submitted an offer of judgment to resolve claims in the Indian Point 2 fourth round and Indian Point 3 third round combined damages case. The $59 million offer was accepted by Entergy recorded $9.1and Holtec International, as the current owner. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a final judgment in that amount in favor of Holtec Indian Point 2, LLC and Holtec Indian Point 3, LLC (previously Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC) and against the DOE. Holtec received payment from the U.S. Treasury in July 2023. Consistent with certain terms agreed upon in connection with the sale of Indian Point Energy Center in May 2021, Holtec transferred $40 million asto Entergy for its pro-rata share of the litigation proceeds in August 2023. The remainder of the judgment was retained by Holtec. The effect of recording Entergy’s pro-rata share of the judgment was a reduction to previously-recorded depreciation expense.asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits). Entergy’s pro-rata share of the damages awarded included $18 million related to costs previously recorded as spending on the asset retirement obligation, $15 million related to costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses, $6 million related to costs previously recorded as plant, and $1 million related to costs previously recorded as taxes other than income taxes.

Management cannot predict the timing or amount of any potential recoveries on other claims filed by Entergy subsidiaries and cannot predict the timing of any eventual receipt from the DOE of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims damage awards.

Nuclear Insurance

Third Party Liability Insurance

The Price-Anderson Act requires that reactor licensees purchase insurance and participate in a secondary insurance pool that provides insurance coverage for the public in the event of a nuclear power plant accident.  The costs of this insurance are borne by the nuclear power industry.  Congress amended and renewed the Price-Anderson Act in 2005 for a term through 2025.  The Price-Anderson Act requires nuclear power plants to show evidence of financial protection in the event of a nuclear accident.  This protection must consist of 2two layers of coverage:

1.The primary level is private insurance underwritten by American Nuclear Insurers (ANI) and provides public liability insurance coverage of $450$500 million, as of January 1, 2024, for each operating reactor.  If this amount is not sufficient to cover claims arising from an accident, the second level, Secondary Financial Protection, applies.
2.Within the Secondary Financial Protection level, each nuclear reactor has a contingent obligation to pay a retrospective premium, equal to its proportionate share of the loss in excess of the primary level, regardless of proximity to the incident or fault, up to a maximum of approximately $137.6 million per reactor per incident (Entergy’s maximum total contingent obligation per incident is $1.101 billion).  This retrospective
148

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

premium is payable at a rate currently set at approximately $21 million per year per incident per nuclear power reactor.
3.In the event that one or more acts of terrorism cause a nuclear power plant accident, which results in third-party damages – off-site property and environmental damage, off-site bodily injury, and on-site third-party bodily injury (i.e. contractors), the primary level provided by ANI combined with the Secondary Financial Protection would provide approximately $14 billion in coverage.  The Terrorism Risk Insurance Reauthorization Act of 2007 created a government program that provides for up to $100 billion in coverage in excess of existing coverage for a terrorist event. Under current law, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act extends through 2027.

The shutdown Big Rock Point facility maintains its NRC site specific statutory nuclear liability insurance requirement limit of $44.4 million.

2.Secondary Financial Protection: Currently, 9795 nuclear reactors are participatingparticipate in the Secondary Financial Protection program, thatwhich provides approximately $13$15.8 billion in secondary layer insurance coverage to compensate the public in the event of a nuclear power reactor accident.  The Price-Anderson Act provides that all potential liability for a nuclear accident is limited to the amounts of insurance coverage available under the primary and secondary layers.

158

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Within the Secondary Financial Protection program, each nuclear reactor has a contingent obligation to pay a retrospective premium, equal to its proportionate share of the loss in excess of the primary level, regardless of proximity to the incident or fault, up to a maximum of approximately $165.9 million per reactor per incident (Entergy’s maximum total contingent obligation per incident is $829.6 million).  This retrospective premium is assessable at approximately $24.7 million per year per incident per nuclear power reactor.

3.Total insurance coverage available is approximately $16.3 billion, among the primary ANI coverage and the Secondary Financial Protection program, to respond to a nuclear power plant accident that causes third-party damages (e.g., off-site property and environmental damage, off-site bodily injury, and on-site third-party bodily injury (i.e., contractors)). These coverages also respond to an accident caused by terrorism.

Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana each have 2two licensed reactors. System Energy has 1one licensed reactor (10% of Grand Gulf is owned by a non-affiliated company (Cooperative Energy) that would share on a pro-rata basis in any retrospective premium assessment to System Energy under the Price-Anderson Act).  The Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment includes the ownership, operation, and decommissioning of 3 nuclear power reactors and the ownership of the shutdown Indian Point 1 reactor and Big Rock Point facility. Indian Point 2 was shutdown in April 2020 and has been defueled successfully as of May 2020. Indian Point 3 and Palisades are scheduled for shutdown in April 2021 and May 2022, respectively. The Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment previously included two nuclear power reactors that were sold in 2019. Vermont Yankee was sold in January 2019 and Pilgrim was sold in August 2019.

Property Insurance

Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries are members of NEIL, a mutual insurance company that provides property damage coverage, including decontamination and reactor stabilization, to the members’ nuclear generating plants.  The property damage insurance limits procured by Entergy for its Utility plants and Entergy Wholesale Commodity plants are in compliance with the financial protection requirements of the NRC. These coverage limits, deductibles, and weekly indemnity periods are subject to change based on results of NEIL loss control inspections.

The Utility plants’ (ANO 1 and 2, Grand Gulf, River Bend, and Waterford 3) property damage insurance limits are $1.5$1.06 billion per occurrence at each plant with an additional $100plant. The property deductible is $20 million per nuclear property occurrence that is shared amongsite at the plants.Utility plants, except for earth movement, flood, and windstorm. Property damage from earth movement is excluded from the first $500 million in coverage for all Utility plants. Property damage from flood is excluded from the first $500 million in coverage at ANO 1 and 2 and Grand Gulf. Property damage from flood for Waterford 3 and River Bend includes a deductible of $10 million plus an additional 10% of the amount of the loss in excess of $10 million, up to a maximum deductible of $50 million. Property damage from winda windstorm for all of the Utility nuclear plants includes a deductible of $10 million plus an additional 10% of the amount of the loss in excess of $10 million, up to a total maximum deductible of $50 million.

The Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ plants (Palisades, Indian Point 2, Indian Point 3, and Big Rock Point) have property damage insurance limits as follows: Big Rock Point - $50 million per occurrence; Palisades - $1.115 billion per occurrence; and Indian Point - $1.06 billion per occurrence. For losses that are considered non-nuclear in nature, the property damage insurance limit at Palisades and Indian Point is $500 million. Property damage from wind and flood at Indian Point includes a deductible of $10 million plus an additional 10% of the amount of the loss in excess of $10 million, up to a maximum deductible of $50 million, and property damage from earth movement at Indian Point is excluded. Property damage from wind, flood, and earth movement at Palisades includes a deductible
149

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




of $10 million plus an additional 10% of the amount of the loss in excess of $10 million, up to a maximum deductible of $50 million. Property damage from wind, flood, and earth movement at Big Rock Point includes a deductible of $10 million plus an additional 10% of the amount of the loss in excess of $10 million, up to a maximum deductible of $14 million.

The valuation basis of the insured property at Palisades and Indian Point have been changed from replacement cost to actual cash value, given the sites’ ages, anticipated ownership horizon and/or shutdown status.

In addition, Waterford 3 and Grand Gulf are also covered under NEIL’s Accidental Outage Coverage program.  Due to Entergy’s gradual exit from the merchant/wholesale power business, Entergy no longer purchases Accidental Outage Coverage for its non-regulated, non-generation assets.  Accidental outage coverage provides indemnification for the actual cost incurred in the event of an unplanned outage resulting from property damage covered under the NEIL Primary Property Insurance policy, subject to a deductible period.  The indemnification for the actual cost incurred is based on market power prices at the time of the loss. After the deductible period has passed, weekly indemnities for an unplanned nuclear outage, covered under NEIL’s Accidental Outage Coverage program, would be paid according to the amounts listed below:

100% of the weekly indemnity for each week for the first payment period of 52 weeks;weeks (nuclear and non-nuclear loss); then
80% of the weekly indemnity for each week for the second payment period of 52 weeks;weeks (nuclear and non-nuclear loss); and thereafter
80% of the weekly indemnity for an additional 58 weeks for the third and final payment period.period (nuclear loss only).

159

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Under the property damage and accidental outage insurance programs, all NEIL insured plants could be subject to assessments should losses exceed the accumulated funds available from NEIL.  Effective April 1, 2020,2023, the maximum amounts of such possible assessments per occurrence were as follows:
 Assessments
 (In Millions)
Utility: 
Entergy Arkansas$29.619.4
Entergy Louisiana$51.836.6
Entergy Mississippi$0.110.1
Entergy New Orleans$0.110.1
Entergy TexasN/A
System Energy$22.4
Entergy Wholesale Commodities$014.3

Potential assessments for the Entergy Wholesale Commodities plants are covered by insurance obtained through NEIL’s reinsurers.

NRC regulations provide that the proceeds of this insurance must be used, first, to render the reactor safe and stable, and second, to complete decontamination operations.  Only after proceeds are dedicated for such use and regulatory approval is secured would any remaining proceeds be made available for the benefit of plant owners or their creditors.

In the event that one or more acts of terrorism causes property damage from a nuclear event under one or more or all nuclear insurance policies issued by NEIL (including, but not limited to, those described above) within 12 months from the date the first property damage occurs, the maximum recovery under all such nuclear insurance policies shall be an aggregate not exceeding $3.24 billion plus the additional amounts recovered for such losses from reinsurance, indemnity, and any other sources applicable to such losses.
150

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


Non-Nuclear Property Insurance

Entergy’s non-nuclear property insurance program provides coverage on a system-wide basis for Entergy’s non-nuclear assets. The insurance program provides coverage for property damage up to $400 million per occurrence in excess of a $20 million self-insured retention except for property damage caused by the following: earthquake shock, flood, and named windstorm, including associated storm surge. For earthquake shock and flood, the insurance program provides coverage up to $400 million on an annual aggregate basis in excess of a $40 million self-insured retention. For named windstorm and associated storm surge, the insurance program provides coverage up to $125 million on an annual aggregate basis in excess of a $40 million self-insured retention.  The coverage provided by the insurance program for the Entergy New Orleans gas distribution system is limited to $50 million per occurrence and is subject to the same annual aggregate limits and retentions listed above for earthquake shock, flood, and named windstorm, including associated storm surge.

Covered property generally includes power plants, substations, facilities, inventories, and gas distribution-related properties.  Excluded property generally includes transmission and distribution lines, poles, and towers. For substations valued at $5 million or less, coverage for named windstorm and associated storm surge is excluded.  This coverage is in place for Entergy Corporation, the Registrant Subsidiaries, and certain other Entergy subsidiaries.  Entergy also purchases $300$400 million in terrorism insurance coverage for its conventional property.  The Terrorism Risk Insurance Reauthorization Act of 2007 created a government program that provides for up to $100 billion in coverage in excess of existing coverage for a terrorist event. Under current law, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act extends through 2027.

Employment and Labor-related Proceedings

The Registrant Subsidiaries and other Entergy subsidiaries and related entities are responding to various lawsuits in both state and federal courts and to other labor-related proceedings filed by current and former employees, recognized bargaining representatives, and certain third parties.  Generally, the amount of damages being sought is not specified in these proceedings.  These actions may include, but are not limited to, allegations of wrongful employment actions; wage disputes and other claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act or its state
160

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

counterparts; claims of race, gender, age, and disability discrimination; disputes arising under collective bargaining agreements; unfair labor practice proceedings and other administrative proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board or concerning the National Labor Relations Act; claims of retaliation; claims of harassment and hostile work environment; and claims for or regarding benefits under various Entergy Corporation-sponsored employee benefit plans. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries and related entities are responding to these lawsuits and proceedings and deny liability to the claimants.  Management believes that loss exposure has been and will continue to be handled so that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not be material, in the aggregate, to the financial position, results of operation, or cash flows of Entergy or the Utility operating companies.Registrant Subsidiaries.

Asbestos Litigation (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

Numerous lawsuits have been filed in state courts against primarily Entergy Texas and Entergy Louisiana by individuals alleging exposure to asbestos while working at Entergy facilities between 1955 and 1980. Entergy is being sued as a premises owner.  Many other defendants are named in these lawsuits as well.  Currently, there are approximately 200195 lawsuits involving approximately 350345 claimants.  Management believes that adequate provisions have been established to cover any exposure.  Additionally, negotiations continue with insurers to recover reimbursements.  Management believes that loss exposure has been and will continue to be handled so that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not be material, in the aggregate, to the financial position, results of operation, or cash flows of the Utility operating companies.


151

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Grand Gulf - Related Agreements

Unit Power Sales Agreement (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and System Energy)

System Energy has agreed to sell all of its share of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans in accordance with specified percentages (Entergy Arkansas-36%Arkansas - 36%, Entergy Louisiana-14%Louisiana - 14%, Entergy Mississippi-33%Mississippi - 33%, and Entergy New Orleans-17%Orleans - 17%) as ordered by the FERC.  Charges under this agreement are paid in consideration for the purchasing companies’ respective entitlement to receive capacity and energy and are payable irrespective of the quantity of energy delivered.  The agreement will remain in effect until terminated by the parties and the termination is approved by the FERC, most likely upon Grand Gulf’s retirement from service.  In December 2016 the NRC granted the extension of Grand Gulf’s operating license to 2044. Monthly obligations are based on actual capacity and energy costs.  The average monthly payments for 20202023 under the agreement were approximately $15.7$17.9 million for Entergy Arkansas, $6.3$6.7 million for Entergy Louisiana, $13.8$16.3 million for Entergy Mississippi, and $7.6$8.1 million for Entergy New Orleans. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the complaints filed with the FERC against System Energy seeking a reduction in the return on equity component of the Unit Power Sales Agreement and other complaints filed with the FERC regarding the rates charged by System Energy under the System Agreement.

Availability Agreement (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and System Energy)

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans are individually obligated to make payments or subordinated advances to System Energy in accordance with stated percentages (Entergy Arkansas-17.1%Arkansas - 17.1%, Entergy Louisiana-26.9%Louisiana - 26.9%, Entergy Mississippi-31.3%Mississippi - 31.3%, and Entergy New Orleans-24.7%Orleans - 24.7%) in amounts that, when added to amounts received under the Unit Power Sales Agreement or otherwise, are adequate to cover all of System Energy’s operating expenses as defined, including an amount sufficient to amortize the cost of Grand Gulf 2 over 27 years (See Reallocation Agreement terms below) and expenses incurred in connection with a permanent shutdown of Grand Gulf.  System Energy has assigned its rights to payments and advances to certain creditors as security for certain of its debt obligations.  Since commercial operation of Grand Gulf began, payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement to System Energy have exceeded the amounts payable under the Availability Agreement.  Accordingly,Agreement and, therefore, no payments under the Availability Agreement have ever been required.  IfHowever, if Entergy Arkansas or Entergy Mississippi fails to make its Unit Power Sales Agreement payments, and System Energy is unable to obtain funds from other sources, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans could
161

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



become subject to claims or demands by System Energy or certain of its creditors for payments or advances under the Availability Agreement (or the assignments thereof) equal to the difference between their required Unit Power Sales Agreement payments and their required Availability Agreement payments.payments because their allocated shares under the Availability Agreement exceed their allocated shares under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See discussion below of the Reallocation Agreement among System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans, pursuant to which Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans assumed all of Entergy Arkansas’s responsibilities and obligations with respect to Grand Gulf under the Availability Agreement.

Reallocation Agreement (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and System Energy)

System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans entered into the Reallocation Agreement relating to the sale of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf and the related costs, in which Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans agreed to assume all of Entergy Arkansas’s responsibilities and obligations with respect to Grand Gulf under the Availability Agreement.  The FERC’s decision allocating a portion of Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Arkansas supersedes the Reallocation Agreement as it relates to Grand Gulf.  Responsibility for any Grand Gulf 2 amortization amounts has been individually allocated (Entergy Louisiana-26.23%, Entergy Mississippi-43.97%, and Entergy New Orleans-29.80%) under the terms of the Reallocation Agreement.  However, the Reallocation Agreement does not affect Entergy Arkansas’s obligation to System Energy’s lenders under the assignments referred to in the preceding paragraph.  Entergy Arkansas would be liable for its share of such amounts if Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans were unable to meet their contractual obligations.  No payments of any
152

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

amortization amounts will be required so long as amounts paid to System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, including other funds available to System Energy, exceed amounts required under the Availability Agreement, which is expected to be the case for the foreseeable future.

Nelson Industrial Steam Company (Entergy Louisiana)

Entergy Louisiana is a partner in the Nelson Industrial Steam Company (NISCO) partnership which owns two petroleum coke generating units. In April 2023 these generating units suspended operations in the MISO market, and Entergy Louisiana currently is working to wind up the NISCO partnership, which will ultimately result in ownership of the generating units transferring to Entergy Louisiana. In November 2023 the FERC issued an order providing Section 203 of the Federal Power Act approval for any subsequent transfer of the facilities to Entergy Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana is evaluating the effect of the transaction on its results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition, but at this time does not expect the effect to be material.


NOTE 9. ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Accounting standards require companies to record liabilities for all legal obligations associated with the retirement of long-lived assets that result from the normal operation of the assets.  For Entergy, substantially all of its asset retirement obligations consist of its liability for decommissioning its nuclear power plants.  In addition, an insignificant amount of removal costs associated with non-nuclear power plants is also included in the decommissioning and asset retirement costs line item on the balance sheets.

These liabilities are recorded at their fair values (which are the present values of the estimated future cash outflows) in the period in which they are incurred, with an accompanying addition to the recorded cost of the long-lived asset.  The asset retirement obligation is accreted each year through a charge to expense, to reflect the time value of money for this present value obligation.  The accretion will continue through the completion of the asset retirement activity.  The amounts added to the carrying amounts of the long-lived assets will be depreciated over the useful lives of the assets.  The application of accounting standards related to asset retirement obligations is earnings neutral to the rate-regulated business of the Registrant Subsidiaries.
162

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


In accordance with ratemaking treatment and as required by regulatory accounting standards, the depreciation provisions for the Registrant Subsidiaries include a component for removal costs that are not asset retirement obligations under accounting standards.  In accordance with regulatory accounting principles, the Registrant Subsidiaries have recorded regulatory assets (liabilities) in the following amounts to reflect their estimates of the difference between estimated incurred removal costs and estimated removal costs expected to be recovered in rates:
December 31, December 31,
20202019 20232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas$212.6$168.9Entergy Arkansas$319.7$267.1
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana$302.5($2.4)Entergy Louisiana$262.3$418.8
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$107.3$80.8Entergy Mississippi$188.0$159.4
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans$63.2$52.9Entergy New Orleans$61.1$56.3
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas$115.3$42.5Entergy Texas$77.5$62.9
System EnergySystem Energy$92.9$75.9System Energy$102.1$94.4

As of December 31, 20202023 and 2022, the regulatory asset for removal costs for the Utility operating companies includes amounts related to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta,storm restoration costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of storm restoration costs and Hurricane Zeta restoration costs.requested recovery.

The cumulative decommissioning and retirement cost liabilities and expenses recorded in 2023 and 2022 by Entergy were as follows:
 Liabilities as of December 31, 2022
 
 
Accretion
Change in
Cash Flow
Estimate
Liabilities as of December 31, 2023
 (In Millions)
Entergy$4,271.5 $219.4 $14.9 $4,505.8 
Entergy Arkansas$1,472.7 $87.4 $— $1,560.1 
Entergy Louisiana$1,736.8 $88.6 $10.8 $1,836.2 
Entergy Mississippi$7.8 $0.4 $— $8.2 
Entergy New Orleans$— $0.5 $4.1 $4.6 
Entergy Texas$11.1 $0.6 $— $11.7 
System Energy$1,042.5 $41.7 $— $1,084.2 

153163

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The cumulative decommissioning and retirement cost liabilities and expenses recorded in 2020 and 2019 by Entergy were as follows:
 Liabilities as
of December 31,
2019
 
 
Accretion
 
 
Spending
Liabilities as
of December 31,
2020
 (In Millions)
Entergy$6,159.2 $394.6 ($84.3)$6,469.5 
Utility    
Entergy Arkansas1,242.6 73.3 (1.7)1,314.2 
Entergy Louisiana1,497.3 76.0 1,573.3 
Entergy Mississippi9.7 0.6 (0.5)9.8 
Entergy New Orleans3.5 0.3 3.8 
Entergy Texas7.6 0.5 8.1 
System Energy931.7 37.2 968.9 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Big Rock Point40.3 3.3 (2.5)41.1 
Indian Point 1238.6 20.4 (12.4)246.6 
Indian Point 2829.0 69.4 (58.6)839.8 
Indian Point 3808.4 67.4 (6.4)869.4 
Palisades549.8 46.4 (2.1)594.1 
Other (a)0.5 0.5 

154

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Liabilities as
of December 31,
2018
 
 
Accretion
Change in
Cash Flow
Estimate
 
 
Spending
DispositionsLiabilities as
of December 31,
2019
Liabilities as
of December 31,
2021
 
 
Accretion
Change in
Cash Flow
Estimate
 
 
Spending
DispositionsLiabilities as
of December 31,
2022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
EntergyEntergy$6,923.4 $414.0 $273.7 ($45.6)($1,406.3)$6,159.2 
Utility
Utility
UtilityUtility        
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas1,048.4 68.0 126.2 1,242.6 
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana1,280.3 69.5 147.5 1,497.3 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi9.2 0.5 9.7 
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans3.3 0.2 3.5 
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas7.2 0.4 7.6 
System EnergySystem Energy896.0 35.7 931.7 
Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Non-Utility Operations
Non-Utility Operations
Non-Utility Operations
Big Rock PointBig Rock Point39.7 3.2 (2.6)40.3 
Indian Point 1227.9 19.5 (8.8)238.6 
Indian Point 2768.0 65.5 (4.5)829.0 
Indian Point 3750.6 62.5 (4.7)808.4 
Big Rock Point
Big Rock Point
PalisadesPalisades508.0 42.9 (1.1)549.8 
Pilgrim816.5 44.1 (23.9)(836.7)(b)
Vermont Yankee567.9 1.7 (569.6)(b)
Other (a)Other (a)0.4 0.1 0.5 

(a)    See “Coal Combustion Residuals” below for additional discussion regarding the asset retirement obligations related to coal combustion residuals management.
(b)    See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Pilgrim plant to Holtec InternationalBig Rock Point Site and Palisades in August 2019 and the sale of the Vermont Yankee plant to NorthStar in January 2019.June 2022.

Nuclear Plant Decommissioning

Entergy periodically reviews and updates estimated decommissioning costs.  The actual decommissioning costs may vary from the estimates because of the timing of plant decommissioning, regulatory requirements, changes in technology, and increased costs of labor, materials, and equipment.  As described below, during 2019 and 2018, Entergy updated decommissioning cost estimates for certain nuclear power plants. Entergy did not update decommissioning cost estimates in 2020.

Utility

In the firstthird quarter 2019, Entergy Arkansas recorded a revision to its estimated decommissioning cost liabilities for ANO 1 and ANO 2 as a result of a revised decommissioning cost study. The revised estimates resulted in a $126.2 million increase in its decommissioning cost liabilities, along with corresponding increases in the related asset retirement cost assets that will be depreciated over the remaining lives of the units.

In the second quarter 2019,2023, Entergy Louisiana recorded a revision to its estimated decommissioning cost liability for Waterford 3River Bend as a result of a revised decommissioning cost study. The revised estimate resulted in a $147.5$10.8 million increase in its decommissioning cost liability, along with a corresponding increase in the related asset retirement cost asset that will be depreciated over the remaining useful life of the unit.
155

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements





Entergy Wholesale Commodities

Pilgrim

Entergy Nuclear Generation Company filed its Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities report (PSDAR) with the NRC in the fourth quarter 2018 for the Pilgrim plant in anticipation of its May 2019 shutdown. As part of the development of the PSDAR, Entergy obtained a revised decommissioning cost study in the third quarter 2018. The revised estimate resulted in a $117.5 million increase in the decommissioning cost liability and a corresponding impairment charge.

Vermont Yankee

In the fourththird quarter 2018, Entergy Wholesale Commodities2022, System Energy recorded a revision to its estimated decommissioning cost liability for Vermont Yankee.Grand Gulf as a result of a revised decommissioning cost study. The revised estimate resulted in a $293$5.4 million increasereduction in theits decommissioning cost liability, along with a corresponding increasereduction in the related asset retirement obligation cost asset. The revision was prompted byasset that will be depreciated over the progressremaining life of the Vermont Yankee sales transaction, which is described in Note 14 to the financial statements. Entergy accordingly evaluated the Vermont Yankee asset retirement obligation in light of the terms of the sale transaction, upon determining that Vermont Yankee was in held for sale status. Based on the terms of the sales agreement, which include Entergy receiving a note receivable from the purchaser, Entergy determined that $165 million of the asset retirement cost was impaired, and it was accordingly written down in the fourth quarter 2018. The Vermont Yankee plant was sold to NorthStar in January 2019.unit.

NRC Filings Regarding Trust Funding Levels

Plant owners are required to provide the NRC with a biennial report (annually for units that have shut down or will shut down within five years), based on values as of December 31, addressing the owners’ ability to meet the NRC minimum funding levels. Depending on the value of the trust funds, plant owners may be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or making additional contributions to the trusts, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and that NRC minimum funding requirements are met.

164

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

As nuclear plants individually approach and begin decommissioning, filings will be submitted to the NRC for planned shutdown activities. These filings with the NRC also determine whether financial assurance may be required in addition to the nuclear decommissioning trust fund.

Coal Combustion Residuals

In June 2010April 2015 the EPA issued a proposed rule onpublished the final coal combustion residuals (CCRs) that contained two primary regulatory options: (1) regulating CCRs destined for disposal in landfills or received (including stored) in surface impoundments as so-called “special wastes” under the hazardous waste program of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C; or (2)(CCR) rule regulating CCRs destined for disposal in landfills or surface impoundments as non-hazardous wastes under Subtitle D of RCRA.  Under both options, CCRs that are beneficially reused in certain processes would remain excluded from hazardous waste regulation. In April 2015 the EPA published the final CCR rule with the material being regulated under the second scenario presented above - as non-hazardous wastes regulated under RCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle D. The final regulations create new compliance requirements including modified storage, new notification and reporting practices, product disposal considerations, and CCR unit closure criteria.criteria, but excluded CCRs that are beneficially reused in certain processes.  Entergy believes that on-site disposal options will be available at its facilities, to the extent needed for CCR that cannot be transferred for beneficial reuse. In December 2016 the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act) was signed into law, which authorizes states to regulate coal ash rather than leaving primary enforcement to citizen suit actions. States may submit to the EPA proposals for permit programs.
156

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statementsneeded.

In the third quarter 2022, revisions to the Big Cajun 2 CCR asset retirement obligations were made as a result of revised closure and post-closure cost estimates. The revised estimates resulted in increases of $2.8 million at Entergy Louisiana and $2.1 million at Entergy Texas in decommissioning cost liabilities, along with corresponding increases in related asset retirement obligations cost assets that will be depreciated over the remaining useful life of the unit.


NOTE 10.  LEASES (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Entergy implemented ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842),” effective January 1, 2019. The ASU’s core principle is that “a lessee should recognize the assets and liabilities that arise from leases.” The ASU considers that “all leases create an asset and a liability,” and accordingly requires recording the assets and liabilities related to all leases with a term greater than 12 months. Concurrent with the implementation of ASU 2016-02, Entergy implemented ASU 2018-01, “Leases (Topic 842): Land Easement Practical Expedient for Transition to Topic 842,” which provided Entergy the option to elect not to evaluate existing land easements that are not currently accounted for as leases under the previous lease standard, and ASU 2018-11, “Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements,” which intended to simplify the transition requirement giving Entergy the option to apply the transition provisions of the new standard at the date of adoption instead of at the earliest comparative period. In implementing these ASUs, Entergy elected the options provided in both ASU 2018-01 and ASU 2018-11. This accounting was applied to all lease agreements using the modified retrospective method, which required an adjustment to retained earnings for the cumulative effect of adopting the standard as of the effective date, and when implemented with ASU 2018-11, allowed Entergy to recognize the leased assets and liabilities on its balance sheet beginning on January 1, 2019 without restating prior periods. In adopting the standard in January 2019, Entergy recognized right-of-use assets and corresponding lease liabilities totaling approximately $263 million, including $59 million for Entergy Arkansas, $51 million for Entergy Louisiana, $26 million for Entergy Mississippi, $7 million for Entergy New Orleans, and $16 million for Entergy Texas. Implementation of the standards had no material effect on consolidated net income; therefore, no adjustment to retained earnings was recorded. The adoption of the standards had no effect on cash flows.

General

As of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries held operating and finance leases for fleet vehicles used in operations, real estate, and aircraft. Excluded are power purchase agreements not meeting the definition of a lease, nuclear fuel leases, and the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback which were determined not to be leases under the accounting standards.

Leases have remaining terms of one year to 6057 years. Real estate leases generally include at least one five-year renewal option; however, renewal is not typically considered reasonably certain unless Entergy or a Registrant Subsidiary makes significant leasehold improvements or other modifications that would hinder its ability to easily move. In certain of the lease agreements for fleet vehicles used in operations, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries provide residual value guarantees to the lessor. Due to the nature of the agreements and Entergy’s continuing relationship with the lessor, however, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries expect to renegotiate or refinance the leases prior to conclusion of the lease. As such, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries do not believe it is probable that they will be required to pay anything pertaining to the residual value guarantee, and the lease liabilities and right-of-use assets are measured accordingly.

Entergy incurred the following total lease costs for the years ended December 31, 20202023 and 2019:2022:
20202019
(In Thousands)
2023
2023
2023
(In Thousands)
(In Thousands)
(In Thousands)
Operating lease cost
Operating lease cost
Operating lease costOperating lease cost$67,471 $63,566 
Finance lease cost:Finance lease cost:
Finance lease cost:
Finance lease cost:
Amortization of right-of-use assets
Amortization of right-of-use assets
Amortization of right-of-use assetsAmortization of right-of-use assets$12,180 $16,048 
Interest on lease liabilitiesInterest on lease liabilities$2,884 $3,667 
Interest on lease liabilities
Interest on lease liabilities

Of the lease costs disclosed above, Entergy had $5.0 million and $5.4 million in short-term leases costs for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively.

157165

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



The Registrant Subsidiaries incurred the following lease costs for the year ended December 31, 2023:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy
New Orleans
Entergy Texas
(In Thousands)
Operating lease cost$17,065 $16,906 $7,837 $1,912 $7,290 
Finance lease cost:
Amortization of right-of-use assets$3,633 $4,835 $2,227 $1,025 $1,786 
Interest on lease liabilities$545 $729 $973 $150 $284 

Of the lease costs disclosed above, Entergy Arkansas had $759 thousand$1.7 million, Entergy Louisiana had $1.6 million, Entergy Mississippi had $1.1 million, Entergy New Orleans had $0.1 million, and $43 thousandEntergy Texas had $0.4 million in short-term leaseslease costs for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

The lease costs disclosed above materially approximate the cash flows used by Entergy for leases with all costs included within operating activities on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, except for the finance lease costs which are included in financing activities.2023.

The Registrant Subsidiaries incurred the following lease costs for the year ended December 31, 2020:2022:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy
New Orleans
Entergy Texas
(In Thousands)
Entergy Arkansas
Entergy Arkansas
Entergy Arkansas
(In Thousands)
(In Thousands)
(In Thousands)
Operating lease costOperating lease cost$14,344 $13,944 $6,584 $1,443 $4,870 
Finance lease cost:Finance lease cost:
Finance lease cost:
Finance lease cost:
Amortization of right-of-use assets
Amortization of right-of-use assets
Amortization of right-of-use assetsAmortization of right-of-use assets$2,693 $4,097 $1,627 $712 $1,340 
Interest on lease liabilitiesInterest on lease liabilities$408 $597 $254 $120 $196 
Interest on lease liabilities
Interest on lease liabilities

Of the lease costs disclosed above, Entergy Arkansas had $43 thousand and$1.7 million, Entergy Louisiana had $719 thousand$1.8 million, Entergy Mississippi had $0.9 million, Entergy New Orleans had $0.2 million, and Entergy Texas had $0.8 million in short-term lease costs for the year ended December 31, 2020.    2022.

The lease costs for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 disclosed above materially approximate the cash flows used by the Registrant Subsidiaries for leases with all costs included within operating activities on the respective Statements of Cash Flows, except for the finance lease costs which are included in financing activities.

The Registrant Subsidiaries incurred the following lease costs for the year ended December 31, 2019:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy
New Orleans
Entergy Texas
(In Thousands)
Operating lease cost$13,213 $11,975 $6,927 $1,406 $4,259 
Finance lease cost:
Amortization of right-of-use assets$3,643 $5,940 $2,097 $1,042 $1,568 
Interest on lease liabilities$594 $895 $353 $168 $241 

Of the lease costs disclosed above, Entergy Louisiana had $43 thousand in short-term lease costs for the year ended December 31, 2019.

The lease costs disclosed above materially approximate the cash flows used by the Registrant Subsidiaries for leases with all costs included within operating activities on the respective Statements of Cash Flows, except for the finance lease costs which are included in financing activities.
Entergy has elected to account for short-term leases in accordance with policy options provided by accounting guidance; therefore, there are no related lease liabilities or right-of-use assets for the costs recognized above by Entergy or by its Registrant Subsidiaries in the table below.

Included within Property, Plant, and Equipment on Entergy’s consolidated balance sheetsheets at December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are $230$207 million and $234$191 million related to operating leases, respectively, and $60$84 million and $61$64 million related to finance leases, respectively.

158166

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Included within Utility Plant on the Registrant Subsidiaries’ respective balance sheets at December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are the following amounts:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)
2020
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
2023
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases$55,840 $43,189 $16,538 $5,222 $14,738 
Finance leasesFinance leases$12,447 $16,425 $7,452 $3,428 $5,719 
2019
2022
2022
2022
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases$52,317 $36,034 $16,900 $3,878 $14,020 
Finance leasesFinance leases$11,216 $17,209 $6,869 $3,291 $5,273 

The following lease-related liabilities are recorded within the respective Other lines on Entergy’s consolidated balance sheetsheets as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019:2022:
20202019
(In Thousands)
202320232022
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Current liabilities:Current liabilities:
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases$59,004 $52,678 
Finance leasesFinance leases$11,921 $11,413 
Non-current liabilities:Non-current liabilities:
Operating leasesOperating leases$170,980 $181,339 
Operating leases
Operating leases
Finance leasesFinance leases$52,803 $53,396 

The following lease-related liabilities are recorded within the respective Other lines on the Registrant Subsidiaries’ respective balance sheets at December 31, 2020:2023:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Current liabilities:Current liabilities:
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases$11,942 $11,934 $5,738 $1,406 $4,277 
Finance leasesFinance leases$2,660 $3,821 $1,644 $686 $1,327 
Non-current liabilities:Non-current liabilities:
Operating leasesOperating leases$43,914 $31,260 $10,867 $3,819 $10,469 
Operating leases
Operating leases
Finance leasesFinance leases$9,788 $12,603 $5,808 $2,741 $4,392 

159167

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The following lease-related liabilities are recorded within the respective Other lines on the Registrant Subsidiaries’ respective balance sheets at December 31, 2019:2022:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Current liabilities:Current liabilities:
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases$11,443 $10,331 $5,633 $1,134 $3,698 
Finance leasesFinance leases$2,442 $3,919 $1,487 $647 $1,222 
Non-current liabilities:Non-current liabilities:
Operating leasesOperating leases$40,880 $25,743 $11,232 $2,746 $10,364 
Operating leases
Operating leases
Finance leasesFinance leases$8,768 $13,376 $5,382 $2,644 $4,009 

The following information contains the weighted averageweighted-average remaining lease term in years and the weighted averageweighted-average discount rate for the operating and finance leases of Entergy at December 31, 20202023 and 2019:2022:
20202019
Weighted average remaining lease terms:
202320232022
Weighted-average remaining lease terms:
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases4.825.144.464.32
Finance leasesFinance leases6.346.69Finance leases8.615.63
Weighted average discount rate:
Weighted-average discount rate:
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases3.58 %3.86 %4.10 %3.61 %
Finance leasesFinance leases4.42 %4.60 %Finance leases4.64 %3.95 %

The following information contains the weighted averageweighted-average remaining lease term in years and the weighted averageweighted-average discount rate for the operating and finance leases of the Registrant Subsidiaries at December 31, 2020:2023:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
Weighted average remaining lease terms:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
Weighted-average remaining lease terms:
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases5.744.725.305.784.304.624.605.346.384.44
Finance leasesFinance leases5.605.205.445.695.39Finance leases5.575.4017.825.735.49
Weighted average discount rate:
Weighted-average discount rate:
Operating leases
Operating leases
Operating leasesOperating leases3.34 %3.11 %3.43 %3.09 %3.07 %4.04 %4.01 %4.08 %4.02 %4.43 %
Finance leasesFinance leases3.18 %3.33 %3.22 %3.35 %3.22 %Finance leases3.77 %3.85 %5.08 %3.69 %3.76 %

The following information contains the weighted-average remaining lease term in years and the weighted-average discount rate for the operating and finance leases of the Registrant Subsidiaries at December 31, 2022:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
Weighted-average remaining lease terms:
Operating leases4.554.265.316.083.84
Finance leases5.325.275.155.725.67
Weighted-average discount rate:
Operating leases3.43 %3.24 %3.52 %3.50 %3.63 %
Finance leases2.93 %3.15 %2.87 %3.04 %3.07 %

160168

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


The following information contains the weighted average remaining lease term in years and the weighted average discount rate for the operating and finance leases of the Registrant Subsidiaries at December 31, 2019:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
Weighted average remaining lease terms:
Operating leases5.844.335.045.624.54
Finance leases5.435.245.325.935.12
Weighted average discount rate:
Operating leases3.67 %3.65 %3.75 %3.88 %3.73 %
Finance leases3.68 %3.65 %3.67 %3.74 %3.82 %

Maturity of the lease liabilities for Entergy as of December 31, 20202023 are as follows:
YearOperating LeasesFinance Leases
(In Thousands)
2021$65,693 $14,436 
202257,497 13,175 
202346,540 12,114 
Operating LeasesOperating LeasesFinance Leases
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
2024202438,525 10,013 
2025202520,269 8,225 
2026
2027
2028
Years thereafterYears thereafter20,999 16,436 
Minimum lease paymentsMinimum lease payments249,523 74,399 
Less: amount representing interestLess: amount representing interest19,539 9,675 
Present value of net minimum lease paymentsPresent value of net minimum lease payments$229,984 $64,724 

161

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Maturity of the lease liabilities for the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 are as follows:

Operating Leases
YearEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)
2021$13,527 $13,076 $6,183 $1,533 $4,650 
202211,547 10,581 4,890 1,256 3,705 
20239,868 8,624 2,788 1,028 3,299 
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
202420248,524 6,466 1,749 773 2,313 
202520256,993 3,693 872 406 1,037 
2026
2027
2028
Years thereafterYears thereafter10,737 3,717 1,927 694 657 
Minimum lease paymentsMinimum lease payments61,196 46,157 18,409 5,690 15,661 
Less: amount representing interestLess: amount representing interest5,340 2,963 1,804 465 915 
Present value of net minimum lease paymentsPresent value of net minimum lease payments$55,856 $43,194 $16,605 $5,225 $14,746 

Finance Leases
YearEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)
2021$3,013 $4,305 $1,857 $790 $1,490 
20222,712 3,856 1,665 729 1,258 
20232,441 3,437 1,483 684 1,119 
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
202420241,978 2,493 1,156 561 882 
202520251,498 1,783 885 456 677 
2026
2027
2028
Years thereafterYears thereafter1,843 1,893 1,027 523 759 
Minimum lease paymentsMinimum lease payments13,485 17,767 8,073 3,743 6,185 
Less: amount representing interestLess: amount representing interest1,037 1,343 621 316 467 
Present value of net minimum lease paymentsPresent value of net minimum lease payments$12,448 $16,424 $7,452 $3,427 $5,718 

169

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



In allocating consideration in lease contracts to the lease and non-lease components, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries have made the accounting policy election to combine lease and non-lease components related to fleet vehicles used in operations fuel storage agreements, and purchased power agreements and to allocate the contract consideration to both lease and non-lease components for real estate leases.

Following are the relevant lease disclosures from Note 10 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.

Total 2018 rental expenses for all leases (excluding power purchase agreement operating leases, nuclear fuel leases, and the Grand Gulf sale and leaseback transaction) amounted to $47.8 million for Entergy.
162

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


Total 2018 rental expenses for leases (excluding power purchase agreement operating leases, nuclear fuel leases, and the Grand Gulf sale and leaseback transaction) amounted to $6.2 million for Entergy Arkansas, $20.2 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.6 million for Entergy Mississippi, $2.5 million for Entergy New Orleans, $3.1 million for Entergy Texas, and $1.9 million for System Energy.

In addition to rental expense, railcar operating lease payments and oil tank facilities lease payments are recorded in fuel expense in accordance with regulatory treatment. Railcar operating lease payments were $2.8 million in 2018 for Entergy Arkansas and $0.4 million in 2018 for Entergy Louisiana. Oil tank facilities lease payments for Entergy Mississippi were $0.1 million in 2018.

Total capacity expense under the power purchase agreement accounted for as an operating lease at Entergy Texas was $30.5 million in 2018.

NOTE 11.  RETIREMENT, OTHER POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS, AND DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLANS (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Qualified Pension Plans

Entergy has eight defined benefit qualified pension plans, covering substantially all employees. Theincluding the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Plan I), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Bargaining Employees (Bargaining Plan I), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan II for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Plan II), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan II for Bargaining Employees (Bargaining Plan II), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan III and(Plan III), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan IV for Bargaining Employees, are non-contributory final average pay plans and provide pension benefits that are based on employees’ credited service and compensation during employment.  Non-bargaining employees whose most recent date of hire is after June 30, 2014 but before January 1, 2021 participate in the Entergy Corporation Cash Balance Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Cash Balance Plan). Certain bargaining employees hired or rehired after June 30, 2014, or such later date provided for in their applicable collective bargaining agreements, participate in the Entergy Corporation Cash Balance Plan for Bargaining Employees (Bargaining Cash Balance Plan).  The Entergy Corporation Cash Balance Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Cash Balance Plan) was merged with and into Non-Bargaining Plan I effective January 1, 2022. Effective January 1, 2024, Non-Bargaining Plan I was amended to spin-off predominately inactive participants into a new qualified pension plan, Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan VI for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Plan VI). The Registrant Subsidiaries participate in these four plans: Non-Bargaining Plan I, Bargaining Plan I, Plan III, Non-Bargaining Plan VI, and Bargaining Cash Balance Plan. Non-bargaining and bargaining employees whose most recent date of hire was prior to June 30, 2014 (or such later date provided for in their applicable collective bargaining agreement) participate in a noncontributory final average pay formula that provides pension benefits based on the employee’s credited service and compensation during employment. Non-bargaining and bargaining employees whose most recent date of hire is after June 30, 2014 and before January 1, 2021 (or such later date provided for in their applicable collective bargaining agreement) do not participate in a final average pay formula, but instead participate in a cash balance formula. Effective January 1, 2021, the Non-Bargaining Cash Balance Plan and Bargaining Cash Balance Plan.Plan were amended to close participation in each plan to those employees whose most recent hire date is after December 31, 2020 (or such later date provided for in their applicable collective bargaining agreement). Employees hired after this date instead may be eligible to participate in and receive a discretionary employer contribution under an Entergy sponsored tax-qualified defined contribution plan that includes a 401(k) feature.

The assets of the six final average pay defined benefit qualified pension plans are held in a master trust established by Entergy, and the assets of the two cash balance pension plans are held in a second master trust established by Entergy. Each pension plan has an undivided beneficial interest in each of the investment accounts in its respectivethe master trust that is maintained by a trustee.  Use of the master truststrust permits the commingling of the trust assets of the pension plans of Entergy Corporation and its Registrant Subsidiaries for investment and administrative purposes.  Although assets in the master truststrust are commingled, the trustee maintains supporting records for the purpose of allocating the trust level equity in net earnings (loss) and the administrative expenses of the investment accounts in eachthe trust to the various participating pension plans in that particularthe trust.  The fair value of the trusts’trust’s assets is determined by the trustee and certain investment managers.  For each trust, theThe trustee calculates a daily earnings factor, including realized and unrealized gains or losses, collected and accrued income, and administrative expenses, and allocates earnings to each plan in the master truststrust on a pro rata basis.

Within each pension plan, the record of each Registrant Subsidiary’s beneficial interest in the plan assets is maintained by the plan’s actuary and is updated quarterly.  Assets for each Registrant Subsidiary are increased for investment net income and contributions and are decreased for benefit payments.  A plan’s investment net income/loss (i.e., interest and dividends, realized and unrealized gains and losses and expenses) is allocated to the Registrant Subsidiaries participating in that plan based on the value of assets for each Registrant Subsidiary at the beginning of the quarter adjusted for contributions and benefit payments made during the quarter.
163170

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements





Entergy Corporation and its subsidiaries fund pension plans in an amount not less than the minimum required contribution under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.  The assets of the plans include common and preferred stocks, fixed-income securities, interest in a money market fund, and insurance contracts.  The Registrant Subsidiaries’ pension costs are recovered from customers as a component of cost of service in each of their respective jurisdictions.

Components of Qualified Net Pension Cost and Other Amounts Recognized as a Regulatory Asset and/or Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI)

Entergy Corporation and its subsidiaries’ total 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 qualified pension costs and amounts recognized as a regulatory asset and/or other comprehensive income, including amounts capitalized, included the following components:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Net periodic pension cost:Net periodic pension cost:   Net periodic pension cost:  
Service cost - benefits earned during the periodService cost - benefits earned during the period$161,487 $134,193 $155,010 
Interest cost on projected benefit obligationInterest cost on projected benefit obligation239,614 293,114 267,415 
Expected return on assetsExpected return on assets(414,273)(414,947)(442,142)
Amortization of prior service cost398 
Recognized net loss
Recognized net loss
Recognized net lossRecognized net loss350,010 241,117 274,104 
Settlement chargesSettlement charges36,946 23,492 828 
Net periodic pension costs$373,784 $276,969 $255,613 
Settlement charges
Settlement charges
Net pension cost
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)   Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)  
Arising this period:Arising this period:   Arising this period:  
Net loss$483,653 $614,600 $394,951 
Net (gain)/loss
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:   Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:  
Amortization of prior service cost(398)
Amortization of net loss
Amortization of net loss
Amortization of net lossAmortization of net loss(358,473)(241,117)(274,104)
Settlement chargeSettlement charge(36,946)(23,492)(828)
TotalTotal$88,234 $349,991 $119,621 
Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)$462,018 $626,960 $375,234 

164

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The Registrant Subsidiaries’ total 2020, 2019, and 2018 qualified pension costs and amounts recognized as a regulatory asset and/or other comprehensive income, including amounts capitalized, for their employees included the following components:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net periodic pension cost:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$26,329 $35,158 $8,060 $2,654 $6,116 $7,883 
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation44,165 50,432 12,922 5,825 10,731 11,006 
Expected return on assets(78,187)(89,691)(23,147)(10,509)(21,951)(18,757)
Recognized net loss68,338 66,640 18,983 8,018 13,173 17,104 
Settlement charges21,078 8,109 3,366 4,289 105 
Net pension cost$81,723 $70,648 $20,184 $5,988 $12,358 $17,341 
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net loss$106,178 $90,064 $36,899 $8,148 $13,379 $35,403 
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:      
Amortization of net loss(69,713)(68,248)(19,393)(8,213)(13,564)(17,434)
Settlement charge(21,078)(8,109)(3,366)(4,289)(105)
Total$15,387 $13,707 $14,140 ($65)($4,474)$17,864 
Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)$97,110 $84,355 $34,324 $5,923 $7,884 $35,205 

165171

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net periodic pension cost:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$21,043 $29,137 $6,516 $2,274 $5,401 $6,199 
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation56,701 63,529 16,272 7,495 14,451 13,456 
Expected return on assets(80,705)(90,607)(23,873)(10,785)(23,447)(18,710)
Recognized net loss47,361 46,571 12,416 6,117 9,335 11,400 
Net pension cost$44,400 $48,630 $11,331 $5,101 $5,740 $12,345 
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net loss$118,898 $99,346 $41,088 $6,531 $10,869 $36,711 
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:      
Amortization of net loss(47,361)(46,571)(12,416)(6,117)(9,335)(11,400)
Total$71,537 $52,775 $28,672 $414 $1,534 $25,311 
Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)$115,937 $101,405 $40,003 $5,515 $7,274 $37,656 
The Registrant Subsidiaries’ total 2023, 2022, and 2021 qualified pension costs and amounts recognized as a regulatory asset and/or other comprehensive income, including amounts capitalized, for their current and former employees included the following components:

2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net periodic pension cost:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$18,461 $24,716 $5,775 $1,955 $4,328 $5,749 
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation56,026 60,346 15,402 6,747 12,726 13,852 
Expected return on assets(70,574)(75,757)(19,423)(8,798)(16,641)(17,585)
Recognized net loss19,400 19,797 5,719 1,694 4,075 4,236 
Settlement charges26,137 40,437 12,242 2,080 11,230 6,375 
Net pension cost$49,450 $69,539 $19,715 $3,678 $15,718 $12,627 
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net gain($30,674)($71,016)($20,220)($3,183)($16,759)($3,268)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:      
Amortization of net loss(19,400)(19,797)(5,719)(1,694)(4,075)(4,236)
Settlement charge(26,137)(40,437)(12,242)(2,080)(11,230)(6,375)
Total($76,211)($131,250)($38,181)($6,957)($32,064)($13,879)
Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)($26,761)($61,711)($18,466)($3,279)($16,346)($1,252)
166172

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2018Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net periodic pension cost:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$24,757 $33,783 $7,286 $2,693 $6,356 $7,102 
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation52,017 59,761 15,075 7,253 13,390 12,907 
Expected return on assets(87,404)(99,236)(26,007)(11,973)(26,091)(19,963)
Recognized net loss53,650 57,800 14,438 7,816 10,503 14,859 
Net pension cost$43,020 $52,108 $10,792 $5,789 $4,158 $14,905 
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net (gain)/loss$74,570 $41,642 $19,244 $2,351 $24,121 ($2,359)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:      
Amortization of net loss(53,650)(57,800)(14,438)(7,816)(10,503)(14,859)
Total$20,920 ($16,158)$4,806 ($5,465)$13,618 ($17,218)
Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)$63,940 $35,950 $15,598 $324 $17,776 ($2,313)

2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net periodic pension cost:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$25,210 $33,520 $8,043 $2,745 $5,999 $7,746 
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation45,378 49,330 12,979 5,491 10,729 11,286 
Expected return on assets(75,820)(82,478)(20,168)(9,920)(18,317)(18,173)
Recognized net loss43,597 41,711 12,594 4,787 9,013 10,938 
Settlement charges36,409 58,550 15,786 6,676 22,411 9,905 
Net pension cost$74,774 $100,633 $29,234 $9,779 $29,835 $21,702 
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net (gain)/loss$28,365 ($15,604)($4,743)$525 $13,363 ($7,063)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:      
Amortization of net loss(43,597)(41,711)(12,594)(4,787)(9,013)(10,938)
Settlement charge(36,409)(58,550)(15,786)(6,676)(22,411)(9,905)
Total($51,641)($115,865)($33,123)($10,938)($18,061)($27,906)
Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)$23,133 ($15,232)($3,889)($1,159)$11,774 ($6,204)
167173

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Qualified Pension Obligations, Plan Assets, Funded Status, Amounts Recognized in the Balance Sheet

Qualified pension obligations, plan assets, funded status, amounts recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets for Entergy Corporation and its Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 are as follows:
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO)  
Balance at January 1$8,406,203 $7,404,917 
Service cost161,487 134,193 
Interest cost239,614 293,114 
Actuarial loss969,609 1,292,767 
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($84,754) in 2020 and ($68,203) in 2019)(633,261)(718,788)
Balance at December 31$9,143,652 $8,406,203 
Change in Plan Assets  
Fair value of assets at January 1$6,271,160 $5,497,415 
Actual return on plan assets900,229 1,093,114 
Employer contributions316,298 399,419 
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($84,754) in 2020 and ($68,203) in 2019)(633,261)(718,788)
Fair value of assets at December 31$6,854,426 $6,271,160 
Funded status($2,289,226)($2,135,043)
Amount recognized in the balance sheet  
Non-current liabilities($2,289,226)($2,135,043)
Amount recognized as a regulatory asset  
Net loss$2,926,670 $2,831,408 
Amount recognized as AOCI (before tax)  
Net loss$726,010 $724,575 
2021Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Net periodic pension cost:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$28,632 $38,271 $9,070 $3,038 $6,921 $8,851 
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation35,683 39,740 10,446 4,392 8,381 9,087 
Expected return on assets(78,368)(89,821)(22,407)(10,598)(21,158)(19,254)
Recognized net loss69,290 67,015 20,007 7,596 12,676 18,404 
Settlement charges37,682 61,945 16,710 5,431 11,797 12,260 
Net pension cost$92,919 $117,150 $33,826 $9,859 $18,617 $29,348 
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net gain($96,066)($89,534)($29,675)($16,159)($18,217)($27,617)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic pension cost in the current year:      
Amortization of net loss(69,290)(67,015)(20,007)(7,596)(12,676)(18,404)
Settlement charge(37,682)(61,945)(16,710)(5,431)(11,797)(12,260)
Total($203,038)($218,494)($66,392)($29,186)($42,690)($58,281)
Total recognized as net periodic pension cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)($110,119)($101,344)($32,566)($19,327)($24,073)($28,933)

168174

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Qualified Pension Obligations, Plan Assets, Funded Status, and Amounts Recognized in the Balance Sheet

Qualified pension obligations, plan assets, funded status, and amounts recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets for the RegistrantEntergy Corporation and its Subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are as follows:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
20232022
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO)Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO)      Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO)  
Balance at January 1Balance at January 1$1,615,084 $1,784,474 $471,510 $206,962 $396,764 $393,607 
Service costService cost26,329 35,158 8,060 2,654 6,116 7,883 
Interest costInterest cost44,165 50,432 12,922 5,825 10,731 11,006 
Actuarial (gain)/loss
Actuarial (gain)/loss
Actuarial (gain)/loss
Actuarial loss196,755 196,032 62,564 20,535 37,579 57,574 
Benefits paid (a)(142,951)(138,825)(44,947)(15,689)(40,526)(28,922)
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($410,110) in 2023 and ($604,753) in 2022)
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($410,110) in 2023 and ($604,753) in 2022)
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($410,110) in 2023 and ($604,753) in 2022)
Balance at December 31Balance at December 31$1,739,382 $1,927,271 $510,109 $220,287 $410,664 $441,148 
Change in Plan AssetsChange in Plan Assets      Change in Plan Assets  
Fair value of assets at
January 1
Fair value of assets at
January 1
$1,200,035 $1,364,030 $354,928 $160,777 $339,126 $282,668 
Actual return on plan assetsActual return on plan assets168,764 195,658 48,812 22,896 46,151 40,927 
Employer contributionsEmployer contributions60,008 55,443 12,601 4,567 4,997 16,145 
Benefits paid (a)(142,951)(138,825)(44,947)(15,689)(40,526)(28,922)
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($410,110) in 2023 and ($604,753) in 2022)
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($410,110) in 2023 and ($604,753) in 2022)
Benefits paid (including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($410,110) in 2023 and ($604,753) in 2022)
Fair value of assets at December 31Fair value of assets at December 31$1,285,856 $1,476,306 $371,394 $172,551 $349,748 $310,818 
Funded statusFunded status($453,526)($450,965)($138,715)($47,736)($60,916)($130,330)
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet (funded status)      
Amount recognized in the balance sheet (funded status)Amount recognized in the balance sheet (funded status)  
Non-current liabilitiesNon-current liabilities($453,526)($450,965)($138,715)($47,736)($60,916)($130,330)
Amounts recognized as regulatory asset      
Amount recognized as a regulatory assetAmount recognized as a regulatory asset  
Net lossNet loss$816,002 $766,099 $239,904 $91,991 $156,480 $212,062 
Net loss
Net loss
Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)      
Amount recognized as AOCI (before tax)
Amount recognized as AOCI (before tax)
Amount recognized as AOCI (before tax)  
Net lossNet loss$0 $31,921 $0 $0 $0 $0 
Net loss
Net loss

(a)    Including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($48.4) million at Entergy Arkansas, ($18.6) million at Entergy Louisiana, ($7.7) million at Entergy Mississippi, ($9.8) million at Entergy Texas, and ($236) thousand at System Energy.
169175

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Qualified pension obligations, plan assets, funded status, and amounts recognized in the Balance Sheets for the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO)      
Balance at January 1$1,168,098 $1,256,422 $320,994 $140,436 $265,565 $288,302 
Service cost18,461 24,716 5,775 1,955 4,328 5,749 
Interest cost56,026 60,346 15,402 6,747 12,726 13,852 
Actuarial (gain)/loss39,643 1,925 (328)4,590 (1,416)14,522 
Benefits paid (a)(164,643)(170,126)(45,901)(19,778)(41,219)(35,867)
Balance at December 31$1,117,585 $1,173,283 $295,942 $133,950 $239,984 $286,558 
Change in Plan Assets      
Fair value of assets at January 1$961,178 $1,035,574 $265,736 $119,710 $226,417 $240,392 
Actual return on plan assets140,891 148,698 39,315 16,571 31,984 35,375 
Employer contributions54,468 44,565 21,110 1,420 5,314 15,543 
Benefits paid (a)(164,643)(170,126)(45,901)(19,778)(41,219)(35,867)
Fair value of assets at December 31$991,894 $1,058,711 $280,260 $117,923 $222,496 $255,443 
Funded status($125,691)($114,572)($15,682)($16,027)($17,488)($31,115)
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet (funded status)      
Non-current liabilities($125,691)($114,572)($15,682)($16,027)($17,488)($31,115)
Amounts recognized as regulatory asset      
Net loss$485,113 $319,116 $102,208 $44,911 $63,665 $111,996 
Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)      
Net loss$— $13,296 $— $— $— $— 

(a)    Including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($68.7) million at Entergy Arkansas, ($103.1) million at Entergy Louisiana, ($31.4) million at Entergy Mississippi, ($5.3) million at Entergy New Orleans, ($29.4) million at Entergy Texas, and ($16.7) million at System Energy.

176

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
20222022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO)Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO)      Change in Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO) 
Balance at January 1Balance at January 1$1,443,808 $1,599,916 $414,089 $191,190 $369,604 $339,034 
Service costService cost21,043 29,137 6,516 2,274 5,401 6,199 
Interest costInterest cost56,701 63,529 16,272 7,495 14,451 13,456 
Actuarial loss248,213 248,509 79,453 24,299 49,235 66,460 
Benefits paid(154,681)(156,617)(44,820)(18,296)(41,927)(31,542)
Actuarial gain
Actuarial gain
Actuarial gain
Benefits paid (a)
Balance at December 31Balance at December 31$1,615,084 $1,784,474 $471,510 $206,962 $396,764 $393,607 
Change in Plan AssetsChange in Plan Assets      Change in Plan Assets 
Fair value of assets at January 1Fair value of assets at January 1$1,068,842 $1,215,926 $316,716 $145,968 $315,514 $245,516 
Actual return on plan assetsActual return on plan assets210,020 239,770 62,238 28,552 61,814 48,460 
Employer contributionsEmployer contributions75,854 64,951 20,794 4,553 3,725 20,234 
Benefits paid(154,681)(156,617)(44,820)(18,296)(41,927)(31,542)
Benefits paid (a)
Fair value of assets at December 31Fair value of assets at December 31$1,200,035 $1,364,030 $354,928 $160,777 $339,126 $282,668 
Funded statusFunded status($415,049)($420,444)($116,582)($46,185)($57,638)($110,939)
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet (funded status)Amounts recognized in the balance sheet (funded status)      Amounts recognized in the balance sheet (funded status) 
Non-current liabilitiesNon-current liabilities($415,049)($420,444)($116,582)($46,185)($57,638)($110,939)
Amounts recognized as regulatory assetAmounts recognized as regulatory asset      Amounts recognized as regulatory asset 
Net lossNet loss$799,235 $759,228 $225,354 $91,862 $160,564 $193,870 
Net loss
Net loss
Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)
Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)
Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)        
Net lossNet loss$0 $23,481 $0 $0 $0 $0 
Net loss
Net loss

(a)    Including settlement lump sum benefit payments of ($96) million at Entergy Arkansas, ($146.6) million at Entergy Louisiana, ($48) million at Entergy Mississippi, ($16.2) million at Entergy New Orleans, ($48.9) million at Entergy Texas, and ($23.5) million at System Energy.

The qualified pension plans incurred net actuarial lossesgains during 2020 and 20192023 primarily due to asset gains resulting from an actual return on assets much higher than the expected return on assets, offset by liability losses due to a falldecline in bond yields that resulted in decreases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations. TheseThe qualified pension plans incurred a small net actuarial loss during 2022 primarily due to asset losses were partially offset by gains resulting from thean actual return on assets exceedingmuch lower than the expected return on assets, for both 2020 and 2019.substantially offset by liability gains due to a rise in bond yields that resulted in increases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations.

Accumulated Pension Benefit Obligation

The accumulated benefit obligation for Entergy’s qualified pension plans was $8.4$5.6 billion and $7.8$5.7 billion at December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, respectively.

170177

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



The qualified pension accumulated benefit obligation for each of the Registrant Subsidiaries for their current and former employees as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 was as follows:
December 31, December 31,
20202019 20232022
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas$1,617,858 $1,519,998 
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana$1,753,980 $1,643,759 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$466,497 $438,817 
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans$201,159 $192,561 
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas$379,050 $371,589 
System EnergySystem Energy$410,296 $368,771 

Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy also currently offers retiree medical, dental, vision, and life insurance benefits (other postretirement benefits) for eligible retired employees.  Employees who commenced employment before July 1, 2014 and who satisfy certain eligibility requirements (including retiring from Entergy after a certain age and/or years of service with Entergy and immediately commencing their Entergy pension benefit), may become eligible for other postretirement benefits.

In March 2020, Entergy announced changes to its other postretirement benefits. Effective January 1, 2021, certain retired, former non-bargaining employees age 65 and older who are eligible for Entergy-sponsored retiree welfare benefits, and their eligible spouses who are age 65 and older (collectively, Medicare-eligible participants), will beare eligible to participate in a newan Entergy-sponsored retiree health plan, and willare no longer be eligible for retiree coverage under the Entergy Corporation Companies’ Benefits Plus Medical, Dental and Vision Plans. Under the new EntergyEntergy-sponsored retiree health plan, Medicare-eligible participants will beare eligible to participate in a health reimbursement arrangement which they may use towards the purchase of various types of qualified insurance offered through a Medicare exchange provider and for other qualified medical expenses. In accordance with accounting standards, the effects of this change are reflected in the December 31, 2020 other postretirement obligation. The changes affecting active bargaining unit employees will bewere negotiated with the unions prior to implementation, where necessary, and to the extent required by law.

Effective January 1, 1993, Entergy adopted an accounting standard requiring a change from a cash method to an accrual method of accounting for postretirement benefits other than pensions.  Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas have received regulatory approval to recover accrued other postretirement benefitbenefits costs through rates.  The LPSC ordered Entergy Louisiana to continue the use of the pay-as-you-go method for ratemaking purposes for postretirement benefits other than pensions.  However, the LPSC retains the flexibility to examine individual companies’ accounting for other postretirement benefits to determine if special exceptions to this order are warranted. Pursuant to regulatory directives, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy contribute the other postretirement benefitbenefits costs collected in rates into external trusts.  System Energy is funding, on behalf of Entergy Operations, other postretirement benefits associated with employees who work or worked at Grand Gulf.

Trust assets contributed by participating Registrant Subsidiaries are in master trusts, established by Entergy Corporation and maintained by a trustee.  Each participating Registrant Subsidiary holds a beneficial interest in the trusts’ assets.  The assets in the master trusts are commingled for investment and administrative purposes.  Although assets are commingled, supporting records are maintained for the purpose of allocating the beneficial interest in net earnings/(losses) and the administrative expenses of the investment accounts to the various participating plans and participating Registrant Subsidiaries. Beneficial interest in an investment account’s net income/(loss) is comprised of interest and dividends, realized and unrealized gains and losses, and expenses.  Beneficial interest from these
171178

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




investments is allocated to the plans and participating Registrant Subsidiary based on their portion of net assets in the pooled accounts.

Components of Net Other Postretirement BenefitBenefits Cost and Other Amounts Recognized as a Regulatory Asset and/or AOCI

Entergy Corporation’s and its subsidiaries’ total 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 other postretirement benefitbenefits costs, including amounts capitalized and amounts recognized as a regulatory asset and/or other comprehensive income, included the following components:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Other postretirement costs:Other postretirement costs:   Other postretirement costs:  
Service cost - benefits earned during the periodService cost - benefits earned during the period$24,500 $18,699 $27,129 
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation (APBO)28,597 47,901 50,725 
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefits obligation (APBO)
Expected return on assetsExpected return on assets(40,880)(38,246)(41,493)
Amortization of prior service creditAmortization of prior service credit(32,882)(35,377)(37,002)
Recognized net loss3,481 1,430 13,729 
Amortization of prior service credit
Amortization of prior service credit
Recognized net (gain)/loss
Net other postretirement benefit (income)/cost($17,184)($5,593)$13,088 
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and /or AOCI (before tax)   
Net other postretirement benefits income
Net other postretirement benefits income
Net other postretirement benefits income
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)  
Arising this period:Arising this period:   Arising this period:  
Prior service credit for period($128,837)$0 $0 
Prior service credit for the period
Net (gain)/lossNet (gain)/loss41,031 (38,526)(274,354)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and /or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:   
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:  
Amortization of prior service creditAmortization of prior service credit32,882 35,377 37,002 
Amortization of prior service credit
Amortization of prior service credit
Amortization of net loss(3,481)(1,430)(13,729)
Amortization of net gain/(loss)
Amortization of net gain/(loss)
Amortization of net gain/(loss)
TotalTotal($58,405)($4,579)($251,081)
Total recognized as net periodic benefit (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)($75,589)($10,172)($237,993)
Total recognized as net periodic other postretirement (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)

172

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Total 2020, 2019, and 2018 other postretirement benefit costs of the Registrant Subsidiaries, including amounts capitalized and deferred, for their employees included the following components:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 
Other postretirement costs:     
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$3,626 $5,993 $1,468 $445 $1,219 $1,254 
Interest cost on APBO4,712 6,216 1,536 784 2,008 1,130 
Expected return on assets(17,104)(5,167)(5,382)(9,643)(2,958)
Amortization of prior service credit(1,849)(6,179)(1,652)(763)(3,364)(1,065)
Recognized net (gain)/ loss540 (447)171 (13)907 121 
Net other postretirement benefit (income)/cost($10,075)$5,583 ($3,644)($4,929)($8,873)($1,518)
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Prior service cost/(credit) for the period$12,320 ($23,508)($4,428)($5,493)($22,441)($1,963)
Net (gain)/loss$2,245 $8,744 ($4,456)($5,351)($3,266)$58 
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:     
Amortization of prior service credit1,849 6,179 1,652 763 3,364 1,065 
Amortization of net (gain)/loss(540)447 (171)13 (907)(121)
Total$15,874 ($8,138)($7,403)($10,068)($23,250)($961)
Total recognized as net periodic other postretirement (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)$5,799 ($2,555)($11,047)($14,997)($32,123)($2,479)

173179

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Other postretirement costs:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$2,363 $4,639 $1,046 $367 $943 $973 
Interest cost on APBO7,226 10,664 2,681 1,581 3,415 1,902 
Expected return on assets(15,962)(4,794)(4,947)(9,103)(2,788)
Amortization of prior service credit(4,950)(7,349)(1,756)(682)(2,243)(1,450)
Recognized net (gain)/loss576 (695)723 231 485 354 
Net other postretirement benefit (income)/cost($10,747)$7,259 ($2,100)($3,450)($6,503)($1,009)
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net gain($26,707)($2,220)($11,950)($10,967)($6,406)($5,539)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:      
Amortization of prior service credit4,950 7,349 1,756 682 2,243 1,450 
Amortization of net (gain)/ loss(576)695 (723)(231)(485)(354)
Total($22,333)$5,824 ($10,917)($10,516)($4,648)($4,443)
Total recognized as net periodic other postretirement (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)($33,080)$13,083 ($13,017)($13,966)($11,151)($5,452)
Total 2023, 2022, and 2021 other postretirement benefits costs of the Registrant Subsidiaries, including amounts capitalized and deferred, for their current and former employees included the following components:

2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Other postretirement costs:     
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$2,965 $3,379 $878 $235 $809 $754 
Interest cost on APBO8,002 8,931 2,170 1,160 2,597 1,726 
Expected return on assets(15,113)— (4,716)(5,263)(8,776)(2,535)
Amortization of prior service cost/(credit)2,096 (3,804)(955)(916)(4,371)(293)
Recognized net (gain)/loss171 (7,057)85 466 914 — 
Net other postretirement benefits (income)/cost($1,879)$1,449 ($2,538)($4,318)($8,827)($348)
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Prior service credit for the period$— ($4,434)$— $— $— $— 
Net gain(23,033)(458)(6,883)(7,606)(8,790)(3,942)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:     
Amortization of prior service credit/(cost)(2,096)3,804 955 916 4,371 293 
Amortization of net gain/(loss)(171)7,057 (85)(466)(914)— 
Total($25,300)$5,969 ($6,013)($7,156)($5,333)($3,649)
Total recognized as net periodic other postretirement (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)($27,179)$7,418 ($8,551)($11,474)($14,160)($3,997)
174180

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2018Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Other postretirement costs:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$3,170 $6,225 $1,284 $516 $1,319 $1,223 
Interest cost on APBO7,986 11,154 2,731 1,669 3,754 1,998 
Expected return on assets(17,368)(5,213)(5,250)(9,784)(3,130)
Amortization of prior service credit(5,110)(7,735)(1,823)(745)(2,316)(1,513)
Recognized net loss1,154 1,550 1,508 137 823 932 
Net other postretirement benefit (income)/cost($10,168)$11,194 ($1,513)($3,673)($6,204)($490)
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Net gain(32,219)(73,249)(7,794)(981)(10,561)(6,680)
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:      
Amortization of prior service credit5,110 7,735 1,823 745 2,316 1,513 
Amortization of net loss(1,154)(1,550)(1,508)(137)(823)(932)
Total($28,263)($67,064)($7,479)($373)($9,068)($6,099)
Total recognized as net periodic other postretirement (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)($38,431)($55,870)($8,992)($4,046)($15,272)($6,589)

2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Other postretirement costs:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$4,457 $5,633 $1,354 $397 $1,322 $1,239 
Interest cost on APBO5,050 5,770 1,401 694 1,596 1,116 
Expected return on assets(17,930)— (5,575)(5,997)(10,273)(3,162)
Amortization of prior service cost/(credit)1,885 (4,630)(1,772)(916)(4,371)(319)
Recognized net (gain)/loss873 (744)222 (898)648 121 
Net other postretirement benefits (income)/cost($5,665)$6,029 ($4,370)($6,720)($11,078)($1,005)
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:
Prior service cost/(credit) for the period$273 $323 ($1,300)$— $— $141 
Net (gain)/loss12,894 (65,501)6,629 17,334 22,323 1,208 
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:      
Amortization of prior service credit/(cost)(1,885)4,630 1,772 916 4,371 319 
Amortization of net gain/(loss)(873)744 (222)898 (648)(121)
Total$10,409 ($59,804)$6,879 $19,148 $26,046 $1,547 
Total recognized as net periodic other postretirement (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)$4,744 ($53,775)$2,509 $12,428 $14,968 $542 
175181

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



2021Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Other postretirement costs:      
Service cost - benefits earned during the period$4,135 $6,174 $1,448 $437 $1,384 $1,340 
Interest cost on APBO3,726 4,520 1,110 521 1,269 878 
Expected return on assets(18,020)— (5,536)(5,750)(10,192)(3,156)
Amortization of prior service credit(1,121)(4,920)(1,775)(916)(3,742)(436)
Recognized net (gain)/loss196 (364)76 (712)398 61 
Net other postretirement benefits (income)/cost($11,084)$5,410 ($4,677)($6,420)($10,883)($1,313)
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized as a regulatory asset and/or AOCI (before tax)      
Arising this period:      
Prior service cost/(credit) for the period($85)$357 $— $— ($3,776)$69 
Net (gain)/loss9,956 (2,367)(2,823)(3,330)939 210 
Amounts reclassified from regulatory asset and/or AOCI to net periodic benefit cost in the current year:      
Amortization of prior service credit1,121 4,920 1,775 916 3,742 436 
Amortization of net gain/(loss)(196)364 (76)712 (398)(61)
Total$10,796 $3,274 ($1,124)($1,702)$507 $654 
Total recognized as net periodic other postretirement (income)/cost, regulatory asset, and/or AOCI (before tax)($288)$8,684 ($5,801)($8,122)($10,376)($659)

182

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Other Postretirement BenefitBenefits Obligations, Plan Assets, Funded Status, and Amounts Not Yet Recognized and Recognized in the Balance Sheet

Other postretirement benefitbenefits obligations, plan assets, funded status, and amounts not yet recognized and recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets of Entergy Corporation and its Subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are as follows:
20202019 20232022
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Change in APBOChange in APBO  Change in APBO  
Balance at January 1Balance at January 1$1,252,903 $1,232,619 
Service costService cost24,500 18,699 
Interest costInterest cost28,597 47,901 
Plan amendmentsPlan amendments(128,837)
Plan participant contributionsPlan participant contributions37,176 38,640 
Actuarial loss80,162 23,673 
Plan participant contributions
Plan participant contributions
Actuarial gain
Benefits paidBenefits paid(113,786)(109,223)
Medicare Part D subsidy receivedMedicare Part D subsidy received360 594 
Balance at December 31Balance at December 31$1,181,075 $1,252,903 
Change in Plan AssetsChange in Plan Assets  Change in Plan Assets  
Fair value of assets at January 1Fair value of assets at January 1$686,262 $609,782 
Actual return on plan assetsActual return on plan assets80,011 100,445 
Employer contributionsEmployer contributions48,203 46,618 
Plan participant contributionsPlan participant contributions37,176 38,640 
Benefits paidBenefits paid(113,786)(109,223)
Fair value of assets at December 31Fair value of assets at December 31$737,866 $686,262 
Funded statusFunded status($443,209)($566,641)
Amounts recognized in the balance sheetAmounts recognized in the balance sheet  Amounts recognized in the balance sheet  
Current liabilitiesCurrent liabilities($38,963)($48,040)
Non-current liabilitiesNon-current liabilities(404,246)(518,601)
Total funded statusTotal funded status($443,209)($566,641)
Amounts recognized as a regulatory assetAmounts recognized as a regulatory asset  Amounts recognized as a regulatory asset  
Prior service creditPrior service credit($45,501)($11,899)
Net gain(8,565)(5,081)
Net (gain)/loss
($54,066)($16,980)
Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)  Amounts recognized as AOCI (before tax)  
Prior service creditPrior service credit($83,581)($21,231)
Net (gain)/loss24,365 (16,670)
Net gain
($59,216)($37,901)

176183

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Other postretirement benefitbenefits obligations, plan assets, funded status, and amounts not yet recognized and recognized in the Balance Sheets of the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are as follows:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Change in APBO      
Balance at January 1$185,744 $274,175 $65,979 $38,460 $94,742 $47,348 
Service cost3,626 5,993 1,468 445 1,219 1,254 
Interest cost4,712 6,216 1,536 784 2,008 1,130 
Plan amendments12,320 (23,508)(4,428)(5,493)(22,441)(1,963)
Plan participant contributions7,792 8,269 2,122 1,123 2,456 1,732 
Actuarial (gain)/loss18,257 8,744 684 (91)5,952 3,025 
Benefits paid(23,141)(24,395)(5,382)(3,530)(9,721)(4,851)
Medicare Part D subsidy received59 77 11 18 26 
Balance at December 31$209,369 $255,571 $61,990 $31,707 $74,233 $47,701 
Change in Plan Assets      
Fair value of assets at January 1$284,224 $0 $86,085 $93,858 $161,810 $48,471 
Actual return on plan assets33,116 10,307 10,642 18,861 5,925 
Employer contributions2,201 16,126 343 641 690 1,342 
Plan participant contributions7,792 8,269 2,122 1,123 2,456 1,732 
Benefits paid(23,141)(24,395)(5,382)(3,530)(9,721)(4,851)
Fair value of assets at December 31$304,192 $0 $93,475 $102,734 $174,096 $52,619 
Funded status$94,823 ($255,571)$31,485 $71,027 $99,863 $4,918 
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet      
Current liabilities$0 ($15,580)$0 $0 $0 $0 
Non-current liabilities94,823 (239,991)31,485 71,027 99,863 4,918 
Total funded status$94,823 ($255,571)$31,485 $71,027 $99,863 $4,918 
Amounts recognized in regulatory asset      
Prior service cost/(credit)$7,655 $0 ($5,884)($4,730)($20,498)($1,754)
Net (gain)/loss(16,557)(1,355)(13,385)2,030 2,818 
 ($8,902)$0 ($7,239)($18,115)($18,468)$1,064 
Amounts recognized in AOCI (before tax)      
Prior service credit$0 ($22,244)$0 $0 $0 $0 
Net gain(15,548)
 $0 ($37,792)$0 $0 $0 $0 

2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Change in APBO      
Balance at January 1$164,018 $183,126 $44,365 $23,971 $53,482 $35,274 
Service cost2,965 3,379 878 235 809 754 
Interest cost8,002 8,931 2,170 1,160 2,597 1,726 
Plan amendments— (4,434)— — — — 
Plan participant contributions3,131 4,317 1,386 374 680 994 
Actuarial (gain)/loss(6,403)(458)(1,650)(1,676)337 (1,075)
Benefits paid(15,759)(24,768)(5,815)(2,384)(6,299)(3,908)
Medicare Part D subsidy received33 46 10 11 13 
Balance at December 31$155,987 $170,139 $41,344 $21,685 $51,617 $33,778 
Change in Plan Assets      
Fair value of assets at January 1$255,117 $— $79,496 $91,140 $148,799 $42,434 
Actual return on plan assets31,743 — 9,949 11,193 17,903 5,402 
Employer contributions582 20,451 646 213 235 480 
Plan participant contributions3,131 4,317 1,386 374 680 994 
Benefits paid(15,759)(24,768)(5,815)(2,384)(6,299)(3,908)
Fair value of assets at December 31$274,814 $— $85,662 $100,536 $161,318 $45,402 
Funded status$118,827 ($170,139)$44,318 $78,851 $109,701 $11,624 
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet      
Current liabilities$— ($15,049)$— $— $— $— 
Non-current liabilities118,827 (155,090)44,318 78,851 109,701 11,624 
Total funded status$118,827 ($170,139)$44,318 $78,851 $109,701 $11,624 
Amounts recognized in regulatory asset      
Prior service cost/(credit)$4,983 $— ($2,682)($1,982)($11,790)($496)
Net loss/(gain)(17,980)— (4,815)(5,843)14,542 112 
 ($12,997)$— ($7,497)($7,825)$2,752 ($384)
Amounts recognized in AOCI (before tax)      
Prior service credit$— ($12,645)$— $— $— $— 
Net gain— (75,709)— — — — 
 $— ($88,354)$— $— $— $— 

177184

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Change in APBO      
Balance at January 1$221,183 $253,031 $61,001 $31,866 $71,961 $47,875 
Service cost4,457 5,633 1,354 397 1,322 1,239 
Interest cost5,050 5,770 1,401 694 1,596 1,116 
Plan amendments273 323 (1,300)— — 141 
Plan participant contributions5,521 5,081 1,443 440 924 1,222 
Actuarial gain(54,923)(65,501)(14,465)(6,867)(16,291)(10,679)
Benefits paid(17,585)(21,268)(5,075)(2,566)(6,046)(5,657)
Medicare Part D subsidy received42 57 16 17 
Balance at December 31$164,018 $183,126 $44,365 $23,971 $53,482 $35,274 
Change in Plan Assets      
Fair value of assets at January 1$315,495 $— $97,888 $111,137 $182,285 $54,650 
Actual return on plan assets(49,887)— (15,519)(18,204)(28,341)(8,725)
Employer contributions1,573 16,187 759 333 (23)944 
Plan participant contributions5,521 5,081 1,443 440 924 1,222 
Benefits paid(17,585)(21,268)(5,075)(2,566)(6,046)(5,657)
Fair value of assets at December 31$255,117 $— $79,496 $91,140 $148,799 $42,434 
Funded status$91,099 ($183,126)$35,131 $67,169 $95,317 $7,160 
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet      
Current liabilities$— ($15,356)$— $— $— $— 
Non-current liabilities91,099 (167,770)35,131 67,169 95,317 7,160 
Total funded status$91,099 ($183,126)$35,131 $67,169 $95,317 $7,160 
Amounts recognized in regulatory asset      
Prior service cost/(credit)$7,079 $— ($3,637)($2,898)($16,161)($789)
Net loss5,224 — 2,153 2,229 24,246 4,054 
 $12,303 $— ($1,484)($669)$8,085 $3,265 
Amounts recognized in AOCI (before tax)      
Prior service credit$— ($12,015)$— $— $— $— 
Net gain— (82,308)— — — — 
 $— ($94,323)$— $— $— $— 

The other postretirement plans incurred net actuarial gains during 2023 primarily due to updated demographic assumptions and census data coupled with an actual return on assets much higher than the expected return on assets, partially offset by liability losses due to a decline in bond yields that resulted in decreases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations. The other postretirement plans incurred net actuarial gains during 2022 primarily due to a rise in bond yields that resulted in increases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations, partially offset by asset losses due to an actual return on assets much lower than the expected return on assets during 2022.

185

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Change in APBO      
Balance at January 1$187,830 $275,269 $68,976 $41,987 $88,310 $48,791 
Service cost2,363 4,639 1,046 367 943 973 
Interest cost7,226 10,664 2,681 1,581 3,415 1,902 
Plan participant contributions8,125 8,876 2,197 1,343 2,602 1,765 
Actuarial (gain)/loss166 (2,220)(3,778)(4,234)8,279 (891)
Benefits paid(20,048)(23,160)(5,159)(2,598)(8,830)(5,229)
Medicare Part D subsidy received82 107 16 14 23 37 
Balance at December 31$185,744 $274,175 $65,979 $38,460 $94,742 $47,348 
Change in Plan Assets      
Fair value of assets at January 1$252,055 $0 $75,853 $81,774 $144,846 $43,670 
Actual return on plan assets42,835 12,966 11,680 23,788 7,436 
Employer contributions1,257 14,284 228 1,659 (596)829 
Plan participant contributions8,125 8,876 2,197 1,343 2,602 1,765 
Benefits paid(20,048)(23,160)(5,159)(2,598)(8,830)(5,229)
Fair value of assets at December 31$284,224 $0 $86,085 $93,858 $161,810 $48,471 
Funded status$98,480 ($274,175)$20,106 $55,398 $67,068 $1,123 
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet      
Current liabilities$0 ($18,467)$0 $0 $0 $0 
Non-current liabilities98,480 (255,708)20,106 55,398 67,068 1,123 
Total funded status$98,480 ($274,175)$20,106 $55,398 $67,068 $1,123 
Amounts recognized in regulatory asset      
Prior service credit($6,515)$0 ($3,108)$0 ($1,422)($854)
Net (gain)/loss(18,262)3,272 (8,046)6,203 2,881 
 ($24,777)$0 $164 ($8,046)$4,781 $2,027 
Amounts recognized in AOCI (before tax)      
Prior service credit$0 ($4,915)$0 $0 $0 $0 
Net gain(24,739)
 $0 ($29,654)$0 $0 $0 $0 

The other postretirement plans incurred actuarial losses during 2020 primarily due to a reduction in the projected Employer Group Waiver Plan (EGWP) revenue and a fall in bond yields that resulted in decreases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations. These losses were partially offset by gains resulting from the actual return on assets exceeding the expected return on assets for 2020, an update to the latest mortality projection scale MP-2020, and favorable claims experience. The other postretirement plans experienced actuarial gains during 2019 primarily due to the actual return on assets exceeding the expected return on assets for 2019, favorable claims
178

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

experience, an increase in projected EGWP revenue, and the adoption of the Pri.H-2012 mortality table with improvement scale MP-2019. These gains were partially offset by losses resulting from a fall in bond yields that resulted in decreases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations.

Non-Qualified Pension Plans

Entergy also sponsors non-qualified, non-contributory defined benefit pension plans that provide benefits to certain key employees.  Entergy recognized net periodic pension cost related to these plans of $18.1$43.8 million in 2020, $22.62023, $30.9 million in 2019,2022, and $24.4$28.6 million in 2018.2021.  In 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021, Entergy recognized $7.4$27.9 million, $12.2 million, and $7.7$10.9 million, respectively, in settlement charges related to the payment of lump sum benefits out of the plan that is included in the non-qualified pension plan cost above.

The projected benefit obligation was $182.4$88.6 million as of December 31, 20202023 of which $22.9$13.8 million was a current liability and $159.5$74.8 million was a non-current liability. The projected benefit obligation was $162.8$152.4 million as of December 31, 20192022 of which $18.1$62.4 million was a current liability and $144.6$90 million was a non-current liability.  The accumulated benefit obligation was $161.3$77.9 million and $143.4$140 million as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, respectively. The unamortized prior service cost and net loss are recognized in regulatory assets ($77.329.7 million at December 31, 20202023 and $58.8$56.8 million at December 31, 2019)2022) and accumulated other comprehensive income before taxes ($16.73.9 million at December 31, 20202023 and $24.9$8.7 million at December 31, 2019)2022).

A Rabbi Trust was established for the benefit of certain participants in Entergy’s non-qualified, non-contributory defined benefit pension plans. The Rabbi Trust assets were invested in money-market funds which were recorded at fair value with all gains and losses recognized immediately in income. All of the investments were classified as Level 1 investments for purposes of Fair Value Measurements. At December 31, 2022, the fair value of the assets held in the Rabbi Trust was $35 million. In August 2023 the Rabbi Trust assets were used to pay benefits due under the non-qualified pension plans.

The following Registrant Subsidiaries participate in Entergy’s non-qualified, non-contributory defined benefit pension plans that provide benefits to certain key employees.  The net periodic pension cost for their current and former employees for the non-qualified plans for 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, was as follows:
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2020$333 $148 $359 $31 $469 
2019$275 $159 $326 $20 $481 
2018$474 $180 $300 $81 $650 
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2023$637 $99 $808 $132 $253 
2022$282 $102 $321 $114 $1,320 
2021$343 $307 $365 $30 $615 

Included in the 20192023 net periodic pension cost above are settlement charges of $40$379 thousand and $453 thousand for Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi, respectively, related to the lump sum benefits paid out of the plan. Included in the 20182022 net periodic pension cost above are settlement charges of $30$1 thousand, $2 thousand, and $139$1 million for Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Texas, respectively, related to the lump sum benefits paid out of the plan. Included in the 2021 net periodic pension cost above are settlement charges of $155 thousand and $172 thousand for Entergy ArkansasLouisiana and Entergy Texas, respectively, related to the lump sum benefits paid out of the plan.

The projected benefit obligation for their current and former employees for the non-qualified plans as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 was as follows:
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2020$3,197 $1,965 $3,852 $247 $8,475 
2019$2,755 $1,682 $3,286 $231 $7,783 
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2023$2,313 $2,574 $3,369 $1,034 $3,762 
2022$2,433 $1,197 $3,830 $1,024 $3,850 
186

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


The accumulated benefit obligation for their current and former employees for the non-qualified plans as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 was as follows:
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2023$1,935 $2,494 $3,187 $814 $3,701 
2022$2,192 $1,197 $3,594 $719 $3,776 

The following amounts were recorded on the balance sheet as of December 31, 2023 and 2022:
2023Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
Current liabilities($276)($308)($474)($106)($448)
Non-current liabilities(2,037)(2,266)(2,895)(928)(3,314)
Total funded status($2,313)($2,574)($3,369)($1,034)($3,762)
Regulatory asset/(liability)$857 $1,604 $1,303 $5 ($2,526)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (before taxes)$— $67 $— $— $— 

2022Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
Current liabilities($234)($184)($214)($32)($448)
Non-current liabilities(2,199)(1,013)(3,616)(992)(3,402)
Total funded status($2,433)($1,197)($3,830)($1,024)($3,850)
Regulatory asset/(liability)$512 $119 $1,291 $111 ($2,615)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (before taxes)$— $5 $— $— $— 

The non-qualified pension plans incurred a small actuarial loss during 2023 primarily as a result of liability losses due to differences in recent retirement and lump sum experience relative to actuarial assumptions. The non-qualified pension plans incurred a small actuarial gain during 2022 primarily due to a rise in bond yields that resulted in increases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations, partially offset by differences in recent retirement and lump sum experience relative to actuarial assumptions.

179187

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The accumulated benefit obligation for their employees for the non-qualified plans as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 was as follows:
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2020$2,626 $1,802 $3,345 $240 $7,949 
2019$2,248 $1,682 $2,938 $230 $7,391 

The following amounts were recorded on the balance sheet as of December 31, 2020 and 2019:
2020Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
Current liabilities($218)($193)($181)($17)($633)
Non-current liabilities(2,979)(1,772)(3,671)(230)(7,842)
Total funded status($3,197)($1,965)($3,852)($247)($8,475)
Regulatory asset/(liability)$1,535 $424 $1,757 ($558)$147 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (before taxes)$0 $18 $0 $0 $0 

2019Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
Current liabilities($249)($216)($357)($17)($723)
Non-current liabilities(2,506)(1,467)(2,930)(215)(7,060)
Total funded status($2,755)($1,683)($3,287)($232)($7,783)
Regulatory asset/(liability)$1,232 $3 $1,432 ($559)($603)

The non-qualified pension plans incurred actuarial losses during 2020 and 2019 primarily due to a fall in bond yields that resulted in decreases to the discount rates used to develop the benefit obligations.
180

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Reclassification out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Entergy and Entergy Louisiana reclassified the following costs out of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (before taxes and including amounts capitalized) as of December 31, 2020:2023:

Qualified Pension CostsOther Postretirement CostsNon-Qualified Pension CostsTotal Qualified Pension CostsOther Postretirement CostsNon-Qualified Pension CostsTotal
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
EntergyEntergy  
Amortization of prior service costAmortization of prior service cost$0 $21,000 ($231)$20,769 
Amortization of prior service cost
Amortization of prior service cost
Amortization of loss(105,853)(1,006)(3,326)(110,185)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Settlement lossSettlement loss(243)(243)
($106,096)$19,994 ($3,557)($89,659)
($12,251)
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana  
Amortization of prior service costAmortization of prior service cost$0 $6,179 $0 $6,179 
Amortization of prior service cost
Amortization of prior service cost
Amortization of loss(2,001)447 (3)(1,557)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Settlement lossSettlement loss(243)(243)
($2,244)$6,626 ($3)$4,379 
($2,409)

Entergy and Entergy Louisiana reclassified the following costs out of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (before taxes and including amounts capitalized) as of December 31, 2019:2022:

Qualified Pension CostsOther Postretirement CostsNon-Qualified Pension CostsTotal Qualified Pension CostsOther Postretirement CostsNon-Qualified Pension CostsTotal
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
EntergyEntergy  
Amortization of prior service costAmortization of prior service cost$0 $21,498 ($198)$21,300 
Amortization of loss(82,284)1,230 (2,192)(83,246)
Settlement loss(23,458)(1,697)(25,155)
($105,742)$22,728 ($4,087)($87,101)
Entergy Louisiana  
Amortization of prior service cost
Amortization of prior service costAmortization of prior service cost$0 $7,349 $0 $7,349 
Amortization of lossAmortization of loss(2,795)695 (6)(2,106)
Amortization of loss
Amortization of loss
Settlement loss
($53,783)
Entergy Louisiana
Amortization of prior service cost
Amortization of prior service cost
Amortization of prior service cost
($2,795)$8,044 ($6)$5,243 
Amortization of gain (loss)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Amortization of gain (loss)
Settlement loss
($4,011)

Accounting for Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Accounting standards require an employer to recognize in its balance sheet the funded status of its benefit plans.  This is measured as the difference between plan assets at fair value and the benefit obligation.  Entergy uses a December 31 measurement date for its pension and other postretirement plans.  Employers are to record previously unrecognized gains and losses, prior service costs, and any remaining transition asset or obligation (that resulted from adopting prior pension and other postretirement benefits accounting standards) as comprehensive income and/or as a regulatory asset reflective of the recovery mechanism for pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits costs in the Registrant Subsidiaries’ respective regulatory jurisdictions.  For the portion of Entergy Louisiana that is not regulated, the unrecognized prior service cost, gains and losses, and transition asset/obligation for its pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits obligations are recorded as other comprehensive income.  Entergy Louisiana recovers other postretirement benefitbenefits costs on a pay-as-you-go basis and records the unrecognized prior
181188

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




service cost, gains and losses, and transition obligation for its other postretirement benefitbenefits obligation as other comprehensive income.  Accounting standards also require that changes in the funded status be recorded as other comprehensive income and/or a regulatory asset in the period in which the changes occur.

With regard to pension and other postretirement costs, Entergy calculates the expected return on pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits plan assets by multiplying the long-term expected rate of return on assets by the market-related value (MRV) of plan assets.  In general, Entergy determines the MRV of its pension plan assets, except for the long duration fixed income assets, by calculating a value that uses a 20-quarter phase-in of the difference between actual and expected returnsreturns. For the long duration fixed income assets in the pension trust and for its other postretirement benefitbenefits plan assets Entergy generally uses fair value.value as the MRV.

In accordance with ASU No. 2017-07, “Compensation - Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost”, the other components of net benefit cost are required to be presented in the income statement separately from the service cost component and outside a subtotal of income from operations and are presented by Entergy in miscellaneous - net in other income.

Qualified Pension Settlement Cost

In 2020, year-to-dateYear-to-date lump sum benefit payments from the Entergy Corporation RetirementNon-Bargaining Plan forI, Bargaining EmployeesPlan I, Non-Bargaining Plan II, and Bargaining Plan II exceeded the sum of the Plan’s 2020Plans’ service and interest cost, resulting in a settlement cost of $36.9 million.costs during 2023, 2022, and 2021. In accordance with accounting standards, settlement accounting requires immediate recognition of the portion of previously unrecognized losses associated with the settled portion of the plan’splans’ pension liability. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, andEntergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy participate in the Entergy Corporation Retirementone or both of Non-Bargaining Plan forI and Bargaining EmployeesPlan I and incurred settlement costs. Similar to other pension costs, of $21.1 million, $8.1 million, $3.4 million, and $4.3 million, respectively. Thethe settlement costs were included with employee labor costs and charged to expense and capital in the same manner that labor costs were charged. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy MississippiNew Orleans received regulatory approval to defer the expense portion of the settlement costs, with future amortization of the deferred settlement expense over the period in which the expense otherwise would be recorded had the immediate recognition not occurred.

Entergy Texas Reserve

In September 2020, Entergy Texas elected to establish a reserve, in accordance with PUCT regulations, forto track the difference between the amount recorded for pension and other postretirement benefits expense under generally accepted accounting principles during the first year that rates from Entergy Texas’s last general rate proceeding weresurplus or deficit in effect, and the annual amount of actuarially determined pension and other postretirement benefits chargeable to Entergy Texas’s expense in 2020.expense. The reserve amounts recorded for 2020 and 2021 were included in the base rate case that was filed with the PUCT in July 2022, and amortization of that amount began in 2023 when interim rates became effective. The reserve amounts recorded for 2022 and through December 2023 will be evaluated in Entergy Texas’sthe next base rate case proceedingfiled by Entergy Texas, and a reasonablean amortization period will be determined by the PUCT at that time. At December 31, 2020,2023, the balance in this reserve was approximately $3.8$32.7 million.

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Plans’ Assets

The Plan Administrator’s trust asset investment strategy is to invest the assets in a manner whereby long-term earnings on the assets (plus cash contributions) provide adequate funding for retiree benefit payments.  The mix of assets is based on an optimization study that identifies asset allocation targets in order to achieve the maximum return for an acceptable level of risk, while minimizing the expected contributions and pension and postretirement expense.

In the optimization studies, the Plan Administrator formulates assumptions about characteristics, such as expected asset class investment returns, volatility (risk), and correlation coefficients among the various asset classes.  The future market assumptions used in the optimization study are determined by examining historical
189

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



market characteristics of the various asset classes and making adjustments to reflect future conditions expected to prevail over the study period.
182

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


The target asset allocation for pension adjusts dynamically based on the pension plans’ funded status.status of each plan within the trust. The current targets are shown below. The expectation is that the allocation to fixed income securities will increase as the pension plans’ funded status increases.  The following ranges were established to produce an acceptable, economically efficient plan to manage around the targets.

For postretirement assets the target and range asset allocations (as shown below) reflect recommendations made in the latest optimization study. The target asset allocations for postretirement assets adjust dynamically based on the funded status of each sub-account within each trust. The current weighted averageweighted-average targets shown below represent the aggregate of all targets for all sub-accounts within all trusts.

Entergy’s qualified pension and postretirement weighted-average asset allocations by asset category at December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 and the target asset allocation and ranges for 20202023 are as follows:

Pension Asset AllocationPension Asset AllocationTargetRangeActual 2020Actual 2019Pension Asset AllocationTargetRangeActual 2023Actual 2022
Domestic Equity SecuritiesDomestic Equity Securities39%32%to46%38%39%Domestic Equity Securities32%26%to38%33%42%
International Equity SecuritiesInternational Equity Securities19%15%to23%19%19%International Equity Securities17%14%to20%18%22%
Fixed Income Securities42%39%to45%42%41%
Intermediate Fixed Income SecuritiesIntermediate Fixed Income Securities8%7%to9%9%11%
Long Duration Fixed Income SecuritiesLong Duration Fixed Income Securities43%39%to47%40%22%
OtherOther0%0%to10%1%1%Other—%to10%—%3%

Postretirement Asset AllocationPostretirement Asset AllocationNon-Taxable and TaxablePostretirement Asset AllocationNon-Taxable and Taxable
TargetRangeActual 2020Actual 2019 TargetRangeActual 2023Actual 2022
Domestic Equity SecuritiesDomestic Equity Securities26%21%to31%29%29%Domestic Equity Securities25%20%to30%28%25%
International Equity SecuritiesInternational Equity Securities18%13%to23%18%18%International Equity Securities17%12%to22%17%18%
Fixed Income SecuritiesFixed Income Securities56%51%to61%53%53%Fixed Income Securities58%53%to63%55%57%
OtherOther0%0%to5%0%0%Other—%to5%—%

In determining its expected long-term rate of return on plan assets used in the calculation of benefit plan costs, Entergy reviews past performance, current and expected future asset allocations, and capital market assumptions of its investment consultant and some investment managers.

The expected long-term rate of return for the qualified pension plans’ assets is based primarily on the geometric average of the historical annual performance of a representative portfolio weighted by the target asset allocation defined in the table above, along with other indications of expected return on assets. The time period reflected is a long-dated period spanning several decades.

The expected long-term rate of return for the non-taxable postretirement trust assets is determined using the same methodology described above for pension assets, but the aggregate asset allocation specific to the non-taxable postretirement assets is used.

For the taxable postretirement trust assets, the investment allocation includes tax-exempt fixed income securities.  This asset allocation, in combination with the same methodology employed to determine the expected return for other postretirement assets (as described above), and with a modification to reflect applicable taxes, is used to produce the expected long-term rate of return for taxable postretirement trust assets.

190

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Concentrations of Credit Risk

Entergy’s investment guidelines mandate the avoidance of risk concentrations.  Types of concentrations specified to be avoided include, but are not limited to, investment concentrations in a single entity, type of industry,
183

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




foreign country, geographic area, and individual security issuance.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, all investment managers and assets were materially in compliance with the approved investment guidelines, therefore there were no significant concentrations (defined as greater than 10 percent of plan assets) of credit risk in Entergy’s pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits plan assets.

Fair Value Measurements

Accounting standards provide the framework for measuring fair value. That framework provides a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value.  The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements).

The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described below:

Level 1 - Level 1 inputs are unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that the Plan has the ability to access at the measurement date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis.

Level 2 - Level 2 inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are, either directly or indirectly, observable for the asset or liability at the measurement date.  Assets are valued based on prices derived by an independent party that uses inputs such as benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, and issuer spreads.  Prices are reviewed and can be challenged with the independent parties and/or overridden if it is believed such would be more reflective of fair value.  Level 2 inputs include the following:

-     quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets;
-     quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in inactive markets;
-     inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability; or
-    inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.

If an asset or liability has a specified (contractual) term, the Level 2 input must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

Level 3 - Level 3 refers to securities valued based on significant unobservable inputs.

Assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.  The following tables set forth by level within the fair value hierarchy, measured at fair value on a recurring basis at December 31, 2020,2023, and December 31, 2019,2022, a summary of the investments held in the master trusts for Entergy’s qualified pension and other postretirement plans in which the Registrant Subsidiaries participate.



184

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Qualified Defined Benefit Pension Plan Trusts


2020Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
 (In Thousands)
Equity securities:      
Corporate stocks:      
Preferred$15,756 (b)$0 $0 $15,756 
Common1,031,213 (b)(b)1,031,213 
Common collective trusts (c)0 002,958,767 
Registered investment companies(d)
Fixed income securities:      
U.S. Government securities731,319 (a)731,319 
Corporate debt instruments 1,029,370 (a)1,029,370 
Registered investment companies (e)81,800 (d)3,076 (d)1,128,107 
Other156 (f)56,323 (f)56,479 
Other:      
Insurance company general account (unallocated contracts) 6,253 (g)6,253 
Total investments$1,128,925  $1,826,341  $0 $6,957,264 
Cash     2,316 
Other pending transactions     (29,121)
Less: Other postretirement assets included in total investments     (76,033)
Total fair value of qualified pension assets     $6,854,426 

185191

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




2019Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
 (In Thousands)
Equity securities:      
Corporate stocks:      
Preferred$10,379 (b)$0 $0 $10,379 
Common857,159 (b)(b)857,159 
Common collective trusts (c)0 002,698,697 
Registered investment companies132,389 (d)132,389 
Fixed income securities:      
U.S. Government securities(b)805,671 (a)805,671 
Corporate debt instruments 762,577 (a)762,577 
Registered investment companies (e)53,842 (d)2,903 (d)1,008,371 
Other73 (f)43,106 (f)43,179 
Other:      
Insurance company general account (unallocated contracts) 40,452 (g)40,452 
Total investments$1,053,842  $1,654,709  $0 $6,358,874 
Cash     1,407 
Other pending transactions     (22,549)
Less: Other postretirement assets included in total investments     (66,572)
Total fair value of qualified pension assets     $6,271,160 
Qualified Defined Benefit Pension Plan Trusts

Other Postretirement Trusts
2020Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
20232023Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
(In Thousands)
(In Thousands)
Equity securities:Equity securities:  
Common collective trust (c) $315,191 
Equity securities:
Equity securities:   
Corporate stocks:Corporate stocks:   
Preferred
Common
Common collective trusts (c)
Fixed income securities:
Fixed income securities:
Fixed income securities:Fixed income securities:     
U.S. Government securitiesU.S. Government securities46,498 (b)97,604 (a)144,102 
Corporate debt instrumentsCorporate debt instruments 147,287 (a)147,287 
Registered investment companies16,965 (d) 16,965 
Registered investment companies (e)
OtherOther 60,219 (f)60,219 
Other:Other:   
Insurance company general account (unallocated contracts)
Total investmentsTotal investments$63,463  $305,110  $0 $683,764 
Cash
Other pending transactionsOther pending transactions     (21,931)
Plus: Other postretirement assets included in the investments of the qualified pension trust 76,033 
Total fair value of other postretirement assets $737,866 
Less: Other postretirement assets included in total investments
Total fair value of qualified pension assets

2022Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
 (In Thousands)
Equity securities:      
Corporate stocks:      
Preferred$12,178 (b)$— $— $12,178 
Common807,437 (b)— — 807,437 
Common collective trusts (c) 2,516,688 
Fixed income securities:      
U.S. Government securities— 673,348 (a)— 673,348 
Corporate debt instruments—  525,184 (a)— 525,184 
Registered investment companies (e)221,582 (d)2,595 (d)— 750,454 
Other— 15,395 (f)— 15,395 
Other:      
Insurance company general account (unallocated contracts)—  5,911 (g)— 5,911 
Total investments$1,041,197  $1,222,433  $— $5,306,595 
Cash     10,601 
Other pending transactions     (13,813)
Less: Other postretirement assets included in total investments     (61,285)
Total fair value of qualified pension assets     $5,242,098 
186
192

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2019Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
 (In Thousands)
Equity securities:      
Common collective trust (c) $289,398 
Fixed income securities:      
U.S. Government securities49,930 (b)89,297 (a)139,227 
Corporate debt instruments 130,333 (a)130,333 
Registered investment companies1,877 (d) 1,877 
Other 57,210 (f)57,210 
Total investments$51,807  $276,840  $0 $618,045 
Other pending transactions     1,645 
Plus:  Other postretirement assets included in the investments of the qualified pension trust     66,572 
Total fair value of other postretirement assets     $686,262 

Other Postretirement Trusts

2023Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
 (In Thousands)
Equity securities:      
Common collective trust (c) $276,560 
Fixed income securities:      
U.S. Government securities$80,219 (b)$84,521 (a)$— 164,740 
Corporate debt instruments—  106,523 (a)— 106,523 
Registered investment companies548 (d)—  — 548 
Other—  57,511 (f)— 57,511 
Total investments$80,767  $248,555  $— $605,882 
Other pending transactions     2,868 
Plus: Other postretirement assets included in the investments of the qualified pension trust     64,391 
Total fair value of other postretirement assets     $673,141 

2022Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Total
 (In Thousands)
Equity securities:      
Common collective trust (c) $241,676 
Fixed income securities:      
U.S. Government securities$69,503 (b)$78,436 (a)$— 147,939 
Corporate debt instruments—  113,273 (a)— 113,273 
Registered investment companies3,016 (d)—  — 3,016 
Other—  56,149 (f)— 56,149 
Total investments$72,519  $247,858  $— $562,053 
Other pending transactions     486 
Plus: Other postretirement assets included in the investments of the qualified pension trust     61,285 
Total fair value of other postretirement assets     $623,824 

(a)Certain preferred stocks and certain fixed income debt securities (corporate, government, and securitized) are stated at fair value as determined by broker quotes.
(b)Common stocks, certain preferred stocks, and certain fixed income debt securities (government) are stated at fair value determined by quoted market prices.
(c)The common collective trusts hold investments in accordance with stated objectives.  The investment strategy of the trusts is to capture the growth potential of equity markets by replicating the performance of a specified index.  The issuer of these funds allows daily trading at the net asset value and trades settle at a later date, with no other trading restrictions. Net asset value per share of common collective trusts estimate fair value. Certain of these commonCommon collective trusts are not publicly quoted and are valued by the fund administrators using net asset value as a practical expedient. Accordingly, these funds are not assigned a level in the fair value table, but are included in the total.
193

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



(d)Registered investment companies are money market mutual funds with a stable net asset value of one dollar per share. Registered investment companies may hold investments in domestic and international bond markets or domestic equities and estimate fair value usingvalued at the daily closing price as reported by the fund. These funds are required to publish their daily net asset value per share.and to transact at that price. The money market mutual funds held by the trusts are deemed to be actively traded. Certain registered investment companies are recorded at contract value, which approximates fair value.
(e)Certain of these registered investment companies are not publicly quoted and are valued by the fund administrators using net asset value as a practical expedient. The issuer of these funds allows daily trading at the net asset value and trades settle at a later date, with no other trading restrictions. Accordingly, these funds are not assigned a level in the fair value table, but are included in the total.
(f)The other remaining assets are U.S. municipal and foreign government bonds stated at fair value as determined by broker quotes.
(g)The unallocated insurance contract investments are recorded at contract value, which approximates fair value.  The contract value represents contributions made under the contract, plus interest, less funds used to pay benefits and contract expenses, and less distributions to the master trust.


187

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Estimated Future Benefit Payments

Based upon the assumptions used to measure Entergy’s qualified pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits obligations at December 31, 2020,2023, and including pension and other postretirement benefits attributable to estimated future employee service, Entergy expects that benefits to be paid and the Medicare Part D subsidies to be received over the next ten years for Entergy Corporation and its subsidiaries will be as follows:

 Estimated Future Benefits Payments 
 Qualified PensionNon-Qualified PensionOther Postretirement (before Medicare Subsidy)Estimated Future Medicare D Subsidy Receipts
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)    
2021$566,242 $22,851 $68,109 $123 
2022$568,058 $24,193 $67,904 $82 
2023$569,348 $23,906 $68,149 $93 
2024$576,365 $17,183 $67,569 $101 
2025$552,303 $25,477 $66,414 $112 
2026 - 2030$2,641,864 $56,584 $314,972 $703 
 Estimated Future Benefits Payments
 Qualified PensionNon-Qualified PensionOther Postretirement
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)   
2024$463,557 $13,802 $74,649 
2025$449,803 $10,894 $70,720 
2026$450,945 $8,507 $67,105 
2027$449,510 $14,374 $63,949 
2028$450,827 $9,325 $61,234 
2029 - 2033$2,222,959 $36,584 $283,477 

Based upon the same assumptions, Entergy expects that benefits to be paid and the Medicare Part D subsidies to be received over the next ten years for the Registrant Subsidiaries for their current and former employees will be as follows:
Estimated Future Qualified Pension Benefits PaymentsEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)      
2021$115,340 $130,058 $38,131 $15,011 $32,935 $29,202 
2022$114,260 $130,019 $38,104 $15,202 $32,859 $28,854 
2023$111,759 $128,199 $37,159 $15,030 $31,439 $28,833 
2024$110,128 $126,927 $35,571 $14,437 $29,541 $28,641 
2025$108,314 $124,911 $34,377 $14,052 $27,781 $27,378 
2026 - 2030$513,207 $575,141 $155,722 $63,426 $123,688 $132,163 

Estimated Future Non-Qualified Pension Benefits PaymentsEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)     
2021$218 $193 $181 $17 $633 
2022$424 $211 $411 $17 $871 
2023$328 $217 $377 $21 $1,004 
2024$285 $196 $454 $19 $851 
2025$580 $209 $439 $19 $762 
2026 - 2030$976 $718 $2,146 $111 $3,250 

Estimated Future Qualified Pension Benefits PaymentsEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)      
2024$90,682 $95,706 $25,534 $11,300 $21,807 $24,163 
2025$89,113 $92,420 $24,816 $10,799 $21,019 $22,053 
2026$88,427 $92,499 $25,210 $10,910 $21,268 $21,612 
2027$87,845 $91,485 $24,686 $10,566 $20,407 $22,665 
2028$87,719 $91,450 $24,147 $10,458 $20,074 $22,107 
2029 - 2033$429,882 $444,131 $115,629 $48,870 $92,182 $109,712 
188194

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Estimated Future Other Postretirement Benefits Payments (before Medicare Part D Subsidy)Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)      
2021$12,693 $15,600 $3,386 $2,412 $5,322 $2,739 
2022$12,542 $15,502 $3,498 $2,322 $4,840 $2,734 
2023$12,329 $15,397 $3,541 $2,238 $4,770 $2,676 
2024$12,156 $15,034 $3,574 $2,151 $4,597 $2,579 
2025$11,869 $14,825 $3,614 $2,070 $4,486 $2,518 
2026 - 2030$56,603 $69,424 $17,668 $8,853 $20,622 $11,749 
Estimated Future Non-Qualified Pension Benefits PaymentsEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)     
2024$276 $308 $474 $106 $448 
2025$474 $301 $547 $143 $423 
2026$160 $288 $461 $139 $445 
2027$149 $265 $642 $224 $395 
2028$288 $270 $395 $141 $369 
2029 - 2033$938 $941 $1,326 $529 $1,524 

Estimated Future Medicare Part D SubsidyEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)      
2021$40 $20 $15 $0 $13 $5 
2022$39 $6 $15 $0 $4 $1 
2023$42 $6 $17 $0 $5 $2 
2024$45 $8 $17 $0 $5 $2 
2025$49 $8 $19 $0 $6 $1 
2026 - 2030$289 $58 $112 $0 $43 $12 
Estimated Future Other Postretirement Benefits PaymentsEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
Year(s)      
2024$13,697 $15,049 $3,521 $2,200 $5,187 $2,811 
2025$12,913 $14,380 $3,386 $2,086 $4,874 $2,668 
2026$12,342 $13,676 $3,256 $1,942 $4,436 $2,434 
2027$11,767 $13,037 $3,126 $1,785 $4,215 $2,320 
2028$11,424 $12,348 $3,121 $1,640 $3,937 $2,266 
2029 - 2033$54,789 $57,264 $14,563 $7,297 $17,857 $11,270 

Contributions

Entergy currently expects to contribute approximately $356$270 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $39.9$45.9 million to other postretirement plans in 2021.2024.  The expected 20212024 pension and other postretirement plan contributions of the Registrant Subsidiaries for their employees are shown below.  The 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.

The Registrant Subsidiaries expect to contribute approximately the following to the qualified pension and other postretirement plans for their current and former employees in 2021:2024:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Pension ContributionsPension Contributions$66,649 $59,882 $13,715 $5,395 $6,955 $18,663 
Other Postretirement ContributionsOther Postretirement Contributions$517 $15,600 $130 $175 $66 $22 

189195

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Actuarial Assumptions

The significant actuarial assumptions used in determining the pension PBO and the other postretirement benefitbenefits APBO as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 were as follows:
20202019 20232022
Weighted-average discount rate:Weighted-average discount rate:  Weighted-average discount rate:  
Qualified pensionQualified pension
2.60% - 2.83%
Blended 2.77%
3.26% - 3.43% Blended 3.39%Qualified pension
5.02% - 5.10%
Blended 5.06%
5.21% - 5.27%
Blended 5.24%
Other postretirementOther postretirement2.62%3.26%Other postretirement5.01%5.20%
Non-qualified pensionNon-qualified pension1.61%2.72%Non-qualified pension4.68%4.98%
Weighted-average rate of increase in future compensation levelsWeighted-average rate of increase in future compensation levels3.98% - 4.40%3.98% - 4.40%Weighted-average rate of increase in future compensation levels3.98% - 4.40%3.98% - 4.40%
Interest crediting rateInterest crediting rate2.60%2.60%Interest crediting rate4.00%4.00%
Assumed health care trend rate:Assumed health care trend rate:
Pre-65Pre-655.87%6.13%
Post-656.31%6.25%
Ultimate rate4.75%4.75%
Year ultimate rate is reached and beyond:
Pre-65
Pre-65 Pre-65203020276.95%6.65%
Post-65 Post-6520282027Post-657.88%7.50%
Ultimate health care cost trend rateUltimate health care cost trend rate4.75%4.75%
Year ultimate health care cost trend rate is reached and beyond:
Pre-65
Pre-65
Pre-6520322032
Post-65 Post-6520322032

The significant actuarial assumptions used in determining the net periodic pension and other postretirement benefit costs for 2020, 2019, and 2018 were as follows:
 202020192018
Weighted-average discount rate:   
Qualified pension:
    Service cost3.42%4.57%3.89%
    Interest cost2.99%4.15%3.44%
Other postretirement:
    Service cost3.27%4.62%3.88%
    Interest cost2.41%4.01%3.33%
Non-qualified pension:
    Service cost2.71%3.94%3.35%
    Interest cost2.25%3.46%2.76%
Weighted-average rate of increase in future compensation levels3.98% - 4.40%3.98%3.98%
Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets:   
Pension assets7.00%7.25%7.50%
Other postretirement non-taxable assets6.25% - 7.00%6.5%-7.25%6.50% - 7.50%
Other postretirement taxable assets5.25%5.50%5.50%
Assumed health care trend rate:
Pre-656.13%6.59%6.95%
Post-656.25%7.15%7.25%
Ultimate rate4.75%4.75%4.75%
Year ultimate rate is reached and beyond:
    Pre-65202720272027
    Post-65202720262027
190196

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


The significant actuarial assumptions used in determining the net periodic pension and other postretirement benefits costs for 2023, 2022, and 2021 were as follows:
 202320222021
Weighted-average discount rate:   
Qualified pension:
    Service cost5.26%3.07%2.81%
    Interest cost5.16%2.49%2.08%
Other postretirement:
    Service cost5.00%3.20%2.98%
    Interest cost5.09%2.31%1.86%
Non-qualified pension:
    Service cost5.31%4.94%1.48%
    Interest cost5.30%5.03%2.14%
Weighted-average rate of increase in future compensation levels3.98% - 4.40%3.98% - 4.40%3.98% - 4.40%
Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets:   
Pension assets7.00%6.75%6.75%
Other postretirement non-taxable assets6.00% - 7.00%5.75% - 6.75%6.00% - 6.75%
Other postretirement taxable assets5.25%4.75%5.00%
Assumed health care trend rate:
Pre-656.65%5.65%5.87%
Post-657.50%5.90%6.31%
Ultimate health care cost trend rate4.75%4.75%4.75%
Year ultimate health care cost trend rate is reached and beyond:
    Pre-65203220322030
    Post-65203220322028
With respect to the mortality assumptions, Entergy used the Pri-2012 Employee and Healthy Annuitant Table, projected generationally using Scale MP-2021 with Aon’s Endemic Adjustment, in determining its December 31, 2023 pension plans’ PBOs and the Pri.H 2012 (headcount weighted) Employee and Healthy Annuitant Table, projected generationally using Scale MP-2021 with Aon’s Endemic Adjustment, in determining its December 31, 2023 other postretirement benefits APBO. With respect to the mortality assumptions, Entergy used the Pri-2012 Employee and Healthy Annuitant Tables with a fully generational MP-2020 projection scale, in determining its December 31, 20202022 pension plans’ PBOs and the Pri.H 2012 (headcount weighted) Employee and Healthy Annuitant Tables with a fully generational MP-2020 projection scale, in determining its December 31, 20202022 other postretirement benefitbenefits APBO. Entergy used the Pri-2012 Employee and Healthy Annuitant Tables with a fully generational MP-2019 projection scale, in determining its December 31, 2019 pension plans’ PBOs and the Pri.H 2012 (headcount weighted) Employee and Healthy Annuitant Tables with a fully generational MP-2019 projection scale, in determining its December 31, 2019 other postretirement benefit APBO. 

Defined Contribution Plans

Entergy sponsors the Savings Plan of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries (System Savings Plan).  The System Savings Plan is a defined contribution plan covering eligible employees of Entergy and certain of its subsidiaries. The participating Entergy subsidiary makes matching contributions to the System Savings Plan for all eligible participating employees in an amount equal to either 70% or 100% of the participants’ basic contributions, up to 6% of their eligible earnings per pay period.  The matching contribution is allocated to investments as directed by the employee.

Entergy also sponsors the Savings Plan of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries VI (Savings Plan VI) (established in April 2007) and the Savings Plan of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries VII (established(Savings Plan VII)
197

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



(established in April 2007) to which matching contributions are also made.  The plans are defined contribution plans that cover eligible employees, as defined by each plan, of Entergy and certain of its subsidiaries. Effective December 31, 2023, employees participating in Savings Plan VI and Savings Plan VII were transferred into the System Savings Plan when Savings Plan VI and Savings Plan VII merged into the System Savings Plan.

Entergy also sponsors the Savings Plan of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries VIII (established January 2021) and the Savings Plan of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries IX (established January 2021) to which company contributions are made. The participating Entergy subsidiary makes matching contributions to these defined contribution plans for all eligible participating employees in an amount equal to 100% of the participants’ basic contributions, up to 5% of their eligible earnings per pay period. Eligible participants may also receive a discretionary annual company contribution up to 4% of the participant’s eligible earnings (subject to vesting).

Entergy’s subsidiaries’ contributions to defined contribution plans collectively were $63.1$65.1 million in 2020, $57.62023, $62.1 million in 2019,2022, and $54.3$62.3 million in 2018.2021.  The majority of the contributions were to the System Savings Plan.

The Registrant Subsidiaries’ 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 contributions to defined contribution plans for their employees were as follows:
 
 
Year
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2020$4,515 $6,518 $2,863 $1,115 $2,596 
2019$4,111 $5,641 $2,424 $882 $2,136 
2018$3,985 $5,450 $2,307 $795 $1,992 
 
 
Year
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Thousands)
2023$5,866 $7,757 $3,534 $1,383 $3,380 
2022$5,124 $7,138 $3,194 $1,223 $2,938 
2021$4,820 $6,678 $3,045 $1,140 $2,699 


NOTE 12.  STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION (Entergy Corporation)

Entergy grants stock options, restricted stock, performance units, and restricted stock units to key employees of the Entergy subsidiaries under its equity plans which are shareholder-approved stock-based compensation plans.  Effective May 3, 2019, Entergy’s shareholders approved the 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan
191

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




(2019 (2019 Plan).  The maximum number of common shares that can be issued from the 2019 Plan for stock-based awards is 7,300,00012,200,000 all of which are available for incentive stock option grants.  The 2019 Plan applies to awards granted on or after May 3, 2019 and awards expire ten years from the date of grant. As of December 31, 2020,2023, there were 6,108,4517,546,825 authorized shares remaining for stock-based awards.

Stock Options

Stock options are granted at exercise prices that equal the closing market price of Entergy Corporation common stock on the date of grant.  Generally, stock options granted will become exercisable in equal amounts on each of the first three anniversaries of the date of grant.  Unless they are forfeited previously under the terms of the grant, options expire 10 years after the date of the grant if they are not exercised.

198

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The following table includes financial information for stock options for each of the years presented:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net incomeCompensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$3.9$3.8$4.3Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$4.1$4.2
Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net incomeTax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$1.0$1.0$1.1Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$1.1$1.1
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and inventory$1.5$1.4$0.7
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and materials and
supplies
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and materials and
supplies
$1.9$1.7$1.5

Entergy determines the fair value of the stock option grants by considering factors such as lack of marketability, stock retention requirements, and regulatory restrictions on exercisability in accordance with accounting standards.  The stock option weighted-average assumptions used in determining the fair values are as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
Stock price volatilityStock price volatility17.16%17.23%17.44%Stock price volatility24.89%24.27%23.93%
Expected term in yearsExpected term in years7.047.327.33Expected term in years6.896.926.93
Risk-free interest rateRisk-free interest rate1.49%2.50%2.54%Risk-free interest rate3.51%1.77%0.74%
Dividend yieldDividend yield4.00%4.50%4.75%Dividend yield4.00%4.00%
Dividend payment per shareDividend payment per share$3.74$3.66$3.58Dividend payment per share$4.34$4.10$3.86

Stock price volatility is calculated based upon the daily public stock price volatility of Entergy Corporation common stock over a period equal to the expected term of the award.  The expected term of the options is based upon historical option exercises and the weighted averageweighted-average life of options when exercised and the estimated weighted averageweighted-average life of all vested but unexercised options.  In 2008, Entergy implemented stock ownership guidelines for its senior executive officers.  These guidelines require an executive officer to own shares of Entergy Corporation common stock equal to a specified multiple of his or her salary.  Until an executive officer achieves this ownership position the executive officer is required to retain 75% of the net-of-tax net profit upon exercise of the option to be held in Entergy Corporation common stock.  The reduction in fair value of the stock options due to this restriction is based upon an estimate of the call option value of the reinvested gain discounted to present value over the applicable reinvestment period.
192

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


A summary of stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 20202023 and changes during the year are presented below:
 
 
 
Number
of Options
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
 
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
Weighted-
Average
Contractual Life
Options outstanding as of January 1, 20202,448,913 $78.48  
Options granted530,716 $131.72  
Options exercised(544,082)$79.27  
Options forfeited/expired(36,168)$108.69  
Options outstanding as of December 31, 20202,399,379 $89.63$40,842,1526.72 years
Options exercisable as of December 31, 20201,264,641 $74.55$31,979,3705.26 years
Weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted during 2020$11.45   
 
 
 
Number
of Options
Weighted-
Average
Exercise
Price
 
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
Weighted-
Average
Contractual Life
Options outstanding as of January 1, 20232,776,355 $96.30  
Options granted281,874 $108.47  
Options exercised(111,929)$85.69  
Options forfeited/expired(47,592)$110.40  
Options outstanding as of December 31, 20232,898,708 $97.66$31,447,5295.66
Options exercisable as of December 31, 20232,191,916 $94.94$30,475,1614.83
Weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted during 2023$20.07   

The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted during the year was $8.32$16.25 for 20192022 and $6.99$12.27 for 2018.2021.  The total intrinsic value of stock options exercised was $26$2 million during 2020, $292023, $20 million during 2019,2022, and $19$2 million during 2018.2021.  The intrinsic value, which has no effect on net income, of the outstanding stock options exercised is calculated by the positive difference between the weighted averageweighted-average exercise price of the stock options
199

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



granted and Entergy Corporation’s common stock price as of December 31, 2020.2023.  The aggregate intrinsic value of the stock options outstanding as of December 31, 20202023 was $40.8$31.4 million. Stock options outstanding as of December 31, 20202023 includes 512,3161,153,596 out of the money options with an intrinsic value of zero. Entergy recognizes compensation cost over the vesting period of the options based on their grant-date fair value.  The total fair value of options that vested was approximately $6 million during 2023, $6 million during 2022, and $5 million during 2020, $5 million during 2019, and $4 million during 2018.2021. Cash received from option exercises was $43$10 million for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023. The tax benefits realized from options exercised was $7$0.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023.

193

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding as of December 31, 2020:2023:
 Options OutstandingOptions Exercisable
Range of Exercise PriceAs of December 31, 2020Weighted-Average Remaining Contractual Life-Yrs.Weighted Average Exercise PriceNumber Exercisable as of December 31, 2020Weighted Average Exercise Price
$51  -$64.99240,200 2.72$63.69240,200 $63.69
$65  -$78.99960,110 6.09$73.86759,031 $72.74
$79  -$91.99686,753 7.24$89.34265,410 $89.57
$92  -$131.72512,316 9.08$131.72$0.00
$51  -$131.722,399,379 6.72$89.631,264,641 $74.55
 Options OutstandingOptions Exercisable
Range of Exercise PriceAs of December 31, 2023Weighted-Average Remaining Contractual Life-Yrs.Weighted-Average Exercise PriceNumber Exercisable as of December 31, 2023Weighted-Average Exercise Price
$63.17  -$79.99772,974 3.18$73.58772,974 $73.58
$80.00  -$99.99972,138 5.45$92.30814,286 $91.61
$100.00  -$119.99685,327 8.48$109.14136,387 $109.59
$120.00  -$131.72468,269 6.08$131.72468,269 $131.72
$63.17  -$131.722,898,708 5.66$97.662,191,916 $94.94

Stock-based compensation cost related to non-vested stock options outstanding as of December 31, 20202023 not yet recognized is approximately $6$5 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.721.6 years.

Restricted Stock Awards

Entergy grants restricted stock awards earned under its stock benefit plans in the form of stock units. One-third of the restricted stock awards will vest upon each anniversary of the grant date and are expensed ratably over the three-year vesting period.  Shares of restricted stock have the same dividend and voting rights as other common stock and are considered issued and outstanding shares of Entergy upon vesting. In January 20202023 the Board approved and Entergy granted 313,805345,983 restricted stock awards under the 2019 Plan.  The restricted stock awards were made effective on January 30, 202026, 2023 and were valued at $131.72$108.47 per share, which was the closing price of Entergy Corporation’s common stock on that date.

The following table includes information about the restricted stock awards outstanding as of December 31, 2020:2023:
 SharesWeighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Outstanding shares at January 1, 2020692,134 $82.56
Granted336,363 $130.11
Vested(345,271)$79.41
Forfeited(34,728)$101.32
Outstanding shares at December 31, 2020648,498 $107.89

The following table includes financial information for restricted stock for each of the years presented:
 202020192018
 (In Millions)
Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$23.1$20.2$19.8
Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$5.9$5.1$5.1
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and inventory$8.5$7.1$5.7

The total fair value of the restricted stock awards granted was $44 million, $34 million, and $28 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, respectively.
 SharesWeighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Outstanding shares at January 1, 2023607,723 $107.55
Granted373,741 $108.35
Vested(294,145)$110.54
Forfeited(60,546)$105.64
Outstanding shares at December 31, 2023626,773 $106.80

194200

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The following table includes financial information for restricted stock for each of the years presented:
 202320222021
 (In Millions)
Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$22.2$23.2$24.7
Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$5.7$5.9$6.3
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and materials and
supplies
$9.7$9.2$9.3

The total fair value of the restricted stock awards granted was $41 million, $39 million, and $40 million for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021, respectively.

The total fair value of the restricted stock awards vested was $27$33 million, $25$34 million, and $25$32 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, respectively.

Long-Term Performance Unit Program

Entergy grants long-term incentive awards earned under its stock benefit plans in the form of performance units, which represents the value of, and are settled with, one share of Entergy Corporation common stock at the end of the three-year performance period, plus dividends accrued during the performance period on the number of performance units earned. The Long-Term Performance Unit Program specifies a minimum, target, and maximum achievement level, the achievement of which will determine the number of performance units that may be earned. Entergy measures performance by assessing Entergy’s total shareholder return relative to the total shareholder return of the companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index. To emphasize the importance of strong cash generation for the long-term health of its business, a credit measure – adjusted funds from operations/debt ratio – was selected as one of the performance measures for the 2023-2025 performance period. For the 2020-20212023-2025 performance period, performance will be measured based 80eighty percent on relative total shareholder return and 20twenty percent on a cumulative adjusted earnings per share metric.the credit measure.

In January 20202023 the Board approved and Entergy granted 134,853143,212 performance units under the 2019 Plan.  The performance units were granted on January 30, 2020,26, 2023, and eighty percent were valued at $169.74$130.65 per share based on various factors, primarily market conditions; and twenty percent were valued at $131.72$108.47 per share, the closing price of Entergy Corporation’s common stock on that date. Performance units have the same dividend and voting rights as other common stock, are considered issued and outstanding shares of Entergy upon vesting, and are expensed ratably over the 3-year vesting period, and compensation cost for the portion of the award based on cumulative adjusted earnings per sharethe selected credit measure will be adjusted based on the number of units that ultimately vest.

The following table includes information about the long-term performance units outstanding at the target level as of December 31, 2020:2023:
SharesWeighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share SharesWeighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Outstanding shares at January 1, 2020551,933 $84.01
Outstanding shares at January 1, 2023Outstanding shares at January 1, 2023521,838 $129.94
GrantedGranted376,557 $105.90Granted156,627 $126.39$126.39
VestedVested(423,225)$71.40Vested(38,150)$162.14$162.14
ForfeitedForfeited(29,500)$111.86Forfeited(159,314)$145.35$145.35
Outstanding shares at December 31, 2020475,765 $110.82
Outstanding shares at December 31, 2023Outstanding shares at December 31, 2023481,001 $121.12

The following table includes financial information for the long-term performance units for each of the years presented:
 202020192018
 (In Millions)
Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$12.6$11.1 $11.5 
Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$3.2$2.8 $2.9 
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and inventory$4.9$4.0 $3.3 

The total fair value of the long-term performance units granted was $40 million, $23 million, and $16 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, respectively.

In January 2020, Entergy issued 423,184 shares of Entergy Corporation common stock at a share price of $126.31 for awards earned and dividends accrued under the 2017-2019 Long-Term Performance Unit Program. In January 2019, Entergy issued 226,208 shares of Entergy Corporation common stock at a share price of $86.03 for awards earned and dividends accrued under the 2016-2018 Long-Term Performance Unit Program. In January
195201

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



The following table includes financial information for the long-term performance units for each of the years presented:
 202320222021
 (In Millions)
Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$11.1$16.0 $14.5 
Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$2.8$4.1 $3.7 
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and materials and
supplies
$5.2$6.7 $5.8 

The total fair value of the long-term performance units granted was $20 million, $35 million, and $32 million for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021, respectively.
2018,
In January 2023, Entergy issued 50,81238,150 shares of Entergy Corporation common stock at a share price of $78.51$107.59 for awards earned and dividends accrued under the 2015-20172020-2022 Long-Term Performance Unit Program. In January 2022, Entergy issued 224,334 shares of Entergy Corporation common stock at a share price of $110.35 for awards earned and dividends accrued under the 2019-2021 Long-Term Performance Unit Program. In January 2021, Entergy issued 235,983 shares of Entergy Corporation common stock at a share price of $95.12 for awards earned and dividends accrued under the 2018-2020 Long-Term Performance Unit Program.

Restricted Stock Unit Awards

Entergy grants restricted stock unit awards earned under its stock benefit plans in the form of stock units that are subject to time-based restrictions.  The restricted stock units may be settled in shares of Entergy Corporation common stock or the cash value of shares of Entergy Corporation common stock at the time of vesting.  The costs of restricted stock unit awards are charged to income over the restricted period, which varies from grant to grant.  The average vesting period for restricted stock unit awards granted is 3338 months.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, there were 86,175139,500 unvested restricted stock units that are expected to vest over an average period of 1620 months.

The following table includes information about the restricted stock unit awards outstanding as of December 31, 2020:2023:
SharesWeighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share SharesWeighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Outstanding shares at January 1, 2020130,463 $82.72
Outstanding shares at January 1, 2023Outstanding shares at January 1, 2023132,407 $105.75
GrantedGranted18,100 $114.30Granted22,547 $102.05$102.05
VestedVested(55,888)$77.04Vested(6,142)$110.33$110.33
ForfeitedForfeited(6,500)$84.32Forfeited(9,312)$103.37$103.37
Outstanding shares at December 31, 202086,175 $92.92
Outstanding shares at December 31, 2023Outstanding shares at December 31, 2023139,500 $105.11

The following table includes financial information for restricted stock unit awards for each of the years presented:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net incomeCompensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$2.0$2.2$2.9Compensation expense included in Entergy’s consolidated net income$2.8$2.0$1.9
Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net incomeTax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$0.5$0.6$0.7Tax benefit recognized in Entergy’s consolidated net income$0.7$0.5
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and inventory$0.9$0.9$0.7
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and materials and
supplies
Compensation cost capitalized as part of fixed assets and materials and
supplies
$1.2$0.8$0.7

202

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The total fair value of the restricted stock unit awards granted was $2 million, $3$8 million, and $2$4 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, respectively.

The total fair value of the restricted stock unit awards vested was $4$1 million, $6$3 million, and $3.1$3 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, respectively.


NOTE 13. BUSINESS SEGMENT INFORMATION (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Entergy’sEntergy has a single reportable segments as of December 31, 2020 aresegment, Utility, and Entergy Wholesale Commodities.  Utilitywhich includes the generation, transmission, distribution, and sale of electric power in portions of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, and Louisiana, including the City of New Orleans; and operation of a small natural gas utility servicedistribution business in portions of Louisiana.  Entergy Wholesale CommoditiesThe Utility segment reflects management’s primary basis of organization with a predominant focus on its utility operations in the Gulf South. Parent & Other includes the ownership, operation,parent company, Entergy Corporation, and decommissioning of nuclear power plants located in the northern United States and the sale of the electric power produced by its operating plants to wholesale customers.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities also includes the ownership ofother business activity, including Entergy’s non-utility operations business which owns interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers.  “All Other” includescustomers and also provides decommissioning services to nuclear power plants owned by non-affiliated entities in the parent company, Entergy Corporation, and other business activity.
196

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

United States.

Entergy’s segment financial information was as follows:
2020
 
 
Utility
Entergy Wholesale Commodities
 
 
All Other
 
 
Eliminations
 
 
Consolidated
20232023UtilityParent & OtherEliminationsConsolidated
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Operating revenuesOperating revenues$9,170,714 $942,869 $78 ($25)$10,113,636 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges$0 $26,623 $0 $0 $26,623 
Depreciation, amortization, & decommissioning$1,685,138 $306,974 $2,835 $0 $1,994,947 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits)
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning
Interest and investment incomeInterest and investment income$299,004 $234,194 $19,563 ($159,943)$392,818 
Interest expenseInterest expense$648,851 $22,432 $146,730 ($32,350)$785,663 
Income taxesIncome taxes($282,311)$104,937 $55,868 $0 ($121,506)
Consolidated net income (loss)$1,816,354 ($62,763)($219,344)($127,594)$1,406,653 
Consolidated net income
Total assetsTotal assets$55,940,153 $3,800,378 $552,632 ($2,053,951)$58,239,212 
Cash paid for long-lived asset additionsCash paid for long-lived asset additions$5,102,322 $54,455 $84 $0 $5,156,861 

2019
 
 
Utility
Entergy Wholesale Commodities
 
 
All Other
 
 
Eliminations
 
 
Consolidated
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$9,583,985 $1,294,719 $21 ($52)$10,878,673 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges$0 $290,027 $0 $0 $290,027 
Depreciation, amortization, & decommissioning$1,493,167 $384,707 $2,944 $0 $1,880,818 
Interest and investment income$289,570 $414,636 $26,295 ($182,589)$547,912 
Interest expense$589,395 $29,450 $178,575 ($54,995)$742,425 
Income taxes$19,634 ($161,295)($28,164)$0 ($169,825)
Consolidated net income (loss)$1,425,643 $148,870 ($188,675)($127,594)$1,258,244 
Total assets$49,557,664 $4,154,961 $514,020 ($2,502,733)$51,723,912 
Cash paid for long-lived asset additions$4,527,045 $104,300 $160 $0 $4,631,505 

2022UtilityParent & OtherEliminationsConsolidated
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$13,420,804 $343,461 ($28)$13,764,237 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits)$— ($163,464)$— ($163,464)
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning$1,941,653 $43,446 $— $1,985,099 
Interest and investment income (loss)$145,968 ($35,293)($186,256)($75,581)
Interest expense$750,175 $162,300 ($238)$912,237 
Income taxes($34,263)($4,715)$— ($38,978)
Consolidated net income (loss)$1,398,580 ($115,425)($186,017)$1,097,138 
Total assets$61,399,243 $884,442 ($3,688,494)$58,595,191 
Cash paid for long-lived asset additions$5,382,243 $13,884 $— $5,396,127 
197203

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




2018
 
 
Utility
Entergy Wholesale Commodities
 
 
All Other
 
 
Eliminations
 
 
Consolidated
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$9,540,670 $1,468,905 $0 ($123)$11,009,452 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges$0 $532,321 $0 $0 $532,321 
Depreciation, amortization, & decommissioning$1,367,944 $388,732 $1,274 $0 $1,757,950 
Interest and investment income$203,936 $14,543 $31,602 ($186,217)$63,864 
Interest expense$552,919 $33,694 $179,358 ($58,623)$707,348 
Income taxes($732,548)($269,025)($35,253)$0 ($1,036,826)
Consolidated net income (loss)$1,495,061 ($340,641)($164,271)($127,594)$862,555 
Total assets$44,777,167 $5,459,275 $733,366 ($2,694,742)$48,275,066 
Investment in affiliates - at equity$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 
Cash paid for long-lived asset additions$3,987,424 $283,707 $86 $0 $4,271,217 

The Entergy Wholesale Commodities business is sometimes referred to as the “competitive businesses.”  
2021UtilityParent & OtherEliminationsConsolidated
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$11,044,674 $698,251 ($29)$11,742,896 
Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges$— $263,625 $— $263,625 
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning$1,823,389 $167,308 $— $1,990,697 
Interest and investment income$442,817 $115,273 ($127,624)$430,466 
Interest expense$692,004 $142,693 ($3)$834,694 
Income taxes$264,209 ($72,835)$— $191,374 
Consolidated net income (loss)$1,488,487 ($242,146)($127,622)$1,118,719 
Total assets$59,733,625 $1,718,638 ($1,998,021)$59,454,242 
Cash paid for long-lived asset additions$6,409,855 $12,257 $— $6,422,112 

Eliminations are primarily intersegment activity.  AlmostAs of December 31, 2023, all of Entergy’s goodwill is related to the Utility segment. As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, almost all of Entergy’s goodwill was related to the Utility segment.

InResults of operations for 2023 include: (1) a $568 million reduction, recorded at Utility, and a $275 million reduction, recorded at Parent & Other, in income tax expense as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit, partially offset by $98 million ($72 million net-of-tax) of regulatory charges, recorded at Utility, to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers by Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit; (2) the reversal of a $106 million regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, recorded at Utility, as part of the settlement of Entergy Louisiana’s test year 2017 formula rate plan filing; (3) a $129 million reduction in income tax expense as a result of the Hurricane Ida securitization in March 2023, which also resulted in a $103 million ($76 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge, recorded at Utility, to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceeding; and (4) write-offs of $78 million ($59 million net-of-tax), recorded at Utility, as a result of Entergy Arkansas’s approved motion to forgo recovery of identified costs resulting from the 2013 ANO stator incident. See Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the Entergy Louisiana formula rate plan global settlement. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the Entergy Louisiana March 2023 storm cost securitization. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the ANO stator incident and the approved motion to forgo recovery.

Results of operations for 2022 include: (1) a regulatory charge of $551 million ($413 million net-of-tax), recorded at Utility, as a result of System Energy’s partial settlement agreement and offer of settlement related to pending proceedings before the FERC; (2) a $283 million reduction in income tax expense as a result of the Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida May 2022 securitization financing, which also resulted in a $224 million ($165 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge, recorded at Utility, to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization regulatory proceeding; and (3) a gain of $166 million ($130 million net-of-tax), reflected in “Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits),” as a result of the sale of the Palisades plant in June 2022. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the System Energy settlement agreement with the MPSC. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the Entergy Louisiana May 2022 storm cost securitization. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Palisades plant.
204

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


Results of operations for 2021 include a charge of $340 million ($268 million net-of-tax), reflected in “Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits),” as a result of the sale of the Indian Point Energy Center in May 2021. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Indian Point Energy Center.

Change in Reportable Segments Effective January 2019, 1, 2023

Entergy completed its multi-year strategy to exit the merchant nuclear power business in 2022 and upon completion of all transition activities, effective January 1, 2023, Entergy Wholesale Commodities is no longer a reportable segment. Remaining business activity previously reported under Entergy Wholesale Commodities is now reported under Parent & Other. Historical segment financial information presented herein has been restated for 2022 and 2021 to reflect the change in reportable segments. The change in reportable segments had no effect on Entergy’s consolidated financial statements or historical segment financial information for the Utility reportable segment.

The Fitzpatrick plant was sold theto Exelon in March 2017. The Vermont Yankee plant which it had previously shut down,was sold to NorthStar. In August 2019, Entergy sold theNorthStar in January 2019. The Pilgrim plant which it had previously shut down,was sold to Holtec.Holtec International in August 2019. The Indian Point 2 was shut down in April 2020, and Entergy has also announced plans to shut down Indian Point 3 in April 2021 and Palisadesplants were sold to Holtec International in May 2022, and has purchase and sale agreements with2021. The Palisades plant was sold to Holtec for each of them expected to close after they are shut down. Management expects these transactions to resultInternational in the cessation of merchant power generation at all Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants owned and operated by Entergy byJune 2022. Entergy will continue to have the obligation to decommission the nuclear plants pending their sales to third parties.

The decisions to shut down these plants and the related transactions resulted in asset impairments; employee retention and severance expenses and other benefits-related costs; and contracted economic development contributions. The employee retention and severance expenses and other benefits-related costs and contracted economic development contributions are included in "Other operation and maintenance" in theEntergy’s consolidated income statements.

As the exit from the merchant nuclear power business was completed in 2022, there were no restructuring charges recorded in 2023. Total restructuring charges in 2022 and 2021 were comprised of the following:
 Employee retention and severance expenses and other benefits-related costsContracted economic development costsTotal
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2020$145 $14 $159 
Restructuring costs accrued12 13 
Cash paid out120 15 135 
Balance as of December 31, 2021$37 $— $37 
Restructuring costs accrued— 
Cash paid out40 — 40 
Balance as of December 31, 2022$— $— $— 

In addition, a gain of $166 million was recorded in 2022 as a result of the sale of the Palisades plant and a charge of $340 million was recorded in 2021 as a result of the sale of the Indian Point Energy Center, both reflected in “Asset write-offs, impairments, and related charges (credits)” in Entergy’s consolidated income statements. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Palisades plant and the Indian Point Energy Center.

198
205

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Total restructuring charges in 2020, 2019, and 2018 were comprised of the following:

 Employee retention and severance expenses and other benefits-related costsContracted economic development costsTotal
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2017$83 $14 $97 
Restructuring costs accrued139 139 
Cash paid out43 43 
Balance as of December 31, 2018$179 $14 $193 
Restructuring costs accrued91 91 
Cash paid out141 141 
Balance as of December 31, 2019$129 $14 $143 
Restructuring costs accrued71 71 
Cash paid out55 55 
Balance as of December 31, 2020$145 $14 $159 

In addition, Entergy Wholesale Commodities incurred $19 million in 2020, $290 million in 2019, and $532 million in 2018 of impairment, loss on sales, and other related charges associated with these strategic decisions and transactions. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of these impairment charges.

Going forward, Entergy Wholesale Commodities expects to incur employee retention and severance expenses of approximately $40 million in 2021 and approximately $15 million in 2022 associated with these strategic transactions.

Geographic Areas

For the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018, the amount of revenue2021, Entergy derived no revenue from outside of the United States was insignificant.States.  As of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, Entergy had no long-lived assets located outside of the United States.

Registrant Subsidiaries

Each of the Registrant Subsidiaries has one reportable segment, which is an integrated utility business, except for System Energy, which is an electricity generation business.  Each of the Registrant Subsidiaries’ operations isare managed on an integrated basis by that company because of the substantial effect of cost-based rates and regulatory oversight on the business process, cost structures, and operating results. Management allocates resources and assesses financial performance on a consolidated basis.


NOTE 14.  ACQUISITIONS DISPOSITIONS, AND IMPAIRMENT OF LONG-LIVED ASSETSDISPOSITIONS (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Louisiana,Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Mississippi)Texas)

Acquisitions

Choctaw Generating StationWalnut Bend Solar

In October 2019,June 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Walnut Bend Solar facility, to be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Lee County, Arkansas. Acquisition of the Walnut Bend Solar facility was initially approved by the APSC in July 2021. The agreement was amended by the parties in February 2023 and the revised agreement was approved by the APSC in July 2023. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of $170 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is completed and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to achieve commercial operation in the first half of 2024, at which time a substantial completion payment of approximately $20 million is expected.

Sunflower Solar

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi purchasedentered into an agreement for the Choctaw Generating Station,purchase of an 810approximately 100 MW natural gas fired combined-cycle turbine plant located near French Camp, Mississippi, from asolar photovoltaic facility to be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi. The project, Sunflower Solar facility, was being built by Sunflower County Solar Project, LLC, an indirect subsidiary of GenOnRecurrent Energy, Inc. The purchase priceLLC. In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed a joint petition with Sunflower County Solar Project with the MPSC for Sunflower County Solar Project to construct and for Entergy Mississippi to acquire and thereafter own, operate, improve, and maintain the solar facility. In March 2020, Entergy Mississippi filed supplemental testimony addressing questions and observations raised in August 2019 by consultants retained by the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and proposing an alternative structure for the Choctaw Generating Stationtransaction that would reduce its cost. In April 2020 the MPSC issued an order approving certification of the Sunflower Solar facility, subject to certain conditions, including: (i) that Entergy Mississippi pursue a tax equity partnership structure through which the partnership would acquire and own the facility under the build-own-transfer agreement and (ii) that if Entergy Mississippi does not consummate the partnership structure under the terms of the order, there will be a cap of $136 million on the level of recoverable costs. In April 2022, Entergy Mississippi confirmed mechanical completion of the Sunflower Solar facility. Pursuant to the MPSC’s April 2020 order, MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC was approximately $305 million.formed for the tax equity partnership with Entergy Mississippi as its managing member. In May 2022 both Entergy Mississippi and the tax equity investor made capital contributions to the tax equity partnership that were then used to make an initial payment of $105 million for acquisition of the facility. Substantial completion of the Sunflower Solar facility was accepted by Entergy Mississippi in September 2022. Commercial operation at the Sunflower Solar facility commenced in September 2022. In April 2023 both Entergy Mississippi and the tax equity
199206

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


investor made additional capital contributions to the tax equity partnership that were then used to make the substantial completion payment of $30 million for acquisition of the facility. The final payment of $5 million for acquisition of the facility was made in October 2023. See Note 1 to the financial statements for further discussion of the HLBV method of accounting used to account for the investment in MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC.



Washington Parish Energy CenterSearcy Solar

In April 2017,March 2019, Entergy LouisianaArkansas entered into a build-own-transfer agreement for the purchase of an agreement withapproximately 100 MW solar energy facility to be sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas. The project, Searcy Solar facility, was being constructed by a subsidiary of Calpine CorporationNextEra Energy Resources. In April 2020 the APSC issued an order approving Entergy Arkansas’s acquisition of the Searcy Solar facility as being in the public interest. In May 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC an application seeking to amend its certificate for the constructionSearcy Solar facility to allow for the use of a tax equity partnership to acquire and purchase of Washington Parish Energy Center, which consists of two natural gas-fired combustion turbine unitsown the facility. The tax equity partnership structure is expected to reduce costs and yield incremental net benefits to customers beyond those expected under the build-own-transfer structure alone. The APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s tax equity partnership request in September 2021. AR Searcy Partnership, LLC was formed for the tax equity partnership with a total nominal capacity of approximately 361 MW.Entergy Arkansas as its managing member. In November 2020,2021 both Entergy LouisianaArkansas and the tax equity investor made capital contributions to the tax equity partnership that were then used to acquire the facility. Upon substantial completion of the facility in December 2021, the tax equity partnership completed the purchase asof the Searcy Solar facility. The purchase price for the Searcy Solar facility was approximately $133 million, which included a final payment of $1 million made in 2022. See Note 1 to the financial statements for further discussion of the HLBV method of accounting used to account for the investment in AR Searcy Partnership, LLC.

Hardin County Peaking Facility

In June 2021, Entergy Texas purchased the Hardin County Peaking Facility, an existing 147 MW simple-cycle gas-fired peaking power plant in Kountze, Texas, from East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc. In addition, also in June 2021, Entergy Texas sold a 7.56% partial interest in the Montgomery County Power Station to East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc. for approximately $68 million. The two interdependent transactions were approved by the LPSC, ofPUCT in April 2021. The purchase price for the Washington Parish Energy Center. The total investment including transmission and other related costs, isHardin County Peaking Facility was approximately $261 million, including a payment of $222 million to purchase the plant.$37 million.

Dispositions

PilgrimPalisades

In July 2018, Entergy entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Holtec International to sell to a Holtec subsidiary 100% of the equity interests in the subsidiary that owns Palisades and the Big Rock Point Site. In December 2020, Entergy Nuclear Generation Company, the owner of the Pilgrim plant. In August 2019and Holtec submitted a license transfer application to the NRC approvedrequesting approval to transfer the sale of the plantPalisades and Big Rock Point licenses from Entergy to Holtec. The NRC issued an order approving the application in December 2021. Palisades was shut down in May 2022 and defueled in June 2022. The Palisades transaction closed in August 2019June 2022 for a purchase price of $1,000 (subject to adjustmentsadjustment for net liabilities and other amounts). The sale included the transfer of the PilgrimPalisades nuclear decommissioning trust and the asset retirement obligation for spent fuel management and plant decommissioning. The transaction resulted in a lossgain of $190$166 million ($156130 million net-of-tax) in the thirdsecond quarter 2019.2022. The disposition-date fair value of the nuclear decommissioning trust fund was approximately $1,030$552 million, and the disposition-date fair value of the asset retirement obligation was $837approximately $708 million. The transaction also included property, plant, and equipment with a net book value of 0,zero and materials and supplies, and prepaid assets.supplies.

Willow Glen

In December 2018, Entergy Louisiana sold the Willow Glen Power Station, a non-operating gas plant. Entergy Louisiana sold Willow Glen for approximately $12 million in cash and the transfer of the obligation to decommission the plant. Entergy Louisiana recognized a regulatory liability of $5.7 million for return of removal costs previously collected in rates. Entergy Louisiana realized a pre-tax gain of $14.8 million on the sale. Entergy Louisiana recorded a $31.9 million regulatory liability to recognize the obligation to refund excess customer collections for decommissioning Willow Glen.

Vermont Yankee

In November 2016, Entergy entered into an agreement to sell 100% of the membership interests in Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC to a subsidiary of NorthStar. Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee was the owner of the Vermont Yankee plant. The sale of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee to NorthStar included the transfer of the nuclear decommissioning trust fund and the asset retirement obligation for the spent fuel management and decommissioning of the plant.

In March 2018, Entergy and NorthStar entered into a settlement agreement and a Memorandum of Understanding with State of Vermont agencies and other interested parties that set forth the terms on which the agencies and parties support the Vermont Public Utility Commission’s approval of the transaction. The agreements provide additional financial assurance for decommissioning, spent fuel management and site restoration, and detail the site restoration standards. In October 2018 the NRC issued an order approving the application to transfer Vermont Yankee’s license to NorthStar for decommissioning. In December 2018, the Vermont Public Utility Commission issued an order approving the transaction consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding’s terms. On January 11, 2019, Entergy and NorthStar closed the transaction.

Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee had an outstanding credit facility that was used to pay for dry fuel storage costs. This credit facility was guaranteed by Entergy Corporation. A subsidiary of Entergy assumed the
200

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

obligations under the credit facility, which remains outstanding. At the closing of the sale transaction, NorthStar caused Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, renamed NorthStar Vermont Yankee, to issue a $139 million promissory note to the Entergy subsidiary that assumed the credit facility obligations. The amount of the note included the balance outstanding on the credit facility, as well as borrowing fees and costs incurred by Entergy in connection with the credit facility.

With the receipt of the NRC and Vermont Public Utility Commission approvals and the resolution among the parties of the significant conditions of the sale, Entergy concluded that as of December 31, 2018 Vermont Yankee was in held for sale status. Entergy accordingly evaluated the Vermont Yankee asset retirement obligation in light of the terms of the sale transaction and evaluated the remaining values of the Vermont Yankee assets. These evaluations resulted in an increase in the asset retirement obligation and $173 million of asset impairment and related other charges in the fourth quarter 2018. See Note 9 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the asset retirement obligation. Upon closing of the transaction in January 2019, the Vermont Yankee decommissioning trust, along with the decommissioning obligation for the plant, was transferred to NorthStar. The assets and liabilities associated with the sale of Vermont Yankee were classified as held for sale on the Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2018. As of December 31, 2018, the value of the decommissioning trust was $532 million. As of December 31, 2018, the asset retirement cost asset was $127 million, classified within other deferred debits, and the asset retirement cost obligation was $568 million, classified within other non-current liabilities.

The Vermont Yankee spent fuel disposal contract was assigned to NorthStar as part of the transaction. The Vermont Yankee transaction resulted in Entergy generating a net deferred tax asset in January 2019.  The deferred tax asset could not be fully realized by Entergy in the first quarter of 2019; accordingly, Entergy accrued a net tax expense of $29 million on the disposition of Vermont Yankee. The transaction also resulted in other charges of $5.4 million ($4.2 million net-of-tax) in the first quarter 2019.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

2018, 2019, and 2020 Impairments

Entergy continues to execute its strategy to shut down and sell all of the remaining plants in Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant nuclear fleet, with planned shutdowns of Indian Point 3 by April 30, 2021 and Palisades by May 31, 2022. The Indian Point 2 plant permanently ceased operations on April 30, 2020. The other three Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ nuclear plants, FitzPatrick, Vermont Yankee, and Pilgrim, have been sold. The FitzPatrick plant was classified as held-for-sale at December 31, 2016, and subsequently sold to Exelon in March 2017. The Vermont Yankee plant was classified as held-for-sale at December 31, 2018, and subsequently sold to NorthStar on January 11, 2019. The Pilgrim plant was sold to Holtec International on August 26, 2019.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities incurred $19 million in 2020, $100 million in 2019, and $532 million in 2018 of impairment charges related to nuclear fuel spending, nuclear refueling outage spending, expenditures for capital assets, and asset retirement obligation revisions. These costs were charged to expense as incurred as a result of the impaired fair value of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants’ long-lived assets due to the significantly reduced remaining estimated operating lives associated with management’s strategy to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities merchant power business.

With respect to Palisades, Entergy and Consumers Energy had agreed to amend the existing PPA so that it would terminate early, on May 31, 2018. In September 2017, however, Entergy and Consumers Energy agreed to terminate the PPA amendment agreement. Entergy continues to operate Palisades under the current PPA with Consumers Energy, instead of shutting down in the fall of 2018 as previously planned. Entergy intends to shut down the Palisades plant permanently no later than May 31, 2022. As a result of the change in expected operating life of the Palisades plant, the expected probability-weighted undiscounted net cash flows as of September 30, 2017 exceeded the carrying value of the plant and related assets. Accordingly, nuclear fuel spending, nuclear refueling
201207

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




outage spending, and expenditures for capital assets incurred at Palisades after September 30, 2017 are no longer charged to expense as incurred, but recorded as assets and depreciated or amortized, subject to the typical periodic impairment reviews prescribed in the accounting rules.Indian Point Energy Center

The impairments and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy’s consolidated statements of operations and are included within the resultsIn April 2019, Entergy entered into an agreement to sell, directly or indirectly, 100% of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment. In addition to the impairments and other related charges, Entergy expects to incur additional charges through mid-2022 associated with these strategic transactions. See Note 13 to the financial statements for further discussion of these additional charges.

2018 Pilgrim Impairment

The Pilgrim plant ceased operations on May 31, 2019, at the end of its current fuel cycle. Entergy Nuclear Generation Company filed its Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) with the NRCequity interests in the fourth quarter 2018 for the Pilgrim plant. As part of the development of the PSDAR, Entergy obtained a revised decommissioning cost study in the third quarter 2018. The revised estimate resulted in a $117.5 million increase in the decommissioning cost liabilitysubsidiaries that own Indian Point 1, Indian Point 2, and a corresponding impairment charge in the third quarter 2018. As discussed above in Dispositions, on August 26, 2019, Entergy sold the Pilgrim plantIndian Point 3, after Indian Point 3 had been shut down and defueled, to a Holtec International subsidiary.

2018 Vermont Yankee Impairment

As discussed above In November 2020 the NRC approved the sale of the plants to Holtec. Indian Point 3 was shut down in Dispositions, on January 11, 2019, Entergy soldApril 2021 and defueled in May 2021. In May 2021 the Vermont YankeeNew York State Public Service Commission approved the sale of the plant to NorthStar. WithHoltec. The transaction closed in May 2021. The sale included the receipttransfer of the NRClicenses, spent fuel, decommissioning liabilities, and Vermont Public Utility Commission approvalsnuclear decommissioning trusts for the three units. The transaction resulted in a charge of $340 million ($268 million net-of-tax) in the second quarter of 2021. The disposition-date fair value of the nuclear decommissioning trust funds was approximately $2,387 million, and the resolution among the parties of the significant conditions of the sale, Entergy concluded that as of December 31, 2018 Vermont Yankee was in held-for- sale status. Entergy accordingly evaluated the Vermont Yankee asset retirement obligation in light of the terms of the sale transaction, and evaluated the remaining values of the Vermont Yankee assets. These evaluations resulted in $173 million of asset impairment and related charges in the fourth quarter 2018. See Note 9 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the revisiondisposition-date fair value of the asset retirement obligation.obligations was $1,996 million. The transaction also included materials and supplies and prepaid assets.


NOTE 15.  RISK MANAGEMENT AND FAIR VALUES (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Market Risk

In the normal course of business, Entergy is exposed to a number of market risks.  Market risk is the potential loss that Entergy may incur as a result of changes in the market or fair value of a particular commodity or instrument.  All financial and commodity-related instruments, including derivatives, are subject to market risk including commodity price risk, equity price, and interest rate risk.  Entergy uses derivatives primarily to mitigate commodity price risk, particularly power price and fuel price risk.

The Utility has limited exposure to the effects of market risk because it operates primarily under cost-based rate regulation.  To the extent approved by their retail regulators, the Utility operating companies use derivative instruments to hedge the exposure to price volatility inherent in their purchased power, fuel, and gas purchased for resale costs, that are recovered from customers.

AsEntergy’s non-utility operations’ core business as a wholesale generator Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ core business iswas selling energy, measured in MWh, to its customers.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities entersThe non-utility operations business entered into forward contracts with its customers and also sellssold energy and capacity in the day ahead or spot markets.  In addition to its forward physical power and gas contracts, Entergy Wholesale Commodities may also usethe non-utility operations business used a combination of financial contracts, including swaps, collars, and options, to mitigate commodity price risk.  When the market price falls,fell, the combination of instruments
202

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

isfinancial contracts was expected to settle in gains that offset lower revenue from generation, which resultsresulted in a more predictable cash flow. As a result of the completion of Entergy’s strategy to exit the merchant nuclear power business, which included the shut down and sale of all non-utility nuclear plants, the portfolio of derivative instruments held by Entergy’s non-utility operations business expired in April 2021, which was the settlement date for the last financial derivative contracts in the non-utility operations business’ portfolio.

Entergy’s exposure to market risk is determined by a number of factors, including the size, term, composition, and diversification of positions held, as well as market volatility and liquidity.  For instruments such as options, the time period during which the option may be exercised and the relationship between the current market price of the underlying instrument and the option’s contractual strike or exercise price also affects the level of market risk.  A significant factor influencing the overall level of market risk to which Entergy is exposed is its use of hedging techniques to mitigate such risk.  Hedging instruments and volumes are chosen based on ability to mitigate risk associated with future energy and capacity prices; however, other considerations are factored into hedge product and volume decisions including corporate liquidity, corporate credit ratings, counterparty credit risk, hedging costs, firm settlement risk, and product availability in the marketplace.  Entergy manages market risk by actively monitoring compliance with stated risk management policies as well as monitoring the effectiveness of its hedging policies and strategies.  Entergy’s risk management policies limit the amount of total net exposure and
208

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

rolling net exposure during the stated periods.  These policies, including related risk limits, are regularly assessed to ensure their appropriateness given Entergy’s objectives.

Derivatives

Some derivative instruments are classified as cash flow hedges due to their financial settlement provisions while others are classified as normal purchase/normal sale transactions due to their physical settlement provisions.  Normal purchase/normal sale risk management tools include power purchase and sales agreements, fuel purchase agreements, capacity contracts, and tolling agreements.  Financially-settled cash flow hedges can include natural gas and electricity swaps and options and interest rate swaps.options.  Entergy may enter into financially-settled swap and option contracts to manage market risk that may or may not be designated as hedging instruments.

Entergy entersentered into derivatives to manage natural risks inherent in its physical or financial assets or liabilities.  Electricity over-the-counter instruments and futures contracts that financially settlesettled against day-ahead power pool prices arewere used to manage price exposure for Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesthe non-utility operations’ generation.  The maximum length of time over which Entergy Wholesale Commodities is currently hedging the variability in future cash flows with derivatives for forecasted power transactions at December 31, 2020 is approximately 3 months.  Planned generation currently under contract from Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants is 98% for 2021, of which approximately 29% is sold under financial derivatives and the remainder under normal purchase/normal sale contracts.  Total planned generation for 2021 is 9.6 TWh. 

Entergy may use standardized master netting agreements to help mitigate the credit risk of derivative instruments. These master agreements facilitate the netting of cash flows associated with a single counterparty and may include collateral requirements. Cash, letters of credit, and parental/affiliate guarantees may be obtained as security from counterparties in order to mitigate credit risk. The collateral agreements require a counterparty to post cash or letters of credit in the event an exposure exceeds an established threshold. The threshold represents an unsecured credit limit, which may be supported by a parental/affiliate guarantee, as determined in accordance with Entergy’s credit policy. In addition, collateral agreements allow for termination and liquidation of all positions in the event of a failure or inability to post collateral.

Certain of the agreements to sell the power produced by Entergy Wholesale Commodities power plants contain provisions that require an Entergy subsidiary to provide credit support to secure its obligations depending on the mark-to-market values of the contracts. The primary form of credit support to satisfy these requirements is an Entergy Corporation guarantee.  As of December 31, 2020, there were no derivative contracts with counterparties in a liability position. In addition to the corporate guarantee, $5 million in cash collateral was required to be posted by the Entergy subsidiary to its counterparties and $39 million in letters of credit were required to be posted by its counterparties to the Entergy subsidiary. As of December 31, 2019, there were no derivative contracts with counterparties in a liability position. In addition to the corporate guarantee, $11 million in cash collateral was
203

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




required to be posted by the Entergy subsidiary to its counterparties and $1 million in cash collateral and $98 million in letters of credit were required to be posted by its counterparties to the Entergy subsidiary. If the Entergy Corporation credit rating falls below investment grade, Entergy would have to post collateral equal to the estimated outstanding liability under the contract at the applicable date.   

Entergy manages fuel price volatility for its Louisiana jurisdictions (Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans) and Entergy Mississippi through the purchase of natural gas swaps and options that financially settle against either the average Henry Hub Gas Daily prices or the NYMEX Henry Hub. These swaps and options are marked-to-market through fuel expense with offsetting regulatory assets or liabilities. All benefits or costs of the program are recorded in fuel costs. The notional volumes of these swaps are based on a portion of projected annual exposure to gas price volatility for electric generation at Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Mississippi and projected winter purchases for gas distribution at Entergy New Orleans. The maximum length of time over which Entergy hadhas executed natural gas swaps and options as of December 31, 20202023 is 3.25 years3 months for Entergy Louisiana, and the maximum length of time over which Entergy has executed natural gas swaps as of December 31, 2020 is 10 months for Entergy Mississippi, and 3 months for Entergy New Orleans. The total volume of natural gas swaps and options outstanding as of December 31, 20202023 is 38,799,00014,798,500 MMBtu for Entergy, including 23,720,0001,820,000 MMBtu for Entergy Louisiana, 14,573,00012,491,700 MMBtu for Entergy Mississippi, and 506,000486,800 MMBtu for Entergy New Orleans.  Credit support for these natural gas swaps and options is covered by master agreements that do not require Entergy to provide collateral based on mark-to-market value, but do carry adequate assurance language that may lead to requests for collateral.

During the second quarter 2020,2023, Entergy participated in the annual financial transmission rights auction process for the MISO planning year of June 1, 20202023 through May 31, 2021.2024. Financial transmission rights are derivative instruments that represent economic hedges of future congestion charges that will be incurred in serving Entergy’s customer load. They are not designated as hedging instruments. Entergy initially records financial transmission rights at their estimated fair value and subsequently adjusts the carrying value to their estimated fair value at the end of each accounting period prior to settlement. Unrealized gains or losses on financial transmission rights held by Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesthe non-utility operations are included in operating revenues. The Utility operating companies recognize regulatory liabilities or assets for unrealized gains or losses on financial transmission rights. The total volume of financial transmission rights outstanding as of December 31, 20202023 is 57,19662,809 GWh for Entergy, including 14,13815,385 GWh for Entergy Arkansas, 26,67926,990 GWh for Entergy Louisiana, 6,3628,250 GWh for Entergy Mississippi, 2,6182,478 GWh for Entergy New Orleans, and 7,2059,611 GWh for Entergy Texas. Credit support for financial transmission rights held by the Utility operating companies is covered by cash and/or letters of credit issued by each Utility operating company as required by MISO. Credit support for financial transmission rights held by Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesthe non-utility operations business is covered by cash. No cash or letters of credit were required to be posted for financial transmission rights exposure for Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesthe non-utility operations business as of December 31, 20202023 and December 31, 2019.2022. Letters of credit posted with MISO covered the financial transmission rights exposure for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Texas as of December 31, 2023 and for Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas as of December 31, 2020 and for Entergy Mississippi as of December 31, 2019.2022.

204209

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



The fair values of Entergy’s derivative instruments innot designated as hedging instruments on the consolidated balance sheetsheets as of December 31, 20202023 and 2022 are shown in the table below. Certain investments, including those not designated as hedging instruments, are subject to master netting agreements and are presented in the balance sheet on a net basis in accordance with accounting guidance for derivatives and hedging.
InstrumentInstrumentBalance Sheet LocationGross Fair Value (a)Offsetting Position (b)Net Fair Value (c) (d)BusinessInstrumentBalance Sheet LocationGross Fair Value (a)Offsetting Position (b)Net Fair Value (c) (d)
(In Millions)(In Millions)
2023
(In Millions)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments    
    
Assets:Assets:    
Electricity swaps and optionsPrepayments and other (current portion)$39($1)$38Entergy Wholesale Commodities
    
Assets:
Assets:
Financial transmission rights
Financial transmission rights
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$21$—$21
Liabilities:Liabilities:    
Electricity swaps and optionsOther current liabilities (current portion)$1($1)$0Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Liabilities:
Liabilities:
Natural gas swaps and options
Natural gas swaps and options
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther current liabilities$11 $— $11

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments    
     
Assets:    
Natural gas swaps and optionsPrepayments and other (current portion)$1$—$1Utility
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther deferred debits and other assets (non-current portion)$1$—$1Utility
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$9$—$9Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities
     
Liabilities:    
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther current liabilities (current portion)$6 $0 $6Utility
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther non-current liabilities (non-current portion)$1$0$1Utility

205

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The fair values of Entergy’s derivative instruments in the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2019 are shown in the table below. Certain investments, including those not designated as hedging instruments, are subject to master netting agreements and are presented in the balance sheet on a net basis in accordance with accounting guidance for derivatives and hedging.
InstrumentBalance Sheet LocationGross Fair Value (a)Offsetting Position (b)Net Fair Value (c) (d)Business
(In Millions)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
Assets:
Electricity swaps and optionsPrepayments and other (current portion)$92($1)$91Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Electricity swaps and optionsOther deferred debits and other assets (non-current portion)$17$0$17Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Liabilities:    
Electricity swaps and optionsOther current liabilities (current portion)$1($1)$0Entergy Wholesale Commodities

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments    
2022
Assets:Assets:    
Electricity swaps and optionsPrepayments and other (current portion)$11($1)$10Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Assets:
Assets:
Natural gas swaps and optionsNatural gas swaps and optionsOther deferred debits and other assets (non-current portion)$1$0$1Utility
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$10$0$10Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Liabilities:    
Electricity swaps and optionsOther current liabilities (current portion)$2($2)$0Entergy Wholesale Commodities
Natural gas swaps and options
Natural gas swaps and optionsNatural gas swaps and optionsOther current liabilities (current portion)$5$—$5UtilityPrepayments and other$13$—$13
Natural gas swaps and optionsNatural gas swaps and optionsOther non-current liabilities (non-current portion)$2$—$2UtilityNatural gas swaps and optionsOther deferred debits and other assets$3$—$3
Financial transmission rightsFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$21($2)$19
Liabilities:
Liabilities:
Liabilities:
Natural gas swaps and options
Natural gas swaps and options
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther current liabilities$25$—$25

(a)Represents the gross amounts of recognized assets/liabilities
(b)Represents the netting of fair value balances with the same counterparty
(c)Represents the net amounts of assets/liabilities presented on the Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries’ Consolidated Balance SheetSheets
(d)Excludes cash collateral in the amount of $5$8 million posted as of December 31, 2020 and $11 million posted and $1 million held as of December 31, 2019.2022. Also excludes letters of credit in the amount of $1$2 million posted and $39 million held as of December 31, 20202023 and $98$3 million heldposted as of December 31, 2019.2022.
206

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


The effects of Entergy’s derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges on the consolidated income statements for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 are as follows:
InstrumentAmount of gain (loss) recognized in other comprehensive incomeIncome Statement locationAmount of gain (loss) reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income into income (a)
 (In Millions) (In Millions)
2020   
Electricity swaps and options$77Competitive business operating revenues$148
    
2019   
Electricity swaps and options$232Competitive business operating revenues$97
    
2018   
Electricity swaps and options($40)Competitive business operating revenues($68)

(a)Before taxesAs discussed above, the non-utility operations business’ portfolio of $31 million, $20 million, and ($14) million,derivative instruments expired in April 2021, which was the settlement date for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, respectively

last financial derivative contract in the portfolio. Prior to the adoptionexpiration of ASU 2017-12, Entergy measured its hedges for ineffectiveness. Any ineffectiveness was recognized in earnings during the period. The ineffective portionnon-utility operations business’ portfolio of cash flow hedges was recorded in competitive businesses operating revenues. The change in fair value of Entergy’s cash flow hedges due to ineffectiveness was ($5.9) million for the year ended December 31, 2018.

Based on market prices as of December 31, 2020, unrealized gains recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income on cash flow hedges relating to power sales totaled $38 million of net unrealized losses.  Approximately $38 million is expected to be reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to operating revenues in the next twelve months.  The actual amount reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income, however, could vary due to future changes in market prices. 

derivative instruments, Entergy may have effectively liquidateliquidated a cash flow hedge instrument by entering into a contract offsetting the original hedge, and then de-designating the original hedge in this situation.  Gains or losses accumulated in other comprehensive income prior to de-designation continuewould have continued to be deferred in other comprehensive income until they arewere included in income as the original hedged transaction occurs.occurred. From the point of de-designation, the gains or losses on the original hedge and the offsetting contract arewere recorded as assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and offset as they flowflowed through to earnings. The non-utility operations business recognized a gain of $2 million in other comprehensive income and reclassified a gain of $40 million, before taxes of $8 million, from accumulated other comprehensive income into income, each resulting from the effect of Entergy’s derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges on the consolidated income statements for the year ended December 31, 2021.

207210

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The effects of Entergy’s derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments on the consolidated income statements for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 are as follows:
InstrumentIncome Statement locationAmount of gain (loss) recorded in the income statement
  (In Millions)
20202023  
Natural gas swaps and optionsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale(a)($12)54)
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense(b)$92124
Electricity swaps and options (c)Competitive business operating revenues$1
   
20192022  
Natural gas swaps and optionFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale(a)($13)
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense(b)$94
Electricity swaps and options (c)Competitive business operating revenues$12
2018
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale(a)$874
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense(b)$131176
2021
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale(a)$32
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense(b)$179
Electricity swaps and options (c)Competitive businessOther operating revenues$8($2)

(a)Due to regulatory treatment, the natural gas swaps and options are marked-to-market through fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale and then such amounts are simultaneously reversed and recorded as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability.  The gains or losses recorded as fuel expenses when the swaps and options are settled are recovered or refunded through fuel cost recovery mechanisms.
(b)Due to regulatory treatment, the changes in the estimated fair value of financial transmission rights for the Utility operating companies are recorded through purchased power expense and then such amounts are simultaneously reversed and recorded as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability.  The gains or losses recorded as purchased power expense when the financial transmission rights for the Utility operating companies are settled are recovered or refunded through fuel cost recovery mechanisms.
(c)There were no gains (losses) recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income from electricity swaps and options.


options prior to the expiration of the non-utility operations business’ portfolio of derivative instruments in April 2021.

208211

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



The fair values of the Registrant Subsidiaries’ derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments on theirthe Registrant Subsidiaries’ balance sheets as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are shown in the table below. Certain investments, including those not designated as hedging instruments, are subject to master netting agreements and are presented in the balance sheet on a net basis in accordance with accounting guidance for derivatives and hedging.
InstrumentBalance Sheet LocationGross Fair Value (a)Offsetting Position (b)Net Fair Value (c) (d)Registrant
  (In Millions) 
2020   
Assets:   
Natural gas swaps and optionsPrepayments and other$0.8$0$0.8Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther deferred debits and other assets$0.5$0$0.5Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$2.9($0.2)$2.7Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$4.3($0.1)$4.2Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$0.6$0$0.6Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$0.2($0.1)$0.1Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$1.6$0$1.6Entergy Texas
Liabilities:
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther current liabilities$0.3$0$0.3Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther non-current liabilities$1.3$0$1.3Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swapsOther current liabilities$5.0$0$5.0Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsOther current liabilities$0.3$0$0.3Entergy New Orleans


InstrumentBalance Sheet LocationGross Fair Value (a)Offsetting Position (b)Net Fair Value (c) (d)Registrant
  (In Millions) 
2023   
Assets:   
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$6.0$—$6.0Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$9.8$—$9.8Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$1.4$—$1.4Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$1.1$—$1.1Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$2.7($0.3)$2.4Entergy Texas
Liabilities:
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther current liabilities$0.4$—$0.4Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swapsOther current liabilities$10.1$—$10.1Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsOther current liabilities$0.6$—$0.6Entergy New Orleans
209212

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




InstrumentInstrumentBalance Sheet LocationGross Fair Value (a)Offsetting Position (b)Net Fair Value (c) (d)RegistrantInstrumentBalance Sheet LocationGross Fair Value (a)Offsetting Position (b)Net Fair Value (c) (d)Registrant
2019  
(In Millions)
2022
2022
2022
Assets:Assets:   
Assets:
Assets:   
Natural gas swaps and optionsNatural gas swaps and optionsPrepayments and other$13.1$—$13.1Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swaps and optionsNatural gas swaps and optionsOther deferred debits and other assets$0.8$0$0.8Entergy LouisianaNatural gas swaps and optionsOther deferred debits and other assets$3.4$—$3.4Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rights
Financial transmission rights
Financial transmission rightsFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$3.4($0.1)$3.3Entergy ArkansasPrepayments and other$10.3$—$10.3Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$4.5$0$4.5Entergy LouisianaFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$7.7($0.4)$7.3Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$0.8$0$0.8Entergy MississippiFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$0.6$—$0.6Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$0.3$0$0.3Entergy New OrleansFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$0.8$—$0.8Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$1.0($0.1)$0.9Entergy TexasFinancial transmission rightsPrepayments and other$1.2($1.1)$0.1Entergy Texas
Liabilities:Liabilities:
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther current liabilities$2.4$0$2.4Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swaps and optionsOther non-current liabilities$2.2$0$2.2Entergy Louisiana
Liabilities:
Liabilities:
Natural gas swaps
Natural gas swaps
Natural gas swapsNatural gas swapsOther current liabilities$2.3$0$2.3Entergy MississippiOther current liabilities$24.0$—$24.0Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsNatural gas swapsOther current liabilities$0.2$0$0.2Entergy New OrleansNatural gas swapsOther current liabilities$1.5$—$1.5Entergy New Orleans

(a)Represents the gross amounts of recognized assets/liabilities
(b)Represents the netting of fair value balances with the same counterparty
(c)Represents the net amounts of assets/liabilities presented on the Registrant Subsidiaries’ balance sheets
(d)As of December 31, 2020,2023, letters of credit posted with MISO covered financial transmission rights exposure of $1.2 million for Entergy Arkansas, $0.5 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.3 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.2 million for Entergy Mississippi, $0.2 million for Entergy New Orleans, and $0.5$0.1 million for Entergy Texas. As of December 31, 2019,2022, letters of credit posted with MISO covered financial transmission rights exposure of $0.2 million for Entergy Mississippi.
210

Table of Contents
Mississippi, $0.2 million for Entergy CorporationNew Orleans, and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements$2.4 million for Entergy Texas.

The effects of the Registrant Subsidiaries’ derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments on their income statements for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 are as follows:
InstrumentIncome Statement LocationAmount of gain (loss) recorded in the income statementRegistrant
(In Millions)
2020
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($11.1)(a)Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($0.8)(a)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$26.7(b)Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$19.6(b)Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$3.0(b)Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$1.4(b)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$40.4(b)Entergy Texas
2019
Natural gas swaps and optionsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($5.3)(a)Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($7.7)(a)Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$22.3(b)Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$46.7(b)Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$6.8(b)Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$2.7(b)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$15.7(b)Entergy Texas
2018
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale$4.4(a)Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale$3.2(a)Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale$0.2(a)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$25.3(b)Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$72.7(b)Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$26.3(b)Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power$13.8(b)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power($6.0)(b)Entergy Texas
211213

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



The effects of derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments on the Registrant Subsidiaries’ income statements for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021 are as follows:
InstrumentIncome Statement LocationAmount of gain (loss) recorded in the income statementRegistrant
(In Millions)
2023
Natural gas swaps and optionsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($8.4)(a)Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($42.9)(a)Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($3.0)(a)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$25.8(b)Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$60.4(b)Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$13.7(b)Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$6.4(b)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$17.3(b)Entergy Texas
2022
Natural gas swaps and optionsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale$21.4(a)Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale$53.6(a)Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($1.2)(a)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$106.5(b)Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$48.5(b)Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$10.4(b)Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$3.7(b)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$6.3(b)Entergy Texas
2021
Natural gas swaps and optionsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale$12.6(a)Entergy Louisiana
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale$19.8(a)Entergy Mississippi
Natural gas swapsFuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale($0.1)(a)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$42.6(b)Entergy Arkansas
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$31.6(b)Entergy Louisiana
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$11.3(b)Entergy Mississippi
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$4.3(b)Entergy New Orleans
Financial transmission rightsPurchased power expense$85.9(b)Entergy Texas

(a)Due to regulatory treatment, the natural gas swaps and options are marked-to-market through fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale and then such amounts are simultaneously reversed and
214

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

recorded as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability.  The gains or losses recorded as fuel expenses when the swaps and options are settled are recovered or refunded through fuel cost recovery mechanisms.

(b)Due to regulatory treatment, the changes in the estimated fair value of financial transmission rights for the Utility operating companies are recorded through purchased power expense and then such amounts are simultaneously reversed and recorded as an offsetting regulatory asset or liability.  The gains or losses recorded as purchased power expense when the financial transmission rights for the Utility operating companies are settled are recovered or refunded through fuel cost recovery mechanisms.

Fair Values

The estimated fair values of Entergy’s financial instruments and derivatives are determined using historical prices, bid prices, market quotes, and financial modeling.  Considerable judgment is required in developing the estimates of fair value.  Therefore, estimates are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that Entergy could realize in a current market exchange.  Gains or losses realized on financial instruments other than those instruments held by the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business are reflected in future rates and therefore do not affect net income. Entergy considers the carrying amounts of most financial instruments classified as current assets and liabilities to be a reasonable estimate of their fair value because of the short maturity of these instruments.

Accounting standards define fair value as an exit price, or the price that would be received to sell an asset or the amount that would be paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between knowledgeable market participants at the date of measurement.  Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries use assumptions or market input data that market participants would use in pricing assets or liabilities at fair value.  The inputs can be readily observable, corroborated by market data, or generally unobservable.  Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries endeavor to use the best available information to determine fair value.

Accounting standards establish a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value.  The hierarchy establishes the highest priority for unadjusted market quotes in an active market for the identical asset or liability and the lowest priority for unobservable inputs.

The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are:

Level 1 - Level 1 inputs are unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the entity has the ability to access at the measurement date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis.  Level 1 primarily consists of individually owned common stocks, cash equivalents (temporary cash investments, securitization recovery trust account, and escrow accounts), debt instruments, and gas swaps traded on exchanges with active markets.  Cash equivalents includes all unrestricted highly liquid debt instruments with an original or remaining maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase.

Level 2 - Level 2 inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are, either directly or indirectly, observable for the asset or liability at the measurement date.  Assets are valued based on prices derived by independent third parties that use inputs such as benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, and issuer spreads.  Prices are reviewed and can be challenged with the independent parties and/or overridden by Entergy if it is believed such would be more reflective of fair value.  Level 2 inputs include the following:

quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets;
quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in inactive markets;
212

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability; or
inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.
215

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Level 2 consists primarily of individually-owned debt instruments and gas swaps and options valued using observable inputs.

Level 3 - Level 3 inputs are pricing inputs that are generally less observable or unobservable from objective sources.  These inputs are used with internally developed methodologies to produce management’s best estimate of fair value for the asset or liability.  Level 3 consists primarily of financial transmission rightsrights.

As a result of the completion of Entergy’s strategy to exit the merchant nuclear power business, which included the shut down and sale of all non-utility nuclear plants, the portfolio of derivative powerinstruments held by Entergy’s non-utility operations business expired in April 2021, which was the settlement date for the last financial derivative contracts used as cash flow hedges of power sales at merchant power plants.in the non-utility operations business’ portfolio.

The values for power contract assets or liabilities areprior to expiration in April 2021 were based on both observable inputs including public market prices and interest rates, and unobservable inputs such as implied volatilities, unit contingent discounts, expected basis differences, and credit adjusted counterparty interest rates.  They arewere classified as Level 3 assets and liabilities.  The valuations of these assets and liabilities arewere performed by the Office of Corporate Risk Oversight and the Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesnon-utility operations Accounting group.  The primary related functions of the Office of Corporate Risk Oversight include:included: gathering, validating, and reporting market data, providing market risk analyses and valuations in support of Entergy Wholesale Commodities’the non-utility operations commercial transactions, developing and administering protocols for the management of market risks, and implementing and maintaining controls around changes to market data in the energy trading and risk management system.  The Office of Corporate Risk Oversight iswas also responsible for managing the energy trading and risk management system, forecasting revenues, forward positions, and analysis. The Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesnon-utility operations Accounting group performsperformed functions related to market and counterparty settlements, revenue reporting and analysis, and financial accounting. The Office of Corporate Risk Oversight reports to the Vice President and Treasurer while the Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesnon-utility operations Accounting group reports to the Chief Accounting Officer.

The amounts reflected as the fair value of electricity swaps arewere based on the estimated amount that the contracts arewere in-the-money at the balance sheet date (treated as an asset) or out-of-the-money at the balance sheet date (treated as a liability) and would equalequaled the estimated amount receivable to or payable by Entergy if the contracts were settled at that date.  These derivative contracts includeincluded cash flow hedges that swapswapped fixed for floating cash flows for sales of the output from the Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesnon-utility operations business.  The fair values arewere based on the mark-to-market comparison between the fixed contract prices and the floating prices determined each period from quoted forward power market prices.  The differences between the fixed price in the swap contract and these market-related prices multiplied by the volume specified in the contract and discounted at the counterparties’ credit adjusted risk free rate arewere recorded as derivative contract assets or liabilities.  For contracts that havehad unit contingent terms, a further discount iswas applied based on the historical relationship between contract and market prices for similar contract terms.

The amounts reflected as the fair values of electricity options arewere valued based on a Black Scholes model and arewere calculated at the end of each month for accounting purposes.  Inputs to the valuation includeincluded end of day forward market prices for the period when the transactions will settle,settled, implied volatilities based on market volatilities provided by a third-party data aggregator, and U.S. Treasury rates for a risk-free return rate.  As described further below, prices and implied volatilities arewere reviewed and cancould be adjusted if it iswas determined that there iswas a better representation of fair value.

On a daily basis, the Office of Corporate Risk Oversight calculatescalculated the mark-to-market for electricity swaps and options.  The Office of Corporate Risk Oversight also validatesvalidated forward market prices by comparing them to other sources of forward market prices or to settlement prices of actual market transactions.  Significant differences arewere analyzed and potentially adjusted based on these other sources of forward market prices or settlement prices of actual market transactions.  Implied volatilities used to value options arewere also validated using actual counterparty quotes for Entergy Wholesale Commodities transactions when available and compared with other sources of market
213216

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




quotes for transactions by the non-utility operations business when available and compared with other sources of market implied volatilities.  Moreover, on a quarterly basis, the Office of Corporate Risk Oversight confirmsconfirmed the mark-to-market calculations and preparesprepared price scenarios and credit downgrade scenario analysis.  The scenario analysis iswas communicated to senior management within Entergy and within Entergy Wholesale Commodities.Entergy.  Finally, for all proposed derivative transactions, an analysis iswas completed to assess the risk of adding the proposed derivative to Entergy Wholesale Commodities’the non-utility operations business’ portfolio.  In particular, the credit and liquidity effects arewere calculated for this analysis.  This analysis iswas communicated to senior management within Entergy and Entergy Wholesale Commodities.Entergy.

The values of financial transmission rights are based on unobservable inputs, including estimates of congestion costs in MISO between applicable generation and load pricing nodes based on the 50th percentile of historical prices.  They are classified as Level 3 assets and liabilities.  The valuations of these assets and liabilities are performed by the Office of Corporate Risk Oversight.  The values are calculated internally and verified against the data published by MISO. Entergy’s Entergy Wholesale Commodities Accounting group reviewreviews these valuations for reasonableness, with the assistance of others within the organization with knowledge of the various inputs and assumptions used in the valuation. The Office of Corporate Risk Oversight reports to the Vice President and Treasurer.  The Entergy Wholesale Commodities Accounting group reports to the Chief Accounting Officer.

The following tables set forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, Entergy’s assets and liabilities that are accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 20202023 and December 31, 2019.2022.  The assessment of the significance of a particular input to a fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

2020Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$1,630 $0 $0 $1,630 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities1,533 1,533 
Debt securities (b)919 1,698 2,617 
Common trusts (c)3,103 
Power contracts38 38 
Securitization recovery trust account42 42 
Escrow accounts148 148 
Gas hedge contracts
Financial transmission rights
$4,273 $1,699 $47 $9,122 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$6 $1 $0 $7 



2023Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$61 $— $— $61 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities24 — — 24 
Debt securities611 1,159 — 1,770 
Common trusts (b)3,070 
Securitization recovery trust account— — 
Storm reserve escrow accounts323 — — 323 
Financial transmission rights— — 21 21 
$1,027 $1,159 $21 $5,277 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$11 $— $— $11 

214217

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements


2019Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$391 $0 $0 $391 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities905 905 
Debt securities1,139 1,824 2,963 
Common trusts (c)2,536 
Power contracts118 118 
Securitization recovery trust account47 47 
Escrow accounts459 459 
Gas hedge contracts
Financial transmission rights10 10 
$2,941 $1,825 $128 $7,430 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$5 $2 $0 $7 

2022Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$109 $— $— $109 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities24 — — 24 
Debt securities534 1,122 — 1,656 
Common trusts (b)2,442 
Securitization recovery trust account13 — — 13 
Storm reserve escrow accounts402 — — 402 
Gas hedge contracts13 — 16 
Financial transmission rights— — 19 19 
$1,095 $1,125 $19 $4,681 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$25 $— $— $25 

(a)The decommissioning trust funds hold equity and fixed income securities. Equity securities are invested to approximate the returns of major market indices.  Fixed income securities are held in various governmental and corporate securities.  See Note 16 to the financial statements herein for additional information on the investment portfolios.
(b)The decommissioning trust funds fair value presented herein does not include the recognition of a credit loss valuation allowance of $0.1 million on debt securities due to the adoption of ASU 2016-13. See Note 16 to the financial statements herein for additional information on the allowance for expected credit losses.
(c)Common trust funds are not publicly quoted and are valued by the fund administrators using net asset value as a practical expedient. Accordingly, these funds are not assigned a level in the fair value table. The fund administrator of these investments allows daily trading at the net asset value and trades settle at a later date.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the net assets (liabilities) for the fair value of derivatives classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018:
 202020192018
Power ContractsFinancial transmission rightsPower ContractsFinancial transmission rightsPower ContractsFinancial transmission rights
 (In Millions)
Balance as of January 1,$118 $10 ($31)$15 ($65)$21 
Total gains (losses) for the period (a)
Included in earnings12 (1)
Included in other comprehensive income77 232 (40)
Included as a regulatory liability/asset67 54 80 
Issuances of financial transmission rights23 35 46 
Settlements(158)(92)(95)(94)72 (131)
Balance as of December 31,$38 $9 $118 $10 ($31)$15 

215

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




(a)    Change in unrealized gains or losses for the period included in earnings for derivatives held at the end of the reporting period is ($0.3) million, ($9.2) million, and ($3.5) million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, respectively.

The following table sets forth a description of the types of transactions classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy and significant unobservable inputs to each which cause that classification, as of December 31, 2020:
Transaction TypeFair Value as of December 31, 2020Significant Unobservable InputsRange from Average %Effect on Fair Value
 (In Millions)  (In Millions)
Power contracts - electricity swaps$38Unit contingent discount4.75%$4

The values of financial transmission rights are based on unobservable inputs calculated internally and verified against historical pricing data published by MISO.

The following table sets forth an analysis of each of the types of unobservable inputs impacting the fair value of items classified as Level 3 within the fair value hierarchy, and the sensitivity to changes to those inputs:
Significant Unobservable InputTransaction TypePositionChange to InputEffect on Fair Value
Unit contingent discountElectricity swapsSellIncrease (Decrease)Decrease (Increase)

The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, the Registrant Subsidiaries’ assets and liabilities that are accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.  The assessment of the significance of a particular input to a fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect its placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

216

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy Arkansas
2020Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$168.0 $0 $0 $168.0 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities1.3 1.3 
Debt securities98.2 349.7 447.9 
Common trusts (b)824.7 
Financial transmission rights2.7 2.7 
$267.5 $349.7 $2.7 $1,444.6 

2019Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities$0.6 $0 $0 $0.6 
Debt securities108.7 304.1 412.8 
Common trusts (b)687.9 
Securitization recovery trust account4.0 4.0 
Financial transmission rights3.3 3.3 
$113.3 $304.1 $3.3 $1,108.6 

Entergy Louisiana
2020Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$726.7 $0 $0 $726.7 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities8.7 8.7 
Debt securities172.4 459.8 632.2 
Common trusts (b)1,153.1 
Securitization recovery trust account2.7 2.7 
Gas hedge contracts0.8 0.5 1.3 
Financial transmission rights4.2 4.2 
$911.3 $460.3 $4.2 $2,528.9 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$0.3 $1.3 $0 $1.6 
217

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements





2019Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$1.5 $0 $0 $1.5 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities4.3 4.3 
Debt securities180.8 420.7 601.5 
Common trusts (b)958.0 
Escrow accounts295.9 295.9 
Securitization recovery trust account3.7 3.7 
Gas hedge contracts0.8 0.8 
Financial transmission rights4.5 4.5 
$486.2 $421.5 $4.5 $1,870.2 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$2.4 $2.2 $0 $4.6 

Entergy Mississippi
2020Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Escrow accounts$64.6 $0 $0 $64.6 
Financial transmission rights0.6 0.6 
$64.6 $0 $0.6 $65.2 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$5.0 $0 $0 $5.0 

2019Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$51.6 $0 $0 $51.6 
Escrow accounts80.2 80.2 
Financial transmission rights0.8 0.8 
$131.8 $0 $0.8 $132.6 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$2.3 $0 $0 $2.3 

218

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy New Orleans
2020Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Securitization recovery trust account$3.4 $0 $0 $3.4 
Escrow accounts83.0 83.0 
Financial transmission rights0.1 0.1 
$86.4 $0 $0.1 $86.5 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$0.3 $0 $0 $0.3 

2019Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$6.0 $0 $0 $6.0 
Securitization recovery trust account2.0 2.0 
Escrow accounts82.6 82.6 
Financial transmission rights0.3 0.3 
$90.6 $0 $0.3 $90.9 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$0.2 $0 $0 $0.2 

Entergy Texas
2020Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$248.6 $0 $0 $248.6 
Securitization recovery trust account36.2 36.2 
Financial transmission rights1.6 1.6 
$284.8 $0 $1.6 $286.4 

2019Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$12.9 $0 $0 $12.9 
Securitization recovery trust account37.7 37.7 
Financial transmission rights0.9 0.9 
$50.6 $0 $0.9 $51.5 

219

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




System Energy
2020Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$216.4 $0 $0 $216.4 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities3.8 3.8 
Debt securities177.3 250.4 427.7 
Common trusts (b)784.4 
$397.5 $250.4 $0 $1,432.3 

2019Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$68.4 $0 $0 $68.4 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities13.3 13.3 
Debt securities176.3 209.9 386.2 
Common trusts (b)654.6 
$258.0 $209.9 $0 $1,122.5 

(a)The decommissioning trust funds hold equity and fixed income securities. Equity securities are invested to approximate the returns of major market indices.  Fixed income securities are held in various governmental and corporate securities.  See Note 16 to the financial statements herein for additional information on the investment portfolios.
(b)Common trust funds are not publicly quoted and are valued by the fund administrators using net asset value as a practical expedient. Accordingly, these funds are not assigned a level in the fair value table. The fund administrator of these investments allows daily trading at the net asset value and trades settle at a later date.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the net assets for the fair value of derivatives classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy for the yearyears ended December 31, 2020.2023, 2022, and 2021:
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of January 1, 2020$3.3 $4.5 $0.8 $0.3 $0.9 
Issuances of financial transmission rights6.5 13.2 1.4 (0.1)2.4 
Gains (losses) included as a regulatory liability/asset19.6 6.1 1.4 1.3 38.7 
Settlements(26.7)(19.6)(3.0)(1.4)(40.4)
Balance as of December 31, 2020$2.7 $4.2 $0.6 $0.1 $1.6 
 202320222021
Financial transmission rightsFinancial transmission rightsPower ContractsFinancial transmission rights
 
Balance as of January 1,$19 $4 $38 $9 
Total gains (losses) for the period
Included in earnings— — (2)— 
Included in other comprehensive income— — — 
Included as a regulatory liability/asset84 175 — 162 
Issuances of financial transmission rights42 16 — 12 
Settlements(124)(176)(38)(179)
Balance as of December 31,$21 $19 $— $4 

The fair values of the Level 3 financial transmission rights are based on unobservable inputs calculated internally and verified against historical pricing data published by MISO.

218

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The following table sets forth an analysis of each of the types of unobservable inputs impacting the fair value of items classified as Level 3 within the fair value hierarchy, and the sensitivity to changes to those inputs:
Significant Unobservable InputTransaction TypePositionChange to InputEffect on Fair Value
Unit contingent discountElectricity swapsSellIncrease (Decrease)Decrease (Increase)

The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, the Registrant Subsidiaries’ assets and liabilities that are accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022.  The assessment of the significance of a particular input to a fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

Entergy Arkansas
2023Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$3.1 $— $— $3.1 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities6.4 — — 6.4 
Debt securities129.9 367.0 — 496.9 
Common trusts (b)910.7 
Financial transmission rights— — 6.0 6.0 
$139.4 $367.0 $6.0 $1,423.1 

2022Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$3.4 $— $— $3.4 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities4.5 — — 4.5 
Debt securities126.8 343.9 — 470.7 
Common trusts (b)724.7 
Financial transmission rights— — 10.3 10.3 
$134.7 $343.9 $10.3 $1,213.6 

219

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Entergy Louisiana
2023Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$0.5 $— $— $0.5 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities14.6 — — 14.6 
Debt securities271.7 516.4 — 788.1 
Common trusts (b)1,304.7 
Storm reserve escrow account243.8 — — 243.8 
Financial transmission rights— — 9.8 9.8 
$530.6 $516.4 $9.8 $2,361.5 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$0.4 $— $— $0.4 

2022Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$6.3 $— $— $6.3 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities16.8 — — 16.8 
Debt securities209.4 515.7 — 725.1 
Common trusts (b)1,037.2 
Storm reserve escrow account293.4 — — 293.4 
Gas hedge contracts13.1 3.4 — 16.5 
Financial transmission rights— — 7.3 7.3 
$539.0 $519.1 $7.3 $2,102.6 

Entergy Mississippi
2023Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$6.6 $— $— $6.6 
Storm reserve escrow account0.7 — — 0.7 
Financial transmission rights— — 1.4 1.4 
$7.3 $— $1.4 $8.7 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$10.1 $— $— $10.1 

220

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

2022Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$17.0 $— $— $17.0 
Storm reserve escrow account33.5 — — 33.5 
Financial transmission rights— — 0.6 0.6 
$50.5 $— $0.6 $51.1 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$24.0 $— $— $24.0 

Entergy New Orleans
2023Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Securitization recovery trust account$2.4 $— $— $2.4 
Storm reserve escrow account78.7 — — 78.7 
Financial transmission rights— — 1.1 1.1 
$81.1 $— $1.1 $82.2 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$0.6 $— $— $0.6 

2022Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$4.4 $— $— $4.4 
Securitization recovery trust account2.2 — — 2.2 
Storm reserve escrow account75.0 — — 75.0 
Financial transmission rights— — 0.8 0.8 
$81.6 $— $0.8 $82.4 
Liabilities:
Gas hedge contracts$1.5 $— $— $1.5 

Entergy Texas
2023Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$20.5 $— $— $20.5 
Securitization recovery trust account5.2 — — 5.2 
Financial transmission rights— — 2.4 2.4 
$25.7 $— $2.4 $28.1 

221

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



2022Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$3.0 $— $— $3.0 
Securitization recovery trust account10.9 — — 10.9 
Financial transmission rights— — 0.1 0.1 
$13.9 $— $0.1 $14.0 

System Energy
2023Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities$2.7 $— $— $2.7 
Debt securities209.5 275.7 — 485.2 
Common trusts (b)854.4 
$212.2 $275.7 $— $1,342.3 

2022Level 1Level 2Level 3Total
(In Millions)
Assets:
Temporary cash investments$2.9 $— $— $2.9 
Decommissioning trust funds (a):
Equity securities2.8 — — 2.8 
Debt securities197.5 262.2 — 459.7 
Common trusts (b)680.4 
$203.2 $262.2 $— $1,145.8 

(a)The decommissioning trust funds hold equity and fixed income securities. Equity securities are invested to approximate the returns of major market indices.  Fixed income securities are held in various governmental and corporate securities.  See Note 16 to the financial statements for additional information on the investment portfolios.
(b)Common trust funds are not publicly quoted and are valued by the fund administrators using net asset value as a practical expedient. Accordingly, these funds are not assigned a level in the fair value table. The fund administrator of these investments allows daily trading at the net asset value and trades settle at a later date.

222

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the net assets (liabilities) for the fair value of derivatives classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy for the year ended December 31, 2019.2023.
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas (In Millions)
(In Millions)
Balance as of January 1, 2019$3.4 $8.3 $2.2 $1.3 ($0.5)
Balance as of January 1, 2023
Issuances of financial transmission rightsIssuances of financial transmission rights9.6 18.7 3.9 2.7 0.1 
Gains (losses) included as a regulatory liability/assetGains (losses) included as a regulatory liability/asset12.6 24.2 1.5 (1.0)17.0 
SettlementsSettlements(22.3)(46.7)(6.8)(2.7)(15.7)
Balance as of December 31, 2019$3.3 $4.5 $0.8 $0.3 $0.9 
Balance as of December 31, 2023

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the net assets for the fair value of derivatives classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy for the year ended December 31, 2022.
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of January 1, 2022$2.3 $0.6 $0.3 $0.1 $0.8 
Issuances of financial transmission rights5.4 5.3 0.8 0.8 3.9 
Gains (losses) included as a regulatory liability/asset109.1 49.9 9.9 3.6 1.7 
Settlements(106.5)(48.5)(10.4)(3.7)(6.3)
Balance as of December 31, 2022$10.3 $7.3 $0.6 $0.8 $0.1 


NOTE 16.  DECOMMISSIONING TRUST FUNDS (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy)

The NRC requires Entergy subsidiariescertain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy to maintain nuclear decommissioning trusts to fund the costs of decommissioning ANO 1, ANO 2, River Bend, Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, Indian Point 1, Indian Point 2, Indian Point 3, and Palisades.Gulf. Entergy’s nuclear decommissioning trust funds invest in equity securities, fixed-rate debt securities, and cash and cash equivalents.

Entergy records decommissioning trust funds on the balance sheet at their fair value. Because of the ability of the Registrant Subsidiaries to recover decommissioning costs in rates and in accordance with the regulatory treatment for decommissioning trust funds, the Registrant Subsidiaries have recorded an offsetting amount offor unrealized gains/(losses) on investment securities, the Registrant Subsidiaries record an offsetting amount in other regulatory liabilities/assets.  For the 30% interest in River Bend formerly owned by Cajun, Entergy Louisiana records an offsetting amount in other deferred credits for the unrealized trust earnings not currently expected to be needed to decommission the plant. Decommissioning trust funds for the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants dopreviously owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations, all of which have been sold as of June 2022, did not meet the criteria for regulatory accounting treatment.  Accordingly, unrealized gains/(losses) recorded on the equity securities in the trust funds arefor these plants were recognized in earnings.earnings with no offsetting regulatory liability/asset amount. Unrealized gainsgains/(losses) recorded on the available-for-sale debt securities in the trust funds arewere recognized in the accumulated other comprehensive income component of shareholders’ equity.  Unrealized losses (where cost exceeds fair market value) on the available-for-sale debt securities in the trust funds are also recorded in the accumulated other comprehensive income component of shareholders’ equity unless the unrealized loss is other than temporary and therefore recorded in earnings. A portion of Entergy’s decommissioning trust funds were held in a wholly-owned registered investment company, and unrealized gains and losses on both the equity and debt securities held in the registered investment company were recognized in earnings. In December 2020, Entergy liquidated its interest in the registered investment company. Generally, Entergy records gains and losses on its debt and equity securities using the specific identification method to determine the cost basis of its securities.
223

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




As discussed in Note 14 to the financial statements, in June 2022, Entergy completed the sale of Palisades to Holtec. As part of the transaction, Entergy transferred the Palisades decommissioning trust fund to Holtec. The disposition-date fair value of the decommissioning trust fund was approximately $552 million.

The unrealized gains/(losses) recognized during the year ended December 31, 20202023 on equity securities still held as of December 31, 20202023 were $531$591 million. The equity securities are generally held in funds that are designed to approximate or somewhat exceed the return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index. A relatively small percentage of the equity securities are held in funds intended to replicate the return of the Wilshire 4500 indexIndex or the Russell 3000 Index. The debt securities are generally held in individual government and credit issuances.

221

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The available-for-sale securities held as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are summarized as follows:
 Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses
 (In Millions)
2020
Debt Securities (a)$2,617 $197 $3 
2019
Debt Securities (a)$2,456 $96 $6 
 Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses
 (In Millions)
2023
Debt Securities$1,770 $19 $134 
2022
Debt Securities$1,655 $4 $201 

(a)    Debt securities presented herein do not include the $507 million of debt securities held in the wholly-owned registered investment company asAs of December 31, 2019, which are not accounted for as available-for-sale.

The2023 and 2022, there were no deferred taxes on unrealized gains/(losses) above are reported before deferred taxes of $31 million as of December 31, 2020 and $13 million as of December 31, 2019 for debt securities.. The amortized cost of available-for-sale debt securities was $2,423$1,885 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $2,366$1,852 million as of December 31, 2019.2022.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, available-for-sale debt securities havehad an average coupon rate of approximately 3.01%3.48%, an average duration of approximately 7.366.36 years, and an average maturity of approximately 10.7210.82 years.

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities havehad been in a continuous loss position, arewere as follows as of December 31, 2020:2023 and 2022:
Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
 (In Millions)
Less than 12 months$187 $3 
More than 12 months
Total$189 $3 

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities have been in a continuous loss position, are as follows as of December 31, 2019:
Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
December 31, 2023December 31, 2023December 31, 2022
Fair ValueFair ValueGross Unrealized LossesFair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Less than 12 monthsLess than 12 months$404 $5 
More than 12 monthsMore than 12 months38 
TotalTotal$442 $6 

222224

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The fair value of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by contractual maturities, as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are as follows:
20202019 20232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Less than 1 yearLess than 1 year($4)$128 
1 year - 5 years1 year - 5 years672 807 
5 years - 10 years5 years - 10 years852 666 
10 years - 15 years10 years - 15 years377 125 
15 years - 20 years15 years - 20 years144 126 
20 years+20 years+576 604 
TotalTotal$2,617 $2,456 

During the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, proceeds from the dispositions of available-for-sale securities amounted to $1,024$661 million, $1,427$889 million, and $2,406$1,465 million, respectively.  During the year ended December 31, 2023, there were gross gains of $1 million and gross losses of $37 million related to available-for-sale securities reclassified out of other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings. During the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2022 and 2018,2021, there were gross gains of $47 million, $25$2 million and $7$29 million, respectively, and gross losses of $4 million, $4$46 million and $47$17 million, respectively, related to available-for-sale securities were reclassified out of other comprehensive income or other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings.

The fair values of the decommissioning trust funds related to the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants as of December 31, 2020 are $631 million for Indian Point 1, $794 million for Indian Point 2, $991 million for Indian Point 3, and $554 million for Palisades. The fair values of the decommissioning trust funds related to the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants as of December 31, 2019 are $556 million for Indian Point 1, $701 million for Indian Point 2, $930 million for Indian Point 3, and $498 million for Palisades. The fair values of the decommissioning trust funds for the Registrant Subsidiaries’ nuclear plants are detailed below.

Entergy Arkansas

Entergy Arkansas holds equity securities and available-for-sale debt securities in nuclear decommissioning trust accounts.  The available-for-sale securities held as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are summarized as follows:
Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses
(In Millions) (In Millions)
2020
2023
Debt Securities
Debt Securities
Debt SecuritiesDebt Securities$447.9 $27.7 $0.3 
2019
2022
2022
2022
Debt SecuritiesDebt Securities$412.8 $9.9 $2.6 
Debt Securities
Debt Securities

The amortized cost of available-for-sale debt securities was $420.4$548.1 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $405.4$539.8 million as of December 31, 2019.2022.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, the available-for-sale debt securities havehad an average coupon rate of approximately 2.57%2.66%, an average duration of approximately 6.976.02 years, and an average maturity of approximately 8.247.64 years.

The unrealized gains/(losses) recognized during the year ended December 31, 20202023 on equity securities still held as of December 31, 20202023 were $116.8$175 million. The equity securities are generally held in funds that are designed to approximate the return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index.  A relatively small percentage of the equity securities are held in funds intended to replicate the return of the Wilshire 4500 Index.

223225

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities havehad been in a continuous loss position, arewere as follows as of December 31, 2020:2023 and 2022:
 Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
 (In Millions)
Less than 12 months$29.9 $0.3 
More than 12 months
Total$29.9 $0.3 

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities have been in a continuous loss position, are as follows as of December 31, 2019:
Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
(In Millions)
December 31, 2023December 31, 2023December 31, 2022
Fair ValueFair ValueGross Unrealized LossesFair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Less than 12 monthsLess than 12 months$104.8 $2.5 
More than 12 monthsMore than 12 months7.7 0.1 
TotalTotal$112.5 $2.6 

The fair value of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by contractual maturities, as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are as follows:
20202019 20232022
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Less than 1 yearLess than 1 year$0 $44.1 
1 year - 5 years1 year - 5 years113.1 109.1 
5 years - 10 years5 years - 10 years189.8 156.0 
10 years - 15 years10 years - 15 years81.4 31.3 
15 years - 20 years15 years - 20 years28.5 23.8 
20 years+20 years+35.1 48.5 
TotalTotal$447.9 $412.8 

During the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, proceeds from the dispositions of available-for-sale securities amounted to $94.5$28.5 million, $110.6$42.1 million, and $82.1$57.6 million, respectively.  During the yearsyear ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018,2023, there were gross gains of $8.8 million, $2.9 million, and $0.1 million respectively, and gross losses of $0.2$2 million $0.1 million, and $2.9 million, respectively, related to available-for-sale securities were reclassified out of other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings. During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, there were gross gains of $0.1 million and $2.5 million, respectively, and gross losses of $2.6 million and $0.6 million, respectively, related to available-for-sale securities reclassified out of other comprehensive income or other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings.

224

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Entergy Louisiana

Entergy Louisiana holds equity securities and available-for-sale debt securities in nuclear decommissioning trust accounts.  The available-for-sale securities held as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are summarized as follows:
Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses
(In Millions) (In Millions)
2020
2023
Debt Securities
Debt Securities
Debt SecuritiesDebt Securities$632.2 $51.3 $0.5 
2019
2022
2022
2022
Debt SecuritiesDebt Securities$601.5 $29.3 $0.8 
Debt Securities
Debt Securities

The amortized cost of available-for-sale debt securities was $581.4$813.9 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $573$789.1 million as of December 31, 2019.2022.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, the available-for-sale debt securities havehad an
226

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

average coupon rate of approximately 3.64%3.91%, an average duration of approximately 7.256.53 years, and an average maturity of approximately 12.7313.16 years.

The unrealized gains/(losses) recognized during the year ended December 31, 20202023 on equity securities still held as of December 31, 20202023 were $163.6$251.3 million. The equity securities are generally held in funds that are designed to approximate the return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index.  A relatively small percentage of the equity securities are held in funds intended to replicate the return of the Wilshire 4500 Index.

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities havehad been in a continuous loss position, arewere as follows as of December 31, 2020:2023 and 2022:
Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
(In Millions)
December 31, 2023December 31, 2023December 31, 2022
Fair ValueFair ValueGross Unrealized LossesFair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
(In Millions)(In Millions)
Less than 12 monthsLess than 12 months$36.4 $0.5 
More than 12 monthsMore than 12 months0.8 
TotalTotal$37.2 $0.5 

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities have been in a continuous loss position, are as followscontractual maturities, as of December 31, 2019:2023 and 2022 are as follows:
 Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
 (In Millions)
Less than 12 months$71.2 $0.8 
More than 12 months7.9 
Total$79.1 $0.8 
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Less than 1 year$31.4 $33.6 
1 year - 5 years181.6 159.1 
5 years - 10 years170.0 161.7 
10 years - 15 years70.2 67.1 
15 years - 20 years90.2 83.3 
20 years+244.7 220.3 
Total$788.1 $725.1 

During the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021, proceeds from the dispositions of available-for-sale securities amounted to $318.6 million, $362.2 million, and $303.4 million, respectively.  During the year ended December 31, 2023, there were gross gains of $0.5 million and gross losses of $20.9 million related to available-for-sale securities reclassified out of other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings. During the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021, there were gross gains of $1.3 million and $6.8 million, respectively, and gross losses of $23 million and $4.1 million, respectively, related to available-for-sale securities reclassified out of other comprehensive income or other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings.

225227

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The fair value of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by contractual maturities, as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 are as follows:
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Less than 1 year$0 $40.7 
1 year - 5 years117.0 142.0 
5 years - 10 years159.4 132.4 
10 years - 15 years101.2 39.8 
15 years - 20 years66.9 49.2 
20 years+187.7 197.4 
Total$632.2 $601.5 

During the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, proceeds from the dispositions of available-for-sale securities amounted to $159.7 million, $186 million, and $401.7 million, respectively.  During the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, gross gains of $8.1 million, $4.8 million, and $2.1 million, respectively, and gross losses of $0.7 million, $0.3 million, and $7.5 million, respectively, related to available-for-sale securities were reclassified out of other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings.

System Energy

System Energy holds equity securities and available-for-sale debt securities in nuclear decommissioning trust accounts.  The available-for-sale securities held as of December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 are summarized as follows:
Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses Fair ValueTotal Unrealized GainsTotal Unrealized Losses
(In Millions) (In Millions)
2020
2023
Debt Securities
Debt Securities
Debt SecuritiesDebt Securities$427.7 $30.0 $0.8 
2019
2022
2022
2022
Debt SecuritiesDebt Securities$386.2 $15.1 $0.3 
Debt Securities
Debt Securities

The amortized cost of available-for-sale debt securities was $398.4$523.2 million as of December 31, 20202023 and $371.4$522.7 million as of December 31, 2019.2022.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, the available-for-sale debt securities havehad an average coupon rate of approximately 2.74%3.63%, an average duration of approximately 7.546.44 years, and an average maturity of approximately 11.0910.27 years.

The unrealized gains/(losses) recognized during the year ended December 31, 20202023 on equity securities still held as of December 31, 20202023 were $111.1$164.2 million. The equity securities are generally held in funds that are designed to approximate the return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index.  A relatively small percentage of the equity securities are held in funds intended to replicate the return of the Wilshire 4500 Index.

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities had been in a continuous loss position, were as follows as of December 31, 2023 and 2022:
December 31, 2023December 31, 2022
Fair ValueGross Unrealized LossesFair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
(In Millions)
Less than 12 months$42.1 $4.5 $231.9 $19.2 
More than 12 months239.1 38.0 198.0 44.5 
Total$281.2 $42.5 $429.9 $63.7 

The fair value of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by contractual maturities, as of December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
 20232022
 (In Millions)
Less than 1 year$5.3 $6.8 
1 year - 5 years203.4 201.7 
5 years - 10 years128.6 107.1 
10 years - 15 years10.7 11.7 
15 years - 20 years38.8 35.0 
20 years+98.4 97.4 
Total$485.2 $459.7 

226
228

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities have been in a continuous loss position, are as follows as of December 31, 2020:
 Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
 (In Millions)
Less than 12 months$28.9 $0.8 
More than 12 months
Total$28.9 $0.8 

The fair value and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by length of time that the securities have been in a continuous loss position, are as follows as of December 31, 2019:
 Fair ValueGross Unrealized Losses
 (In Millions)
Less than 12 months$56.9 $0.3 
More than 12 months0.3 
Total$57.2 $0.3 

The fair value of available-for-sale debt securities, summarized by contractual maturities, as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 are as follows:
 20202019
 (In Millions)
Less than 1 year($1.1)$8.5 
1 year - 5 years134.7 154.6 
5 years - 10 years141.5 92.3 
10 years - 15 years31.5 13.4 
15 years - 20 years5.3 14.4 
20 years+115.8 103.0 
Total$427.7 $386.2 

During the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018,2021, proceeds from the dispositions of available-for-sale securities amounted to $252.2$314.3 million, $338.1$209.4 million, and $361.9$513.8 million, respectively.   During the yearsyear ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018,2023, there were gross gains of $11.5$0.6 million $5.4 million, and $0.5 million, respectively, and gross losses of $0.6$14.2 million $0.7 million, and $6.1 million, respectively, related to available-for-sale securities were reclassified out of other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings.

Allowance for expected credit losses

Entergy implemented ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, effective January 1, 2020. In accordance with the new standard, Entergy estimates the expected credit losses for its available for sale securities based on the current credit rating and remaining life of the securities.  To the extent an individual security is determined to be uncollectible it is written off against this allowance.  Entergy’s available-for-sale securities are held in trusts managed by third parties who operate in accordance with agreements that define investment guidelines and place restrictions on the purchases and sales of investments.  Specifically, available-for-sale securities are subject to credit worthiness restrictions, with requirements for both the average credit rating of the portfolio and minimum credit ratings for individual debt
227

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




securities.  As of December 31, 2020, Entergy’s allowance for expected credit losses related to available-for-sale securities was $0.1 million. Entergy did not record any impairments of available-for-sale debt securities for the year ended December 31, 2020.

Other-than-temporary impairments and unrealized gains and losses

Prior to the implementation of ASU 2016-13 on January 1, 2020, Entergy evaluated the available-for-sale debt securities in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear decommissioning trust funds with unrealized losses at the end of each period to determine whether an other-than-temporary impairment had occurred.  The assessment of whether an investment in a debt security suffered an other-than-temporary impairment was based on whether Entergy had the intent to sell or more likely than not would have been required to sell the debt security before recovery of its amortized costs.  Further, if Entergy did not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the debt security, an other-than-temporary impairment was considered to have occurred and it was measured by the present value of cash flows expected to be collected less the amortized cost basis (credit loss).  Entergy did not have any material other-than-temporary impairments relating to credit losses on debt securities for During the years ended December 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021, there were gross gains of $0.2 million and $9.3 million, respectively, and gross losses of $10.7 million and $4 million, respectively, related to available-for-sale securities reclassified out of other comprehensive income or other regulatory liabilities/assets into earnings.


NOTE 17.  VARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Under applicable authoritative accounting guidance, a variable interest entity (VIE) is an entity that conducts a business or holds property that possesses any of the following characteristics: an insufficient amount of equity at risk to finance its activities, equity owners who do not have the power to direct the significant activities of the entity (or have voting rights that are disproportionate to their ownership interest), or where equity holders do not receive expected losses or returns. An entity may have an interest in a VIE through ownership or other contractual rights or obligations, and is required to consolidate a VIE if it is the VIE’s primary beneficiary. The primary beneficiary of a VIE is the entity that has the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly affect the VIE’s economic performance and has the obligation to absorb losses or has the right to residual returns that would potentially be significant to the entity.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy consolidate the respective companies from which they lease nuclear fuel, usually in a sale and leaseback transaction. This is because Entergy directs the nuclear fuel companies with respect to nuclear fuel purchases, assists the nuclear fuel companies in obtaining financing, and, if financing cannot be arranged, the lessee (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, or System Energy) is responsiblerequired to repurchase nuclear fuelpay advance rent (Entergy Arkansas VIE, Entergy Louisiana Waterford VIE, and System Energy VIE) or special payments (Entergy Louisiana River Bend VIE) to allow the nuclear fuel company (the VIE) to meet its obligations. During the term of the arrangements, none of the Entergy operating companies have been required to provide financial support apart from their scheduled lease payments. See Note 4 to the financial statements for details of the nuclear fuel companies’ credit facility and commercial paper borrowings and long-term debt that are reported by Entergy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy. These amounts also represent Entergy’s and the respective Registrant Subsidiary’s maximum exposure to losses associated with their respective interests in the nuclear fuel companies.

Entergy Gulf States ReconstructionTexas Restoration Funding, I, LLC and Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II, LLC, companies wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Texas, are variable interest entitiesVIEs and Entergy Texas is the primary beneficiary. In June 2007, Entergy Gulf States Reconstruction Funding issued senior secured transition bonds (securitization bonds) to finance Entergy Texas’s Hurricane Rita reconstruction costs. In November 2009, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding issued senior secured transition bonds (securitization bonds) to finance Entergy Texas’s Hurricane Ike and Hurricane Gustav restoration costs. Although the principal amount was not due until November 2023, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding made principal payments on the bonds in 2022, after which the bonds were fully repaid. In April 2022, Entergy Texas Restoration Funding II issued senior secured system restoration bonds (securitization bonds) to finance Entergy Texas’s Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri restoration costs. With the proceeds, the variable interest entitiesVIEs purchased from Entergy Texas the transition property, which is the right to recover from customers through a transitionsystem restoration charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. The transition property is reflected as a regulatory asset on the consolidated Entergy Texas balance sheet. The creditors of Entergy Texas do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of the variable interest entities,VIEs, including the transition property, and the creditors
228

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

of the variable interest entitiesVIEs do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Texas. Entergy Texas has no payment obligations to the variable interest entitiesVIEs except to remit transitionsystem restoration charge collections. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional details regarding the securitization bonds.

Entergy Arkansas Restoration Funding, LLC, a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Arkansas, is a variable interest entity and Entergy Arkansas is the primary beneficiary. In August 2010, Entergy Arkansas Restoration Funding issued storm cost recovery bonds to finance Entergy Arkansas’s January 2009 ice storm damage restoration costs. With the proceeds, Entergy Arkansas Restoration Funding purchased from Entergy Arkansas the storm recovery property, which is the right to recover from customers through a storm recovery charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds.  The storm recovery property is reflected as a regulatory asset on the consolidated Entergy Arkansas balance sheet as of December 31, 2019. Although the principal amount was not due until August 2021, Entergy Arkansas Restoration Funding made principal payments on the bonds in 2020, after which the bonds were fully repaid. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional details regarding the storm cost recovery bonds.

Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding I, L.L.C., a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy Louisiana, is a variable interest entityVIE and Entergy Louisiana is the primary beneficiary. In September 2011, Entergy
229

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding issued investment recovery bonds to recover Entergy Louisiana’s investment recovery costs associated with the canceled Little Gypsy repowering project.  With the proceeds, Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding purchased from Entergy Louisiana the investment recovery property, which is the right to recover from customers through an investment recovery charge amounts sufficient to service the bonds. The investment recovery property is reflected as a regulatory asset onAlthough the consolidated Entergy Louisiana balance sheet.  The creditors of Entergy Louisiana doprincipal amount was not have recourse to the assets or revenues ofdue until September 2023, Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding includingmade principal payments on the investment recovery property, andbonds in 2021, after which the creditors of Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana has no payment obligations to Entergy Louisiana Investment Recovery Funding except to remit investment recovery charge collections.bonds were fully repaid. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional details regarding the investment recovery bonds.

Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding I, L.L.C., a company wholly-owned and consolidated by Entergy New Orleans, is a variable interest entity,VIE and Entergy New Orleans is the primary beneficiary. In July 2015, Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding issued storm cost recovery bonds to recover Entergy New Orleans’s Hurricane Isaac storm restoration costs, including carrying costs, the costs of funding and replenishing the storm recovery reserve, and up-front financing costs associated with the securitization. With the proceeds, Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding purchased from Entergy New Orleans the storm recovery property, which is the right to recover from customers through a storm recovery charge amounts sufficient to service the securitization bonds. The storm recovery property is reflected as a regulatory asset on the consolidated Entergy New Orleans balance sheet. The creditors of Entergy New Orleans do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding, including the storm recovery property, and the creditors of Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of Entergy New Orleans. Entergy New Orleans has no payment obligations to Entergy New Orleans Storm Recovery Funding except to remit storm recovery charge collections. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional details regarding the securitization bonds.

Restoration Law Trust I (the storm trust I), a trust consolidated by Entergy Louisiana, is a VIE and Entergy Louisiana is the primary beneficiary. The storm trust I was established as part of the Act 293 securitization of Entergy Louisiana’s Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, and Winter Storm Uri restoration costs, as well as to establish a storm reserve to fund a portion of Hurricane Ida storm restoration costs. Entergy Louisiana is the primary beneficiary of the storm trust I because it was created to facilitate the financing of Entergy Louisiana’s storm restoration costs and Entergy Louisiana is entitled to receive a majority of the proceeds received by the storm trust I. As of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the primary asset held by the storm trust I was $3 billion and $3.2 billion, respectively, of outstanding Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests, which is reflected as an investment in affiliate preferred membership interests on the consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Louisiana. The storm trust I’s investment in affiliate preferred membership interests was purchased with the net bond proceeds of the securitization bonds issued by the LCDA. After the securitization bonds were issued, the LCDA loaned the net bond proceeds to the LURC, and pursuant to Act 293, the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to the storm trust I. The holders of the securitization bonds do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of the trust or to any Entergy affiliate and the bonds are not reflected in the consolidated balance sheets of Entergy or Entergy Louisiana. The LURC’s 1% beneficial interest in the storm trust I is presented as noncontrolling interest on the consolidated balance sheets of Entergy and Entergy Louisiana, with balances of $30.5 million and $31.7 million as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the securitization bonds and the preferred membership interests.

Restoration Law Trust II (the storm trust II), a trust consolidated by Entergy Louisiana, is a VIE and Entergy Louisiana is the primary beneficiary. The storm trust II was established as part of the March 2023 Act 293 securitization of Entergy Louisiana’s Hurricane Ida restoration costs, less Hurricane Ida amounts previously financed in May 2022 in a prior securitization transaction. Entergy Louisiana is the primary beneficiary of the storm trust II because it was created to facilitate the financing of Entergy Louisiana’s storm restoration costs and Entergy Louisiana is entitled to receive a majority of the proceeds received by the storm trust II. As of December 31, 2023, the primary asset held by the storm trust II is the $1.5 billion of outstanding Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests, which is reflected as an investment in affiliate preferred membership interests on the consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Louisiana. The storm trust II’s investment in affiliate preferred membership interests was purchased with the net bond proceeds of the securitization bonds issued by the LCDA. After the securitization bonds were issued, the LCDA loaned the net bond proceeds to the LURC, and pursuant to
230

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Act 293, the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to the storm trust II. The holders of the securitization bonds do not have recourse to the assets or revenues of the storm trust II or to any Entergy affiliate and the bonds are not reflected in the consolidated balance sheets of Entergy or Entergy Louisiana. The LURC’s 1% beneficial interest in the storm trust II is presented as noncontrolling interest on the consolidated balance sheets of Entergy and Entergy Louisiana, with a balance of $14.6 million as of December 31, 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements herein for additional discussion of the securitization bonds and the preferred membership interests.

System Energy is considered to hold a variable interest in the lessor from which it leases an undivided interest in the Grand Gulf nuclear plant.  System Energy is the lessee under this arrangement, which is described in more detail in Note 5 to the financial statements. System Energy made payments on its lease,under this arrangement, including interest, of $17.2 million in 2020,2023, $17.2 million in 2019,2022, and $17.2 million in 2018.2021.  The lessor is a bank acting in the capacity of owner trustee for the benefit of equity investors in the transaction pursuant to trust agreement entered solely for the purpose of facilitating the lease transaction.  It is possible that System Energy may be considered as the primary beneficiary of the lessor, but it is unable to apply the authoritative accounting guidance with respect to this VIE because the lessor is not required to, and could not, provide the necessary financial information to consolidate the
229

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




lessor.  Because System Energy accounts for this leasing arrangement as a capital financing, however, System Energy believes that consolidating the lessor would not materially affect the financial statements.  In the unlikely event of default under a lease, remedies available to the lessor include payment by the lessee of the fair value of the undivided interest in the plant, payment of the present value of the basic rent payments, or payment of a predetermined casualty value.  System Energy believes, however, that the obligations recorded on the balance sheet materially represent its potential exposure to loss.

AR Searcy Partnership, LLC, is a tax equity partnership that qualifies as a VIE, which Entergy Arkansas is required to consolidate as it is the primary beneficiary. See Note 14 to the financial statements for additional discussion on the establishment of AR Searcy Partnership, LLC and the acquisition of the Searcy Solar facility. The entity is a VIE because the holders of the membership interests, as a group, lack the characteristics of a controlling financial interest, including substantive kick out rights. Entergy Arkansas is the primary beneficiary of the partnership because, as the managing member, it has the right to direct the operations and receive a majority of the operating income of the partnership. See Note 1 to the financial statements for discussion of the presentation of the third party tax equity partner’s noncontrolling interest and the HLBV method of accounting used to account for Entergy Arkansas’s investment in AR Searcy Partnership, LLC. As of December 31, 2023, AR Searcy Partnership, LLC recorded assets equal to $134 million, primarily consisting of property, plant, and equipment, and the carrying value of Entergy Arkansas’s ownership interest in the partnership was approximately $111.2 million. As of December 31, 2022, AR Searcy Partnership, LLC recorded assets equal to $138.3 million, primarily consisting of property, plant, and equipment, and the carrying value of Entergy Arkansas’s ownership interest in the partnership was approximately $109 million. The tax equity investor’s ownership interest is recorded as noncontrolling interest.

MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC, is a tax equity partnership that qualifies as a VIE, which Entergy Mississippi is required to consolidate as it is the primary beneficiary. See Note 14 to the financial statements for additional discussion on the establishment of MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC and the acquisition of the Sunflower Solar facility. The entity is a VIE because the holders of the membership interests, as a group, lack the characteristics of a controlling financial interest, including substantive kick out rights. Entergy Mississippi is the primary beneficiary of the partnership because, as the managing member, it has the right to direct the operations and receive a majority of the operating income of the partnership. See Note 1 to the financial statements for discussion of the presentation of the third party tax equity partner’s noncontrolling interest and the HLBV method of accounting used to account for Entergy Mississippi’s investment in MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC. As of December 31, 2023, MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC recorded assets equal to $163.2 million, primarily consisting of property, plant, and equipment, and the carrying value of Entergy Mississippi’s ownership interest in the partnership was approximately $128.4 million. As of December 31, 2022, MS Sunflower Partnership, LLC recorded assets equal to $154.5 million, primarily consisting of property, plant, and equipment, and the carrying value of Entergy Mississippi’s ownership interest in the partnership was approximately $117.2 million. The tax equity investor’s ownership interest is recorded as noncontrolling interest.
231

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Entergy has also reviewed various lease arrangements, power purchase agreements, including agreements for renewable power, and other agreements that represent variable interests in other legal entities which have been determined to be variable interest entities.VIEs.  In these cases, Entergy has determined that it is not the primary beneficiary of the related VIE because it does not have the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly affect the VIE’s economic performance, or it does not have the obligation to absorb losses or the right to residual returns that would potentially be significant to the entity, or both.


NOTE 18.  TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATES (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Each Registrant Subsidiary purchases electricity from or sells electricity to the other Registrant Subsidiaries, or both, under rate schedules filed with the FERC.  The Registrant Subsidiaries receive management, technical, advisory, operating, and administrative services from Entergy Services; and receive management, technical, and operating services from Entergy Operations.  These transactions are on an “at cost” basis.

As described in Note 1 to the financial statements, all of System Energy’s operating revenues consist of billings to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.

As described in Note 4 to the financial statements, the Registrant Subsidiaries participate in Entergy’sthe Entergy system money pool and earn interest income from the money pool.  As described in Note 2 to the financial statements, Entergy Louisiana receivesreceived preferred membership interest distributions from Entergy Holdings Company.Company through May 2022, at which point Entergy Holdings Company was dissolved. As a result of storm securitizations at Entergy Louisiana in 2022 and 2023, the Entergy Louisiana storm trust I purchased preferred membership interests issued by Entergy Finance Company in May 2022 and the Entergy Louisiana storm trust II purchased preferred membership interests issued by Entergy Finance Company in March 2023. The Entergy Louisiana storm trust I and storm trust II receive annual dividends on their respective preferred membership interests.

The tables below contain the various affiliate transactions of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and other Entergy affiliates.

Intercompany Revenues
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
2020$105.2 $280.5 $1.2 $0 $40.4 $520.7 
2019$117.5 $277.8 $1.4 $0 $51.6 $584.1 
2018$104.3 $299.0 $2.5 $0 $58.8 $456.7 
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
2023$125.2 $317.6 $1.0 $— $0.7 $588.4 
2022$127.5 $354.0 $1.0 $— $18.9 $658.8 
2021$109.8 $289.9 $1.4 $— $64.3 $545.6 

Intercompany Operating Expenses
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
2020$515.5 $661.5 $283.3 $266.0 $260.3 $177.4 
2019$534.0 $665.4 $306.7 $292.1 $255.0 $156.2 
2018$471.9 $627.8 $266.8 $256.4 $240.2 $176.5 
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
2023$585.8 $719.8 $345.2 $302.5 $316.8 $179.0 
2022$617.4 $770.2 $356.1 $341.7 $321.4 $215.0 
2021$559.7 $755.2 $299.8 $287.8 $275.0 $190.8 

230232

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Intercompany Interest and Investment Income
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
2020$0 $127.7 $0.1 $0 $0 $0.2 
2019$0.4 $128.5 $0.4 $0 $0.4 $1.0 
2018$0.4 $128.2 $0 $0 $0.2 $1.2 

Transactions with Equity Method Investees

EWO Marketing, LLC, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy, paid capacity charges and gas transportation to RS Cogen in the amounts of $26 million in 2020, $24.5 million in 2019, and $24 million in 2018.

Entergy’s operating transactions with its other equity method investees were not significant in 2020, 2019, or 2018.
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Millions)
2023$0.7 $303.2 $0.2 $1.0 $1.8 $0.6 
2022$0.1 $186.1 $0.1 $0.1 $0.3 $0.3 
2021$— $127.6 $— $— $— $— 


NOTE 19.  REVENUE (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Revenues from electric service and the sale of natural gas are recognized when services are transferred to the customer in an amount equal to what Entergy has the right to bill the customer because this amount represents the value of services provided to customers. Entergy’s total revenues for the years ended December 31, 20202023, 2022 and 20192021 are as follows:
20202019
(In Thousands)
2023
2023
2023
(In Thousands)
(In Thousands)
(In Thousands)
Utility:
Utility:
Utility:Utility:
ResidentialResidential$3,550,317 $3,531,500 
Residential
Residential
Commercial
Commercial
CommercialCommercial2,292,740 2,475,586 
IndustrialIndustrial2,331,170 2,541,287 
Industrial
Industrial
GovernmentalGovernmental212,131 228,470 
Governmental
Governmental
Total billed retail
Total billed retail
Total billed retailTotal billed retail8,386,358 8,776,843 
Sales for resale (a)Sales for resale (a)295,810 285,722 
Sales for resale (a)
Sales for resale (a)
Other electric revenues (b)
Other electric revenues (b)
Other electric revenues (b)Other electric revenues (b)348,102 343,143 
Revenues from contracts with customersRevenues from contracts with customers9,030,270 9,405,708 
Other revenues (c)16,373 24,270 
Total electric revenues9,046,643 9,429,978 
Revenues from contracts with customers
Revenues from contracts with customers
Other Utility revenues (c)
Other Utility revenues (c)
Other Utility revenues (c)
Electric revenues
Electric revenues
Electric revenues
Natural gas124,008 153,954 
Natural gas revenues
Entergy Wholesale Commodities:
Competitive businesses sales from contracts with customers (a)771,360 1,164,552 
Other revenues (c)171,625 130,189 
Total competitive businesses revenues942,985 1,294,741 
Natural gas revenues
Natural gas revenues
Other revenues (d)
Other revenues (d)
Other revenues (d)
Total operating revenuesTotal operating revenues$10,113,636 $10,878,673 
Total operating revenues
Total operating revenues

231233

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




The Registrant Subsidiaries’Utility operating companies’ total revenues for the year ended December 31, 20202023 were as follows:
2020Entergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
(In Thousands)
20232023Entergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
ResidentialResidential$841,162 $1,270,187 $523,379 $243,502 $672,087 
CommercialCommercial466,273 886,548 395,875 179,406 364,638 
IndustrialIndustrial461,907 1,314,234 145,100 24,248 385,681 
GovernmentalGovernmental18,011 68,901 41,955 59,819 23,445 
Total billed retailTotal billed retail1,787,353 3,539,870 1,106,309 506,975 1,445,851 
Sales for resale (a)Sales for resale (a)173,115 333,594 77,530 33,213 100,273 
Other electric revenues (b)Other electric revenues (b)109,642 141,004 54,590 8,294 39,981 
Revenues from contracts with customersRevenues from contracts with customers2,070,110 4,014,468 1,238,429 548,482 1,586,105 
Other revenues (c)Other revenues (c)14,384 4,595 9,425 12,150 1,020 
Total electric revenues2,084,494 4,019,063 1,247,854 560,632 1,587,125 
Natural gas50,799 73,209 
Electric revenues
Natural gas revenues
Total operating revenuesTotal operating revenues$2,084,494 $4,069,862 $1,247,854 $633,841 $1,587,125 

The Registrant Subsidiaries’Utility operating companies’ total revenues for the year ended December 31, 20192022 were as follows:
2019Entergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
(In Thousands)
20222022Entergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
ResidentialResidential$795,269 $1,270,478 $562,219 $245,081 $658,453 
CommercialCommercial538,850 947,412 444,173 202,138 343,013 
IndustrialIndustrial520,958 1,450,966 164,491 31,824 373,048 
GovernmentalGovernmental20,795 71,046 44,300 70,865 21,464 
Total billed retailTotal billed retail1,875,872 3,739,902 1,215,183 549,908 1,395,978 
Sales for resale (a)Sales for resale (a)257,864 333,395 39,295 38,626 59,074 
Other electric revenues (b)Other electric revenues (b)112,618 135,783 58,269 9,842 32,424 
Revenues from contracts with customersRevenues from contracts with customers2,246,354 4,209,080 1,312,747 598,376 1,487,476 
Other revenues (c)Other revenues (c)13,240 13,947 10,296 (3,959)1,479 
Total electric revenues2,259,594 4,223,027 1,323,043 594,417 1,488,955 
Natural gas62,148 91,806 
Electric revenues
Natural gas revenues
Total operating revenuesTotal operating revenues$2,259,594 $4,285,175 $1,323,043 $686,223 $1,488,955 

234

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The Utility operating companies’ total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2021 were as follows:
2021Entergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
(In Thousands)
Residential$882,773 $1,484,612 $578,258 $269,891 $766,312 
Commercial480,401 1,055,825 439,950 208,104 425,927 
Industrial496,661 1,771,311 150,698 30,751 492,949 
Governmental19,112 82,503 46,248 71,584 26,238 
Total billed retail1,878,947 4,394,251 1,215,154 580,330 1,711,426 
Sales for resale (a)311,791 391,424 124,632 88,349 145,719 
Other electric revenues (b)130,443 148,304 58,357 1,813 41,805 
Revenues from contracts with customers2,321,181 4,933,979 1,398,143 670,492 1,898,950 
Other revenues (c)17,409 60,480 8,203 1,739 3,561 
Electric revenues2,338,590 4,994,459 1,406,346 672,231 1,902,511 
Natural gas revenues— 73,989 — 96,621 — 
Total operating revenues$2,338,590 $5,068,448 $1,406,346 $768,852 $1,902,511 

(a)Sales for resale and competitive businesses sales includeincludes day-ahead sales of energy in a market administered by an ISO. These sales represent financially binding commitments for the sale of physical energy the next day. These sales are adjusted to actual power generated and delivered in the real time market. Given the short duration of these transactions, Entergy does not consider them to be derivatives subject to fair value adjustments and includes them as part of customer revenues.
(b)Other electric revenues consist primarily of transmission and ancillary services provided to participants of an ISO-administered market, unbilled revenue, and unbilled revenue.certain customer credits as directed by regulators.
232

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

(c)Other Utility revenues include the equity component of carrying costs related to securitization, settlement of financial hedges, occasional sales of inventory, alternative revenue programs, provisions for revenue subject to refund, and late fees.
(d)Other revenues include the sale of electric power and capacity to wholesale customers, day-ahead sales of energy in a market administered by an ISO, operation and management services fees, and amortization of a below-market power purchase agreement.

Electric Revenues

Entergy’s primary source of revenue is from retail electric sales sold under tariff rates approved by regulators in its various jurisdictions. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas generate, transmit, and distribute electric power primarily to retail customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Entergy’s Utility operating companies provide power to customers on demand throughout the month, measured by a meter located at the customer’s property. Approved rates vary by customer class due to differing requirements of the customers and market factors involved in fulfilling those requirements. Entergy issues monthly bills to customers at rates approved by regulators for power and related services provided during the previous billing cycle.

To the extent that deliveries have occurred, but a bill has not been issued, Entergy’s Utility operating companies record an estimate for energy delivered since the latest billings. The Utility operating companies calculate the estimate based upon several factors including billings through the last billing cycle in a month, actual generation in the month, historical line loss factors, and market prices of power in the respective jurisdiction. The inputs are revised as needed to approximate actual usage and cost. Each month, estimated unbilled amounts are recorded as unbilled revenue and accounts receivable, and the prior month’s estimate is reversed. Price and volume
235

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



differences resulting from factors such as weather affect the calculation of unbilled revenues from one period to the other.

Entergy may record revenue based on rates that are subject to refund. Such revenues are reduced by estimated refund amounts when Entergy believes refunds are probable based on the status of rate proceedings as of the date financial statements are prepared. Because these refunds will be made through a reduction in future rates, and not as a reduction in bills previously issued, they are presented as other revenues in the table above.

System Energy’s only source of revenue is the sale of electric power and capacity generated from its 90% interest in the Grand Gulf nuclear plant to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans. System Energy issues monthly bills to its affiliated customers equal to its actual operating costs plus a return on common equity approved by the FERC.

Entergy’s Utility operating companies also sell excess power not needed for itstheir own customers, primarily through transactions with MISO, a regional transmission organization that maintains functional control over the combined transmission systems of its members and manages one of the largest energy markets in the U.S. In the MISO market, Entergy offers its generation and bids its load into the market. MISO settles these offers and bids based on locational marginal prices. These represent pricing for energy at a given location based on a market clearing price that takes into account physical limitations on the transmission system, generation, and demand throughout the MISO region. MISO evaluates each market participant’s energy offers and demand bids to economically and reliably dispatch the entire MISO system. Entergy nets purchases and sales within the MISO market and reports in operating revenues when in a net selling position and in operating expenses when in a net purchasing position.

Natural Gas

Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans also distribute natural gas to retail customers in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and New Orleans, Louisiana, respectively. Gas transferred to customers is measured by a meter at the customer’s property. Entergy issues monthly invoices to customers at rates approved by regulators for the volume of gas transferred to date.

233

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial StatementsOther Revenues




Competitive Businesses Revenues

The Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment derives almost all ofEntergy’s revenues from its revenue from salesnon-utility operations include the sale of electric power and capacity produced by its operating plants to wholesale customers. Thecustomers, day-ahead sales of energy in a market administered by an ISO, operation and management services fees, and amortization of a below-market PPA. In 2022 and 2021, the majority of Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ revenues arewere from Entergy’sthe Palisades nuclear power plantsplant located in the northern United States. Entergy issues monthly invoices to the counterparties for these electric sales at the respective contracted or ISO market rate of electricityMichigan, which was shut down in May 2022 and related services provided during the previous month.

subsequently sold in June 2022. Almost all of the Palisades nuclear plant output iswas sold under a 15-year PPA with Consumers Energy, which was executed as part of the acquisition of the plant in 2007 and expiringexpired in April 2022. Prices under the original PPA rangeranged from $43.50/MWh in 2007 to $61.50/MWh in 2022, and the average price under the PPA iswas $51/MWh. Entergy executed an additional PPA to cover the period from the expiration of the original PPA through final shutdown in May 2022 at a price of $24.14/MWh. Entergy issuesissued monthly invoices to Consumers Energy for electric sales based on the actual output of electricity and related services provided during the previous month at the contract price.  The PPA was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition and Entergy amortizesamortized a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement.  The amount amortized each period iswas based upon the present value, calculated at the date of acquisition, of each year’s difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices.  Amounts amortized to revenue were $11$5 million in 2020, $10 million in 2019,2022 and $6 million in 2018.  Amounts to be amortized to revenue through the remaining life of the agreement will be approximately $12 million in 2021 and $5 million in 2022.2021. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Palisades plant.

236

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Practical Expedients and Exceptions

Entergy has elected not to disclose the value of unsatisfied performance obligations for contracts with an original expected term of one year or less, or for revenue recognized in an amount equal to what Entergy has the right to bill the customer for services performed.

Most of Entergy’s contracts, except in a few cases where there are defined minimums or stated terms, are on demand. This results in customer bills that vary each month based on an approved tariff and usage. Entergy imposes monthly or annual minimum requirements on some customers primarily as credit and cost recovery guarantees and not as pricing for unsatisfied performance obligations. These minimums typically expire after the initial term or when specified costs have been recovered. The minimum amounts are part of each month’s bill and recognized as revenue accordingly.accordingly. Some ofEntergy subsidiaries in the subsidiaries within the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segmentnon-utility operations business have operations and maintenance services contracts that have fixed components and terms longer than one year. TheThe total fixed consideration related to these unsatisfied performance obligations, however, is not material to Entergy revenues.

Recovery of Fuel Costs

Entergy’s Utility operating companies’ rate schedules include either fuel adjustment clauses or fixed fuel factors, which allow either current recovery in billings to customers or deferral of fuel costs until the costs are billed to customers. Where the fuel component of revenues is based on a pre-determined fuel cost (fixed fuel factor), the fuel factor remains in effect until changed as part of a general rate case, fuel reconciliation, or fixed fuel factor filing. System Energy’s operating revenues are intended to recover from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans operating expenses and capital costs attributable to Grand Gulf. The capital costs are based on System Energy’s common equity funds allocable to its net investment in Grand Gulf, plus System Energy’s effective interest cost for its debt allocable to its investment in Grand Gulf.

Taxes Imposed on Revenue-Producing Transactions

Governmental authorities assess taxes that are both imposed on and concurrent with a specific revenue-producing transaction between a seller and a customer, including, but not limited to, sales, use, value added, and
234

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

some excise taxes.  Entergy presents these taxes on a net basis, excluding them from revenues.

Allowance for doubtful accountsDoubtful Accounts

The allowance for doubtful accounts reflects Entergy’s best estimate of expected losses on its accounts receivable balances. Due to the essential nature of utility services, Entergy has historically experienced a low rate of default on its accounts receivables. Due toThe following tables set forth a reconciliation of changes in the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on customer receivables, however, Entergy recorded an increase in its allowance for doubtful accounts as shown below:for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022.
EntergyEntergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2019$7.4 $1.2 $1.9 $0.6 $3.2 $0.5 
Provisions (a)109.0 16.2 43.7 18.8 14.1 16.2 
Write-offs(8.6)(1.8)(3.5)(1.2)(1.0)(1.1)
Recoveries9.9 2.7 3.6 1.3 1.1 1.2 
Balance as of December 31, 2020$117.7 $18.3 $45.7 $19.5 $17.4 $16.8 
EntergyEntergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2022$30.9 $6.5 $7.6 $2.5 $11.9 $2.4 
Provisions38.7 9.4 13.9 7.3 3.4 4.7 
Write-offs(83.1)(20.6)(31.3)(10.4)(10.7)(10.1)
Recoveries39.4 11.9 15.9 3.9 3.2 4.5 
Balance as of December 31, 2023$25.9 $7.2 $6.1 $3.3 $7.8 $1.5 
237

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



EntergyEntergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2021$68.6 $13.1 $29.2 $7.2 $13.3 $5.8 
Provisions (a)40.6 14.9 10.7 3.2 7.7 4.1 
Write-offs(112.5)(31.2)(45.1)(12.1)(13.5)(10.6)
Recoveries34.2 9.7 12.8 4.2 4.4 3.1 
Balance as of December 31, 2022$30.9 $6.5 $7.6 $2.5 $11.9 $2.4 
(a)Provisions include estimated incremental bad debt expenses, and revisions to those estimates, resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic of $87.1($6.4) million for Entergy, $10.5$6.4 million for Entergy Arkansas, $36($8.5) million for Entergy Louisiana, $15.5 million for Entergy Mississippi, $12.2($3.0) million for Entergy New Orleans, and $12.9($1.3) million for Entergy Texas that have been deferred as regulatory assets. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussioninformation on regulatory assets recorded as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and orders issued by retail regulators.
The allowance for currently expected credit losses is calculated as the historical rate of customer write-offs multiplied by the current accounts receivable balance, taking into account the length of time the receivable balances have been outstanding. Although theThe rate of customer write-offs has historically experienced minimal variation, managementalthough general economic conditions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or other economic hardships, can affect the rate of customer write-offs. Management monitors the current condition of individual customer accounts to manage collections and ensure bad debt expense is recorded in a timely manner.

235

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




NOTE 20.  QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED) (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Operating results for the four quarters of 2020 and 2019 for Entergy Corporation and subsidiaries were:
 Operating RevenuesOperating IncomeConsolidated Net IncomeNet Income Attributable to Entergy Corporation
 (In Thousands)
2020:  
First Quarter$2,427,179 $399,756 $123,294 $118,714 
Second Quarter$2,412,788 $439,311 $365,113 $360,533 
Third Quarter$2,903,568 $778,016 $525,699 $521,119 
Fourth Quarter$2,370,101 $152,112 $392,547 $387,968 
2019:  
First Quarter$2,609,584 $283,254 $258,646 $254,537 
Second Quarter$2,666,209 $338,775 $240,533 $236,424 
Third Quarter$3,140,575 $519,929 $369,459 $365,240 
Fourth Quarter$2,462,305 $248,539 $389,606 $385,025 

Earnings per average common share
 20202019
 BasicDilutedBasicDiluted
First Quarter$0.59 $0.59 $1.34 $1.32 
Second Quarter$1.80 $1.79 $1.22 $1.22 
Third Quarter$2.60 $2.59 $1.84 $1.82 
Fourth Quarter$1.95 $1.93 $1.96 $1.94 

Results of operations for 2020 include resolution of the 2014-2015 IRS audit, which resulted in a reduction in deferred income tax expense of $230 million that includes a $396 million reduction in deferred income tax expense at Utility related to the basis of assets contributed in the 2015 Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana business combination, including the recognition of previously uncertain tax positions, and deferred income tax expense of $105 million at Entergy Wholesale Commodities and $61 million at Parent and Other resulting from the revaluation of net operating losses as a result of the release of the reserves. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the IRS audit resolution.

Results of operations for 2019 include: 1) a loss of $190 million ($156 million net-of-tax) as a result of the sale of the Pilgrim plant in August 2019; 2) a $156 million reduction in income tax expense recognized by Entergy Wholesale Commodities as a result of an internal restructuring; and 3) impairment charges of $100 million ($79 million net-of-tax) due to costs being charged directly to expense as incurred as a result of the impaired value of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants’ long-lived assets due to the significantly reduced remaining estimated operating lives associated with management’s strategy to exit the Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ merchant power business. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the internal restructuring. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the sale of the Pilgrim plant.



236

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

The business of the Utility operating companies is subject to seasonal fluctuations with the peak periods occurring during the third quarter.  Operating results for the Registrant Subsidiaries for the four quarters of 2020 and 2019 were:
Operating Revenues
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
2020:      
First Quarter$481,912 $930,647 $293,922 $149,302 $339,336 $130,664 
Second Quarter$491,767 $1,011,652 $297,954 $147,343 $372,194 $126,049 
Third Quarter$644,389 $1,120,022 $356,496 $182,064 $494,922 $148,517 
Fourth Quarter$466,426 $1,007,541 $299,482 $155,132 $380,673 $90,228 
2019:      
First Quarter$545,812 $959,330 $282,244 $163,194 $340,474 $140,104 
Second Quarter$542,929 $1,106,317 $302,737 $175,793 $363,580 $139,009 
Third Quarter$687,526 $1,231,677 $398,732 $194,204 $442,877 $145,472 
Fourth Quarter$483,327 $987,851 $339,330 $153,032 $342,024 $148,825 

Operating Income
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
2020:      
First Quarter$67,835 $166,779 $41,181 $12,091 $36,060 $35,309 
Second Quarter$107,949 $256,412 $67,705 $7,602 $56,443 $31,236 
Third Quarter$217,648 $324,496 $93,843 $32,322 $108,306 $48,896 
Fourth Quarter$9,126 $117,134 $33,466 $12,397 $46,040 $1,303 
2019:      
First Quarter$42,471 $153,944 $30,792 $16,136 $16,741 $31,368 
Second Quarter$69,774 $241,520 $45,607 $17,509 $36,022 $24,300 
Third Quarter$182,176 $336,754 $87,024 $28,876 $69,510 $29,086 
Fourth Quarter$32,576 $164,424 $40,331 $6,164 $24,229 $30,231 

237

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements




Net Income
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem Energy
 (In Thousands)
2020:      
First Quarter$44,595 $189,396 $22,526 $11,186 $32,707 $28,513 
Second Quarter$60,170 $170,459 $38,893 $4,929 $46,868 $28,991 
Third Quarter$135,843 $223,466 $58,589 $19,450 $92,164 $31,064 
Fourth Quarter$4,624 $499,031 $20,575 $13,773 $43,334 $10,563 
2019:      
First Quarter$39,121 $127,633 $15,398 $9,023 $21,342 $23,578 
Second Quarter$50,299 $183,084 $26,667 $13,003 $38,936 $24,472 
Third Quarter$149,716 $255,260 $56,237 $24,908 $73,224 $25,031 
Fourth Quarter$23,828 $125,560 $21,623 $5,695 $25,895 $26,039 

Earnings Applicable to Common Equity/Stock
Entergy Texas
(In Thousands)
2020:
First Quarter$32,237 
Second Quarter$46,397 
Third Quarter$91,694 
Fourth Quarter$42,863 
2019:
First Quarter$21,342 
Second Quarter$38,936 
Third Quarter$73,114 
Fourth Quarter$25,425 


238

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy
Item 1. Business

RISK FACTORS SUMMARY

Entergy’s business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could affect its ability to successfully implement its business strategy and affect its financial results. Carefully consider all of the information in this report and, in particular, the following principal risks and all of the other specific factors described in Part I, Item 1A.1A of this report, “Risk Factors,” before deciding whether to invest in Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Utility Regulatory Risks

The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and responsive measures taken are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted.
The terms and conditions of service, including electric and gas rates, of the Utility operating companies and System EnergyRegistrant Subsidiaries are determined through regulatory approval proceedings that can be lengthy and subject to appeal, potentially resulting in lengthy litigation, and uncertainty as to ultimate results.
Entergy’s business could experience adverse effects related to changes to state or federal legislation or regulation, or experience risks associated with participation in the MISO markets and allocation of transmission upgrade costs.
The Utility operating companies recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs through rate mechanisms that are subject to risks of delay or disallowance in regulatory proceedings.
Entergy’s business could experience adverse effects related to changes to state or federal legislation or regulation.
There remains uncertainty regarding the effect of the termination of the System Agreement on the Utility operating companies.
The Utility operating companies are subject to risks associated with participation in the MISO markets and the allocation of transmission upgrade costs.
A delay or failure in recovering amounts for storm restoration costs incurred as a result of severe weather (including from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta) could have material effects on Entergy and thoseits Utility operating companies affected by severe weather.
Weather, economic conditions, technological developments, and other factors may have a material impact on electricity and gas usage and otherwise materially affect the Utility operating companies’ results of operations.

Nuclear Operating, Shutdown, and Regulatory Risks

The results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy and Entergy Wholesale Commodities could be materially affected by the following:
failureinability to consistently operate their nuclear power plants at high capacity factors;
refueling outages that last materially longer than anticipated or unplanned outages;
risks related to the purchase of uranium fuel (and its conversion, enrichment, and fabrication);
the risk that the NRC will change or modify its regulations, suspend or revoke their licenses, or increase oversight of their nuclear plants;
risks and costs related to operating and maintaining their nuclear power plants;
the costs associated with the storage of the spent nuclear fuel, as well as the costs of and their ability to fully decommission their nuclear power plants;
the potential requirement to pay substantial retrospective premiums and/or assessments imposed under the Price-Anderson Act and/or by Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL) in the event of a nuclear incident, and losses not covered by insurance;
the risk that the decommissioning trust fund assets for the nuclear power plants may not be adequate to meet decommissioning obligations if market performance and other changes decrease the value of assets in the decommissioning trusts; and
new or existing safety concerns regarding operating nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel.

Business Risks
Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ power plants are subject to impairment charges in certain circumstances and its nuclear power plants are exposed to price risk.
The Entergy Wholesale Commodities business is subjectand the Registrant Subsidiaries depend on access to substantial governmental regulationthe capital markets and, at times, may beface potential liquidity constraints.  Disruptions in the capital and credit markets or a downgrade in Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ credit ratings could, among other things, adversely affected by legislative, regulatory,affect their ability to meet liquidity needs, or market design changes, as well as liability under, or any future inability to comply with, existing or future regulations or requirements.

access capital to operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital.
239

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy
General Business Risks

The reputation of Entergy andor its Registrant Subsidiaries may be materially adversely affected by negative publicity or the Utility operating companies depend on access to the capital markets and, at times, may face potential liquidity constraints, which could make it more difficult to handle future contingencies.  Disruptions in the capital and credit markets may adversely affect Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ abilityinability to meet liquidity needs, access capital and operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital.
A downgrade in Entergy Corporation’sstated goals or its subsidiaries’ credit ratings could,commitments, among other things, negatively affect Entergy Corporation’s and its subsidiaries’ ability to access capital.potential causes.
Changes in tax legislation and taxation as well as the inherent difficulty in quantifying potential tax effects of business decisions could negatively impact Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’, and System Energy’sRegistrant Subsidiaries’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to successfully execute on their business strategies, including their ability to complete capital projects, other capital improvements, and strategic transactions, is subject to significant risks, and, as a result, they may be unable to achieve some or all of the anticipated results of such strategies.
Failure to attract, retain, and manage an appropriately qualified workforce could negatively affect Entergy or its subsidiaries’ results of operations.
TheEntergy and its subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business may incur substantial costs (i) to fulfill their obligations related to environmental and other matters or (ii) related to reliability standards.
Weather, economic conditions, technological developments, and other factors may have a material impact on electricity and gas usage and otherwise materially affect the Utility operating companies’ results of operations.
Entergy could be negatively affected by the effects of climate change, including physical risks, such as increased frequency and intensity of hurricanes, availability of water, droughts, and other severe weather and wildfires, and transition risks, such as environmental and regulatory obligations intended to compelcombat the effects of climate change, including by compelling greenhouse gas emission reductions or increasereporting, or increasing clean or renewable energy requirements, or to placeplacing a price on greenhouse gas emissions.
Entergy is dependent on the continued and future availability and quality of water for cooling, process, and sanitary uses.
Entergy and its subsidiaries may not be adequately hedged against changes in commodity prices.
The Utility operating companies and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business are exposed to the risk that counterparties may not meet their obligations.
Market performance and other changes may decrease the value of benefit plan assets, which then could require additional funding of such benefit plans and result in increased benefit plan costs.
The litigation environment in the states in which certain Entergy subsidiariesthe Registrant Subsidiaries operate poses a significant risk to those businesses.
Terrorist attacks and sabotage, physical attacks, cyber attacks, system failures, or data breaches or other disruptions of Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ or itstheir suppliers’ physical infrastructure or technology systems may adversely affect Entergy’s business and results of operations.
Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are subject to risks associated with their ability to obtain adequate insurance at acceptable costs.
Significant increases in commodity prices, other materials and supplies, and operation and maintenance expenses may adversely affect Entergy’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
The effect of higher purchased gas cost charges to customers taking gas service may adversely affect Entergy New Orleans’s results of operations and liquidity.
System Energy owns and, through an affiliate, operates a single nuclear generating facility, and it is dependent on sales to affiliated companies for all of its revenues. Certain contractual arrangements relating to System Energy, the affiliated companies, and these revenues are the subject of ongoing litigation and regulatory proceedings. The aggregate amount of refunds claimed in these proceedings, after reduction for settlements reached with the MPSC and the APSC (subject in the latter case to approval by the FERC), exceeds the current net book value of System Energy. In the event of an adverse decision in one or more of these proceedings requiring the payment of substantial additional refunds, System Energy would be required to seek financing to pay such refunds, which financing may not be available on terms acceptable to System Energy when required.
As a holding company, Entergy Corporation depends on cash distributions from its subsidiaries to meet its debt service and other financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock.stock, and has provided, and may continue to provide, capital contributions or debt financing to its subsidiaries, which would reduce the funds available to meet its other financial obligations.

The hazardous activities associated with power generation could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.
240

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


ENTERGY’S BUSINESS

Entergy is an integrated energy company engaged primarily in electric power production and retail distribution operations.  Entergy owns and operates power plants with approximately 30,00024,000 MW of electric generating capacity, including approximately 8,000 MW of nuclear power.capacity. Entergy delivers electricity to 3.0approximately 3 million utilityUtility customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.  Entergy had annual revenues of $10.1$12.1 billion in 20202023 and had more than 13,000approximately 12,000 employees as of December 31, 2020.2023.

Entergy operates primarily through two business segments:a single reportable segment, Utility. The Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities.

The Utility business segment includes the generation, transmission, distribution, and sale of electric power in portions of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana, including the City of New Orleans; and operation of a small natural gas distribution business.
The Entergy Wholesale Commoditiesbusiness segment includes the ownership, operation, and decommissioningin portions of nuclear power plants located in the northern United States and the sale of the electric power produced by its operating plants to wholesale customers. Entergy Wholesale Commodities also provides services to other nuclear power plant owners and owns interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers.Louisiana. See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power BusinessPlanned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” for discussion of the operation and planned shutdown and sale of each of the Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana gas distribution businesses. Entergy completed its multi-year strategy to exit the merchant nuclear power business in 2022 and upon completion of all transition activities, effective January 1, 2023, Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants.

is no longer a reportable segment. See Note 13 to the financial statements for discussion of and financial information regarding Entergy’s business segments.

Strategy

Entergy’s strategy is to operate and grow the premierits utility business that creates sustainablethrough a customer-centric approach designed to understand and meet customer needs, creating value for all of its key stakeholders, including customers, communities, employees, communities, and owners. Entergy’sAs part of its strategy, to achieve its stakeholder objectives has two key aspects. First, Entergy invests in the Utilitysignificant capital to support customer growth and its customers’ growing demands for the benefit of its customers, which supports steady, predictable growth in earningsgreater reliability, resilience, and dividends. Second,clean energy, while remaining focused on affordability. Entergy manages risks by ensuring its Utility investments are customer-centric,customer-driven, the result of robust analysis, supported by broad stakeholder outreach and progressive regulatory constructs, and executed with disciplined project management. Entergy’s strategy for theFurther, Entergy Wholesale Commodities business segment iscontinues to continue to manage the risk of its operating portfolio as Entergy completes its exit from the merchant power business.integrate key sustainability elements, including social responsibility and good governance, into every decision it makes.

Utility

The Utility business segment includes five retail electric utility subsidiaries: Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas.  These companies generate, transmit, distribute, and sell electric power to retail and wholesale customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.  Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans also provide natural gas utility services to customers in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and New Orleans, Louisiana, respectively. See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” for discussion of the planned sale of the Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana gas distribution businesses. Also included in the Utility is System Energy, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation that owns or leases 90 percent of Grand Gulf.  System Energy sells its power and capacity from Grand Gulf at wholesale to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.  The five retail utility subsidiaries are each regulated by the FERC and by state utility commissions, or, in the case of Entergy New Orleans, the City Council.  System Energy is regulated by the FERC because all of its transactions are at wholesale.  The overallUtility has a diverse power generation portfolio, of the Utility,including increasingly carbon-free energy sources, which relies heavily on natural gas and nuclear generation, is consistent with Entergy’s strong support for the environment.

241

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Customers

As of December 31, 2020,2023, the Utility operating companies provided retail electric and gas service to customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, as follows:
 Electric CustomersGas Customers  Electric CustomersGas Customers
Area Served(In Thousands)(%)(In Thousands)(%) Area Served(In Thousands)(%)(In Thousands)(%)
Entergy ArkansasEntergy ArkansasPortions of Arkansas722 25 %  Entergy ArkansasPortions of Arkansas730 24 24   
Entergy LouisianaEntergy LouisianaPortions of Louisiana1,096 37 %94 47 %
Entergy MississippiEntergy MississippiPortions of Mississippi456 15 %  Entergy MississippiPortions of Mississippi459 15 15   
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New OrleansCity of New Orleans207 %108 53 %
Entergy TexasEntergy TexasPortions of Texas473 16 %  Entergy TexasPortions of Texas512 17 17   
Total customers 2,954 100 %202 100 %
Total

Electric and Natural Gas Energy Sales

Electric Energy Sales

The total electric energy sales of the Utility operating companies are subject to seasonal fluctuations, with the peak sales period normally occurring during the third quarter of each year.  On August 10, 2020,23, 2023, Entergy reached a 20202023 peak demand of 21,34023,319 MWh, compared to the 20192022 peak of 21,59822,301 MWh recorded on August 12, 2019.June 24, 2022.  Selected electric energy sales data for 2023 is shown in the table below:

Selected 2020 Electric Energy Sales Data
Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem EnergyEntergy (a) Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem EnergyEntergy (a)
(In GWh) (GWh)
Sales to retail customersSales to retail customers20,749 53,896 12,402 5,447 18,677 — 111,170 
Sales for resale:Sales for resale:     Sales for resale:     
AffiliatesAffiliates1,659 5,585 — — 1,203 5,849 — 
OthersOthers4,198 2,365 4,316 1,969 810 — 13,658 
TotalTotal26,606 61,846 16,718 7,416 20,690 5,849 124,828 
Average use per residential customer (kWh)Average use per residential customer (kWh)12,633 14,576 14,093 12,315 14,829 — 13,917 

(a)Includes the effect of intercompany eliminations.

The following table illustrates the Utility operating companies’ 20202023 combined electric sales volume as a percentage of total electric sales volume, and 20202023 combined electric revenues as a percentage of total 20202023 electric revenue, each by customer class.
Customer ClassCustomer Class% of Sales Volume% of RevenueCustomer Class% of Sales Volume% of Revenue
ResidentialResidential28.239.2Residential26.938.4
CommercialCommercial21.225.4Commercial20.925.3
Industrial (a)Industrial (a)37.725.8Industrial (a)39.126.8
GovernmentalGovernmental2.02.3Governmental1.82.3
Wholesale/OtherWholesale/Other10.97.3Wholesale/Other11.37.2

(a)Major industrial customers are primarily in the petroleum refining and chemical industries.

See “Selected Financial Data” for each of the Utility operating companies for the detail of their sales by customer class for 2016-2020.
242

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


Selected 2020 Natural Gas Energy Sales Data

Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana provide both electric power and natural gas to retail customers.  Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana sold 9,467,8998,917,149 and 6,268,0036,130,048 Mcf, respectively, of natural gas to retail customers in 2020.2023.  In 2020,2023, 99% of Entergy Louisiana’s operating revenue was derived from the electric utility business and only 1% from the natural gas distribution business.  For Entergy New Orleans, 88%87% of operating revenue was derived from the electric utility business and 12%13% from the natural gas distribution business in 2020.2023.

Following is data concerning Entergy New Orleans’s 20202023 retail operating revenue sources.sources:
Customer ClassCustomer ClassElectric Operating RevenueNatural Gas Operating RevenueCustomer Class% of Electric Operating Revenue% of Natural Gas Operating Revenue
ResidentialResidential48%51%Residential4851
CommercialCommercial35%25%Commercial3526
IndustrialIndustrial5%18%Industrial517
Governmental/MunicipalGovernmental/Municipal12%6%Governmental/Municipal126

Retail Rate Regulation

General (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas)Texas, System Energy)

Each Utility operating company regularly participates in retail rate proceedings.  The status of material retail rate proceedings is described in Note 2 to the financial statements.  Certain aspects of the Utility operating companies’companies and System Energy’s retail rate mechanisms are discussed below.
Rate base (in billions)Current authorized return on common equityWeighted average cost of capital (after-tax)Equity ratioRegulatory construct
Rate base (in billions)Rate base (in billions)Current authorized return on common equityWeighted-average cost of capital (after-tax)Equity ratioRegulatory construct
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas$8.4 (a)9.25% - 10.25%5.04%36.6% - forward test year formula rate
plan through 2021 test year (i)

- riders: MISO, capacity, Grand
Gulf, tax adjustment, energy
efficiency, fuel and purchased
power
Entergy Arkansas$10.1 (a)9.15% - 10.15%5.62%38.7% (b) - forward test year formula rate plan
 - riders: fuel and purchased power, MISO, capacity, Grand Gulf, energy efficiency
Entergy Louisiana (electric)Entergy Louisiana (electric)$11.9 (b)9.2% - 10.4%6.97%48.63% - formula rate plan through 2019
test year (j)

- riders/specific recovery: MISO,
capacity, transmission, fuel
Entergy Louisiana (electric)$15.7 (c)9.0% - 10.0%6.66%49.51% - formula rate plan through 2022 test year
 - riders/specific recovery: MISO, capacity, transmission, fuel, distribution, tax reform
Entergy Louisiana (gas)Entergy Louisiana (gas)$0.08 (c)9.3% - 10.3%6.96%48.37% - gas rate stabilization plan

- rider: gas infrastructure
Entergy Louisiana (gas)$0.15 (d)9.3% - 10.3%6.93%51.83% - gas rate stabilization plan
 - rider: gas infrastructure
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi$4.2 (e)9.74% - 11.88%7.06%46.76% - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - riders: fuel, Grand Gulf, MISO, unit power cost, storm damage, ad valorem tax adjustment, vegetation, grid modernization, restructuring credit, power management
243

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Mississippi$3.0 (d)8.89% - 10.93%6.82%49.09% - formula rate plan with
forward-looking features

- riders: power management, Grand
Gulf, fuel, MISO, unit power cost,
storm damage, energy efficiency,
ad valorem tax adjustment,
vegetation, grid modernization,
restructuring credit
Rate base (in billions)Rate base (in billions)Current authorized return on common equityWeighted-average cost of capital (after-tax)Equity ratioRegulatory construct
Entergy New Orleans (electric)Entergy New Orleans (electric)$0.8 (e)9.35%7.09%50%
 - formula rate plan with
       forward-looking features

 - riders/specific recovery: fuel and
       purchased power, MISO, energy
       efficiency, environmental
Entergy New Orleans (electric)$1.2 (f)8.85% - 9.85%6.86%51% (g) - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - riders/specific recovery: fuel and purchased power, MISO, energy efficiency, environmental, capacity costs
Entergy New Orleans (gas)Entergy New Orleans (gas)$0.1 (e)9.35%7.09%50%
 - formula rate plan with
      forward-looking features

 - rider: purchased gas
Entergy New Orleans (gas)$0.2 (f)8.85% - 9.85%6.86%51% (g) - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - rider: purchased gas
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas$2.4 (f)9.65%7.73%50.9% - rate case

- riders: fuel, distribution and
transmission, generation, rate case
expenses, AMI surcharge,
tax reform, among others
Entergy Texas$4.4 (h)9.57%6.61%51.2% - rate case and cost recovery riders
 - riders: fuel, capacity, cost recovery riders (distribution, transmission, and generation), rate case expenses, advanced metering infrastructure surcharge, and tax reform, among others
System EnergySystem Energy$1.6 (g)10.94% (h)8.57 %65% (h) - monthly cost of serviceSystem Energy$1.74 (i)10.94% (j)8.54%59.5% (j) - monthly cost of service

(a)Based on 20212024 test year.
(b)Based on December 31, 2019 test year and excludes approximately $800 million for the Lake Charles Power Station and $300 million for the Washington Parish Energy Center, each$1.9 billion in accumulated deferred income taxes at a 0% cost rate included in the capacity rider, and $400 millionweighted-average cost of transmission plant, included in the transmission rider.capital calculation.
(c)Based on September 30, 2019 test year.
(d)Based on 2020 forwardDecember 31, 2022 test year and excludes approximately $300 million for the Choctaw Generating Station,of transmission plant investment included in interim capacitythe transmission recovery mechanism and approximately $200 million of distribution plant investment included in the distribution recovery mechanism, as well as approximately $400 million of net accumulated deferred tax liability items included in the tax reform adjustment mechanism.
(d)Based on September 30, 2022 test year.
(e)Based on 2023 forward test year.
(f)Based on December 31, 20182022 test year and known and measurables through December 31, 2019. Electric rate base excludes approximately $190 million for New Orleans Power Station and $40 million for New Orleans Solar Station.2023.
(f)(g)In October 2023 the City Council approved a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s formula rate plan, modified to reflect a 55% fixed capital structure for rate setting purposes.
(h)Based on December 31, 20172021 test year and excludes $1.0 billion in cost recovery riders.year.
(g)(i)Based on calculation as of December 31, 2020.2023.
(h)(j)Effective July 2022, Entergy Mississippi’s bills from System Energy reflect an authorized return on equity of 9.65%, a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity, and a rate base reduction for the advance collection of sale-leaseback rental costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of ongoing proceedings at the FERC challenging System Energy’s authorized return on common equity and capital structure.
(i)
Entergy Arkansas
See Note 2
Formula Rate Plan

Between base rate cases, Entergy Arkansas is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize a forward test year. Entergy Arkansas is subject to a maximum rate change of 4% of the financial statements for discussionfiling year total retail revenue. In addition, Entergy Arkansas is subject to a true-up of projection to actuals netted with future projection. In response to Entergy Arkansas’s pending formula rate plan extension request.
(j)See Note 2 to the financial statementsapplication for discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s pending formula rate plan extension request.

a general change in rates in
244

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2015, the APSC approved the formula rate plan tariff proposed by Entergy Arkansas including its use of a projected year test period and an initial five-year term. The initial five-year term expired in 2021. As granted by Arkansas law, Entergy Arkansas obtained APSC approval of the extension of the formula rate plan tariff for an additional five-year term, through 2026. As part of the settlement of the 2023 formula rate plan proceeding, Entergy Arkansas agreed to file its next base rate case no later than February 2026. If Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan were terminated, Entergy Arkansas could file an application for a general change in rates that may include a request for continued regulation under a formula rate review mechanism.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Arkansas’s rate schedules include an energy cost recovery rider to recover fuel and purchased power costs in monthly bills.  The rider utilizes prior calendar year energy costs and projected energy sales for the twelve-month period commencing on April 1 of each year to develop an energy cost rate, which is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery, including carrying charges, of the energy cost for the prior calendar year.  The energy cost recovery rider tariff also allows an interim rate request depending upon the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.  In December 2007 the APSC issued an order stating that Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider will remain in effect, and any future termination of the rider would be subject to eighteen months advance notice by the APSC, which would occur following notice and hearing.

Production Cost Allocation Rider

Entergy Arkansas has in place an APSC-approved production cost allocation rider for recovery from customers of the retail portion of the costs allocated to Entergy Arkansas as a result of System Agreement proceedings.

Other

In June 2022 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff filing for a proposed green tariff designed to help participating customers meet their renewable and sustainability goals and to enhance economic development efforts in Arkansas. The APSC approved an initial offering of 100 MW of solar capacity to be made available under this tariff.

In June 2023 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s Go ZERO tariff, which provides participating industrial and commercial customers the opportunity to chose from a number of clean energy options to help them achieve their sustainability goals.

Entergy Louisiana

Formula Rate Plan

Entergy Louisiana historically sets electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan using a historic test year. The form of the formula rate plan, on a combined basis, was approved in connection with the business combination of Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and largely followed the formula rate plans that were approved by the LPSC in connection with the full electric base rate cases filed by those companies in February 2013. In 2021 the LPSC approved a settlement extending the formula rate plan for test years 2020, 2021 and 2022; certain modifications were made in that extension, including a decrease to the allowed return on equity, narrowing of the earnings “dead band” around the mid-point allowed return on equity, elimination of sharing above and below the earnings “dead band,” and the addition of a distribution cost recovery mechanism. The formula rate plan continues to include exceptions from the rate cap and sharing requirements for certain large capital investment projects, including acquisition or construction of generating facilities and purchase power agreements approved by the LPSC, certain transmission investments, and certain distribution investments, among other items. In August
245

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application for approval of a regulatory blueprint necessary for it to strengthen the electric grid for the State of Louisiana, which contains a dual-path request to update rates through either: (1) extension of Entergy Louisiana’s current formula rate plan (with certain modifications) for three years, test years 2023-2025, which is Entergy Louisiana’s recommended path; or (2) implementation of rates resulting from a cost-of-service study, with a 2024-2026 test year formula rate plan. The application complies with Entergy Louisiana’s previous formula rate plan extension order requiring that for Entergy Louisiana to obtain another extension of its formula rate plan that included a rate reset, Entergy Louisiana would need to submit a full cost-of-service/rate case. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s application.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Louisiana’s rate schedules include a fuel adjustment clause designed to recover the cost of fuel and purchased power costs.  The fuel adjustment clause contains a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense and related carrying charges arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings related to audits of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Louisiana received approval from the LPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Louisiana historically hedged approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity was reviewed on an annual basis. In January 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC to suspend these seasonal hedging programs and implement financial hedges with terms up to five years for a portion of its natural gas exposure, which was approved in November 2018.

Entergy Louisiana’s gas rates include a purchased gas adjustment clause based on estimated gas costs for the billing month adjusted by a surcharge or credit that arises from an annual reconciliation of fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Retail Rates - Gas

In accordance with the settlement of Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’s gas rate stabilization plan for the test year ended September 30, 2012, in August 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal for implementation of an infrastructure rider to recover expenditures associated with strategic plant investment and relocation projects mandated by local governments. After review by the LPSC staff and inclusion of certain customer safeguards required by the LPSC staff, in December 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted a joint settlement for implementation of an accelerated gas pipe replacement program providing for the replacement of approximately 100 miles of pipe over the next ten years, as well as relocation of certain existing pipe resulting from local government-related infrastructure projects, and for a rider to recover the
245

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

investment associated with these projects. The rider allows for recovery of approximately $65 million over ten years. The rider recovery will be adjusted on a quarterly basis to include actual investment incurred for the prior quarter and is subject to the following conditions, among others: a ten-year term; application of any earnings in excess of the upper end of the earnings band as an offset to the revenue requirement of the infrastructure rider; adherence to a specified spending plan, within plus or minus 20% annually; annual filings comparing actual versus planned rider spending with actual spending and explanation of variances exceeding 10%; and an annual true-up. The joint settlement was approved by the LPSC in January 2015. Implementation of the infrastructure rider commenced with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of April 2015. In April 2022 Entergy Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal to extend the infrastructure rider to address replacement of an additional 187 miles of pipe. In December 2022 Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted an uncontested settlement that extends the rider for an additional ten years beginning after the end of the current term of the rider in 2025. The extension is subject to the same customer safeguards and conditions as the original term of the rider. The extension
246

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

allows for recovery of approximately $95 million over ten years. In February 2023, the uncontested settlement was approved by the LPSC.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In March 2016 the LPSC opened two dockets to examine, on a generic basis, issues that it identified in connection with its review of Cleco Corporation’s acquisition by third party investors.  The first docket is captioned “In re: Investigation of double leveraging issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities,” and the second is captioned “In re: Investigation of tax structure issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities.”  In April 2016 the LPSC clarified that the concerns giving rise to the two dockets arose as a result of its review of the structure of the Cleco-Macquarie transaction and that the specific intent of the directives is to seek more information regarding intra-corporate debt financing of a utility’s capital structure as well as the use of investment tax credits to mitigate the tax obligation at the parent level of a consolidated entity.  No schedule has been set for either docket, and limited discovery has occurred.

In December 2019 an LPSC commissioner issued an unopposed directive to staff to research customer-centered options for all customer classes, as well as other regulatory environments, and recommend a plan for how to ensure customers are the focus. There was no opposition to the directive from other commissioners but several remarked that the intent of the directive was not initiated to pursue retail open access. In furtherance of the directive, the LPSC issued a notice of the opening of a docket to conduct a rulemaking to research and evaluate customer-centered options for all electric customer classes as well as other regulatory environments in January 2020. To date, the LPSC staff has requested multiple rounds of comments from stakeholders and conducted one technical conference. Topics on which comments have been filed include full and limited retail access, demand response, sleeved power purchase agreements, and energy efficiency. Neither the LPSC or the LPSC staff have made recommendations or adopted any rules.

Entergy Mississippi

Fuel RecoveryFormula Rate Plan

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include energy cost recovery riders to recover fuel and purchased power costs.  The energy cost rate for each calendar year is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflectingSince the over-recovery or under-recovery of the energy costs as of the 12-month period ended September 30.  Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Mississippi received approval from the MPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Mississippi hedges approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity is reviewed on an annual basis.

246

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings regarding recoveryconclusion in 2015 of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs.

Formula Rate Planmost recent base rate case, Entergy Mississippi has set electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan. Between base rate cases, Entergy Mississippi is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize forward-looking features. In addition, Entergy Mississippi is subject to an annual “look-back” evaluation. Entergy Mississippi is allowed a maximum rate increase of 4% of each test year’s retail revenue. Any increase above 4% requires a base rate case. If Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan were terminated without replacement, it would revert to the more traditional rate case environment or seek approval of a new formula rate plan.

In August 2012 the MPSC opened inquiries to review whether the currentthen-current formulaic methodology used to calculate the return on common equity in both Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan and Mississippi Power Company’s annual formula rate plan was still appropriate or could be improved to better serve the public interest. The intent of this inquiry and review was for informational purposes only; the evaluation of any recommendations for changes to the existing methodology would take place in a general rate case or in the existing formula rate plan proceeding. In March 2013 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed its consultant’s report which noted the return on common equity estimation methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company are commonly used throughout the electric utility industry. The report suggested ways in which the methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company might be improved, but did not recommend specific changes in the
247

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

return on common equity formulas or calculations at that time. In June 2014 the MPSC expanded the scope of the August 2012 inquiry to study the merits of adopting a uniform formula rate plan that could be applied, where possible in whole or in part, to both Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company in order to achieve greater consistency in the plans. The MPSC directed the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff to investigate and review Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan rider schedule and Mississippi Power Company’s Performance Evaluation Plan by considering the merits and deficiencies and possibilities for improvement of each and then to propose a uniform formula rate plan that, where possible, could be applicable to both companies. No procedural schedule has been set. In October 2014 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff conducted a public technical conference to discuss performance benchmarking and its potential application to the electric utilities’ formula rate plans. The docket remains open.

In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for a mechanism in the formula rate plan, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi as well as to allow similar cost recovery treatment for other capacity acquisitions that are approved by the MPSC. The MPSC must approve recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment for each new resource. In addition, the MPSC approved revisions to the formula rate plan which allows Entergy Mississippi to begin billing rate adjustments effective April 1 of the filing year on a temporary basis subject to refund or credit to customers, subject to final MPSC order. The MPSC also authorized Entergy Mississippi to remove vegetation management costs from the formula rate plan and recover these costs through the establishment of a vegetation management rider.

In November 2020 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan providing for the realignment of energy efficiency costs to its formula rate plan, the deferral of energy efficiency expenditures into a regulatory asset, and the elimination of its energy efficiency cost recovery rider effective with the January 2022 billing cycle.

In June 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan to realign the recovery of certain long-term service agreement and conductor handling costs to the annual power management and grid modernization riders effective January 2023.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include energy cost recovery riders to recover fuel and purchased power costs.  The energy cost rate for each calendar year is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery of the energy costs as of the 12-month period ended September 30.  Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC. The energy cost recovery riders allow interim rate adjustments depending on the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Mississippi received approval from the MPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Mississippi hedges approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity is reviewed on an annual basis.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings regarding recovery of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs.

248

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Other

In October 2022 the MPSC adopted the Distributed Generation Rule. The Distributed Generation Rule maintains the 3% net metering participation cap. The Distributed Generation Rule grandfathers a 2.5 cents per kWh distributed generation benefits adder for 25 years and expands eligibility for the 2 cents per kWh low-income benefits adder to households up to 225% of the federal poverty level and grandfathers that adder for 25 years. The Distributed Generation Rule also directs utilities to make rate filings implementing up-front incentives for distributed generating systems and demand response battery systems, and to establish a public K-12 solar for schools program. In August 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed solar for schools rate schedule under the Distributed Generation Rule.

Entergy New Orleans

Formula Rate Plan

As part of its determination of rates in the base rate case filed by Entergy New Orleans in 2018, in November 2019, the City Council issued a resolution resolving the rate case, with rates to become effective retroactive to August 2019. The resolution allows Entergy New Orleans to implement a three-year formula rate plan, beginning with the 2019 test year as adjusted for forward-looking known and measurable changes, with the filing for the first test year to be made in 2020. In October 2020 the City Council approved an agreement in principle filed by Entergy New Orleans that results in Entergy New Orleans forgoing its 2020 formula rate plan filing and shifting the three-year formula rate plan to filings in 2021, 2022, and 2023. In September 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a motion seeking City Council approval of a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas formula rate plans, for filings in 2024, 2025, and 2026. In October 2023 the City Council granted Entergy New Orleans’s request for an extension, subject to minor modifications.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy New Orleans’s electric rate schedules include a fuel adjustment tariff designed to reflect no more than targeted fuel and purchased power costs, adjusted by a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel and purchased power costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Entergy New Orleans’s gas rate schedules include a purchased gas adjustment to reflect estimated gas costs for the billing month, adjusted by a surcharge or credit similar to that included in the electric fuel adjustment clause, including carrying charges.

To help stabilize gas costs, Entergy New Orleans seeks approval annually from the City Council to continue implementation of its natural gas hedging program consistent with the City Council’s stated policy objectives.  The program uses financial instruments to hedge exposure to volatility in the wholesale price of natural gas purchased to serve Entergy New Orleans gas customers.  Entergy New Orleans hedges up to 25% of actual gas sales made during the winter months.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s effortsfilings to recover storm-related costs.

247249

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Energy Efficiency Programs

A 2008 rate case settlement included $3.1 million per year in electric rates to fund the Energy Smart energy efficiency programs.  The rate settlement provided an incentive for Entergy New Orleans to meet or exceed energy savings targets set by the City Council and provided a mechanism for Entergy New Orleans to recover lost contribution to fixed costs associated with the energy savings generated from the energy efficiency programs. In January 2015 the City Council approved funding for the Energy Smart program from April 2015 through March 2017 using the remainder of the approximately $12.8 million of 2014 rough production cost equalization funds, with any remaining costs being recovered through the fuel adjustment clause. This funding methodology was modified in November 2015 when the City Council directed Entergy New Orleans to use a combination of guaranteed customer savings related to a prior agreement with the City Council and rough production cost equalization funds to cover program costs prior to recovering any costs through the fuel adjustment clause. In April 2017 the City Council approved an implementation plan for the Energy Smart program from April 2017 through December 2019. The City Council directed that the $11.8 million balance reported for Energy Smart funds be used to continue funding the program for Entergy New Orleans’s legacy customers and that the Energy Smart Algiers program continue to be funded through the Algiers fuel adjustment clause, until additional customer funding is required for the legacy customers. In September 2017, Entergy New Orleans filed a supplemental plan and proposed several options for an interim cost recovery mechanism necessary to recover program costs during the period between when existing funds directed to Energy Smart programs are depleted and when new rates from the 2018 combined rate case, which includes a cost recovery mechanism for Energy Smart funding, take effect. In December 2017 the City Council approved an energy efficiency cost recovery rider as an interim funding mechanism for Energy Smart, subject to verification that no additional funding sources exist. In June 2018 the City Council also approved a resolution recommending that Entergy New Orleans allocate approximately $13.5 million of benefits resulting from the Tax Act to Energy Smart. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s application with the City Council seeking approval of an implementation plan for the Energy Smart program from April 2020 through December 2022.

Entergy Texas

Base Rates

The base rates of Entergy Texas are established largely in traditional base rate case proceedings. Between base rate proceedings, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. Entergy Texas is required to file full base rate case proceedings every four years and within eighteen months of utilizing its generation cost recovery rider for investments above $200 million.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, that are not included in base rates.  Semi-annualHistorically, semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor arehave been made in March and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. TheIn the course of this reconciliation, the PUCT determines whether eligible fuel cost proceedingsand fuel-related expenses and revenues are discussed in Note 2necessary and reasonable and makes a prudence finding for each of the fuel-related contracts entered into during the reconciliation period. In 2023 the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to provide that material over- and under-recovered fuel balances are to be refunded or surcharged through interim fuel adjustments and that fuel reconciliations must be filed at least once every two years. Entergy Texas expects the financial statements.PUCT to undertake a rulemaking to effectuate the new legislation by the end of 2024.

At the PUCT’s April 2013 open meeting, the PUCT Commissioners discussed their view that a purchased power capacity rider was good public policy. The PUCT issued an order in May 2013 adopting the rule allowing for a purchased power capacity rider, subject to an offsetting adjustment for load growth. The rule, as adopted, also includes a process for obtaining pre-approval by the PUCT of purchased power agreements.agreements to be recovered through a purchased power capacity rider. No Texas utility, including Entergy Texas, has not exercised the option to recover its capacity costs under the new rider mechanism, but Entergy Texas will continue to evaluate the benefits of utilizing the new rider to recover future capacity costs. In 2023, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit a utility to seek pre-approval from the PUCT for a purchased power agreement of three years or more if such approval is a precondition to the effectiveness of such agreements, regardless of whether the utility intends to recover costs associated with the purchased power agreement through a purchased power capacity rider.

Transmission, Distribution, and Generation Cost Recovery

As discussed above, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. These riders include a transmission cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of transmission-related capital investments, a distribution cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of distribution-related capital investment, and a generation cost recovery rider mechanism for the recovery of generation-related capital investments.

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas containing provisions that allow Entergy Texas to take advantage of a cost recovery mechanism that permits annual filings for the recovery of reasonable and necessary expenditures for transmission infrastructure improvement and changes in wholesale transmission charges. This mechanism was previously available to other non-ERCOT Texas utility companies, but not to Entergy Texas.

In September 2011 the PUCT adopted a proposed rule implementing a distribution cost recovery factor to recover capital and capital-related costs related to distribution infrastructure.  The distribution cost recovery factor permitted utilities once per year to implement an increase or decrease in rates above or below amounts reflected in base rates to reflect distribution-related depreciation expense, federal income tax and other taxes, and return on investment.  In 2023, the Texas Legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit utilities to update their
250

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

distribution cost recovery factors up to twice per year and to require the PUCT to issue an order on such update applications within 60 days, with a 15-day extension permitted for good cause.

In September 2019 the PUCT initiated a rulemaking to promulgate a generation cost recovery rider rule, implementing legislation passed in the 2019 Texas legislative session intended to allow electric utilities to recover generation investments between base rate proceedings.  The PUCT approved the final rule in July 2020.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Texas’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In January 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application requesting approval to implement two voluntary renewable option tariffs, Rider Small Volume Renewable Option (Rider SVRO) and Rider Large Volume Renewable Option (Rider LVRO). Both tariffs are voluntary offerings that give customers the ability to match some or all of their monthly electricity usage with renewable energy credits that are purchased by Entergy Texas and retired on the customer’s behalf. Voluntary participation in either Rider SVRO or Rider LVRO and the charges assessed under the respective tariff would be in addition to the charges paid by customers under their otherwise applicable rate schedules and riders. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement agreement supporting approval of Entergy Texas’s proposed voluntary renewable option tariffs. As part of the settlement agreement, Entergy Texas agreed to revise the cost allocation between the rate tiers of Rider SVRO and committed to collaborating with and considering the input of customers to develop an asset-backed green tariff program. The PUCT approved the settlement agreement in August 2022.

As part of its rate case application filed with the PUCT in July 2022, Entergy Texas requested approval of Schedule Green Future Option (Schedule GFO), an asset-backed green tariff that would allow Entergy Texas’s customers to voluntarily subscribe to a portion of the underlying solar facility’s capacity in exchange for energy credits. In August 2023 the PUCT approved an unopposed settlement in the proceeding that included approval of Schedule GFO.

Electric Industry Restructuring

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas that required Entergy Texas to cease all activities relating to Entergy Texas’s transition to competition.  The law allows Entergy Texas to remain a part of the SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC) Region, although it does not prevent Entergy Texas from joining another power region.  The law provides that proceedings to certify a power region that Entergy Texas belongs to as a qualified power region can be initiated by the PUCT, or on motion by another party, when the conditions supporting such a proceeding
248

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

exist.  Under the law, the PUCT may not approve a transition to competition plan for Entergy Texas until the expiration of four years from the PUCT’s certification of Entergy Texas’sa qualified power region.

The law also contains provisions that allow Entergy Texas to take advantage of a cost recovery mechanism that permits annual filingsregion for the recovery of reasonable and necessary expenditures for transmission infrastructure improvement and changes in wholesale transmission charges.  This mechanism was previously available to other non-ERCOT Texas utility companies, but not to Entergy Texas.

The law further amended already existing law that had required Entergy Texas to propose for PUCT approval a tariff to allow eligible customers the ability to contract for competitive generation.  The amending language in the law provides, among other things, that: 1)(1) the tariff shall not be implemented in a manner that harms the sustainability or competitiveness of manufacturers who choose not to participate in the tariff; 2)(2) Entergy Texas shall “purchase competitive generation service, selected by the customer, and provide the generation at retail to the customer;” and 3)(3) Entergy Texas shall provide and price transmission service and ancillary services under that tariff at a rate that is unbundled from its cost of service.  The law directs that the PUCT may not issue an order on the tariff that is contrary to an applicable decision, rule, or policy statement of a federal regulatory agency having jurisdiction.

The PUCT determined that unrecovered costs that may be recovered through the rider consist only of those costs necessary to implement and administer the competitive generation program and do not include lost
251

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

revenues or embedded generation costs.  The amount of customer load that may be included in the competitive generation service program is limited to 115 MW.

In September 2011 the PUCT adopted a proposed rule implementing a distribution cost recovery factor to recover capital and capital-related costs related to distribution infrastructure.  The distribution cost recovery factor permits utilities once per year to implement an increase or decrease in rates above or below amounts reflected in base rates to reflect depreciation expense, federal income tax and other taxes, and return on investment.  The distribution cost recovery factor rider may be changed a maximum of four times between base rate cases.System Energy

In September 2019Cost of Service

The rates of System Energy are established by the PUCT initiated a rulemakingFERC, and the costs allowed to promulgate a generation cost recovery factor rule, implementing legislationbe charged pursuant to these rates are, in turn, passed through to the participating Utility operating companies through the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which has monthly billings that reflect the current operating costs of, and investment in, Grand Gulf. Retail regulators and other parties may seek to initiate proceedings at FERC to investigate the prudence of costs included in the 2019 Texas legislative session intendedrates charged under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and examine, among other things, the reasonableness or prudence of the operation and maintenance practices, level of expenditures, allowed rates of return and rate base, and previously incurred capital expenditures. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to allow electric utilitiesthe United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including challenges with respect to recover generation investments between base rateSystem Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period. Beginning in 2021, System Energy implemented billing protocols to provide retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. Entergy cannot predict the outcome of any of these proceedings, and an adverse outcome in any of them could have a material adverse effect on Entergy’s or System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings.  The PUCT approved the final rule in July 2020.

Franchises

Entergy Arkansas holds exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 308 incorporated cities and towns in Arkansas.  These franchises generally are unlimited in duration and continue unless the municipalities purchase the utility property.  In Arkansas, franchises are considered to be contracts and, therefore, are terminablegoverned pursuant to the terms of the franchise agreement and applicable statutes.

Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 175 incorporated municipalities and in the unincorporated areas of approximately 59 parishes of Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide natural gas service to customers in the City of Baton Rouge and in East Baton Rouge Parish.  Municipal franchise agreement terms range from 25 to 60 years while parish franchise terms range from 25 to 99 years.

Entergy Mississippi has received from the MPSC certificates of public convenience and necessity to provide electric service to areas within 45 counties, including a number of municipalities, in western Mississippi.  Under Mississippi statutory law, such certificates are exclusive.  Entergy Mississippi may continue to serve in such municipalities upon payment of a statutory franchise fee, regardless of whether an original municipal franchise is still in existence.

249

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy New Orleans provides electric and gas service in the City of New Orleans pursuant to indeterminate permits set forth in city ordinances.  These ordinances contain a continuing option for the City of New Orleans to purchase Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas utility properties.

Entergy Texas holds a certificate of convenience and necessity from the PUCT to provide electric service to areas within approximately 27 counties in eastern Texas and holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric
252

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

service in approximately 6870 incorporated municipalities.  Entergy Texas typically obtains 25-year franchise agreements as existing agreements expire.  Entergy Texas’s electric franchises expire over the period 2020-2058.2024-2058.

The business of System Energy is limited to wholesale power sales.  It has no distribution franchises.

Property and Other Generation Resources

Owned Generating Stations

The total capability of the generating stations owned and leased by the Utility operating companies and System Energy as of December 31, 2020,2023 is indicated below:
Owned and Leased Capability MW(a) Owned and Leased Capability MW(a)
CompanyCompanyTotalGas/OilNuclearCoalHydroSolarCompanyTotalCT / CCGT (b)Legacy Gas/OilNuclearCoalHydroSolar
Entergy ArkansasEntergy Arkansas5,175 2,091 1,817 1,194 73 — 
Entergy LouisianaEntergy Louisiana11,317 8,827 2,144 346 — — 
Entergy MississippiEntergy Mississippi3,347 2,929 — 416 — 
Entergy New OrleansEntergy New Orleans665 638 — — — 27 
Entergy TexasEntergy Texas2,260 2,005 — 255 — — 
System EnergySystem Energy1,256 — 1,256 — — — 
TotalTotal24,020 16,490 5,217 2,211 73 29 

(a)“Owned and Leased Capability” is the dependable load carrying capability as demonstrated under actual operating conditions based on the primary fuel (assuming no curtailments) that each station was designed to utilize.
(b)Represents Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.

Summer peak load for the Utility has averaged 21,59121,775 MW over the previous decade.

The Utility operating companies’ load and capacity projections are reviewed periodically to assess the need and timing for additional generating capacity and interconnections. These reviews consider existing and projected demand, the availability and price of power, the location of new load, the economy, Entergy’s clean energy and other public policy goals, environmental regulations, and the age and condition of Entergy’s existing infrastructure.

The Utility operating companies’ long-term resource strategy (Portfolio Transformation Strategy) calls for the bulk of capacity needs to be met through long-term resources, whether owned or contracted. Over the past decade, the Portfolio Transformation Strategy has resulted in the addition of about 8,8017,963 MW of new long-term resources and the deactivation of about 4,6644,241 MW of legacy generation. As MISO market participants, the Utility operating companies also participate in MISO’s Day Ahead and Real Time Energy and Ancillary Services markets to economically dispatch generation and purchase energy to serve customers reliably and at the lowest reasonable cost.

250

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Other Generation Resources

RFP Procurements

The Utility operating companies from time to timetime-to-time issue requests for proposals (RFP) to procure supply-side resources from sources other than the spot market to meet the unique regional needs of the Utility operating companies. The RFPs issued by the Utility operating companies have sought resources needed to meet near-term MISO reliability requirements as well as long-term requirements through a broad range of wholesale power
253

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

products, including limited-term (1 to 3 years) and long-term contractual products and asset acquisitions. The RFP process has resulted in selections or acquisitions, including, among other things:

Entergy Louisiana’s construction of the 980 MW, combined-cycle, gas turbine J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (previously referred to as the St. Charles generating facility) at its existing Little Gypsy electric generating station. The facility began commercial operation in May 2019;
Entergy Texas’s construction of the 993 MW, combined-cycle, gas turbine Montgomery County Power Station at its existing Lewis Creek electric generating station. The facility began commercial operation in January 2021;
In December 2020, Entergy Louisiana’s constructionTexas selected the self-build alternative, Orange County Advanced Power Station, out of the 994 MW,2020 Entergy Texas combined-cycle, gas turbine Lake Charles generating facility at its existing Nelson electric generating station site.RFP. Regulatory approval was received in November 2022 and construction has commenced. The facility began commercial operation in March 2020;
In October 2018, Entergy Mississippi signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi. Entergy Mississippi received regulatory approval from the MPSC in April 2020, and the facility is scheduledexpected to be in service by early 2022;mid-2026;
In March 2019, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be- constructedto-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, that will beSearcy Solar facility, sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas. Entergy Arkansas received regulatory approval from the APSC in April 2020, and closed on the facility is scheduled to beacquisition, through use of a tax equity partnership, in service by the end of 2021;
Entergy New Orleans received regulatory approval in August 2019 to construct the New OrleansDecember 2021. The Searcy Solar Station (a 20 MW self-build solar project) located at the NASA Michoud Facility.The facility was placed in service in December 2020;January 2022;
In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Sunflower Solar facility, sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi. Entergy Mississippi received regulatory approval from the MPSC in April 2020, and the Sunflower Solar facility began commercial operation in September 2022;
In June 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Walnut Bend Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Lee County, Arkansas. In October 2020,July 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the Walnut Bend Solar facility. The counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas filed a petition withthat it was terminating the project, though it was willing to consider an alternative for the site. Entergy Arkansas disputed the right of termination, and in February 2023 an amendment to the agreement was executed by the parties. In July 2023 the APSC seeking a finding thatissued an order approving the transactionrevisions to the agreement and full notice to proceed was issued shortly thereafter. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of approximately $169.7 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is completed and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to achieve commercial operation in the public interest and requesting all necessary approvals. Closing is expected to occur by the endfirst half of 2022;2024;
In September 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 180 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, West Memphis Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,500 acres in Crittenden County, Arkansas. In October 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the West Memphis Solar facility. In March 2022 the counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was seeking changes to certain terms of the build-own-transfer agreement, including both cost and schedule. In January 2021,2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a petitionsupplemental application with the APSC seeking a finding thatAPSC. Following the transactionAPSC’s approval of the supplemental application in March 2023, full notice to proceed was issued in April 2023 and the project is in the public interest and requesting all necessary approvals. Closing iscurrently expected to occurachieve commercial operation by the end of 2023; and2024;
In June 2020,November 2021, Entergy TexasLouisiana signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100150 MW to-be- constructedto-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, St. Jacques facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,200 acres in Liberty CountySt. James Parish near Dayton, Texas.Vacherie, Louisiana. In September 2020,2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the St. Jacques facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Texas filed a petitionLouisiana is in discussions with the PUCT seeking a finding thatcounterparty for the transaction is inSt. Jacques facility regarding amendments to the public interestagreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and requesting all necessary approvals.Closingthe facility is expected to occurreach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the endparties on the terms of 2023.the amendments;

In August 2022, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 250 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Driver Solar facility, that will be sited near Osceola, Arkansas. Also in August 2022, Entergy Arkansas received necessary approvals for the Driver Solar
251254

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

facility, and Entergy Arkansas has issued the counterparty full notice to proceed to begin construction. The project is expected to achieve commercial operation as early as mid-2024; and
Entergy Louisiana expects to start construction on the 49 MW Sterlington Solar project in the fourth quarter 2024, located in Sterlington, Louisiana. The facility is expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2026.

The RFP process has also resulted in the selection, or confirmation of the economic merits of, long-term purchased power agreements (PPAs), including, among others:

River Bend’s 30% life-of-unit PPA between Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans for 100 MW related to Entergy Louisiana’s unregulated portion of the River Bend nuclear station, which portion was formerly owned by Cajun;
Entergy Arkansas’s wholesale base load capacity life-of-unit PPAs executed in 2003 totaling approximately 220 MW between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana (110 MW) and between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy New Orleans (110 MW) related to the sale of a portion of Entergy Arkansas’s coal and nuclear base load resources (which had not been included in Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates);
In May 2011, Entergy Texas and Calpine Energy Services, L.P. executed a 10-year agreement for 485 MW from the Carville Energy Center located in St. Gabriel, Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana purchases 50% of the facility’s capacity and energy from Entergy Texas. In July 2014, LS Power purchased the Carville Energy Center and replaced Calpine Energy Services as the counterparty to the agreement;
In September 2012, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Rain CII Carbon LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 28 MW, with the potential to purchase an additional 9 MW when available, from Rain CII Carbon LLC’sa petroleum coke calcining facility in Sulphur, Louisiana. The facility began commercial operation in May 2013. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with the facility;
In March 2013, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Agrilectric Power Partners, LP executed a 20-year agreement for 8.5 MW from Agrilectric Power Partners, LP’sa refurbished rice hull-fueled electric generation facility located in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with Agrilectric;
In September 2013, Entergy Louisiana executed a 10-year agreement withand TX LFG Energy, LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Montauk Energy Holdings, LLC, executed a 10-year agreement to purchase approximately 3 MW from its landfill gas-fueled power generation facility located in Cleveland, Texas;
Entergy Mississippi’s cost-based purchase, beginning in January 2013, of 90 MW from Entergy Arkansas’s share of Grand Gulf (only 60 MW of this PPA came through the RFP process). Cost recovery for the 90 MW was approved by the MPSC in January 2013;
In April 2015, Entergy Arkansas and Stuttgart Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 81 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generation facility located near Stuttgart, Arkansas. The APSC approved the project and deliveries pursuant to that agreement commenced in June 2018;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and LS Power executed a 10-year agreement for 485 MW from the Carville Energy Center located in St. Gabriel, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approvalIn November 2019, LS Power sold and will begin in June 2022;transferred the Carville Energy Center and facility to Argo Infrastructure Partners, which included the power purchase agreement;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and Occidental Chemical Corporation executed a 10-year agreement for 500 MW from the Taft Cogeneration facility located in Hahnville, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval and began in June 2018;
In June 2017, Entergy Arkansas and Chicot Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Chicot County, Arkansas. The transaction received regulatory approval and the PPA began in November 2020;
In February 2018, Entergy Louisiana and LA3 West Baton Rouge, LLC (Capital Region Solar project) executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in February 2019 and the PPA began in October 2020;
In July 2018, Entergy New Orleans and St. James Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 20 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and is targetingthe PPA began in February 2023 after the facility reached commercial operation in mid-2021;March 2023;
255

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

In August 2018, Entergy Louisiana and South Alexander Development I, LLC executed a five-year5-year agreement for 5 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Livingston Parish, Louisiana. The PPA began in December 2020 and received regulatory approval in January 2021;
In February 2019, Entergy New Orleans and Iris Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and achieved commercial operation in November 2022;
In August 2020, Entergy Texas and Umbriel Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Polk County, Texas. The facility achieved commercial operation in November 2023;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Sunlight Road Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve the order including this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Sunlight Road facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2024;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Vacherie Solar Energy Center, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the Vacherie facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the Vacherie facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In December 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Hinds Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Hinds County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in June 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Wildwood Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Tallahatchie County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in May 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Greer Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 170 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Washington County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Flat Fork Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in St. Francis County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Forgeview Solar, LLC executed a 15-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Mississippi County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In January 2023, Entergy Texas and Piney Woods Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Walker County, Texas. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026;
In January 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Coastal Prairie Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 175 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Iberville Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC
252
256

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as December 2025; and
In February 2019,October 2023, Entergy New OrleansLouisiana and IrisMondu Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreementPPA for 50approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generatingenergy facility located in WashingtonPoint Coupee Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC requesting all necessary approvals. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and is targeting commercial operation in mid-2021; and
In August 2020, Entergy Texas and Umbriel Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 150 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Polk County, Texas.The PPA is expected to start when the facility reachesreach commercial operation in 2023.as early as June 2026.

In April 2020,July 2021, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for combined-cycle gas turbine capacitysolar generation resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and energy resources. The RFPowned resources in March 2022. One PPA was seeking upexecuted in January 2023 and the certificate of convenience and necessity for the owned resource is expected to 1,000 MW - 1,200 MW of capacity, capacity-related benefits, energy, other electric products, and environmental attributes, if any, from a single generation resource locatedbe filed with the PUCT in the “Eastern Region”mid-2024.

In April 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas’s service area. In December 2020,Arkansas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Texas posted notice that it has elected to proceed withArkansas selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in February 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the self-build alternative, Orange County Power Station. The self-build alternative will be conditioned on receipt of required internal and regulatory approvals.resources are in progress.

In June 2020,2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Louisiana, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic resources. The RFP was seeking 300 MW of energy, capacity, capacity-related benefits, other electric products, and environmental attributes from eligible new-build solar photovoltaic generationwind resources. In December 2020, Entergy Louisiana concluded evaluationsselected a combination of the RFP. Three proposalsPPA and build own transfer resources in March 2023 some of which have been placed onexecuted and are noted above, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the primary selection list and two proposals have been placed on the secondary selection list. Negotiationsremaining resources are currently in progress.

In January 2021,October 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, provided notice that it intends to issueissued an RFP for solar generationphotovoltaic and wind resources. The RFP is seeking a minimum of 200 MW throughEntergy Texas selected a combination of build-own-transferPPA and owned resources in July 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements self-build alternatives, and power purchase agreements that can provide cost-effective energy supply, fuel diversity, and other benefits to Entergy Texas customers.are in progress for all resources.

In November 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Mississippi, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Mississippi selected a combination of owned resources in May 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

Natural Gas

Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans also distribute natural gas to retail customers in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and New Orleans, Louisiana, respectively. Gas transferred to customers is measured by a meter at the customer’s property. Entergy issues monthly invoices to customers at rates approved by regulators for the volume of gas transferred to date.

Other Revenues

Entergy’s revenues from its non-utility operations include the sale of electric power and capacity to wholesale customers, day-ahead sales of energy in a market administered by an ISO, operation and management services fees, and amortization of a below-market PPA. In 2022 and 2021, the majority of revenues were from the Palisades nuclear power plant located in Michigan, which was shut down in May 2022 and subsequently sold in June 2022. Almost all of the Palisades nuclear plant output was sold under a 15-year PPA with Consumers Energy, which was executed as part of the acquisition of the plant in 2007 and expired in April 2022. Prices under the original PPA ranged from $43.50/MWh in 2007 to $61.50/MWh in 2022, and the average price under the PPA was $51/MWh. Entergy executed an additional PPA to cover the period from the expiration of the original PPA through final shutdown in May 2022 at a price of $24.14/MWh. Entergy issued monthly invoices to Consumers Energy for electric sales based on the actual output of electricity and related services provided during the previous month at the contract price.  The PPA was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition and Entergy amortized a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement.  The amount amortized each period was based upon the present value, calculated at the date of acquisition, of each year’s difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices.  Amounts amortized to revenue were $5 million in 2022 and $12 million in 2021. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Palisades plant.

236

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Practical Expedients and Exceptions

Entergy has elected not to disclose the value of unsatisfied performance obligations for contracts with an original expected term of one year or less, or for revenue recognized in an amount equal to what Entergy has the right to bill the customer for services performed.

Most of Entergy’s contracts, except in a few cases where there are defined minimums or stated terms, are on demand. This results in customer bills that vary each month based on an approved tariff and usage. Entergy imposes monthly or annual minimum requirements on some customers primarily as credit and cost recovery guarantees and not as pricing for unsatisfied performance obligations. These minimums typically expire after the initial term or when specified costs have been recovered. The minimum amounts are part of each month’s bill and recognized as revenue accordingly. Some Entergy subsidiaries in the non-utility operations business have services contracts that have fixed components and terms longer than one year. The total fixed consideration related to these unsatisfied performance obligations, however, is not material to Entergy revenues.

Recovery of Fuel Costs

Entergy’s Utility operating companies’ rate schedules include either fuel adjustment clauses or fixed fuel factors, which allow either current recovery in billings to customers or deferral of fuel costs until the costs are billed to customers. Where the fuel component of revenues is based on a pre-determined fuel cost (fixed fuel factor), the fuel factor remains in effect until changed as part of a general rate case, fuel reconciliation, or fixed fuel factor filing. System Energy’s operating revenues are intended to recover from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans operating expenses and capital costs attributable to Grand Gulf. The capital costs are based on System Energy’s common equity funds allocable to its net investment in Grand Gulf, plus System Energy’s effective interest cost for its debt allocable to its investment in Grand Gulf.

Taxes Imposed on Revenue-Producing Transactions

Governmental authorities assess taxes that are both imposed on and concurrent with a specific revenue-producing transaction between a seller and a customer, including, but not limited to, sales, use, value added, and some excise taxes.  Entergy presents these taxes on a net basis, excluding them from revenues.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

The allowance for doubtful accounts reflects Entergy’s best estimate of expected losses on its accounts receivable balances. Due to the essential nature of utility services, Entergy has historically experienced a low rate of default on its accounts receivables. The following tables set forth a reconciliation of changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022.
EntergyEntergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2022$30.9 $6.5 $7.6 $2.5 $11.9 $2.4 
Provisions38.7 9.4 13.9 7.3 3.4 4.7 
Write-offs(83.1)(20.6)(31.3)(10.4)(10.7)(10.1)
Recoveries39.4 11.9 15.9 3.9 3.2 4.5 
Balance as of December 31, 2023$25.9 $7.2 $6.1 $3.3 $7.8 $1.5 
237

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



EntergyEntergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2021$68.6 $13.1 $29.2 $7.2 $13.3 $5.8 
Provisions (a)40.6 14.9 10.7 3.2 7.7 4.1 
Write-offs(112.5)(31.2)(45.1)(12.1)(13.5)(10.6)
Recoveries34.2 9.7 12.8 4.2 4.4 3.1 
Balance as of December 31, 2022$30.9 $6.5 $7.6 $2.5 $11.9 $2.4 
(a)Provisions include estimated incremental bad debt expenses, and revisions to those estimates, resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic of ($6.4) million for Entergy, $6.4 million for Entergy Arkansas, ($8.5) million for Entergy Louisiana, ($3.0) million for Entergy New Orleans, and ($1.3) million for Entergy Texas that have been deferred as regulatory assets. See Note 2 to the financial statements for information on regulatory assets recorded as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and orders issued by retail regulators.
The allowance is calculated as the historical rate of customer write-offs multiplied by the current accounts receivable balance, taking into account the length of time the receivable balances have been outstanding. The rate of customer write-offs has historically experienced minimal variation, although general economic conditions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or other economic hardships, can affect the rate of customer write-offs. Management monitors the current condition of individual customer accounts to manage collections and ensure bad debt expense is recorded in a timely manner.

238

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy
Item 1. Business

RISK FACTORS SUMMARY

Entergy’s business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could affect its ability to successfully implement its business strategy and affect its financial results. Carefully consider all of the information in this report and, in particular, the following principal risks and all of the other specific factors described in Part I, Item 1A of this report, “Risk Factors,” before deciding whether to invest in Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Utility Regulatory Risks

The terms and conditions of service, including electric and gas rates, of the Registrant Subsidiaries are determined through regulatory approval proceedings that can be lengthy and subject to appeal, potentially resulting in lengthy litigation, and uncertainty as to ultimate results.
Entergy’s business could experience adverse effects related to changes to state or federal legislation or regulation, or experience risks associated with participation in the MISO markets and allocation of transmission upgrade costs.
The Utility operating companies recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs through rate mechanisms that are subject to risks of delay or disallowance in regulatory proceedings.
A delay or failure in recovering amounts for storm restoration costs incurred as a result of severe weather could have material effects on Entergy and its Utility operating companies affected by severe weather.
Weather, economic conditions, technological developments, and other factors may have a material impact on electricity and gas usage and otherwise materially affect the Utility operating companies’ results of operations.

Nuclear Operating, Shutdown, and Regulatory Risks

The results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy could be materially affected by the following:
inability to consistently operate their nuclear power plants at high capacity factors;
refueling outages that last materially longer than anticipated or unplanned outages;
risks related to the purchase of uranium fuel (and its conversion, enrichment, and fabrication);
the risk that the NRC will change or modify its regulations, suspend or revoke their licenses, or increase oversight of their nuclear plants;
risks and costs related to operating and maintaining their nuclear power plants;
the costs associated with the storage of the spent nuclear fuel, as well as the costs of and their ability to fully decommission their nuclear power plants;
the potential requirement to pay substantial retrospective premiums and/or assessments imposed under the Price-Anderson Act and/or by Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL) in the event of a nuclear incident, and losses not covered by insurance;
the risk that the decommissioning trust fund assets may not be adequate to meet decommissioning obligations if market performance and other changes decrease the value of assets in the decommissioning trusts; and
new or existing safety concerns regarding operating nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel.

Business Risks

Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries depend on access to the capital markets and, at times, may face potential liquidity constraints.  Disruptions in the capital and credit markets or a downgrade in Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ credit ratings could, among other things, adversely affect their ability to meet liquidity needs, or to access capital to operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital.
239

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy
The reputation of Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries may be materially adversely affected by negative publicity or the inability to meet their stated goals or commitments, among other potential causes.
Changes in tax legislation and taxation as well as the inherent difficulty in quantifying potential tax effects of business decisions could negatively impact Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to successfully execute on their business strategies, including their ability to complete capital projects, other capital improvements, and strategic transactions, is subject to significant risks, and, as a result, they may be unable to achieve some or all of the anticipated results of such strategies.
Failure to attract, retain, and manage an appropriately qualified workforce could negatively affect Entergy or its subsidiaries’ results of operations.
Entergy and its subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, may incur substantial costs (i) to fulfill their obligations related to environmental and other matters or (ii) related to reliability standards.
Entergy could be negatively affected by the effects of climate change, including physical risks, such as increased frequency and intensity of hurricanes, availability of water, droughts, and other severe weather and wildfires, and transition risks, such as environmental and regulatory obligations intended to combat the effects of climate change, including by compelling greenhouse gas emission reductions or reporting, or increasing clean or renewable energy requirements, or placing a price on greenhouse gas emissions.
Market performance and other changes may decrease the value of benefit plan assets, which then could require additional funding of such benefit plans and result in increased benefit plan costs.
The litigation environment in the states in which the Registrant Subsidiaries operate poses a significant risk to those businesses.
Terrorist attacks and sabotage, physical attacks, cyber attacks, system failures, data breaches or other disruptions of Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ or their suppliers’ physical infrastructure or technology systems may adversely affect Entergy’s business and results of operations.
Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are subject to risks associated with their ability to obtain adequate insurance at acceptable costs.
Significant increases in commodity prices, other materials and supplies, and operation and maintenance expenses may adversely affect Entergy’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
The effect of higher purchased gas cost charges to customers taking gas service may adversely affect Entergy New Orleans’s results of operations and liquidity.
System Energy owns and, through an affiliate, operates a single nuclear generating facility, and it is dependent on sales to affiliated companies for all of its revenues. Certain contractual arrangements relating to System Energy, the affiliated companies, and these revenues are the subject of ongoing litigation and regulatory proceedings. The aggregate amount of refunds claimed in these proceedings, after reduction for settlements reached with the MPSC and the APSC (subject in the latter case to approval by the FERC), exceeds the current net book value of System Energy. In the event of an adverse decision in one or more of these proceedings requiring the payment of substantial additional refunds, System Energy would be required to seek financing to pay such refunds, which financing may not be available on terms acceptable to System Energy when required.
As a holding company, Entergy Corporation depends on cash distributions from its subsidiaries to meet its debt service and other financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock, and has provided, and may continue to provide, capital contributions or debt financing to its subsidiaries, which would reduce the funds available to meet its other financial obligations.
The hazardous activities associated with power generation could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.
240

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

ENTERGY’S BUSINESS

Entergy is an integrated energy company engaged primarily in electric power production and retail distribution operations.  Entergy owns and operates power plants with approximately 24,000 MW of electric generating capacity. Entergy delivers electricity to approximately 3 million Utility customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.  Entergy had annual revenues of $12.1 billion in 2023 and had approximately 12,000 employees as of December 31, 2023.

Entergy operates primarily through a single reportable segment, Utility. The Utility segment includes the generation, transmission, distribution, and sale of electric power in portions of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana, including the City of New Orleans; and operation of a small natural gas distribution business in portions of Louisiana. See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” for discussion of the planned sale of the Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana gas distribution businesses. Entergy completed its multi-year strategy to exit the merchant nuclear power business in 2022 and upon completion of all transition activities, effective January 1, 2023, Entergy Wholesale Commodities is no longer a reportable segment. See Note 13 to the financial statements for discussion of and financial information regarding Entergy’s business segments.

Strategy

Entergy’s strategy is to operate and grow its utility business through a customer-centric approach designed to understand and meet customer needs, creating value for all of its key stakeholders, including customers, communities, employees, and owners. As part of its strategy, Entergy invests significant capital to support customer growth and its customers’ growing demands for greater reliability, resilience, and clean energy, while remaining focused on affordability. Entergy manages risks by ensuring its Utility investments are customer-driven, the result of robust analysis, supported by broad stakeholder outreach and progressive regulatory constructs, and executed with disciplined project management. Further, Entergy continues to integrate key sustainability elements, including social responsibility and good governance, into every decision it makes.

Utility

The Utility segment includes five retail electric utility subsidiaries: Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas.  These companies generate, transmit, distribute, and sell electric power to retail and wholesale customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.  Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans also provide natural gas utility services to customers in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and New Orleans, Louisiana, respectively. See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” for discussion of the planned sale of the Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana gas distribution businesses. Also included in the Utility is System Energy, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation that owns or leases 90 percent of Grand Gulf.  System Energy sells its power and capacity from Grand Gulf at wholesale to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.  The five retail utility subsidiaries are each regulated by the FERC and by state utility commissions, or, in the case of Entergy New Orleans, the City Council.  System Energy is regulated by the FERC because all of its transactions are at wholesale.  The Utility has a diverse power generation portfolio, including increasingly carbon-free energy sources, which is consistent with Entergy’s strong support for the environment.

241

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Customers

As of December 31, 2023, the Utility operating companies provided retail electric and gas service to customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, as follows:
  Electric CustomersGas Customers
 Area Served(In Thousands)(%)(In Thousands)(%)
Entergy ArkansasPortions of Arkansas730 24   
Entergy LouisianaPortions of Louisiana1,105 37 96 47 
Entergy MississippiPortions of Mississippi459 15   
Entergy New OrleansCity of New Orleans208 108 53 
Entergy TexasPortions of Texas512 17   
Total 3,014 100 204 100 

Electric and Natural Gas Energy Sales

Electric Energy Sales

The total electric energy sales of the Utility operating companies are subject to seasonal fluctuations, with the peak sales period normally occurring during the third quarter of each year.  On August 23, 2023, Entergy reached a 2023 peak demand of 23,319 MWh, compared to the 2022 peak of 22,301 MWh recorded on June 24, 2022.  Selected electric energy sales data for 2023 is shown in the table below:
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem EnergyEntergy (a)
 (GWh)
Sales to retail customers22,481 57,681 12,854 5,696 21,146 — 119,858 
Sales for resale:     
Affiliates2,218 4,406 — — — 10,574 — 
Others5,777 1,534 4,598 2,818 462 — 15,189 
Total30,476 63,621 17,452 8,514 21,608 10,574 135,047 
Average use per residential customer (kWh)12,561 14,893 14,226 12,610 14,941 — 14,089 

(a)Includes the effect of intercompany eliminations.

The following table illustrates the Utility operating companies’ 2023 combined electric sales volume as a percentage of total electric sales volume, and 2023 combined electric revenues as a percentage of total 2023 electric revenue, each by customer class.
Customer Class% of Sales Volume% of Revenue
Residential26.938.4
Commercial20.925.3
Industrial (a)39.126.8
Governmental1.82.3
Wholesale/Other11.37.2

(a)Major industrial customers are primarily in the petroleum refining and chemical industries.

242

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Natural Gas Energy Sales

Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana provide both electric power and natural gas to retail customers.  Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana sold 8,917,149 and 6,130,048 Mcf, respectively, of natural gas to retail customers in 2023.  In 2023, 99% of Entergy Louisiana’s operating revenue was derived from the electric utility business and only 1% from the natural gas distribution business.  For Entergy New Orleans, 87% of operating revenue was derived from the electric utility business and 13% from the natural gas distribution business in 2023.

Following is data concerning Entergy New Orleans’s 2023 retail operating revenue sources:
Customer Class% of Electric Operating Revenue% of Natural Gas Operating Revenue
Residential4851
Commercial3526
Industrial517
Governmental/Municipal126

Retail Rate Regulation

General (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, System Energy)

Each Utility operating company regularly participates in retail rate proceedings.  The status of material retail rate proceedings is described in Note 2 to the financial statements.  Certain aspects of the Utility operating companies and System Energy’s retail rate mechanisms are discussed below.
Rate base (in billions)Current authorized return on common equityWeighted-average cost of capital (after-tax)Equity ratioRegulatory construct
Entergy Arkansas$10.1 (a)9.15% - 10.15%5.62%38.7% (b) - forward test year formula rate plan
 - riders: fuel and purchased power, MISO, capacity, Grand Gulf, energy efficiency
Entergy Louisiana (electric)$15.7 (c)9.0% - 10.0%6.66%49.51% - formula rate plan through 2022 test year
 - riders/specific recovery: MISO, capacity, transmission, fuel, distribution, tax reform
Entergy Louisiana (gas)$0.15 (d)9.3% - 10.3%6.93%51.83% - gas rate stabilization plan
 - rider: gas infrastructure
Entergy Mississippi$4.2 (e)9.74% - 11.88%7.06%46.76% - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - riders: fuel, Grand Gulf, MISO, unit power cost, storm damage, ad valorem tax adjustment, vegetation, grid modernization, restructuring credit, power management
243

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Rate base (in billions)Current authorized return on common equityWeighted-average cost of capital (after-tax)Equity ratioRegulatory construct
Entergy New Orleans (electric)$1.2 (f)8.85% - 9.85%6.86%51% (g) - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - riders/specific recovery: fuel and purchased power, MISO, energy efficiency, environmental, capacity costs
Entergy New Orleans (gas)$0.2 (f)8.85% - 9.85%6.86%51% (g) - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - rider: purchased gas
Entergy Texas$4.4 (h)9.57%6.61%51.2% - rate case and cost recovery riders
 - riders: fuel, capacity, cost recovery riders (distribution, transmission, and generation), rate case expenses, advanced metering infrastructure surcharge, and tax reform, among others
System Energy$1.74 (i)10.94% (j)8.54%59.5% (j) - monthly cost of service

(a)Based on 2024 test year.
(b)Based on $1.9 billion in accumulated deferred income taxes at a 0% cost rate included in the weighted-average cost of capital calculation.
(c)Based on December 31, 2022 test year and excludes approximately $300 million of transmission plant investment included in the transmission recovery mechanism and approximately $200 million of distribution plant investment included in the distribution recovery mechanism, as well as approximately $400 million of net accumulated deferred tax liability items included in the tax reform adjustment mechanism.
(d)Based on September 30, 2022 test year.
(e)Based on 2023 forward test year.
(f)Based on December 31, 2022 test year and known and measurables through December 31, 2023.
(g)In October 2023 the City Council approved a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s formula rate plan, modified to reflect a 55% fixed capital structure for rate setting purposes.
(h)Based on December 31, 2021 test year.
(i)Based on calculation as of December 31, 2023.
(j)Effective July 2022, Entergy Mississippi’s bills from System Energy reflect an authorized return on equity of 9.65%, a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity, and a rate base reduction for the advance collection of sale-leaseback rental costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of ongoing proceedings at the FERC challenging System Energy’s authorized return on common equity and capital structure.

Entergy Arkansas

Formula Rate Plan

Between base rate cases, Entergy Arkansas is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize a forward test year. Entergy Arkansas is subject to a maximum rate change of 4% of the filing year total retail revenue. In addition, Entergy Arkansas is subject to a true-up of projection to actuals netted with future projection. In response to Entergy Arkansas’s application for a general change in rates in
244

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2015, the APSC approved the formula rate plan tariff proposed by Entergy Arkansas including its use of a projected year test period and an initial five-year term. The initial five-year term expired in 2021. As granted by Arkansas law, Entergy Arkansas obtained APSC approval of the extension of the formula rate plan tariff for an additional five-year term, through 2026. As part of the settlement of the 2023 formula rate plan proceeding, Entergy Arkansas agreed to file its next base rate case no later than February 2026. If Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan were terminated, Entergy Arkansas could file an application for a general change in rates that may include a request for continued regulation under a formula rate review mechanism.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Arkansas’s rate schedules include an energy cost recovery rider to recover fuel and purchased power costs in monthly bills.  The rider utilizes prior calendar year energy costs and projected energy sales for the twelve-month period commencing on April 1 of each year to develop an energy cost rate, which is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery, including carrying charges, of the energy cost for the prior calendar year.  The energy cost recovery rider tariff also allows an interim rate request depending upon the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.  In December 2007 the APSC issued an order stating that Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider will remain in effect, and any future termination of the rider would be subject to eighteen months advance notice by the APSC, which would occur following notice and hearing.

Production Cost Allocation Rider

Entergy Arkansas has in place an APSC-approved production cost allocation rider for recovery from customers of the retail portion of the costs allocated to Entergy Arkansas as a result of System Agreement proceedings.

Other

In June 2022 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff filing for a proposed green tariff designed to help participating customers meet their renewable and sustainability goals and to enhance economic development efforts in Arkansas. The APSC approved an initial offering of 100 MW of solar capacity to be made available under this tariff.

In June 2023 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s Go ZERO tariff, which provides participating industrial and commercial customers the opportunity to chose from a number of clean energy options to help them achieve their sustainability goals.

Entergy Louisiana

Formula Rate Plan

Entergy Louisiana historically sets electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan using a historic test year. The form of the formula rate plan, on a combined basis, was approved in connection with the business combination of Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and largely followed the formula rate plans that were approved by the LPSC in connection with the full electric base rate cases filed by those companies in February 2013. In 2021 the LPSC approved a settlement extending the formula rate plan for test years 2020, 2021 and 2022; certain modifications were made in that extension, including a decrease to the allowed return on equity, narrowing of the earnings “dead band” around the mid-point allowed return on equity, elimination of sharing above and below the earnings “dead band,” and the addition of a distribution cost recovery mechanism. The formula rate plan continues to include exceptions from the rate cap and sharing requirements for certain large capital investment projects, including acquisition or construction of generating facilities and purchase power agreements approved by the LPSC, certain transmission investments, and certain distribution investments, among other items. In August
245

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application for approval of a regulatory blueprint necessary for it to strengthen the electric grid for the State of Louisiana, which contains a dual-path request to update rates through either: (1) extension of Entergy Louisiana’s current formula rate plan (with certain modifications) for three years, test years 2023-2025, which is Entergy Louisiana’s recommended path; or (2) implementation of rates resulting from a cost-of-service study, with a 2024-2026 test year formula rate plan. The application complies with Entergy Louisiana’s previous formula rate plan extension order requiring that for Entergy Louisiana to obtain another extension of its formula rate plan that included a rate reset, Entergy Louisiana would need to submit a full cost-of-service/rate case. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s application.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Louisiana’s rate schedules include a fuel adjustment clause designed to recover the cost of fuel and purchased power costs.  The fuel adjustment clause contains a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense and related carrying charges arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings related to audits of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Louisiana received approval from the LPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Louisiana historically hedged approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity was reviewed on an annual basis. In January 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC to suspend these seasonal hedging programs and implement financial hedges with terms up to five years for a portion of its natural gas exposure, which was approved in November 2018.

Entergy Louisiana’s gas rates include a purchased gas adjustment clause based on estimated gas costs for the billing month adjusted by a surcharge or credit that arises from an annual reconciliation of fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Retail Rates - Gas

In accordance with the settlement of Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’s gas rate stabilization plan for the test year ended September 30, 2012, in August 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal for implementation of an infrastructure rider to recover expenditures associated with strategic plant investment and relocation projects mandated by local governments. After review by the LPSC staff and inclusion of certain customer safeguards required by the LPSC staff, in December 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted a joint settlement for implementation of an accelerated gas pipe replacement program providing for the replacement of approximately 100 miles of pipe over the next ten years, as well as relocation of certain existing pipe resulting from local government-related infrastructure projects, and for a rider to recover the investment associated with these projects. The rider allows for recovery of approximately $65 million over ten years. The rider recovery will be adjusted on a quarterly basis to include actual investment incurred for the prior quarter and is subject to the following conditions, among others: a ten-year term; application of any earnings in excess of the upper end of the earnings band as an offset to the revenue requirement of the infrastructure rider; adherence to a specified spending plan, within plus or minus 20% annually; annual filings comparing actual versus planned rider spending with actual spending and explanation of variances exceeding 10%; and an annual true-up. The joint settlement was approved by the LPSC in January 2015. Implementation of the infrastructure rider commenced with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of April 2015. In April 2022 Entergy Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal to extend the infrastructure rider to address replacement of an additional 187 miles of pipe. In December 2022 Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted an uncontested settlement that extends the rider for an additional ten years beginning after the end of the current term of the rider in 2025. The extension is subject to the same customer safeguards and conditions as the original term of the rider. The extension
246

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

allows for recovery of approximately $95 million over ten years. In February 2023, the uncontested settlement was approved by the LPSC.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In March 2016 the LPSC opened two dockets to examine, on a generic basis, issues that it identified in connection with its review of Cleco Corporation’s acquisition by third party investors.  The first docket is captioned “In re: Investigation of double leveraging issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities,” and the second is captioned “In re: Investigation of tax structure issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities.”  In April 2016 the LPSC clarified that the concerns giving rise to the two dockets arose as a result of its review of the structure of the Cleco-Macquarie transaction and that the specific intent of the directives is to seek more information regarding intra-corporate debt financing of a utility’s capital structure as well as the use of investment tax credits to mitigate the tax obligation at the parent level of a consolidated entity.  No schedule has been set for either docket, and limited discovery has occurred.

In December 2019 an LPSC commissioner issued an unopposed directive to staff to research customer-centered options for all customer classes, as well as other regulatory environments, and recommend a plan for how to ensure customers are the focus. There was no opposition to the directive from other commissioners but several remarked that the intent of the directive was not initiated to pursue retail open access. In furtherance of the directive, the LPSC issued a notice of the opening of a docket to conduct a rulemaking to research and evaluate customer-centered options for all electric customer classes as well as other regulatory environments in January 2020. To date, the LPSC staff has requested multiple rounds of comments from stakeholders and conducted one technical conference. Topics on which comments have been filed include full and limited retail access, demand response, sleeved power purchase agreements, and energy efficiency. Neither the LPSC or the LPSC staff have made recommendations or adopted any rules.

Entergy Mississippi

Formula Rate Plan

Since the conclusion in 2015 of Entergy Mississippi’s most recent base rate case, Entergy Mississippi has set electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan. Between base rate cases, Entergy Mississippi is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize forward-looking features. In addition, Entergy Mississippi is subject to an annual “look-back” evaluation. Entergy Mississippi is allowed a maximum rate increase of 4% of each test year’s retail revenue. Any increase above 4% requires a base rate case. If Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan were terminated without replacement, it would revert to the more traditional rate case environment or seek approval of a new formula rate plan.

In August 2012 the MPSC opened inquiries to review whether the then-current formulaic methodology used to calculate the return on common equity in both Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan and Mississippi Power Company’s annual formula rate plan was still appropriate or could be improved to better serve the public interest. The intent of this inquiry and review was for informational purposes only; the evaluation of any recommendations for changes to the existing methodology would take place in a general rate case or in the existing formula rate plan proceeding. In March 2013 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed its consultant’s report which noted the return on common equity estimation methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company are commonly used throughout the electric utility industry. The report suggested ways in which the methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company might be improved, but did not recommend specific changes in the
247

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

return on common equity formulas or calculations at that time. In June 2014 the MPSC expanded the scope of the August 2012 inquiry to study the merits of adopting a uniform formula rate plan that could be applied, where possible in whole or in part, to both Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company in order to achieve greater consistency in the plans. The MPSC directed the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff to investigate and review Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan rider schedule and Mississippi Power Company’s Performance Evaluation Plan by considering the merits and deficiencies and possibilities for improvement of each and then to propose a uniform formula rate plan that, where possible, could be applicable to both companies. No procedural schedule has been set. In October 2014 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff conducted a public technical conference to discuss performance benchmarking and its potential application to the electric utilities’ formula rate plans. The docket remains open.

In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for a mechanism in the formula rate plan, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi as well as to allow similar cost recovery treatment for other capacity acquisitions that are approved by the MPSC. The MPSC must approve recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment for each new resource. In addition, the MPSC approved revisions to the formula rate plan which allows Entergy Mississippi to begin billing rate adjustments effective April 1 of the filing year on a temporary basis subject to refund or credit to customers, subject to final MPSC order. The MPSC also authorized Entergy Mississippi to remove vegetation management costs from the formula rate plan and recover these costs through the establishment of a vegetation management rider.

In November 2020 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan providing for the realignment of energy efficiency costs to its formula rate plan, the deferral of energy efficiency expenditures into a regulatory asset, and the elimination of its energy efficiency cost recovery rider effective with the January 2022 billing cycle.

In June 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan to realign the recovery of certain long-term service agreement and conductor handling costs to the annual power management and grid modernization riders effective January 2023.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include energy cost recovery riders to recover fuel and purchased power costs.  The energy cost rate for each calendar year is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery of the energy costs as of the 12-month period ended September 30.  Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC. The energy cost recovery riders allow interim rate adjustments depending on the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Mississippi received approval from the MPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Mississippi hedges approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity is reviewed on an annual basis.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings regarding recovery of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs.

248

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Other

In October 2022 the MPSC adopted the Distributed Generation Rule. The Distributed Generation Rule maintains the 3% net metering participation cap. The Distributed Generation Rule grandfathers a 2.5 cents per kWh distributed generation benefits adder for 25 years and expands eligibility for the 2 cents per kWh low-income benefits adder to households up to 225% of the federal poverty level and grandfathers that adder for 25 years. The Distributed Generation Rule also directs utilities to make rate filings implementing up-front incentives for distributed generating systems and demand response battery systems, and to establish a public K-12 solar for schools program. In August 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed solar for schools rate schedule under the Distributed Generation Rule.

Entergy New Orleans

Formula Rate Plan

As part of its determination of rates in the base rate case filed by Entergy New Orleans in 2018, in November 2019, the City Council issued a resolution resolving the rate case, with rates to become effective retroactive to August 2019. The resolution allows Entergy New Orleans to implement a three-year formula rate plan, beginning with the 2019 test year as adjusted for forward-looking known and measurable changes, with the filing for the first test year to be made in 2020. In October 2020 the City Council approved an agreement in principle filed by Entergy New Orleans that results in Entergy New Orleans forgoing its 2020 formula rate plan filing and shifting the three-year formula rate plan to filings in 2021, 2022, and 2023. In September 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a motion seeking City Council approval of a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas formula rate plans, for filings in 2024, 2025, and 2026. In October 2023 the City Council granted Entergy New Orleans’s request for an extension, subject to minor modifications.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy New Orleans’s electric rate schedules include a fuel adjustment tariff designed to reflect no more than targeted fuel and purchased power costs, adjusted by a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel and purchased power costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Entergy New Orleans’s gas rate schedules include a purchased gas adjustment to reflect estimated gas costs for the billing month, adjusted by a surcharge or credit similar to that included in the electric fuel adjustment clause, including carrying charges.

To help stabilize gas costs, Entergy New Orleans seeks approval annually from the City Council to continue implementation of its natural gas hedging program consistent with the City Council’s stated policy objectives.  The program uses financial instruments to hedge exposure to volatility in the wholesale price of natural gas purchased to serve Entergy New Orleans gas customers.  Entergy New Orleans hedges up to 25% of actual gas sales made during the winter months.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

249

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Texas

Base Rates

The base rates of Entergy Texas are established largely in traditional base rate case proceedings. Between base rate proceedings, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. Entergy Texas is required to file full base rate case proceedings every four years and within eighteen months of utilizing its generation cost recovery rider for investments above $200 million.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, that are not included in base rates.  Historically, semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor have been made in March and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. In the course of this reconciliation, the PUCT determines whether eligible fuel and fuel-related expenses and revenues are necessary and reasonable and makes a prudence finding for each of the fuel-related contracts entered into during the reconciliation period. In 2023 the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to provide that material over- and under-recovered fuel balances are to be refunded or surcharged through interim fuel adjustments and that fuel reconciliations must be filed at least once every two years. Entergy Texas expects the PUCT to undertake a rulemaking to effectuate the new legislation by the end of 2024.

At the PUCT’s April 2013 open meeting, the PUCT Commissioners discussed their view that a purchased power capacity rider was good public policy. The PUCT issued an order in May 2013 adopting the rule allowing for a purchased power capacity rider, subject to an offsetting adjustment for load growth. The rule, as adopted, also includes a process for obtaining pre-approval by the PUCT of purchased power agreements to be recovered through a purchased power capacity rider. No Texas utility, including Entergy Texas, has exercised the option to recover capacity costs under the rider mechanism, but Entergy Texas will continue to evaluate the benefits of utilizing the rider to recover future capacity costs. In 2023, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit a utility to seek pre-approval from the PUCT for a purchased power agreement of three years or more if such approval is a precondition to the effectiveness of such agreements, regardless of whether the utility intends to recover costs associated with the purchased power agreement through a purchased power capacity rider.

Transmission, Distribution, and Generation Cost Recovery

As discussed above, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. These riders include a transmission cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of transmission-related capital investments, a distribution cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of distribution-related capital investment, and a generation cost recovery rider mechanism for the recovery of generation-related capital investments.

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas containing provisions that allow Entergy Texas to take advantage of a cost recovery mechanism that permits annual filings for the recovery of reasonable and necessary expenditures for transmission infrastructure improvement and changes in wholesale transmission charges. This mechanism was previously available to other non-ERCOT Texas utility companies, but not to Entergy Texas.

In September 2011 the PUCT adopted a proposed rule implementing a distribution cost recovery factor to recover capital and capital-related costs related to distribution infrastructure.  The distribution cost recovery factor permitted utilities once per year to implement an increase or decrease in rates above or below amounts reflected in base rates to reflect distribution-related depreciation expense, federal income tax and other taxes, and return on investment.  In 2023, the Texas Legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit utilities to update their
250

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

distribution cost recovery factors up to twice per year and to require the PUCT to issue an order on such update applications within 60 days, with a 15-day extension permitted for good cause.

In September 2019 the PUCT initiated a rulemaking to promulgate a generation cost recovery rider rule, implementing legislation passed in the 2019 Texas legislative session intended to allow electric utilities to recover generation investments between base rate proceedings.  The PUCT approved the final rule in July 2020.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Texas’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In January 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application requesting approval to implement two voluntary renewable option tariffs, Rider Small Volume Renewable Option (Rider SVRO) and Rider Large Volume Renewable Option (Rider LVRO). Both tariffs are voluntary offerings that give customers the ability to match some or all of their monthly electricity usage with renewable energy credits that are purchased by Entergy Texas and retired on the customer’s behalf. Voluntary participation in either Rider SVRO or Rider LVRO and the charges assessed under the respective tariff would be in addition to the charges paid by customers under their otherwise applicable rate schedules and riders. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement agreement supporting approval of Entergy Texas’s proposed voluntary renewable option tariffs. As part of the settlement agreement, Entergy Texas agreed to revise the cost allocation between the rate tiers of Rider SVRO and committed to collaborating with and considering the input of customers to develop an asset-backed green tariff program. The PUCT approved the settlement agreement in August 2022.

As part of its rate case application filed with the PUCT in July 2022, Entergy Texas requested approval of Schedule Green Future Option (Schedule GFO), an asset-backed green tariff that would allow Entergy Texas’s customers to voluntarily subscribe to a portion of the underlying solar facility’s capacity in exchange for energy credits. In August 2023 the PUCT approved an unopposed settlement in the proceeding that included approval of Schedule GFO.

Electric Industry Restructuring

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas that required Entergy Texas to cease all activities relating to Entergy Texas’s transition to competition.  The law allows Entergy Texas to remain a part of the SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC) Region, although it does not prevent Entergy Texas from joining another power region.  The law provides that proceedings to certify a power region that Entergy Texas belongs to as a qualified power region can be initiated by the PUCT, or on motion by another party, when the conditions supporting such a proceeding exist.  Under the law, the PUCT may not approve a transition to competition plan for Entergy Texas until the expiration of four years from the PUCT’s certification of a qualified power region for Entergy Texas.

The law further amended already existing law that had required Entergy Texas to propose for PUCT approval a tariff to allow eligible customers the ability to contract for competitive generation.  The amending language in the law provides, among other things, that: (1) the tariff shall not be implemented in a manner that harms the sustainability or competitiveness of manufacturers who choose not to participate in the tariff; (2) Entergy Texas shall “purchase competitive generation service, selected by the customer, and provide the generation at retail to the customer;” and (3) Entergy Texas shall provide and price transmission service and ancillary services under that tariff at a rate that is unbundled from its cost of service.  The law directs that the PUCT may not issue an order on the tariff that is contrary to an applicable decision, rule, or policy statement of a federal regulatory agency having jurisdiction. The PUCT determined that unrecovered costs that may be recovered through the rider consist only of those costs necessary to implement and administer the competitive generation program and do not include lost
251

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

revenues or embedded generation costs.  The amount of customer load that may be included in the competitive generation service program is limited to 115 MW.

System Energy

Cost of Service

The rates of System Energy are established by the FERC, and the costs allowed to be charged pursuant to these rates are, in turn, passed through to the participating Utility operating companies through the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which has monthly billings that reflect the current operating costs of, and investment in, Grand Gulf. Retail regulators and other parties may seek to initiate proceedings at FERC to investigate the prudence of costs included in the rates charged under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and examine, among other things, the reasonableness or prudence of the operation and maintenance practices, level of expenditures, allowed rates of return and rate base, and previously incurred capital expenditures. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including challenges with respect to System Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period. Beginning in 2021, System Energy implemented billing protocols to provide retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. Entergy cannot predict the outcome of any of these proceedings, and an adverse outcome in any of them could have a material adverse effect on Entergy’s or System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings.

Franchises

Entergy Arkansas holds exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 308 incorporated cities and towns in Arkansas.  These franchises generally are unlimited in duration and continue unless the municipalities purchase the utility property.  In Arkansas, franchises are considered to be contracts and, therefore, are governed pursuant to the terms of the franchise agreement and applicable statutes.

Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 175 incorporated municipalities and in the unincorporated areas of approximately 59 parishes of Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide natural gas service to customers in the City of Baton Rouge and in East Baton Rouge Parish.  Municipal franchise agreement terms range from 25 to 60 years while parish franchise terms range from 25 to 99 years.

Entergy Mississippi has received from the MPSC certificates of public convenience and necessity to provide electric service to areas within 45 counties, including a number of municipalities, in western Mississippi.  Under Mississippi statutory law, such certificates are exclusive.  Entergy Mississippi may continue to serve in such municipalities upon payment of a statutory franchise fee, regardless of whether an original municipal franchise is still in existence.

Entergy New Orleans provides electric and gas service in the City of New Orleans pursuant to indeterminate permits set forth in city ordinances.  These ordinances contain a continuing option for the City of New Orleans to purchase Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas utility properties.

Entergy Texas holds a certificate of convenience and necessity from the PUCT to provide electric service to areas within approximately 27 counties in eastern Texas and holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric
252

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

service in approximately 70 incorporated municipalities.  Entergy Texas typically obtains 25-year franchise agreements as existing agreements expire.  Entergy Texas’s electric franchises expire over the period 2024-2058.

The business of System Energy is limited to wholesale power sales.  It has no distribution franchises.

Property and Other Generation Resources

Owned Generating Stations

The total capability of the generating stations owned and leased by the Utility operating companies and System Energy as of December 31, 2023 is indicated below:
 Owned and Leased Capability MW(a)
CompanyTotalCT / CCGT (b)Legacy Gas/OilNuclearCoalHydroSolar
Entergy Arkansas5,036 1,548 521 1,825 969 73 100 
Entergy Louisiana10,798 5,594 2,728 2,137 339 — — 
Entergy Mississippi2,904 1,744 641 — 417 — 102 
Entergy New Orleans662 635 — — — — 27 
Entergy Texas3,234 990 1,994 — 250 — — 
System Energy1,245 — — 1,245 — — — 
Total23,879 10,511 5,884 5,207 1,975 73 229 

(a)“Owned and Leased Capability” is the dependable load carrying capability as demonstrated under actual operating conditions based on the primary fuel (assuming no curtailments) that each station was designed to utilize.
(b)Represents Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.

Summer peak load for the Utility has averaged 21,775 MW over the previous decade.

The Utility operating companies’ load and capacity projections are reviewed periodically to assess the need and timing for additional generating capacity and interconnections. These reviews consider existing and projected demand, the availability and price of power, the location of new load, the economy, Entergy’s clean energy and other public policy goals, environmental regulations, and the age and condition of Entergy’s existing infrastructure.

The Utility operating companies’ long-term resource strategy (Portfolio Transformation Strategy) calls for the bulk of capacity needs to be met through long-term resources, whether owned or contracted. Over the past decade, the Portfolio Transformation Strategy has resulted in the addition of about 7,963 MW of new long-term resources and the deactivation of about 4,241 MW of legacy generation. As MISO market participants, the Utility operating companies also participate in MISO’s Day Ahead and Real Time Energy and Ancillary Services markets to economically dispatch generation and purchase energy to serve customers reliably and at the lowest reasonable cost.

Other Generation Resources

RFP Procurements From Third Parties

The Utility operating companies have also made resource acquisitions outsidefrom time-to-time issue requests for proposals (RFP) to procure supply-side resources from sources other than the spot market to meet the unique regional needs of the RFP process, including Entergy Mississippi’s January 2006 acquisition ofUtility operating companies. The RFPs issued by the 480 MW, combined-cycle, gas-fired Attala power plant; Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’s March 2008 acquisition of the 322 MW, simple-cycle, gas-fired Calcasieu Generating Facility; Entergy Louisiana’s April 2011 acquisition of the 580 MW, combined-cycle, gas-fired Acadia Energy Center Unit 2; Entergy Arkansas’s (Power Block 2), Entergy Louisiana’s (Power Blocks 3 and 4), and Entergy New Orleans’s (Power Block 1) March 2016 acquisitions of the 1,980 MW (summer rating), natural gas-fired, combined-cycle gas turbine Union Power Station power blocks, each rated at 495 MW (summer rating); and Entergy Mississippi’s October 2019 acquisition of the 810 MW, combined-cycle, natural gas-fired Choctaw Generating Station. The Utility operating companies have also entered into various limited- andsought resources needed to meet near-term MISO reliability requirements as well as long-term contracts in recent years asrequirements through a resultbroad range of bilateral negotiations.

The Washington Parish Energy Center is a 361 MW natural gas-fired peakingwholesale power plant approximately 60 miles north of New Orleans on a site Entergy Louisiana purchased from Calpine in 2019. In May 2018, Entergy Louisiana received LPSC approval of its certification application for this simple-cycle power plant to be developed pursuant to an agreement between Calpine and Entergy Louisiana. Calpine began construction on the plant in early 2019 and Entergy Louisiana purchased the plant upon completion in November 2020.

The Hardin County Peaking Facility is an existing 147 MW simple-cycle gas-fired peaking power plant in Kountze, Texas, owned by East Texas Electric Cooperative. Entergy Texas is currently seeking regulatory certification to move forward with the purchase of the facility. The facility has been in operation since January 2010.


253

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Power Through Programproducts, including long-term contractual products and asset acquisitions. The RFP process has resulted in selections or acquisitions, including, among other things:

Entergy Texas’s construction of the 993 MW, combined-cycle, gas turbine Montgomery County Power Station at its existing Lewis Creek electric generating station. The facility began commercial operation in January 2021;
In December 2020, Entergy Texas selected the self-build alternative, Orange County Advanced Power Station, out of the 2020 Entergy Texas combined-cycle, gas turbine RFP. Regulatory approval was received in November 2022 and construction has commenced. The facility is expected to be in service by mid-2026;
In March 2019, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Searcy Solar facility, sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas. Entergy Arkansas received regulatory approval from the APSC in April 2020, and closed on the acquisition, through use of a tax equity partnership, in December 2021. The Searcy Solar facility was placed in service in January 2022;
In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Sunflower Solar facility, sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi. Entergy Mississippi received regulatory approval from the MPSC in April 2020, and the Sunflower Solar facility began commercial operation in September 2022;
In June 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Walnut Bend Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Lee County, Arkansas. In July 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the Walnut Bend Solar facility. The counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was terminating the project, though it was willing to consider an alternative for the site. Entergy Arkansas disputed the right of termination, and in February 2023 an amendment to the agreement was executed by the parties. In July 2023 the APSC issued an order approving the revisions to the agreement and full notice to proceed was issued shortly thereafter. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of approximately $169.7 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is completed and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to achieve commercial operation in the first half of 2024;
In September 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 180 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, West Memphis Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,500 acres in Crittenden County, Arkansas. In October 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the West Memphis Solar facility. In March 2022 the counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was seeking changes to certain terms of the build-own-transfer agreement, including both cost and schedule. In January 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed ana supplemental application with the PUCTAPSC. Following the APSC’s approval of the supplemental application in March 2023, full notice to amend its certificateproceed was issued in April 2023 and the project is currently expected to achieve commercial operation by the end of convenience and necessity to own and operate up to 75 MW of natural gas-fired distributed generation that is to be installed at commercial and industrial customer premises. If approved, Entergy Texas would own and operate a fleet of generators ranging from 100 kW to 10 MW that would supply a portion of Entergy Texas’s long-term resource needs and enhance the resiliency of Entergy Texas’s electric grid. This fleet of generators would also be available to customers during outages to supply backup electric service as part of a program known as “Power Through.” 2024;

Interconnections

In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 150 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, St. Jacques facility, that will be sited in St. James Parish near Vacherie, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the St. Jacques facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the St. Jacques facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
The Utility operating companies’ generating units are interconnected to a transmission system operating at various voltages up to 500 kV.  These generating units consist of steam-electric production facilities, combustion-turbine generators, pressurized and boiling water nuclear reactors, and inverter-based technologies operating in the MISO energy and ancillary services market. Entergy’s Utility operating companies are MISO market participants and are interconnected with many neighboring utilities.  MISO isIn August 2022, Entergy Arkansas signed an essential link in the safe, cost-effective delivery of electric power across all or parts of 15 U.S. states and the Canadian province of Manitoba. As a Regional Transmission Organization, MISO assures consumers of unbiased regional grid management and open access to the transmission facilities under MISO’s functional supervision. In addition, the Utility operating companies are members of SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC). SERC is a nonprofit corporation responsible for promoting and improving the reliability, adequacy, and critical infrastructure of the bulk power supply systems in all or portions of 16 central and southeastern states.SERC serves as a regional entity with delegated authority from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)agreement for the purposepurchase of proposing and enforcing Bulk Electric System reliability standards within the SERC Region.

Gas Property

As of December 31, 2020, Entergy New Orleans distributed and transported natural gas for distribution within New Orleans, Louisiana, throughan approximately 2,600 miles of gas pipeline.  As of December 31, 2020, the gas properties of Entergy Louisiana, which are located250 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Driver Solar facility, that will be sited near Osceola, Arkansas. Also in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, were not material to Entergy Louisiana’s financial position.

Title

The Utility operating companies’ generating stations are generally located on properties owned in fee simple.  Most of the substations and transmission and distribution lines are constructed on private property or public rights-of-way pursuant to easements, servitudes, or appropriate franchises.  Some substation properties are owned in fee simple.  The Utility operating companies generally have the right of eminent domain, whereby they may perfect title to, or secure easements or servitudes on, private property for their utility operations.

Substantially all of the physical properties and assets owned byAugust 2022, Entergy Arkansas Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy are subject toreceived necessary approvals for the liens of mortgages securing bonds issued by those companies.  The Lewis Creek generating station of Entergy Texas was acquired by merger with a subsidiary of Entergy Texas and is currently not subject to the lien of the Entergy Texas indenture.


Driver Solar
254

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Fuel Supplyfacility, and Entergy Arkansas has issued the counterparty full notice to proceed to begin construction. The project is expected to achieve commercial operation as early as mid-2024; and
Entergy Louisiana expects to start construction on the 49 MW Sterlington Solar project in the fourth quarter 2024, located in Sterlington, Louisiana. The facility is expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2026.

The sourcesRFP process has also resulted in the selection, or confirmation of the economic merits of, long-term purchased power agreements (PPAs), including, among others:

River Bend’s 30% life-of-unit PPA between Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans for 100 MW related to Entergy Louisiana’s unregulated portion of the River Bend nuclear station, which portion was formerly owned by Cajun;
Entergy Arkansas’s wholesale base load capacity life-of-unit PPAs executed in 2003 totaling approximately 220 MW between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana (110 MW) and between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy New Orleans (110 MW) related to the sale of a portion of Entergy Arkansas’s coal and nuclear base load resources (which had not been included in Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates);
In September 2012, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Rain CII Carbon LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 28 MW, with the potential to purchase an additional 9 MW when available, from a petroleum coke calcining facility in Sulphur, Louisiana. The facility began commercial operation in May 2013. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with the facility;
In March 2013, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Agrilectric Power Partners, LP executed a 20-year agreement for 8.5 MW from a refurbished rice hull-fueled electric generation facility located in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with Agrilectric;
In September 2013, Entergy Louisiana and average fuel cost per kWhTX LFG Energy, LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Montauk Energy Holdings, LLC, executed a 10-year agreement to purchase approximately 3 MW from its landfill gas-fueled power generation facility located in Cleveland, Texas;
Entergy Mississippi’s cost-based purchase, beginning in January 2013, of 90 MW from Entergy Arkansas’s share of Grand Gulf (only 60 MW of this PPA came through the RFP process). Cost recovery for the 90 MW was approved by the MPSC in January 2013;
In April 2015, Entergy Arkansas and Stuttgart Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 81 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generation facility located near Stuttgart, Arkansas. The APSC approved the project and deliveries pursuant to that agreement commenced in June 2018;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and LS Power executed a 10-year agreement for 485 MW from the Carville Energy Center located in St. Gabriel, Louisiana. In November 2019, LS Power sold and transferred the Carville Energy Center and facility to Argo Infrastructure Partners, which included the power purchase agreement;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and Occidental Chemical Corporation executed a 10-year agreement for 500 MW from the Taft Cogeneration facility located in Hahnville, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval and began in June 2018;
In June 2017, Entergy Arkansas and Chicot Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Chicot County, Arkansas. The transaction received regulatory approval and the PPA began in November 2020;
In February 2018, Entergy Louisiana and LA3 West Baton Rouge, LLC (Capital Region Solar project) executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in February 2019 and the PPA began in October 2020;
In July 2018, Entergy New Orleans and St. James Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 20 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and the PPA began in February 2023 after the facility reached commercial operation in March 2023;
255

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy for the years 2018-2020 were:
 Natural GasNuclearCoalPurchased PowerMISO Purchases
Year% of GenCents Per kWh% of GenCents Per kWh% of GenCents Per kWh% of GenCents Per kWh% of GenCents Per kWh
202047 1.92 29 0.57 2.54 4.36 13 2.48 
201940 2.33 28 0.73 2.31 4.86 18 2.71 
201839 2.84 27 0.84 2.24 5.23 17 3.71 

ActualIn August 2018, Entergy Louisiana and South Alexander Development I, LLC executed a 5-year agreement for 5 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Livingston Parish, Louisiana. The PPA began in December 2020 and projectedreceived regulatory approval in January 2021;
In February 2019, Entergy New Orleans and Iris Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and achieved commercial operation in November 2022;
In August 2020, Entergy Texas and Umbriel Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Polk County, Texas. The facility achieved commercial operation in November 2023;
In June 2021, sourcesEntergy Louisiana and Sunlight Road Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve the order including this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Sunlight Road facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2024;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Vacherie Solar Energy Center, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the Vacherie facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the Vacherie facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of generationthe St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In December 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Hinds Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Hinds County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in June 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Wildwood Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Tallahatchie County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in May 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Greer Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 170 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Washington County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Flat Fork Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in St. Francis County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Forgeview Solar, LLC executed a 15-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Mississippi County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In January 2023, Entergy Texas and Piney Woods Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Walker County, Texas. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026;
In January 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Coastal Prairie Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 175 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Iberville Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC
256

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy including certain power purchases

requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as December 2025; and
In October 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Mondu Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from affiliates under lifea to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Point Coupee Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of unit power purchase agreements, including the Unit Power Sales Agreement, are:
 Natural GasNuclearCoalPurchased Power (d)MISO Purchases (e)
 2020202120202021202020212020202120202021
Entergy Arkansas (a)24 %35 %60 %51 %10 %13 %%%%— 
Entergy Louisiana51 %59 %26 %27 %%%%12 %13 %— 
Entergy Mississippi (b)73 %69 %14 %22 %%%— — %— 
Entergy New Orleans (b)55 %56 %33 %40 %%%%%%— 
Entergy Texas39 %60 %11 %13 %%%23 %21 %25 %— 
System Energy (c)— — 100 %100 %— — — — — — 
Utility (a) (b)47 %55 %29 %31 %%%%%13 %— 
agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026.

(a)Hydroelectric power provided less than 1%In July 2021, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Arkansas’sTexas, issued an RFP for solar generation resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in 2020March 2022. One PPA was executed in January 2023 and the certificate of convenience and necessity for the owned resource is expected to provide less than 1% of its generationbe filed with the PUCT in 2021.
(b)Solar power provided less than 1% of Entergy Mississippi’s and Entergy New Orleans's generation in 2020 and is expected to provide less than 1% of each of Entergy Mississippi’s and Entergy New Orleans's generation in 2021.
(c)Capacity and energy from System Energy’s interest in Grand Gulf is allocated as follows under the Unit Power Sales Agreement: Entergy Arkansas - 36%; Entergy Louisiana - 14%; Entergy Mississippi - 33%; and Entergy New Orleans - 17%.  Pursuant to purchased power agreements, Entergy Arkansas is selling a portion of its owned capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.
(d)Excludes MISO purchases.
(e)In December 2013, Entergy integrated its transmission system into the MISO RTO. Entergy offers all of its generation into the MISO energy market on a day-ahead and real-time basis and bids for power in the MISO energy market to serve the demand of its customers, with MISO making dispatch decisions. The MISO purchases metric provided for 2020 is not projected for 2021.mid-2024.

SomeIn April 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Arkansas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Arkansas selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in February 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the Utility’s gas-fired plantsresources are also capable of using fuel oil, if necessary. Although based on current economics the Utility does not expect fuel oil use in 2021, it is possible that various operational events including weather or pipeline maintenance may require the use of fuel oil.progress.

In June 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Louisiana, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Louisiana selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in March 2023 some of which have been executed and are noted above, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the remaining resources are in progress.

In October 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in July 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

In November 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Mississippi, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Mississippi selected a combination of owned resources in May 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

Natural Gas

Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans also distribute natural gas to retail customers in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and New Orleans, Louisiana, respectively. Gas transferred to customers is measured by a meter at the customer’s property. Entergy issues monthly invoices to customers at rates approved by regulators for the volume of gas transferred to date.

Other Revenues

Entergy’s revenues from its non-utility operations include the sale of electric power and capacity to wholesale customers, day-ahead sales of energy in a market administered by an ISO, operation and management services fees, and amortization of a below-market PPA. In 2022 and 2021, the majority of revenues were from the Palisades nuclear power plant located in Michigan, which was shut down in May 2022 and subsequently sold in June 2022. Almost all of the Palisades nuclear plant output was sold under a 15-year PPA with Consumers Energy, which was executed as part of the acquisition of the plant in 2007 and expired in April 2022. Prices under the original PPA ranged from $43.50/MWh in 2007 to $61.50/MWh in 2022, and the average price under the PPA was $51/MWh. Entergy executed an additional PPA to cover the period from the expiration of the original PPA through final shutdown in May 2022 at a price of $24.14/MWh. Entergy issued monthly invoices to Consumers Energy for electric sales based on the actual output of electricity and related services provided during the previous month at the contract price.  The PPA was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition and Entergy amortized a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement.  The amount amortized each period was based upon the present value, calculated at the date of acquisition, of each year’s difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices.  Amounts amortized to revenue were $5 million in 2022 and $12 million in 2021. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the sale of the Palisades plant.

236

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements

Practical Expedients and Exceptions

Entergy has elected not to disclose the value of unsatisfied performance obligations for contracts with an original expected term of one year or less, or for revenue recognized in an amount equal to what Entergy has the right to bill the customer for services performed.

Most of Entergy’s contracts, except in a few cases where there are defined minimums or stated terms, are on demand. This results in customer bills that vary each month based on an approved tariff and usage. Entergy imposes monthly or annual minimum requirements on some customers primarily as credit and cost recovery guarantees and not as pricing for unsatisfied performance obligations. These minimums typically expire after the initial term or when specified costs have been recovered. The minimum amounts are part of each month’s bill and recognized as revenue accordingly. Some Entergy subsidiaries in the non-utility operations business have services contracts that have fixed components and terms longer than one year. The total fixed consideration related to these unsatisfied performance obligations, however, is not material to Entergy revenues.

Recovery of Fuel Costs

Entergy’s Utility operating companies’ rate schedules include either fuel adjustment clauses or fixed fuel factors, which allow either current recovery in billings to customers or deferral of fuel costs until the costs are billed to customers. Where the fuel component of revenues is based on a pre-determined fuel cost (fixed fuel factor), the fuel factor remains in effect until changed as part of a general rate case, fuel reconciliation, or fixed fuel factor filing. System Energy’s operating revenues are intended to recover from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans operating expenses and capital costs attributable to Grand Gulf. The capital costs are based on System Energy’s common equity funds allocable to its net investment in Grand Gulf, plus System Energy’s effective interest cost for its debt allocable to its investment in Grand Gulf.

Taxes Imposed on Revenue-Producing Transactions

Governmental authorities assess taxes that are both imposed on and concurrent with a specific revenue-producing transaction between a seller and a customer, including, but not limited to, sales, use, value added, and some excise taxes.  Entergy presents these taxes on a net basis, excluding them from revenues.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

The allowance for doubtful accounts reflects Entergy’s best estimate of expected losses on its accounts receivable balances. Due to the essential nature of utility services, Entergy has historically experienced a low rate of default on its accounts receivables. The following tables set forth a reconciliation of changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022.
EntergyEntergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2022$30.9 $6.5 $7.6 $2.5 $11.9 $2.4 
Provisions38.7 9.4 13.9 7.3 3.4 4.7 
Write-offs(83.1)(20.6)(31.3)(10.4)(10.7)(10.1)
Recoveries39.4 11.9 15.9 3.9 3.2 4.5 
Balance as of December 31, 2023$25.9 $7.2 $6.1 $3.3 $7.8 $1.5 
237

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Financial Statements



EntergyEntergy
Arkansas
Entergy
Louisiana
Entergy
Mississippi
Entergy
New
Orleans
Entergy
Texas
 (In Millions)
Balance as of December 31, 2021$68.6 $13.1 $29.2 $7.2 $13.3 $5.8 
Provisions (a)40.6 14.9 10.7 3.2 7.7 4.1 
Write-offs(112.5)(31.2)(45.1)(12.1)(13.5)(10.6)
Recoveries34.2 9.7 12.8 4.2 4.4 3.1 
Balance as of December 31, 2022$30.9 $6.5 $7.6 $2.5 $11.9 $2.4 
(a)Provisions include estimated incremental bad debt expenses, and revisions to those estimates, resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic of ($6.4) million for Entergy, $6.4 million for Entergy Arkansas, ($8.5) million for Entergy Louisiana, ($3.0) million for Entergy New Orleans, and ($1.3) million for Entergy Texas that have been deferred as regulatory assets. See Note 2 to the financial statements for information on regulatory assets recorded as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and orders issued by retail regulators.
The allowance is calculated as the historical rate of customer write-offs multiplied by the current accounts receivable balance, taking into account the length of time the receivable balances have been outstanding. The rate of customer write-offs has historically experienced minimal variation, although general economic conditions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or other economic hardships, can affect the rate of customer write-offs. Management monitors the current condition of individual customer accounts to manage collections and ensure bad debt expense is recorded in a timely manner.

238

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy
Item 1. Business

RISK FACTORS SUMMARY

Entergy’s business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could affect its ability to successfully implement its business strategy and affect its financial results. Carefully consider all of the information in this report and, in particular, the following principal risks and all of the other specific factors described in Part I, Item 1A of this report, “Risk Factors,” before deciding whether to invest in Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Utility Regulatory Risks

The terms and conditions of service, including electric and gas rates, of the Registrant Subsidiaries are determined through regulatory approval proceedings that can be lengthy and subject to appeal, potentially resulting in lengthy litigation, and uncertainty as to ultimate results.
Entergy’s business could experience adverse effects related to changes to state or federal legislation or regulation, or experience risks associated with participation in the MISO markets and allocation of transmission upgrade costs.
The Utility operating companies recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs through rate mechanisms that are subject to risks of delay or disallowance in regulatory proceedings.
A delay or failure in recovering amounts for storm restoration costs incurred as a result of severe weather could have material effects on Entergy and its Utility operating companies affected by severe weather.
Weather, economic conditions, technological developments, and other factors may have a material impact on electricity and gas usage and otherwise materially affect the Utility operating companies’ results of operations.

Nuclear Operating, Shutdown, and Regulatory Risks

The results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy could be materially affected by the following:
inability to consistently operate their nuclear power plants at high capacity factors;
refueling outages that last materially longer than anticipated or unplanned outages;
risks related to the purchase of uranium fuel (and its conversion, enrichment, and fabrication);
the risk that the NRC will change or modify its regulations, suspend or revoke their licenses, or increase oversight of their nuclear plants;
risks and costs related to operating and maintaining their nuclear power plants;
the costs associated with the storage of the spent nuclear fuel, as well as the costs of and their ability to fully decommission their nuclear power plants;
the potential requirement to pay substantial retrospective premiums and/or assessments imposed under the Price-Anderson Act and/or by Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL) in the event of a nuclear incident, and losses not covered by insurance;
the risk that the decommissioning trust fund assets may not be adequate to meet decommissioning obligations if market performance and other changes decrease the value of assets in the decommissioning trusts; and
new or existing safety concerns regarding operating nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel.

Business Risks

Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries depend on access to the capital markets and, at times, may face potential liquidity constraints.  Disruptions in the capital and credit markets or a downgrade in Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ credit ratings could, among other things, adversely affect their ability to meet liquidity needs, or to access capital to operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital.
239

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy
The reputation of Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries may be materially adversely affected by negative publicity or the inability to meet their stated goals or commitments, among other potential causes.
Changes in tax legislation and taxation as well as the inherent difficulty in quantifying potential tax effects of business decisions could negatively impact Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to successfully execute on their business strategies, including their ability to complete capital projects, other capital improvements, and strategic transactions, is subject to significant risks, and, as a result, they may be unable to achieve some or all of the anticipated results of such strategies.
Failure to attract, retain, and manage an appropriately qualified workforce could negatively affect Entergy or its subsidiaries’ results of operations.
Entergy and its subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, may incur substantial costs (i) to fulfill their obligations related to environmental and other matters or (ii) related to reliability standards.
Entergy could be negatively affected by the effects of climate change, including physical risks, such as increased frequency and intensity of hurricanes, availability of water, droughts, and other severe weather and wildfires, and transition risks, such as environmental and regulatory obligations intended to combat the effects of climate change, including by compelling greenhouse gas emission reductions or reporting, or increasing clean or renewable energy requirements, or placing a price on greenhouse gas emissions.
Market performance and other changes may decrease the value of benefit plan assets, which then could require additional funding of such benefit plans and result in increased benefit plan costs.
The litigation environment in the states in which the Registrant Subsidiaries operate poses a significant risk to those businesses.
Terrorist attacks and sabotage, physical attacks, cyber attacks, system failures, data breaches or other disruptions of Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ or their suppliers’ physical infrastructure or technology systems may adversely affect Entergy’s business and results of operations.
Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are subject to risks associated with their ability to obtain adequate insurance at acceptable costs.
Significant increases in commodity prices, other materials and supplies, and operation and maintenance expenses may adversely affect Entergy’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.
The effect of higher purchased gas cost charges to customers taking gas service may adversely affect Entergy New Orleans’s results of operations and liquidity.
System Energy owns and, through an affiliate, operates a single nuclear generating facility, and it is dependent on sales to affiliated companies for all of its revenues. Certain contractual arrangements relating to System Energy, the affiliated companies, and these revenues are the subject of ongoing litigation and regulatory proceedings. The aggregate amount of refunds claimed in these proceedings, after reduction for settlements reached with the MPSC and the APSC (subject in the latter case to approval by the FERC), exceeds the current net book value of System Energy. In the event of an adverse decision in one or more of these proceedings requiring the payment of substantial additional refunds, System Energy would be required to seek financing to pay such refunds, which financing may not be available on terms acceptable to System Energy when required.
As a holding company, Entergy Corporation depends on cash distributions from its subsidiaries to meet its debt service and other financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock, and has provided, and may continue to provide, capital contributions or debt financing to its subsidiaries, which would reduce the funds available to meet its other financial obligations.
The hazardous activities associated with power generation could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.
240

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

ENTERGY’S BUSINESS

Entergy is an integrated energy company engaged primarily in electric power production and retail distribution operations.  Entergy owns and operates power plants with approximately 24,000 MW of electric generating capacity. Entergy delivers electricity to approximately 3 million Utility customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.  Entergy had annual revenues of $12.1 billion in 2023 and had approximately 12,000 employees as of December 31, 2023.

Entergy operates primarily through a single reportable segment, Utility. The Utility segment includes the generation, transmission, distribution, and sale of electric power in portions of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana, including the City of New Orleans; and operation of a small natural gas distribution business in portions of Louisiana. See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” for discussion of the planned sale of the Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana gas distribution businesses. Entergy completed its multi-year strategy to exit the merchant nuclear power business in 2022 and upon completion of all transition activities, effective January 1, 2023, Entergy Wholesale Commodities is no longer a reportable segment. See Note 13 to the financial statements for discussion of and financial information regarding Entergy’s business segments.

Strategy

Entergy’s strategy is to operate and grow its utility business through a customer-centric approach designed to understand and meet customer needs, creating value for all of its key stakeholders, including customers, communities, employees, and owners. As part of its strategy, Entergy invests significant capital to support customer growth and its customers’ growing demands for greater reliability, resilience, and clean energy, while remaining focused on affordability. Entergy manages risks by ensuring its Utility investments are customer-driven, the result of robust analysis, supported by broad stakeholder outreach and progressive regulatory constructs, and executed with disciplined project management. Further, Entergy continues to integrate key sustainability elements, including social responsibility and good governance, into every decision it makes.

Utility

The Utility segment includes five retail electric utility subsidiaries: Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas.  These companies generate, transmit, distribute, and sell electric power to retail and wholesale customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.  Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans also provide natural gas utility services to customers in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and New Orleans, Louisiana, respectively. See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” for discussion of the planned sale of the Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana gas distribution businesses. Also included in the Utility is System Energy, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation that owns or leases 90 percent of Grand Gulf.  System Energy sells its power and capacity from Grand Gulf at wholesale to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.  The five retail utility subsidiaries are each regulated by the FERC and by state utility commissions, or, in the case of Entergy New Orleans, the City Council.  System Energy is regulated by the FERC because all of its transactions are at wholesale.  The Utility has a diverse power generation portfolio, including increasingly carbon-free energy sources, which is consistent with Entergy’s strong support for the environment.

241

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Customers

As of December 31, 2023, the Utility operating companies provided retail electric and gas service to customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, as follows:
  Electric CustomersGas Customers
 Area Served(In Thousands)(%)(In Thousands)(%)
Entergy ArkansasPortions of Arkansas730 24   
Entergy LouisianaPortions of Louisiana1,105 37 96 47 
Entergy MississippiPortions of Mississippi459 15   
Entergy New OrleansCity of New Orleans208 108 53 
Entergy TexasPortions of Texas512 17   
Total 3,014 100 204 100 

Electric and Natural Gas Energy Sales

Electric Energy Sales

The total electric energy sales of the Utility operating companies are subject to seasonal fluctuations, with the peak sales period normally occurring during the third quarter of each year.  On August 23, 2023, Entergy reached a 2023 peak demand of 23,319 MWh, compared to the 2022 peak of 22,301 MWh recorded on June 24, 2022.  Selected electric energy sales data for 2023 is shown in the table below:
 Entergy ArkansasEntergy LouisianaEntergy MississippiEntergy New OrleansEntergy TexasSystem EnergyEntergy (a)
 (GWh)
Sales to retail customers22,481 57,681 12,854 5,696 21,146 — 119,858 
Sales for resale:     
Affiliates2,218 4,406 — — — 10,574 — 
Others5,777 1,534 4,598 2,818 462 — 15,189 
Total30,476 63,621 17,452 8,514 21,608 10,574 135,047 
Average use per residential customer (kWh)12,561 14,893 14,226 12,610 14,941 — 14,089 

(a)Includes the effect of intercompany eliminations.

The following table illustrates the Utility operating companies’ 2023 combined electric sales volume as a percentage of total electric sales volume, and 2023 combined electric revenues as a percentage of total 2023 electric revenue, each by customer class.
Customer Class% of Sales Volume% of Revenue
Residential26.938.4
Commercial20.925.3
Industrial (a)39.126.8
Governmental1.82.3
Wholesale/Other11.37.2

(a)Major industrial customers are primarily in the petroleum refining and chemical industries.

242

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Natural Gas Energy Sales

Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana provide both electric power and natural gas to retail customers.  Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Louisiana sold 8,917,149 and 6,130,048 Mcf, respectively, of natural gas to retail customers in 2023.  In 2023, 99% of Entergy Louisiana’s operating revenue was derived from the electric utility business and only 1% from the natural gas distribution business.  For Entergy New Orleans, 87% of operating revenue was derived from the electric utility business and 13% from the natural gas distribution business in 2023.

Following is data concerning Entergy New Orleans’s 2023 retail operating revenue sources:
Customer Class% of Electric Operating Revenue% of Natural Gas Operating Revenue
Residential4851
Commercial3526
Industrial517
Governmental/Municipal126

Retail Rate Regulation

General (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, System Energy)

Each Utility operating company regularly participates in retail rate proceedings.  The status of material retail rate proceedings is described in Note 2 to the financial statements.  Certain aspects of the Utility operating companies and System Energy’s retail rate mechanisms are discussed below.
Rate base (in billions)Current authorized return on common equityWeighted-average cost of capital (after-tax)Equity ratioRegulatory construct
Entergy Arkansas$10.1 (a)9.15% - 10.15%5.62%38.7% (b) - forward test year formula rate plan
 - riders: fuel and purchased power, MISO, capacity, Grand Gulf, energy efficiency
Entergy Louisiana (electric)$15.7 (c)9.0% - 10.0%6.66%49.51% - formula rate plan through 2022 test year
 - riders/specific recovery: MISO, capacity, transmission, fuel, distribution, tax reform
Entergy Louisiana (gas)$0.15 (d)9.3% - 10.3%6.93%51.83% - gas rate stabilization plan
 - rider: gas infrastructure
Entergy Mississippi$4.2 (e)9.74% - 11.88%7.06%46.76% - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - riders: fuel, Grand Gulf, MISO, unit power cost, storm damage, ad valorem tax adjustment, vegetation, grid modernization, restructuring credit, power management
243

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Rate base (in billions)Current authorized return on common equityWeighted-average cost of capital (after-tax)Equity ratioRegulatory construct
Entergy New Orleans (electric)$1.2 (f)8.85% - 9.85%6.86%51% (g) - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - riders/specific recovery: fuel and purchased power, MISO, energy efficiency, environmental, capacity costs
Entergy New Orleans (gas)$0.2 (f)8.85% - 9.85%6.86%51% (g) - formula rate plan with forward-looking features
 - rider: purchased gas
Entergy Texas$4.4 (h)9.57%6.61%51.2% - rate case and cost recovery riders
 - riders: fuel, capacity, cost recovery riders (distribution, transmission, and generation), rate case expenses, advanced metering infrastructure surcharge, and tax reform, among others
System Energy$1.74 (i)10.94% (j)8.54%59.5% (j) - monthly cost of service

(a)Based on 2024 test year.
(b)Based on $1.9 billion in accumulated deferred income taxes at a 0% cost rate included in the weighted-average cost of capital calculation.
(c)Based on December 31, 2022 test year and excludes approximately $300 million of transmission plant investment included in the transmission recovery mechanism and approximately $200 million of distribution plant investment included in the distribution recovery mechanism, as well as approximately $400 million of net accumulated deferred tax liability items included in the tax reform adjustment mechanism.
(d)Based on September 30, 2022 test year.
(e)Based on 2023 forward test year.
(f)Based on December 31, 2022 test year and known and measurables through December 31, 2023.
(g)In October 2023 the City Council approved a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s formula rate plan, modified to reflect a 55% fixed capital structure for rate setting purposes.
(h)Based on December 31, 2021 test year.
(i)Based on calculation as of December 31, 2023.
(j)Effective July 2022, Entergy Mississippi’s bills from System Energy reflect an authorized return on equity of 9.65%, a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity, and a rate base reduction for the advance collection of sale-leaseback rental costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of ongoing proceedings at the FERC challenging System Energy’s authorized return on common equity and capital structure.

Entergy Arkansas

Formula Rate Plan

Between base rate cases, Entergy Arkansas is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize a forward test year. Entergy Arkansas is subject to a maximum rate change of 4% of the filing year total retail revenue. In addition, Entergy Arkansas is subject to a true-up of projection to actuals netted with future projection. In response to Entergy Arkansas’s application for a general change in rates in
244

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2015, the APSC approved the formula rate plan tariff proposed by Entergy Arkansas including its use of a projected year test period and an initial five-year term. The initial five-year term expired in 2021. As granted by Arkansas law, Entergy Arkansas obtained APSC approval of the extension of the formula rate plan tariff for an additional five-year term, through 2026. As part of the settlement of the 2023 formula rate plan proceeding, Entergy Arkansas agreed to file its next base rate case no later than February 2026. If Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan were terminated, Entergy Arkansas could file an application for a general change in rates that may include a request for continued regulation under a formula rate review mechanism.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Arkansas’s rate schedules include an energy cost recovery rider to recover fuel and purchased power costs in monthly bills.  The rider utilizes prior calendar year energy costs and projected energy sales for the twelve-month period commencing on April 1 of each year to develop an energy cost rate, which is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery, including carrying charges, of the energy cost for the prior calendar year.  The energy cost recovery rider tariff also allows an interim rate request depending upon the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.  In December 2007 the APSC issued an order stating that Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider will remain in effect, and any future termination of the rider would be subject to eighteen months advance notice by the APSC, which would occur following notice and hearing.

Production Cost Allocation Rider

Entergy Arkansas has in place an APSC-approved production cost allocation rider for recovery from customers of the retail portion of the costs allocated to Entergy Arkansas as a result of System Agreement proceedings.

Other

In June 2022 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff filing for a proposed green tariff designed to help participating customers meet their renewable and sustainability goals and to enhance economic development efforts in Arkansas. The APSC approved an initial offering of 100 MW of solar capacity to be made available under this tariff.

In June 2023 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s Go ZERO tariff, which provides participating industrial and commercial customers the opportunity to chose from a number of clean energy options to help them achieve their sustainability goals.

Entergy Louisiana

Formula Rate Plan

Entergy Louisiana historically sets electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan using a historic test year. The form of the formula rate plan, on a combined basis, was approved in connection with the business combination of Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and largely followed the formula rate plans that were approved by the LPSC in connection with the full electric base rate cases filed by those companies in February 2013. In 2021 the LPSC approved a settlement extending the formula rate plan for test years 2020, 2021 and 2022; certain modifications were made in that extension, including a decrease to the allowed return on equity, narrowing of the earnings “dead band” around the mid-point allowed return on equity, elimination of sharing above and below the earnings “dead band,” and the addition of a distribution cost recovery mechanism. The formula rate plan continues to include exceptions from the rate cap and sharing requirements for certain large capital investment projects, including acquisition or construction of generating facilities and purchase power agreements approved by the LPSC, certain transmission investments, and certain distribution investments, among other items. In August
245

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application for approval of a regulatory blueprint necessary for it to strengthen the electric grid for the State of Louisiana, which contains a dual-path request to update rates through either: (1) extension of Entergy Louisiana’s current formula rate plan (with certain modifications) for three years, test years 2023-2025, which is Entergy Louisiana’s recommended path; or (2) implementation of rates resulting from a cost-of-service study, with a 2024-2026 test year formula rate plan. The application complies with Entergy Louisiana’s previous formula rate plan extension order requiring that for Entergy Louisiana to obtain another extension of its formula rate plan that included a rate reset, Entergy Louisiana would need to submit a full cost-of-service/rate case. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s application.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Louisiana’s rate schedules include a fuel adjustment clause designed to recover the cost of fuel and purchased power costs.  The fuel adjustment clause contains a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense and related carrying charges arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings related to audits of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Louisiana received approval from the LPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Louisiana historically hedged approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity was reviewed on an annual basis. In January 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC to suspend these seasonal hedging programs and implement financial hedges with terms up to five years for a portion of its natural gas exposure, which was approved in November 2018.

Entergy Louisiana’s gas rates include a purchased gas adjustment clause based on estimated gas costs for the billing month adjusted by a surcharge or credit that arises from an annual reconciliation of fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Retail Rates - Gas

In accordance with the settlement of Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’s gas rate stabilization plan for the test year ended September 30, 2012, in August 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal for implementation of an infrastructure rider to recover expenditures associated with strategic plant investment and relocation projects mandated by local governments. After review by the LPSC staff and inclusion of certain customer safeguards required by the LPSC staff, in December 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted a joint settlement for implementation of an accelerated gas pipe replacement program providing for the replacement of approximately 100 miles of pipe over the next ten years, as well as relocation of certain existing pipe resulting from local government-related infrastructure projects, and for a rider to recover the investment associated with these projects. The rider allows for recovery of approximately $65 million over ten years. The rider recovery will be adjusted on a quarterly basis to include actual investment incurred for the prior quarter and is subject to the following conditions, among others: a ten-year term; application of any earnings in excess of the upper end of the earnings band as an offset to the revenue requirement of the infrastructure rider; adherence to a specified spending plan, within plus or minus 20% annually; annual filings comparing actual versus planned rider spending with actual spending and explanation of variances exceeding 10%; and an annual true-up. The joint settlement was approved by the LPSC in January 2015. Implementation of the infrastructure rider commenced with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of April 2015. In April 2022 Entergy Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal to extend the infrastructure rider to address replacement of an additional 187 miles of pipe. In December 2022 Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted an uncontested settlement that extends the rider for an additional ten years beginning after the end of the current term of the rider in 2025. The extension is subject to the same customer safeguards and conditions as the original term of the rider. The extension
246

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

allows for recovery of approximately $95 million over ten years. In February 2023, the uncontested settlement was approved by the LPSC.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In March 2016 the LPSC opened two dockets to examine, on a generic basis, issues that it identified in connection with its review of Cleco Corporation’s acquisition by third party investors.  The first docket is captioned “In re: Investigation of double leveraging issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities,” and the second is captioned “In re: Investigation of tax structure issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities.”  In April 2016 the LPSC clarified that the concerns giving rise to the two dockets arose as a result of its review of the structure of the Cleco-Macquarie transaction and that the specific intent of the directives is to seek more information regarding intra-corporate debt financing of a utility’s capital structure as well as the use of investment tax credits to mitigate the tax obligation at the parent level of a consolidated entity.  No schedule has been set for either docket, and limited discovery has occurred.

In December 2019 an LPSC commissioner issued an unopposed directive to staff to research customer-centered options for all customer classes, as well as other regulatory environments, and recommend a plan for how to ensure customers are the focus. There was no opposition to the directive from other commissioners but several remarked that the intent of the directive was not initiated to pursue retail open access. In furtherance of the directive, the LPSC issued a notice of the opening of a docket to conduct a rulemaking to research and evaluate customer-centered options for all electric customer classes as well as other regulatory environments in January 2020. To date, the LPSC staff has requested multiple rounds of comments from stakeholders and conducted one technical conference. Topics on which comments have been filed include full and limited retail access, demand response, sleeved power purchase agreements, and energy efficiency. Neither the LPSC or the LPSC staff have made recommendations or adopted any rules.

Entergy Mississippi

Formula Rate Plan

Since the conclusion in 2015 of Entergy Mississippi’s most recent base rate case, Entergy Mississippi has set electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan. Between base rate cases, Entergy Mississippi is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize forward-looking features. In addition, Entergy Mississippi is subject to an annual “look-back” evaluation. Entergy Mississippi is allowed a maximum rate increase of 4% of each test year’s retail revenue. Any increase above 4% requires a base rate case. If Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan were terminated without replacement, it would revert to the more traditional rate case environment or seek approval of a new formula rate plan.

In August 2012 the MPSC opened inquiries to review whether the then-current formulaic methodology used to calculate the return on common equity in both Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan and Mississippi Power Company’s annual formula rate plan was still appropriate or could be improved to better serve the public interest. The intent of this inquiry and review was for informational purposes only; the evaluation of any recommendations for changes to the existing methodology would take place in a general rate case or in the existing formula rate plan proceeding. In March 2013 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed its consultant’s report which noted the return on common equity estimation methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company are commonly used throughout the electric utility industry. The report suggested ways in which the methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company might be improved, but did not recommend specific changes in the
247

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

return on common equity formulas or calculations at that time. In June 2014 the MPSC expanded the scope of the August 2012 inquiry to study the merits of adopting a uniform formula rate plan that could be applied, where possible in whole or in part, to both Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company in order to achieve greater consistency in the plans. The MPSC directed the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff to investigate and review Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan rider schedule and Mississippi Power Company’s Performance Evaluation Plan by considering the merits and deficiencies and possibilities for improvement of each and then to propose a uniform formula rate plan that, where possible, could be applicable to both companies. No procedural schedule has been set. In October 2014 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff conducted a public technical conference to discuss performance benchmarking and its potential application to the electric utilities’ formula rate plans. The docket remains open.

In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for a mechanism in the formula rate plan, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi as well as to allow similar cost recovery treatment for other capacity acquisitions that are approved by the MPSC. The MPSC must approve recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment for each new resource. In addition, the MPSC approved revisions to the formula rate plan which allows Entergy Mississippi to begin billing rate adjustments effective April 1 of the filing year on a temporary basis subject to refund or credit to customers, subject to final MPSC order. The MPSC also authorized Entergy Mississippi to remove vegetation management costs from the formula rate plan and recover these costs through the establishment of a vegetation management rider.

In November 2020 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan providing for the realignment of energy efficiency costs to its formula rate plan, the deferral of energy efficiency expenditures into a regulatory asset, and the elimination of its energy efficiency cost recovery rider effective with the January 2022 billing cycle.

In June 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan to realign the recovery of certain long-term service agreement and conductor handling costs to the annual power management and grid modernization riders effective January 2023.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include energy cost recovery riders to recover fuel and purchased power costs.  The energy cost rate for each calendar year is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery of the energy costs as of the 12-month period ended September 30.  Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC. The energy cost recovery riders allow interim rate adjustments depending on the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Mississippi received approval from the MPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Mississippi hedges approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity is reviewed on an annual basis.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings regarding recovery of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs.

248

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Other

In October 2022 the MPSC adopted the Distributed Generation Rule. The Distributed Generation Rule maintains the 3% net metering participation cap. The Distributed Generation Rule grandfathers a 2.5 cents per kWh distributed generation benefits adder for 25 years and expands eligibility for the 2 cents per kWh low-income benefits adder to households up to 225% of the federal poverty level and grandfathers that adder for 25 years. The Distributed Generation Rule also directs utilities to make rate filings implementing up-front incentives for distributed generating systems and demand response battery systems, and to establish a public K-12 solar for schools program. In August 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed solar for schools rate schedule under the Distributed Generation Rule.

Entergy New Orleans

Formula Rate Plan

As part of its determination of rates in the base rate case filed by Entergy New Orleans in 2018, in November 2019, the City Council issued a resolution resolving the rate case, with rates to become effective retroactive to August 2019. The resolution allows Entergy New Orleans to implement a three-year formula rate plan, beginning with the 2019 test year as adjusted for forward-looking known and measurable changes, with the filing for the first test year to be made in 2020. In October 2020 the City Council approved an agreement in principle filed by Entergy New Orleans that results in Entergy New Orleans forgoing its 2020 formula rate plan filing and shifting the three-year formula rate plan to filings in 2021, 2022, and 2023. In September 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a motion seeking City Council approval of a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas formula rate plans, for filings in 2024, 2025, and 2026. In October 2023 the City Council granted Entergy New Orleans’s request for an extension, subject to minor modifications.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy New Orleans’s electric rate schedules include a fuel adjustment tariff designed to reflect no more than targeted fuel and purchased power costs, adjusted by a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel and purchased power costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Entergy New Orleans’s gas rate schedules include a purchased gas adjustment to reflect estimated gas costs for the billing month, adjusted by a surcharge or credit similar to that included in the electric fuel adjustment clause, including carrying charges.

To help stabilize gas costs, Entergy New Orleans seeks approval annually from the City Council to continue implementation of its natural gas hedging program consistent with the City Council’s stated policy objectives.  The program uses financial instruments to hedge exposure to volatility in the wholesale price of natural gas purchased to serve Entergy New Orleans gas customers.  Entergy New Orleans hedges up to 25% of actual gas sales made during the winter months.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

249

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Texas

Base Rates

The base rates of Entergy Texas are established largely in traditional base rate case proceedings. Between base rate proceedings, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. Entergy Texas is required to file full base rate case proceedings every four years and within eighteen months of utilizing its generation cost recovery rider for investments above $200 million.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, that are not included in base rates.  Historically, semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor have been made in March and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. In the course of this reconciliation, the PUCT determines whether eligible fuel and fuel-related expenses and revenues are necessary and reasonable and makes a prudence finding for each of the fuel-related contracts entered into during the reconciliation period. In 2023 the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to provide that material over- and under-recovered fuel balances are to be refunded or surcharged through interim fuel adjustments and that fuel reconciliations must be filed at least once every two years. Entergy Texas expects the PUCT to undertake a rulemaking to effectuate the new legislation by the end of 2024.

At the PUCT’s April 2013 open meeting, the PUCT Commissioners discussed their view that a purchased power capacity rider was good public policy. The PUCT issued an order in May 2013 adopting the rule allowing for a purchased power capacity rider, subject to an offsetting adjustment for load growth. The rule, as adopted, also includes a process for obtaining pre-approval by the PUCT of purchased power agreements to be recovered through a purchased power capacity rider. No Texas utility, including Entergy Texas, has exercised the option to recover capacity costs under the rider mechanism, but Entergy Texas will continue to evaluate the benefits of utilizing the rider to recover future capacity costs. In 2023, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit a utility to seek pre-approval from the PUCT for a purchased power agreement of three years or more if such approval is a precondition to the effectiveness of such agreements, regardless of whether the utility intends to recover costs associated with the purchased power agreement through a purchased power capacity rider.

Transmission, Distribution, and Generation Cost Recovery

As discussed above, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. These riders include a transmission cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of transmission-related capital investments, a distribution cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of distribution-related capital investment, and a generation cost recovery rider mechanism for the recovery of generation-related capital investments.

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas containing provisions that allow Entergy Texas to take advantage of a cost recovery mechanism that permits annual filings for the recovery of reasonable and necessary expenditures for transmission infrastructure improvement and changes in wholesale transmission charges. This mechanism was previously available to other non-ERCOT Texas utility companies, but not to Entergy Texas.

In September 2011 the PUCT adopted a proposed rule implementing a distribution cost recovery factor to recover capital and capital-related costs related to distribution infrastructure.  The distribution cost recovery factor permitted utilities once per year to implement an increase or decrease in rates above or below amounts reflected in base rates to reflect distribution-related depreciation expense, federal income tax and other taxes, and return on investment.  In 2023, the Texas Legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit utilities to update their
250

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

distribution cost recovery factors up to twice per year and to require the PUCT to issue an order on such update applications within 60 days, with a 15-day extension permitted for good cause.

In September 2019 the PUCT initiated a rulemaking to promulgate a generation cost recovery rider rule, implementing legislation passed in the 2019 Texas legislative session intended to allow electric utilities to recover generation investments between base rate proceedings.  The PUCT approved the final rule in July 2020.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Texas’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In January 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application requesting approval to implement two voluntary renewable option tariffs, Rider Small Volume Renewable Option (Rider SVRO) and Rider Large Volume Renewable Option (Rider LVRO). Both tariffs are voluntary offerings that give customers the ability to match some or all of their monthly electricity usage with renewable energy credits that are purchased by Entergy Texas and retired on the customer’s behalf. Voluntary participation in either Rider SVRO or Rider LVRO and the charges assessed under the respective tariff would be in addition to the charges paid by customers under their otherwise applicable rate schedules and riders. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement agreement supporting approval of Entergy Texas’s proposed voluntary renewable option tariffs. As part of the settlement agreement, Entergy Texas agreed to revise the cost allocation between the rate tiers of Rider SVRO and committed to collaborating with and considering the input of customers to develop an asset-backed green tariff program. The PUCT approved the settlement agreement in August 2022.

As part of its rate case application filed with the PUCT in July 2022, Entergy Texas requested approval of Schedule Green Future Option (Schedule GFO), an asset-backed green tariff that would allow Entergy Texas’s customers to voluntarily subscribe to a portion of the underlying solar facility’s capacity in exchange for energy credits. In August 2023 the PUCT approved an unopposed settlement in the proceeding that included approval of Schedule GFO.

Electric Industry Restructuring

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas that required Entergy Texas to cease all activities relating to Entergy Texas’s transition to competition.  The law allows Entergy Texas to remain a part of the SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC) Region, although it does not prevent Entergy Texas from joining another power region.  The law provides that proceedings to certify a power region that Entergy Texas belongs to as a qualified power region can be initiated by the PUCT, or on motion by another party, when the conditions supporting such a proceeding exist.  Under the law, the PUCT may not approve a transition to competition plan for Entergy Texas until the expiration of four years from the PUCT’s certification of a qualified power region for Entergy Texas.

The law further amended already existing law that had required Entergy Texas to propose for PUCT approval a tariff to allow eligible customers the ability to contract for competitive generation.  The amending language in the law provides, among other things, that: (1) the tariff shall not be implemented in a manner that harms the sustainability or competitiveness of manufacturers who choose not to participate in the tariff; (2) Entergy Texas shall “purchase competitive generation service, selected by the customer, and provide the generation at retail to the customer;” and (3) Entergy Texas shall provide and price transmission service and ancillary services under that tariff at a rate that is unbundled from its cost of service.  The law directs that the PUCT may not issue an order on the tariff that is contrary to an applicable decision, rule, or policy statement of a federal regulatory agency having jurisdiction. The PUCT determined that unrecovered costs that may be recovered through the rider consist only of those costs necessary to implement and administer the competitive generation program and do not include lost
251

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

revenues or embedded generation costs.  The amount of customer load that may be included in the competitive generation service program is limited to 115 MW.

System Energy

Cost of Service

The rates of System Energy are established by the FERC, and the costs allowed to be charged pursuant to these rates are, in turn, passed through to the participating Utility operating companies through the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which has monthly billings that reflect the current operating costs of, and investment in, Grand Gulf. Retail regulators and other parties may seek to initiate proceedings at FERC to investigate the prudence of costs included in the rates charged under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and examine, among other things, the reasonableness or prudence of the operation and maintenance practices, level of expenditures, allowed rates of return and rate base, and previously incurred capital expenditures. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including challenges with respect to System Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period. Beginning in 2021, System Energy implemented billing protocols to provide retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. Entergy cannot predict the outcome of any of these proceedings, and an adverse outcome in any of them could have a material adverse effect on Entergy’s or System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings.

Franchises

Entergy Arkansas holds exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 308 incorporated cities and towns in Arkansas.  These franchises generally are unlimited in duration and continue unless the municipalities purchase the utility property.  In Arkansas, franchises are considered to be contracts and, therefore, are governed pursuant to the terms of the franchise agreement and applicable statutes.

Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 175 incorporated municipalities and in the unincorporated areas of approximately 59 parishes of Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide natural gas service to customers in the City of Baton Rouge and in East Baton Rouge Parish.  Municipal franchise agreement terms range from 25 to 60 years while parish franchise terms range from 25 to 99 years.

Entergy Mississippi has received from the MPSC certificates of public convenience and necessity to provide electric service to areas within 45 counties, including a number of municipalities, in western Mississippi.  Under Mississippi statutory law, such certificates are exclusive.  Entergy Mississippi may continue to serve in such municipalities upon payment of a statutory franchise fee, regardless of whether an original municipal franchise is still in existence.

Entergy New Orleans provides electric and gas service in the City of New Orleans pursuant to indeterminate permits set forth in city ordinances.  These ordinances contain a continuing option for the City of New Orleans to purchase Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas utility properties.

Entergy Texas holds a certificate of convenience and necessity from the PUCT to provide electric service to areas within approximately 27 counties in eastern Texas and holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric
252

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

service in approximately 70 incorporated municipalities.  Entergy Texas typically obtains 25-year franchise agreements as existing agreements expire.  Entergy Texas’s electric franchises expire over the period 2024-2058.

The business of System Energy is limited to wholesale power sales.  It has no distribution franchises.

Property and Other Generation Resources

Owned Generating Stations

The total capability of the generating stations owned and leased by the Utility operating companies and System Energy as of December 31, 2023 is indicated below:
 Owned and Leased Capability MW(a)
CompanyTotalCT / CCGT (b)Legacy Gas/OilNuclearCoalHydroSolar
Entergy Arkansas5,036 1,548 521 1,825 969 73 100 
Entergy Louisiana10,798 5,594 2,728 2,137 339 — — 
Entergy Mississippi2,904 1,744 641 — 417 — 102 
Entergy New Orleans662 635 — — — — 27 
Entergy Texas3,234 990 1,994 — 250 — — 
System Energy1,245 — — 1,245 — — — 
Total23,879 10,511 5,884 5,207 1,975 73 229 

(a)“Owned and Leased Capability” is the dependable load carrying capability as demonstrated under actual operating conditions based on the primary fuel (assuming no curtailments) that each station was designed to utilize.
(b)Represents Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.

Summer peak load for the Utility has averaged 21,775 MW over the previous decade.

The Utility operating companies’ load and capacity projections are reviewed periodically to assess the need and timing for additional generating capacity and interconnections. These reviews consider existing and projected demand, the availability and price of power, the location of new load, the economy, Entergy’s clean energy and other public policy goals, environmental regulations, and the age and condition of Entergy’s existing infrastructure.

The Utility operating companies’ long-term resource strategy (Portfolio Transformation Strategy) calls for the bulk of capacity needs to be met through long-term resources, whether owned or contracted. Over the past decade, the Portfolio Transformation Strategy has resulted in the addition of about 7,963 MW of new long-term resources and the deactivation of about 4,241 MW of legacy generation. As MISO market participants, the Utility operating companies also participate in MISO’s Day Ahead and Real Time Energy and Ancillary Services markets to economically dispatch generation and purchase energy to serve customers reliably and at the lowest reasonable cost.

Other Generation Resources

RFP Procurements

The Utility operating companies have long-term firm and short-term interruptible gas contractsfrom time-to-time issue requests for both supply and transportation. Over 50%proposals (RFP) to procure supply-side resources from sources other than the spot market to meet the unique regional needs of the Utility operating companies’companies. The RFPs issued by the Utility operating companies have sought resources needed to meet near-term MISO reliability requirements as well as long-term requirements through a broad range of wholesale power plants maintain some level
253

Table of long-Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

products, including long-term contractual products and asset acquisitions. The RFP process has resulted in selections or acquisitions, including, among other things:

Entergy Texas’s construction of the 993 MW, combined-cycle, gas turbine Montgomery County Power Station at its existing Lewis Creek electric generating station. The facility began commercial operation in January 2021;
In December 2020, Entergy Texas selected the self-build alternative, Orange County Advanced Power Station, out of the 2020 Entergy Texas combined-cycle, gas turbine RFP. Regulatory approval was received in November 2022 and construction has commenced. The facility is expected to be in service by mid-2026;
In March 2019, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Searcy Solar facility, sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas. Entergy Arkansas received regulatory approval from the APSC in April 2020, and closed on the acquisition, through use of a tax equity partnership, in December 2021. The Searcy Solar facility was placed in service in January 2022;
In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Sunflower Solar facility, sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi. Entergy Mississippi received regulatory approval from the MPSC in April 2020, and the Sunflower Solar facility began commercial operation in September 2022;
In June 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Walnut Bend Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Lee County, Arkansas. In July 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the Walnut Bend Solar facility. The counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was terminating the project, though it was willing to consider an alternative for the site. Entergy Arkansas disputed the right of termination, and in February 2023 an amendment to the agreement was executed by the parties. In July 2023 the APSC issued an order approving the revisions to the agreement and full notice to proceed was issued shortly thereafter. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of approximately $169.7 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is completed and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to achieve commercial operation in the first half of 2024;
In September 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 180 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, West Memphis Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,500 acres in Crittenden County, Arkansas. In October 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the West Memphis Solar facility. In March 2022 the counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was seeking changes to certain terms of the build-own-transfer agreement, including both cost and schedule. In January 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a supplemental application with the APSC. Following the APSC’s approval of the supplemental application in March 2023, full notice to proceed was issued in April 2023 and the project is currently expected to achieve commercial operation by the end of 2024;
In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 150 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, St. Jacques facility, that will be sited in St. James Parish near Vacherie, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the St. Jacques facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the St. Jacques facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In August 2022, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 250 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Driver Solar facility, that will be sited near Osceola, Arkansas. Also in August 2022, Entergy Arkansas received necessary approvals for the Driver Solar
254

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

facility, and Entergy Arkansas has issued the counterparty full notice to proceed to begin construction. The project is expected to achieve commercial operation as early as mid-2024; and
Entergy Louisiana expects to start construction on the 49 MW Sterlington Solar project in the fourth quarter 2024, located in Sterlington, Louisiana. The facility is expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2026.

The RFP process has also resulted in the selection, or confirmation of the economic merits of, long-term purchased power agreements (PPAs), including, among others:

River Bend’s 30% life-of-unit PPA between Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans for 100 MW related to Entergy Louisiana’s unregulated portion of the River Bend nuclear station, which portion was formerly owned by Cajun;
Entergy Arkansas’s wholesale base load capacity life-of-unit PPAs executed in 2003 totaling approximately 220 MW between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana (110 MW) and between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy New Orleans (110 MW) related to the sale of a portion of Entergy Arkansas’s coal and nuclear base load resources (which had not been included in Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates);
In September 2012, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Rain CII Carbon LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 28 MW, with the potential to purchase an additional 9 MW when available, from a petroleum coke calcining facility in Sulphur, Louisiana. The facility began commercial operation in May 2013. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with the facility;
In March 2013, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Agrilectric Power Partners, LP executed a 20-year agreement for 8.5 MW from a refurbished rice hull-fueled electric generation facility located in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with Agrilectric;
In September 2013, Entergy Louisiana and TX LFG Energy, LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Montauk Energy Holdings, LLC, executed a 10-year agreement to purchase approximately 3 MW from its landfill gas-fueled power generation facility located in Cleveland, Texas;
Entergy Mississippi’s cost-based purchase, beginning in January 2013, of 90 MW from Entergy Arkansas’s share of Grand Gulf (only 60 MW of this PPA came through the RFP process). Cost recovery for the 90 MW was approved by the MPSC in January 2013;
In April 2015, Entergy Arkansas and Stuttgart Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 81 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generation facility located near Stuttgart, Arkansas. The APSC approved the project and deliveries pursuant to that agreement commenced in June 2018;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and LS Power executed a 10-year agreement for 485 MW from the Carville Energy Center located in St. Gabriel, Louisiana. In November 2019, LS Power sold and transferred the Carville Energy Center and facility to Argo Infrastructure Partners, which included the power purchase agreement;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and Occidental Chemical Corporation executed a 10-year agreement for 500 MW from the Taft Cogeneration facility located in Hahnville, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval and began in June 2018;
In June 2017, Entergy Arkansas and Chicot Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Chicot County, Arkansas. The transaction received regulatory approval and the PPA began in November 2020;
In February 2018, Entergy Louisiana and LA3 West Baton Rouge, LLC (Capital Region Solar project) executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in February 2019 and the PPA began in October 2020;
In July 2018, Entergy New Orleans and St. James Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 20 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and the PPA began in February 2023 after the facility reached commercial operation in March 2023;
255

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

termIn August 2018, Entergy Louisiana and South Alexander Development I, LLC executed a 5-year agreement for 5 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Livingston Parish, Louisiana. The PPA began in December 2020 and received regulatory approval in January 2021;
In February 2019, Entergy New Orleans and Iris Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and achieved commercial operation in November 2022;
In August 2020, Entergy Texas and Umbriel Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Polk County, Texas. The facility achieved commercial operation in November 2023;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Sunlight Road Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve the order including this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Sunlight Road facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2024;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Vacherie Solar Energy Center, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the Vacherie facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the Vacherie facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In December 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Hinds Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Hinds County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in June 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Wildwood Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Tallahatchie County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in May 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Greer Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 170 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Washington County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Flat Fork Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in St. Francis County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Forgeview Solar, LLC executed a 15-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Mississippi County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In January 2023, Entergy Texas and Piney Woods Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Walker County, Texas. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026;
In January 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Coastal Prairie Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 175 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Iberville Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC
256

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as December 2025; and
In October 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Mondu Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Point Coupee Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026.

In July 2021, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for solar generation resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in March 2022. One PPA was executed in January 2023 and the certificate of convenience and necessity for the owned resource is expected to be filed with the PUCT in mid-2024.

In April 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Arkansas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Arkansas selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in February 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the resources are in progress.

In June 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Louisiana, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Louisiana selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in March 2023 some of which have been executed and are noted above, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the remaining resources are in progress.

In October 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in July 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

In November 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Mississippi, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Mississippi selected a combination of owned resources in May 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

Other Procurements From Third Parties

The Utility operating companies have also made resource acquisitions outside of the RFP process and have also entered various limited- and long-term contracts in recent years as a result of bilateral negotiations, including among others:

In March 2016, Entergy Arkansas’s (Power Block 2), Entergy Louisiana’s (Power Blocks 3 and 4), and Entergy New Orleans’s (Power Block 1) acquisitions of the 1,980 MW (summer rating), natural gas-fired, combined-cycle gas turbine Union Power Station power blocks, each rated at 495 MW (summer rating). The facility is located near El Dorado, Arkansas and has been in operation since July 2003;
In October 2019, Entergy Mississippi’s acquisition of the 810 MW, combined-cycle, natural gas-fired Choctaw Generating Station. The facility is located in Choctaw County and has been in operation since July 2003;
In November 2020, Entergy Louisiana’s acquisition of the Washington Parish Energy Center is a 361 MW natural gas-fired peaking power plant approximately 60 miles north of New Orleans on a site Entergy Louisiana purchased from Calpine in 2019. Calpine began construction on the plant in early 2019 and Entergy Louisiana purchased the plant upon completion in November 2020;
In June 2021, Entergy Texas’s acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility, an existing 147 MW simple-cycle gas-fired peaking power plant in Kountze, Texas, previously owned by East Texas Electric Cooperative. The facility has been in operation since January 2010; and
In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Elizabeth Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 125 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Allen Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported
257

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Elizabeth Solar facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in August 2024.

Power Through Programs

In February 2019, Entergy Mississippi proposed a new technologies pilot to the MPSC, which was approved in December 2019. The pilot further modernized the energy grid and met customers’ evolving expectations by offering utility-owned, natural gas-fired backup generators to customers. Following conclusion of the three-year pilot, in October 2023, Entergy Mississippi proposed full-scale implementation of commercial scale, natural gas-fired resilient distributed generation, to be installed in front of the meter at commercial and industrial customer premises. The full-scale offering was approved by the MPSC in December 2023 along with an associated rate schedule, the Resiliency as a Service Rider Schedule. Entergy Mississippi can dispatch the units at times of peak demand, which can mitigate the typically higher energy and capacity costs borne by all customers during times of peak energy usage.

In December 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to amend its certificate of convenience and necessity to own and operate up to 75 MW of natural gas-fired distributed generation to be installed at commercial and industrial customer premises. Under this proposal, Entergy Texas would own and operate a fleet of generators ranging from 100 kW to 10 MW that would supply a portion of Entergy Texas’s long-term resource needs and enhance the resiliency of Entergy Texas’s electric grid. This fleet of generators would also be available to customers during outages to supply backup electric service as part of a program known as “Power Through.” In its 2021 session, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to exempt generators under 10 megawatts from the requirement to obtain a certificate of convenience and necessity. In addition, the PUCT announced an intent to conduct a broad rulemaking related to distributed generation and recommended that utilities with pending applications addressing distributed generation withdraw them. Accordingly, Entergy Texas withdrew its application for a certificate of convenience and necessity and associated tariff from the PUCT without prejudice to refiling. Entergy Texas continues to deploy certain customer-sited distributed generators under an existing PUCT-approved tariff. In August 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application for PUCT approval of voluntary Rate Schedule Utility Owned Distributed Generation through which it would charge host customers for back-up service from customer-sited Power Through generators. Based on the exemption enacted by the Texas legislature in 2021, Entergy Texas’s application was not required to, and did not, seek an amendment to its certificate of convenience and necessity in order to continue deploying Power Through generators. In October 2022 two intervenors filed requests for a hearing on Entergy Texas’s application. In October 2022 the PUCT staff filed a request that the proceeding be referred to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In January 2023 the PUCT announced an intent to develop certain broadly applicable reliability metrics against which to measure distributed generation resources and directed Entergy Texas to withdraw its application. However, the PUCT did allow Entergy Texas to continue its pilot program for Power Through generators. Entergy Texas withdrew its application. In its 2023 session, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to confirm Entergy Texas’s ability to provide back-up generation service using customer-sited utility-owned distributed generation and directing the PUCT to approve rates for such service upon application by Entergy Texas. In February 2024, Entergy Texas resubmitted its application for PUCT approval of voluntary Rate Schedule Utility Owned Distributed Generation. A procedural schedule has not yet been set.

In August 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC an application seeking authority for a “Power Through” offering to deploy natural gas-fired distributed generation. The application was supported by a number of letters of interest from Entergy Arkansas customers. In December 2021 the APSC general staff requested briefing, which Entergy Arkansas opposed. In January 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed to support the establishment of a procedural schedule with a hearing in April 2022. Also in January 2022, the APSC granted the general staff’s request for briefing but on an expedited schedule; briefing concluded in February 2022. Based on testimony filed to date the APSC general staff, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Sierra Club, and Audubon opposed Entergy Arkansas’s proposed Power Through offering, which was demonstrated to be in high demand by interested customers, some of which directly filed public comments encouraging the APSC to approve the application. A
258

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

paper hearing was held in August and September 2022, and Entergy Arkansas responded to several written commissioner questions. In May 2023 the APSC issued an order approving the Power Through offering with some modifications, and in June 2023, Entergy Arkansas sought rehearing or clarification of several issues. In August 2023 the APSC denied Entergy Arkansas’s rehearing petition. In December 2023 the APSC approved a streamlined approval process for the individual Power Through generators. Entergy Arkansas is developing tariff revisions to comply with the APSC’s order.

In July 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC an application for authority to deploy natural gas-fired distributed generation. The application was supported by a number of letters of interest from Entergy Louisiana customers. In October 2021, a procedural schedule was established with a hearing in April 2022. Staff and certain intervenors filed direct testimony in December 2021, and cross-answering testimony was filed in January 2022. Entergy Louisiana filed rebuttal testimony in February 2022. The parties reached an uncontested settlement which, among other things, recommended approval of 120 MW of natural gas fired distributed generation and an additional 30 MW of solar and battery distributed generation, for a total distributed generation program of 150 MW. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, Entergy Louisiana may seek to expand the distributed generation program following the earlier of two years after issuance of an order approving the settlement or the installation of 60 MW of distributed generation pursuant to this program. The settlement was approved by the LPSC in November 2022.

Interconnections

The Utility operating companies’ generating units are interconnected to the transmission system which operates at various voltages up to 500 kV.  These generating units consist of steam-turbine generators fueled by natural gas, coal, and pressurized and boiling water nuclear reactors; combustion-turbine generators, combined-cycle combustion turbine generators and reciprocating internal combustion engine generators that are fueled by natural gas; and inverter-based resources interconnecting both solar photovoltaic systems and energy storage devices that participate in the MISO wholesale electric market. Additionally, some of the Utility operating companies also offer customer services and products that include generating and demand response resources that are interconnected to both the distribution and transmission systems and that also participate in the wholesale market. Entergy’s Utility operating companies are MISO market participants and the companies’ transmission systems are interconnected with those of many neighboring utilities.  MISO is an essential link in the safe, cost-effective delivery of electric power across all or parts of 15 U.S. states and the Canadian province of Manitoba. In addition, the Utility operating companies are members of SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC), the Regional Entity with delegated authority from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) for the purpose of proposing and enforcing Bulk Electric System reliability standards within 16 central and southeastern states.

Gas Property

As of December 31, 2023, Entergy New Orleans distributed and transported natural gas for distribution within New Orleans, Louisiana, through approximately 2,600 miles of gas pipeline.  As of December 31, 2023, the gas properties of Entergy Louisiana, which are located in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, were not material to Entergy Louisiana’s financial position.

Title

The Utility operating companies’ generating stations are generally located on properties owned in fee simple.  Most of the substations and transmission and distribution lines are constructed on private property or public rights-of-way pursuant to easements, servitudes, or appropriate franchises.  Some substation properties are owned in fee simple.  The Utility operating companies generally have the right of eminent domain, whereby they may perfect title to, or secure easements or servitudes on, private property for their utility operations.

Substantially all of the physical properties and assets owned by Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy are subject to the liens of mortgages
259

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

securing bonds issued by those companies.  The Lewis Creek generating station of Entergy Texas was acquired by merger with a subsidiary of Entergy Texas and is currently not subject to the lien of the Entergy Texas indenture.

Fuel Supply

The average fuel cost per kWh for the Utility operating companies and System Energy for the years 2021-2023 were:
YearNatural GasNuclearCoalRenewables (a)Purchased PowerMISO Purchases (b)
2023(Cents Per kWh)
Entergy Arkansas1.98 0.50 3.09 1.98 11.57 0.77 
Entergy Louisiana2.34 0.60 3.22 10.38 3.76 2.50 
Entergy Mississippi2.21 — 2.82 0.03 5.86 1.84 
Entergy New Orleans (c)2.05 — — 3.24 — 2.33 
Entergy Texas2.29 — 3.17 2.25 5.64 3.18 
System Energy— 0.68 — — — — 
Utility2.25 0.58 3.06 6.14 4.03 2.61 
2022
Entergy Arkansas4.98 0.52 2.93 2.11 10.90 (2.65)
Entergy Louisiana5.50 0.57 2.84 10.70 6.95 6.45 
Entergy Mississippi4.38 — 2.85 0.04 6.53 6.68 
Entergy New Orleans (c)5.10 — — (5.16)— 7.21 
Entergy Texas5.77 — 2.83 6.26 5.61 6.68 
System Energy— 0.65 — — — — 
Utility5.27 0.57 2.89 7.00 6.54 5.95 
2021
Entergy Arkansas4.11 0.56 2.43 2.85 2.53 3.87 
Entergy Louisiana3.77 0.56 2.62 10.87 5.52 4.04 
Entergy Mississippi2.71 — 2.53 1.22 2.70 4.16 
Entergy New Orleans (c)3.47 — — (2.82)— 4.50 
Entergy Texas4.65 — 2.60 3.97 4.53 4.10 
System Energy— 0.55 — — — — 
Utility3.75 0.56 2.48 9.07 4.76 4.08 

(a)Includes average fuel costs from both owned and purchased power resources.
(b)Includes activity from financial transmission rights. See Note 15 to the financial statements for discussion of financial transmission rights.
(c)Entergy New Orleans’s renewables include liquidated damage payments of $0.1 million in 2023, $2.9 million in 2022, and $1 million in 2021 due to the delay of in-service dates related to purchased power agreements.

260

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Actual 2023 and projected 2024 sources of generation for the Utility operating companies and System Energy, including certain power purchases from affiliates under life of unit power purchase agreements, including the Unit Power Sales Agreement, are:
2023
 CT / CCGT (b)Legacy GasNuclearCoalRenewables (c)Purchased Power (d)MISO Purchases (e)
Entergy Arkansas26 %%57 %%%— %%
Entergy Louisiana47 %%20 %%%10 %12 %
Entergy Mississippi63 %%23 %%%— %%
Entergy New Orleans55 %%36 %%%%%
Entergy Texas32 %25 %%%— %%30 %
System Energy (a)— %— %100 %— %— %— %— %
Utility43 %%27 %%%%12 %

2024
 CT / CCGT (b)Legacy GasNuclearCoalRenewables (c)Purchased Power (d)MISO Purchases (e)
Entergy Arkansas26 %— %59 %12 %%— %— %
Entergy Louisiana48 %%30 %%%11 %— %
Entergy Mississippi64 %— %24 %10 %%— %— %
Entergy New Orleans51 %%43 %%%%— %
Entergy Texas43 %31 %17 %%%— %— %
System Energy (a)— %— %100 %— %— %— %— %
Utility45 %%35 %%%%— %

(a)Capacity and energy from System Energy’s interest in Grand Gulf is allocated as follows under the Unit Power Sales Agreement: Entergy Arkansas - 36%; Entergy Louisiana - 14%; Entergy Mississippi - 33%; and Entergy New Orleans - 17%.  Pursuant to purchased power agreements, Entergy Arkansas is selling a portion of its owned capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.
(b)Represents natural gas sourced for Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.
(c)Includes generation from both owned and purchased power resources.
(d)Excludes MISO purchases and renewables purchased through purchased power agreements.
(e)In December 2013, Entergy integrated its transmission system into the MISO RTO. Entergy offers all of its generation into the MISO energy market on a day-ahead and real-time basis and bids for power in the MISO energy market to serve the demand of its customers, with MISO making dispatch decisions. The MISO purchases metric provided for 2023 is not projected for 2024.

Some of the Utility’s gas-fired plants are also capable of using fuel oil, if necessary. Although based on current economics the Utility does not expect fuel oil use in 2024, it is possible that various operational events including weather or pipeline maintenance may require the use of fuel oil.

Natural Gas

The Utility operating companies have long-term firm and short-term interruptible gas contracts for both supply and transportation. Over 70% of the Utility operating companies’ power plants maintain some level of long-term firm transportation. Short-term contracts and spot-market purchases satisfy additional gas requirements.
261

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Texas owns a gas storage facility and Entergy Louisiana has a firm storage service agreement that providesprovide reliable and flexible natural gas service to certain generating stations.

Many factors, including wellhead deliverability, storage, pipeline capacity, and demand requirements of end users, influence the availability and price of natural gas supplies for power plants. Demand is primarily tied to weather conditions as well as to the prices and availability of other energy sources. Pursuant to federal and state regulations, gas supplies to power plants may be interrupted during periods of shortage. To the extent natural gas supplies are disrupted or natural gas prices significantly increase, the Utility operating companies may in some instances use alternate fuels, such as oil when available, or rely to a larger extent on coal, nuclear generation, and purchased power.

Coal

Entergy Arkansas has committed to seven one-six two- to three-year contracts that will supply approximatelyat least 85% of the total coal supply needs in 2021.2024. These contracts are staggered in term so that not all contracts have to be renewed the same year. The remaining 15% of totalIf needed, additional Powder River Basin (PRB) coal requirements will be satisfied bypurchased through contracts with a term of less than one year.year to provide the remaining supply needs. Based on continued improved Powder River Basin (PRB) coal deliveries by rail and the high cost of alternate sources, and modes of transportation, and infrastructure improvements necessary for its delivery, no alternative coal consumption is expected at Entergy Arkansas during 2021.2024. Coal will be transported to Arkansas via an existing Union Pacific transportation agreement that is expected to provide all of Entergy Arkansas’s rail transportation requirements for 2021.2024.

Entergy Louisiana has committed to five one-three two- to three-year contracts that will supply approximatelyat least 90% of Nelson Unit 6 coal needs in 2021.2024. If needed, additional PRB coal will be purchased through contracts with a term of less than one year to provide the remaining supply needs. For the same reasons as forthe Entergy Arkansas’sArkansas plants, no alternative coal consumption is expected at Nelson Unit 6 during 2021.2024. Coal will be transported to Nelson primarily via an existing transportation agreement that is expected to provide all of Entergy Louisiana’s rail transportation requirements for 2021.2024.

For the year 2020, coalCoal transportation delivery rates to Entergy Arkansas-andArkansas- and Entergy Louisiana-operated coal-fired units were adequateable to fully meet supply needs and obligations in 2023. While deliveries remained constrained through summer 2023, improvements were observed in the second half of the year and it isare expected that delivery timesto continue in 2021 will continue to be consistent.2024. Both Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana control a sufficient number ofenough railcars to satisfy the rail transportation requirement.

The operator of Big Cajun 2 - Unit 3, Louisiana Generating, LLC, has advised Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas that it has adequate rail car and barge capacity to meet the volumes of PRB coal requested for 2021.2024, but is also currently experiencing delivery constraints. Entergy Louisiana’s and Entergy Texas’s coal nomination requests to Big Cajun 2 - Unit 3 are made on an annual basis.

Nuclear Fuel

The nuclear fuel cycle consists of the following:

mining and milling of uranium ore to produce a concentrate;
conversion of the concentrate to uranium hexafluoride gas;
enrichment of the uranium hexafluoride gas;
fabrication of nuclear fuel assemblies for use in fueling nuclear reactors; and
disposal of spent fuel.

The Registrant Subsidiaries that own nuclear plants, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, are responsible through a shared regulated uranium pool for contracts to acquire nuclear material to be used in fueling Entergy’s Utility nuclear units.  These companies own the materials and services in this shared regulated
256262

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

uranium pool on a pro rata fractional basis determined by the nuclear generation capability of each company.  Any liabilities for obligations of the pooled contracts are on a several but not joint basis.  The shared regulated uranium pool maintains inventories of nuclear materials during the various stages of processing.  The Registrant Subsidiaries purchase enriched uranium hexafluoride for their nuclear plant reload requirements at the average inventory cost from the shared regulated uranium pool.  Entergy Operations, Inc. contracts separately for the fabrication of nuclear fuel as agent on behalf of each of the Registrant Subsidiaries that owns a nuclear plant.  All contracts for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel are between the DOE and the owner of a nuclear power plant.

Based upon currently planned fuel cycles, the Utility nuclear units have a diversified portfolio of contracts and inventory that provides substantially adequate nuclear fuel materials and conversion and enrichment services at what Entergy believes are reasonably predictable or fixed prices through most of 2023.2027. Entergy’s ability to purchase nuclear fuel at reasonably predictable prices, however, depends upon the performance reliability of uranium miners.miners, including their ability to work through supply disruptions caused by global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or national events, such as political disruption.  There are a number of possible supply alternatives that may be accessed to mitigate any supplier performance failure, including potentially drawing upon Entergy’s inventory intended for later generation periods depending upon its risk management strategy at that time, although the pricing of any alternate uranium supply from the market will be dependent upon the market for uranium supply at that time.  In addition, some nuclear fuel contracts are on a non-fixed price basis subject to prevailing prices at the time of delivery.

The effects of market price changes may be reduced and deferred by risk management strategies, such as negotiation of floor and ceiling amounts for long-term contracts, buying for inventory or entering into forward physical contracts at fixed prices when Entergy believes it is appropriate and useful.  Entergy buys uranium from a diversified mix of sellers located in a diversified mix of countries, and from time to time purchases from nearly all qualified reliable major market participants worldwide that sell into the U.S.

Entergy’s ability to assure nuclear fuel supply also depends upon the performance reliability of conversion, enrichment, and fabrication services providers. There are fewer of these providers than for uranium. For conversion and enrichment services, like uranium, Entergy diversifies its supply by supplier and country and may take special measures as needed to ensure supply of enriched uranium for the reliable fabrication of nuclear fuel. For fabrication services, each plant is dependent upon the effective performance of the fabricator of that plant’s nuclear fuel, therefore, Entergy provides additional monitoring, inspection, and oversight for the fabrication process to assure reliability and quality.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy each have made arrangements to lease nuclear fuel and related equipment and services.  The lessors, which are consolidated in the financial statements of Entergy and the applicable Registrant Subsidiary, finance the acquisition and ownership of nuclear fuel through credit agreements and the issuance of notes.  These credit facilities are subject to periodic renewal, and the notes are issued periodically, typically for terms between three and seven years.

Natural Gas Purchased for Resale

Entergy New Orleans has several suppliers of natural gas. Its system is interconnected with one interstate and three intrastate pipelines. Entergy New Orleans has a “no-notice” service gas purchase contract with CenterPointSymmetry Energy ServicesSolutions which guaranteesensures Entergy New Orleans gas delivery at specific delivery points and at any volume within the minimum and maximum set forth in the contract amounts. The CenterPointSymmetry Energy ServiceSolutions gas supply is transported to Entergy New Orleans pursuant to a transportation service agreement with Gulf South Pipeline Co. This service is subject to FERC-approved rates. Entergy New Orleans also makes interruptible spot market purchases.

Entergy Louisiana purchased natural gas for resale in 20202023 under a firm contract from Sequent Energy Management L.P. The gas is delivered through a combination of intrastate and interstate pipelines.

257263

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


As a result of the implementation of FERC-mandated interstate pipeline restructuring in 1993, curtailments of interstate gas supply could occur if Entergy Louisiana’s or Entergy New Orleans’s suppliers failed to perform their obligations to deliver gas under their supply agreements. Gulf South Pipeline Co. could curtail transportation capacity only in the event of pipeline system constraints.

Federal Regulation of the Utility

State or local regulatory authorities, as described above, regulate the retail rates of the Utility operating companies.  The FERC regulates wholesale sales of electricity rates and interstate transmission of electricity, including System Energy’s sales of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of federal regulation proceedings.

System Agreement (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

Prior to each operating company’s termination of participation in the System Agreement (Entergy Arkansas in December 2013, Entergy Mississippi in November 2015, and Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas each in August 2016), the Utility operating companies engaged in the coordinated planning, construction, and operation of generating and bulk transmission facilities under the terms of the System Agreement, which was a rate schedule approved by the FERC. Under the terms of the System Agreement, generating capacity and other power resources were jointly operated by the Utility operating companies that were participating in the System Agreement.  The System Agreement provided, among other things, that parties having generating reserves greater than their allocated share of reserves (long companies) would receive payments from those parties having generating reserves that were less than their allocated share of reserves (short companies).  Such payments were at amounts sufficient to cover certain of the long companies’ costs for intermediate and peaking oil/gas-fired generation, including operating expenses, fixed charges on debt, dividend requirements on preferred equity, and a fair rate of return on common equity investment.  Under the System Agreement, the rates used to compensate long companies were based on costs associated with the long companies’ steam electric generating units fueled by oil or gas and having an annual average heat rate above 10,000 Btu/kWh.  In addition, for all energy exchanged among the Utility operating companies under the System Agreement, the companies purchasing exchange energy were required to pay the cost of fuel consumed in generating such energy plus a charge to cover other associated costs.

Although the System Agreement has terminated, certain of the Utility operating companies’ and their retail regulators are pursuing litigation involving the System Agreement at the FERC and in federal courts. The proceedings include challenges to the allocation of costs as defined by the System Agreement and other matters. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of legal proceedings at the FERC and in federal courts involving the System Agreement.

Transmission and MISO Markets

In December 2013 the Utility operating companies integrated into the MISO RTO. Although becoming a member of MISO did not affect the ownership by the Utility operating companies of their transmission facilities or the responsibility for maintaining those facilities, MISO maintains functional control over the combined transmission systems of its members and administers wholesale energy and ancillary services markets for market participants in the MISO region, including the Utility operating companies. MISO also exercises functional control of transmission planning and congestion management and provides schedules and pricing for the commitment and dispatch of generation that is offered into MISO’s markets, as well as pricing for load that bids into the markets. The Utility operating companies sell capacity, energy, and ancillary services on a bilateral basis to certain wholesale customers and offer available electricity production of their owned and controlled generating facilities into the MISO resource adequacy construct (the annual Planning Resource Auction), as well as the MISO day-ahead and real-time energy markets pursuant to the MISO tariff and market rules. The resource adequacy construct provided under the MISO tariff confers certain rights and imposes certain obligations upon load-serving entities, including the Utility operating companies, that are served from the transmission systems subject to MISO’s functional control, including the transmission facilities of the Utility operating companies. The MISO tariff is subject to change and has recently undergone significant changes. As an example, MISO recently has made changes to its capacity accreditation methodology for thermal resources which emphasize performance during a very small subset of hours in which the supply of generation capacity needed to serve load is tightest. MISO is now pursuing a larger scale reassessment of its overall accreditation practices, including accreditation of renewable resources.

MISO administers a process governed by the MISO tariff and subject to the FERC regulation that governs the interconnection of new generation resources to the transmission system under MISO’s functional control. This process generally involves parties that wish to interconnect new generation resources submitting to MISO requests to do so, which are then studied and analyzed by MISO, with the participation of its member transmission owners, to determine if the interconnection of such generators requires new transmission facilities to ensure the continued reliable operations of the grid. Under MISO’s current tariff, these requests are studied and considered in clusters, generally in the order in which they are received – a system of priority known as the MISO interconnection queue.

Each Utility operating company has its own transmission pricing zone and a formula rate template (included as Attachment O to the MISO tariff) used to
258

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

establish transmission rates within MISO. The terms and conditions of the MISO tariff, including provisions related to the design and implementation of wholesale markets and the allocation of transmission upgrade costs, are subject to regulation by the FERC.

In addition, orders from each of the Utility operating companies’ respective retail regulators generally require that the Utility operating companies make periodic filings, or generally allow the retail regulator to direct the making of such filings, setting forth the results of analysis of the costs and benefits realized from MISO
264

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

membership as well as the projected costs and benefits of continued membership in MISO and/or requesting approval of their continued membership in MISO.

System Energy and Related Agreements

System Energy recovers costs related to its interest in Grand Gulf through rates charged to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans for capacity and energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement (described below).  In July 2001 a rate proceeding commenced by System Energy at the FERC in 1995 became final, with the FERC approving a prospective 10.94% return on equity.  In 1998 the FERC approved requests by Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi to accelerate a portion of their Grand Gulf purchased power obligations.  Entergy Arkansas’s and Entergy Mississippi’s acceleration of Grand Gulf purchased power obligations ceased effective July 2001 and July 2003, respectively, as approved by the FERC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of complaints filed withproceedings at the FERC regardingrelated to System Energy’s return on equity.Energy.

Unit Power Sales Agreement

The Unit Power Sales Agreement allocates capacity, energy, and the related costs from System Energy’s ownership and leasehold interests in Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas (36%), Entergy Louisiana (14%), Entergy Mississippi (33%), and Entergy New Orleans (17%).  Each of these companies is obligated to make payments to System Energy for its entitlement of capacity and energy on a full cost-of-service basis regardless of the quantity of energy delivered.  Payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement are System Energy’s only source of operating revenue.  The financial condition of System Energy depends upon the continued commercial operation of Grand Gulf and the receipt of such payments.  Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans generally recover payments made under the Unit Power Sales Agreement through rates charged to their customers.

In the case of Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana, payments are also recovered through sales of electricity from their respective retained shares of Grand Gulf.  Under a settlement agreement entered into with the APSC in 1985 and amended in 1988, Entergy Arkansas retains 22% of its 36% share of Grand Gulf-related costs and recovers the remaining 78% of its share in retail rates.  In the event that Entergy Arkansas is not able to sell its retained share to third parties, it may sell such energy to its retail customers at a price equal to its avoided cost, which is currently less than Entergy Arkansas’s cost from its retained share.  Entergy Arkansas has life-of-resources purchased power agreements with Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans that sell a portion of the output of Entergy Arkansas’s retained share of Grand Gulf to those companies, with the remainder of the retained share being sold to Entergy Mississippi through a separate life-of-resources purchased power agreement.companies.  In a series of LPSC orders, court decisions, and agreements from late 1985 to mid-1988, Entergy Louisiana was granted rate reliefcost recovery with respect to costs associated with Entergy Louisiana’s share of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf, subject to certain terms and conditions.  Entergy Louisiana retains and does not recover from retail ratepayers 18% of its 14% share of the costs of Grand Gulf capacity and energy and recovers the remaining 82% of its share in rates.  Entergy Louisiana is allowed to recover through the fuel adjustment clause at 4.6 cents per kWh for the energy related to its retained portion of these costs.  Alternatively, Entergy Louisiana may sell such energy to non-affiliated parties at prices above the fuel adjustment clause recovery amount, subject to the LPSC’s approval. The remainder of Entergy Arkansas’s retained share is sold to Entergy Mississippi through a separate life-of-resource purchase power agreement with Entergy Mississippi. Entergy Arkansas also has a life-of-resources purchased power agreement with Entergy Mississippi to sell a portion of the output of Entergy Arkansas’s non-retained share of Grand Gulf. Entergy Mississippi was granted rate reliefcost recovery for those purchases by the MPSC through its annual unit power cost rate mechanism.

Availability Agreement

The Availability Agreement among System Energy and Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans was entered into in 1974 in connection with the original financing by System Energy of Grand Gulf. The Availability Agreement provides that System Energy make available to Entergy
259265

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

of Grand Gulf. The Availability Agreement provides that System Energy make available to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans all capacity and energy available from System Energy’s share of Grand Gulf.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans also agreed severally to pay System Energy monthly for the right to receive capacity and energy from Grand Gulf in amounts that (when added to any amounts received by System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement) would at least equal System Energy’s total operating expenses for Grand Gulf (including depreciation at a specified rate and expenses incurred in a permanent shutdown of Grand Gulf) and interest charges.

The allocation percentages under the Availability Agreement are fixed as follows: Entergy Arkansas - 17.1%; Entergy Louisiana - 26.9%; Entergy Mississippi - 31.3%; and Entergy New Orleans - 24.7%. The allocation percentages under the Availability Agreement would remain in effect and would govern payments made under such agreement in the event of a shortfall of operating expense funds available to System Energy from other sources, including payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

System Energy has assigned its rights to payments and advances from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans under the Availability Agreement as security for all of its two outstanding series of first mortgage bonds.bonds, as well as for its outstanding term loan and the pollution control revenue refunding bonds issued on its behalf.  In these assignments, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans further agreed that, in the event they were prohibited by governmental action from making payments under the Availability Agreement (for example, if the FERC reduced or disallowed such payments as constituting excessive rates), they would then make subordinated advances to System Energy in the same amounts and at the same times as the prohibited payments. System Energy would not be allowed to repay these subordinated advances so long as it remained in default under the related indebtedness or in other similar circumstances.

Each of the assignment agreements relating to the Availability Agreement provides that Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans will make payments directly to System Energy. However, if there is an event of default, those payments must be made directly to the holders of indebtedness that are the beneficiaries of such assignment agreements. The payments must be made pro rata according to the amount of the respective obligations secured.

The obligations of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans to make payments under the Availability Agreement are subject to the receipt and continued effectiveness of all necessary regulatory approvals.  Sales of capacity and energy under the Availability Agreement would require that the Availability Agreement be submitted to the FERC for approval with respect to the terms of such sale. No such filing with the FERC has been made because sales of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf are being made pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement.  If, for any reason, sales of capacity and energy are made in the future pursuant to the Availability Agreement, the jurisdictional portions of the Availability Agreement would be submitted to the FERC for approval.

Since commercial operation of Grand Gulf began, payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement to System Energy have exceeded the amounts payable under the Availability Agreement and, therefore, no payments under the Availability Agreement to System Energy have ever been required.  IfHowever, if Entergy Arkansas or Entergy Mississippi fails to make its Unit Power Sales Agreement payments, and System Energy is unable to obtain funds from other sources, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans could become subject to claims or demands by System Energy or certain of its creditors for payments or advances under the Availability Agreement (or the assignments thereof) equal to the difference between their required Unit Power Sales Agreement payments and their required Availability Agreement payments because their allocated shares under the Availability Agreement obligations exceed their allocated shares under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the Reallocation Agreement obligations.among System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans, pursuant to which Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans
266

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

assumed all of Entergy Arkansas’s responsibilities and obligations with respect to Grand Gulf under the Availability Agreement.

The Availability Agreement may be terminated, amended, or modified by mutual agreement of the parties thereto, without further consent of any assignees or other creditors.
260

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


Service Companies

Entergy Services, a limited liability company wholly-owned by Entergy Corporation, provides management, administrative, accounting, legal, engineering, and other services primarily to the Utility operating companies, but also provides servicesas well as to Entergy Wholesale Commodities.Entergy’s non-utility operations business. Entergy Operations is also wholly-owned by Entergy Corporation and provides nuclear management, operations, and maintenance services under contract for ANO, River Bend, Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, subject to the owner oversight of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, respectively.  Entergy Services and Entergy Operations provide their services to the Utility operating companies and System Energy on an “at cost” basis, pursuant to cost allocation methodologies for these service agreements that were approved by the FERC.

Jurisdictional Separation of Entergy Gulf States, Inc. into Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas

Effective December 31, 2007, Entergy Gulf States, Inc. completed a jurisdictional separation into two vertically integrated utility companies, one operating under the sole retail jurisdiction of the PUCT, Entergy Texas, and the other operating under the sole retail jurisdiction of the LPSC, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana.  Entergy Texas owns all Entergy Gulf States, Inc. distribution and transmission assets located in Texas, the gas-fired generating plants located in Texas, undivided 42.5% ownership shares of Entergy Gulf States, Inc.’s 70% ownership interest in Nelson Unit 6 and 42% ownership interest in Big Cajun 2, Unit 3, which are coal-fired generating plants located in Louisiana, and other assets and contract rights to the extent related to utility operations in Texas.  Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, owns all of the remaining assets that were owned by Entergy Gulf States, Inc.  On a book value basis, approximately 58.1% of the Entergy Gulf States, Inc. assets were allocated to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and approximately 41.9% were allocated to Entergy Texas.

Entergy Texas purchases from Entergy Louisiana pursuant to a life-of-unit purchased power agreement a 42.5% share of capacity and energy from the 70% of River Bend subject to retail regulation.  Entergy Texas was allocated a share of River Bend’s nuclear and environmental liabilities that is identical to the share of the plant’s output purchased by Entergy Texas under the purchased power agreement.  In connection with the termination of the System Agreement effective August 31, 2016, the purchased power agreements that were put in place for certain legacy units at the time of the jurisdictional separation were also terminated at that time. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the purchased power agreements.

Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana Business Combination

On October 1, 2015, the businesses formerly conducted by Entergy Louisiana (Old Entergy Louisiana) and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana) were combined into a single public utility. In order to effect the business combination, under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Old Entergy Louisiana allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Louisiana Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (New Entergy Louisiana), and New Entergy Louisiana assumed the liabilities of Old Entergy Louisiana, in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Under the TXBOC, Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary (New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana) and New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana assumed the liabilities of Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana then merged into New Entergy Louisiana with New Entergy Louisiana surviving the merger. Thereupon, Old Entergy Louisiana changed its name from “Entergy Louisiana, LLC” to “EL Investment Company, LLC” and New Entergy Louisiana changed its name from “Entergy Louisiana Power, LLC” to “Entergy Louisiana, LLC” (Entergy Louisiana). With the
267

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

completion of the business combination, Entergy Louisiana holds substantially all of the assets, and has assumed the liabilities, of Old Entergy Louisiana and Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana.

261

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy New Orleans Internal Restructuring

In November 2017, pursuant to the agreement in principle, Entergy New Orleans, Inc. undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy New Orleans, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock at a price of approximately $21 million, which included a call premium of approximately $819,000, plus any accumulated and unpaid dividends.
Entergy New Orleans, Inc. converted from a Louisiana corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy New Orleans, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy New Orleans Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy New Orleans Power), and Entergy New Orleans Power assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy New Orleans, Inc. in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy New Orleans, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy New Orleans Power.
Entergy New Orleans, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy New Orleans Power to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy New Orleans Power is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2017, Entergy New Orleans, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Group, Inc., and Entergy New Orleans Power then changed its name to Entergy New Orleans, LLC. Entergy New Orleans, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and has assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy New Orleans, Inc. The restructuring was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

Entergy Arkansas Internal Restructuring

In November 2018, Entergy Arkansas undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Arkansas, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $32.7 million.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. converted from an Arkansas corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Arkansas, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Arkansas Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Arkansas Power), and Entergy Arkansas Power assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Arkansas, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Arkansas, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Arkansas Power is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Arkansas, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Property, Inc., and Entergy Arkansas Power then changed its name to Entergy Arkansas, LLC. Entergy Arkansas, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Arkansas, Inc. The transaction was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

Entergy Mississippi Internal Restructuring

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Mississippi, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock, at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $21.2 million.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. converted from a Mississippi corporation to a Texas corporation.
262

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Mississippi, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Mississippi Power and Light), and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Mississippi, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Mississippi, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Enterprises, Inc., and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light then changed its name to Entergy Mississippi, LLC. Entergy Mississippi, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Mississippi, Inc. The restructuring was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities

Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, located in the northern United States and the sale of the electric power produced by its operating plants to wholesale customers. Entergy Wholesale Commodities revenues are primarily derived from sales of energy and generation capacity from these plants. Entergy Wholesale Commodities also provides operations and management services, including decommissioning-related services, to nuclear power plants owned by non-affiliated entities in the United States. Entergy Wholesale Commodities also includes the ownership of interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers.

See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” in Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion of the operation and planned shutdown and sale of each of the remaining Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants.

Property

Nuclear Generating Stations

Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership of the following nuclear power plants:
Power PlantMarketIn Service YearAcquiredLocationCapacity - Reactor TypeLicense Expiration Date
Indian Point 3 (a)NYISO1976Nov. 2000Buchanan, NY1,041 MW - Pressurized Water2025 (a)
Indian Point 2 (a)NYISO1974Sept. 2001Buchanan, NY1,028 MW - Pressurized Water2024 (a)
Palisades (b)MISO1971Apr. 2007Covert,
MI
811 MW - Pressurized Water2031 (b)

(a)Power operations ceased at the Indian Point 2 plant in April 2020. The fuel was permanently removed from the reactor vessel and placed in the spent fuel pool in May 2020. The Indian Point 3 plant is expected to cease operations on April 30, 2021. Entergy and Holtec jointly filed a license transfer application with the NRC in November 2019, requesting approval for the transfer of the Indian Point plants, along with their nuclear decommissioning trusts and decommissioning liabilities, from Entergy to Holtec. The NRC approved the license transfer application on November 23, 2020.
263

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

(b)The Palisades plant is expected to cease operations on May 31, 2022. There is a contract to sell the plant to Holtec subject to NRC and other regulatory approvals.

See “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” in Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion of the operation and planned shutdown and sale of each of the remaining Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants.

Entergy Wholesale Commodities also includes the ownership of two non-operating nuclear facilities, Big Rock Point in Michigan and Indian Point 1 in New York that were acquired when Entergy purchased the Palisades and Indian Point 2 nuclear plants, respectively. These facilities are in various stages of the decommissioning process. Both Big Rock Point and Indian Point 1 are under contract to be sold with their respective plants.

Non-nuclear Generating Stations

Entergy Wholesale Commodities includes the ownership, or interests in joint ventures that own, the following non-nuclear power plants:
PlantLocationOwnershipNet Owned Capacity (a)Type
Independence Unit 2;   842 MWNewark, AR14%    121 MW(b)Coal
RS Cogen;   425 MW (c)Lake Charles, LA50%213 MWGas/Steam
Nelson Unit 6;   550 MWWestlake, LA11%       60 MW(b)Coal

(a)“Net Owned Capacity” refers to the nameplate rating on the generating unit.
(b)The owned MW capacity is the portion of the plant capacity owned by Entergy Wholesale Commodities.  For a complete listing of Entergy’s jointly-owned generating stations, refer to “Jointly-Owned Generating Stations” in Note 1 to the financial statements.
(c)Indirectly owned through an interest in an unconsolidated joint venture. In December 2020, Entergy’s wholly-owned subsidiary with a direct interest in RS Cogen, LLC entered into a membership interest purchase agreement with a subsidiary of the other 50% equity partner to sell its 50% membership interest in the joint venture to the equity partner. The targeted closing date for the transaction is October 2022.

Independent System Operators

The Indian Point plants fall under the authority of the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO). The Palisades plant falls under the authority of the MISO. The primary purpose of NYISO and MISO is to direct the operations of the major generation and transmission facilities in their respective regions; ensure grid reliability; administer and monitor wholesale electricity markets; and plan for their respective region’s energy needs.

Energy and Capacity Sales

As a wholesale generator, Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ core business is selling energy, measured in MWh, to its customers.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities enters into forward contracts with its customers and also sells energy in the day ahead or spot markets.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities also sells unforced capacity, which allows load-serving entities to meet specified reserve and related requirements placed on them by the ISOs in their respective areas.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ forward physical power contracts consist of contracts to sell energy only, contracts to sell capacity only, and bundled contracts in which it sells both capacity and energy.  While the terminology and payment mechanics vary in these contracts, each of these types of contracts requires Entergy Wholesale Commodities to deliver MWh of energy, make capacity available, or both.See “Market and Credit Risk Sensitive Instruments” in Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for additional information regarding these contracts.

264

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

As part of the purchase of the Palisades plant in 2007, Entergy executed a 15-year PPA with the seller, Consumers Energy, for 100% of the plant’s output, excluding any future uprates. Under the purchased power agreement, Consumers Energy receives the value of any new environmental credits for the first ten years of the agreement. Palisades and Consumers Energy will share on a 50/50 basis the value of any new environmental credits for years 11 through 15 of the agreement. The environmental credits are defined as benefits from a change in law that causes capability of the plant as of the purchase date to become a tradable attribute (e.g., emission credit, renewable energy credit, environmental credit, “green” credit, etc.) or otherwise to have a market value. Entergy intends to shut down the Palisades nuclear power plant permanently on May 31, 2022 and transfer to Holtec thereafter.

Customers

Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ customers for the sale of both energy and capacity from its nuclear plants include retail power providers, utilities, electric power co-operatives, power trading organizations, and other power generation companies. These customers include Consumers Energy, the company from which Entergy purchased the Palisades plant, and NYISO and MISO. Substantially all the credit exposure associated with the planned energy output under contract for Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants is with counterparties or their guarantors that have public investment grade credit ratings.

Competition

The NYISO market is highly competitive. Entergy Wholesale Commodities has numerous competitors in New York including generation companies affiliated with regulated utilities, other independent power producers, municipal and co-operative generators, owners of co-generation plants and wholesale power marketers. Entergy Wholesale Commodities is an independent power producer, which means it generates power for sale to third parties at day ahead or spot market prices to the extent that the power is not sold under a fixed price contract. Municipal and co-operative generators also generate power but use most of it to deliver power to their municipal or co-operative power customers. Owners of co-generation plants produce power primarily for their own consumption. Wholesale power marketers do not own generation; rather they buy power from generators or other market participants and resell it to retail providers or other market participants. Competition in the New York power market is affected by, among other factors, the amount of generation and transmission capacity in these markets. MISO does not have a centralized clearing capacity market, but load serving entities do meet most of their capacity needs through bilateral contracts and self-supply with a smaller portion coming through voluntary MISO auctions. Almost all of Palisades’ current output is contracted to Consumers Energy through May 2022. Entergy Wholesale Commodities does not expect to be materially affected by competition in the MISO market in the near term.

Seasonality

Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ revenues and operating income are subject to fluctuations during the year due to seasonal factors, weather conditions, and contract pricing. When outdoor and cooling water temperatures are low, generally during colder months, Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants operate more efficiently, and consequently, generate more electricity. Many of Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ contracts provide for shaped pricing over the course of the year. As a result of these factors, Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ revenues are typically higher in the first and third quarters than in the second and fourth quarters.

Fuel Supply

Nuclear Fuel

See “Fuel Supply - Nuclear Fuel” in the Utility portion of Part I, Item 1 for a discussion of the nuclear fuel cycle and markets. Entergy Nuclear Fuels Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary, is responsible for contracts to acquire nuclear materials, except for fuel fabrication, for Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants,
265

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

while Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. acts as the agent for the purchase of nuclear fuel assembly fabrication services. All contracts for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel are between the DOE and each of the nuclear power plant owners. The nuclear fuel supply portfolio for the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment has been adjusted to reflect reduced overall requirements related to the planned permanent shutdowns of the Indian Point 3 and Palisades plants. Fuel procurement for the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment was primarily limited to the requirements of the Palisades plant’s final refueling in 2020.

Other Business Activities

Entergy’s non-utility operations business includes the ownership of interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers. Entergy’s non-utility operations
268

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing, LLC (ENPM) was formed in 2005Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

business also provides decommissioning-related services to centralize the power marketing function for Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants. Upon its formation, ENPM entered into long-term power purchase agreements with the Entergy Wholesale Commodities subsidiaries that own nuclear power plants (generating subsidiaries). As part of a series of agreements, ENPM agreedowned by non-affiliated entities in the United States.

Property

Entergy’s non-utility operations business owns interests in the following non-nuclear power plants:
PlantLocationOwnershipNet Owned Capacity (a)Type
Independence Unit 2; 842 MWNewark, AR14%121 MW(b)Coal
Nelson Unit 6; 550 MWWestlake, LA11%60 MW(b)Coal

(a)“Net Owned Capacity” refers to assume and/or otherwise service the existing power purchase agreements that were in effect betweennameplate rating on the generating subsidiaries and their customers. ENPM’s functions include originationunit.
(b)The owned MW capacity is the portion of newthe plant capacity owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations business.  For a complete listing of Entergy’s jointly-owned generating stations, refer to “Jointly-Owned Generating Stations” in Note 1 to the financial statements.

All generation owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations business falls under the authority of MISO. Customers for the sale of both energy and capacity transactionsfrom its owned generation and generation scheduling.

Services provided by either Entergy Nuclear, Inc. or other Entergy Wholesale Commodities subsidiariescontracted power purchases include engineering, operations and maintenance, fuel procurement, management and supervision, technical support and training, administrative support,retail power providers, utilities, electric power co-operatives, power trading organizations, and other managerial or technical services required to operate, maintain,power generation companies. The majority of the non-utility operations businesses’ owned generation and decommission nuclear electriccontracted power facilities.purchases are sold under a cost-based contract.

TLG Services, a subsidiary in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment,Entergy’s non-utility operations business, offers decommissioning, engineering, and related services to nuclear power plant owners.

Entergy provides plant operation support services for the 800 MW Cooper Nuclear Station located near Brownville, Nebraska. In 2010 an Entergy subsidiary signed an agreement to extend the management support services to Cooper Nuclear Station by 15 years, through January 2029.

Regulation of Entergy’s Business

Federal Power Act

The Federal Power Act provides the FERC the authority to regulate:

the transmission and wholesale sale of electric energy in interstate commerce;
the reliability of the high voltage interstate transmission system through reliability standards;
sale or acquisition of certain assets;
securities issuances;
the licensing of certain hydroelectric projects;
certain other activities, including accounting policies and practices of electric and gas utilities; and
changes in control of FERC jurisdictional entities or rate schedules.

The Federal Power Act gives the FERC jurisdiction over the rates charged by System Energy for Grand Gulf capacity and energy provided to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans and over the rates charged by Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana to unaffiliated wholesale customers. The FERC also regulates wholesale power sales between the Utility operating companies. In addition, the FERC regulates the MISO RTO, an independent entity that maintains functional control over the combined transmission systems of its members and administers wholesale energy, capacity, and ancillary services markets for market participants in the MISO region, including the Utility operating companies. FERC regulation of the MISO RTO includes regulation of the design and implementation of the wholesale markets administered by the MISO RTO, as well as the rates, terms, and conditions of open access transmission service over the member systems and the allocation of costs associated with transmission upgrades.

266
269

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


Entergy Arkansas holds a FERC license that expires in 2053 for two hydroelectric projects totaling 7065 MW of capacity.

State Regulation

Utility

Entergy Arkansas is subject to regulation by the APSC as to the following:

utility service;
utility service areas;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the energy cost recovery rider;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
the acquisition, sale, or lease of any public utility plant or property constituting an operating unit or system;
certificates of convenience and necessity and certificates of environmental compatibility and public need, as applicable, for generating and transmission facilities;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
net energy metering;
integrated resource planning;
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control; and
the issuance and sale of certain securities.

Additionally, Entergy Arkansas serves a limited number of retail customers in Tennessee. Pursuant to legislation enacted in Tennessee, Entergy Arkansas is subject to complaints before the Tennessee Regulatory Authority only if it fails to treat its retail customers in Tennessee in the same manner as its retail customers in Arkansas. Additionally, Entergy Arkansas maintains limited facilities in Missouri but does not provide retail electric service to customers in Missouri. Although Entergy Arkansas obtained a certificate with respect to its Missouri facilities, Entergy Arkansas is not subject to retail ratemaking or other regulatory jurisdiction in Missouri.

Entergy Louisiana’s electric and gas business is subject to regulation by the LPSC as to the following:

utility service;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the fuel adjustment clause, environmental adjustment charge, and purchased gas adjustment charge;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
certification of certain transmission projects;
certification of capacity acquisitions, both for owned capacity and for purchase power contracts;contracts that exceed either 5 MW or one year in term;
procurement process to acquire overcapacity at or above 50 MW;
audits of the environmental adjustment charge, energy efficiency rider;
avoided cost payment to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities, and energy efficiency rider;Facilities;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control.

270

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Mississippi is subject to regulation by the MPSC as to the following:

utility service;
utility service areas;
267

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the energy cost recovery mechanism;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
certification of generating facilities, certain transmission projects, and certain transmission projects;distribution projects with construction costs greater than $10 million;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers, acquisitions, and other changes of control.

Entergy Mississippi is also subject to regulation by the APSC as to the certificate of environmental compatibility and public need for the Independence Station, which is located in Arkansas.

Entergy New Orleans is subject to regulation by the City Council as to the following:

utility service;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the fuel adjustment charge and purchased gas adjustment charge;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
audit of the environmental adjustment charge;
certification of the construction or extension of any new plant, equipment, property, or facility that comprises more than 2% of the utility’s rate base;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
issuance and sale of certain securities; and
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control.

To the extent authorized by governing legislation, Entergy Texas is subject to the original jurisdiction of the municipal authorities of a number of incorporated cities in Texas with appellate jurisdiction over such matters residing in the PUCT.  Entergy Texas is also subject to regulation by the PUCT as to the following:

retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates, and terms and conditions of service in unincorporated areas of its service territory, and in municipalities that have ceded jurisdiction to the PUCT;
fuel recovery, including reconciliations (audits) of the fuel adjustment charges;
service standards;
certification of certain transmission and generation projects;
utility service areas, including extensions into new areas;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers, sales/acquisitions/leases of plants over $10 million, sales of greater than 50% voting stock of utilities, and transfers of controlling interest in or operation of utilities.

268271

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Regulation of the Nuclear Power Industry

Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and Energy Reorganization Act of 1974

Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the operation of nuclear plants is heavily regulated by the NRC, which has broad power to impose licensing and safety-related requirements.  The NRC has broad authority to impose civil penalties or shut down a unit, or both, depending upon its assessment of the severity of the situation, until compliance is achieved. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, as owners of all or portions of ANO, River Bend and Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, respectively, and Entergy Operations, as the licensee and operator of these units, are subject to the jurisdiction of the NRC. Entergy subsidiaries in the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment are subject to the NRC’s jurisdiction as the owners and operators of Indian Point Energy Center, Palisades, and Big Rock Point.

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

Spent Nuclear Fuel

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the DOE is required, for a specified fee, to construct storage facilities for, and to dispose of, all spent nuclear fuel and other high-level radioactive waste generated by domestic nuclear power reactors. Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have been charged fees for the estimated future disposal costs of spent nuclear fuel in accordance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. The affected Entergy companies entered into contracts with the DOE, whereby the DOE is to furnish disposal services at a cost of one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983, plus a one-time fee for generation prior to that date. Entergy Arkansas is the only one of the Utility operating companies that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and has a recorded liability as of December 31, 20202023 of $192.0$205.2 million for the one-time fee. Entergy accepted assignment of the Pilgrim, FitzPatrick, Indian Point 3, Indian Point 1 and Indian Point 2, Vermont Yankee, Palisades, and Big Rock Point spent fuel disposal contracts with the DOE held by their previous owners. The FitzPatrick spent fuel disposal contract was assigned to Exelon as part of the sale of the plant, completed in March 2017. The Vermont Yankee spent fuel disposal contract was assigned to NorthStar as part of the sale of the plant in January 2019. The Pilgrim spent fuel disposal contract was transferred to Holtec as part of the sale of Entergy Nuclear Generation Company in August 2019. The owners of these plants previous to Entergy have paid or retained liability for the fees for all generation prior to the purchase dates of those plants. The fees payable to the DOE may be adjusted in the future to assure full recovery.  Entergy considers all costs incurred for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, except accrued interest, to be proper components of nuclear fuel expense.  Provisions to recover such costs have been or will be made in applications to regulatory authorities for the Utility plants.  Entergy’s total spent fuel fees to date, including the one-time fee liability of Entergy Arkansas, have surpassed $1.6$1.7 billion (exclusive of amounts relating to Entergy plants that were paid or are owed by prior owners of those plants).

The permanent spent fuel repository in the U.S. has been legislated to be Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The DOE is required by law to proceed with the licensing of the Yucca Mountain repository (the DOE filed the license application in June 2008) and, after the license is granted by the NRC, proceed with the repository construction and commencement of receipt of spent fuel. Because the DOE has not begun accepting spent fuel, it is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and has breachedis in partial breach of its spent fuel disposal contracts. The DOE continues to delay meeting its obligation. Specific steps were taken to discontinue the Yucca Mountain project, including a motion to the NRC to withdraw the license application with prejudice and the establishment of a commission to develop recommendations for alternative spent fuel storage solutions. In August 2013 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered the NRC to continue with the Yucca Mountain license review, but only to the extent of funds previously appropriated by Congress for that purpose and not yet used. Although the NRC completed the safety evaluation report for the license review in 2015, the previously appropriated funds are not sufficient to complete the review, including required hearings. The government has taken no effective action to date related to the recommendations of the appointed spent fuel study commission. Accordingly, large uncertainty remains regarding the time frame under
269

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

which the DOE will begin to accept spent fuel from Entergy’s facilities for storage or disposal. As a result, continuing future expenditures will be required to increase spent fuel storage capacity at Entergy’s nuclear sites.

Following the defunding of the Yucca Mountain spent fuel repository program, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and others sued the government seeking cessation of collection of the one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983 fee. In November 2013 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the DOE to submit a proposal to Congress to reset the fee to zero until the DOE complies with the Nuclear
272

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Waste Policy Act or Congress enacts an alternative waste disposal plan. In January 2014 the DOE submitted the proposal to Congress under protest, and also filed a petition for rehearing with the D.C. Circuit. The petition for rehearing was denied. The zero spent fuel fee went into effect prospectively in May 2014.

As a result of the DOE’s failure to begin disposal of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and the spent fuel disposal contracts, Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have incurred and will continue to incur damages. These subsidiaries have been, and continue to be, involved in litigation to recover the damages caused by the DOE’s delay in performance. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of final judgments recorded by Entergy in 2018, 2019,2021, 2022, and 20202023 related to Entergy’s nuclear owner owner/licensee subsidiaries’ litigation with the DOE. Through 2020,2023, Entergy’s subsidiaries have won and collected on judgments against the government totaling approximately $800 million.$1 billion.

Pending DOE acceptance and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, the owners of nuclear plants are providing their own spent fuel storage.  Storage capability additions using dry casks began operations at Palisades in 1993, at ANO in 1996, at River Bend in 2005, at Grand Gulf in 2006, at Indian Point in 2008, and at Waterford 3 in 2011.  These facilities will be expanded as needed.

Nuclear Plant Decommissioning

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy are entitled to recover from customers through electric rates the estimated decommissioning costs for ANO, Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, respectively.  In addition, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas are entitled to recover from customers through electric rates the estimated decommissioning costs for the portion of River Bend subject to retail rate regulation. The collections are deposited in trust funds that can only be used in accordance with NRC and other applicable regulatory requirements.  Entergy periodically reviews and updates the estimated decommissioning costs to reflect inflation and changes in regulatory requirements and technology, and then makes applications to the regulatory authorities to reflect, in rates, the changes in projected decommissioning costs.

In December 2018 the APSC ordered collections in rates for decommissioning ANO 2 and found that ANO 1’s decommissioning was adequately funded without additional collections. In October 2020,November 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed a revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that both ANO 1 and ANO 2 decommissioning trusts were adequately funded without further collections, and in December 2020,2021 the APSC ordered zero collections for ANO 1 and 2 decommissioning. In November 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed a revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that ANO 1’s decommissioning trust was adequately funded, but that ANO 2’s fund had a projected shortage as a result of a decline in decommissioning trust fund investment values over the past year. The filing proposed a reinstatement of decommissioning cost recovery for ANO 2. In December 2022 the APSC ordered reinstatement of decommissioning collections for ANO 2 decommissioning.in accordance with the request in the November 2022 filing. In November 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a further revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that ANO 1’s decommissioning trust continued to be adequately funded, but that ANO 2’s fund continued to require collections higher than those in effect. In December 2023 the APSC approved the proposed higher decommissioning collections for ANO 2.

In July 2010 the LPSC approved increased decommissioning collections for Waterford 3 and the Louisiana regulated share of River Bend to address previously identified funding shortfalls. This LPSC decision contemplated that the level of decommissioning collections could be revisited should the NRC grant license extensions for both Waterford 3 and River Bend. In July 2019, following the NRC approval of license extensions for Waterford 3 and River Bend, Entergy Louisiana made a filing with the LPSC seeking to adjust decommissioning and depreciation rates for those plants, including one proposed scenario that would adjust Louisiana-jurisdictional decommissioning collections to zero for both plants (including an offsetting increase in depreciation rates). Because of the ongoing public health emergency arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying economic uncertainty, Entergy Louisiana determined that the relief sought in the filing was no longer appropriate, and in November 2020, filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the proceeding. Following that filing, in a December 2020 order, the LPSC dismissed the proceeding without prejudice. In July 2021, Entergy Louisiana made a filing with the LPSC to adjust Waterford
270273

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

3 and River Bend decommissioning collections based on the latest site-specific decommissioning cost estimates for those plants. The filing seeks to increase Waterford 3 decommissioning collections and decrease River Bend decommissioning collections. The procedural schedule in the case has been suspended pending settlement negotiations. In August 2023, Entergy Louisiana made another filing with the LPSC requesting to maintain the same total decommissioning funding collections as currently in effect for both Waterford 3 and River Bend combined, but also requesting to reallocate that same amount of funding by increasing the contributions for Waterford 3 and reducing the contributions for River Bend. In October 2023 a procedural schedule was adopted that includes a hearing date in August 2024. Management cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings.

In December 2010 the PUCT approved increased decommissioning collections for the Texas share of River Bend to address previously identified funding shortfalls.  In December 2018 the PUCT approved a settlement that eliminated River Bend decommissioning collections for the Texas jurisdictional share of the plant based on a determination by Entergy Texas that the existing decommissioning fund was adequate following license renewal. In July 2022, Entergy Texas filed a base rate case that proposed continuation of the cessation of River Bend decommissioning collections. In May 2023, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties to the base rate case an unopposed settlement, which included an agreement to maintain Entergy Texas’s decommissioning funding for River Bend at a revenue requirement of $0. In August 2023 the PUCT issued an order accepting the unopposed settlement, including the proposed decommissioning funding settlement terms.

In SeptemberDecember 2016 the NRC issued a 20-year operating license renewal for Grand Gulf. In a 2017 filing at the FERC, System Energy stated that with the renewed operating license, Grand Gulf’s decommissioning trust was sufficiently funded, and proposed, among other things, to cease decommissioning collections for Grand Gulf effective October 1, 2017. The FERC accepted a settlement including the proposed decommissioning revenue requirement by letter order in August 2018.

Entergy currently believes its decommissioning funding will be sufficient for its nuclear plants subject to retail rate regulation, although decommissioning cost inflation and trust fund performance will ultimately determine the adequacy of the funding amounts.

In January 2019, Entergy sold 100%Plant owners are required to provide the NRC with a biennial report (annually for units that have shut down or will shut down within five years), based on values as of December 31, addressing the owners’ ability to meet the NRC minimum funding levels. Depending on the value of the membership interest in Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankeetrust funds, plant owners may be required to a subsidiarytake steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of NorthStar. As a result of the sale, NorthStar assumed ownership of Vermont Yankee and its decommissioning and site restoration trusts, together with complete responsibility for the facility’s decommissioning and site restoration. See Note 9credit or parent company guarantees or making additional contributions to the financial statements for further discussion of Vermont Yankee decommissioning coststrusts, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and see “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” in Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion of the NorthStar transaction.

In August 2019, Entergy sold 100% of the equity interests in Entergy Nuclear Generation Company, LLC to a subsidiary of Holtec International. As a result of the sale, Holtec assumed ownership of Pilgrim and its decommissioning trust, together with complete responsibility for the facility’s decommissioning and site restoration. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the sale.

For the Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick plants purchased in 2000 from NYPA, NYPA retained the decommissioning trust funds and the decommissioning liabilities with the right to require the Entergy subsidiaries to assume each of the decommissioning liabilities provided that it assigns the corresponding decommissioning trust, up to a specified level, to the Entergy subsidiaries.  In August 2016, Entergy entered into a trust transfer agreement with NYPA to transfer the decommissioning trust funds and decommissioning liabilities for the Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick plants to Entergy, which was completed in January 2017.NRC minimum funding requirements are met. In March 2017, Entergy sold the FitzPatrick plant to Exelon, and as part of the transaction, the FitzPatrick decommissioning trust fund, along with the decommissioning obligation for that plant, was transferred to Exelon. The FitzPatrick spent fuel disposal contract was assigned to Exelon as part of the transaction. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the FitzPatrick sale.

In March 20202023 filings with the NRC were made reporting on decommissioning funding for all of EntergyEntergy’s subsidiaries’ nuclear plants. Those reports showed that decommissioning funding for each of the nuclear plants met the NRC’s financial assurance requirements.

Additional information with respect to Entergy’s decommissioning costs and decommissioning trust funds is found in Note 9 and Note 16 to the financial statements.

Price-Anderson Act

The Price-Anderson Act requires that reactor licensees purchase and maintain the maximum amount of nuclear liability insurance available and participate in an industry assessment program called Secondary Financial Protection in order to protect the public in the event of a nuclear power plant accident.  The costs of this insurance
271

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

are borne by the nuclear power industry.  Congress amended and renewed the Price-Anderson Act in 2005 for a term through 2025.  The Price-Anderson Act limits the contingent liability for a single nuclear incident to a maximum assessment of approximately $137.6$165.9 million per reactor (with 9795 nuclear industry reactors currently participating).  In the case of a nuclear event in which Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, or System Energy or an Entergy Wholesale Commodities company is liable, protection is afforded through a combination of private insurance and the Secondary Financial Protection program. In addition to this, insurance for property damage, costs of replacement power, and other risks relating to
274

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

nuclear generating units is also purchased.  The Price-Anderson Act and insurance applicable to the nuclear programs of Entergy are discussed in more detail in Note 8 to the financial statements.

NRC Reactor Oversight Process

The NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process is a program to collect information about plant performance, assess the information for its safety significance, and provide for appropriate licensee and NRC response. The NRC evaluates plant performance by analyzing two distinct inputs: inspection findings resulting from the NRC’s inspection program and performance indicators reported by the licensee. The evaluations result in the placement of each plant in one of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix columns: “licensee response column,” or Column 1, “regulatory response column,” or Column 2, “degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 3, and “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 4.4, and “unacceptable performance,” or Column 5. Plants in Column 1 are subject to normal NRC inspection activities. Plants in Column 2, Column 3, or Column 4 are subject to progressively increasing levels of inspection by the NRC with, in general, progressively increasing levels of associated costs. TheContinued plant operation is not permitted for plants in Column 5. All of the nuclear generating plants owned and operated by Entergy’s Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities businessesbusiness are currently in Column 1, except for Grand Gulf,River Bend, which is currently in Column 2.

In November 2020July 2023 the NRC placed Grand GulfRiver Bend in Column 2, effective April 2023, based on failure to inspect wiring associated with the incidencehigh pressure core spray system. In August 2023 the NRC issued a finding and notice of three unplanned plant scrams during the second and third quarters of 2020.Two of the scram events related to new turbine control system components that failed, and a thirdviolation related to a feedwater valve positioner that failed, all of which had been replacedradiation monitor calibration issue at River Bend. In December 2023, River Bend successfully completed the inspection on the high pressure core spray system issue and in a refueling outage that ended in May 2020. The NRC plans to conduct aFebruary 2024, River Bend successfully completed the supplemental inspection of Grand Gulf in accordance with its inspection procedures for nuclear plantsthe radiation monitor calibration issue involving radiation monitor calibrations. River Bend will remain in Column 2. As a consequence2 pending receipt of two additional Grand Gulf scrams during the fourthformal report on the inspection, which is expected in first quarter 2020, System Energy expects Grand Gulf to be placed into NRC Column 3 based on plant performance indicators for the four quarters ended December 31, 2020. This will involve an additional supplemental NRC inspection of Grand Gulf in accordance with its inspection procedures for nuclear plants in Column 3.2024.

Environmental Regulation

Entergy’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.  Management believes that Entergy’s businesses are in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted below.  Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance requirements and costs cannot be precisely estimated.  Except to the extent discussed below, at this time compliance with federal, state, and local provisions regulating the discharge of materials into the environment, or otherwise protecting the environment, is incorporated into the routine cost structure of Entergy’s businesses and is not expected to have a material effect on their competitive position, results of operations, cash flows, or financial position.

272

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Clean Air Act and Subsequent Amendments

The Clean Air Act and its amendments establish several programs that currently or in the future may affect Entergy’s fossil-fueled generation facilities and, to a lesser extent, certain operations at nuclear and other facilities.  Individual states also operate similar independent state programs or delegated federal programs that may include requirements more stringent than federal regulatory requirements.  These programs include:

Newnew source review and preconstruction permits for new sources of criteria air pollutants, greenhouse gases, and significant modifications to existing facilities;
Acidacid rain program for control of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx);
Nonattainmentnonattainment area programs for control of criteria air pollutants, which could include fee assessments for air pollutant emission sources under Section 185 of the Clean Air Act if attainment is not reached in a timely manner;
Hazardoushazardous air pollutant emissions reduction programs;
Interstate Air Transport;
Operating permit programs and enforcement of these and other Clean Air Act programs;
Regional Haze programs; and
New and existing source standards for greenhouse gas and other air emissions.

New Source Review (NSR)

Preconstruction permits are required for new facilities and for existing facilities that undergo a modification that results in a significant net emissions increase and is not classified as routine repair, maintenance, or replacement.  Units that undergo certain non-routine modifications must obtain a permit modification and may be required to install additional air pollution control technologies. In December 2020 the EPA amended the NSR regulations to clarify when a physical change or change in the method of operation will constitute such a modification. Entergy has an established process for identifying modifications requiring additional permitting approval and is monitoring the regulations and associated guidance provided by the states and the federal government with regard to the determination of routine repair, maintenance, and replacement.  Several years ago, however, the EPA implemented an enforcement initiative, aimed primarily at coal plants, to identify modifications that it does not consider routine for which the unit did not obtain a modified permit.  Various courts and the EPA have been inconsistent in their judgments regarding modifications that are considered routine and on other legal issues that affect this program.

In February 2011, Entergy received a request from the EPA for several categories of information concerning capital and maintenance projects at the White Bluff and Independence facilities, both located in Arkansas, in order to determine compliance with the Clean Air Act, including NSR requirements and air permits issued by the Arkansas Department of Energy and Environment, Division of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). In August 2011, Entergy’s Nelson facility, located in Louisiana, received a similar request for information from the EPA. In September 2015 an additional request for similar information was received for the White Bluff facility. Entergy responded to all requests. None of these EPA requests for information alleged that the facilities were in violation of law.

In January and February 2018, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy Power, and other co-owners received 60-day notice of intent to sue letters from the Sierra Club and the National Parks Conservation Association concerning allegations of violations of new source review and permitting provisions of the Clean Air Act at the Independence and White Bluff coal-burning units, respectively. In November 2018, following extensive negotiations, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Power entered a proposed settlement resolving those claims as well as other issues facing Entergy Arkansas’s fossil generation plants. The settlement, which formally resolves a complaint filed by the Sierra Club and the National Parks Conservation Association, is subject to approval by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. In October 2019 the District Court requested supplemental briefing on several issues to be resolved prior to addressing the motion to approve the
273275

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

settlement; that briefing was completed in May 2020. For further information about the settlement, see “Regional Haze” discussed below.Interstate Air Transport;
operating permit programs and enforcement of these and other Clean Air Act programs;
Regional Haze programs; and
new and existing source standards for greenhouse gas and other air emissions.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide and requires periodic review of those standards. When an area fails to meet an ambient standard, it is considered to be in nonattainment and is classified as “marginal,” “moderate,” “serious,” or “severe.” When an area fails to meet the ambient air standard, the EPA requires state regulatory authorities to prepare state implementation plans meant to cause progress toward bringing the area into attainment with applicable standards.

Ozone Nonattainment

Entergy Texas operates two fossil-fueled generating facilities (Lewis Creek and Montgomery County Power Station) in a geographic area that is not in attainment with the applicable NAAQS for ozone.  The ozone nonattainment area that affects Entergy Texas is the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria area.  Both Lewis Creek and the Montgomery County Power Station hold all necessary permits for construction and operation and comply with applicable air quality program regulations. Measures enacted to return the area to ozone attainment could make these program regulations more stringent. Entergy will continue to work with state environmental agencies on appropriate methods for assessing attainment and nonattainment with the ozone NAAQS.

Potential SO2 Nonattainment

The EPA issued a final rule in June 2010 adopting an SO2 1-hour national ambient air quality standard of 75 parts per billion.  In Entergy’s utility service territory, only St. Bernard Parish and Evangeline Parish in Louisiana are designated as nonattainment. In August 2017 the EPA issued a letter indicating that East Baton Rouge and St. Charles parishes would be designated by December 31, 2020, as monitors were installed to determine compliance. In December 2020March 2021 the EPA designatedpublished a final rule designating East Baton Rouge, St. Charles, St. James, and West Baton Rouge parishes in Louisiana as attainment/unclassifiable and, in Texas, Jefferson County as attainment/unclassifiable and Orange County as unclassifiable. ChallengesNo challenges to these final designations must bewere filed within the 60 days of publication in the Federal Register.day deadline. Entergy continues to monitor this situation.

Hazardous Air Pollutants

The EPA released the final Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS) rule in December 2011, which had a compliance date, with a widely granted one-year extension, of April 2016. The required controls have been installed and are operational at all affected Entergy units. In May 2020 the EPA finalized a rule that finds that it is not “appropriate and necessary” to regulate hazardous air pollutants from electric steam generating units under the provisions of section 112(n) of the Clean Air Act. This is a reversal of the EPA’s previous finding requiring such regulation. The final appropriate and necessary finding does not revise the underlying MATS rule. Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the appropriate and necessary finding. In February 2021 the D.C. Circuit granted the EPA’s motion to hold the litigation in abeyance pending the agency’s review of the appropriate and necessary rule. In February 2022 the EPA issued a proposed rule revoking the 2020 rule and determining, again, that it is “appropriate and necessary” to regulate hazardous air pollutants. In April 2023 the EPA issued a regulatory proposal to revise portions of the MATS rule, including a proposed reduction to the emission limit for filterable particulate matter. If finalized, the proposed lower filterable particulate matter emission limitation could require additional capital investment and/or additional other operation and maintenance costs at Entergy’s coal-fired generating units. Entergy will continue to monitoris closely monitoring this situation.rulemaking, in part through its various trade associations.

276

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Good Neighbor Plan/Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

In March 2005 the EPA finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which was intended to reduce SO2 and NOx emissions from electric generation plants in order to improve air quality in twenty-nine eastern states. The rule required a combination of capital investment to install pollution control equipment and increased operating costs through the purchase of emission allowances. Entergy began implementation in 2007, including installation of controls at several facilities and the development of an emission allowance procurement strategy.

274

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Based on several court challenges, CAIR and its subsequent versions, now known as the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), have been remanded to and modified by the EPA on multiple occasions.

In September 2016June 2023 the EPA finalizedpublished its final Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), known as the CSAPR Update RuleGood Neighbor Plan, to address interstate transport for the 20082015 ozone NAAQS. StartingNAAQS which would increase the stringency of the CSAPR program in 2017all four of the final rule requires reductions in summer nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions. Several states including Arkansas and Texas, filed a challenge towhere the Update Rule. In September 2019 the D.C. Circuit upheld the EPA’s underlying approach to the Update Rule, but determined that it was inconsistent with the Clean Air Act because it failed to include deadlines consistent with downwind states’ deadlines for attainment.Utility operating companies operate. The court remanded the rule to the EPA for further consideration, but did not vacate so the rule remains in effect pending the EPA’s further review. In October 2020 the EPA issued its proposal intended to address the D.C. Circuit’s remand. The draft rule proposes to finalize interstate transport obligations for 21 states. For nine states, including Arkansas, Mississippi, and Texas, the EPA proposes that additional emission reductions are not necessary. For 12 states, however, including Louisiana, the EPA proposes additional emission reductions through proposed reductions in the number of NOx emission allowances allocated to each state. Entergy, through its various trade associations, filed comments on the proposal and will continue to monitor the rulemaking and its potential impact on its facilities in Louisiana. If the October 2020 proposal is finalized,FIP would significantly reduce ozone season NOx emissions may become more expensiveemission allowance budgets and allocations for electric generating units. Entergy is currently assessing its compliance options for the FIP. Prior to issuance of the FIP, in Louisiana.February 2023 the EPA issued related State Implementation Plan (SIP) disapprovals for many states, including the four states in which the Utility operating companies operate, and these SIP disapprovals are the subject of many legal challenges, including a petition for review filed by Entergy Louisiana challenging the disapproval of Louisiana’s SIP. Stays of the SIP disapprovals have been granted in all four states in which the Utility operating companies operate, and the Good Neighbor Plan will not go into effect while the stays are in place. Decisions on the merits regarding the respective SIP disapprovals are expected in 2024. The final FIP also is subject to numerous legal challenges.

Regional Haze

In June 2005 the EPA issued its final Clean Air Visibility Rule (CAVR) regulations that potentially could result in a requirement to install SO2 and NOx pollution control technology as Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BART) to continue operating certain of Entergy’s fossil generation units.  The rule leaves certain CAVR determinations to the states.

In Arkansas, This rule establishes a series of 10-year planning periods, with states required to develop SIPs for each planning period, with each SIP including such air pollution control measures as may be necessary to achieve the Arkansas Departmentultimate goal of Energy and Environment, Divisionthe CAVR by the year 2064. The various states are currently in the process of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) prepared a state implementation plan (SIP) for Arkansas facilitiesdeveloping SIPs to implement its obligations under the CAVR.   In April 2012 the EPA finalized a decision addressing the Arkansas Regional Haze SIP, in which it disapproved a large portionsecond planning period of the Arkansas plan, includingCAVR, which addresses the emission limits for NOx and SO2 at White Bluff.  In April 2015 the EPA published a proposed federal implementation plan (FIP) for Arkansas, taking comment on requiring installation of scrubbers and low NOx burners to continue operating both units at the White Bluff plant and both units at the Independence plant and NOx controls to continue operating the Lake Catherine plant. Entergy filed comments by the deadline in August 2015. Among other comments, including opposition to the EPA’s proposed controls on the Independence units, Entergy proposed to meet more stringent SO2 and NOx limits at both White Bluff and Independence within three years of the effective date of the final FIP and to cease the use of coal at the White Bluff units at a later date.

In September 2016 the EPA published the final Arkansas Regional Haze FIP. In most respects, the EPA finalized its original proposal but shortened the time for compliance for installation of the NOx controls. The FIP required an emission limitation consistent with SO2 scrubbers at both White Bluff and Independence by October 2021 and NOx controls by April 2018. The EPA declined to adopt Entergy’s proposals related to ceasing coal use as an alternative to SO2 scrubbers for White Bluff SO2 BART. In November 2016, Entergy and other interested parties, including the State of Arkansas, filed petitions for administrative reconsideration and stay at the EPA as well as petitions for judicial review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The Eighth Circuit granted the stay pending settlement discussions and pending the State’s development of a SIP that, if approved by the EPA, would replace the FIP. The state had proposed its replacement SIP in two parts: Part I considers NOx requirements, and Part II considers SO2 requirements. The EPA approved the Part I NOx SIP in January 2018. The Part I SIP requires that Entergy address NOx impacts on visibility via compliance with the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule ozone-season emission trading program. Arkansas has finalized a Part II SIP which has been approved by the EPA but is currently pending a state court appeal. That appeal has been stayed pending the outcome of a federal court case, which may resolve many of the issues on appeal. The final Part II SIP requires that Entergy achieve SO2 emission reductions via the use of low-sulfur coal at both White Bluff and Independence within three years. The
275

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Part II SIP also requires that Entergy cease to use coal at White Bluff by December 31, 2028 and notes the current2018-2028 planning assumption that Entergy’s Independence units will cease to use coal by December 31, 2030.

period.
In January and February 2018, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy Power, and other co-owners received 60-day notice of intent to sue letters from the Sierra Club and the National Parks Conservation Association concerning allegations of violations of new source review and permitting provisions of the Clean Air Act at the Independence and White Bluff coal-burning units, respectively. In November 2018, following extensive negotiations, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Power entered a proposed settlement resolving those claims and reducing the risk that Entergy Arkansas, as operator of Independence and White Bluff, might be compelled under the Clean Air Act’s regional haze program to install costly emissions control technologies. Consistent with the terms of the settlement and in many cases also the Part II SIP, Entergy Arkansas, along with co-owners, will begin using only low-sulfur coal at Independence and White Bluff by mid-2021; cease to use coal at White Bluff and Independence by the end of 2028 and 2030, respectively; cease operation of the remaining gas unit at Lake Catherine by the end of 2027; reserve the option to develop new generating sources at each plant site; and commit to install or propose to regulators at least 800 MWs of renewable generation by the end of 2027, with at least half installed or proposed by the end of 2022 (which includes two existing Entergy Arkansas projects) and with all qualifying co-owner projects counting toward satisfaction of the obligation. Under the settlement, the Sierra Club and the National Parks Conservation Association also waive certain potential existing claims under federal and state environmental law with respect to specified generating plants. The settlement, which formally resolves a complaint filed by the Sierra Club and the National Parks Conservation Association, is subject to approval by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. The EPA, which is allowed to comment on such a settlement agreement, has stated that it has no objections to the settlement. In November 2020 the court denied motions by the Arkansas Attorney General and the Arkansas Affordable Energy Coalition to intervene and to stay the proceedings. The proposed intervenors did not appeal the ruling. Still pending before the court is a motion by the plaintiffs to approve the settlement, in support of which Entergy made a filing. The Arkansas Attorney General also filed an application before the APSC in December 2018 seeking an investigation into the effects of the settlement. The Arkansas Affordable Energy Coalition filed to support the Arkansas Attorney General’s application, and Entergy Arkansas filed a motion to dismiss it. The application remains pending before the APSC. In October 2019 the District Court requested supplemental briefing on several issues prior to addressing the motion to approve the settlement; that briefing concluded in May 2020.

In Louisiana, Entergy has worked with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) and the EPA to revise the Louisiana SIP for regional haze, which had been disapproved in part in 2012. The LDEQ submitted a revised SIP in February 2017. In May 2017 the EPA proposed to approve a majority of the revisions. In September 2017 the EPA issued a proposed SIP approval for the Nelson plant, requiring an emission limitation consistent with the use of low-sulfur coal, with a compliance date of January 22, 2021. The EPA issued final approval in December 2017. The EPA approval was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In October 2019 the Fifth Circuit affirmed the EPA’s SIP approval. A petition for rehearing filed by plaintiffs was denied by the Fifth Circuit. Plaintiffs did not petition for further review by the Supreme Court.

The second planning period (2018-2028) for the regional haze program requires states to examine sources for impacts on visibility and to prepare SIPs by 2021.July 31, 2021 to ensure reasonable progress is being made to attain visibility improvements. Entergy received information collection requests from the Arkansas and Louisiana Departments of Environmental Quality requesting an evaluation of technical and economic feasibility of various NOx and SO2 control technologies for Independence, Nelson 6, NISCO, and Ninemile. Responses to the information collection requests have beenwere submitted to the respective state agencies. Louisiana issued its draft SIP which did not propose any additional air emissions controls for the affected Entergy units in Louisiana. Some public commenters, however, believe additional air controls are cost-effective. It is not yet clear how the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) will respond in its final SIP, and the agency, like many other state agencies, did not meet the July 31, 2021 deadline to submit a SIP to the EPA for review.

New and Existing Source Performance Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In July 2019 the EPA released the Affordable Clean Energy Rule (ACE), which applies onlySimilar to existing coal-fired electric generating units. The ACE determines that heat rate improvements are the best system of emission reductions and lists six candidate technologies for consideration by states at each coal unit. The rule and associated rulemakings by the EPA replace the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, which established
276

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

national emissions performance rates for existing fossil-fuel fired steam electric generating units and combustion turbines. The ACE rule provides states discretion in determining how the best system for emission reductions applies to individual units, including through the consideration of technical feasibility and the remaining useful life of the facility. The ADEQ and the LDEQ, have issued information collection requests to Entergy facilities to help the states collectArkansas Department of Energy and Environment, Division of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) did not meet the information needed to determine the best system of emission reductions for each facility. Entergy responded to the requests and will continue to monitor litigation challenging the rule. In JanuaryJuly 31, 2021 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated ACE. The court held that ACE relied on an incorrect interpretation of the Clean Air Act that the statute expressly forecloses emission reduction approaches, such as emissions trading and generating shifting, that cannot be applied at and to the individual source. The court remanded ACESIP submission deadline, but subsequently submitted it to the EPA for further consideration and also vacated the repeal of the Clean Power Plan.review. The vacatur willADEQ reviewed Entergy’s Independence plant but determined that additional air emission controls would not be effective untilcost-effective considering the court issues its mandate which is being held until after disposition of any petitions for rehearing. Entergy is currently reviewing the court’s opinion.facility’s commitment to cease coal-fired combustion by December 31, 2030.

In 2018The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has completed its second-planning period SIP and submitted it to the EPA proposed a revision to the new source performance standard on greenhouse gas emissions that primarily impacts new coal units and, therefore, should not impact Entergy. In January 2021 the EPA finalized a pollutant-specific contribution finding for greenhouse gas emissions from new, modified, and reconstructed electric generating units.review. There were no Entergy sources selected for additional emission controls. The rule establishes a three percent threshold for determining when a pollutant significantly contributes to air pollution and reaffirms the EPA’s position that the Clean Air Act Section 111(b) requires the EPA to make pollutant-specific significant contribution findings before promulgation of a new source performance standard. The EPA did not, however, finalize the new source performance standard on greenhouse gas emissions and intends to address the 2018 proposal in a future action.

Potential Legislative, Regulatory, and Judicial Developments

In addition to the specific instances described above, there are a number of legislative and regulatory initiatives concerning air emissions, as well as other media, that are under consideration at the federal, state, and local level.  Because of the nature of Entergy’s business, the imposition of any of these initiatives could affect Entergy’s operations.  Entergy continues to monitor these initiatives and activities in order to analyze their potential operational and cost implications.  These initiatives include:

designation by the EPA and state environmental agencies of areas that are not in attainment with national ambient air quality standards;
introduction of bills in Congress and development of regulations by the EPA proposing further limits on NOx, SO2, mercury, and carbon dioxide and other air emissions.  New legislation or regulations applicable to stationary sources could take the form of market-based cap-and-trade programs, direct requirements for the installation of air emission controls onto air emission sources, or other or combined regulatory programs;
efforts in Congress or at the EPA to establish a federal carbon dioxide emission tax, control structure, or unit performance standards;
revisions to the estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon and its use for regulatory impact analysis of federal laws and regulations;
implementation of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative by several states in the northeastern United States and similar actions in other regions of the United States;
efforts on the local, state, and federal level to codify renewable portfolio standards, clean energy standards, or a similar mechanism requiring utilities to produce or purchase a certain percentage of their power from defined renewable energy sources or energy sources with lower emissions;
efforts to develop more stringent state water quality standards, effluent limitations for Entergy’s industry sector, stormwater runoff control regulations, and cooling water intake structure requirements;
efforts to restrict the previously-approved continued use of oil-filled equipment containing certain levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs);
efforts by certain external groups to encourage reporting and disclosure of environmental, social, and governance risk;
277

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality also did not meet the listingJuly 31, 2021 SIP submission deadline and continues to develop its SIP, but there are no Entergy sources that are expected to be impacted.

In August 2022 the EPA issued findings of additional species as threatenedfailure to submit regional haze SIPs to 15 states, including Louisiana and Mississippi. These findings were effective September 2022 and start the two-year period for the EPA to either approve a SIP submitted by the state or endangered,issue a final federal plan.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In April 2021, President Biden announced a target for the protectionUnited States in connection with the United Nations’ “Paris Agreement” on climate change. The target consists of critical habitata 50-52 percent reduction in economy-wide net greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. President Biden has also stated that a goal of his administration is for these species, and developments in the legal protection of eagles and migratory birds;electric power industry to decarbonize fully by 2035.

Consistent with the Biden administration’s stated climate goals, in May 2023 the EPA proposed several rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing coal and gas-fired power plants. If finalized, the proposed requirements for existing “large and frequently used” gas turbine generating units could require significant investments in CO2 emission reduction technologies at certain of Entergy’s existing gas turbine units with a capacity of greater than 300 MW per combustion turbine and which operate at an annual capacity factor of greater than 50 percent. Comments on the regulation ofproposed rules were submitted in August 2023 and Entergy is monitoring the management, disposal, and beneficial reuse of coal combustion residuals; and
the regulation of the management and disposal and recycling of equipment associated with renewable and clean energy sources such as used solar panels, wind turbine blades, hydrogen usage, or battery storage.rulemaking, in part through its trade associations.

Entergy continues to support national legislation that would most efficiently reduce economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions and increase planning certainty for electric utilities while addressing carbon dioxide emissions in an economy-wide, responsible, and flexible manner.utilities.  By virtue of its proportionally large investment in low-emitting generation technologies, Entergy has a low overall carbon dioxide emission “intensity,” or rate of carbon dioxide emitted per megawatt-hour of electricity generated.  In anticipation of the imposition of carbon dioxide emission limits on the electric industry, Entergy initiated actions designed to reduce its exposure to potential new governmental requirements related to carbon dioxide emissions.  These voluntary actions included a formal program to stabilize owned power plant carbon dioxide emissions at 2000 levels through 2005, and Entergy succeeded in reducing emissions below 2000 levels. In 2006, Entergy started including emissions from controllable power purchases in addition to its ownership share of generation and established a second formal voluntary program to stabilize power plant carbon dioxide emissions and emissions from controllable power purchases, cumulatively over the period, at 20% below 2000 levels through 2010.  In 2011, Entergy extended this commitment through 2020.2020, which it ultimately outperformed by approximately 8% both cumulatively and on an annual basis.  In 2020, Entergy succeeded2019, in achieving its initial climate commitment to reduce carbon dioxide cumulative emissions by 20% from 2000 levels. Total carbon dioxide emissions representing Entergy’s ownership share of power plants and controllable power purchases in the United States were approximately 39.1 million tons in 2020 and 40.7 million tons in 2019. Since its original commitment in 2001, Entergy’s cumulative emissions are approximately 7.6% below its 2020 goal.

Entergy voluntarily conductedconnection with a climate scenario analysis and published a comprehensive report in March 2019. The report followsfollowing the framework and recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures describing climate-related governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. Scenario analyses resulted intargets, Entergy developing and publishingannounced a new goal of reducing the Utility’s2030 carbon dioxide emission rate by 50 percentgoal focused on a 50% reduction from 2000 levels by 2030.Entergy’s base year - 2000. In September 2020, Entergy committedannounced a commitment to achievingachieve net-zero carbongreenhouse gas emissions by 2050 while continuinginclusive of all businesses, all applicable gases, and all emission scopes. In 2022, Entergy enhanced its commitment to grid reliabilityinclude an interim goal of 50% carbon-free energy generating capacity by 2030 and affordabilityexpanded its interim emission rate goal to include all purchased power. See “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A for customers. In December 2020, Entergydiscussion of the risks associated with achieving these climate goals. Entergy’s comprehensive, third party verified greenhouse gas inventory and progress against its voluntary goals are published a report regarding this long-term commitment that describeson its approach and technology point-of-view. Technology research and development, innovation, and advancement are critical to Entergy’s ability to meet this climate commitment.website.

278

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy participates in the M.J. Bradley & Associates’ Annual Benchmarking Air Emissions Report, an annual analysis of the 100 largest U.S. electric power producers. The report is available on the M.J. Bradley website. Entergy’s annual greenhouse gas emissions inventory is also third-party verified,Corporation, Utility operating companies, and that certification is made available on the American Carbon Registry website. Entergy participates annually in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index and in 2020 was listed on the North American Index. Entergy has been listed on the World or North American Index, or both, for nineteen consecutive years. Entergy also participated in the 2020 CDP and CDP Water evaluations, receiving a ‘B’ for both responses.System Energy

Potential Legislative, Regulatory, and Judicial Developments

In addition to the specific instances described above, there are a number of legislative and regulatory initiatives that are under consideration at the federal, state, and local level.  Because of the nature of Entergy’s business, the imposition of any of these initiatives could affect Entergy’s operations.  Entergy continues to monitor these initiatives and activities in order to analyze their potential operational and cost implications.  These initiatives include:

reconsideration and revision of ambient air quality standards downward which could lead to additional areas of nonattainment;
designation by the EPA and state environmental agencies of areas that are not in attainment with national ambient air quality standards;
introduction of bills in Congress and development of regulations by the EPA proposing further limits on SO2, mercury, carbon dioxide, and other air emissions.  New legislation or regulations applicable to stationary sources could take the form of market-based cap-and-trade programs, direct requirements for the installation of air emission controls onto air emission sources, or other or combined regulatory programs;
efforts in Congress or at the EPA to establish a federal carbon dioxide emission tax, control structure, or unit performance standards;
revisions to the estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon and its use for regulatory impact analysis of federal laws and regulations;
implementation of the regional cap and trade programs to limit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases;
efforts on the local, state, and federal level to codify renewable portfolio standards, clean energy standards, or a similar mechanism requiring utilities to produce or purchase a certain percentage of their power from defined renewable energy sources or energy sources with lower emissions;
efforts to develop more stringent state water quality standards, effluent limitations for Entergy’s industry sector, stormwater runoff control regulations, and cooling water intake structure requirements;
efforts to restrict the previously-approved continued use of oil-filled equipment containing certain levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and increased regulation of per- and polyfluorinated substances or other chemicals;
efforts by certain external groups to encourage reporting and disclosure of environmental, social, and governance risk;
the listing of additional species as threatened or endangered, the protection of critical habitat for these species, and developments in the legal protection of eagles and migratory birds;
the regulation of the management, disposal, and beneficial reuse of coal combustion residuals; and
the regulation of the management and disposal and recycling of equipment associated with renewable and clean energy sources such as used solar panels, wind turbine blades, hydrogen usage, or battery storage.

Clean Water Act

The 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (known as the Clean Water Act) provide the statutory basis for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program, section 402, and the basic structure for regulating the discharge of pollutants from point sources to waters of the United States.  The Clean Water Act requires virtually all discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States to be permitted.  Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act regulates cooling water intake structures, section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires a water quality certification from the state in support of certain federal actions and approvals, and section 404 of the Clean Water Act regulates the dredge and fill of waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands.

Federal Jurisdiction of Waters of the United States

In June 2020 the EPA’s revised definition of waters of the United States in the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) became effective, narrowing the scope of Clean Water Act jurisdiction, as compared to a 2015
278
279

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Steam Electric Effluent Guidelines

The 2015 Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELG) rule required, among other things, that there be no discharge of bottom ash transport water. In October 2020 the EPA issued its final rule revision on bottom ash transport water allowing the discharge of up to 10% system volume for certain purge waters, including storm events and non-routine operations. The final rule requires compliance as soon as possible beginning October 31, 2021, but no later than December 31, 2025. Several challenges to the final rule have been filed. Additionally, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals previously vacated and remanded the provisions of the rule related to legacy wastewater and leachate, which the EPA plans to address in a separate rulemaking. Despite the final rule and pending challenges, Entergy is implementing projects at its White Bluff and Independence plants to convert to zero-discharge systems to comply with the ELG rule and the coal combustion residuals restrictions on impoundments. Additionally, the Nelson Unit 6 facility is implementing operational and maintenance measures to minimize the potential for discharge of bottom ash transport water from the existing bottom ash handling system at the site, and is reviewing the effectiveness of these changes for compliance with the requirements of the October 2020 final rule.

Federal Jurisdiction of Waters of the United States

In February 2019 the EPA published its proposed revised definition of Waters of the United States, which proposes to narrow the scope of Clean Water Act jurisdiction, as compared to a 2015 definition which had been stayed by several federal courts. In August 2021 a federal district court vacated and remanded the NWPR for further consideration. The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) subsequently issued a statement that the agencies would revert to pre-2015 regulations pending a new rulemaking. In December 2022 the EPA and the Corps released a final definition of waters of the United States (the 2022 Rule) that replaces the NWPR with a definition that is consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime as interpreted by several United States Supreme Court decisions. The 2022 Rule was subject to multiple legal challenges and was enjoined from implementation or enforcement throughout Entergy’s utility service territory. In May 2023 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision limiting the scope of federal jurisdiction over wetlands, and in September 2023 the EPA and the Corps issued a final rule was released in January 2020 and effective in June 2020. In October 2019incorporating the EPA repealedSupreme Court decision. Most notably, the 2015 rule and re-codified the pre-existing regulations. That rule was effective late December 2019. Numerous challenges have been filed against both rules.

Groundwater at Certain Nuclear Sites

The NRC requires nuclear power plants to monitor and report regularly the presence of radioactive material in the environment.  Entergy joined other nuclear utilities and the Nuclear Energy Institute in 2006 to develop a voluntary groundwater monitoring and protection program.  This initiative began after detection of very low levels of radioactive material, primarily tritium, in groundwater at several plants in the United States.  Tritiumexclusion for waste treatment systems is a radioactive form of hydrogen that occurs naturally and is also a byproduct of nuclear plant operations.  In addition to tritium, other radionuclides have been found in site groundwater at nuclear plants.

As part of the groundwater monitoring and protection program, Entergy has: (1) performed reviews of plant groundwater characteristics (hydrology) and historical records of past events on site that may have potentially impacted groundwater; (2) implemented fleet procedures on how to handle events that could impact groundwater; and (3) installed groundwater monitoring wells and began periodic sampling.  The program also includes protocols for notifying local officials if contamination is found.  To date, radionuclides such as tritium have been detected at Arkansas Nuclear One, Indian Point, Palisades, Grand Gulf, and River Bend.  Each of these sites has installed groundwater monitoring wells and implemented a program for testing groundwater at the sites for the presence of tritium and other radionuclides.  Based on current information, the concentrations and locations of radionuclides detected at these plants pose no threat to public health or safety, but each site continues to evaluate the results from its groundwater monitoring program.retained.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), authorizes the EPA to mandate clean-up by, or to collect reimbursement of clean-up costs from, owners or operators of sites at which hazardous substances may be or have been released.  Certain private parties also may use CERCLA to recover response costs.  Parties that transported hazardous substances to these sites or arranged for the disposal of the substances are also deemed liable by CERCLA.  CERCLA has been interpreted to impose strict, joint, and several liability on responsible parties.  Many states have adopted programs similar to CERCLA.  Entergy subsidiaries in the Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities businesses have sent waste materials to various
279

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

disposal sites over the years, and releases have occurred at Entergy facilities including nuclear facilities that have been or will be sold to decommissioning companies.  In addition, environmental laws now regulate certain of Entergy’s operating procedures and maintenance practices that historically were not subject to regulation.  Some disposal sites used by Entergy subsidiaries have been the subject of governmental action under CERCLA or similar state programs, resulting in site clean-up activities.  Entergy subsidiaries have participated to various degrees in accordance with their respective potential liabilities in such site clean-ups and have developed experience with clean-up costs.  The affected Entergy subsidiaries have established provisions for the liabilities for such environmental clean-up and restoration activities.  Details of potentially material CERCLA and similar state program liabilities are discussed in the “Other Environmental Matters” section below.

Coal Combustion Residuals

In June 2010April 2015 the EPA issued a proposed rule onpublished the final coal combustion residuals (CCRs) that contained two primary regulatory options: (1) regulating CCRs destined for disposal in landfills or received (including stored) in surface impoundments as so-called “special wastes” under the hazardous waste program of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C; or (2)(CCR) rule regulating CCRs destined for disposal in landfills or surface impoundments as non-hazardous wastes under Subtitle D of RCRA.  Under both options, CCRs that are beneficially reused in certain processes would remain excluded from hazardous waste regulation. In April 2015 the EPA published the final CCR rule with the material being regulated under the second scenario presented above - as non-hazardous wastes regulated under RCRAResource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle D.

The final regulations createcreated new compliance requirements including modified storage, new notification and reporting practices, product disposal considerations, and CCR unit closure criteria.criteria but excluded CCRs that are beneficially reused in certain processes.  Entergy believes that on-site disposal options will be available at its facilities, to the extent needed for CCR that cannot be transferred for beneficial reuse.needed. As of December 31, 2020,2023, Entergy has recorded asset retirement obligations related to CCR management of $20.1$28 million.

In December 2016 the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act) was signed into law, which authorizes states to regulate coal ash rather than leaving primary enforcement to citizen suit actions. States may submit to the EPA proposals for a permit program.

Pursuant to the EPA Rule, Entergy operates groundwater monitoring systems surrounding its coal combustion residual landfills located at White Bluff, Independence, and Nelson. Monitoring to date has detected concentrations of certain listed constituents in the area, but has not indicated that these constituents originated at the active landfill cells. Reporting has occurred as required, and detection monitoring will continue as the rule requires. In late-2017, Entergy determined that certain in-ground wastewater treatment system recycle ponds at its White Bluff and Independence facilities require management under the new EPA regulations. Consequently, in order to move away from using the recycle ponds, White Bluff and Independence each have installed a new permanent bottom ash handling system that does not fall under the CCR rule. As of November 2020, both sites are operating the new system and no longer are sending waste to the recycle ponds. Each site has commenced closure of one of its two recycle ponds with(four ponds total) prior to the remaining pond being held in reserve during initial operation of the new bottom ash handling system. Closure of the remaining recycle pond at each site will commence as soon as possible, but no later than April 11, 2021 which is the deadline under the finalized CCR rule to commence closure of anyfor unlined recycle ponds. Any potential requirements for corrective action or operational changes under the new CCR rule continue to be assessed. Notably, ongoing litigation has resulted in the EPA’s continuing review of the rule. Consequently, the nature and cost of additional corrective action requirements may depend, in part, on the outcome of the EPA’s review.

280

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Additionally, all three sites are preparing to implement measures to meet the new and updated Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELG). The nature, cost, and timing of those compliance measures depends on the guidance included in the final ELG rule, which is expected by mid-2024.

In May 2023 the EPA released a proposed rule establishing management standards for legacy CCR surface impoundments (i.e., inactive surface impoundments at inactive power plants) and establishing a new class of units referred to as CCR management units (i.e., non-containerized CCR located at a regulated CCR facility). Entergy does not have any legacy impoundments; however, the proposed definition of CCR management units appears to regulate on-site areas where CCR was beneficially used. This is contrary to the current CCR rule which exempts beneficial uses that meet certain criteria. Comments on the proposed rule were submitted in July 2023 and Entergy is monitoring the rulemaking, in part through its trade associations.

Other Environmental Matters

Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas

Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, currently is involved in the second phase of the remedial investigation of the Lake Charles Service Center site, located in Lake Charles, Louisiana.  A manufactured gas plant (MGP) is believed to have operated at this site from approximately 1916 to 1931.  Coal tar, a by-product of the distillation process employed at MGPs, apparently was routed to a portion of the property for disposal.  The same area also has been used as a landfill.  In 1999, Entergy Gulf States, Inc. signed a second administrative consent order with the EPA to perform a removal action at the site.  Removal actions addressed contaminated source material, soil, and sediment and included capping certain soil on and off-site. In 2002 approximately 7,400 tons of contaminated soil and debris were excavated and disposed of from an area within the service center.  In 2003 a cap was constructed over the remedial area to prevent the migration of contamination to the surface.  In August 2005 an administrative order was issued by the EPA requiring that a 10-year groundwater study be conducted at this site.  The groundwater monitoring study commenced in January 2006.  The EPA released the second Five Year Review in 2015. In that review, the EPA indicated that the remediation technique was insufficient and that Entergy would need to utilize other remediation technologies on the site. In July 2015, Entergy submitted a Focused Feasibility Study to the EPA outlining the potential remedies and suggesting installation of the new remedial method, a waterloo barrier. The estimated cost for this remedy is approximately $2 million, to be allocated between Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas.  In early 2017 the EPA indicated that the waterloo barrier may not be necessary and requested revisions to the Focused Feasibility Study. The EPA released the third Five Year Review in late-2019 confirming that a new remedial method is not necessary but requiring continuation of the current groundwater monitoring. The site’s remedy includes monitored natural attenuation of groundwater, and institutional controls to restrict groundwater and land use. The EPA has determined that no additional actions are needed for the remedy to be protective over the long-term, and the remedy is protective of human health and the environment.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) notified Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas that the TCEQ believes those entities are potentially responsible parties (PRPs) concerning contamination existing at the San Angelo Electric Service Company (SESCO) facility in San Angelo, Texas.  The facility operated as a transformer repair and scrapping facility from the 1930s until 2003.  Both soil and groundwater contamination existed at the site.  Entergy subsidiaries sent transformers to this facility.  Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy Texas responded to an information request from the TCEQ.  Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas joined a group of PRPs responding to site conditions in cooperation with the State of Texas, creating cost allocation models based on review of SESCO documents and employee interviews, and investigating contribution actions against other PRPs.  Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas have agreed to contribute to the remediation of contaminated soil and groundwater at the site in a measure proportionate to those companies’ involvement at the site.  Current estimates, although variable depending on ultimate remediation design and performance, indicate that Entergy’s total share of remediation costs likely will be approximately $1.5 million to $2 million.  Groundwater monitoring wells at the site were plugged and abandoned in December 2019 following receipt of a certificate of completion issued by the TCEQ. Site decommissioning activities are complete and final disposition of the property will be determined at a later time.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Texas

The EPA notified Entergy that the EPA believes Entergy is a PRP concerning PCB contamination at the F.J. Doyle Salvage facility in Leonard, Texas. The facility operated as a scrap salvage business during the 1970s to the 1990s. In May 2018 the EPA investigated the site surface and sub-surface soils, and in November 2018 the EPA conducted a removal action, including disposal of PCB contaminated soils. Entergy responded to the EPA’s information requests in May and July 2019. In November 2020 the EPA sent Entergy and other PRPs a demand
281

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

letter seeking reimbursement for response costs totaling $4 million expended at the site. The demand letter is being evaluated and liabilityLiability and PRP allocation of response costs are yet to be determined.

Entergy Texas

In December 2016 a transformer inside the Hartburg, Texas Substation had an internal fault resulting in a release of approximately 15,000 gallons of non-PCB mineral oil. Cleanup ensued immediately; however, rain caused much of the oil to spread across the substation yard and into a nearby wetland. The TCEQ and the National Response Center were immediately notified, and the TCEQ2020, Entergy responded to the site approximately two hours after the cleanup was initiated. The remediationdemand letter, without admitting liability is estimated at $2.2 million; however, this number could fluctuate depending on the remediation extent and wetland mitigation requirements. In July 2017, Entergy entered into the Voluntary Cleanup Programor waiving any rights, indicating that it would engage in good faith negotiations with the TCEQ. In November 2017, additional soil sampling was completed in the wetland area and, in February 2018, a site summary report of findings was submittedEPA with respect to the TCEQ. The TCEQ respondeddemand. An initial meeting between the EPA and the PRPs took place in June 20182021. Negotiations between the PRPs and requested an ecological exclusion criteria checklist/Tier II screening-level ecological risk assessment, and additional site assessment, additional soil samples, groundwater samples, and some additional diagrams and maps. In October 2018, Entergy submitted the requested information to the TCEQ. In January 2019 the TCEQ responded with another request for information. In March 2019, Entergy submitted the requested information to the TCEQ. In August 2019 the TCEQ responded with a request for additional information including an Affected Property Assessment Report (APAR) and water well survey. The TCEQ has agreed that the necessity of the water well survey is dependent on the results of the groundwater resampling that will occur. Groundwater sampling was completed in December 2019 and results were submitted to the TCEQ for review. Based on the groundwater sampling results, the TCEQ confirmed in February 2020 that a water well survey is not necessary and requested the APAR and an Ecological Risk Assessment by August 2020. Due to COVID-19 delays, the TCEQ extended the APAR and Ecological Risk Assessment submittal dates to December 2020, which Entergy timely met.EPA are ongoing.

Litigation

Entergy usesand its subsidiaries use legal and appropriate means to contest litigation threatened or filed against it,them, but certainthe states in which Entergy operatesand the Registrant Subsidiaries operate have proven to be unusually litigious environments.  Judges and juries in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texasthese states have demonstrated a willingness to grant large verdicts, including punitive damages, to plaintiffs in personal injury, property damage, and business tort cases.  The litigation environment in these states poses a significant business risk to Entergy.

Asbestos Litigation (Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

See Note 8 to the financial statements for a discussion of this litigation.

Employment and Labor-related Proceedings (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

See Note 8 to the financial statements for a discussion of these proceedings.

282281

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Human Capital

Employees

Employees are an integral part of Entergy’s commitment to serving customers.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, Entergy subsidiaries employed 13,40012,177 people.

Utility: 
Entergy Arkansas1,2441,302 
Entergy Louisiana1,6541,639 
Entergy Mississippi750747 
Entergy New Orleans303302 
Entergy Texas658704 
System Energy— 
Entergy Operations3,5293,349 
Entergy Services3,8594,117 
Entergy Nuclear Operations1,35614 
Other subsidiaries473 
Total Entergy13,40012,177 

Approximately 3,900There are 3,104 employees are represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the Utility Workers Union of America, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the United Government Security Officers of America, and the International Union, Security, Police, and Fire Professionals of America.

Below is the breakdown of Entergy’s employees by gender and race/ethnicity:

Gender (%)20202019
Gender (%) (a)Gender (%) (a)20232022
FemaleFemale2120Female23.022.2
MaleMale7980Male77.077.8
100100

Race/Ethnicity (%) (a)20232022
White73.174.8
Black/African American18.217.3
Hispanic/Latino3.23.0
Asian3.22.3
Other2.32.6


(a)
Race/Ethnicity (%)20202019
White7879
Black/African American1515
Hispanic/Latino32
Asian22
Other22
100100
Based on employees who self-identify.

Entergy’s Approach to Human Resources

Entergy’s people and culture enable its success; that is why acquiring, retaining, and developing talent are important components of Entergy’s human resources strategy. Entergy focuses on an approach that includes, among other things, governance and oversight; safety; organizational health, including diversity, inclusion, and belonging; and talent management.

283282

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Governance and Oversight

Ensuring that workplace processes support the desired culture and strategy begins with the Board of Directors and the Office of the Chief Executive. The Personnel Committee establishes priorities and reviews performance on a range of topics. It oversees Entergy’s incentive plan design and administers its executive compensation plans to incentivize the behaviors and outcomes that support achievement of Entergy’s corporate objectives. Annually, it reviews executive performance, development and succession plans to align a high performing executive team with Entergy’s priorities. The Personnel Committee also oversees Entergy’s performance through regular briefings on a wide variety of human resources topics including Entergy’s safety culture and performance; organizational health; and diversity, inclusion, and belonging initiatives and performance.

Other committees of the Board oversee other key aspects of Entergy’s culture. For example, the Audit Committee reviews reports on ethics and compliance training and performance, as well as regular reports on calls made to Entergy’s ethics line and related investigations. To maximize the sharing of information and facilitate the participation of all Board members in these discussions, the Board schedules its regular committee meetings in a manner such that all directors can attend.

The Office of the Chief Executive, which includes the Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer, ensures annual business plans are designed to support Entergy’s talent objectives, reviews workforce-related metrics, and regularly discusses the development, succession planning, and performance of their direct reports and other company officers.

Safety

Entergy’s safety objective is: Everyone Safe. All Day. Every Day. While the COVID-19 pandemic and historical hurricane season presented significant challenges, Entergy’s safety strategy and commitment to excellence showed results in 2020. Entergy employees achieved a total recordable incident rate of 0.40 in 2020 compared to 0.56 in 2019 and 0.48 in 2018. The recordable incident rate equals the number of recordable incidents per 100 full-time equivalents. Recordable incidents include fatalities, lost-time accidents, restricted-duty accidents, and medical attentions and is not inclusive of potential work-related COVID-19 cases. This marked improvement in total recordable incident rate placed Entergy in top-decile in safety performance when benchmarked amongst peers within the Edison Electric Institute.

Organizational Health, including Diversity, Inclusion and BelongingProduction Cost Allocation Rider

Entergy believes that organizational health fostersArkansas has in place an engagedAPSC-approved production cost allocation rider for recovery from customers of the retail portion of the costs allocated to Entergy Arkansas as a result of System Agreement proceedings.

Other

In June 2022 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff filing for a proposed green tariff designed to help participating customers meet their renewable and productive culture that positions Entergysustainability goals and to deliver sustainable value to its stakeholders. Entergy measures its progress through an organizational health survey coordinated by an external third party. Since initially administering the surveyenhance economic development efforts in 2014, Entergy improved fromArkansas. The APSC approved an initial scoreoffering of 49 (fourth quartile)100 MW of solar capacity to be made available under this tariff.

In June 2023 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s Go ZERO tariff, which provides participating industrial and commercial customers the opportunity to chose from a score in 2020number of 72 (near top quartile). In additionclean energy options to significantly improved scores, initial employee participation of 66 percent in 2014 rose to and remains at 90 percent in 2018-2020.help them achieve their sustainability goals.

Entergy believes that a culture focused on diversity, inclusion, and belonging drives foundational engagement. Entergy is committed to developing and retaining a workforce that reflects the rich diversity of the communities it serves. In 2019, Entergy embarked on a three-year phased approach to enhance inclusion for individuals and teams. Among other actions, the primary focus of its 2020 actions was taking a stand against social injustice, reinforcing expectations, training and leading by example, starting at the top of the organization and cascading through management ranks.Louisiana

284

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Talent ManagementFormula Rate Plan

Entergy’s focus on talent management is organized in three areas: developing and attracting a diverse pool of talent, equipping its leaders to develop the organization, and building premier utility capability through employee performance management and succession programs. Entergy believes that developing a diverse pool of local talent equipped with the skills needed, today and in the future, and reflecting the communities Entergy serves will give it a long-term competitive advantage. The focus of Entergy’s leadership development programs is to equip managers with the skills needed to effectively develop their teams and improve the leader-employee relationship. Entergy’s talent development infrastructure, which includes a combination of business function-specific and enterprise-wide learning and development programs, is designed to ensure Entergy has qualified staff with the skills, experiences, and behaviors needed to perform today and prepare for the future. Entergy strives to achieve its strategic priorities by aligning and enhancing team and individual performance with business objectives, effectively deploying talent through succession planning, and managing workforce transitions.

Availability of SEC filings and other information on Entergy’s website

Entergy electronically files reports with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxies, and amendments to such reports. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding registrants that file electronically with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov. Copies of the reports that Entergy files with the SEC can be obtained at the SEC’s website.

Entergy uses its website, http://www.entergy.com, as a routine channel for distribution of important information, including news releases, analyst presentations and financial information.  Filings made with the SEC are posted and available without charge on Entergy’s website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC.  These filings include annual and quarterly reports on Forms 10-K and 10-Q (including related filings in Inline XBRL format) and current reports on Form 8-K; proxy statements; and any amendments to those reports or statements.  All such postings and filings are available on Entergy’s Investor Relations website free of charge.  Entergy is providing the address to its internet site solely for the information of investors and does not intend the address to be an active link.  The contents of the website are not incorporated into this report.


285

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

RISK FACTORS

See “RISK FACTOR SUMMARY” in Part I Item 1 for a summary of Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ risk factors.

Investors should review carefully the following risk factors and the other information in this Form 10-K.  The risks that Entergy faces are not limited to those in this section.  There may be additional risks and uncertainties (either currently unknown or not currently believed to be material) that could adversely affect Entergy’s financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.  See “FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION.”

Utility Regulatory Risks

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and responsive measures taken on Entergy’s and its Utility operating companies’ business, results of operations, and financial condition are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted.

In December 2019 a novel strain of coronavirus was reported to have surfaced in Wuhan, China. Since then, COVID-19 has spread throughout most countries in the world, including the United States. Public health officials in the United States have both recommended and mandated wearing of masks, precautions to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, including prohibitions on congregating in heavily-populated areas, mandated closure or limitations on the functions of non-essential business, and shelter-in-place orders or similar measures, including throughout Entergy’s service areas. While some of these mitigation measures have been lifted, it is unclear how long certain forms of mitigation measures will remain in place, whether they will be reinstated in the future, and how they will ultimately impact the general economy, Entergy’s customers, and its operations.

Entergy and its Utility operating companies have experienced a decline in commercial and industrial sales and an increase in arrearages and bad debt expense due to non-payment by customers, and expect such reduced levels of sales and increased arrearages and bad debt expense to continue, the extent and duration of which management cannot predict. The Utility operating companies temporarily suspended disconnecting customers for non-payment of bills, and the suspension remains in place at Entergy Arkansas, has been re-instituted at Entergy New Orleans, and could be re-instituted at the other Utility operating companies should their regulators mandate. While they are working with regulators to ensure ultimate recovery for those and other COVID-19 related costs, the amount, method, and timing of such recovery is unknown. Entergy and its Registrant Subsidiaries also could experience, and in some cases have experienced, among other challenges, supply chain, vendor, and contractor disruptions; delays in completion of capital or other construction projects, maintenance, and other operations activities, including prolonged or delayed outages; delays in regulatory proceedings; workforce availability, health or safety issues; increased storm recovery costs; increased cybersecurity risks as a result of many employees telecommuting; increased late or uncollectible customer payments; volatility in the credit or capital markets (and any related increased cost of capital or any inability to access the capital markets or draw on available credit facilities); or other adverse impacts on their ability to execute on business strategies and initiatives.

A sustained or further economic decline could adversely impact Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ liquidity and cash flows, including through declining sales, reduced revenues, delays in receipts of customer payments, or increased bad debt expense. The Utility operating companies also may experience regulatory outcomes that require them to postpone planned investment and otherwise reduce costs due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their customers. In addition, if the COVID-19 pandemic continues to create disruptions or turmoil in the credit or financial markets, or adversely impacts Entergy’s credit metrics or ratings, such developments could adversely affect its ability to access capital on favorable terms and continue to meet its
286

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

liquidity needs, or cause a decrease in the value of its defined benefit pension trust funds, as well as its nuclear decommissioning trust funds, all of which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted.

Entergy cannot predict the extent or duration of the outbreak, the impact of new variants of COVID-19, the timing, availability, distribution or effectiveness of a vaccine, anti-viral or other treatments for COVID-19, governmental responsive measures, or the extent of the effects or ultimate impacts on the global, national or local economy, the capital markets, or its customers, suppliers, operations, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The terms and conditions of service, including electric and gas rates, of the Utility operating companies and System Energy are determined through regulatory approval proceedings that can be lengthy and subject to appeal, potentially resulting in delays in effecting rate changes, lengthy litigation and uncertainty as to ultimate results.

The Utility operating companies are regulated on a cost-of-service and rate of return basis and are subject to statutes and regulatory commission rules and procedures. The rates that the Utility operating companies and System Energy charge reflect their capital expenditures, operations and maintenance costs, allowed rates of return, financing costs, and related costs of service.  These rates significantly influence the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy and each of the Utility operating companies and System Energy.  These rates are determined in regulatory proceedings and are subject to periodic regulatory review and adjustment, including adjustment upon the initiative of a regulator or affected stakeholders.

In addition, regulators may initiate proceedings to investigate the prudence of costs in the Utility operating companies’ and System Energy’s base rates and examine, among other things, the reasonableness or prudence of the companies’ operation and maintenance practices, level of expenditures (including storm costs and costs associated with capital projects), allowed rates of return and rate base, proposed resource acquisitions, and previously incurred capital expenditures that the operating companies seek to place in rates.  The regulators may disallow costs subject to their jurisdiction found not to have been prudently incurred or found not to have been incurred in compliance with applicable tariffs, creating some risk to the ultimate recovery of those costs.  Regulatory proceedings relating to rates and other matters typically involve multiple parties seeking to limit or reduce rates.  Traditional base rate proceedings, as opposed to formula rate plans, generally have long timelines, are primarily based on historical costs, and may or may not be limited in scope or duration by statute. The length of these base rate proceedings can cause the Utility operating companies and System Energy to experience regulatory lag in recovering costs through rates, such that the Utility operating companies may not fully recover all costs during the rate effective period and the Utility operating companies may, therefore, earn less than their allowed returns.  Decisions are typically subject to appeal, potentially leading to additional uncertainty associated with rate case proceedings.

The Utility operating companies have large customer and stakeholder bases and, as a result, could be the subject of public criticism or adverse publicity focused on issues including the operation of their assets and infrastructure or the quality of their service. Criticism or adverse publicity of this nature could render legislatures and other governing bodies, public service commissions and other regulatory authorities, and government officials less likely to view the applicable operating company in a favorable light and could potentially negatively affect legislative or regulatory processes or outcomes, as well as lead to increased regulatory oversight or more stringent legislative or regulatory requirements.

The base rates of Entergy Texas are established largely in traditional base rate case proceedings.Between base rate proceedings, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs.These riders include a distribution cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of distribution-related capital investment and certain non-fuel MISO charges, a transmission cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of transmission-related capital investments, a generation cost recovery rider mechanism for the recovery of generation-related capital investments, and a fixed fuel factor mechanism for the recovery of MISO fuel and energy-related costs.Entergy Texas also is required to make a filing every three years,
287

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

at a minimum, reconciling its fuel and purchased power costs and fuel factor revenues.In the course of this reconciliation, the PUCT determines whether eligible fuel and fuel-related expenses and revenues are necessary and reasonable, and makes a prudence finding for each of the fuel-related contracts for the reconciliation period.Entergy Texas also is required to file full base rate case proceedings every four years and within eighteen months of utilizing its generation cost recovery rider for investments above $200 million.

Between base rate cases, Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi are able to adjust base rates annually through formula rate plans that utilize a forward test year (Entergy Arkansas) or forward-looking features (Entergy Mississippi).In response to Entergy Arkansas’s application for a general change in rates in 2015, the APSC approved the formula rate plan tariff proposed by Entergy Arkansas including its use of a projected year test period and an initial five-year term.The initial five-year term expires in 2021. Entergy Arkansas has requested APSC approval of the extension of the formula rate plan tariff for an additional five years through 2026.If Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan were terminated or not extended beyond the initial term, Entergy Arkansas could file an application for a general change in rates that may include a request for continued regulation under a formula rate review mechanism.If Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan is terminated, it would revert to the more traditional rate case environment or seek approval of a new formula rate plan.Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi recover fuel and purchased energy and certain non-fuel costs through other APSC-approved and MPSC-approved tariffs, respectively.

Entergy Louisiana historically sets electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan using ana historic test year.The form of the formula rate plan, on a combined basis, was approved in connection with the business combination of Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and largely followed the formula rate plans that were approved by the LPSC in connection with the full electric base rate cases filed by those companies in February 2013.The In 2021 the LPSC approved a settlement extending the formula rate plan was most recently extended through thefor test year 2019;years 2020, 2021 and 2022; certain modifications were made in that extension, including a decrease to the allowed return on equity, narrowing of the earnings “dead band” around the mid-point allowed return on equity, elimination of sharing above and below the earnings “dead band,” and the addition of a transmissiondistribution cost recovery mechanism.The formula rate plan continues to include exceptions from the rate cap and sharing requirements for certain large capital investment projects, including acquisition or construction of generating facilities and purchase power agreements approved by the LPSC, and as noted, for certain transmission investment,investments, and certain distribution investments, among other items. In August
245

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application for approval of a regulatory blueprint necessary for it to strengthen the electric grid for the State of Louisiana, which contains a dual-path request to update rates through either: (1) extension of Entergy Louisiana’s current formula rate plan (with certain modifications) for three years, test years 2023-2025, which is Entergy Louisiana’s recommended path; or (2) implementation of rates resulting from a cost-of-service study, with a 2024-2026 test year formula rate plan. The application complies with Entergy Louisiana’s previous formula rate plan extension order requiring that for Entergy Louisiana to obtain another extension of its formula rate plan that included a rate reset, Entergy Louisiana would need to submit a full cost-of-service/rate case. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s application.
MISO
Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Louisiana’s rate schedules include a fuel adjustment clause designed to recover the cost of fuel and energy-relatedpurchased power costs.  The fuel adjustment clause contains a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense and related carrying charges arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel costs are recoverable inincurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings related to audits of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause.clause filings.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Louisiana hasreceived approval from the LPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Louisiana historically hedged approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity was reviewed on an annual basis. In January 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC to suspend these seasonal hedging programs and implement financial hedges with terms up to five years for a pending requestportion of its natural gas exposure, which was approved in November 2018.

Entergy Louisiana’s gas rates include a purchased gas adjustment clause based on estimated gas costs for the billing month adjusted by a surcharge or credit that arises from an annual reconciliation of fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Retail Rates - Gas

In accordance with the settlement of Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’s gas rate stabilization plan for the test year ended September 30, 2012, in August 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal for implementation of an infrastructure rider to recover expenditures associated with strategic plant investment and relocation projects mandated by local governments. After review by the LPSC staff and inclusion of certain customer safeguards required by the LPSC staff, in December 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted a joint settlement for implementation of an accelerated gas pipe replacement program providing for the replacement of approximately 100 miles of pipe over the next ten years, as well as relocation of certain existing pipe resulting from local government-related infrastructure projects, and for a rider to recover the investment associated with these projects. The rider allows for recovery of approximately $65 million over ten years. The rider recovery will be adjusted on a quarterly basis to include actual investment incurred for the prior quarter and is subject to the following conditions, among others: a ten-year term; application of any earnings in excess of the upper end of the earnings band as an offset to the revenue requirement of the infrastructure rider; adherence to a specified spending plan, within plus or minus 20% annually; annual filings comparing actual versus planned rider spending with actual spending and explanation of variances exceeding 10%; and an annual true-up. The joint settlement was approved by the LPSC in January 2015. Implementation of the infrastructure rider commenced with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of April 2015. In April 2022 Entergy Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal to extend the infrastructure rider to address replacement of an additional 187 miles of pipe. In December 2022 Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted an uncontested settlement that extends the rider for an additional ten years beginning after the end of the current term of the rider in 2025. The extension is subject to the same customer safeguards and conditions as the original term of the rider. The extension
246

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

allows for recovery of approximately $95 million over ten years. In February 2023, the uncontested settlement was approved by the LPSC.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In March 2016 the LPSC opened two dockets to examine, on a generic basis, issues that it identified in connection with its review of Cleco Corporation’s acquisition by third party investors.  The first docket is captioned “In re: Investigation of double leveraging issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities,” and the second is captioned “In re: Investigation of tax structure issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities.”  In April 2016 the LPSC clarified that the concerns giving rise to the two dockets arose as a result of its review of the structure of the Cleco-Macquarie transaction and that the specific intent of the directives is to seek more information regarding intra-corporate debt financing of a utility’s capital structure as well as the use of investment tax credits to mitigate the tax obligation at the parent level of a consolidated entity.  No schedule has been set for either docket, and limited discovery has occurred.

In December 2019 an LPSC commissioner issued an unopposed directive to staff to research customer-centered options for all customer classes, as well as other regulatory environments, and recommend a plan for how to ensure customers are the focus. There was no opposition to the directive from other commissioners but several remarked that the intent of the directive was not initiated to pursue retail open access. In furtherance of the directive, the LPSC issued a notice of the opening of a docket to conduct a rulemaking to research and evaluate customer-centered options for all electric customer classes as well as other regulatory environments in January 2020. To date, the LPSC staff has requested multiple rounds of comments from stakeholders and conducted one technical conference. Topics on which comments have been filed include full and limited retail access, demand response, sleeved power purchase agreements, and energy efficiency. Neither the LPSC or the LPSC staff have made recommendations or adopted any rules.

Entergy Mississippi

Formula Rate Plan

Since the conclusion in 2015 of Entergy Mississippi’s most recent base rate case, Entergy Mississippi has set electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan. Between base rate cases, Entergy Mississippi is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize forward-looking features. In addition, Entergy Mississippi is subject to an annual “look-back” evaluation. Entergy Mississippi is allowed a maximum rate increase of 4% of each test year’s retail revenue. Any increase above 4% requires a base rate case. If Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan with certain modifications, including implementation of a distribution investment recovery mechanism and use of end of period rate base.In the event that the electric formula rate plan is not renewed or extended, Entergy Louisianawere terminated without replacement, it would revert to the more traditional rate case environment.environment or seek approval of a new formula rate plan.

In August 2012 the MPSC opened inquiries to review whether the then-current formulaic methodology used to calculate the return on common equity in both Entergy New Orleans previously operated underMississippi’s formula rate plan and Mississippi Power Company’s annual formula rate plan was still appropriate or could be improved to better serve the public interest. The intent of this inquiry and review was for informational purposes only; the evaluation of any recommendations for changes to the existing methodology would take place in a general rate case or in the existing formula rate plan proceeding. In March 2013 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed its consultant’s report which noted the return on common equity estimation methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company are commonly used throughout the electric utility industry. The report suggested ways in which the methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company might be improved, but did not recommend specific changes in the
247

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

return on common equity formulas or calculations at that time. In June 2014 the MPSC expanded the scope of the August 2012 inquiry to study the merits of adopting a uniform formula rate plan that ended withcould be applied, where possible in whole or in part, to both Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company in order to achieve greater consistency in the 2011 test year.Based onplans. The MPSC directed the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff to investigate and review Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan rider schedule and Mississippi Power Company’s Performance Evaluation Plan by considering the merits and deficiencies and possibilities for improvement of each and then to propose a settlement agreementuniform formula rate plan that, where possible, could be applicable to both companies. No procedural schedule has been set. In October 2014 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff conducted a public technical conference to discuss performance benchmarking and its potential application to the electric utilities’ formula rate plans. The docket remains open.

In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for a mechanism in the formula rate plan, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi as well as to allow similar cost recovery treatment for other capacity acquisitions that are approved by the City Council,MPSC. The MPSC must approve recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment for each new resource. In addition, the MPSC approved revisions to the formula rate plan which allows Entergy Mississippi to begin billing rate adjustments effective April 1 of the filing year on a temporary basis subject to refund or credit to customers, subject to final MPSC order. The MPSC also authorized Entergy Mississippi to remove vegetation management costs from the formula rate plan and recover these costs through the establishment of a vegetation management rider.

In November 2020 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan providing for the realignment of energy efficiency costs to its formula rate plan, the deferral of energy efficiency expenditures into a regulatory asset, and the elimination of its energy efficiency cost recovery rider effective with limited exceptions, the base ratesJanuary 2022 billing cycle.

In June 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan to realign the recovery of certain long-term service agreement and conductor handling costs to the annual power management and grid modernization riders effective January 2023.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include energy cost recovery riders to recover fuel and purchased power costs.  The energy cost rate for each calendar year is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery of the energy costs as of the 12-month period ended September 30.  Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC. The energy cost recovery riders allow interim rate adjustments depending on the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Mississippi received approval from the MPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Mississippi hedges approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity is reviewed on an annual basis.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings regarding recovery of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs.

248

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Other

In October 2022 the MPSC adopted the Distributed Generation Rule. The Distributed Generation Rule maintains the 3% net metering participation cap. The Distributed Generation Rule grandfathers a 2.5 cents per kWh distributed generation benefits adder for 25 years and expands eligibility for the 2 cents per kWh low-income benefits adder to households up to 225% of the federal poverty level and grandfathers that adder for 25 years. The Distributed Generation Rule also directs utilities to make rate filings implementing up-front incentives for distributed generating systems and demand response battery systems, and to establish a public K-12 solar for schools program. In August 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed solar for schools rate schedule under the Distributed Generation Rule.

Entergy New Orleans were frozen until

Formula Rate Plan

As part of its determination of rates were implemented in connection with the base rate case filed by Entergy New Orleans in 2018.In2018, in November 2019, the City Council issued a resolution resolving the rate case, with rates to become effective retroactive to August 2019.The resolution allows Entergy New Orleans to implement a three-year formula rate plan, beginning with the 2019 test year as adjusted for forward-looking known and measurable changes.changes, with the filing for the first test year to be made in 2020. In NovemberOctober 2020 the City Council issued a resolution approving a settlement of the 2018 rate case.As part of this settlement,approved an agreement in principle filed by Entergy New Orleans agreed to postponethat results in Entergy New Orleans forgoing its 2020 formula rate plan filing and shifting the filing of its first test yearthree-year formula rate plan to filings in 2021, 2022, and 2023. In September 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a motion seeking City Council approval of a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas formula rate plans, for filings in return,2024, 2025, and 2026. In October 2023 the City Council granted Entergy New Orleans’s request for an extension, subject to be provided an additional test yearminor modifications.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy New Orleans’s electric rate schedules include a fuel adjustment tariff designed to reflect no more than targeted fuel and purchased power costs, adjusted by a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel and purchased power costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Entergy New Orleans’s gas rate schedules include a purchased gas adjustment to reflect estimated gas costs for the three-year cycle.billing month, adjusted by a surcharge or credit similar to that included in the electric fuel adjustment clause, including carrying charges.

To help stabilize gas costs, Entergy New Orleans seeks approval annually from the City Council to continue implementation of its natural gas hedging program consistent with the City Council’s stated policy objectives.  The program uses financial instruments to hedge exposure to volatility in the wholesale price of natural gas purchased to serve Entergy New Orleans gas customers.  Entergy New Orleans hedges up to 25% of actual gas sales made during the winter months.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion.a discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

249

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Texas

Base Rates

The base rates of Entergy Texas are established largely in traditional base rate case proceedings. Between base rate proceedings, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. Entergy Texas is required to file full base rate case proceedings every four years and within eighteen months of utilizing its generation cost recovery rider for investments above $200 million.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, that are not included in base rates.  Historically, semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor have been made in March and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. In the course of this reconciliation, the PUCT determines whether eligible fuel and fuel-related expenses and revenues are necessary and reasonable and makes a prudence finding for each of the fuel-related contracts entered into during the reconciliation period. In 2023 the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to provide that material over- and under-recovered fuel balances are to be refunded or surcharged through interim fuel adjustments and that fuel reconciliations must be filed at least once every two years. Entergy Texas expects the PUCT to undertake a rulemaking to effectuate the new legislation by the end of 2024.

At the PUCT’s April 2013 open meeting, the PUCT Commissioners discussed their view that a purchased power capacity rider was good public policy. The PUCT issued an order in May 2013 adopting the rule allowing for a purchased power capacity rider, subject to an offsetting adjustment for load growth. The rule, as adopted, also includes a process for obtaining pre-approval by the PUCT of purchased power agreements to be recovered through a purchased power capacity rider. No Texas utility, including Entergy Texas, has exercised the option to recover capacity costs under the rider mechanism, but Entergy Texas will continue to evaluate the benefits of utilizing the rider to recover future capacity costs. In 2023, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit a utility to seek pre-approval from the PUCT for a purchased power agreement of three years or more if such approval is a precondition to the effectiveness of such agreements, regardless of whether the utility intends to recover costs associated with the purchased power agreement through a purchased power capacity rider.

Transmission, Distribution, and Generation Cost Recovery

As discussed above, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. These riders include a transmission cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of transmission-related capital investments, a distribution cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of distribution-related capital investment, and a generation cost recovery rider mechanism for the recovery of generation-related capital investments.

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas containing provisions that allow Entergy Texas to take advantage of a cost recovery mechanism that permits annual filings for the recovery of reasonable and necessary expenditures for transmission infrastructure improvement and changes in wholesale transmission charges. This mechanism was previously available to other non-ERCOT Texas utility companies, but not to Entergy Texas.

In September 2011 the PUCT adopted a proposed rule implementing a distribution cost recovery factor to recover capital and capital-related costs related to distribution infrastructure.  The distribution cost recovery factor permitted utilities once per year to implement an increase or decrease in rates above or below amounts reflected in base rates to reflect distribution-related depreciation expense, federal income tax and other taxes, and return on investment.  In 2023, the Texas Legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit utilities to update their
250

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

distribution cost recovery factors up to twice per year and to require the PUCT to issue an order on such update applications within 60 days, with a 15-day extension permitted for good cause.

In September 2019 the PUCT initiated a rulemaking to promulgate a generation cost recovery rider rule, implementing legislation passed in the 2019 Texas legislative session intended to allow electric utilities to recover generation investments between base rate proceedings.  The PUCT approved the final rule in July 2020.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Texas’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In January 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application requesting approval to implement two voluntary renewable option tariffs, Rider Small Volume Renewable Option (Rider SVRO) and Rider Large Volume Renewable Option (Rider LVRO). Both tariffs are voluntary offerings that give customers the ability to match some or all of their monthly electricity usage with renewable energy credits that are purchased by Entergy Texas and retired on the customer’s behalf. Voluntary participation in either Rider SVRO or Rider LVRO and the charges assessed under the respective tariff would be in addition to the charges paid by customers under their otherwise applicable rate schedules and riders. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement agreement supporting approval of Entergy Texas’s proposed voluntary renewable option tariffs. As part of the settlement agreement, Entergy Texas agreed to revise the cost allocation between the rate tiers of Rider SVRO and committed to collaborating with and considering the input of customers to develop an asset-backed green tariff program. The PUCT approved the settlement agreement in August 2022.

As part of its rate case application filed with the PUCT in July 2022, Entergy Texas requested approval of Schedule Green Future Option (Schedule GFO), an asset-backed green tariff that would allow Entergy Texas’s customers to voluntarily subscribe to a portion of the underlying solar facility’s capacity in exchange for energy credits. In August 2023 the PUCT approved an unopposed settlement in the proceeding that included approval of Schedule GFO.

Electric Industry Restructuring

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas that required Entergy Texas to cease all activities relating to Entergy Texas’s transition to competition.  The law allows Entergy Texas to remain a part of the SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC) Region, although it does not prevent Entergy Texas from joining another power region.  The law provides that proceedings to certify a power region that Entergy Texas belongs to as a qualified power region can be initiated by the PUCT, or on motion by another party, when the conditions supporting such a proceeding exist.  Under the law, the PUCT may not approve a transition to competition plan for Entergy Texas until the expiration of four years from the PUCT’s certification of a qualified power region for Entergy Texas.

The law further amended already existing law that had required Entergy Texas to propose for PUCT approval a tariff to allow eligible customers the ability to contract for competitive generation.  The amending language in the law provides, among other things, that: (1) the tariff shall not be implemented in a manner that harms the sustainability or competitiveness of manufacturers who choose not to participate in the tariff; (2) Entergy Texas shall “purchase competitive generation service, selected by the customer, and provide the generation at retail to the customer;” and (3) Entergy Texas shall provide and price transmission service and ancillary services under that tariff at a rate that is unbundled from its cost of service.  The law directs that the PUCT may not issue an order on the tariff that is contrary to an applicable decision, rule, or policy statement of a federal regulatory agency having jurisdiction. The PUCT determined that unrecovered costs that may be recovered through the rider consist only of those costs necessary to implement and administer the competitive generation program and do not include lost
251

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

revenues or embedded generation costs.  The amount of customer load that may be included in the competitive generation service program is limited to 115 MW.

System Energy

Cost of Service

The rates of System Energy are established by the FERC, and the costs allowed to be charged pursuant to these rates are, in turn, passed through to the participating Utility operating companies through the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which has monthly billings that reflect the current operating costs of, and investment in, Grand Gulf. Retail regulators and other parties may seek to initiate proceedings at FERC to investigate the prudence of costs included in the rates charged under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and examine, among other things, the
288

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

reasonableness or prudence of the operation and maintenance practices, level of expenditures, allowed rates of return and rate base, and previously incurred capital expenditures. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including a challengechallenges with respect to System Energy’s uncertain tax positions, sale leaseback arrangement, authorized return on equity and capital structure, and a separate request for FERC to initiaterenewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period. Beginning in 2021, System Energy implemented billing protocols to provide retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. Entergy cannot predict the outcome of any of these proceedings, nor can it predict whetherand an adverse outcome in any outcomeof them could have a material adverse effect on Entergy’s or System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings. System Energy has received FERC acceptance for billing protocols to provide retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

The Utility operating companies and System Energy, and the energy industry as a whole, have experienced a period of rising costs and investments, and an upward trend in spending, especially with respect to infrastructure investments, which is likely to continue in the foreseeable future and could result in more frequent rate cases and requests for, and the continuation of, cost recovery mechanisms.  For information regarding rate case proceedings and formula rate plans applicable to the Utility operating companies, see Note 2 to the financial statements.Franchises

ChangesEntergy Arkansas holds exclusive franchises to state or federal legislation or regulation affectingprovide electric generation, electricservice in approximately 308 incorporated cities and natural gas transmission, distribution,towns in Arkansas.  These franchises generally are unlimited in duration and related activities could adversely affect Entergycontinue unless the municipalities purchase the utility property.  In Arkansas, franchises are considered to be contracts and, therefore, are governed pursuant to the Utility operating companies’ financial position, resultsterms of operations, or cash flowsthe franchise agreement and their utility businesses.applicable statutes.

If legislativeEntergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 175 incorporated municipalities and regulatory structures evolve in a manner that erodes the Utility operating companies’ exclusive rightsunincorporated areas of approximately 59 parishes of Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to serve their regulatedprovide natural gas service to customers they could lose customersin the City of Baton Rouge and sales and their results of operations, financial position, or cash flows could be materially affected. Additionally, technological advances in energy efficiency and distributed energy resources are reducing the costs of these technologies and together with ongoing state and federal subsidies, the increasing penetration of these technologies could result in reduced sales by the Utility operating companies. Such loss of sales could put upward pressure on rates, resulting in adverse regulatory actionsEast Baton Rouge Parish.  Municipal franchise agreement terms range from 25 to mitigate such effects on rates. Entergy and the Utility operating companies cannot predict if or when they may be subject60 years while parish franchise terms range from 25 to changes in legislation or regulation, or the extent and timing of reductions of the cost of distributed energy resources, nor can they predict the impact of these changes on their results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.99 years.

The Utility operating companies recover fuel, purchased power,Entergy Mississippi has received from the MPSC certificates of public convenience and associated costs through rate mechanisms thatnecessity to provide electric service to areas within 45 counties, including a number of municipalities, in western Mississippi.  Under Mississippi statutory law, such certificates are subjectexclusive.  Entergy Mississippi may continue to risksserve in such municipalities upon payment of delay or disallowancea statutory franchise fee, regardless of whether an original municipal franchise is still in regulatory proceedings.existence.

The Utility operating companies recover their fuel, purchased power,Entergy New Orleans provides electric and associated costs from their customers through rate mechanisms subject to periodic regulatory review and adjustment.  Because regulatory review can resultgas service in the disallowanceCity of incurred costs found notNew Orleans pursuant to have been prudently incurred, includingindeterminate permits set forth in city ordinances.  These ordinances contain a continuing option for the costCity of replacement power purchased when generators experience outages or when planned outages are extended, with the possibility of refundsNew Orleans to ratepayers, there exists some risk to the ultimate recovery of those costs, particularly when there are substantial or sudden increases in such costs.  Regulators also may initiate proceedings to investigate the continued usage or the adequacypurchase Entergy New Orleans’s electric and operation of the fuel and purchased power recovery clauses of the Utility operating companies and, therefore, there can be no assurance that existing recovery mechanisms will remain unchanged or in effect at all.gas utility properties.

The Utility operating companies’ cash flows can be negatively affected byEntergy Texas holds a certificate of convenience and necessity from the time delays between when gas, power, or other commodities are purchasedPUCT to provide electric service to areas within approximately 27 counties in eastern Texas and the ultimate recovery from customers of the costs in rates.  On occasion, when the level of incurred costs for fuel and purchased power rises very dramatically, some of the Utility operating companies may agreeholds non-exclusive franchises to defer recovery of a portion of that period’s fuel and purchased power costs for recovery at a later date, which could increase the near-term working capital and borrowing requirements of those companies.  For a description of fuel and purchased power recovery mechanisms and information regarding the regulatory proceedings for fuel and purchased power costs recovery, see Note 2 to the financial statements.provide electric
289252

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

service in approximately 70 incorporated municipalities.  Entergy Texas typically obtains 25-year franchise agreements as existing agreements expire.  Entergy Texas’s electric franchises expire over the period 2024-2058.

The business of System Energy is limited to wholesale power sales.  It has no distribution franchises.

Property and Other Generation Resources

Owned Generating Stations

The total capability of the generating stations owned and leased by the Utility operating companies and System Energy as of December 31, 2023 is indicated below:
 Owned and Leased Capability MW(a)
CompanyTotalCT / CCGT (b)Legacy Gas/OilNuclearCoalHydroSolar
Entergy Arkansas5,036 1,548 521 1,825 969 73 100 
Entergy Louisiana10,798 5,594 2,728 2,137 339 — — 
Entergy Mississippi2,904 1,744 641 — 417 — 102 
Entergy New Orleans662 635 — — — — 27 
Entergy Texas3,234 990 1,994 — 250 — — 
System Energy1,245 — — 1,245 — — — 
Total23,879 10,511 5,884 5,207 1,975 73 229 

(a)“Owned and Leased Capability” is the dependable load carrying capability as demonstrated under actual operating conditions based on the primary fuel (assuming no curtailments) that each station was designed to utilize.
(b)Represents Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.

Summer peak load for the Utility has averaged 21,775 MW over the previous decade.

The Utility operating companies’ load and capacity projections are reviewed periodically to assess the need and timing for additional generating capacity and interconnections. These reviews consider existing and projected demand, the availability and price of power, the location of new load, the economy, Entergy’s clean energy and other public policy goals, environmental regulations, and the age and condition of Entergy’s existing infrastructure.

The Utility operating companies’ long-term resource strategy (Portfolio Transformation Strategy) calls for the bulk of capacity needs to be met through long-term resources, whether owned or contracted. Over the past decade, the Portfolio Transformation Strategy has resulted in the addition of about 7,963 MW of new long-term resources and the deactivation of about 4,241 MW of legacy generation. As MISO market participants, the Utility operating companies also participate in MISO’s Day Ahead and Real Time Energy and Ancillary Services markets to economically dispatch generation and purchase energy to serve customers reliably and at the lowest reasonable cost.

Other Generation Resources

RFP Procurements

The Utility operating companies from time-to-time issue requests for proposals (RFP) to procure supply-side resources from sources other than the spot market to meet the unique regional needs of the Utility operating companies. The RFPs issued by the Utility operating companies have sought resources needed to meet near-term MISO reliability requirements as well as long-term requirements through a broad range of wholesale power
253

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

products, including long-term contractual products and asset acquisitions. The RFP process has resulted in selections or acquisitions, including, among other things:

Entergy Texas’s construction of the 993 MW, combined-cycle, gas turbine Montgomery County Power Station at its existing Lewis Creek electric generating station. The facility began commercial operation in January 2021;
In December 2020, Entergy Texas selected the self-build alternative, Orange County Advanced Power Station, out of the 2020 Entergy Texas combined-cycle, gas turbine RFP. Regulatory approval was received in November 2022 and construction has commenced. The facility is expected to be in service by mid-2026;
In March 2019, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Searcy Solar facility, sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas. Entergy Arkansas received regulatory approval from the APSC in April 2020, and closed on the acquisition, through use of a tax equity partnership, in December 2021. The Searcy Solar facility was placed in service in January 2022;
In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Sunflower Solar facility, sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi. Entergy Mississippi received regulatory approval from the MPSC in April 2020, and the Sunflower Solar facility began commercial operation in September 2022;
In June 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Walnut Bend Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Lee County, Arkansas. In July 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the Walnut Bend Solar facility. The counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was terminating the project, though it was willing to consider an alternative for the site. Entergy Arkansas disputed the right of termination, and in February 2023 an amendment to the agreement was executed by the parties. In July 2023 the APSC issued an order approving the revisions to the agreement and full notice to proceed was issued shortly thereafter. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of approximately $169.7 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is completed and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to achieve commercial operation in the first half of 2024;
In September 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 180 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, West Memphis Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,500 acres in Crittenden County, Arkansas. In October 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the West Memphis Solar facility. In March 2022 the counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was seeking changes to certain terms of the build-own-transfer agreement, including both cost and schedule. In January 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a supplemental application with the APSC. Following the APSC’s approval of the supplemental application in March 2023, full notice to proceed was issued in April 2023 and the project is currently expected to achieve commercial operation by the end of 2024;
In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 150 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, St. Jacques facility, that will be sited in St. James Parish near Vacherie, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the St. Jacques facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the St. Jacques facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In August 2022, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 250 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Driver Solar facility, that will be sited near Osceola, Arkansas. Also in August 2022, Entergy Arkansas received necessary approvals for the Driver Solar
254

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

facility, and Entergy Arkansas has issued the counterparty full notice to proceed to begin construction. The project is expected to achieve commercial operation as early as mid-2024; and
Entergy Louisiana expects to start construction on the 49 MW Sterlington Solar project in the fourth quarter 2024, located in Sterlington, Louisiana. The facility is expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2026.

The RFP process has also resulted in the selection, or confirmation of the economic merits of, long-term purchased power agreements (PPAs), including, among others:

River Bend’s 30% life-of-unit PPA between Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans for 100 MW related to Entergy Louisiana’s unregulated portion of the River Bend nuclear station, which portion was formerly owned by Cajun;
Entergy Arkansas’s wholesale base load capacity life-of-unit PPAs executed in 2003 totaling approximately 220 MW between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana (110 MW) and between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy New Orleans (110 MW) related to the sale of a portion of Entergy Arkansas’s coal and nuclear base load resources (which had not been included in Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates);
In September 2012, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Rain CII Carbon LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 28 MW, with the potential to purchase an additional 9 MW when available, from a petroleum coke calcining facility in Sulphur, Louisiana. The facility began commercial operation in May 2013. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with the facility;
In March 2013, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Agrilectric Power Partners, LP executed a 20-year agreement for 8.5 MW from a refurbished rice hull-fueled electric generation facility located in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with Agrilectric;
In September 2013, Entergy Louisiana and TX LFG Energy, LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Montauk Energy Holdings, LLC, executed a 10-year agreement to purchase approximately 3 MW from its landfill gas-fueled power generation facility located in Cleveland, Texas;
Entergy Mississippi’s cost-based purchase, beginning in January 2013, of 90 MW from Entergy Arkansas’s share of Grand Gulf (only 60 MW of this PPA came through the RFP process). Cost recovery for the 90 MW was approved by the MPSC in January 2013;
In April 2015, Entergy Arkansas and Stuttgart Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 81 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generation facility located near Stuttgart, Arkansas. The APSC approved the project and deliveries pursuant to that agreement commenced in June 2018;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and LS Power executed a 10-year agreement for 485 MW from the Carville Energy Center located in St. Gabriel, Louisiana. In November 2019, LS Power sold and transferred the Carville Energy Center and facility to Argo Infrastructure Partners, which included the power purchase agreement;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and Occidental Chemical Corporation executed a 10-year agreement for 500 MW from the Taft Cogeneration facility located in Hahnville, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval and began in June 2018;
In June 2017, Entergy Arkansas and Chicot Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Chicot County, Arkansas. The transaction received regulatory approval and the PPA began in November 2020;
In February 2018, Entergy Louisiana and LA3 West Baton Rouge, LLC (Capital Region Solar project) executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in February 2019 and the PPA began in October 2020;
In July 2018, Entergy New Orleans and St. James Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 20 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and the PPA began in February 2023 after the facility reached commercial operation in March 2023;
255

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

In August 2018, Entergy Louisiana and South Alexander Development I, LLC executed a 5-year agreement for 5 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Livingston Parish, Louisiana. The PPA began in December 2020 and received regulatory approval in January 2021;
In February 2019, Entergy New Orleans and Iris Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and achieved commercial operation in November 2022;
In August 2020, Entergy Texas and Umbriel Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Polk County, Texas. The facility achieved commercial operation in November 2023;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Sunlight Road Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve the order including this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Sunlight Road facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2024;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Vacherie Solar Energy Center, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the Vacherie facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the Vacherie facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In December 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Hinds Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Hinds County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in June 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Wildwood Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Tallahatchie County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in May 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Greer Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 170 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Washington County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Flat Fork Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in St. Francis County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Forgeview Solar, LLC executed a 15-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Mississippi County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In January 2023, Entergy Texas and Piney Woods Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Walker County, Texas. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026;
In January 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Coastal Prairie Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 175 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Iberville Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC
256

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as December 2025; and
In October 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Mondu Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Point Coupee Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026.

In July 2021, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for solar generation resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in March 2022. One PPA was executed in January 2023 and the certificate of convenience and necessity for the owned resource is expected to be filed with the PUCT in mid-2024.

In April 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Arkansas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Arkansas selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in February 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the resources are in progress.

In June 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Louisiana, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Louisiana selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in March 2023 some of which have been executed and are noted above, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the remaining resources are in progress.

In October 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in July 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

In November 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Mississippi, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Mississippi selected a combination of owned resources in May 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

Other Procurements From Third Parties

The Utility operating companies have also made resource acquisitions outside of the RFP process and have also entered various limited- and long-term contracts in recent years as a result of bilateral negotiations, including among others:

In March 2016, Entergy Arkansas’s (Power Block 2), Entergy Louisiana’s (Power Blocks 3 and 4), and Entergy New Orleans’s (Power Block 1) acquisitions of the 1,980 MW (summer rating), natural gas-fired, combined-cycle gas turbine Union Power Station power blocks, each rated at 495 MW (summer rating). The facility is located near El Dorado, Arkansas and has been in operation since July 2003;
In October 2019, Entergy Mississippi’s acquisition of the 810 MW, combined-cycle, natural gas-fired Choctaw Generating Station. The facility is located in Choctaw County and has been in operation since July 2003;
In November 2020, Entergy Louisiana’s acquisition of the Washington Parish Energy Center is a 361 MW natural gas-fired peaking power plant approximately 60 miles north of New Orleans on a site Entergy Louisiana purchased from Calpine in 2019. Calpine began construction on the plant in early 2019 and Entergy Louisiana purchased the plant upon completion in November 2020;
In June 2021, Entergy Texas’s acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility, an existing 147 MW simple-cycle gas-fired peaking power plant in Kountze, Texas, previously owned by East Texas Electric Cooperative. The facility has been in operation since January 2010; and
In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Elizabeth Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 125 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Allen Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported
257

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Elizabeth Solar facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in August 2024.

Power Through Programs

In February 2019, Entergy Mississippi proposed a new technologies pilot to the MPSC, which was approved in December 2019. The pilot further modernized the energy grid and met customers’ evolving expectations by offering utility-owned, natural gas-fired backup generators to customers. Following conclusion of the three-year pilot, in October 2023, Entergy Mississippi proposed full-scale implementation of commercial scale, natural gas-fired resilient distributed generation, to be installed in front of the meter at commercial and industrial customer premises. The full-scale offering was approved by the MPSC in December 2023 along with an associated rate schedule, the Resiliency as a Service Rider Schedule. Entergy Mississippi can dispatch the units at times of peak demand, which can mitigate the typically higher energy and capacity costs borne by all customers during times of peak energy usage.

In December 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to amend its certificate of convenience and necessity to own and operate up to 75 MW of natural gas-fired distributed generation to be installed at commercial and industrial customer premises. Under this proposal, Entergy Texas would own and operate a fleet of generators ranging from 100 kW to 10 MW that would supply a portion of Entergy Texas’s long-term resource needs and enhance the resiliency of Entergy Texas’s electric grid. This fleet of generators would also be available to customers during outages to supply backup electric service as part of a program known as “Power Through.” In its 2021 session, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to exempt generators under 10 megawatts from the requirement to obtain a certificate of convenience and necessity. In addition, the PUCT announced an intent to conduct a broad rulemaking related to distributed generation and recommended that utilities with pending applications addressing distributed generation withdraw them. Accordingly, Entergy Texas withdrew its application for a certificate of convenience and necessity and associated tariff from the PUCT without prejudice to refiling. Entergy Texas continues to deploy certain customer-sited distributed generators under an existing PUCT-approved tariff. In August 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application for PUCT approval of voluntary Rate Schedule Utility Owned Distributed Generation through which it would charge host customers for back-up service from customer-sited Power Through generators. Based on the exemption enacted by the Texas legislature in 2021, Entergy Texas’s application was not required to, and did not, seek an amendment to its certificate of convenience and necessity in order to continue deploying Power Through generators. In October 2022 two intervenors filed requests for a hearing on Entergy Texas’s application. In October 2022 the PUCT staff filed a request that the proceeding be referred to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In January 2023 the PUCT announced an intent to develop certain broadly applicable reliability metrics against which to measure distributed generation resources and directed Entergy Texas to withdraw its application. However, the PUCT did allow Entergy Texas to continue its pilot program for Power Through generators. Entergy Texas withdrew its application. In its 2023 session, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to confirm Entergy Texas’s ability to provide back-up generation service using customer-sited utility-owned distributed generation and directing the PUCT to approve rates for such service upon application by Entergy Texas. In February 2024, Entergy Texas resubmitted its application for PUCT approval of voluntary Rate Schedule Utility Owned Distributed Generation. A procedural schedule has not yet been set.

In August 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC an application seeking authority for a “Power Through” offering to deploy natural gas-fired distributed generation. The application was supported by a number of letters of interest from Entergy Arkansas customers. In December 2021 the APSC general staff requested briefing, which Entergy Arkansas opposed. In January 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed to support the establishment of a procedural schedule with a hearing in April 2022. Also in January 2022, the APSC granted the general staff’s request for briefing but on an expedited schedule; briefing concluded in February 2022. Based on testimony filed to date the APSC general staff, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Sierra Club, and Audubon opposed Entergy Arkansas’s proposed Power Through offering, which was demonstrated to be in high demand by interested customers, some of which directly filed public comments encouraging the APSC to approve the application. A
258

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

paper hearing was held in August and September 2022, and Entergy Arkansas responded to several written commissioner questions. In May 2023 the APSC issued an order approving the Power Through offering with some modifications, and in June 2023, Entergy Arkansas sought rehearing or clarification of several issues. In August 2023 the APSC denied Entergy Arkansas’s rehearing petition. In December 2023 the APSC approved a streamlined approval process for the individual Power Through generators. Entergy Arkansas is developing tariff revisions to comply with the APSC’s order.

In July 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC an application for authority to deploy natural gas-fired distributed generation. The application was supported by a number of letters of interest from Entergy Louisiana customers. In October 2021, a procedural schedule was established with a hearing in April 2022. Staff and certain intervenors filed direct testimony in December 2021, and cross-answering testimony was filed in January 2022. Entergy Louisiana filed rebuttal testimony in February 2022. The parties reached an uncontested settlement which, among other things, recommended approval of 120 MW of natural gas fired distributed generation and an additional 30 MW of solar and battery distributed generation, for a total distributed generation program of 150 MW. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, Entergy Louisiana may seek to expand the distributed generation program following the earlier of two years after issuance of an order approving the settlement or the installation of 60 MW of distributed generation pursuant to this program. The settlement was approved by the LPSC in November 2022.

Interconnections

The Utility operating companies’ generating units are interconnected to the transmission system which operates at various voltages up to 500 kV.  These generating units consist of steam-turbine generators fueled by natural gas, coal, and pressurized and boiling water nuclear reactors; combustion-turbine generators, combined-cycle combustion turbine generators and reciprocating internal combustion engine generators that are fueled by natural gas; and inverter-based resources interconnecting both solar photovoltaic systems and energy storage devices that participate in the MISO wholesale electric market. Additionally, some of the Utility operating companies also offer customer services and products that include generating and demand response resources that are interconnected to both the distribution and transmission systems and that also participate in the wholesale market. Entergy’s Utility operating companies are MISO market participants and the companies’ transmission systems are interconnected with those of many neighboring utilities.  MISO is an essential link in the safe, cost-effective delivery of electric power across all or parts of 15 U.S. states and the Canadian province of Manitoba. In addition, the Utility operating companies are members of SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC), the Regional Entity with delegated authority from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) for the purpose of proposing and enforcing Bulk Electric System reliability standards within 16 central and southeastern states.

Gas Property

As of December 31, 2023, Entergy New Orleans distributed and transported natural gas for distribution within New Orleans, Louisiana, through approximately 2,600 miles of gas pipeline.  As of December 31, 2023, the gas properties of Entergy Louisiana, which are located in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, were not material to Entergy Louisiana’s financial position.

Title

The Utility operating companies’ generating stations are generally located on properties owned in fee simple.  Most of the substations and transmission and distribution lines are constructed on private property or public rights-of-way pursuant to easements, servitudes, or appropriate franchises.  Some substation properties are owned in fee simple.  The Utility operating companies generally have the right of eminent domain, whereby they may perfect title to, or secure easements or servitudes on, private property for their utility operations.

Substantially all of the physical properties and assets owned by Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy are subject to the liens of mortgages
259

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

securing bonds issued by those companies.  The Lewis Creek generating station of Entergy Texas was acquired by merger with a subsidiary of Entergy Texas and is currently not subject to the lien of the Entergy Texas indenture.

Fuel Supply

The average fuel cost per kWh for the Utility operating companies and System Energy for the years 2021-2023 were:
YearNatural GasNuclearCoalRenewables (a)Purchased PowerMISO Purchases (b)
2023(Cents Per kWh)
Entergy Arkansas1.98 0.50 3.09 1.98 11.57 0.77 
Entergy Louisiana2.34 0.60 3.22 10.38 3.76 2.50 
Entergy Mississippi2.21 — 2.82 0.03 5.86 1.84 
Entergy New Orleans (c)2.05 — — 3.24 — 2.33 
Entergy Texas2.29 — 3.17 2.25 5.64 3.18 
System Energy— 0.68 — — — — 
Utility2.25 0.58 3.06 6.14 4.03 2.61 
2022
Entergy Arkansas4.98 0.52 2.93 2.11 10.90 (2.65)
Entergy Louisiana5.50 0.57 2.84 10.70 6.95 6.45 
Entergy Mississippi4.38 — 2.85 0.04 6.53 6.68 
Entergy New Orleans (c)5.10 — — (5.16)— 7.21 
Entergy Texas5.77 — 2.83 6.26 5.61 6.68 
System Energy— 0.65 — — — — 
Utility5.27 0.57 2.89 7.00 6.54 5.95 
2021
Entergy Arkansas4.11 0.56 2.43 2.85 2.53 3.87 
Entergy Louisiana3.77 0.56 2.62 10.87 5.52 4.04 
Entergy Mississippi2.71 — 2.53 1.22 2.70 4.16 
Entergy New Orleans (c)3.47 — — (2.82)— 4.50 
Entergy Texas4.65 — 2.60 3.97 4.53 4.10 
System Energy— 0.55 — — — — 
Utility3.75 0.56 2.48 9.07 4.76 4.08 

(a)Includes average fuel costs from both owned and purchased power resources.
(b)Includes activity from financial transmission rights. See Note 15 to the financial statements for discussion of financial transmission rights.
(c)Entergy New Orleans’s renewables include liquidated damage payments of $0.1 million in 2023, $2.9 million in 2022, and $1 million in 2021 due to the delay of in-service dates related to purchased power agreements.

260

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Actual 2023 and projected 2024 sources of generation for the Utility operating companies and System Energy, including certain power purchases from affiliates under life of unit power purchase agreements, including the Unit Power Sales Agreement, are:
2023
 CT / CCGT (b)Legacy GasNuclearCoalRenewables (c)Purchased Power (d)MISO Purchases (e)
Entergy Arkansas26 %%57 %%%— %%
Entergy Louisiana47 %%20 %%%10 %12 %
Entergy Mississippi63 %%23 %%%— %%
Entergy New Orleans55 %%36 %%%%%
Entergy Texas32 %25 %%%— %%30 %
System Energy (a)— %— %100 %— %— %— %— %
Utility43 %%27 %%%%12 %

2024
 CT / CCGT (b)Legacy GasNuclearCoalRenewables (c)Purchased Power (d)MISO Purchases (e)
Entergy Arkansas26 %— %59 %12 %%— %— %
Entergy Louisiana48 %%30 %%%11 %— %
Entergy Mississippi64 %— %24 %10 %%— %— %
Entergy New Orleans51 %%43 %%%%— %
Entergy Texas43 %31 %17 %%%— %— %
System Energy (a)— %— %100 %— %— %— %— %
Utility45 %%35 %%%%— %

(a)Capacity and energy from System Energy’s interest in Grand Gulf is allocated as follows under the Unit Power Sales Agreement: Entergy Arkansas - 36%; Entergy Louisiana - 14%; Entergy Mississippi - 33%; and Entergy New Orleans - 17%.  Pursuant to purchased power agreements, Entergy Arkansas is selling a portion of its owned capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.
(b)Represents natural gas sourced for Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.
(c)Includes generation from both owned and purchased power resources.
(d)Excludes MISO purchases and renewables purchased through purchased power agreements.
(e)In December 2013, Entergy integrated its transmission system into the MISO RTO. Entergy offers all of its generation into the MISO energy market on a day-ahead and real-time basis and bids for power in the MISO energy market to serve the demand of its customers, with MISO making dispatch decisions. The MISO purchases metric provided for 2023 is not projected for 2024.

Some of the Utility’s gas-fired plants are also capable of using fuel oil, if necessary. Although based on current economics the Utility does not expect fuel oil use in 2024, it is possible that various operational events including weather or pipeline maintenance may require the use of fuel oil.

Natural Gas

The Utility operating companies have long-term firm and short-term interruptible gas contracts for both supply and transportation. Over 70% of the Utility operating companies’ power plants maintain some level of long-term firm transportation. Short-term contracts and spot-market purchases satisfy additional gas requirements.
261

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Texas owns a gas storage facility and Entergy Louisiana has a firm storage service agreement that provide reliable and flexible natural gas service to certain generating stations.

Many factors, including wellhead deliverability, storage, pipeline capacity, and demand requirements of end users, influence the availability and price of natural gas supplies for power plants. Demand is primarily tied to weather conditions as well as to the prices and availability of other energy sources. Pursuant to federal and state regulations, gas supplies to power plants may be interrupted during periods of shortage. To the extent natural gas supplies are disrupted or natural gas prices significantly increase, the Utility operating companies may in some instances use alternate fuels, such as oil when available, or rely to a larger extent on coal, nuclear generation, and purchased power.

Coal

Entergy Arkansas has committed to six two- to three-year contracts that will supply at least 85% of the total coal supply needs in 2024. These contracts are staggered in term so that not all contracts have to be renewed the same year. If needed, additional Powder River Basin (PRB) coal will be purchased through contracts with a term of less than one year to provide the remaining supply needs. Based on the high cost of alternate sources, modes of transportation, and infrastructure improvements necessary for its delivery, no alternative coal consumption is expected at Entergy Arkansas during 2024. Coal will be transported to Arkansas via an existing Union Pacific transportation agreement that is expected to provide all of Entergy Arkansas’s rail transportation requirements for 2024.

Entergy Louisiana has committed to three two- to three-year contracts that will supply at least 90% of Nelson Unit 6 coal needs in 2024. If needed, additional PRB coal will be purchased through contracts with a term of less than one year to provide the remaining supply needs. For the same reasons as the Entergy Arkansas plants, no alternative coal consumption is expected at Nelson Unit 6 during 2024. Coal will be transported to Nelson via an existing transportation agreement that is expected to provide all of Entergy Louisiana’s rail transportation requirements for 2024.

Coal transportation delivery rates to Entergy Arkansas- and Entergy Louisiana-operated coal-fired units were able to fully meet supply needs and obligations in 2023. While deliveries remained constrained through summer 2023, improvements were observed in the second half of the year and are expected to continue in 2024. Both Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana control enough railcars to satisfy the rail transportation requirement.

The operator of Big Cajun 2 - Unit 3, Louisiana Generating, LLC, has advised Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas that it has adequate rail car and barge capacity to meet the volumes of PRB coal requested for 2024, but is also currently experiencing delivery constraints. Entergy Louisiana’s and Entergy Texas’s coal nomination requests to Big Cajun 2 - Unit 3 are made on an annual basis.

Nuclear Fuel

The nuclear fuel cycle consists of the following:

mining and milling of uranium ore to produce a concentrate;
conversion of the concentrate to uranium hexafluoride gas;
enrichment of the uranium hexafluoride gas;
fabrication of nuclear fuel assemblies for use in fueling nuclear reactors; and
disposal of spent fuel.

The Registrant Subsidiaries that own nuclear plants, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, are responsible through a shared regulated uranium pool for contracts to acquire nuclear material to be used in fueling Entergy’s Utility nuclear units.  These companies own the materials and services in this shared regulated
262

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

uranium pool on a pro rata fractional basis determined by the nuclear generation capability of each company.  Any liabilities for obligations of the pooled contracts are on a several but not joint basis.  The shared regulated uranium pool maintains inventories of nuclear materials during the various stages of processing.  The Registrant Subsidiaries purchase enriched uranium hexafluoride for their nuclear plant reload requirements at the average inventory cost from the shared regulated uranium pool.  Entergy Operations, Inc. contracts separately for the fabrication of nuclear fuel as agent on behalf of each of the Registrant Subsidiaries that owns a nuclear plant.  All contracts for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel are between the DOE and the owner of a nuclear power plant.

Based upon currently planned fuel cycles, the Utility nuclear units have a diversified portfolio of contracts and inventory that provides substantially adequate nuclear fuel materials and conversion and enrichment services at what Entergy believes are reasonably predictable or fixed prices through 2027. Entergy’s ability to purchase nuclear fuel at reasonably predictable prices, however, depends upon the performance reliability of uranium miners, including their ability to work through supply disruptions caused by global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or national events, such as political disruption.  There are a number of possible supply alternatives that may be accessed to mitigate any supplier performance failure, including potentially drawing upon Entergy’s inventory intended for later generation periods depending upon its risk management strategy at that time, although the pricing of any alternate uranium supply from the market will be dependent upon the market for uranium supply at that time.  In addition, some nuclear fuel contracts are on a non-fixed price basis subject to prevailing prices at the time of delivery.

The effects of market price changes may be reduced and deferred by risk management strategies, such as negotiation of floor and ceiling amounts for long-term contracts, buying for inventory or entering into forward physical contracts at fixed prices when Entergy believes it is appropriate and useful.  Entergy buys uranium from a diversified mix of sellers located in a diversified mix of countries, and from time to time purchases from nearly all qualified reliable major market participants worldwide that sell into the U.S.

Entergy’s ability to assure nuclear fuel supply also depends upon the performance reliability of conversion, enrichment, and fabrication services providers. There are fewer of these providers than for uranium. For conversion and enrichment services, like uranium, Entergy diversifies its supply by supplier and country and may take special measures as needed to ensure supply of enriched uranium for the reliable fabrication of nuclear fuel. For fabrication services, each plant is dependent upon the effective performance of the fabricator of that plant’s nuclear fuel, therefore, Entergy provides additional monitoring, inspection, and oversight for the fabrication process to assure reliability and quality.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy each have made arrangements to lease nuclear fuel and related equipment and services.  The lessors, which are consolidated in the financial statements of Entergy and the applicable Registrant Subsidiary, finance the acquisition and ownership of nuclear fuel through credit agreements and the issuance of notes.  These credit facilities are subject to periodic renewal, and the notes are issued periodically, typically for terms between three and seven years.

Natural Gas Purchased for Resale

Entergy New Orleans has several suppliers of natural gas. Its system is interconnected with one interstate and three intrastate pipelines. Entergy New Orleans has a “no-notice” service gas purchase contract with Symmetry Energy Solutions which ensures Entergy New Orleans gas delivery at specific delivery points and at any volume within the minimum and maximum set forth in the contract amounts. The Symmetry Energy Solutions gas supply is transported to Entergy New Orleans pursuant to a transportation service agreement with Gulf South Pipeline Co. This service is subject to FERC-approved rates. Entergy New Orleans also makes interruptible spot market purchases.

Entergy Louisiana purchased natural gas for resale in 2023 under a firm contract from Sequent Energy Management L.P. The gas is delivered through a combination of intrastate and interstate pipelines.
263

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


There remains uncertainty regarding the effectAs a result of the terminationimplementation of FERC-mandated interstate pipeline restructuring in 1993, curtailments of interstate gas supply could occur if Entergy Louisiana’s or Entergy New Orleans’s suppliers failed to perform their obligations to deliver gas under their supply agreements. Gulf South Pipeline Co. could curtail transportation capacity only in the event of pipeline system constraints.

Federal Regulation of the System Agreement onUtility

State or local regulatory authorities, as described above, regulate the retail rates of the Utility operating companies.

The Utility operating companies historically engaged in the coordinated planning, construction,FERC regulates wholesale sales of electricity rates and operationinterstate transmission of generating resourceselectricity, including System Energy’s sales of capacity and bulk transmission facilities under the terms of the System Agreement, which is a rate schedule that had been approved by the FERC. The System Agreement terminated in its entirety on August 31, 2016.

There remains uncertainty regarding the long-term effect of the termination of the System Agreement on the Utility operating companies because of the significant effect of the agreement on the generationenergy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and transmission functions of the Utility operating companies and the significant period of time (over 30 years) that it had been in existence. In the absence of the System Agreement, there remains uncertainty around the effectiveness of governance processes and the potential absence of federal authority to resolve certain issues among the Utility operating companies and their retail regulators.

In addition, although the System Agreement terminated in its entirety in August 2016, there are a few outstanding System Agreement proceedings at the FERC and at the D.C. Circuit that may require future adjustments, including challengesEntergy New Orleans pursuant to the level and timing of payments made by Entergy Arkansas under the SystemUnit Power Sales Agreement. The outcome and timing of these FERC proceedings and resulting recovery and impact on rates cannot be predicted at this time.

For further information regarding the regulatory proceedings relating to the System Agreement, seeSee Note 2 to the financial statements.statements for further discussion of federal regulation proceedings.

The Utility operating companies are subject to economic risks associated with participation in theTransmission and MISO markets and the allocation of transmission upgrade costs. The operation of the Utility operating companies’ transmission system pursuant to the MISO RTO tariff and their participation in the MISO RTO’s wholesale markets may be adversely affected by regulatory or market design changes, as well as liability under, or any future inability to comply with, existing or future regulations or requirements.Markets

OnIn December 19, 2013 the Utility operating companies integrated into the MISO RTO. Although becoming a member of MISO did not affect the ownership by the Utility operating companies of their transmission facilities or the responsibility for maintaining those facilities, MISO maintains functional control over the combined transmission systems of its members and administers wholesale energy and ancillary services markets for market participants in the MISO region, including the Utility operating companies. MISO also exercises functional control of transmission planning and congestion management and provides schedules and pricing for the commitment and dispatch of generation that is offered into MISO’s markets, as well as pricing for load that bids into the markets. The Utility operating companies sell capacity, energy, and ancillary services on a bilateral basis to certain wholesale customers and offer available electricity production of their owned and controlled generating facilities into the MISO resource adequacy construct (the annual Planning Resource Auction), as well as the MISO day-ahead and real-time energy markets pursuant to the MISO tariff and market rules. The resource adequacy construct provided under the MISO tariff confers certain rights and imposes certain obligations upon load-serving entities, including the Utility operating companies, that are served from the transmission systems subject to economic risks associated with participation inMISO’s functional control, including the MISO markets. MISO tariff rules and system conditions, including transmission congestion, could affect the Utility operating companies’ ability to sell capacity, energy, and/or ancillary services in certain regions and/or the economic value of such sales, or the cost of serving the Utility operating companies’ respective loads, and MISO market rules may change in ways that cause additional risk.

The Utility operating companies participate in the MISO regional transmission planning process and are subject to risks associated with planning decisions that MISO makes in the exercise of control over the planningfacilities of the Utility operating companies’companies. The MISO tariff is subject to change and has recently undergone significant changes. As an example, MISO recently has made changes to its capacity accreditation methodology for thermal resources which emphasize performance during a very small subset of hours in which the supply of generation capacity needed to serve load is tightest. MISO is now pursuing a larger scale reassessment of its overall accreditation practices, including accreditation of renewable resources.

MISO administers a process governed by the MISO tariff and subject to the FERC regulation that governs the interconnection of new generation resources to the transmission assets that aresystem under MISO’s functional control. TheThis process generally involves parties that wish to interconnect new generation resources submitting to MISO requests to do so, which are then studied and analyzed by MISO, with the participation of its member transmission owners, to determine if the interconnection of such generators requires new transmission facilities to ensure the continued reliable operations of the grid. Under MISO’s current tariff, these requests are studied and considered in clusters, generally in the order in which they are received – a system of priority known as the MISO interconnection queue.

Each Utility operating companies paycompany has its own transmission pricing zone and a formula rate template (included as Attachment O to the MISO tariff) used to establish transmission rates that reflect the cost of transmission projects that the Utility operating companies do not own, which could increase cash or financing needs. In addition to the cash and financing-related risks arising from the potential additional cost allocation to the Utility operating companies from transmission projects of others, there is a risk that the Utility operating companies’ business and financial position could be harmed as a result of lost investment opportunities and other effects that flow from an increased number of competitive projects being approved and constructed that are interconnected with their transmission systems. Further, thewithin MISO. The terms and conditions of the MISO tariff, including provisions related to the design and implementation of wholesale markets the
290

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

the allocation of transmission upgrade costs, the MISO-wide allowed base rate of return on equity, and any required MISO-related charges and credits are subject to regulation by the FERC. The operation of the Utility operating companies’ transmission system pursuant to the MISO tariff and their participation in the MISO wholesale markets may be adversely affected by regulatory or market design changes, as well as liability under, or any future inability to comply with, existing or future regulations or requirements.

In addition, orders from each of the Utility operating companies’ respective retail regulators generally require that the Utility operating companies make periodic filings, or generally allow the retail regulator to direct the making of such filings, setting forth the results of analysis of the costs and benefits realized from MISO
264

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

membership as well as the projected costs and benefits of continued membership in MISO and/or requesting approval of their continued membership in MISO. These filings have been submitted periodically by each of the Utility operating companies as required by their respective retail regulators, and the outcome of the resulting proceedings may affect the Utility operating companies’ continued membership in MISO.

(Entergy Corporation,System Energy and Related Agreements

System Energy recovers costs related to its interest in Grand Gulf through rates charged to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans for capacity and energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement (described below).  In 1998 the FERC approved requests by Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Texas)Mississippi to accelerate a portion of their Grand Gulf purchased power obligations.  Entergy Arkansas’s and Entergy Mississippi’s acceleration of Grand Gulf purchased power obligations ceased effective July 2001 and July 2003, respectively, as approved by the FERC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of proceedings at the FERC related to System Energy.

A delay or failure in recovering amounts for storm restoration costs incurred as a result of severe weather (including from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta), or the impact on customer bills of permitted storm cost recovery, could have material effects on Entergy and its Utility operating companies.Unit Power Sales Agreement

Entergy’sThe Unit Power Sales Agreement allocates capacity, energy, and the related costs from System Energy’s ownership and leasehold interests in Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas (36%), Entergy Louisiana (14%), Entergy Mississippi (33%), and Entergy New Orleans (17%).  Each of these companies is obligated to make payments to System Energy for its Utilityentitlement of capacity and energy on a full cost-of-service basis regardless of the quantity of energy delivered.  Payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement are System Energy’s only source of operating companies’ results of operations, liquidity, andrevenue.  The financial condition can be materially affected byof System Energy depends upon the destructive effectscontinued commercial operation of severe weather.  Severe weather can also result in significant outages forGrand Gulf and the customers of the Utility operating companies and, therefore, reduced revenues for the Utility operating companies during the period of the outages.  A delay or failure in recovering amounts for storm restoration costs incurred or revenues lost as a result of severe weather could have a material effect on Entergy and those Utility operating companies affected by severe weather. In addition, the recovery of major storm restoration costs from customers could effectively limit our ability to make planned capital or other investments due to the impactreceipt of such storm cost recovery on customer bills.payments.  Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans generally recover payments made under the Unit Power Sales Agreement through rates charged to their customers.

In Augustthe case of Entergy Arkansas and October 2020, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta,Entergy Louisiana, payments are also recovered through sales of electricity from their respective retained shares of Grand Gulf.  Under a settlement agreement entered into with the APSC in 1985 and Hurricane Zeta caused significant damageamended in 1988, Entergy Arkansas retains 22% of its 36% share of Grand Gulf-related costs and recovers the remaining 78% of its share in retail rates.  In the event that Entergy Arkansas is not able to portionssell its retained share to third parties, it may sell such energy to its retail customers at a price equal to its avoided cost, which is currently less than Entergy Arkansas’s cost from its retained share.  Entergy Arkansas has life-of-resources purchased power agreements with Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans that sell a portion of the Utility’s service territoriesoutput of Entergy Arkansas’s retained share of Grand Gulf to those companies.  In a series of LPSC orders, court decisions, and agreements from late 1985 to mid-1988, Entergy Louisiana was granted cost recovery with respect to costs associated with Entergy Louisiana’s share of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf, subject to certain terms and conditions.  Entergy Louisiana retains and does not recover from retail ratepayers 18% of its 14% share of the costs of Grand Gulf capacity and energy and recovers the remaining 82% of its share in rates.  Entergy Louisiana including New Orleans, Texas, andis allowed to a lesser extent, in Arkansas and Mississippi. The storms resulted in widespread power outages, significant damagerecover through the fuel adjustment clause at 4.6 cents per kWh for the energy related to distribution and transmission infrastructure, andits retained portion of these costs.  Alternatively, Entergy Louisiana may sell such energy to non-affiliated parties at prices above the loss of sales during the outages. Additionally, as a result of Hurricane Laura’s extensive damagefuel adjustment clause recovery amount, subject to the grid infrastructure serving the impacted area, large portionsLPSC’s approval. The remainder of Entergy Arkansas’s retained share is sold to Entergy Mississippi through a separate life-of-resource purchase power agreement with Entergy Mississippi. Entergy Arkansas also has a life-of-resources purchased power agreement with Entergy Mississippi to sell a portion of the underlying transmission system required nearly a complete rebuild. Total restoration costsoutput of Entergy Arkansas’s non-retained share of Grand Gulf. Entergy Mississippi was granted cost recovery for those purchases by the repair and/or replacement of the electrical system damaged by Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta are currently estimated to be approximately $2.4 billion. Because Entergy has not goneMPSC through the regulatory process regarding these storm costs, there is an element of risk, and Entergy is unable to predict with certainty the degree of success it may have in its recovery initiatives, the amount of restoration costs that it may ultimately recover, or the timing of such recovery.annual unit power cost rate mechanism.

Nuclear Operating, Shutdown, and Regulatory RisksAvailability Agreement

(Entergy Corporation,The Availability Agreement among System Energy and Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and System Energy)

Certain ofEntergy New Orleans was entered into in 1974 in connection with the Utility operating companies,original financing by System Energy and Entergy Wholesale Commodities must consistently operate their nuclear power plants at high capacity factors in order to be successful, and lower capacity factors could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Nuclear capacity factors significantly affect the results of operations of certain Utility operating companies,Grand Gulf. The Availability Agreement provides that System Energy andmake available to Entergy Wholesale Commodities.  Nuclear plant operations involve substantial fixed operating
291265

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

costs.  Consequently, to be successful, a plant owner must consistently operate its nuclear power plants at highArkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans all capacity factors, consistent with safety requirements. For the Utility operating companies that own nuclear plants, lower capacity factors can increase production costs by requiring the affected companies to generate additionaland energy sometimes at higher costs,available from their owned or contractually controlled facilities or purchase additional energy in the spot or forward markets in order to satisfy their supply needs.  For the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants, lower capacity factors directly affect revenues and cash flow from operations.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ forward sales are comprisedSystem Energy’s share of various hedge products, many of which have some degree of operational-contingent price risk. Certain unit-contingent contracts guarantee specified minimum capacity factors. In the event plants with these contracts were operating below the guaranteed capacity factors, Entergy would be subject to price risk for the undelivered power.  Further, Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ nuclear forward sales contracts can also be on a firm LD basis, which subjects Entergy to increasing price risk as capacity factors decrease. Many of these firm hedge products have damages risk.Grand Gulf.

CertainEntergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans also agreed severally to pay System Energy monthly for the right to receive capacity and energy from Grand Gulf in amounts that (when added to any amounts received by System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement) would at least equal System Energy’s total operating expenses for Grand Gulf (including depreciation at a specified rate and expenses incurred in a permanent shutdown of Grand Gulf) and interest charges.

The allocation percentages under the Availability Agreement are fixed as follows: Entergy Arkansas - 17.1%; Entergy Louisiana - 26.9%; Entergy Mississippi - 31.3%; and Entergy New Orleans - 24.7%. The allocation percentages under the Availability Agreement would remain in effect and would govern payments made under such agreement in the event of a shortfall of operating expense funds available to System Energy from other sources, including payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

System Energy has assigned its rights to payments and advances from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans under the Availability Agreement as security for all of its outstanding series of first mortgage bonds, as well as for its outstanding term loan and the pollution control revenue refunding bonds issued on its behalf.  In these assignments, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans further agreed that, in the event they were prohibited by governmental action from making payments under the Availability Agreement (for example, if the FERC reduced or disallowed such payments as constituting excessive rates), they would then make subordinated advances to System Energy in the same amounts and at the same times as the prohibited payments. System Energy would not be allowed to repay these subordinated advances so long as it remained in default under the related indebtedness or in other similar circumstances.

Each of the Utility operating companiesassignment agreements relating to the Availability Agreement provides that Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans will make payments directly to System Energy. However, if there is an event of default, those payments must be made directly to the holders of indebtedness that are the beneficiaries of such assignment agreements. The payments must be made pro rata according to the amount of the respective obligations secured.

The obligations of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans to make payments under the Availability Agreement are subject to the receipt and continued effectiveness of all necessary regulatory approvals.  Sales of capacity and energy under the Availability Agreement would require that the Availability Agreement be submitted to the FERC for approval with respect to the terms of such sale. No such filing with the FERC has been made because sales of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf are being made pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement.  If, for any reason, sales of capacity and energy are made in the future pursuant to the Availability Agreement, the jurisdictional portions of the Availability Agreement would be submitted to the FERC for approval.

Since commercial operation of Grand Gulf began, payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement to System Energy have exceeded the amounts payable under the Availability Agreement and, therefore, no payments under the Availability Agreement to System Energy have ever been required.  However, if Entergy Arkansas or Entergy Mississippi fails to make its Unit Power Sales Agreement payments, and System Energy periodically shut downis unable to obtain funds from other sources, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans could become subject to claims or demands by System Energy or certain of its creditors for payments or advances under the Availability Agreement (or the assignments thereof) equal to the difference between their nuclear power plants to replenish fuel.  Plant maintenance and upgrades are often scheduled during such refueling outages.  If refueling outages last longer than anticipated or if unplanned outages arise, Entergy’srequired Unit Power Sales Agreement payments and their results of operations,required Availability Agreement payments because their allocated shares under the Availability Agreement exceed their allocated shares under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See Note 8 to the financial condition, and liquidity could be materially affected.

Outages at nuclear power plants to replenish fuel require the plant to be “turned off.”  Refueling outages generally are planned to occur once every 18 to 24 months.  Plant maintenance and upgrades are often scheduled during such planned outages, which typically extends the planned outage duration.  When refueling outages last longer than anticipated or a plant experiences unplanned outages, capacity factors decrease, and maintenance costs may increase.

Certainstatements for discussion of the Utility operating companies andReallocation Agreement among System Energy, face risks relatedEntergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans, pursuant to the purchase of uranium fuel (and its conversion, enrichment,which Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and fabrication). These risks could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Based upon currently planned fuel cycles, Entergy’s nuclear units have a diversified portfolio of contracts and inventory that provides substantially adequate nuclear fuel materials and conversion and enrichment services at what Entergy believes are reasonably predictable prices through 2020 and beyond. Entergy’s ability to purchase nuclear fuel at reasonably predictable prices, however, depends upon the performance reliability of uranium miners. While there are a number of possible alternate suppliers that may be accessed to mitigate any supplier performance failure, the pricing of any such alternate uranium supply from the market will be dependent upon the market for uranium supply at that time. Entergy buys uranium from a diversified mix of sellers located in a diversified mix of countries, and from time to time purchases from nearly all qualified reliable major market participants worldwide that sell into the U.S. Market prices for nuclear fuel have been extremely volatile from time to time in the past and may be subject to increased volatility due to the imposition of tariffs, domestic purchase requirements or limitations on importation of uranium or uranium products from foreign countries, or shifting trade arrangements between countries.  Although Entergy’s nuclear fuel contract portfolio provides a degree of hedging against market risks for several years, costs for nuclear fuel in the future cannot be predicted with certainty due to normal inherent market uncertainties, and price changes could materially affect the liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations of certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy.

Entergy’s ability to assure nuclear fuel supply also depends upon the performance and reliability of conversion, enrichment, and fabrication services providers. These service providers are fewer in number than uranium suppliers. For conversion and enrichment services, Entergy diversifies its supply by supplier and country and may take special measures to ensure a reliable supply of enriched uranium for fabrication into nuclear fuel. For fabrication services, each plant is dependent upon the performance of the fabricator of that plant’s nuclear fuel; therefore, Entergy relies upon additional monitoring, inspection, and oversight of the fabrication process to assure reliability and quality of its nuclear fuel. Certain of the suppliers and service providers are located in or dependent upon countries, such as Russia, in which international sanctions or tariffs could further restrict the ability of suchNew Orleans
292266

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

suppliersassumed all of Entergy Arkansas’s responsibilities and obligations with respect to continueGrand Gulf under the Availability Agreement.

The Availability Agreement may be terminated, amended, or modified by mutual agreement of the parties thereto, without further consent of any assignees or other creditors.

Service Companies

Entergy Services, a limited liability company wholly-owned by Entergy Corporation, provides management, administrative, accounting, legal, engineering, and other services primarily to supply fuel or provide such services at acceptable prices or at all.  The inability of such suppliers or service providers to perform such obligations could materially affect the liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations of certain of the Utility operating companies, as well as to Entergy’s non-utility operations business. Entergy Operations is also wholly-owned by Entergy Corporation and System Energy.

provides nuclear management, operations, and maintenance services under contract for ANO, River Bend, Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, subject to the owner oversight of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, and therespectively.  Entergy Wholesale Commodities business face the risk that the NRC will change or modify its regulations, suspend or revoke their licenses, or increase oversight of their nuclear plants, which could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Under the Atomic Energy Act and Energy Reorganization Act, the NRC regulates the operation of nuclear power plants.  The NRC may modify, suspend, or revoke licenses, shut down a nuclear facility and impose civil penalties for failure to comply with the Atomic Energy Act, related regulations, or the terms of the licenses for nuclear facilities. Interested parties may also intervene which could result in prolonged proceedings. A change in the Atomic Energy Act, other applicable statutes, or the applicable regulations or licenses, or the NRC’s interpretation thereof, may require a substantial increase in capital expenditures or may result in increased operating or decommissioning costs and could materially affect the results of operations, liquidity, or financial condition of Entergy (through Entergy Wholesale Commodities), its Utility operating companies, or System Energy.  A change in the classification of a plant owned by one of these companies under the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process, which is the NRC’s program to collect information about plant performance, assess the information for its safety significance, and provide for appropriate licensee and NRC response, also could cause the owner of the plant to incur material additional costs as a result of the increased oversight activity and potential response costs associated with the change in classification.For additional information concerning the current classification of the plants owned by Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, see “Regulation of Entergy’s Business- Regulation of the Nuclear Power Industry - NRC Reactor Oversight Process” in Part I, Item 1.

Events at nuclear plants owned by one of these companies, as well as those owned by others, may lead to a change in laws or regulations or the terms of the applicable licenses, or the NRC’s interpretation thereof, or may cause the NRC to increase oversight activity or initiate actions to modify, suspend, or revoke licenses, shut down a nuclear facility, or impose civil penalties.  As a result, if an incident were to occur at any nuclear generating unit, whether an Entergy nuclear generating unit or not, it could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy, certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, or Entergy Wholesale Commodities.

Certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy,Services and Entergy Wholesale Commodities are exposedOperations provide their services to risks and costs related to operating and maintaining their nuclear power plants, and their failure to maintain operational efficiency at their nuclear power plants could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

The nuclear generating units owned by certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy,and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business began commercial operations in the 1970s-1980s.  Older equipment may require more capital expenditures to keep each of these nuclear power plants operating safely and efficiently.  This equipment is also likely to require periodic upgrading and improvement.  Any unexpected failure, including failure associated with breakdowns, forced outages, or any unanticipated capital expenditures, could result in increased costs, some of which costs may not be fully recoverable by the Utility operating companies and System Energy in regulatory proceedings should there beon an “at cost” basis, pursuant to cost allocation methodologies for these service agreements that were approved by the FERC.

Jurisdictional Separation of Entergy Gulf States, Inc. into Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas

Effective December 31, 2007, Entergy Gulf States, Inc. completed a determination of imprudence.  Operations at anyjurisdictional separation into two vertically integrated utility companies, one operating under the sole retail jurisdiction of the nuclearPUCT, Entergy Texas, and the other operating under the sole retail jurisdiction of the LPSC, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana.  Entergy Texas owns all Entergy Gulf States, Inc. distribution and transmission assets located in Texas, the gas-fired generating units ownedplants located in Texas, undivided 42.5% ownership shares of Entergy Gulf States, Inc.’s 70% ownership interest in Nelson Unit 6 and operated by Entergy’s subsidiaries could degrade42% ownership interest in Big Cajun 2, Unit 3, which are coal-fired generating plants located in Louisiana, and other assets and contract rights to the point whereextent related to utility operations in Texas.  Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, owns all of the affected unit needsremaining assets that were owned by Entergy Gulf States, Inc.  On a book value basis, approximately 58.1% of the Entergy Gulf States, Inc. assets were allocated to be shut down or operated at less than full capacity.  If thisEntergy Gulf States Louisiana and approximately 41.9% were allocated to happen, identifying and correcting the causes may require significant time and expense.  A decision may be madeEntergy Texas.

Entergy Texas purchases from Entergy Louisiana pursuant to close a unit rather than incur the expense of restarting it or returning the unit to full capacity.  For the Utility operating companies and System Energy, this could result in certain costs being stranded and potentially not fully recoverable in regulatory proceedings. For Entergy Wholesale Commodities, this could result in lost revenue and increased fuel andlife-of-unit purchased power expenseagreement a 42.5% share of capacity and energy from the 70% of River Bend subject to meetretail regulation.  Entergy Texas was allocated a share of River Bend’s nuclear and environmental liabilities that is identical to the share of the plant’s output purchased by Entergy Texas under the purchased power agreement.  In connection with the termination of the System Agreement effective August 31, 2016, the purchased power agreements that were put in place for certain legacy units at the time of the jurisdictional separation were also terminated at that time. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the purchased power agreements.

Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana Business Combination

On October 1, 2015, the businesses formerly conducted by Entergy Louisiana (Old Entergy Louisiana) and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana) were combined into a single public utility. In order to effect the business combination, under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Old Entergy Louisiana allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Louisiana Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (New Entergy Louisiana), and New Entergy Louisiana assumed the liabilities of Old Entergy Louisiana, in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Under the TXBOC, Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary (New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana) and New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana assumed the liabilities of Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana then merged into New Entergy Louisiana with New Entergy Louisiana surviving the merger. Thereupon, Old Entergy Louisiana changed its name from “Entergy Louisiana, LLC” to “EL Investment Company, LLC” and New Entergy Louisiana changed its name from “Entergy Louisiana Power, LLC” to “Entergy Louisiana, LLC” (Entergy Louisiana). With the
293267

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

supply commitments and penalties for failure to perform under their contracts with customers. In addition, the operation and maintenance of Entergy’s nuclear facilities require the commitment of substantial human resources that can result in increased costs.

The nuclear industry continues to address susceptibility to the effects of stress corrosion cracking and other corrosion mechanisms on certain materials within plant systems.  The issue is applicable at all nuclear units to varying degrees and is managed in accordance with industry standard practices and guidelines that include in-service examinations, replacements, and mitigation strategies.  Developments in the industry or identification of issues at the nuclear units could require unanticipated remediation efforts that cannot be quantified in advance.

Moreover, Entergy is becoming more dependent on fewer suppliers for key parts of Entergy’s nuclear power plants that may need to be replaced or refurbished, and in some cases, parts are no longer available and have to be reverse-engineered for replacement.  In addition, certain major parts have long lead-times to manufacture if an unplanned replacement is needed. This dependence on a reduced number of suppliers and long lead-times on certain major parts for unplanned replacements could result in delays in obtaining qualified replacement parts and, therefore, greater expense for Entergy.

The costs associated with the storagecompletion of the spent nuclear fuel of certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the owners of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants, as well as the costs of and their ability to fully decommission their nuclear power plants, could be significantly affected by the timing of the opening of a spent nuclear fuel disposal facility, as well as interim storage and transportation requirements.

Certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the owners of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants incur costs for the on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel.  The approval of a license for a national repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, such as the one proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nevada, or any interim storage facility, and the timing of such facility opening, will significantly affect the costs associated with on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel.  For example, while the DOE is required by law to proceed with the licensing of Yucca Mountain and, after the license is granted by the NRC, to construct the repository and commence the receipt of spent fuel, the NRC licensing of the Yucca Mountain repository is effectively at a standstill. These actions are prolonging the time before spent fuel is removed from Entergy’s plant sites.  Because the DOE has not accomplished its objectives, it is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and has breached its spent fuel disposal contracts, and Entergy has sued the DOE for such breach.  Furthermore, Entergy is uncertain as to when the DOE will commence acceptance of spent fuel from its facilities for storage or disposal.  As a result, continuing future expenditures will be required to increase spent fuel storage capacity at the companies’ nuclear sites and maintenance costs on existing storage facilities, including aging management of fuel storage casks, may increase.  The costs of on-site storage are also affected by regulatory requirements for such storage.  In addition, the availability of a repository or other off-site storage facility for spent nuclear fuel may affect the ability to fully decommission the nuclear units and the costs relating to decommissioning.  For further information regarding spent fuel storage, see the “Critical Accounting EstimatesNuclear Decommissioning CostsSpent Fuel Disposal” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy, Entergy Arkansas,business combination, Entergy Louisiana and System Energy and Note 8 to the financial statements.

Certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plant owners may be required to pay substantial retrospective premiums imposed under the Price-Anderson Act in the event of a nuclear incident, and losses not covered by insurance could have a material effect on Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

Accidents and other unforeseen problems at nuclear power plants have occurred both in the United States and elsewhere.  The Price-Anderson Act limits each reactor owner’s public liability (off-site) for a single nuclear incident to the payment of retrospective premiums into a secondary insurance pool, which is referred to as Secondary Financial Protection, up to approximately $137.6 million per reactor.  With 97 reactors currently
294

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

participating, this translates to a total public liability cap of approximately $14 billion per incident.  The limit is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation, a change in the primary limit of insurance coverage, and changes in the number of licensed reactors.  As required by the Price-Anderson Act, the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and Entergy Wholesale Commodities carry the maximum available amount of primary nuclear off-site liability insurance with American Nuclear Insurers, which is $450 million for each operating site.  Claims for any nuclear incident exceeding that amount are covered under Secondary Financial Protection.  As a result, in the event of a nuclear incident that causes damages (off-site) in excess of the primary insurance coverage, each owner of a nuclear plant reactor, including Entergy’s Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities plant owners, regardless of fault or proximity to the incident, will be required to pay a retrospective premium, equal to its proportionate share of the loss in excess of the primary insurance level, up to a maximum of approximately $137.6 million per reactor per incident (Entergy’s maximum total contingent obligation per incident is $1.101 billion).  The retrospective premium payment is currently limited to approximately $21 million per year per incident per reactor until the aggregate public liability for each licensee is paid up to the $137.6 million cap.

NEIL is a utility industry mutual insurance company, owned by its members, including the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the owners of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities plants. All member plants could be subject to an annual assessment (retrospective premium of up to 10 times current annual premium for all policies) should the NEIL surplus (reserve) be significantly depleted due toinsured losses.  As of December 31, 2020, the maximum annual assessment amounts total $104 million for the Utility plants.  Retrospective premium insurance available through NEIL’s reinsurance treaty can cover the potential assessments and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities plants currently maintain the retrospective premium insurance to cover those potential assessments.

As an owner of nuclear power plants, Entergy participates in industry self-insurance programs and could be liable to fund claims should a plant owned by a different company experience a major event.  Any resulting liability from a nuclear accident may exceed the applicable primary insurance coverage and require contribution of additional funds through the industry-wide program that could significantly affect the results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity of Entergy, certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, or the Entergy Wholesale Commodities subsidiaries.

The decommissioning trust fund assets for the nuclear power plants owned by the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plant owners may not be adequate to meet decommissioning obligations if market performance and other changes decrease the value of assets in the decommissioning trusts, if one or more of Entergy’s nuclear power plants is retired earlier than the anticipated shutdown date, if the plants cost more to decommission than estimated, or if current regulatory requirements change, which then could require significant additional funding.

Owners of nuclear generating plants have an obligation to decommission those plants.  Certain of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and owners of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants maintain decommissioning trust funds for this purpose.  Certain of the Utility operating companies collect funds from their customers, which are deposited into the trusts covering the units operated for or on behalf of those companies.  Those rate collections, as adjusted from time to time by rate regulators, are generally based upon operating license lives and trust fund balances as well as estimated trust fund earnings and decommissioning costs.  Assets in these trust funds are subject to market fluctuations, will yield uncertain returns that may fall below projected return rates, and may result in losses resulting from the recognition of impairments of the value of certain securities held in these trust funds.

Under NRC regulations, nuclear plant owners are permitted to project the NRC-required decommissioning amount, based on an NRC formula or a site-specific estimate, and the amount that will be available in each nuclear power plant’s decommissioning trusts combined with any other decommissioning financial assurances in place.  The projections are made based on the operating license expiration date and the mid-point of the subsequent
295

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

decommissioning process, or the anticipated actual completion of decommissioning if a site-specific estimate is used. If the projected amount of each individual plant’s decommissioning trusts exceeds the NRC-required decommissioning amount, then its NRC license termination decommissioning obligations are considered to be funded in accordance with NRC regulations.  If the projected costs do not sufficiently reflect the actual costs required to decommission these nuclear power plants, or funding is otherwise inadequate, or if the formula, formula inputs, or site-specific estimate is changed to require increased funding, additional resources or commitments would be required.  Furthermore, depending upon the level of funding available in the trust funds, the NRC may not permit the trust funds to be used to pay for related costs such as the management of spent nuclear fuel that are not included in the NRC’s formula.  The NRC may also require a plan for the provision of separate funding for spent fuel management costs.  In addition to NRC requirements, there are other decommissioning-related obligations for certain of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants, which management believes it will be able to satisfy.

Further, federal or state regulatory changes, including mandated increases in decommissioning funding or changes in the methods or standards for decommissioning operations, may also increase the funding requirements of, or accelerate the timing for funding of, the obligations related to the decommissioning of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, or Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants or may restrict the decommissioning-related costs that can be paid from the decommissioning trusts.  Such changes also could result in the need for additional contributions to decommissioning trusts, or the posting of parent guarantees, letters of credit, or other surety mechanisms. As a result, under any of these circumstances, Entergy’s results of operations, liquidity, and financial condition could be materially affected.

An early plant shutdown (either generally or relative to current expectations), poor investment results, or higher than anticipated decommissioning costs (including as a result of changing regulatory requirements) could cause trust fund assets to be insufficient to meet the decommissioning obligations, with the result that the Utility operating companies, System Energy, or the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plant owners may be required to provide significant additional funds or credit support to satisfy regulatory requirements for decommissioning, which, with respect to the Utility operating companies, may not be recoverable from customers in a timely fashion or at all.

For further information regarding nuclear decommissioning costs, management’s decision to exit the merchant power business, the impairment charges that resulted from such decision, and the planned sales of Palisades and Indian Point Energy Center (which, in each case, will include the transfer of the associated decommissioning trusts), see the “Critical Accounting Estimates- Nuclear Decommissioning Costs” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, the “Entergy Wholesale Commodities Exit from the Merchant Power Business” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries, and Notes 9 and 14 to the financial statements.

New or existing safety concerns regarding operating nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel could lead to restrictions upon the operation and decommissioning of Entergy’s nuclear power plants.

New and existing concerns are being expressed in public forums about the safety of nuclear generating units and nuclear fuel. These concerns have led to, and may continue to lead to, various proposals to Federal regulators and governing bodies in some localities where Entergy’s subsidiaries own nuclear generating units for legislative and regulatory changes that might lead to the shutdown of nuclear units, additional requirements or restrictions related to spent nuclear fuel on-site storage and eventual disposal, or other adverse effects on owning, operating, and decommissioning nuclear generating units.  Entergy vigorously responds to these concerns and proposals.  If any of the existing proposals, or any proposals that may arise in the future with respect to legislative and regulatory changes, become effective, they could have a material effect on Entergy’s results of operations and financial condition.

296

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

(Entergy Corporation)

Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants are exposed to price risk.

Entergy and its subsidiaries do not have a regulator-authorized rate of return on their capital investments in non-utility businesses.  As a result, the sale of capacity and energy from the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants, unless otherwise contracted, is subject to the fluctuation of market power prices. In order to reduce future price risk to desired levels, Entergy Wholesale Commodities utilizes contracts that are unit-contingent and Firm LD and various products such as forward sales, options, and collars.  As of December 31, 2020, Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ nuclear power generation plants had sold forward 98% in 2021 and 99% in 2022 of its generation portfolio’s planned energy output, reflecting the planned shutdown and sale of the remaining Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants by mid-2022.

Market conditions such as product cost, market liquidity, and other portfolio considerations influence the product and contractual mix.  The obligations under unit-contingent agreements depend on a generating asset that is operating; if the generation asset is not operating, the seller generally is not liable for damages.  For some unit-contingent obligations, however, there is also a guarantee of availability that provides for the payment to the power purchaser of contract damages, if incurred, in the event the unit owner fails to deliver power as a result of the failure of the specified generation unit to generate power at or above a specified availability threshold.  Firm LD sales transactions may be exposed to substantial operational price risk, a portion of which may be capped through the use of risk management products, to the extent that the plants do not run as expected and market prices exceed contract prices.

Market prices may fluctuate substantially, sometimes over relatively short periods of time, and at other times experience sustained increases or decreases.  Demand for electricity and its fuel stock can fluctuate dramatically, creating periods of substantial under- or over-supply.  During periods of over-supply, prices might be depressed.  Also, from time to time there may be political pressure, or pressure from regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over wholesale and retail energy commodity and transportation rates, to impose price limitations, credit requirements, bidding rules, and other mechanisms to address volatility and other issues in these markets.

The effects of sustained low natural gas prices and power market structure challenges have resulted in lower market prices for electricity in the power regions where the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants are located. In addition, currently the market design under which the plants operate does not adequately compensate merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region. These conditions were primary factors leading to Entergy’s decision to shut down (or sell) Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ nuclear power plants before the end of their operating licenses.

The price that different counterparties offer for various products including forward sales is influenced both by market conditions as well as the contract terms such as damage provisions, credit support requirements, and the number of available counterparties interested in contracting for the desired forward period.  Depending on differences between market factors at the time of contracting versus current conditions, Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ contract portfolio may have average contract prices above or below current market prices, including at the expiration of the contracts, which may significantly affect Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.  New hedges are generally layered into on a rolling forward basis, which tends to drive hedge over-performance to market in a falling price environment, and hedge underperformance to market in a rising price environment; however, hedge timing, product choice, and hedging costs will also affect these results. See the “Market and Credit Risk Sensitive Instruments” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries.  Since Entergy Wholesale Commodities has announced the closure (or sale) of its nuclear plants, Entergy Wholesale Commodities may enter into fewer forward sales contracts for output from such plants.

297

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

The Entergy Wholesale Commodities business is subject to substantial governmental regulation and may be adversely affected by legislative, regulatory, or market design changes, as well as liability under, or any future inability to comply with, existing or future regulations or requirements.

The Entergy Wholesale Commodities business is subject to extensive regulation under federal, state, and local laws. Compliance with the requirements under these various regulatory regimes may cause the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business to incur significant additional costs, and failure to comply with such requirements could result in the shutdown of the non-complying facility, the imposition of liens, fines, and/or civil or criminal liability.

Public utilities under the Federal Power Act are required to obtain FERC acceptance of their rate schedules for wholesale sales of electricity.  Each of the owners of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear power plants that generates electricity, as well as Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing, LLC, is a “public utility” under the Federal Power Act by virtue of making wholesale sales of electric energy and/or owning wholesale electric transmission facilities.  The FERC has granted these generating and power marketing companies the authority to sell electricity at market-based rates.  The FERC’s orders that grant the Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ generating and power marketing companies market-based rate authority reserve the right to revoke or revise that authority if the FERC subsequently determines that the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business can exercise market power in transmission or generation, create barriers to entry, or engage in abusive affiliate transactions.  In addition, the Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ market-based sales are subject to certain market behavior rules, and if any of its generating and power marketing companies were deemed to have violated one of those rules, they would be subject to potential disgorgement of profits associated with the violation and/or suspension or revocation of their market-based rate authority and potential penalties of up to $1.29 million per day per violation.  If the Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ generating or power marketing companies were to lose their market-based rate authority, such companies would be required to obtain the FERC’s acceptance of a cost-of-service rate schedule and could become subject to the accounting, record-keeping, and reporting requirements that are imposed on utilities with cost-based rate schedules.  This could have an adverse effect on the rates the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business charges for power from its facilities.

The Entergy Wholesale Commodities business is also affected by legislative and regulatory changes, as well as changes to market design, market rules, tariffs, cost allocations, and bidding rules imposed by the existing Independent System Operators.  The Independent System Operators that oversee most of the wholesale power markets may impose, and in the future may continue to impose, mitigation, including price limitations, offer caps and other mechanisms, to address some of the volatility and the potential exercise of market power in these markets.  These types of price limitations and other regulatory mechanisms may have an adverse effect on the profitability of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business’ generation facilities that sell energy and capacity into the wholesale power markets. For further information regarding federal, state, and local laws and regulation applicable to the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, see the “Regulation of Entergy’s Business” section in Part I, Item 1.

The regulatory environment applicable to the electric power industry is subject to changes as a result of restructuring initiatives at both the state and federal levels. Entergy cannot predict the future design of the wholesale power markets or the ultimate effect that the changing regulatory environment will have on the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business.  In addition, in some of these markets, interested parties have proposed material market design changes, including the elimination of a single clearing price mechanism, have raised claims that the competitive marketplace is not working because energy prices in wholesale markets exceed the marginal cost of operating nuclear power plants, and have made proposals to re-regulate the markets, impose a generation tax, or require divestitures by generating companies to reduce their market share.  Other proposals to re-regulate may be made and legislative or other attention to the electric power market restructuring process may delay or reverse the deregulation process, which could require material changes to business planning models.  If competitive restructuring of the electric power markets is reversed, modified, discontinued, or delayed, the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity could be materially affected.
298

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


The power plants owned by the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business are subject to impairment charges in certain circumstances, which could have a material effect on Entergy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

Entergy reviews long-lived assets held in all of its business segments whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that recoverability of these assets is uncertain.  Generally, the determination of recoverability is based on the undiscounted net cash flows expected to result from the operations of such assets.  Projected net cash flows depend on the expected operating life of the assets, the future operating costs associated with the assets, the efficiency and availability of the assets and generating units, and the future market and price for energy and capacity over the remaining life of the assets.  In particular, the remaining assets of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business are subject to further impairment in connection with the closure and sale of its nuclear power plants. Moreover, prior to the closure and sale of these plants, the failure of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business to achieve forecasted operating results and cash flows, an unfavorable change in forecasted operating results or cash flows, a reduction in the expected remaining useful life of a unit, or a decline in observable industry market multiples could all result in potential additional impairment charges for the affected assets.

If Entergy concludes that any of its nuclear power plants is unlikely to operate through its planned shutdown date, which conclusion would be based on a variety of factors, such a conclusion could result in a further impairment of part or all of the carrying value of the plant.  Any impairment charge taken by Entergy with respect to its long-lived assets, including the remaining power plants owned by the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, would likely be material in the quarter that the charge is taken and could otherwise have a material effect on Entergy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. For further information regarding evaluating long-lived assets for impairment, see the “Critical Accounting Estimates - Impairment of Long-lived Assets” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries and for further discussion of the impairment charges, see Note 14 to the financial statements.

General Business

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

Entergy and the Utility operating companies depend on access to the capital markets and, at times, may face potential liquidity constraints, which could make it more difficult to handle future contingencies such as natural disasters or substantial increases in gas and fuel prices.  Disruptions in the capital and credit markets may adversely affect Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ ability to meet liquidity needs, access capital and operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital.

Entergy’s business is capital intensive and dependent upon its ability to access capital at reasonable rates and other terms.  At times there are also spikes in the price for natural gas and other commodities that increase the liquidity requirements of the Utility operating companies and Entergy Wholesale Commodities.  In addition, Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ liquidity needs could significantly increase in the event of a hurricane or other weather-related or unforeseen disaster similar to that experienced in Entergy’s service territory with Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita in 2005, Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike in 2008, Hurricane Isaac in 2012, and Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta in 2020.  The occurrence of one or more contingencies, including a delay in regulatory recovery of fuel or purchased power costs or storm restoration costs, an acceleration of payments or decreased credit lines, less cash flow from operations than expected, changes in regulation or governmental policy (including tax and trade policy), or other unknown events, could cause the financing needs of Entergy and its subsidiaries to increase.  In addition, accessing the debt capital markets more frequently in these situations may result in an increase in leverage.  Material leverage increases could negatively affect the credit ratings of Entergy and the Utility operating companies, which in turn could negatively affect access to the capital markets.
299

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


The inability to raise capital on favorable terms, particularly during times of high interest rates, and uncertainty or reduced liquidity in the capital markets, could negatively affect Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to maintain and to expand their businesses.  Access to capital markets could be restricted and/or borrowing costs could be increased due to certain sources of debt and equity capital being unwilling to invest in companies that experience extreme weather events, that rely on fossil fuels or offerings to fund fossil fuel projects, or due to risks related to climate change. Events beyond Entergy’s control may create uncertainty that could increase its cost of capital or impair its ability to access the capital markets, including the ability to draw on its bank credit facilities.  Entergy and its subsidiaries are unable to predict the degree of success they will have in renewing or replacing their credit facilities as they come up for renewal.  Moreover, the size, terms, and covenants of any new credit facilities may not be comparable to, and may be more restrictive than, existing facilities.  If Entergy and its subsidiaries are unable to access the credit and capital markets on terms that are reasonable, they may have to delay raising capital, issue shorter-term securities and/or bear an unfavorable cost of capital, which, in turn, could impact their ability to grow their businesses, decrease earnings, significantly reduce financial flexibility and/or limit Entergy Corporation’s ability to sustain its current common stock dividend level.

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

A downgrade in Entergy Corporations or its subsidiariescredit ratings could negatively affect Entergy Corporations and its subsidiariesability to access capital and/or could require Entergy Corporation or its subsidiaries to post collateral, accelerate certain payments, or repay certain indebtedness.

There are a number of factors that rating agencies evaluate to arrive at credit ratings for each of Entergy Corporation and the Registrant Subsidiaries, including each Registrant’s regulatory framework, ability to recover costs and earn returns, diversification and financial strength and liquidity.  If one or more rating agencies downgrade Entergy Corporation’s, any of the Utility operating companies’, or System Energy’s ratings, particularly below investment grade, borrowing costs would increase, the potential pool of investors and funding sources would likely decrease, and cash or letter of credit collateral demands may be triggered by the terms of a number of commodity contracts, leases, and other agreements.

Most of Entergy Corporation’s and its subsidiaries’ suppliers and counterparties require sufficient creditworthiness to enter into transactions.  If Entergy Corporation’s or its subsidiaries’ ratings decline, particularly below investment grade, or if certain counterparties believe Entergy Corporation or the Utility operating companies are losing creditworthiness and demand adequate assurance under fuel, gas, and purchased power contracts, the counterparties may require posting of collateral in cash or letters of credit, prepayment for fuel, gas or purchased power or accelerated payment, or counterparties may decline business with Entergy Corporation or its subsidiaries. At December 31, 2020 based on power prices at that time, Entergy had liquidity exposure of $62 million under the guarantees in place supporting Entergy Wholesale Commodities transactions and $6 million of posted cash collateral. In the event of a decrease in Entergy Corporation’s credit rating to below investment grade, based on power prices as of December 31, 2020, Entergy would have been required to provide approximately $30 million of additional cash or letters of credit under some of the agreements. As of December 31, 2020, the liquidity exposure associated with Entergy Wholesale Commodities assurance requirements, including return of previously posted collateral from counterparties, would increase by $22 million for a $1 per MMBtu increase in gas prices in both the short- and long-term markets.

Recent U.S. tax legislation may materially adversely affect Entergy’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and CARES Act of 2020 significantly changed the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, including taxation of U.S. corporations, by, among other things, reducing the federal corporate income tax rate, limiting interest deductions, and altering the expensing of capital expenditures. The interpretive
300

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

guidance issued by the IRS and state tax authorities may be inconsistent with Entergy’s own interpretation and the legislation could be subject to amendments, which could lessen or increase certain impacts of the legislation.

As further described in Note 3 to the financial statements, as a result of amortization of accumulated deferred income taxes and payment of such amounts to customers in 2019, Entergy’s net regulatory liability for income taxes balance is $1.6 billion as of December 31, 2020. Depending on the outcome of IRS examinations or tax positions and elections that Entergy may make, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries may be required to record additional charges or credits to income tax expense. Further, there may be other material effects resulting from the legislation that have not been identified.

See Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on 2018, 2019 and 2020 results of operations and financial condition, the provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and the uncertainties associated with accounting for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the regulatory proceedings that have considered the effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Changes in taxation as well as the inherent difficulty in quantifying potential tax effects of business decisions could negatively impact Entergy’s, the Utility operating companies’, and System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Entergy and its subsidiaries make judgments regarding the potential tax effects of various transactions and results of operations to estimate their obligations to taxing authorities.  These tax obligations include income, franchise, real estate, sales and use, and employment-related taxes.  These judgments include provisions for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that have been taken.  Entergy and its subsidiaries also estimate their ability to utilize tax benefits, including those in the form of carryforwards for which the benefits have already been reflected in the financial statements.  Changes in federal, state, or local tax laws, adverse tax audit results or adverse tax rulings on positions taken by Entergy and its subsidiaries could negatively affect Entergy’s, the Utility operating companies’, and System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity. For further information regarding Entergy’s income taxes, see Note 3 to the financial statements.

Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to successfully execute on their business strategies, including their ability to complete strategic transactions, is subject to significant risks, and, as a result, they may be unable to achieve some or all of the anticipated results of such strategies, which could materially affect their future prospects, results of operations, and benefits that they anticipate from such transactions.

Entergy and its subsidiaries’ future prospects and results of operations significantly depend on their ability to successfully implement their business strategies, which are subject to business, regulatory, economic, and other risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond their control. As a result, Entergy and its subsidiaries may be unable to fully achieve the anticipated results of such strategies.

Additionally, Entergy and its subsidiaries have pursued and may continue to pursue strategic transactions including merger, acquisition, divestiture, joint venture, restructuring, or other strategic transactions. For example, Entergy has entered into an agreement to sell its equity interests in the subsidiary that owns the Palisades Nuclear Plant and the decommissioned Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant and an agreement to sell the equity interests of Indian Point 1, Indian Point 2, and Indian Point 3, in each case after each of the plants has been shut down and defueled. Also, a significant portion of Entergy’s utility business over the next several years includes the construction and/or purchase of a variety of generating units. These transactions and plans are or may become subject to regulatory approval and other material conditions or contingencies. The failure to complete these transactions or plans or any future strategic transaction successfully or on a timely basis could have an adverse effect on Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ financial condition or results of operations and the market’s perception of Entergy’s ability to execute its strategy. Further, these transactions, and any completed or future strategic transactions, involve substantial risks, including the following:

301

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

acquired businesses or assets may not produce revenues, earnings, or cash flow at anticipated levels;
acquired businesses or assets could have environmental, permitting, or other problems for which contractual protections prove inadequate;
Entergy and/or its subsidiaries may assume liabilities that were not disclosed to them, that exceed their estimates, or for which their rights to indemnification from the seller are limited;
Entergy may experience issues integrating businesses into its internal controls over financial reporting;
the disposition of a business, including Entergy’s planned exit from the merchant power business, could divert management’s attention from other business concerns;
Entergy and/or its subsidiaries may be unable to obtain the necessary regulatory or governmental approvals to close a transaction, such approvals may be granted subject to terms that are unacceptable, or Entergy or its subsidiaries otherwise may be unable to achieve anticipated regulatory treatment of any such transaction or acquired business or assets; and
Entergy or its subsidiaries otherwise may be unable to achieve the full strategic and financial benefits that they anticipate from the transaction, or such benefits may be delayed or may not occur at all.

Entergy and its subsidiaries may not be successful in managing these or any other significant risks that they may encounter in acquiring or divesting a business, or engaging in other strategic transactions, which could have a material effect on their business, financial condition or results of operations.

The completion of capital projects, including the construction of power generation facilities, and other capital improvements involve substantial risks.  Should such efforts be unsuccessful, the financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity of Entergy and the Utility operating companies could be materially affected.

Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ ability to complete capital projects, including the construction of power generation facilities, or make other capital improvements, in a timely manner and within budget is contingent upon many variables and subject to substantial risks.  These variables include, but are not limited to, project management expertise, escalating costs for materials, labor, and environmental compliance, and reliance on suppliers for timely and satisfactory performance.  Delays in obtaining permits, shortages in materials and qualified labor, levels of public support or opposition, suppliers and contractors not performing as expected or required under their contracts and/or experiencing financial problems that inhibit their ability to fulfill their obligations under contracts, changes in the scope and timing of projects, poor quality initial cost estimates from contractors, the inability to raise capital on favorable terms, changes in commodity prices affecting revenue, fuel costs, or materials costs,  downward changes in the economy, changes in law or regulation, including environmental compliance requirements, and other events beyond the control of the Utility operating companies or the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business may occur that may materially affect the schedule, cost, and performance of these projects.  If these projects or other capital improvements are significantly delayed or become subject to cost overruns or cancellation, Entergy and the Utility operating companies could incur additional costs and termination payments, or face increased risk of potential write-off of the investment in the project.  In addition, the Utility operating companies could be exposed to higher costs and market volatility, which could affect cash flow and cost recovery, should their respective regulators decline to approve the construction of the project or new generation needed to meet the reliability needs of customers at the lowest reasonable cost.

For further information regarding capital expenditure plans and other uses of capital in connection with capital projects, including the potential construction and/or purchase of additional generation supply sources within the Utility operating companies’ service territory, and as to the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, see the “Capital Expenditure Plans and Other Uses of Capital” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy and each of the Registrant Subsidiaries.

302

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Failure to attract, retain and manage an appropriately qualified workforce could negatively affect Entergy or its subsidiaries’ results of operations.

We rely on a large and changing workforce of team members, including employees, contractors and temporary staffing. Certain events, such as an aging workforce, mismatching of skill sets, failing to appropriately anticipate future workforce needs, or the unavailability of contract resources may lead to operating challenges and increased costs. The challenges include lack of resources, loss of knowledge base, and the time required for skill development. In this case, costs, including costs for contractors to replace employees, productivity costs, and safety costs, may increase. Failure to hire and adequately train replacement employees, or the future availability and cost of contract labor may adversely affect the ability to manage and operate the business, especially considering the workforce needs associated with nuclear generation facilities and new skills required to operate a modernized, technology-enabled power grid. If Entergy and its subsidiaries are unable to successfully attract, retain, and manage an appropriately qualified workforce, their results of operations, financial position, and cash flows could be negatively affected.

The Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business may incur substantial costs to fulfill their obligations related to environmental and other matters.

The businesses in which the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business operate are subject to extensive environmental regulation by local, state, and federal authorities.  These laws and regulations affect the manner in which the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business conduct their operations and make capital expenditures.  These laws and regulations also affect how the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business manage air emissions, discharges to water, wetlands impacts, solid and hazardous waste storage and disposal, cooling and service water intake, the protection of threatened and endangered species, certain migratory birds and eagles, hazardous materials transportation, and similar matters.  Federal, state, and local authorities continually revise these laws and regulations, and the laws and regulations are subject to judicial interpretation and to the permitting and enforcement discretion vested in the implementing agencies.  Developing and implementing plans for facility compliance with these requirements can lead to capital, personnel, and operation and maintenance expenditures.  Violations of these requirements can subject the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business to enforcement actions, capital expenditures to bring existing facilities into compliance, additional operating costs or operating restrictions to achieve compliance, remediation and clean-up costs, civil penalties, and exposure to third parties’ claims for alleged health or property damages or for violations of applicable permits or standards.  In addition, the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business potentially are subject to liability under these laws for the costs of remediation of environmental contamination of property now or formerly owned or operated by the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and Entergy Wholesale Commodities and of property contaminated by hazardous substances they generate.  The Utility operating companies currently are involved in proceedings relating to sites where hazardous substances have been released and may be subject to additional proceedings in the future.  The Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business have incurred and expect to incur significant costs related to environmental compliance.

Emissions of nitrogen and sulfur oxides, mercury, particulates, greenhouse gases, and other regulated air emissions from generating plants potentially are subject to increased regulation, controls, and mitigation expenses.  In addition, existing air regulations and programs promulgated by the EPA often are challenged legally, or are revised or withdrawn by the EPA, sometimes resulting in large-scale changes to anticipated regulatory regimes and the resulting need to shift course, both operationally and economically, depending on the nature of the changes.  Risks relating to global climate change, initiatives to compel greenhouse gas emission reductions, and water availability issues are discussed below.

Entergy and its subsidiaries may not be able to obtain or maintain all required environmental regulatory approvals.  If there is a delay in obtaining any required environmental regulatory approvals, or if Entergy and its subsidiaries fail to obtain, maintain, or comply with any such approval, the operation of its facilities could be
303

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

stopped or become subject to additional costs.  For further information regarding environmental regulation and environmental matters, see the “Regulation of Entergys Business– Environmental Regulation” section of Part I, Item 1.

The Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business may incur substantial costs related to reliability standards.

Entergy’s business is subject to extensive and mandatory reliability standards.  Such standards, which are established by the NERC, the SERC, and other regional enforcement entities, are approved by the FERC and frequently are reviewed, amended, and supplemented.  Failure to comply with such standards could result in the imposition of fines or civil penalties, and potential exposure to third party claims for alleged violations of such standards.  The standards, as well as the laws and regulations that govern them, are subject to judicial interpretation and to the enforcement discretion vested in the implementing agencies.  In addition to exposure to civil penalties and fines, the Utility operating companies have incurred and expect to incur significant costs related to compliance with new and existing reliability standards, including costs associated with the Utility operating companies’ transmission system and generation assets.  In addition, the retail regulators of the Utility operating companies possess the jurisdiction, and in some cases have exercised such jurisdiction, to impose standards governing the reliable operation of the Utility operating companies’ distribution systems, including penalties if these standards are not met. The changes to the reliability standards applicable to the electric power industry are ongoing, and Entergy cannot predict the ultimate effect that the reliability standards will have on its Utility and Entergy Wholesale Commodities businesses.

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

Weather, economic conditions, technological developments, and other factors may have a material impact on electricity and gas usage and otherwise materially affect the Utility operating companiesresults of operations and system reliability.

Temperatures above normal levels in the summer tend to increase electric cooling demand and revenues, and temperatures below normal levels in the winter tend to increase electric and gas heating demand and revenues.  As a corollary, mild temperatures in either season tend to decrease energy usage and resulting revenues.  Higher consumption levels coupled with seasonal pricing differentials typically cause the Utility operating companies to report higher revenues in the third quarter of the fiscal year than in the other quarters.  Extreme weather conditions including hurricanes or tropical storms, flooding events, or ice storms may stress the Utility operating companies’ generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems, resulting in increased maintenance and capital costs (and potential increased financing needs), limits on their ability to meet peak customer demand, increased regulatory oversight, and reduced customer satisfaction.  These extreme conditions could have a material effect on the Utility operating companies’ financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.

Entergy’s electricity sales volumes are affected by a number of factors including weather and economic conditions, trends in energy efficiency, new technologies, and self-generation alternatives, including the willingness and ability of large industrial customers to develop co-generation facilities that greatly reduce their grid demand. Some of these factors are inherently cyclical or temporary in nature, such as the weather or economic conditions, and rarely have a long-lasting effect on Entergy’s operating results.  Others, such as the organic turnover of appliances and their replacement with more efficient ones, adoption of newer technologies including smart thermostats, new building codes, distributed energy resources, energy storage, demand side management, and rooftop solar are having a more permanent effect by reducing sales growth rates from historical norms. As a result of these emerging efficiencies and technologies, the Utility operating companies may lose customers or experience lower average use per customer in the residential and commercial classes, and continuing advances have the potential to further limit sales growth in the future. The Utility operating companies also may face competition from other companies offering products and services to Entergy’s customers. Electricity sales to industrial
304

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

customers, in particular, benefit from steady economic growth and favorable commodity markets; however, industrial sales are sensitive to changes in conditions in the markets in which its customers operate.  Negative changes in any of these or other factors, particularly sustained economic downturns or sluggishness, have the potential to result in slower sales growth or sales declines and increased bad debt expense, which could materially affect Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

The effects of climate change, environmental and regulatory obligations intended to compel greenhouse gas emission reductions or increase clean or renewable energy requirements or to place a price on greenhouse gas emissions, or achieving voluntary climate commitments could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy, the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business.

In an effort to address climate change concerns, some federal, state, and local authorities are calling for additional laws and regulations aimed at known or suspected causes of climate change.  For example, in response to the United States Supreme Court’s 2007 decision holding that the EPA has authority to regulate emissions of CO2 and other “greenhouse gases” under the Clean Air Act, the EPA, various environmental interest groups, and other organizations focused considerable attention on CO2 emissions from power generation facilities and their potential role in climate change.  Since that ruling, the EPA has promulgated regulations controlling greenhouse gas emissions from certain vehicles, and from new, existing, and significantly modified stationary sources of emissions, including electric generating units. As examples of state action, in the Northeast, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative establishes a cap on CO2 emissions from electric power plants and requires generators to purchase emission permits to cover their CO2 emissions, and a similar program has been developed in California. In Louisiana, the Office of the Governor announced the creation of a Climate Initiatives Task Force and issued an executive order that established a path to net-zero emissions by 2050 while the City Council of New Orleans passed a renewable and clean portfolio standard that sets a goal of net-zero emissions by 2040 and absolute zero emissions by 2050. The impact that continued changes in the governmental response to climate change risk will have on existing and pending environmental laws and regulations related to greenhouse gas emissions is currently unclear.

Developing and implementing plans for compliance with greenhouse gas emissions reduction, clean/renewable energy requirements, or for achieving voluntary climate commitments can lead to additional capital, personnel, and operation and maintenance expenditures and could significantly affect the economic position of existing facilities and proposed projects. The operations of low or non-emitting generating units (such as nuclear units) at lower than expected capacity factors could require increased generation from higher emitting units, thus increasing the company’s greenhouse gas emission rate. Moreover, long-term planning to meet environmental requirements can be negatively impacted and costs may increase to the extent laws and regulations change prior to full implementation.  These requirements could, in turn, lead to changes in the planning or operations of balancing authorities or organized markets in areas where the Utility operating companies, System Energy, or Entergy Wholesale Commodities do business. Violations of such requirements may subject Entergy Wholesale Commodities and the Utility operating companies to enforcement actions, capital expenditures to bring existing facilities into compliance, additional operating costs or operating restrictions to achieve compliance, civil penalties, and exposure to third parties’ claims for alleged health or property damages or for violations of applicable permits or standards.  To the extent Entergy believes any of these costs are recoverable in rates, however, additional material rate increases for customers could be resisted by Entergy’s regulators and, in extreme cases, Entergy’s regulators might attempt to deny or defer timely recovery of these costs.  Future changes in regulation or policies governing the emission of CO2 and other greenhouse gases or mix of generation sources could (i) result in significant additional costs to Entergy’s utility operating companies, their suppliers or customers, (ii) make some of Entergy’s electric generating units uneconomical to maintain or operate, (iii) result in the early retirement of generation facilities and stranded costs if Entergy’s utility operating companies are unable to fully recover the costs and investment in generation and (iv) could increase the difficulty that Entergy and its utility operating companies have with obtaining or maintaining required environmental regulatory approvals, each of which could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy and its subsidiaries.  In addition, lawsuits have occurred or are reasonably expected against emitters of greenhouse gases alleging that these
305

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

companies are liable for personal injuries and property damage caused by climate change.  These lawsuits may seek injunctive relief, monetary compensation, and punitive damages.

In addition to the regulatory and financial risks associated with climate change discussed above, potential physical risks from climate change include an increase in sea level, wind and storm surge damages, wildfires, wetland and barrier island erosion, risks of flooding and changes in weather conditions, (such as increases in precipitation, drought, or changes in average temperatures), and potential increased impacts of extreme weather conditions or storms.  Entergy subsidiaries own assets in, and serve, communities that are at risk from sea level rise, changes in weather conditions, storms, and loss of the protection offered by coastal wetlands.  A significant portion of the nation’s oil and gas infrastructure is located in these areas and susceptible to storm damage that could be aggravated by the physical impacts of climate change, which could give rise to fuel supply interruptions and price spikes. Entergy and its subsidiaries also face the risk that climate change could impact the availability and quality of water supply necessary for operations.

These and other physical changes could result in changes in customer demand, increased costs associated with repairing and maintaining generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems resulting in increased maintenance and capital costs (and potential increased financing needs), limits on the Entergy System’s ability to meet peak customer demand, more frequent and longer lasting outages, increased regulatory oversight, and lower customer satisfaction.  Also, to the extent that climate change adversely impacts the economic health of a region or results in energy conservation or demand side management programs, it may adversely impact customer demand and revenues.  Such physical or operational risks could have a material effect on Entergy’s, Entergy Wholesale Commodities’, System Energy’s, and the Utility operating companies’ financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.

In September 2020, Entergy voluntarily committed to achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Technology research and development, innovation, and advancement are critical to Entergy’s ability to achieve this commitment. Moreover, Entergy cannot predict the ultimate impact of achieving this objective, or the various implementation aspects, on its system reliability, or its results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Continued and future availability and quality of water for cooling, process, and sanitary uses could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of the Utility operating companies, System Energy, and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business.

Water is a vital natural resource that is also critical to the Utility operating companies’, System Energy’s, and Entergy Wholesale Commodities’ business operations.  Entergy’s facilities use water for cooling, boiler make-up, sanitary uses, potable supply, and many other uses.  Entergy’s Utility operating companies also own and/or operate hydroelectric facilities.  Accordingly, water availability and quality are critical to Entergy’s business operations.  Impacts to water availability or quality could negatively impact both operations and revenues.

Entergy secures water through various mechanisms (ground water wells, surface waters intakes, municipal supply, etc.) and operates under the provisions and conditions set forth by the provider and/or regulatory authorities.  Entergy also obtains and operates in substantial compliance with water discharge permits issued under various provisions of the Clean Water Act and/or state water pollution control provisions. Regulations and authorizations for both water intake and use and for waste discharge can become more stringent in times of water shortages, low flows in rivers, low lake levels, low groundwater aquifer volumes, and similar conditions.  The increased use of water by industry, agriculture, and the population at large, population growth, and the potential impacts of climate change on water resources may cause water use restrictions that affect Entergy and its subsidiaries.

306

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy and its subsidiaries may not be adequately hedged against changes in commodity prices, which could materially affect Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

To manage near-term financial exposure related to commodity price fluctuations, Entergy and its subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, may enter into contracts to hedge portions of their purchase and sale commitments, fuel requirements, and inventories of natural gas, uranium and its conversion and enrichment, coal, refined products, and other commodities, within established risk management guidelines.  As part of this strategy, Entergy and its subsidiaries may utilize fixed- and variable-price forward physical purchase and sales contracts, futures, financial swaps, and option contracts traded in the over-the-counter markets or on exchanges.  However, Entergy and its subsidiaries normally cover only a portion of the exposure of their assets and positions to market price volatility, and the coverage will vary over time.  In addition, Entergy also elects to leave certain volumes during certain years unhedged.  To the extent Entergy and its subsidiaries have unhedged positions, fluctuating commodity prices can materially affect Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ results of operations and financial position.

Although Entergy and its subsidiaries devote a considerable effort to these risk management strategies, they cannot eliminate all the risks associated with these activities.  As a result of these and other factors, Entergy and its subsidiaries cannot predict with precision the impact that risk management decisions may have on their business, results of operations, or financial position.

Entergy’s over-the-counter financial derivatives are subject to rules implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that are designed to promote transparency, mitigate systemic risk, and protect against market abuse. Entergy cannot predict the impact any proposed or not fully-implemented final rules will have on its ability to hedge its commodity price risk or on over-the-counter derivatives markets as a whole, but such rules and regulations could have a material effect on Entergy's risk exposure, as well as reduce market liquidity and further increase the cost of hedging activities.

Entergy has guaranteed or indemnified the performance of a portion of the obligations relating to hedging and risk management activities.  Reductions in Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ credit quality or changes in the market prices of energy commodities could increase the cash or letter of credit collateral required to be posted in connection with hedging and risk management activities, which could materially affect Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ liquidity and financial position.

The Utility operating companies and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business are exposed to the risk that counterparties may not meet their obligations, which may materially affect the Utility operating companies and Entergy Wholesale Commodities.

The hedging and risk management practices of the Utility operating companies and the Entergy Wholesale Commodities business are exposed to the risk that counterparties that owe Entergy and its subsidiaries money, energy, or other commodities will not perform their obligations.  Currently, some hedging agreements contain provisions that require the counterparties to provide credit support to secure all or part of their obligations to Entergy or its subsidiaries.  If the counterparties to these arrangements fail to perform, Entergy or its subsidiaries may enforce and recover the proceeds from the credit support provided and acquire alternative hedging arrangements, which credit support may not always be adequate to cover the related obligations.  In such event, Entergy and its subsidiaries might incur losses in addition to amounts, if any, already paid to the counterparties.  In addition, the credit commitments of Entergy’s lenders under its bank facilities may not be honored for a variety of reasons, including unexpected periods of financial distress affecting such lenders, which could materially affect the adequacy of its liquidity sources.

307

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Market performance and other changes may decrease the value of benefit plan assets, which then could require additional funding and result in increased benefit plan costs.

The performance of the capital markets affects the values of the assets held in trust under Entergy’s pension and postretirement benefit plans.  A decline in the market value of the assets may increase the funding requirements relating to Entergy’s benefit plan liabilities and also result in higher benefit costs. As the value of the assets decreases, the “expected return on assets” component of benefit costs decreases, resulting in higher benefits costs. Additionally, asset losses are incorporated into benefit costs over time, thus increasing benefits costs.  Volatility in the capital markets has affected the market value of these assets, which may affect Entergy’s planned levels of contributions in the future.  Additionally, changes in interest rates affect the liabilities under Entergy’s pension and postretirement benefit plans; as interest rates decrease, the liabilities increase, potentially requiring additional funding and recognition of higher liability carrying costs.  The funding requirements of the obligations related to the pension benefit plans can also increase as a result of changes in, among other factors, retirement rates, life expectancy assumptions, or Federal regulations.  For further information regarding Entergy’s pension and other postretirement benefit plans, refer to the “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy and each of its Registrant Subsidiaries and Note 11 to the financial statements.

The litigation environment in the states in which certain Entergy subsidiaries operate poses a significant risk to those businesses.

Entergy and its subsidiaries are involved in the ordinary course of business in a number of lawsuits involving employment, commercial, asbestos, hazardous material and ratepayer matters, and injuries and damages issues, among other matters.  The states in which the Utility operating companies operate have proven to be unusually litigious environments.  Judges and juries in these states have demonstrated a willingness to grant large verdicts, including punitive damages, to plaintiffs in personal injury, property damage, and business tort cases.  Entergy and its subsidiaries use legal and appropriate means to contest litigation threatened or filed against them, but the litigation environment in these states poses a significant business risk.

Terrorist attacks, cyber attacks, system failures or data breaches of Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ or our suppliers’ technology systems may adversely affect Entergy’s results of operations.

Entergy and its subsidiaries operate in a business that requires evolving information technology systems that include sophisticated data collection, processing systems, software, network infrastructure, and other technologies that are becoming more complex and may be subject to mandatory and prescriptive reliability and security standards. The functionality of Entergy’s technology systems depends on its own and its suppliers’ and their contractors’ technology. Suppliers’ and their contractors’ technology systems to which Entergy is connected directly or indirectly support a variety of business processes and activities to store sensitive data, including (i) intellectual property, (ii) proprietary business information, (iii) personally identifiable information of customers and employees, and (iv) data with respect to invoicing and the collection of payments, accounting, procurement, and supply chain activities. Any significant failure or malfunction of such information technology systems could result in loss of data or disruptions of operations.

There have been attacks and threats of attacks on energy infrastructure by cyber actors, including those associated with foreign governments. As an operator of critical infrastructure, Entergy and its subsidiaries face heightened risk of an act or threat of terrorism, cyber attacks, and data breaches, whether as a direct or indirect act against one of Entergy’s generation, transmission or distribution facilities, operations centers, infrastructure, or information technology systems used to manage, monitor, and transport power to customers and perform day-to-day business functions. An actual act could affect Entergy’s ability to operate, including its ability to operate the information technology systems and network infrastructure on which it relies to conduct business.

Given the rapid technological advancements of existing and emerging threats, Entergy’s technology systems remain inherently vulnerable despite implementations and enhancements of the multiple layers of security
308

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

and controls. If Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ technology systems were compromised and unable to detect or recover in a timely fashion to a normal state of operations, Entergy or its subsidiaries could be unable to perform critical business functions that are essential to the company’s well-being and could result in a loss of its confidential, sensitive, and proprietary information, including personal information of its customers, employees, suppliers, and others in Entergy’s care.

Any such attacks, failures or data breaches could have a material effect on Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ business, financial condition, results of operations or reputation. Although we purchase insurance coverage for cyber-attacks or data breaches, such insurance may not be adequate to cover all losses that might arise in connection with these events. Such events may also expose Entergy to an increased risk of litigation (and associated damages and fines).

(Entergy New Orleans)

The effect of higher purchased gas cost charges to customers taking gas service may adversely affect Entergy New Orleans’s results of operations and liquidity.

Gas rates charged to retail gas customers are comprised primarily of purchased gas cost charges, which provide no return or profit to Entergy New Orleans, and distribution charges, which provide a return or profit to the utility.  Distribution charges recover fixed costs on a volumetric basis and, thus, are affected by the amount of gas sold to customers.  When purchased gas cost charges increase due to higher gas procurement costs, customer usage may decrease, especially in weaker economic times, resulting in lower distribution charges for Entergy New Orleans, which could adversely affect results of operations. Purchased gas cost charges, which comprise most of a customer’s bill and may be adjusted monthly, represent gas commodity costs that Entergy New Orleans recovers from its customers.  Entergy New Orleans’s cash flows can be affected by differences between the time period when gas is purchased and the time when ultimate recovery from customers occurs.

(System Energy)

System Energy owns and, through an affiliate, operates a single nuclear generating facility, and it is dependent on sales to affiliated companies for all of its revenues. Certain contractual arrangements relating to System Energy, the affiliated companies, and these revenues are the subject of ongoing litigation and regulatory proceedings.

System Energy’s operating revenues are derived from the allocation of the capacity, energy, and related costs associated with its 90% ownership/leasehold interest in Grand Gulf.  Charges under the Unit Power Sales Agreement are paid by the Utility operating companies as consideration for their respective entitlements to receive capacity and energy.  The useful economic life of Grand Gulf is finite and is limited by the terms of its operating license, which expires in November 2044. System Energy’s financial condition depends both on the receipt of payments from the Utility operating companies under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and on the continued commercial operation of Grand Gulf. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC, including a challenge with respect to System Energy’s uncertain tax positions, sale leaseback arrangement, authorized return on equity and capital structure, and a request in a separate proceeding for FERC to initiate a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The LPSC has also authorized the filing of a prudence complaint at the FERC relating to Grand Gulf operations. Entergy cannot predict the outcome of any of these proceedings nor can it predict whether any outcome could have a material effect on Entergy’s or System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition or liquidity. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings. The Utility operating companies have agreed to implement certain protocols for providing retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

For information regarding the Unit Power Sales Agreement, the sale and leaseback transactions and certain other agreements relating to the Entergy System companies’ support of System Energy, see Notes 5 and 8 to the
309

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A & 1B
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

financial statements and the “Utility - System Energy and Related Agreements” section of Part I, Item 1.

(Entergy Corporation)

As a holding company, Entergy Corporation depends on cash distributions from its subsidiaries to meet its debt service and other financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock.

Entergy Corporation is a holding company with no material revenue generating operations of its own or material assets other than the stock of its subsidiaries. Accordingly, all of its operations are conducted by its subsidiaries. Entergy Corporation’s ability to satisfy its financial obligations, including the payment of interest and principal on its outstanding debt, and to pay dividends on its common stock depends on the payment to it of dividends or distributions by its subsidiaries. The subsidiaries of Entergy Corporation are separate and distinct legal entities and have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay any dividends or make distributions to Entergy Corporation. The ability of such subsidiaries to make payments of dividends or distributions to Entergy Corporation depends on their results of operations and cash flows and other items affecting retained earnings, and on any applicable legal, regulatory, or contractual limitations on subsidiaries’ ability to pay such dividends or distributions. Prior to providing funds to Entergy Corporation, such subsidiaries have financial and regulatory obligations that must be satisfied, including among others, debt service and, in the case of Entergy Utility Holding Company and Entergy Texas, dividends and distributions on preferred securities. Any distributions from the Registrant Subsidiaries other than Entergy Texas and System Energy are paid directly to Entergy Utility Holding Company and are therefore subject to prior payment of distributions on its preferred securities.


310

Table of Contents

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The COVID-19 Pandemic

See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

February 2021 Winter Storms

See the “February 2021 Winter Storms” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the February 2021 winter storms. Entergy Arkansas’s preliminary estimate for the cost of mobilizing crews and restoring power is approximately $10 million. Natural gas purchases for Entergy Arkansas for February 1st through 25th, 2021 are approximately $105 million compared to natural gas purchases for February 2020 of $10 million.

Results of Operations

2020 Compared to 2019

Net Income

Net income decreased $17.7 million primarily due to lower volume/weather, a formula rate plan provision recorded in 2020 to reflect the 2019 historical year netting adjustment, and higher depreciation and amortization expenses, partially offset by higher retail electric price and lower other operation and maintenance expenses. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the 2019 historical year netting adjustment.

Operating Revenues

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenues comparing 2020 to 2019:
Amount
(In Millions)
2019 operating revenues$2,259.6 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income(278.5)
Volume/weather(72.2)
Retail electric price57.4 
Return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers118.2 
2020 operating revenues$2,084.5

Entergy Arkansas’s results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to a decrease of 1,069 GWh, or 5%, in billed electricity usage, including decreased commercial and industrial usage as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the effect of less favorable weather on residential and commercial sales, partially offset by an increase in residential usage as a
311

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

result of the COVID-19 pandemic. See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The retail electric price variance is primarily due to the $56.5 million annual formula rate plan increase related to the 2020 projected test year included in the 2019 formula rate plan filing effective with the first billing cycle of January 2020. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the formula rate plan filing.

The return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers resulted from the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes through a tax adjustment rider beginning in April 2018. In 2020, $8.1 million was returned to customers as compared to $126.3 million in 2019. There is no effect on net income as the reduction in operating revenues in each period was offset by a reduction in income tax expense. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Other Income Statement Variances

Nuclear refueling outage expenses decreased primarily due to the amortization of lower costs associated with the most recent outages as compared to previous outages.

Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to:

a decrease of $18.3 million in nuclear generation expenses primarily due to lower nuclear labor costs, including contract labor, in part as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic;
a decrease of $13.2 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to lower long-term service agreement expenses;
an $11.2 million write-off in 2019 of specific costs related to the potential construction of scrubbers at the White Bluff plant. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the write-off;
higher nuclear insurance refunds of $7.8 million;
a decrease of $5.9 million primarily due to contract costs in 2019 related to initiatives to explore new customer products and services; and
a decrease of $5.8 million in energy efficiency costs.

The decrease was partially offset by the effects of recording in 2019 a final judgment to resolve claims in the ANO damages case against the DOE related to spent nuclear fuel storage costs. The damages awarded include the reimbursement of approximately $11.9 million of spent nuclear fuel storage costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expense. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to additions to plant in service.

Other income increased primarily due to changes in decommissioning trust fund investment activity.

Other regulatory credits - net for 2020 includes a provision of $43.5 million to reflect the 2019 historical year netting adjustment included in the APSC’s December 2020 order in the 2020 formula rate plan proceeding. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the 2020 formula rate plan proceeding.

The effective income tax rates were 16.3% for 2020 and (21.6%) for 2019. The difference in the effective income tax rate versus the federal statutory rate of 21% for 2019 was primarily due to the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of the effects and regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory rate of 21% to the effective income tax rates.

312

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

2019 Compared to 2018

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy Arkansas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020, for discussion of results of operations for 2019 compared to 2018.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 were as follows:
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$3,519 $119 $6,216 
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities659,818 677,766 211,825 
Investing activities(795,709)(676,293)(688,727)
Financing activities324,500 1,927 470,805 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents188,609 3,400 (6,097)
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$192,128 $3,519 $119 

2020 Compared to 2019

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities decreased $17.9 million in 2020 primarily due to:

the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs;
lower collections of receivables from customers, in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic; and
the timing of payments to vendors.

The decrease was partially offset by:

a decrease in the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers in 2020 as compared to 2019. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act;
$25 million in proceeds received from the DOE in 2020 resulting from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously expensed. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation; and
a decrease of $15.8 million in pension contributions in 2020. See “Critical Accounting Estimates” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.


313

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities increased $119.4 million in 2020 primarily due to:

an increase of $79.5 million in storm spending;
an increase of $47.3 million in non-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to increased spending on various projects in 2020;
an increase of $39.4 million in nuclear construction expenditures primarily as a result of work performed in 2020 on various ANO 2 outage projects;
an increase of $38.5 million as a result of fluctuations in nuclear fuel activity because of variations from year to year in the timing and pricing of fuel reload requirements in the Utility business, material and service deliveries, and the timing of cash payments during the nuclear fuel cycle; and
an increase of $30.3 million in distribution construction expenditures primarily due to investment in the reliability and infrastructure of Entergy Arkansas’s distribution system, including increased spending on advanced metering infrastructure.

The increase was partially offset by:

a decrease of $56 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to a lower scope of work performed in 2020 as compared to 2019; and
$55 million in proceeds received from the DOE in 2020 resulting from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously capitalized. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided by financing activities increased $322.6 million in 2020 primarily due to:

issuances of $100 million of 4.0% Series mortgage bonds in March 2020 and $675 million of 2.65% Series mortgage bonds in September 2020;
money pool activity;
a decrease of $41.6 million in net long-term repayments in 2020 on the Entergy Arkansas nuclear fuel company variable interest entity credit facility; and
a decrease of $20 million in common equity distributions in 2020 in order to maintain Entergy Arkansas’s capital structure.

The increase was partially offset by:

the issuance of $350 million of 4.20% Series mortgage bonds in March 2019;
the repayment in October 2020 of $200 million of 4.90% Series mortgage bonds due December 2052; and
the repayment in October 2020 of $125 million of 4.75% Series mortgage bonds due June 2063.

Decreases in Entergy Arkansas’s payable to the money pool are a use of cash flow, and Entergy Arkansas’s payable to the money pool decreased by $21.6 million in 2020 compared to decreasing by $161.1 million in 2019. The money pool is an inter-company borrowing arrangement designed to reduce the Utility subsidiaries’ need for external short-term borrowings.

See Note 5 to the financial statements for further details of long-term debt.


314

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

2019 Compared to 2018

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of Entergy Arkansas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2019 compared to 2018.

Capital Structure

Entergy Arkansas’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The increase in the debt to capital ratio is primarily due to the net issuances of long-term debt in 2020.
 December 31,
2020
December 31,
2019
Debt to capital54.8 %53.0 %
Effect of excluding the securitization bonds— %— %
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)54.8 %53.0 %
Effect of subtracting cash(1.2 %)— %
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)53.6 %53.0 %

(a)Calculation excludes the securitization bonds, which are non-recourse to Entergy Arkansas.

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents. Debt consists of short-term borrowings, finance lease obligations, and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion. Capital consists of debt and equity. Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents. Entergy Arkansas uses the debt to capital ratios excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes they provide useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Arkansas’s financial condition because the securitization bonds, which have been repaid as of December 31, 2020, were non-recourse to Entergy Arkansas, as more fully described in Note 5 to the financial statements. Entergy Arkansas also uses the net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Arkansas’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy Arkansas’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

Entergy Arkansas seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings.  To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a distribution, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure.  To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, Entergy Arkansas may issue incremental debt or reduce distributions, or both, to maintain its capital structure.  In addition, in certain infrequent circumstances, such as financing of large transactions that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reducing distributions, Entergy Arkansas may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure.

Uses of Capital

Entergy Arkansas requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
debt maturities or retirements;
working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel and purchased power costs; and
distribution and interest payments.

315

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Following are the amounts of Entergy Arkansas’s planned construction and other capital investments.
 202120222023
 (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:  
Generation$340 $355 $430 
Transmission40 45 190 
Distribution95 255 420 
Utility Support105 80 75 
Total$580 $735 $1,115 

Following are the amounts of Entergy Arkansas’s existing debt and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments) and other purchase obligations.
 20212022-20232024-2025After 2025Total
 (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)$611 $543 $581 $4,713 $6,448 
Operating leases (b)$14 $21 $15 $11 $61 
Finance leases (b)$3 $5 $3 $2 $13 
Purchase obligations (c)$452 $618 $509 $3,882 $5,461 

(a)Includes estimated interest payments.  Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.
(c)Purchase obligations represent the minimum purchase obligation or cancellation charge for contractual obligations to purchase goods or services.  For Entergy Arkansas, almost all of the total consists of unconditional fuel and purchased power obligations, including its obligations under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which are discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

In addition to the contractual obligations given above, Entergy Arkansas currently expects to contribute approximately $66.6 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $517 thousand to its other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2021, although the 2021 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 2021 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.  See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Also in addition to the contractual obligations, Entergy Arkansas has $252 million of unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions.  See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

In addition to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Arkansas includes specific investments in renewables such as the Searcy Solar Facility, Walnut Bend Solar Facility, and West Memphis Solar Facility; transmission projects to enhance reliability, reduce congestion, and enable economic growth; distribution spending to enhance reliability and improve service to customers, including advanced meters and related investments; resource planning, including potential generation and renewables projects; system improvements; investments in ANO 1 and 2; software and security; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital. Management provides more information on long-term debt maturities in Note 5 to the financial statements.

316

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, Entergy Arkansas pays distributions from its earnings at a percentage determined monthly.

Renewables

Searcy Solar Facility

In March 2019, Entergy Arkansas announced that it signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW solar energy facility that will be sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas.  The purchase is contingent upon, among other things, obtaining necessary approvals from applicable federal and state regulatory and permitting agencies.  The project is being constructed by a subsidiary of NextEra Energy Resources.  Entergy Arkansas will purchase the facility upon mechanical completion and after the other purchase contingencies have been met.  Closing is expected to occur by the end of 2021. In May 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the transaction is in the public interest and requesting all necessary approvals. In September 2019 other parties filed testimony largely supporting the resource acquisition but disputing Entergy Arkansas’s proposed method of cost recovery. Entergy Arkansas filed its rebuttal testimony in October 2019. In February 2020, Entergy Arkansas, the Attorney General, and the APSC general staff filed a partial settlement agreement asking the APSC to approve, based on the record in the proceeding, all issues except certain issues that are submitted to the APSC for determination. In April 2020 the APSC issued an order approving Entergy Arkansas’s acquisition of the Searcy Solar facility as being in the public interest, but declined to approve Entergy Arkansas’s preferred cost recovery rider mechanism, finding instead, based on the particular facts and circumstances presented, that the formula rate plan rider was a sufficient recovery mechanism for this resource.

Walnut Bend Solar Facility

In October 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 100 MW Walnut Bend Solar Facility is in the public interest. Entergy Arkansas requested a decision by the APSC by June 15, 2021 and primarily requests cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled in April 2021. Closing is expected to occur in 2022.

West Memphis Solar Facility

In January 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 180 MW West Memphis Solar Facility is in the public interest. Entergy Arkansas requested a decision by the APSC by September 7, 2021 and primarily requests cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. Closing is expected to occur in 2023.

Sources of Capital

Entergy Arkansas’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand;
debt or preferred membership interest issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
capital contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Entergy Arkansas may refinance, redeem, or otherwise retire debt prior to maturity, to the extent market conditions and interest rates are favorable.

317

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

All debt and common and preferred membership interest issuances by Entergy Arkansas require prior regulatory approval.  Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in Entergy Arkansas’s bond indentures and other agreements.  Entergy Arkansas has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs.

Entergy Arkansas’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2020201920182017
(In Thousands)
$3,110($21,634)($182,738)($166,137)

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

Entergy Arkansas has a credit facility in the amount of $150 million scheduled to expire in September 2024. Entergy Arkansas also has a $25 million credit facility scheduled to expire in April 2021.  The $150 million credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $5 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility. As of December 31, 2020, there were no cash borrowings and no letters of credit outstanding under the credit facilities. In addition, Entergy Arkansas is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO. As of December 31, 2020, a $1 million letter of credit was outstanding under Entergy Arkansas’s uncommitted letter of credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of the credit facilities.

The Entergy Arkansas nuclear fuel company variable interest entity has a credit facility in the amount of $80 million scheduled to expire in September 2022.  As of December 31, 2020, $12.2 million in loans were outstanding under the credit facility for the Entergy Arkansas nuclear fuel company variable interest entity. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of the nuclear fuel company variable interest entity credit facility.

Entergy Arkansas obtained authorization from the FERC through July 2022 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $250 million at any time outstanding and borrowings by its nuclear fuel company variable interest entity. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy Arkansas’s short-term borrowing limits. The long-term securities issuances of Entergy Arkansas are limited to amounts authorized by the FERC. The APSC has concurrent jurisdiction over Entergy Arkansas’s first mortgage bond/secured issuances. Entergy Arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the FERC that extends through July 2022. Entergy Arkansas has obtained first mortgage bond/secured financing authorization from the APSC that extends through December 2022.

State and Local Rate Regulation and Fuel-Cost Recovery

Retail Rates

2018 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2018, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2018 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2019 calendar year. The filing showed Entergy Arkansas’s projected earned return on common equity for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019 test period to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. Additionally, the filing included the first netting adjustment under the current formula rate plan for the historical test year 2017, reflecting the change in formula rate plan revenues associated with actual 2017 results when compared to the allowed rate of return on equity. The filing included a projected $73.4 millionrevenue deficiency for 2019 and a $95.6 million revenue deficiency for the 2017 historical test year, for a total revenue requirement of $169 million for this filing. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is
318

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to four percent of total revenue, which originally was $65.4 million but was increased to $66.7 million based upon the APSC staff’s updated calculation of 2018 revenue. In October 2018, Entergy Arkansas and the parties to the proceeding filed joint motions to approve a partial settlement agreement as to certain factual issues and agreed to brief contested legal issues. In November 2018 the APSC held a hearing and was briefed on a contested legal issue. In December 2018 the APSC issued a decision related to the initial legal brief, approved the partial settlement agreement and $66.7 million revenue requirement increase, as well as Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan, with updated rates going into effect for the first billing cycle of January 2019.

2019 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2019 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2020 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2020 and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2018.  The total proposed formula rate plan rider revenue change designed to produce a target rate of return on common equity of 9.75% is $15.3 million, which is based upon a deficiency of approximately $61.9 million for the 2020 projected year, netted with a credit of approximately $46.6 million in the 2018 historical year netting adjustment. During 2018 Entergy Arkansas experienced higher-than expected sales volume, and actual costs were lower than forecasted.  These changes, coupled with a reduced income tax rate resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, resulted in the credit for the historical year netting adjustment. In the fourth quarter 2018, Entergy Arkansas recorded a provision of $35.1 million that reflected the estimate of the historical year netting adjustment that was expected to be included in the 2019 filing. In 2019, Entergy Arkansas recorded additional provisions totaling $11.5 million to reflect the updated estimate of the historical year netting adjustment included in the 2019 filing.  In October 2019 other parties in the proceeding filed their errors and objections requesting certain adjustments to Entergy Arkansas’s filing that would reduce or eliminate Entergy Arkansas’s proposed revenue change. Entergy Arkansas filed its response addressing the requested adjustments in October 2019. In its response, Entergy Arkansas accepted certain of the adjustments recommended by the General Staff of the APSC that would reduce the proposed formula rate plan rider revenue change to $14 million. Entergy Arkansas disputed the remaining adjustments proposed by the parties. In October 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed a unanimous settlement agreement with the other parties in the proceeding seeking APSC approval of a revised total formula rate plan rider revenue change of $10.1 million. In its July 2019 formula rate plan filing, Entergy Arkansas proposed to recover an $11.2 million regulatory asset, amortized over five years, associated with specific costs related to the potential construction of scrubbers at the White Bluff plant. Although Entergy Arkansas does not concede that the regulatory asset lacks merit, for purposes of reaching a settlement on the total formula rate plan rider amount, Entergy Arkansas agreed not to include the White Bluff scrubber regulatory asset cost in the 2019 formula rate plan filing or future filings. Entergy Arkansas recorded a write-off in 2019 of the $11.2 million White Bluff scrubber regulatory asset. In December 2019 the APSC approved the settlement as being in the public interest and approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the first billing cycle of January 2020.

2020 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2020 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2021 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2021, as amended through subsequent filings in the proceeding, and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2019. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2021 projected year is 8.22% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $64.3 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2019 historical year was 9.07% resulting in a $23.9 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2021 projected year and 2019 historical year netting adjustment was $88.2 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $74.3 million. In October 2020 other parties in the proceeding filed their errors
319

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

and objections recommending certain adjustments, and Entergy Arkansas filed responsive testimony disputing these adjustments. As part of the formula rate plan tariff the calculation for the revenue constraint was updated based on actual revenues which had the effect of reducing the initially-proposed $74.3 million revenue requirement increase to $72.6 million. In October 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a unanimous settlement agreement reached with the other parties that resolved all but one issue. As a result of the settlement agreement, Entergy Arkansas’s requested revenue increase was $68.4 million, including a $44.5 million increase for the projected 2021 year and a $23.9 million netting adjustment. The remaining issue litigated concerned the methodology used to calculate the netting adjustment within the formula rate plan. In December 2020 the APSC issued an order rejecting the netting adjustment method used by Entergy Arkansas. Applying the approach ordered by the APSC changed the netting adjustment for the 2019 historical year from a $23.9 million deficiency to $43.5 million excess. Overall, the decision reduced Entergy Arkansas’s revenue adjustment for 2021 to $1 million. In December 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition for rehearing of the APSC’s decision, and in January 2021 the APSC granted further consideration of Entergy Arkansas’s petition. Based on the progress of the proceeding to date, in December 2020, Entergy Arkansas recorded a regulatory liability of $43.5 million to reflect the netting adjustment for 2019, as included in the APSC’s December 2020 order, which would be returned to customers in 2021. Also with the formula rate plan filing, Entergy Arkansas is requesting an extension of the formula rate plan rider for a second five-year term. Decisions by the APSC on the netting adjustment rehearing and the extension are expected in March 2021.

Internal Restructuring

In November 2017, Entergy Arkansas filed an application with the APSC seeking authorization to undertake a restructuring that would result in the transfer ofholds substantially all of the assets, and operationshas assumed the liabilities, of Old Entergy Louisiana and Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana.

Entergy Arkansas to a new entity, which would ultimately be owned by an existing Entergy subsidiary holding company. In July 2018, Entergy Arkansas filed a settlement, reached by all parties in the APSC proceeding, resolving all issues. The APSC approved the settlement agreement and restructuring in August 2018. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, Entergy Arkansas will credit retail customers $39.6 million over six years, beginning in 2019. Entergy Arkansas also received the required FERC and NRC approvals.Internal Restructuring

In November 2018, Entergy Arkansas undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Arkansas, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $32.7 million.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. converted from an Arkansas corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Arkansas, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Arkansas Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Arkansas Power), and Entergy Arkansas Power assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Arkansas, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Arkansas, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Arkansas Power is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Arkansas, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Property, Inc., and Entergy Arkansas Power then changed its name to Entergy Arkansas, LLC. Entergy Arkansas, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Arkansas, Inc. The transaction was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

Entergy Mississippi Internal Restructuring

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Mississippi, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock, at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $21.2 million.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. converted from a Mississippi corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Mississippi, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Mississippi Power and Light), and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Mississippi, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Mississippi, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Enterprises, Inc., and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light then changed its name to Entergy Mississippi, LLC. Entergy Mississippi, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Mississippi, Inc. The restructuring was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

Other Business Activities

Entergy’s non-utility operations business includes the ownership of interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers. Entergy’s non-utility operations
320
268

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Arkansas, LLCCorporation, Utility operating companies, and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and AnalysisSystem Energy

business also provides decommissioning-related services to nuclear power plants owned by non-affiliated entities in the United States.

Property

Entergy’s non-utility operations business owns interests in the following non-nuclear power plants:
PlantLocationOwnershipNet Owned Capacity (a)Type
Independence Unit 2; 842 MWNewark, AR14%121 MW(b)Coal
Nelson Unit 6; 550 MWWestlake, LA11%60 MW(b)Coal

(a)“Net Owned Capacity” refers to the nameplate rating on the generating unit.
(b)The owned MW capacity is the portion of the plant capacity owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations business.  For a complete listing of Entergy’s jointly-owned generating stations, refer to “Jointly-Owned Generating Stations” in Note 1 to the financial statements.

All generation owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations business falls under the authority of MISO. Customers for the sale of both energy and capacity from its owned generation and contracted power purchases include retail power providers, utilities, electric power co-operatives, power trading organizations, and other power generation companies. The majority of the non-utility operations businesses’ owned generation and contracted power purchases are sold under a cost-based contract.

TLG Services, a subsidiary in Entergy’s non-utility operations business, offers decommissioning, engineering, and related services to nuclear power plant owners.

Regulation of Entergy’s Business

Federal Power Act

The Federal Power Act provides the FERC the authority to regulate:

the transmission and wholesale sale of electric energy in interstate commerce;
the reliability of the high voltage interstate transmission system through reliability standards;
sale or acquisition of certain assets;
securities issuances;
the licensing of certain hydroelectric projects;
certain other activities, including accounting policies and practices of electric and gas utilities; and
changes in control of FERC jurisdictional entities or rate schedules.

The Federal Power Act gives the FERC jurisdiction over the rates charged by System Energy for Grand Gulf capacity and energy provided to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans and over the rates charged by Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana to unaffiliated wholesale customers. The FERC also regulates wholesale power sales between the Utility operating companies. In addition, the FERC regulates the MISO RTO, an independent entity that maintains functional control over the combined transmission systems of its members and administers wholesale energy, capacity, and ancillary services markets for market participants in the MISO region, including the Utility operating companies. FERC regulation of the MISO RTO includes regulation of the design and implementation of the wholesale markets administered by the MISO RTO, as well as the rates, terms, and conditions of open access transmission service over the member systems and the allocation of costs associated with transmission upgrades.

269

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Arkansas holds a FERC license that expires in 2053 for two hydroelectric projects totaling 65 MW of capacity.

State Regulation

Utility

Entergy Arkansas is subject to regulation by the APSC as to the following:

utility service;
utility service areas;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the energy cost recovery rider;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
the acquisition, sale, or lease of any public utility plant or property constituting an operating unit or system;
certificates of convenience and necessity and certificates of environmental compatibility and public need, as applicable, for generating and transmission facilities;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
net energy metering;
integrated resource planning;
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control; and
the issuance and sale of certain securities.

Additionally, Entergy Arkansas serves a limited number of retail customers in Tennessee. Pursuant to legislation enacted in Tennessee, Entergy Arkansas is subject to complaints before the Tennessee Regulatory Authority only if it fails to treat its retail customers in Tennessee in the same manner as its retail customers in Arkansas. Additionally, Entergy Arkansas maintains limited facilities in Missouri but does not provide retail electric service to customers in Missouri. Although Entergy Arkansas obtained a certificate with respect to its Missouri facilities, Entergy Arkansas is not subject to retail ratemaking jurisdiction in Missouri.

Entergy Louisiana’s electric and gas business is subject to regulation by the LPSC as to the following:

utility service;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the fuel adjustment clause, environmental adjustment charge, and purchased gas adjustment charge;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
certification of certain transmission projects;
certification of capacity acquisitions, both for owned capacity and for purchase power contracts that exceed either 5 MW or one year in term;
procurement process to acquire capacity at or above 50 MW;
audits of the energy efficiency rider;
avoided cost payment to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control.

270

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Mississippi is subject to regulation by the MPSC as to the following:

utility service;
utility service areas;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the energy cost recovery mechanism;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
certification of generating facilities, certain transmission projects, and certain distribution projects with construction costs greater than $10 million;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers, acquisitions, and other changes of control.

Entergy Mississippi is also subject to regulation by the APSC as to the certificate of environmental compatibility and public need for the Independence Station, which is located in Arkansas.

Entergy New Orleans is subject to regulation by the City Council as to the following:

utility service;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the fuel adjustment charge and purchased gas adjustment charge;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
audit of the environmental adjustment charge;
certification of the construction or extension of any new plant, equipment, property, or facility that comprises more than 2% of the utility’s rate base;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
issuance and sale of certain securities; and
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control.

To the extent authorized by governing legislation, Entergy Texas is subject to the original jurisdiction of the municipal authorities of a number of incorporated cities in Texas with appellate jurisdiction over such matters residing in the PUCT.  Entergy Texas is also subject to regulation by the PUCT as to the following:

retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates, and terms and conditions of service in unincorporated areas of its service territory, and in municipalities that have ceded jurisdiction to the PUCT;
fuel recovery, including reconciliations (audits) of the fuel adjustment charges;
service standards;
certification of certain transmission and generation projects;
utility service areas, including extensions into new areas;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers, sales/acquisitions/leases of plants over $10 million, sales of greater than 50% voting stock of utilities, and transfers of controlling interest in or operation of utilities.

271

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Regulation of the Nuclear Power Industry

Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and Energy Reorganization Act of 1974

Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the operation of nuclear plants is heavily regulated by the NRC, which has broad power to impose licensing and safety-related requirements.  The NRC has broad authority to impose civil penalties or shut down a unit, or both, depending upon its assessment of the severity of the situation, until compliance is achieved. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, as owners of all or portions of ANO, River Bend and Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, respectively, and Entergy Operations, as the licensee and operator of these units, are subject to the jurisdiction of the NRC.

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

Spent Nuclear Fuel

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the DOE is required, for a specified fee, to construct storage facilities for, and to dispose of, all spent nuclear fuel and other high-level radioactive waste generated by domestic nuclear power reactors. Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have been charged fees for the estimated future disposal costs of spent nuclear fuel in accordance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. The affected Entergy companies entered into contracts with the DOE, whereby the DOE is to furnish disposal services at a cost of one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983, plus a one-time fee for generation prior to that date. Entergy Arkansas is the only one of the Utility operating companies that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and has a recorded liability as of December 31, 2023 of $205.2 million for the one-time fee. The fees payable to the DOE may be adjusted in the future to assure full recovery.  Entergy considers all costs incurred for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, except accrued interest, to be proper components of nuclear fuel expense.  Provisions to recover such costs have been or will be made in applications to regulatory authorities for the Utility plants.  Entergy’s total spent fuel fees to date, including the one-time fee liability of Entergy Arkansas, have surpassed $1.7 billion (exclusive of amounts relating to Entergy plants that were paid or are owed by prior owners of those plants).

The permanent spent fuel repository in the U.S. has been legislated to be Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The DOE is required by law to proceed with the licensing of the Yucca Mountain repository (the DOE filed the license application in June 2008) and, after the license is granted by the NRC, proceed with the repository construction and commencement of receipt of spent fuel. Because the DOE has not begun accepting spent fuel, it is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and is in partial breach of its spent fuel disposal contracts. The DOE continues to delay meeting its obligation. Specific steps were taken to discontinue the Yucca Mountain project, including a motion to the NRC to withdraw the license application with prejudice and the establishment of a commission to develop recommendations for alternative spent fuel storage solutions. In August 2013 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered the NRC to continue with the Yucca Mountain license review, but only to the extent of funds previously appropriated by Congress for that purpose and not yet used. Although the NRC completed the safety evaluation report for the license review in 2015, the previously appropriated funds are not sufficient to complete the review, including required hearings. The government has taken no effective action to date related to the recommendations of the appointed spent fuel study commission. Accordingly, large uncertainty remains regarding the time frame under which the DOE will begin to accept spent fuel from Entergy’s facilities for storage or disposal. As a result, continuing future expenditures will be required to increase spent fuel storage capacity at Entergy’s nuclear sites.

Following the defunding of the Yucca Mountain spent fuel repository program, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and others sued the government seeking cessation of collection of the one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983 fee. In November 2013 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the DOE to submit a proposal to Congress to reset the fee to zero until the DOE complies with the Nuclear
272

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Waste Policy Act or Congress enacts an alternative waste disposal plan. In January 2014 the DOE submitted the proposal to Congress under protest, and also filed a petition for rehearing with the D.C. Circuit. The petition for rehearing was denied. The zero spent fuel fee went into effect prospectively in May 2014.

As a result of the DOE’s failure to begin disposal of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and the spent fuel disposal contracts, Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have incurred and will continue to incur damages. These subsidiaries have been, and continue to be, involved in litigation to recover the damages caused by the DOE’s delay in performance. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of final judgments recorded by Entergy in 2021, 2022, and 2023 related to Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries’ litigation with the DOE. Through 2023, Entergy’s subsidiaries have won and collected on judgments against the government totaling approximately $1 billion.

Pending DOE acceptance and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, the owners of nuclear plants are providing their own spent fuel storage.  Storage capability additions using dry casks began operations at ANO in 1996, at River Bend in 2005, at Grand Gulf in 2006, and at Waterford 3 in 2011.  These facilities will be expanded as needed.

Nuclear Plant Decommissioning

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy are entitled to recover from customers through electric rates the estimated decommissioning costs for ANO, Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, respectively.  In addition, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas are entitled to recover from customers through electric rates the estimated decommissioning costs for the portion of River Bend subject to retail rate regulation. The collections are deposited in trust funds that can only be used in accordance with NRC and other applicable regulatory requirements.  Entergy periodically reviews and updates the estimated decommissioning costs to reflect inflation and changes in regulatory requirements and technology, and then makes applications to the regulatory authorities to reflect, in rates, the changes in projected decommissioning costs.

In December 2018 the APSC ordered collections in rates for decommissioning ANO 2 and found that ANO 1’s decommissioning was adequately funded without additional collections. In November 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed a revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that both ANO 1 and 2 decommissioning trusts were adequately funded without further collections, and in December 2021 the APSC ordered zero collections for ANO 1 and 2 decommissioning. In November 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed a revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that ANO 1’s decommissioning trust was adequately funded, but that ANO 2’s fund had a projected shortage as a result of a decline in decommissioning trust fund investment values over the past year. The filing proposed a reinstatement of decommissioning cost recovery for ANO 2. In December 2022 the APSC ordered reinstatement of decommissioning collections for ANO 2 in accordance with the request in the November 2022 filing. In November 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a further revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that ANO 1’s decommissioning trust continued to be adequately funded, but that ANO 2’s fund continued to require collections higher than those in effect. In December 2023 the APSC approved the proposed higher decommissioning collections for ANO 2.

In July 2010 the LPSC approved increased decommissioning collections for Waterford 3 and the Louisiana regulated share of River Bend to address previously identified funding shortfalls. This LPSC decision contemplated that the level of decommissioning collections could be revisited should the NRC grant license extensions for both Waterford 3 and River Bend. In July 2019, following the NRC approval of license extensions for Waterford 3 and River Bend, Entergy Louisiana made a filing with the LPSC seeking to adjust decommissioning and depreciation rates for those plants, including one proposed scenario that would adjust Louisiana-jurisdictional decommissioning collections to zero for both plants (including an offsetting increase in depreciation rates). Because of the ongoing public health emergency arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying economic uncertainty, Entergy Louisiana determined that the relief sought in the filing was no longer appropriate, and in November 2020, filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the proceeding. Following that filing, in a December 2020 order, the LPSC dismissed the proceeding without prejudice. In July 2021, Entergy Louisiana made a filing with the LPSC to adjust Waterford
273

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

3 and River Bend decommissioning collections based on the latest site-specific decommissioning cost estimates for those plants. The filing seeks to increase Waterford 3 decommissioning collections and decrease River Bend decommissioning collections. The procedural schedule in the case has been suspended pending settlement negotiations. In August 2023, Entergy Louisiana made another filing with the LPSC requesting to maintain the same total decommissioning funding collections as currently in effect for both Waterford 3 and River Bend combined, but also requesting to reallocate that same amount of funding by increasing the contributions for Waterford 3 and reducing the contributions for River Bend. In October 2023 a procedural schedule was adopted that includes a hearing date in August 2024. Management cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings.

In December 2010 the PUCT approved increased decommissioning collections for the Texas share of River Bend to address previously identified funding shortfalls.  In December 2018 the PUCT approved a settlement that eliminated River Bend decommissioning collections for the Texas jurisdictional share of the plant based on a determination by Entergy Texas that the existing decommissioning fund was adequate following license renewal. In July 2022, Entergy Texas filed a base rate case that proposed continuation of the cessation of River Bend decommissioning collections. In May 2023, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties to the base rate case an unopposed settlement, which included an agreement to maintain Entergy Texas’s decommissioning funding for River Bend at a revenue requirement of $0. In August 2023 the PUCT issued an order accepting the unopposed settlement, including the proposed decommissioning funding settlement terms.

In December 2016 the NRC issued a 20-year operating license renewal for Grand Gulf. In a 2017 filing at the FERC, System Energy stated that with the renewed operating license, Grand Gulf’s decommissioning trust was sufficiently funded, and proposed, among other things, to cease decommissioning collections for Grand Gulf effective October 1, 2017. The FERC accepted a settlement including the proposed decommissioning revenue requirement by letter order in August 2018.

Entergy currently believes its decommissioning funding will be sufficient for its nuclear plants subject to retail rate regulation, although decommissioning cost inflation and trust fund performance will ultimately determine the adequacy of the funding amounts.

Plant owners are required to provide the NRC with a biennial report (annually for units that have shut down or will shut down within five years), based on values as of December 31, addressing the owners’ ability to meet the NRC minimum funding levels. Depending on the value of the trust funds, plant owners may be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or making additional contributions to the trusts, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and that NRC minimum funding requirements are met. In March 2023 filings with the NRC were made reporting on decommissioning funding for all of Entergy’s subsidiaries’ nuclear plants. Those reports showed that decommissioning funding for each of the nuclear plants met the NRC’s financial assurance requirements.

Additional information with respect to Entergy’s decommissioning costs and decommissioning trust funds is found in Note 9 and Note 16 to the financial statements.

Price-Anderson Act

The Price-Anderson Act requires that reactor licensees purchase and maintain the maximum amount of nuclear liability insurance available and participate in an industry assessment program called Secondary Financial Protection in order to protect the public in the event of a nuclear power plant accident.  The costs of this insurance are borne by the nuclear power industry.  Congress amended and renewed the Price-Anderson Act in 2005 for a term through 2025.  The Price-Anderson Act limits the contingent liability for a single nuclear incident to a maximum assessment of approximately $165.9 million per reactor (with 95 nuclear industry reactors currently participating).  In the case of a nuclear event in which Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, or System Energy is liable, protection is afforded through a combination of private insurance and the Secondary Financial Protection program. In addition to this, insurance for property damage, costs of replacement power, and other risks relating to
274

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

nuclear generating units is also purchased.  The Price-Anderson Act and insurance applicable to the nuclear programs of Entergy are discussed in more detail in Note 8 to the financial statements.

NRC Reactor Oversight Process

The NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process is a program to collect information about plant performance, assess the information for its safety significance, and provide for appropriate licensee and NRC response. The NRC evaluates plant performance by analyzing two distinct inputs: inspection findings resulting from the NRC’s inspection program and performance indicators reported by the licensee. The evaluations result in the placement of each plant in one of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix columns: “licensee response column,” or Column 1, “regulatory response column,” or Column 2, “degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 3, “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 4, and “unacceptable performance,” or Column 5. Plants in Column 1 are subject to normal NRC inspection activities. Plants in Column 2, Column 3, or Column 4 are subject to progressively increasing levels of inspection by the NRC with, in general, progressively increasing levels of associated costs. Continued plant operation is not permitted for plants in Column 5. All of the nuclear generating plants owned and operated by Entergy’s Utility business are currently in Column 1, except River Bend, which is in Column 2.

In July 2023 the NRC placed River Bend in Column 2, effective April 2023, based on failure to inspect wiring associated with the high pressure core spray system. In August 2023 the NRC issued a finding and notice of violation related to a radiation monitor calibration issue at River Bend. In December 2023, River Bend successfully completed the inspection on the high pressure core spray system issue and in February 2024, River Bend successfully completed the supplemental inspection for the radiation monitor calibration issue involving radiation monitor calibrations. River Bend will remain in Column 2 pending receipt of the formal report on the inspection, which is expected in first quarter 2024.

Environmental Regulation

Entergy’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.  Management believes that Entergy’s businesses are in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted below.  Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance requirements and costs cannot be precisely estimated.  Except to the extent discussed below, at this time compliance with federal, state, and local provisions regulating the discharge of materials into the environment, or otherwise protecting the environment, is incorporated into the routine cost structure of Entergy’s businesses and is not expected to have a material effect on their competitive position, results of operations, cash flows, or financial position.

Clean Air Act and Subsequent Amendments

The Clean Air Act and its amendments establish several programs that currently or in the future may affect Entergy’s fossil-fueled generation facilities and, to a lesser extent, certain operations at nuclear and other facilities.  Individual states also operate similar independent state programs or delegated federal programs that may include requirements more stringent than federal regulatory requirements.  These programs include:

new source review and preconstruction permits for new sources of criteria air pollutants, greenhouse gases, and significant modifications to existing facilities;
acid rain program for control of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx);
nonattainment area programs for control of criteria air pollutants, which could include fee assessments for air pollutant emission sources under Section 185 of the Clean Air Act if attainment is not reached in a timely manner;
hazardous air pollutant emissions reduction programs;
275

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Interstate Air Transport;
operating permit programs and enforcement of these and other Clean Air Act programs;
Regional Haze programs; and
new and existing source standards for greenhouse gas and other air emissions.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide and requires periodic review of those standards. When an area fails to meet an ambient standard, it is considered to be in nonattainment and is classified as “marginal,” “moderate,” “serious,” or “severe.” When an area fails to meet the ambient air standard, the EPA requires state regulatory authorities to prepare state implementation plans meant to cause progress toward bringing the area into attainment with applicable standards.

Ozone Nonattainment

Entergy Texas operates two fossil-fueled generating facilities (Lewis Creek and Montgomery County Power Station) in a geographic area that is not in attainment with the applicable NAAQS for ozone.  The ozone nonattainment area that affects Entergy Texas is the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria area.  Both Lewis Creek and the Montgomery County Power Station hold all necessary permits for operation and comply with applicable air quality program regulations. Measures enacted to return the area to ozone attainment could make these program regulations more stringent. Entergy will continue to work with state environmental agencies on appropriate methods for assessing attainment and nonattainment with the ozone NAAQS.

Potential SO2Nonattainment

The EPA issued a final rule in June 2010 adopting an SO2 1-hour national ambient air quality standard of 75 parts per billion.  In Entergy’s utility service territory, only St. Bernard Parish and Evangeline Parish in Louisiana are designated as nonattainment. In August 2017 the EPA issued a letter indicating that East Baton Rouge and St. Charles parishes would be designated by December 31, 2020, as monitors were installed to determine compliance. In March 2021 the EPA published a final rule designating East Baton Rouge, St. Charles, St. James, and West Baton Rouge parishes in Louisiana as attainment/unclassifiable and, in Texas, Jefferson County as attainment/unclassifiable and Orange County as unclassifiable. No challenges to these final designations were filed within the 60 day deadline. Entergy continues to monitor this situation.

Hazardous Air Pollutants

The EPA released the final Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS) rule in December 2011, which had a compliance date, with a widely granted one-year extension, of April 2016. The required controls have been installed and are operational at all affected Entergy units. In May 2020 the EPA finalized a rule that finds that it is not “appropriate and necessary” to regulate hazardous air pollutants from electric steam generating units under the provisions of section 112(n) of the Clean Air Act. This is a reversal of the EPA’s previous finding requiring such regulation. The final appropriate and necessary finding does not revise the underlying MATS rule. Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the appropriate and necessary finding. In February 2021 the D.C. Circuit granted the EPA’s motion to hold the litigation in abeyance pending the agency’s review of the appropriate and necessary rule. In February 2022 the EPA issued a proposed rule revoking the 2020 rule and determining, again, that it is “appropriate and necessary” to regulate hazardous air pollutants. In April 2023 the EPA issued a regulatory proposal to revise portions of the MATS rule, including a proposed reduction to the emission limit for filterable particulate matter. If finalized, the proposed lower filterable particulate matter emission limitation could require additional capital investment and/or additional other operation and maintenance costs at Entergy’s coal-fired generating units. Entergy is closely monitoring this rulemaking, in part through its various trade associations.

276

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Good Neighbor Plan/Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

In March 2005 the EPA finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which was intended to reduce SO2 and NOx emissions from electric generation plants in order to improve air quality in twenty-nine eastern states. The rule required a combination of capital investment to install pollution control equipment and increased operating costs through the purchase of emission allowances. Entergy began implementation in 2007, including installation of controls at several facilities and the development of an emission allowance procurement strategy. Based on several court challenges, CAIR and its subsequent versions, now known as the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), have been remanded to and modified by the EPA on multiple occasions.

In June 2023 the EPA published its final Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), known as the Good Neighbor Plan, to address interstate transport for the 2015 ozone NAAQS which would increase the stringency of the CSAPR program in all four of the states where the Utility operating companies operate. The FIP would significantly reduce ozone season NOx emission allowance budgets and allocations for electric generating units. Entergy is currently assessing its compliance options for the FIP. Prior to issuance of the FIP, in February 2023 the EPA issued related State Implementation Plan (SIP) disapprovals for many states, including the four states in which the Utility operating companies operate, and these SIP disapprovals are the subject of many legal challenges, including a petition for review filed by Entergy Louisiana challenging the disapproval of Louisiana’s SIP. Stays of the SIP disapprovals have been granted in all four states in which the Utility operating companies operate, and the Good Neighbor Plan will not go into effect while the stays are in place. Decisions on the merits regarding the respective SIP disapprovals are expected in 2024. The final FIP also is subject to numerous legal challenges.

Regional Haze

In June 2005 the EPA issued its final Clean Air Visibility Rule (CAVR) regulations that potentially could result in a requirement to install SO2 and NOx pollution control technology as Best Available Retrofit Control Technology to continue operating certain of Entergy’s fossil generation units.  The rule leaves certain CAVR determinations to the states. This rule establishes a series of 10-year planning periods, with states required to develop SIPs for each planning period, with each SIP including such air pollution control measures as may be necessary to achieve the ultimate goal of the CAVR by the year 2064. The various states are currently in the process of developing SIPs to implement the second planning period of the CAVR, which addresses the 2018-2028 planning period.

The second planning period (2018-2028) for the regional haze program requires states to examine sources for impacts on visibility and to prepare SIPs by July 31, 2021 to ensure reasonable progress is being made to attain visibility improvements. Entergy received information collection requests from the Arkansas and Louisiana Departments of Environmental Quality requesting an evaluation of technical and economic feasibility of various NOx and SO2 control technologies for Independence, Nelson 6, NISCO, and Ninemile. Responses to the information collection requests were submitted to the respective state agencies. Louisiana issued its draft SIP which did not propose any additional air emissions controls for the affected Entergy units in Louisiana. Some public commenters, however, believe additional air controls are cost-effective. It is not yet clear how the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) will respond in its final SIP, and the agency, like many other state agencies, did not meet the July 31, 2021 deadline to submit a SIP to the EPA for review.

Similar to the LDEQ, the Arkansas Department of Energy and Environment, Division of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) did not meet the July 31, 2021 SIP submission deadline, but subsequently submitted it to the EPA for review. The ADEQ reviewed Entergy’s Independence plant but determined that additional air emission controls would not be cost-effective considering the facility’s commitment to cease coal-fired combustion by December 31, 2030.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has completed its second-planning period SIP and submitted it to the EPA for review. There were no Entergy sources selected for additional emission controls. The
277

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality also did not meet the July 31, 2021 SIP submission deadline and continues to develop its SIP, but there are no Entergy sources that are expected to be impacted.

In August 2022 the EPA issued findings of failure to submit regional haze SIPs to 15 states, including Louisiana and Mississippi. These findings were effective September 2022 and start the two-year period for the EPA to either approve a SIP submitted by the state or issue a final federal plan.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In April 2021, President Biden announced a target for the United States in connection with the United Nations’ “Paris Agreement” on climate change. The target consists of a 50-52 percent reduction in economy-wide net greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. President Biden has also stated that a goal of his administration is for the electric power industry to decarbonize fully by 2035.

Consistent with the Biden administration’s stated climate goals, in May 2023 the EPA proposed several rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing coal and gas-fired power plants. If finalized, the proposed requirements for existing “large and frequently used” gas turbine generating units could require significant investments in CO2 emission reduction technologies at certain of Entergy’s existing gas turbine units with a capacity of greater than 300 MW per combustion turbine and which operate at an annual capacity factor of greater than 50 percent. Comments on the proposed rules were submitted in August 2023 and Entergy is monitoring the rulemaking, in part through its trade associations.

Entergy continues to support national legislation that would most efficiently reduce economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions and increase planning certainty for electric utilities.  By virtue of its proportionally large investment in low-emitting generation technologies, Entergy has a low overall carbon dioxide emission “intensity,” or rate of carbon dioxide emitted per megawatt-hour of electricity generated.  In anticipation of the imposition of carbon dioxide emission limits on the electric industry, Entergy initiated actions designed to reduce its exposure to potential new governmental requirements related to carbon dioxide emissions.  These voluntary actions included a formal program to stabilize owned power plant carbon dioxide emissions at 2000 levels through 2005, and Entergy succeeded in reducing emissions below 2000 levels. In 2006, Entergy started including emissions from controllable power purchases in addition to its ownership share of generation and established a second formal voluntary program to stabilize power plant carbon dioxide emissions and emissions from controllable power purchases, cumulatively over the period, at 20% below 2000 levels through 2010.  In 2011, Entergy extended this commitment through 2020, which it ultimately outperformed by approximately 8% both cumulatively and on an annual basis.  In 2019, in connection with a climate scenario analysis following the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures describing climate-related governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets, Entergy announced a 2030 carbon dioxide emission rate goal focused on a 50% reduction from Entergy’s base year - 2000. In September 2020, Entergy announced a commitment to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 inclusive of all businesses, all applicable gases, and all emission scopes. In 2022, Entergy enhanced its commitment to include an interim goal of 50% carbon-free energy generating capacity by 2030 and expanded its interim emission rate goal to include all purchased power. See “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A for discussion of the risks associated with achieving these climate goals. Entergy’s comprehensive, third party verified greenhouse gas inventory and progress against its voluntary goals are published on its website.

278

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Potential Legislative, Regulatory, and Judicial Developments

In addition to the specific instances described above, there are a number of legislative and regulatory initiatives that are under consideration at the federal, state, and local level.  Because of the nature of Entergy’s business, the imposition of any of these initiatives could affect Entergy’s operations.  Entergy continues to monitor these initiatives and activities in order to analyze their potential operational and cost implications.  These initiatives include:

reconsideration and revision of ambient air quality standards downward which could lead to additional areas of nonattainment;
designation by the EPA and state environmental agencies of areas that are not in attainment with national ambient air quality standards;
introduction of bills in Congress and development of regulations by the EPA proposing further limits on SO2, mercury, carbon dioxide, and other air emissions.  New legislation or regulations applicable to stationary sources could take the form of market-based cap-and-trade programs, direct requirements for the installation of air emission controls onto air emission sources, or other or combined regulatory programs;
efforts in Congress or at the EPA to establish a federal carbon dioxide emission tax, control structure, or unit performance standards;
revisions to the estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon and its use for regulatory impact analysis of federal laws and regulations;
implementation of the regional cap and trade programs to limit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases;
efforts on the local, state, and federal level to codify renewable portfolio standards, clean energy standards, or a similar mechanism requiring utilities to produce or purchase a certain percentage of their power from defined renewable energy sources or energy sources with lower emissions;
efforts to develop more stringent state water quality standards, effluent limitations for Entergy’s industry sector, stormwater runoff control regulations, and cooling water intake structure requirements;
efforts to restrict the previously-approved continued use of oil-filled equipment containing certain levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and increased regulation of per- and polyfluorinated substances or other chemicals;
efforts by certain external groups to encourage reporting and disclosure of environmental, social, and governance risk;
the listing of additional species as threatened or endangered, the protection of critical habitat for these species, and developments in the legal protection of eagles and migratory birds;
the regulation of the management, disposal, and beneficial reuse of coal combustion residuals; and
the regulation of the management and disposal and recycling of equipment associated with renewable and clean energy sources such as used solar panels, wind turbine blades, hydrogen usage, or battery storage.

Clean Water Act

The 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (known as the Clean Water Act) provide the statutory basis for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program, section 402, and the basic structure for regulating the discharge of pollutants from point sources to waters of the United States.  The Clean Water Act requires virtually all discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States to be permitted.  Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act regulates cooling water intake structures, section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires a water quality certification from the state in support of certain federal actions and approvals, and section 404 of the Clean Water Act regulates the dredge and fill of waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands.

Federal Jurisdiction of Waters of the United States

In June 2020 the EPA’s revised definition of waters of the United States in the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) became effective, narrowing the scope of Clean Water Act jurisdiction, as compared to a 2015
279

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

definition which had been stayed by several federal courts. In August 2021 a federal district court vacated and remanded the NWPR for further consideration. The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) subsequently issued a statement that the agencies would revert to pre-2015 regulations pending a new rulemaking. In December 2022 the EPA and the Corps released a final definition of waters of the United States (the 2022 Rule) that replaces the NWPR with a definition that is consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime as interpreted by several United States Supreme Court decisions. The 2022 Rule was subject to multiple legal challenges and was enjoined from implementation or enforcement throughout Entergy’s utility service territory. In May 2023 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision limiting the scope of federal jurisdiction over wetlands, and in September 2023 the EPA and the Corps issued a final rule incorporating the Supreme Court decision. Most notably, the exclusion for waste treatment systems is retained.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), authorizes the EPA to mandate clean-up by, or to collect reimbursement of clean-up costs from, owners or operators of sites at which hazardous substances may be or have been released.  Certain private parties also may use CERCLA to recover response costs.  Parties that transported hazardous substances to these sites or arranged for the disposal of the substances are also deemed liable by CERCLA.  CERCLA has been interpreted to impose strict, joint, and several liability on responsible parties.  Many states have adopted programs similar to CERCLA.  Entergy subsidiaries have sent waste materials to various disposal sites over the years, and releases have occurred at Entergy facilities including nuclear facilities that have been sold to decommissioning companies.  In addition, environmental laws now regulate certain of Entergy’s operating procedures and maintenance practices that historically were not subject to regulation.  Some disposal sites used by Entergy subsidiaries have been the subject of governmental action under CERCLA or similar state programs, resulting in site clean-up activities.  Entergy subsidiaries have participated to various degrees in accordance with their respective potential liabilities in such site clean-ups and have developed experience with clean-up costs.  The affected Entergy subsidiaries have established provisions for the liabilities for such environmental clean-up and restoration activities.  Details of potentially material CERCLA and similar state program liabilities are discussed in the “Other Environmental Matters” section below.

Coal Combustion Residuals

In April 2015 the EPA published the final coal combustion residuals (CCR) rule regulating CCRs destined for disposal in landfills or surface impoundments as non-hazardous wastes regulated under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle D. The final regulations created new compliance requirements including modified storage, new notification and reporting practices, product disposal considerations, and CCR unit closure criteria but excluded CCRs that are beneficially reused in certain processes.  Entergy believes that on-site disposal options will be available at its facilities, to the extent needed. As of December 31, 2023, Entergy has recorded asset retirement obligations related to CCR management of $28 million.

Pursuant to the EPA Rule, Entergy operates groundwater monitoring systems surrounding its coal combustion residual landfills located at White Bluff, Independence, and Nelson. Monitoring to date has detected concentrations of certain listed constituents in the area, but has not indicated that these constituents originated at the active landfill cells. Reporting has occurred as required, and detection monitoring will continue as the rule requires. In late-2017, Entergy determined that certain in-ground wastewater treatment system recycle ponds at its White Bluff and Independence facilities require management under the new EPA regulations. Consequently, in order to move away from using the recycle ponds, White Bluff and Independence each installed a new permanent bottom ash handling system that does not fall under the CCR rule. As of November 2020, both sites are operating the new system and no longer are sending waste to the recycle ponds. Each site commenced closure of its two recycle ponds (four ponds total) prior to the April 11, 2021 deadline under the finalized CCR rule for unlined recycle ponds. Any potential requirements for corrective action or operational changes under the new CCR rule continue to be assessed. Notably, ongoing litigation has resulted in the EPA’s continuing review of the rule. Consequently, the nature and cost of additional corrective action requirements may depend, in part, on the outcome of the EPA’s review.
280

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Additionally, all three sites are preparing to implement measures to meet the new and updated Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELG). The nature, cost, and timing of those compliance measures depends on the guidance included in the final ELG rule, which is expected by mid-2024.

In May 2023 the EPA released a proposed rule establishing management standards for legacy CCR surface impoundments (i.e., inactive surface impoundments at inactive power plants) and establishing a new class of units referred to as CCR management units (i.e., non-containerized CCR located at a regulated CCR facility). Entergy does not have any legacy impoundments; however, the proposed definition of CCR management units appears to regulate on-site areas where CCR was beneficially used. This is contrary to the current CCR rule which exempts beneficial uses that meet certain criteria. Comments on the proposed rule were submitted in July 2023 and Entergy is monitoring the rulemaking, in part through its trade associations.

Other Environmental Matters

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Texas

The EPA notified Entergy that the EPA believes Entergy is a PRP concerning PCB contamination at the F.J. Doyle Salvage facility in Leonard, Texas. The facility operated as a scrap salvage business during the 1970s to the 1990s. In May 2018 the EPA investigated the site surface and sub-surface soils, and in November 2018 the EPA conducted a removal action, including disposal of PCB contaminated soils. Entergy responded to the EPA’s information requests in May and July 2019. In November 2020 the EPA sent Entergy and other PRPs a demand letter seeking reimbursement for response costs totaling $4 million expended at the site. Liability and PRP allocation of response costs are yet to be determined. In December 2020, Entergy responded to the demand letter, without admitting liability or waiving any rights, indicating that it would engage in good faith negotiations with the EPA with respect to the demand. An initial meeting between the EPA and the PRPs took place in June 2021. Negotiations between the PRPs and the EPA are ongoing.

Litigation

Entergy and its subsidiaries use legal and appropriate means to contest litigation threatened or filed against them, but the states in which Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries operate have proven to be unusually litigious environments.  Judges and juries in these states have demonstrated a willingness to grant large verdicts, including punitive damages, to plaintiffs in personal injury, property damage, and business tort cases.  The litigation environment in these states poses a significant business risk to Entergy.

Asbestos Litigation(Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

See Note 8 to the financial statements for a discussion of this litigation.

Employment and Labor-related Proceedings (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

See Note 8 to the financial statements for a discussion of these proceedings.

281

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Human Capital

Employees

Employees are an integral part of Entergy’s commitment to serving customers.  As of December 31, 2023, Entergy subsidiaries employed 12,177 people.

Utility:
Entergy Arkansas1,302 
Entergy Louisiana1,639 
Entergy Mississippi747 
Entergy New Orleans302 
Entergy Texas704 
System Energy— 
Entergy Operations3,349 
Entergy Services4,117 
Entergy Nuclear Operations14 
Other subsidiaries
Total Entergy12,177 

There are 3,104 employees represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the United Government Security Officers of America, and the International Union, Security, Police, and Fire Professionals of America.

Below is the breakdown of Entergy’s employees by gender and race/ethnicity:

Gender (%) (a)20232022
Female23.022.2
Male77.077.8

Race/Ethnicity (%) (a)20232022
White73.174.8
Black/African American18.217.3
Hispanic/Latino3.23.0
Asian3.22.3
Other2.32.6

(a)Based on employees who self-identify.

Entergy’s Approach to Human Resources

Entergy’s people and culture enable its success; that is why acquiring, retaining, and developing talent are important components of Entergy’s human resources strategy. Entergy focuses on an approach that includes, among other things, governance and oversight; safety; organizational health, including diversity, inclusion, and belonging; and talent management.

282

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Production Cost Allocation Rider

The APSC approved aEntergy Arkansas has in place an APSC-approved production cost allocation rider for recovery from customers of the retail portion of the costs allocated to Entergy Arkansas as a result of System Agreement proceedings.

Other

In June 2022 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff filing for a proposed green tariff designed to help participating customers meet their renewable and sustainability goals and to enhance economic development efforts in Arkansas. The APSC approved an initial offering of 100 MW of solar capacity to be made available under this tariff.

In June 2023 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s Go ZERO tariff, which provides participating industrial and commercial customers the opportunity to chose from a number of clean energy options to help them achieve their sustainability goals.

Entergy Louisiana

Formula Rate Plan

Entergy Louisiana historically sets electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan using a historic test year. The form of the formula rate plan, on a combined basis, was approved in connection with the business combination of Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and largely followed the formula rate plans that were approved by the LPSC in connection with the full electric base rate cases filed by those companies in February 2013. In 2021 the LPSC approved a settlement extending the formula rate plan for test years 2020, 2021 and 2022; certain modifications were made in that extension, including a decrease to the allowed return on equity, narrowing of the earnings “dead band” around the mid-point allowed return on equity, elimination of sharing above and below the earnings “dead band,” and the addition of a distribution cost recovery mechanism. The formula rate plan continues to include exceptions from the rate cap and sharing requirements for certain large capital investment projects, including acquisition or construction of generating facilities and purchase power agreements approved by the LPSC, certain transmission investments, and certain distribution investments, among other items. In August
245

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application for approval of a regulatory blueprint necessary for it to strengthen the electric grid for the State of Louisiana, which contains a dual-path request to update rates through either: (1) extension of Entergy Louisiana’s current formula rate plan (with certain modifications) for three years, test years 2023-2025, which is Entergy Louisiana’s recommended path; or (2) implementation of rates resulting from a cost-of-service study, with a 2024-2026 test year formula rate plan. The application complies with Entergy Louisiana’s previous formula rate plan extension order requiring that for Entergy Louisiana to obtain another extension of its formula rate plan that included a rate reset, Entergy Louisiana would need to submit a full cost-of-service/rate case. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s application.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Louisiana’s rate schedules include a fuel adjustment clause designed to recover the cost of fuel and purchased power costs.  The fuel adjustment clause contains a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense and related carrying charges arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings related to audits of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Louisiana received approval from the LPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Louisiana historically hedged approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity was reviewed on an annual basis. In January 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC to suspend these seasonal hedging programs and implement financial hedges with terms up to five years for a portion of its natural gas exposure, which was approved in November 2018.

Entergy Louisiana’s gas rates include a purchased gas adjustment clause based on estimated gas costs for the billing month adjusted by a surcharge or credit that arises from an annual reconciliation of fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Retail Rates - Gas

In accordance with the settlement of Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’s gas rate stabilization plan for the test year ended September 30, 2012, in August 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal for implementation of an infrastructure rider to recover expenditures associated with strategic plant investment and relocation projects mandated by local governments. After review by the LPSC staff and inclusion of certain customer safeguards required by the LPSC staff, in December 2014, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted a joint settlement for implementation of an accelerated gas pipe replacement program providing for the replacement of approximately 100 miles of pipe over the next ten years, as well as relocation of certain existing pipe resulting from local government-related infrastructure projects, and for a rider to recover the investment associated with these projects. The rider allows for recovery of approximately $65 million over ten years. The rider recovery will be adjusted on a quarterly basis to include actual investment incurred for the prior quarter and is subject to the following conditions, among others: a ten-year term; application of any earnings in excess of the upper end of the earnings band as an offset to the revenue requirement of the infrastructure rider; adherence to a specified spending plan, within plus or minus 20% annually; annual filings comparing actual versus planned rider spending with actual spending and explanation of variances exceeding 10%; and an annual true-up. The joint settlement was approved by the LPSC in January 2015. Implementation of the infrastructure rider commenced with bills rendered on and after the first billing cycle of April 2015. In April 2022 Entergy Louisiana submitted for consideration a proposal to extend the infrastructure rider to address replacement of an additional 187 miles of pipe. In December 2022 Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff submitted an uncontested settlement that extends the rider for an additional ten years beginning after the end of the current term of the rider in 2025. The extension is subject to the same customer safeguards and conditions as the original term of the rider. The extension
246

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

allows for recovery of approximately $95 million over ten years. In February 2023, the uncontested settlement was approved by the LPSC.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In March 2016 the LPSC opened two dockets to examine, on a generic basis, issues that it identified in connection with its review of Cleco Corporation’s acquisition by third party investors.  The first docket is captioned “In re: Investigation of double leveraging issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities,” and the second is captioned “In re: Investigation of tax structure issues for all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities.”  In April 2016 the LPSC clarified that the concerns giving rise to the two dockets arose as a result of its review of the structure of the Cleco-Macquarie transaction and that the specific intent of the directives is to seek more information regarding intra-corporate debt financing of a utility’s capital structure as well as the use of investment tax credits to mitigate the tax obligation at the parent level of a consolidated entity.  No schedule has been set for either docket, and limited discovery has occurred.

In December 2019 an LPSC commissioner issued an unopposed directive to staff to research customer-centered options for all customer classes, as well as other regulatory environments, and recommend a plan for how to ensure customers are the focus. There was no opposition to the directive from other commissioners but several remarked that the intent of the directive was not initiated to pursue retail open access. In furtherance of the directive, the LPSC issued a notice of the opening of a docket to conduct a rulemaking to research and evaluate customer-centered options for all electric customer classes as well as other regulatory environments in January 2020. To date, the LPSC staff has requested multiple rounds of comments from stakeholders and conducted one technical conference. Topics on which comments have been filed include full and limited retail access, demand response, sleeved power purchase agreements, and energy efficiency. Neither the LPSC or the LPSC staff have made recommendations or adopted any rules.

Entergy Mississippi

Formula Rate Plan

Since the conclusion in 2015 of Entergy Mississippi’s most recent base rate case, Entergy Mississippi has set electric base rates annually through a formula rate plan. Between base rate cases, Entergy Mississippi is able to adjust base rates annually, subject to certain caps, through formula rate plans that utilize forward-looking features. In addition, Entergy Mississippi is subject to an annual “look-back” evaluation. Entergy Mississippi is allowed a maximum rate increase of 4% of each test year’s retail revenue. Any increase above 4% requires a base rate case. If Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan were terminated without replacement, it would revert to the more traditional rate case environment or seek approval of a new formula rate plan.

In August 2012 the MPSC opened inquiries to review whether the then-current formulaic methodology used to calculate the return on common equity in both Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan and Mississippi Power Company’s annual formula rate plan was still appropriate or could be improved to better serve the public interest. The intent of this inquiry and review was for informational purposes only; the evaluation of any recommendations for changes to the existing methodology would take place in a general rate case or in the existing formula rate plan proceeding. In March 2013 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed its consultant’s report which noted the return on common equity estimation methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company are commonly used throughout the electric utility industry. The report suggested ways in which the methods used by Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company might be improved, but did not recommend specific changes in the
247

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

return on common equity formulas or calculations at that time. In June 2014 the MPSC expanded the scope of the August 2012 inquiry to study the merits of adopting a uniform formula rate plan that could be applied, where possible in whole or in part, to both Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power Company in order to achieve greater consistency in the plans. The MPSC directed the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff to investigate and review Entergy Mississippi’s formula rate plan rider schedule and Mississippi Power Company’s Performance Evaluation Plan by considering the merits and deficiencies and possibilities for improvement of each and then to propose a uniform formula rate plan that, where possible, could be applicable to both companies. No procedural schedule has been set. In October 2014 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff conducted a public technical conference to discuss performance benchmarking and its potential application to the electric utilities’ formula rate plans. The docket remains open.

In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for a mechanism in the formula rate plan, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi as well as to allow similar cost recovery treatment for other capacity acquisitions that are approved by the MPSC. The MPSC must approve recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment for each new resource. In addition, the MPSC approved revisions to the formula rate plan which allows Entergy Mississippi to begin billing rate adjustments effective April 1 of the filing year on a temporary basis subject to refund or credit to customers, subject to final MPSC order. The MPSC also authorized Entergy Mississippi to remove vegetation management costs from the formula rate plan and recover these costs through the establishment of a vegetation management rider.

In November 2020 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan providing for the realignment of energy efficiency costs to its formula rate plan, the deferral of energy efficiency expenditures into a regulatory asset, and the elimination of its energy efficiency cost recovery rider effective with the January 2022 billing cycle.

In June 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan to realign the recovery of certain long-term service agreement and conductor handling costs to the annual power management and grid modernization riders effective January 2023.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include energy cost recovery riders to recover fuel and purchased power costs.  The energy cost rate for each calendar year is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over-recovery or under-recovery of the energy costs as of the 12-month period ended September 30.  Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC. The energy cost recovery riders allow interim rate adjustments depending on the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.

To help stabilize electricity costs, Entergy Mississippi received approval from the MPSC to hedge its exposure to natural gas price volatility through the use of financial instruments.  Entergy Mississippi hedges approximately one-third of the projected exposure to natural gas price changes for the gas used to serve its native electric load for all months of the year.  The hedge quantity is reviewed on an annual basis.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of proceedings regarding recovery of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs.

248

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Other

In October 2022 the MPSC adopted the Distributed Generation Rule. The Distributed Generation Rule maintains the 3% net metering participation cap. The Distributed Generation Rule grandfathers a 2.5 cents per kWh distributed generation benefits adder for 25 years and expands eligibility for the 2 cents per kWh low-income benefits adder to households up to 225% of the federal poverty level and grandfathers that adder for 25 years. The Distributed Generation Rule also directs utilities to make rate filings implementing up-front incentives for distributed generating systems and demand response battery systems, and to establish a public K-12 solar for schools program. In August 2023 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed solar for schools rate schedule under the Distributed Generation Rule.

Entergy New Orleans

Formula Rate Plan

As part of its determination of rates in the base rate case filed by Entergy New Orleans in 2018, in November 2019, the City Council issued a resolution resolving the rate case, with rates to become effective retroactive to August 2019. The resolution allows Entergy New Orleans to implement a three-year formula rate plan, beginning with the 2019 test year as adjusted for forward-looking known and measurable changes, with the filing for the first test year to be made in 2020. In October 2020 the City Council approved an agreement in principle filed by Entergy New Orleans that results in Entergy New Orleans forgoing its 2020 formula rate plan filing and shifting the three-year formula rate plan to filings in 2021, 2022, and 2023. In September 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a motion seeking City Council approval of a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas formula rate plans, for filings in 2024, 2025, and 2026. In October 2023 the City Council granted Entergy New Orleans’s request for an extension, subject to minor modifications.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy New Orleans’s electric rate schedules include a fuel adjustment tariff designed to reflect no more than targeted fuel and purchased power costs, adjusted by a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel and purchased power costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

Entergy New Orleans’s gas rate schedules include a purchased gas adjustment to reflect estimated gas costs for the billing month, adjusted by a surcharge or credit similar to that included in the electric fuel adjustment clause, including carrying charges.

To help stabilize gas costs, Entergy New Orleans seeks approval annually from the City Council to continue implementation of its natural gas hedging program consistent with the City Council’s stated policy objectives.  The program uses financial instruments to hedge exposure to volatility in the wholesale price of natural gas purchased to serve Entergy New Orleans gas customers.  Entergy New Orleans hedges up to 25% of actual gas sales made during the winter months.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

249

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Texas

Base Rates

The base rates of Entergy Texas are established largely in traditional base rate case proceedings. Between base rate proceedings, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. Entergy Texas is required to file full base rate case proceedings every four years and within eighteen months of utilizing its generation cost recovery rider for investments above $200 million.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, that are not included in base rates.  Historically, semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor have been made in March and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. In the course of this reconciliation, the PUCT determines whether eligible fuel and fuel-related expenses and revenues are necessary and reasonable and makes a prudence finding for each of the fuel-related contracts entered into during the reconciliation period. In 2023 the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to provide that material over- and under-recovered fuel balances are to be refunded or surcharged through interim fuel adjustments and that fuel reconciliations must be filed at least once every two years. Entergy Texas expects the PUCT to undertake a rulemaking to effectuate the new legislation by the end of 2024.

At the PUCT’s April 2013 open meeting, the PUCT Commissioners discussed their view that a purchased power capacity rider was good public policy. The PUCT issued an order in May 2013 adopting the rule allowing for a purchased power capacity rider, subject to an offsetting adjustment for load growth. The rule, as adopted, also includes a process for obtaining pre-approval by the PUCT of purchased power agreements to be recovered through a purchased power capacity rider. No Texas utility, including Entergy Texas, has exercised the option to recover capacity costs under the rider mechanism, but Entergy Texas will continue to evaluate the benefits of utilizing the rider to recover future capacity costs. In 2023, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit a utility to seek pre-approval from the PUCT for a purchased power agreement of three years or more if such approval is a precondition to the effectiveness of such agreements, regardless of whether the utility intends to recover costs associated with the purchased power agreement through a purchased power capacity rider.

Transmission, Distribution, and Generation Cost Recovery

As discussed above, Entergy Texas has available rate riders to recover the revenue requirements associated with certain incremental costs. These riders include a transmission cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of transmission-related capital investments, a distribution cost recovery factor rider mechanism for the recovery of distribution-related capital investment, and a generation cost recovery rider mechanism for the recovery of generation-related capital investments.

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas containing provisions that allow Entergy Texas to take advantage of a cost recovery mechanism that permits annual filings for the recovery of reasonable and necessary expenditures for transmission infrastructure improvement and changes in wholesale transmission charges. This mechanism was previously available to other non-ERCOT Texas utility companies, but not to Entergy Texas.

In September 2011 the PUCT adopted a proposed rule implementing a distribution cost recovery factor to recover capital and capital-related costs related to distribution infrastructure.  The distribution cost recovery factor permitted utilities once per year to implement an increase or decrease in rates above or below amounts reflected in base rates to reflect distribution-related depreciation expense, federal income tax and other taxes, and return on investment.  In 2023, the Texas Legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to permit utilities to update their
250

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

distribution cost recovery factors up to twice per year and to require the PUCT to issue an order on such update applications within 60 days, with a 15-day extension permitted for good cause.

In September 2019 the PUCT initiated a rulemaking to promulgate a generation cost recovery rider rule, implementing legislation passed in the 2019 Texas legislative session intended to allow electric utilities to recover generation investments between base rate proceedings.  The PUCT approved the final rule in July 2020.

Storm Cost Recovery

See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of Entergy Texas’s filings to recover storm-related costs.

Other

In January 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application requesting approval to implement two voluntary renewable option tariffs, Rider Small Volume Renewable Option (Rider SVRO) and Rider Large Volume Renewable Option (Rider LVRO). Both tariffs are voluntary offerings that give customers the ability to match some or all of their monthly electricity usage with renewable energy credits that are purchased by Entergy Texas and retired on the customer’s behalf. Voluntary participation in either Rider SVRO or Rider LVRO and the charges assessed under the respective tariff would be in addition to the charges paid by customers under their otherwise applicable rate schedules and riders. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement agreement supporting approval of Entergy Texas’s proposed voluntary renewable option tariffs. As part of the settlement agreement, Entergy Texas agreed to revise the cost allocation between the rate tiers of Rider SVRO and committed to collaborating with and considering the input of customers to develop an asset-backed green tariff program. The PUCT approved the settlement agreement in August 2022.

As part of its rate case application filed with the PUCT in July 2022, Entergy Texas requested approval of Schedule Green Future Option (Schedule GFO), an asset-backed green tariff that would allow Entergy Texas’s customers to voluntarily subscribe to a portion of the underlying solar facility’s capacity in exchange for energy credits. In August 2023 the PUCT approved an unopposed settlement in the proceeding that included approval of Schedule GFO.

Electric Industry Restructuring

In June 2009 a law was enacted in Texas that required Entergy Texas to cease all activities relating to Entergy Texas’s transition to competition.  The law allows Entergy Texas to remain a part of the SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC) Region, although it does not prevent Entergy Texas from joining another power region.  The law provides that proceedings to certify a power region that Entergy Texas belongs to as a qualified power region can be initiated by the PUCT, or on motion by another party, when the conditions supporting such a proceeding exist.  Under the law, the PUCT may not approve a transition to competition plan for Entergy Texas until the expiration of four years from the PUCT’s certification of a qualified power region for Entergy Texas.

The law further amended already existing law that had required Entergy Texas to propose for PUCT approval a tariff to allow eligible customers the ability to contract for competitive generation.  The amending language in the law provides, among other things, that: (1) the tariff shall not be implemented in a manner that harms the sustainability or competitiveness of manufacturers who choose not to participate in the tariff; (2) Entergy Texas shall “purchase competitive generation service, selected by the customer, and provide the generation at retail to the customer;” and (3) Entergy Texas shall provide and price transmission service and ancillary services under that tariff at a rate that is unbundled from its cost of service.  The law directs that the PUCT may not issue an order on the tariff that is contrary to an applicable decision, rule, or policy statement of a federal regulatory agency having jurisdiction. The PUCT determined that unrecovered costs that may be recovered through the rider consist only of those costs necessary to implement and administer the competitive generation program and do not include lost
251

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

revenues or embedded generation costs.  The amount of customer load that may be included in the competitive generation service program is limited to 115 MW.

System Energy

Cost of Service

The rates of System Energy are established by the FERC, and the costs allowed to be charged pursuant to these rates are, in turn, passed through to the participating Utility operating companies through the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which has monthly billings that reflect the current operating costs of, and investment in, Grand Gulf. Retail regulators and other parties may seek to initiate proceedings at FERC to investigate the prudence of costs included in the rates charged under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and examine, among other things, the reasonableness or prudence of the operation and maintenance practices, level of expenditures, allowed rates of return and rate base, and previously incurred capital expenditures. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including challenges with respect to System Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period. Beginning in 2021, System Energy implemented billing protocols to provide retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. Entergy cannot predict the outcome of any of these proceedings, and an adverse outcome in any of them could have a material adverse effect on Entergy’s or System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings.

Franchises

Entergy Arkansas holds exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 308 incorporated cities and towns in Arkansas.  These franchises generally are unlimited in duration and continue unless the municipalities purchase the utility property.  In Arkansas, franchises are considered to be contracts and, therefore, are governed pursuant to the terms of the franchise agreement and applicable statutes.

Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric service in approximately 175 incorporated municipalities and in the unincorporated areas of approximately 59 parishes of Louisiana.  Entergy Louisiana holds non-exclusive franchises to provide natural gas service to customers in the City of Baton Rouge and in East Baton Rouge Parish.  Municipal franchise agreement terms range from 25 to 60 years while parish franchise terms range from 25 to 99 years.

Entergy Mississippi has received from the MPSC certificates of public convenience and necessity to provide electric service to areas within 45 counties, including a number of municipalities, in western Mississippi.  Under Mississippi statutory law, such certificates are exclusive.  Entergy Mississippi may continue to serve in such municipalities upon payment of a statutory franchise fee, regardless of whether an original municipal franchise is still in existence.

Entergy New Orleans provides electric and gas service in the City of New Orleans pursuant to indeterminate permits set forth in city ordinances.  These ordinances contain a continuing option for the City of New Orleans to purchase Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas utility properties.

Entergy Texas holds a certificate of convenience and necessity from the PUCT to provide electric service to areas within approximately 27 counties in eastern Texas and holds non-exclusive franchises to provide electric
252

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

service in approximately 70 incorporated municipalities.  Entergy Texas typically obtains 25-year franchise agreements as existing agreements expire.  Entergy Texas’s electric franchises expire over the period 2024-2058.

The business of System Energy is limited to wholesale power sales.  It has no distribution franchises.

Property and Other Generation Resources

Owned Generating Stations

The total capability of the generating stations owned and leased by the Utility operating companies and System Energy as of December 31, 2023 is indicated below:
 Owned and Leased Capability MW(a)
CompanyTotalCT / CCGT (b)Legacy Gas/OilNuclearCoalHydroSolar
Entergy Arkansas5,036 1,548 521 1,825 969 73 100 
Entergy Louisiana10,798 5,594 2,728 2,137 339 — — 
Entergy Mississippi2,904 1,744 641 — 417 — 102 
Entergy New Orleans662 635 — — — — 27 
Entergy Texas3,234 990 1,994 — 250 — — 
System Energy1,245 — — 1,245 — — — 
Total23,879 10,511 5,884 5,207 1,975 73 229 

(a)“Owned and Leased Capability” is the dependable load carrying capability as demonstrated under actual operating conditions based on the primary fuel (assuming no curtailments) that each station was designed to utilize.
(b)Represents Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.

Summer peak load for the Utility has averaged 21,775 MW over the previous decade.

The Utility operating companies’ load and capacity projections are reviewed periodically to assess the need and timing for additional generating capacity and interconnections. These reviews consider existing and projected demand, the availability and price of power, the location of new load, the economy, Entergy’s clean energy and other public policy goals, environmental regulations, and the age and condition of Entergy’s existing infrastructure.

The Utility operating companies’ long-term resource strategy (Portfolio Transformation Strategy) calls for the bulk of capacity needs to be met through long-term resources, whether owned or contracted. Over the past decade, the Portfolio Transformation Strategy has resulted in the addition of about 7,963 MW of new long-term resources and the deactivation of about 4,241 MW of legacy generation. As MISO market participants, the Utility operating companies also participate in MISO’s Day Ahead and Real Time Energy and Ancillary Services markets to economically dispatch generation and purchase energy to serve customers reliably and at the lowest reasonable cost.

Other Generation Resources

RFP Procurements

The Utility operating companies from time-to-time issue requests for proposals (RFP) to procure supply-side resources from sources other than the spot market to meet the unique regional needs of the Utility operating companies. The RFPs issued by the Utility operating companies have sought resources needed to meet near-term MISO reliability requirements as well as long-term requirements through a broad range of wholesale power
253

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

products, including long-term contractual products and asset acquisitions. The RFP process has resulted in selections or acquisitions, including, among other things:

Entergy Texas’s construction of the 993 MW, combined-cycle, gas turbine Montgomery County Power Station at its existing Lewis Creek electric generating station. The facility began commercial operation in January 2021;
In December 2020, Entergy Texas selected the self-build alternative, Orange County Advanced Power Station, out of the 2020 Entergy Texas combined-cycle, gas turbine RFP. Regulatory approval was received in November 2022 and construction has commenced. The facility is expected to be in service by mid-2026;
In March 2019, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Searcy Solar facility, sited on approximately 800 acres in White County near Searcy, Arkansas. Entergy Arkansas received regulatory approval from the APSC in April 2020, and closed on the acquisition, through use of a tax equity partnership, in December 2021. The Searcy Solar facility was placed in service in January 2022;
In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Sunflower Solar facility, sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi. Entergy Mississippi received regulatory approval from the MPSC in April 2020, and the Sunflower Solar facility began commercial operation in September 2022;
In June 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Walnut Bend Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Lee County, Arkansas. In July 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the Walnut Bend Solar facility. The counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was terminating the project, though it was willing to consider an alternative for the site. Entergy Arkansas disputed the right of termination, and in February 2023 an amendment to the agreement was executed by the parties. In July 2023 the APSC issued an order approving the revisions to the agreement and full notice to proceed was issued shortly thereafter. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of approximately $169.7 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is completed and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to achieve commercial operation in the first half of 2024;
In September 2020, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 180 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, West Memphis Solar facility, that will be sited on approximately 1,500 acres in Crittenden County, Arkansas. In October 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the acquisition of the West Memphis Solar facility. In March 2022 the counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was seeking changes to certain terms of the build-own-transfer agreement, including both cost and schedule. In January 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a supplemental application with the APSC. Following the APSC’s approval of the supplemental application in March 2023, full notice to proceed was issued in April 2023 and the project is currently expected to achieve commercial operation by the end of 2024;
In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 150 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, St. Jacques facility, that will be sited in St. James Parish near Vacherie, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the St. Jacques facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the St. Jacques facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In August 2022, Entergy Arkansas signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 250 MW to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility, Driver Solar facility, that will be sited near Osceola, Arkansas. Also in August 2022, Entergy Arkansas received necessary approvals for the Driver Solar
254

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

facility, and Entergy Arkansas has issued the counterparty full notice to proceed to begin construction. The project is expected to achieve commercial operation as early as mid-2024; and
Entergy Louisiana expects to start construction on the 49 MW Sterlington Solar project in the fourth quarter 2024, located in Sterlington, Louisiana. The facility is expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2026.

The RFP process has also resulted in the selection, or confirmation of the economic merits of, long-term purchased power agreements (PPAs), including, among others:

River Bend’s 30% life-of-unit PPA between Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans for 100 MW related to Entergy Louisiana’s unregulated portion of the River Bend nuclear station, which portion was formerly owned by Cajun;
Entergy Arkansas’s wholesale base load capacity life-of-unit PPAs executed in 2003 totaling approximately 220 MW between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana (110 MW) and between Entergy Arkansas and Entergy New Orleans (110 MW) related to the sale of a portion of Entergy Arkansas’s coal and nuclear base load resources (which had not been included in Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates);
In September 2012, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Rain CII Carbon LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 28 MW, with the potential to purchase an additional 9 MW when available, from a petroleum coke calcining facility in Sulphur, Louisiana. The facility began commercial operation in May 2013. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with the facility;
In March 2013, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Agrilectric Power Partners, LP executed a 20-year agreement for 8.5 MW from a refurbished rice hull-fueled electric generation facility located in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, now holds the agreement with Agrilectric;
In September 2013, Entergy Louisiana and TX LFG Energy, LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Montauk Energy Holdings, LLC, executed a 10-year agreement to purchase approximately 3 MW from its landfill gas-fueled power generation facility located in Cleveland, Texas;
Entergy Mississippi’s cost-based purchase, beginning in January 2013, of 90 MW from Entergy Arkansas’s share of Grand Gulf (only 60 MW of this PPA came through the RFP process). Cost recovery for the 90 MW was approved by the MPSC in January 2013;
In April 2015, Entergy Arkansas and Stuttgart Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 81 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generation facility located near Stuttgart, Arkansas. The APSC approved the project and deliveries pursuant to that agreement commenced in June 2018;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and LS Power executed a 10-year agreement for 485 MW from the Carville Energy Center located in St. Gabriel, Louisiana. In November 2019, LS Power sold and transferred the Carville Energy Center and facility to Argo Infrastructure Partners, which included the power purchase agreement;
In November 2016, Entergy Louisiana and Occidental Chemical Corporation executed a 10-year agreement for 500 MW from the Taft Cogeneration facility located in Hahnville, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval and began in June 2018;
In June 2017, Entergy Arkansas and Chicot Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Chicot County, Arkansas. The transaction received regulatory approval and the PPA began in November 2020;
In February 2018, Entergy Louisiana and LA3 West Baton Rouge, LLC (Capital Region Solar project) executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in West Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in February 2019 and the PPA began in October 2020;
In July 2018, Entergy New Orleans and St. James Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 20 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and the PPA began in February 2023 after the facility reached commercial operation in March 2023;
255

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

In August 2018, Entergy Louisiana and South Alexander Development I, LLC executed a 5-year agreement for 5 MW from a solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Livingston Parish, Louisiana. The PPA began in December 2020 and received regulatory approval in January 2021;
In February 2019, Entergy New Orleans and Iris Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. The transaction received regulatory approval in July 2019 and achieved commercial operation in November 2022;
In August 2020, Entergy Texas and Umbriel Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Polk County, Texas. The facility achieved commercial operation in November 2023;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Sunlight Road Solar, LLC executed a 20-year agreement for 50 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in Washington Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve the order including this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Sunlight Road facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2024;
In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Vacherie Solar Energy Center, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic electric generating facility located in St. James Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to issue an order approving the Vacherie facility; however, following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparty for the Vacherie facility regarding amendments to the agreement to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027 dependent upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments;
In December 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Hinds Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Hinds County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in June 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Wildwood Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Tallahatchie County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in May 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Mississippi and Greer Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 170 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Washington County, Mississippi. In August 2023 the MPSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in December 2026;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Flat Fork Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in St. Francis County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In October 2022, Entergy Arkansas and Forgeview Solar, LLC executed a 15-year PPA for approximately 200 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Mississippi County, Arkansas. In September 2023 the APSC approved the PPA, and the facility is expected to reach commercial operation in September 2025;
In January 2023, Entergy Texas and Piney Woods Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 150 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Walker County, Texas. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026;
In January 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Coastal Prairie Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 175 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Iberville Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC
256

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as December 2025; and
In October 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Mondu Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 100 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Point Coupee Parish, Louisiana. Following execution of the agreement, Entergy Louisiana filed a petition with the LPSC requesting all necessary approvals. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation as early as June 2026.

In July 2021, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for solar generation resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in March 2022. One PPA was executed in January 2023 and the certificate of convenience and necessity for the owned resource is expected to be filed with the PUCT in mid-2024.

In April 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Arkansas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Arkansas selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in February 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the resources are in progress.

In June 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Louisiana, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Louisiana selected a combination of PPA and build own transfer resources in March 2023 some of which have been executed and are noted above, and negotiation of definitive agreements for the remaining resources are in progress.

In October 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Texas, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Texas selected a combination of PPA and owned resources in July 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

In November 2022, Entergy Services, on behalf of Entergy Mississippi, issued an RFP for solar photovoltaic and wind resources. Entergy Mississippi selected a combination of owned resources in May 2023, and negotiation of definitive agreements are in progress for all resources.

Other Procurements From Third Parties

The Utility operating companies have also made resource acquisitions outside of the RFP process and have also entered various limited- and long-term contracts in recent years as a result of bilateral negotiations, including among others:

In March 2016, Entergy Arkansas’s (Power Block 2), Entergy Louisiana’s (Power Blocks 3 and 4), and Entergy New Orleans’s (Power Block 1) acquisitions of the 1,980 MW (summer rating), natural gas-fired, combined-cycle gas turbine Union Power Station power blocks, each rated at 495 MW (summer rating). The facility is located near El Dorado, Arkansas and has been in operation since July 2003;
In October 2019, Entergy Mississippi’s acquisition of the 810 MW, combined-cycle, natural gas-fired Choctaw Generating Station. The facility is located in Choctaw County and has been in operation since July 2003;
In November 2020, Entergy Louisiana’s acquisition of the Washington Parish Energy Center is a 361 MW natural gas-fired peaking power plant approximately 60 miles north of New Orleans on a site Entergy Louisiana purchased from Calpine in 2019. Calpine began construction on the plant in early 2019 and Entergy Louisiana purchased the plant upon completion in November 2020;
In June 2021, Entergy Texas’s acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility, an existing 147 MW simple-cycle gas-fired peaking power plant in Kountze, Texas, previously owned by East Texas Electric Cooperative. The facility has been in operation since January 2010; and
In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana and Elizabeth Solar, LLC executed a 20-year PPA for approximately 125 MW from a to-be-constructed solar photovoltaic energy facility located in Allen Parish, Louisiana. In September 2022 the LPSC voted to approve this project and in September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported
257

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

to the LPSC that it had entered into amended agreements related to the Elizabeth Solar facility. The facility is expected to reach commercial operation in August 2024.

Power Through Programs

In February 2019, Entergy Mississippi proposed a new technologies pilot to the MPSC, which was approved in December 2019. The pilot further modernized the energy grid and met customers’ evolving expectations by offering utility-owned, natural gas-fired backup generators to customers. Following conclusion of the three-year pilot, in October 2023, Entergy Mississippi proposed full-scale implementation of commercial scale, natural gas-fired resilient distributed generation, to be installed in front of the meter at commercial and industrial customer premises. The full-scale offering was approved by the MPSC in December 2023 along with an associated rate schedule, the Resiliency as a Service Rider Schedule. Entergy Mississippi can dispatch the units at times of peak demand, which can mitigate the typically higher energy and capacity costs borne by all customers during times of peak energy usage.

In December 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to amend its certificate of convenience and necessity to own and operate up to 75 MW of natural gas-fired distributed generation to be installed at commercial and industrial customer premises. Under this proposal, Entergy Texas would own and operate a fleet of generators ranging from 100 kW to 10 MW that would supply a portion of Entergy Texas’s long-term resource needs and enhance the resiliency of Entergy Texas’s electric grid. This fleet of generators would also be available to customers during outages to supply backup electric service as part of a program known as “Power Through.” In its 2021 session, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to exempt generators under 10 megawatts from the requirement to obtain a certificate of convenience and necessity. In addition, the PUCT announced an intent to conduct a broad rulemaking related to distributed generation and recommended that utilities with pending applications addressing distributed generation withdraw them. Accordingly, Entergy Texas withdrew its application for a certificate of convenience and necessity and associated tariff from the PUCT without prejudice to refiling. Entergy Texas continues to deploy certain customer-sited distributed generators under an existing PUCT-approved tariff. In August 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application for PUCT approval of voluntary Rate Schedule Utility Owned Distributed Generation through which it would charge host customers for back-up service from customer-sited Power Through generators. Based on the exemption enacted by the Texas legislature in 2021, Entergy Texas’s application was not required to, and did not, seek an amendment to its certificate of convenience and necessity in order to continue deploying Power Through generators. In October 2022 two intervenors filed requests for a hearing on Entergy Texas’s application. In October 2022 the PUCT staff filed a request that the proceeding be referred to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In January 2023 the PUCT announced an intent to develop certain broadly applicable reliability metrics against which to measure distributed generation resources and directed Entergy Texas to withdraw its application. However, the PUCT did allow Entergy Texas to continue its pilot program for Power Through generators. Entergy Texas withdrew its application. In its 2023 session, the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to confirm Entergy Texas’s ability to provide back-up generation service using customer-sited utility-owned distributed generation and directing the PUCT to approve rates for such service upon application by Entergy Texas. In February 2024, Entergy Texas resubmitted its application for PUCT approval of voluntary Rate Schedule Utility Owned Distributed Generation. A procedural schedule has not yet been set.

In August 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC an application seeking authority for a “Power Through” offering to deploy natural gas-fired distributed generation. The application was supported by a number of letters of interest from Entergy Arkansas customers. In December 2021 the APSC general staff requested briefing, which Entergy Arkansas opposed. In January 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed to support the establishment of a procedural schedule with a hearing in April 2022. Also in January 2022, the APSC granted the general staff’s request for briefing but on an expedited schedule; briefing concluded in February 2022. Based on testimony filed to date the APSC general staff, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Sierra Club, and Audubon opposed Entergy Arkansas’s proposed Power Through offering, which was demonstrated to be in high demand by interested customers, some of which directly filed public comments encouraging the APSC to approve the application. A
258

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

paper hearing was held in August and September 2022, and Entergy Arkansas responded to several written commissioner questions. In May 2023 the APSC issued an order approving the Power Through offering with some modifications, and in June 2023, Entergy Arkansas sought rehearing or clarification of several issues. In August 2023 the APSC denied Entergy Arkansas’s rehearing petition. In December 2023 the APSC approved a streamlined approval process for the individual Power Through generators. Entergy Arkansas is developing tariff revisions to comply with the APSC’s order.

In July 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC an application for authority to deploy natural gas-fired distributed generation. The application was supported by a number of letters of interest from Entergy Louisiana customers. In October 2021, a procedural schedule was established with a hearing in April 2022. Staff and certain intervenors filed direct testimony in December 2021, and cross-answering testimony was filed in January 2022. Entergy Louisiana filed rebuttal testimony in February 2022. The parties reached an uncontested settlement which, among other things, recommended approval of 120 MW of natural gas fired distributed generation and an additional 30 MW of solar and battery distributed generation, for a total distributed generation program of 150 MW. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, Entergy Louisiana may seek to expand the distributed generation program following the earlier of two years after issuance of an order approving the settlement or the installation of 60 MW of distributed generation pursuant to this program. The settlement was approved by the LPSC in November 2022.

Interconnections

The Utility operating companies’ generating units are interconnected to the transmission system which operates at various voltages up to 500 kV.  These generating units consist of steam-turbine generators fueled by natural gas, coal, and pressurized and boiling water nuclear reactors; combustion-turbine generators, combined-cycle combustion turbine generators and reciprocating internal combustion engine generators that are fueled by natural gas; and inverter-based resources interconnecting both solar photovoltaic systems and energy storage devices that participate in the MISO wholesale electric market. Additionally, some of the Utility operating companies also offer customer services and products that include generating and demand response resources that are interconnected to both the distribution and transmission systems and that also participate in the wholesale market. Entergy’s Utility operating companies are MISO market participants and the companies’ transmission systems are interconnected with those of many neighboring utilities.  MISO is an essential link in the safe, cost-effective delivery of electric power across all or parts of 15 U.S. states and the Canadian province of Manitoba. In addition, the Utility operating companies are members of SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC), the Regional Entity with delegated authority from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) for the purpose of proposing and enforcing Bulk Electric System reliability standards within 16 central and southeastern states.

Gas Property

As of December 31, 2023, Entergy New Orleans distributed and transported natural gas for distribution within New Orleans, Louisiana, through approximately 2,600 miles of gas pipeline.  As of December 31, 2023, the gas properties of Entergy Louisiana, which are located in and around Baton Rouge, Louisiana, were not material to Entergy Louisiana’s financial position.

Title

The Utility operating companies’ generating stations are generally located on properties owned in fee simple.  Most of the substations and transmission and distribution lines are constructed on private property or public rights-of-way pursuant to easements, servitudes, or appropriate franchises.  Some substation properties are owned in fee simple.  The Utility operating companies generally have the right of eminent domain, whereby they may perfect title to, or secure easements or servitudes on, private property for their utility operations.

Substantially all of the physical properties and assets owned by Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy are subject to the liens of mortgages
259

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

securing bonds issued by those companies.  The Lewis Creek generating station of Entergy Texas was acquired by merger with a subsidiary of Entergy Texas and is currently not subject to the lien of the Entergy Texas indenture.

Fuel Supply

The average fuel cost per kWh for the Utility operating companies and System Energy for the years 2021-2023 were:
YearNatural GasNuclearCoalRenewables (a)Purchased PowerMISO Purchases (b)
2023(Cents Per kWh)
Entergy Arkansas1.98 0.50 3.09 1.98 11.57 0.77 
Entergy Louisiana2.34 0.60 3.22 10.38 3.76 2.50 
Entergy Mississippi2.21 — 2.82 0.03 5.86 1.84 
Entergy New Orleans (c)2.05 — — 3.24 — 2.33 
Entergy Texas2.29 — 3.17 2.25 5.64 3.18 
System Energy— 0.68 — — — — 
Utility2.25 0.58 3.06 6.14 4.03 2.61 
2022
Entergy Arkansas4.98 0.52 2.93 2.11 10.90 (2.65)
Entergy Louisiana5.50 0.57 2.84 10.70 6.95 6.45 
Entergy Mississippi4.38 — 2.85 0.04 6.53 6.68 
Entergy New Orleans (c)5.10 — — (5.16)— 7.21 
Entergy Texas5.77 — 2.83 6.26 5.61 6.68 
System Energy— 0.65 — — — — 
Utility5.27 0.57 2.89 7.00 6.54 5.95 
2021
Entergy Arkansas4.11 0.56 2.43 2.85 2.53 3.87 
Entergy Louisiana3.77 0.56 2.62 10.87 5.52 4.04 
Entergy Mississippi2.71 — 2.53 1.22 2.70 4.16 
Entergy New Orleans (c)3.47 — — (2.82)— 4.50 
Entergy Texas4.65 — 2.60 3.97 4.53 4.10 
System Energy— 0.55 — — — — 
Utility3.75 0.56 2.48 9.07 4.76 4.08 

(a)Includes average fuel costs from both owned and purchased power resources.
(b)Includes activity from financial transmission rights. See Note 15 to the financial statements for discussion of financial transmission rights.
(c)Entergy New Orleans’s renewables include liquidated damage payments of $0.1 million in 2023, $2.9 million in 2022, and $1 million in 2021 due to the delay of in-service dates related to purchased power agreements.

260

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Actual 2023 and projected 2024 sources of generation for the Utility operating companies and System Energy, including certain power purchases from affiliates under life of unit power purchase agreements, including the Unit Power Sales Agreement, are:
2023
 CT / CCGT (b)Legacy GasNuclearCoalRenewables (c)Purchased Power (d)MISO Purchases (e)
Entergy Arkansas26 %%57 %%%— %%
Entergy Louisiana47 %%20 %%%10 %12 %
Entergy Mississippi63 %%23 %%%— %%
Entergy New Orleans55 %%36 %%%%%
Entergy Texas32 %25 %%%— %%30 %
System Energy (a)— %— %100 %— %— %— %— %
Utility43 %%27 %%%%12 %

2024
 CT / CCGT (b)Legacy GasNuclearCoalRenewables (c)Purchased Power (d)MISO Purchases (e)
Entergy Arkansas26 %— %59 %12 %%— %— %
Entergy Louisiana48 %%30 %%%11 %— %
Entergy Mississippi64 %— %24 %10 %%— %— %
Entergy New Orleans51 %%43 %%%%— %
Entergy Texas43 %31 %17 %%%— %— %
System Energy (a)— %— %100 %— %— %— %— %
Utility45 %%35 %%%%— %

(a)Capacity and energy from System Energy’s interest in Grand Gulf is allocated as follows under the Unit Power Sales Agreement: Entergy Arkansas - 36%; Entergy Louisiana - 14%; Entergy Mississippi - 33%; and Entergy New Orleans - 17%.  Pursuant to purchased power agreements, Entergy Arkansas is selling a portion of its owned capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.
(b)Represents natural gas sourced for Simple Cycle Combustion Turbine units and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine units.
(c)Includes generation from both owned and purchased power resources.
(d)Excludes MISO purchases and renewables purchased through purchased power agreements.
(e)In December 2013, Entergy integrated its transmission system into the MISO RTO. Entergy offers all of its generation into the MISO energy market on a day-ahead and real-time basis and bids for power in the MISO energy market to serve the demand of its customers, with MISO making dispatch decisions. The MISO purchases metric provided for 2023 is not projected for 2024.

Some of the Utility’s gas-fired plants are also capable of using fuel oil, if necessary. Although based on current economics the Utility does not expect fuel oil use in 2024, it is possible that various operational events including weather or pipeline maintenance may require the use of fuel oil.

Natural Gas

The Utility operating companies have long-term firm and short-term interruptible gas contracts for both supply and transportation. Over 70% of the Utility operating companies’ power plants maintain some level of long-term firm transportation. Short-term contracts and spot-market purchases satisfy additional gas requirements.
261

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Texas owns a gas storage facility and Entergy Louisiana has a firm storage service agreement that provide reliable and flexible natural gas service to certain generating stations.

Many factors, including wellhead deliverability, storage, pipeline capacity, and demand requirements of end users, influence the availability and price of natural gas supplies for power plants. Demand is primarily tied to weather conditions as well as to the prices and availability of other energy sources. Pursuant to federal and state regulations, gas supplies to power plants may be interrupted during periods of shortage. To the extent natural gas supplies are disrupted or natural gas prices significantly increase, the Utility operating companies may in some instances use alternate fuels, such as oil when available, or rely to a larger extent on coal, nuclear generation, and purchased power.

Coal

Entergy Arkansas has committed to six two- to three-year contracts that will supply at least 85% of the total coal supply needs in 2024. These contracts are staggered in term so that not all contracts have to be renewed the same year. If needed, additional Powder River Basin (PRB) coal will be purchased through contracts with a term of less than one year to provide the remaining supply needs. Based on the high cost of alternate sources, modes of transportation, and infrastructure improvements necessary for its delivery, no alternative coal consumption is expected at Entergy Arkansas during 2024. Coal will be transported to Arkansas via an existing Union Pacific transportation agreement that is expected to provide all of Entergy Arkansas’s rail transportation requirements for 2024.

Entergy Louisiana has committed to three two- to three-year contracts that will supply at least 90% of Nelson Unit 6 coal needs in 2024. If needed, additional PRB coal will be purchased through contracts with a term of less than one year to provide the remaining supply needs. For the same reasons as the Entergy Arkansas plants, no alternative coal consumption is expected at Nelson Unit 6 during 2024. Coal will be transported to Nelson via an existing transportation agreement that is expected to provide all of Entergy Louisiana’s rail transportation requirements for 2024.

Coal transportation delivery rates to Entergy Arkansas- and Entergy Louisiana-operated coal-fired units were able to fully meet supply needs and obligations in 2023. While deliveries remained constrained through summer 2023, improvements were observed in the second half of the year and are expected to continue in 2024. Both Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana control enough railcars to satisfy the rail transportation requirement.

The operator of Big Cajun 2 - Unit 3, Louisiana Generating, LLC, has advised Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas that it has adequate rail car and barge capacity to meet the volumes of PRB coal requested for 2024, but is also currently experiencing delivery constraints. Entergy Louisiana’s and Entergy Texas’s coal nomination requests to Big Cajun 2 - Unit 3 are made on an annual basis.

Nuclear Fuel

The nuclear fuel cycle consists of the following:

mining and milling of uranium ore to produce a concentrate;
conversion of the concentrate to uranium hexafluoride gas;
enrichment of the uranium hexafluoride gas;
fabrication of nuclear fuel assemblies for use in fueling nuclear reactors; and
disposal of spent fuel.

The Registrant Subsidiaries that own nuclear plants, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, are responsible through a shared regulated uranium pool for contracts to acquire nuclear material to be used in fueling Entergy’s Utility nuclear units.  These companies own the materials and services in this shared regulated
262

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

uranium pool on a pro rata fractional basis determined by the nuclear generation capability of each company.  Any liabilities for obligations of the pooled contracts are on a several but not joint basis.  The shared regulated uranium pool maintains inventories of nuclear materials during the various stages of processing.  The Registrant Subsidiaries purchase enriched uranium hexafluoride for their nuclear plant reload requirements at the average inventory cost from the shared regulated uranium pool.  Entergy Operations, Inc. contracts separately for the fabrication of nuclear fuel as agent on behalf of each of the Registrant Subsidiaries that owns a nuclear plant.  All contracts for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel are between the DOE and the owner of a nuclear power plant.

Based upon currently planned fuel cycles, the Utility nuclear units have a diversified portfolio of contracts and inventory that provides substantially adequate nuclear fuel materials and conversion and enrichment services at what Entergy believes are reasonably predictable or fixed prices through 2027. Entergy’s ability to purchase nuclear fuel at reasonably predictable prices, however, depends upon the performance reliability of uranium miners, including their ability to work through supply disruptions caused by global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or national events, such as political disruption.  There are a number of possible supply alternatives that may be accessed to mitigate any supplier performance failure, including potentially drawing upon Entergy’s inventory intended for later generation periods depending upon its risk management strategy at that time, although the pricing of any alternate uranium supply from the market will be dependent upon the market for uranium supply at that time.  In addition, some nuclear fuel contracts are on a non-fixed price basis subject to prevailing prices at the time of delivery.

The effects of market price changes may be reduced and deferred by risk management strategies, such as negotiation of floor and ceiling amounts for long-term contracts, buying for inventory or entering into forward physical contracts at fixed prices when Entergy believes it is appropriate and useful.  Entergy buys uranium from a diversified mix of sellers located in a diversified mix of countries, and from time to time purchases from nearly all qualified reliable major market participants worldwide that sell into the U.S.

Entergy’s ability to assure nuclear fuel supply also depends upon the performance reliability of conversion, enrichment, and fabrication services providers. There are fewer of these providers than for uranium. For conversion and enrichment services, like uranium, Entergy diversifies its supply by supplier and country and may take special measures as needed to ensure supply of enriched uranium for the reliable fabrication of nuclear fuel. For fabrication services, each plant is dependent upon the effective performance of the fabricator of that plant’s nuclear fuel, therefore, Entergy provides additional monitoring, inspection, and oversight for the fabrication process to assure reliability and quality.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy each have made arrangements to lease nuclear fuel and related equipment and services.  The lessors, which are consolidated in the financial statements of Entergy and the applicable Registrant Subsidiary, finance the acquisition and ownership of nuclear fuel through credit agreements and the issuance of notes.  These credit facilities are subject to periodic renewal, and the notes are issued periodically, typically for terms between three and seven years.

Natural Gas Purchased for Resale

Entergy New Orleans has several suppliers of natural gas. Its system is interconnected with one interstate and three intrastate pipelines. Entergy New Orleans has a “no-notice” service gas purchase contract with Symmetry Energy Solutions which ensures Entergy New Orleans gas delivery at specific delivery points and at any volume within the minimum and maximum set forth in the contract amounts. The Symmetry Energy Solutions gas supply is transported to Entergy New Orleans pursuant to a transportation service agreement with Gulf South Pipeline Co. This service is subject to FERC-approved rates. Entergy New Orleans also makes interruptible spot market purchases.

Entergy Louisiana purchased natural gas for resale in 2023 under a firm contract from Sequent Energy Management L.P. The gas is delivered through a combination of intrastate and interstate pipelines.
263

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


As a result of the implementation of FERC-mandated interstate pipeline restructuring in 1993, curtailments of interstate gas supply could occur if Entergy Louisiana’s or Entergy New Orleans’s suppliers failed to perform their obligations to deliver gas under their supply agreements. Gulf South Pipeline Co. could curtail transportation capacity only in the event of pipeline system constraints.

Federal Regulation of the Utility

State or local regulatory authorities, as described above, regulate the retail rates of the Utility operating companies.  The FERC regulates wholesale sales of electricity rates and interstate transmission of electricity, including System Energy’s sales of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of federal regulation proceedings.

Transmission and MISO Markets

In December 2013 the Utility operating companies integrated into the MISO RTO. Although becoming a member of MISO did not affect the ownership by the Utility operating companies of their transmission facilities or the responsibility for maintaining those facilities, MISO maintains functional control over the combined transmission systems of its members and administers wholesale energy and ancillary services markets for market participants in the MISO region, including the Utility operating companies. MISO also exercises functional control of transmission planning and congestion management and provides schedules and pricing for the commitment and dispatch of generation that is offered into MISO’s markets, as well as pricing for load that bids into the markets. The Utility operating companies sell capacity, energy, and ancillary services on a bilateral basis to certain wholesale customers and offer available electricity production of their owned and controlled generating facilities into the MISO resource adequacy construct (the annual Planning Resource Auction), as well as the MISO day-ahead and real-time energy markets pursuant to the MISO tariff and market rules. The resource adequacy construct provided under the MISO tariff confers certain rights and imposes certain obligations upon load-serving entities, including the Utility operating companies, that are served from the transmission systems subject to MISO’s functional control, including the transmission facilities of the Utility operating companies. The MISO tariff is subject to change and has recently undergone significant changes. As an example, MISO recently has made changes to its capacity accreditation methodology for thermal resources which emphasize performance during a very small subset of hours in which the supply of generation capacity needed to serve load is tightest. MISO is now pursuing a larger scale reassessment of its overall accreditation practices, including accreditation of renewable resources.

MISO administers a process governed by the MISO tariff and subject to the FERC regulation that governs the interconnection of new generation resources to the transmission system under MISO’s functional control. This process generally involves parties that wish to interconnect new generation resources submitting to MISO requests to do so, which are then studied and analyzed by MISO, with the participation of its member transmission owners, to determine if the interconnection of such generators requires new transmission facilities to ensure the continued reliable operations of the grid. Under MISO’s current tariff, these requests are studied and considered in clusters, generally in the order in which they are received – a system of priority known as the MISO interconnection queue.

Each Utility operating company has its own transmission pricing zone and a formula rate template (included as Attachment O to the MISO tariff) used to establish transmission rates within MISO. The terms and conditions of the MISO tariff, including provisions related to the design and implementation of wholesale markets and the allocation of transmission upgrade costs, are subject to regulation by the FERC.

In addition, orders from each of the Utility operating companies’ respective retail regulators generally require that the Utility operating companies make periodic filings, or generally allow the retail regulator to direct the making of such filings, setting forth the results of analysis of the costs and benefits realized from MISO
264

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

membership as well as the projected costs and benefits of continued membership in MISO and/or requesting approval of their continued membership in MISO.

System Energy and Related Agreements

System Energy recovers costs related to its interest in Grand Gulf through rates charged to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans for capacity and energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement (described below).  In 1998 the FERC approved requests by Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Mississippi to accelerate a portion of their Grand Gulf purchased power obligations.  Entergy Arkansas’s and Entergy Mississippi’s acceleration of Grand Gulf purchased power obligations ceased effective July 2001 and July 2003, respectively, as approved by the FERC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of proceedings at the FERC related to System Energy.

Unit Power Sales Agreement

The Unit Power Sales Agreement allocates capacity, energy, and the related costs from System Energy’s ownership and leasehold interests in Grand Gulf to Entergy Arkansas (36%), Entergy Louisiana (14%), Entergy Mississippi (33%), and Entergy New Orleans (17%).  Each of these companies is obligated to make payments to System Energy for its entitlement of capacity and energy on a full cost-of-service basis regardless of the quantity of energy delivered.  Payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement are System Energy’s only source of operating revenue.  The financial condition of System Energy depends upon the continued commercial operation of Grand Gulf and the receipt of such payments.  Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans generally recover payments made under the Unit Power Sales Agreement through rates charged to their customers.

In the case of Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana, payments are also recovered through sales of electricity from their respective retained shares of Grand Gulf.  Under a settlement agreement entered into with the APSC in 1985 and amended in 1988, Entergy Arkansas retains 22% of its 36% share of Grand Gulf-related costs and recovers the remaining 78% of its share in retail rates.  In the event that Entergy Arkansas is not able to sell its retained share to third parties, it may sell such energy to its retail customers at a price equal to its avoided cost, which is currently less than Entergy Arkansas’s cost from its retained share.  Entergy Arkansas has life-of-resources purchased power agreements with Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans that sell a portion of the output of Entergy Arkansas’s retained share of Grand Gulf to those companies.  In a series of LPSC orders, court decisions, and agreements from late 1985 to mid-1988, Entergy Louisiana was granted cost recovery with respect to costs associated with Entergy Louisiana’s share of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf, subject to certain terms and conditions.  Entergy Louisiana retains and does not recover from retail ratepayers 18% of its 14% share of the costs of Grand Gulf capacity and energy and recovers the remaining 82% of its share in rates.  Entergy Louisiana is allowed to recover through the fuel adjustment clause at 4.6 cents per kWh for the energy related to its retained portion of these costs.  Alternatively, Entergy Louisiana may sell such energy to non-affiliated parties at prices above the fuel adjustment clause recovery amount, subject to the LPSC’s approval. The remainder of Entergy Arkansas’s retained share is sold to Entergy Mississippi through a separate life-of-resource purchase power agreement with Entergy Mississippi. Entergy Arkansas also has a life-of-resources purchased power agreement with Entergy Mississippi to sell a portion of the output of Entergy Arkansas’s non-retained share of Grand Gulf. Entergy Mississippi was granted cost recovery for those purchases by the MPSC through its annual unit power cost rate mechanism.

Availability Agreement

The Availability Agreement among System Energy and Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans was entered into in 1974 in connection with the original financing by System Energy of Grand Gulf. The Availability Agreement provides that System Energy make available to Entergy
265

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans all capacity and energy available from System Energy’s share of Grand Gulf.

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans also agreed severally to pay System Energy monthly for the right to receive capacity and energy from Grand Gulf in amounts that (when added to any amounts received by System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement) would at least equal System Energy’s total operating expenses for Grand Gulf (including depreciation at a specified rate and expenses incurred in a permanent shutdown of Grand Gulf) and interest charges.

The allocation percentages under the Availability Agreement are fixed as follows: Entergy Arkansas - 17.1%; Entergy Louisiana - 26.9%; Entergy Mississippi - 31.3%; and Entergy New Orleans - 24.7%. The allocation percentages under the Availability Agreement would remain in effect and would govern payments made under such agreement in the event of a shortfall of operating expense funds available to System Energy from other sources, including payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

System Energy has assigned its rights to payments and advances from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans under the Availability Agreement as security for all of its outstanding series of first mortgage bonds, as well as for its outstanding term loan and the pollution control revenue refunding bonds issued on its behalf.  In these assignments, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans further agreed that, in the event they were prohibited by governmental action from making payments under the Availability Agreement (for example, if the FERC reduced or disallowed such payments as constituting excessive rates), they would then make subordinated advances to System Energy in the same amounts and at the same times as the prohibited payments. System Energy would not be allowed to repay these subordinated advances so long as it remained in default under the related indebtedness or in other similar circumstances.

Each of the assignment agreements relating to the Availability Agreement provides that Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans will make payments directly to System Energy. However, if there is an event of default, those payments must be made directly to the holders of indebtedness that are the beneficiaries of such assignment agreements. The payments must be made pro rata according to the amount of the respective obligations secured.

The obligations of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans to make payments under the Availability Agreement are subject to the receipt and continued effectiveness of all necessary regulatory approvals.  Sales of capacity and energy under the Availability Agreement would require that the Availability Agreement be submitted to the FERC for approval with respect to the terms of such sale. No such filing with the FERC has been made because sales of capacity and energy from Grand Gulf are being made pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement.  If, for any reason, sales of capacity and energy are made in the future pursuant to the Availability Agreement, the jurisdictional portions of the Availability Agreement would be submitted to the FERC for approval.

Since commercial operation of Grand Gulf began, payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement to System Energy have exceeded the amounts payable under the Availability Agreement and, therefore, no payments under the Availability Agreement to System Energy have ever been required.  However, if Entergy Arkansas or Entergy Mississippi fails to make its Unit Power Sales Agreement payments, and System Energy is unable to obtain funds from other sources, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans could become subject to claims or demands by System Energy or certain of its creditors for payments or advances under the Availability Agreement (or the assignments thereof) equal to the difference between their required Unit Power Sales Agreement payments and their required Availability Agreement payments because their allocated shares under the Availability Agreement exceed their allocated shares under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the Reallocation Agreement among System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans, pursuant to which Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans
266

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

assumed all of Entergy Arkansas’s responsibilities and obligations with respect to Grand Gulf under the Availability Agreement.

The Availability Agreement may be terminated, amended, or modified by mutual agreement of the parties thereto, without further consent of any assignees or other creditors.

Service Companies

Entergy Services, a limited liability company wholly-owned by Entergy Corporation, provides management, administrative, accounting, legal, engineering, and other services primarily to the Utility operating companies, as well as to Entergy’s non-utility operations business. Entergy Operations is also wholly-owned by Entergy Corporation and provides nuclear management, operations, and maintenance services under contract for ANO, River Bend, Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, subject to the owner oversight of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, respectively.  Entergy Services and Entergy Operations provide their services to the Utility operating companies and System Energy on an “at cost” basis, pursuant to cost allocation methodologies for these service agreements that were approved by the FERC.

Jurisdictional Separation of Entergy Gulf States, Inc. into Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas

Effective December 31, 2007, Entergy Gulf States, Inc. completed a jurisdictional separation into two vertically integrated utility companies, one operating under the sole retail jurisdiction of the PUCT, Entergy Texas, and the other operating under the sole retail jurisdiction of the LPSC, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana.  Entergy Texas owns all Entergy Gulf States, Inc. distribution and transmission assets located in Texas, the gas-fired generating plants located in Texas, undivided 42.5% ownership shares of Entergy Gulf States, Inc.’s 70% ownership interest in Nelson Unit 6 and 42% ownership interest in Big Cajun 2, Unit 3, which are coal-fired generating plants located in Louisiana, and other assets and contract rights to the extent related to utility operations in Texas.  Entergy Louisiana, as successor in interest to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, owns all of the remaining assets that were owned by Entergy Gulf States, Inc.  On a book value basis, approximately 58.1% of the Entergy Gulf States, Inc. assets were allocated to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and approximately 41.9% were allocated to Entergy Texas.

Entergy Texas purchases from Entergy Louisiana pursuant to a life-of-unit purchased power agreement a 42.5% share of capacity and energy from the 70% of River Bend subject to retail regulation.  Entergy Texas was allocated a share of River Bend’s nuclear and environmental liabilities that is identical to the share of the plant’s output purchased by Entergy Texas under the purchased power agreement.  In connection with the termination of the System Agreement proceedings,effective August 31, 2016, the purchased power agreements that were put in place for certain legacy units at the time of the jurisdictional separation were also terminated at that time. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the purchased power agreements.

Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana Business Combination

On October 1, 2015, the businesses formerly conducted by Entergy Louisiana (Old Entergy Louisiana) and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana) were combined into a single public utility. In order to effect the business combination, under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Old Entergy Louisiana allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Louisiana Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (New Entergy Louisiana), and New Entergy Louisiana assumed the liabilities of Old Entergy Louisiana, in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Under the TXBOC, Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary (New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana) and New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana assumed the liabilities of Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. New Entergy Gulf States Louisiana then merged into New Entergy Louisiana with New Entergy Louisiana surviving the merger. Thereupon, Old Entergy Louisiana changed its name from “Entergy Louisiana, LLC” to “EL Investment Company, LLC” and New Entergy Louisiana changed its name from “Entergy Louisiana Power, LLC” to “Entergy Louisiana, LLC” (Entergy Louisiana). With the
267

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

completion of the business combination, Entergy Louisiana holds substantially all of the assets, and has assumed the liabilities, of Old Entergy Louisiana and Old Entergy Gulf States Louisiana.

Entergy Arkansas Internal Restructuring

In November 2018, Entergy Arkansas undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Arkansas, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $32.7 million.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. converted from an Arkansas corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Arkansas, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Arkansas Power, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Arkansas Power), and Entergy Arkansas Power assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Arkansas, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Arkansas, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power.
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Arkansas Power to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Arkansas Power is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Arkansas, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Property, Inc., and Entergy Arkansas Power then changed its name to Entergy Arkansas, LLC. Entergy Arkansas, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Arkansas, Inc. The transaction was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

Entergy Mississippi Internal Restructuring

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Mississippi, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock, at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $21.2 million.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. converted from a Mississippi corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Mississippi, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Mississippi Power and Light), and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Mississippi, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Mississippi, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Enterprises, Inc., and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light then changed its name to Entergy Mississippi, LLC. Entergy Mississippi, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Mississippi, Inc. The restructuring was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.

Other Business Activities

Entergy’s non-utility operations business includes the ownership of interests in non-nuclear power plants that sell the electric power produced by those plants to wholesale customers. Entergy’s non-utility operations
268

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

business also provides decommissioning-related services to nuclear power plants owned by non-affiliated entities in the United States.

Property

Entergy’s non-utility operations business owns interests in the following non-nuclear power plants:
PlantLocationOwnershipNet Owned Capacity (a)Type
Independence Unit 2; 842 MWNewark, AR14%121 MW(b)Coal
Nelson Unit 6; 550 MWWestlake, LA11%60 MW(b)Coal

(a)“Net Owned Capacity” refers to the nameplate rating on the generating unit.
(b)The owned MW capacity is the portion of the plant capacity owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations business.  For a complete listing of Entergy’s jointly-owned generating stations, refer to “Jointly-Owned Generating Stations” in Note 1 to the financial statements.

All generation owned by Entergy’s non-utility operations business falls under the authority of MISO. Customers for the sale of both energy and capacity from its owned generation and contracted power purchases include retail power providers, utilities, electric power co-operatives, power trading organizations, and other power generation companies. The majority of the non-utility operations businesses’ owned generation and contracted power purchases are sold under a cost-based contract.

TLG Services, a subsidiary in Entergy’s non-utility operations business, offers decommissioning, engineering, and related services to nuclear power plant owners.

Regulation of Entergy’s Business

Federal Power Act

The Federal Power Act provides the FERC the authority to regulate:

the transmission and wholesale sale of electric energy in interstate commerce;
the reliability of the high voltage interstate transmission system through reliability standards;
sale or acquisition of certain assets;
securities issuances;
the licensing of certain hydroelectric projects;
certain other activities, including accounting policies and practices of electric and gas utilities; and
changes in control of FERC jurisdictional entities or rate schedules.

The Federal Power Act gives the FERC jurisdiction over the rates charged by System Energy for Grand Gulf capacity and energy provided to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans and over the rates charged by Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Louisiana to unaffiliated wholesale customers. The FERC also regulates wholesale power sales between the Utility operating companies. In addition, the FERC regulates the MISO RTO, an independent entity that maintains functional control over the combined transmission systems of its members and administers wholesale energy, capacity, and ancillary services markets for market participants in the MISO region, including the Utility operating companies. FERC regulation of the MISO RTO includes regulation of the design and implementation of the wholesale markets administered by the MISO RTO, as well as the rates, terms, and conditions of open access transmission service over the member systems and the allocation of costs associated with transmission upgrades.

269

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Arkansas holds a FERC license that expires in 2053 for two hydroelectric projects totaling 65 MW of capacity.

State Regulation

Utility

Entergy Arkansas is subject to regulation by the APSC as to the following:

utility service;
utility service areas;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the energy cost recovery rider;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
the acquisition, sale, or lease of any public utility plant or property constituting an operating unit or system;
certificates of convenience and necessity and certificates of environmental compatibility and public need, as applicable, for generating and transmission facilities;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
net energy metering;
integrated resource planning;
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control; and
the issuance and sale of certain securities.

Additionally, Entergy Arkansas serves a limited number of retail customers in Tennessee. Pursuant to legislation enacted in Tennessee, Entergy Arkansas is subject to complaints before the Tennessee Regulatory Authority only if it fails to treat its retail customers in Tennessee in the same manner as its retail customers in Arkansas. Additionally, Entergy Arkansas maintains limited facilities in Missouri but does not provide retail electric service to customers in Missouri. Although Entergy Arkansas obtained a certificate with respect to its Missouri facilities, Entergy Arkansas is not subject to retail ratemaking jurisdiction in Missouri.

Entergy Louisiana’s electric and gas business is subject to regulation by the LPSC as to the following:

utility service;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the fuel adjustment clause, environmental adjustment charge, and purchased gas adjustment charge;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
certification of certain transmission projects;
certification of capacity acquisitions, both for owned capacity and for purchase power contracts that exceed either 5 MW or one year in term;
procurement process to acquire capacity at or above 50 MW;
audits of the energy efficiency rider;
avoided cost payment to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control.

270

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy Mississippi is subject to regulation by the MPSC as to the following:

utility service;
utility service areas;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the energy cost recovery mechanism;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
certification of generating facilities, certain transmission projects, and certain distribution projects with construction costs greater than $10 million;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers, acquisitions, and other changes of control.

Entergy Mississippi is also subject to regulation by the APSC as to the certificate of environmental compatibility and public need for the Independence Station, which is located in Arkansas.

Entergy New Orleans is subject to regulation by the City Council as to the following:

utility service;
retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates;
fuel cost recovery, including audits of the fuel adjustment charge and purchased gas adjustment charge;
terms and conditions of service;
service standards;
audit of the environmental adjustment charge;
certification of the construction or extension of any new plant, equipment, property, or facility that comprises more than 2% of the utility’s rate base;
integrated resource planning;
net energy metering;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
issuance and sale of certain securities; and
utility mergers and acquisitions and other changes of control.

To the extent authorized by governing legislation, Entergy Texas is subject to the original jurisdiction of the municipal authorities of a number of incorporated cities in Texas with appellate jurisdiction over such matters residing in the PUCT.  Entergy Texas is also subject to regulation by the PUCT as to the following:

retail rates and charges, including depreciation rates, and terms and conditions of service in unincorporated areas of its service territory, and in municipalities that have ceded jurisdiction to the PUCT;
fuel recovery, including reconciliations (audits) of the fuel adjustment charges;
service standards;
certification of certain transmission and generation projects;
utility service areas, including extensions into new areas;
avoided cost payments to non-exempt Qualifying Facilities;
net energy metering; and
utility mergers, sales/acquisitions/leases of plants over $10 million, sales of greater than 50% voting stock of utilities, and transfers of controlling interest in or operation of utilities.

271

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Regulation of the Nuclear Power Industry

Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and Energy Reorganization Act of 1974

Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the operation of nuclear plants is heavily regulated by the NRC, which has broad power to impose licensing and safety-related requirements.  The NRC has broad authority to impose civil penalties or shut down a unit, or both, depending upon its assessment of the severity of the situation, until compliance is achieved. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, as owners of all or portions of ANO, River Bend and Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, respectively, and Entergy Operations, as the licensee and operator of these units, are subject to the jurisdiction of the NRC.

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

Spent Nuclear Fuel

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the DOE is required, for a specified fee, to construct storage facilities for, and to dispose of, all spent nuclear fuel and other high-level radioactive waste generated by domestic nuclear power reactors. Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have been charged fees for the estimated future disposal costs of spent nuclear fuel in accordance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. The affected Entergy companies entered into contracts with the DOE, whereby the DOE is to furnish disposal services at a cost of one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983, plus a one-time fee for generation prior to that date. Entergy Arkansas is the only one of the Utility operating companies that generated electric power with nuclear fuel prior to that date and has a recorded liability as of December 31, 2023 of $205.2 million for the one-time fee. The fees payable to the DOE may be adjusted in the future to assure full recovery.  Entergy considers all costs incurred for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, except accrued interest, to be proper components of nuclear fuel expense.  Provisions to recover such costs have been or will be made in applications to regulatory authorities for the Utility plants.  Entergy’s total spent fuel fees to date, including the one-time fee liability of Entergy Arkansas, have surpassed $1.7 billion (exclusive of amounts relating to Entergy plants that were paid or are owed by prior owners of those plants).

The permanent spent fuel repository in the U.S. has been legislated to be Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The DOE is required by law to proceed with the licensing of the Yucca Mountain repository (the DOE filed the license application in June 2008) and, after the license is granted by the NRC, proceed with the repository construction and commencement of receipt of spent fuel. Because the DOE has not begun accepting spent fuel, it is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and is in partial breach of its spent fuel disposal contracts. The DOE continues to delay meeting its obligation. Specific steps were taken to discontinue the Yucca Mountain project, including a motion to the NRC to withdraw the license application with prejudice and the establishment of a commission to develop recommendations for alternative spent fuel storage solutions. In August 2013 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered the NRC to continue with the Yucca Mountain license review, but only to the extent of funds previously appropriated by Congress for that purpose and not yet used. Although the NRC completed the safety evaluation report for the license review in 2015, the previously appropriated funds are not sufficient to complete the review, including required hearings. The government has taken no effective action to date related to the recommendations of the appointed spent fuel study commission. Accordingly, large uncertainty remains regarding the time frame under which the DOE will begin to accept spent fuel from Entergy’s facilities for storage or disposal. As a result, continuing future expenditures will be required to increase spent fuel storage capacity at Entergy’s nuclear sites.

Following the defunding of the Yucca Mountain spent fuel repository program, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and others sued the government seeking cessation of collection of the one mill per net kWh generated and sold after April 7, 1983 fee. In November 2013 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the DOE to submit a proposal to Congress to reset the fee to zero until the DOE complies with the Nuclear
272

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Waste Policy Act or Congress enacts an alternative waste disposal plan. In January 2014 the DOE submitted the proposal to Congress under protest, and also filed a petition for rehearing with the D.C. Circuit. The petition for rehearing was denied. The zero spent fuel fee went into effect prospectively in May 2014.

As a result of the DOE’s failure to begin disposal of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and the spent fuel disposal contracts, Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries have incurred and will continue to incur damages. These subsidiaries have been, and continue to be, involved in litigation to recover the damages caused by the DOE’s delay in performance. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of final judgments recorded by Entergy in 2021, 2022, and 2023 related to Entergy’s nuclear owner/licensee subsidiaries’ litigation with the DOE. Through 2023, Entergy’s subsidiaries have won and collected on judgments against the government totaling approximately $1 billion.

Pending DOE acceptance and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, the owners of nuclear plants are providing their own spent fuel storage.  Storage capability additions using dry casks began operations at ANO in 1996, at River Bend in 2005, at Grand Gulf in 2006, and at Waterford 3 in 2011.  These facilities will be expanded as needed.

Nuclear Plant Decommissioning

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy are entitled to recover from customers through electric rates the estimated decommissioning costs for ANO, Waterford 3, and Grand Gulf, respectively.  In addition, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Texas are entitled to recover from customers through electric rates the estimated decommissioning costs for the portion of River Bend subject to retail rate regulation. The collections are deposited in trust funds that can only be used in accordance with NRC and other applicable regulatory requirements.  Entergy periodically reviews and updates the estimated decommissioning costs to reflect inflation and changes in regulatory requirements and technology, and then makes applications to the regulatory authorities to reflect, in rates, the changes in projected decommissioning costs.

In December 2018 the APSC ordered collections in rates for decommissioning ANO 2 and found that ANO 1’s decommissioning was adequately funded without additional collections. In November 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed a revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that both ANO 1 and 2 decommissioning trusts were adequately funded without further collections, and in December 2021 the APSC ordered zero collections for ANO 1 and 2 decommissioning. In November 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed a revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that ANO 1’s decommissioning trust was adequately funded, but that ANO 2’s fund had a projected shortage as a result of a decline in decommissioning trust fund investment values over the past year. The filing proposed a reinstatement of decommissioning cost recovery for ANO 2. In December 2022 the APSC ordered reinstatement of decommissioning collections for ANO 2 in accordance with the request in the November 2022 filing. In November 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a further revised decommissioning cost recovery tariff for ANO indicating that ANO 1’s decommissioning trust continued to be adequately funded, but that ANO 2’s fund continued to require collections higher than those in effect. In December 2023 the APSC approved the proposed higher decommissioning collections for ANO 2.

In July 2010 the LPSC approved increased decommissioning collections for Waterford 3 and the Louisiana regulated share of River Bend to address previously identified funding shortfalls. This LPSC decision contemplated that the level of decommissioning collections could be revisited should the NRC grant license extensions for both Waterford 3 and River Bend. In July 2019, following the NRC approval of license extensions for Waterford 3 and River Bend, Entergy Louisiana made a filing with the LPSC seeking to adjust decommissioning and depreciation rates for those plants, including one proposed scenario that would adjust Louisiana-jurisdictional decommissioning collections to zero for both plants (including an offsetting increase in depreciation rates). Because of the ongoing public health emergency arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying economic uncertainty, Entergy Louisiana determined that the relief sought in the filing was no longer appropriate, and in November 2020, filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the proceeding. Following that filing, in a December 2020 order, the LPSC dismissed the proceeding without prejudice. In July 2021, Entergy Louisiana made a filing with the LPSC to adjust Waterford
273

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

3 and River Bend decommissioning collections based on the latest site-specific decommissioning cost estimates for those plants. The filing seeks to increase Waterford 3 decommissioning collections and decrease River Bend decommissioning collections. The procedural schedule in the case has been suspended pending settlement negotiations. In August 2023, Entergy Louisiana made another filing with the LPSC requesting to maintain the same total decommissioning funding collections as currently in effect for both Waterford 3 and River Bend combined, but also requesting to reallocate that same amount of funding by increasing the contributions for Waterford 3 and reducing the contributions for River Bend. In October 2023 a procedural schedule was adopted that includes a hearing date in August 2024. Management cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings.

In December 2010 the PUCT approved increased decommissioning collections for the Texas share of River Bend to address previously identified funding shortfalls.  In December 2018 the PUCT approved a settlement that eliminated River Bend decommissioning collections for the Texas jurisdictional share of the plant based on a determination by Entergy Texas that the existing decommissioning fund was adequate following license renewal. In July 2022, Entergy Texas filed a base rate case that proposed continuation of the cessation of River Bend decommissioning collections. In May 2023, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties to the base rate case an unopposed settlement, which included an agreement to maintain Entergy Texas’s decommissioning funding for River Bend at a revenue requirement of $0. In August 2023 the PUCT issued an order accepting the unopposed settlement, including the proposed decommissioning funding settlement terms.

In December 2016 the NRC issued a 20-year operating license renewal for Grand Gulf. In a 2017 filing at the FERC, System Energy stated that with the renewed operating license, Grand Gulf’s decommissioning trust was sufficiently funded, and proposed, among other things, to cease decommissioning collections for Grand Gulf effective October 1, 2017. The FERC accepted a settlement including the proposed decommissioning revenue requirement by letter order in August 2018.

Entergy currently believes its decommissioning funding will be sufficient for its nuclear plants subject to retail rate regulation, although decommissioning cost inflation and trust fund performance will ultimately determine the adequacy of the funding amounts.

Plant owners are required to provide the NRC with a biennial report (annually for units that have shut down or will shut down within five years), based on values as of December 31, addressing the owners’ ability to meet the NRC minimum funding levels. Depending on the value of the trust funds, plant owners may be required to take steps, such as providing financial guarantees through letters of credit or parent company guarantees or making additional contributions to the trusts, to ensure that the trusts are adequately funded and that NRC minimum funding requirements are met. In March 2023 filings with the NRC were made reporting on decommissioning funding for all of Entergy’s subsidiaries’ nuclear plants. Those reports showed that decommissioning funding for each of the nuclear plants met the NRC’s financial assurance requirements.

Additional information with respect to Entergy’s decommissioning costs and decommissioning trust funds is found in Note 9 and Note 16 to the financial statements.

Price-Anderson Act

The Price-Anderson Act requires that reactor licensees purchase and maintain the maximum amount of nuclear liability insurance available and participate in an industry assessment program called Secondary Financial Protection in order to protect the public in the event of a nuclear power plant accident.  The costs of this insurance are borne by the nuclear power industry.  Congress amended and renewed the Price-Anderson Act in 2005 for a term through 2025.  The Price-Anderson Act limits the contingent liability for a single nuclear incident to a maximum assessment of approximately $165.9 million per reactor (with 95 nuclear industry reactors currently participating).  In the case of a nuclear event in which Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, or System Energy is liable, protection is afforded through a combination of private insurance and the Secondary Financial Protection program. In addition to this, insurance for property damage, costs of replacement power, and other risks relating to
274

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

nuclear generating units is also purchased.  The Price-Anderson Act and insurance applicable to the nuclear programs of Entergy are discussed in more detail in Note 8 to the financial statements.

NRC Reactor Oversight Process

The NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process is a program to collect information about plant performance, assess the information for its safety significance, and provide for appropriate licensee and NRC response. The NRC evaluates plant performance by analyzing two distinct inputs: inspection findings resulting from the NRC’s inspection program and performance indicators reported by the licensee. The evaluations result in the placement of each plant in one of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix columns: “licensee response column,” or Column 1, “regulatory response column,” or Column 2, “degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 3, “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 4, and “unacceptable performance,” or Column 5. Plants in Column 1 are subject to normal NRC inspection activities. Plants in Column 2, Column 3, or Column 4 are subject to progressively increasing levels of inspection by the NRC with, in general, progressively increasing levels of associated costs. Continued plant operation is not permitted for plants in Column 5. All of the nuclear generating plants owned and operated by Entergy’s Utility business are currently in Column 1, except River Bend, which is in Column 2.

In July 2023 the NRC placed River Bend in Column 2, effective April 2023, based on failure to inspect wiring associated with the high pressure core spray system. In August 2023 the NRC issued a finding and notice of violation related to a radiation monitor calibration issue at River Bend. In December 2023, River Bend successfully completed the inspection on the high pressure core spray system issue and in February 2024, River Bend successfully completed the supplemental inspection for the radiation monitor calibration issue involving radiation monitor calibrations. River Bend will remain in Column 2 pending receipt of the formal report on the inspection, which is expected in first quarter 2024.

Environmental Regulation

Entergy’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.  Management believes that Entergy’s businesses are in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted below.  Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance requirements and costs cannot be precisely estimated.  Except to the extent discussed below, at this time compliance with federal, state, and local provisions regulating the discharge of materials into the environment, or otherwise protecting the environment, is incorporated into the routine cost structure of Entergy’s businesses and is not expected to have a material effect on their competitive position, results of operations, cash flows, or financial position.

Clean Air Act and Subsequent Amendments

The Clean Air Act and its amendments establish several programs that currently or in the future may affect Entergy’s fossil-fueled generation facilities and, to a lesser extent, certain operations at nuclear and other facilities.  Individual states also operate similar independent state programs or delegated federal programs that may include requirements more stringent than federal regulatory requirements.  These programs include:

new source review and preconstruction permits for new sources of criteria air pollutants, greenhouse gases, and significant modifications to existing facilities;
acid rain program for control of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx);
nonattainment area programs for control of criteria air pollutants, which could include fee assessments for air pollutant emission sources under Section 185 of the Clean Air Act if attainment is not reached in a timely manner;
hazardous air pollutant emissions reduction programs;
275

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Interstate Air Transport;
operating permit programs and enforcement of these and other Clean Air Act programs;
Regional Haze programs; and
new and existing source standards for greenhouse gas and other air emissions.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide and requires periodic review of those standards. When an area fails to meet an ambient standard, it is considered to be in nonattainment and is classified as “marginal,” “moderate,” “serious,” or “severe.” When an area fails to meet the ambient air standard, the EPA requires state regulatory authorities to prepare state implementation plans meant to cause progress toward bringing the area into attainment with applicable standards.

Ozone Nonattainment

Entergy Texas operates two fossil-fueled generating facilities (Lewis Creek and Montgomery County Power Station) in a geographic area that is not in attainment with the applicable NAAQS for ozone.  The ozone nonattainment area that affects Entergy Texas is the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria area.  Both Lewis Creek and the Montgomery County Power Station hold all necessary permits for operation and comply with applicable air quality program regulations. Measures enacted to return the area to ozone attainment could make these program regulations more stringent. Entergy will continue to work with state environmental agencies on appropriate methods for assessing attainment and nonattainment with the ozone NAAQS.

Potential SO2Nonattainment

The EPA issued a final rule in June 2010 adopting an SO2 1-hour national ambient air quality standard of 75 parts per billion.  In Entergy’s utility service territory, only St. Bernard Parish and Evangeline Parish in Louisiana are designated as nonattainment. In August 2017 the EPA issued a letter indicating that East Baton Rouge and St. Charles parishes would be designated by December 31, 2020, as monitors were installed to determine compliance. In March 2021 the EPA published a final rule designating East Baton Rouge, St. Charles, St. James, and West Baton Rouge parishes in Louisiana as attainment/unclassifiable and, in Texas, Jefferson County as attainment/unclassifiable and Orange County as unclassifiable. No challenges to these final designations were filed within the 60 day deadline. Entergy continues to monitor this situation.

Hazardous Air Pollutants

The EPA released the final Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS) rule in December 2011, which had a compliance date, with a widely granted one-year extension, of April 2016. The required controls have been installed and are operational at all affected Entergy units. In May 2020 the EPA finalized a rule that finds that it is not “appropriate and necessary” to regulate hazardous air pollutants from electric steam generating units under the provisions of section 112(n) of the Clean Air Act. This is a reversal of the EPA’s previous finding requiring such regulation. The final appropriate and necessary finding does not revise the underlying MATS rule. Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the appropriate and necessary finding. In February 2021 the D.C. Circuit granted the EPA’s motion to hold the litigation in abeyance pending the agency’s review of the appropriate and necessary rule. In February 2022 the EPA issued a proposed rule revoking the 2020 rule and determining, again, that it is “appropriate and necessary” to regulate hazardous air pollutants. In April 2023 the EPA issued a regulatory proposal to revise portions of the MATS rule, including a proposed reduction to the emission limit for filterable particulate matter. If finalized, the proposed lower filterable particulate matter emission limitation could require additional capital investment and/or additional other operation and maintenance costs at Entergy’s coal-fired generating units. Entergy is closely monitoring this rulemaking, in part through its various trade associations.

276

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Good Neighbor Plan/Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

In March 2005 the EPA finalized the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which was intended to reduce SO2 and NOx emissions from electric generation plants in order to improve air quality in twenty-nine eastern states. The rule required a combination of capital investment to install pollution control equipment and increased operating costs through the purchase of emission allowances. Entergy began implementation in 2007, including installation of controls at several facilities and the development of an emission allowance procurement strategy. Based on several court challenges, CAIR and its subsequent versions, now known as the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), have been remanded to and modified by the EPA on multiple occasions.

In June 2023 the EPA published its final Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), known as the Good Neighbor Plan, to address interstate transport for the 2015 ozone NAAQS which would increase the stringency of the CSAPR program in all four of the states where the Utility operating companies operate. The FIP would significantly reduce ozone season NOx emission allowance budgets and allocations for electric generating units. Entergy is currently assessing its compliance options for the FIP. Prior to issuance of the FIP, in February 2023 the EPA issued related State Implementation Plan (SIP) disapprovals for many states, including the four states in which the Utility operating companies operate, and these SIP disapprovals are the subject of many legal challenges, including a petition for review filed by Entergy Louisiana challenging the disapproval of Louisiana’s SIP. Stays of the SIP disapprovals have been granted in all four states in which the Utility operating companies operate, and the Good Neighbor Plan will not go into effect while the stays are in place. Decisions on the merits regarding the respective SIP disapprovals are expected in 2024. The final FIP also is subject to numerous legal challenges.

Regional Haze

In June 2005 the EPA issued its final Clean Air Visibility Rule (CAVR) regulations that potentially could result in a requirement to install SO2 and NOx pollution control technology as Best Available Retrofit Control Technology to continue operating certain of Entergy’s fossil generation units.  The rule leaves certain CAVR determinations to the states. This rule establishes a series of 10-year planning periods, with states required to develop SIPs for each planning period, with each SIP including such air pollution control measures as may be necessary to achieve the ultimate goal of the CAVR by the year 2064. The various states are currently in the process of developing SIPs to implement the second planning period of the CAVR, which addresses the 2018-2028 planning period.

The second planning period (2018-2028) for the regional haze program requires states to examine sources for impacts on visibility and to prepare SIPs by July 31, 2021 to ensure reasonable progress is being made to attain visibility improvements. Entergy received information collection requests from the Arkansas and Louisiana Departments of Environmental Quality requesting an evaluation of technical and economic feasibility of various NOx and SO2 control technologies for Independence, Nelson 6, NISCO, and Ninemile. Responses to the information collection requests were submitted to the respective state agencies. Louisiana issued its draft SIP which did not propose any additional air emissions controls for the affected Entergy units in Louisiana. Some public commenters, however, believe additional air controls are cost-effective. It is not yet clear how the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) will respond in its final SIP, and the agency, like many other state agencies, did not meet the July 31, 2021 deadline to submit a SIP to the EPA for review.

Similar to the LDEQ, the Arkansas Department of Energy and Environment, Division of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) did not meet the July 31, 2021 SIP submission deadline, but subsequently submitted it to the EPA for review. The ADEQ reviewed Entergy’s Independence plant but determined that additional air emission controls would not be cost-effective considering the facility’s commitment to cease coal-fired combustion by December 31, 2030.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has completed its second-planning period SIP and submitted it to the EPA for review. There were no Entergy sources selected for additional emission controls. The
277

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality also did not meet the July 31, 2021 SIP submission deadline and continues to develop its SIP, but there are no Entergy sources that are expected to be impacted.

In August 2022 the EPA issued findings of failure to submit regional haze SIPs to 15 states, including Louisiana and Mississippi. These findings were effective September 2022 and start the two-year period for the EPA to either approve a SIP submitted by the state or issue a final federal plan.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In April 2021, President Biden announced a target for the United States in connection with the United Nations’ “Paris Agreement” on climate change. The target consists of a 50-52 percent reduction in economy-wide net greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. President Biden has also stated that a goal of his administration is for the electric power industry to decarbonize fully by 2035.

Consistent with the Biden administration’s stated climate goals, in May 2023 the EPA proposed several rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing coal and gas-fired power plants. If finalized, the proposed requirements for existing “large and frequently used” gas turbine generating units could require significant investments in CO2 emission reduction technologies at certain of Entergy’s existing gas turbine units with a capacity of greater than 300 MW per combustion turbine and which operate at an annual capacity factor of greater than 50 percent. Comments on the proposed rules were submitted in August 2023 and Entergy is monitoring the rulemaking, in part through its trade associations.

Entergy continues to support national legislation that would most efficiently reduce economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions and increase planning certainty for electric utilities.  By virtue of its proportionally large investment in low-emitting generation technologies, Entergy has a low overall carbon dioxide emission “intensity,” or rate of carbon dioxide emitted per megawatt-hour of electricity generated.  In anticipation of the imposition of carbon dioxide emission limits on the electric industry, Entergy initiated actions designed to reduce its exposure to potential new governmental requirements related to carbon dioxide emissions.  These voluntary actions included a formal program to stabilize owned power plant carbon dioxide emissions at 2000 levels through 2005, and Entergy succeeded in reducing emissions below 2000 levels. In 2006, Entergy started including emissions from controllable power purchases in addition to its ownership share of generation and established a second formal voluntary program to stabilize power plant carbon dioxide emissions and emissions from controllable power purchases, cumulatively over the period, at 20% below 2000 levels through 2010.  In 2011, Entergy extended this commitment through 2020, which it ultimately outperformed by approximately 8% both cumulatively and on an annual basis.  In 2019, in connection with a climate scenario analysis following the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures describing climate-related governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets, Entergy announced a 2030 carbon dioxide emission rate goal focused on a 50% reduction from Entergy’s base year - 2000. In September 2020, Entergy announced a commitment to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 inclusive of all businesses, all applicable gases, and all emission scopes. In 2022, Entergy enhanced its commitment to include an interim goal of 50% carbon-free energy generating capacity by 2030 and expanded its interim emission rate goal to include all purchased power. See “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A for discussion of the risks associated with achieving these climate goals. Entergy’s comprehensive, third party verified greenhouse gas inventory and progress against its voluntary goals are published on its website.

278

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Potential Legislative, Regulatory, and Judicial Developments

In addition to the specific instances described above, there are a number of legislative and regulatory initiatives that are under consideration at the federal, state, and local level.  Because of the nature of Entergy’s business, the imposition of any of these initiatives could affect Entergy’s operations.  Entergy continues to monitor these initiatives and activities in order to analyze their potential operational and cost implications.  These initiatives include:

reconsideration and revision of ambient air quality standards downward which could lead to additional areas of nonattainment;
designation by the EPA and state environmental agencies of areas that are not in attainment with national ambient air quality standards;
introduction of bills in Congress and development of regulations by the EPA proposing further limits on SO2, mercury, carbon dioxide, and other air emissions.  New legislation or regulations applicable to stationary sources could take the form of market-based cap-and-trade programs, direct requirements for the installation of air emission controls onto air emission sources, or other or combined regulatory programs;
efforts in Congress or at the EPA to establish a federal carbon dioxide emission tax, control structure, or unit performance standards;
revisions to the estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon and its use for regulatory impact analysis of federal laws and regulations;
implementation of the regional cap and trade programs to limit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases;
efforts on the local, state, and federal level to codify renewable portfolio standards, clean energy standards, or a similar mechanism requiring utilities to produce or purchase a certain percentage of their power from defined renewable energy sources or energy sources with lower emissions;
efforts to develop more stringent state water quality standards, effluent limitations for Entergy’s industry sector, stormwater runoff control regulations, and cooling water intake structure requirements;
efforts to restrict the previously-approved continued use of oil-filled equipment containing certain levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and increased regulation of per- and polyfluorinated substances or other chemicals;
efforts by certain external groups to encourage reporting and disclosure of environmental, social, and governance risk;
the listing of additional species as threatened or endangered, the protection of critical habitat for these species, and developments in the legal protection of eagles and migratory birds;
the regulation of the management, disposal, and beneficial reuse of coal combustion residuals; and
the regulation of the management and disposal and recycling of equipment associated with renewable and clean energy sources such as used solar panels, wind turbine blades, hydrogen usage, or battery storage.

Clean Water Act

The 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (known as the Clean Water Act) provide the statutory basis for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program, section 402, and the basic structure for regulating the discharge of pollutants from point sources to waters of the United States.  The Clean Water Act requires virtually all discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States to be permitted.  Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act regulates cooling water intake structures, section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires a water quality certification from the state in support of certain federal actions and approvals, and section 404 of the Clean Water Act regulates the dredge and fill of waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands.

Federal Jurisdiction of Waters of the United States

In June 2020 the EPA’s revised definition of waters of the United States in the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) became effective, narrowing the scope of Clean Water Act jurisdiction, as compared to a 2015
279

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

definition which had been stayed by several federal courts. In August 2021 a federal district court vacated and remanded the NWPR for further consideration. The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) subsequently issued a statement that the agencies would revert to pre-2015 regulations pending a new rulemaking. In December 2022 the EPA and the Corps released a final definition of waters of the United States (the 2022 Rule) that replaces the NWPR with a definition that is consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime as interpreted by several United States Supreme Court decisions. The 2022 Rule was subject to multiple legal challenges and was enjoined from implementation or enforcement throughout Entergy’s utility service territory. In May 2023 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision limiting the scope of federal jurisdiction over wetlands, and in September 2023 the EPA and the Corps issued a final rule incorporating the Supreme Court decision. Most notably, the exclusion for waste treatment systems is retained.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), authorizes the EPA to mandate clean-up by, or to collect reimbursement of clean-up costs from, owners or operators of sites at which hazardous substances may be or have been released.  Certain private parties also may use CERCLA to recover response costs.  Parties that transported hazardous substances to these sites or arranged for the disposal of the substances are also deemed liable by CERCLA.  CERCLA has been interpreted to impose strict, joint, and several liability on responsible parties.  Many states have adopted programs similar to CERCLA.  Entergy subsidiaries have sent waste materials to various disposal sites over the years, and releases have occurred at Entergy facilities including nuclear facilities that have been sold to decommissioning companies.  In addition, environmental laws now regulate certain of Entergy’s operating procedures and maintenance practices that historically were not subject to regulation.  Some disposal sites used by Entergy subsidiaries have been the subject of governmental action under CERCLA or similar state programs, resulting in site clean-up activities.  Entergy subsidiaries have participated to various degrees in accordance with their respective potential liabilities in such site clean-ups and have developed experience with clean-up costs.  The affected Entergy subsidiaries have established provisions for the liabilities for such environmental clean-up and restoration activities.  Details of potentially material CERCLA and similar state program liabilities are discussed in the “System Agreement Cost Equalization ProceedingsOther Environmental Matters” section below.

Coal Combustion Residuals

In April 2015 the EPA published the final coal combustion residuals (CCR) rule regulating CCRs destined for disposal in landfills or surface impoundments as non-hazardous wastes regulated under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle D. The final regulations created new compliance requirements including modified storage, new notification and reporting practices, product disposal considerations, and CCR unit closure criteria but excluded CCRs that are beneficially reused in certain processes.  Entergy believes that on-site disposal options will be available at its facilities, to the extent needed. As of December 31, 2023, Entergy has recorded asset retirement obligations related to CCR management of $28 million.

Pursuant to the EPA Rule, Entergy operates groundwater monitoring systems surrounding its coal combustion residual landfills located at White Bluff, Independence, and Nelson. Monitoring to date has detected concentrations of certain listed constituents in the area, but has not indicated that these constituents originated at the active landfill cells. Reporting has occurred as required, and detection monitoring will continue as the rule requires. In late-2017, Entergy determined that certain in-ground wastewater treatment system recycle ponds at its White Bluff and Independence facilities require management under the new EPA regulations. Consequently, in order to move away from using the recycle ponds, White Bluff and Independence each installed a new permanent bottom ash handling system that does not fall under the CCR rule. As of November 2020, both sites are operating the new system and no longer are sending waste to the recycle ponds. Each site commenced closure of its two recycle ponds (four ponds total) prior to the April 11, 2021 deadline under the finalized CCR rule for unlined recycle ponds. Any potential requirements for corrective action or operational changes under the new CCR rule continue to be assessed. Notably, ongoing litigation has resulted in the EPA’s continuing review of the rule. Consequently, the nature and cost of additional corrective action requirements may depend, in part, on the outcome of the EPA’s review.
280

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Additionally, all three sites are preparing to implement measures to meet the new and updated Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELG). The nature, cost, and timing of those compliance measures depends on the guidance included in the final ELG rule, which is expected by mid-2024.

In May 2023 the EPA released a proposed rule establishing management standards for legacy CCR surface impoundments (i.e., inactive surface impoundments at inactive power plants) and establishing a new class of units referred to as CCR management units (i.e., non-containerized CCR located at a regulated CCR facility). Entergy does not have any legacy impoundments; however, the proposed definition of CCR management units appears to regulate on-site areas where CCR was beneficially used. This is contrary to the current CCR rule which exempts beneficial uses that meet certain criteria. Comments on the proposed rule were submitted in July 2023 and Entergy is monitoring the rulemaking, in part through its trade associations.

Other Environmental Matters

Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy Texas

The EPA notified Entergy that the EPA believes Entergy is a PRP concerning PCB contamination at the F.J. Doyle Salvage facility in Leonard, Texas. The facility operated as a scrap salvage business during the 1970s to the 1990s. In May 2018 the EPA investigated the site surface and sub-surface soils, and in November 2018 the EPA conducted a removal action, including disposal of PCB contaminated soils. Entergy responded to the EPA’s information requests in May and July 2019. In November 2020 the EPA sent Entergy and other PRPs a demand letter seeking reimbursement for response costs totaling $4 million expended at the site. Liability and PRP allocation of response costs are yet to be determined. In December 2020, Entergy responded to the demand letter, without admitting liability or waiving any rights, indicating that it would engage in good faith negotiations with the EPA with respect to the demand. An initial meeting between the EPA and the PRPs took place in June 2021. Negotiations between the PRPs and the EPA are ongoing.

Litigation

Entergy and its subsidiaries use legal and appropriate means to contest litigation threatened or filed against them, but the states in which Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries operate have proven to be unusually litigious environments.  Judges and juries in these states have demonstrated a willingness to grant large verdicts, including punitive damages, to plaintiffs in personal injury, property damage, and business tort cases.  The litigation environment in these states poses a significant business risk to Entergy.

Asbestos Litigation(Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

See Note 8 to the financial statements for a discussion of this litigation.

Employment and Labor-related Proceedings (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

See Note 8 to the financial statements for a discussion of these proceedings.

281

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Human Capital

Employees

Employees are an integral part of Entergy’s commitment to serving customers.  As of December 31, 2023, Entergy subsidiaries employed 12,177 people.

Utility:
Entergy Arkansas1,302 
Entergy Louisiana1,639 
Entergy Mississippi747 
Entergy New Orleans302 
Entergy Texas704 
System Energy— 
Entergy Operations3,349 
Entergy Services4,117 
Entergy Nuclear Operations14 
Other subsidiaries
Total Entergy12,177 

There are 3,104 employees represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the United Government Security Officers of America, and the International Union, Security, Police, and Fire Professionals of America.

Below is the breakdown of Entergy’s employees by gender and race/ethnicity:

Gender (%) (a)20232022
Female23.022.2
Male77.077.8

Race/Ethnicity (%) (a)20232022
White73.174.8
Black/African American18.217.3
Hispanic/Latino3.23.0
Asian3.22.3
Other2.32.6

(a)Based on employees who self-identify.

Entergy’s Approach to Human Resources

Entergy’s people and culture enable its success; that is why acquiring, retaining, and developing talent are important components of Entergy’s human resources strategy. Entergy focuses on an approach that includes, among other things, governance and oversight; safety; organizational health, including diversity, inclusion, and belonging; and talent management.

282

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Governance and Oversight

Ensuring that workplace processes support the desired culture and strategy begins with the Board of Directors and the Office of the Chief Executive. The Talent and Compensation Committee establishes priorities and each quarter reviews strategies and results on a range of topics covering diversity, culture, and commerce. It oversees Entergy’s incentive plan design and administers its executive compensation plans to incentivize the behaviors and outcomes that support achievement of Entergy’s corporate objectives. Annually, it reviews executive performance, development, succession plans, and talent pipeline to align a high performing executive team with Entergy’s priorities. The Talent and Compensation Committee also oversees Entergy’s performance through regular briefings on a wide variety of human resources topics including Entergy’s safety culture and performance; organizational health; and diversity, inclusion, and belonging initiatives and performance.

The Talent and Compensation Committee is responsible for overseeing and monitoring the effectiveness of Entergy’s human capital strategies, including its workforce diversity, inclusion, and organizational health and safety strategies, programs, and initiatives. In recognition of the importance that organizational health and diversity, inclusion, and belonging play in enabling Entergy to achieve its business strategies, the committee receives periodic reports on Entergy’s organization health and diversity, inclusion, and belonging programs, strategies, and performance, including briefings at each of its regular meetings. The committee also receives updates on Entergy’s performance to date on key diversity, culture, and commerce measures, including the representation of women and underrepresented minorities, both in the total workforce and in director level and above placements, progress in key diversity, inclusion, and belonging initiatives and diverse supplier spend.

Other committees of the Board oversee other key aspects of Entergy’s culture. For example, the Audit Committee reviews reports on enterprise risks, ethics, and compliance training and performance, as well as regular reports on calls made to Entergy’s ethics line and related investigations. To maximize the sharing of information and facilitate the participation of all Board members in these discussions, the Board schedules its regular committee meetings in a manner such that all directors can attend.

The Office of the Chief Executive, which includes the Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer, ensures annual business plans are designed to support Entergy’s talent objectives, reviews workforce-related metrics, and regularly discusses the development, succession planning, and performance of their direct reports and other company officers.

Safety

Entergy’s safety objective is: Everyone Safe. All Day. Every Day. Entergy employees achieved a total recordable incident rate of 0.49 in 2023 as compared to 0.51 in 2022 and 0.46 in 2021. The results of 2021 unfortunately included an employee fatality. Entergy has enhanced dramatically leadership efforts and field presence to further its objective of zero fatalities, which it achieved in 2022 and 2023, although in early 2024 Entergy experienced a contractor fatality. Also in 2023, there was a significant decrease in the number of serious injuries. The recordable incident rate equals the number of recordable incidents per 100 full-time equivalents. Recordable incidents include fatalities, lost-time accidents, restricted-duty accidents, and medical attentions.

Organizational Health, including Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging (DIB)

Entergy believes that organizational health fosters an engaged and productive culture that positions Entergy to deliver sustainable value to its stakeholders. Entergy measures its progress through an organizational health survey coordinated by an external third party. Since initially administering the survey in 2014, Entergy improved from an initial score of 49 (fourth quartile) to a score in 2021 of 63 (third quartile), in 2022 of 61 (third quartile), and in 2023 of 62 (third quartile). Although the score is nearly the same in 2023 as in 2022, Entergy has maintained improvement from the 2014 baseline. Improvement in behavioral expectations, which are the leading indicators of outcome improvements, indicates that Entergy is moving in a positive direction.
283

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


Entergy believes that creating a culture of diversity, inclusion, and belonging drives foundational engagement for all employees. Entergy is committed to developing and retaining a top-performing workforce that reflects the rich diversity of the communities it serves. In 2021, Entergy established a new Diversity and Workforce Strategies organization to serve as a center of excellence for workforce development, talent attraction/pipeline development, and organizational health and diversity. The organization supports Entergy’s actions to strengthen our partnerships with colleges and vocational-technical schools for a more viable pipeline of future talent while expanding efforts to increase employee engagement and cultivate an inclusive culture with high performance. Entergy continues to focus its actions to engage a diverse workforce, infusing DIB into hiring policies, practices, and procedures, aligning Employee Resource Group goals to business objectives, growing its DIB Champion network, ensuring that Entergy’s leadership development programs support all employees, and facilitating training from the executive leadership ranks down to the frontline. Through these efforts, Entergy aspires to create greater understanding and accountability regarding the behaviors and outcomes that are indicative of a premier utility.

Talent Management

Entergy’s focus on talent management is organized in three areas: developing and attracting a highly qualified, diverse pool of talent, equipping its leaders to develop the organization, and building premier utility capability through employee performance management and succession programs. Entergy believes that developing a diverse pool of local talent equipped with the skills needed, today and in the future, and reflecting the communities Entergy serves will give it a long-term competitive advantage. The focus of Entergy’s leadership development programs is to equip managers with the skills needed to effectively develop their teams and improve the leader-employee relationship. Entergy’s talent development infrastructure, which includes a combination of business function-specific and enterprise-wide learning and development programs, is designed to ensure Entergy has qualified staff with the skills, experiences, and behaviors needed to perform today and prepare for the future. Entergy strives to achieve its strategic priorities by aligning and enhancing team and individual performance with business objectives, effectively deploying talent through succession planning, and managing workforce transitions.

Availability of SEC filings and other information on Entergy’s website

Entergy electronically files reports with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, and amendments to such filings. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding registrants that file electronically with the SEC at https://www.sec.gov. Copies of the reports that Entergy files with the SEC can be obtained at the SEC’s website.

Entergy uses its website, https://www.entergy.com, as a routine channel for distribution of important information, including news releases, analyst presentations, and financial information.  Filings made with the SEC are posted and available without charge on Entergy’s website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC.  These filings include annual and quarterly reports on Forms 10-K and 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K (including related filings in XBRL format); proxy statements; and any amendments to such filings.  All such postings and filings are available on Entergy’s Investor Relations website free of charge.  Entergy is providing the address to its internet site solely for the information of investors and does not intend the address to be an active link.  Notwithstanding this reference or any references to the website in this report, the contents of the website are not incorporated into this report.

284

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Item 1A. Risk Factors

See “RISK FACTORS SUMMARY” in Part I, Item 1 for a summary of Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ risk factors.

Investors should review carefully the following risk factors and the other information in this Form 10-K.  The risks that Entergy faces are not limited to those in this section.  There may be additional risks and uncertainties (either currently unknown or not currently believed to be material) that could adversely affect Entergy’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.  See “FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION.”

Utility Regulatory Risks

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

The terms and conditions of service, including electric and gas rates, of the Utility operating companies and System Energy are determined through regulatory approval proceedings that can be lengthy and subject to appeal, potentially resulting in delays in effecting rate changes, lengthy litigation, the risk of disallowance of recovery of certain costs, and uncertainty as to ultimate results.

The Utility operating companies are regulated on a cost-of-service and rate of return basis and are subject to statutes and regulatory commission rules and procedures. The rates that the Utility operating companies and System Energy charge reflect their capital expenditures, operations and maintenance costs, allowed rates of return, financing costs, and related costs of service.  These rates significantly influence the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy and each of the Utility operating companies and System Energy.  These rates are determined in regulatory proceedings and are subject to periodic regulatory review and adjustment, including adjustment upon the initiative of a regulator or, in some cases, affected stakeholders. Regulators in a future rate proceeding may alter the timing or amount of certain costs for which recovery is allowed or modify the current authorized rate of return. Rate refunds may also be required, subject to applicable law.

In addition, regulators have initiated and may initiate additional proceedings to investigate the prudence of costs in the Utility operating companies’ and System Energy’s base rates and examine, among other things, the reasonableness or prudence of the companies’ operation and maintenance practices, level of expenditures (including storm costs and costs associated with capital projects), allowed rates of return and rate base, proposed resource acquisitions, and previously incurred capital expenditures that the operating companies seek to place in rates.  The regulators may disallow costs subject to their jurisdiction found not to have been prudently incurred or found not to have been incurred in compliance with applicable tariffs, creating some risk to the ultimate recovery of those costs.  Regulatory proceedings relating to rates and other matters typically involve multiple parties seeking to limit or reduce rates.  Traditional base rate proceedings, as opposed to formula rate plans, generally have long timelines, are primarily based on historical costs, and may or may not be limited in scope or duration by statute. The length of these base rate proceedings can cause the Utility operating companies and System Energy to experience regulatory lag in recovering costs through rates, such that the Utility operating companies may not fully recover all costs during the rate effective period and may, therefore, earn less than their allowed returns.  Decisions are typically subject to appeal, potentially leading to additional uncertainty associated with rate case proceedings. For a discussion of such appeals and related litigation for both the Utility operating companies and System Energy, see Note 2 to the financial statements.

The Utility operating companies have large customer and stakeholder bases and, as a result, could be the subject of public criticism or adverse publicity focused on issues including, but not limited to, the operation and maintenance of their assets and infrastructure, including with respect to climate or environmental matters, their preparedness for major storms or other extreme weather events and/or the time it takes to restore service after such
285

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

events, the quality of their customer service, including timely and accurate billing practices and ability to resolve customer complaints, and the reasonableness of the cost of their service. Criticism or adverse publicity of this nature could render legislatures and other governing bodies, public service commissions and other regulatory authorities, and government officials less likely to view the applicable operating company in a favorable light and could potentially negatively affect legislative or regulatory processes or outcomes, as well as lead to increased regulatory oversight or more stringent legislative or regulatory requirements or other legislation or regulatory actions that adversely affect the Utility operating companies.

The Utility operating companies and System Energy, and the energy industry as a whole, have experienced a period of rising costs and investments and an upward trend in spending, especially with respect to infrastructure investments, which is likely to continue in the foreseeable future and could result in more frequent rate cases and requests for, and the continuation of, cost recovery mechanisms, all of which could face resistance from customers and other stakeholders especially in a rising cost environment, whether due to inflation or high fuel prices or otherwise, and/or in periods of economic decline or hardship.  Significant increases in costs could increase financing needs and otherwise adversely affect Entergy, the Utility operating companies, and System Energy’s business, financial position, results of operation, or cash flows. For information regarding rate case proceedings and formula rate plans applicable to the Utility operating companies, see Note 2 to the financial statements.

Changes to state or federal legislation or regulation affecting electric generation, electric and natural gas transmission, distribution, and related activities could adversely affect Entergy and the Utility operating companies’ financial position, results of operations, or cash flows and their utility businesses.

If legislative and regulatory structures evolve in a manner that erodes the Utility operating companies’ exclusive rights to serve their regulated customers, such as through “retail open access” or otherwise, they could lose customers and sales and their results of operations, financial position, or cash flows could be materially affected. Additionally, technological advances in energy efficiency and distributed energy resources are reducing the costs of these technologies and, together with ongoing state and federal subsidies, the increasing penetration of these technologies could result in reduced sales by the Utility operating companies. Such loss of sales, due to the methodology used to determine cost of service rates or otherwise, could put upward pressure on rates, possibly resulting in adverse regulatory actions to mitigate such effects on rates. Further, the failure of regulatory structures to evolve to accommodate the changing needs and desires of customers with respect to the sourcing and use of electricity also could diminish sales by the operating companies. Entergy and the Utility operating companies cannot predict if or when they may be subject to changes in legislation or regulation, or the extent and timing of reductions of the cost of distributed energy resources, nor can they predict the impact of these changes on their results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

The Utility operating companies recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs through rate mechanisms that are subject to risks of delay or disallowance in regulatory proceedings, and sudden or prolonged increases in fuel and purchased power costs could lead to increased customer arrearages or bad debt expenses.

The Utility operating companies recover their fuel, purchased power, and associated costs from their customers through rate mechanisms subject to periodic regulatory review and adjustment.  Because regulatory review can result in the disallowance of incurred costs found not to have been prudently incurred or not reflected in rates as permitted by approved rate schedules and accounting rules, including the cost of replacement power purchased when generators experience outages or when planned outages are extended, with the possibility of refunds to ratepayers, there exists some risk to the ultimate recovery of those costs, particularly when there are substantial or sudden increases in such costs.  Regulators also may initiate proceedings to investigate the continued usage or the adequacy and operation of the fuel and purchased power recovery clauses of the Utility operating companies and, therefore, there can be no assurance that existing recovery mechanisms will remain unchanged or in effect at all.

286

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

The Utility operating companies’ cash flows can be negatively affected by the time delays between when gas, power, or other commodities are purchased and the ultimate recovery from customers of the costs in rates.  On occasion, when the level of incurred costs for fuel and purchased power rises dramatically, some of the Utility operating companies may agree to defer recovery of a portion of that period’s fuel and purchased power costs for recovery at a later date, which could increase the near-term working capital and borrowing requirements of those companies.  The Utility operating companies also may experience, and in some instances have experienced, an increase in customer bill arrearages and bad debt expenses due to, among other reasons, increases in fuel and purchased power costs, especially in periods of economic decline or hardship. For a description of fuel and purchased power recovery mechanisms and information regarding the regulatory proceedings for fuel and purchased power cost recovery, see Note 2 to the financial statements.

The Utility operating companies are subject to economic risks associated with participation in the MISO markets and the allocation of transmission upgrade costs. The operation of the Utility operating companies’ transmission system pursuant to the MISO RTO tariff and their participation in the MISO RTO’s wholesale markets may be adversely affected by regulatory or market design changes, as well as liability under, or any future inability to comply with, existing or future regulations or requirements.

The Utility operating companies are subject to economic risks associated with participation in the MISO markets and resource adequacy construct. MISO tariff rules and system conditions, including transmission congestion, could affect the Utility operating companies’ ability to sell capacity, energy, and/or ancillary services in certain regions and/or the economic value of such sales, or increase the cost of serving the Utility operating companies’ respective loads. MISO market rules may change or be interpreted in ways that cause additional cost and risk, including compliance risk. Additionally, each Utility operating company’s continued participation in MISO may be affected by the outcomes of proceedings at their respective retail regulators regarding the realized and expected costs and benefits associated with such Utility operating company’s ongoing participation in MISO.

The Utility operating companies participate in the MISO regional transmission planning process and are subject to risks associated with planning decisions that MISO makes in the exercise of control over the planning of the Utility operating companies’ transmission assets that are under MISO’s functional control. The Utility operating companies pay transmission rates that reflect the cost of transmission projects that the Utility operating companies do not own, which could increase cash or financing needs. Further, FERC policies and regulation addressing cost responsibility for transmission projects, including transmission projects to interconnect new generation facilities, may potentially give rise to cash and financing-related risks as well as result in upward pressure on the retail rates of the Utility operating companies, which, in turn, may result in adverse actions by the Utility operating companies’ retail regulators. In addition to the cash and financing-related risks arising from the potential additional cost allocation to the Utility operating companies from transmission projects of others or changes in FERC policies or regulation related to cost responsibility for transmission projects, there is a risk that the Utility operating companies’ business and financial position could be harmed as a result of lost investment opportunities and other effects that flow from an increased number of competitive projects being approved and constructed that are interconnected with their transmission systems.

Further, the terms and conditions of the MISO tariff, including provisions related to the design and implementation of wholesale markets, the allocation of transmission upgrade costs, the MISO-wide allowed base rate of return on equity, and any required MISO-related charges and credits are subject to regulation by the FERC. The operation of the Utility operating companies’ transmission system pursuant to the MISO tariff and their participation in the MISO wholesale markets, and the resulting costs, may be adversely affected by regulatory or market design changes, as well as liability under, or any future inability to comply with, existing or future regulations or requirements.

The MISO tariff provisions governing the rights and obligations associated with the resource adequacy construct provided under the MISO tariff are subject to change and have recently undergone significant changes, some of which are the subject of pending litigation and/or appeals. As an example, MISO recently has made
287

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

changes to its capacity accreditation methodology for thermal resources which emphasizes performance during a very small subset of hours in which the supply of generation capacity needed to serve load is tightest. MISO is now embarking on a larger scale reassessment of its overall accreditation practices, including accreditation of renewable resources. Due to their magnitude and, with respect to the changes already made, the speed with which they have been implemented, these changes carry risk, including compliance risk, and may result in material additional costs being passed through to the Utility operating companies’ customers in retail rates, including but not limited to additional capacity costs incurred in the annual MISO Planning Resource Auction. Also, by virtue of the Utility operating companies’ participation in MISO and the design and terms of the MISO resource adequacy construct, other load-serving entities served by the Utility operating companies’ transmission assets, which are under MISO’s functional control, may be able to circumvent reasonable resource planning obligations and avoid, in whole or in part, the full cost of procuring the resources reasonably needed to reliably supply their respective loads. In particular, the design of the current MISO resource adequacy construct and the absence of a minimum capacity obligation in MISO create a risk of other load-serving entities engaging in “free ridership” through their strategy for participation in the MISO resource adequacy construct and energy and ancillary services markets – specifically, by using energy and ancillary services available from the Utility operating companies’ owned and controlled generating units without paying a reasonable share of the cost of the capacity required to provide such energy and ancillary services. As a result, there are a variety of risks to the Utility operating companies and their customers, including the risk of bearing additional costs for resources needed to ensure reliable service, the risk of reduced reliability and the enhanced risk of outages and lost sales which, because of the methodology for establishing cost of service rates, presents the risk of upward pressure on the Utility operating companies’ rates.

In addition, a large volume of parties and individual generation resources are presently seeking to interconnect to the transmission system MISO administers and over which MISO exercises functional control. Due to the resources and time required to study and evaluate these numerous interconnection requests, including the effects of speculative requests and requests that are withdrawn at late stages of the process, the current MISO interconnection queue to review new requests is subject to significant delays or periods in which MISO does not accept new interconnection requests. These delays present risks to the Utility operating companies and their ability to develop and procure new generation resources to serve their respective loads.

For additional information on MISO regulation and the Utility operating companies’ membership in MISO, see “FederalRegulation of the Utility – Transmission and MISO Marketssection of Part I, Item 1.

Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ business, results of operations, and financial condition could be adversely affected by events beyond their control, such as public health crises, natural disasters, geopolitical tensions, or other catastrophic events.

Entergy and the Utility operating companies could be adversely affected by various events beyond their control, including, without limitation, public health crises, natural disasters, geopolitical tensions and other political instability, or other catastrophic events. Any of the foregoing, whether occurring locally, nationally, or globally, and the resulting effects thereof could lead to disruption of the general economy, impacts on the customers of the Utility operating companies, and disruption of the operations of Entergy’s subsidiaries, due to, among other things:

supply chain, vendor, and contractor disruptions, including shortages or delays in the availability of key components, parts, and supplies such as electronic components and solar panels;
delays in completion of capital or other construction projects, maintenance, and other operations activities, including prolonged or delayed refueling and maintenance outages;
adverse impacts on liquidity and cash flows, including through declining sales, reduced revenues, delays in receipts of customer payments, or increased bad debt expense;
delays in regulatory proceedings;
regulatory outcomes that require the Utility operating companies to postpone planned investments and otherwise reduce costs due to, for example, the impact of a public health crises or such other catastrophic events on their customers;
288

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

workforce availability challenges, including, for example, from infections, health, or safety issues resulting from a public health crisis;
increased storm recovery costs;
increased cybersecurity risks as a result of many employees telecommuting;
volatility in the credit or capital markets (and any related increased cost of capital or any inability to access the capital markets or draw on available credit facilities on favorable terms), which could in turn, cause a decrease in the value of its defined benefit pension or decommissioning trust funds;
adverse impacts on Entergy’s credit metrics or ratings;
governmental mandates in response to any such event; or
other adverse impacts on their ability to execute on business strategies and initiatives.

To the extent any of these events occur, the business, results of operations, and financial condition of Entergy and the Utility operating companies could be adversely affected.

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

A delay or failure in recovering amounts for storm restoration costs incurred as a result of severe weather, the impact on customer bills of permitted storm cost recovery, or the inability to securitize future storm restoration costs could have material effects on Entergy and its Utility operating companies.

Entergy’s and its Utility operating companies’ results of operations, liquidity, and financial condition can be materially affected by the destructive effects of severe weather. Severe weather can also result in significant outages for the customers of the Utility operating companies and, therefore, reduced revenues for the Utility operating companies during the period of the outages. A delay or failure in recovering amounts for storm restoration costs incurred, inability to securitize future storm restoration costs, or loss of revenues as a result of severe weather could have a material effect on Entergy and those Utility operating companies affected by severe weather, including lower credit ratings and, thus, higher costs for future debt issuances. The inability to recover losses either excluded by insurance or in excess of the insurance limits that can be secured economically also could have a material effect on Entergy and its Utility operating companies. In addition, the recovery of major storm restoration costs from customers could effectively limit our ability to make planned capital or other investments due to the impact of such storm cost recovery on customer bills, especially in a rising cost environment.

Weather, economic conditions, technological developments, and other factors may have a material impact on electricity and gas sales and otherwise materially affect the Utility operating companiesresults of operations and system reliability.

Temperatures above normal levels in the summer tend to increase electric cooling demand and revenues, and temperatures below normal levels in the winter tend to increase electric and gas heating demand and revenues.  As a corollary, mild temperatures in either season tend to decrease energy usage and resulting revenues.  Higher consumption levels coupled with seasonal pricing differentials typically cause the Utility operating companies to report higher revenues in the third quarter of the fiscal year than in the other quarters.  Changing weather patterns and extreme weather conditions, including hurricanes or tropical storms, droughts, wildfires, flooding events, or ice storms, the frequency or intensity of which may be exacerbated by climate change, may stress the Utility operating companies’ generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems, resulting in increased maintenance and capital costs (and potential increased financing needs), limits on their ability to meet peak customer demand, increased regulatory oversight, criticism or adverse publicity, and reduced customer satisfaction.  These extreme conditions could have a material effect on the Utility operating companies’ financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.

Entergy’s electricity sales volumes are affected by a number of factors including weather and economic conditions, trends in energy efficiency, new technologies, and self-generation alternatives, including the willingness
289

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

and ability of large industrial customers to develop co-generation facilities that greatly reduce their grid demand. In addition, changes to regulatory policies, such as those that allow customers to directly access the market to procure wholesale energy or those that incentivize development and utilization of new, developing, or alternative sources of generation, could, and in some instances, have reduced sales, and other non-traditional procurements, such as virtual purchase power agreements, could, and in some instances have limited growth opportunities or reduced sales at the Utility operating companies. Some of these factors are inherently cyclical or temporary in nature, such as the weather or economic conditions, and typically do not have a long-lasting effect on Entergy’s operating results.  Others, such as the organic turnover of appliances and lighting and their replacement with more efficient ones and adoption of newer technologies, including smart thermostats, new building codes, distributed energy resources, energy storage, demand side management, and rooftop solar, are having a more permanent effect by reducing sales growth rates from historical norms. As a result of these emerging efficiencies and technologies, the Utility operating companies may lose customers or experience lower average use per customer in the residential and commercial classes, and continuing advances have the potential to further limit sales or sales growth in the future.

The Utility operating companies also may face competition from other companies offering products and services to Entergy’s customers. Electricity sales to industrial customers, in particular, benefit from steady economic growth and favorable commodity markets; however, industrial sales are sensitive to changes in conditions in the markets in which its customers operate.  Negative changes in any of these or other factors, particularly sustained economic downturns or sluggishness, have the potential to result in slower sales growth or sales declines and increased bad debt expense, which could materially affect Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity. The Utility operating companies also may not realize anticipated or expected growth in industrial sales, such as from electrification opportunities to help such customers achieve their environmental and sustainability goals. This could occur because of changes in customers’ goals or business priorities, competition from other companies, or decisions by such customers to seek to achieve such goals through methods not offered by Entergy.

Nuclear Operating, Shutdown, and Regulatory Risks

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy)

Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy are expected to consistently operate their nuclear power plants at high capacity factors in order to be successful, and lower capacity factors could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Nuclear capacity factors significantly affect the results of operations of certain Utility operating companies and System Energy.  Nuclear plant operations involve substantial fixed operating costs.  Consequently, there is pressure on plant owners to operate nuclear power plants at higher capacity factors, though such operations always must be consistent with safety, reliability, and nuclear regulatory requirements. For the Utility operating companies that own nuclear plants, lower nuclear plant capacity factors can increase production costs by requiring the affected companies to generate additional energy, sometimes at higher costs, from their owned or contractually controlled facilities or purchase additional energy in the spot or forward markets in order to satisfy their supply needs.

Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy periodically shut down their nuclear power plants to replenish fuel.  Plant maintenance and upgrades are often scheduled during such refueling outages.  If refueling outages last longer than anticipated or if unplanned outages arise, Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity could be materially affected.

Outages at nuclear power plants to replenish fuel require the plant to be “turned off.”  Refueling outages generally are planned to occur once every 18 to 24 months.  Plant maintenance and upgrades are often scheduled during such planned outages, which may extend the planned outage duration beyond that required for only refueling activities.  When refueling outages last longer than anticipated or a plant experiences unplanned outages, capacity factors decrease, and maintenance costs may increase.
290

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy face risks related to the purchase of uranium fuel (and its conversion, enrichment, and fabrication). These risks could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Based upon currently planned fuel cycles, Entergy’s nuclear units have a diversified portfolio of contracts and inventory that provides substantially adequate nuclear fuel materials and conversion and enrichment services at what Entergy believes are reasonably predictable prices through the end of 2027. Entergy’s ability to purchase nuclear fuel at reasonably predictable prices, however, depends upon the performance reliability of uranium miners. While there are a number of possible alternate suppliers that may be accessed to mitigate any supplier performance failure, the pricing of any such alternate uranium supply from the market will be dependent upon the market for uranium supply at that time. Entergy buys uranium from a diversified mix of sellers located in a diversified mix of countries, and from time to time purchases from nearly all qualified reliable major market participants worldwide that sell into the U.S. Market prices for nuclear fuel have been extremely volatile from time to time in the past and may be subject to increased volatility due to the imposition of tariffs, domestic purchase requirements, supply chain disruptions, limitations or bans on importation of uranium or uranium products from foreign countries, evolving geopolitical conditions such as the wars between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas, the Nigerien coup, or shifting trade arrangements or sanctions between countries.  Although Entergy’s nuclear fuel contract portfolio provides a degree of hedging against market risks for several years, costs for nuclear fuel in the future cannot be predicted with certainty due to inherent market uncertainties, as well as uncertainties arising from geopolitical conflicts, and price changes could materially affect the liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations of certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy.

Entergy’s ability to assure uninterrupted nuclear fuel supply also depends upon the performance and reliability of conversion, enrichment, and fabrication services providers. These service providers are fewer in number than uranium suppliers. For conversion and enrichment services, Entergy diversifies its supply by supplier and country and may take special measures to ensure a reliable supply of enriched uranium for fabrication into nuclear fuel. For fabrication services, each plant is dependent upon the performance of the fabricator of that plant’s nuclear fuel; therefore, Entergy relies upon additional monitoring, inspection, and oversight of the fabrication process to assure reliability and quality of its nuclear fuel. Certain of the suppliers and service providers are located in or dependent upon foreign countries, such as Russia, and international sanctions or tariffs impacting trade with such countries could further restrict the ability of such suppliers or service providers to continue to supply fuel or provide such services at acceptable prices or at all.  While such suppliers have performed as expected to date, the future inability of suppliers to perform such obligations could materially affect the liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations of certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy.

Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy face the risk that the NRC will change or modify its regulations, suspend or revoke their licenses, or increase oversight of their nuclear plants, which could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Under the Atomic Energy Act and Energy Reorganization Act, the NRC regulates the operation of nuclear power plants.  The NRC may modify, suspend, or revoke licenses, shut down a nuclear facility and impose civil penalties for failure to comply with the Atomic Energy Act, related regulations, or the terms of the licenses for nuclear facilities. Interested parties may also intervene in pending proceedings, which could result in prolonged proceedings. A change in the Atomic Energy Act, other applicable statutes, or the applicable regulations or licenses, or the NRC’s interpretation thereof, may require a substantial increase in capital expenditures or may result in increased operating or decommissioning costs and could materially affect the results of operations, liquidity, or financial condition of Entergy, certain of the Utility operating companies, or System Energy.  A change in the classification of a plant owned by one of these companies under the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process, which is the NRC’s program to collect information about plant performance, assess the information for its safety significance, and provide for appropriate licensee and NRC response, also could cause the owner of the plant to incur material additional costs as a result of the increased oversight activity and potential response costs associated with the
291

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

change in classification. For additional information concerning the current classification of the plants owned by Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, see “Regulation of Entergy’s Business- Regulation of the Nuclear Power Industry - NRC Reactor Oversight Process” in Part I, Item 1.

Events at nuclear plants owned by one of these companies, as well as those owned by others, may lead to a change in laws or regulations or the terms of the applicable licenses, or the NRC’s interpretation thereof, or may cause the NRC to increase oversight activity or initiate actions to modify, suspend, or revoke licenses, shut down a nuclear facility, or impose civil penalties.  As a result, if an incident were to occur at any nuclear generating unit, whether an Entergy nuclear generating unit or not, it could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy, certain of the Utility operating companies, or System Energy.

Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy are exposed to risks and costs related to operating and maintaining their nuclear power plants, and their failure to maintain operational efficiency at their nuclear power plants could materially affect Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

The nuclear generating units owned by certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy began commercial operations in the 1970s-1980s.  Older equipment may require more capital expenditures to keep each of these nuclear power plants operating safely and efficiently.  This equipment is also likely to require periodic upgrading and improvement.  Any unexpected failure, including failure associated with breakdowns, forced outages, or any unanticipated capital expenditures, could result in increased costs, some of which costs may not be fully recoverable by these Utility operating companies and System Energy in regulatory proceedings should there be a determination of imprudence.  Operations at any of the nuclear generating units owned and operated by Entergy’s subsidiaries could degrade to the point where the affected unit needs to be shut down or operated at less than full capacity.  If this were to happen, identifying and correcting the causes may require significant time and expense.  A decision may be made to close a unit rather than incur the expense of restarting it or returning the unit to full capacity.  For these Utility operating companies and System Energy, this could result in certain costs being stranded and potentially not fully recoverable in regulatory proceedings. In addition, the operation and maintenance of Entergy’s nuclear facilities require the commitment of substantial human resources that can result in increased costs.

Moreover, Entergy is becoming more dependent on fewer suppliers for key parts of Entergy’s nuclear power plants that may need to be replaced or refurbished, and in some cases, parts are no longer available and have to be reverse-engineered for replacement.  In addition, certain major parts have long lead-times to manufacture if an unplanned replacement is needed. This dependence on a reduced number of suppliers and long lead-times on certain major parts for unplanned replacements could result in delays in obtaining qualified replacement parts and, therefore, greater expense for certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy.

The costs associated with the storage of the spent nuclear fuel of certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy, as well as the costs of and their ability to fully decommission their nuclear power plants, could be significantly affected by the timing of the opening of a spent nuclear fuel disposal facility, as well as interim storage and transportation requirements.

Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy incur costs for the on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel.  The approval of a license for a national repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel, such as the one proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nevada, or any interim storage facility, and the timing of such facility opening, will significantly affect the costs associated with on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel.  For example, while the DOE is required by law to proceed with the licensing of the Yucca Mountain repository and, after the license is granted by the NRC, to construct the repository and commence the receipt of spent fuel, the NRC licensing of the Yucca Mountain repository is effectively at a standstill. These actions are prolonging the time before spent fuel is removed from Entergy’s plant sites.  Because the DOE has not accomplished its objectives, it is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and is in partial breach of its spent fuel disposal contracts, and Entergy has sued the DOE for such breach.  Furthermore, Entergy is uncertain as to when the DOE will commence acceptance of
292

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

spent fuel from its facilities for storage or disposal.  As a result, continuing future expenditures will be required to increase spent fuel storage capacity at the companies’ nuclear sites and maintenance costs on existing storage facilities, including aging management of fuel storage casks, may increase.  The costs of on-site storage are also affected by regulatory requirements for such storage.  In addition, the availability of a repository or other off-site storage facility for spent nuclear fuel may affect the ability to fully decommission the nuclear units and the costs relating to decommissioning.  For further information regarding spent fuel storage, see the “Critical Accounting EstimatesNuclear Decommissioning CostsSpent Fuel Disposal” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy and Note 8 to the financial statements.

Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy may be required to pay substantial retrospective premiums imposed under the Price-Anderson Act and/or by Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL) in the event of a nuclear incident, and losses not covered by insurance could have a material effect on Entergy’s and their results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

Accidents and other unforeseen problems at nuclear power plants have occurred both in the United States and elsewhere.  As required by the Price-Anderson Act, the Utility operating companies and System Energy carry the maximum available amount of primary nuclear off-site liability insurance with American Nuclear Insurers, which as of January 1, 2024 is $500 million for each operating site. Claims for any nuclear incident exceeding that amount are covered under Secondary Financial Protection. The Price-Anderson Act limits each reactor owner’s public liability (off-site) for a single nuclear incident to the payment of retrospective premiums into a secondary insurance pool, which is referred to as Secondary Financial Protection, up to approximately $165.9 million per reactor.  With 95 reactors currently participating, this translates to a total public liability cap of approximately $15.8 billion per incident.  The limit is subject to change to account for the effects of inflation, a change in the primary limit of insurance coverage, and changes in the number of licensed reactors.  As a result, in the event of a nuclear incident that causes damages (off-site) in excess of the primary insurance coverage, each owner of a nuclear plant reactor, including Entergy’s Utility operating companies and System Energy, regardless of fault or proximity to the incident, will be required to pay a retrospective premium, equal to its proportionate share of the loss in excess of the primary insurance level, up to a maximum of approximately $165.9 million per reactor per incident (Entergy’s maximum total contingent obligation per incident is approximately $830 million). The retrospective premium payment is currently limited to approximately $25 million per year per incident per reactor until the aggregate public liability for each licensee is paid up to the $165.9 million cap.

NEIL is a utility industry mutual insurance company, owned by its members, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy. NEIL provides onsite property and decontamination coverage. All member plants could be subject to an annual assessment (retrospective premium of up to 10 times current annual premium for all policies) should the NEIL surplus (reserve) be significantly depleted due toinsured losses.  As of April 1, 2023, the maximum annual assessment amounts total approximately $70 million for the Utility plants.

As mentioned above, as an owner of nuclear power plants, Entergy participates in industry self-insurance programs and could be liable to fund claims should a plant owned by a different company experience a major event.  Any resulting liability from a nuclear accident may exceed the applicable primary insurance coverage and require contribution of additional funds through the industry-wide program that could significantly affect the results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity of Entergy, certain of the Utility operating companies, or System Energy.

293

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

The decommissioning trust fund assets for the nuclear power plants owned by certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy may not be adequate to meet decommissioning obligations if market performance and other changes decrease the value of assets in the decommissioning trusts, if one or more of Entergy’s nuclear power plants is retired earlier than the anticipated shutdown date, if the plants cost more to decommission than estimated, or if current regulatory requirements change, which then could require significant additional funding.

Owners of nuclear generating plants have an obligation to decommission those plants.  Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy maintain decommissioning trust funds for this purpose.  Certain of the Utility operating companies and System Energy collect funds from their customers, which are deposited into the trusts covering the units operated for or on behalf of those companies.  Those rate collections, as adjusted from time to time by rate regulators, are generally based upon operating license lives and trust fund balances as well as estimated trust fund earnings and decommissioning costs.  Assets in these trust funds are subject to market fluctuations, will yield uncertain returns that may fall below projected return rates, and may result in losses resulting from the recognition of impairments of the value of certain securities held in these trust funds.

Under NRC regulations, nuclear plant owners are permitted to project the NRC-required decommissioning amount, based on an NRC formula or a site-specific estimate, and the amount that will be available in each nuclear power plant’s decommissioning trusts combined with any other decommissioning financial assurances in place.  The projections are made based on the operating license expiration date and the mid-point of the subsequent decommissioning process, or the anticipated actual completion of decommissioning if a site-specific estimate is used. If the projected amount of each individual plant’s decommissioning trusts exceeds the NRC-required decommissioning amount, then its NRC license termination decommissioning obligations are considered to be funded in accordance with NRC regulations.  If the projected costs do not sufficiently reflect the actual costs required to decommission these nuclear power plants, or if funding is otherwise inadequate, or if the formula, formula inputs, or site-specific estimate is changed to require increased funding, additional resources or commitments would be required.  Furthermore, depending upon the level of funding available in the trust funds, the NRC may not permit the trust funds to be used to pay for related costs such as the management of spent nuclear fuel that are not included in the NRC’s formula.  The NRC may also require a plan for the provision of separate funding for spent fuel management costs.

Further, federal or state regulatory changes, including mandated increases in decommissioning funding or changes in the methods or standards for decommissioning operations, may also increase the funding requirements of, or accelerate the timing for funding of, the obligations related to the decommissioning of the nuclear generating plant owned by certain of the Utility operating companies or System Energy or may restrict the decommissioning-related costs that can be paid from the decommissioning trusts.  Such changes also could result in the need for additional contributions to decommissioning trusts, or the posting of parent guarantees, letters of credit, or other surety mechanisms. As a result, under any of these circumstances, the results of operations, liquidity, and financial condition of Entergy, certain of the Utility operating companies, or System Energy could be materially affected.

An early plant shutdown (either generally or relative to current expectations), poor investment results, or higher than anticipated decommissioning costs (including as a result of changing regulatory requirements) could cause trust fund assets to be insufficient to meet the decommissioning obligations, with the result that certain of the Utility operating companies or System Energy may be required to provide significant additional funds or credit support to satisfy regulatory requirements for decommissioning, which, with respect to these Utility operating companies or System Energy, may not be recoverable from customers in a timely fashion or at all.

For further information regarding nuclear decommissioning costs, see the “Critical Accounting Estimates- Nuclear Decommissioning Costs” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy, and Notes 9 and 16 to the financial statements.

294

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

New or existing safety concerns regarding operating nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel could lead to restrictions upon the operation and decommissioning of Entergy’s nuclear power plants.

New and existing concerns are being expressed in public forums about the safety of nuclear generating units and nuclear fuel. These concerns have led to, and may continue to lead to, various proposals to federal regulators and governing bodies in some localities where Entergy’s subsidiaries own nuclear generating units for legislative and regulatory changes that might lead to the shutdown of nuclear units, additional requirements or restrictions related to spent nuclear fuel on-site storage and eventual disposal, or other adverse effects on owning, operating, and decommissioning nuclear generating units.  Entergy vigorously responds to these concerns and proposals.  If any of the existing proposals, or any proposals that may arise in the future with respect to legislative and regulatory changes, become effective, they could have a material effect on Entergy’s results of operations and financial condition.

Business Risks

(Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Entergy and its Registrant Subsidiaries depend on access to the capital markets and, at times, may face potential liquidity constraints, which could make it more difficult to handle future contingencies such as natural disasters or substantial increases in gas and fuel prices.  Disruptions in the capital and credit markets may adversely affect Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ ability to meet liquidity needs, or to access capital to operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital.

Entergy’s business is capital intensive and dependent upon its ability to access capital at reasonable rates and other terms.  At times there are also spikes in the price for natural gas and other commodities that increase the liquidity requirements of the Utility operating companies.  In addition, Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ liquidity needs could significantly increase in the event of a hurricane or other weather-related or unforeseen disaster similar to that experienced in Entergy’s service area with Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita in 2005, Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike in 2008, Hurricane Isaac in 2012, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta in 2020, and Winter Storm Uri and Hurricane Ida in 2021.  The occurrence of one or more contingencies, including an adverse decision or a delay in regulatory recovery of fuel or purchased power costs or storm restoration costs, an acceleration of payments or decreased credit lines, less cash flow from operations than expected, changes in regulation or governmental policy (including tax and trade policy), or other unknown or unforeseen events, could cause the financing needs of Entergy and its subsidiaries to increase.  In addition, accessing the debt capital markets more frequently in these situations may result in an increase in leverage.  Material leverage increases could negatively affect the credit ratings of Entergy, the Utility operating companies, and System Energy, which in turn could negatively affect access to the capital markets.

The inability to raise capital on favorable terms, particularly during times of high interest rates and inflation, and uncertainty or reduced liquidity in the capital markets, could negatively affect Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to maintain and to expand their businesses.  Access to capital markets could be restricted and/or borrowing costs could be increased due to certain sources of debt and equity capital being unwilling to invest in offerings to fund fossil fuel projects or companies that are impacted by extreme weather events, that rely on fossil fuels, or that are impacted by risks related to climate change. Factors beyond Entergy’s control may create uncertainty that could increase its cost of capital or impair its ability to access the capital markets, including the ability to draw on its bank credit facilities.  These factors include depressed economic conditions, a recession, increasing interest rates, inflation, sanctions, trade restrictions, political instability, war, terrorism, and extreme volatility in the debt, equity, or credit markets. Entergy and its subsidiaries are unable to predict the degree of success they will have in renewing or replacing their credit facilities as they come up for renewal.  Moreover, the size, terms, and covenants of any new credit facilities may not be comparable to, and may be more restrictive than, existing facilities.  If Entergy and its subsidiaries are unable to access the credit and capital markets on terms that are reasonable, they may have to delay
295

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

raising capital, issue shorter-term securities, and/or bear an unfavorable cost of capital, which, in turn, could impact their ability to grow their businesses, decrease earnings, significantly reduce financial flexibility, and/or limit Entergy Corporation’s ability to sustain its current common stock dividend level.

A downgrade in Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiariescredit ratings could negatively affect Entergy’s and its Registrant Subsidiariesability to access capital or the cost of such capital and/or could require Entergy or its subsidiaries to post collateral, accelerate certain payments, or repay certain indebtedness.

There are a number of factors that rating agencies evaluate to arrive at credit ratings for each of Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries, including each Registrant Subsidiary’s regulatory framework, ability to recover costs and earn returns, storm or climate risk exposure, diversification, and financial strength and liquidity.  If one or more rating agencies downgrade Entergy’s or any of the Registrant Subsidiaries’ ratings, particularly below investment grade, borrowing costs would increase, the potential pool of investors and funding sources would likely decrease, and cash or letter of credit collateral demands may be triggered by the terms of a number of commodity contracts, leases, and other agreements.

Most of Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ suppliers and counterparties require sufficient creditworthiness to enter into transactions.  If Entergy’s or the Registrant Subsidiaries’ ratings decline, particularly below investment grade, or if certain counterparties believe Entergy or the Utility operating companies are losing creditworthiness and demand adequate assurance under fuel, gas, and purchased power contracts, the counterparties may require posting of collateral in cash or letters of credit, prepayment for fuel, gas or purchased power or accelerated payment, or counterparties may decline business with Entergy or its subsidiaries.

The reputation of Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries may be materially adversely affected by negative publicity or the inability to meet its stated goals or commitments, among other potential causes.

As with any company, Entergy’s and its Registrant Subsidiaries’ reputations are an important element of their ability to effectively conduct their businesses. Entergy’s and its Registrant Subsidiaries’ reputations could be harmed by a variety of factors, including: failure of a generating asset or supporting infrastructure; failure to restore power after a hurricane or other severe weather event in a manner perceived as timely by regulators or customers; the incurrence of storm restoration costs perceived as excessive by regulators or customers; failure to effectively manage land and other natural resources; real or perceived violations of environmental regulations, including those related to climate change; real or perceived issues with Entergy’s safety culture or work environment; inability to meet their climate or human capital strategy goals, or failure to demonstrate meaningful progress toward such goals; inability to keep their electricity rates stable; inability to provide quality customer service, including timely and accurate billing; involvement in a class-action or other high-profile lawsuit; significant delays in construction projects; occurrence of or responses to cyber attacks, data breaches or physical- or cyber- security vulnerabilities; acts or omissions of Entergy management or acts or omissions of a contractor or other third party working with or for Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries, which actually or perceivably reflect negatively on Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries; measures taken to offset reductions in demand or to supply rising demand; a significant dispute with one of Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ customers or other stakeholders; or negative political and public sentiment resulting in a significant amount of adverse press coverage and other adverse statements affecting Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries.

Addressing any adverse publicity or regulatory scrutiny is time consuming and expensive and, regardless of the factual basis for the assertions being made (or lack thereof), can have a negative impact on the reputations of Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries, on the morale and performance of their employees, and on their relationships with their respective regulators, customers, investors, and commercial counterparties. Adverse publicity or regulatory scrutiny may also have a negative impact on Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ ability to take timely advantage of various business or market opportunities.

296

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Deterioration in Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ reputations may harm Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ relationships with their customers, regulators, and other stakeholders, may increase their cost of doing business, may interfere with its ability to attract and retain a qualified, inclusive, and diverse workforce, may impact Entergy’s or its Registrant Subsidiaries’ ability to raise debt capital, and may potentially lead to the enactment of new laws and regulations, or the modification of existing laws and regulations, that negatively affect the way Entergy or its Registrant Subsidiaries conduct their business, or may have a material adverse effect on their financial condition and results of operations.

Recent U.S. tax legislation may materially adversely affect Entergy’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 significantly changed the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, including taxation of U.S. corporations, by, among other things, reducing the federal corporate income tax rate, limiting interest deductions, and altering the expensing of capital expenditures. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 further significantly changed the U.S. Internal Revenue Code by, among other things, enacting a new corporate alternative minimum tax and expanding federal tax credits for clean energy production. The interpretive guidance issued by the IRS and state tax authorities may be inconsistent with Entergy’s own interpretation and the legislation could be subject to amendments, which could lessen or increase certain impacts of the legislation. Further, changes in tax legislation or guidance, or uncertainties regarding interpretation of such tax legislation or guidance, could impact interpretation of and negotiations around certain contractual arrangements with counterparties, which could result in unfavorable changes to such arrangements or delays. In addition, the retail regulatory treatment of the expanded tax credits and corporate alternative minimum tax included in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 could materially impact Entergy’s future cash flows, and this legislation and pending interpretive guidance could result in unintended consequences not yet identified that could have a material adverse impact on Entergy’s financial results and future cash flows.

Based on initial IRS guidance and current internal forecasts, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries may become subject to the corporate alternative minimum tax included in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 beginning in the next two to four years.

The tax rate decrease included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act required Entergy to record a regulatory liability for income taxes payable to customers. Such regulatory liability for income taxes is described in Note 3 to the financial statements. Depending on the outcome of IRS examinations or tax positions and elections that Entergy may make, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries may be required to record additional charges or credits to income tax expense.

See Note 3 to the financial statements for discussion of the effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on 2023, 2022, and 2021 results of operations and financial condition, the provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and the uncertainties associated with accounting for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the regulatory proceedings that have considered the effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. For further discussion of the effects of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, see the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 3 to the financial statements.

Changes in taxation as well as the inherent difficulty in quantifying potential tax effects of business decisions could negatively impact Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Entergy and its subsidiaries make judgments regarding the potential tax effects of various transactions and results of operations to estimate their obligations to taxing authorities, which judgment may prove to be incorrect or may be disputed by regulators or taxing authorities.  These tax obligations include income, franchise, real estate, sales and use, and employment-related taxes.  These judgments include provisions for potential adverse outcomes
297

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

regarding tax positions that have been taken.  Entergy and its subsidiaries also estimate their ability to utilize tax benefits, including those in the form of carryforwards for which the benefits have already been reflected in the financial statements.  Changes in federal, state, or local tax laws or interpretive guidance relating thereto, adverse tax audit results or adverse tax rulings on positions taken by Entergy and its subsidiaries could negatively affect Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity. The intended and unintended consequences of recently enacted legislation could have a material adverse impact on Entergy’s financial results and future cash flows. For further information regarding Entergy’s income taxes, see the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 3 to the financial statements.

Entergy and its subsidiaries’ ability to successfully execute on their business strategies, including their ability to complete strategic transactions, is subject to significant risks, and, as a result, they may be unable to achieve some or all of the anticipated results of such strategies, which could materially affect their future prospects, results of operations, and the realization of any anticipated benefits from such transactions.

Entergy and its subsidiaries’ future prospects and results of operations significantly depend on their ability to successfully implement their business strategies, including achieving Entergy’s climate goals and commitments, which are subject to business, regulatory, economic, shareholder activism and other risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond their control. As a result, Entergy and its subsidiaries may be unable to fully achieve the anticipated results of such strategies.

Additionally, Entergy and its subsidiaries have pursued and may continue to pursue strategic transactions including merger, acquisition, divestiture, joint venture, restructuring, or other strategic transactions. For example, each of Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans have entered into purchase and sale agreements to sell their respective regulated natural gas local distribution company businesses to a third-party. Also, a significant portion of Entergy’s utility business plan over the next several years includes the construction and/or purchase of a variety of solar facilities. These or other transactions and plans are or may become subject to regulatory approval and other material conditions or contingencies, including increased costs or delays resulting from supply chain disruptions, import tariffs, and other issues. The failure to complete these transactions or plans or any future strategic transaction successfully or on a timely basis could have an adverse effect on Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ financial condition or results of operations and the market’s perception of Entergy’s ability to execute its strategy. Further, these transactions, and any completed or future strategic transactions, involve substantial risks, including the following:

acquired businesses or assets may not produce revenues, earnings, or cash flow at anticipated levels;
acquired businesses or assets could have environmental, permitting, or other problems for which contractual protections prove inadequate;
Entergy and/or its subsidiaries may assume liabilities that were not disclosed to them, that exceed their estimates, or for which their rights to indemnification from the seller are limited;
Entergy may experience issues integrating businesses into its internal controls over financial reporting;
the acquisition or disposition of a business could divert management’s attention from other business concerns;
Entergy and/or its subsidiaries may be unable to obtain the necessary regulatory or governmental approvals to close a transaction, such approvals may be granted subject to terms that are unacceptable, or Entergy or its subsidiaries otherwise may be unable to achieve anticipated regulatory treatment of any such transaction or acquired business or assets; and
Entergy or its subsidiaries otherwise may be unable to achieve the full strategic and financial benefits that they anticipate from the transaction, or such benefits may be delayed or may not occur at all.

Entergy and its subsidiaries may not be successful in managing these or any other significant risks that they may encounter in acquiring or divesting a business, or engaging in other strategic transactions, which could have a material effect on their business, financial condition, or results of operations.
298

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy


The completion of capital projects, including the construction of power generation facilities, and other capital improvements, involve substantial risks.  Should such efforts be unsuccessful, the financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity of Entergy and the Utility operating companies could be materially affected.

Entergy’s and the Utility operating companies’ ability to complete capital projects, including the construction of power generation facilities, or make other capital improvements, such as transmission and distribution infrastructure replacements or upgrades, in a timely and cost-effective manner and within budget is contingent upon many variables and subject to substantial risks.  These variables include, but are not limited to, project management expertise, escalating costs for materials, labor, and environmental compliance, reliance on suppliers for timely and satisfactory performance, delays and cost increases, and supply chains and material constraints, including those that may result from major storm events, both within and outside of Entergy’s service area.  Delays in obtaining permits, challenges in securing sufficient land for the siting of solar panels and power generation facilities, shortages in materials and qualified labor, levels of public support or opposition, suppliers and contractors not performing as expected or required under their contracts and/or experiencing financial problems that inhibit their ability to fulfill their obligations under contracts, changes in the scope and timing of projects, poor quality initial cost estimates from contractors, the inability to raise capital on favorable terms, changes in commodity prices affecting revenue, fuel costs, or materials costs, downward changes in the economy, changes in law or regulation, including environmental compliance requirements, further direct and indirect trade and tariff issues, including those associated with imported solar panels, supply chain delays or disruptions, and other events beyond the control of the Utility operating companies may occur that may materially affect the schedule, cost, and performance of these projects.  If these projects or other capital improvements are significantly delayed or become subject to cost overruns or cancellation, Entergy and the Utility operating companies could incur additional costs and termination payments or face increased risk of potential write-off of the investment in the project.  In addition, the Utility operating companies could be exposed to higher costs and market volatility, which could affect cash flow and cost recovery, should their respective regulators decline to approve the construction of the project or new generation needed to meet the reliability needs of customers at the lowest reasonable cost.

For further information regarding capital expenditure plans and other uses of capital in connection with capital projects, including the potential construction and/or purchase of additional generation supply sources within the Utility operating companies’ service areas, see the “Capital Expenditure Plans and Other Uses of Capital” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy and each of the Registrant Subsidiaries.

Failure to attract, retain and manage an appropriately qualified workforce could negatively affect Entergy or its subsidiaries’ results of operations.

Entergy relies on a large and changing workforce, including employees, contractors, and temporary staffing. Certain factors, such as an aging workforce, mismatching of skill sets for current and future needs, failing to appropriately anticipate future workforce needs, workforce impacts from public health concerns, challenges competing with other employers offering fully remote or more flexible work options, rising salary and other labor costs, unavailability of contract resources, and labor disputes and work disruptions may lead to operating challenges and increased costs. The challenges include inability to attract or retain talent, lack of resources, loss of knowledge base, and the time required for skill development. Costs, including costs for contractors to replace employees, productivity costs, and safety costs, may increase. Failure to hire and adequately train replacement employees, or the future availability and cost of contract labor, may adversely affect the ability to manage and operate the business, especially considering the specialized workforce needs associated with nuclear generation facilities and new skills required to develop and operate a modernized, technology-enabled, and lower carbon power grid. If Entergy and its subsidiaries are unable to successfully attract, retain, and manage an appropriately qualified workforce, their results of operations, financial position, and cash flows could be negatively affected.

299

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy and its subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, may incur substantial costs to fulfill their obligations related to environmental and other matters.

The businesses in which Entergy’s subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, operate are subject to extensive environmental regulation by local, state, and federal authorities.  These laws and regulations affect the manner in which the Utility operating companies and System Energy conduct their operations and make capital expenditures.  These laws and regulations also affect how Entergy’s subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, manage air emissions, discharges to water, wetlands impacts, solid and hazardous waste storage and disposal, cooling and service water intake, the protection of threatened and endangered species, certain migratory birds and eagles, hazardous materials transportation, and similar matters.  Federal, state, and local authorities continually revise these laws and regulations, and the laws and regulations are subject to judicial interpretation and to the permitting and enforcement discretion vested in the implementing agencies.  Developing and implementing plans for facility compliance with these requirements can lead to capital, personnel, and operation and maintenance expenditures.  Violations of these requirements can subject the Utility operating companies and System Energy to enforcement actions, capital expenditures to bring existing facilities into compliance, additional operating costs or operating restrictions to achieve compliance, remediation and clean-up costs, civil penalties, and exposure to third parties’ claims for alleged health or property damages or for violations of applicable permits or standards.  In addition, Entergy and its subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, are subject to potential liability under these laws for the costs of remediation of environmental contamination of property now or formerly owned or operated by the Utility operating companies and System Energy and of property potentially contaminated by hazardous substances they generate.  The Utility operating companies currently are involved in proceedings relating to sites where hazardous substances have been released and may be subject to additional proceedings in the future.  Entergy’s subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy, have incurred and expect to incur significant costs related to environmental compliance.

Emissions of nitrogen and sulfur oxides, mercury, particulates, greenhouse gases, and other regulated emissions from generating plants potentially are subject to increased regulation, controls, and mitigation expenses.  In addition, existing environmental regulations and programs promulgated by the EPA often are challenged legally, or are revised or withdrawn by the EPA, sometimes resulting in large-scale changes to anticipated regulatory regimes and the resulting need to shift course, both operationally and economically, depending on the nature of the changes.  Risks relating to global climate change, initiatives to regulate, or otherwise compel reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, and water availability issues are discussed below.

Entergy and its subsidiaries may not be able to obtain or maintain all required environmental regulatory approvals.  If there is a delay in obtaining any required environmental regulatory approvals, or if Entergy and its subsidiaries fail to obtain, maintain, or comply with any such approval, the operation of its facilities could be stopped or become subject to additional costs.  For further information regarding environmental regulation and environmental matters, including Entergy’s response to climate change, see the “Regulation of Entergys Business– Environmental Regulation” section of Part I, Item 1.

Environmental and regulatory obligations intended to combat the effects of climate change, including by compelling greenhouse gas emission reductions or reporting, increasing clean or renewable energy requirements, or placing a price on greenhouse gas emissions, or the achievement of voluntary climate commitments could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy and Entergy’s subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies and System Energy.

In an effort to address climate change concerns, some federal, state, and local authorities are calling for additional laws and regulations aimed at known or suspected causes of climate change.  For example, the EPA, various environmental interest groups, and other organizations have focused considerable attention on CO2 emissions from power generation facilities and their potential role in climate change.  The EPA has promulgated regulations controlling greenhouse gas emissions from certain vehicles, and has proposed regulations for new,
300

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

existing, and significantly modified stationary sources of emissions, including electric generating units. Such regulations continue to evolve. Various states and regions of the U.S. have taken action to establish greenhouse gas limitations and trading programs. In Louisiana, the former Office of the Governor announced in 2020 the creation of a Climate Initiatives Task Force and issued an executive order that established a path to net-zero emissions by 2050, while in 2021, the City Council of New Orleans passed a renewable and clean portfolio standard that sets a goal of net-zero emissions by 2040 and absolute zero emissions by 2050. The impact that continued changes in the governmental response to climate change risk and any judicial interpretation thereof will have on existing and pending environmental laws and regulations related to greenhouse gas emissions currently is unclear.

Developing and implementing plans for compliance with greenhouse gas emissions reduction or reporting or clean/renewable energy requirements, or for achieving voluntary climate commitments can lead to additional capital, personnel, and operation and maintenance expenditures and could significantly affect the economic position of existing facilities and proposed projects. The operations of low or non-emitting generating units (such as nuclear units and solar facilities) at lower than expected capacity factors could require increased generation from higher emitting units, thus increasing Entergy’s greenhouse gas emission rate. Moreover, long-term planning to meet environmental requirements can be negatively impacted and costs may increase to the extent laws and regulations change prior to full implementation.  These requirements could, in turn, lead to changes in the planning or operations of balancing authorities or organized markets in areas where Entergy’s subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies or System Energy, do business. Violations of such requirements may subject the Utility operating companies to enforcement actions, capital expenditures to bring existing facilities into compliance, additional operating costs or operating restrictions to achieve compliance, civil penalties, and exposure to third parties’ claims for alleged health or property damages or for violations of applicable permits or standards.  Further, real or perceived violations of environmental regulations, including those related to climate change, or inability to meet Entergy’s voluntary climate commitments, could negatively impact Entergy’s reputation or inhibit Entergy’s ability to pursue its decarbonization objectives. To the extent Entergy believes any of these costs are recoverable in rates, however, additional material rate increases for customers could be resisted by Entergy’s regulators and, in extreme cases, Entergy’s regulators might attempt to deny or defer timely recovery of these costs.

Future changes in regulation or policies governing the reporting or emission of CO2 and other greenhouse gases or mix of generation sources could (i) result in significant additional costs to Entergy’s Utility operating companies, their suppliers, or customers, (ii) make some of Entergy’s electric generating units uneconomical to maintain or operate, (iii) result in the early retirement of generation facilities and stranded costs if Entergy’s Utility operating companies are unable to fully recover the costs and investment in generation, and (iv) increase the difficulty that Entergy and its Utility operating companies have with obtaining or maintaining required environmental regulatory approvals, each of which could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy and its subsidiaries.  In addition, lawsuits have occurred or are reasonably expected against emitters of greenhouse gases alleging that these companies are liable for personal injuries and property damage caused by climate change.  These lawsuits may seek injunctive relief, monetary compensation, and punitive damages.

In March 2019, Entergy voluntarily set a climate goal to achieve a 50 percent reduction in its carbon emission rate from the year 2000 by 2030. In September 2020, Entergy voluntarily committed to achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050. In November 2022, Entergy voluntarily set a climate goal to achieve 50 percent carbon-free energy capacity by 2030. Risks to achieving the 2030 and 2050 goals include, among other things, the ability to execute on renewable resource plans, regulatory approvals, customer demand for carbon-free energy that exceeds Entergy’s or its Utility operating companies’ ability to add lower carbon or carbon-free capacity, load growth, potential tariffs, carbon policy and regulation at the federal or state level, including mandates related to reliability standards, and supply chain costs and constraints. Technology research and development, innovation, and advancements in carbon-free generation are also critical to Entergy’s ability to achieve its 2050 commitment. Entergy cannot predict the ultimate impact of achieving these objectives, or the various implementation aspects, on its system reliability, or its results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

301

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

The physical effects of climate change could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy and its subsidiaries.

Potential physical risks from climate change include an increase in sea level, wind and storm surge damages, more frequent or intense hurricanes and wildfires, wetland and barrier island erosion, flooding and changes in weather conditions (such as increases in precipitation, drought, or changes in average temperatures), and potential increased impacts of extreme weather conditions or storms.  Entergy’s subsidiaries own assets in, and serve, communities that are at risk from sea level rise, changes in weather conditions, storms, floods, and loss of the protection offered by coastal wetlands.  A significant portion of the nation’s oil and gas infrastructure is located in these areas and susceptible to storm damage that could be aggravated by the physical impacts of climate change, which could give rise to fuel supply interruptions and price spikes. Entergy and its subsidiaries also face the risk that climate change could impact the availability and quality of water supplies necessary for operations.

Due in part to the recent increase in frequency and intensity of major storm activity along the Gulf Coast, Entergy is pursuing plans to accelerate investments that would enhance the resilience of the electric systems of the Utility operating companies to enable them to better withstand major storms or other significant weather events, to mitigate the cost of restoration of the electric system after major storms or other significant events, to enable more rapid restoration of electricity after major storm or other significant adverse events, and to deliver electricity to critical customers more immediately after such events. These plans are generally subject to approval by the Utility operating companies’ retail regulators and may not be approved in full or at all. The need for this investment and these expenditures could give rise to liquidity, capital or other financing-related risks as well as result in upward pressure on the retail rates of the Utility operating companies, which, particularly when combined with upward pressure resulting from the recovery of the costs of recent and future storms, may result in adverse actions by the Utility operating companies’ retail regulators or effectively limit the ability to make other planned capital or other investments.

Additionally, prolonged drought conditions and shifting weather patterns resulting from climate change as well as, among other things, buildup of dry vegetation in areas severely impacted by drought may increase the risk of severe wildfire events within the Utility operating companies’ service areas. Catastrophic wildfires occurring in the Utility operating companies’ service areas could give rise to large damage claims against Entergy or its subsidiaries for fire-related losses alleged to be the result of utility practices and/or the failure of electric and other utility equipment and could also cause Entergy or its subsidiaries to suffer reputational harm or face a more challenging operating, political and regulatory environment.

These and other physical changes could result in, among other things, changes in customer demand, increased costs associated with repairing and maintaining generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems resulting in increased maintenance and capital costs (and potential increased financing needs), limits on the Entergy system’s ability to meet peak customer demand, more frequent and longer lasting outages, increased regulatory oversight, criticism or adverse publicity, and lower customer satisfaction.  Also, to the extent that climate change adversely impacts the economic health of a region or results in energy conservation or demand side management programs, it may adversely impact customer demand and revenues.  Such physical or operational risks could have a material effect on Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.

A decline in the continued and future availability and quality of water for cooling, process, and sanitary uses could materially affect the financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity of Entergy and its subsidiaries.

Water is a vital natural resource that is also critical to Entergy and its subsidiaries.  Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ facilities use water for cooling, boiler make-up, sanitary uses, potable supply, and many other uses.  Entergy’s Utility operating companies also own and/or operate hydroelectric facilities.  Accordingly, water
302

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

availability and quality are critical to Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ business operations.  Impacts to water availability or quality could negatively impact both operations and revenues.

Entergy and its subsidiaries secure water through various mechanisms (ground water wells, surface waters intakes, municipal supply, etc.) and operate under the provisions and conditions set forth by the provider and/or regulatory authorities.  Entergy and its subsidiaries also obtain and operate in substantial compliance with water discharge permits issued under various provisions of the Clean Water Act and/or state water pollution control provisions. Regulations and authorizations for both water intake and use and for waste discharge can become more stringent in times of water shortages, low flows in rivers, low lake levels, low groundwater aquifer volumes, and similar conditions.  The increased use of water by industry, agriculture, and the population at large, population growth, saltwater intrusion, and the potential impacts of climate change on the availability of water resources may cause water use restrictions that affect Entergy and its subsidiaries.

The Utility operating companies, System Energy, and Entergy’s non-utility operations may incur substantial costs related to reliability standards.

Entergy’s business is subject to extensive and mandatory reliability standards.  Such standards, which are established by the NERC, the SERC, and other regional enforcement entities, are approved by the FERC and frequently are reviewed, amended, and supplemented.  Failure to comply with such standards could result in the imposition of fines or civil penalties, and potential exposure to third party claims for alleged violations of such standards.  The standards, as well as the laws and regulations that govern them, are subject to judicial interpretation and to the enforcement discretion vested in the implementing agencies.  In addition to exposure to civil penalties and fines, the Utility operating companies have incurred and expect to incur significant costs related to compliance with new and existing reliability standards, including costs associated with the Utility operating companies’ transmission system and generation assets.  In addition, the retail regulators of the Utility operating companies possess the jurisdiction, and in some cases have exercised such jurisdiction, to impose standards governing the reliable operation of the Utility operating companies’ distribution systems, including penalties if these standards are not met. The changes to the reliability standards applicable to the electric power industry are ongoing, and Entergy cannot predict the ultimate effect that the reliability standards will have on its Utility and Entergy’s non-utility operations.

Entergy and its subsidiaries may not be adequately hedged against changes in commodity prices, which could materially affect Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

To manage near-term and medium-term financial exposure related to commodity price fluctuations, Entergy and its subsidiaries, including the Utility operating companies, may enter into contracts to hedge portions of their purchase and sale commitments, fuel requirements, and inventories of natural gas, uranium and its conversion and enrichment, coal, refined products, and other commodities, within established risk management guidelines.  As part of this strategy, Entergy and its subsidiaries may utilize fixed- and variable-price forward physical purchase and sales contracts, futures, financial swaps, and option contracts traded in the over-the-counter markets or on exchanges.  However, Entergy and its subsidiaries normally cover only a portion of the exposure of their assets and positions to market price volatility, and the coverage will vary over time.  In addition, Entergy also elects to leave certain volumes during certain years unhedged.  To the extent Entergy and its subsidiaries have unhedged positions, fluctuating commodity prices can materially affect Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ results of operations and financial position.

Although Entergy and its subsidiaries devote a considerable effort to these risk management strategies, they cannot eliminate all the risks associated with these activities.  As a result of these and other factors, Entergy and its subsidiaries cannot predict with precision the impact that risk management decisions may have on their business, results of operations, or financial position.

303

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Entergy’s over-the-counter financial derivatives are subject to rules implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that are designed to promote transparency, mitigate systemic risk, and protect against market abuse. Entergy cannot predict the impact any proposed or not fully-implemented final rules will have on its ability to hedge its commodity price risk or on over-the-counter derivatives markets as a whole, but such rules and regulations could have a material effect on Entergy's risk exposure, as well as reduce market liquidity and further increase the cost of hedging activities.

Entergy has guaranteed or indemnified the performance of a portion of the obligations relating to hedging and risk management activities.  Reductions in Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ credit quality or changes in the market prices of energy commodities could increase the cash or letter of credit collateral required to be posted in connection with hedging and risk management activities, which could materially affect Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ liquidity and financial position.

The Utility operating companies and Entergy’s non-utility business are exposed to the risk that counterparties may not meet their obligations, which may materially affect the Utility operating companies and Entergy’s non-utility business.

The hedging and risk management practices of the Utility operating companies and Entergy's non-utility business are exposed to the risk that counterparties that owe Entergy and its subsidiaries money, energy, or other commodities will not perform their obligations.  Currently, some hedging agreements contain provisions that require the counterparties to provide credit support to secure all or part of their obligations to Entergy or its subsidiaries.  If the counterparties to these arrangements fail to perform, Entergy or its subsidiaries may enforce and recover the proceeds from the credit support provided and acquire alternative hedging arrangements, which credit support may not always be adequate to cover the related obligations.  In such event, Entergy and its subsidiaries might incur losses in addition to amounts, if any, already paid to the counterparties.  In addition, the credit commitments of Entergy’s lenders under its bank facilities may not be honored for a variety of reasons, including unexpected periods of financial distress affecting such lenders, which could materially affect the adequacy of its liquidity sources.

Market performance and other changes may decrease the value of benefit plan assets, which then could require additional funding and result in increased benefit plan costs.

The performance of the capital markets affects the values of the assets held in trust under Entergy’s pension and postretirement benefits plans.  A decline in the market value of the assets may increase the funding requirements relating to Entergy’s benefit plan liabilities and also result in higher benefit costs. As the value of the assets decreases, the “expected return on assets” component of benefit costs decreases, resulting in higher benefits costs. Additionally, asset losses are incorporated into benefit costs over time, thus increasing benefits costs.  Volatility in the capital markets has affected the market value of these assets, which has affected and may affect Entergy’s planned levels of contributions in the future.  Additionally, changes in interest rates affect the liabilities under Entergy’s pension and postretirement benefits plans; as interest rates decrease, the liabilities increase, potentially requiring additional funding and recognition of higher liability carrying costs.  The funding requirements of the obligations related to the pension benefit plans can also increase as a result of changes in, among other factors, retirement rates, life expectancy assumptions, or federal regulations.  For further information regarding Entergy’s pension and other postretirement benefits plans, refer to the “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” section of Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for Entergy and each of its Registrant Subsidiaries and Note 11 to the financial statements.

The litigation environment in the states in which the Registrant Subsidiaries operate poses a significant risk to those businesses.

Entergy and its subsidiaries and related entities are involved in the ordinary course of business in a number of lawsuits involving employment, commercial, asbestos, hazardous material and customer matters, and injuries and damages issues, among other matters.  The states in which Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries operate have
304

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

proven to be unusually litigious environments.  Judges and juries in these states have demonstrated a willingness to grant large verdicts, including punitive damages, to plaintiffs in personal injury, property damage, and business tort cases.  Entergy and its subsidiaries use legal and appropriate means to contest litigation threatened or filed against them, but the litigation environment in these states poses a significant business risk.

Terrorist attacks and sabotage, physical attacks, cyber attacks, system failures, data breaches or other disruptions of Entergy’s and its subsidiaries’ or their suppliers’ infrastructure or technology systems, including disruptions affecting other third parties ultimately connected to Entergy and its subsidiaries or their suppliers through the transmission grid, may adversely affect Entergy’s business and results of operations.

As an operator of critical infrastructure, Entergy and its subsidiaries face a heightened risk of physical attacks or acts or threats of terrorism, cyber attacks, including ransomware attacks, and data breaches, whether as a direct or indirect act against one of Entergy’s generation, transmission or distribution facilities, operations centers, infrastructure, or information technology systems used to manage, monitor, and transport power to customers and perform day-to-day business functions as well as against the systems of critical suppliers and contractors or other third parties interconnected through the grid. Like many businesses and operators of critical infrastructure, Entergy and its subsidiaries and their third-party suppliers have in the past and, will in the future, continue to be subject to cyber attacks, cybersecurity threats and attempts to compromise and penetrate the information technology systems of Entergy and its subsidiaries and disrupt their operations.

Entergy and its subsidiaries operate in a business that requires evolving information technology systems that include sophisticated data collection, processing systems, software, network infrastructure, and other technologies that are becoming more complex and may be subject to mandatory and prescriptive reliability and security standards. The functionality of Entergy’s technology systems depends on its own and its suppliers’ and their contractors’ technology. Suppliers’ and their contractors’ technology systems to which Entergy is connected directly or indirectly support a variety of business processes and activities to store sensitive data, including (i) intellectual property, (ii) proprietary business information, (iii) personally identifiable information of customers, employees, and others, and (iv) data with respect to invoicing and the collection of payments, accounting, procurement, and supply-chain activities. Any significant failure or malfunction of such information technology systems could result in loss of or inappropriate access to data or disruptions of operations.

There have been attacks and threats of attacks on energy infrastructure by cyber actors, including those associated with foreign governments. Further, attacks may become more frequent in the future as technology becomes more prevalent in energy infrastructure. An attack could affect Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ ability to operate, including its ability to operate the information technology systems and network infrastructure on which it relies to conduct business.

Given the rapid technological advancements of existing and emerging threats, including threats fueled by artificial intelligence, Entergy’s technology systems remain inherently vulnerable despite implementations and enhancements of the multiple layers of security and controls. In addition, the prevalent use of smartphones, tablets, and other wireless devices, as well as ongoing remote or hybrid work-from-home arrangement for a significant portion of Entergy’s employees and those of its contractors and vendors may also heighten these risks. If Entergy’s or its subsidiaries’ technology systems, or those of critical suppliers or contractors or other third parties interconnected through the grid, were compromised and unable to detect or recover in a timely fashion to a normal state of operations, Entergy or its subsidiaries could be unable to perform critical business functions that are essential to the company’s well-being and could result in a loss of or inappropriate access to its confidential, sensitive, and proprietary information, including personal information of its customers, employees, suppliers, and others in Entergy’s care. We cannot anticipate, detect, or implement fully preventive measures against all cybersecurity threats.

Any such attacks, failures, or data breaches could have a material effect on Entergy’s and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ business, financial condition, results of operations or reputation. Although Entergy and the Registrant
305

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Subsidiaries purchase insurance for cyber attacks and data breaches, such insurance prices have increased substantially, and coverage may not be adequate to cover all losses that might arise in connection with these incidents. Such incidents may also expose Entergy to an increased risk of litigation (and associated damages and fines). For information on our cybersecurity risk management, strategy, and governance, see “Item 1C. Cybersecurity” in Part I, Item 1C.

Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries are subject to risks associated with their ability to obtain adequate insurance at acceptable costs.

The global economic cost to insurers resulting from cyber attacks, natural disasters, and other catastrophic events, in addition to an increased focus on climate issues, could have disruptive effects on insurance markets. The availability of insurance capacity may decrease, and the insurance policies that Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries are able to obtain may have higher deductibles, higher premiums, and more restrictive terms and conditions. Further, the insurance policies of Entergy or the Registrant Subsidiaries may not cover all of their potential exposures or actual amounts of losses incurred.

Significant increases in commodity prices, other materials and supplies, and operation and maintenance expenses may adversely affect Entergy's results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

Entergy and its subsidiaries have observed and expect continued inflationary pressures related to commodity prices, other materials and supplies, and operation and maintenance expenses, including in the areas of labor, health care, and pension costs. The contracts for the construction of certain of the Utility operating companies’ generation facilities also have included, and in the future may include, price adjustment provisions that, subject to certain limitations, may enable the contractor to increase the contract price to reflect increases in certain costs of constructing the facility. These inflationary pressures could impact the ability of Entergy and its subsidiaries to control costs and/or make substantial investments in their businesses, including their ability to recover costs and investments, and to earn their allowed return on equity within frameworks established by their regulators while maintaining affordability of their services for their customers, in addition to having unpredictable effects on Entergy’s customers. Increases in commodity prices, other materials and supplies, and operation and maintenance expenses, including increasing labor costs and costs and funding requirements associated with Entergy's defined benefit retirement plans, health care plans, and other employee benefits, could increase their financing needs and otherwise adversely affect their results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity.

(Entergy New Orleans)

The effect of higher purchased gas cost charges to customers taking gas service may adversely affect Entergy New Orleans’s results of operations and liquidity.

Gas rates charged to retail gas customers are comprised primarily of purchased gas cost charges, which provide no return or profit to Entergy New Orleans, and distribution charges, which provide a return or profit to the utility.  Distribution charges recover fixed costs on a volumetric basis and, thus, are affected by the amount of gas sold to customers.  When purchased gas cost charges increase due to higher gas procurement costs, customer usage may decrease, especially in weaker economic times, resulting in lower distribution charges for Entergy New Orleans, which, given its relatively smaller size, could adversely affect results of operations. Purchased gas cost charges, which comprise most of a customer’s bill and may be adjusted monthly, represent gas commodity costs that Entergy New Orleans recovers from its customers.  Entergy New Orleans’s cash flows can be affected by differences between the time when gas is purchased and the time when ultimate recovery from customers occurs.

(Entergy Corporation and System Energy)

System Energy owns and, through an affiliate, operates a single nuclear generating facility, and it is dependent on sales to affiliated companies for all of its revenues. Certain contractual arrangements relating to
306

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

System Energy, the affiliated companies, and these revenues are the subject of ongoing litigation and regulatory proceedings. The aggregate amount of refunds claimed in these proceedings, after reduction for settlements reached with the MPSC and the APSC (subject in the latter case to approval by the FERC), exceeds the current net book value of System Energy. In the event of an adverse decision in one or more of these proceedings requiring the payment of substantial additional refunds, System Energy would be required to seek financing to pay such refunds which financing may not be available on terms acceptable to System Energy when required.

System Energy’s operating revenues are derived from the allocation of the capacity, energy, and related costs associated with its 90% ownership/leasehold interest in Grand Gulf.  Charges under the Unit Power Sales Agreement are paid by the Utility operating companies (other than Entergy Texas) as consideration for their respective entitlements to receive capacity and energy.  The useful economic life of Grand Gulf is finite and is limited by the terms of its operating license, which currently expires in November 2044. System Energy’s financial condition depends both on the receipt of payments from the Utility operating companies (other than Entergy Texas) under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and on the continued commercial operation of Grand Gulf. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including challenges with respect to System Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period.

The claims in these proceedings include claims for refunds and claims for rate adjustments. The aggregate amount of refunds claimed in these proceedings, after reduction for settlements reached with the MPSC and the APSC (subject in the latter case to approval by the FERC), exceeds the current net book value of System Energy. Entergy Corporation is not obligated to provide funding to System Energy to enable it to pay any such refunds. In the event that an adverse decision in one or more of these proceedings required the payment of substantial additional refunds, System Energy would need to source additional financing to pay such refunds. Such financing may not be available on terms acceptable to System Energy when required. System Energy and its debt securities have been subject to downgrade by rating agencies in the past, most recently in May 2023. Any further downgrade by one or more rating agencies could adversely affect the market prices of System Energy’s debt securities and otherwise adversely affect System Energy’s financial condition.

In addition, an order requiring System Energy to pay substantial additional refunds could result in a default and, in certain cases, acceleration under one or more of System Energy’s existing bond indentures, credit agreements, or other financing arrangements. Certain events constituting events of default under System Energy’s financing agreements may also result in defaults under, or acceleration with respect to, financing arrangements involving certain credit agreement and guarantee obligations of Entergy Corporation.

These proceedings are pending before their respective adjudicators and no final decisions have been reached. Thus, Entergy cannot predict with certainty the outcome of any of these proceedings, or the magnitude of any refunds or rate adjustments, and an adverse outcome in any of them could have a material adverse effect on Entergy’s or System Energy’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the proceedings. The Utility operating companies (other than Entergy Texas) have agreed to implement certain protocols for providing retail regulators with information regarding rates billed under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

For information regarding the Unit Power Sales Agreement, the sale and leaseback transactions and certain other agreements relating to certain Entergy System companies’ support of System Energy, see Notes 5 and 8 to the financial statements and the “Utility - System Energy and Related Agreements” section of Part I, Item 1.

307

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

(Entergy Corporation)

Entergy’s non-utility operations are subject to substantial governmental regulation and may be adversely affected by legislative, regulatory, or market design changes, as well as liability under, or any future inability to comply with, existing or future regulations or requirements.

Entergy’s non-utility operations are subject to regulation under federal, state, and local laws. Compliance with the requirements under these various regulatory regimes may cause Entergy’s non-utility operations to incur significant additional costs, and failure to comply with such requirements could result in the shutdown of the non-complying facility, the imposition of liens, fines, and/or civil or criminal liability.

Public utilities under the Federal Power Act are required to obtain FERC acceptance of their rate schedules for wholesale sales of electricity.  Entergy’s non-utility operations include legal entities that meet the definition of a “public utility” under the Federal Power Act by virtue of making wholesale sales of electric energy and/or owning wholesale electric transmission facilities. The FERC has granted those entities the authority to sell electricity at market-based rates.  The FERC’s orders that grant those entities market-based rate authority reserve the right to revoke or revise that authority if the FERC subsequently determines that those entities can exercise market power in transmission or generation, create barriers to entry, or engage in abusive affiliate transactions.  In addition, market-based sales are subject to certain market behavior rules, and if one of those entities were deemed to have violated one of those rules, they would be subject to potential disgorgement of profits associated with the violation and/or suspension or revocation of their market-based rate authority and potential penalties of up to $1.496 million per day per violation.  If one of those entities were to lose their market-based rate authority, it would be required to obtain the FERC’s acceptance of a cost-of-service rate schedule and could become subject to the accounting, record-keeping, and reporting requirements that are imposed on utilities with cost-based rate schedules.  This could have an adverse effect on the rates those entities charge for power from its facilities.

Entergy’s non-utility operations are also affected by legislative and regulatory changes, as well as by changes to market design, market rules, tariffs, cost allocations, and bidding rules imposed by the existing Independent System Operator.  The Independent System Operator that oversees the relevant wholesale power market has imposed, and in the future may continue to impose, mitigation, including price limitations, offer caps and other mechanisms, to address some of the volatility and the potential exercise of market power in that market.  These types of price limitations and other regulatory mechanisms may have an adverse effect on the profitability of Entergy’s non-utility operations’ generation facilities that sell energy and capacity into the wholesale power markets.

The regulatory environment applicable to the electric power industry is subject to changes as a result of restructuring initiatives at both the state and federal levels. Entergy cannot predict the future design of the wholesale power markets or the ultimate effect that the changing regulatory environment will have on Entergy’s non-utility operations.  In addition, in some of these markets, interested parties have proposed material market design changes, including the elimination of a single clearing price mechanism, have raised claims that the competitive marketplace is not working, and have made proposals to re-regulate the markets, impose a generation tax, or require divestitures by generating companies to reduce their market share.  Other proposals to re-regulate may be made and legislative or other attention to the electric power market restructuring process may delay or reverse the deregulation process, which could require material changes to business planning models.  If competitive restructuring of the electric power markets is reversed, modified, discontinued, or delayed, Entergy’s non-utility operations’ results of operations, financial condition, and liquidity could be materially affected.

308

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

As a holding company, Entergy Corporation depends on cash distributions from its subsidiaries to meet its debt service and other financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock, and has provided, and may continue to provide, capital contributions or debt financing to its subsidiaries, which would reduce the funds available to meet its other financial obligations.

Entergy Corporation is a holding company with no material revenue generating operations of its own or material assets other than the stock of its subsidiaries. Accordingly, all of its operations are conducted by its subsidiaries. Entergy Corporation has provided, and may continue to provide, capital contributions or debt financing to its subsidiaries, which would reduce the funds available to meet its financial obligations, including making interest and principal payments on outstanding indebtedness, and to pay dividends on Entergy’s common stock. Entergy Corporation’s ability to satisfy its financial obligations, including the payment of interest and principal on its outstanding debt, and to pay dividends on its common stock depends on the payment to it of dividends or distributions by its subsidiaries. The subsidiaries of Entergy Corporation are separate and distinct legal entities and have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay any dividends or make distributions to Entergy Corporation. The ability of such subsidiaries to make payments of dividends or distributions to Entergy Corporation depends on their results of operations and cash flows and other items affecting retained earnings, and on any applicable legal, regulatory, or contractual limitations on subsidiaries’ ability to pay such dividends or distributions. Prior to providing funds to Entergy Corporation, such subsidiaries have financial and regulatory obligations that must be satisfied, including among others, debt service and, in the case of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC and Entergy Texas, dividends and distributions on preferred securities. Any distributions from the Registrant Subsidiaries other than Entergy Texas and System Energy are paid directly to Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC and are therefore subject to prior payment of distributions on its preferred securities.

The hazardous activities associated with power generation could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.

Power generation involves hazardous activities, including acquiring, transporting and unloading fuel, operating large pieces of rotating equipment and delivering electricity to transmission and distribution systems. In addition to natural risks, such as earthquakes, floods, lightning, hurricanes and wind, hazards, such as fire, explosion, collapse, and machinery failure, are inherent risks in our operations which may occur as a result of inadequate internal processes, technological flaws, human error, or actions of third parties or other external events. The control and management of these risks depend upon adequate development and training of personnel and on operational procedures, preventative maintenance plans, and specific programs supported by quality control systems, which may not prevent the occurrence and impact of these risks.

The hazards described above, along with other safety hazards associated with our operations, can cause significant personal injury or loss of life, severe damage to and destruction of property, plant and equipment, contamination of, or damage to, the environment and suspension of operations. The occurrence of any one of these events may result in our being named as a defendant in lawsuits asserting claims for substantial damages, environmental cleanup costs, personal injury, and fines and/or penalties and may adversely affect our reputation.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 1C. Cybersecurity

Risk Management and Strategy

Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries maintain a security-risk-management system with defined roles, duties, governance, and accountability. Under this physical- and cyber-risk model, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries streamline security into a centralized program. The Chief Security Officer (CSO) is responsible for
309

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

establishing the security and reliability risk strategy, setting policies, monitoring controls and compliance, providing support activities, and reporting on the security program. The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) is responsible for establishing the cybersecurity strategy and implementing physical and cyber security systems for the security program. The Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer works with the CSO to address requirements of external security-related regulations, and where applicable, incorporate them into business policies. Management is responsible for identifying and managing risk directly through execution of the security program and compliance with security policies. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ risk management model addresses compliance with certain regulatory constructs, such as the NERC Reliability Standards, the NRC Code of Federal Regulations, the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, among other regulations. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ risk management model continuously evolves to improve and implement protections, controls, and monitoring to mitigate risks to their part of North America’s electric grid, to protect sensitive information, and to maintain secure business operations. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries manage cybersecurity threats as an enterprise risk with close coordination and information sharing with its federal, state, and local partners. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries also engage with local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies on initiatives to share threat information and participate in a wide range of industry collaborations and classified briefings on cybersecurity developments and evolving risks.

Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries maintain access-management controls, including a layered multi-factor authentication process for network and system access, and a defense-in-depth security ecosystem that includes advanced threat detection from independent third parties and federal agencies, security logging and monitoring, and independent third-party penetration and vulnerability assessments. Relevant employees and contractors must complete cybersecurity trainings periodically to heighten security and threat awareness, promote best practices, and meet regulatory requirements. Additional multi-layered prevention and detection processes and technologies to mitigate and minimize the effects of cybersecurity risks include email security, continuous monitoring, vulnerability scanning, anti-virus and anti-malware software, backups and recovery strategy, network segregation, third-party security, and information protection.

Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries have incorporated certain cyber-specific response protocols and procedures into their Entergy Incident Management System framework for responding to emergency incidents. This includes the Entergy Incident Response Team Plan, which outlines Entergy’s procedures, steps, and responsibilities for preparing for, detecting, containing, and recovering from an incident. The plan details the roles and responsibilities of Entergy’s officers who would be engaged in such a response to an emergency incident, including key questions to be addressed, critical decision points, and sources of key information to support decision-making. Senior management and the Emergency Incident Response Team periodically review and drill on the plan.

As cybersecurity risks continue to evolve with multiple threat vectors, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries maintain a comprehensive security strategy to keep current with the changing threats. To inform this effort, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries utilize the National Institute of Standards and Technology Cybersecurity Framework, which consists of standards, guidelines, and best practices to manage cybersecurity risk across the enterprise. A risk-based approach is used to direct security initiatives to the most significant risks and provide the most value in terms of risk reduction and protection. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries use a vendor risk management program to assess and monitor security risks that arise from third-party vendors. In addition, Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries utilize technology and threat intelligence services to assess and continuously monitor the cybersecurity risk of key vendors, as identified through the vendor risk management program.

While Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries have experienced cybersecurity incidents, except as otherwise summarized above or discussed elsewhere in this report, the risks from cybersecurity threats, including as a result of any previous cybersecurity incidents, have not materially affected them including their business strategy, results of operations, or financial condition. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A for a detailed description of the risks related to cybersecurity.

310

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

Corporate Governance

The Board of Directors is responsible for oversight of the identification, management, and mitigation of enterprise-wide risk, including cybersecurity risk. The Audit Committee has the primary responsibility for overseeing risk management, including oversight of cybersecurity risk management practices and performance. The Audit Committee generally receives reports at each regular quarterly meeting provided by the Chief Information Officer, the CSO, the CISO, and the General Auditor on the cybersecurity management program. The reports focus on the programs and protocols in place to mitigate cybersecurity risks, led by the CSO. Among other things, the reports may include: recent cyber risk and cybersecurity developments; industry engagement activities; legislative and regulatory developments; cyber-risk governance and oversight; selected cyber risk metrics and activities; cyber risk incident response plans and strategies; cybersecurity drills and exercises; assessments by third party experts and Internal Audit; and major projects and initiatives.

While the Board of Directors and Audit Committee oversee cybersecurity risk management, Entergy’s management is responsible for managing cybersecurity risk. Entergy and the Registrant Subsidiaries’ security-risk-management system, as discussed above, is comprised of a three lines of defense model to enhance risk management efforts and define roles in the security program. The first line of defense, comprised of business units performing operational functions, including the CISO, is responsible for identification and management of security and reliability risks directly through design, implementation, and execution of control activities. The second line of defense, comprised of the CSO and Chief Security Office, performs and supports security and reliability risk management and governs and oversees the execution of security and reliability controls by the first line of defense. Ownership of specific security operations may migrate from a business unit in the first line of defense to the second line of defense, as determined to be appropriate by the Chief Security Office. The third line of defense, which includes Internal Audit, independent third parties, and certain regulatory constructs, such as the NERC Reliability Standards and the NRC Cyber Rule, provides assurance of selective actions taken by the first and second lines of defense to senior management and the Board of Directors.

Entergy’s CSO is responsible for overseeing physical, cyber, and reliability risk, including governance, compliance, and threat intelligence. The CSO’s background includes serving as the Global Lead Business Information Security Officer for a multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology company, Vice President of Cybersecurity Solutions for an international consulting firm, and an operations manager for a multinational technology company. The CSO is also a former intelligence officer in the U.S. Marine Corps, with experience in the Fleet Marine Force, Joint Staff J-2/Defense Intelligence Agency, and Headquarters Marine Corps Command, Control, Communications, and Computers (C4I). The CSO participated in numerous exercises and crisis operations during his time in the military. The CSO is a certified Information Security Manager from the Information Systems Audit and Control Association and a certified Information Privacy Manager from the International Association of Privacy Professionals. The CSO also completed the Harvard Kennedy School Executive Education Program in Cybersecurity and the FBI Domestic Security Executive Academy.

Entergy’s CISO is responsible for enterprise strategic and operational cybersecurity, physical security systems, and regulatory compliance. The CISO oversees investments in tools, resources, and processes that allow for the continuous improvement and maturity of Entergy’s cybersecurity posture. The CISO has expertise spanning more than 25 years in the realm of information technology, information security, and cyber/physical security management. The CISO’s background includes serving as the Vice President and Chief Information Security Officer for an electric utility with responsibility for enterprise cybersecurity covering corporate, electric, nuclear, and gas operations. Additionally, the CISO served as the Chief Security Officer for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas with overall responsibility for its cybersecurity, physical security, and emergency management programs. Her previous experience includes multiple technical, managerial, and strategic roles within industries ranging from energy, telecommunication, software development, and cybersecurity consulting. The CISO is a Certified Information Systems Security Professional, Certified Information Security Manager, and Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control.

311

Table of Contents
Part I Item 1A, 1B, and 1C
Entergy Corporation, Utility operating companies, and System Energy

In the event of a suspected or actual cybersecurity incident, the Security Incident Response Team (SIRT), which includes the CISO, has primary responsibility for initial identification and evaluation of potential business impacts and escalation of the incident’s severity classification using pre-established criteria with a specified communication matrix and escalation thresholds. The Security Incident Commander, which role is served by rotating leaders in the CISO organization, provides tactical leadership and oversight management at the cross-functional level for the incident. The SIRT remains engaged throughout the incident response lifecycle, including detection and analysis, containment, eradication and recovery, and post-incident remediation, and coordinates with the impacted business functions, if warranted. Once a cyber incident is confirmed, the SIRT is responsible for maintaining situational awareness and continuous monitoring of the need for escalation or de-escalation of the incident’s severity classification. As certain escalation thresholds are exceeded, additional levels of management notification are required by the SIRT, including notification of and recurring communication with Entergy’s Incident Response Team, which includes the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Operating Officer, the CSO, other executive management, and members of the affected business functions. Depending upon the facts, analysis, materiality, and anticipated or current impacts, the Chief Executive Officer and the General Counsel will determine the timing and cadence for communication of the cyber incident with the Board of Directors or Audit Committee.
312

Table of Contents

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Results of Operations

2023 Compared to 2022

Net Income

Net income increased $104 million primarily due to a $159.6 million reduction in income tax expense in 2023 as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit, higher retail electric price, lower other operation and maintenance expenses, and higher other income. The increase was partially offset by write-offs of $78.4 million ($58.8 million net-of-tax) in third quarter 2023 as a result of Entergy Arkansas’s approved motion to forgo recovery related to the 2013 ANO stator incident, higher interest expense, lower volume/weather, and higher depreciation and amortization expenses. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit. See Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of the ANO stator incident and the approved motion to forgo recovery.

Operating Revenues

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenues comparing 2023 to 2022:
Amount
(In Millions)
2022 operating revenues$2,673.2 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income(75.0)
Volume/weather(31.4)
Retail electric price79.6 
2023 operating revenues$2,646.4

Entergy Arkansas’s results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales and a decrease in weather-adjusted residential usage, partially offset by an increase in industrial usage. The increase in industrial usage is primarily due to an increase in demand from small industrial customers and an increase in demand from expansion projects, primarily in the metals industry.

The retail electric price variance is primarily due to an increase in formula rate plan rates effective January 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the 2022 formula rate plan filing.

313

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Total electric energy sales for Entergy Arkansas for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
20232022% Change
(GWh)
Residential7,610 8,147 (7)
Commercial5,584 5,615 (1)
Industrial9,095 8,493 
Governmental192 218 (12)
  Total retail22,481 22,473 — 
Sales for resale:
  Associated companies2,218 1,906 16 
  Non-associated companies5,777 6,520 (11)
Total30,476 30,899 (1)

See Note 19 to the financial statements for additional discussion of Entergy Arkansas’s operating revenues.

Other Income Statement Variances

Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to:

a decrease of $17.1 million in compensation and benefits costs primarily due toa decrease in net periodic pension and other postretirement benefits service costs as a result of an increase in the discount rates used to value the benefits liabilities, lower health and welfare costs, including higher prescription drug rebates in second quarter 2023, and a revision to estimated incentive compensation expense in first quarter 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for further discussion of pension and other postretirement benefits costs;
a decrease of $10.5 million in transmission costs allocated by MISO;
the effects of recording a final judgment in first quarter 2023 to resolve claims in the ANO damages case against the DOE related to spent nuclear fuel storage costs. The damages awarded include the reimbursement of approximately $10.3 million of spent nuclear fuel storage costs previously recorded as other operation and maintenance expenses. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation; and
a decrease of $9.6 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work, including during plant outages, performed in 2023 as compared to 2022.

The decrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $10.4 million in contract costs related to operational performance, customer service, and organizational health initiatives;
an increase of $9.2 million in insurance expenses primarily due to lower nuclear insurance refunds received in 2023;
an increase of $5.2 million in nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a higher scope of work performed in 2023 as compared to 2022 and higher nuclear labor costs; and
several individually insignificant items.

Asset write-offs includes the effects of Entergy Arkansas forgoing recovery of identified costs resulting from the 2013 ANO stator incident. In third quarter 2023, Entergy Arkansas recorded write-offs of its regulatory asset for deferred fuel of $68.9 million and the undepreciated balance of $9.5 million in capital costs related to the
314

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

ANO stator incident. See Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of the ANO stator incident and the approved motion to forgo recovery.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to additions to plant in service.

Entergy Arkansas records a regulatory charge or credit for the difference between asset retirement obligation-related expenses and nuclear decommissioning trust earnings plus asset retirement obligation-related costs collected in revenue.

Other income increased primarily due to:

higher interest earned on money pool investments;
an increase in the allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2023; and
a decrease in charitable donations in 2023 as compared to 2022.

Interest expense increased primarily due to the issuance of $425 million of 5.15% Series mortgage bonds in January 2023 and higher interest accrued on spent nuclear fuel disposal costs.

The effective income tax rates were (33.3%) for 2023 and 21.6% for 2022. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory rate of 21% to the effective income tax rates and for additional discussion regarding income taxes.

2022 Compared to 2021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy Arkansas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022, filed with the SEC on February 24, 2023, for discussion of results of operations for 2022 compared to 2021.

Income Tax Legislation and Regulation

See the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of income tax legislation and regulation.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021 were as follows:
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$5,278 $12,915 $192,128 
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities941,021 699,732 549,216 
Investing activities(1,032,952)(852,794)(898,193)
Financing activities90,285 145,425 169,764 
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents(1,646)(7,637)(179,213)
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$3,632 $5,278 $12,915 
315

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


2023 Compared to 2022

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities increased $241.3 million in 2023 primarily due to:

lower fuel costs and the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of fuel and purchased power cost recovery;
higher collections from customers;
the refund of $41.7 millionreceived from System Energy in January 2023 related to the sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation as calculated in System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report filed with the FERC. The refund was subsequently applied to the under-recovered deferred fuel balance. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the refund and the related proceedings;
a decrease of $38.5 million in pension contributions in 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding; and
$23.2 million in proceeds received from the DOE in April 2023 resulting from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously expensed. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation.

The increase was partially offset by:

the timing of payments to vendors;
an increase of $25.4 million in storm spending in 2023 as compared to 2022; and
an increase of $22.1 million in interest paid.

Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities increased $180.2 million in 2023 primarily due to:

an increase of $122.9 million in distribution construction expenditures primarily due to higher capital expenditures for storm restoration in 2023;
an increase of $86.6 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to increased investment in the reliability and infrastructure of Entergy Arkansas’s transmission system; and
an increase of $43.2 million as a result of fluctuations in nuclear fuel activity due to variations from year to year in the timing and pricing of fuel reload requirements, materials and services deliveries, and the timing of cash payments during the nuclear fuel cycle.

The increase was partially offset by:

a decrease of $38.3 million in nuclear construction expenditures primarily due to decreased spending on various nuclear projects in 2023;
$17.9 million in proceeds received from the DOE in April 2023 resulting from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously recorded as plant. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation; and
a decrease of $14.1 million in information technology capital expenditures primarily due to decreased spending on various technology projects in 2023.

316

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided by financing activities decreased $55.1 million in 2023 primarily due to:

an increase of $331 million in common equity distributions paid in 2023 in order to maintain Entergy Arkansas’s capital structure;
the repayment, at maturity, of $250 million of 3.05% Series mortgage bonds in June 2023;
the issuance of $200 million of 4.20% Series mortgage bonds in March 2022;
the repayment, at maturity, of $40 million of 3.17% Series M notes by the Entergy Arkansas nuclear fuel company variable interest entity in December 2023; and
money pool activity.

The decrease was partially offset by:

the issuance of $425 million of 5.15% Series mortgage bonds in January 2023;
the issuance of $300 million of 5.30% Series mortgage bonds in August 2023;
net long-term borrowings of $70.2 million in 2023 as compared to net repayments of $4.8 million in 2022 on the nuclear fuel company variable interest entity’s credit facility; and
an increase of $61.3 million in prepaid deposits related to contributions-in-aid-of-construction primarily for customer and generator interconnection agreements.

Decreases in Entergy Arkansas’s payable to the money pool are a use of cash flow, and Entergy Arkansas’s payable to the money pool decreased $35.4 million in 2023 compared to increasing by $40.9 million in 2022. The money pool is an intercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing and lending arrangements, and the money pool and other borrowing arrangements are designed to reduce the Registrant Subsidiaries’ dependence on external short-term borrowings.

See Note 5 to the financial statements for further details of long-term debt.

2022 Compared to 2021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of Entergy Arkansas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022, filed with the SEC on February 24, 2023, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2022 compared to 2021.

Capital Structure

Entergy Arkansas’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The increase in the debt to capital ratio for Entergy Arkansas is primarily due to the net issuance of long-term debt in 2023.
 December 31,
2023
December 31,
2022
Debt to capital55.5 %52.5 %
Effect of subtracting cash— %— %
Net debt to net capital (non-GAAP)55.5 %52.5 %

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents.  Debt consists of short-term borrowings, finance lease obligations, and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion.  Capital consists of debt and equity.  Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents.  Entergy Arkansas uses the debt to capital ratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Arkansas’s financial condition.  The net debt to net capital ratio is a non-GAAP measure.
317

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy Arkansas also uses the net debt to net capital ratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Arkansas’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy Arkansas’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

Entergy Arkansas seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings.  To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a distribution, to the extent funds are legally available to do so, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure.  To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, Entergy Arkansas may issue incremental debt or reduce distributions, or both, to maintain its capital structure.  In addition, in certain infrequent circumstances, such as financing of large transactions that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reduced distributions, Entergy Arkansas may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure.

Uses of Capital

Entergy Arkansas requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
debt maturities or retirements;
working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel and purchased power costs; and
distribution and interest payments.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Arkansas’s planned construction and other capital investments.
 202420252026
 (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:  
Generation$1,090 $355 $240 
Transmission135 85 80 
Distribution415 535 480 
Utility Support65 65 65 
Total$1,705 $1,040 $865 

In addition to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Arkansas includes investments in generation projects to modernize, decarbonize, and diversify Entergy Arkansas’s portfolio, including Walnut Bend Solar, West Memphis Solar, and Driver Solar; investments in ANO 1 and 2; distribution and Utility support spending to improve reliability, resilience, and customer experience; transmission spending to improve reliability and resilience while also supporting renewables expansion; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements, government actions, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital.

318

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Following are the amounts of Entergy Arkansas’s existing debt and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments).
 2024202520262027-2028After 2028
 (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)$546 $233 $835 $619 $5,514 
Operating leases (b)$17 $16 $14 $15 $5 
Finance leases (b)$5 $4 $4 $5 $3 

(a)Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.

Other Obligations

Entergy Arkansas currently expects to contribute approximately $55.1 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $529 thousand to its other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2024, although the 2024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 2024, valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2024.  See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Entergy Arkansas has $34.5 million of unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes plus interest for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions.  See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

In addition, Entergy Arkansas enters into fuel and purchased power agreements that contain minimum purchase obligations. Entergy Arkansas has rate mechanisms in place to recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs incurred under these purchase obligations. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of Entergy Arkansas’s obligations under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, Entergy Arkansas pays distributions from its earnings at a percentage determined monthly.

Renewables

Walnut Bend Solar

In October 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 100 MW Walnut Bend Solar facility is in the public interest. Entergy Arkansas primarily requested cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. In July 2021 the APSC granted Entergy Arkansas’s petition and approved the acquisition of the resource and cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. In addition, the APSC directed Entergy Arkansas to file a report within 180 days detailing its efforts to obtain a tax equity partnership. In January 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed its tax equity partnership status report and will file subsequent reports until a tax equity partnership is obtained or a tax equity partnership is no longer sought. The counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was terminating the project, though it was willing to consider an alternative for the site. Entergy Arkansas disputed the right of termination. Negotiations were conducted, including with respect to cost and schedule and to updates arising as a result of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. In April 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed an application for an amended certificate of environmental compatibility and public need with the APSC seeking approval by June 2023 for the updates to the cost and schedule that were previously approved by the APSC. In June 2023, Entergy Arkansas, the APSC general staff, and the Arkansas Attorney General filed a unanimous settlement supporting that the approval of the Walnut Bend Solar facility is in the public interest based on the terms
319

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

in the settlement, including the treatment for the production tax credits associated with the facility. In July 2023, after requesting further testimony and purporting to modify several terms in the settlement and upon rehearing, the APSC approved the settlement largely on the terms submitted, including a 30-year amortization period for the production tax credits. In February 2024, Entergy Arkansas made an initial payment of approximately $169.7 million to acquire the facility. The project will achieve commercial operation once testing is completed and the project has achieved substantial completion. Entergy Arkansas currently expects the project to achieve commercial operation in the first half of 2024, at which time a substantial completion payment of approximately $20 million is expected.

West Memphis Solar

In January 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 180 MW West Memphis Solar facility is in the public interest. In October 2021 the APSC granted Entergy Arkansas’s petition and approved the acquisition of the West Memphis Solar facility and cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. In addition, the APSC directed Entergy Arkansas to file a report within 180 days detailing its efforts to obtain a tax equity partnership. In April 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed its tax equity partnership status report and will file subsequent reports until a tax equity partnership is obtained or a tax equity partnership is no longer sought. In March 2022 the counterparty notified Entergy Arkansas that it was seeking changes to certain terms of the build-own-transfer agreement, including both cost and schedule. In January 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed a supplemental application with the APSC seeking approval for a change in the transmission route and updates to the cost and schedule that were previously approved by the APSC. In March 2023 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s supplemental application. The project is currently expected to achieve commercial operation by the end of 2024.

Driver Solar

In April 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition with the APSC seeking a finding that the purchase of the 250 MW Driver Solar facility is in the public interest and requested cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. The APSC established a procedural schedule with a hearing scheduled in June 2022, but the parties later agreed to waive the hearing and submit the matter to the APSC for a decision consistent with the filed record. In August 2022 the APSC granted Entergy Arkansas’s petition and approved the acquisition of Driver Solar and cost recovery through the formula rate plan rider. In addition, the APSC directed Entergy Arkansas to inform the APSC as to the status of a tax equity partnership once construction is commenced. The parties are evaluating the effects of certain matters related to the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, including the viability of a tax equity partnership. The project is expected to achieve commercial operation as early as mid-2024.

Sources of Capital

Entergy Arkansas’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand;
the Entergy system money pool;
debt or preferred membership interest issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
capital contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Circumstances such as weather patterns, fuel and purchased power price fluctuations, and unanticipated expenses, including unscheduled plant outages and storms, could affect the timing and level of internally generated funds in the future. In addition to the financings necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations,
320

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy Arkansas expects to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher-cost debt and replace it with lower-cost debt if market conditions permit.

All debt and common and preferred membership interest issuances by Entergy Arkansas require prior regulatory approval.  Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in Entergy Arkansas’s bond indenture and other agreements.  Entergy Arkansas has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs for the next twelve months and beyond.

Entergy Arkansas’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2023202220212020
(In Thousands)
($145,385)($180,795)($139,904)$3,110

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

Entergy Arkansas has a credit facility in the amount of $150 million scheduled to expire in June 2028. Entergy Arkansas also has a $25 million credit facility scheduled to expire in April 2024.  The $150 million credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $5 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility. As of December 31, 2023, there were no cash borrowings and no letters of credit outstanding under the credit facilities. In addition, Entergy Arkansas is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO. As of December 31, 2023, $5.8 million in letters of credit were outstanding under Entergy Arkansas’s uncommitted letter of credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of the credit facilities.

The Entergy Arkansas nuclear fuel company variable interest entity has a credit facility in the amount of $80 million scheduled to expire in June 2025.  As of December 31, 2023, $70.2 million in loans were outstanding under the credit facility for the Entergy Arkansas nuclear fuel company variable interest entity. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of the nuclear fuel company variable interest entity credit facility.

Entergy Arkansas obtained authorization from the FERC through April 2025 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $250 million at any time outstanding and borrowings by its nuclear fuel company variable interest entity. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy Arkansas’s short-term borrowing limits. The long-term securities issuances of Entergy Arkansas are limited to amounts authorized by the FERC. The APSC has concurrent jurisdiction over Entergy Arkansas’s first mortgage bond/secured issuances. Entergy Arkansas has obtained long-term financing authorization from the FERC that extends through April 2025. Entergy Arkansas has obtained first mortgage bond/secured financing authorization from the APSC that extends through December 2025.

State and Local Rate Regulation and Fuel-Cost Recovery

The rates that Entergy Arkansas charges for its services significantly influence its financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. Entergy Arkansas is regulated, and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings. A governmental agency, the APSC, is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers.

321

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Retail Rates

2020 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2020 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2021 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2021, as amended through subsequent filings in the proceeding, and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2019. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2021 projected year was 8.22% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $64.3 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2019 historical year was 9.07% resulting in a $23.9 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2021 projected year and 2019 historical year netting adjustment was $88.2 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $74.3 million. As part of the formula rate plan tariff the calculation for the revenue constraint was updated based on actual revenues which had the effect of reducing the initially-proposed $74.3 million revenue requirement increase to $72.6 million. In October 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a unanimous settlement agreement reached with the other parties that resolved all but one issue. As a result of the settlement agreement, Entergy Arkansas’s requested revenue increase was $68.4 million, including a $44.5 million increase for the projected 2021 year and a $23.9 million netting adjustment. The remaining issue litigated concerned the methodology used to calculate the netting adjustment within the formula rate plan. In December 2020 the APSC issued an order rejecting the netting adjustment method used by Entergy Arkansas. Applying the approach ordered by the APSC changed the netting adjustment for the 2019 historical year from a $23.9 million deficiency to $43.5 million excess. Overall, the decision reduced Entergy Arkansas’s revenue adjustment for 2021 to $1 million. In December 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a petition for rehearing of the APSC’s decision in the 2020 formula rate plan proceeding regarding the 2019 netting adjustment, and in January 2021 the APSC granted further consideration of Entergy Arkansas’s petition. Based on the progress of the proceeding at that point, in December 2020, Entergy Arkansas recorded a regulatory liability of $43.5 million to reflect the netting adjustment for 2019, as included in the APSC’s December 2020 order, which would be returned to customers in 2021. Entergy Arkansas also requested an extension of the formula rate plan rider for a second five-year term. In March 2021 the Arkansas Governor signed HB1662 into law (Act 404). Act 404 clarified aspects of the original formula rate plan legislation enacted in 2015, including with respect to the extension of a formula rate plan, the methodology for the netting adjustment, and debt and equity levels; it also reaffirmed the customer protections of the original formula rate plan legislation, including the cap on annual formula rate plan rate changes. Pursuant to Act 404, Entergy Arkansas’s formula rate plan rider was extended for a second five-year term. Entergy Arkansas filed a compliance tariff in its formula rate plan docket in April 2021 to effectuate the netting provisions of Act 404, which reflected a net change in required formula rate plan rider revenue of $39.8 million, effective with the first billing cycle of May 2021. In April 2021 the APSC issued an order approving the compliance tariff and recognizing the formula rate plan extension. Also in April 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed for approval of modifications to the formula rate plan tariff incorporating the provisions in Act 404, and the APSC approved the tariff modifications in April 2021. Given the APSC general staff’s support for the expedited approval of these filings by the APSC, Entergy Arkansas supported an amendment to Act 404 to achieve a reduced return on equity from 9.75% to 9.65% to apply for years applicable to the extension term; that amendment was signed by the Arkansas Governor in April 2021 and is now Act 894. Based on the APSC’s order issued in April 2021, in the first quarter 2021, Entergy Arkansas reversed the remaining regulatory liability for the netting adjustment for 2019. In June 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed another compliance tariff in its formula rate plan proceeding to effectuate the additional provisions of Act 894, and the APSC approved the second compliance tariff filing in July 2021.

2021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2021 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2022 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2022 and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2020. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate
322

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

of return on common equity for the 2022 projected year was 7.65% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $89.2 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2020 historical year was 7.92% resulting in a $19.4 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2022 projected year and 2020 historical year netting adjustment was $108.7 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $72.4 million. In October 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a settlement agreement reached with other parties resolving all issues in the proceeding. As a result of the settlement agreement, the total proposed revenue change was $82.2 million, including a $62.8 million increase for the projected 2022 year and a $19.4 million netting adjustment. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $72.1 million. In December 2021 the APSC approved the settlement as being in the public interest and approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the first billing cycle of January 2022.

2022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2022 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2023 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2023 and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2021. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2023 projected year was 7.40% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $104.8 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2021 historical year was 8.38% resulting in a $15.2 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2023 projected year and 2021 historical year netting adjustment was $119.9 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $79.3 million. In October 2022 other parties filed their testimony recommending various adjustments to Entergy Arkansas’s overall proposed revenue deficiency, and Entergy Arkansas filed a response including an update to actual revenues through August 2022, which raised the constraint to $79.8 million. In November 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a settlement agreement reached with other parties resolving all issues in the proceeding. As a result of the settlement agreement, the total revenue change was $102.8 million, including a $87.7 million increase for the 2023 projected year and a $15.2 million netting adjustment. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $79.8 million. In December 2022 the APSC approved the settlement agreement as being in the public interest and approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the first billing cycle of January 2023.

2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In July 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC its 2023 formula rate plan filing to set its formula rate for the 2024 calendar year. The filing contained an evaluation of Entergy Arkansas’s earnings for the projected year 2024 and a netting adjustment for the historical year 2022. The filing showed that Entergy Arkansas’s earned rate of return on common equity for the 2024 projected year was 8.11% resulting in a revenue deficiency of $80.5 million. The earned rate of return on common equity for the 2022 historical year was 7.29% resulting in a $49.8 million netting adjustment. The total proposed revenue change for the 2024 projected year and 2022 historical year netting adjustment is $130.3 million. By operation of the formula rate plan, Entergy Arkansas’s recovery of the revenue requirement is subject to a four percent annual revenue constraint. Because Entergy Arkansas’s revenue requirement in this filing exceeded the constraint, the resulting increase was limited to $88.6 million. The APSC general staff and intervenors filed their errors and objections in October 2023, proposing certain adjustments, including the APSC general staff’s update to annual filing year revenues which lowers the constraint to $87.7 million. Entergy Arkansas filed its rebuttal in October 2023. In October 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed with the APSC a settlement agreement reached with other parties resolving all issues in the proceeding, none of which affected Entergy Arkansas’s requested recovery up to the cap constraint of $87.7 million. The settlement agreement provided for amortization of the approximately $39 million regulatory asset for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic over a 10-year period as well as recovery of $34.9 million related to the
323

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

resolution of the 2016 and 2017 IRS audits from previous tax positions that are no longer uncertain, partially offset by $24.7 million in excess accumulated deferred income taxes from reductions in state income tax rates, each before consideration of their respective tax gross-up. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit and the State of Arkansas corporate income tax rate changes. In December 2023 the APSC approved the settlement agreement as being in the public interest and approved Entergy Arkansas’s compliance tariff effective with the first billing cycle of January 2024.

Energy Cost Recovery Rider

Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates include an energy cost recovery rider to recover fuel and purchased energy costs in monthly customer bills.  The rider utilizes the prior calendar-year energy costs and projected energy sales for the twelve-month period commencing on April 1 of each year to develop an energy cost rate, which is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over- or under-recovery, including carrying charges, of the energy costs for the prior calendar year.  The energy cost recovery rider tariff also allows an interim rate request depending upon the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs.

In January 2014, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion with the APSC relating to its upcoming energy cost rate redetermination filing that was made in March 2014. In that motion, Entergy Arkansas requested that the APSC authorize Entergy Arkansas to exclude from the redetermination of its 2014 energy cost rate $65.9 million of incremental fuel and replacement energy costs incurred in 2013 as a result of the ANO stator incident. Entergy Arkansas requested that the APSC authorize Entergy Arkansas to retain that amount in its deferred fuel balance, with recovery to be reviewed in a later period after more information was available regarding various claims associated with the ANO stator incident. In February 2014 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas’s request to retain that amount in its deferred fuel balance. In July 2017, Entergy Arkansas filed for a change in rates pursuant to its formula rate plan rider. In that proceeding, the APSC approved a settlement agreement agreed upon by the parties, including a provision that requires Entergy Arkansas to initiate a regulatory proceeding for the purpose of recovering funds currently withheld from rates and related to the stator incident, including the $65.9 million of deferred fuel and purchased energy costs and costs related to the incremental oversight previously noted, subject to certain timelines and conditions set forth in the settlement agreement. In October 2023, Entergy Arkansas made a commitment to the APSC to make a filing to forgo its opportunity to seek recovery of the incremental fuel and purchased energy expense, among other identified costs, resulting from the ANO stator incident. As a result, in third quarter 2023, Entergy Arkansas recorded a write-off of its regulatory asset for deferred fuel of $68.9 million, which includes interest, related to the ANO stator incident. Consistent with its October 2023 commitment, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion to forgo recovery in November 2023, and the motion was approved by the APSC in December 2023. See theANO Damage, Outage, and NRC Reviewssection in Note 8 to the financial statements for further discussion of the ANO stator incident.incident and the approved motion to forgo recovery.

In March 2017, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected an increase in the rate from $0.01164 per kWh to $0.01547 per kWh. The APSC staff filed testimony in March 2017 recommending that the redetermined rate be implemented with the first billing cycle of April 2017 under the normal operation of the tariff. Accordingly, the redetermined rate went into effect on March 31, 2017 pursuant to the tariff. In July 2017 the Arkansas Attorney General requested additional information to support certain of the costs included in Entergy Arkansas’s 2017 energy cost rate redetermination.

In March 2018, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected an increase in the rate from $0.01547 per kWh to $0.01882 per kWh. The Arkansas Attorney General filed a response to Entergy Arkansas’s annual redetermination filing requesting that the APSC suspend the proposed tariff to investigate the amount of the redetermination or, alternatively, to allow recovery subject to refund. Among the reasons the Attorney General cited for suspension were questions pertaining to how Entergy Arkansas forecasted sales and potential implications of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Entergy Arkansas replied to the Attorney General’s filing and stated that, to the extent there are questions pertaining to its
324

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

load forecasting or the operation of the energy cost recovery rider, those issues exceed the scope of the instant rate redetermination. Entergy Arkansas also stated that potential effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are appropriately considered in the APSC’s separate proceeding regarding potential implications of the tax law. The APSC general staff filed a reply to the Attorney General’s filing and agreed that Entergy Arkansas’s filing complied with the terms of the energy cost recovery rider. The redetermined rate became effective with the first billing cycle of April 2018. Subsequently in April 2018 the APSC issued an order declining to suspend Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider rate and declining to require further investigation at that time of the issues suggested by the Attorney General in the
321

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

proceeding. Following a period of discovery, the Attorney General filed a supplemental response in October 2018 raising new issues with Entergy Arkansas’s March 2018 rate redetermination and asserting that $45.7 million of the increase should be collected subject to refund pending further investigation. Entergy Arkansas filed to dismiss the Attorney General’s supplemental response, the APSC general staff filed a motion to strike the Attorney General’s filing, and the Attorney General filed a supplemental response disputing Entergy Arkansas and the APSC staff’s filing. Applicable APSC rules and processes authorize its general staff to initiate periodic audits of Entergy Arkansas’s energy cost recovery rider. In late-2018 the APSC general staff notified Entergy Arkansas it has initiated an audit of the 2017 fuel costs. The time in which the audit will be complete is uncertain at this time.

In March 2019,2021, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected a decrease from $0.01882$0.01052 per kWh to $0.01462$0.00959 per kWh andkWh. The redetermined rate calculation also included an adjustment to account for a portion of the increased fuel costs resulting from the February 2021 winter storms. The redetermined rate became effective with the first billing cycle in April 2019. In March 20192021 through the Arkansas Attorney General filed a response to Entergy Arkansas’s annual adjustment and included with its filing a motion for investigation of alleged overcharges to customers in connection with the FERC’s October 2018 order in the opportunity sales proceeding. Entergy Arkansas filed its response to the Attorney General’s motion in April 2019 in which Entergy Arkansas stated its intent to initiate a proceeding to address recovery issues related to the October 2018 FERC order. In May 2019, Entergy Arkansas initiated the opportunity sales recovery proceeding, discussed below, and requested that the APSC establish that proceeding as the single designated proceeding in which interested parties may assert claims related to the appropriate retail rate treatmentnormal operation of the FERC October 2018 order and related FERC orders in the opportunity sales proceeding. In June 2019 the APSC granted Entergy Arkansas’s request and also denied the Attorney General’s motion in the energy cost recovery proceeding seeking an investigation into Entergy Arkansas’s annual energy cost recovery rider adjustment and referred the evaluation of such matters to the opportunity sales recovery proceeding.tariff.

In March 2020,2022, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected a decreasean increase from $0.01462$0.00959 per kWh to $0.01052$0.01785 per kWh. The primary reason for the rate increase was a large under-recovered balance as a result of higher natural gas prices in 2021, particularly in the fourth quarter 2021. At the request of the APSC general staff, Entergy Arkansas deferred its request for recovery of $32 million from the under-recovery related to the February 2021 winter storms until the 2023 energy cost rate redetermination, unless a request for an interim adjustment to the energy cost recovery rider is necessary. This resulted in a redetermined rate of $0.016390 per kWh, which became effective with the first billing cycle in April 20202022 through the normal operation of the tariff. In February 2023 the APSC issued orders initiating proceedings with the utilities under its jurisdiction to address the prudence of costs incurred and appropriate cost allocation of the February 2021 winter storms. With respect to any prudence review of Entergy Arkansas fuel costs, as part of the APSC’s draft report issued in its February 2021 winter storms investigation docket, the APSC included findings that the load shedding plans of the investor-owned utilities and some cooperatives were appropriate and comprehensive, and, further, that Entergy Arkansas’s emergency plan was comprehensive and had a multilayered approach supported by a system-wide response plan, which is considered an industry standard. In September 2023 the APSC issued an order in Entergy Arkansas's company-specific proceeding and found that Entergy Arkansas’s practices during the winter storms were prudent.

In March 2023, Entergy Arkansas filed its annual redetermination of its energy cost rate pursuant to the energy cost recovery rider, which reflected an increase from $0.01639 per kWh to $0.01883 per kWh. The primary reason for the rate increase is a large under-recovered balance as a result of higher natural gas prices in 2022 and a $32 million deferral related to the February 2021 winter storms consistent with the APSC general staff’s request in 2022. The under-recovered balance included in the filing was partially offset by the proceeds of the $41.7 million refund that System Energy made to Entergy Arkansas in January 2023 related to the sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation as calculated in System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report filed with the FERC. See “Complaints Against System Energy - Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue” in Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the compliance report filed by System Energy with the FERC in January 2023. The redetermined rate of $0.01883 per kWh became effective with the first billing cycle in April 2023 through the normal operation of the tariff.

325

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Opportunity Sales Proceeding

In June 2009 the LPSC filed a complaint requesting that the FERC determine that certain of Entergy Arkansas’s sales of electric energy to third parties: (a) violated the provisions of the System Agreement that allocated the energy generated by Entergy System resources; (b) imprudently denied the Entergy System and its ultimate consumers the benefits of low-cost Entergy System generating capacity; and (c) violated the provision of the System Agreement that prohibited sales to third parties by individual companies absent an offer of a right-of-first-refusal to other Utility operating companies.  The LPSC’s complaint challenged sales made beginning in 2002 and requested refunds.  In July 2009 the Utility operating companies filed a response to the complaint arguing among other things that the System Agreement contemplates that the Utility operating companies may make sales to third parties for their own account, subject to the requirement that those sales be included in the load (or load shape) for the applicable Utility operating company.  The FERC subsequently ordered a hearing in the proceeding.

After a hearing, the ALJ issued an initial decision in December 2010.  The ALJ found that the System Agreement allowed for Entergy Arkansas to make the sales to third parties but concluded that the sales should be accounted for in the same manner as joint account sales.  The ALJ concluded that “shareholders” should make refunds of the damages to the Utility operating companies, along with interest.  Entergy disagreed with several aspects of the ALJ’s initial decision and in January 2011 filed with the FERC exceptions to the decision.

The FERC issued a decision in June 2012 and held that, while the System Agreement is ambiguous, it does provide authority for individual Utility operating companies to make opportunity sales for their own account and Entergy Arkansas made and priced these sales in good faith.  The FERC found, however, that the System Agreement does not provide authority for an individual Utility operating company to allocate the energy associated
322

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

with such opportunity sales as part of its load but provides a different allocation authority.  The FERC further found that the after-the-fact accounting methodology used to allocate the energy used to supply the sales was inconsistent with the System Agreement.  The FERC in its decision established further hearing procedures to quantify the effect of repricing the opportunity sales in accordance with the FERC’s June 2012 decision. The hearing was held in May 2013 and the ALJ issued an initial decision in August 2013. The LPSC, the APSC, the City Council, and FERC staff filed briefs on exceptions and/or briefs opposing exceptions. Entergy filed a brief on exceptions requesting that the FERC reverse the initial decision and a brief opposing certain exceptions taken by the LPSC and FERC staff.

In April 2016 the FERC issued orders addressing requests for rehearing filed in July 2012 and the ALJ’s August 2013 initial decision. The first order denied Entergy’s request for rehearing and affirmed the FERC’s earlier rulings that Entergy’s original methodology for allocating energy costs to the opportunity sales was incorrect and, as a result, Entergy Arkansas must make payments to the other Utility operating companies to put them in the same position that they would have been in absent the incorrect allocation. The FERC clarified that interest should be included with the payments. The second order affirmed in part, and reversed in part, the rulings in the ALJ’s August 2013 initial decision regarding the methodology that should be used to calculate the payments Entergy Arkansas is to make to the other Utility operating companies. The FERC affirmed the ALJ’s ruling that a full re-run of intra-system bills should be performed but required that methodology be modified so that the sales have the same priority for purposes of energy allocation as joint account sales. The FERC reversed the ALJ’s decision that any payments by Entergy Arkansas should be reduced by 20%. The FERC also reversed the ALJ’s decision that adjustments to other System Agreement service schedules and excess bandwidth payments should not be taken into account when calculating the payments to be made by Entergy Arkansas. The FERC held that such adjustments and excess bandwidth payments should be taken into account but ordered further proceedings before an ALJ to address whether a cap on any reduction due to bandwidth payments was necessary and to implement the other adjustments to the calculation methodology.

In May 2016, Entergy Services filed a request for rehearing of the FERC’s April 2016 order arguing that payments made by Entergy Arkansas should be reduced as a result of the timing of the LPSC’s approval of certain contracts. Entergy Services also filed a request for clarification and/or rehearing of the FERC’s April 2016 order
326

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

addressing the ALJ’s August 2013 initial decision. The APSC and the LPSC also filed requests for rehearing of the FERC’s April 2016 order. In September 2017 the FERC issued an order denying the request for rehearing on the issue of whether any payments by Entergy Arkansas to the other Utility operating companies should be reduced due to the timing of the LPSC’s approval of Entergy Arkansas’s wholesale baseload contract with Entergy Louisiana. In November 2017 the FERC issued an order denying all of the remaining requests for rehearing of the April 2016 order. In November 2017, Entergy Services filed a petition for review in the D.C. Circuit of the FERC’s orders in the first two phases of the opportunity sales case. In December 2017 the D.C. Circuit granted Entergy Services’ request to hold the appeal in abeyance pending final resolution of the related proceeding before the FERC. In January 2018 the APSC and the LPSC filed separate petitions for review in the D.C. Circuit, and the D.C. Circuit consolidated the appeals with Entergy Services’ appeal.

The hearing required by the FERC’s April 2016 order was held in May 2017. In July 2017 the ALJ issued an initial decision addressing whether a cap on any reduction due to bandwidth payments was necessary and whether to implement the other adjustments to the calculation methodology. In August 2017 the Utility operating companies, the LPSC, the APSC, and FERC staff filed individual briefs on exceptions challenging various aspects of the initial decision. In September 2017 the Utility operating companies, the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and FERC staff filed separate briefs opposing exceptions taken by various parties.

Based on testimony previously submitted in the case and its assessment of the April 2016 FERC orders, in the first quarter 2016, Entergy Arkansas recorded a liability of $87 million, which included interest, for its estimated increased costs and payment to the other Utility operating companies, and a deferred fuel regulatory asset of $75 million. Following its assessment of the course of the proceedings, including the FERC’s denial of rehearing in
323

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

November 2017 described above, in the fourth quarter 2017, Entergy Arkansas recorded an additional liability of $35 million and a regulatory asset of $31 million.

In October 2018 the FERC issued an order addressing the ALJ’s July 2017 initial decision. The FERC reversed the ALJ’s decision to cap the reduction in Entergy Arkansas’s payment to account for the increased bandwidth payments that Entergy Arkansas made to the other operating companies. The FERC also reversed the ALJ’s decision that Grand Gulf sales from January through September 2000 should be included in the calculation of Entergy Arkansas’s payment. The FERC affirmed on other grounds the ALJ’s rejection of the LPSC’s claim that certain joint account sales should be accounted for as part of the calculation of Entergy Arkansas’s payment. In November 2018 the LPSC requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2018 decision. In December 2019 the FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing. In January 2020 the LPSC appealed the December 2019 decision to the D.C. Circuit.

In December 2018, Entergy made a compliance filing in response to the FERC’s October 2018 order. The compliance filing provided a final calculation of Entergy Arkansas’s payments to the other Utility operating companies, including interest. No protests were filed in response to the December 2018 compliance filing. The December 2018 compliance filing is pending FERC action. Refunds and interest in the following amounts were paid by Entergy Arkansas to the other operating companies in December 2018:
 Total refunds including interest
Payment/(Receipt)
 (In Millions)
PrincipalInterestTotal
Entergy Arkansas$68$67$135
Entergy Louisiana($30)($29)($59)
Entergy Mississippi($18)($18)($36)
Entergy New Orleans($3)($4)($7)
Entergy Texas($17)($16)($33)

327

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy Arkansas previously recognized a regulatory asset with a balance of $116 million as of December 31, 2018 for a portion of the payments due as a result of this proceeding.

As described above, the FERC’s opportunity sales orders have beenwere appealed to the D.C. Circuit. In February 2020 all of the appeals were consolidated and in April 2020 the D.C. Circuit established a briefing schedule. Briefing was completed in September 2020 and oral argument was heard in December 2020. In July 2021 the D.C. Circuit issued a decision denying all of the petitions for review filed in response to the FERC’s opportunity sales orders.

In February 2019 the LPSC filed a new complaint relating to two issues that were raised in the opportunity sales proceeding, but that, in its October 2018 order, the FERC held were outside the scope of the proceeding. In March 2019, Entergy Services filed an answer and motion to dismiss the new complaint. In November 2019 the FERC issued an order denying the LPSC’s complaint. The order concluded that the settlement agreement approved by the FERC in December 2015 terminating the System Agreement barred the LPSC’s new complaint. In December 2019 the LPSC requested rehearing of the FERC’s November 2019 order, and in July 2020 the FERC issued an order dismissing the LPSC’s request for rehearing. In September 2020 the LPSC appealed to the D.C. Circuit the FERC’s orders dismissing the new opportunity sales complaint. In November 2020 the D.C. Circuit issued an order establishing that briefing will occur in January 2021 through April 2021. Oral argument was held in September 2021. In December 2021 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s Petition for Review of the new opportunity sales complaint. The opportunity sales cases are complete at FERC and at the D.C. Circuit and no additional refund amounts are owed by Entergy Arkansas.

In May 2019, Entergy Arkansas filed an application and supporting testimony with the APSC requesting approval of a special rider tariff to recover the costs of these payments from its retail customers over a 24-month period.  The application requested that the APSC approve the rider to take effect within 30 days or, if suspended by the APSC as allowed by commission rule, approve the rider to take effect in the first billing cycle of the first month occurring 30 days after issuance of the APSC’s order approving the rider. In June 2019 the APSC suspended
324

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy Arkansas’s tariff and granted Entergy Arkansas’s motion asking the APSC to establish the proceeding as the single designated proceeding in which interested parties may assert claims related to the appropriate retail rate treatment of the FERC’s October 2018 order and related FERC orders in the opportunity sales proceeding. In January 2020 the APSC adopted a procedural schedule with a hearing in April 2020. In January 2020 the Attorney General and Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed a joint motion seeking to dismiss Entergy Arkansas’s application alleging that the APSC, in a prior proceeding, ruled on the issues addressed in the application and determined that Entergy Arkansas’s requested relief violates the filed rate doctrine and the prohibition against retroactive ratemaking. Entergy Arkansas responded to the joint motion in February 2020 rebutting these arguments, including demonstrating that the claims in this proceeding differ substantially from those the APSC addressed previously and that the payment resulting from a FERC tariff violation for which Entergy Arkansas seeks retail cost recovery in this proceeding differs materially from the refunds resulting from a FERC tariff amendment that the APSC previously rejected on filed rate doctrine and the retroactive ratemaking grounds. In addition, in January 2020 the Attorney General and Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed testimony opposing the recovery by Entergy Arkansas of the opportunity sales payment but also claiming that certain components of the payment should be segregated and refunded to customers. In March 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed rebuttal testimony.

In July 2020 the APSC issued a decision finding that Entergy Arkansas’s application is not in the public interest. The order also directed Entergy Arkansas to refund to its retail customers within 30 days of the order the FERC-determined over-collection of $13.7 million, plus interest, associated with a recalculated bandwidth remedy. In addition to these primary findings, the order also denied the Attorney General’s request for Entergy Arkansas to prepare a compliance filing detailing all of the retail impacts from the opportunity sales and denied a request by the Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers to recalculate all costs using the revised responsibility ratio. Entergy Arkansas filed a motion for temporary stay of the 30-day requirement to allow Entergy Arkansas a reasonable opportunity to seek rehearing of the APSC order, but in July 2020 the APSC denied Entergy Arkansas’s request for
328

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

a stay and directed Entergy Arkansas to refund to its retail customers the component of the total FERC-determined opportunity sales payment that was associated with increased bandwidth remedy payments of $13.7 million, plus interest. The refunds were issued in the August 2020 billing cycle. While the APSC denied Entergy Arkansas’s stay request, Entergy Arkansas believes its actions were prudent and, therefore, the costs, including the $13.7 million, plus interest, are recoverable. In July 2020, Entergy Arkansas requested rehearing of the APSC order, which rehearing was denied by the APSC in August 2020. In September 2020, Entergy Arkansas filed a complaint in the U. S.U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas challenging the APSC’s order denying Entergy Arkansas’s request to recover the costs of these payments. In October 2020 the APSC filed a motion to dismiss Entergy Arkansas’s complaint, to which Entergy Arkansas responded. Also in December 2020, Entergy Arkansas and the APSC held a pre-trial conference, and filed a report with the court in January 2021. The court scheduledheld a hearing forin February 26, 2021 regarding issues addressed in the pre-trial conference report.report, and in June 2021 the court stayed all discovery until it rules on pending motions, after which the court will issue an amended schedule if necessary. In March 2022 the court denied the APSC’s motion to dismiss, and, in April 2022, issued a scheduling order including a trial date in February 2023. In June 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion asserting that it is entitled to summary judgment because Entergy Arkansas’s position that the APSC’s order is pre-empted by the filed rate doctrine and violates the Dormant Commerce Clause is premised on facts that are not subject to genuine dispute. In July 2022, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc., an industrial customer association, filed a motion to intervene and to hold Entergy Arkansas’s motion for summary judgment in abeyance pending a ruling on the motion to intervene. Entergy Arkansas filed a consolidated opposition to both motions. In August 2022 the APSC filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the APSC is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In September 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed an opposition to the motion. In October 2022 the APSC filed a motion asking the court to hold further proceedings in abeyance pending a decision on the motions for summary judgment filed by Entergy Arkansas and the APSC. Also in October 2022, Entergy Arkansas filed an opposition to the motion, and the APSC filed a reply in support of its motion for summary judgment. In January 2023 the judge assigned to the case, on her own motion, identified facts that may present a conflict and recused herself; a new judge was assigned to the case, but he also recused due to a conflict. The case again was reassigned to a new judge. In January 2023 the court denied all pending motions (including those described above) except for a motion by the APSC to exclude certain testimony and further ruled that the matter would proceed to trial. In January 2023, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed a notice of appeal of the court’s order denying its motion to intervene to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and a motion with the district court to stay the proceedings pending the appeal, which was denied. In February 2023, Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. filed a motion with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth District to stay the proceedings pending the appeal, which also was denied. The trial was held in February 2023. Following the trial, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth District to expedite the appeal filed by Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth District granted Entergy Arkansas’s request, and oral arguments were held in June 2023. In August 2023 the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth District affirmed the order of the court denying Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc.’s motion to intervene. An order from the district court is pending and is anticipated in 2024.

Net Metering Legislation

An Arkansas law was enacted effective July 2019 that, among other things, expands the definition of a “net metering customer” to include two additional types of customers: (1) customers that lease net metering facilities, subject to certain leasing arrangements, and (2) government entities or other entities exempt from state and federal income taxes that enter into a service contract for a net metering facility. The latter provision would allowallows eligible entities, many of whom are small and large general service customers, to purchase renewable energy directly from third party providers and receive bill credits for these purchases. The APSC was given authority under this law to address certain matters, such as cost shifting and the appropriate compensation for net metered energy and has initiated proceedings for this purpose. Because of the size and number of customers eligible under this new law, there is a risk of loss of load and the shifting of costs to customers. A hearing was held in December 2019, with utilities, including Entergy Arkansas, cooperatives, the Arkansas Attorney General, and industrial customers and advocating the
329

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, advocating the LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

need for establishment of a reasonable rate structure that takes into account impacts to non-net metering customers; an additional hearing was conducted in February 2020 for purposes of public comment only. The APSC issued an order in June 2020, and in July 2020 several parties, including Entergy Arkansas, filed for rehearing on multiple
325

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

grounds, including for the reasons that it imposes an unreasonable rate structure and allows facilities to net meter that do not meet the statutory definition of net metering facilities. After granting the rehearing requests, the APSC issued an order in September 2020 largely upholding its June 2020 order. In October 2020, Entergy Arkansas and several other parties filed an appeal of the APSC’s September 2020 order. In January 2021, Entergy Arkansas, pursuant to an APSC order, filed an updated net metering tariff, which was approved in February 2021. In May 2021, Entergy Arkansas filed a motion to dismiss its pending judicial appeal of the APSC’s September 2020 order on rehearing in the proceeding addressing its net metering rules. In June 2021 the Arkansas Court of Appeals granted the motion and dismissed Entergy Arkansas’s appeal, although other appeals of the September 2020 APSC order remained before the court. In May 2022 the court issued an order affirming the APSC’s decision in part and reversing in part. In June 2022 the APSC sought rehearing from the court with respect to the court’s ruling on a grid charge, which the court of appeals denied in July 2022. One of the cooperative appellants filed a further appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court in July 2022, which the court decided not to hear.

Separately, as directed by the APSC general staff, the APSC opened a proceeding to compel utilities to amend their net metering tariffs to incorporate the provisions of the legislation that the APSC general staff considered “black letter law.” Entergy Arkansas, the Arkansas Attorney General, and other intervenors opposed this directive pending the development of the rules for implementation that are being considered in the separate net metering rulemaking docket. Nevertheless, reserving its rights, Entergy Arkansas has complied with the directive to amend its tariffs. Asserting procedural and due process violations, in January 2020, Entergy Arkansas and the Arkansas Attorney General separately appealed certain APSC orders in the proceeding. In December 2021 the Arkansas Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds and without prejudice.

COVID-19 OrdersSince the enactment of the net metering legislation, the APSC has approved numerous applications allowing Entergy Arkansas customers to enter into purchase power agreements with third parties and to utilize these purchase power agreements to offset power usage by Entergy Arkansas, despite the lack of proximity between the purchase power agreement and the end-use customer. The APSC also has allowed the aggregation of accounts by net metering customers. These decisions by the APSC have created subsidies in favor of eligible net metering customers to the detriment of non-participating customers. The level of this subsidy continues to grow as additional net metering applications are approved by the APSC.

In April 2020, in lightAugust 2022 the APSC opened a rulemaking concerning proposed amendments to the net metering rules to address the expiration on December 31, 2022 of the COVID-19 pandemic,automatic grandfathering of the existing net metering rate structure. Entergy Arkansas and other utility parties filed initial briefs and comments setting forth that the statute imposing the expiration of the automatic grandfathering is not ambiguous and that the APSC does not have the authority to extend the grandfathering period, and the hearing was held in October 2022. In December 2022 the APSC issued an order requiring utilities,attempting to modify the extent they had not already done so,net metering rules and purporting to suspend service disconnections duringallow for the remaining pendency ofpotential for grandfathering after December 31, 2022. More than thirty applicants filed individual net metering applications in December 2022 seeking to be considered under the Arkansas Governor’s emergency declaration or until the APSC rescinds the directive. TheAPSC’s order, also authorizes utilities to establish a regulatory asset to record costs resulting from the suspension of service disconnections, directs that in future proceedings the APSC will consider whether the request for recovery of these regulatory assets is reasonable and necessary, and requires utilities to track and report the costs and any savings directly attributable to suspension of disconnects. In May 2020 the APSC approved Entergy Arkansas expanding deferred payment agreements to assist customers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Quarterly reporting began in August 2020 and the APSC ordered additional reporting in October 2020 regarding utilities’ transitional plans for ending the moratorium on service disconnects. In February 2021although the APSC issued an order findingin January 2023 holding those applications in abeyance. Several parties, including Entergy Arkansas, sought rehearing, and the Arkansas’s Governor’s executive order limiting new rulemakings calls into question how the APSC’s order to adopt new rules may be effectuated.

In September 2022 the APSC opened another proceeding to investigate the issue of potential cost shifting arising as a result of net metering. Investor owned utilities and some cooperatives were required to make and did make filings in October 2022 with supporting documentation as to the amount and extent of cost shifting and the manner in which they would design tariffs to recover those costs on behalf of non-net metering customers. Responses to the utility and cooperative filings were filed in January 2023, and utilities filed their further responses in February 2023.

330

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

An Arkansas law was enacted effective March 2023 that revises the billing arrangements for net metering facilities in order to reduce the cost shift to non-net metering customers. The new law also imposes a new limit of 5 MW for future net metering facilities, allows utilities to recover net metering credits in the same manner as fuel, and grandfathers certain net metering facilities that are online or in process to be online by September 2024. Entergy Arkansas joined other utilities in a motion in April 2023 to close the current APSC docket related to potential cost shifting in light of the new law, and the APSC also canceled the remaining procedural schedule in this docket in April 2023. Because of the new law, in May 2023, the APSC also closed the grandfathering rulemaking that it is notopened in August 2022. Under the public interest to immediately lift the moratorium on service disconnects, but to announce a target date of May 3, 2021. In March 2021new law, the APSC will issue an order either confirmingmust approve revisions to the liftingutilities’ tariffs to conform to the new law no later than December 2023. The APSC opened a new rulemaking in April 2023 to consider implementation of the moratorium on service disconnects or extendingnew law and tariffs. In October 2023 the moratorium. As of December 31, 2020,APSC issued new net metering rules to conform to the new law, and utilities, including Entergy Arkansas, recorded a regulatory asset of $10.5 million for costs associatedfiled revised net metering tariffs to comply with the COVID-19 pandemic.new rules on October 16, 2023. Entergy Arkansas’s revised net metering tariff was approved by the APSC in December 2023.

Federal Regulation

See the “Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation – Federal Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of federal regulation.

Nuclear Matters

Entergy Arkansas owns and, through an affiliate, operates the ANO 1 and ANO 2 nuclear power plants. Entergy Arkansasgenerating plants and is, therefore, subject to the risks related to owningsuch ownership and operating nuclear plants.operation. These include risks related to: the use, storage, and handling and disposal of high-level and low-level radioactive materials; the substantial financial requirements, both for capital investments and operational needs, including the financial requirements to address emerging issues related to equipment reliability, to position Entergy’sEntergy Arkansas’s nuclear fleet to meet its operational goals; the performance and capacity factors of these nuclear plants including the financial requirements to address emerging issues like stress corrosion cracking of certain materials within the plant systems;plants; regulatory requirements and potential future regulatory changes, including changes affecting the regulations governing nuclear plant ownership, operations, license amendments, and decommissioning; the availability of interim or permanent sites for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste, including the fees charged for such disposal; the sufficiency of nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets and earnings to complete decommissioning of each site when required; and limitations on the amounts and types of insurance commercially availablerecoveries for losses in connection with nuclear plant operations and catastrophic events such as a nuclear accident. In the event of an unanticipated early shutdown of either ANO 1 or ANO 2, Entergy Arkansas may be required to
326

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

file with the APSC a rate mechanism to provide additional funds or credit support to satisfy regulatory requirements for decommissioning. ANO 1’s operating license expires in 2034 and ANO 2’s operating license expires in 2038.

Environmental Risks

Entergy Arkansas’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.  Management believes that Entergy Arkansas is in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted in “Regulation of Entergy’s Business - Environmental Regulation” in Part I, Item 1.  Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance costs cannot be precisely estimated.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of Entergy Arkansas’s financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.  Management has identified the following
331

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

accounting policies and estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and the potential for future changes in thethese assumptions and measurements that could produce estimates that would have a material effect on the presentation of Entergy Arkansas’s financial position, or results of operations.

In the first quarter 2019, Entergy Arkansas recorded a revision to its estimated decommissioning cost liabilities for ANO 1 and ANO 2 as a result of a revised decommissioning cost study. The revised estimates resulted in a $126.2 million increase in its decommissioning cost liabilities, along with corresponding increases in the related asset retirement cost assets that will be depreciated over the remaining lives of the units.operations, or cash flows.

Nuclear Decommissioning Costs

See “Nuclear Decommissioning Costs” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates inherent in accounting for nuclear decommissioning costs.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

See “Utility Regulatory Accounting” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of accounting for the effects of rate regulation.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

See “Impairment of Long-lived Assets” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates associated with the impairment of long-lived assets.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

See “Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.

327

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy Arkansas’s qualified pension and other postretirement reported costs, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are impactedaffected by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms.   See theQualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.  Because of the complexity of these calculations, the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate.

Costs and SensitivitiesSensitivity

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension cost and qualified projected benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2020 Qualified Projected Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2023 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$2,406$46,791Discount rate(0.25%)$929$26,189
Rate of return on plan assetsRate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$2,914$—Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$2,567$—
Rate of increase in compensationRate of increase in compensation0.25%$1,838$8,922Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$985$4,963

332

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefitbenefits cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Postretirement Benefit CostImpact on 2020 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Postretirement Benefits CostImpact on 2023 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$174$6,576Discount rate(0.25%)($56)$3,841
Health care cost trendHealth care cost trend0.25%$225$4,516Health care cost trend0.25%$217$2,600

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Costs and Employer Contributions

Total qualified pension cost for Entergy Arkansas in 20202023 was $81.7$49.5 million, including $21.1$26.1 million in settlement costs.  Entergy Arkansas anticipates 20212024 qualified pension cost to be $61.6$19.6 million. Entergy Arkansas contributed $60$54.5 million to its qualified pension plans in 20202023 and estimates pension contributions will be approximately $66.6$55.1 million in 2021,2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.

Total other postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income for Entergy Arkansas in 20202023 was $10.1$1.9 million.  Entergy Arkansas expects 20212024 postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income of approximately $11.1$5.5 million.  Entergy Arkansas contributed $2.2 million$582 thousand to its other postretirement plans in 20202023 and estimates 20212024 contributions will be approximately $517$529 thousand.

328

Table of Contents
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Other Contingencies

See “Other Contingencies” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the estimates associated with environmental, litigation, and other risks.

New Accounting Pronouncements

See the New Accounting Pronouncements” section of Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements.
329333

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the member and Board of Directors of
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows and changes in member’s equity (pages 332336 through 336340 and applicable items in pages 5147 through 238), for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matter

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

Rate and Regulatory Matters —EntergyEntergy Arkansas, LLC and SubsidiariesRefer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company is subject to rate regulation by the Arkansas Public Service Commission (the “APSC”), which has jurisdiction with respect to the rates of electric companies in Arkansas, and to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures, such as property, plant, and equipment;disclosures.

330334

Table of Contents
regulatory assets and liabilities; income taxes; operating revenues; operation and maintenance expense; and depreciation and amortization expense.

The Company’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the APSC and the FERC set the rates the Company is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, the Company applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Company assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Company has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the APSC and the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service, or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the significant judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs including costs related to the Opportunity Sales Proceeding and refunds to customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the APSC and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate setting process.process due to its inherent complexities and auditor judgment to evaluate management estimates and the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the APSC and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of costs incurred as property, plant, and equipment and deferred as regulatory assets, and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets or liabilities;liabilities and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.
We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the APSC and the FERC for the Company and other public utilities, regulatory statutes, interpretations, procedural memorandums, filings made by intervenors, and other publicly available information to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the APSC’s and the FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated the external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.
For regulatory matters in process, including the Opportunity Sales Proceeding, we inspected the Company’s filings with the APSC and the FERC including the annual formula rate plan filing,and orders issued, and considered the filings with the APSC and the FERC by intervenors that may impact the Company’s future rates, for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order including the Opportunity Sales Proceeding, to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.
We obtained representation from management regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery, refund, or a future reduction in rates.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2001.

331

Table of Contents

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$2,084,494 $2,259,594 $2,060,643 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale271,896 458,907 517,245 
Purchased power187,690 204,640 252,390 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses55,737 68,769 77,915 
Other operation and maintenance669,518 720,217 724,831 
Decommissioning73,319 68,030 60,420 
Taxes other than income taxes121,057 115,869 104,771 
Depreciation and amortization338,029 307,351 292,649 
Other regulatory credits - net(35,310)(11,186)(14,807)
TOTAL1,681,936 1,932,597 2,015,414 
OPERATING INCOME402,558 326,997 45,229 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction15,019 15,499 16,557 
Interest and investment income35,579 26,020 25,406 
Miscellaneous - net(21,908)(18,566)(14,874)
TOTAL28,690 22,953 27,089 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense144,834 140,087 124,459 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(6,595)(6,332)(7,781)
TOTAL138,239 133,755 116,678 
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES293,009 216,195 (44,360)
Income taxes47,777 (46,769)(297,067)
NET INCOME245,232 262,964 252,707 
Preferred dividend requirements1,249 
EARNINGS APPLICABLE TO COMMON EQUITY$245,232 $262,964 $251,458 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   


332

Table of Contents

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$245,232 $262,964 $252,707 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization490,457 465,299 443,698 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued87,019 94,368 129,524 
Changes in assets and liabilities:   
Receivables(24,507)(58,077)4,294 
Fuel inventory(10,066)(10,597)6,210 
Accounts payable(22,773)3,059 (126,405)
Prepaid taxes and taxes accrued24,942 9,568 
Interest accrued(43)3,895 678 
Deferred fuel costs(1,186)72,560 43,869 
Other working capital accounts(11,061)18,783 (30,118)
Provisions for estimated losses6,289 14,901 14,250 
Other regulatory assets(165,534)(131,873)32,460 
Other regulatory liabilities106,878 39,293 (341,682)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities42,576 5,831 (40,157)
Other assets and liabilities(83,469)(127,582)(187,071)
Net cash flow provided by operating activities659,818 677,766 211,825 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(775,595)(641,525)(660,044)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction15,019 15,306 17,013 
Nuclear fuel purchases(100,678)(54,344)(99,417)
Proceeds from sale of nuclear fuel30,638 22,782 54,810 
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales321,360 317,377 300,801 
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds(336,392)(336,519)(315,163)
Payment for purchase of assets(5,988)
Changes in money pool receivable - net(3,110)
Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs55,001 
Insurance proceeds14,790 
Other4,036 630 (1,517)
Net cash flow used in investing activities(795,709)(676,293)(688,727)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt1,071,121 834,038 958,434 
Retirement of long-term debt(632,175)(548,952)(690,488)
Capital contribution from parent350,000 
Redemption of preferred stock(32,660)
Change in money pool payable - net(21,634)(161,104)16,601 
Changes in short-term borrowings - net(49,974)
Distributions/dividends paid:   
Common equity(95,000)(115,000)(91,751)
Preferred stock(1,606)
Other2,188 (7,055)12,249 
Net cash flow provided by financing activities324,500 1,927 470,805 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents188,609 3,400 (6,097)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period3,519 119 6,216 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$192,128 $3,519 $119 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:  
Cash paid (received) during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$140,735 $131,134 $118,731 
Income taxes($21,971)($33,989)$44,393 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

333

Table of Contents

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$24,108 $3,519 
Temporary cash investments168,020 
Total cash and cash equivalents192,128 3,519 
Securitization recovery trust account4,036 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer183,719 117,679 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(18,334)(1,169)
Associated companies34,216 29,178 
Other35,845 117,653 
Accrued unbilled revenues109,000 108,489 
Total accounts receivable344,446 371,830 
Fuel inventory - at average cost43,811 33,745 
Materials and supplies - at average cost237,640 211,320 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs32,692 48,875 
Prepayments and other13,296 14,096 
TOTAL864,013 687,421 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Decommissioning trust funds1,273,921 1,101,283 
Other341 345 
TOTAL1,274,262 1,101,628 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric12,905,322 12,293,483 
Construction work in progress234,213 197,775 
Nuclear fuel163,044 195,547 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT13,302,579 12,686,805 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization5,255,355 5,019,826 
UTILITY PLANT - NET8,047,224 7,666,979 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $0 as of December 31, 2020 and $1,706 as of December 31, 2019)1,832,384 1,666,850 
Deferred fuel costs68,220 67,690 
Other14,028 15,065 
TOTAL1,914,632 1,749,605 
TOTAL ASSETS$12,100,131 $11,205,633 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

334

Table of Contents
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$485,000 $0 
Accounts payable:  
Associated companies59,448 111,785 
Other208,591 202,201 
Customer deposits98,506 101,411 
Taxes accrued81,837 81,831 
Interest accrued22,745 22,788 
Deferred fuel costs53,065 53,721 
Current portion of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes9,296 
Other40,628 38,760 
TOTAL1,049,820 621,793 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued1,286,123 1,183,126 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits30,500 31,701 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - net467,031 478,174 
Other regulatory liabilities686,872 559,555 
Decommissioning1,314,160 1,242,616 
Accumulated provisions70,169 63,880 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities361,682 319,075 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $0 as of December 31, 2020 and $6,772 as of December 31, 2019)3,482,507 3,517,208 
Other75,098 62,568 
TOTAL7,774,142 7,457,903 
Commitments and Contingencies00
EQUITY  
Member's equity3,276,169 3,125,937 
TOTAL3,276,169 3,125,937 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$12,100,131 $11,205,633 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

335

Table of Contents

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN MEMBER'S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
Member's Equity
(In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2017$2,376,754 
Net income252,707 
Capital contributions from parent350,000 
Common equity distributions(91,751)
Non-cash contribution from parent94,335 
Preferred stock dividends(1,249)
Other2,307 
Balance at December 31, 2018$2,983,103 
Net income262,964 
Common equity distributions(115,000)
Other(5,130)
Balance at December 31, 2019$3,125,937 
Net income245,232 
Common equity distributions(95,000)
Balance at December 31, 2020$3,276,169 
See Notes to Financial Statements.
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$2,646,396 $2,673,194 $2,338,590 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale514,885 640,344 347,166 
Purchased power257,890 201,726 280,504 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses59,973 53,438 51,141 
Other operation and maintenance737,649 754,293 687,418 
Asset write-offs78,434 — — 
Decommissioning87,321 82,326 77,696 
Taxes other than income taxes141,502 136,565 127,249 
Depreciation and amortization400,944 386,272 361,479 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net(87,409)(89,418)(31,501)
TOTAL2,191,189 2,165,546 1,901,152 
OPERATING INCOME455,207 507,648 437,438 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction20,587 17,787 15,273 
Interest and investment income25,024 19,554 76,953 
Miscellaneous - net(23,216)(27,348)(22,278)
TOTAL22,395 9,993 69,948 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense188,232 150,928 140,348 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(8,270)(7,070)(6,641)
TOTAL179,962 143,858 133,707 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES297,640 373,783 373,679 
Income taxes(99,210)80,896 75,195 
NET INCOME396,850 292,887 298,484 
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest(5,231)(4,358)(18,092)
EARNINGS APPLICABLE TO MEMBER'S EQUITY$402,081 $297,245 $316,576 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

336

Table of Contents
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$396,850 $292,887 $298,484 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization556,780 532,291 503,539 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued(102,070)78,958 100,459 
Asset write-offs78,434 — — 
Changes in assets and liabilities:   
Receivables(84,428)(73,579)17,682 
Fuel inventory(6,351)(252)(7,081)
Accounts payable(69,947)64,944 27,967 
Taxes accrued4,625 10,936 7,753 
Interest accrued16,554 1,708 (5,637)
Deferred fuel costs228,021 (31,009)(162,458)
Other working capital accounts(29,690)(29,789)(53,343)
Provisions for estimated losses(21,039)2,914 6,915 
Regulatory assets(6,197)(120,603)142,706 
Other regulatory liabilities240,762 (264,054)21,066 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities(109,077)(67,783)(175,863)
Other assets and liabilities(152,206)302,163 (172,973)
Net cash flow provided by operating activities941,021 699,732 549,216 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(946,244)(785,168)(722,628)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction20,587 17,787 15,273 
Nuclear fuel purchases(137,616)(98,635)(84,302)
Proceeds from sale of nuclear fuel32,937 37,198 16,279 
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales117,123 248,191 530,628 
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds(139,280)(269,497)(524,783)
Payment for purchase of assets— (1,044)(131,770)
Change in money pool receivable - net— — 3,110 
Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs17,933 — — 
Decrease (increase) in other investments1,608 (1,626)— 
Net cash flow used in investing activities(1,032,952)(852,794)(898,193)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt1,093,253 232,731 719,284 
Retirement of long-term debt(597,720)(28,521)(728,917)
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest— — 51,202 
Changes in money pool payable - net(35,410)40,891 139,904 
Common equity distributions paid(417,000)(86,000)(50,000)
Other47,162 (13,676)38,291 
Net cash flow provided by financing activities90,285 145,425 169,764 
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents(1,646)(7,637)(179,213)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period5,278 12,915 192,128 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$3,632 $5,278 $12,915 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:  
Cash paid (received) during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$169,173 $147,060 $143,561 
Income taxes$2,705 ($2,753)($18,933)
Noncash investing activities:
Accrued construction expenditures$36,264 $93,189 $35,616 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
337


ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON
 20202019201820172016
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$2,084,494 $2,259,594 $2,060,643 $2,139,919 $2,086,608 
Net income$245,232 $262,964 $252,707 $139,844 $167,212 
Total assets$12,100,131 $11,205,633 $10,401,596 $10,134,029 $9,606,117 
Long-term obligations (a)$3,482,507 $3,517,208 $3,225,759 $2,983,749 $2,746,435 
(a) Includes long-term debt (excluding currently maturing debt) and preferred stock without sinking fund.
 20202019201820172016
 (Dollars In Millions)
Electric Operating Revenues:     
Residential$841 $795 $807 $768 $789 
Commercial466 539 426 495 495 
Industrial462 521 434 472 446 
Governmental18 21 17 19 18 
Total billed retail1,787 1,876 1,684 1,754 1,748 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies105 118 104 128 49 
Non-associated companies68 140 145 121 118 
Other124 126 128 137 172 
Total$2,084 $2,260 $2,061 $2,140 $2,087 
Billed Electric Energy Sales (GWh):    
Residential7,584 7,996 8,248 7,298 7,618 
Commercial5,356 5,822 5,967 5,825 5,988 
Industrial7,586 7,759 8,071 7,528 6,795 
Governmental223 241 239 237 237 
Total retail20,749 21,818 22,525 20,888 20,638 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies1,659 2,180 1,773 1,782 1,609 
Non-associated companies4,198 7,206 6,447 6,549 7,115 
Total26,606 31,204 30,745 29,219 29,362 
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$520 $1,911 
Temporary cash investments3,112 3,367 
Total cash and cash equivalents3,632 5,278 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer157,520 140,513 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(7,182)(6,528)
Associated companies124,672 45,336 
Other89,532 101,096 
Accrued unbilled revenues117,119 116,816 
Total accounts receivable481,661 397,233 
Deferred fuel costs— 139,739 
Fuel inventory - at average cost57,495 51,144 
Materials and supplies - at average cost358,302 288,260 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs35,463 56,443 
Prepayments and other40,866 26,576 
TOTAL977,419 964,673 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Decommissioning trust funds1,414,009 1,199,860 
Other801 2,414 
TOTAL1,414,810 1,202,274 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric14,821,814 14,077,844 
Construction work in progress340,601 417,244 
Nuclear fuel213,722 176,174 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT15,376,137 14,671,262 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization6,002,203 5,729,304 
UTILITY PLANT - NET9,373,934 8,941,958 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets1,885,361 1,810,281 
Deferred fuel costs— 68,883 
Other21,334 18,507 
TOTAL1,906,695 1,897,671 
TOTAL ASSETS$13,672,858 $13,006,576 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
338

Table of Contents
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$375,000 $290,000 
Accounts payable:  
Associated companies225,344 276,362 
Other215,502 310,339 
Customer deposits113,186 102,799 
Taxes accrued105,151 100,526 
Interest accrued35,370 18,816 
Deferred fuel costs88,282 — 
Other55,683 43,394 
TOTAL1,213,518 1,142,236 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued1,437,053 1,498,234 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits27,270 28,472 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - net392,496 435,157 
Other regulatory liabilities759,181 475,758 
Decommissioning1,560,057 1,472,736 
Accumulated provisions58,959 79,998 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities8,901 118,020 
Long-term debt4,298,080 3,876,500 
Other156,673 97,650 
TOTAL8,698,670 8,082,525 
Commitments and Contingencies
EQUITY  
Member's equity3,739,071 3,753,990 
Noncontrolling interest21,599 27,825 
TOTAL3,760,670 3,781,815 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$13,672,858 $13,006,576 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

337339

Table of Contents
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
 Noncontrolling InterestMember's EquityTotal
 (In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2020$— $3,276,169 $3,276,169 
Net income (loss)(18,092)316,576 298,484 
Common equity distributions— (50,000)(50,000)
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest51,202 — 51,202 
Balance at December 31, 2021$33,110 $3,542,745 $3,575,855 
Net income (loss)(4,358)297,245 292,887 
Common equity distributions— (86,000)(86,000)
Distributions to noncontrolling interest(927)— (927)
Balance at December 31, 2022$27,825 $3,753,990 $3,781,815 
Net income (loss)(5,231)402,081 396,850 
Common equity distributions— (417,000)(417,000)
Distributions to noncontrolling interest(995)— (995)
Balance at December 31, 2023$21,599 $3,739,071 $3,760,670 
See Notes to Financial Statements. 

340

Table of Contents

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The COVID-19 Pandemic

See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta

In August 2020 and October 2020, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to portions of Entergy Louisiana’s service area. The storms resulted in widespread outages, significant damage to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the outages. Additionally, as a result of Hurricane Laura’s extensive damage to the grid infrastructure serving the impacted area, large portions of the underlying transmission system required nearly a complete rebuild. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta are currently estimated to be approximately $2.0 billion, including approximately $1.67 billion in capital costs and approximately $330 million in non-capital costs. This estimate includes all costs to restore power and repair or replace the damages from the hurricanes, except for the cost to repair or replace damage incurred to an Entergy Louisiana transmission line in southeast Louisiana, and the amount of that cost could be significant. The restoration plan for this transmission line and the related cost estimate is still being evaluated. Also, Entergy Louisiana’s revenues were adversely affected in 2020, primarily due to power outages resulting from the hurricanes. Entergy Louisiana is considering all reasonable avenues to recover storm-related costs from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta, including securitization. Storm cost recovery or financing will be subject to review by applicable regulatory authorities.

Entergy Louisiana recorded accounts payable and corresponding construction work in progress and regulatory assets for the estimated costs incurred that were necessary to return customers to service. Entergy Louisiana recorded the regulatory assets in accordance with its accounting policies and based on the historic treatment of such costs in its service area because management believes that recovery through some form of regulatory mechanism is probable. There are well established mechanisms and precedent for addressing these catastrophic events and providing for recovery of prudently incurred storm costs in accordance with applicable regulatory and legal principles. Because Entergy Louisiana has not gone through the regulatory process regarding these storm costs, there is an element of risk, and Entergy is unable to predict with certainty the degree of success it may have in its recovery initiatives, the amount of restoration costs that it may ultimately recover, or the timing of such recovery.

In October 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed an application at the LPSC seeking approval of certain ratemaking adjustments to facilitate issuance of shorter-term bonds to provide interim financing for restoration costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta. Subsequently, Entergy Louisiana and the LPSC staff filed a joint motion seeking approval to exclude from the derivation of Entergy Louisiana’s capital structure and cost rate of debt for ratemaking purposes, including the allowance for funds used during construction, shorter-term debt up to $1.1 billion issued by Entergy Louisiana to fund costs associated with Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta costs on an interim basis. In November 2020 the LPSC issued an order approving the joint motion, and Entergy Louisiana issued $1.1 billion of 0.62% Series mortgage bonds due November 2023. Also in November 2020, Entergy Louisiana drew $257 million from its funded storm reserves.

In December 2020, Entergy Louisiana provided the LPSC with notification that it intends to initiate a storm cost recovery proceeding in the near future, which will permit the LPSC to retain any outside consultants and counsel needed to review the storm cost recovery application. In February 2021 the LPSC voted to retain outside counsel and consultants to assist in the review of Entergy Louisiana’s upcoming storm cost recovery application, which is expected to be filed in March 2021.
338

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

February 2021 Winter Storms

See the “February 2021 Winter Storms” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the February 2021 winter storms. Entergy Louisiana’s preliminary estimate for the cost of mobilizing crews and restoring power is approximately $50 million to $60 million. Natural gas purchases for Entergy Louisiana for February 1st through 25th, 2021 are approximately $190 million compared to natural gas purchases for February 2020 of $39 million.

Results of Operations

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Net Income

Net income increased $390.8$417.5 million primarily due to the $382.8net effects of Entergy Louisiana’s storm cost securitization in March 2023, including a $133.4 million reduction in deferred income tax expense, relatedpartially offset by a $103.4 million ($76.4 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the basis of assets contributedsecuritization regulatory proceeding; a $179.1 million reduction in the 2015 Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana business combinationincome tax expense in 2023 as a result of the resolution of the 2014-20152016-2018 IRS audit, partially offset by a $38 million regulatory charge ($27.8 million net-of-tax) to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers; the reversal of a $105.6 million regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, recorded in fourth quarter 20202023, as part of the settlement of Entergy Louisiana’s test year 2017 formula rate plan filing; higher retail electric price; higher other income; lower other operation and maintenance expenses; and higher volume/weather. The net income increase was partially offset by the $58net effects of Entergy Louisiana’s storm cost securitization in May 2022, including a $290 million reduction in income tax expense, resulting from an IRS settlement in the first quarter 2020 related to the uncertain tax position regarding the Hurricane Isaac Louisiana Act 55 financing, which also resulted inpartially offset by a $29$224.4 million ($21165.4 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s agreement obligation to shareprovide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the savings with customers. Also contributing to the increase were higher retail electric price, lower other operation securitization regulatory proceeding, and maintenance expenses, and a lower effective income tax rate. The increase was partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses, lower volume/weather, lower other income, higher interest expense,expenses. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the storm cost securitizations and higher taxes other than income taxes. the formula rate plan global settlement. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the tax audit resolution andof the tax settlement.2016-2018 IRS audit.

Operating Revenues

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenues comparing 20202023 to 2019:2022:
 Amount
 (In Millions)
20192022 operating revenues$4,285.26,338.8 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income(330.3)(1,368.1)
Volume/weatherStorm restoration carrying costs(68.8)(6.9)
Return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers7.524.6 
Volume/weather40.8 
Retail electric price176.3118.6 
20202023 operating revenues$4,069.95,147.8 

Entergy Louisiana’s results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to decreased commercial and industrial usageStorm restoration carrying costs represent the equity component of storm restoration carrying costs recognized as a resultpart of the COVID-19 pandemic, the effectssecuritization of Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta, on sales,Winter Storm Uri, and the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales, partially offset by increased residential usage as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The decrease in industrial usage is partially offset by an increase in demand from expansion projects, primarily in the transportation and chemicals industries. See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the
339341

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

COVID-19 pandemic.Hurricane Ida restoration costs in May 2022 and the equity component of storm restoration carrying costs recognized as part of the securitization of Hurricane Ida restoration costs in March 2023. See Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta” aboveNote 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the storms.storm cost securitizations.

The return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers resulted from the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes through changes in the formula rate plan effective May 2018.2018 in response to the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. In 2020, $31.12022, $24.6 million was returned to customers as comparedthrough reductions in operating revenues. There was no return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to $38.6 millioncustomers in 2019.2023. There was no effect on net income as the reductionreductions in operating revenues waswere offset by a reductionreductions in income tax expense. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather on residential and commercial sales.

The retail electric price variance is primarily due to an increase in formula rate plan revenues effective June 2019 due to the inclusion of the first-year revenue requirement for the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) and effective April 2020 due to the inclusion of the first-year revenue requirement for the Lake Charles Power Station and increases in formula rate plan revenues, including increases in the distribution and transmission recovery mechanisms, effective September 20192022 and September 2020.2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the formula rate plan proceedings.

Total electric energy sales for Entergy Louisiana for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
20232022% Change
(GWh)
Residential14,207 14,119 
Commercial11,074 10,927 
Industrial31,599 31,666 — 
Governmental801 820 (2)
  Total retail57,681 57,532 — 
Sales for resale:
  Associated companies4,406 5,416 (19)
  Non-associated companies1,534 3,423 (55)
Total63,621 66,371 (4)

See Note 19 to the financial statements for additional discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s operating revenues.

Other Income Statement Variances

Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to:

a decrease of $10.2 million in nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work performed in 2020 as compared to 2019, in part as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic;
a decrease of $9.5 million primarily due to contract costs in 2019 related to initiatives to explore new customer products and services;
a decrease of $6.8 million in loss provisions;
higher nuclear insurance refunds of $5.9 million;
a decrease of $5.8 million in energy efficiency costs due to the timing of recovery from customers; and
a decrease of $4.3 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work performed during plant outages in 2020 as compared to the same period in 2019, partially offset by increases resulting from the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) and the Lake Charles Power Station being placed in service.

The decrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $4.1$27.9 million in compensation and benefits costs primarily due to an increaselower health and welfare costs, including higher prescription drug rebates in second quarter 2023, a decrease in net periodic pension and other postretirement benefits service costs as a result of a decreasean increase in the discount raterates used to value the benefit liabilities.benefits liabilities, and a revision to estimated incentive compensation expense in first quarter 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for further discussion of pension and other postretirement benefitbenefits costs; and
several individually insignificant items.

Taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to increasesa decrease of $25.1 million in ad valorem taxes resulting from higher property assessments.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to additions to plant in service, including the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station), which was placed into service in May 2019 and the Lake Charles Power Station, which was placed in service in March 2020.

Other regulatory charges (credits) include regulatory charges of $32.6 million recorded in the fourth quarter 2020 due to a settlement with the IRS related to the uncertain tax position regarding Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita Louisiana Act 55 financing because the savings will be shared with customers and $29 million recorded in the first quarter 2020 due to a settlement with the IRS related to the uncertain tax position regarding Hurricane Isaac Louisiana Act 55 financing because the savings will be shared with customers.transmission costs allocated by MISO. See Note 32 to the financial statements for further discussioninformation on the recovery of the settlements and savings obligations.these costs;
a decrease of $12.3 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work, including during plant outages, performed in 2023 as compared to 2022;
340342

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

a decrease of $8.2 million in nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work performed in 2023 as compared to 2022, lower nuclear labor costs, and lower costs associated with materials and supplies in 2023 as compared to 2022; and
a decrease of $7.2 million in customer service center support costs primarily due to lower contract costs.

The decrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $15.9 million in contract costs related to operational performance, customer service, and organizational health initiatives;
an increase of $6.1 million in insurance expenses primarily due to lower nuclear insurance refunds received in 2023; and
several individually insignificant items.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to additions to plant in service.

Other regulatory charges (credits) - net includes:

a regulatory charge of $103.4 million, recorded in first quarter 2023, to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued in the Hurricane Ida securitization regulatory proceeding. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the March 2023 storm cost securitization;
a regulatory charge of $224.4 million, recorded in second quarter 2022, to reflect Entergy Louisiana’s obligation to provide credits to its customers as described in an LPSC ancillary order issued in the Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida securitization regulatory proceeding. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the May 2022 storm cost securitization; and
a regulatory charge of $38 million, recorded in fourth quarter 2023, to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit.

In addition, Entergy Louisiana records a regulatory charge or credit for the difference between asset retirement obligation-related expenses and nuclear decommissioning trust earnings plus asset retirement obligation-related costs collected in revenue.

Other income decreasedincreased primarily due to:

an increase of $113 million in affiliated dividend income from affiliated preferred membership interests related to storm cost securitizations;
a decrease$31.6 million charge, recorded in second quarter 2022, for the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest in the storm trust I established as part of the Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, Winter Storm Uri, and Hurricane Ida May 2022 storm cost securitization as compared to a $14.6 million charge, recorded in first quarter 2023, for the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest in the storm trust II established as part of the Hurricane Ida March 2023 storm cost securitization. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the storm cost securitizations;
changes in decommissioning trust fund activity, including portfolio rebalancing of certain decommissioning trust funds in 2022; and
an increase in the allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2019, including the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) and the Lake Charles Power Station projects; and
changes in decommissioning trust fund activity.2023.

Interest expense increased primarily due to:
343

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

The increase was partially offset by:

a decrease of $20.6 million in the issuancesamount of $300 millionstorm restoration carrying costs recognized in 2023 as compared to 2022, primarily related to Hurricane Ida. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of 4.20% Series mortgage bonds and $350 million of 2.90% Series mortgage bonds, each in March 2020;
the storm cost securitizationsthe issuance of $525 million of 4.20% Series mortgage bonds in March 2019;; and
a decrease inlower interest income from carrying costs related to the allowance for borrowed funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2019, including the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) and Lake Charles Power Station projects.deferred fuel balance.

The effective income tax rates were (54.6%(19.3%) for 20202023 and 15%(23.5%) for 2019. The difference in the effective income tax rate versus the federal statutory rate of 21% for 2020 was primarily due to completion of the 2014-2015 IRS audit effectively settling the tax positions for those years. The difference in the effective income tax rate versus the federal statutory rate of 21% for 2019 was primarily due to the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of the effects and regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.2022. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory ratesrate of 21% to the effective income tax rates.rates and for additional discussion regarding income taxes.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy Louisiana’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019,2022, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020,24, 2023, for discussion of results of operations for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

Income Tax Legislation and Regulation

See the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of income tax legislation and regulation.

Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Business

See the “Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the purchase and sale agreement for the sale of Entergy Louisiana’s gas distribution business.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 were as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of periodCash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$2,006 $43,364 $35,907 
Net cash provided by (used in):Net cash provided by (used in):
Net cash provided by (used in):
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities
Operating activities
Operating activitiesOperating activities1,072,986 1,236,002 1,395,204 
Investing activitiesInvesting activities(1,944,671)(1,653,634)(1,878,208)
Financing activitiesFinancing activities1,597,699 376,274 490,461 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalentsNet increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents726,014 (41,358)7,457 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of periodCash and cash equivalents at end of period$728,020 $2,006 $43,364 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

341344

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities decreased $163increased $854.6 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

an increasea decrease of $186.1$236.7 million in storm spending in 2020, primarily due to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta,Ida restoration efforts in 2022;
an increase of $42.4 million in interest received primarily due to shorter-term financing interest earnings and Hurricane Zeta restoration efforts.interest on storm reserve escrow accounts. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of shorter-term financing interest earnings;
the refund of $27.8 million received from System Energy in January 2023 related to the sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation as calculated in System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report filed with the FERC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the refund and the related proceedings;
a decrease of $9.1 million in pension contributions in 2023. See “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta,Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Hurricane ZetaOther Postretirement Benefits”” above below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of storm restoration efforts;qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding;
lower collections of receivables from customers, in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic;
fuel costs and the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs;costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of fuel and
an increase of $21.5 million in interest paid.

The decrease was partially offset by:

a decrease in $43.7 million in spending on nuclear refueling outages; purchased power cost recovery; and
the timing of payments to vendors; andvendors.

income tax refunds
The increase was partially offset by lower collections from customers and an increase of $14.7$14.4 million in 2020 compared to $15.3 million in income tax payments in 2019. Entergy Louisiana had income tax refunds in 2020 and income tax payments in 2019 in accordance with an intercompany tax allocation agreement. Entergy Louisiana had income tax refunds in 2020 as a result of a refund of an overpayment on a prior year state income tax return.interest paid.

Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities increased $291decreased $1,668.3 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

an increase of $709.7 million in storm spending 2020, primarilyinvestment in affiliates in 2022 due to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta restoration efforts, See “Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta” above for discussionthe $3,163.6 million purchase by the storm trust I of storm restoration efforts;
preferred membership interests issued by an Entergy affiliate, partially offset by the purchase$1,390.6 million redemption of Washington Parish Energy Center in November 2020 for approximately $222 million.preferred membership interests. See Note 142 to the financial statements for furthera discussion of the Washington Parish Energy Center purchase;May 2022 storm cost securitization;
an increasea decrease of $16.7$727 million in distribution construction expenditures primarily due to lower capital expenditures for storm restoration in 2023. The decrease in storm restoration expenditures is primarily due to Hurricane Ida restoration efforts in 2022;
a decrease of $265.4 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to lower capital expenditures for storm restoration in 2023 and decreased spending on various transmission projects in 2023. The decrease in storm restoration expenditures is primarily due to Hurricane Ida restoration efforts in 2022;
$125 million of redemptions in 2023 of preferred membership interests held by the storm trust I, as part of periodic redemptions that are expected to occur, subject to certain conditions, for the preferred membership interests that were issued in connection with the May 2022 storm cost securitization. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the May 2022 storm cost securitization and the storm trust I’s investment in the reliability and infrastructure of Entergy Louisiana’s distribution system, including increased spending on advanced metering infrastructure;preferred membership interests; and
money pool activity.net receipts from storm reserve escrow accounts of $49.6 million in 2023 as compared to net payments to storm reserve escrow accounts of $293.4 million in 2022.

The increasedecrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $302.2 million in net receipts from storm reserve escrow accounts;
a decrease of $207.8 millioninvestment in non-nuclear generation construction expendituresaffiliates in 2023 due to higher spending in 2019 on the Lake Charles Power Station and J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) projects;
$1,457.7 million purchase by the storm trust II of preferred membership interests issued by an Entergy affiliate. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a decreasediscussion of $133.1 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to a lower scope of work performed on various projects in 2020 as compared to 2019;
a decrease of $89.5 million in nuclear construction expenditures primarily due to a lower scope of work performed on various nuclear projects in 2020 as compared to 2019; and
a decrease of $26.1 million as a result of fluctuations in nuclear fuel activity because of variations from year to year in the timing and pricing of fuel reload requirements in the Utility business, material, and service deliveries,March 2023 storm cost securitization and the timing of cash payments during the nuclear fuel cycle.

Increasesstorm trust II’s investment in Entergy Louisiana’s receivable from the money pool are a use of cash flow, and Entergy Louisiana’s receivable from the money pool increased by $13.4 million in 2020 compared to decreasing by $46.8preferred membership interests;
342345

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

an increase of $110.2 million in 2019.nuclear construction expenditures primarily due to increased spending on various nuclear projects in 2023;
an increase of $47.5 million as a result of fluctuations in nuclear fuel activity due to variations from year to year in the timing and pricing of fuel reload requirements, materials and services deliveries, and the timing of cash payments during the nuclear fuel cycle; and
money pool activity.

Decreases in Entergy Louisiana’s receivables from the money pool are a source of cash flow, and Entergy Louisiana’s receivable from the money pool decreased $14.5 million in 2022. The money pool is an inter-companyintercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing arrangementand lending arrangements, and the money pool and other borrowing arrangements are designed to reduce the Utility subsidiaries’ need forRegistrant Subsidiaries’ dependence on external short-term borrowings.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided by financing activities increased $1,221.4decreased $2,614.7 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

proceeds from securitization of $1.5 billion received by the issuancestorm trust II in 2023 as compared to proceeds from securitization of $1.1$3.2 billion received by the storm trust I in 2022;
the repayment, at maturity, of $665 million of 0.62% Series mortgage bonds in November 2020;2023;
the issuance of $350$500 million of 2.90%4.75% Series mortgage bonds and $300 million of 4.20% Series mortgage bonds, each in March 2020;August 2022;
the issuancerepayment, at maturity, of $325 million of 4.05% Series mortgage bonds in September 2023;
the repayment, prior to maturity, of $300 million of 2.90%5.59% Series mortgage bonds and $300 million of 1.60% Series mortgage bonds, each in November 2020; andDecember 2023;
a decreasean increase of $186.5$36.8 million in common equity distributions paid in 2020 primarily due2023 in order to upcomingmaintain Entergy Louisiana’s capital expenditures.structure;
the repayment, at maturity, of $20 million of 3.22% Series I notes by the Entergy Louisiana Waterford variable interest entity in December 2023; and
money pool activity.

The increasedecrease was partially offset by:

a capital contribution of approximately $1.5 billion in 2023 as compared to a capital contribution of approximately $1 billion in 2022, both received indirectly from Entergy Corporation and related to the issuance of $525 million of 4.20% Series mortgage bonds in March 2019;2023 storm cost securitization and the May 2022 storm cost securitization, respectively;
the repayment, in August 2020prior to maturity, of $250$435 million, a portion of 3.95%the outstanding principal, of 0.62% Series mortgage bonds due October 2020;in May 2022;
the repayment, in December 2020at maturity, of $200 million of 5.25%3.3% Series mortgage bonds due July 2052;
money pool activity;in December 2022;
the repayment in December 2020issuance of $100$70 million of 4.70%5.94% Series mortgage bonds due June 2063;J notes by the Entergy Louisiana Waterford variable interest entity in September 2023; and
a decrease of $25 million in 2023 in net repayments of long-term borrowings of $62 million in 2020 on the nuclear fuel company variable interest entities’Entergy Louisiana’s revolving credit facilities.facility.

Decreases in Entergy Louisiana’s payable to the money pool are a use of cash flow, and Entergy Louisiana’s payable to the money pool decreased by $82.8$69.9 million in 20202023 compared to increasing by $82.8$226.1 million in 2019.2022.

See Note 5 to the financial statements for details of long-term debt. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the storm cost securitizations.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of Entergy Louisiana’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2019 compared to 2018.

Capital Structure

Entergy Louisiana’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The increase in the debt to capital ratio for Entergy Louisiana is primarily due to the net issuances of long-term debt in 2020.
 December 31,
2020
December 31,
2019
Debt to capital54.8 %53.4 %
Effect of excluding securitization bonds0.0 %(0.1 %)
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)54.8 %53.3 %
Effect of subtracting cash(2.1 %)(0.1 %)
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)52.7 %53.2 %

343346

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

(a)Calculation excludesDecember 31, 2022, filed with the securitization bonds, which are non-recourseSEC on February 24, 2023, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2022 compared to 2021.

Capital Structure

Entergy Louisiana.Louisiana’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The decrease in the debt to capital ratio for Entergy Louisiana is primarily due to the $1.5 billion capital contribution received indirectly from Entergy Corporation in March 2023 and the net retirement of long-term debt in 2023.
 December 31,
2023
December 31,
2022
Debt to capital44.9 %53.0 %
Effect of subtracting cash0.0 %(0.1 %)
Net debt to net capital (non-GAAP)44.9 %52.9 %

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents.  Debt consists of short-term borrowings, finance lease obligations, and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion.  Capital consists of debt and common equity.  Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents.  Entergy Louisiana uses the debt to capital ratios excluding securitization bondsratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes they provideit provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Louisiana’s financial condition because the securitization bonds are non-recoursecondition. The net debt to Entergy Louisiana, as more fully described in Note 5 to the financial statements.net capital ratio is a non-GAAP measure. Entergy Louisiana also uses the net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Louisiana’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy Louisiana’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

Entergy Louisiana seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings.  To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a distribution, to the extent funds are legally available to do so, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure.  To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, Entergy Louisiana may issue incremental debt or reduce distributions, or both, to maintain its capital structure.  In addition, in certain infrequent circumstances, such as financing of large transactions that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reducingreduced distributions, Entergy Louisiana may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure.

Uses of Capital

Entergy Louisiana requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
debt maturities or retirements;
working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel and purchased power costs; and
distribution and interest payments.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Louisiana’s planned construction and other capital investments.
 202120222023
 (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:  
Generation$365 $460 $785 
Transmission425 340 230 
Distribution540 485 500 
Utility Support160 130 115 
Total$1,490 $1,415 $1,630 

In addition to the planned spending in the table above, Entergy Louisiana also expects to pay for $845 million of capital investments in 2021 related to Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta restoration work that have been accrued as of December 31, 2020.
344347

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Following are the amounts of Entergy Louisiana’s planned construction and other capital investments.
 202420252026
 (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:  
Generation$435 $805 $780 
Transmission520 775 1,220 
Distribution775 790 755 
Utility Support100 95 95 
Total$1,830 $2,465 $2,850 

In addition to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Louisiana includes investments in generation projects to modernize, decarbonize, and diversify Entergy Louisiana’s portfolio; investments in River Bend and Waterford 3; distribution and Utility support spending to improve reliability, resilience, and customer experience; transmission spending to improve reliability and resilience while also supporting renewables expansion and customer growth; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements, government actions, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Louisiana’s existing debt and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments) and other purchase obligations..
20212022-20232024-2025After 2025Total 2024202520262027-2028After 2028
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)Long-term debt (a)$557 $2,294 $1,495 $9,506 $13,852 
Operating leases (b)Operating leases (b)$13 $19 $10 $4 $46 
Finance leases (b)Finance leases (b)$4 $7 $4 $2 $17 
Purchase obligations (c)$687 $1,463 $1,472 $4,838 $8,460 

(a)Includes estimated interest payments.  Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.
(c)
Purchase obligations represent the minimum purchase obligation or cancellation charge for contractual obligations to purchase goods or services.  For Entergy Louisiana, almost all of the total consists of unconditional fuel and purchased power obligations, including its obligations under the Vidalia purchased power agreement and the Unit Power Sales Agreement, both of which are discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.
Other Obligations

In addition to the contractual obligations given above, Entergy Louisiana currently expects to contribute approximately $59.9$48.4 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $15.6$15 million to its other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2021,2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024, valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024. See “Critical Accounting Estimates - Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Entergy Louisiana has $128.4 million of unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes plus interest for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions.  See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

In addition, to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Louisiana includes specific investments such as transmission projectsenters into fuel and purchased power agreements that contain minimum purchase obligations. Entergy Louisiana has rate mechanisms in place to enhance reliability, reduce congestion,recover fuel, purchased power, and enable economic growth; distribution spendingassociated costs incurred under these purchase obligations. See Note 8 to maintain reliability and improve service to customers, including advanced meters and related investments; resource planning, including potential generation and renewables projects; system improvements; investments in River Bend and Waterford 3; software and security; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effectsfinancial statements for discussion of regulatory constraints and requirements, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans,Entergy Louisiana’s obligations under the Unit Power Sales Agreement and the ability to access capital.Vidalia purchased power agreement.
348

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, Entergy Louisiana pays distributions from its earnings at a percentage determined monthly.

2021 Solar Certification and the Geaux Green Option

In November 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC seeking certification of and approval for the addition of four new solar photovoltaic resources with a combined nameplate capacity of 475 megawatts (the 2021 Solar Portfolio) and the implementation of a new green tariff, the Geaux Green Option (Rider GGO). The 2021 Solar Portfolio consists of four resources that are expected to provide $242 million in net benefits to Entergy Louisiana’s customers. These resources, all of which would be constructed in Louisiana, include (i) the Vacherie Facility, a 150 megawatt resource in St. James Parish; (ii) the Sunlight Road Facility, a 50 megawatt resource in Washington Parish; (iii) the St. Jacques Facility, a 150 megawatt resource in St. James Parish; and (iv) the Elizabeth Facility, a 125 megawatt resource in Allen Parish. The St. Jacques Facility would be acquired through a build-own-transfer agreement; the remaining resources involve power purchase agreements. The Sunlight Road Facility and the Elizabeth Facility have estimated in service dates in 2024, and the Vacherie Facility and the St. Jacques Facility originally had estimated in service dates in 2025, but are now expected to be no sooner than 2027. The filing proposed to recover the costs of the power purchase agreements through the fuel adjustment clause and the formula rate plan and the acquisition costs through the formula rate plan.

The proposed Rider GGO is a voluntary rate schedule that will enhance Entergy Louisiana’s ability to help customers meet their sustainability goals by allowing customers to align some or all of their electricity requirements with renewable energy from the resources. Because subscription fees from Rider GGO participants are expected to help offset the cost of the resources, the design of Rider GGO also preserves the benefits of the 2021 Solar Portfolio for non-participants by providing them with the reliability and capacity benefits of locally-sited solar generation at a discounted price.

In March 2022 direct testimony from Walmart, the Louisiana Energy Users Group (LEUG), and the LPSC staff was filed. Each party recommended that the LPSC approve the resources proposed in Entergy Louisiana’s application, and the LPSC staff witness indicated that the process through which Entergy Louisiana solicited or obtained the proposals for the resources complied with applicable LPSC orders. The LPSC staff and LEUG’s witnesses made recommendations to modify the proposed Rider GGO and Entergy Louisiana’s proposed rate relief. In April 2022 the LPSC staff and LEUG filed cross-answering testimony concerning each other’s proposed modifications to Rider GGO and the proposed rate recovery. Entergy Louisiana filed rebuttal testimony in June 2022. In August 2022 the parties reached a settlement certifying the 2021 Solar Portfolio and approving implementation of Rider GGO. In September 2022 the LPSC approved the settlement. Following the LPSC approval, the St. James Parish council issued a moratorium on new land use permits for solar facilities until the later of March 2023 or the completion of an environmental and economic impact study. In November 2023, St. James Parish lifted the moratorium and adopted an ordinance modifying the parish’s land use plan to establish solar as an approved land use and defining corresponding solar regulations. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with the counterparties to the Vacherie and St. Jacques facilities regarding amendments to the respective agreements to address the impact of the St. James Parish ordinance, and the facilities are expected to reach commercial operation no sooner than 2027, depending upon agreement by the parties on the terms of the amendments. In September 2023, Entergy Louisiana reported to the LPSC that it also entered into amended agreements related to the Sunlight Road and Elizabeth facilities. Both facilities are still expected to achieve commercial operation in 2024.

2022 Solar Portfolio and Expansion of the Geaux Green Option

In February 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC seeking certification of the Iberville/Coastal Prairie facility, which will provide 175 MW of capacity through a PPA with a third party, and the Sterlington facility, a 49 MW self-build project located near the deactivated Sterlington power plant (the 2022 Solar Portfolio). Entergy Louisiana is seeking to include these resources within the portfolio supporting the Rider GGO
349

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

rate schedule to help fulfill customer interest in access to renewable energy. Entergy Louisiana has requested the costs of these facilities, as offset by Rider GGO revenues, be deemed eligible for recovery in accordance with the terms of the formula rate plan and fuel adjustment clause rate mechanisms that exist at the time the facilities are placed into service. In January 2024, the parties filed an uncontested stipulated settlement agreement on the key issues in the case, which stated that the 2022 Solar Portfolio should be constructed, found that Entergy Louisiana’s proposed cost recovery mechanisms were appropriate, and confirmed the resources’ eligibility for inclusion in Rider GGO. The settlement was approved by the LPSC in January 2024. The Sterlington facility is expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2026.

Alternative RFP and Certification

In March 2023, Entergy Louisiana made the first phase of a bifurcated filing to seek approval from the LPSC for an alternative to the requests for proposals (RFP) process that would enable the acquisition of up to 3 GW of solar resources on a faster timeline than the current RFP and certification process allows. The initial phase of the filing established the need for the acquisition of additional resources and the need for an alternative to the RFP process. The second phase of the filing, which contains the details of the proposal for the alternative competitive procurement process and the information necessary to support certification, was filed in May 2023. In addition to the acquisition of up to 3 GW of solar resources, the filing also seeks approval of a new renewable energy credits-based tariff, Rider Geaux ZERO. Several parties have intervened, and a procedural schedule was established in May 2023 with a hearing scheduled for March 2024. In October 2023 the LPSC staff and intervenors filed testimony, with the LPSC staff supporting the amount of solar resources to be acquired and the alternative RFP process. The LPSC staff also supported, subject to certain recommendations, the proposed framework for evaluation and certification of the solar resources by the LPSC and the proposed tariff.

System Resilience and Storm Hardening

In December 2022, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC seeking a public interest finding regarding Phase I of Entergy Louisiana’s Future Ready resilience plan and approval of a rider mechanism to recover the program’s costs. Phase I reflects the first five years of a ten-year resilience plan and includes investment of approximately $5 billion, including hardening investment, transmission dead-end structures, enhanced vegetation management, and telecommunications improvement. In April 2023 a procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled for January 2024. The LPSC staff and certain intervenors filed direct testimony in August, September, and October 2023. The LPSC staff filed cross-answering testimony in October 2023. The testimony largely supports implementation of some level of accelerated investment in resilience, but raises various issues related to the magnitude of the investment, the cost recovery mechanism applicable to the investment, and the ratemaking for the investment. In January 2024 the hearing in this matter was rescheduled to April 2024.

The LPSC had previously opened a formal rulemaking proceeding in December 2021 to investigate efforts to improve resilience of electric utility infrastructure. In April 2023 the LPSC staff issued a draft rule in the rulemaking proceeding related to a requirement to file a grid resilience plan. The procedural schedule entered in the rulemaking proceeding contemplated adoption of a final rule in October 2023, but this did not occur, and a new date has not been set. The LPSC also has pending rulemakings addressing issues related to pole viability and grid maintenance practices. In December 2023, in those rulemakings, the LPSC staff issued a report and recommendation proposing to impose significant new reporting and compliance obligations related to jurisdictional utilities’ distribution and transmission operations, including new obligations related to grid hardening plans, pole inspections, pole replacement, vegetation management, storm restoration plans, new reliability metrics, software for handling customer complaints and complaint resolution, required use of drone technology, and new penalties and incentives for reliability performance and for compliance with the new obligations. In February 2024, Entergy Louisiana and other parties filed comments on the LPSC staff’s report.

350

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Sources of Capital

Entergy Louisiana’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand;
the Entergy system money pool;
storm reserve escrow accounts;
debt or preferred membership interest issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
capital contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Circumstances such as weather patterns, fuel and purchased power price fluctuations, and unanticipated expenses, including unscheduled plant outages and storms, could affect the timing and level of internally generated funds in the future. In addition to the financings necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, Entergy Louisiana may refinance, redeem, or otherwiseexpects to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher-cost debt prior to maturity, to the extentand replace it with lower-cost debt if market conditions and interest rates are favorable.
345

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysispermit.

All debt and common and preferred membership interest issuances by Entergy Louisiana require prior regulatory approval. Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in its bond indentures and other agreements. Entergy Louisiana has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs.needs for the next twelve months and beyond.

Entergy Louisiana’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2020201920182017
(In Thousands)
$13,426($82,826)$46,843$11,173
2023202220212020
(In Thousands)
($156,166)($226,114)$14,539$13,426

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

Entergy Louisiana has a credit facility in the amount of $350 million scheduled to expire in September 2024.June 2028. The credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $15 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility. As of December 31, 2020,2023, there were no cash borrowings and no letters of credit outstanding under the credit facility. In addition, Entergy Louisiana is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO.  As of December 31, 2020, $2.22023, $17.1 million in letters of credit were outstanding under Entergy Louisiana’s uncommitted letter of credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities.

The Entergy Louisiana nuclear fuel company variable interest entities have two separate credit facilities, each in the amount of $105 million and scheduled to expire in September 2022.June 2025. As of December 31, 2020, $18.92023, $46.6 million ofin loans were outstanding under the credit facility for the Entergy Louisiana River Bend nuclear fuel company variable interest entity. As of December 31, 2020, $39.32023, $29.5 million in loans were outstanding under the Entergy Louisiana Waterford nuclear fuel company variable interest entity credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the nuclear fuel company variable interest entity credit facilities.

351

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy Louisiana obtained authorizations from the FERC through July 2022April 2025 for the following:

short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $450 million at any time outstanding;
long-term borrowings and security issuances; and
borrowings by its nuclear fuel company variable interest entities.

See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy Louisiana’s short-term borrowing limits.

Hurricane IsaacIda

In June 2014 the LPSC voted to approve a series of orders which (i) quantified $290.8 million of Hurricane Isaac system restoration costs as prudently incurred; (ii) determined $290 million as the level of storm reserves to be re-established; (iii) authorized Entergy Louisiana to utilize Louisiana Act 55 financing for Hurricane Isaac system restoration costs; and (iv) granted other requested relief associated with storm reserves and Act 55 financing of Hurricane Isaac system restoration costs. Entergy Louisiana committed to pass on to customers a minimum of $30.8 million of customer benefits through annual customer credits of approximately $6.2 million for five years. Approvals for the Act 55 financings were obtained from the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation and the Louisiana State Bond Commission. SeeAs discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, forin August 2020 and October 2020, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to portions of Entergy Louisiana’s service area. In February 2021 two winter storms (collectively, Winter Storm Uri) brought freezing rain and ice to Louisiana. In August 2021, Hurricane Ida caused extensive damage to Entergy Louisiana’s distribution and, to a discussion of the August 2014 issuance of bonds under Act 55 of the Louisiana Legislature.

Little Gypsy Repowering Projectlesser extent, transmission systems resulting in widespread power outages.

In April 2007,2022, Entergy Louisiana announcedfiled an application with the LPSC relating to Hurricane Ida restoration costs. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Ida were estimated to be approximately $2.54 billion, including approximately $1.96 billion in capital costs and approximately $586 million in non-capital costs. Including carrying costs of $57 million through December 2022, Entergy Louisiana was seeking an LPSC determination that it intended$2.60 billion was prudently incurred and, therefore, eligible for recovery from customers. As part of this filing, Entergy Louisiana also was seeking an LPSC determination that an additional $32 million in costs associated with the restoration of Entergy Louisiana’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Hurricane Zeta as well as Winter Storm Uri was prudently incurred. This amount was exclusive of the requested $3 million in carrying costs through December 2022. In total, Entergy Louisiana was requesting an LPSC determination that $2.64 billion was prudently incurred and, therefore, eligible for recovery from customers. As discussed in Note 2 to pursue the solid fuel repoweringfinancial statements, in March 2022 the LPSC approved financing of a 538 MW unit at$1 billion storm escrow account from which funds were withdrawn to finance costs associated with Hurricane Ida restoration. In June 2022, Entergy Louisiana supplemented the application with a request regarding the financing and recovery of the recoverable storm restoration costs. Specifically, Entergy Louisiana requested approval to securitize its Little Gypsy plant.restoration costs pursuant to Louisiana Act 55 financing, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021. In March 2009October 2022 the LPSC votedstaff recommended a finding that the requested storm restoration costs of $2.64 billion, including associated carrying costs of $59.1 million, were prudently incurred and eligible for recovery from customers. The LPSC staff further recommended approval of Entergy Louisiana’s plans to securitize these costs, net of the $1 billion in favorfunds withdrawn from the storm escrow account described above. The parties negotiated and executed an uncontested stipulated settlement which was filed with the LPSC in December 2022. The settlement agreement contains the following key terms: $2.57 billion of a motion directingrestoration costs from Hurricane Ida, Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, Hurricane Zeta, and Winter Storm Uri were prudently incurred and eligible for recovery; carrying costs of $59.2 million were recoverable; and Entergy Louisiana was authorized to finance $1.657 billion utilizing the securitization process authorized by Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293. A procedural motion to consider the uncontested settlement at the December 2022 LPSC meeting did not pass and the settlement was not voted on. In January 2023 an ALJ with the LPSC conducted a settlement hearing to receive the uncontested settlement and supporting testimony into evidence and issued a report of proceedings, which allows the LPSC to consider the uncontested settlement without the procedural motion that did not pass in December. In January 2023, the LPSC approved the stipulated settlement subject to certain modifications. These modifications include the recognition of accumulated deferred income tax benefits related to damaged assets and system restoration costs as a reduction of the amount authorized to be financed utilizing the securitization process authorized by Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, from $1.657 billion to $1.491 billion. These modifications did not affect the LPSC’s conclusion that all system restoration costs sought by Entergy Louisiana were reasonable and prudent. In February 2023 the Louisiana Bond Commission voted to authorize the Louisiana Local Government Facilities and Community Development Authority (LCDA) to issue the bonds authorized in the LPSC’s financing order.
346352

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


In March 2023 the Hurricane Ida securitization financing closed, resulting in the issuance of approximately $1.491 billion principal amount of bonds by the LCDA and a remaining regulatory asset of $180 million to temporarily suspendbe recovered through the repowering project and, based upon an analysisexclusion of the project’s economic viability,accumulated deferred income taxes related to damaged assets and system restoration costs from the determination of future rates. The securitization was authorized pursuant to the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation Act, Part VIII of Chapter 9 of Title 45 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021. The LCDA loaned the proceeds to the LURC. Pursuant to Act 293, the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to a State legislatively authorized and LURC-sponsored trust, Restoration Law Trust II (the storm trust II).

Pursuant to Act 293, the net proceeds of the bonds were used by the storm trust II to purchase 14,576,757.48 Class B preferred, non-voting membership interest units (the preferred membership interests) issued by Entergy Finance Company, LLC, a majority owned indirect subsidiary of Entergy. Entergy Finance Company is required to make annual distributions (dividends) commencing on December 15, 2023 on the preferred membership interests issued to the storm trust II. These annual dividends received by the storm trust II will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana and the LURC, as beneficiaries of the storm trust II. Specifically, 1% of the annual dividends received by the storm trust II will be distributed to the LURC for the benefit of customers, and 99% will be distributed to Entergy Louisiana, net of storm trust expenses. The preferred membership interests have a recommendation regarding whetherstated annual cumulative cash dividend rate of 7.5% and a liquidation price of $100 per unit. The terms of the preferred membership interests include certain financial covenants to proceedwhich Entergy Finance Company is subject. Semi-annual redemptions of the preferred membership interests, subject to certain conditions, are expected to occur over the next 15 years.

Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on their balance sheets because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA. The bonds are secured by system restoration property, which is the right granted by law to the LURC to collect a system restoration charge from customers. The system restoration charge is adjusted at least semi-annually to ensure that it is sufficient to service the bonds. Entergy Louisiana collects the system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee. Entergy Louisiana began collecting the system restoration charge effective with the project. This action was based uponfirst billing cycle of April 2023 and the system restoration charge is expected to remain in place for up to 15 years. Entergy and Entergy Louisiana do not report the collections as revenue because Entergy Louisiana is merely acting as a number of factors includingbilling and collection agent for the recent decline in natural gas prices,LCDA and the LURC. In the remote possibility that the system restoration charge, as well as environmental concerns, the unknown costs of carbon legislation and changesany funds in the capital/financial markets. In April 2009, Entergy Louisiana complied with the LPSC’s directiveexcess subaccount and recommended that the project be suspended for an extended period of time of three years or more. In May 2009 the LPSC issued an order declaring that Entergy Louisiana’s decision to place the Little Gypsy project into a longer-term suspension of three years or more isfunds in the public interest and prudent.debt service reserve account, are insufficient to service the bonds resulting in a payment default, the storm trust II is required to liquidate Entergy Finance Company preferred membership interests in an amount equal to what would be required to cure the default. The estimated value of this indirect guarantee is immaterial.

In October 2009,From the proceeds from the issuance of the preferred membership interests, Entergy Finance Company loaned approximately $1.5 billion to Entergy, which was indirectly contributed to Entergy Louisiana madeas a filing with the LPSC seeking permission to cancel the Little Gypsy repowering project and seeking project cost recovery over a five-year period. In June 2010 and August 2010, the LPSC staff and intervenors filed testimony. The LPSC staff (1) agreed that it was prudent to move the project from long-term suspension to cancellation and that the timing of the decision to suspend on a longer-term basis was not imprudent; (2) indicated that, except for $0.8 millioncapital contribution.

As discussed in compensation-related costs, the costs incurred should be deemed prudent; (3) recommended recovery from customers over ten years but stated that the LPSC may want to consider 15 years; (4) allowed for recovery of carrying costs and earning a return on project costs, but at a reduced rate approximating the cost of debt, while also acknowledging that the LPSC may consider ordering no return; and (5) indicated that Entergy Louisiana should be directed to securitize project costs, if legally feasible and in the public interest. In the third quarter 2010, in accordance with accounting standards, Entergy Louisiana determined that it was probable that the Little Gypsy repowering project would be abandoned and accordingly reclassified $199.8 million of project costs from construction work in progress to a regulatory asset. A hearing on the issues, except for cost allocation among customer classes, was held before the ALJ in November 2010. In January 2011 all parties participated in a mediation on the disputed issues, resulting in a settlement of all disputed issues, including cost recovery and cost allocation. The settlement provides for Entergy Louisiana to recover $200 million as of March 31, 2011, and carrying costs on that amount on specified terms thereafter. The settlement also provides for Entergy Louisiana to recover the approved project costs by securitization. In April 2011, Entergy Louisiana filed an application with the LPSC to authorize the securitization of the investment recovery costs associated with the project and to issue a financing order by which Entergy Louisiana could accomplish such securitization. In August 2011 the LPSC issued an order approving the settlement and also issued a financing order for the securitization. See Note 53 to the financial statements, the securitization resulted in recognition of a net reduction of income tax expense of approximately $133 million, after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax positions, by Entergy Louisiana. Entergy’s recognition of reduced income tax expense was offset by other tax charges resulting in a discussionnet reduction of the September 2011 issuanceincome tax expense of $129 million, after taking into account a provision for uncertain tax positions. In recognition of its obligations described in an LPSC ancillary order issued as part of the securitization bonds.regulatory proceeding, Entergy Louisiana recorded in first quarter 2023 a $103 million ($76 million net-of-tax) regulatory charge and a corresponding regulatory liability to reflect its obligation to provide credits to its customers.

As discussed in Note 6 and Note 17 to the financial statements, Entergy Louisiana consolidates the storm trust II as a variable interest entity and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is presented as noncontrolling interest in
353

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

the financial statements. In first quarter 2023, Entergy Louisiana recorded a charge of $14.6 million in other income to reflect the LURC’s beneficial interest in the storm trust II.

Nelson Industrial Steam Company

Entergy Louisiana is a partner in the Nelson Industrial Steam Company (NISCO) partnership which owns two petroleum coke generating units. In April 2023 these generating units suspended operations in the MISO market, and Entergy Louisiana currently is working to wind up the NISCO partnership, which will ultimately result in ownership of the generating units transferring to Entergy Louisiana. In November 2023 the FERC issued an order providing Section 203 of the Federal Power Act approval for any subsequent transfer of the facilities to Entergy Louisiana. Entergy Louisiana is evaluating the effect of the transaction on its results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition, but at this time does not expect the effect to be material.

State and Local Rate Regulation and Fuel-Cost Recovery

The rates that Entergy Louisiana charges for its services significantly influence its financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. Entergy Louisiana is regulated, and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings. A governmental agency, the LPSC, is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers.

Retail Rates - Electric

Filings with the LPSC

2017 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In June 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2017 calendar year operations. The 2017 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on equity of 8.16%, due in large part to revenue-neutral realignments to other recovery mechanisms. Without these realignments, the evaluation report produces an earned return on equity of 9.88% and a resulting base rider formula rate plan revenue increase of $4.8 million. Excluding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act credits provided for by the tax reform adjustment mechanisms, total formula rate plan revenues were further increased by a total of $98 million as a result of the evaluation report due to adjustments to the additional capacity and MISO cost recovery mechanisms of the formula rate plan, and implementation of the transmission recovery mechanism. In August 2018, Entergy Louisiana filed a supplemental formula rate plan
347

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

evaluation report to reflect changes from the 2016 test year formula rate plan proceedings, a decrease to the transmission recovery mechanism to reflect lower actual capital additions, and a decrease to evaluation period expenses to reflect the terms of a new power sales agreement. Based on the August 2018 update, Entergy Louisiana recognized a total decrease in formula rate plan revenue of approximately $17.6 million. Results of the updated 2017 evaluation report filing were implemented with the September 2018 billing month subject to refund and review by the LPSC staff and intervenors. In accordance with the terms of the formula rate plan, in September 2018 the LPSC staff filed its report of objections/reservations and intervenors submitted their responses to Entergy Louisiana’s original formula rate plan evaluation report and supplemental compliance updates. TheIn August 2021 the LPSC staff assertedissued a letter updating its objections/reservations regarding 1) Entergy Louisiana’s proposed rate adjustments associated withfor the return of excess accumulated deferred income taxes pursuant to the Tax Act and the treatment of accumulated deferred income taxes related to reductions of rate base; 2) Entergy Louisiana’s reservation regarding treatment of a regulatory asset related to certain special orders by the LPSC; and 3)2017 test year expenses billed from Entergy Services to Entergy Louisiana. Intervenors also objected to Entergy Louisiana’s treatment of the regulatory asset related to certain special orders by the LPSC. A procedural schedule has not yet been established to resolve these issues.

Entergy Louisiana also included in its filing a presentation of an initial proposal to combine the legacy Entergy Louisiana and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana residential rates, which combination, if approved, would be accomplished on a revenue-neutral basis intended not to affect the rates of other customer classes.

Commercial operation at J. Wayne Leonard Power Station (formerly St. Charles Power Station) commenced in May 2019. In May 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed an update to its 2017 formula rate plan evaluation reportreport. In its letter, the LPSC staff reiterated its original objections/reservations. The LPSC staff further reserved its rights for future proceedings and to include the estimated first-year revenue requirement of $109.5 million associated with the J. Wayne Leonard Power Station. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of June 2019. In June 2020, Entergy Louisiana submitted informationdispute future proposed adjustments to the 2017 test year formula rate plan evaluation report. The LPSC to review the prudence of Entergy Louisiana’s management of the project. In August 2020 discovery commenced and a procedural schedule was established with a hearing in July 2021.staff withdrew all other objections/reservations.

In November 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the settlement.

354

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

2018 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2018 calendar year operations. The 2018 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 10.61% leading to a base rider formula rate plan revenue decrease of $8.9 million. While base rider formula rate plan revenue will decreasedecreased as a result of this filing, overall formula rate plan revenues will increaseincreased by approximately $118.7 million. This outcome iswas primarily driven by a reduction to the credits previously flowed through the tax reform adjustment mechanism and an increase in the transmission recovery mechanism, partially offset by reductions in the additional capacity mechanism revenue requirements and extraordinary cost items. The filing iswas subject to review by the LPSC. Resulting rates were implemented in September 2019, subject to refund.

Entergy Louisiana also included in its filing a presentation of an initial proposal to combine the legacy Entergy Louisiana and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana residential rates, which combination, if approved, would be accomplished on a revenue-neutral basis intended not to affect the rates of other customer classes. Entergy Louisiana contemplates that any combination of residential rates resulting from this request would be implemented with the results of the 2019 test year formula rate plan filing.

Several parties intervened in the proceeding and the LPSC staff filed its report of objections/reservations in accordance with the applicable provisions of the formula rate plan. In its reportAugust 2021 the LPSC staff re-urged issued a letter updating its objections/reservations with respectfor the 2018 test year formula rate plan evaluation report. In its letter, the LPSC staff reiterated its original objection/reservation pertaining to thetest year expenses billed from Entergy Services to Entergy Louisiana and outstanding issues from the 2017 test year formula rate plan filing and disputed the inclusion of certain affiliate costs for test years 2017 and 2018.evaluation report. The LPSC staff objected to Entergy Louisiana’s proposal to combine residential rates but proposed the setting of a status conference to establish a procedural schedule to more fully address the issue. The LPSC staff also reserved its right to object to the treatment of the sale of Willow Glen reflected in the evaluation report and to the August 2019 compliance update, which was made primarily to update the capital additions reflected in the formula rate plan’s transmission recovery mechanism,
348

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

based on limited time to review it. Additionally, since the completion of certain transmission projects, the LPSC staff issued supplemental data requests addressing the prudence of Entergy Louisiana’s expenditures in connection with those projects. Entergy Louisiana has responded towithdrew all such requests.other objections/reservations.

Commercial operation at Lake Charles Power Station commenced in March 2020. In March 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed an update to its 2018 formula rate plan evaluation report to include the estimated first-year revenue requirement of $108 million associated with the Lake Charles Power Station. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of April 2020.

In an effortNovember 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to narrow the remaining issues in2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan test years 2017filings and 2018, Entergy Louisiana provided noticeresolved certain issues with respect to the parties in October 2020 that it was withdrawing its request to combine residential rates. Entergy Louisiana noted thatand 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the withdrawal is without prejudice to Entergy Louisiana’s right to seek to combine residential rates in a future proceeding.settlement.

2019 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2019 calendar year operations. The 2019 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 9.66%. As such, no change to base rider formula rate plan revenue is required. Although base rider formula rate plan revenue willdid not change as a result of this filing, overall formula rate plan revenues will increaseincreased by approximately $103 million. This outcome is driven by the removal of prior year credits associated with the sale of the Willow Glen Power Station and an increase in the transmission recovery mechanism. Also contributing to the overall change iswas an increase in legacy formula rate plan revenue requirements driven by legacy Entergy Louisiana capacity cost true-ups and higher annualized legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana revenues due to higher billing determinants, offset by reductions in MISO cost recovery mechanism and tax reform adjustment mechanism revenue requirements. In August 2020 the LPSC staff submitted a list of items for which it needs additional information to confirm the accuracy and compliance of the 2019 test year evaluation report. The LPSC staff objected to a proposed revenue neutral adjustment regarding a certain rider as being beyond the scope of permitted formula rate plan adjustments. Rates reflected in the May 2020 filing, with the exception of thea revenue neutral rider adjustment, and as updated in an August 2020 filing, were implemented in September 2020, subject to refund. In August 2021 the LPSC staff issued a letter updating its objections/reservations for the 2019 test year formula rate plan filing. In its letter, the LPSC staff disputed Entergy Louisiana’s exclusion of approximately $251 thousand of interest income allocated from Entergy Operations and Entergy Services to Entergy Louisiana isto the extent that there are other adjustments that would move Entergy Louisiana out of the formula rate plan deadband. The LPSC staff reserved the right to further contest the issue in future proceedings. The LPSC staff further reserved outstanding issues from the process of providing additional information2017 and details on the May 2020 filing as requested by the LPSC staff.2018 formula rate plan evaluation reports and withdrew all other remaining objections/reservations.

355

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

In November 2020, Entergy Louisiana accepted ownership of2023 the Washington Parish Energy CenterLPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and filed an update to its 2019 formula rate plan evaluation reportfilings and resolved certain issues with respect to include the estimated first-year revenue requirement of $35 million associated with the Washington Parish Energy Center. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of December 2020. In January2020 and 2021 Entergy Louisiana filed an update to its 2019 formula rate plan evaluation report to includefilings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the implementation of a scheduled step-up in its nuclear decommissioning revenue requirement and a true-up for under-collections of nuclear decommissioning expenses. The total rate adjustment would increase formula rate plan revenues by approximately $1.2 million. The resulting interim adjustment to rates became effective with the first billing cycle of February 2021.settlement.

Request for Extension and Modification of Formula Rate Plan

In May 2020, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC its application for authority to extend its formula rate plan. In its application, Entergy Louisiana seekssought to maintain a 9.8% return on equity, with a bandwidth of 60 basis points above and below the midpoint, with a first-year midpoint reset. The parties reached a settlement in April 2021 regarding Entergy Louisiana also seeks to maintain itsLouisiana’s proposed formula rate plan extension. In May 2021 the LPSC approved the uncontested settlement. Key terms of the settlement include: a three year term (test years 2020, 2021, and 2022) covering a rate-effective period of September 2021 through August 2024; a 9.50% return on equity, with a smaller, 50 basis point deadband above and below (9.0%-10.0%); elimination of sharing if earnings are outside the deadband; a $63 million rate increase for test year 2020 (exclusive of riders); continuation of existing riders (transmission, additional capacity, mechanism, tax reform adjustment mechanism, transmissionetc.); addition of a distribution recovery mechanism permitting $225 million per year of distribution investment above a baseline level to be recovered dollar for dollar; modification of the tax mechanism to allow timely rate changes in the event the federal corporate income tax rate is changed from 21%; a cumulative rate increase limit of $70 million (exclusive of riders) for test years 2021 and the MISO cost recovery mechanism. Entergy Louisiana also seeks to add a distribution cost recovery mechanism which operates in substantially the same manner as the transmission recovery mechanism, seeks to utilize end of period rate base to calculate cost of service,2022; and requests a deferral of certain expenses incurredup to $7 million per year in 2021 and 2022 of expenditures on vegetation management for outside of right-of-way vegetation programs. Settlement discussions are ongoing.right of way hazard trees.

2020 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In June 2021, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2020 calendar year operations. The 2020 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 8.45%, with a base formula rate plan revenue increase of $63 million. Certain reductions in formula rate plan revenue driven by lower sales volumes, reductions in capacity cost and net MISO cost, and higher credits resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act offset the base formula rate plan revenue increase, leading to a net increase in formula rate plan revenue of $50.7 million. The report also included multiple new adjustments to account for, among other things, the calculation of distribution recovery mechanism revenues. The effects of the changes to total formula rate plan revenue were different for each legacy company, primarily due to differences in the legacy companies’ capacity cost changes, including the effect of true-ups. Legacy Entergy Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $27 million and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $23.7 million. Subject to LPSC review, the resulting changes became effective for bills rendered during the first billing cycle of September 2021, subject to refund. Discovery commenced in the proceeding. In August 2021, Entergy Louisiana submitted an update to its evaluation report to account for various changes. Relative to the June 2021 filing, the total formula rate plan revenue increased by $14.2 million to an updated total of $64.9 million. Legacy Entergy Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $32.8 million and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $32.1 million. The results of the 2020 test year evaluation report bandwidth calculation were unchanged as there was no change in the earned return on common equity of 8.45%. In September 2021 the LPSC staff filed a letter with a general statement of objections/reservations because it had not completed its review and indicated it would update the letter once its review was complete. Should the parties be unable to resolve any objections, those issues will be set for hearing, with recovery of the associated costs subject to refund.

In November 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the settlement.

349356

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

2021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2022, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2021 calendar year operations. The 2021 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 8.33%, with a base formula rate plan revenue increase of $65.3 million. Other increases in formula rate plan revenue driven by reductions in Tax Cut and Jobs Act credits and additions to transmission and distribution plant in service reflected through the transmission recovery mechanism and distribution recovery mechanism are partly offset by an increase in net MISO revenues, leading to a net increase in formula rate plan revenue of $152.9 million. The effects of the changes to total formula rate plan revenue are different for each legacy company, primarily due to differences in the legacy companies’ capacity cost changes, including the effect of true-ups. Legacy Entergy Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $86 million and legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana formula rate plan revenues increased by $66.9 million. In August 2022 the LPSC staff filed a list of objections/reservations, including outstanding issues from the test years 2017-2020 formula rate plan filings, utilizing the extraordinary cost mechanism to address one-time changes such as state tax rate changes, and failing to include an adjustment for revenues not received as a result of Hurricane Ida. Subject to LPSC review, the resulting changes to formula rate plan revenues became effective for bills rendered during the first billing cycle of September 2022, subject to refund.

In November 2023 the LPSC approved a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. See “Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement” below for further discussion of the settlement.

2022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In May 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed its formula rate plan evaluation report for its 2022 calendar year operations. The 2022 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on common equity of 8.33%, requiring an approximately $70.7 million increase to base rider revenue. Due to a cap for the 2021 and 2022 test years, however, base rider formula rate plan revenues are only being increased by approximately $4.9 million, resulting in a revenue deficiency of approximately $65.9 million and providing for prospective return on common equity opportunity of approximately 8.38%. Other changes in formula rate plan revenue driven by increases in capacity costs, primarily legacy capacity costs, additions eligible for recovery through the transmission recovery mechanism and distribution recovery mechanism, and higher sales during the test period are offset by reductions in net MISO costs as well as credits for FERC-ordered refunds. Also included in the 2022 test year distribution recovery mechanism revenue requirement is a $6 million credit relating to the distribution recovery mechanism performance accountability standards and requirements. In total, the net increase in formula rate plan revenues, including base formula rate plan revenues inside the formula rate plan bandwidth and subject to the cap, as well as other formula rate plan revenues outside of the bandwidth, is $85.2 million. In August 2023 the LPSC staff filed a list of objections/reservations, including outstanding issues from the test years 2017-2021 formula rate plan filings, the calculation of certain refunds from System Energy, and certain calculations relating to the tax reform adjustment mechanism. Subject to LPSC review, the resulting net increase in formula rate plan revenues of $85.2 million became effective for bills rendered during the first billing cycle of September 2023, subject to refund.

2023 Entergy Louisiana Rate Case and Formula Rate Plan Extension Request

In August 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application for approval of a regulatory blueprint necessary for it to strengthen the electric grid for the State of Louisiana, which contains a dual-path request to update rates through either: (1) extension of Entergy Louisiana’s current formula rate plan (with certain modifications) for three years (the Rate Mitigation Proposal), which is Entergy Louisiana’s recommended path; or (2) implementation of rates resulting from a cost-of-service study (the Rate Case path). The application complies with Entergy Louisiana’s previous formula rate plan extension order requiring that for Entergy Louisiana to obtain another extension of its formula rate plan that included a rate reset, Entergy Louisiana would need to submit a full cost-of-
357

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

service/rate case. Entergy Louisiana’s filing supports the need to extend Entergy Louisiana’s formula rate plan with credit supportive mechanisms to facilitate investment in the distribution, transmission, and generation functions.

The Rate Case path proposes a 2024-2026 test year formula rate plan with an initial revenue requirement increase of $430 million, net of $17 million of one-time credits, and a return on common equity of 10.5%. Depreciation rates would be updated for all asset classes. The Rate Mitigation Proposal proposes a 2023-2025 test year formula rate plan with an expected initial revenue requirement increase of $173 million, also net of $17 million of one-time credits, based on a 2023 formula rate plan test year, and a return on common equity of 10.0%. Depreciation rates would be updated only for nuclear assets and would be phased in over three years.

Under both paths, Entergy Louisiana’s filing proposes removing the cap on amounts allowed to be recovered through the distribution recovery mechanism and continuing the distribution recovery mechanism performance accountability targets, which tie Entergy Louisiana’s ability to fully recover its distribution recovery mechanism investments to its reliability performance. Entergy Louisiana’s filing also includes new customer-centric programs specifically focused on affordability, including reducing late fees and certain other fees assessed to customers, lowering additional facilities charge rates, providing eligible low-income seniors with monthly discounts on their electric bill, and adding new voluntary customer options to support new transportation electrification technologies. A status conference was held in October 2023 at which a procedural schedule was adopted that includes three technical conferences, the last of which is in March 2024, and a hearing date in August 2024.

Formula Rate Plan Global Settlement

In October 2023 the LPSC staff and Entergy Louisiana reached a global settlement which resolved all outstanding issues related to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 formula rate plan filings and resolved certain issues with respect to the 2020 and 2021 formula rate plan filings. The settlement was approved by the LPSC in November 2023. The settlement resulted in a one-time cost of service credit to customers of $5.8 million, allowed Entergy Louisiana to retain approximately $6.2 million of securitization over-collection as recovery of a regulatory asset associated with late fees related to the 2016 Baton Rouge flood, and resulted in Entergy Louisiana recording the reversal of a $105.6 million regulatory liability, associated with the Hurricane Isaac securitization, recognized in 2017 as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the reversal of the regulatory liability.

Investigation of Costs Billed by Entergy Services

In November 2018 the LPSC issued a notice of proceeding initiating an investigation into costs incurred by Entergy Services that are included in the retail rates of Entergy Louisiana. As stated in the notice of proceeding, the LPSC observed an increase in capital construction-related costs incurred by Entergy Services. Discovery was issued and included efforts to seek highly detailed information on a broad range of matters unrelated to the scope of the audit. There has been no further activity in the investigation since May 2019.

Fuel and purchased power cost recovery

Entergy Louisiana recovers electric fuel and purchased power costs for the billing month based upon the level of such costs incurred two months prior to the billing month. Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustments include estimates for the billing month adjusted by a surcharge or credit that arises from an annual reconciliation of fuel costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

In July 2014February 2021, Entergy Louisiana incurred extraordinary fuel costs associated with the February 2021 winter storms. To mitigate the effect of these costs on customer bills, in March 2021, Entergy Louisiana requested and the LPSC authorized its staffapproved the deferral and recovery of $166 million in incremental fuel costs over five months beginning in April 2021. The incremental fuel costs remain subject to initiate an audit ofreview for reasonableness and eligibility for recovery through the fuel adjustment clause filings by Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, whose business was combined with Entergy Louisiana in 2015.mechanism. The audit includes a reviewfinal amount of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Gulf States Louisiana’sincremental fuel adjustment clause for the period from 2010 through 2013. In January 2019, the LPSC staff consultant issued its audit report. In its report, the LPSC staff consultant recommended that Entergy Louisiana refund approximately $900,000, plus interest,costs is subject to customers based upon the imputation of a claim of vendor fault in servicing its nuclear plant. Entergy Louisiana recorded a provision in first quarter 2019 for the potential outcome of the audit. In August 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed direct testimony challenging the basis for the LPSC staff’s recommended disallowance and providing an alternative calculation of replacement power costs should it be determined that a disallowance is appropriate. Entergy Louisiana’s calculation would require no refund to customers.

In July 2014 the LPSC authorized its staff to initiate an audit of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings. The audit includes a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed by Entergy Louisiana through its fuel adjustment clause for the period from 2010 through 2013. In January 2019 the LPSC staff consultant issued its audit report. In its report, the LPSC staff consultant recommended that Entergy Louisiana refund approximately $7.3 million, plus interest, to customers based upon the imputation of a claim of vendor fault in servicing its nuclear plant. Entergy Louisiana recorded a provision in the first quarter 2019 for the potential outcome of the audit. In August 2019, Entergy Louisiana filed direct testimony challenging the basis for the LPSC staff’s recommended disallowance and providing an alternative calculation of replacement power costs should it be determined that a disallowance is appropriate. Entergy Louisiana’s calculation would require a refund to customers of approximately $4.3 million, plus interest, as compared to the LPSC staff’s recommendation of $7.3 million, plus interest. Responsive testimony was filed by the LPSC staff and intervenors in September 2019; all parties either agreed with or did not oppose Entergy Louisiana’s alternative calculation of replacement power costs.

In November 2019 the pending LPSC proceedings for the 2010-2013 Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana audits were consolidated to facilitate a settlement of both fuel audits. In December 2019 an unopposed settlement was reached that requires a refund to legacy Entergy Louisiana customers of approximately $2.3 million, including interest, and no refund to legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana customers. The LPSC approved the settlement in January 2020. A one-time refund was made in February 2020.

In June 2016 the LPSC issued notice of audits of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings for the period 2014 through 2015 and purchased gas adjustment clause filings for the period 2012 through 2015. In recognition of the business combination that occurred in 2015, the audit notice was issued to Entergy Louisiana and also includes a review of charges to legacy Entergy Gulf States Louisiana customers prior to the business combination. The audits include a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause for the period from 2014 through 2015 and charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s
350358

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

purchasedchange through the resettlement process. At its April 2021 meeting, the LPSC authorized its staff to review the prudence of the February 2021 fuel costs incurred by all LPSC-jurisdictional utilities, including both gas adjustment clause forand electric utilities. At its June 2021 meeting, the period from 2012 through 2015. RegardingLPSC approved the fuel adjustment clause filing,hiring of consultants to assist its staff in this review. In May 2022 the LPSC staff issued aan audit report in January 2021 that did not recommend a disallowance for the period 2014 through 2015 recoveries, but did propose various reporting requirements.regarding Entergy Louisiana is currently reviewing the LPSC staff recommendations regarding reporting requirements. Regarding the purchased gasLouisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings,charges (for its electric operations) recommending no financial disallowances, but including several prospective recommendations. Responsive testimony was filed by one intervenor and the parties agreed to suspend any procedural schedule and move toward settlement discussions to close the matter. Also in May 2022 the LPSC staff issued aan audit report in February 2020regarding Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment charges (for its gas operations) that did not recommendpropose any financial disallowances. The LPSC staff and Entergy Louisiana submitted a disallowance forjoint report on the period 2012 through 2015 recoveries.audit report and draft order to the LPSC concluding that Entergy Louisiana’s gas distribution operations and fuel costs were not significantly adversely affected by the February 2021 winter storms and the resulting increase in natural gas prices. The LPSC issued an order approving the joint report in September 2020 accepting the LPSC staff’s report.October 2022.

In May 2018March 2021 the LPSC staff provided notice of auditsan audit of Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause filings covering the period January 2018 through December 2020. The audit included a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause for that period. In August 2023 the LPSC submitted its audit report and found that materially all costs recovered through the purchased gas adjustment filings were reasonable and eligible for recovery through the purchased gas adjustment clause. The LPSC approved the report in December 2023.

To mitigate high electric bills, primarily driven by high summer usage and elevated gas prices, Entergy Louisiana deferred approximately $225 million of fuel expense incurred in April, May, June, July, August, and September 2022 (as reflected on June, July, August, September, October, and November 2022 bills). These deferrals were included in the over/under calculation of the fuel adjustment clause, which is intended to recover the full amount of the costs included on a rolling twelve-month basis.

In January 2023 the LPSC staff provided notice of an audit of Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause filings. The audit includes a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s purchased gas adjustment clause for the period from 20162021 through 2017. In February 2020 the LPSC staff issued an2022. Discovery is ongoing, and no audit report recommending a disallowance of approximately $29 thousand Entergy Louisiana submitted a letter disputing the basis of the proposed disallowance but indicated that due to the amount at issue it would not oppose the recommended refund. The LPSC staff and Entergy Louisiana submitted a joint report noting each party’s position on the substantive issues in the matter and recommending resolution of the matters. The LPSC issued an order in September 2020 resolving the matter and ordering a refund of approximately $29 thousand. In January 2021 the LPSC issued a notice closing the matter.has been filed.

In March 2020January 2023 the LPSC staff provided notice of an audit of Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause filings. The audit includes a review of the reasonableness of charges flowed through Entergy Louisiana’s fuel adjustment clause for the period from 20162020 through 2019.2022. Discovery commenced in September 2020is ongoing, and is ongoing.no audit report has been filed.

COVID-19 Orders

In April 2020 the LPSC issued an order authorizing utilities to record as a regulatory asset expenses incurred from the suspension of disconnections and collection of late fees imposed by LPSC orders associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, utilities may seek future recovery, subject to LPSC review and approval, of losses and expenses incurred due to compliance with the LPSC’s COVID-19 orders. The suspension of late fees and disconnects for non-pay was extended until the first billing cycle after July 16, 2020. In January 2021, Entergy Louisiana resumed disconnections for customers in all customer classes with past-due balances that havehad not made payment arrangements. Utilities seeking to recover the regulatory asset must formally petition the LPSC to do so, identifying the direct and indirect costs for which recovery is sought. Any such request is subject to LPSC review and approval. In April 2023, Entergy Louisiana filed an application proposing to utilize approximately $1.6 billion in certain low interest debt to generate earnings to apply toward the reduction of the COVID-19 regulatory asset, as well as to conduct additional outside right-of-way vegetation management activities and fund the minor storm reserve account. In that filing, Entergy Louisiana proposed to delay repayment of certain shorter-term first mortgage bonds that were issued to finance storm restoration costs until the costs could be securitized, and to invest the funds that otherwise would be used to repay those bonds in the money pool to take advantage of the spread between prevailing interest rates on investments in the money pool and the interest rates on the bonds. The LPSC
359

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

approved Entergy Louisiana’s requested relief in June 2023. A subsequent filing will be required to permit the LPSC to review the COVID-19 regulatory asset. As of December 31, 2020,2023, Entergy Louisiana recordedhad a regulatory asset of $48.8$47.8 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.pandemic and a regulatory liability of $36.8 million for the deferred earnings related to the approximately $1.6 billion in low interest debt.

Net Metering Rulemaking

In September 2019 the LPSC issued an order modifying its rules regarding net metering installations.  Among other things, the rule provides for 2-channel billing for net metering with excess energy put to the grid being compensated at the utility’s avoided cost.  However, the rule does provide that net meter installations in place as of December 31, 2019 will be subject to 1:1 net metering with excess energy put to the grid being compensated at the full retail rate for a period of 15 years (through December 31, 2034), after which those installations will be subject to 2-channel billing.  The rule also eliminates the existing limit on the cumulative number of net meter installations.


351

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Industrial and Commercial Customers

Entergy Louisiana’s large industrial and commercial customers continually explore ways to reduce their energy costs. In particular, cogeneration is an option available to a portion of Entergy Louisiana’s industrial customer base. Entergy Louisiana responds by working with industrial and commercial customers and negotiating electric service contracts to provide competitive rates that match specific customer needs and load profiles. Entergy Louisiana actively participates in economic development, customer retention, and reclamation activities to increase industrial and commercial demand, from both new and existing customers.

Federal Regulation

See the “Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation – Federal Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of federal regulation.

Nuclear Matters

Entergy Louisiana owns and, through an affiliate, operates the River Bend and Waterford 3 nuclear power plants. Entergy Louisianagenerating plants and is, therefore, subject to the risks related to owningsuch ownership and operating nuclear plants.operation. These include risks related to: the use, storage, and handling and disposal of high-level and low-level radioactive materials; the substantial financial requirements, both for capital investments and operational needs, including the financial requirements to address emerging issues related to equipment reliability, to position Entergy’sEntergy Louisiana’s nuclear fleet to meet its operational goals; the performance and capacity factors of these nuclear plants; regulatory requirements and potential future regulatory changes, including changes affecting the regulations governing nuclear plant ownership, operations, license amendments, and decommissioning; the availability of interim or permanent sites for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste, including the fees charged for such disposal; the sufficiency of nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets and earnings to complete decommissioning of each site when required; and limitations on the amounts and types of insurance commercially availablerecoveries for losses in connection with nuclear plant operations and catastrophic events such as a nuclear accident. In the event of an unanticipated early shutdown of River Bend or Waterford 3, Entergy Louisiana may be required to provide additional funds or credit support to satisfy regulatory requirements for decommissioning. Waterford 3’s operating license expires in 2044 and River Bend’s operating license expires in 2045.

NRC Reactor Oversight Process

The NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process is a program to collect information about plant performance, assess the information for its safety significance, and provide for appropriate licensee and NRC response. The NRC evaluates plant performance by analyzing two distinct inputs: inspection findings resulting from the NRC’s
360

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

inspection program and performance indicators reported by the licensee. The evaluations result in the placement of each plant in one of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix columns: “licensee response column,” or Column 1, “regulatory response column,” or Column 2, “degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 3, “multiple/repetitive degraded cornerstone column,” or Column 4, and “unacceptable performance,” or Column 5. Plants in Column 1 are subject to normal NRC inspection activities. Plants in Column 2, Column 3, or Column 4 are subject to progressively increasing levels of inspection by the NRC with, in general, progressively increasing levels of associated costs. Continued plant operation is not permitted for plants in Column 5. Waterford 3 is currently in Column 1, and River Bend is currently in Column 2.

In July 2023 the NRC placed River Bend in Column 2, effective April 2023, based on failure to inspect wiring associated with the high pressure core spray system. In August 2023 the NRC issued a finding and notice of violation related to a radiation monitor calibration issue at River Bend. In December 2023, River Bend successfully completed the inspection on the high pressure core spray system issue and in February 2024, River Bend successfully completed the supplemental inspection for the radiation monitor calibration issue involving radiation monitor calibrations. River Bend will remain in Column 2 pending receipt of the formal report on the inspection, which is expected in first quarter 2024.

Environmental Risks

Entergy Louisiana’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters. Management believes that Entergy Louisiana is in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted in “Regulation of Entergy’s Business - Environmental Regulation” in Part I, Item 1. Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance costs cannot be precisely estimated.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of Entergy Louisiana’s financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Management has identified the following accounting policies and estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and the potential for future changes in thethese assumptions and measurements that could produce estimates that would have a material effect on the presentation of Entergy Louisiana’s financial position, or results of operations.operations, or cash flows.

352

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Nuclear Decommissioning Costs

See “Nuclear Decommissioning Costs” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates inherent in accounting for nuclear decommissioning costs.

In the second quarter 2019, Entergy Louisiana recorded a revision to its estimated decommissioning cost liability for Waterford 3 as a result of a revised decommissioning cost study. The revised estimate resulted in a $147.5 million increase in its decommissioning cost liability, along with a corresponding increase in the related asset retirement cost asset that will be depreciated over the remaining useful life of the unit.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

See “Utility Regulatory Accounting” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of accounting for the effects of rate regulation.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

See “Impairment of Long-lived Assets” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates associated with the impairment of long-lived assets.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

See “Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.
361

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy Louisiana’s qualified pension and other postretirement reported costs, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are impactedaffected by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms.   See theQualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.  Because of the complexity of these calculations, the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate.

Cost Sensitivity

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension cost and qualified projected benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2020 Projected Qualified Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2023 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$3,053$52,030Discount rate(0.25%)$1,016$28,165
Rate of return on plan assetsRate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$3,338$—Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$2,739$—
Rate of increase in compensationRate of increase in compensation0.25%$2,313$11,706Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$1,143$6,017

353

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefitbenefits cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Postretirement Benefit CostImpact on 2020 Accumulated postretirement Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Postretirement Benefits CostImpact on 2023 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$872$8,226Discount rate(0.25%)$324$4,287
Health care cost trendHealth care cost trend0.25%$964$5,853Health care cost trend0.25%$559$2,905

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Costs and Employer Contributions

Total qualified pension cost for Entergy Louisiana in 20202023 was $70.6$69.5 million, including $8.1$40.4 million in settlement costs.  Entergy Louisiana anticipates 20212024 qualified pension cost to be $65.1$10.7 million.  Entergy Louisiana contributed $55.4$44.6 million to its qualified pension plans in 20202023 and estimates pension contributions will be approximately $59.9$48.4 million in 2021,2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.

Total postretirement health care and life insurance benefit costs for Entergy Louisiana in 20202023 were $5.6$1.4 million.  Entergy Louisiana expects 20212024 postretirement health care and life insurance benefit costsincome of approximately $5.4 million.$701 thousand.  Entergy Louisiana contributed $16.1$20.5 million to its other postretirement plans in 20202023 and estimates that 20212024 contributions will be approximately $15.6$15 million.

362

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Other Contingencies

See “Other Contingencies” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the estimates associated with environmental, litigation, and other risks.

New Accounting Pronouncements

See the New Accounting Pronouncements” section of Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements.

354363

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the member and Board of Directors of
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, cash flows, and changes in equity (pages 357368 through 362374 and applicable items in pages 5147 through 238), for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit MatterMatters

The critical audit mattermatters communicated below is a matterare matters arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that waswere communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relatesrelate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit mattermatters below, providing a separate opinionopinions on the critical audit mattermatters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Rate and Regulatory Matters —EntergyEntergy Louisiana, LLC and SubsidiariesRefer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company is subject to rate regulation by the Louisiana Public Service Commission (the “LPSC”), which has jurisdiction with respect to the rates of electric companies in Louisiana, and to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying
355

Table of Contents
the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures, such as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets and liabilities; income taxes; operating revenues; operation and maintenance expense; and depreciation and amortization expense.disclosures.
364

Table of Contents

The Company’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the LPSC and the FERC set the rates the Company is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, the Company applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Company assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Company has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the LPSC and the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service, or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the significant judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs, and refunds to customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the LPSC and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate setting process.process due to its inherent complexities and auditor judgment to evaluate management estimates and the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the LPSC and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of costs incurred as property, plant, and equipment and deferred as regulatory assets, and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets or liabilities;liabilities and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.
We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the LPSC and the FERC for the Company and other public utilities, regulatory statutes, interpretations, procedural memorandums, filings made by intervenors, and other publicly available information to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the LPSC’s and the FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated the external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.
For regulatory matters in process, we inspected the Company’s filings with the LPSC and the FERC including the annual formula rate plan filing,and orders issued, and considered the filings with the LPSC and the FERC by intervenors that may impact the Company’s future rates, for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order, to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.
We obtained representation from management regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery, refund, or a future reduction in rates.

Securitization FinancingStorm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail RegulatorsEntergy Louisiana, LLC and SubsidiariesRefer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

Hurricane Ida in 2021 caused significant damage to portions of the Company’s service area within the state of Louisiana. In January 2023, the LPSC issued a Financing Order authorizing financing of $1.491 billion of system restoration costs utilizing the securitization process authorized by Louisiana Act 55 financing, as supplemented by Act 293 of the Louisiana Legislature’s Regular Session of 2021 (“Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293”). In March 2023, the securitization financing closed, resulting in the issuance of $1.491 billion principal amount bonds by
365

Table of Contents
Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities and Community Development Authority (“LCDA”), a political subdivision of the State of Louisiana. The LCDA loaned the proceeds to the Louisiana Utilities Restoration Corporation (“LURC”), and the LURC contributed the net bond proceeds to a State legislatively authorized and LURC-sponsored trust, Restoration Law Trust II (the “storm trust II”). The Company and the LURC each hold beneficial interests in the storm trust II.

The Company does not report the bonds issued by the LCDA on its balance sheet because the bonds are the obligation of the LCDA. The bonds are secured by system restoration property, which is the right granted by law to the LURC to collect a system restoration charge from customers. The Company collects the system restoration charge on behalf of the LURC and remits the collections to the bond indenture trustee. The Company does not report the collection of system restoration charges as revenue because the Company is merely acting as a billing and collection agent for the LCDA and the LURC. In the remote possibility that the system restoration charge, as well as any funds in the excess subaccount and funds in the debt service reserve account, are insufficient to service the bonds resulting in a payment default, the storm trust II is required to liquidate Entergy Finance Company preferred interests in an amount equal to what would be required to cure the default. The estimated value of this indirect guarantee is immaterial. The Company consolidates the storm trust II as a variable interest entity and the LURC’s 1% beneficial interest is shown as a noncontrolling interest in the financial statements.

We identified management’s conclusion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA as a critical audit matter due to the judgments made by management to support its conclusion. Auditing management’s judgments involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for securitization financing transactions.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, securitization financing included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the accounting impact of this securitization financing transaction, including the conclusion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of the Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, securitization financing, including the balances recorded.
We read relevant regulatory and financing orders issued by the LPSC for the Company, the LURC, and the LCDA, and evaluated the external information to compare to management’s conclusions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from the Company’s internal and external legal counsel regarding the legal status of the bonds issued by the LCDA and the system restoration property granted to the LURC to assess management’s assertion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA.
With the assistance of professionals in our firm having expertise and experience in addressing the accounting for securitization financing transactions by regulated utilities, we evaluated the Company’s conclusion, including the conclusion that the bonds issued by the LCDA are the obligation of the LCDA.

Uncertain Tax PositionsEntergy Louisiana, LLC and SubsidiariesRefer to Note 3 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company accounts for uncertain income tax positions under a two-step approach with a more likely-than-not recognition threshold and a measurement approach based on the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than fifty percent likely of being realized upon settlement. The Company has uncertain tax positions which require management to make judgments and assumptions to determine whether available information supports the assertion that the recognition threshold is met, particularly related to the technical merits and facts and circumstances of each position, as well as the probability of different potential outcomes. These uncertain tax positions could be significantly affected by audits by taxing authorities of the tax positions and changes to relevant tax law. There is an uncertain tax position related to the March 2023 securitization financing that provided for a tax benefit in the first quarter of 2023 of approximately $129 million.

Given the judgments made by management, we identified management’s conclusion that the securitization uncertain tax position met the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold as a critical audit matter. Auditing management’s
366

Table of Contents
judgments regarding this uncertain tax position involved specialized knowledge of uncertain tax positions and auditor judgment to evaluate the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the securitization uncertain tax position included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of controls related to the securitization uncertain tax position, including those over the recognition and measurement of the income tax benefit.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures, and the balances recorded, related to the securitization uncertain tax position.
We evaluated the methods and assumptions used by management to estimate the uncertain tax position by testing the underlying data that served as the basis for the uncertain tax position.
With the assistance of our income tax specialists, we tested the technical merits of the securitization uncertain tax position and management’s key estimates and judgments made by:
Assessing the technical merits of the uncertain tax position by comparing to similar cases filed with the Internal Revenue Service.
Obtaining an opinion from the Company’s external legal counsel regarding certain federal income tax consequences related to the Act 55, as supplemented by Act 293, securitization financing and evaluating whether the analysis was consistent with our interpretation of the relevant laws and circumstances.
Considering the impact of changes or settlements in the tax environment on management’s methods and assumptions used to estimate the uncertain tax position.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2001.
356367

Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$5,073,239 $6,246,933 $4,994,459 
Natural gas74,531 91,835 73,989 
TOTAL5,147,770 6,338,768 5,068,448 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale1,080,485 2,002,456 1,302,291 
Purchased power654,721 1,076,715 768,546 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses63,429 59,698 49,373 
Other operation and maintenance1,097,233 1,139,605 1,034,427 
Decommissioning75,962 72,122 68,575 
Taxes other than income taxes245,191 241,908 224,079 
Depreciation and amortization726,389 695,204 656,132 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net41,209 148,871 38,245 
TOTAL3,984,619 5,436,579 4,141,668 
OPERATING INCOME1,163,151 902,189 926,780 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction32,160 26,252 28,648 
Interest and investment income (loss)90,316 (69,144)154,606 
Interest and investment income - affiliated303,233 185,826 127,594 
Miscellaneous - net(160,972)9,824 (125,886)
TOTAL264,737 152,758 184,962 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense375,295 373,480 350,227 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(14,996)(11,550)(12,878)
TOTAL360,299 361,930 337,349 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES1,067,589 693,017 774,393 
Income taxes(205,781)(162,853)120,409 
NET INCOME1,273,370 855,870 653,984 
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests2,988 1,366 — 
EARNINGS APPLICABLE TO MEMBER'S EQUITY$1,270,382 $854,504 $653,984 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

368

Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
Net Income$1,273,370 $855,870 $653,984 
Other comprehensive income (loss)   
Pension and other postretirement liabilities   
(net of tax expense (benefit) of ($211), $17,351, and $1,523)(572)47,092 3,951 
Other comprehensive income (loss)(572)47,092 3,951 
Comprehensive Income1,272,798 902,962 657,935 
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests2,988 1,366 — 
Comprehensive Income Applicable to Member's Equity$1,269,810 $901,596 $657,935 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
369

Table of Contents

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$4,019,063 $4,223,027 $4,232,541 
Natural gas50,799 62,148 63,779 
TOTAL4,069,862 4,285,175 4,296,320 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale700,152 845,108 915,410 
Purchased power596,480 810,462 960,272 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses55,305 54,170 51,626 
Other operation and maintenance969,630 994,637 959,185 
Decommissioning65,225 59,346 53,736 
Taxes other than income taxes208,902 194,222 183,745 
Depreciation and amortization609,931 535,791 492,179 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net(584)(105,203)4,396 
TOTAL3,205,041 3,388,533 3,620,549 
OPERATING INCOME864,821 896,642 675,771 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction38,151 74,023 79,922 
Interest and investment income225,627 231,985 141,882 
Miscellaneous - net(116,366)(115,427)(27,530)
TOTAL147,412 190,581 194,274 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense331,352 309,493 288,658 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(19,147)(35,430)(39,616)
TOTAL312,205 274,063 249,042 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES700,028 813,160 621,003 
Income taxes(382,324)121,623 (54,611)
NET INCOME$1,082,352 $691,537 $675,614 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   























(Page left blank intentionally)
357
370

Table of Contents

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
Net Income$1,082,352 $691,537 $675,614 
Other comprehensive income (loss)   
Pension and other postretirement liabilities   
(net of tax expense (benefit) of ($83), $3,781, and $17,743)(235)10,715 50,296 
Other comprehensive income (loss)(235)10,715 50,296 
Comprehensive Income$1,082,117 $702,252 $725,910 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$1,273,370 $855,870 $653,984 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization864,225 852,521 818,389 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued(99,812)(70,379)175,700 
Changes in working capital:   
Receivables55,140 (53,434)(58,466)
Fuel inventory(15,959)1,099 7,722 
Accounts payable(100,321)(207,949)358,536 
Taxes accrued30,459 (28,244)21,631 
Interest accrued(9,680)8,284 803 
Deferred fuel costs134,383 (113,809)(43,124)
Other working capital accounts(129,173)(103,571)(45,517)
Changes in provisions for estimated losses(52,445)291,824 (449)
Changes in other regulatory assets407,327 720,487 (1,050,600)
Changes in other regulatory liabilities225,645 (4,783)(16,478)
Effect of securitization on regulatory asset(491,150)(1,190,338)— 
Changes in pension and other postretirement liabilities(117,886)(139,067)(164,263)
Other57,997 358,997 394,658 
Net cash flow provided by operating activities2,032,120 1,177,508 1,052,526 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(1,624,181)(2,568,113)(3,621,775)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction32,160 26,252 28,648 
Nuclear fuel purchases(162,079)(122,020)(85,419)
Proceeds from sale of nuclear fuel30,214 37,648 13,254 
Payments to storm reserve escrow account(14,449)(1,293,633)— 
Receipts from storm reserve escrow account64,036 1,000,228 — 
Purchase of preferred membership interests of affiliate(1,457,676)(3,163,572)— 
Redemption of preferred membership interests of affiliate125,002 1,390,587 — 
Changes in securitization account— — 2,700 
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales575,596 633,100 944,703 
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds(633,029)(667,947)(1,004,888)
Changes in money pool receivable - net— 14,539 (1,113)
Proceeds from sale of assets— 5,000 15,000 
Insurance proceeds received for property damages19,493 — — 
Litigation proceeds from settlement agreement— 5,695 — 
Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs— — 8,691 
Decrease (increase) in other investments5,457 (5,475)— 
Net cash flow used in investing activities(3,039,456)(4,707,711)(3,700,199)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt1,410,893 2,942,771 3,769,166 
Retirement of long-term debt(2,699,235)(3,167,832)(1,895,091)
Proceeds received by storm trusts related to securitization1,457,676 3,163,572 — 
Capital contributions from parent1,457,676 1,000,000 125,000 
Changes in money pool payable - net(69,948)226,114 — 
Common equity distributions paid(660,750)(624,000)(60,000)
Other57,183 27,618 (849)
Net cash flow provided by financing activities953,495 3,568,243 1,938,226 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents(53,841)38,040 (709,447)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period56,613 18,573 728,020 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$2,772 $56,613 $18,573 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid (received) during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$376,353 $353,697 $337,926 
Income taxes($141,143)($82,463)($18,453)
Non-cash investing activities:
Accrued construction expenditures$105,859 $156,654 $507,855 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
358371

Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$2,255 $50,318 
Temporary cash investments517 6,295 
Total cash and cash equivalents2,772 56,613 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer264,776 339,291 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(6,156)(7,595)
Associated companies82,292 88,896 
Other74,685 53,241 
Accrued unbilled revenues202,173 199,077 
Total accounts receivable617,770 672,910 
Deferred fuel costs24,800 159,183 
Fuel inventory57,818 41,859 
Materials and supplies - at average cost652,180 555,860 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs96,047 53,833 
Prepayments and other71,613 76,646 
TOTAL1,523,000 1,616,904 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Investment in affiliate preferred membership interests4,496,245 3,163,572 
Decommissioning trust funds2,107,384 1,779,090 
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)404,043 350,723 
Storm reserve escrow account243,819 293,406 
Other9,367 19,679 
TOTAL7,260,858 5,606,470 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric27,800,467 27,498,136 
Natural gas315,658 301,719 
Construction work in progress592,803 736,969 
Nuclear fuel333,472 212,941 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT29,042,400 28,749,765 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization10,570,707 10,087,942 
UTILITY PLANT - NET18,471,693 18,661,823 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets1,648,852 2,056,179 
Deferred fuel costs168,122 168,122 
Other36,945 35,057 
TOTAL1,853,919 2,259,358 
TOTAL ASSETS$29,109,470 $28,144,555 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
372


Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$1,082,352 $691,537 $675,614 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization783,616 685,062 662,390 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued(356,256)196,533 174,063 
Changes in working capital:   
Receivables(79,451)13,942 89,701 
Fuel inventory(9,067)(7,195)5,310 
Accounts payable160,659 (33,375)11,372 
Prepaid taxes and taxes accrued50,576 (38,827)12,711 
Interest accrued4,505 4,294 7,922 
Deferred fuel costs(57,895)24,234 (40,036)
Other working capital accounts(76,284)(62,536)(5,809)
Changes in provisions for estimated losses(295,480)9,664 8,307 
Changes in other regulatory assets(410,855)(210,134)40,765 
Changes in other regulatory liabilities71,698 (35,881)(125,185)
Changes in pension and other postretirement liabilities12,199 35,162 (106,269)
Other192,669 (36,478)(15,652)
Net cash flow provided by operating activities1,072,986 1,236,002 1,395,204 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(1,960,787)(1,673,194)(1,805,641)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction38,151 74,023 79,922 
Nuclear fuel purchases(92,831)(85,984)(111,329)
Proceeds from the sale of nuclear fuel44,511 11,596 53,603 
Payments to storm reserve escrow account(1,488)(6,353)(4,770)
Receipts from storm reserve escrow account297,363 
Changes in securitization account951 (32)(1,655)
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales347,021 412,559 1,055,690 
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds(372,227)(442,501)(1,097,204)
Changes in money pool receivable - net(13,426)46,843 (35,672)
Proceeds from sale of assets11,987 
Payment for purchase of assets(236,999)(26,623)
Insurance proceeds7,040 3,480 
Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs5,090 2,369 
Net cash flow used in investing activities(1,944,671)(1,653,634)(1,878,208)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt3,675,083 2,691,133 2,319,799 
Retirement of long-term debt(1,962,635)(2,199,053)(1,664,354)
Change in money pool payable - net(82,826)82,826 
Changes in short-term borrowings - net(43,540)
Distributions paid:   
Common equity(21,500)(208,000)(128,000)
Other(10,423)9,368 6,556 
Net cash flow provided by financing activities1,597,699 376,274 490,461 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents726,014 (41,358)7,457 
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period2,006 43,364 35,907 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$728,020 $2,006 $43,364 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid (received) during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$318,352 $296,842 $272,335 
Income taxes($14,714)$15,272 ($105,157)
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$1,400,000 $1,010,000 
Accounts payable:  
Associated companies283,016 356,688 
Other467,414 589,355 
Customer deposits167,905 161,666 
Taxes accrued66,463 36,004 
Interest accrued91,656 101,336 
Other87,468 72,525 
TOTAL2,563,922 2,327,574 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued2,391,442 2,374,878 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits93,242 97,868 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - net193,754 337,836 
Other regulatory liabilities1,407,689 1,037,962 
Decommissioning1,836,240 1,736,801 
Accumulated provisions263,869 316,314 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities271,928 389,631 
Long-term debt8,020,689 9,688,922 
Other493,176 343,321 
TOTAL14,972,029 16,323,533 
Commitments and Contingencies
EQUITY  
Members equity
11,473,614 9,406,343 
Accumulated other comprehensive income54,798 55,370 
Noncontrolling interests45,107 31,735 
TOTAL11,573,519 9,493,448 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$29,109,470 $28,144,555 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

359373

Table of Contents

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$1,303 $488 
Temporary cash investments726,717 1,518 
Total cash and cash equivalents728,020 2,006 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer317,905 194,869 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(45,693)(1,902)
Associated companies81,624 77,212 
Other41,760 42,179 
Accrued unbilled revenues178,840 169,201 
Total accounts receivable574,436 481,559 
Deferred fuel costs2,250 
Fuel inventory50,680 41,613 
Materials and supplies - at average cost437,933 354,020 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs48,407 56,743 
Prepaid taxes7,959 
Prepayments and other36,813 37,837 
TOTAL1,878,539 981,737 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Investment in affiliate preferred membership interests1,390,587 1,390,587 
Decommissioning trust funds1,794,042 1,563,812 
Storm reserve escrow account295,875 
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)323,110 312,896 
Other13,399 13,476 
TOTAL3,521,138 3,576,646 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric25,619,789 22,620,365 
Natural gas262,744 235,678 
Construction work in progress667,281 1,383,603 
Nuclear fuel210,128 267,779 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT26,759,942 24,507,425 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization9,372,224 9,118,524 
UTILITY PLANT - NET17,387,718 15,388,901 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $5,088 as of December 31, 2020 and $27,596 as of December 31, 2019)1,726,066 1,315,211 
Deferred fuel costs168,122 168,122 
Other23,924 33,491 
TOTAL1,918,112 1,516,824 
TOTAL ASSETS$24,705,507 $21,464,108 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
 Noncontrolling Interests
Members Equity
Accumulated Other Comprehensive IncomeTotal
 (In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2020$— $7,453,361 $4,327 $7,457,688 
Net income— 653,984 — 653,984 
Other comprehensive income— — 3,951 3,951 
Capital contribution from parent— 125,000 — 125,000 
Common equity distributions— (60,000)— (60,000)
Other— (51)— (51)
Balance at December 31, 2021$— $8,172,294 $8,278 $8,180,572 
Net income1,366 854,504 — 855,870 
Other comprehensive income— — 47,092 47,092 
Beneficial interest in storm trust31,636 — — 31,636 
Non-cash contribution from parent— 3,597 — 3,597 
Capital contribution from parent— 1,000,000 — 1,000,000 
Common equity distributions— (624,000)— (624,000)
Distribution to LURC(1,267)— — (1,267)
Other— (52)— (52)
Balance at December 31, 2022$31,735 $9,406,343 $55,370 $9,493,448 
Net income2,988 1,270,382 — 1,273,370 
Other comprehensive loss— — (572)(572)
Beneficial interest in storm trust14,577 — — 14,577 
Capital contribution from parent— 1,457,676 — 1,457,676 
Common equity distributions— (660,750)— (660,750)
Distributions to LURC(4,193)— — (4,193)
Other— (37)— (37)
Balance at December 31, 2023$45,107 $11,473,614 $54,798 $11,573,519 
See Notes to Financial Statements.    

360

Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$240,000 $320,002 
Accounts payable:  
Associated companies103,148 187,615 
Other1,450,008 357,206 
Customer deposits152,612 153,097 
Taxes accrued42,617 
Interest accrued92,249 87,744 
Deferred fuel costs55,645 
Current portion of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes31,138 31,138 
Other62,968 64,668 
TOTAL2,174,740 1,257,115 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued2,138,522 2,464,513 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits107,317 112,128 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - net447,628 500,083 
Other regulatory liabilities918,293 794,140 
Decommissioning1,573,307 1,497,349 
Accumulated provisions24,939 320,419 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities692,728 677,619 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $10,278 as of December 31, 2020 and $33,220 as of December 31, 2019)8,787,451 6,983,667 
Other382,894 459,957 
TOTAL15,073,079 13,809,875 
Commitments and Contingencies00
EQUITY  
Members equity
7,453,361 6,392,556 
Accumulated other comprehensive income4,327 4,562 
TOTAL7,457,688 6,397,118 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$24,705,507 $21,464,108 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

361

Table of Contents

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
 Common Equity 
 
Members Equity
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)Total
 (In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2017$5,355,204 ($46,400)$5,308,804 
Net income675,614 675,614 
Other comprehensive income50,296 50,296 
Distributions declared on common equity(128,000)(128,000)
Reclassification pursuant to ASU 2018-026,262 (10,049)(3,787)
Other(9)(9)
Balance at December 31, 2018$5,909,071 ($6,153)$5,902,918 
Net income691,537 691,537 
Other comprehensive income10,715 10,715 
Distributions declared on common equity(208,000)(208,000)
Other(52)(52)
Balance at December 31, 2019$6,392,556 $4,562 $6,397,118 
Net income1,082,352 1,082,352 
Other comprehensive loss(235)(235)
Distributions declared on common equity(21,500)(21,500)
Other(47)(47)
Balance at December 31, 2020$7,453,361 $4,327 $7,457,688 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

362

Table of Contents

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON
 20202019201820172016
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$4,069,862 $4,285,175 $4,296,320 $4,300,550 $4,177,048 
Net income$1,082,352 $691,537 $675,614 $316,347 $622,047 
Total assets$24,705,507 $21,464,108 $19,651,815 $18,448,864 $17,701,271 
Long-term obligations (a)$8,787,451 $6,983,667 $6,805,766 $5,469,069 $5,612,593 
(a) Includes long-term debt (excluding currently maturing debt).
 20202019201820172016
 (Dollars In Millions)
Electric Operating Revenues:     
Residential$1,270 $1,271 $1,244 $1,198 $1,196 
Commercial887 947 941 956 930 
Industrial1,314 1,451 1,462 1,534 1,350 
Governmental69 71 69 69 67 
Total billed retail3,540 3,740 3,716 3,757 3,543 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies276 273 295 278 368 
Non-associated companies58 60 62 64 50 
Other145 150 160 147 165 
Total$4,019 $4,223 $4,233 $4,246 $4,126 
Billed Electric Energy Sales (GWh):     
Residential13,771 14,046 14,494 13,357 13,810 
Commercial10,465 11,353 11,578 11,342 11,478 
Industrial28,881 29,801 29,255 29,754 28,517 
Governmental779 827 823 790 794 
Total retail53,896 56,027 56,150 55,243 54,599 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies5,585 4,813 5,498 4,793 7,345 
Non-associated companies2,365 1,924 1,762 1,711 1,690 
Total61,846 62,764 63,410 61,747 63,634 

363374

Table of Contents

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The COVID-19 Pandemic

See “The COVID-19” Pandemic section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

February 2021 Winter Storms

See the “February 2021 Winter Storms” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the February 2021 winter storms. Entergy Mississippi’s preliminary estimate for the cost of mobilizing crews and restoring power is approximately $50 million to $60 million. Natural gas purchases for Entergy Mississippi for February 1st through 25th, 2021 are approximately $45 million compared to natural gas purchases for February 2020 of $14 million.

Results of Operations

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Net IncomeEarnings Applicable to Member’s Equity

Net income increased $20.7Earnings decreased $5.4 million primarily due to higher retail electric price, partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses, lower volume/weather, higher interest expense, lower other income, higher other operation and maintenance expenses, and lower volume/weather.higher taxes other than income taxes. The decrease was partially offset by higher retail electric price.

Operating Revenues

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenues comparing 20202023 to 2019.2022.
Amount
(In Millions)
20192022 operating revenues$1,323.01,624.2 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income(153.2)95.8 
Volume/weather(17.6)
Retail electric price95.758.9 
2020Retail one-time bill credit36.7 
Volume/weather(13.1)
2023 operating revenues1,247.9$1,802.5 

Entergy Mississippi’s results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to decreased commercial and industrial usage as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales, partially offset by increased residential usage as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

364

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
The retail electric price variance is primarily due to:

to increases in the formula rate plan rates effective with the first billing cycles ofAugust 2022, April 2023, and July 2019 and April 2020 and an interim capacity rate adjustment to the formula rate plan effective January 2020 to recover non-fuel related costs of acquiring and operating the Choctaw Generating Station; and
the implementation of a vegetation management rider effective with the April 2020 billing cycle.

2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the formula rate plan filingsfilings.

The retail one-time bill credit represents the disbursement of settlement proceeds in the form of a one-time bill credit provided to retail customers during the September 2022 billing cycle as a result of the System Energy settlement agreement with the MPSC. There is no effect on net income as the reduction in operating revenues was offset by a reduction in fuel and purchased power expenses. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the settlement agreement and the vegetation management rider.MPSC directive related to the disbursement of settlement proceeds.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales and a decrease in weather-adjusted residential and commercial usage, partially offset by the effect of more favorable weather on commercial sales.

375

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Total electric energy sales for Entergy Mississippi for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
20232022% Change
(GWh)
Residential5,460 5,679 (4)
Commercial4,640 4,586 
Industrial2,347 2,359 (1)
Governmental407 414 (2)
  Total retail12,854 13,038 (1)
Sales for resale:
  Non-associated companies4,598 2,914 58 
Total17,452 15,952 

See Note 19 to the financial statements for additional discussion of Entergy Mississippi’s operating revenues.

Other Income Statement Variances

Other operation and maintenance expenses increased primarily due to:

an increase of $13.5$6.6 million in non-nuclear generationcontract costs related to operational performance, customer service, and organizational health initiatives;
an increase of $5.1 million in loss provisions;
an increase of $4.4 million in bad debt expense;
an increase of $3.1 million in power delivery expenses primarily due to an increase inhigher vegetation maintenance costs, after the purchase of the Choctaw Generating Station in October 2019, partially offset by a decrease of $11.1 million primarily due to a lower scope of work performed during plant outages in 20202023 as compared to the same period in 2019, including a delay in plant outages as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic;
an increase of $8.1 million in storm damage provisions. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of storm cost recovery;
an increase of $4.7 million in distribution operations costs due to a higher scope of work, including contract costs in 2020 as compared to the same period in 2019;
an increase of $2.5 million in energy efficiency costs due to the timing of recovery from customers;2022; and
several individually insignificant items.

The increase was partially offset by by:

a decrease of $3.7$5.8 million in transmission costs allocated by MISO;
a decrease of $5.3 million in compensation and benefits costs primarily due to contracta decrease in net periodic pension and other postretirement benefits service costs as a result of an increase in 2019 relatedthe discount rates used to initiativesvalue the benefits liabilities, lower health and welfare costs, including higher prescription drug rebates in second quarter 2023, and a revision to explore new customer productsestimated incentive compensation expense in first quarter 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates” below and services.Note 11 to the financial statements for further discussion of pension and other postretirement benefits costs; and
a decrease of $5.3 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work, including during plant outages, performed in 2023 as compared to 2022.

Taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to increases in ad valorem taxes resulting from higher assessments and increases in local franchise taxes.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily as a result of higher depreciation rates effective July 2019, as approved by the MPSC, anddue to additions to plant in service, including the Choctaw Generating Station,Sunflower Solar facility, which was purchasedplaced in October 2019.service in September 2022.

Other regulatory charges (credits) - net includes regulatory credits of $22.6 million, recorded in third quarter 2022, to reflect the effects of the joint stipulation reached in the 2022 formula rate plan filing proceeding and regulatory credits of $18.2 million, recorded in fourth quarter 2022, to reflect that the 2022 estimated earned
376

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
return was below the formula bandwidth. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the formula rate plan filings.

Other income (deductions) decreased primarily due to lower interest income from carrying costs related to the deferred fuel balance and an increase in non-qualified pension settlement charges recorded in 2023 and other postretirement benefit non-service costs as a result of the amortization of 2022 trust asset losses. The decrease was partially offset by the timing of charitable donations and an increase in the allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for further discussion of pension and other postretirement benefits costs.

Interest expense increased primarily due to the issuance of $300 million of 5.0% Series mortgage bonds in May 2023 and the $150 million unsecured term loan drawn in June 2022, of which $50 million was repaid in May 2023 and $100 million was repaid in December 2023. The increase was partially offset by the repayment of $250 million of 3.10% Series mortgage bonds in June 2023.

Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest reflects the earnings or losses attributable to the noncontrolling partner of the tax equity partnership for the Sunflower Solar facility under HLBV accounting. Entergy Mississippi recorded regulatory charges of $9.1 million in 2023 and $21.4 million in 2022 to defer the difference between the losses allocated to the tax equity partner under the HLBV method of accounting and the earnings/losses that would have been allocated to the tax equity partner under its respective ownership percentage in the partnership. See Note 1 to the financial statements for discussion of the HLBV method of accounting.

The effective income tax rates were 16.2%23.0% for 20202023 and 20.5%23.7% for 2019.2022. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory ratesrate of 21% to the effective income tax rates.rates and for additional discussion regarding income taxes.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy Mississippi’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019,2022, filed with the SEC onFebruary 21, 2020,24, 2023, for discussion of results of operations for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

Income Tax Legislation and Regulation

See the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of income tax legislation and regulation.

365377

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 were as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of periodCash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$51,601 $36,954 $6,096 
Net cash provided by (used in):Net cash provided by (used in):   
Net cash provided by (used in):
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities
Operating activities
Operating activitiesOperating activities300,314 339,952 418,382 
Investing activitiesInvesting activities(530,762)(733,684)(419,453)
Financing activitiesFinancing activities178,865 408,379 31,929 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalentsNet increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents(51,583)14,647 30,858 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of periodCash and cash equivalents at end of period$18 $51,601 $36,954 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities decreased $39.6increased $153.7 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

lower fuel costs and the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power;power costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of fuel and purchased power cost recovery;
lowerhigher collections of receivables from customers, in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic; customers; and
an increase of $10.3 million in storm spending in 2020.

The decrease was partially offset by the timing of payments to vendors and a decrease of $8.2$12.2 million in pension contributions in 2020. 2023. See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

The increase was partially offset by:

the receipt of $235 million in settlement proceeds in 2022, of which $198.3 million was applied to the under-recovered deferred fuel balance. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of fuel and purchased power cost recovery and the System Energy settlement agreement with the MPSC;
income tax payments of $50.9 million in 2023 as compared to income tax refunds of $5.4 million in 2022. Entergy Mississippi made income tax payments in 2023 and received income tax refunds in 2022, each in accordance with an intercompany income tax allocation agreement;
an increase of $13.9 million in storm spending in 2023; and
an increase of $10.7 million in interest paid.

Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities decreased $202.9$92.8 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

the initial payment of approximately $105.1 million in May 2022 as compared to the substantial completion payment of approximately $30.4 million in April 2023 and the final payment of approximately $4.7 million in October 2023 for the purchase of the Choctaw Generating Station in October 2019 for approximately $305 million.Sunflower Solar facility by a consolidated tax equity partnership. See Note 14 to the financial statements for further discussion of the Choctaw Generating StationSunflower Solar facility purchase;
378

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
the receipt of $34.5 million from the storm reserve escrow account in 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the storm escrow disbursement;
a decrease of $20.2 million in non-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to a lower scope of work, including during plant outages, performed in 2023 as compared to 2022;
a decrease of $17.8 million in information technology capital expenditures primarily due to decreased spending on various technology projects in 2023; and
money pool activity.

The decrease was partially offset by:

by an increase of $47.3$46.8 million in storm spending in 2020;
an increase of $40.9 million in distributiontransmission construction expenditures primarily due to increased investment in the reliability and infrastructure of Entergy Mississippi’s distributiontransmission system including increased spending on advanced metering infrastructure;
in 2023 and an increase of $25.8$27.5 million in non-nucleardistribution construction expenditures primarily due to increasedhigher capital expenditures after the purchase of the Choctaw Generating Stationfor storm restoration in October 2019 and higher long-term service agreement expenses;
$24.6 million in plant upgrades for Choctaw Generating Station in March 2020; and
366

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
an increase of $22.4 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to a higher scope of work performed in 2020 as compared to 2019.2023.

Decreases in Entergy Mississippi’s receivable from the money pool are a source of cash flow, and Entergy Mississippi’s receivable from the money pool decreased by $44.7$26.9 million in 20202023 compared to increasingdecreasing by $3.3$13.6 million in 2019.2022. The money pool is an inter-companyintercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing arrangement designedand lending arrangements, including to reduce the Utility subsidiaries’Registrant Subsidiaries’ need for external short-term borrowings.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided byEntergy Mississippi’s financing activities decreased $229.5used $41.8 million of cash in 2023 compared to providing $184.4 million of cash in 2022 primarily due to the following activity:

proceeds of $150 million received in June 2022 from an unsecured term loan due December 2023 as compared to repayments of $150 million on the unsecured term loan in 2023;
the repayment, prior to maturity, of $250 million of 3.10% Series mortgage bonds in June 2023;
$40 million in 2020 primarily due to:common equity distributions paid in 2023 in order to maintain Entergy Mississippi’s capital structure;

money pool activity; and
the issuance of $170$300 million of 3.5%5.0% Series mortgage bonds in 2020 compared to the issuance of $435 million of 3.85% Series mortgage bonds in 2019; andMay 2023.
a capital contribution of $130 million in October 2019 in anticipation of the purchase of the Choctaw Generating Station.

The decrease was partially offset by the repayment, at maturity, of $150 million of 6.64% Series mortgage bonds in July 2019 and money pool activity.

Increases in Entergy Mississippi’s payable to the money pool are a source of cash flow, and Entergy Mississippi’s payable to the money pool increased $16.5$73.8 million in 2020.2023.

See Note 5 to the financial statements for details on long-term debt.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of Entergy Mississippi’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019,2022, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020,24, 2023, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

379

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Capital Structure

Entergy Mississippi’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The decrease in the debt to capital ratio for Entergy Mississippi is primarily due to the net retirement of long-term debt in 2023 and net income in 2023.
December 31,
2020
December 31,
2019
December 31,
2023
December 31,
2022
Debt to capitalDebt to capital51.7 %51.2 %Debt to capital50.5 %53.4 %
Effect of subtracting cashEffect of subtracting cash— %(0.8 %)Effect of subtracting cash(0.1 %)(0.2 %)
Net debt to net capital51.7 %50.4 %
Net debt to net capital (non-GAAP)Net debt to net capital (non-GAAP)50.4 %53.2 %

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents.  Debt consists of short-term borrowings, finance lease obligations, and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion.  Capital consists of debt and equity.  Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents.  Entergy Mississippi uses the debt to capital ratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Mississippi’s financial condition.  The net debt to net capital ratio is a non-GAAP measure. Entergy Mississippi uses the net debt to net capital ratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Mississippi’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy Mississippi’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

367

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy Mississippi seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings.  To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a distribution, to the extent funds are legally available to do so, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure.  To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, Entergy Mississippi may issue incremental debt or reduce distributions, or both, to maintain its capital structure.  In addition, in certain infrequent circumstances, such as financing of large transactions that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reducingreduced distributions, Entergy Mississippi may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure.

Uses of Capital

Entergy Mississippi requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
debt maturities or retirements;
working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel and purchased power costs; and
distributions and interest payments.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Mississippi’s planned construction and other capital investments.
202120222023 202420252026
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:Planned construction and capital investment:  Planned construction and capital investment:  
GenerationGeneration$180 $140 $180 
TransmissionTransmission120 75 55 
DistributionDistribution210 200 225 
Utility SupportUtility Support80 85 30 
TotalTotal$590 $500 $490 

380

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
In addition to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Mississippi includes investments in generation projects to modernize, decarbonize, and diversify Entergy Mississippi’s portfolio, as well as to support customer growth; distribution and Utility support spending to improve reliability, resilience, and customer experience; transmission spending to improve reliability and resilience while also supporting renewables expansion and customer growth; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements, government actions, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Mississippi’s existing debt obligations and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments) and other purchase obligations..
20212022-20232024-2025After 2025Total 2024202520262027-2028After 2028
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)Long-term debt (a)$65 $376 $209 $2,575 $3,225 
Operating leases (b)Operating leases (b)$6 $8 $2 $2 $18 
Finance leases (b)Finance leases (b)$2 $3 $2 $1 $8 
Purchase obligations (c)$223 $434 $412 $3,779 $4,848 

(a)Includes estimated interest payments.  Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.
(c)
Purchase obligations represent the minimum purchase obligation or cancellation charge for contractual obligations to purchase goods or services.  For Entergy Mississippi, almost all of the total consists of unconditional fuel and purchased power obligations, including its obligations under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which is discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.
Other Obligations

In addition to the contractual obligations given above, Entergy Mississippi currently expects to contribute approximately $13.7$15 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $130$178 thousand to other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2021,2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024, valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.  See
368

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Critical Accounting Estimates – Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Also, in addition to the contractual obligations, Entergy Mississippi has $84$1.9 million of unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes plus interest for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

In addition, to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Mississippi includes amountsenters into fuel and purchased power agreements that contain minimum purchase obligations. Entergy Mississippi has rate mechanisms in place to recover fuel, purchased power, and associated with specific investments such ascosts incurred under these purchase obligations. See Note 8 to the Sunflower Solar Facility; transmission projects to enhance reliability, reduce congestion, and enable economic growth; distribution spending to enhance reliability and improve service to customers, including advanced meters and related investments; resource planning, including potential generation and renewables projects; system improvements; software and security; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based onfinancial statements for discussion of Entergy Mississippi’s obligations under the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital.Unit Power Sales Agreement.

As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, Entergy Mississippi pays distributions from its earnings at a percentage determined monthly.

Sunflower Solar Facility

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi announced that it signed an agreement for the purchase of an approximately 100 MW solar photovoltaic facility that will be sited on approximately 1,000 acres in Sunflower County, Mississippi.  The estimated base purchase price is approximately $138.4 million.  The estimated total investment, including the base purchase price and other related costs, for Entergy Mississippi to acquire the Sunflower Solar Facility is approximately $153.2 million. The purchase is contingent upon, among other things, obtaining necessary approvals, including full cost recovery, from applicable federal and state regulatory and permitting agencies.  The project is being built by Sunflower County Solar Project, LLC, an indirect subsidiary of Recurrent Energy, LLC. Entergy Mississippi will purchase the facility upon mechanical completion and after the other purchase contingencies have been met.  In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed a joint petition with Sunflower Solar Project with the MPSC for Sunflower Solar Project to construct and for Entergy Mississippi to acquire and thereafter own, operate, improve, and maintain the solar facility.  Entergy Mississippi proposed revisions to its formula rate plan that would provide for a mechanism, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, in the formula rate plan to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi, including the annual ownership costs of the Sunflower Solar Facility.  In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for an interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism. Recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment requires MPSC approval for each new resource. In August 2019 consultants retained by the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed a report expressing concerns regarding the project economics. In March 2020, Entergy Mississippi filed supplemental testimony addressing questions and observations raised by the consultants retained by the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff and proposing an alternative structure for the transaction that would reduce its cost. A hearing before the MPSC was held in March 2020. In April 2020 the MPSC issued an order approving certification of the Sunflower Solar Facility and its recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, subject to certain conditions including: (i) that Entergy Mississippi pursue a partnership structure through which the partnership would acquire and own the facility under the build-own-transfer agreement and (ii) that if Entergy Mississippi does not consummate the partnership structure under the terms of the order, there will be a cap of $136 million on the level of recoverable costs. Closing is targeted to occur by the end of 2021.

369

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Sources of Capital

Entergy Mississippi’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand;
the Entergy system money pool;
storm reserve escrow accounts;
381

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

debt or preferred membership interest issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
capital contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Circumstances such as weather patterns, fuel and purchased power price fluctuations, and unanticipated expenses, including unscheduled plant outages and storms, could affect the timing and level of internally generated funds in the future. In addition to the financings necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, Entergy Mississippi may refinance, redeem, or otherwiseexpects to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher-cost debt prior to maturity, to the extentand replace it with lower-cost debt if market conditions and interest rates are favorable.permit.

All debt and preferred membership interest issuances by Entergy Mississippi require prior regulatory approval.  Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in its bond indenture and other agreements.  Entergy Mississippi has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs.needs for the next twelve months and beyond.

Entergy Mississippi’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2020201920182017
(In Thousands)
($16,516)$44,693$41,380$1,633
2023202220212020
(In Thousands)
($73,769)$26,879$40,456($16,516)

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

Entergy Mississippi has three separatea credit facilitiesfacility in the aggregate amount of $82.5$150 million scheduled to expire in April 2021. NoJuly 2025. As of December 31, 2023, there were no cash borrowings were outstanding under the credit facilities as of December 31, 2020.facility. In addition, Entergy Mississippi is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility primarily as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO.MISO and for other purposes. As of December 31, 2020, $12023, $20.0 million ofin MISO letters of credit and $1$1.0 million ofin a non-MISO lettersletter of credit were outstanding under this facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities.

Entergy Mississippi obtained authorization from the FERC through July 2022April 2025 for short-term borrowings, not to exceed an aggregate amount of $175$200 million at any time outstanding, and long-term borrowings and security issuances. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy Mississippi’s short-term borrowing limits.

Entergy Mississippi has $33 million in its storm reserve escrow account at December 31, 2020.

State and Local Rate Regulation and Fuel-Cost Recovery

The rates that Entergy Mississippi charges for electricityits services significantly influence its financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. Entergy Mississippi is regulated, and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings. A governmental agency, the MPSC, is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers.

Filings with the MPSC

Retail Rates

2021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In March 2021, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 2021 test year filing and 2020 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return for the historical 2020 calendar year to be below the
370
382

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Formula Rate Plan Filings

In October 2018, Entergy Mississippi proposed revisions to its formula rate plan that would provide for a mechanism in the formula rate plan, the interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism, to recover the non-fuel related costs of additional owned capacity acquired by Entergy Mississippi, including the non-fuel annual ownership costs of the Choctaw Generating Station, as well as to allow similar cost recovery treatment for other future capacity acquisitions, such as the Sunflower Solar Facility, that are approved by the MPSC. In December 2019 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s proposed revisions to its formula rate plan to provide for an interim capacity rate adjustment mechanism to recover the $59 million first-year annual revenue requirement associated with the non-fuel ownership costs of the Choctaw Generating Station, which Entergy Mississippi began billing in January 2020. The MPSC must approve recovery through the interim capacity rate adjustment for each new resource. In addition, the MPSC approved revisions to the formula rate plan which allows Entergy Mississippi to begin billing rate adjustments effective April 1 of the filing year on a temporary basis subject to refund or credit to customers, subject to final MPSC order. The MPSC also authorized Entergy Mississippi to remove vegetation management costs from the formula rate plan and recover these costs through the establishment of a vegetation management rider. Effective with the April 2020 billing cycle, Entergy Mississippi implemented a rider to recover $22 million in vegetation management costs.

In March 2019, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 2019 test year filing and 2018 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return for the historical 2018 calendar year to be above the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 20192021 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 20192021 test year filing showsshowed a $36.8$95.4 million rate increase iswas necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equity to the specified point of adjustment of 6.94%6.69% return on rate base, within the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2018change in formula rate plan revenues, however, was capped at 4% of retail revenues, which equated to a revenue change of $44.3 million. The 2021 evaluation report also included $3.9 million in demand side management costs for which the MPSC approved realignment of recovery from the energy efficiency rider to the formula rate plan. These costs were not subject to the 4% cap and resulted in a total change in formula rate plan revenues of $48.2 million. The 2020 look-back filing comparescompared actual 20182020 results to the approved benchmark return on rate base and showsreflected the need for a $10.1$16.8 million interim decreaseincrease in formula rate plan revenues is necessary.revenues. In addition, the fourth quarter 2018, Entergy Mississippi recorded a provision2020 look-back filing included an interim capacity adjustment true-up for the Choctaw Generating Station, which increased the look-back interim rate adjustment by $1.7 million. These interim rate adjustments totaled $18.5 million. In accordance with the provisions of $9.3 million that reflected the estimate of the difference between the 2018 expected earned rate of return on rate base and an established performance-adjusted benchmark rate of return under the formula rate plan, performance-adjusted bandwidth mechanism. In the first quarter 2019, Entergy Mississippi recordedimplemented a $0.8$22.1 million interim rate increase, reflecting a cap equal to 2% of 2020 retail revenues, effective with the April 2021 billing cycle, subject to refund, pending a final MPSC order. The $3.9 million of demand side management costs and the Choctaw Generating Station true-up of $1.7 million, which were not subject to the 2% cap of 2020 retail revenues, were included in the provision to reflect the amount shown in the look-back filing. April 2021 rate adjustments.

In June 2019,2021, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed the 2021 test year filing that resulted in a total rate increase of $48.2 million. Pursuant to the 2019joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 2020 look-back filing reflected an earned return on rate base of 6.12% in calendar year 2020, which was below the look-back bandwidth, resulting in a $17.5 million increase in formula rate plan revenues on an interim basis through June 2022. This included $1.7 million related to the Choctaw Generating Station and $3.7 million of COVID-19 non-bad debt expenses. The joint stipulation also included Entergy Mississippi’s quantification and methodology for calculating incremental COVID-19 bad debt expenses and provided for Entergy Mississippi to continue to defer these incremental COVID-19 bad debt expenses through December 2021. In June 2021 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effective for the first billing cycle of July 2021. In June 2021, Entergy Mississippi recorded regulatory credits of $19.9 million to reflect the effects of the joint stipulation.

2022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In March 2022, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 2022 test year filing and 2021 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return for the historical 2021 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 2022 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2022 test year filing showed that a $32.8$69 million rate increase iswas necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equity to the specified point of adjustment of 6.93% return on rate base, within the formula rate plan bandwidth. Additionally, pursuant to the joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 2018 look-back filing reflected an earned return on rate base of 7.81% in calendar year 2018 which is above the look-back benchmark return on rate base of 7.13%, resulting in an $11 million decrease in formula rate plan revenues on an interim basis through May 2020. In the second quarter 2019, Entergy Mississippi recorded an additional $0.9 million increase in the provision to reflect the $11 million shown in the look-back filing. In June 2019 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effective for the first billing cycle of July 2019.

In March 2020, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 2020 test year filing and 2019 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return for the historical 2019 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 2020 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2020 test year filing shows a $24.6 million rate increase is necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on common equity to the specified point of adjustment of 6.51%6.70% return on rate base, within the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2019change in formula rate plan revenues, however, was capped at 4% of retail revenues, which equated to a revenue change of $48.6 million. The 2021 look-back filing comparescompared actual 20192021 results to the approved benchmark return on rate base and reflectsreflected the need for a $7.3$34.5 million interim increase in formula rate plan revenues. In fourth quarter 2021, Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory asset of $19 million to reflect the then-current estimate in connection with the look-back feature of the formula rate plan. In accordance with the MPSC-approved revisions toprovisions of the formula rate plan, Entergy Mississippi implemented a $24.3 million interim rate increase, reflecting a cap equal to 2% of 20192021 retail revenues, effective within April 2022. With the April 2020 billing cycle, subject to refund. implementation of the interim formula rate plan rates, Entergy Mississippi began recovery of the bad debt expense deferral resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic over a three-year period.

In June 2020,2022, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed that the 20202022 test year filing showed that resulted in a $23.8 milliontotal rate increase is necessaryof $48.6 million. Pursuant to resetthe joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 2021 look-back filing reflected an earned return on common equityrate base of 5.99% in calendar year 2021, which was below the look-back bandwidth, resulting in a $34.3 million increase in the formula rate plan revenues on an interim basis through June 2023. In July 2022 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effective in August 2022. In July 2022, Entergy Mississippi recorded regulatory credits of $22.6 million to the specified point ofreflect
371383

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

adjustmentthe effects of 6.51%the joint stipulation. In August 2022 an intervenor filed a statutorily-authorized direct appeal to the Mississippi Supreme Court seeking review of the MPSC’s July 2022 order approving the joint stipulation confirming Entergy Mississippi’s 2022 formula rate plan filing. Formula rate plan rates are not stayed or otherwise impacted while the appeal is pending.

In July 2022 the MPSC directed Entergy Mississippi to flow $14.1 million of the power management rider over-recovery balance to customers beginning in August 2022 through December 2022 to mitigate the bill impact of the increase in formula rate plan revenues.

2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In March 2023, Entergy Mississippi submitted its formula rate plan 2023 test year filing and 2022 look-back filing showing Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on rate base for the historical 2022 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth and projected earned return for the 2023 calendar year to be below the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2023 test year filing showed a $39.8 million rate increase was necessary to reset Entergy Mississippi’s earned return on rate base to the specified point of adjustment of 6.67%, within the formula rate plan bandwidth. The 2022 look-back filing compared actual 2022 results to the approved benchmark return on rate base and reflected the need for a $19.8 million temporary increase in formula rate plan revenues, including the refund of a $1.3 million over-recovery resulting from the demand-side management costs true-up for 2022. In fourth quarter 2022, Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory asset of $18.2 million in connection with the look-back feature of the formula rate plan to reflect that the 2022 estimated earned return was below the formula rate plan bandwidth. In accordance with the provisions of the formula rate plan, Entergy Mississippi implemented a $27.9 million interim rate increase, reflecting a cap equal to 2% of 2022 retail revenues, effective in April 2023.

In May 2023, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into a joint stipulation that confirmed a 2023 test year filing resulting in a total revenue increase of $26.5 million for 2023. Pursuant to the joint stipulation, Entergy Mississippi’s 20192022 look-back filing reflected an earned return on rate base of 6.75%6.10% in calendar year 2019,2022, which is withinwas below the look-back bandwidth. Asbandwidth, resulting in a result, there is no change$19.0 million increase in the formula rate plan revenues on an interim basis through June 2024. Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory credit of $0.8 million in June 2023 to reflect the increase in the 2019 look-back filing.regulatory asset. In addition, certain long-term service agreement and conductor handling costs were authorized for realignment from the formula rate plan to the annual power management and grid modernization riders effective January 2023, resulting in regulatory credits recorded in June 2023 of $4.1 million and $4.3 million, respectively. Also, the amortization of Entergy Mississippi’s COVID-19 bad debt expense deferral was suspended for calendar year 2023 and will resume in 2024. In June 20202023 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation with rates effective for the first billing cycle ofin July 2020. In the June 2020 order the MPSC directed Entergy Mississippi to submit revisions to its formula rate plan to realign recovery of costs from its energy efficiency cost recovery rider to its formula rate plan. In November 2020 the MPSC approved Entergy Mississippi’s revisions to its formula rate plan providing for the realignment of energy efficiency costs to its formula rate plan, the deferral of energy efficiency expenditures into a regulatory asset, and the elimination of its energy efficiency cost recovery rider effective with the January 2022 billing cycle.

COVID-19 Order

In March 2020 the MPSC issued an order suspending disconnections for a period of sixty days. The MPSC extended the order on disconnections through May 26, 2020. In April 2020 the MPSC issued an order authorizing utilities to defer incremental costs and expenses associated with COVID-19 compliance and to seek future recovery through rates of the prudently incurred incremental costs and expenses. In December 2020, Entergy Mississippi resumed disconnections for commercial, industrial, and governmental customers with past-due balances that have not made payment arrangements. In January 2021, Entergy Mississippi resumed disconnecting service for residential customers with past-due balances that have not made arrangements. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy Mississippi recorded a regulatory asset of $19.2 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Internal Restructuring

In March 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed an application with the MPSC seeking authorization to undertake a restructuring that would result in the transfer of substantially all of the assets and operations of Entergy Mississippi to a new entity, which would ultimately be held by an existing Entergy subsidiary holding company. In September 2018, Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff entered into and filed a joint stipulation regarding the restructuring filing. In September 2018 the MPSC issued an order accepting the stipulation in its entirety and approving the restructuring and credits of $27 million to retail customers over six years, consisting of annual payments of $4.5 million for the years 2019-2024. Entergy Mississippi also received the required FERC approval.

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi undertook a multi-step restructuring, including the following:

Entergy Mississippi, Inc. redeemed its outstanding preferred stock, at the aggregate redemption price of approximately $21.2 million.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. converted from a Mississippi corporation to a Texas corporation.
Under the Texas Business Organizations Code (TXBOC), Entergy Mississippi, Inc. allocated substantially all of its assets to a new subsidiary, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (Entergy Mississippi Power and Light), and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Entergy Mississippi, Inc., in a transaction regarded as a merger under the TXBOC. Entergy Mississippi, Inc. remained in existence and held the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light.
Entergy Mississippi, Inc. contributed the membership interests in Entergy Mississippi Power and Light to an affiliate (Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, a Texas limited liability company and subsidiary of Entergy Corporation). As a result of the contribution, Entergy Mississippi Power and Light is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC.

In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi, Inc. changed its name to Entergy Utility Enterprises, Inc., and Entergy Mississippi Power and Light then changed its name to Entergy Mississippi, LLC. Entergy Mississippi, LLC holds substantially all of the assets, and assumed substantially all of the liabilities, of Entergy Mississippi, Inc. The restructuring was accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control.
372

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

In December 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed its notice of intent to implement the restructuring credit rider to allow Entergy Mississippi to return credits of $27 million to retail customers over six years. In January 2019 the MPSC approved the proposed restructuring credit adjustment factor, which is effective for bills rendered beginning February 2019.2023.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recoverypurchased power cost recovery

Entergy Mississippi’s rate schedules include an energy cost recovery rider that isand a power management rider, both of which are adjusted annually to reflect accumulated over- or under-recoveries. Entergy Mississippi recovers fuel and purchased energy costs through its energy cost recovery rider and recovers costs associated with natural gas hedging and capacity payments through its power management rider. Entergy Mississippi’s fuel cost recoveries are subject to annual audits conducted pursuant to the authority of the MPSC.

In January 2017 the MPSC certified to the Mississippi Legislature the audit reports of its independent auditors for the fuel year ending September 30, 2016. In November 2017 the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff separately engaged a consultant to review the September 2016 outage at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station and to review ongoing operations at Grand Gulf. This engagement continues, and subsequently, was expanded to include all outages at Grand Gulf that occurred through 2019.

In November 2017, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an under-recovery of approximately $61.5 million as of September 30, 2017. In January 2018 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factors effective for February 2018 bills.

In November 2018, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an under-recovery of approximately $57 million as of September 30, 2018. In January 2019 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor effective for February 2019 bills.

In November 2019, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation included $39.6 million of prior over-recovery flowing back to customers beginning September 2020. Entergy Mississippi’s balance in its deferred fuel account did not decrease as expected after implementation of the new factor. In an effort to assist customers during the COVID-19 pandemic, in May 2020, Entergy Mississippi requested an interim adjustment to the energy cost recovery rider to credit approximately $50 million from the over-recovered balance in the deferred fuel account to customers over four consecutive billing months. The MPSC approved this interim adjustment in May 2020 effective for June through September 2020 bills.

In November 2020, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an over-recovery of approximately $24.4 million as of September 30, 2020. In January 2021 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor effective for February 2021 bills.

In November 2021, Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redetermination of the annual factor to be applied under the energy cost recovery rider. The calculation of the annual factor included an under-recovery of approximately $80.6 million as of September 30, 2021. In December 2021, at the request of the MPSC, Entergy
384

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Mississippi submitted a proposal to mitigate the impact of rising fuel costs on customer bills during 2022. Entergy Mississippi proposed that the deferred fuel balance as of December 31, 2021, which was $121.9 million, be amortized over three years and that the MPSC authorize Entergy Mississippi to apply its weighted-average cost of capital as the carrying cost for the unamortized fuel balance. In January 2022 the MPSC approved the amortization of $100 million of the deferred fuel balance over two years and authorized Entergy Mississippi to apply its weighted-average cost of capital as the carrying cost for the unamortized fuel balance. The MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor effective for February 2022 bills.

SeeComplaints Against System Energy - System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” in Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the settlement agreement filed with the FERC in June 2022. The settlement, which was approved by the FERC in November 2022, provided for a refund of $235 million from System Energy to Entergy Mississippi. In July 2022 the MPSC directed the disbursement of settlement proceeds, ordering Entergy Mississippi to provide a one-time $80 bill credit to each of its approximately 460,000 retail customers to be effective during the September 2022 billing cycle and to apply the remaining proceeds to Entergy Mississippi’s under-recovered deferred fuel balance. In accordance with the MPSC’s directive, Entergy Mississippi provided approximately $36.7 million in customer bill credits as a result of the settlement. In November 2022, Entergy Mississippi applied the remaining settlement proceeds in the amount of approximately $198.3 million to Entergy Mississippi’s under-recovered deferred fuel balance.

Entergy Mississippi had a deferred fuel balance of approximately $291.7 million under the energy cost recovery rider as of July 31, 2022, along with an over-recovery balance of $51.1 million under the power management rider. Without further action, Entergy Mississippi anticipated a year-end deferred fuel balance of approximately $200 million after application of a portion of the System Energy settlement proceeds, as discussed above. In September 2022, Entergy Mississippi filed for interim adjustments under both the energy cost recovery rider and the power management rider. Entergy Mississippi proposed five monthly incremental adjustments to the net energy cost factor designed to collect the under-recovered fuel balance as of July 31, 2022 and to reflect the recovery of a higher natural gas price. Entergy Mississippi also proposed five monthly incremental adjustments to the power management adjustment factor designed to flow through to customers the over-recovered power management rider balance as of July 31, 2022. In October 2022 the MPSC approved modified interim adjustments to Entergy Mississippi’s energy cost recovery rider and power management rider. The MPSC approved dividing the energy cost recovery rider interim adjustment into two components that would allow Entergy Mississippi to (1) recover a natural gas fuel rate that is better aligned with current prices; and (2) recover the estimated under-recovered deferred fuel balance as of September 30, 2022 over a period of 20 months. The MPSC approved six monthly incremental adjustments to the net energy cost factor designed to reflect the recovery of a higher natural gas price. The MPSC also approved six monthly incremental adjustments to the power management adjustment factor designed to flow through to customers the over-recovered power management rider balance. In accordance with the order of the MPSC, Entergy Mississippi did not file an annual redetermination of the energy cost recovery rider or the power management rider in November 2022.

In June 2023 the MPSC approved the joint stipulation agreement between Entergy Mississippi and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff for Entergy Mississippi’s 2023 formula rate plan filing. The stipulation directed Entergy Mississippi to make a compliance filing to revise its power management cost adjustment factor, to revise its grid modernization cost adjustment factor, and to include a revision to reduce the net energy cost factor to a level necessary to reflect an average natural gas price of $4.50 per MMBtu. The MPSC approved the compliance filing in June 2023, effective for July 2023 bills. See “Retail Rate Proceedings - Filings with the MPSC (Entergy Mississippi) - Retail Rates - 2023 Formula Rate Plan Filing” in Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the 2023 formula rate plan filing and the joint stipulation agreement.

In November 2023 Entergy Mississippi filed its annual redeterminations of the energy cost factor and the power management cost adjustment factor. The calculation of the annual factor for the energy cost recovery rider included a projected over-recovery balance of approximately $142 million at the end of January 2024. The calculation of the annual factor for the power management rider included a projected under-recovery of $47 million
385

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

at the end of January 2024. In January 2024 the MPSC approved the proposed energy cost factor and the proposed power management cost factor effective for February 2024 bills.

RenewABLE Community Option

In January 2022, Entergy Mississippi filed its RenewABLE Community Option (Schedule RCO), an offering for qualifying non-residential customers to subscribe to renewable resource capacity to satisfy their environmental, sustainability, and governance goals. The MPSC approved Schedule RCO in December 2022. Registration for the Schedule RCO launched in May 2023 and subscriptions as of December 31, 2023 totaled 17.9 MW of the 40 MW available.

Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators

Entergy Mississippi has approval from the MPSC to collect a storm damage provision of $1.75 million per month. If Entergy Mississippi’s accumulated storm damage provision balance exceeds $15 million, the collection of the storm damage provision ceases until such time that the accumulated storm damage provision becomes less than $10 million. Entergy Mississippi’s storm damage provision balance has been less than $10 million since May 2019, and Entergy Mississippi has been billing the monthly storm damage provision since July 2019.

373

Table of Contents
In December 2023 Entergy Mississippi LLC
Management’s Financial Discussionfiled a Notice of Storm Escrow Disbursement and AnalysisRequest for Interim Relief notifying the MPSC that Entergy Mississippi had requested disbursement of approximately $34.5 million of storm escrow funds from its restricted storm escrow account. The filing also requested authorization from the MPSC, on a temporary basis, that the $34.5 million of storm escrow funds be credited to Entergy Mississippi’s storm damage provision, pending the MPSC’s review of Entergy Mississippi’s storm-related costs, and that Entergy Mississippi continue to bill its monthly storm damage provision without suspension in the event the storm damage provision balance exceeds $15 million, in anticipation of a subsequent filing by Entergy Mississippi in this proceeding. The storm damage reserve exceeded $15 million upon receipt of the storm escrow funds. Because the MPSC had not entered an order on Entergy Mississippi’s filing on the requested relief to continue billing this provision, Entergy Mississippi suspended billing the monthly storm damage provision effective with February 2024 bills.

Federal Regulation

See the “Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation – Federal Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of federal regulation.

Nuclear Matters

See the “Nuclear Matters” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of nuclear matters.

Environmental Risks

Entergy Mississippi’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.  Management believes that Entergy Mississippi is in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted in “Regulation of Entergy’s Business - Environmental Regulation” in Part I, Item 1.  Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance costs cannot be precisely estimated.

386

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of Entergy Mississippi’s financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Management has identified the following accounting policies and estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and there is the potential for future changes in thethese assumptions and measurements that could produce estimates that would have a material impacteffect on the presentation of Entergy Mississippi’s financial position, or results of operations.operations, or cash flows.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

See “Utility Regulatory Accounting” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of accounting for the effects of rate regulation.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

See “Impairment of Long-lived Assets” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates associated with the impairment of long-lived assets.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

See “Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy Mississippi’s qualified pension and other postretirement reported costs, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are impactedaffected by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms.  See the Qualified
374

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion. Because of the complexity of these calculations, the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate.

Cost Sensitivity

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension cost and qualified projected benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2020 Projected Qualified Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2023 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$654$12,777Discount rate(0.25%)$256$6,670
Rate of return on plan assetsRate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$828$—Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$723$—
Rate of increase in compensationRate of increase in compensation0.25%$533$2,720Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$264$1,383

387

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefitbenefits cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Postretirement Benefit CostImpact on 2020 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Postretirement Benefits CostImpact on 2023 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$59$1,970Discount rate(0.25%)$20$1,031
Health care cost trendHealth care cost trend0.25%$73$1,402Health care cost trend0.25%$60$701

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Costs and Employer Contributions

Total qualified pension cost for Entergy Mississippi in 20202023 was $20.2$19.7 million, including $3.4$12.2 million in settlement costs. Entergy Mississippi anticipates 20212024 qualified pension cost to be $19.6$3.3 million.  Entergy Mississippi contributed $12.6$21.1 million to its qualified pension plans in 20202023 and estimates 20212024 pension contributions will be approximately $13.7$15 million, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.

Total postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income for Entergy Mississippi in 20202023 was $3.6$2.5 million. Entergy Mississippi expects 20212024 postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income of approximately $4.7$3.7 million. Entergy Mississippi contributed $343$646 thousand to its other postretirement plansplan in 20202023 and estimates that 20212024 contributions will be approximately $130$178 thousand.

Other Contingencies

See “Other Contingencies” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the estimates associated with environmental, litigation, and other risks.

375

Table of Contents
Entergy Mississippi, LLC
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

New Accounting Pronouncements

See theNew Accounting Pronouncements” section of Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements.

376388

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the member and Board of Directors of
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows and changes in member’s equity (pages 379391 through 384396 and applicable items in pages 5147 through 238), for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matter

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current-period audit of the financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

Rate and Regulatory Matters —EntergyEntergy Mississippi, LLC and SubsidiariesRefer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company is subject to rate regulation by the Mississippi Public Service Commission (the “MPSC”), which has jurisdiction with respect to the rates of electric companies in Mississippi, and to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures, such as property, plant, and equipment;disclosures.

377389

Table of Contents
regulatory assets and liabilities; income taxes; operating revenues; operation and maintenance expense; and depreciation and amortization expense.

The Company’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the MPSC and the FERC set the rates the Company is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, the Company applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Company assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Company has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the MPSC and the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service, or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the significant judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs and refunds to customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the MPSC and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate setting process.process due to its inherent complexities and auditor judgment to evaluate management estimates and the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the MPSC and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of costs incurred as property, plant, and equipment and deferred as regulatory assets, and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets or liabilities;liabilities and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.
We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the MPSC and the FERC for the Company and other public utilities, regulatory statutes, interpretations, procedural memorandums, filings made by intervenors, and other publicly available information to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the MPSC’s and FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated the external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.
For regulatory matters in process, we inspected the Company’s filings with the MPSC and the FERC including the annual formula rate plan filing,and orders issued, and considered the filings with the MPSC and the FERC by intervenors that may impact the Company’s future rates, for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.assertions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.
We obtained representation from management regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery, refund, or a future reduction in rates.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2001.

378390

Table of Contents

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$1,247,854 $1,323,043 $1,335,112 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale187,087 277,425 260,198 
Purchased power240,471 284,492 364,575 
Other operation and maintenance288,543 266,175 261,613 
Taxes other than income taxes101,525 105,318 101,999 
Depreciation and amortization209,252 170,886 152,577 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net(15,219)14,993 147,704 
TOTAL1,011,659 1,119,289 1,288,666 
OPERATING INCOME236,195 203,754 46,446 
OTHER INCOME (DEDUCTIONS)   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction6,726 8,356 8,710 
Interest and investment income272 1,412 135 
Miscellaneous - net(9,253)(4,478)(2,732)
TOTAL(2,255)5,290 6,113 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense68,945 61,785 55,905 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(2,778)(3,532)(3,651)
TOTAL66,167 58,253 52,254 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES167,773 150,791 305 
Income taxes27,190 30,866 (125,773)
NET INCOME140,583 119,925 126,078 
Preferred dividend requirements and other834 
EARNINGS APPLICABLE TO COMMON EQUITY$140,583 $119,925 $125,244 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   



ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$1,802,533 $1,624,234 $1,406,346 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale563,296 252,760 181,511 
Purchased power281,761 322,674 298,034 
Other operation and maintenance320,192 314,902 298,129 
Taxes other than income taxes150,921 137,541 111,712 
Depreciation and amortization262,624 246,063 226,545 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net(111,376)38,017 5,913 
TOTAL1,467,418 1,311,957 1,121,844 
OPERATING INCOME335,115 312,277 284,502 
OTHER INCOME (DEDUCTIONS)   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction8,552 6,125 8,101 
Interest and investment income2,275 508 53 
Miscellaneous - net(13,231)(3,619)(8,791)
TOTAL(2,404)3,014 (637)
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense99,857 86,960 75,124 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(3,479)(2,800)(3,416)
TOTAL96,378 84,160 71,708 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES236,333 231,131 212,157 
Income taxes54,364 54,864 45,323 
NET INCOME181,969 176,267 166,834 
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest(10,302)(21,355)— 
EARNINGS APPLICABLE TO MEMBER'S EQUITY$192,271 $197,622 $166,834 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
379391

Table of Contents

























(Page left blank intentionally)



380
392

Table of Contents

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLCSTATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSCONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31,For the Years Ended December 31,
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIESOPERATING ACTIVITIES   
OPERATING ACTIVITIES
OPERATING ACTIVITIES 
Net incomeNet income$140,583 $119,925 $126,078 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization
Depreciation and amortization
Depreciation and amortizationDepreciation and amortization209,252 170,886 152,577 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accruedDeferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued36,827 32,547 56,502 
Changes in assets and liabilities:Changes in assets and liabilities:   Changes in assets and liabilities: 
ReceivablesReceivables(1,889)(17,245)37,762 
Fuel inventoryFuel inventory(1,978)(3,208)33,675 
Accounts payableAccounts payable22,794 (226)(7,472)
Taxes accruedTaxes accrued17,423 13,109 (5,291)
Interest accruedInterest accrued1,989 (1,331)(2,670)
Deferred fuel costsDeferred fuel costs(55,711)78,418 24,428 
Other working capital accountsOther working capital accounts630 (5,557)(9,902)
Provisions for estimated lossesProvisions for estimated losses(3,517)(1,121)6,378 
Other regulatory assetsOther regulatory assets(89,369)(34,923)54,860 
Other regulatory liabilitiesOther regulatory liabilities(18,672)(21,524)(131,856)
Pension and other postretirement liabilitiesPension and other postretirement liabilities11,319 6,534 (8,405)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities
Pension and other postretirement liabilities
Other assets and liabilitiesOther assets and liabilities30,633 3,668 91,718 
Net cash flow provided by operating activitiesNet cash flow provided by operating activities300,314 339,952 418,382 
INVESTING ACTIVITIESINVESTING ACTIVITIES   INVESTING ACTIVITIES 
Construction expendituresConstruction expenditures(555,287)(432,600)(387,293)
Allowance for equity funds used during constructionAllowance for equity funds used during construction6,726 8,356 8,710 
Payment for purchase of assets
Payment for purchase of assets
Payment for purchase of assets
Changes in money pool receivable - netChanges in money pool receivable - net44,692 (3,313)(39,747)
Receipt from storm reserve escrow account
Payment for purchase of plant or assets(28,612)(305,472)
Other1,719 (655)(1,123)
Decrease (increase) in other investments
Decrease (increase) in other investments
Decrease (increase) in other investments
Net cash flow used in investing activitiesNet cash flow used in investing activities(530,762)(733,684)(419,453)
FINANCING ACTIVITIESFINANCING ACTIVITIES   FINANCING ACTIVITIES 
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debtProceeds from the issuance of long-term debt165,385 437,153 54,449 
Retirement of long-term debtRetirement of long-term debt(150,000)
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest
Changes in money pool payable - netChanges in money pool payable - net16,516 
Redemption of preferred stock(21,208)
Capital contributions from parent130,000 
Distributions/dividends paid:   
Common equity(10,000)(10,000)
Preferred stock(993)
Common equity distributions paid
Common equity distributions paid
Common equity distributions paid
OtherOther6,964 (8,774)9,681 
Net cash flow provided by financing activities178,865 408,379 31,929 
Other
Other
Net cash flow provided by (used in) financing activities
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalentsNet increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents(51,583)14,647 30,858 
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of periodCash and cash equivalents at beginning of period51,601 36,954 6,096 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of periodCash and cash equivalents at end of period$18 $51,601 $36,954 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:  SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:  
Cash paid (received) during the period for:Cash paid (received) during the period for:   Cash paid (received) during the period for: 
Interest - net of amount capitalizedInterest - net of amount capitalized$64,536 $60,533 $56,037 
Income taxesIncome taxes($8,084)($12,204)($19,118)
Noncash investing activities:
Accrued construction expenditures
Accrued construction expenditures
Accrued construction expenditures
See Notes to Financial Statements.See Notes to Financial Statements.   
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements. 

381393

Table of Contents

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$11 $11 
Temporary cash investments51,590 
Total cash and cash equivalents18 51,601 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer105,732 92,050 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(19,527)(636)
Associated companies2,740 49,257 
Other11,821 14,986 
Accrued unbilled revenues59,514 47,426 
Total accounts receivable160,280 203,083 
Fuel inventory - at average cost17,117 15,139 
Materials and supplies - at average cost59,542 57,972 
Prepayments and other4,876 7,149 
TOTAL241,833 334,944 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)4,543 4,560 
Escrow accounts64,635 80,201 
TOTAL69,178 84,761 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric6,084,730 5,672,589 
Construction work in progress134,854 88,373 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT6,219,584 5,760,962 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization2,005,087 1,894,000 
UTILITY PLANT - NET4,214,497 3,866,962 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets467,341 377,972 
Other14,413 10,105 
TOTAL481,754 388,077 
TOTAL ASSETS$5,007,262 $4,674,744 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$30 $26 
Temporary cash investments6,600 16,953 
Total cash and cash equivalents6,630 16,979 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer121,389 99,504 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(3,312)(2,472)
Associated companies4,997 37,673 
Other17,697 34,564 
Accrued unbilled revenues71,465 73,473 
Total accounts receivable212,236 242,742 
Deferred fuel costs— 143,211 
Fuel inventory - at average cost16,196 15,548 
Materials and supplies - at average cost95,526 84,346 
Prepayments and other12,740 9,603 
TOTAL343,328 512,429 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)4,497 4,512 
Storm reserve escrow account656 33,549 
Other— 910 
TOTAL5,153 38,971 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric7,455,145 7,079,849 
Construction work in progress139,635 170,191 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT7,594,780 7,250,040 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization2,346,327 2,264,786 
UTILITY PLANT - NET5,248,453 4,985,254 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets579,076 519,460 
Other51,996 22,650 
TOTAL631,072 542,110 
TOTAL ASSETS$6,228,006 $6,078,764 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
382394

Table of Contents
ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLCBALANCE SHEETS
ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETSCONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITYLIABILITIES AND EQUITYLIABILITIES AND EQUITY
December 31,
20202019
(In Thousands)December 31,
20232022
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
(In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES
CURRENT LIABILITIES
CURRENT LIABILITIES 
Currently maturing long-term debt
Accounts payable:
Accounts payable:
Accounts payable:Accounts payable:   
Associated companiesAssociated companies$61,727 $48,090 
OtherOther117,629 94,729 
Customer depositsCustomer deposits86,200 85,938 
Taxes accruedTaxes accrued108,084 90,661 
Interest accruedInterest accrued20,889 18,900 
Interest accrued
Interest accrued
Deferred fuel costsDeferred fuel costs14,691 70,402 
OtherOther34,270 32,667 
Other
Other
TOTALTOTAL443,490 441,387 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIESNON-CURRENT LIABILITIES   
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accruedAccumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued646,674 594,832 
Accumulated deferred investment tax creditsAccumulated deferred investment tax credits9,062 9,602 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - netRegulatory liability for income taxes - net224,000 236,988 
Other regulatory liabilities
Other regulatory liabilities
Other regulatory liabilitiesOther regulatory liabilities15,828 21,512 
Asset retirement cost liabilitiesAsset retirement cost liabilities9,762 9,727 
Accumulated provisionsAccumulated provisions46,504 50,021 
Pension and other postretirement liabilitiesPension and other postretirement liabilities110,901 99,406 
Long-term debtLong-term debt1,780,577 1,614,129 
OtherOther47,730 54,989 
TOTALTOTAL2,891,038 2,691,206 
Commitments and ContingenciesCommitments and Contingencies00
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies
EQUITYEQUITY  
EQUITY
EQUITY 
Member's equityMember's equity1,672,734 1,542,151 
Noncontrolling interest
TOTALTOTAL1,672,734 1,542,151 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITYTOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$5,007,262 $4,674,744 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
See Notes to Financial Statements.See Notes to Financial Statements.  
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements. 

383395

Table of Contents

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN MEMBER'S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
Member's Equity
(In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2017$1,177,870 
Net income126,078 
Common equity distributions(10,000)
Preferred stock dividends(834)
Other(888)
Balance at December 31, 2018$1,292,226 
Net income119,925 
Capital contribution from parent130,000 
Balance at December 31, 2019$1,542,151 
Net income140,583 
Common equity distributions(10,000)
Balance at December 31, 2020$1,672,734 
See Notes to Financial Statements.
ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
 Noncontrolling InterestMember's EquityTotal
 (In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2020$— $1,672,734 $1,672,734 
Net income— 166,834 166,834 
Balance at December 31, 2021$— $1,839,568 $1,839,568 
Net income (loss)(21,355)197,622 176,267 
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest24,702 — 24,702 
Balance at December 31, 2022$3,347 $2,037,190 $2,040,537 
Net income (loss)(10,302)192,271 181,969 
Common equity distributions— (40,000)(40,000)
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest25,708 — 25,708 
Balance at December 31, 2023$18,753 $2,189,461 $2,208,214 
See Notes to Financial Statements. 

384

Table of Contents

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON
 20202019201820172016
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$1,247,854 $1,323,043 $1,335,112 $1,198,229 $1,094,649 
Net income$140,583 $119,925 $126,078 $110,032 $109,184 
Total assets$5,007,262 $4,674,744 $3,946,804 $3,879,375 $3,602,140 
Long-term obligations (a)$1,780,577 $1,614,129 $1,175,750 $1,290,503 $1,141,924 
(a) Includes long-term debt (excluding currently maturing debt), non-current capital lease obligations, and preferred stock without sinking fund.
 20202019201820172016
 (Dollars In Millions)
Electric Operating Revenues:     
Residential$523 $562 $579 $502 $459 
Commercial396 444 462 423 374 
Industrial145 165 175 159 134 
Governmental42 44 44 41 38 
Total billed retail1,106 1,215 1,260 1,125 1,005 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies— — — 
Non-associated companies78 39 25 18 30 
Other64 69 49 55 59 
Total$1,248 $1,323 $1,335 $1,198 $1,095 
Billed Electric Energy Sales (GWh):    
Residential5,378 5,659 5,829 5,308 5,617 
Commercial4,283 4,698 4,865 4,783 4,894 
Industrial2,343 2,443 2,559 2,536 2,493 
Governmental398 436 438 421 439 
Total retail12,402 13,236 13,691 13,048 13,443 
Sales for resale:     
Non-associated companies4,316 1,776 1,060 857 1,021 
Total16,718 15,012 14,751 13,905 14,464 

385396

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENTS FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The COVID-19 Pandemic

See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hurricane Zeta

In October 2020, Hurricane Zeta caused significant damage to Entergy New Orleans’s service area. The storm resulted in widespread power outages, significant damage to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the power outages. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of Entergy New Orleans’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Zeta are currently estimated to be approximately $40 million, including approximately $30 million in capital costs and approximately $10 million in non-capital costs. Entergy New Orleans is considering all available avenues to recover storm-related costs from Hurricane Zeta, including accessing funded storm reserve escrows and securitization. Storm cost recovery or financing will be subject to review by applicable regulatory authorities.

Entergy New Orleans recorded accounts payable and corresponding construction work in progress and regulatory assets for the estimated costs incurred that were necessary to return customers to service. Entergy New Orleans recorded the regulatory assets in accordance with its accounting policies and based on the historic treatment of such costs in its service area because management believes that recovery through some form of regulatory mechanism is probable. There are well established mechanisms and precedent for addressing these catastrophic events and providing for recovery of prudently incurred storm costs in accordance with applicable regulatory and legal principles. Because Entergy New Orleans has not gone through the regulatory process regarding these storm costs, there is an element of risk, and Entergy New Orleans is unable to predict with certainty the degree of success it may have in its recovery initiatives, the amount of restoration costs that it may ultimately recover, or the timing of such recovery.

February 2021 Winter Storms

See the “February 2021 Winter Storms” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the February 2021 winter storms. Entergy New Orleans’s preliminary estimate for the cost of mobilizing crews and restoring power is approximately $1 million. Natural gas purchases for Entergy New Orleans for February 1st through 25th, 2021 are approximately $15 million compared to natural gas purchases for February 2020 of $7 million.

Results of Operations

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Net Income

Net income decreased $3.3increased $164.8 million primarily due to lower volume/weather, lower retail electric price, and higher interesta $198.4 million reduction in income tax expense in 2023 as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit, partially offset by a lower effective income tax rate.$60 million regulatory charge ($43.8 million net-of-tax) to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers, and higher retail electric price. The increase was partially offset by higher other operation and maintenance expenses. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit.

386

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Operating Revenues

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenues comparing 20202023 to 2019.2022:
 Amount
 (In Millions)
20192022 operating revenues$686.2997.3 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income(32.5)(174.6)
Volume/weather(12.5)0.5 
Storm restoration carrying costs5.2 
Retail electric price(7.4)15.5 
20202023 operating revenues$633.8843.9 

Entergy New Orleans’s results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

The volume/weather variance is insignificant and primarily due to a decrease of 374 GWh, or 6.4%, in billed electricity usage, including the effect of decreasedmore favorable weather on commercial sales and governmentalan increase in weather-adjusted residential usage, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic andpartially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential and commercial sales, partially offset by an increasesales.

Storm restoration carrying costs represent the equity component of storm restoration carrying costs, recorded in residential usagefourth quarter 2023, recognized as a resultpart of the COVID-19 pandemic.City Council’s approval of the Hurricane Ida storm cost certification report in December 2023. See The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and AnalysisNote 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.storm cost certification.

The retail electric price variance is primarily due to the effects of aan increase in formula rate reduction implemented with April 2020 bills that wasplan rates effective August 2019September 2022 in accordance with the City Council resolution and related agreement in principle reached interms of the 2018 base2022 formula rate case.plan filing. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the formula rate case.plan filing.
397

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Total electric energy sales for Entergy New Orleans for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
20232022% Change
(GWh)
Residential2,364 2,410 (2)
Commercial2,126 2,096 
Industrial423 411 
Governmental783 789 (1)
  Total retail5,696 5,706 — 
Sales for resale:
  Non-associated companies2,818 2,298 23 
Total8,514 8,004 

See Note 19 to the financial statements for additional discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s operating revenues.

Other Income Statement Variances

Other operation and maintenance expenses increased primarily due to:

an increase of $4.9$4.6 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a higher scope of work performed in 2023 as compared to 2022;
an increase of $4.5 million resulting from a gain on the 2019 deferralsale of NOx allowances in 2022;
an increase of $3.9 million in power delivery expenses primarily due to higher reliability costs relatedand higher vegetation maintenance costs in 2023 as compared to the 2018 rate case and a system conversion for Algiers customers as a result of the 2018 combined rate case resolution approved by the City Council. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case resolution;2022; and
an increase of $3.8$3 million in energy efficiency costs.contract costs related to operational performance, customer service, and organizational health initiatives.

The increase was partially offset by:

by a decrease of $2.4$3 million in gas operations costsenergy efficiency expenses primarily due to the deferral in 2020timing of certain gas infrastructure replacement program costs as a result of the 2018 combined rate case resolution. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case resolution;recovery from customers and
a decrease of $2.2 million primarily due to contract costs in 2019 related to initiatives to explore new customer products and services. lower energy efficiency costs.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to additions to plant in service.

Other regulatory charges (credits) - net includes a regulatory charge of $60 million, recorded in fourth quarter 2023, to reflect credits expected to be provided to customers as a result of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit. See Note 3 to the financial statements for further discussion of the resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit.

Other income increased primarily due to higher interest earned on money pool investments. The increase was partially offset by a decrease of $2.3 million due to the recognition of storm restoration carrying costs in 2022 related to Hurricane Ida and an increase in other postretirement benefit non-service costs as a result of the amortization of 2022 trust asset losses and non-qualified pension settlement charges. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of storm restoration costs. See “Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for further discussion of pension and other postretirement benefits costs.

Interest expense increased primarily due to a higher fixed interest rate on Entergy New Orleans’s unsecured term loan and interest on the $34 million regulatory liability recorded when Entergy New Orleans received a refund from System Energy in January 2023 related to the sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation. The
387
398

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Other regulatory charges - net include regulatory credits recorded in the first quarter 2020 to reflect compliance with terms of the 2018 combined rate case resolution approvedincrease was partially offset by the City Councilrepayment of $100 million of 3.9% Series mortgage bonds in February 2020.July 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the rate case resolution.

Interest expense increased primarily due torefund and the issuance of:

a $70 million term loan at 3.0% in December 2019;
$78 million of 3.00% Series mortgage bonds in March 2020; and
$62 million of 3.75% Series mortgage bonds in March 2020.related proceedings.

The effective income tax rates were (9.3%(487.5%) for 2023 and 27.5% for 2020 and 0.4% for 2019. The difference in the effective income tax rate versus the federal statutory rate of 21% for 2020 was primarily due to the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes and the completion of the 2014-2015 IRS audit effectively settling the tax positions for those years. The difference in the effective income tax rate versus the federal statutory rate of 21% for 2019 was primarily due to the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of the effects and regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.2022. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory rate of 21% to the effective income tax rates.rates and for additional discussion regarding income taxes.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy New Orleans’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019,2022, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020,24, 2023, for discussion of results of operations for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

Income Tax Legislation and Regulation

See the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of income tax legislation and regulation.

Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Business

See the “Planned Sale of Gas Distribution Businesses” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the purchase and sale agreement for the sale of Entergy New Orleans’s gas distribution business.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 were as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of periodCash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$6,017 $19,677 $32,741 
Net cash provided by (used in):Net cash provided by (used in):   
Net cash provided by (used in):
Net cash provided by (used in):  
Operating activitiesOperating activities64,024 115,604 171,778 
Investing activitiesInvesting activities(220,845)(204,310)(207,616)
Financing activitiesFinancing activities150,830 75,046 22,774 
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents(5,991)(13,660)(13,064)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents at end of periodCash and cash equivalents at end of period$26 $6,017 $19,677 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities decreased $51.6$160.8 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

lower collectionsnet proceeds of receivables$201.8 million received from customers,the LURC in part dueDecember 2022 from securitization. See Note 2 to the COVID-19 pandemic;financial statements for further discussion of the storm securitization;
the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs; andlower receipts from associated companies in 2022;
388399

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

an increase of $13.6 million in income taxes paid in 2023. Entergy New Orleans made net income tax payments in 2023 primarily related to the resolution of $3.4 million made in 2020 comparedthe 2016-2018 IRS audit and estimated federal and state income taxes. See Note 3 to income tax refundsthe financial statements for further discussion of $5.3 million received in 2019, each in accordance with an intercompany income tax allocation agreement. The income tax refunds resultedthe resolution of the 2016-2018 IRS audit; and
lower collections from the utilization of Entergy New Orleans’s net operating loss.customers.

The decrease was partially offset byby:

lower fuel costs and the timing of paymentsrecovery of fuel and purchased power costs. See Note 2 to vendors.the financial statements for a discussion of fuel and purchased power cost recovery;
the refund of $34 million received from System Energy in January 2023 related to the sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation as calculated in System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report filed with the FERC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the refund and the related proceedings; and
a decrease of $18.7 million in storm spending primarily due to Hurricane Ida restoration efforts in 2022.

Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities increased $16.5decreased $385 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

an increasemoney pool activity;
a decrease of $12.4$71.3 million in net payments to the storm reserve escrow account in 2023; and
a decrease of $42.9 million in distribution construction expenditures primarily due to higher capital expenditures for Hurricane Ida storm restoration efforts in 2022, partially offset by increased investment in the reliability and infrastructure of Entergy New Orleans’s distribution system including increased spending on advanced metering infrastructure;
money pool activity;
an increase of $10.8 million in storm spending in 2020, primarily due to Hurricane Zeta restoration efforts. See “Hurricane Zeta” above for discussion of hurricane restoration efforts; and
an increase of $5.1 million in facilities construction expenditures primarily due to a higher scope of work performed in 2020.

The increase was partially offset by:

a decrease of $16.2 million in non-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to lower spending in 2020 on the New Orleans Power Station project, partially offset by higher spending in 2020 on the New Orleans Solar Station project; and
a decrease of $7.5 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to lower spending in 2020 on the New Orleans Power Station project.2023.

Decreases in Entergy New Orleans’s receivable from the money pool are a source of cash flow, and Entergy New Orleans’s receivable from the money pool decreased $5.2$147.3 million in 20202023 compared to decreasing $16.8increasing by $110.8 million in 2019.2022. The money pool is an inter-companyintercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing arrangementand lending arrangements, and the money pool and other borrowing arrangements are designed to reduce the Utility subsidiaries’ need forRegistrant Subsidiaries’ dependence on external short-term borrowings.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided byEntergy New Orleans’s financing activities increased $75.8used $188.6 million of cash in 2023 compared to providing $1.6 million of cash in 2022 primarily due to a capital contribution received from Entergy Corporation of $60the following activity:

$125 million in November 2020common equity distributions paid in 2023 in order to maintain Entergy New Orleans’s capital structurestructure;
the repayment, at maturity, of $100 million of 3.90% Series mortgage bonds in July 2023;
additional borrowings of $15 million in May 2023 on an unsecured term loan due June 2024; and
money pool activity.

Increases in Entergy New Orleans’s payable to the money pool are a source of cash flow, and Entergy New Orleans’s payable to the money pool increased $10.2$21.7 million in 2020.2023.

2019See Note 5 to the financial statements for details on long-term debt.

2022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of Entergy New Orleans’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2019 compared to 2018.

389400

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

December 31, 2022, filed with the SEC on February 24, 2023, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2022 compared to 2021.

Capital Structure

Entergy New Orleans’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The decrease in the debt to capital ratio for Entergy New Orleans is primarily due to an increase in equity resulting from a $60 million capital contribution received from Entergy Corporation in 2020 and net income partially offset byin 2023 and the net issuanceretirement of long-term debt in 2020. 
December 31,
2020
December 31,
2019
Debt to capital51.5 %53.1 %
Effect of excluding securitization bonds(1.6 %)(2.4 %)
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)49.9 %50.7 %
Effect of subtracting cash— %(0.3 %)
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)49.9 %50.4 %
2023, partially offset by common equity distributions of $125 million in 2023.

December 31,
2023
December 31,
2022
Debt to capital45.8 %52.6 %
Effect of excluding securitization bonds(0.2 %)(0.6 %)
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)45.6 %52.0 %
Effect of subtracting cash— %(0.1 %)
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)45.6 %51.9 %

(a)Calculation excludes the securitization bonds, which are non-recourse to Entergy New Orleans.

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents. Debt consists of short-term borrowings, finance lease obligations, long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion, and the long-term payable due to an associated company. Capital consists of debt and equity. Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents. The debt to capital ratio excluding securitization bonds and net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds are non-GAAP measures. Entergy New Orleans uses the debt to capital ratios excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes they provide useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy New Orleans’s financial condition because the securitization bonds are non-recourse to Entergy New Orleans, as more fully described in Note 5 to the financial statements. Entergy New Orleans also uses the net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy New Orleans’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy New Orleans’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

Entergy New Orleans seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings.  To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a distribution, to the extent funds are legally available to do so, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure.  To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, Entergy New Orleans may issue incremental debt or reduce distributions, or both, to maintain its capital structure.  In addition, in certain infrequent circumstances, such as financing of large transactions that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reducingreduced distributions, Entergy New Orleans may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure.

Uses of Capital

Entergy New Orleans requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel and purchased power costs;
debt maturities or retirements; and
distribution and interest payments.

390401

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Following are the amounts of Entergy New Orleans’s planned construction and other capital investments.
202120222023 202420252026
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:Planned construction and capital investment: 
GenerationGeneration$10 $15 $5 
Generation
Generation
TransmissionTransmission20 25 20 
DistributionDistribution90 125 120 
Utility SupportUtility Support20 15 10 
TotalTotal$140 $180 $155 

In addition to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned spending in the table above,capital investment estimate for Entergy New Orleans also expectsincludes distribution and Utility support spending to pay for $25 milliondeliver reliability, resilience, and customer experience; transmission spending to improve reliability and resilience; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of capital investmentsregulatory constraints and requirements, government actions, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in 2021 relatedproject plans, and the ability to Hurricane Zeta restoration work that have been accrued as of December 31, 2020.access capital.

Following are the amounts of Entergy New Orleans’s existing debt and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments) and other purchase obligations..
20212022-20232024-2025After 2025Total 2024202520262027-2028After 2028
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)Long-term debt (a)$37 $240 $119 $686 $1,082 
Operating leases (b)Operating leases (b)$2 $2 $1 $1 $6 
Finance leases (b)Finance leases (b)$1 $1 $1 $1 $4 
Purchase obligations (c)$217 $438 $419 $3,287 $4,361 

(a)Includes estimated interest payments.  Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.
(c)
Purchase obligations represent the minimum purchase obligation or cancellation charge for contractual obligations to purchase goods or services.  For Entergy New Orleans, almost all of the total consists of unconditional fuel and purchased power obligations, including its obligations under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, which is discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.
Other Obligations

In addition to the contractual obligations given above, Entergy New Orleans currently expects to contribute approximately $5.4$4.9 million to its qualified pension plan and approximately $175$205 thousand to other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2021,2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024, valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024. See “Critical Accounting Estimates - Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Also in addition to the contractual obligations, Entergy New Orleans has $187.6$7.6 million of unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes and paymentsplus interest for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

In addition, to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy New Orleans includes transmission projects to enhance reliability, reduce congestion,enters into fuel and enable economic growth; distribution spending to enhance reliability and improve service to customers, including advanced meters and related investments; resource planning, including potential generation and renewables projects; system improvements; software and security; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring,
391

Table of Contents
purchased power agreements that contain minimum purchase obligations. Entergy New Orleans LLChas rate mechanisms in place to recover fuel, purchased power, and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital. Management provides more information on long-term debt and preferred stock maturities in Notes 5 and 6associated costs incurred under these purchase obligations. See Note 8 to the financial statements.statements for discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s obligations under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC, Entergy New Orleans pays distributions from its earnings at a percentage determined monthly.
402

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


Gas Infrastructure Rebuild PlanSystem Resilience and Storm Hardening

In September 2016,October 2021 the City Council passed a resolution and order establishing a docket and procedural schedule with respect to system resiliency and storm hardening. The docket will identify a plan for storm hardening and resiliency projects with other stakeholders. In July 2022, Entergy New Orleans submitted tofiled with the City Council a requestresponse identifying a preliminary plan for authorization for Entergy New Orleansstorm hardening and resiliency projects, including microgrids, to proceed with annual incremental capital fundingbe implemented over ten years at an approximate cost of $12.5 million for its gas infrastructure rebuild plan, which would replace all of Entergy New Orleans’s low pressure cast iron, steel, and vintage plastic pipe over a ten-year period commencing in 2017.  Entergy New Orleans also proposed that recovery of the investment to fund its gas infrastructure replacement plan be determined in connection with its next base rate case.  The City Council authorized Entergy New Orleans to proceed with its replacement plans and established a schedule for proceedings in advance of the rate case intended to provide an opportunity for evaluation of the gas infrastructure plan that would best serve the public interest and the effect on customers of the approval of any such plan.$1.5 billion. In the course of that proceeding, the City Council’s advisors submitted pre-filed testimony recommending that Entergy New Orleans be allowed to continue with its condition-based approach to gas pipeline replacement to replace approximately 238 miles of low pressure pipe at a rate of approximately 25 miles per year. The City Council’s advisors also recommended that Entergy New Orleans be required to adhere to certain reporting requirements and recognized the need to address the sustained level of investment in gas infrastructure on customer bills. In September 2017, Entergy New Orleans filed rebuttal testimony suggesting that its recovery of future investment and customer effects would be addressed in the rate case that Entergy New Orleans was required to file in July 2018. The procedural schedule was suspended in order to allow for resolution in the rate case proceeding. As a result of the rate case,February 2023 the City Council approved the planned gas rebuild expenditures through 2019, but rejected Entergy New Orleans’s proposed gas infrastructure rider. In April 2020, Entergy New Orleans submitted its gas infrastructure rebuild plan to the City Council, which maintained the previously proposed timeline and cost estimates, but included measures to spread out the cost impact to customers of the program.

Renewables

In July 2018, Entergy New Orleans filed an application with the City Council requesting approval of three utility-scale solar projects totaling 90 MW.  If approved, the resource additions will allowa revised procedural schedule requiring Entergy New Orleans to make significant progress towards meeting its voluntary commitment to the City Council to add up to 100 MWa filing in April 2023 containing a narrowed list of renewable energy resources.  The threeproposed hardening projects, include constructing a self-build solar plant in Orleans Parish with an output of 20 MW, acquiring a 50 MW solar facility in Washington Parish through a build-own-transfer acquisition, and procuring 20 MW of solar power from a project to be built in St. James Parish through a power purchase agreement.final comments on that filing due July 2023. In December 2018 the City Council advisors requested thatApril 2023, Entergy New Orleans pursue alternative deal structures forfiled the Washington Parish projectrequired application and attempt to reduce costs forsupporting testimony seeking City Council approval of the 20 MW New Orleans Solar Station. Asfirst phase (five years and $559 million) of a result of settlement discussions, in March 2019,ten-year infrastructure hardening plan totaling approximately $1 billion. Entergy New Orleans revised its applicationalso sought, among other relief, City Council approval of a rider to convertrecover from customers the build-own transfer acquisitioncosts of the 50 MW facility in Washington Parish to a power purchase agreement.infrastructure hardening plan. In June 2019 the parties to the proceeding executed a stipulated settlement term sheet, which recommends that the City Council approveJuly 2023, Entergy New Orleans’s revised application as to all three projects.Orleans filed comments in support of its application. In July 2019February 2024 the City Council approved the stipulated settlement. Commercial operation of the 20 MW New Orleans Solar Station commenced in December 2020.a resolution authorizing Entergy New Orleans expects to begin receiving power underimplement a resilience project to be partially funded by $55 million of matching funding through the 50 MW Iris SolarDepartment of Energy’s Grid Resilience and the 20 MW St. James Solar power purchase agreements by third quarter 2021.Innovation Partnerships program. The resolution also requires Entergy New Orleans to submit, no later than July 2024, a revised resilience plan consisting of projects in three-year intervals. Entergy New Orleans continues to seek approval of its application.

Sources of Capital

Entergy New Orleans’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
392

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

cash on hand;
the Entergy system money pool;
storm reserve escrow accounts;
debt and preferred membership interest issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
capital contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Circumstances such as weather patterns, fuel and purchased power price fluctuations, and unanticipated expenses, including unscheduled plant outages and storms, could affect the timing and level of internally generated funds in the future. In addition to the financings necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, Entergy New Orleans may refinance, redeem, or otherwiseexpects to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher-cost debt prior to maturity, to the extentand replace it with lower-cost debt if market conditions and interest rates are favorable.permit.

All debt and common and preferred membership interest issuances by Entergy New Orleans require prior regulatory approval. Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in its bond indenturesindenture and other agreements. Entergy New Orleans has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs.needs for the next twelve months and beyond.

Entergy New Orleans’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2020201920182017
(In Thousands)
($10,190)$5,191$22,016$12,723
2023202220212020
(In Thousands)
($21,651)$147,254$36,410($10,190)

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.
403

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


Entergy New Orleans has a credit facility in the amount of $25 million scheduled to expire in November 2021.June 2024. The credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $10 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility. As of December 31, 2020,2023, there were no cash borrowings and an $0.8 million letterno letters of credit outstanding under the credit facility. In addition, Entergy New Orleans is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO.  As of December 31, 2020,2023, a $1$0.5 million letter of credit was outstanding under Entergy New Orleans’s uncommitted letter of credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities.

Entergy New Orleans obtained authorization from the FERC through July 2022April 2025 for short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $150 million at any time outstanding and long-term borrowings and securities issuances. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s short-term borrowing limits. The long-term securities issuances of Entergy New Orleans are limited to amounts authorized not only by the FERC, but also by the City Council, and the current City Council authorization extends through July 2022.December 2025.

State and Local Rate Regulation

The rates that Entergy New Orleans charges for electricity and natural gasits services significantly influence its financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. Entergy New Orleans is regulated, and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings. A governmental agency, the City Council, is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers.

Retail Rates

Energy Efficiency2021 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In December 2019,July 2021, Entergy New Orleans filed an application withsubmitted to the City Council seeking approvalits formula rate plan 2020 test year filing. The 2020 test year evaluation report produced an earned return on equity of an implementation plan for6.26% compared to the Energy Smart program from April 2020 through December 2022.authorized return on equity of 9.35%. Entergy New Orleans proposedsought approval of a $64 million rate increase based on the formula set by the City Council in the 2018 rate case. The formula resulted in an increase in authorized electric revenues of $40 million and an increase in authorized gas revenues of $18.8 million. Entergy New Orleans also sought to recover the costs of the program through mechanismscommence collecting $5.2 million in electric revenues and $0.3 million in gas revenues that were previously approved by the City Council for collection through the formula rate plan. The filing was subject to review by the City Council and other parties over a 75-day review period, followed by a 25-day period to resolve any disputes among the parties. In October 2021 the City Council’s advisors filed a 75-day report recommending a reduction of $10 million for electric revenues and a reduction of $4.5 million for gas revenues, along with one-time credits funded by certain electric regulatory liabilities currently held by Entergy New Orleans for customers. On October 26, 2021, Entergy New Orleans provided notice to the City Council that it intends to implement rates effective with the first billing cycle of November 2021, with such rates reflecting an amount agreed-upon by Entergy New Orleans including adjustments filed in the City Council’s 75-day report, per the approved process for formula rate plan implementation. The total formula rate plan increase implemented was $49.5 million, with an increase of $34.9 million in electric revenues and $14.6 million in gas revenues. Also, credits of $17.4 million funded by certain regulatory liabilities currently held by Entergy New Orleans for customers will be issued over a five-month period from November 2021 through March 2022. Resulting rates went into effect with the first billing cycle of November 2021 pursuant to the formula rate plan tariff.

2022 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In April 2022, Entergy New Orleans submitted to the City Council its formula rate plan 2021 test year filing. The 2021 test year evaluation report, subsequently updated in a July 2022 filing, produced an earned return on equity of 6.88% compared to the authorized return on equity of 9.35%. Entergy New Orleans sought approval of
393404

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

or through the energy efficiency cost recovery rider, which was approved in the 2018 combined rate case resolution. In January 2020 the City Council’s advisors recommended that, beginning with Program Year 10, the City Council allow Entergy New Orleans to earn a utility performance incentive of 7% of Energy Smart costs for each year in which Entergy New Orleans achieves 100% of the City Council’s savings targets for Energy Smart. In February 2020 the City Council approved Entergy New Orleans’s application.

2018 Base Rate Case

In September 2018, Entergy New Orleans filed an electric and gas base rate case with the City Council. The filing requested a 10.5% return on equity for electric operations with opportunity to earn a 10.75% return on equity through a performance adder provision of the electric formula rate plan in subsequent years under a formula rate plan and requested a 10.75% return on equity for gas operations. The proposed electric rates in the revised filing reflect a net reduction of $20.3 million. The reduction in electric rates includes a base$42.1 million rate increase of $135.2 million, of which $131.5 million is associated with moving costs currently collected through fuel and other riders into base rates, plus a request for an advanced metering surcharge to recover $7.1 million associated with advanced metering infrastructure, offset by a net decrease of $31.1 million related to fuel and other riders. The filing also included a proposed gas rate decrease of $142 thousand. Entergy New Orleans’s rates reflected the inclusion of federal income tax reductions due to the Tax Act and the provisions of a previously-approved agreement in principle determining how the benefits of the Tax Act would flow. Entergy New Orleans included cost of service studies for electric and gas operations for the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and the projected twelve months ending December 31, 2018. In addition, Entergy New Orleans included capital additions expected to be placed into service for the period through December 31, 2019. Entergy New Orleans based its request for a change in rates on the projected twelve months ending December 31, 2018.

The filing’s major provisions included: (1) a new electric rate structure, which realigns the revenue requirement associated with capacity and long-term service agreement expense from certain existing riders to base revenue, provides for the recovery of the cost of advanced metering infrastructure, and partially blends rates for Entergy New Orleans’s customers residing in Algiers with customers residing in the remainder of Orleans Parish through a three-year phase-in; (2) contemporaneous cost recovery riders for investments in energy efficiency/demand response, incremental changes in capacity/long-term service agreement costs, grid modernization investment, and gas infrastructure replacement investment; and (3) formula rate plans for both electric and gas operations. In February 2019 the City Council’s advisors and several intervenors filed testimony in response to Entergy New Orleans’s application. The City Council’s advisors recommended, among other things, overall rate reductions of approximately $33 million in electric rates and $3.8 million in gas rates. Certain intervenors recommended overall rate reductions of up to approximately $49 million in electric rates and $5 million in gas rates. An evidentiary hearing was held in June 2019, and the record and post-hearing briefs were submitted in July 2019.

In October 2019 the City Council’s Utility Committee approved a resolution for a change in electric and gas rates for consideration by the full City Council that included a 9.35% return on common equity, an equity ratio of the lesser of 50% or Entergy New Orleans’s actual equity ratio, and a total reduction in revenues that Entergy New Orleans initially estimated to be approximately $39 million ($36 million electric; $3 million gas). At its November 7, 2019 meeting, the full City Council approved the resolution that had previously been approved by the City Council’s Utility Committee. Based on the approved resolution, in the fourth quarter 2019 Entergy New Orleans recorded an accrual of $10 million that reflects the estimate of the revenue billed in 2019 to be refunded to customers in 2020 based on an August 2019 effective date for the rate decrease. Entergy New Orleans also recorded a total of $12 million in regulatory assets for rate case costs and information technology costs associated with integrating Algiers customers with Entergy New Orleans’s legacy system and records. Entergy New Orleans will also be allowed to recover $10 million of retired general plant costs over a 20-year period.

The resolution directed Entergy New Orleans to submit a compliance filing within 30 days of the date of the resolution to facilitate the eventual implementation of rates, including all necessary calculations and conforming rate schedules and riders. The electric formula rate plan rider includes, among other things, 1) a provision for
394

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

forward-looking adjustments to include known and measurable changes realized up to 12 months after the evaluation period; 2) a decoupling mechanism; and 3) recognition that Entergy New Orleans is authorized to make an in-service adjustment to the formula rate plan to include the non-fuel cost of the New Orleans Power Station in rates, unless the two pending appeals in the New Orleans Power Station proceeding have not concluded. Under this circumstance, Entergy New Orleans shall be permitted to defer the New Orleans Power Station non-fuel costs, including the cost of capital, until Entergy New Orleans commences non-fuel cost recovery. After taking into account the requirements for submission of the compliance filing, the total annual revenue requirement reduction required by the resolution was refined to approximately $45 million ($42 million electric, including $29 million in rider reductions; $3 million gas). In January 2020 the City Council’s advisors found that the rates calculated by Entergy New Orleans and reflected in the December 2019 compliance filing should be implemented, except with respect to the City Council-approved energy efficiency cost recovery rider, which rider calculation should take into account events to be determinedset by the City Council in the future. Also2018 rate case. The formula resulted in response to the resolution,an increase in authorized electric revenues of $34.1 million and an increase in authorized gas revenues of $3.3 million. Entergy New Orleans filed timely a petition for appeal and judicial review and for stay of or injunctive relief allegingalso sought to commence collecting $4.7 million in electric revenues that the resolution is unlawful in failing to produce just and reasonable rates. A hearing on the requested injunction was scheduled in Civil District Court for February 2020, butwere previously approved by joint motion of the City Council for collection through the formula rate plan. In July 2022 the City Council’s advisors issued a report seeking a reduction to Entergy New Orleans’s proposed increase of approximately $17.1 million in total for electric and gas revenues. Effective with the first billing cycle of September 2022, Entergy New Orleans the Civil District Court issuedimplemented rates reflecting an order for a limited remand to the City Council to consider a potential agreement in principle/stipulation at its February 20, 2020 meeting. On February 17, 2020, Entergy New Orleans filed with the City Council an agreement in principle betweenamount agreed upon by Entergy New Orleans and the City Council’s advisors. On February 20, 2020,Council including adjustments filed in the City Council voted to approveCouncil’s advisors’ report, per the proposed agreement in principle and issued a resolution modifying the required treatmentapproved process for formula rate plan implementation. The total formula rate plan increase implemented was $24.7 million, which includes an increase of certain accumulated deferred income taxes. As a result of the agreement in principle, the total annual revenue requirement reduction will be approximately $45 million ($42 million electric, including $29$18.2 million in rider reductions;electric revenues, $4.7 million in previously approved electric revenues, and $3an increase of $1.8 million gas).in gas revenues. Additionally, credits of $13.9 million funded by certain regulatory liabilities currently held by Entergy New Orleans fully implemented the new rates in April 2020. In January 2021, pursuant to the agreement in principle approved by the City Council in October 2020, Entergy New Orleans filed with Civil District Court a motion seeking to dismiss its petition for judicial review of the City Council’s resolution in the 2018 combined rate case.customers were issued over an eight-month period beginning September 2022.

Commercial operation of the New Orleans Power Station commenced in May 2020. In accordance with the City Council resolution issued in the 2018 base rate case proceeding, Entergy New Orleans had been deferring the New Orleans Power Station non-fuel costs pending the conclusion of the appellate proceedings. In October 2020 the Louisiana Supreme Court denied all writ applications relating to the New Orleans Power Station. With those denials, Entergy New Orleans began recovering New Orleans Power Station costs in rates in November 2020. As of December 31, 2020 the regulatory asset for the deferral of New Orleans Power Station non-fuel costs was $5 million. Entergy New Orleans is recovering the costs over a five-year period that began in November 2020. In December 2020 the Alliance for Affordable Energy and Sierra Club filed a joint motion with the City Council to institute a prudence review to investigate the costs of the New Orleans Power Station. On January 28, 2021, the City Council passed a resolution giving parties 30 days to respond to the motion. Entergy New Orleans plans to respond to the motion.

20202023 Formula Rate Plan Filing

In April 2023, Entergy New Orleans’s first annual filing underOrleans submitted to the three-yearCity Council its formula rate plan 2022 test year filing. The 2022 test year evaluation report produced an electric earned return on equity of 7.34% and a gas earned return on equity of 3.52% compared to the authorized return on equity for each of 9.35%. Entergy New Orleans sought approval of a $25.6 million rate increase based on the formula set by the City Council in the 2018 rate case. The formula would result in an increase in authorized electric revenues of $17.4 million and an increase in authorized gas revenues of $8.2 million. Entergy New Orleans also sought to commence collecting $3.4 million in electric revenues that were previously approved by the City Council in November 2019 was originally duefor collection through the formula rate plan. In July 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed a report to be filed in April 2020. The authorized return on equity under the approved three-yeardecrease its requested formula rate plan is 9.35%revenues by approximately $0.5 million to account for bothminor errors discovered after the filing. The City Council advisors issued a report seeking a reduction in the requested formula rate plan revenues of approximately $8.3 million, combined for electric and gas, operations.due to alleged errors. The City Council approved several extensionsadvisors proposed additional rate mitigation in the amount of $12 million through offsets to the deadline to allow additional time to assess the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the New Orleans community, Entergy New Orleans customers, and Entergy New Orleans itself.formula rate plan rate increase by certain regulatory liabilities. In October 2020September 2023 the City Council approved an agreement in principle filedto settle the 2023 formula rate plan filing. Effective with the first billing cycle of September 2023, Entergy New Orleans implemented rates reflecting an amount agreed upon by Entergy New Orleans that results in Entergy New Orleans foregoing its 2020and the City Council, per the approved process for formula rate plan filingimplementation. The agreement provides for a total increase in electric revenues of $10.5 million and shiftinga total increase in gas revenues of $6.9 million. The agreement also provides for a minor storm accrual of $0.5 million per year and the three-year formula rate plan to filings in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Key provisionsdistribution of the agreement in principle include: changing the lower of actual equity ratio or 50% equity ratio approved in the rate case to a hypothetical capital structure of 51% equity and 49% debt for the duration of the three-year formula rate plan; changing the 2% depreciation rate for the New Orleans Power Station approved in the rate case to 3%; retention of over-recovery of $2.2 million in rider revenues; recovery of $1.4$8.9 million of certain rate
395

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

case expenses outside ofcurrently held customer credits to implement the earnings band; recovery of the New Orleans Solar Station costs upon commercial operation; and Entergy New Orleans’s dismissal of its 2018 rate case appeal.City Council advisors’ mitigation recommendations.

COVID-19 OrdersRequest for Extension and Modification of Formula Rate Plan

In March 2020,September 2023, Entergy New Orleans voluntarily suspended customer disconnections for non-paymentfiled a motion seeking City Council approval of utility bills through May 2020. Subsequently,a three-year extension of Entergy New Orleans’s electric and gas formula rate plans. In October 2023 the City Council ordered that the moratorium be extended to August 1, 2020. In May 2020 the City Council issued an accounting order authorizinggranted Entergy New OrleansOrleans’s request for an extension, subject to establishminor modifications which included a regulatory asset55% fixed capital structure for incremental COVID-19-related expenses. In January 2021, Entergy New Orleans resumed disconnecting service to commercial and small business customers with past-due balances that have not made payment arrangements. In February 2021 the City Council adopted a resolution suspending residential customer disconnections for non-payment of utility bills and suspending the assessment and accumulation of late fees on residential customers with past-due balances through May 15, 2021. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy New Orleans recorded a regulatory asset of $14.3 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

In June 2020 the City Council established the City Council Cares Program and directed Entergy New Orleans to use the approximately $7 million refund received from the Entergy Arkansas opportunity sales FERC proceeding, currently being held in escrow, and approximately $15 million of non-securitized storm reserves to fund this program, which is intended to provide temporary bill relief to customers who become unemployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The program became effective July 1, 2020, and offers qualifying residential customers bill credits of $100 per month for up to four months, for a maximum of $400 in residential customer bill credits. As of December 31, 2020, credits of $3.4 million have been applied to customer bills under the City Council Cares Program.rate setting purposes.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recoverypurchased power cost recovery

Entergy New Orleans’s electric rate schedules include a fuel adjustment tariff designed to reflect no more than targeted fuel and purchased power costs, adjusted by a surcharge or credit for deferred fuel expense arising from the monthly reconciliation of actual fuel and purchased power costs incurred with fuel cost revenues billed to customers, including carrying charges.

405

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy New Orleans’s gas rate schedules include a purchased gas adjustment to reflect estimated gas costs for the billing month, adjusted by a surcharge or credit similar to that included in the electric fuel adjustment clause, including carrying charges.

Show Cause Order

In July 2016 the City Council approved the issuance of a show cause order, which directed Entergy New Orleans to make a filing on or before September 29, 2016 to demonstrate the reasonableness of its actions or positions with regard to certain issues in four existing dockets that relate to Entergy New Orleans’s: (i) storm hardening proposal; (ii) 2015 integrated resource plan; (iii) gas infrastructure rebuild proposal; and (iv) proposed sizing of the New Orleans Power Station and its community outreach prior to the filing. In September 2016, Entergy New Orleans filed its response to the City Council’s show cause order. The City Council has not established any further procedural schedule with regard to this proceeding.

Reliability Investigation

In August 2017 the City Council established a docket to investigate the reliability of the Entergy New Orleans distribution system and to consider implementing certain reliability standards and possible financial penalties for not meeting any such standards. In April 2018 the City Council adopted a resolution directing Entergy New Orleans to demonstrate that it has been prudent in the management and maintenance of the reliability of its distribution system. The resolution also called for Entergy New Orleans to file a revised reliability plan addressing
396

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

the current state of its distribution system and proposing remedial measures for increasing reliability. In June 2018, Entergy New Orleans filed its response to the City Council’s resolution regarding the prudence of its management and maintenance of the reliability of its distribution system.  In July 2018, Entergy New Orleans filed its revised reliability plan discussing the various reliability programs that it uses to improve distribution system reliability and discussing generally the positive effect that advanced meter deployment and grid modernization can have on future reliability.  Entergy New Orleans has retained a national consulting firm with expertise in distribution system reliability to conduct a review of Entergy New Orleans’s distribution system reliability-related practices and procedures and to provide recommendations for improving distribution system reliability. The report was filed with the City Council in October 2018. The City Council also approved a resolution that opensopened a prudence investigation into whether Entergy New Orleans was imprudent for not acting sooner to address outages in New Orleans and whether fines should be imposed. In January 2019, Entergy New Orleans filed testimony in response to the prudence investigation and asserting that it had been prudent in managing system reliability. In April 2019 the City Council advisors filed comments and testimony asserting that Entergy New Orleans did not act prudently in maintaining and improving its distribution system reliability in recent years and recommending that a financial penalty in the range of $1.5 million to $2 million should be assessed.  Entergy New Orleans disagreesdisagreed with the recommendation and submitted rebuttal testimony and rebuttal comments in June 2019. In November 2019 the City Council passed a resolution that penalized Entergy New Orleans $1 million for alleged imprudence in the maintenance of its distribution system. In December 2019, Entergy New Orleans filed suit in Louisiana state court seeking judicial review of the City Council’s resolution. AlthoughIn June 2022 the Orleans Civil District Court issued a written judgment that the penalty be set aside, reversed, and vacated. In August 2022 the Orleans Civil District Court issued written reasons for its judgment and also granted a post-judgment motion to remand for the City Council evidentiary record has been lodgedto take actions consistent with its judgment.

Also in August 2022 the City Council approved a resolution establishing a 30-day comment period on proposed minimum reliability standards and an associated penalty mechanism. In September 2022, Entergy New Orleans filed comments to the proposed plan including a request for an additional round of comments. In February 2023 the City Council approved a resolution adopting the proposed reliability standards, including a minimum annual performance level for Entergy New Orleans’s distribution system, as well as associated penalty mechanisms. In April 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed the compliance filings required by the resolution for calendar year 2023. The first year for which the City Council may assess a penalty for distribution system reliability performance is calendar year 2024.

In April 2023 the City Council approved a resolution that established a procedural schedule to allow for the submission of additional evidence regarding the penalty imposed in 2019. In May 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed with the Orleans Civil District count,Court a petition for judicial review and (or alternatively) declaratory judgment of, together with a request for injunctive relief from, the court has not yet establishedCity Council’s April 2023 resolution. In June 2023 the City Council filed exceptions requesting the Orleans Civil District Court dismiss the suit as premature, and a briefing schedule.hearing date was set on the exceptions. In September 2023, Entergy New Orleans filed an unopposed motion to continue the hearing on the City Council’s exceptions without date, which was granted. Entergy New Orleans expects to file its opposition to the City Council’s exceptions by the applicable deadlines. In January 2024 the City Council approved
406

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

a modified procedural schedule in which the hearing officer shall certify the record of the proceeding for City Council consideration no later than July 2024.

Renewable Portfolio Standard Rulemaking

In March 2019 the City Council initiated a rulemaking proceeding to consider whether to establish a renewable portfolio standard. The rulemaking will consider, among other issues, whether to adopt a renewable portfolio standard, whether such standard should be voluntary or mandatory, what kinds of technologies should qualify for inclusion in the rules, what level, if any, of renewable generation should be required, and whether penalties are an appropriate component of the proposed rules. Parties to the proceeding submitted initial comments in June 2019 and reply comments in July 2019. Entergy New Orleans recommends that the City Council adopt a voluntary clean energy standard of 70% of generation being clean energy by 2030, as so defined, which, in addition to renewable generation, would include nuclear, beneficial electrification, and demand-side management as compliant technologies. Several other industry leaders, academic researchers, and environmental advocates filed comments also supporting a clean energy standard. Other parties, including many representatives of the solar and wind industry, are recommending mandatory, renewables-only requirements of up to 100% renewable resources by 2040. In September 2019 the City Council advisors issued a report and recommendations, which also put forth three alternative rules for comment from the parties. Comments were submitted in October 2019 and replies were filed in November 2019. In March 2020 the City Council’s Utility Committee recommended a resolution for approval by the City Council that directed the City Council advisors to work toward development of a rule for enacting a Renewable and Clean Portfolio Standard. The four components of the Renewable and Clean Portfolio Standard that the City Council expressed a desire to implement are:were: (1) a mandatory requirement that Entergy New Orleans achieve 100% net zero carbon emissions by 2040; (2) reliance on renewable energy credits purchased without the associated energy for compliance with the standard being phased out over the ten-year period from 2040 to 2050; (3) no carbon-emitting resources in the portfolio of resources Entergy New Orleans uses to serve New Orleans by 2050; and (4) a mechanism to limit costs in any one plan year to no more than one percent of plan year total utility retail sales revenues. The City Council adopted the Utility Committee resolution in April 2020. The first technical meeting ofCity Council approved the parties occurredrule in June 2020; a second technical meeting occurred in July 2020. May 2021, establishing the Renewable and Clean Portfolio Standard.

In August 2020March 2022 the City Council advisors issuedapproved Entergy New Orleans’s initial compliance plan and established an alternative compliance payment value of $8.45 per MWh, which Entergy New Orleans will pay if it is unable to comply with the Renewable and Clean Portfolio Standard for the 2022 compliance year. Such compliance payments are paid into a final draft of the rules for review and comment from the parties before final rules are proposed for considerationclean energy fund established by the City Council. The City Council also approved the electric vehicle credit calculation methodology for use in the compliance demonstration report for 2022, to be filed prior to May 1, 2023. Entergy New Orleans filed comments in September and October 2020. A City Council decision is expected inOrleans’s proposal to create a 5% contingency reserve was considered reasonable for the first quarter 2021.initial compliance plan.

397

Table of Contents
In August 2022, Entergy New Orleans LLCsubmitted its compliance plan covering compliance years 2023-2025. After receiving comments from intervenors and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial DiscussionEntergy New Orleans, in December 2022 the City Council adopted a resolution that (a) approved Entergy New Orleans's proposal to purchase unbundled renewable energy credits, as needed; (b) denied Entergy New Orleans’s request to treat the Sewerage and AnalysisWater Board’s 230 kV Sullivan substation electrification as a “qualified measure;” (c) approved the alternative compliance payment for years 2023-2025 at $8.45 per MWh; and (d) approved the Tier 3 credit calculations for electric vehicle charging infrastructure but denied the request to approve a Tier 3 credit for the Sewerage and Water Board substation electrification project at this time while the substation is not yet in service.

In May 2023, Entergy New Orleans submitted its compliance demonstration report to the City Council for the 2022 compliance year, which describes and demonstrates Entergy New Orleans’s compliance with the Renewable and Clean Portfolio Standard in 2022 and satisfies certain informational requirements. Entergy New Orleans requested, among other things, that the City Council determine that Entergy New Orleans achieved the target under the portfolio standard for 2022 and remains within the customer protection cost cap, and that the City Council approve a proposal to recover costs associated with 2022 compliance. In July 2023 intervenors filed comments on the compliance demonstration report, and Entergy New Orleans responded to those comments in August 2023.

Federal Regulation

See the “Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation – Federal Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of federal regulation.

Nuclear Matters

See the “Nuclear Matters” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of nuclear matters.

407

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Environmental Risks

Entergy New Orleans’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.  Management believes that Entergy New Orleans is in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted in “Regulation of Entergy’s Business - Environmental Regulation” in Part I, Item 1.  Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance costs cannot be precisely estimated.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of Entergy New Orleans’s financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.  Management has identified the following accounting policies and estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and there is the potential for future changes in thethese assumptions and measurements that could produce estimates that would have a material impacteffect on the presentation of Entergy New Orleans’s financial position, or results of operations.operations, or cash flows.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

See “Utility Regulatory Accounting” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of accounting for the effects of rate regulation.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

See “Impairment of Long-lived Assets” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates associated with the impairment of long-lived assets.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

See “Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy New Orleans’s qualified pension and other postretirement reported costs, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are impactedaffected by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms.  See the Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy
398

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.  Because of the complexity of these calculations, the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate.

Cost Sensitivity

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension cost and qualified projected benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2020 Projected Qualified Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2023 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$303$5,858Discount rate(0.25%)$93$3,124
Rate of return on plan assetsRate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$388$—Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$305$—
Rate of increase in compensationRate of increase in compensation0.25%$225$1,060Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$132$538
408

Table of Contents
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefitbenefits cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Postretirement Benefit CostImpact on 2020 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Postretirement Benefits CostImpact on 2023 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$76$893Discount rate(0.25%)$32$494
Health care cost trendHealth care cost trend0.25%$82$571Health care cost trend0.25%$49$282

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Costs and Employer Contributions

Total qualified pension cost for Entergy New Orleans in 20202023 was $6 million.$3.7 million, including $2.1 million in settlement costs. Entergy New Orleans anticipates 20212024 qualified pension cost to be $5.9$1.1 million.  Entergy New Orleans contributed $4.6$1.4 million to its qualified pension plans in 20202023 and estimates 20212024 pension contributions will be approximately $5.4$4.9 million, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.

Total postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income for Entergy New Orleans in 20202023 was $4.9$4.3 million.  Entergy New Orleans expects 20212024 postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income of approximately $6.4$5.5 million.  Entergy New Orleans contributed $641$213 thousand to its other postretirement plans in 20202023 and estimates 20212024 contributions will be approximately $175$205 thousand.

Other Contingencies

See “Other Contingencies” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the estimates associated with environmental, litigation, and other risks.

New Accounting Pronouncements

See the New Accounting Pronouncements” section of Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements.
399409

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the member and Board of Directors of
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows, and changes in member’s equity (pages 402412 through 406416 and applicable items in pages 5147 through 238), for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matters

The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current-period audit of the financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Rate and Regulatory MattersEntergy New Orleans, LLC and SubsidiariesRefer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company is subject to rate regulation by the Council of the City of New Orleans, Louisiana (the “City Council”), which has jurisdiction with respect to the rates of electric companies in the City of New Orleans, Louisiana, and to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based
410

Table of Contents
rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures.

The Company’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the City Council and the FERC set the rates the Company is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, the Company applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Company assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Company has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the City Council and the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service, or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs and refunds to customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the City Council and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities involved specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate setting process due to its inherent complexities and auditor judgment to evaluate management estimates and the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the City Council and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of regulatory assets, and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as regulatory assets or liabilities and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.
We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the City Council and the FERC for the Company to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the City Council’s and the FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.
For regulatory matters in process, we inspected the Company’s filings with the City Council and the FERC and orders issued, and considered the filings with the City Council and the FERC by intervenors that may impact the Company’s future rates, for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.
We obtained representation from management regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery, refund, or a future reduction in rates.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 23, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2001.
411

Table of Contents
ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$737,974 $855,248 $672,231 
Natural gas105,959 142,085 96,621 
TOTAL843,933 997,333 768,852 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale122,400 244,994 150,018 
Purchased power268,478 314,283 268,568 
Other operation and maintenance167,719 156,653 145,377 
Taxes other than income taxes62,979 63,743 53,569 
Depreciation and amortization81,282 76,938 73,480 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net69,211 19,596 13,177 
TOTAL772,069 876,207 704,189 
OPERATING INCOME71,864 121,126 64,663 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction1,470 829 2,371 
Interest and investment income7,154 742 48 
Miscellaneous - net(4,119)(21)(1,240)
TOTAL4,505 1,550 1,179 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense38,118 34,829 29,164 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(714)(531)(1,056)
TOTAL37,404 34,298 28,108 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES38,965 88,378 37,734 
Income taxes(189,973)24,277 5,936 
NET INCOME$228,938 $64,101 $31,798 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

412

Table of Contents
ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$228,938 $64,101 $31,798 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization81,282 76,938 73,480 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued(191,326)18,685 12,573 
Changes in assets and liabilities:   
Receivables29,944 6,128 (42,612)
Fuel inventory2,574 (2,927)(967)
Accounts payable(11,924)21 22,457 
Prepaid taxes and taxes accrued(11,882)5,923 (315)
Interest accrued454 89 (104)
Deferred fuel costs4,005 (17,760)9,737 
Other working capital accounts(9,184)(790)(3,233)
Provisions for estimated losses1,076 80,719 (83,569)
Other regulatory assets19,745 46,505 18,173 
Other regulatory liabilities66,022 (8,639)4,985 
Effect of securitization on regulatory asset— 95,920 — 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities(16,371)9,769 (32,144)
Other assets and liabilities9,603 (10,919)68,549 
Net cash flow provided by operating activities202,956 363,763 78,808 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(164,279)(217,864)(220,284)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction1,470 829 2,371 
Changes in money pool receivable - net147,254 (110,844)(36,410)
Payments to storm reserve escrow account(3,731)(200,000)(7)
Receipts from storm reserve escrow account— 125,000 83,045 
Changes in securitization account(191)(236)1,365 
Decrease (increase) in other investments675 (675)— 
Net cash flow used in investing activities(18,802)(403,790)(169,920)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt14,610 — 183,403 
Retirement of long-term debt(112,525)(12,207)(36,873)
Repayment of long-term payable due to associated company(1,306)(1,326)(1,618)
Contributions from customer for construction15,000 15,000 — 
Changes in money pool payable - net21,651 — (10,190)
Common equity distributions paid(125,000)— — 
Other(1,022)162 (774)
Net cash flow provided by (used in) financing activities(188,592)1,629 133,948 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents(4,438)(38,398)42,836 
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period4,464 42,862 26 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$26 $4,464 $42,862 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid (received) during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$36,263 $33,343 $28,009 
Income taxes$14,120 $499 ($3,839)
Noncash investing activities:
Accrued construction expenditures$7,068 $11,152 $— 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
413

Table of Contents
ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$26 $27 
Temporary cash investments— 4,437 
Total cash and cash equivalents26 4,464 
Securitization recovery trust account2,426 2,235 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer67,258 93,288 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(7,770)(11,909)
Associated companies1,657 149,927 
Other5,270 6,110 
Accrued unbilled revenues31,087 37,284 
Total accounts receivable97,502 274,700 
Deferred fuel costs6,148 10,153 
Fuel inventory - at average cost3,298 5,872 
Materials and supplies - at average cost30,019 22,498 
Prepaid taxes1,574 — 
Prepayments and other11,482 6,312 
TOTAL152,475 326,234 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)832 1,050 
Storm reserve escrow account78,731 75,000 
Other— 675 
TOTAL79,563 76,725 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric2,046,928 1,934,837 
Natural gas401,846 390,252 
Construction work in progress25,424 39,607 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT2,474,198 2,364,696 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization858,672 808,224 
UTILITY PLANT - NET1,615,526 1,556,472 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $506 as of December 31, 2023 and $13,363 as of December 31, 2022)182,367 202,112 
Deferred fuel costs4,080 4,080 
Other63,964 46,778 
TOTAL250,411 252,970 
TOTAL ASSETS$2,097,975 $2,212,401 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
414

Table of Contents
ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$85,000 $170,000 
Payable due to associated company1,275 1,306 
Accounts payable:  
Associated companies76,736 53,258 
Other39,813 57,291 
Customer deposits32,420 31,826 
Taxes accrued— 10,308 
Interest accrued8,534 8,080 
Other8,953 6,560 
TOTAL252,731 338,629 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued195,615 385,259 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits16,457 16,481 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - net36,061 39,738 
Other regulatory liabilities90,434 20,735 
Accumulated provisions88,124 87,048 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $5,415 as of December 31, 2023 and $17,697 as of December 31, 2022)584,171 596,047 
Long-term payable due to associated company7,004 8,279 
Other20,624 17,369 
TOTAL1,038,490 1,170,956 
Commitments and Contingencies
EQUITY  
Member's equity806,754 702,816 
TOTAL806,754 702,816 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$2,097,975 $2,212,401 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

415

Table of Contents
ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN MEMBER'S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
Members Equity
(In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2020$606,917 
Net income31,798 
Balance at December 31, 2021$638,715 
Net income64,101 
Balance at December 31, 2022$702,816 
Net income228,938 
Common equity distributions(125,000)
Balance at December 31, 2023$806,754 
See Notes to Financial Statements.

416

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Results of Operations

2023 Compared to 2022

Net Income

Net income decreased $12.1 million primarily due to higher depreciation and amortization expenses, the recognition of the equity component of carrying costs as part of the securitization of the Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri system restoration costs in April 2022, and higher taxes other than income taxes. The decrease was partially offset by higher retail electric price and higher other income.

Operating Revenues

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenues comparing 2023 to 2022.
Amount
(In Millions)
2022 operating revenues$2,288.9 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income(331.8)
System restoration carrying costs(21.7)
Volume/weather8.4 
Return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers26.6 
Retail electric price58.2 
2023 operating revenues$2,028.6

Entergy Texas’s results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

System restoration carrying costs represent the equity component of system restoration carrying costs recognized as part of the securitization of the Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Delta, and Winter Storm Uri system restoration costs in April 2022. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the securitization.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase in weather-adjusted residential usage and an increase in commercial usage, partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales and a decrease in demand from cogeneration customers. The increase in weather-adjusted residential usage was primarily due to an increase in customers.

The return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers resulted from the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes through a rider effective October 2018 in response to the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. There was no return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers in 2023. In 2022, $26.6 million was returned to customers through reductions in operating revenues. There was no effect on net income as the reductions in operating revenues were offset by reductions in
417

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

income tax expense. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

The retail electric price variance is primarily due to an increase in base rates, including the realignment of the costs previously being collected through the distribution and transmission cost recovery factor riders and the generation cost recovery rider to base rates, effective June 2023 on an interim basis and approved by the PUCT in August 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the 2022 base rate case.

Total electric energy sales for Entergy Texas for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 are as follows:
20232022% Change
(GWh)
Residential6,731 6,779 (1)
Commercial4,797 4,758 
Industrial9,343 9,572 (2)
Governmental275 271 
  Total retail21,146 21,380 (1)
Sales for resale:
  Associated companies— 279 (100)
  Non-associated companies462 813 (43)
Total21,608 22,472 (4)

See Note 19 to the financial statements for additional discussion of Entergy Texas’s operating revenues.

Other Income Statement Variances

Other operation and maintenance expenses increased primarily due to:

an increase of $12.2 million in power delivery expenses primarily due to higher vegetation maintenance costs;
an increase of $7 million in contract costs related to operational performance, customer service, and organizational health initiatives;
an increase of $2.4 million in loss provisions; and
several individually insignificant items.

The increase was partially offset by a decrease of $9.5 million in transmission costs allocated by MISO and a gain of $6.9 million on the partial sale of a service center in April 2023 as part of an eminent domain proceeding.

Taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to increases in ad valorem taxes resulting from higher assessments.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to an increase in depreciation rates effective with an interim increase in base rates in June 2023, which was approved by the PUCT in August 2023, and additions to plant in service. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the 2022 base rate case.

Other regulatory charges (credits) - net includes the reversal in third quarter 2023 of $21.9 million of regulatory liabilities to reflect the recognition of certain receipts by Entergy Texas under affiliated PPAs that have been resolved. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the 2022 base rate case.

418

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Other income increased primarily due to an increase in the allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2023, including the Orange County Advanced Power Station project, and higher interest earned on money pool investments.

Interest expense increased primarily due to the issuance of $325 million of 5.00% Series mortgage bonds in August 2022 and the issuance of $350 million of 5.80% Series mortgage bonds in August 2023, partially offset by an increase in the allowance for borrowed funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2023, including the Orange County Advanced Power Station project.

The effective income tax rates were 17.8% for 2023 and 14.3% for 2022. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory rate of 21% to the effective income tax rates and for additional discussion regarding income taxes.

2022 Compared to 2021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy Texas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022, filed with the SEC on February 24, 2023, for discussion of results of operations for 2022 compared to 2021.

Income Tax Legislation and Regulation

See the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of income tax legislation and regulation.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

    Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021 were as follows:
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$3,497 $28 $248,596 
Net cash provided by (used in):   
Operating activities641,691 409,427 356,933 
Investing activities(1,125,948)(764,069)(647,271)
Financing activities502,746 358,111 41,770 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents18,489 3,469 (248,568)
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$21,986 $3,497 $28 

2023 Compared to 2022

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities increased $232.3 million in 2023 primarily due to lower fuel costs and the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs. See Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of fuel and purchased power cost recovery. The increase was partially offset by:

lower collections from customers;
419

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

the timing of payments to vendors;
an increase of $27.1 million in income taxes paid in 2023 as a result of higher estimated income tax payments in comparison to 2022; and
an increase of $17.1 million in interest paid.

Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities increased $361.9 million in 2023 primarily due to:

an increase of $162.3 million in non-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to higher spending on the Orange County Advanced Power Station project;
money pool activity;
an increase of $73.5 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to increased investment in the reliability and infrastructure of Entergy Texas’s transmission system; and
an increase of $27.6 million in distribution construction expenditures primarily due to higher capital expenditures for storm restoration in 2023.

The increase was partially offset by the partial sale of a service center in April 2023 for $11 million as part of an eminent domain proceeding.

Increases in Entergy Texas’s receivable from the money pool are a use of cash flow, and Entergy Texas’s receivable from the money pool increased $218.4 million in 2023 compared to increasing by $99.5 million in 2022. The money pool is an intercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing and lending arrangements, and the money pool and other borrowing arrangements are designed to reduce the Registrant Subsidiaries’ dependence on external short-term borrowings.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided by financing activities increased $144.6 million in 2023 primarily due to:

the issuance of $350 million of 5.80% Series mortgage bonds in August 2023;
a capital contribution of $150 million received from Entergy Corporation in 2023 in order to maintain Entergy Texas’s capital structure and in anticipation of various capital expenditures;
the payment of $105 million of common stock dividends in 2022. No common stock dividends were paid in 2023 in order to maintain Entergy Texas’s capital structure;
money pool activity;
principal payments of $17.8 million on securitization bonds in 2023 as compared to principal payments of $66.5 million on securitization bonds in 2022; and
an increase of $22.8 million in prepaid deposits related to contributions-in-aid-of-construction primarily for customer and generator interconnection agreements.

The increase was partially offset by the issuance of $325 million of 5.00% Series mortgage bonds in August 2022 and the issuance of $290.85 million of senior secured system restoration bonds in April 2022.

Decreases in Entergy Texas’s payable to the money pool are a use of cash flow, and Entergy Texas’s payable to the money pool decreased $79.6 million in 2022.

See Note 5 to the financial statements for further details of long-term debt.

420

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
2022 Compared to 2021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of Entergy Texas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022, filed with the SEC on February 24, 2023, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2022 compared to 2021.

Capital Structure

Entergy Texas’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The decrease in the debt to capital ratio is primarily due to net income in 2023 and the capital contribution of $150 million received from Entergy Corporation in 2023, partially offset by the issuance of long-term debt in 2023.

 December 31,
2023
December 31,
2022
Debt to capital50.9 %52.0 %
Effect of excluding securitization bonds(2.1 %)(2.5 %)
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)48.8 %49.5 %
Effect of subtracting cash(0.2 %)— %
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (non-GAAP) (a)48.6 %49.5 %

(a)Calculation excludes the securitization bonds, which are non-recourse to Entergy Texas.

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents. Debt consists of finance lease obligations and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion. Capital consists of debt and equity. Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents. The debt to capital ratio excluding securitization bonds and net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds are non-GAAP measures. Entergy Texas uses the debt to capital ratios excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes they provide useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Texas’s financial condition because the securitization bonds are non-recourse to Entergy Texas, as more fully described in Note 5 to the financial statements. Entergy Texas also uses the net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Texas’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy Texas’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

Entergy Texas seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings. To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a dividend, to the extent funds are legally available to do so, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure. To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, Entergy Texas may issue incremental debt or reduce dividends, or both, to maintain its capital structure. In addition, Entergy Texas may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure for certain circumstances such as financing of large transactions that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reduced dividends.

Uses of Capital

Entergy Texas requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
debt maturities or retirements;
421

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel and purchased power costs; and
dividend and interest payments.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Texas’s planned construction and other capital investments.
 202420252026
 (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:  
Generation$445 $935 $1,205 
Transmission320 305 370 
Distribution475 365 315 
Utility Support50 25 90 
Total$1,290 $1,630 $1,980 

In addition to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Texas includes investments in generation projects to modernize, decarbonize, and diversify Entergy Texas’s portfolio, including Orange County Advanced Power Station; distribution and Utility support spending to improve reliability, resilience, and customer experience; transmission spending to improve reliability and resilience while also supporting renewables expansion and customer growth; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements, government actions, environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Texas’s existing debt and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments).
 2024202520262027-2028After 2028
 (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)$141 $141 $270 $422 $4,537 
Operating leases (b)$7 $6 $5 $4 $2 
Finance leases (b)$2 $2 $2 $3 $1 

(a)Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.

Other Obligations

Entergy Texas expects to contribute approximately $8.3 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $156 thousand to other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2024, although the 2024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 2024, valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2024. See “Critical Accounting Estimates - Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Entergy Texas has $33.6 million of unrecognized tax benefits net of unused tax attributes plus interest and payments for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

422

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
In addition, Entergy Texas enters into fuel and purchased power agreements that contain minimum purchase obligations. Entergy Texas has rate mechanisms in place to recover fuel, purchased power, and associated costs incurred under these purchase obligations.

As a subsidiary, Entergy Texas dividends its earnings to Entergy Corporation at a percentage determined monthly.

Orange County Advanced Power Station

In September 2021, Entergy Texas filed an application seeking PUCT approval to amend Entergy Texas’s certificate of convenience and necessity to construct, own, and operate the Orange County Advanced Power Station, a new 1,215 MW combined-cycle combustion turbine facility to be located in Bridge City, Texas at an initially-estimated expected total cost of $1.2 billion inclusive of the estimated costs of the generation facilities, transmission upgrades, contingency, an allowance for funds used during construction, and necessary regulatory expenses, among others. The project includes combustion turbine technology with dual fuel capability, able to co-fire up to 30% hydrogen by volume upon commercial operation and upgradable to support 100% hydrogen operations in the future. In December 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In March 2022 certain intervenors filed testimony opposing the hydrogen co-firing component of the proposed project and others filed testimony opposing the project outright. Also in March 2022 the PUCT staff filed testimony opposing the hydrogen co-firing component of the proposed project, but otherwise taking no specific position on the merits of the project. The PUCT staff also proposed that the PUCT establish a maximum amount that Entergy Texas may recover in rates attributable to the project. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed rebuttal testimony addressing and rebutting these various arguments. The hearing on the merits was held in June 2022, and post-hearing briefs were submitted in July 2022. In September 2022 the ALJs with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued a proposal for decision recommending the PUCT approve Entergy Texas’s application for certification of Orange County Advanced Power Station subject to certain conditions, including a cap on cost recovery at $1.37 billion, the exclusion of investment associated with co-firing hydrogen, weatherization requirements, and customer receipt of any contractual benefits associated with the facility’s guaranteed heat rate. In October 2022 the parties in the proceeding filed exceptions and replies to exceptions to the proposal for decision. Also in October 2022, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT information regarding a new fixed pricing option for an estimated project cost of approximately $1.55 billion associated with Entergy Texas’s issuance of limited notice to proceed by mid-November 2022. In November 2022 the PUCT issued a final order approving the requested amendment to Entergy Texas’s certificate of convenience and necessity to construct, own, and operate the Orange County Advanced Power Station without the investment associated with hydrogen co-firing capability, without a cap on cost recovery, and subject to certain conditions, including weatherization requirements and customer receipt of any contractual benefits associated with the facility’s guaranteed heat rate.

In December 2022, Texas Industrial Energy Consumers and Sierra Club filed motions for rehearing of the PUCT’s final order alleging the PUCT erred in granting the certification of the Orange County Advanced Power Station, in not imposing a cost cap, in including certain findings related to the reasonableness of Entergy Texas’s request for proposals from which the Orange County Advanced Power Station was selected, and in other regards. Also in December 2022, Entergy Texas filed a response to the motions for rehearing refuting the points raised therein. In January 2023 the PUCT issued letters noting that it voted to consider Texas Industrial Energy Consumers’ motion for rehearing at its upcoming January 2023 open meeting and voted not to consider Sierra Club’s motion for rehearing at an open meeting. At the January 2023 open meeting, the PUCT voted to grant Texas Industrial Energy Consumers’ motion for rehearing for the limited purpose of issuing an order on rehearing that excludes three findings related to Entergy Texas’s request for proposals. The order on rehearing does not change the PUCT’s certification of the Orange County Advanced Power Station or the conditions placed thereon in the PUCT’s November 2022 final order. Construction is in progress, and subject to receipt of required permits, the facility is expected to be in service by mid-2026.

423

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Sources of Capital

Entergy Texas’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand;
the Entergy system money pool;
debt or preferred stock issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
capital contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Circumstances such as weather patterns, fuel and purchased power price fluctuations, and unanticipated expenses, including unscheduled plant outages and storms, could affect the timing and level of internally generated funds in the future. In addition to the financings necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, Entergy Texas expects to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher-cost debt and replace it with lower-cost debt if market conditions permit.

All debt and common and preferred stock issuances by Entergy Texas require prior regulatory approval. Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in its bond indenture and other agreements. Entergy Texas has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs for the next twelve months and beyond.

Entergy Texas’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2023202220212020
(In Thousands)
$317,882$99,468($79,594)$4,601

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

Entergy Texas has a credit facility in the amount of $150 million scheduled to expire in June 2028. The credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $30 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility. As of December 31, 2023, there were no cash borrowings and $1.1 million in letters of credit outstanding under the credit facility. In addition, Entergy Texas is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO. As of December 31, 2023, $76.5 million in letters of credit were outstanding under Entergy Texas’s uncommitted letter of credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities.

Entergy Texas obtained authorizations from the FERC through April 2025 for short-term borrowings, not to exceed an aggregate amount of $200 million at any time outstanding, and long-term borrowings and security issuances. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy Texas’s short-term borrowing limits.

State and Local Rate Regulation and Fuel-Cost Recovery

The rates that Entergy Texas charges for its services significantly influence its financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. Entergy Texas is regulated, and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings. A governmental agency, the PUCT, is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers.

424

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Filings with the PUCT and Texas Cities

Retail Rates

2022 Base Rate Case

In July 2022, Entergy Texas filed a base rate case with the PUCT seeking a net increase in base rates of approximately $131.4 million. The base rate case was based on a 12-month test year ending December 31, 2021. Key drivers of the requested increase were changes in depreciation rates as the result of a depreciation study and an increase in the return on equity. In addition, Entergy Texas included capital additions placed into service for the period of January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2021, including those additions reflected in the then-effective distribution and transmission cost recovery factor riders and the generation cost recovery rider, all of which have been reset to zero as a result of this proceeding. In July 2022 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In October 2022 intervenors filed direct testimony challenging and supporting various aspects of Entergy Texas’s rate case application. The key issues addressed included the appropriate return on equity, generation plant deactivations, depreciation rates, and proposed tariffs related to electric vehicles. In November 2022 the PUCT staff filed direct testimony addressing a similar set of issues and recommending a reduction of $50.7 million to Entergy Texas’s overall cost of service associated with the requested net increase in base rates of approximately $131.4 million. Entergy Texas filed rebuttal testimony in November 2022. In December 2022 the ALJs with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued two orders, one adopting the parties’ joint proposal that issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure be decided exclusively on written evidence and briefing, and one adopting a joint proposed briefing outline and schedule with deadlines in January 2023 for the parties to submit briefing on issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure and admitting evidence related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure issues. In January 2023 the parties filed initial and reply briefs addressing issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

In May 2023, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement resolving all issues in the proceeding, except for issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and Entergy Texas filed an agreed motion for interim rates, subject to refund or surcharge to the extent that the interim rates differ from the final approved rates. The unopposed settlement reflected a net base rate increase to be effective and relate back to December 2022 of $54 million, exclusive of, and incremental to, the costs being realigned from the distribution and transmission cost recovery factor riders and the generation cost recovery rider and $4.8 million of rate case expenses to be recovered through a rider over a period of 36 months. The net base rate increase of $54 million includes updated depreciation rates and a total annual revenue requirement of $14.5 million for the accrual of a self-insured storm reserve and the recovery of the regulatory assets for the pension and postretirement benefits expense deferral, costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, and retired non-advanced metering system electric meters. In May 2023 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings granted the motion for interim rates, which became effective in June 2023. Additionally, the ALJ remanded the proceeding, except for the issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure, to the PUCT to consider the settlement. In June 2023 the ALJ issued a proposal for decision related to the electric vehicle charging infrastructure issues and which noted recent legislation enacted which permits electric utilities to own and operate such infrastructure. The ALJ’s proposal for decision deferred to the PUCT regarding whether it is appropriate for any vertically integrated electric utility, or Entergy Texas specifically, to own electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and in the event that the PUCT decided ownership is permissible, the ALJ recommended approval of the proposed tariff to charge host customers for utility-owned and operated electric vehicle charging infrastructure sited on customer premises and denial of the proposed tariff to temporarily adjust billing demand charges for separately metered electric vehicle charging infrastructure, citing cost-shifting concerns. In July 2023 the parties filed exceptions and replies to exceptions to the proposal for decision. In August 2023 the PUCT issued an order approving the unopposed settlement and also issued an order severing the issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure addressed in the ALJ’s proposal for decision to a separate proceeding. Concurrently, Entergy Texas recorded the reversal of $21.9 million of regulatory liabilities to reflect the recognition of certain receipts by Entergy Texas under affiliated PPAs that have been resolved.

425

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Following the PUCT’s approval of the unopposed settlement in August 2023, Entergy Texas recorded a regulatory liability of $10.3 million, which reflects the net effects of higher depreciation and amortizations for the relate back period, partially offset by the relate back of base rate revenues that would have been collected had the approved rates been in effect for the period from December 2022 through June 2023, the date the new base rates were implemented on an interim basis. In October 2023, Entergy Texas filed a relate back surcharge rider to collect over six months beginning in January 2024 an additional approximately $24.6 million, which is the revenue requirement associated with the relate back of rates from December 2022 through June 2023, including carrying costs, as authorized by the PUCT’s August 2023 order. In November 2023, Entergy Texas filed an amended relate back surcharge rider to collect approximately $24.1 million based on a revised carrying cost rate. The amended relate back surcharge rider was approved by the PUCT in December 2023. The higher depreciation and amortizations for the relate back period will also be recognized over the six months beginning in January 2024, resulting in no effect on net income from the collection of the relate back surcharge rider.

In December 2023 the PUCT referred the separate proceeding to resolve issues related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In January 2024, the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings adopted a procedural schedule setting a hearing on the merits for April 2024.

Distribution Cost Recovery Factor (DCRF) Rider

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The amended rider was designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $26.3 million annually, or $6.8 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s then-effective DCRF rider based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2020. In February 2021 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings approved Entergy Texas's agreed motion for interim rates, which went into effect in March 2021. In March 2021 the parties filed an unopposed settlement recommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested DCRF revenue requirement and resolving all issues in the proceeding. In May 2021 the PUCT issued an order approving the settlement.

In August 2021, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The amended rider was designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $40.2 million annually, or $13.9 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s then-effective DCRF rider based on its capital invested in distribution between September 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021. In September 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled in December 2021. In December 2021 the parties filed an unopposed settlement recommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested DCRF revenue requirement and resolving all issues in the proceeding, including a motion for interim rates to take effect for usage on and after January 24, 2022. Also, in December 2021, the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued an order granting the motion for interim rates, which went into effect in January 2022, admitting evidence, and remanding the proceeding to the PUCT to consider the settlement. In March 2022 the PUCT issued an order approving the settlement.

Transmission Cost Recovery Factor (TCRF) Rider

In December 2018, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to set a new TCRF rider. The new TCRF rider was designed to collect approximately $2.7 million annually from Entergy Texas’s retail customers based on its capital invested in transmission between January 1, 2018 and September 30, 2018. In April 2019 parties filed testimony proposing a load growth adjustment, which would fully offset Entergy Texas’s proposed TCRF revenue requirement. In July 2019 the PUCT granted Entergy Texas’s application as filed to begin recovery of the requested $2.7 million annual revenue requirement, rejecting opposing parties’ proposed adjustment; however, the PUCT found that the question of prudence of the actual investment costs should be determined in Entergy Texas’s next rate case similar to the procedure used for the costs recovered through the DCRF rider. In October 2019 the PUCT issued an order on a motion for rehearing, clarifying and affirming its prior order granting Entergy Texas’s application as filed. Also in October 2019 a second motion for rehearing was filed, and Entergy Texas filed a
426

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
response in opposition to the motion. The second motion for rehearing was overruled by operation of law. In December 2019, Texas Industrial Energy Consumers filed an appeal to the PUCT order in district court alleging that the PUCT erred in declining to apply a load growth adjustment.

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its TCRF rider. The amended rider was designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $51 million annually, or $31.6 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s then-effective TCRF rider based on its capital invested in transmission between July 1, 2019 and August 31, 2020. In March 2021 the parties filed an unopposed settlement recommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested TCRF revenue requirement with interim rates effective March 2021 and resolving all issues in the proceeding. In March 2021 the ALJ granted the motion for interim rates, admitted evidence, and remanded the case to the PUCT for consideration of a final order at a future open meeting. In June 2021 the PUCT issued an order approving the settlement.

In October 2021, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its TCRF rider. The amended rider was designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $66.1 million annually, or $15.1 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Energy Texas’s then-effective TCRF rider based on its capital invested in transmission between September 1, 2020 and July 31, 2021 and changes in approved transmission charges. In January 2022 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In February 2022 the parties filed an unopposed settlement recommending that Entergy Texas be allowed to collect its full requested TCRF revenue requirement with interim rates effective March 2022. In February 2022 the ALJ granted the motion for interim rates, admitted evidence, and remanded the case to the PUCT for consideration of a final order at a future open meeting. In June 2022 the PUCT issued an order approving the settlement.

Generation Cost Recovery Rider

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application to establish a generation cost recovery rider with an initial annual revenue requirement of approximately $91 million to begin recovering a return of and on its generation capital investment in the Montgomery County Power Station through August 31, 2020. In December 2020, Entergy Texas filed an unopposed settlement supporting a generation cost recovery rider with an annual revenue requirement of approximately $86 million. The settlement revenue requirement was based on a depreciation rate intended to fully depreciate Montgomery County Power Station over 38 years and the removal of certain costs from Entergy Texas’s request. Under the settlement, Entergy Texas retained the right to propose a different depreciation rate and seek recovery of a majority of the costs removed from its request in its next base rate proceeding, and such depreciation rate was revised to fully depreciate Montgomery County Power Station over 40 years and all requested capital additions were approved as prudent in the 2022 base rate case proceeding discussed above. On January 14, 2021, the PUCT approved the generation cost recovery rider settlement rates on an interim basis and abated the proceeding. In March 2021, Entergy Texas filed to update its generation cost recovery rider to include its generation capital investment in Montgomery County Power Station after August 31, 2020. In April 2021 the ALJ issued an order unabating the proceeding and in May 2021 the ALJ issued an order finding Entergy Texas’s application and notice of the application to be sufficient. In May 2021, Entergy Texas filed an amendment to the application to reflect the PUCT’s approval of the sale of a 7.56% partial interest in the Montgomery County Power Station to East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc., which closed in June 2021. In June 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In July 2021 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings adopted a procedural schedule setting a hearing on the merits for September 2021. In July 2021 the parties filed a motion to abate the procedural schedule noting they had reached an agreement in principle and to allow the parties time to finalize a settlement agreement, which motion was granted by the ALJ. In October 2021, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement agreement that would adjust its generation cost recovery rider to recover an annual revenue requirement of approximately $88.3 million related to Entergy Texas’s investment in the Montgomery County Power Station through January 1, 2021, with Entergy Texas able to seek recovery of the remainder of its investment in its next base rate case, and all requested capital additions were approved as prudent in the 2022 base rate case proceeding discussed above. Also in October 2021 the ALJ granted a motion to admit evidence and remand the proceeding to the PUCT. In January 2022 the PUCT issued an
427

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

order approving the unopposed settlement. In February 2022, Entergy Texas filed a relate-back rider to collect over five months an additional approximately $5 million, which is the difference between the interim revenue requirement approved in January 2021 and the revenue requirement approved in January 2022 that reflects Entergy Texas’s full generation capital investment and ownership in Montgomery County Power Station on January 1, 2021, plus carrying costs from January 2021 through January 2022 when the updated revenue requirement took effect. In April 2022, Entergy Texas and the PUCT staff filed a joint proposed order supporting approval of Entergy Texas’s as-filed request. The PUCT approved the relate-back rider consistent with Entergy Texas’s as-filed request, and rates became effective over a five-month period, in August 2022.

In December 2020, Entergy Texas also filed an application to amend its generation cost recovery rider to reflect its acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility, which closed in June 2021. Because Hardin was to be acquired in the future, the initial generation cost recovery rider rates proposed in the application represented no change from the generation cost recovery rider rates established in Entergy Texas’s previous generation cost recovery rider proceeding. In July 2021 the PUCT issued an order approving the application. In August 2021, Entergy Texas filed an update application to recover its actual investment in the acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility. In September 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled in April 2022. In January 2022, Entergy Texas filed an update to its application to align the requested revenue requirement with the terms of the generation cost recovery rider settlement approved by the PUCT in January 2022. In March 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed motion, which motion was granted by the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings, to abate the procedural schedule indicating that the parties had reached an agreement in principle. In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties a unanimous settlement agreement that would adjust its generation cost recovery rider to recover an annual revenue requirement of approximately $92.8 million, which is $4.5 million in incremental annual revenue above the $88.3 million approved in January 2022, related to Entergy Texas’s actual investment in the acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility. Concurrently with filing of the unanimous settlement agreement, Entergy Texas submitted an agreed motion to admit evidence and remand the case to the PUCT for review and consideration of the settlement agreement, which motion was granted by the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings. The PUCT approved the settlement agreement and rates became effective in August 2022. In September 2022, Entergy Texas filed a relate-back rider designed to collect over three months an additional approximately $5.7 million, which is the revenue requirement, plus carrying costs, associated with Entergy Texas’s acquisition of Hardin County Peaking Facility from June 2021 through August 2022 when the updated revenue requirement took effect. In April 2023 the PUCT approved Entergy Texas’s as-filed request with rates effective over three months beginning in May 2023. See Note 14 to the financial statements for discussion of the Hardin County Peaking Facility purchase.

Fuel and purchased power cost recovery

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, not recovered in base rates.  Historically, semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor have been made in March and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. In 2023 the Texas legislature modified the Texas Utilities Code to provide that material over- and under-recovered fuel balances are to be refunded or surcharged through interim fuel adjustments and that fuel reconciliations must be filed at least once every two years. Entergy Texas expects the PUCT to undertake a rulemaking to effectuate the new legislation by the end of 2024.

In May 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to implement an interim fuel surcharge to collect the cumulative under-recovery of approximately $51.7 million, including interest, of fuel and purchased power costs incurred from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2021. The under-recovery balance is primarily attributable to the impacts of Winter Storm Uri, including historically high natural gas prices, partially offset by settlements received by Entergy Texas from MISO related to Hurricane Laura. Entergy Texas proposed that the interim fuel surcharge be assessed over a period of six months beginning with the first billing cycle after the PUCT
428

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
issues a final order, but no later than the first billing cycle of September 2022. Also in May 2022, the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In July 2022, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties an unopposed settlement resolving all issues in the proceeding. In addition, Entergy Texas filed on behalf of the parties a motion to admit evidence, to approve interim rates as requested in the initial application, and to remand the proceeding to the PUCT to consider the unopposed settlement. In August 2022 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued an order granting Entergy Texas’s motion, approving interim rates effective with the first billing cycle of September 2022, and remanding the case to the PUCT for final approval. The interim fuel surcharge was approved by the PUCT in January 2023.

In September 2022, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to reconcile its fuel and purchased power costs for the period from April 2019 through March 2022. During the reconciliation period, Entergy Texas incurred approximately $1.7 billion in eligible fuel and purchased power expenses, net of certain revenues credited to such expenses and other adjustments. As of the end of the reconciliation period, Entergy Texas’s cumulative under-recovery balance was approximately $103.1 million, including interest, which Entergy Texas requested authority to carry over as the beginning balance for the subsequent reconciliation period beginning April 2022, pending future surcharges or refunds as approved by the PUCT. In November 2022 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings. In May 2023, Entergy Texas filed, and the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings granted, a joint motion to abate the proceeding to give parties additional time to finalize a settlement. In July 2023, Entergy Texas filed an unopposed settlement, supporting testimony, and an agreed motion to admit evidence and remand the proceeding to the PUCT. Pursuant to the unopposed settlement, Entergy Texas would receive no disallowance of fuel costs incurred over the three-year reconciliation period and retain $9.3 million in margins from off-system sales made during the reconciliation period, resulting in a cumulative under-recovery balance of approximately $99.7 million, including interest, as of the end of the reconciliation period. In July 2023 the ALJ with the State Office of Administrative Hearings granted the motion to admit evidence and remanded the proceeding to the PUCT for consideration of the unopposed settlement. The PUCT approved the settlement in September 2023.

Federal Regulation

See the “Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation– Federal Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of federal regulation.

Nuclear Matters

See the “Nuclear Matters” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of nuclear matters.

Industrial and Commercial Customers

Entergy Texas’s large industrial and commercial customers continually explore ways to reduce their energy costs. In particular, cogeneration is an option available to a portion of Entergy Texas’s industrial customer base. Entergy Texas responds by working with industrial and commercial customers and negotiating electric service contracts to provide, under existing rate schedules, competitive rates that match specific customer needs and load profiles. Entergy Texas actively participates in economic development, customer retention, and reclamation activities to increase industrial and commercial demand, from both new and existing customers.

Environmental Risks

Entergy Texas’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters. Management believes that Entergy Texas is in substantial compliance with
429

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted in “Regulation of Entergy’s Business - Environmental Regulation” in Part I, Item 1. Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance costs cannot be precisely estimated.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of Entergy Texas’s financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Management has identified the following accounting estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and the potential for future changes in these assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that would have a material effect on the presentation of Entergy Texas’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

See “Utility Regulatory Accounting” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of accounting for the effects of rate regulation.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

See “Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy Texas’s qualified pension and other postretirement reported costs, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are affected by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms.  See “Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion. Because of the complexity of these calculations, the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate.

Cost Sensitivity

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension and qualified projected benefit obligation cost to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2023 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
  Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rate(0.25%)$182$5,266
Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$577$—
Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$196$953

430

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefits cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Postretirement Benefits CostImpact on 2023 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
  Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rate(0.25%)$7$1,188
Health care cost trend0.25%$59$755

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Costs and Employer Contributions

Total qualified pension cost for Entergy Texas in 2023 was $15.7 million, including $11.2 million in settlement costs. Entergy Texas anticipates 2024 qualified pension cost to be $436 thousand. Entergy Texas contributed $5.3 million to its qualified pension plans in 2023 and estimates 2024 pension contributions will be approximately $8.3 million, although the 2024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 2024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2024.

Total postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income for Entergy Texas in 2023 was $8.8 million. Entergy Texas expects 2024 postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income to approximate $10.9 million. Entergy Texas contributed $235 thousand to its other postretirement plans in 2023 and estimates 2024 contributions will be approximately $156 thousand.

Other Contingencies

See “Other Contingencies” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the estimates associated with environmental, litigation, and other risks.

New Accounting Pronouncements

See the “New Accounting Pronouncements” section of Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements.
431

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the shareholders and Board of Directors of
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows, and changes in equity (pages 434 through 438 and applicable items in pages 47 through 238), for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2023, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2023, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matter

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current-period audit of the financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

Rate and Regulatory Matters— MattersEntergy New Orleans, LLCTexas, Inc. and SubsidiariesRefer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company is subject to rate regulation by the Council of the City of New Orleans, Louisiana (the “City Council”), which has jurisdiction with respect to the rates of electric companies in the City of New Orleans, Louisiana, and to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based
400

Table of Contents
rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures, such as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets and liabilities; income taxes; operating revenues; operation and maintenance expense; and depreciation and amortization expense.

The Company’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the City Council and the FERC set the rates the Company is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, the Company applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Company assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Company has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the City Council and the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service, or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the significant judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs and refunds to customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the City Council and the FERC, involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate setting process.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the City Council and the FERC included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of costs incurred as property, plant, and equipment and deferred as regulatory assets, and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets or liabilities; and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.
We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the City Council and the FERC for the Company and other public utilities, regulatory statutes, interpretations, procedural memorandums, filings made by intervenors, and other publicly available information to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the City Council’s and the FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated the external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.
For regulatory matters in process, we inspected the Company’s filings with the City Council and the FERC, including the base rate case filing, and considered the filings with the City Council and the FERC by intervenors that may impact the Company’s future rates, for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 2021

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2001.

401

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$560,632 $594,417 $624,733 
Natural gas73,209 91,806 92,657 
TOTAL633,841 686,223 717,390 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale76,781 105,217 114,787 
Purchased power243,572 258,306 270,634 
Other operation and maintenance125,756 121,057 124,293 
Taxes other than income taxes57,454 55,270 56,141 
Depreciation and amortization64,012 56,072 55,930 
Other regulatory charges - net1,854 21,616 21,413 
TOTAL569,429 617,538 643,198 
OPERATING INCOME64,412 68,685 74,192 
OTHER INCOME (DEDUCTIONS)   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction6,339 9,941 5,941 
Interest and investment income120 428 604 
Miscellaneous - net316 (6,038)(10,444)
TOTAL6,775 4,331 (3,899)
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense29,105 24,463 21,772 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(3,049)(4,262)(2,195)
TOTAL26,056 20,201 19,577 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES45,131 52,815 50,716 
Income taxes(4,207)186 (2,436)
NET INCOME$49,338 $52,629 $53,152 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   


402

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$49,338 $52,629 $53,152 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization64,012 56,072 55,930 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued3,938 21,350 24,548 
Changes in assets and liabilities:   
Receivables(12,003)(9,372)15,724 
Fuel inventory(58)(387)357 
Accounts payable5,582 (5,571)(385)
Taxes accrued398 234 30,547 
Interest accrued1,179 550 879 
Deferred fuel costs(7,048)3,630 (6,486)
Other working capital accounts(13,156)5,021 4,146 
Provisions for estimated losses1,356 1,948 1,511 
Other regulatory assets(7,427)(29,567)21,637 
Other regulatory liabilities(4,728)(22,105)(28,459)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities(14,063)(14,624)(15,134)
Other assets and liabilities(3,296)55,796 13,811 
Net cash flow provided by operating activities64,024 115,604 171,778 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(228,983)(229,560)(202,186)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction6,339 9,941 5,941 
Payment for purchase of assets(1,584)
Changes in money pool receivable - net5,191 16,825 (9,293)
Payments to storm reserve escrow account(433)(1,752)(1,311)
Receipts from storm reserve escrow account
Changes in securitization account(1,375)236 (770)
Net cash flow used in investing activities(220,845)(204,310)(207,616)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt138,925 113,876 59,234 
Retirement of long-term debt(56,593)(35,376)(11,042)
Repayment of long-term payable due to associated company(1,838)(1,979)(2,077)
Capital contributions from parent60,000 
Changes in money pool payable - net10,190 
Common equity distributions paid(23,750)
Other146 (1,475)409 
Net cash flow provided by financing activities150,830 75,046 22,774 
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents(5,991)(13,660)(13,064)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period6,017 19,677 32,741 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$26 $6,017 $19,677 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid (received) during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$26,673 $22,873 $19,840 
Income taxes$3,392 ($5,310)($39,781)
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

403

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents  
Cash$26 $26 
Temporary cash investments5,991 
Total cash and cash equivalents26 6,017 
Securitization recovery trust account3,364 1,989 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer70,694 48,265 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(17,430)(3,226)
Associated companies2,381 6,280 
Other4,248 7,378 
Accrued unbilled revenues31,069 25,453 
Total accounts receivable90,962 84,150 
Deferred fuel costs2,130 
Fuel inventory - at average cost1,978 1,920 
Materials and supplies - at average cost16,550 13,522 
Prepayments and other3,715 4,846 
TOTAL118,725 112,444 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Non-utility property at cost (less accumulated depreciation)1,016 1,016 
Storm reserve escrow account83,038 82,605 
TOTAL84,054 83,621 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric1,821,638 1,467,215 
Natural gas348,024 311,432 
Construction work in progress12,460 201,829 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT2,182,122 1,980,476 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization740,796 715,406 
UTILITY PLANT - NET1,441,326 1,265,070 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Deferred fuel costs4,080 4,080 
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $35,559 as of December 31, 2020 and $49,542 as of December 31, 2019)266,790 259,363 
Other23,931 10,720 
TOTAL294,801 274,163 
TOTAL ASSETS$1,938,906 $1,735,298 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

404

Table of Contents
ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$0 $25,000 
Payable due to associated company1,618 1,838 
Accounts payable:  
Associated companies54,234 43,222 
Other60,766 43,963 
Customer deposits27,912 28,493 
Taxes accrued4,700 4,302 
Interest accrued8,095 6,916 
Deferred fuel costs4,918 
Current portion of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes3,296 9,470 
Other5,462 15,827 
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES166,083 183,949 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued338,714 354,536 
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits16,095 2,131 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - net55,675 49,090 
Asset retirement cost liabilities3,768 3,522 
Accumulated provisions89,898 88,542 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $41,291 as of December 31, 2020 and $52,641 as of December 31, 2019)629,704 521,539 
Long-term payable due to associated company10,911 12,529 
Other21,141 21,881 
TOTAL NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES1,165,906 1,053,770 
Commitments and Contingencies00
EQUITY  
Member's equity606,917 497,579 
TOTAL606,917 497,579 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$1,938,906 $1,735,298 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

405

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN MEMBER'S EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
Members Equity
(In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2017$415,548 
Net income53,152 
Common equity distributions(23,750)
Balance at December 31, 2018$444,950 
Net income52,629 
Balance at December 31, 2019$497,579 
Net income49,338 
Capital contributions from parent60,000 
Balance at December 31, 2020$606,917 
See Notes to Financial Statements.

406

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON
 20202019201820172016
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$633,841 $686,223 $717,390 $716,070 $665,463 
Net income$49,338 $52,629 $53,152 $44,553 $48,849 
Total assets$1,938,906 $1,735,298 $1,576,588 $1,497,836 $1,494,569 
Long-term obligations (a)$640,615 $534,068 $481,725 $434,793 $466,670 
(a) Includes long-term debt (including the long-term payable to associated company and excluding currently maturing debt) and preferred stock without sinking fund.
 20202019201820172016
 (Dollars In Millions)
Electric Operating Revenues:     
Residential$244 $245 $262 $250 $231 
Commercial179 202 217 228 206 
Industrial24 32 33 36 33 
Governmental60 71 72 77 69 
Total billed retail507 550 584 591 539 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies— — — — 30 
Non-associated companies33 38 30 29 
Other21 11 12 15 
Total$561 $594 $625 $632 $587 
Billed Electric Energy Sales (GWh):    
Residential2,294 2,353 2,401 2,155 2,231 
Commercial1,975 2,215 2,270 2,248 2,268 
Industrial423 438 448 429 441 
Governmental755 815 795 790 794 
Total retail5,447 5,821 5,914 5,622 5,734 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies— — — — 1,071 
Non-associated companies1,969 1,961 1,484 1,703 141 
Total7,416 7,782 7,398 7,325 6,946 

407

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The COVID-19 Pandemic

See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta

In August 2020 and October 2020, Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta caused extensive damage to Entergy Texas’s service area. The storm resulted in widespread power outages, significant damage primarily to distribution and transmission infrastructure, and the loss of sales during the power outages. Total restoration costs for the repair and/or replacement of Entergy Texas’s electric facilities damaged by Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta are currently estimated to be approximately $300 million, including $245 million in capital costs and approximately $55 million in non-capital costs. Entergy Texas is considering all available avenues to recover storm-related costs from Hurricanes Laura and Hurricane Delta, including securitization. Storm cost recovery or financing will be subject to review by applicable regulatory authorities.

Entergy Texas recorded accounts payable and corresponding construction work in progress and regulatory assets for the estimated costs incurred that were necessary to return customers to service. Entergy Texas recorded the regulatory assets in accordance with its accounting policies and based on the historic treatment of such costs in its service area because management believes that recovery through some form of regulatory mechanism is probable. There are well established mechanisms and precedent for addressing these catastrophic events and providing for recovery of prudently incurred storm costs in accordance with applicable regulatory and legal principles. Because Entergy Texas has not gone through the regulatory process regarding these storm costs, there is an element of risk, and Entergy Texas is unable to predict with certainty the degree of success it may have in its recovery initiatives, the amount of restoration costs that it may ultimately recover, or the timing of such recovery.

February 2021 Winter Storms

See the “February 2021 Winter Storms” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the February 2021 winter storms. Entergy Texas’s preliminary estimate for the cost of mobilizing crews and restoring power is approximately $12 million. Natural gas purchases for Entergy Texas for February 1st through 25th, 2021 are approximately $155 million compared to natural gas purchases for February 2020 of $10 million.

Results of Operations

2020 Compared to 2019

Net Income

Net income increased $55.7 million primarily due to higher retail electric price, higher other income, lower other operation and maintenance expenses, a lower effective income tax rate, after excluding the effect of the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers which is offset in income taxes, and higher volume/weather. The increase was partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses.

408

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Operating Revenues

Following is an analysis of the change in operating revenue comparing 2020 to 2019.
Amount
(In Millions)
2019 operating revenues$1,489.0 
Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income4.4 
Return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers58.6 
Retail electric price28.1 
Volume/weather7.0 
2020 operating revenues$1,587.1

Entergy Texas’s results include revenues from rate mechanisms designed to recover fuel, purchased power, and other costs such that the revenues and expenses associated with these items generally offset and do not affect net income. “Fuel, rider, and other revenues that do not significantly affect net income” includes the revenue variance associated with these items.

The return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers resulted from the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes through a rider effective October 2018. In 2020, $28.8 million was returned to customers as compared to $87.4 million in 2019. There is no effect on net income as the reduction in operating revenues is offset by a reduction in income tax expense. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

The retail electric price variance is primarily due to an increase in the transmission cost recovery factor rider effective January 2020 and an increase in the distribution cost recovery factor rider effective October 2020. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the transmission and distribution cost recovery factor rider filings.

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase in usage during the unbilled sales period and an increase in billed residential usage as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential sales and decreased commercial and industrial usage as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The decrease in industrial usage is partially offset by an increase in demand from expansion projects, primarily in the chemicals and transportation industries. See “The COVID-19 Pandemic” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Other Income Statement Variances

Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to:

a decrease of $7.7 million in non-nuclear generation expenses primarily due to a lower scope of work performed during plant outages in 2020 as compared to the same period in 2019, including a delay in plant outages as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic; and
a decrease of $3.7 million primarily due to contract costs in 2019 related to initiatives to explore new customer products and services.

The decrease was partially offset by $2.3 million of transaction costs incurred in connection with the purchase of the Hardin County Peaking Facility and the partial sale of Montgomery County Power Station.
409

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to additions to plant in service.

Other income increased primarily due to an increase in the allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher construction work in progress in 2020, including the Montgomery County Power Station project.

The effective income tax rates were 1.4% for 2020 and (51.1%) for 2019. The difference in the effective income tax rates versus the federal statutory rate of 21% for 2020 and 2019 was primarily due to the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes. See Notes 2 and 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of the effects and regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory rate of 21% to the effective income tax rates.

2019 Compared to 2018

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of Entergy Texas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020, for discussion of results of operations for 2019 compared to 2018.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 were as follows:
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$12,929 $56 $115,513 
Net cash provided by (used in):   
Operating activities375,325 286,739 331,753 
Investing activities(848,648)(878,280)(395,973)
Financing activities708,990 604,414 (51,237)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents235,667 12,873 (115,457)
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$248,596 $12,929 $56 

2020 Compared to 2019

Operating Activities

Net cash flow provided by operating activities increased $88.6 million in 2020 compared to 2019 primarily due to the timing of recovery of fuel and purchased power costs and a decrease in the return of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes to customers. The increase was partially offset by lower collections of receivables from customers, in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and increased storm spending. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the regulatory activity regarding the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. See “Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta” above for discussion of hurricane restoration efforts.

410

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities decreased $29.6 million in 2020 primarily due to:

a decrease of $158.8 million in non-nuclear generation construction expenditures primarily due to the Montgomery County Power Station in 2020 as compared to 2019;
a decrease of $9.9 million in information technology capital expenditures primarily due to decreased spending on various technology projects; and
money pool activity.

The decrease was partially offset by:

an increase of $93.8 million in storm spending in 2020, primarily due to Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta restoration efforts. See “Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta” above for discussion of hurricane restoration efforts;
an increase of $43.9 million in distribution construction expenditures, primarily due to investment in the reliability and infrastructure of Entergy Texas’s distribution system, including increased spending on advanced metering infrastructure; and
an increase of $29.8 million in transmission construction expenditures primarily due to a higher scope of work performed in 2020 as compared to 2019.

Decreases in Entergy Texas’s receivable from the money pool are a source of cash flow, and Entergy Texas’s receivable from the money pool decreased by $6.6 million in 2020 compared to increasing $11.2 million in 2019. The money pool is an inter-company borrowing arrangement designed to reduce the Utility subsidiaries’ need for external short-term borrowings.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided by financing activities increased $104.6 million from 2020 compared to 2019 primarily due to:

the issuance of $600 million of 1.75% Series mortgage bonds in October 2020;
the repayment, at maturity, of $500 million of 7.125% Series mortgage bonds in February 2019;
the issuance of $175 million of 3.55% Series mortgage bonds in March 2020; and
money pool activity.

The increase was partially offset by:

the issuances of $300 million of 4.0% Series mortgage bonds and $400 million of 4.5% Series mortgage bonds, each in January 2019;
the issuance of $300 million of 3.55% Series mortgage bonds in September 2019;
the repayment of $135 million of 5.625% Series mortgage bonds in November 2020;
the issuance of $35 million aggregate liquidation value 5.375% Series A preferred stock in September 2019; and
the payment of $30 million of common stock dividends in 2020. No common stock dividends were paid in 2019 as a result of upcoming capital expenditures, including Montgomery County Power Station.

Decreases in Entergy Texas’s payable to the money pool are a use of cash flow, and Entergy Texas’s payable to the money pool decreased $22.4 million in 2019.

411

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

2019 Compared to 2018

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of Entergy Texas’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 2019 compared to 2018.

Capital Structure

Entergy Texas’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The increase in the debt to capital ratio for Entergy Texas is primarily due to the net issuance of $640 million of mortgage bonds in 2020, partially offset by the $175 million capital contribution received from Entergy Corporation in 2020 and net income in 2020.
 December 31,
2020
December 31,
2019
Debt to capital53.7 %51.7 %
Effect of excluding the securitization bonds(1.3 %)(2.8 %)
Debt to capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)52.4 %48.9 %
Effect of subtracting cash(2.7 %)(0.2 %)
Net debt to net capital, excluding securitization bonds (a)49.7 %48.7 %

(a)Calculation excludes the securitization bonds, which are non-recourse to Entergy Texas.

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents. Debt consists of finance lease obligations and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion. Capital consists of debt and equity. Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents. Entergy Texas uses the debt to capital ratios excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes they provide useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Texas’s financial condition because the securitization bonds are non-recourse to Entergy Texas, as more fully described in Note 5 to the financial statements. Entergy Texas also uses the net debt to net capital ratio excluding securitization bonds in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy Texas’s financial condition because net debt indicates Entergy Texas’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

Entergy Texas seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings. To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a dividend, or both, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure. To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments, Entergy Texas may issue incremental debt or reduce dividends, or both, to maintain its capital structure. In addition, Entergy Texas may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure for certain circumstances such as financing of large transactions that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reduced dividends.

Uses of Capital

Entergy Texas requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
debt maturities or retirements;
working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel and purchased power costs; and
dividend and interest payments.
412

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Following are the amounts of Entergy Texas’s planned construction and other capital investments.
 202120222023
 (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:  
Generation$95 $40 $490 
Transmission115 125 180 
Distribution245 285 295 
Utility Support55 75 50 
Total$510 $525 $1,015 

In addition to the planned spending in the table above, Entergy Texas also expects to pay for $180 million of capital investments in 2021 related to Hurricane Laura and Hurricane Delta restoration work that have been accrued as of December 31, 2020.

Following are the amounts of Entergy Texas’s existing debt and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments) and other purchase obligations.
 20212022-20232024-2025After 2025Total
 (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)$353 $207 $151 $2,163 $2,874 
Operating leases (b)$5 $7 $3 $1 $16 
Finance leases (b)$1 $2 $2 $1 $6 
Purchase obligations (c)$255 $384 $361 $294 $1,294 

(a)Includes estimated interest payments.  Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)Lease obligations are discussed in Note 10 to the financial statements.
(c)Purchase obligations represent the minimum purchase obligation or cancellation charge for contractual obligations to purchase goods or services.  For Entergy Texas, it primarily includes unconditional fuel and purchased power obligations.

In addition to the contractual obligations given above, Entergy Texas expects to contribute approximately $7 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $66 thousand to other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2021, although the 2021 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 2021 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021. See “Critical Accounting Estimates - Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Also in addition to the contractual obligations, Entergy Texas has $14.2 million of unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes and payments for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

In addition to routine capital spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate for Entergy Texas includes specific investments such as the Liberty County Power Station and the Hardin County Peaking Facility; transmission projects to enhance reliability, reduce congestion, and enable economic growth; distribution spending to enhance reliability and improve service to customers, including advanced meters and related investments; resource planning, including potential generation and renewables projects; system improvements; software and security; and other investments. Estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints and requirements,
413

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

environmental compliance, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, business restructuring, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital. Management provides more information on long-term debt in Note 5 to the financial statements.

As a subsidiary, Entergy Texas dividends its earnings to Entergy Corporation at a percentage determined monthly.

Liberty County Solar Facility

In September 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application seeking PUCT approval to amend Entergy Texas’s certificate of convenience and necessity to acquire the 100 MW Liberty County Solar Facility and a determination that Entergy Texas’s acquisition of the facility through a tax equity partnership is in the public interest. In its preliminary order, the PUCT determined that, in considering Entergy Texas’s application, it would not specifically address whether Entergy Texas’s use of a tax equity partnership is in the public interest. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing on the merits scheduled in April 2021. Closing is expected to occur in 2023.

Hardin County Peaking Facility

In April 2020, Entergy Texas and East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc. filed a joint report and application seeking PUCT approvals related to two transactions: (1) Entergy Texas’s acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility from East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.; and (2) Entergy Texas’s sale of a 7.55% partial interest in the Montgomery County Power Station to East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc. The two transactions, currently scheduled to close in April 2021 (pending PUCT approval), are interdependent. In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed an unopposed settlement agreement supporting approval of the transactions. Key provisions of the settlement include: Entergy Texas will propose to depreciate its investment in Hardin County Peaking Facility through the end of 2041; Entergy Texas’s recovery of its investment in Hardin County Peaking Facility will be capped at approximately $36 million; and Entergy Texas will not seek recovery of an acquisition adjustment, if any, or transaction costs for either transaction. The settlement is currently pending before the PUCT.

Sources of Capital

Entergy Texas’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand;
debt or preferred stock issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
capital contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Entergy Texas may refinance, redeem, or otherwise retire debt prior to maturity, to the extent market conditions and interest and dividend rates are favorable.

All debt and common and preferred stock issuances by Entergy Texas require prior regulatory approval. Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in its bond indenture and other agreements. Entergy Texas has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs.

Entergy Texas’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2020201920182017
(In Thousands)
$4,601$11,181($22,389)$44,903
414

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

Entergy Texas has a credit facility in the amount of $150 million scheduled to expire in September 2024. The credit facility includes fronting commitments for the issuance of letters of credit against $30 million of the borrowing capacity of the facility. As of December 31, 2020, there were no cash borrowings and $1.3 million of letters of credit outstanding under the credit facility. In addition, Entergy Texas is a party to an uncommitted letter of credit facility as a means to post collateral to support its obligations to MISO. As of December 31, 2020, $6.2 million in letters of credit were outstanding under Entergy Texas’s letter of credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the credit facilities.

Entergy Texas obtained authorizations from the FERC through July 2022 for short-term borrowings, not to exceed an aggregate amount of $200 million at any time outstanding, and long-term borrowings and security issuances. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy Texas’s short-term borrowing limits.

State and Local Rate Regulation and Fuel-Cost Recovery

The rates that Entergy Texas charges for its services significantly influence its financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. Entergy Texas is regulated and the rates charged to its customers are determined in regulatory proceedings. The PUCT, a governmental agency, is primarily responsible for approval of the rates charged to customers.

Filings with the PUCT

2018 Rate Case

In May 2018, Entergy Texas filed a base rate case with the PUCT seeking an increase in base rates and rider rates of approximately $166 million, of which $48 million is associated with moving costs currently being collected through riders into base rates such that the total incremental revenue requirement increase is approximately $118 million. The base rate case was based on a 12-month test year ending December 31, 2017. In addition, Entergy Texas included capital additions placed into service for the period of April 1, 2013 through December 31, 2017, as well as a post-test year adjustment to include capital additions placed in service by June 30, 2018.

In October 2018 the parties filed an unopposed settlement resolving all issues in the proceeding and a motion for interim rates effective for usage on and after October 17, 2018. The unopposed settlement reflects the following terms: a base rate increase of $53.2 million (net of costs realigned from riders and including updated depreciation rates), a $25 million refund to reflect the lower federal income tax rate applicable to Entergy Texas from January 25, 2018 through the date new rates are implemented, $6 million of capitalized skylining tree hazard costs will not be recovered from customers, $242.5 million of protected excess accumulated deferred income taxes, which includes a tax gross-up, will be returned to customers through base rates under the average rate assumption method over the lives of the associated assets, and $185.2 million of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes, which includes a tax gross-up, will be returned to customers through a rider. The unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes rider will include carrying charges and will be in effect over a period of 12 months for large customers and over a period of four years for other customers. The settlement also provides for the deferral of $24.5 million of costs associated with the remaining book value of the Neches and Sabine 2 plants, previously taken out of service, to be recovered over a ten-year period and the deferral of $20.5 million of costs associated with Hurricane Harvey to be recovered over a 12-year period, each beginning in October 2018. The settlement provides final resolution of all issues in the matter, including those related to the Tax Act. In October 2018 the ALJ granted the unopposed motion for interim rates to be effective for service rendered on or after October 17, 2018. In December 2018 the PUCT issued an order approving the unopposed settlement.

415

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Distribution Cost Recovery Factor (DCRF) Rider

In March 2019, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to set a new DCRF rider. The proposed new DCRF rider is designed to collect approximately $3.2 million annually from Entergy Texas’s retail customers based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018. In September 2019 the PUCT issued an order approving rates, which had been effective on an interim basis since June 2019, at the level proposed in Entergy Texas’s application.

In March 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The proposed rider is designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $23.6 million annually, or $20.4 million in incremental annual DCRF revenue beyond Entergy Texas’s then-effective DCRF rider, based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019. In May and June 2020 intervenors filed testimony recommending reductions in Entergy Texas’s annual revenue requirement of approximately $0.3 million and $4.1 million. The parties briefed the contested issues in this matter and a proposal for decision was issued in September 2020 recommending a $4.1 million revenue reduction related to non-Advanced Metering System meters included in the DCRF calculation. The parties filed exceptions to the proposal for decision and replies to those exceptions in September 2020. In October 2020 the PUCT issued a final order approving a $16.3 million incremental annual DCRF revenue increase.

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its DCRF rider. The proposed rider is designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $26.3 million annually, or $6.8 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s currently effective DCRF rider based on its capital invested in distribution between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2020. In February 2021 the administrative law judge with the State Office of Administrative Hearings approved Entergy Texas's agreed motion for interim rates, which will go into effect in March 2021. The administrative law judge also adopted a procedural schedule setting a hearing on the merits, if necessary, in April 2021.

Transmission Cost Recovery Factor (TCRF) Rider

In December 2018, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to set a new TCRF rider. The proposed new TCRF rider is designed to collect approximately $2.7 million annually from Entergy Texas’s retail customers based on its capital invested in transmission between January 1, 2018 and September 30, 2018. In April 2019 parties filed testimony proposing a load growth adjustment, which would fully offset Entergy Texas’s proposed TCRF revenue requirement. In July 2019 the PUCT granted Entergy Texas’s application as filed to begin recovery of the requested $2.7 million annual revenue requirement, rejecting opposing parties’ proposed adjustment; however, the PUCT found that the question of prudence of the actual investment costs should be determined in Entergy Texas’s next rate case similar to the procedure used for the costs recovered through the DCRF rider. In October 2019 the PUCT issued an order on a motion for rehearing, clarifying and affirming its prior order granting Entergy Texas’s application as filed. Also, in October 2019 a second motion for rehearing was filed, and Entergy Texas filed a response in opposition to the motion. The second motion for rehearing was overruled by operation of law. In December 2019, Texas Industrial Energy Consumers filed an appeal to the PUCT order in district court alleging that the PUCT erred in declining to apply a load growth adjustment.

In August 2019, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its TCRF rider. The amended TCRF rider is designed to collect approximately $19.4 million annually from Entergy Texas’s retail customers based on its capital invested in transmission between January 1, 2018 and June 30, 2019, which is $16.7 million in incremental annual revenue above the $2.7 million approved in the prior pending TCRF proceeding. In January 2020 the PUCT issued an order approving an unopposed settlement providing for recovery of the requested revenue requirement. Entergy Texas implemented the amended rider beginning with bills covering usage on and after January 23, 2020.

416

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT a request to amend its TCRF rider. The proposed rider is designed to collect from Entergy Texas’s retail customers approximately $51 million annually, or $31.6 million in incremental annual revenues beyond Entergy Texas’s currently effective TCRF rider based on its capital invested in transmission between July 1, 2019 and August 31, 2020. A procedural schedule was established with a hearing scheduled in March 2021. In February 2021, Entergy Texas filed an agreed motion to abate the procedural schedule, noting that the parties had reached a settlement in principle, and the administrative law judge granted the motion to abate.

Generation Cost Recovery Rider

In October 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application to establish a generation cost recovery rider with an initial annual revenue requirement of approximately $91 million to begin recovering a return of and on its capital investment in the Montgomery County Power Station through August 31, 2020. In December 2020, Entergy Texas filed an unopposed settlement supporting a generation cost recovery rider with an annual revenue requirement of approximately $86 million. The settlement revenue requirement is based on a depreciation rate intended to fully depreciate Montgomery County Power Station over 38 years and the removal of certain costs from Entergy Texas’s request. Under the settlement, Entergy Texas retains the right to propose a different depreciation rate and seek recovery of a majority of the costs removed from its request in its next base rate proceeding. On January 14, 2021, the PUCT approved the generation cost recovery rider settlement rates on an interim basis and abated the proceeding. Within 60 days of Montgomery County Power Station being placed in service on January 1, 2021, Entergy Texas will file to update its generation cost recovery rider to include investment in Montgomery County Power Station after August 31, 2020. The current estimated cost of Montgomery County Power Station, including transmission interconnection and network upgrades, is approximately $921 million. Of this investment, approximately $756 million is eligible to begin being recovered through the generation cost recovery rider. Entergy Texas will address recovery of the remainder of its Montgomery County Power Station investment through other rate mechanisms.

In December 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application to amend its generation cost recovery rider to reflect its acquisition of the Hardin County Peaking Facility, which is expected to close in April 2021.The initial generation cost recovery rider rates proposed in the application represent no change from the generation cost recovery rider rates to be established in Entergy Texas’s previous generation cost recovery rider proceeding.Once Entergy Texas has acquired the Hardin County Peaking Facility, its investment in the facility will be reflected in the updated filing to Entergy Texas’s application, which will be made within 60 days of the acquisition’s closing.

COVID-19 Orders

In March 2020 the PUCT authorized electric utilities to record as a regulatory asset expenses resulting from the effects of COVID-19.In future proceedings the PUCT will consider whether each utility's request for recovery of these regulatory assets is reasonable and necessary, the appropriate period of recovery, and any amount of carrying costs thereon.In March 2020 the PUCT ordered a moratorium on disconnections for nonpayment for all customer classes, but, in April 2020, revised the disconnect moratorium to apply only to residential customers.The PUCT allowed the moratorium to expire on June 13, 2020, but on July 17, 2020, the PUCT re-established the disconnect moratorium for residential customers until August 31, 2020.In January 2021, Entergy Texas resumed disconnections for customers with past-due balances that have not made payment arrangements. As of December 31, 2020, Entergy Texas recorded a regulatory asset of $12.9 million for costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fuel and Purchased Power Cost Recovery

Entergy Texas’s rate schedules include a fixed fuel factor to recover fuel and purchased power costs, including interest, not recovered in base rates.   Semi-annual revisions of the fixed fuel factor are made in March
417

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

and September based on the market price of natural gas and changes in fuel mix.  The amounts collected under Entergy Texas’s fixed fuel factor and any interim surcharge or refund are subject to fuel reconciliation proceedings before the PUCT. A fuel reconciliation is required to be filed at least once every three years and outside of a base rate case filing.

In December 2017, Entergy Texas filed an application for a fuel refund of approximately $30.5 million for the months of May 2017 through October 2017. Also in December 2017, the PUCT’s ALJ approved the refund on an interim basis. For most customers, the refunds flowed through bills January 2018 through March 2018. The fuel refund was approved by the PUCT in March 2018.

In September 2019, Entergy Texas filed an application to reconcile its fuel and purchased power costs for the period from April 2016 through March 2019. During the reconciliation period, Entergy Texas incurred approximately $1.6 billion in Texas jurisdictional eligible fuel and purchased power expenses, net of certain revenues credited to such expenses and other adjustments. Entergy Texas estimated an under-recovery balance of approximately $25.8 million, including interest, which Entergy Texas requested authority to carry over as the beginning balance for the subsequent reconciliation period beginning April 2019. In March 2020 an intervenor filed testimony proposing that the PUCT disallow: (1) $2 million in replacement power costs associated with generation outages during the reconciliation period; and (2) $24.4 million associated with the operation of the Spindletop natural gas storage facility during the reconciliation period. In April 2020, Entergy Texas filed rebuttal testimony refuting all points raised by the intervenor. In June 2020 the parties filed a stipulation and settlement agreement, which included a $1.2 million disallowance not associated with any particular issue raised by any party.The PUCT approved the settlement in August 2020.

In July 2020, Entergy Texas filed an application with the PUCT to implement an interim fuel refund of $25.5 million, including interest.Entergy Texas proposed that the interim fuel refund be implemented beginning with the first August 2020 billing cycle over a three-month period for smaller customers and in a lump sum amount in the billing month of August 2020 for transmission-level customers.The interim fuel refund was approved in July 2020, and Entergy Texas began refunds in August 2020.

In February 2021, Entergy Texas filed an application to implement a fuel refund for a cumulative over-recovery of approximately $75 million that is primarily attributable to settlements received by Entergy Texas from MISO related to Hurricane Laura. Entergy Texas planned to issue the refund over the period of March through August 2021. On February 22, 2021, Entergy Texas filed a motion to abate its fuel refund proceeding to assess how the February 2021 winter storm impacted Entergy Texas’s fuel over-recovery position.

Federal Regulation

See the “Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation– Federal Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of federal regulation.

Nuclear Matters

See the “Nuclear Matters” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of nuclear matters.

Industrial and Commercial Customers

Entergy Texas’s large industrial and commercial customers continually explore ways to reduce their energy costs. In particular, cogeneration is an option available to a portion of Entergy Texas’s industrial customer base. Entergy Texas responds by working with industrial and commercial customers and negotiating electric service contracts to provide, under existing rate schedules, competitive rates that match specific customer needs and load
418

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
profiles. Entergy Texas actively participates in economic development, customer retention, and reclamation activities to increase industrial and commercial demand, from both new and existing customers.

Environmental Risks

Entergy Texas’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters. Management believes that Entergy Texas is in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted in “Regulation of Entergy’s Business - Environmental Regulation” in Part I, Item 1. Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance costs cannot be precisely estimated.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of Entergy Texas’s financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Management has identified the following accounting policies and estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and the potential for future changes in the assumptions and measurements that could produce estimates that would have a material effect on the presentation of Entergy Texas’s financial position or results of operations.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

See “Utility Regulatory Accounting” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of accounting for the effects of rate regulation.

Impairment of Long-lived Assets

See “Impairment of Long-lived Assets” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates associated with the impairment of long-lived assets.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

See “Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Entergy Texas’s qualified pension and other postretirement reported costs, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are impacted by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms.   See the “Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries’ Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion. Because of the complexity of these calculations, the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate.

Cost Sensitivity

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension and qualified projected benefit obligation cost to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
419

Table of Contents
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Actuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2020 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
  Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rate(0.25%)$472$9,960
Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$772$—
Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$388$1,916

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefit cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Postretirement Benefit CostImpact on 2020 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
  Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rate(0.25%)$49$2,206
Health care cost trend0.25%$76$1,593

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Costs and Employer Contributions

Total qualified pension cost for Entergy Texas in 2020 was $12.4 million, including $4.3 million in settlement costs. Entergy Texas anticipates 2021 qualified pension cost to be $8.9 million. Entergy Texas contributed $5 million to its qualified pension plans in 2020 and estimates 2021 pension contributions will be approximately $7 million, although the 2021 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 2021 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.

Total postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income for Entergy Texas in 2020 was $8.9 million. Entergy Texas expects 2020 postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income to approximate $10.9 million. In 2020, Entergy Texas’ postretirement contributions (that is, contributions to the external trusts plus claims payments) were $690 thousand. Entergy Texas estimates 2021 contributions will be approximately $66 thousand.

Other Contingencies

See “Other Contingencies” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the estimates associated with environmental, litigation, and other risks.

New Accounting Pronouncements

See “New Accounting Pronouncements” section of Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements.

420

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the shareholders and Board of Directors of
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows, and changes in common equity (pages 423 through 428 and applicable items in pages 51 through 238), for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matter

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current-period audit of the financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

Rate and Regulatory Matters —Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries — Refer to Note 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company is subject to rate regulation by the Public Utility Commission of Texas (the “PUCT”), which has jurisdiction with respect to the rates of electric companies in Texas, and to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures.

421432

Table of Contents
regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures, such as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets and liabilities; income taxes; operating revenues; operation and maintenance expense; and depreciation and amortization expense.

The Company’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the PUCT and the FERC set the rates the Company is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable return on equity, the Company applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Company assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Company has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the PUCT and the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service, or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the significant judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs and refunds to customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the PUCT and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate setting process.process due to its inherent complexities and auditor judgment to evaluate management estimates and the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the PUCT and the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of costs incurred as property, plant, and equipment and deferred as regulatory assets, and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets or liabilities;liabilities and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.
We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the PUCT and the FERC for the Company and other public utilities, regulatory statutes, interpretations, procedural memorandums, filings made by intervenors, and other publicly available information to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the PUCT’s and the FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated the external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.
For regulatory matters in process, we inspected the Company’s filings with the PUCT and the FERC including the base rate case filing,and orders issued, and considered the filings with the PUCT and the FERC by intervenors that may impact the Company’s future rates, for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.
We obtained representation from management regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery, refund, or a future reduction in rates.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2001.

422433

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$1,587,125 $1,488,955 $1,605,902 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale238,428 162,544 204,830 
Purchased power510,633 602,563 614,012 
Other operation and maintenance250,170 258,924 238,400 
Taxes other than income taxes72,909 76,366 82,033 
Depreciation and amortization177,738 153,286 128,534 
Other regulatory charges - net90,398 88,770 131,667 
TOTAL1,340,276 1,342,453 1,399,476 
OPERATING INCOME246,849 146,502 206,426 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction44,073 28,445 9,723 
Interest and investment income1,201 3,072 2,188 
Miscellaneous - net(28)546 (655)
TOTAL45,246 32,063 11,256 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense92,920 86,333 87,203 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(18,940)(13,269)(5,513)
TOTAL73,980 73,064 81,690 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES218,115 105,501 135,992 
Income taxes3,042 (53,896)(26,243)
NET INCOME215,073 159,397 162,235 
Preferred dividend requirements1,882 580 
EARNINGS APPLICABLE TO COMMON STOCK$213,191 $158,817 $162,235 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$2,028,586 $2,288,905 $1,902,511 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale403,111 443,765 335,742 
Purchased power468,511 717,501 588,941 
Other operation and maintenance323,797 312,340 281,713 
Taxes other than income taxes117,852 101,673 94,989 
Depreciation and amortization278,311 230,692 214,838 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net7,324 49,175 59,581 
TOTAL1,598,906 1,855,146 1,575,804 
OPERATING INCOME429,680 433,759 326,707 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction28,193 13,527 9,892 
Interest and investment income11,116 4,141 837 
Miscellaneous - net(10,411)(6,572)721 
TOTAL28,898 11,096 11,450 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense114,978 95,454 87,787 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(10,545)(4,547)(3,980)
TOTAL104,433 90,907 83,807 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES354,145 353,948 254,350 
Income taxes62,872 50,621 25,526 
NET INCOME291,273 303,327 228,824 
Preferred dividend requirements2,072 2,072 1,909 
EARNINGS APPLICABLE TO COMMON STOCK$289,201 $301,255 $226,915 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
423

Table of Contents

























(Page left blank intentionally)

424434

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$215,073 $159,397 $162,235 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization177,738 153,286 128,534 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued36,033 20,143 (39,545)
Changes in assets and liabilities:   
Receivables(30,082)58,445 (17,099)
Fuel inventory(5,938)(4,926)64 
Accounts payable(23,692)(33,646)43,319 
Prepaid taxes and taxes accrued2,730 (3,805)7,854 
Interest accrued1,864 (5,363)(1,201)
Deferred fuel costs72,355 (6,696)(47,604)
Other working capital accounts(11,837)(13,822)1,328 
Provisions for estimated losses274 (5,748)3,741 
Other regulatory assets(12,065)85,400 63,350 
Other regulatory liabilities(57,477)(105,517)(19,336)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities(28,825)(7,152)(13,135)
Other assets and liabilities39,174 (3,257)59,248 
Net cash flow provided by operating activities375,325 286,739 331,753 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(895,857)(898,090)(451,988)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction44,073 28,526 9,861 
Proceeds from sale of assets3,753 
Payment for purchase of assets(4,931)
Changes in money pool receivable - net6,580 (11,181)44,903 
Changes in securitization account1,487 2,465 (2,502)
Net cash flow used in investing activities(848,648)(878,280)(395,973)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt937,725 986,019 
Retirement of long-term debt(367,565)(578,593)(74,950)
Capital contributions from parent175,000 185,000 
Proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock33,188 
Change in money pool payable - net(22,389)22,389 
Dividends paid:   
Common stock(30,000)
Preferred stock(2,064)
Other(4,106)1,189 1,324 
Net cash flow provided by (used in) financing activities708,990 604,414 (51,237)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents235,667 12,873 (115,457)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period12,929 56 115,513 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$248,596 $12,929 $56 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$89,077 $89,402 $85,719 
Income taxes$2,792 $17,010 $20,787 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$291,273 $303,327 $228,824 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization278,311 230,692 214,838 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued53,507 41,648 48,813 
Changes in assets and liabilities:   
Receivables24,249 (35,131)(16,455)
Fuel inventory(24,097)15,962 10,819 
Accounts payable(22,046)48,199 (5,718)
Taxes accrued(14,146)44,015 (3,420)
Interest accrued7,357 4,926 (1,854)
Deferred fuel costs119,096 (209,835)(133,636)
Other working capital accounts(36,097)(19,574)(12,105)
Provisions for estimated losses1,887 (649)(140)
Other regulatory assets(17,924)(157,349)103,380 
Other regulatory liabilities(20,122)(30,499)(28,747)
Effect of securitization on regulatory asset— 153,383 — 
Pension and other postretirement liabilities(36,131)20,656 (42,502)
Other assets and liabilities36,574 (344)(5,164)
Net cash flow provided by operating activities641,691 409,427 356,933 
INVESTING ACTIVITIES   
Construction expenditures(946,543)(696,879)(702,754)
Allowance for equity funds used during construction28,193 13,527 9,892 
Proceeds from sale of assets11,000 — 67,920 
Payment for purchase of assets— — (36,534)
Litigation proceeds from settlement agreement— 4,134 — 
Changes in money pool receivable - net(218,414)(99,468)4,601 
Changes in securitization account5,684 15,750 9,604 
Increase in other investments(5,868)(1,133)— 
Net cash flow used in investing activities(1,125,948)(764,069)(647,271)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES   
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt344,895 606,168 127,931 
Retirement of long-term debt(17,835)(66,514)(269,435)
Capital contributions from parent150,000 — 95,000 
Proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock— — 3,713 
Changes in money pool payable - net— (79,594)79,594 
Dividends paid:   
Common stock— (105,000)— 
Preferred stock(2,072)(2,060)(1,881)
Other27,758 5,111 6,848 
Net cash flow provided by financing activities502,746 358,111 41,770 
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents18,489 3,469 (248,568)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period3,497 28 248,596 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period$21,986 $3,497 $28 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   
Cash paid during the period for:   
Interest - net of amount capitalized$104,766 $87,682 $87,094 
Income taxes$28,969 $1,864 $17,594 
Noncash investing activities:
Accrued construction expenditures$257,467 $68,893 $73,105 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
425435

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$26 $25 
Temporary cash investments248,570 12,904 
Total cash and cash equivalents248,596 12,929 
Securitization recovery trust account36,233 37,720 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer103,221 59,365 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(16,810)(471)
Associated companies18,892 24,001 
Other11,780 17,050 
Accrued unbilled revenues56,411 50,048 
Total accounts receivable173,494 149,993 
Fuel inventory - at average cost53,531 47,593 
Materials and supplies - at average cost56,227 46,056 
Prepayments and other20,165 21,012 
TOTAL588,246 315,303 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Investments in affiliates - at equity349 396 
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)376 376 
Other19,889 20,077 
TOTAL20,614 20,849 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric6,007,687 5,199,027 
Construction work in progress879,908 760,354 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT6,887,595 5,959,381 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization1,864,494 1,770,852 
UTILITY PLANT - NET5,023,101 4,188,529 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $78,590 as of December 31, 2020 and $160,375 as of December 31, 2019)524,713 512,648 
Other70,397 33,393 
TOTAL595,110 546,041 
TOTAL ASSETS$6,227,071 $5,070,722 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$1,497 $500 
Temporary cash investments20,489 2,997 
Total cash and cash equivalents21,986 3,497 
Securitization recovery trust account5,195 10,879 
Accounts receivable:  
Customer88,468 115,955 
Allowance for doubtful accounts(1,484)(2,352)
Associated companies329,941 115,549 
Other24,416 21,587 
Accrued unbilled revenues72,771 69,208 
Total accounts receivable514,112 319,947 
Deferred fuel costs139,019 258,115 
Fuel inventory - at average cost50,847 26,750 
Materials and supplies - at average cost123,020 93,031 
Prepayments and other35,232 20,568 
TOTAL889,411 732,787 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Investments in affiliates - at equity214 250 
Non-utility property - at cost (less accumulated depreciation)376 376 
Other15,068 18,975 
TOTAL15,658 19,601 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric7,931,340 7,409,461 
Construction work in progress857,707 339,139 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT8,789,047 7,748,600 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization2,363,919 2,135,400 
UTILITY PLANT - NET6,425,128 5,613,200 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets (includes securitization property of $250,324 as of December 31, 2023 and $269,523 as of December 31, 2022)596,606 578,682 
Other129,769 99,694 
TOTAL726,375 678,376 
TOTAL ASSETS$8,056,572 $7,043,964 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
426436

Table of Contents
ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETSCONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETSCONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITYLIABILITIES AND EQUITYLIABILITIES AND EQUITY
December 31,
20202019
(In Thousands)December 31,
20232022
(In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIESCURRENT LIABILITIES  
Currently maturing long-term debt$200,000 $0 
CURRENT LIABILITIES
CURRENT LIABILITIES  
Accounts payable:
Accounts payable:
Accounts payable:Accounts payable:   
Associated companiesAssociated companies55,944 58,055 
OtherOther350,947 188,460 
Customer depositsCustomer deposits36,282 40,232 
Taxes accruedTaxes accrued52,438 49,708 
Interest accruedInterest accrued20,856 18,992 
Current portion of unprotected excess accumulated deferred income taxes29,249 26,552 
Deferred fuel costs85,356 13,001 
Other
Other
OtherOther12,370 10,521 
TOTALTOTAL843,442 405,521 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIESNON-CURRENT LIABILITIES   
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accruedAccumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued639,422 585,413 
Accumulated deferred investment tax creditsAccumulated deferred investment tax credits9,942 10,559 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - netRegulatory liability for income taxes - net175,594 225,980 
Other regulatory liabilitiesOther regulatory liabilities32,297 42,085 
Asset retirement cost liabilitiesAsset retirement cost liabilities8,063 7,631 
Accumulated provisionsAccumulated provisions8,382 8,108 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $123,066 as of December 31, 2020 and $205,349 as of December 31, 2019)2,293,708 1,922,956 
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $257,592 as of December 31, 2023 and $275,064 as of December 31, 2022)
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $257,592 as of December 31, 2023 and $275,064 as of December 31, 2022)
Long-term debt (includes securitization bonds of $257,592 as of December 31, 2023 and $275,064 as of December 31, 2022)
OtherOther58,643 63,062 
TOTALTOTAL3,226,051 2,865,794 
Commitments and ContingenciesCommitments and Contingencies00
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies
EQUITYEQUITY  
Common stock, no par value, authorized 200,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding 46,525,000 shares in 2020 and 201949,452 49,452 
EQUITY
EQUITY 
Common stock, no par value, authorized 200,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding 46,525,000 shares in 2023 and 2022
Paid-in capitalPaid-in capital955,162 780,182 
Retained earningsRetained earnings1,117,964 934,773 
Total common shareholder's equityTotal common shareholder's equity2,122,578 1,764,407 
Preferred stock without sinking fundPreferred stock without sinking fund35,000 35,000 
TOTALTOTAL2,157,578 1,799,407 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITYTOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$6,227,071 $5,070,722 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
See Notes to Financial Statements.See Notes to Financial Statements.  
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements. 

427437

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITYCONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITYCONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
Common Equity 
Preferred StockCommon StockPaid-in CapitalRetained EarningsTotal
(In Thousands)Common Equity 
Preferred StockCommon StockPaid-in CapitalRetained EarningsTotal
Balance at December 31, 2017$0 $49,452 $596,994 $613,721 $1,260,167 
Net income162,235 162,235 
Balance at December 31, 2018$0 $49,452 $596,994 $775,956 $1,422,402 
(In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2020
Balance at December 31, 2020
Balance at December 31, 2020
Net incomeNet income159,397 159,397 
Capital contributions from parentCapital contributions from parent0185,000 185,000 
Preferred stock issuance
Preferred stock issuance
Preferred stock issuancePreferred stock issuance35,000 (1,812)33,188 
Preferred stock dividendsPreferred stock dividends(580)(580)
Balance at December 31, 2019$35,000 $49,452 $780,182 $934,773 $1,799,407 
Balance at December 31, 2021
Balance at December 31, 2021
Balance at December 31, 2021
Net income
Common stock dividends
Common stock dividends
Common stock dividends
Preferred stock dividends
Preferred stock dividends
Preferred stock dividends
Balance at December 31, 2022
Balance at December 31, 2022
Balance at December 31, 2022
Net incomeNet income215,073 215,073 
Capital contributions from parentCapital contributions from parent175,000 175,000 
Common stock dividends(30,000)(30,000)
Preferred stock dividendsPreferred stock dividends(1,882)(1,882)
Other(20)(20)
Balance at December 31, 2020$35,000 $49,452 $955,162 $1,117,964 $2,157,578 
Preferred stock dividends
Preferred stock dividends
Balance at December 31, 2023
Balance at December 31, 2023
Balance at December 31, 2023
See Notes to Financial Statements.See Notes to Financial Statements.   
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements.

428438

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON
 20202019201820172016
 (In Thousands)
Operating revenues$1,587,125 $1,488,955 $1,605,902 $1,544,893 $1,615,619 
Net income$215,073 $159,397 $162,235 $76,173 $107,538 
Total assets$6,227,071 $5,070,722 $4,400,020 $4,279,738 $4,033,081 
Long-term obligations (a)$2,293,708 $1,922,956 $1,013,735 $1,587,150 $1,508,407 
(a) Includes long-term debt (excluding currently maturing debt).
 20202019201820172016
 (Dollars In Millions)
Electric Operating Revenues:     
Residential$672 $658 $674 $636 $613 
Commercial365 343 381 378 356 
Industrial386 373 394 384 365 
Governmental23 22 25 25 24 
Total billed retail1,446 1,396 1,474 1,423 1,358 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies40 52 59 58 178 
Non-associated companies60 39 22 40 
Other41 34 34 42 40 
Total$1,587 $1,489 $1,606 $1,545 $1,616 
Billed Electric Energy Sales (GWh):    
Residential6,146 6,039 6,135 5,716 5,836 
Commercial4,386 4,667 4,747 4,548 4,570 
Industrial7,885 8,043 8,052 7,521 7,493 
Governmental260 259 286 273 283 
Total retail18,677 19,008 19,220 18,058 18,182 
Sales for resale:     
Associated companies1,203 1,472 1,516 1,534 4,625 
Non-associated companies810 343 962 729 1,086 
Total20,690 20,823 21,698 20,321 23,893 

429

Table of Contents

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.

MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

System Energy’s principal asset consists of an ownership interest and a leasehold interest in Grand Gulf.  The capacity and energy from its 90% interest is sold under the Unit Power Sales Agreement to its only four customers, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.  System Energy’s operating revenues are derived from the allocation of the capacity, energy, and related costs associated with its 90% interest in Grand Gulf pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement.  Payments under the Unit Power Sales Agreement are System Energy’s only source of operating revenues. As discussed in “Complaints Against System Energy” below, System Energy isand the Unit Power Sales Agreement are currently involved inthe subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC commenced by(or on appeal from the retail regulatorsFERC to the United States Court of its customers regarding its return on equity, its capital structure, its renewal ofAppeals for the sale-leaseback of 11.5% of Grand Gulf, the treatment of uncertain tax positions in rate base, and the rates it charges under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.Fifth Circuit).

Results of Operations

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Net Income

NetSystem Energy had net income remained relatively unchanged. Anof $108.8 million in 2023 compared to a net loss of $276.6 million in 2022 primarily due to a regulatory charge of $551 million ($413 million net-of-tax) recorded in second quarter 2022 to reflect the effects of the partial settlement agreement and offer of settlement related to pending proceedings before the FERC. The increase in operating revenues resulting from changes in rate base was substantiallypartially offset by higher provisions against revenue, as comparedthe disallowance of the recovery of sale-leaseback lease renewal costs from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans per the December 2022 FERC order related to prior year. A provision forthe Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint and the lower authorized rate refund was recorded in 2020 to reflect a one-time credit of $25.2 million provided for in the Federal Power Act section 205 filing made by System Energy in December 2020. Provisions against revenue were recorded in 2019 in connection with the return on equity complaint against System Energy.and capital structure limitations on monthly bills issued to Entergy Mississippi per the June 2022 settlement agreement with the MPSC. See Complaints Against System Energy” belowNote 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of these itemsthe partial settlement agreement with the MPSC and other proceedings involving System Energy atdiscussion of the FERC. The one-time credit is discussed in the Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue part of that section. The return on equity complaint is discussed in the Return on Equity and Capital Structure Complaints part of that section.sale-leaseback renewal complaint.

Income Taxes

The effective income tax rates were 17.2%22.7% for 20202023 and 13.4%25.1% for 2019.2022. See Note 3 to the financial statements for a reconciliation of the federal statutory rate of 21% to the effective income tax rates.rates and for additional discussion regarding income taxes.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Results of Operations” in Item 7 of System Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019,2022, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020,24, 2023, for discussion of results of operations for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

Income Tax Legislation and Regulation

See the “Income Tax Legislation and Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of income tax legislation and regulation.

430439

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow

Cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 20182021 were as follows:
202020192018 202320222021
(In Thousands) (In Thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of periodCash and cash equivalents at beginning of period$68,534 $95,685 $287,187 
Net cash provided by (used in):Net cash provided by (used in):
Net cash provided by (used in):
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities
Operating activities
Operating activitiesOperating activities(145,462)300,141 101,328 
Investing activitiesInvesting activities(206,443)(119,553)(286,161)
Financing activitiesFinancing activities525,840 (207,739)(6,669)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents173,935 (27,151)(191,502)
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents at end of periodCash and cash equivalents at end of period$242,469 $68,534 $95,685 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

20202023 Compared to 20192022

Operating Activities

System Energy’sNet cash flow provided by operating activities used $145.5increased $266.3 million of cash in 2020 compared to providing $300.1 million of cash in 20192023 primarily due to:

an increasethe refund of $382$235 million to Entergy Mississippi in 2022 as a result of the settlement with the MPSC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the settlement agreement with the MPSC;
$40.5 million in recoupment payments received from Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans in October 2023 related to the sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation as calculated in System Energy’s October 2023 compliance filing with the FERC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint;
income taxes paidtax refunds of $19.8 million in 2020.2023 as compared to income tax payments of $18.4 million in 2022. System Energy received income tax refunds in 2023 and made income tax payments of $384.3 million in 20202022, each in accordance with an intercompany income tax allocation agreement. The 2020 income tax payments are primarily related to the resolution of the 2014-2015 IRS audit regarding the treatment of nuclear decommissioning costs included in cost of goods sold, which is discussed in Note 3 to the financial statements in Tax Accounting Methods;agreement;
an increasea decrease in spending of $34.9$36.4 million on nuclear refueling outagesoutage costs in 20202023 as compared to prior year;2022; and
timinga decrease of payments to vendors.

The increase$13.1 million in cash used was offset by proceeds of $35 million receivedpension contributions in December 2020 from the DOE resulting from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously expensed.2023. See Critical Accounting Estimates– Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 811 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

The increase was partially offset by:

aggregate refunds of $103.5 million made in January 2023 related to the spent nuclear fuel litigation.sale-leaseback renewal costs and depreciation litigation as calculated in System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report filed with the FERC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for further discussion of the refunds and the related proceedings;
refunds of $41.8 million included in September 2023 service month bills under the Unit Power Sales Agreement to reflect the revenue requirement effects of Grand Gulf’s updated depreciation rates as approved by the FERC in August 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the Unit Power Sales Agreement depreciation amendment proceeding; and
refunds of $19.3 million included in May 2023 service month bills under the Unit Power Sales Agreement to reflect the effects of the partial settlement agreement approved by the FERC in April 2023. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the Unit Power Sales Agreement complaint.
440

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


Investing Activities

Net cash flow used in investing activities increaseddecreased by $86.9$188.4 million in 20202023 primarily due to:

an increasemoney pool activity;
a decrease of $77.2$43.4 million as a result of fluctuations in nuclear fuel activity because of variations from year to year in the timing and pricing of fuel reload requirements, material and services deliveries, and the timing of cash payments during the nuclear fuel cycle; and
an increasea decrease of $28$41.8 million in nuclear construction expenditures as a result ofprimarily due to higher spending in 20202022 on Grand Gulf outage projects.

The increase was partially offset by money pool activityprojects and proceeds of $5.5 million received in December 2020 from the DOE resulting from litigation regarding spent nuclear fuel storage costs that were previously capitalized. See Note 8 to the financial statements for discussion of the spent nuclear fuel litigation.
431

Table of Contentsupgrades.
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Decreases in System Energy’s receivable from the money pool are a source of cash flow, and System Energy’s receivable from the money pool decreased by $55.3$95 million in 20202023 compared to decreasingincreasing by $47.8$19.2 million in 2019.2022. The money pool is an inter-companyintercompany cash management program that makes possible intercompany borrowing arrangementand lending arrangements, and the money pool and other borrowing arrangements are designed to reduce the Utility subsidiaries’ need forRegistrant Subsidiaries’ dependence on external short-term borrowings.

Financing Activities

System Energy’s financing activities provided $525.8used $200.6 million of cash in 20202023 compared to using $207.7providing $170.6 million of cash in 20192022 primarily due to the following activity:

a $350the repayment, at maturity, of $250 million capital contribution from Entergy Corporationof 4.10% Series mortgage bonds in April 2023;
$170 million in common stock dividends and distributions paid in 2023. No common stock dividends or distributions were made in 2022 in order to maintain System Energy’s capital structure and in conjunctionanticipation of the settlement with the tax payments discussedMPSC. See Note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the settlement with the MPSC;
a $135 million capital contribution from Entergy Corporation in “Operating Activities”;2022 primarily to fund the settlement payment to Entergy Mississippi;
the issuance of a $50 million term loan in December 2020 of $200 million of 2.14% Series mortgage bonds;May 2022, which was repaid, prior to maturity, in March 2023;
the issuance in October 2020 of $90 million of 2.05% Series K notes by the System Energy nuclear fuel company variable interest entity;
a decrease in net repayments of $50.7$51.1 million ofin 2023 as compared to net long-term borrowings of $36.5 million in 20202022 on the nuclear fuel company variable interest entity’s credit facility;facilities;
the repayment, at maturity, of $50.3 million of 2.5% Series governmental bonds in April 2022; and
a decreasethe issuance of $43.6$325 million of 6.00% Series mortgage bonds in common stock dividends and distributions in 2020 in order to maintain System Energy’s capital structure.March 2023.

See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional details of long-term debt.

20192022 Compared to 20182021

See “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Cash Flow” in Item 7 of System Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019,2022, filed with the SEC on February 21, 2020,24, 2023, for discussion of operating, investing, and financing cash flow activities for 20192022 compared to 2018.2021.

441

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Capital Structure

System Energy’s debt to capital ratio is shown in the following table. The decrease in the debt to capital ratio is primarily due to the capital contribution from Entergy Corporation, partially offset by the issuance of long-term debt in 2020.
December 31,
2020
December 31,
2019
December 31,
2023
December 31,
2022
Debt to capitalDebt to capital42.7 %43.5 %Debt to capital45.4 %45.0 %
Effect of subtracting cashEffect of subtracting cash(8.5 %)(3.3 %)Effect of subtracting cash— %(0.1 %)
Net debt to net capital34.2 %40.2 %
Net debt to net capital (non-GAAP)Net debt to net capital (non-GAAP)45.4 %44.9 %

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents.  Debt consists of short-term borrowings and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion.  Capital consists of debt and common equity.  Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents.  System Energy uses the debt to capital ratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating System Energy’s financial condition.  The net debt to net capital ratio is a non-GAAP measure. System Energy uses the net debt to net capital ratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating System Energy’s financial condition because net debt indicates System Energy’s outstanding debt position that could not be readily satisfied by cash and cash equivalents on hand.

432

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

System Energy seeks to optimize its capital structure in accordance with its regulatory requirements and to control its cost of capital while also maintaining equity capitalization at a level consistent with investment-grade debt ratings. To the extent that operating cash flows are in excess of planned investments, cash may be used to reduce outstanding debt or may be paid as a dividend or a capital distribution, to the extent funds are legally available to do so, or a combination of the three, in appropriate amounts to maintain the capital structure.  To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to support planned investments and other uses of cash such as the payment of expenses in the ordinary course, System Energy may issue incremental debt or reduce dividends, or both, to maintain its capital structure. In addition, System Energy may receive equity contributions to maintain its capital structure for certain circumstances that would materially alter the capital structure if financed entirely with debt and reduced dividends.

Uses of Capital

System Energy requires capital resources for:

construction and other capital investments;
debt maturities or retirements;
working capital purposes, including the financing of fuel costs and tax payments; and
dividend, distribution, and interest payments.

Following are the amounts of System Energy’s planned construction and other capital investments.
202120222023 202420252026
(In Millions) (In Millions)
Planned construction and capital investment:Planned construction and capital investment:  Planned construction and capital investment:  
GenerationGeneration$90 $145 $140 
Utility SupportUtility Support15 10 15 
TotalTotal$105 $155 $155 

In addition to routine spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate includes amounts associated with Grand Gulf investments and initiatives.

442

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Following are the amounts of System Energy’s existing debt and lease obligations (includes estimated interest payments) and other purchase obligations..
 20212022-20232024-2025After 2025Total
 (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)$138 $444 $246 $299 $1,127 
Purchase obligations (b)$6 $53 $47 $40 $146 
 2024202520262027-2028After 2028
 (In Millions)
Long-term debt (a)$46 $266 $41 $479 $252 

(a)Includes estimated interest payments.  Long-term debt is discussed in Note 5 to the financial statements.
(b)
Purchase obligations represent the minimum purchase obligation or cancellation charge for contractual obligations to purchase goods or services. For System Energy, it includes nuclear fuel purchase obligations.
Other Obligations

In addition to the contractual obligations given above, System Energy expects to contribute approximately $18.7$16.7 million to its qualified pension plans and approximately $22$34 thousand to other postretirement health care and life insurance plans in 2021,2024, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024, valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024. See “Critical Accounting Estimates – Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” below and Note 11 to the financial statements for a discussion of qualified pension and other postretirement benefits funding.

Also in addition to the contractual obligations, System Energy has $14.2 million ofno unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes and payments for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions.  See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

433

Table of Contents
In addition, System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
In additionenters into nuclear fuel purchase agreements that contain minimum purchase obligations. As discussed in Note 8 to routine spending to maintain operations, the planned capital investment estimate includes specific Grand Gulf investments and initiatives.financial statements, System Energy recovers these costs through charges under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

As a wholly-owned subsidiary, System Energy dividends its earnings to Entergy Corporation at a percentage determined monthly.

Sources of Capital

System Energy’s sources to meet its capital requirements include:

internally generated funds;
cash on hand;
the Entergy system money pool;
debt issuances, including debt issuances to refund or retire currently outstanding or maturing indebtedness;
equity contributions; and
bank financing under new or existing facilities.

Circumstances such fuel and purchased power price fluctuations and unanticipated expenses, including unscheduled plant outages, could affect the timing and level of internally generated funds in the future. In addition to the financings necessary to meet capital requirements and contractual obligations, System Energy may refinance, redeem, or otherwiseexpects to continue, when economically feasible, to retire higher-cost debt prior to maturity, to the extentand replace it with lower-cost debt if market conditions and interest rates are favorable.permit.

All debt issuances by System Energy require prior regulatory approval.  Debt issuances are also subject to issuance tests set forth in its bond indenture and other agreements.  System Energy has sufficient capacity under these tests to meet its foreseeable capital needs.needs for the next twelve months and beyond.

443

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
System Energy’s receivables from or (payables to) the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years.
2020201920182017
(In Thousands)
$4,004$59,298$107,122$111,667
2023202220212020
(In Thousands)
($12,246)$94,981$75,745$4,004

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

The System Energy nuclear fuel company variable interest entity has a credit facility in the amount of $120 million scheduled to expire in September 2022.June 2025. As of December 31, 2020, no2023, $21.5 million in loans were outstanding under the System Energy nuclear fuel company variable interest entity credit facility. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the variable interest entity credit facility.

System Energy obtained authorizations from the FERC through July 14, 2022March 2025 for the following:

short-term borrowings not to exceed an aggregate amount of $200 million at any time outstanding;
long-term borrowings and security issuances;issuances not to exceed an aggregate amount of $1.3 billion at any time outstanding; and
borrowings by its nuclear fuel company variable interest entity.

See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of System Energy’s short-term borrowing limits.

Federal Regulation

See the “Rate, Cost-recovery, and Other Regulation – Federal Regulation” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of federal regulation.

Complaints Against System Energy

System Energy’s operating revenues are derived from the allocation of the capacity, energy, and related costs associated with its 90% ownership/leasehold interest in Grand Gulf.  System Energy sells its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans pursuant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. System Energy and the Unit Power Sales Agreement are currently the subject of several litigation proceedings at the FERC (or on appeal from the FERC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit), including challenges with respect to System Energy’s authorized return on equity and capital structure, renewal of its sale-leaseback arrangement, treatment of uncertain tax positions, a broader investigation of rates under the Unit Power Sales Agreement, and two prudence complaints, one challenging the extended power uprate completed at Grand Gulf in 2012 and the operation and management of Grand Gulf, particularly in the 2016-2020 time period, and the second challenging the operation and management of Grand Gulf in the 2021-2022 time period. The settlement with the MPSC described in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below, and the settlement in principle with the APSC described in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC” below, if approved by the FERC, substantially reduce the aggregate amount of exposure resulting from these claims. The claims in these proceedings include claims for refunds and claims for rate adjustments; the aggregate amount of refunds claimed in these proceedings, after reduction for settlements reached with the MPSC and the APSC (subject in the latter case to approval by the FERC), exceeds the current net book value of System Energy. In the event of an adverse decision in one or more of these proceedings requiring the payment of additional refunds, System Energy may be required to seek financing to pay such refunds, the cost and availability of which are unknown. Following are discussions of these proceedings.

434
444

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Complaints Against System Energy

Return on Equity and Capital Structure Complaints

In January 2017 the APSC and MPSC filed a complaint with the FERC against System Energy. The complaint seeks a reduction in the return on equity component of the Unit Power Sales Agreement pursuant to which System Energy sells its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans. Entergy Arkansas also sells some of its Grand Gulf capacity and energy to Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans under separate agreements. The current return on equity under the Unit Power Sales Agreement is 10.94%, which was established in a rate proceeding that became final in July 2001. As discussed below in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC,” beginning with the July 2022 service month, bills issued to Entergy Mississippi under the Unit Power Sales Agreement reflect a return on equity of 9.65%.

The APSC and MPSC complaint alleges that the return on equity is unjust and unreasonable because capital market and other considerations indicate that it is excessive. The complaint requests proceedings to investigate the return on equity and establish a lower return on equity, and also requests that the FERC establish January 23, 2017 as a refund effective date. The complaint includes return on equity analysis that purports to establish that the range of reasonable return on equity for System Energy is between 8.37% and 8.67%. System Energy answered the complaint in February 2017 and disputes that a return on equity of 8.37% to 8.67% is just and reasonable. The LPSC and the City Council intervened in the proceeding expressing support for the complaint. In September 2017 the FERC established a refund effective date of January 23, 2017 and directed the parties to engage in settlement proceedings before an ALJ. The parties have beenwere unable to settle the return on equity issue and a FERC hearing judge was assigned in July 2018. The 15-month refund period in connection with the APSC/MPSC complaint expired on April 23, 2018.

In April 2018 the LPSC filed a complaint with the FERC against System Energy seeking an additional 15-month refund period.  The LPSC complaint requests similar relief from the FERC with respect to System Energy’s return on equity and also requests the FERC to investigate System Energy’s capital structure.  The APSC, MPSC, and City Council intervened in the proceeding, filed an answer expressing support for the complaint, and asked the FERC to consolidate this proceeding with the proceeding initiated by the complaint of the APSC and MPSC in January 2017. System Energy answered the LPSC complaint in May 2018 and also filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. In August 2018 the FERC issued an order dismissing the LPSC’s request to investigate System Energy’s capital structure and setting for hearing the return on equity complaint, with a refund effective date of April 27, 2018. The 15-month refund period in connection with the LPSC return on equity complaint expired on July 26, 2019.

The portion of the LPSC’s complaint dealing with return on equity was subsequently consolidated with the APSC and MPSC complaint for hearing. The parties addressed an order (issued in a separate FERC proceeding involving New England transmission owners) that proposed modifying the FERC’s standard methodology for determining return on equity. In September 2018, System Energy filed a request for rehearing and the LPSC filed a request for rehearing or reconsideration of the FERC’s August 2018 order. The LPSC’s request referenced an amended complaint that it filed on the same day raising the same capital structure claim the FERC had earlier dismissed. The FERC initiated a new proceeding for the amended capital structure complaint, and System Energy submitted a response in October 2018. In January 2019 the FERC set the amended complaint for settlement and hearing proceedings. Settlement proceedings in the capital structure proceeding commenced in February 2019. As noted below, in June 2019 settlement discussions were terminated and the amended capital structure complaint was consolidated with the ongoing return on equity proceeding. The 15-month refund period in connection with the capital structure complaint was from September 24, 2018 to December 23, 2019.

In January 2019 the LPSC, and the APSC, and the MPSC filed direct testimony in the return on equity proceeding. For the refund period January 23, 2017 through April 23, 2018, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.81% and the APSC and the MPSC argue for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.24%. For the refund period April 27, 2018 through July 27, 2019, and for application on a
435445

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
prospective basis, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.97% and the APSC and the MPSC argue for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.41%. In March 2019, System Energy submitted answering testimony. For the first refund period, System Energy’s testimony argues for a return on equity of 10.10% (median) or 10.70% (midpoint). For the second refund period, System Energy’s testimony shows that the calculated returns on equity for the first period fall within the range of presumptively just and reasonable returns on equity, and thus the second complaint should be dismissed (and the first period return on equity used going forward). If the FERC nonetheless were to set a new return on equity for the second period (and going forward), System Energy argues the return on equity should be either 10.32% (median) or 10.69% (midpoint).

In May 2019 the FERC trial staff filed its direct and answering testimony in the return on equity proceeding. For the first refund period, the FERC trial staff calculates an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 9.89% based on the application of FERC’s proposed methodology. The FERC trial staff’s direct and answering testimony noted that an authorized return on equity of 9.89% for the first refund period was within the range of presumptively just and reasonable returns on equity for the second refund period, as calculated using a study period ending January 31, 2019 for the second refund period.

In June 2019, System EntergyEnergy filed testimony responding to the testimony filed by the FERC trial staff. Among other things, System Energy’s testimony rebutted arguments raised by the FERC trial staff and provided updated calculations for the second refund period based on the study period ending May 31, 2019. For that refund period, System Energy’s testimony shows that strict application of the return on equity methodology proposed by the FERC staff indicates that the second complaint would not be dismissed, and the new return on equity would be set at 9.65% (median) or 9.74% (midpoint). System Energy’s testimony argues that these results are insufficient in light of benchmarks such as state returns on equity and treasury bond yields, and instead proposes that the calculated returns on equity for the second period should be either 9.91% (median) or 10.3% (midpoint). System Energy’s testimony also argues that, under application of its proposed modified methodology, the 10.10% return on equity calculated for the first refund period would fall within the range of presumptively just and reasonable returns on equity for the second refund period.

Also in June 2019, the FERC’s Chief ALJ issued an order terminating settlement discussions in the amended complaint addressing System Energy’s capital structure. The ALJ consolidated the amended capital structure complaint with the ongoing return on equity proceeding and set new procedural deadlines for the consolidated hearing.

In August 2019 the LPSC, and the APSC, and the MPSC filed rebuttal testimony in the return on equity proceeding and direct and answering testimony relating to System Energy’s capital structure. The LPSC re-argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.81% for the first refund period and 7.97% for the second refund period. The APSC and MPSC argue for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.26% for the first refund period and 8.32% for the second refund period. With respect to capital structure, the LPSC proposes that the FERC establish a hypothetical capital structure for System Energy for ratemaking purposes. Specifically, the LPSC proposes that System Energy’s common equity ratio be set to Entergy Corporation’s equity ratio of 37% equity and 63% debt. In the alternative, the LPSC argues that the equity ratio should be no higher than 49%, the composite equity ratio of System Energy and the other Entergy operating companies who purchase under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The APSC and the MPSC recommend that 35.98% be set as the common equity ratio for System Energy. As an alternative, the APSC and the MPSC propose that System Energy’s common equity be set at 46.75% based on the median equity ratio of the proxy group for setting the return on equity.

In September 2019 the FERC trial staff filed its rebuttal testimony in the return on equity proceeding. For the first refund period, the FERC trial staff calculates an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 9.40% based on the application of the FERC’s proposed methodology and an updated proxy group. For the second refund period, based on the study period ending May 31, 2019, the FERC trial staff rebuttal testimony argues for a return on equity of 9.63%. In September 2019 the FERC trial staff also filed direct and answering testimony relating to System Energy’s capital structure. The FERC trial staff argues that the average capital structure of the proxy group used to develop System Energy’s return on equity should be used to establish the capital structure. Using this
436446

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

used to develop System Energy’s return on equity should be used to establish the capital structure. Using this approach, the FERC trial staff calculates the average capital structure for its proposed proxy group of 46.74% common equity, and 53.26% debt.

In October 2019, System Energy filed answering testimony disputing the FERC trial staff’s, the LPSC’s, and the APSC’s and MPSC’s arguments for the use of a hypothetical capital structure and arguing that the use of System Energy’s actual capital structure is just and reasonable.

In November 2019, in a proceeding that did not involve System Energy, the FERC issued an order addressing the methodology for determining the return on equity applicable to transmission owners in MISO. Thereafter, the procedural schedule in the System Energy proceeding was amended to allow the participants to file supplemental testimony addressing the order in the MISO transmission owner proceeding (Opinion No. 569).

In February 2020 the LPSC, the MPSC and APSC, and the FERC trial staff filed supplemental testimony addressing Opinion No. 569 and how it would affect the return on equity evaluation for the two complaint periods concerning System Energy.For the first refund period, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the Opinion No. 569 methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 8.44%; the MPSC and APSC argue for an authorized return on equity of 8.41%; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 9.22%.For the second refund period and on a prospective basis, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the Opinion No. 569 methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.89%; the MPSC and APSC argue that an authorized return on equity of 8.01% may be appropriate; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 8.66%.

In April 2020, System Energy filed supplemental answering testimony addressing Opinion No. 569.System Energy argues that the Opinion No. 569 methodology is conceptually and analytically defective for purposes of establishing just and reasonable authorized return on equity determinations and proposes an alternative approach.As its primary recommendation, System Energy continues to support the return on equity determinations in its March 2019 testimony for the first refund period and its June 2019 testimony for the second refund period.Under the Opinion No. 569 methodology, System Energy calculates a “presumptively just and reasonable range” for the authorized return on equity for the first refund period of 8.57% to 9.52%, and for the second refund period of 8.28% to 9.11%.System Energy argues that these ranges are not just and reasonable results.Under its proposed alternative methodology, System Energy calculates an authorized return on equity of 10.26% for the first refund period, which also falls within the presumptively just and reasonable range calculated for the second refund period and prospectively.

In May 2020 the FERC issued an order on rehearing of Opinion No. 569 (Opinion No. 569-A).In June 2020 the procedural schedule in the System Energy proceeding was further revised in order to allow parties to address the Opinion No. 569-A methodology.Pursuant to the revised schedule, in June 2020, the LPSC, MPSC and APSC, and the FERC trial staff filed supplemental testimony addressing Opinion No. 569-A and how it would affect the return on equity evaluation for the two complaint periods concerning System Energy.For the first refund period, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the Opinion No. 569-A methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.97%; the MPSC and APSC argue for an authorized return on equity of 9.24%; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 9.49%.For the second refund period and on a prospective basis, based on their respective interpretations and applications of the Opinion No. 569-A methodology, the LPSC argues for an authorized return on equity for System Energy of 7.78%; the MPSC and APSC argue that an authorized return on equity of 9.15% may be appropriate if the second complaint is not dismissed; and the FERC trial staff argues for an authorized return on equity of 9.09% if the second complaint is not dismissed.

Pursuant to the revised procedural schedule, in July 2020, System Energy filed supplemental testimony addressing Opinion No. 569-A.System Energy argues that strict application of the Opinion No. 569-A methodology produces results inconsistent with investor requirements and does not provide a sound basis on which
437447

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
to evaluate System Energy’s authorized return on equity.As its primary recommendation, System Energy argues for the use of a methodology that incorporates four separate financial models, including the constant growth form of the discounted cash flow model and the empirical capital asset pricing model.Based on application of its recommended methodology, System Energy argues for an authorized return on equity of 10.12% for the first refund period, which also falls within the presumptively just and reasonable range calculated for the second refund period and prospectively.Under the Opinion No. 569-A methodology, System Energy calculates an authorized return on equity of 9.44% for the first refund period, which also falls within the presumptively just and reasonable range calculated for the second refund period and prospectively.

The parties and FERC trial staff filed final rounds of testimony in August 2020. The hearing before a FERC ALJ occurred in late-September through early-October 2020, post-hearing briefing took place in November and December 2020,2020.

In March 2021 the FERC ALJ issued an initial decision. With regard to System Energy’s authorized return on equity, the ALJ determined that the existing return on equity of 10.94% is no longer just and reasonable, and that the replacement authorized return on equity, based on application of the Opinion No. 569-A methodology, should be 9.32%. The ALJ further determined that System Energy should pay refunds for a fifteen-month refund period (January 2017-April 2018) based on the difference between the current return on equity and the replacement authorized return on equity. The ALJ determined that the April 2018 complaint concerning the authorized return on equity should be dismissed, and that no refunds for a second fifteen-month refund period should be due. With regard to System Energy’s capital structure, the ALJ determined that System Energy’s actual equity ratio is excessive and that the just and reasonable equity ratio is 48.15% equity, based on the average equity ratio of the proxy group used to evaluate the return on equity for the second complaint. The ALJ further determined that System Energy should pay refunds for a fifteen-month refund period (September 2018-December 2019) based on the difference between the actual equity ratio and the 48.15% equity ratio. If the ALJ’s initial decision is due in March 2021. upheld, the estimated refund for this proceeding is approximately $41 million, which includes interest through December 31, 2023, and the estimated resulting annual rate reduction would be approximately $25 million. As a result of the 2022 settlement agreement with the MPSC, both the estimated refund and rate reduction exclude Entergy Mississippi's portion. See “System Energy recordedSettlement with the MPSC” below for discussion of the settlement. The estimated refund will continue to accrue interest until a provision against revenue for the potential outcome of this proceeding.final FERC decision is issued.

The ALJ initial decision is an interim step in the FERC litigation process, and an ALJ’s determinations made in an initial decision are not controlling on the FERC. In April 2021, System Energy filed its brief on exceptions, in which it challenged the initial decision’s findings on both the return on equity and capital structure issues. Also in April 2021 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff filed briefs on exceptions. Reply briefs opposing exceptions were filed in May 2021 by System Energy, the FERC trial staff, the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council. Refunds, if any, that might be required will only become due after the FERC issues its order reviewing the initial decision.

As discussed in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below, beginning with the July 2022 service month, bills issued to Entergy Mississippi under the Unit Power Sales Agreement were adjusted to reflect a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity.

In August 2022 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order addressing appeals of FERC’s Opinion No. 569 and 569-A, which established the methodology applied in the ALJ’s initial decision in the proceeding against System Energy discussed above. The appellate order addressed the methodology for determining the return on equity applicable to transmission owners in MISO. The D.C. Circuit found the FERC’s use of the Risk Premium model as part of the methodology to be arbitrary and capricious, and remanded the case back to the FERC. The remanded case is pending FERC action.

448

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue

In May 2018 the LPSC filed a complaint against System Energy and Entergy Services related to System Energy’s renewal of a sale-leaseback transaction originally entered into in December 1988 for an 11.5% undivided interest in Grand Gulf Unit 1. The complaint alleges that System Energy violated the filed rate and the FERC’s ratemaking and accounting requirements when it included in Unit Power Sales Agreement billings the cost of capital additions associated with the sale-leaseback interest, and that System Energy is double-recovering costs by including both the lease payments and the capital additions in Unit Power Sales Agreement billings. The complaint also claims that System Energy was imprudent in entering into the sale-leaseback renewal because the Utility operating companies that purchase Grand Gulf’s output from System Energy could have obtained cheaper capacity and energy in the MISO markets. The complaint further alleges that System Energy violated various other reporting and accounting requirements and should have sought prior FERC approval of the lease renewal. The complaint seeks various forms of relief from the FERC. The complaint seeks refunds for capital addition costs for all years in which they were recorded in allegedly non-formula accounts or, alternatively, the disallowance of the return on equity for the capital additions in those years plus interest. The complaint also asks that the FERC disallow and refund the lease costs of the sale-leaseback renewal on grounds of imprudence, investigate System Energy’s treatment of a DOE litigation payment, and impose certain forward-looking procedural protections, including audit rights for retail regulators of the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rates. The APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council intervened in the proceeding.

In June 2018, System Energy and Entergy Services filed a motion to dismiss and an answer to the LPSC complaint denying that System Energy’s treatment of the sale-leaseback renewal and capital additions violated the terms of the filed rate or any other FERC ratemaking, accounting, or legal requirements or otherwise constituted double recovery. The response also argued that the complaint is inconsistent with a FERC-approved settlement to which the LPSC is a party and that explicitly authorizes System Energy to recover its lease payments. Finally, the response argued that both the capital additions and the sale-leaseback renewal were prudent investments and the LPSC complaint fails to justify any disallowance or refunds. The response also offered to submit formula rate protocols for the Unit Power Sales Agreement similar to the procedures used for reviewing transmission rates under the MISO tariff. In September 2018 the FERC issued an order setting the complaint for hearing and settlement proceedings. The FERC established a refund effective date of May 18, 2018.

In February 2019 the presiding ALJ ruled that the hearing ordered by the FERC includes the issue of whether specific subcategories of accumulated deferred income tax should be included in, or excluded from, System Energy’s formula rate. In March 2019 the LPSC, the MPSC, the APSC and the City Council filed direct testimony. The LPSC testimony sought refunds that include the renewal lease payments (approximately $17.2 million per year since July 2015), rate base reductions for accumulated deferred income tax associated with uncertain tax positions, and the cost of capital additions associated with the sale-leaseback interest, as well as interest on those amounts.

438

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

In June 2019 System Energy filed answering testimony arguing that the FERC should reject all claims for refunds.  Among other things, System Energy argued that claims for refunds of the costs of lease renewal payments and capital additions should be rejected because those costs were recovered consistent with the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rate, System Energy was not over or double recovering any costs, and ratepayers will save costs over the initial and renewal terms of the leases.  System Energy argued that claims for refunds associated with liabilities arising from uncertain tax positions should be rejected because the liabilities do not provide cost-free capital, the repayment timing of the liabilities is uncertain, and the outcome of the underlying tax positions is uncertain.  System Energy’s testimony also challenged the refund calculations supplied by the other parties.

In August 2019 the FERC trial staff filed direct and answering testimony seeking refunds for rate base reductions for liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions. The FERC trial staff also argued that System Energy recovered $32 million more than it should have in depreciation expense for capital additions. In September 2019, System Energy filed cross-answering testimony disputing the FERC trial staff’s arguments for refunds, stating that the FERC trial staff’s position regarding depreciation rates for capital additions is not unreasonable, but
449

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
explaining that any change in depreciation expense is only one element of a Unit Power Sales Agreement re-billing calculation. Adjustments to depreciation expense in any re-billing under the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rate will also involve changes to accumulated depreciation, accumulated deferred income taxes, and other formula elements as needed. In October 2019 the LPSC filed rebuttal testimony increasing the amount of refunds sought for liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions.  The LPSC seeks approximately $512 million plus interest, which is approximately $191$310 million through December 31, 2020.  The2023.  The FERC trial staff also filed rebuttal testimony in which it seeks refunds of a similar amount as the LPSC for the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions.  The LPSC testimony also argued that adjustments to depreciation rates should affect rate base on a prospective basis only.

A hearing was held before a FERC ALJ in November 2019.In April 2020 the ALJ issued anthe initial decision.Among other things, the ALJ determined that refunds were due on three main issues.First, with regard to the lease renewal payments, the ALJ determined that System Energy is recovering an unjust acquisition premium through the lease renewal payments, and that System Energy’s recovery from customers through rates should be limited to the cost of service based on the remaining net book value of the leased assets, which is approximately $70 million.The ALJ found that the remedy for this issue should be the refund of lease payments (approximately $17.2 million per year since July 2015) with interest determined at the FERC quarterly interest rate, which would be offset by the addition of the net book value of the leased assets in the cost of service.The ALJ did not calculate a value for the refund expected as a result of this remedy.In addition, System Energy would no longer recover the lease payments in rates prospectively.prospectively. Second, with regard to the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions, the ALJ determined that the liabilities are accumulated deferred income taxes and that System Energy’s rate base should have been reduced for those liabilities.If the ALJ’s initial decision is upheld, the estimated refund for this issue through December 31, 2020, is approximately $422 million, plus interest, which is approximately $110 million through December 31, 2020.The The ALJ also found that System Energy should include liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions as a raterate base reduction going forward.Third, with regard to the depreciation expense adjustments, the ALJ found that System Energy should correct for the error in re-billings retroactively and prospectively, but that System Energy should not be permitted to recover interest on any retroactive return on enhanced rate base resulting from such corrections.If the initial decision is affirmed on this issue, System Energy estimates refunds of approximately $19 million, which includes interest through December 31, 2020.

The ALJ initial decision is an interim step in the FERC litigation process, and an ALJ’s determinations made in an initial decision are not controlling on the FERC.The ALJ in the initial decision acknowledges that these are issues of first impression before the FERC.In June 2020, System Energy, the LPSC, and the FERC trial staff filed briefs on exceptions, challenging several of the initial decision’s findings.System Energy’s brief on exceptions challenged the initial decision’s limitations on recovery of the lease renewal payments, its proposed rate base refund for the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions, and its proposal to asymmetrically treat interest on bill corrections for depreciation expense adjustments.The LPSC’s and the FERC trial staff’s briefs on
439

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
exceptions each challenged the initial decision’s allowance for recovery of the cost of service associated with the lease renewal based on the remaining net book value of the leased assets, its calculation of the remaining net book value of the leased assets, and the amount of the initial decision’s proposed rate base refund for the liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions.The LPSC’s brief on exceptions also challenged the initial decision’s proposal that depreciation expense adjustments include retroactive adjustments to rate base and its finding that section 203 of the Federal Power Act did not apply to the lease renewal.The FERC trial staff’s brief on exceptions also challenged the initial decision’s finding that the FERC need not institute a formal investigation into System Energy’s tariff.In October 2020, System Energy, the LPSC, the MPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed briefs opposing exceptions. System Energy opposed the exceptions filed by the LPSC and the FERC trial staff. The LPSC, the MPSC, the APSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff opposed the exceptions filed by System Energy. Also in October 2020 the MPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed briefs adopting the exceptions of the LPSC and the FERC trial staff. The case is pending before the FERC, which will review the case and issue an order on the proceeding, and the FERC may accept, reject, or modify the ALJ’s initial decision in whole or in part.Refunds, if any, that might be required will only become due after the FERC issues its order reviewing the initial decision.

In addition, in September 2020, the IRS issued a Notice of Proposed Adjustment (NOPA) and Entergy executed it.The NOPA memorializes the IRS’s decision to adjust the 2015 consolidated federal income tax return of Entergy Corporation and certain of its subsidiaries, including System Energy, with regard to the uncertain decommissioning tax position.Pursuant to the audit resolution documented in the NOPA, the IRS allowed System Energy’s inclusion of $102 million of future nuclear decommissioning costs in System Energy’s cost of goods sold for the 2015 tax year, roughly 10% of the requested deduction, but disallowed the balance of the position. In September 2020, System Energy filed a motion to lodge the NOPA into the record in the FERC proceeding. In October 2020 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff filed oppositions to
450

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

System Energy’s motion. As a result of the NOPA issued by the IRS in September 2020, System Energy filed, in October 2020, a new Federal Power Act section 205 filing at FERC to establish an ongoing rate base credit for the accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the decommissioning uncertain tax position. On a prospective basis beginning with the October 2020 bill, System Energy proposes to include the accumulated deferred income taxes arising from the successful portion of the decommissioning uncertain tax position as a credit to rate base under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. In November 2020 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council filed a protest to the filing, and System Energy responded.

In November 2020 the IRS issued a Revenue Agent’s Report (RAR) for the 2014/2015 tax year and in December 2020 Entergy executed it. The RAR contained the same adjustment to the uncertain nuclear decommissioning tax position as that which the IRS had announced in the NOPA. In December 2020, System Energy filed a motion to lodge the RAR into the record in the FERC proceeding addressing the uncertain tax position rate base issue. In January 2021 the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council filed a protest to the motion.

As a result of the RAR, in December 2020, System Energy filed amendments to its new Federal Power Act section 205 filings to establish an ongoing rate base credit for the accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the decommissioning uncertain tax position and to credit excess accumulated deferred income taxes arising from the successful portion of the decommissioning uncertain tax position. The amendments both propose the inclusion of the RAR as support for the filings. In December 2020 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed a protest in response to the amendments, reiterating their prior objections to the filings. In February 2021 the FERC issued an order accepting System Energy’s Federal Power Act section 205 filings subject to refund, setting them for hearing, and holding the hearing in abeyance.

In December 2020, System Energy filed a new Federal Power Act section 205 filing to provide a one-time, historical credit of $25.2 million for the accumulated deferred income taxes that would have been created by the decommissioning uncertain tax position if the IRS’s decision had been known in 2016. In January 2021 the LPSC, APSC, MPSC, and City Council filed a protest to the filing.In February 2021 the FERC issued an order accepting System Energy’s Federal Power Act section 205 filing subject to refund, setting it for hearing, and holding the hearing in abeyance. The one-time credit was made during the first quarter 2021.

In December 2022 the FERC issued an order on the ALJ’s initial decision, which affirmed it in part and modified it in part. The FERC’s order directed System Energy to calculate refunds on three issues, and to provide a compliance report detailing the calculations. The FERC’s order also disallows the future recovery of sale-leaseback renewal costs, which is estimated at approximately $11.5 million annually for purchases from Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans through July 2036. The three refund issues are rental expenses related to the renewal of the sale-leaseback arrangements; refunds, if any, for the revenue requirement impact of including accumulated deferred income taxes resulting from the decommissioning uncertain tax positions from 2004 through the present; and refunds for the net effect of correcting the depreciation inputs for capital additions attributable to the portion of plant subject to the sale-leaseback.

As a result of the FERC order’s directives regarding the recovery of the sale-leaseback transaction, in December 2022 System Energy reduced the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback regulatory liability by $56 million, reduced the related accumulated deferred income tax asset by $94 million, and reduced the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback accumulated deferred income tax regulatory liability by $25 million, resulting in an increase in income tax expense of $13 million. In addition, the FERC determined that System Energy recognized excess depreciation expense related to property subject to the sale-leaseback. As a result, in December 2022, System Energy recorded a reduction in depreciation expense and the related accumulated depreciation of $33 million.

In January 2023, System Energy filed its compliance report with the FERC. With respect to the sale-leaseback renewal costs, System Energy calculated a refund of $89.8 million, which represented all of the sale-leaseback renewal rental costs that System Energy recovered in rates, with interest. With respect to the
440
451

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
decommissioning uncertain tax position issue, System Energy calculated that no additional refunds are owed because it had already provided a one-time historical credit (for the period January 2016 through September 2020) of $25.2 million based on the accumulated deferred income taxes that resulted from the IRS’s partial acceptance of the decommissioning tax position, and because it has been providing an ongoing rate base credit for the accumulated deferred income taxes that resulted from the IRS’s partial acceptance of the decommissioning tax position since October 2020. With respect to the depreciation refund, System Energy calculated a refund of $13.7 million, which is the net total of a refund to customers for excess depreciation expense previously collected, plus interest, offset by the additional return on rate base that System Energy previously did not collect, without interest. See “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below for discussion of the regulatory charge and corresponding regulatory liability recorded in June 2022 related to these proceedings. The $103.5 million in total refunds calculated in the compliance filing were reclassified from long-term other regulatory liabilities to a current regulatory liability as of December 31, 2022. In January 2023, System Energy paid the refunds of $103.5 million, which included refunds of $41.7 million to Entergy Arkansas, $27.8 million to Entergy Louisiana, and $34 million to Entergy New Orleans.

In February 2023 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed protests to System Energy’s January 2023 compliance report, in which they challenged System Energy’s calculation of the refunds associated with the decommissioning tax position but did not protest the other components of the compliance report. Each of them argued that System Energy should have paid additional refunds for the decommissioning tax position issue, and the City Council estimated the total additional refunds owed to customers of Entergy Louisiana, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Arkansas for that issue as $493 million, including interest (and without factoring in the $25.2 million refund that System Energy already paid in 2021).

In January 2023, System Energy filed a request for rehearing of the FERC’s determinations in the December 2022 order on sale-leaseback refund issues and future lease cost disallowances, the FERC’s prospective policy on uncertain tax positions, and the proper accounting of System Energy’s accumulated deferred income taxes adjustment for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017; and a motion for confirmation of its interpretation of the December 2022 order’s remedy concerning the decommissioning tax position. In January 2023 the retail regulators filed a motion for confirmation of their interpretation of the refund requirement in the December 2022 FERC order and a provisional request for rehearing. In February 2023 the FERC issued a notice that the rehearing requests have been deemed denied by operation of law. The deemed denial of the rehearing request initiates a sixty-day period in which aggrieved parties may petition for federal appellate court review of the underlying FERC orders; however, the FERC may issue a substantive order on rehearing as long as it continues to have jurisdiction over the case. In March 2023, System Energy filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit a petition for review of the December 2022 order. In March 2023, System Energy also filed an unopposed motion to stay the proceeding in the Fifth Circuit pending the FERC’s disposition of the pending motions, and the court granted the motion to stay.

In February 2023, System Energy submitted a tariff compliance filing with the FERC to clarify that, consistent with the releases provided in the MPSC settlement, Entergy Mississippi will continue to be charged for its allocation of the sale-leaseback renewal costs under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. See “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” below for discussion of the settlement. In March 2023 the MPSC filed a protest to System Energy’s tariff compliance filing. The MPSC argues that the settlement did not specifically address post-settlement sale-leaseback renewal costs and that the sale-leaseback renewal costs may not be recovered under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. Entergy Mississippi’s allocated sale-leaseback renewal costs are estimated at $5.7 million annually for the remaining term of the sale-leaseback renewal.

In August 2023 the FERC issued an order addressing arguments raised on rehearing and partially setting aside the prior order (rehearing order). The rehearing order addresses rehearing requests that were filed in January 2023 separately by System Energy and the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council.

In the rehearing order, the FERC directs System Energy to recalculate refunds for two issues: (1) refunds of rental expenses related to the renewal of the sale-leaseback arrangements and (2) refunds for the net effect of
452

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

correcting the depreciation inputs for capital additions associated with the sale-leaseback. With regard to the sale-leaseback renewal rental expenses, the rehearing order allows System Energy to recover an implied return of and on the depreciated cost of the portion of the plant subject to the sale-leaseback as of the expiration of the initial lease term. With regard to the depreciation input issue, the rehearing order allows System Energy to offset refunds so that System Energy may collect interest on the rate base recalculations that were part of the overall depreciation rate recalculations. The rehearing order further directs System Energy to submit within 60 days of the date of the rehearing order an additional compliance filing to revise the total refunds for these two issues. As discussed above, System Energy’s January 2023 compliance filing calculated $103.5 million in total refunds, and the refunds were paid in January 2023. In October 2023, System Energy filed its compliance report with the FERC as directed in the August 2023 rehearing order. The October 2023 compliance report reflected recalculated refunds totaling $35.7 million for the two issues resulting in $67.8 million in refunds that could be recouped by System Energy. As discussed below in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC,” System Energy reached a settlement in principle with the APSC to resolve several pending cases under the FERC’s jurisdiction, including this one, pursuant to which it has agreed not to recoup the $27.3 million calculated for Entergy Arkansas in the compliance filing. As a result of the FERC’s rulings on the sale-leaseback and depreciation input issues in the August 2023 rehearing order, in third quarter 2023, System Energy recorded a regulatory asset and corresponding regulatory credit of $40 million to reflect the portion of the January 2023 refunds to be recouped from Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans. Consistent with the compliance filing, in October 2023, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans paid recoupment amounts of $18.2 million and $22.3 million, respectively, to System Energy.

On the third refund issue identified in the rehearing requests, concerning the decommissioning uncertain tax positions, the rehearing order denied all rehearing requests, re-affirmed the remedy contained in the December 2022 order, and did not direct System Energy to recalculate refunds or to submit an additional compliance filing. On this issue, as reflected in its January 2023 compliance filing, System Energy believes it has already paid the refunds due under the remedy that the FERC outlined for the uncertain tax positions issue in its December 2022 order. In August 2023 the LPSC Authorizationissued a media release in which it stated that it disagrees with System Energy’s determination that the rehearing order requires no further refunds to be made on this issue.

In September 2023, System Energy filed a protective appeal of the rehearing order with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The appeal was consolidated with System Energy’s prior appeal of the December 2022 order.

In September 2023 the LPSC filed with the FERC a request for rehearing and clarification of the rehearing order. The LPSC requests that the FERC reverse its determination in the rehearing order that System Energy may collect an implied return of and on the depreciated cost of the portion of the plant subject to the sale-leaseback, as of the expiration of the initial lease term, as well as its determination in the rehearing order that System Energy may offset the refunds for the depreciation rate input issue and collect interest on the rate base recalculations that were part of the overall depreciation rate recalculations. In addition, the LPSC requests that the FERC either confirm the LPSC’s interpretation of the refund associated with the decommissioning uncertain tax positions or explain why it is not doing so. In October 2023 the FERC issued a notice that the rehearing request has been deemed denied by operation of law. In November 2023 the FERC issued a further notice stating that it would not issue any further order addressing the rehearing request. Also in November 2023 the LPSC filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit a petition for review of the FERC’s August 2023 rehearing order and denials of the September 2023 rehearing request.

In December 2023 the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit lifted the abeyance on the consolidated System Energy appeals and it also consolidated the LPSC’s appeal with the System Energy appeals. In February 2024 the parties filed a proposed briefing schedule under which briefing will occur from March 2024 through July 2024.

453

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
LPSC Additional Complaints

In May 2020 the LPSC authorized its staff to file additional complaints at the FERC related to the rates charged by System Energy for Grand Gulf energy and capacity supplied to Entergy Louisiana under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The LPSC directive notesnoted that the initial decision issued by the presiding ALJ in the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback complaint proceeding did not address, for procedural reasons, certain rate issues raised by the LPSC and declined to order further investigation of rates charged by System Energy. The LPSC directive authorizesauthorized its staff to file complaints at the FERC “necessary to address these rate issues, to request a full investigation into the rates charged by System Energy for Grand Gulf power, and to seek rate refund, rate reduction, and such other remedies as may be necessary and appropriate to protect Louisiana ratepayers.” The LPSC directive further stated that the LPSC has seen “information suggesting that the Grand Gulf plant has been significantly underperforming compared to other nuclear plants in the United States, has had several extended and unexplained outages, and has been plagued with serious safety concerns.” The LPSC expressed concern that the costs paid by Entergy Louisiana's retail customers may have been detrimentally impacted, and authorized “the filing of a FERC complaint to address these performance issues and to seek appropriate refund, rate reduction, and other remedies as may be appropriate.”

Unit Power Sales Agreement Complaint

The first of the additional complaints was filed at the FERC by the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, and the City Council in September 2020. The newfirst complaint raises two sets of rate allegations: violations of the filed rate and a corresponding request for refunds for prior periods; and elements of the Unit Power Sales Agreement are unjust and unreasonable and a corresponding request for refunds for the 15-month refund period and changes to the Unit Power Sales Agreement prospectively. Several of the filed rate allegations overlap with the previous complaints. The filed rate allegations not previously raised are that System Energy: failed to provide a rate base credit to customers for the “time value” of sale-leaseback lease payments collected from customers in advance of the time those payments were due to the owner-lessors; improperly included certain lease refinancingsale-leaseback transaction costs in rate base as prepayments; improperly included nuclear decommissioningrefueling outage costs in rate base; failed to includewrongly included categories of accumulated deferred income taxes as a reductionincreases to rate base; charged customers based on a higher equity ratio than would be appropriate due to excessive retained earnings; and did not correctly reflect money pool investments and imprudently invested cash into the money pool. The elements of the Unit Power Sales Agreement that the complaint alleges are unjust and unreasonable include: the current cash working capital allowance of zero, uncapped recovery of incentive and executive compensation, lack of an equity re-opener, and recovery of lobbying and private airplane travel.travel expenses. The new complaint also requests a rate investigation into the Unit Power Sales Agreement and System Energy’s billing practices pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act, including any issue relevant to the Unit Power Sales Agreement and its inputs. System Energy filed its answer opposing the new complaint in November 2020. In its answer, System Energy argued that all of the claims raised in the complaint should be dismissed and agreed that bill adjustment with respect to two discrete issues were justified.System Energy argued that dismissal is warranted because all claims fall into one or more of the following categories: the claims have been raised and are being litigated in another proceeding; the claims do not present a prima facie case and do not satisfy the threshold burden to establish a complaint proceeding; the claims are premised on a theory or request relief that is incompatible with federal law or FERC policy; the claims request relief that is inconsistent with the filed rate; the claims are barred or waived by the legal doctrine of laches; and/or the claims have been fully addressed and do not warrant further litigation. In December 2020, System Energy filed a bill adjustment report indicating that $3.4 million had been credited to customers in connection with the two discrete issues concerning the inclusion of certain accumulated deferred income taxes balances in rates.In January 2021 the complainants filed a response to System Energy’s November 2020 answer, and in February 2020,2021, System Energy filed a response to the complainant’s response.

In May 2021 the FERC issued an order addressing the complaint, establishing a refund effective date of September 21, 2020, establishing hearing procedures, and holding those procedures in abeyance pending the FERC’s review of the initial decision in the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint discussed above. System
454

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Energy agreed that the hearing should be held in abeyance but sought rehearing of FERC’s decision as related to matters set for hearing that were beyond the scope of FERC’s jurisdiction or authority. The operational prudence-related complaint has not beencomplainants sought rehearing of FERC’s decision to hold the hearing in abeyance and filed asa motion to proceed, which motion System Energy subsequently opposed. In June 2021, System Energy’s request for rehearing was denied by operation of this date,law, and System Energy filed an appeal of FERC’s orders in the LPSC directive did not set a dateCourt of Appeals for the filing.Fifth Circuit. The appeal was initially stayed for a period of 90 days, but the stay expired. In November 2021 the Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal as premature.

Unit Power Sales AgreementIn August 2021 the FERC issued an order addressing System Energy’s and the complainants’ rehearing requests. The FERC dismissed part of the complaint seeking an equity re-opener, maintained the abeyance for issues related to the proceeding addressing the sale-leaseback renewal and uncertain tax positions, lifted the abeyance for issues unrelated to that proceeding, and clarified the scope of the hearing.

In August 2017, System Energy submitted toNovember 2021 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed direct testimony and requested the FERC proposedto order refunds for prior periods and prospective amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The LPSC’s refund claims include, among other things, allegations that: (1) System Energy should not have included certain sale-leaseback transaction costs in prepayments; (2) System Energy should have credited rate base to reflect the time value of money associated with the advance collection of lease payments; (3) System Energy incorrectly included refueling outage costs that were recorded in account 174 in rate base; and (4) System Energy should have excluded several accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 from rate base. The LPSC is also seeking a retroactive adjustment to retained earnings and capital structure in conjunction with the implementation of its proposed refunds. In addition, the LPSC seeks amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement going forward to address below-the-line costs, incentive compensation, the working capital allowance, litigation expenses, and the 2019 termination of the capital funds agreement. The APSC argues that: (1) System Energy should have included borrowings from the Entergy system money pool in its determination of short-term debt in its cost of capital; and (2) System Energy should credit customers with System Energy’s allocation of earnings on money pool investments. The City Council alleges that System Energy has maintained excess cash on hand in the money pool and that retention of excess cash was imprudent. Based on this allegation, the City Council’s witness recommends a refund of approximately $98.8 million for the period 2004-September 2021 or other alternative relief. The City Council further recommends that the FERC impose a hypothetical equity ratio such as 48.15% equity to capital on a prospective basis.

In January 2022, System Energy filed answering testimony arguing that the FERC should not order refunds for prior periods or any prospective amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement. In response to the LPSC’s refund claims, System Energy argues, among other things, that: (1) the inclusion of sale-leaseback transaction costs in prepayments was correct; (2) that the filed rate doctrine bars the request for a retroactive credit to rate base for the time value of money associated with the advance collection of lease payments; (3) that an accounting misclassification for deferred refueling outage costs has been corrected, caused no harm to customers, and requires no refunds; and (4) that its accounting and ratemaking treatment of specified accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 has been correct. System Energy further responds that no retroactive adjustment to retained earnings or capital structure should be ordered because there is no general policy requiring such a remedy, and there was no showing that the retained earnings element of the capital structure was incorrectly implemented. Further, System Energy presented evidence that all of the costs that are being challenged were long known to the retail regulators and were approved by them for inclusion in retail rates, and the attempt to retroactively challenge these costs, some of which have been included in rates for decades, is unjust and unreasonable. In response to the LPSC’s proposed going-forward adjustments, System Energy presents evidence to show that none of the proposed adjustments are needed. On the issue of below-the-line expenses, during discovery procedures System Energy identified a historical allocation error in certain months and agreed to provide a bill credit to customers to correct the error. In response to the APSC’s claims, System Energy argues that the Unit Power Sales Agreement does not include System Energy’s borrowings from the Entergy system money pool or earnings on deposits to the Entergy system money pool in the determination of the cost of capital; and accordingly, no refunds are appropriate on those issues. In response to the City Council’s claims, System Energy argues that it has reasonably managed its cash and
441455

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Agreement pursuantthat the City Council’s theory of cash management is defective because it fails to whichadequately consider the relevant cash needs of System Energy sellsand it makes faulty presumptions about the operation of the Entergy system money pool. System Energy further points out that the issue of its Grand Gulf capacitycapital structure is already subject to pending FERC litigation.

In March 2022 the FERC trial staff filed direct and energyanswering testimony in response to the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council’s direct testimony. In its testimony, the FERC trial staff recommends refunds for two primary reasons: (1) it concluded that System Energy should have excluded specified accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 associated with rate refunds; and (2) it concluded that System Energy should have excluded specified accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 associated with a deemed contract satisfaction and reissuance that occurred in 2005. The FERC trial staff recommends refunds of $84.1 million, exclusive of any tax gross-up or FERC interest. In addition, the FERC trial staff recommends the following prospective modifications to the Unit Power Sales Agreement: (1) inclusion of a rate base credit to recognize the time value of money associated with the advance collection of lease payments; (2) exclusion of executive incentive compensation costs for members of the Office of the Chief Executive and long-term performance unit costs where awards are based solely or primarily on financial metrics; and (3) exclusion of unvested, accrued amounts for stock options, performance units, and restricted stock awards. With respect to issues that ultimately concern the reasonableness of System Energy’s rate of return, the FERC trial staff states that it is unnecessary to consider such issues in this proceeding, in light of the pending case concerning System Energy’s return on equity and capital structure. On all other material issues raised by the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council, the FERC trial staff recommends either no refunds or no modification to the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

In April 2022, System Energy filed cross-answering testimony in response to the FERC trial staff’s recommendations of refunds for the accumulated deferred income taxes issues and proposed modifications to the Unit Power Sales Agreement for the executive incentive compensation issues. In June 2022 the FERC trial staff submitted revised answering testimony, in which it recommended additional refunds associated with the accumulated deferred income tax balances in account 190 associated with a deemed contract satisfaction and reissuance that occurred in 2005. Based on the testimony revisions, the FERC trial staff’s recommended refunds total $106.6 million, exclusive of any tax gross-up or FERC awarded interest. Also in June 2022, System Energy filed revised and supplemental cross-answering testimony to respond to the FERC trial staff’s testimony and oppose its revised recommendation.

In May 2022 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed rebuttal testimony. The LPSC’s testimony asserts new claims, including that: (1) certain of the sale-leaseback transaction costs may have been imprudently incurred; (2) accumulated deferred income taxes associated with sale-leaseback transaction costs should have been included in rate base; (3) accumulated deferred income taxes associated with federal investment tax credits should have been excluded from rate base; (4) monthly net operating loss accumulated deferred income taxes should have been excluded from rate base; and (5) several categories of proposed rate changes, including executive incentive compensation, air travel, industry dues, and legal costs, also warrant historical refunds. The LPSC’s rebuttal testimony argues that refunds for the alleged tariff violations and other claims must be calculated by rerunning the Unit Power Sales Agreement formula rate; however, it includes estimates of refunds associated with some, but not all, of its claims, totaling $286 million without interest. The City Council’s rebuttal testimony also proposes a new, alternate theory and claim for relief regarding System Energy’s participation in the Entergy system money pool, under which it calculates estimated refunds of approximately $51.7 million. The APSC’s rebuttal testimony agrees with the LPSC’s direct testimony that retained earnings should be adjusted in a comprehensive refund calculation. The testimony quantifies the estimated impacts of three issues: (1) a $1.5 million reduction in the revenue requirement under the Unit Power Sales Agreement if System Energy’s borrowings from the money pool are included in short-term debt; (2) a $1.9 million reduction in the revenue requirement if System Energy’s allocated share of money pool earnings are credited through the Unit Power Sales Agreement; and (3) a $1.9 million reduction in the revenue requirement for every $50 million of refunds ordered in a given year, without interest. In total, excluding the settled issues noted below, the claims seek more than $700 million in refunds and interest, based on charges to all Unit Power Sales Agreement purchasers including Entergy Mississippi.
456

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis


In June 2022 a new procedural schedule was adopted, providing for additional rounds of testimony and for the hearing to begin in September 2022. The hearing concluded in December 2022.

In November 2022, System Energy filed a partial settlement agreement with the APSC, the City Council, and the LPSC that resolved the following issues raised in the Unit Power Sales Agreement complaint: advance collection of lease payments, aircraft costs, executive incentive compensation, money pool borrowings, advertising expenses, deferred nuclear refueling outage costs, industry association dues, and termination of the capital funds agreement. The settlement provided that System Energy would provide a black-box refund of $18 million (inclusive of interest), plus additional refund amounts with interest to be calculated for certain issues to be distributed to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans as the Utility operating companies other than Entergy Mississippi purchasing under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The settlement further provided that if the APSC, the City Council, or the LPSC agrees to the global settlement System Energy entered into with the MPSC (discussed below), and such global settlement includes a black-box refund amount, then the black-box refund for this settlement agreement shall not be incremental or in addition to the global black-box refund amount. The settlement agreement addressed other matters as well, including adjustments to rate base beginning in October 2022, exclusion of certain other costs, and inclusion of money pool borrowings, if any, in short-term debt within the cost of capital calculation used in the Unit Power Sales Agreement. In April 2023 the FERC approved the settlement agreement. The refund provided for in the settlement agreement was included in the May 2023 service month bills under the Unit Power Sales Agreement.

In May 2023 the presiding ALJ issued an initial decision finding that System Energy should have excluded multiple identified categories of accumulated deferred income taxes from rate base when calculating Unit Power Sales Agreement bills. Based on this finding, the initial decision recommended refunds; System Energy estimates that those refunds for Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans would total approximately $116 million plus $152 million of interest through December 31, 2023. The initial decision also finds that the Unit Power Sales Agreement should be modified such that a cash working capital allowance of negative $36.4 million is applied prospectively. If the FERC ultimately orders these modifications to cash working capital be implemented, the estimated annual revenue requirement impact is expected to be immaterial. On the other non-settled issues for which the complainants sought refunds or changes to the Unit Power Sales Agreement, the initial decision ruled against the complainants.

The initial decision is an interim step in the FERC litigation process, and an ALJ’s determination made in an initial decision is not controlling on the FERC. System Energy disagrees with the ALJ’s findings concerning the accumulated deferred income taxes issues and cash working capital. In July 2023, System Energy filed a brief on exceptions to the initial decision’s accumulated deferred income taxes findings. Also in July 2023, the APSC, the LPSC, the City Council, and the FERC trial staff filed separate briefs on exceptions. The APSC’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations on the money pool interest and retained earnings issues. The LPSC’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations regarding the sale-leaseback transaction costs, legal fees, and retained earnings issues. The City Council’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations on the money pool and cash management issues. The FERC trial staff’s brief on exceptions challenges the ALJ’s determinations on the cash working capital issue as well as certain of the accumulated deferred income taxes issues. In August 2023 all parties filed separate briefs opposing exceptions. System Energy filed a brief opposing the exceptions of the APSC, the LPSC, and the City Council. The APSC, the LPSC, and the City Council filed separate briefs opposing the exceptions raised by System Energy and the FERC trial staff. The FERC trial staff filed its own brief opposing certain exceptions raised by System Energy, the APSC, the LPSC, and the City Council. The case is now pending a decision by the FERC.Refunds, if any, that might be required will become due only after the FERC issues its order reviewing the initial decision.

457

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Grand Gulf Prudence Complaint

The second of the additional complaints was filed at the FERC in March 2021 by the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council against System Energy, Entergy Services, Entergy Operations, and Entergy Corporation. The second complaint contains two primary allegations. First, it alleges that, based on the plant’s capacity factor and alleged safety performance, System Energy and the other respondents imprudently operated Grand Gulf during the period 2016-2020, and it seeks refunds of at least $360 million in alleged replacement energy costs, in addition to other costs, including those that can only be identified upon further investigation. Second, it alleges that the performance and/or management of the 2012 extended power uprate of Grand Gulf was imprudent, and it seeks refunds of all costs of the 2012 uprate that are determined to result from imprudent planning or management of the project. In addition to the requested refunds, the complaint asks that the FERC modify the Unit Power Sales Agreement to provide for full cost recovery only if certain performance indicators are met and to require pre-authorization of capital improvement projects in excess of $125 million before related costs may be passed through to customers in rates. In April 2021, System Energy and the other respondents filed their motion to dismiss and answer to the complaint. System Energy requested that the FERC dismiss the claims within the complaint. With respect to the claim concerning operations, System Energy argues that the complaint does not meet its legal burden because, among other reasons, it fails to allege any specific imprudent conduct. With respect to the claim concerning the uprate, System Energy argues that the complaint fails because, among other reasons, the complainants’ own conduct prevents them from raising a serious doubt as to the prudence of the uprate. System Energy also requests that the FERC dismiss other elements of the complaint, including the proposed modifications to the Unit Power Sales Agreement, because they are not warranted. Additional responsive pleadings were filed by the complainants and System Energy during the period from March through July 2021. In November 2022 the FERC issued an order setting the complaint for settlement and hearing procedures. In February 2023 the FERC issued an order denying rehearing and thereby affirming its order setting the complaint for settlement and hearing procedures. In July 2023 the FERC chief ALJ terminated settlement procedures and appointed a presiding ALJ to oversee hearing procedures. In September 2023 a procedural schedule for hearing procedures was established. Pursuant to that schedule, the complainant’s testimony was filed in December 2023. System Energy’s answering testimony is due April 2024, and additional rounds of testimony are due through October 2024. The hearing is scheduled to begin in January 2025, with the presiding ALJ’s initial decision due in July 2025.

In September 2023 the LPSC authorized its staff to file an additional complaint concerning the prudence of System Energy’s operation and management of Grand Gulf in the year 2022. In October 2023 the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed what they styled as an amended and supplemental complaint with the FERC against System Energy, Entergy Services, and Entergy Operations. As discussed below in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC”, the APSC has settled all of its claims related to this proceeding. The amended complaint states that it is being filed for three primary purposes: (1) to include System Energy’s performance in 2021-2022 in the scope of the hearing; (2) to explicitly allege that System Energy’s inadequate performance, excessive costs, unplanned outages, and costs attributable to safety violations violate the contractual obligation to maintain and operate the plant in accordance with “good utility practice”; and (3) to provide and substantiate allegations concerning the damages attributable to the alleged breach of contractual obligations. The amended complaint alleges that potentially more than $1 billion in damages may be due. In November 2023, System Energy and the other Entergy respondents filed an answer and motion to dismiss the amended and supplemental complaint.

System Energy Settlement with the MPSC

In June 2022, System Energy, Entergy Mississippi, and additional named Entergy parties involved in thirteen docketed proceedings before the FERC filed with the FERC a partial settlement agreement and offer of settlement. The settlement memorializes the Entergy parties’ agreement with the MPSC to globally resolve all actual and potential claims between the Entergy parties and the MPSC associated with those FERC proceedings and with System Energy’s past implementation of the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is a FERC-jurisdictional formula rate tariff for sales of energy and capacity from System Energy’s owned and leased share of Grand Gulf to Entergy Mississippi, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans.
458

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Entergy Mississippi purchases the greatest single amount, nearly 40% of System Energy’s share of Grand Gulf, after its additional purchases from affiliates are considered. The filing proposes limitedsettlement therefore limits System Energy’s overall refund exposure associated with the identified proceedings because they will be resolved completely as between the Entergy parties and the MPSC.

The settlement provided for a black-box refund of $235 million from System Energy to Entergy Mississippi, which was to be paid within 120 days of the settlement’s effective date (either the date of the FERC approval of the settlement without material modification, or the date that all settling parties agree to accept modifications or otherwise modify the settlement in response to a proposed material modification by the FERC). In addition, beginning with the July 2022 service month, the settlement provided for Entergy Mississippi’s bills from System Energy to be adjusted to reflect: an authorized rate of return on equity of 9.65%, a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity, a rate base reduction for the advance collection of sale-leaseback rental costs, and the exclusion of certain long-term incentive plan performance unit costs from rates. The settlement was approved by the MPSC in June 2022 and the FERC in November 2022.

System Energy previously recorded a provision and associated liability of $37 million for elements of the applicable litigation. In June 2022, System Energy recorded a regulatory charge of $551 million ($413 million net-of-tax), increasing the regulatory liability to $588 million, which consisted of $235 million for the settlement with the MPSC and $353 million for potential future refunds to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans. System Energy paid the black-box refund of $235 million to Entergy Mississippi in November 2022. See “System Energy Regulatory Liability for Pending Complaints” below for discussion of the regulatory liability related to complaints against System Energy as of December 31, 2023.

System Energy Settlement with the APSC

In October 2023, System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, and additional named Entergy parties involved in multiple docketed proceedings pending before the FERC reached a settlement in principle with the APSC to globally resolve all of their actual and potential claims in those dockets and with System Energy’s past implementation of the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The settlement also covers the amended and supplemental complaint, discussed above in “Grand Gulf Prudence Complaint,” filed at the FERC in October 2023. System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, additional Entergy parties, and the APSC filed the settlement agreement and supporting materials with the FERC in November 2023. The Unit Power Sales Agreement is a FERC-jurisdictional formula rate tariff for sales of energy and capacity from System Energy’s owned and leased share of Grand Gulf to Entergy Mississippi, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans. As discussed above in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC,” System Energy previously settled with the MPSC with respect to these complaints before the FERC. Entergy Mississippi has nearly 40% of System Energy’s share of Grand Gulf’s output, after its additional purchases from affiliates are considered. The settlements with both the APSC and the MPSC represent almost 65% of System Energy’s share of the output of Grand Gulf.

The terms of the settlement with the APSC align with the $588 million global black box settlement reached between System Energy and the MPSC in June 2022 and provide for Entergy Arkansas to receive a black box refund of $142 million from System Energy, inclusive of $49.5 million already received by Entergy Arkansas from System Energy. In November 2022 the FERC approved the System Energy settlement with the MPSC and stated that the settlement “appears to be fair and reasonable and in the public interest.”

In addition to the black box refund of $142 million described above, beginning with the November 2023 service month, the settlement provides for Entergy Arkansas’s bills from System Energy to be adjusted to reflect an authorized rate of return on equity of 9.65% and a capital structure not to exceed 52% equity.

In December 2023 the FERC trial staff and the LPSC filed comments. The FERC trial staff commented that it “believes that the settlement is fair, and in the public interest,” and neither it nor the LPSC oppose the settlement. In December 2023 the $93 million black box refund to Entergy Arkansas was reclassified from long-
459

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
term other regulatory liabilities to accounts payable - associated companies on System Energy’s balance sheet. If the FERC approves the filed settlement in accordance with its terms, it will become binding upon the Entergy parties and the APSC.

System Energy Regulatory Liability for Pending Complaints

Prior to June 2022, System Energy recorded a provision and associated liability of $37 million for elements of the complaints against System Energy. In June 2022, as discussed in “System Energy Settlement with the MPSC” above, System Energy recorded a regulatory charge of $551 million ($413 million net-of-tax), increasing System Energy’s regulatory liability to $588 million, which consisted of $235 million for the settlement with the MPSC and $353 million for potential future refunds to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Louisiana. The $142 million of refunds for Entergy Arkansas, discussed above in “System Energy Settlement with the APSC” is covered within the $353 million previously recorded. System Energy paid the black-box refund of $235 million to Entergy Mississippi in November 2022. As discussed above in “Grand Gulf Sale-leaseback Renewal Complaint and Uncertain Tax Position Rate Base Issue,” in January 2023 System Energy paid refunds of $103.5 million as a result of the FERC’s order in December 2022 in that proceeding and recouped $40.5 million of the $103.5 million from Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans in October 2023. In addition, as discussed above in “Unit Power Sales Agreement Complaint,” a black-box refund of $18 million was made by System Energy in 2023 in connection with a partial settlement in that proceeding.

Based on analysis of the pending complaints against System Energy and potential future settlement negotiations with the LPSC and the City Council, in third quarter 2023, System Energy recorded a regulatory charge of $40 million to increase System Energy’s regulatory liability related to complaints against System Energy. As discussed above, in December 2023 the $93 million black box refund to Entergy Arkansas was reclassified from the regulatory liability to accounts payable - associated companies on System Energy’s balance sheet. System Energy’s remaining regulatory liability related to complaints against System Energy as of December 31, 2023 is $178 million. This regulatory liability is consistent with the settlement agreements reached with the MPSC and the APSC, as described above, taking into account amounts already or expected to be refunded.

Unit Power Sales Agreement

System Energy Formula Rate Annual Protocols Formal Challenge Concerning 2020 Calendar Year Bills

System Energy’s Unit Power Sales Agreement includes formula rate protocols that provide for the disclosure of cost inputs, an opportunity for informal discovery procedures, and a challenge process. In February 2022, pursuant to the protocols procedures, the LPSC, the APSC, the MPSC, the City Council, and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff filed with the FERC a formal challenge to System Energy’s implementation of the formula rate during calendar year 2020. The formal challenge alleges: (1) that it was imprudent for System Energy to accept the IRS’s partial acceptance of a previously uncertain tax position; (2) that System Energy should have delayed recording the result of the IRS’s partial acceptance of the previously uncertain tax position until after internal tax allocation payments were made; (3) that the equity ratio charged in rates was excessive; (4) that sale-leaseback rental payments should have been excluded from rates; and (5) that all issues in the ongoing Unit Power Sales Agreement complaint proceeding should also be reflected in calendar year 2020 bills. While System Energy disagrees that any refunds are owed for the 2020 calendar year bills, the formal challenge estimates that the financial impact of the first through fourth allegations is approximately $53 million; it does not provide an estimate of the financial impact of the fifth allegation. However, $17 million of the $53 million is attributable to the sale-leaseback rental payments. These were refunded to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and Entergy New Orleans in January 2023 as a result of the FERC order received in the Grand Gulf sale-leaseback renewal complaint and uncertain tax position rate base issue. Entergy Mississippi’s portion of the refund was included within the settlement with the MPSC, as discussed below.

460

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

In March 2022, System Energy filed an answer to the formal challenge in which it requested that the FERC deny the formal challenge as a matter of law, or else hold the proceeding in abeyance pending the resolution of related dockets.

System Energy Formula Rate Annual Protocols Formal Challenge Concerning 2021 Calendar Year Bills

In March 2023, pursuant to the protocols procedures discussed above, the LPSC, the APSC, and the City Council filed with the FERC a formal challenge to System Energy’s implementation of the formula rate during calendar year 2021. The formal challenge alleges: (1) that it was imprudent for System Energy to accept the IRS’s partial acceptance of a previously uncertain tax position; (2) that System Energy used incorrect inputs for retained earnings that are used to determine the capital structure; (3) that the equity ratio charged in rates was excessive; and (4) that all issues in the ongoing Unit Power Sales Agreement complaint proceeding should also be reflected in calendar year 2021 bills. The first, third, and fourth allegations are identical to issues that were raised in the formal challenge to the calendar year 2020 bills. The formal challenge to the calendar year 2021 bills states that the impact of the first allegation is “tens of millions of dollars,” but it does not provide an estimate of the financial impact of the remaining allegations.

In May 2023, System Energy filed an answer to the formal challenge in which it requested that the FERC deny the formal challenge as a matter of law, or else hold the proceeding in abeyance pending the resolution of related dockets.

Depreciation Amendment Proceeding

In December 2021, System Energy submitted to the FERC proposed amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement to adopt (1) updated rates for use in calculating Grand Gulf plant depreciation and amortization expenses and (2) updated nuclear decommissioning cost annual revenue requirements, both of which are recovered through the Unit Power Sales Agreement rate formula.expenses. The proposed amendments would result in lowerhigher charges to the Utility operating companies that buy capacity and energy from System Energy under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. The changes were based on updated depreciation and nuclear decommissioning studies that take into account the renewal of Grand Gulf’s operating license for a term through November 1, 2044.

In September 2017February 2022 the FERC accepted System Energy’s proposed Unit Power Sales Agreement amendments, subject to further proceedings to consider the justness and reasonablenessincreased depreciation rates with an effective date of the amendments. Because the amendments propose a rate decrease, the FERC also initiated an investigation under section 206 of the Federal Power Act to determine if the rate decrease should be lower than proposed. The FERC accepted the proposed amendments effective OctoberMarch 1, 2017,2022, subject to refund pending the outcome of the further settlement and/or hearing proceedings, and established a refund effective date of October 11, 2017 with respect to the rate decrease.procedures. In June 2018,2023 System Energy filed with the FERC an uncontestedunopposed offer of settlement relatingthat it had negotiated with intervenors to the updated depreciation rates and nuclear decommissioning cost annual revenue requirements.proceeding. In August 20182023 the FERC issued an order acceptingapproved the settlement.settlement, which resolves the proceeding. In the third quarter 2018,2023, System Energy recorded a reduction in depreciation expense of approximately $26$41 million representing the cumulative difference in depreciation expense resulting from the depreciation rates used from October 11, 2017March 2022 through September 30, 2018June 2023 and the depreciation rates included in the settlement filing acceptedapproved by the FERC. In October 2023, System Energy filed a refund report with the FERC. The refund provided for in the refund report was included in the September 2023 service month bills under the Unit Power Sales Agreement. No comments or protests to the refund report were filed.

Pension Costs Amendment Proceeding

In October 2021, System Energy submitted to the FERC proposed amendments to the Unit Power Sales Agreement to include in rate base the prepaid and accrued pension costs associated with System Energy’s qualified pension plans. Based on data ending in 2020, the increased annual revenue requirement associated with the filing is approximately $8.9 million. In March 2022 the FERC accepted System Energy’s proposed amendments with an effective date of December 1, 2021, subject to refund pending the outcome of the settlement and/or hearing procedures. In August 2023 the FERC chief ALJ terminated settlement procedures and designated a presiding ALJ to oversee hearing procedures. In October 2023, System Energy filed direct testimony in support of its proposed amendments. Under the procedural schedule, testimony will be filed through April 2024, and the hearing is scheduled to begin in May 2024. The presiding ALJ’s initial decision is expected to be due in September 2024.

461

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Nuclear Matters

System Energy owns and, through an affiliate, operates the Grand Gulf.  System EnergyGulf nuclear generating plant and is, therefore, subject to the risks related to owningsuch ownership and operating a nuclear plant.operation.  These include risks related to: the use, storage, and handling and disposal of high-level and low-level radioactive materials; the substantial financial requirements, both for capital investments and operational needs, including the financial requirements to address emerging issues related to equipment reliability, to position Grand Gulf to meet its operational goals; the performance and capacity factors of Grand Gulf, includingGulf; the financial requirementsrisk of an adverse outcome to address emerging issues like stress corrosion crackinga challenge to the prudence of certain materials within the plant systems;operations at Grand Gulf; regulatory requirements and potential future regulatory changes, including changes affecting the regulations governing nuclear plant ownership, operations, license renewal and amendments, and decommissioning; the availability of interim or permanent sites for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste, including the fees charged for such disposal; the sufficiency of nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets and earnings to complete decommissioning of the site when required; and limitations on the amounts and types of insurance commercially availablerecoveries for losses in connection with nuclear plant operations and catastrophic events such as a nuclear accident. In the event of an unanticipated early shutdown of Grand Gulf, System Energy may be required to provide additional funds or credit support to satisfy regulatory requirements for decommissioning.  Grand Gulf’s operating license expires in 2044.

In November 2020 the NRC placed Grand Gulf in the “regulatory response column”, or Column 2, of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix based on the incidence of three unplanned plant scrams during the second and third quarters of 2020.Two of the scram events related to new turbine control system components that failed, and a third related to a feedwater valve positioner that failed, all of which had been replaced in a refueling outage that ended in May 2020.The NRC plans to conduct a supplemental inspection of Grand Gulf in accordance with its inspection procedures for nuclear plants in Column 2.As a consequence of two additional Grand Gulf scrams during the fourth quarter 2020, System Energy expects Grand Gulf to be placed into the “degraded cornerstone column”, or Column 3, of the NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process Action Matrix based on plant performance indicators for the four quarters ended December 31, 2020. This will involve an additional supplemental NRC inspection of Grand Gulf in accordance with its inspection procedures for nuclear plants in Column 3.

442

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Environmental Risks

System Energy’s facilities and operations are subject to regulation by various governmental authorities having jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances and hazardous and solid wastes, and other environmental matters.  Management believes that System Energy is in substantial compliance with environmental regulations currently applicable to its facilities and operations, with reference to possible exceptions noted in “Regulation of Entergy’s Business - Environmental Regulation” in Part I, Item 1.  Because environmental regulations are subject to change, future compliance costs cannot be precisely estimated.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of System Energy’s financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principlesGAAP requires management to apply appropriate accounting policies and to make estimates and judgments that can have a significant effect on reported financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.  Management has identified the following accounting policies and estimates as critical because they are based on assumptions and measurements that involve a high degree of uncertainty, and there is the potential for future changes in thethese assumptions and measurements that could produce estimates that would have a material impacteffect on the presentation of System Energy’s financial position, or results of operations.operations, or cash flows.

Nuclear Decommissioning Costs

See “Nuclear Decommissioning Costs” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates inherent in accounting for nuclear decommissioning costs.

Utility Regulatory Accounting

See “Utility Regulatory Accounting” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of accounting for the effects of rate regulation.

Impairment
462

Table of Long-lived Assets

Contents
See “Impairment of Long-lived Assets” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for discussion of the estimates associated with the impairment of long-lived assets.

Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions

See “Taxation and Uncertain Tax Positions” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.

Qualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

System Energy’s qualified pension and other postretirement reported costs, as described in Note 11 to the financial statements, are impactedaffected by numerous factors including the provisions of the plans, changing employee demographics, and various actuarial calculations, assumptions, and accounting mechanisms.  See theQualified Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for further discussion.  Because of the complexity of these calculations, the long-term nature of these obligations, and the importance of the assumptions utilized, Entergy’s estimate of these costs is a critical accounting estimate.

443

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis
Cost Sensitivity

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of qualified pension cost and qualified projected benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2020 Projected Qualified Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Qualified Pension CostImpact on 2023 Qualified Projected Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$727$12,152Discount rate(0.25%)$235$6,886
Rate of return on plan assetsRate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$709$—Rate of return on plan assets(0.25%)$659$—
Rate of increase in compensationRate of increase in compensation0.25%$464$2,133Rate of increase in compensation0.25%$247$1,227

The following chart reflects the sensitivity of postretirement benefitbenefits cost and accumulated postretirement benefit obligation to changes in certain actuarial assumptions (dollars in thousands).
Actuarial AssumptionActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2021 Postretirement Benefit CostImpact on 2020 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit ObligationActuarial AssumptionChange in AssumptionImpact on 2024 Postretirement Benefits CostImpact on 2023 Accumulated Postretirement Benefit Obligation
 Increase/(Decrease)   Increase/(Decrease) 
Discount rateDiscount rate(0.25%)$58$1,635Discount rate(0.25%)($5)$909
Health care cost trendHealth care cost trend0.25%$69$1,202Health care cost trend0.25%$56$663

Each fluctuation above assumes that the other components of the calculation are held constant.

Costs and Employer Contributions

Total qualified pension cost for System Energy in 20202023 was $17.3$12.6 million, including $105 thousand$6.4 million in settlement costs.  System Energy anticipates 20212024 qualified pension cost to be $20$5.2 million.  System Energy contributed $16.1$15.5 million to its qualified pension plans in 20202023 and estimates 20212024 pension contributions will approximate $18.7$16.7 million, although the 20212024 required pension contributions will be known with more certainty when the January 1, 20212024 valuations are completed, which is expected by April 1, 2021.2024.

Total postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income for System Energy in 20202023 was $1.5 million.$348 thousand. System Energy expects 20212024 postretirement health care and life insurance benefit income to approximate $1.3 million.$913 thousand. System Energy contributed $1.3 million$480 thousand to its other postretirement plans in 20202023 and expects 20212024 contributions to approximate $22$34 thousand.
463

Table of Contents
System Energy Resources, Inc.
Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

Other Contingencies

See “Other Contingencies” in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis for a discussion of the estimates associated with environmental, litigation, and other risks.

New Accounting Pronouncements

See the New Accounting Pronouncements” section of Note 1 to the financial statements for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements.


444464

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the shareholder and Board of Directors of
System Energy Resources, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of System Energy Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, the related statements of income,operations, cash flows, and changes in common equity (pages 447467 through 452472 and applicable items in pages 5147 through 238), for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matter

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relates to accounts or disclosures that is material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing separate opinion on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Rate and Regulatory Matters —SystemSystem Energy Resources, Inc.Refer to NotesNote 2 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company is subject to wholesale rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). Management has determined it meets the requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America to prepare its financial statements applying the specialized rules to account for the effects of cost-based rate regulation. Accounting for the economics of rate regulation impacts multiple financial statement line items and disclosures, such as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets and liabilities; operating revenues; operation and maintenance expense; income taxes; and depreciation and amortization expense.
445

Table of Contents
disclosures.

The Company’s rates are subject to regulatory rate-setting processes and annual earnings oversight. Because the FERC sets the rates the Company is allowed to charge customers based on allowable costs, including a reasonable
465

Table of Contents
return on equity, the Company applies accounting standards that require the financial statements to reflect the effects of rate regulation, including the recording of regulatory assets and liabilities. The Company assesses whether the regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities continue to meet the criteria for probable future recovery or settlement at each balance sheet date and when regulatory events occur. This assessment includes consideration of recent rate orders, historical regulatory treatment for similar costs, and factors such as changes in applicable regulatory and political environments. While the Company has indicated it expects to recover costs from customers through regulated rates, there is a risk that the FERC will not approve: (1) full recovery of the costs of providing utility service, or (2) full recovery of amounts invested in the utility business and a reasonable return on that investment.

We identified the impact of rate regulation as a critical audit matter due to the significant judgments made by management to support its assertions about impacted account balances and disclosures and the high degree of subjectivity involved in assessing the impact of future regulatory orders on the financial statements. Management judgments include assessing the (1) likelihood of recovery in future rates of incurred costs and the (2) likelihood of refunds to customers, and (3) ongoing complaints filed with the FERC against the Company.customers. Auditing management’s judgments regarding the outcome of future decisions by the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities involved especially subjective judgment and specialized knowledge of accounting for rate regulation and the rate setting process.process due to its inherent complexities and auditor judgment to evaluate management estimates and the subjectivity of audit evidence.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the uncertainty of future decisions by the FERC, recovery in future rates of regulatory assets and refunds or future reductions in rates related to regulatory liabilities included the following, among others:

We tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the evaluation of the likelihood of (1) the recovery in future rates of costs incurred as property, plant, and equipment and deferred as regulatory assets, and (2) a refund or a future reduction in rates that should be reported as regulatory liabilities. We also tested the effectiveness of management’s controls over the initial recognition of amounts as property, plant, and equipment; regulatory assets or liabilities;liabilities and the monitoring and evaluation of regulatory developments that may affect the likelihood of recovering costs in future rates or of a future reduction in rates.
We evaluated the Company’s disclosures related to the impacts of rate regulation, including the balances recorded and regulatory developments.
We read relevant regulatory orders issued by the FERC for the Company and other public utilities, regulatory statutes, interpretations, procedural memorandums, filings made by intervenors, and other publicly available information to assess the likelihood of recovery in future rates or of a future reduction in rates based on precedents of the FERC’s treatment of similar costs under similar circumstances. We evaluated the external information and compared to management’s recorded regulatory asset and liability balances for completeness.
For regulatory matters in process, we inspected the Company’s filings and ongoing complaints filed with the FERC, including the Return on Equity, Capital Structure, and Grand Gulf Sale-Leaseback Renewal complaints, and considered theintervenors’ filings with the FERC, by intervenors that may impactinitial Administrative Law Judge decisions and FERC orders issued, and settlement offers and agreements with the Company’s future rates,FERC for any evidence that might contradict management’s assertions.
We obtained an analysis from management and support from internal and external legal counsel, as appropriate, regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities not yet addressed in a regulatory order including the complaints filed with the FERC against the Company, to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery or a future reduction in rates.
We obtained representation from management regarding probability of recovery for regulatory assets or refund or future reduction in rates for regulatory liabilities to assess management’s assertion that amounts are probable of recovery, refund, or a future reduction in rates.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2001.

446466

Table of Contents

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
INCOME STATEMENTS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202020192018
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$495,458 $573,410 $456,707 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale23,026 82,438 64,778 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses27,737 33,376 20,715 
Other operation and maintenance178,249 206,444 196,505 
Decommissioning37,181 35,729 34,336 
Taxes other than income taxes28,657 29,018 28,090 
Depreciation and amortization110,395 106,630 97,527 
Other regulatory credits - net(26,531)(35,210)(28,924)
TOTAL378,714 458,425 413,027 
OPERATING INCOME116,744 114,985 43,680 
OTHER INCOME   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction9,122 8,709 8,750 
Interest and investment income36,478 29,488 35,985 
Miscellaneous - net(10,012)(5,516)(5,775)
TOTAL35,588 32,681 38,960 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense34,467 35,328 38,424 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(1,809)(2,131)(2,218)
TOTAL32,658 33,197 36,206 
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES119,674 114,469 46,434 
Income taxes20,543 15,349 (47,675)
NET INCOME$99,131 $99,120 $94,109 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   


SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
 For the Years Ended December 31,
 202320222021
 (In Thousands)
OPERATING REVENUES   
Electric$586,603 $658,812 $570,848 
OPERATING EXPENSES   
Operation and Maintenance:   
Fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale71,762 50,216 58,313 
Nuclear refueling outage expenses26,745 24,482 27,244 
Other operation and maintenance207,765 226,557 214,322 
Decommissioning41,773 40,235 38,693 
Taxes other than income taxes29,224 29,428 27,842 
Depreciation and amortization90,858 111,889 105,978 
Other regulatory charges (credits) - net(57,429)503,162 26,214 
TOTAL410,698 985,969 498,606 
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)175,905 (327,157)72,242 
OTHER INCOME (DEDUCTIONS)   
Allowance for equity funds used during construction7,531 8,312 6,188 
Interest and investment income13,131 5,096 82,744 
Miscellaneous - net(9,101)(19,616)(18,991)
TOTAL11,561 (6,208)69,941 
INTEREST EXPENSE   
Interest expense48,416 37,381 38,393 
Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction(1,754)(1,325)(1,047)
TOTAL46,662 36,056 37,346 
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES140,804 (369,421)104,837 
Income taxes32,032 (92,828)(1,977)
NET INCOME (LOSS)$108,772 ($276,593)$106,814 
See Notes to Financial Statements.   
447467

Table of Contents
























(Page left blank intentionally)


448
468

Table of Contents

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSSTATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSSTATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31,
202020192018
(In Thousands)For the Years Ended December 31,
202320222021
(In Thousands)
OPERATING ACTIVITIESOPERATING ACTIVITIES   
Net income$99,131 $99,120 $94,109 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash flow provided by (used in) operating activities:
OPERATING ACTIVITIES
OPERATING ACTIVITIES 
Net income (loss)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash flow provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortizationDepreciation, amortization, and decommissioning, including nuclear fuel amortization184,429 212,170 186,719 
Deferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accruedDeferred income taxes, investment tax credits, and non-current taxes accrued(455,732)95 24,040 
Changes in assets and liabilities:Changes in assets and liabilities:   Changes in assets and liabilities: 
ReceivablesReceivables13,932 (23,382)18,169 
Accounts payableAccounts payable(11,587)18,204 (7,067)
Prepaid taxes and taxes accrued69,145 19,247 (51,999)
Taxes accrued
Interest accruedInterest accrued729 (1,302)(94)
Other working capital accountsOther working capital accounts(34,158)15,879 (45,415)
Other regulatory assetsOther regulatory assets(48,880)(43,712)(2,044)
Other regulatory liabilitiesOther regulatory liabilities140,965 130,949 (156,802)
Pension and other postretirement liabilitiesPension and other postretirement liabilities15,596 11,177 (23,235)
Pension and other postretirement liabilities
Pension and other postretirement liabilities
Other assets and liabilitiesOther assets and liabilities(119,032)(138,304)64,947 
Net cash flow provided by (used in) operating activities(145,462)300,141 101,328 
Net cash flow provided by operating activities
INVESTING ACTIVITIESINVESTING ACTIVITIES   INVESTING ACTIVITIES 
Construction expendituresConstruction expenditures(193,857)(166,695)(194,696)
Allowance for equity funds used during constructionAllowance for equity funds used during construction9,122 8,709 8,750 
Nuclear fuel purchasesNuclear fuel purchases(94,991)(18,170)(125,272)
Proceeds from the sale of nuclear fuel25,836 26,223 30,634 
Proceeds from sale of nuclear fuel
Decrease (increase) in other investments
Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund salesProceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales418,943 500,384 573,561 
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust fundsInvestment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds(432,249)(517,828)(583,683)
Changes in money pool receivable - netChanges in money pool receivable - net55,294 47,824 4,545 
Litigation proceeds for reimbursement of spent nuclear fuel storage costs5,459 
Net cash flow used in investing activities
Net cash flow used in investing activities
Net cash flow used in investing activitiesNet cash flow used in investing activities(206,443)(119,553)(286,161)
FINANCING ACTIVITIESFINANCING ACTIVITIES   FINANCING ACTIVITIES 
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debtProceeds from the issuance of long-term debt1,147,903 1,103,917 741,785 
Retirement of long-term debtRetirement of long-term debt(891,410)(1,187,406)(662,904)
Capital contribution from parentCapital contribution from parent350,000 
Changes in short-term credit borrowings - net(17,830)
Change in money pool payable - net
Common stock dividends and distributions(80,653)(124,250)(67,720)
Common stock dividends and distributions paid
Common stock dividends and distributions paid
Common stock dividends and distributions paid
Net cash flow provided by (used in) financing activitiesNet cash flow provided by (used in) financing activities525,840 (207,739)(6,669)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents173,935 (27,151)(191,502)
Net cash flow provided by (used in) financing activities
Net cash flow provided by (used in) financing activities
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of periodCash and cash equivalents at beginning of period68,534 95,685 287,187 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of periodCash and cash equivalents at end of period$242,469 $68,534 $95,685 
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:   SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION: 
Cash paid during the period for:   
Cash paid (received) during the period for:Cash paid (received) during the period for: 
Interest - net of amount capitalizedInterest - net of amount capitalized$35,061 $21,052 $17,183 
Income taxesIncome taxes$384,329 $2,284 $53,956 
Noncash investing activities:
Accrued construction expenditures
Accrued construction expenditures
Accrued construction expenditures
See Notes to Financial Statements.See Notes to Financial Statements.   
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements. 

449469

Table of Contents

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20202019
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$26,086 $93 
Temporary cash investments216,383 68,441 
Total cash and cash equivalents242,469 68,534 
Accounts receivable:  
Associated companies57,743 121,972 
Other2,550 7,547 
Total accounts receivable60,293 129,519 
Materials and supplies - at average cost123,006 108,766 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs34,459 14,493 
Prepayments and other6,864 6,045 
TOTAL467,091 327,357 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Decommissioning trust funds1,215,868 1,054,098 
TOTAL1,215,868 1,054,098 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric5,309,458 5,070,859 
Construction work in progress59,831 164,996 
Nuclear fuel175,005 149,574 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT5,544,294 5,385,429 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization3,355,367 3,285,487 
UTILITY PLANT - NET2,188,927 2,099,942 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets538,963 490,083 
Accumulated deferred income tax8,023 
Other3,119 3,192 
TOTAL542,082 501,298 
TOTAL ASSETS$4,413,968 $3,982,695 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
 December 31,
 20232022
 (In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS  
Cash and cash equivalents:  
Cash$60 $78 
Temporary cash investments— 2,862 
Total cash and cash equivalents60 2,940 
Accounts receivable:  
Associated companies54,544 158,601 
Other6,861 6,145 
Total accounts receivable61,405 164,746 
Materials and supplies - at average cost155,565 135,346 
Deferred nuclear refueling outage costs8,603 33,377 
Prepayments and other3,373 9,097 
TOTAL229,006 345,506 
OTHER PROPERTY AND INVESTMENTS  
Decommissioning trust funds1,342,317 1,142,914 
TOTAL1,342,317 1,142,914 
UTILITY PLANT  
Electric5,495,728 5,425,449 
Construction work in progress130,866 102,987 
Nuclear fuel160,655 193,004 
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT5,787,249 5,721,440 
Less - accumulated depreciation and amortization3,493,299 3,412,257 
UTILITY PLANT - NET2,293,950 2,309,183 
DEFERRED DEBITS AND OTHER ASSETS  
Regulatory assets:  
Other regulatory assets446,360 415,121 
Other730 1,422 
TOTAL447,090 416,543 
TOTAL ASSETS$4,312,363 $4,214,146 
See Notes to Financial Statements.  
450470

Table of Contents
SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
BALANCE SHEETSBALANCE SHEETSBALANCE SHEETS
LIABILITIES AND EQUITYLIABILITIES AND EQUITYLIABILITIES AND EQUITY
December 31,
20202019
(In Thousands)December 31,
20232022
(In Thousands)
CURRENT LIABILITIES
CURRENT LIABILITIES
CURRENT LIABILITIESCURRENT LIABILITIES   
Currently maturing long-term debtCurrently maturing long-term debt$100,015 $10 
Accounts payable:
Accounts payable:
Accounts payable:Accounts payable:   
Associated companiesAssociated companies15,309 14,619 
OtherOther41,313 64,144 
Taxes accruedTaxes accrued82,977 13,832 
Interest accruedInterest accrued12,722 11,993 
Interest accrued
Interest accrued
Sale-leaseback/depreciation regulatory liability
Sale-leaseback/depreciation regulatory liability
Sale-leaseback/depreciation regulatory liability
OtherOther4,248 3,381 
TOTALTOTAL256,584 107,979 
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES
NON-CURRENT LIABILITIESNON-CURRENT LIABILITIES   
Accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accruedAccumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued359,835 821,963 
Accumulated deferred investment tax creditsAccumulated deferred investment tax credits38,902 40,181 
Regulatory liability for income taxes - netRegulatory liability for income taxes - net151,829 142,845 
Other regulatory liabilitiesOther regulatory liabilities665,396 533,415 
DecommissioningDecommissioning968,910 931,729 
Pension and other postretirement liabilitiesPension and other postretirement liabilities125,412 109,816 
Long-term debtLong-term debt705,259 548,097 
OtherOther61,295 34,602 
TOTALTOTAL3,076,838 3,162,648 
Commitments and ContingenciesCommitments and Contingencies00
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies
COMMON EQUITYCOMMON EQUITY  
Common stock, no par value, authorized 1,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding 789,350 shares in 2020 and 2019951,850 601,850 
COMMON EQUITY
COMMON EQUITY 
Common stock, no par value, authorized 1,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding 789,350 shares in 2023 and 2022
Retained earnings128,696 110,218 
Accumulated deficit
Accumulated deficit
Accumulated deficit
TOTALTOTAL1,080,546 712,068 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITYTOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY$4,413,968 $3,982,695 
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
See Notes to Financial Statements.See Notes to Financial Statements.  
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements. 

451471

Table of Contents

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN COMMON EQUITYSTATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN COMMON EQUITYSTATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN COMMON EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
Common Equity 
Common StockRetained EarningsTotal
(In Thousands)Common StockRetained Earnings (Accumulated Deficit)Total
(In Thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2017$658,350 $52,459 $710,809 
Balance at December 31, 2020
Balance at December 31, 2020
Balance at December 31, 2020
Net incomeNet income94,109 94,109 
Common stock dividends and distributionsCommon stock dividends and distributions(56,500)(11,220)(67,720)
Balance at December 31, 2018$601,850 $135,348 $737,198 
Common stock dividends and distributions
Common stock dividends and distributions
Balance at December 31, 2021
Net loss
Capital contribution from parent
Balance at December 31, 2022
Balance at December 31, 2022
Balance at December 31, 2022
Net incomeNet income99,120 99,120 
Common stock dividends and distributionsCommon stock dividends and distributions(124,250)(124,250)
Balance at December 31, 2019$601,850 $110,218 $712,068 
Net income99,131 99,131 
Capital contribution from parent350,000 350,000 
Common stock dividends and distributionsCommon stock dividends and distributions(80,653)(80,653)
Balance at December 31, 2020$951,850 $128,696 $1,080,546 
Common stock dividends and distributions
Balance at December 31, 2023
See Notes to Financial Statements.See Notes to Financial Statements.   
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements.   

452

Table of Contents

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON
 20202019201820172016
 (Dollars In Thousands)
Operating revenues$495,458 $573,410 $456,707 $633,458 $548,291 
Net income$99,131 $99,120 $94,109 $78,596 $96,744 
Total assets$4,413,968 $3,982,695 $3,848,814 $3,938,887 $3,927,712 
Long-term obligations (a)$705,259 $548,097 $630,744 $466,484 $501,129 
Electric energy sales (GWh)5,849 9,940 6,264 6,675 5,384 
(a) Includes long-term debt (excluding currently maturing debt).

453472

Table of Contents
Item 2.   Properties

Information regarding the registrant’s properties is included in Part I.I, Item 1. - Entergy’s Business under the sections titled “Utility - Property and Other Generation Resources” and “Entergy Wholesale CommoditiesOther Business Activities - Property” in this report.

Item 3.   Legal Proceedings

Details of the registrant’s material environmental regulation and proceedings and other regulatory proceedings and litigation that are pending or those terminated in the fourth quarter of 20202023 are discussed in Part I.I, Item 1. - Entergy’s Business under the sections titled “Retail Rate Regulation,” “Environmental Regulation,” and “Litigation. and “Impairment of Long-lived Assets” in Note 14to the financial statements.

Item 4.   Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

INFORMATION ABOUT EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF ENTERGY CORPORATION

Executive Officers
NameAgePositionPeriod
Leo P. DenaultAndrew S. Marsh (a)6152Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Corporation2013-Present2022-Present
Chairman of the Board of Entergy Corporation2023-Present
A. Christopher Bakken, III (a)59Executive Vice President and Chief NuclearFinancial Officer of Entergy Corporation2013-2022
Director of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2016-Present2013-2022
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System EnergyProject Director, Hinkley Point C of EDF Energy2009-20162014-2022
Marcus V. Brown (a)5962Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2013-Present
Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (a)4950Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Entergy Corporation2013-Present2022-Present
Director of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2013-Present2022-Present
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2014-Present

454

Table of Contents

NameAgePositionPeriod2022-Present
Roderick K. West (a)52Group President Utility Operations of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas2017-Present
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director of System Energy2017-Present
Director of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2017-Present
President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy New Orleans2018
Executive Vice President of Entergy Corporation2010-2017
Chief Administrative Officer of Entergy Corporation2010-2016
Paul D. Hinnenkamp (a)59Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Entergy Corporation2017-Present
Director of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas2015-Present
Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Entergy Corporation2015-2017
Senior Vice President, Capital Project Management and Technology of Entergy Services, Inc.2015
Kathryn A. Collins57Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer, Entergy Corporation2020-Present
Chief Human Resources Officer, Arcosa, Inc.2018-2020
Vice President, Human Resources, Trinity, Inc.2014-2018
Julie E. Harbert (a)47Senior Vice President, Corporate Business Services of Entergy Corporation2019-Present
Vice President, Shared Services of Entergy Services, Inc.2017-2019
Senior Vice President, Global Business Services of Philips Health Tech2015-2017
Kimberly A. Fontan (a)47Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2019-Present2019-2022
Vice President, System Planning of Entergy Services, Inc.Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas2017-2019
473

Table of Contents
Name2017-2019AgePositionPeriod
Roderick K. West (a)55Group President Utility Operations of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas2017-Present
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director of System Energy2017-Present
Director of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2017-Present
Jason Chapman (a)53Senior Vice President, RegulatoryChief Technology and Business Services Officer of Entergy Corporation2023-Present
Acting Senior Vice President, Corporate Business Services of Entergy Services Inc.2015-20172023
Vice President, Enterprise Shared Services of Entergy Services2019-2023
Vice President, Global Business Services, Xylem, Inc.2016-2019
Kathryn A. Collins60Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer of Entergy Corporation2020-Present
Chief Human Resources Officer, Arcosa, Inc.2018-2020
Vice President, Human Resources, Trinity, Inc.2014-2018
Kimberly Cook-Nelson (a)51Executive Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, and System Energy2022-Present
Director of System Energy2022-Present
Chief Operating Officer, Nuclear Operations of Entergy Services2021-2022
Vice President, System Planning of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas2019-2021
Vice President, Operations Support of Entergy Services2016-2019
Anastasia Minor54Chief Transformation Officer of Entergy Services2023-Present
Senior Vice President, Strategy and Financial Planning of Entergy Services2022-2023
Vice President, Financial Business Partners of Entergy Services2017-2022
Peter S. Norgeot, Jr. (a)5558Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Entergy Corporation2022-Present
Director of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas2022-Present
Senior Vice President, Operations and Development of Entergy Corporation2022
Senior Vice President, Sustainable Planning, Development and Operations of Entergy Corporation2021-2022
Senior Vice President, Transformation of Entergy Corporation2018-2021
474

Table of Contents
Name2018-PresentAgePositionPeriod
Reginald T. Jackson (a)57Senior Vice President Power Generationand Chief Accounting Officer of Entergy ServicesCorporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy2017-20182022-Present
Vice President, Fossil GenerationInternal Audit and General Auditor of Entergy Services2015-20172020-2022
Director, Real Estate and Security of Entergy Services2014-2020
(a)In addition, this officer is an executive officer and/or director of various other wholly owned subsidiaries of Entergy Corporation and its operating companies.

Each officer of Entergy Corporation is elected yearly by the Board of Directors. Each officer’s age and title are provided as of December 31, 2020.2023.
455475

Table of Contents
PART II

Item 5.  Market for Registrants’ Common Equity, and Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Entergy Corporation

The shares of Entergy Corporation’s common stock are listed on the New York Stock and Chicago Stock Exchanges under the ticker symbol ETR. As of January 31, 2021,2024, there were 22,81719,887 stockholders of record of Entergy Corporation.
See “
Dividends and Stock Repurchases
Unregistered Sales” in the “Capital Expenditure Plans and Other Uses of Equity SecuritiesCapital” section of Entergy Corporation and UseSubsidiaries Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis and Note 7 to the financial statements for details of ProceedsEntergy Corporation’s payment of dividends.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities (1)
PeriodTotal Number of Shares PurchasedAverage Price Paid per ShareTotal Number of Shares Purchased as Part of a Publicly Announced PlanMaximum $ Amount of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under a Plan (2)
    
10/01/20202023 - 10/31/20202023— $— — $350,052,918 
11/01/20202023 - 11/30/20202023— $— — $350,052,918 
12/01/20202023 - 12/31/20202023— $— — $350,052,918 
Total— $— —  

In accordance with Entergy’s stock-based compensation plans, Entergy periodically grants stock options to key employees, which may be exercised to obtain shares of Entergy’s common stock.  According to the plans, these shares can be newly issued shares, treasury stock, or shares purchased on the open market.  Entergy’s management has been authorized by the Board to repurchase on the open market shares up to an amount sufficient to fund the exercise of grants under the plans.  In addition to this authority, the Board has authorized share repurchase programs to enable opportunistic purchases in response to market conditions. In October 2010 the Board granted authority for a $500 million share repurchase program. The amount of share repurchases under these programs may vary as a result of material changes in business results or capital spending or new investment opportunities.  In addition, in the first quarter 2020,2023, Entergy withheld 151,15971,722 shares of its common stock at $126.31$108.71 per share, 79,15327,533 shares of its common stock at $129.55$107.69 per share, 41,16712,265 shares of its common stock at $131.52$107.59 per share, 2,269551 shares of its common stock at $124.28$103.72 per share, 1,331232 shares of its common stock at $123.74$106.07 per share, 1,088and 100 shares of its common stock at $102.93 per share, 441 shares of its common stock at $132.19 per share, 71 shares of its common stock at $86.51 per share, 31 shares of its common stock at $115.90 per share, and 19 shares of its common stock at $86.74$105.79 per share to pay income taxes due upon vesting of restricted stock granted and payout of performance units as part of its long-term incentive program.

(1)See Note 12 to the financial statements for additional discussion of the stock-based compensation plans.
(2)Maximum amount of shares that may yet be repurchased relates only to the $500 million share repurchase program plan and does not include an estimate of the amount of shares that may be purchased to fund the exercise of grants under the stock-based compensation plans.

Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy

There is no market for the common equity of the Registrant Subsidiaries. Information with respect to restrictions that limit the ability of the Registrant Subsidiaries to pay dividends or distributions is presented in Note 7 to the financial statements.

Item 6.  Reserved

456476

Table of Contents
Item 6.    Selected Financial Data

Refer to “SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA - FIVE-YEAR COMPARISON OF ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC, ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES, and SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.” which follow each company’s financial statements in this report, for information with respect to selected financial data and certain operating statistics.

Item 7.   Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Refer to “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OFANALYSIS” of each of ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES, ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES, and SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.

Item 7A.   Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

Refer to “MANAGEMENT’S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES - Market and Credit Risk Sensitive Instruments.”

Item 8.  Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Refer to “TABLE OF CONTENTS - Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries, Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries, Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries, Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries, Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries, Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries, and System Energy Resources, Inc.”

Item 9.  Changes Inin and Disagreements Withwith Accountants Onon Accounting and Financial Disclosure

No event that would be described in response to this item has occurred with respect to Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, or System Energy.

Item 9A.  Controls and Procedures

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

As of December 31, 2020,2023, evaluations were performed under the supervision and with the participation of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy (individually(each individually a “Registrant” and collectively the “Registrants”) management, including their respective Principal Executive Officers (PEO) and Principal Financial Officers (PFO).  The evaluations assessed the effectiveness of the Registrants’ disclosure controls and procedures.  Based on the evaluations, each PEO and PFO has concluded that, as to the Registrant or Registrants for which they serve as PEO or PFO, the Registrant’s or Registrants’ disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by each Registrant in reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms; and that the Registrant’s or Registrants’ disclosure controls and procedures are also effective in reasonably assuring that such information is accumulated and communicated to the Registrant’s or Registrants’ management, including their respective PEOs and PFOs, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

457

Table of Contents
Internal Control over Financial Reporting (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

The managements of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy (individually(each individually a “Registrant” and collectively the “Registrants”) are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting for the Registrants.  Each Registrant’s internal control system is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the preparation and fair presentation of each Registrant’s financial statements presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
477

Table of Contents

All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations.  Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.

Each Registrant’s management assessed the effectiveness of each Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020.2023.  In making this assessment, each Registrant’s management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control - Integrated Framework. The 2013 COSO Framework was utilized for management’s assessment.

Based on each management’s assessment and the criteria set forth by the 2013 COSO Framework, each Registrant’s management believes that each Registrant maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020.2023.

The report of Deloitte & Touche LLP, Entergy Corporation’s independent registered public accounting firm, regarding Entergy Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting is included herein. The report of Deloitte & Touche LLP is not applicable to Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy because these Registrants are non-accelerated filers.

Changes in Internal ControlsControl over Financial Reporting

Under the supervision and with the participation of each Registrant’s management, including its respective PEO and PFO, each Registrant evaluated changes in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 20202023 and found no change that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, internal control over financial reporting.

458
478

Table of Contents
Attestation Report of Registered Public Accounting Firm

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the shareholders and Board of Directors of
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries

Opinion on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “Corporation”) as of December 31, 2020,2023, based on criteria established in Internal Control —Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). In our opinion, the Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020,2023, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 20202023 of the Corporation and our report dated February 26, 202123, 2024 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.

Basis for Opinion

The Corporation’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Item 9A, Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Corporation in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024
459479

Table of Contents
Item 9B. Other Information

Rule 10b5-1 Trading Agreements

During the three months ended December 31, 2023, no director or officer of Entergy or any of the Registrant Subsidiaries adopted, modified, or terminated a “Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement” or “non-Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangement” as each term is defined in Item 408(a) of Regulation S-K.

Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections

Not applicable.
480

Table of Contents
PART III

Item 10.  Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance of the Registrants (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas)

Information required by this item concerning directors of Entergy Corporation is set forth under the heading “Proposal 1 – Election of Directors” contained in the Proxy Statement of Entergy Corporation, to be filed in connection with its Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held May 7, 2021,3, 2024 (the “2024 Entergy Proxy Statement”), and is incorporated herein by reference.

All officers and directors listed below held the specified positions with their respective companies as of the date of filing this report, unless otherwise noted.

NameAgePositionPeriod
Entergy Arkansas, LLC
Directors   
Laura R. Landreaux4750President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Arkansas2018-Present
Director of Entergy Arkansas2018-Present
Operational Finance Director of Entergy Arkansas2017-2018
Kimberly A. FontanVice President, Regulatory Affairs of Entergy Arkansas2014-2017
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
AndrewPeter S. MarshNorgeot, Jr.See information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Roderick K. WestSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Officers
A. Christopher Bakken, IIIMarcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Marcus V. BrownKimberly Cook-NelsonSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Leo P. DenaultKimberly A. Fontan

See information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Paul D. HinnenkampReginald T. JacksonSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Laura R. Landreaux

See information under the Entergy Arkansas Directors Section above.
Andrew S. Marsh

See information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Kimberly A. FontanRoderick K. West

See information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

481

Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC
Roderick K. WestDirectors

Phillip R. May, Jr.61President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Louisiana2013-Present
Director of Entergy Louisiana2013-Present
Kimberly A. FontanSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

460

Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC
Directors 
Phillip R. May,Peter S. Norgeot, Jr.58President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Louisiana2013-Present
Director of Entergy Louisiana2013-Present
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Andrew S. MarshRoderick K. WestSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Roderick K. West
Officers
Marcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
OfficersKimberly Cook-Nelson
A. Christopher Bakken, IIISee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Marcus V. BrownKimberly A. FontanSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Leo P. DenaultReginald T. JacksonSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Paul D. HinnenkampAndrew S. MarshSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Andrew S. MarshPhillip R. May, Jr.See information under the Entergy Louisiana Directors Section above.
Roderick K. WestSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
Phillip R. May, Jr.DirectorsSee information under the Entergy Louisiana Directors Section above.
Haley R. Fisackerly58President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Mississippi2008-Present
Director of Entergy Mississippi2008-Present
Kimberly A. FontanSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Roderick K. WestPeter S. Norgeot, Jr.See information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
DirectorsRoderick K. West 
Haley R. Fisackerly55President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Mississippi2008-Present
Director of Entergy Mississippi2008-Present
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Andrew S. Marsh
Officers
Marcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Roderick K. WestHaley R. FisackerlySee information under the Entergy Mississippi Directors Section above.
Kimberly A. FontanSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

461

Table of Contents
OfficersReginald T. Jackson
Marcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Leo P. DenaultAndrew S. MarshSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Haley R. FisackerlyRoderick K. WestSee information under the Entergy Mississippi Directors Section above.
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
482

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC
AndrewDirectors
Deanna D. Rodriguez59President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy New Orleans2021-Present
Director of Entergy New Orleans2021-Present
Vice President, Regulatory and Public Affairs of Entergy Texas2014-2021
Peter S. MarshNorgeot, Jr.See information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Kimberly A. FontanRoderick K. WestSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Roderick K. West
Officers
Marcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC
DirectorsKimberly A. Fontan 
David D. Ellis52President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy New Orleans2018-Present
Director of Entergy New Orleans2018-Present
President and Chief Executive Officer, Global Power Technologies2018
Managing Director and Chairman of Comverge International, Inc.2010-2017
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Andrew S. MarshReginald T. JacksonSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Roderick K. WestAndrew S. MarshSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

OfficersDeanna D. RodriguezSee information under the Entergy New Orleans Directors Section above.
Roderick K. West 
Marcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
483

Table of Contents
ENTERGY TEXAS, INC.
Leo P. DenaultDirectors
Eliecer Viamontes41President and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Texas2021-Present
Director of Entergy Texas2021-Present
Vice President, Utility Distribution Operations of Entergy Services2020-2021
Senior Director of Labor Relations and Corporate Safety, Florida Power and Light Corporation2018-2020
Kimberly A. FontanSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
David D. EllisPeter S. Norgeot, Jr.See information under the Entergy New Orleans Directors Section above.
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Andrew S. MarshRoderick K. WestSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Kimberly A. Fontan
Officers
Marcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Roderick K. WestKimberly A. FontanSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

462

Table of Contents
ENTERGY TEXAS, INC.
Directors 
SallieReginald T. Rainer58JacksonPresident and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Texas2012-Present
Director of Entergy Texas2012-Present
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Andrew S. MarshSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Eliecer ViamontesSee information under the Entergy Texas Directors Section above.
Roderick K. WestSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

Officers 
Marcus V. BrownSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Leo P. DenaultSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Paul D. HinnenkampSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Andrew S. MarshSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Kimberly A. FontanSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.
Sallie T. RainerSee information under the Entergy Texas Directors Section above.
Roderick K. WestSee information under the Information about Executive Officers of Entergy Corporation in Part I.

The directors and officers of Entergy Texas are elected annually to serve by the unanimous consent of its sole common stockholder. The directors and officers of Entergy Arkansas, LLC, Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Entergy New Orleans LLC are elected annually to serve by the unanimous consent of the sole common membership owner, Entergy Utility Holding Company, LLC. Entergy Corporation’s directors are elected annually at the annual meeting of shareholders.  Entergy Corporation’s officers are elected annually at the annual organizationala meeting of theits Board of Directors, which immediately follows the annual meeting of shareholders. The age of each officer and director for whom information is presented above is as of December 31, 2020.2023.

Corporate Governance GuidelinesDirectors, Director Nomination Process and Committee Charters

Each of the Audit, Corporate Governance, and Personnel Committees of Entergy Corporation’s Board of Directors operates under a written charter.  In addition, the Board has adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines.  Each charter and the guidelines are available through Entergy’s website (www.entergy.com) or upon written request.

Audit Committee of the Entergy Corporation Board

The followinginformation required under Item 10 concerning directors are membersand nominees for election as directors of Entergy Corporation at the annual meeting of shareholders (Item 401 of Regulation S-K), the director nomination process (Item 407(c)(3) of Regulation S-K), the audit committee (Item 407(d)(4) and (d)(5) of Regulation S-K), and the compliance with the reporting requirements of Section 16 (“Section 16”) of the Audit CommitteeSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) (Item 405 of Regulation S-K) is incorporated herein by reference to information to be contained in the 2024 Entergy Corporation’s Board of Directors:Proxy Statement to be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Exchange Act.

Patrick J. Condon (Chairman)
Philip L. Frederickson
M. Elise Hyland
Karen A. Puckett
463

Table of Contents

All Audit Committee members are independent.  In addition to the general independence requirements of the NYSE, all Audit Committee members must meet the heightened independence standards imposed by the SEC and NYSE.  All Audit Committee members possess the level of financial literacy required by the NYSE rules and  the Board has determined that Messrs. Condon and Frederickson satisfy the financial expertise requirements of the NYSE and have the requisite experience to be designated an audit committee financial expert as that term is defined by the rules of the SEC.

Code of Ethics

Effective October 2018, the Entergy Corporation Board of Directors adopted aCorporation’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (Code of Business Conduct) is the code of ethics that applies to membersEntergy’s Chief Executive Officer and other senior financial officers, including those of the Entergy Corporation Board of Directors and all Entergy officers and employees.Registrant Subsidiaries. The Code of Business Conduct is filed as Exhibit 14 to this report and Ethics includes Special Provisions Relating to Principal Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officers.  It is to be read in conjunction with Entergy’s omnibus codeavailable on
484

Table of integrity under which Contents
Entergy operates, called the Code of Entegrity, as well as system policies.  All employees are expected to abide by the Codes.  Non-bargaining employees are required to acknowledge annually that they understand and abide by the Code of Entegrity.Corporation’s website at www.entergy.com. The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, includingwill be made available, without charge, in print to any shareholder who requests such document from Entergy Corporation’s Corporate Secretary at Entergy Corporation, 639 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, Louisiana 70113.

If any substantive amendments to the Code of Business Conduct are made or any waivers thereto, andare granted, including any implicit waiver, from a provision of the Code of Entegrity are available through Entergy’s website (www.entergy.com)Business Conduct, for any director or upon written request.

Nominations to the Entergy Corporation Board of Directors; Nominating Procedure

Shareholders wishing to recommend a candidate to the Corporate Governance Committee should do so by submitting the recommendation in writing to Entergy Corporation’s Secretary at 639 Loyola Avenue, P.O. Box 61000, New Orleans, LA 70161, and it will be forwarded to the Corporate Governance Committee members for their consideration. Any recommendation should include:

the number of sharesexecutive officer of Entergy Corporation, stock held byEntergy will disclose the shareholder;
nature of such amendment or waiver on Entergy’s website, www.entergy.com. Entergy is providing the nameaddress to its internet site solely for the information of investors and does not intend the address to be an active link. Notwithstanding this reference or any references to the website in this report, the contents of the candidate;
a brief biographical description of the candidate, including his or her occupation for at least the last five years, and a statement of the qualifications of the candidate, takingwebsite are not incorporated into account the qualification requirements discussed in the Proxy Statement under “Board of Directors - Identifying Director Candidates”; and
the candidate’s signed consent to be named in the Proxy Statement and a representation of such candidates’ intent to serve as a director for the entire term if elected.

Once the Corporate Governance Committee receives the recommendation, it may request additional information from the candidate about the candidate’s independence, qualifications, and other information that would assist the Corporate Governance Committee in evaluating the candidate, as well as certain information that must be disclosed about the candidate in the Proxy Statement, if nominated. The Corporate Governance Committee will apply the same standards in considering director candidates recommended by shareholders as it applies to other candidates.


this report.
464485

Table of Contents
Item 11.  Executive Compensation

ENTERGY CORPORATION

Information concerning compensation earned by the directors and officers of Entergy Corporation is set forth in itsthe 2024 Entergy Proxy Statement, to be filed in connection with the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 7, 2021,3, 2024, under the headings “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” “Annual Compensation Programs Risk Assessment,” “Executive Compensation“Compensation Tables,” “Pay Ratio Disclosure,” “Our 2021 Director Nominees,” and “2020“2023 Non-Employee Director Compensation,” all of which information is incorporated herein by reference. References inIn this section, Entergy Corporation is also referred to as “Entergy” or the “Company” refer to Entergy Corporation.“Company.”

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, ENTERGY LOUISIANA, ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, AND ENTERGY TEXAS

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) describes Entergy Corporation’sthe executive compensation policies, programs, philosophy, and decisions regarding the Named Executive Officers (“NEOs”) for 2020.2023. It also explains how and why the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee of Entergy Corporation’s Board of Directors arrived at the specific compensation decisions involving the NEOs in 20202023 who were:

Name(1)
Title
A. Christopher Bakken, IIIExecutive Vice President, Nuclear Operations/Chief Nuclear Officer
Marcus V. BrownExecutive Vice President and General Counsel
Leo P. DenaultChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
David D. EllisPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Entergy New Orleans
Haley R. FisackerlyPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Entergy Mississippi
Laura R. LandreauxKimberly A. FontanPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Entergy Arkansas
Andrew S. MarshExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas
Laura R. LandreauxPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Entergy Arkansas
Andrew S. MarshChair of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Phillip R. May, Jr.President and Chief Executive Officer, Entergy Louisiana
Sallie T. RainerDeanna D. RodriguezPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Entergy New Orleans
Eliecer ViamontesPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Entergy Texas
Roderick K. WestGroup President, Utility Operations, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas

(1)Messrs. Bakken, Brown, Denault, Marsh, and West and Ms. Fontan hold the positions referenced above as executive officers of Entergy Corporation and are members of Entergy Corporation’s Office of the Chief Executive (“OCE”). No additional compensation was paid in 20202023 to any of these officers for their service as NEOs of the Utility operating companies.

All of Entergy Arkansas’s, Entergy Louisiana’s, Entergy Mississippi’s, Entergy New Orleans’s, and Entergy Texas’s directors are employees of Entergy or its subsidiaries and do not receive any additional compensation for their services as director.
465
486

Table of Contents
Entergy Corporation’s Compensation Principles and Philosophy

Entergy Corporation’s executive compensation programs are based on a philosophy of pay for performance that supports itsaimed at achieving the Company’s strategy and business objectives. ItEntergy Corporation believes its executive compensation programs advance the executive pay programs:interests of all of its stakeholders, as they are thoughtfully designed to:

Motivate its management team to drive strong financial and operational results by linking pay to performance.
Attract and retain a highly experienced, diverse and successful management team.
Incentivize and reward the achievement of results that are deemed by the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee to be consistent with the overall goals and strategic direction that the Entergy Corporation Board has approved.approved for the Company.
Attract and retain a highly experienced, diverse, and successful management team.
Create sustainable value for the benefit of all of Entergy Corporation’s stakeholders, including its customers, employees, communities, and owners.
Align the interests of the executives and Entergy Corporation’s investors in itsexecutives with the Company’s long-term business strategy by directly tying the value of equity-based awards to performance metrics designed to focus Entergy Corporation’s stock price performanceexecutives on driving continuous improvement in operational and relative total shareholder return.financial results to the benefit of all stakeholders, including Entergy Corporation’s customers, employees, communities, and owners.

Compensation Best Practices

The Talent and Compensation Committee reviews Entergy’s executive compensation programs on an ongoing basis to evaluate whether they support the Company’s executive compensation principles and philosophy and are aligned with the interests of our stakeholders. The Company’s executive compensation practices include the following, each of which the Talent and Compensation Committee believes reinforces our executive compensation principles and philosophy:

PracticeDescription
Pay for PerformanceThe executive compensation programs yield pay outcomes that the Company believes are highly correlated with performance and drive long-term value creation.
Annual and Long-Term Incentive Measures Drive Desired Employee BehaviorsPerformance measures for the annual and long-term incentive programs are designed to incentivize employee behaviors that serve the Company’s key stakeholders:
Customers – Net Promoter Score (NPS).
Employees – Diversity, Inclusion, & Belonging (DIB) and Safety.
Communities – Environmental Stewardship, DIB.
Owners – Adjusted Earnings Per Share, Credit measure, TSR.
Double Trigger Change-in-ControlThe Company requires both a change-in-control and an involuntary termination without cause or voluntary termination with good reason for cash severance payments and immediate vesting of unvested equity awards.
Long-Term Incentives Paid in StockAll long-term incentives are settled in shares of Entergy common stock.
Stock Ownership GuidelinesThe Company requires executive officers to own a significant amount of Entergy stock.
Cap on Incentive Awards for OCE MembersThe maximum payout for members of the OCE is capped at 200% of the target opportunity for the annual incentive and long-term Performance Unit Program (PUP) awards.
Rigorous GoalsThe Company sets financial goals based on externally disclosed annual and multi-year guidance and outlooks and non-financial goals based on a rigorous internal review.
466
487

Table of Contents
Executive Compensation Best Practices:

Entergy Corporation regularly reviews its executive compensation programs to align them with commonly viewed best practices in the market and to reflect feedback from discussions with Entergy Corporation’s investors on executive compensation.

PracticeDescription
WhatClawback PolicyWe have a recoupment policy that complies with and, in certain respects, goes beyond, the requirements of the new SEC rules and NYSE Listing Standards for Entergy’s officers as defined under Section 16 for the recovery of any erroneously awarded performance-based incentive compensation. In 2024, we also adopted a discretionary recoupment policy applicable to all of our officers, including the NEOs, that allows for recovery of incentive compensation, including time-based awards, from an officer who engages in certain detrimental conduct. See section of this CD&A discussing “Recoupment of Compensation (Clawback Provisions)” for additional information about these policies.
No Hedging of Company StockDirectors, executive officers, and employees of Entergy Corporation Doesand its subsidiaries may not directly or indirectly engage in transactions intended to hedge or offset the market value of the Company’s common stock owned by them.
No Pledging of Company StockDirectors and executive officers of Entergy and its subsidiaries may not directly or indirectly pledge Entergy common stock as collateral for any obligation.
No Excessive PerquisitesExecutive compensation programs are highly correlated to performance and focused on long-term value creationofficers receive limited ongoing perquisites that make up a small portion of total compensation.
No Tax ReimbursementsThe Company does not provide tax reimbursements to OCE members, other than certain relocation benefits.
No Dividends on Unearned Performance AwardsThe Company does not pay dividends on unearned performance awards.
No Repricing or Exchange of Underwater Stock OptionsDouble trigger for cash severance payments andThe Company’s equity acceleration inincentive plan does not permit repricing or the eventexchange of a change in controlunderwater stock options without the approval of its shareholders.
No Employment AgreementsThe Company does not have employment contracts with its executive officers.
Independent Compensation ConsultantClawback policyThe Talent and Compensation Committee retains an independent compensation consultant to advise on the executive compensation programs and practices.
Annual Say-on-PayMaximum payout capped at 200%The Company values the input of target forits shareholders on the executive compensation programs and holds annual incentive awards and Long-Term Performance Unit Program for members of the OCEsay-on-pay votes.
Rigorous goal setting aligned with externally disclosed annual and multi-year financial targets
Minimum vesting periods for equity-based awards
Long-term compensation mix weighted more toward performance units than service-based equity awards
All long-term incentive compensation is settled in Entergy Corporation common stock
Rigorous stock ownership and share retention requirements
Annual Say on Pay vote
Annual Compensation Risk Assessment
What Entergy Corporation Doesn’t Do
×No 280G tax “gross up” payments in the event of a change in control
×No tax “gross up” payments on any executive perquisites for membersA risk assessment of the OCE, other than relocation benefits
×No option repricing or cash buy-outs for underwater options without shareholder approval
×No agreements providing for severance paymentscompensation programs is performed on an annual basis to executive officersensure that exceed 2.99 times annual base salarythe programs and annual incentive awards without shareholder approval
×No unusualpolicies do not incentivize unnecessary or excessive perquisites
×No hedging or pledging of Entergy Corporation common stock
×No fixed term employment agreements
×No new officer participation in the System Executive Retirement Plan
×No grants of supplemental service credit to newly-hired officers under any of Entergy Corporation’s non-qualified retirement plansrisk-taking behavior.

2023 Incentive Program Awards

Performance measures and targets for the 2023 annual incentive program awards were determined by the Talent and Compensation Committee in December 2022 and January 2023, respectively. Performance measures and targets for the 2021 – 2023 performance period for the long-term PUP awards were established in December 2020 and January 2021, respectively. In January 2024 the Talent and Compensation Committee certified the results for the Entergy Achievement Multiplier (“EAM”), the payout factor that determines the funding available for the 2023 annual incentive program awards, and certified the results for the long-term PUP awards for the 2021 – 2023 performance period.

Annual Incentive Program Awards

In December 2022 the Talent and Compensation Committee determined that the EAM would be based on financial and non-financial measures with the financial measure weighted 60% and the four non-financial measures, which address key aspects of our performance on strategies designed to ensure the long-term health and success of the Company, collectively accounting for the remaining 40%.

467488

Table of Contents
How Entergy Corporation Makes Compensation Decisions
The Personnel Committee overseesOf the executive compensation programsfour non-financial measures, two are solely quantitative measures and policies withtwo are based on qualitative assessments that are informed by quantitative measures. As a result, under the adviceprogram design, the performance assessments for 80% of its independent compensation consultant and support from Entergy Corporation’s management team.
Personnel CommitteeThe Personnel Committee is responsible for the review and approval of all aspects of the executive compensation programs and policies.
Among its duties, the Personnel Committee is responsible for approving the compensation for all members of the OCE, including:
Annual review of the compensation elements and mix of elements for the following year;
Annual review and approval of incentive program design, goals and objectives for alignment with Entergy Corporation’s compensation and business strategies;
Evaluation of Company and individual performance results in light of these goals and objectives;
Evaluation of the competitiveness of each executive officer’s total compensation package;
Approval of any changes to its executive officers’ compensation, including but not limited to, base salary,the overall annual and long-term incentive award opportunities and retention programs;
Evaluation of the performance of Entergy Corporation’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and
Reporting, at least annually, to the Entergy Corporation Board of Directors on succession planning.
The Personnel Committee also receives reports and engages on other significant matters affecting the general employee population, including workforce diversity, inclusion and belonging, organizational health and safety.
The Personnel Committee has the sole authority to hire its compensation consultant, approve its compensation, determine the nature and scope of its services, evaluate its performance and terminate its engagement.
ManagementEntergy Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) work closely with the Personnel Committee in managing the executive compensation programs and attend meetings of the Personnel Committee. Mr. Denault and the CHRO, Kathryn Collins since she joined Entergy Corporation, attended all of the Personnel Committee meetings held in 2020.
The Chief Executive Officer reviews with the committee the performance of the members of the OCE other than himself and makes recommendations to the committee regarding compensation for these executive officers.
Independent Compensation ConsultantDuring 2020, Pay Governance, LLC (“Pay Governance”) assisted the Personnel Committee with its responsibilities related to Entergy Corporation’s executive compensation programs.
Pay Governance:
Regularly attended meetings of the committee;
Conducted studies of competitive compensation practices;
Identified Entergy Corporation’s market surveys and proxy peer group;
Provided updates on executive compensation trends and regulatory developments;
Reviewed base salary, annual incentives and long-term incentive compensation opportunities relative to competitive practices; and
Developed conclusions and recommendations related to the executive compensation programs for consideration by the committee.

468

Table of Contents

2021 Executive Compensation Program Enhancements

Annual Incentive Awards. Feedback from Entergy Corporation’s investors has indicated that environmental, social and governance (or ESG) issues are being viewed as increasingly vital to long-term performance. In addition, investors are expecting more transparency regarding corporate ESG commitments. This echoes Entergy Corporation’s own commitment to ESG and all of its critical stakeholders. Thus, Entergy Corporation conducted a comprehensive review of its incentive program in 2020 to identify and prioritize the optimal incentive metrics – including ESG goals – to use in the 2021 program. Historically, Entergy Corporation has used two financial measures to determine the Entergy Achievement Multiplier (“EAM”), which is the performance metric used to determine the maximum funding available for annual incentive awards. ESG and other performance metrics were considered in determining the allocation of incentive funds to certain workgroups and individual recipients. However, to demonstrate Entergy Corporation’s strong commitment to its ESG goals, and to more explicitly link compensation to the interests of its stakeholders, the EAM will be determined based on financial and non-financial measures beginning in 2021. Specifically, a financial measure will be weighted 60%, while quantitative and qualitative non-financial measures, including ESG metrics, will account for the remaining 40%.are purely formulaic.

Financial Measure: Keeping with the committee’sTalent and Compensation Committee’s goal of aligning performance measures with financial results that link to externally communicated investor guidance, Entergy Tax Adjusted Earnings Per Share (“ETR Tax Adjusted earnings per share or ETR TaxEPS”) - a non-GAAP financial measure that is based on the Adjusted EPS will continuethat Entergy reports to beinvestors - was used as the financial measure to determine 60%the EAM.

Non-Financial Measures: To demonstrate Entergy’s strong commitment to creating long-term sustainable value for its key stakeholders - customers, communities, employees, and owners - and to link executive compensation more directly to the achievement of those objectives, the Talent and Compensation Committee decided that 40% of the EAM. EAM would be determined on the basis of results achieved in the following areas, each of which would be weighted equally: Safety; Customer Net Promoter Score, or NPS; DIB; and Environmental Stewardship.

The 2023 annual incentive targets and results determined by the Talent and Compensation Committee were:

Annual Incentive Performance Goals(1)
2023 Percentage of EAMTarget2023 ResultsLevel of Achievement
ETR Tax Adjusted EPS ($)(2)
60%6.708.83200%
Safety (SIF Rate)(3)
10%0.040.03150%
Customer NPS(4)
10%Residential: 5
Business: 28
Residential: -4.5
Business: 17
—%
DIB10%
Qualitative(5)
110%
Environmental Stewardship10%
Qualitative(5)
105%
EAM as a percentage of target, per annual incentive program100%157%
EAM as a percentage of target following discretionary adjustment(6)
138%

(1)See “What Entergy Corporation Pays and Why – 2023 Compensation Decisions – 2023 Annual Incentive Program Performance Assessment” for the minimum and maximum achievement levels.
(2)ETR Tax Adjusted EPS is a non-GAAP financial measure. See "What Energy Corporation Pays and Why - 2023 Compensation Decisions - Annual Incentive Program Financial Measure and Target" for information regarding this non-GAAP financial measure.
(3)SIF Rate refers to the rate of serious injuries and fatalities per 100 employees or contractors. The employee and contractor targets and results are averaged to arrive at reported results. The 2023 target was top quartile performance among electric utilities for 2023, as reported by the Edison Electric Institute.
(4)The Customer NPS measure for 2023 was calculated based on equally weighted categories of residential and business customer NPS scores.
(5)See “What Entergy Corporation Pays and Why – 2023 Compensation Decisions – Annual Incentive Program Non-Financial Measures and Targets” for a discussion of the performance assessment of the DIB and Environmental Stewardship performance measures.
(6)In recognition of the substantial impact on the calculated EAM of the adjustment for 50% of the net benefit of tax strategy items for 2023 and the fact that those items did not produce any current year cash benefit, the Talent and Compensation Committee exercised its discretion to reduce the EAM from 157% to 138%. The Talent and Compensation Committee concluded that this result represented an appropriate recognition of management's strong performance over the course of 2023, including its important role in securing the significant tax benefits reflected in the tax strategy adjustment.

489

Table of Contents
After consideration of individual performance, the Talent and Compensation Committee awarded the NEOs who are members of the OCE payouts averaging 138% of target, with a payout of 138% of target to Mr. Marsh.

Long-Term Performance Unit Program Awards

In January 2021 the Talent and Compensation Committee chose relative TSR and Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio, a non-GAAP financial measure, as the performance measures for the 2021 – 2023 performance period, with relative TSR weighted 80% and Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio weighted 20%.

The targets and results for the 2021 – 2023 performance period as determined by the Talent and Compensation Committee were:

Long-Term PUP MeasuresWeighting2021-2023 PUP Target2021-2023 PUP ResultsLevel of Achievement
Relative TSR(1)
80%Median
2rd Quartile
115%
Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio(2)
20%16%2021: 10.74%
2022: 14.30%
2023: 16.95%
66%
Payout (as a percentage of target)100%105%

(1)The Company ranked 10th of the 20 companies comprising the Philadelphia Utility Index, the industry peer group used by the Talent and Compensation Committee for determining relative TSR performance levels, for the performance period
(2)The Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio, a non-GAAP financial measure, is the ratio of: (i) adjusted funds from operations calculated as consolidated operating cash flow adjusted for allowance for funds used during construction, working capital and the effects of securitization revenue, and the Pre-Determined Exclusions (as defined later in this CD&A) to (ii) total consolidated debt, excluding outstanding or pending securitization debt. The Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio is evaluated on an annual basis against the target set for each year, which for the 2021-2023 performance period was 15.5%. The annual results are then averaged to determine the Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio payout percentage. The Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio FFO/ Debt was below the minimum performance achievement level of 14.5% for 2021 and 2022 and near the maximum achievement level of 17.0% for 2023, resulting in an overall payout of 66% for that measure.

What Entergy Corporation Pays and Why

How Entergy Corporation Makes Compensation Decisions

Role of the Talent and Compensation Committee

The Talent and Compensation Committee, which is composed solely of independent directors, determines the compensation for each member of the OCE and oversees the design and administration of Entergy’s executive compensation programs. Each year, the Talent and Compensation Committee reviews and considers a comprehensive assessment and analysis of the executive compensation programs, including the elements of each OCE member’s compensation, with input from the committee’s independent compensation consultant. When establishing the compensation programs for the NEOs, the Talent and Compensation Committee also considers input and recommendations from management, including Entergy’s Chief Executive Officer and Entergy’s Chief Human Resources Officer, who attend the Talent and Compensation Committee meetings as appropriate.

Role of the Independent Compensation Consultant

In 2023, the Talent and Compensation Committee continued to retain Pay Governance, LLC (“Pay Governance”) as its independent compensation consultant. Pay Governance attends all Talent and Compensation Committee meetings and provides advice, including reviewing and commenting on market compensation data used
490

Table of Contents
to establish the compensation of the executive officers and Entergy Corporation’s directors, the terms and performance goals applicable to incentive plan awards, the process for certifying achievement of the incentive goals, and analysis with respect to specific projects and information regarding trends and competitive practices.Pay Governance also meets with the Talent and Compensation Committee members without management present. The committee annually conducts an independence assessment of its advisors including the compensation consultant, consistent with NYSE listing standards and SEC rules governing proxy disclosure.

Competitive Positioning

1. Market Data for Compensation Comparison

Annually, the Talent and Compensation Committee reviews:

published and private compensation survey data analyzed and provided by Pay Governance;
both utility and general industry data to help determine total direct compensation (base salary, annual, and long-term incentive) for non-industry specific roles; and
data from utility companies to help determine total direct compensation for management roles that are utility-specific, such as Group President, Utility Operations.

2.How the Talent and Compensation Committee Uses Market Data

The Talent and Compensation Committee uses this survey data to develop compensation opportunities that are designed to deliver total direct compensation within a targeted range of approximately the 50th percentile of the surveyed companies in the aggregate. In general, compensation levels for an executive officer who is new to a position tend to be closer to the 25th percentile of surveyed companies, while seasoned executive officers whose experience and skill set are viewed as critical to retain may be positioned at or somewhat above the market median.

3.Proxy Peer Group

Although the survey data described above is the primary data used in benchmarking compensation, the Talent and Compensation Committee used compensation information from the companies included in the Philadelphia Utility Index to evaluate the overall reasonableness of the Company’s executive compensation programs and to determine relative TSR performance levels for the 2023 – 2025 PUP performance period. The Talent and Compensation Committee identified the Philadelphia Utility Index as the appropriate industry peer group for determining relative TSR performance levels because the companies included in this index, in the aggregate, are viewed as comparable to the Company in terms of business and scale.

The Talent and Compensation Committee approved the 2023 compensation model and framework based on compensation information from the companies included in the Philadelphia Utility Index as of December 31, 2022, which were:

AES CorporationConsolidated Edison Inc.Edison InternationalPinnacle West Capital Corporation
Ameren CorporationConstellation Energy CorporationEversource EnergyPublic Service Enterprise Group, Inc.
American Electric Power Co. Inc.Dominion EnergyExelon CorporationSouthern Company
American Water Works Company, Inc.DTE Energy CompanyFirstEnergy CorporationWEC Energy, Inc.
CenterPoint Energy Inc.Duke Energy CorporationNextEra Energy, Inc.Xcel Energy, Inc.

491

Table of Contents
2023 Compensation Structure and Incentive Metrics

In 2023, the executive compensation programs consisted of base salary and annual and long-term incentives as outlined in the table below:

Compensation ElementFormObjectiveMetrics/Performance Period
Base SalaryCashProvides a base level of competitive cash compensation for executive talent.N/A
Annual Incentive Program AwardsCashMotivates and rewards executives for performance on both key financial and non-financial measures during the year; incentivizes behaviors that serve the Company’s four stakeholders - customers, employees, communities, and owners.
ETR Tax Adjusted EPS
Safety
Customer NPS
DIB
Environmental Stewardship
Measured over a one-year performance period
PUP AwardsEquityProvides market competitive compensation designed to retain skills and knowledge while increasing our executives’ ownership in the Company further enhancing their focus on driving continuous improvement in operational results to the benefit of all stakeholders. Designed to focus our executives on driving utility growth, building long-term shareholder value, and a strong balance sheet.
Relative TSR
Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio

Measured over a 3-year performance period
Stock OptionsEquityEnhances management’s focus on driving continuous improvement in operational results to the benefit of all stakeholders. Designed to align interests of management with long-term shareholder value as demonstrated by increases in our share price, provide market competitive compensation, retain talent, and increase management’s ownership in the Company.Share price appreciation with 3-year pro rata vesting
Restricted StockEquityEnhances management’s focus on driving continuous improvement in operational results to the benefit of all stakeholders. Designed to provide market competitive compensation, retain talent, and increase management’s ownership in the Company.Service-based with 3-year pro rata vesting

492

Table of Contents
2023 Compensation Decisions

Base Salary

The salary for each NEO is based on the outcome of an annual merit review, the need to retain an experienced team, job promotion, individual performance, scope of responsibility, leadership skills and values, current compensation, and internal equity. For the NEOs who are members of the OCE, the Talent and Compensation Committee also considers the results of the annual market assessment of OCE compensation as provided by its independent compensation consultant. The Talent and Compensation Committee considers changes in the base salaries of the NEOs at least annually, and in 2023, all of the NEOs, other than Ms. Fontan and Mr. Marsh, received increases in their base salaries ranging from approximately 4% to 5.63% effective April 1, 2023. Ms. Fontan and Mr. Marsh did not receive compensation increases in April 2023 as each had received compensation increases in November 2022 in connection with their promotions to their current positions. These adjustments were made after considering the competitive market data described above as well as their previous compensation levels and the compensation paid to their predecessors.

The following table sets forth the 2022 and 2023 year-end base salaries for the NEOs. Changes in base salaries for 2023 were effective in April.

Named Executive Officer2022 Base Salary2023 Base Salary
Marcus V. Brown$732,021$761,302
Haley R. Fisackerly$414,840$438,206
Kimberly A. Fontan$625,000$625,000
Laura R. Landreaux$394,204$411,351
Andrew S. Marsh$1,100,000$1,100,000
Phillip R. May, Jr.$435,643$454,593
Deanna D. Rodriguez$347,172$362,274
Eliecer Viamontes$350,154$365,385
Roderick K. West$776,434$807,491

Annual Incentive Compensation

The NEOs are eligible for annual incentive awards under our 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan (“2019 OIP”). The maximum funding available for the annual incentive program is determined by the EAM performance measure. At the beginning of each year, after a review of the Company’s strategic plan, the Talent and Compensation Committee engages in a rigorous process to determine the financial and non-financial measures and the targets for each measure that will be used to determine the EAM. The Talent and Compensation Committee also annually establishes target opportunities for each NEO who is a member of the OCE. For the other NEOs, target award opportunities are determined based on their management level (ML) within the Entergy organization. Executive management levels at Entergy Corporation range from ML level 1 through ML level 4. Accordingly, their respective incentive award opportunities differ from one another based on either their management level or the external market data developed by Pay Governance. The 2023 target opportunities for each of the NEOs remained at the same level as those established for 2022 or, in the case of Mr. Marsh and Ms. Fontan, remained at the same level as those established in 2022 in conjunction with their promotions.

Each January, after the end of the fiscal year, the Finance and Talent and Compensation Committees jointly review the Company’s results, and the Talent and Compensation Committee determines the EAM based on the level of achievement of the performance measures established. The Talent and Compensation Committee retains discretion to modify the EAM based on its assessment of the degree of management’s success in achieving the Company’s strategic objectives during the year taking into account the business and operating environment.

493

Table of Contents
Individual executive officer awards are determined based on the Talent and Compensation Committee’s or management’s consideration of each executive officer’s role in executing the Company’s strategies and delivering the financial and operational performance achieved, but also the individual’s accountability for any challenges and achievements the Company experienced during the year.

2023 Annual Incentive Program Performance Measures and Methodology

For 2023, and consistent with the 2022 program design, the Talent and Compensation Committee decided that the EAM would be based on both financial and non-financial measures, with the financial measure weighted 60% and four non-financial measures each weighted 10%. Targets and ranges of performance were established for each of the measures, with no payout for results less than the designated minimum, a 25% payout opportunity for results at the minimum, a 100% payout opportunity for results at target, and a 200% payout opportunity for results equal to or exceeding the maximum. Payout opportunities for results between the minimum and maximum performance achievement levels were determined by straight line interpolation, with the EAM result being determined by the weighted-average of the payout opportunities for each of the performance measures.

Annual Incentive Program Financial Measure and Target

For the EAM financial measure, the Talent and Compensation Committee decided to use ETR Tax Adjusted Earnings Per Share (“EPS, a non-GAAP financial measure. This measureis based on ETR Adjusted EPS”),EPS, a non-GAAP financial measure which is the earnings measure by which the Company provides external guidance, and excludes the effects of certain adjustments, which are unusual or non-recurring items or events or other items or events that is used for external guidance. ETR Adjusted EPS adjustsmanagement believes do not reflect the ongoing business of Entergy, Corporation’ssuch as reported (GAAP) earnings per share results to eliminate the impact of its Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, significant tax items, and other non-routineitems such as certain costs, expenses, or other specified items. To arrive at ETR Tax Adjusted EPS, ETR Adjusted EPS is then adjusted to add back the net effect (positive or negative) of significant tax strategy items and to eliminate the effect of: (i) major storms, including the impact on total debt of pending securitizations, (ii) resolutions during the resolutionyear of certain unresolved regulatory litigation matters, (iii) unrealized gains or losses on equity securities, (iv) potential effects of federal income tax law changes, and (v) electiveany adjustments to contributions to pension plansinvestments or trusts related to non-qualified postretirementpost-retirement benefits that are elective and deviate from original plan assumptions.assumptions (collectively, the “Pre-Determined Exclusions”). The Talent and Compensation Committee determined that target performance for this metric would equal management’s expectation for ETR Adjusted EPS as reflected in its financial plan, or $6.70 per share, with minimum performance determined to be $6.35 per share and maximum performance being $7.05 per share.

ETR Tax Adjusted EPS was used as the financial measure for the EAM because:

It is based on an objective financial measure that the Company and its investors consider to be important in evaluating financial performance.
It is based on the same measure used for internal and external financial reporting.
It provides both discipline and transparency.

The Talent and Compensation Committee considered it appropriate to use ETR Tax Adjusted EPS, which adds back 50% of the net effect of significant tax strategy items that may have been excluded from ETR Adjusted EPS, as the earnings measure because of the significant financial impact to the Company resulting from such tax strategy items.

The Talent and Compensation Committee also considered, both at the time it chose ETR Tax Adjusted EPS as the EAM financial measure and when it established the targets for this measure, the appropriateness of excluding the effect of each of the specific Pre-Determined Exclusions it had identified from the financial measure. It viewed the exclusion of major storms as appropriate because although the Company includes estimates for storm costs in its financial plan, it does not include estimates for a major storm event, such as a hurricane, given management’s inability to control or predict acts of nature. The Talent and Compensation Committee considered the exclusion of the effects of any unanticipated changes in federal income tax law to be appropriate because of the inability of management to impact those results. It approved the exclusion of elective adjustments to Company contributions to
469
494

Table of Contents
pension and post-retirement benefit plan trusts because such elective adjustments are not viewed as reflective of the underlying performance of the business. The Talent and Compensation Committee approved the other Pre-Determined Exclusions from reported results — for the impact of certain legacy unresolved regulatory litigation and unanticipated unrealized gains and losses on securities — primarily because of management’s inability to influence either of the related outcomes.

Annual Incentive Program Non-Financial Measures and Targets

: The following non-financial metrics will be used
To demonstrate Entergy’s strong commitment to creating long-term sustainable value for its key stakeholders - customers, communities, employees, and owners - and to link executive compensation to successful execution on those strategies to achieve those objectives, the Talent and Compensation Committee decided to use the measures described below to collectively determine 40% of the EAM, with each of the measures weighted at 10%. These measures were selected because the Talent and Compensation Committee considered them to represent key measures of the Company’s success in advancing strategies to create sustainable value for 2021:its stakeholders that may not be fully captured in its quarterly and annual financial results. The non-financial performance measures remained fundamentally consistent with the measures used in the 2022 annual incentive program.

Following is a summary description of each of these measures, including the metric or methodology used for determining the level of achievement and the rationale for each of the selected measures:

MeasureDescriptionMetrics and TargetsRationaleObjective
SafetyQuantitative measuresafety metric based on rate of serious injuryinjuries and fatalities per 100 employees or contractors (SIF rate). Minimum performance = second quartile, target = top quartile, and maximum performance = top decile of published Edison Electric Institute (EEI) member SIF rate data as defined by EEI.published in 2023, with no payout in the event of any fatalities during the reporting year.
EnsuresSupports Entergy’s goal of maintaining a safe and incident-free workplace is maintained for all of Entergy Corporation’sits employees and contractors.
Customer Net Promoter Score (NPS)
Quantitative customer NPS metric is determined through a blind survey of residential and business customers who are asked how likely they are to recommend Entergy, on a scale of 1 to 10.The NPS is the percentage of promoters (scores 9-10) less the percentage of detractors (scores less than 6).

Residential: minimum performance = .5; target = 5; and maximum performance = 10.

Business: minimum performance = 21; target = 28; and maximum performance = 35.
Incentivizes actions that drive positive customer outcomes (as measured through customer feedback), including impacts on reliability improvements, responsiveness, continuous improvement, and innovation.
Signals overall health and loyalty of our customer relationship.
495

Table of Contents
MeasureMetrics and TargetsObjective
Diversity, Inclusion, & Belonging (DIB)Overall qualitative assessment of DIB key performance indicators assessed in the workforce, workplaceareas of diversity, culture, and marketplace,commerce, informed by quantitative measures;measures in the areas of female, racially, and ethnically diverse representation in the employee population and in director and above placements, inclusive climate survey scores, and diverse supplier managed spend; progress on DIB initiatives; and responsiveness to emergent issues.
Reinforces theEntergy’s commitment to be a fair and equitable work environment that is welcoming to all and allows Entergy Corporationus to attract and retain superb talent, allowing itthe Company to execute on its strategystrategy.
Rewards progress toward meeting Entergy’s commitment to bedevelop and retain a workforce that reflects the Premier Utility.rich diversity of the communities Entergy serves, while maintaining its commitment to hiring the most qualified candidates.
Drives an engaged workforce; customer-centric service and solutions; enhancement of owner value; and community partnerships.
Environmental StewardshipAssessment of progress toward environmental commitments through performance on publicly announced goals and other key initiatives and Utility CO2initiatives. Goals set for 2023 included carbon dioxide emission rate outcomes.and carbon-free energy capacity targets, advancement of our resilience strategy as demonstrated by regulatory filings made, approved, and implemented, and customer engagement, electrification, and emission reductions.
Reinforces Entergy Corporation’sEntergy’s commitment to long-term sustainability and a reduced impact on the environment. Ensures accountability for achieving its significant external commitments to reduce carbon emissions.
Customer Net Promoter ScoreUtilize quantitative Residential Net Promoter Score benchmark survey process.
Incentivizes actions that drive positive customer outcomes (as measured through customer feedback) including impacts on reliability improvements, responsiveness, continuous improvementenvironment, in particular by advancing Entergy’s climate goals and innovation.commitments.
Signals overall healthProvides accountability for accelerating completion of Entergy’s resilience investments and loyalty of Entergy Corporation’sadvancing Entergy’s customer relationship.electrification initiatives.

Targets for each of the non-financial measures will be clearly defined and will be designed to drive employee behaviors that support all four of Entergy Corporation’s stakeholders – customers, employees, communities and our owners.

Long-Term Performance Incentive Program (“LTIP”). In recent performance periods, Entergy Corporation has used two financial measures to determine awards under the LTIP – a cumulative earnings per share (EPS) measure (most recently cumulative ETR Adjusted EPS) and relative total shareholder return (“TSR”). To emphasize the importance of strong cash generation for the long-term health of its business, Entergy Corporation is replacing the EPS measure with a credit measure – adjusted FFO/Debt ratio for the 2021 – 2023 performance period. The adjusted FFO/Debt ratio is the ratio of: (i) adjusted funds from operations calculated as operating cash flow adjusted for allowance for funds used during construction, working capital and the effects of securitization revenue, and the pre-defined exclusions discussed above for the annual incentives; to (ii) total debt, excluding outstanding or pending securitization debt. The Personnel Committee decided to use this ratio because it emphasizes financial stability, noting that a financially healthy utility creates the capacity to make investments on behalf of customers, addresses the needs of communities, provides low-cost access to capital markets and promotes employee confidence. Relative TSR will continue to be used as the other performance measure for the 2021 – 2023 LTIP performance period, with relative TSR weighted 80% and the credit measure weighted 20%. Relative TSR measures Entergy Corporation’s total TSR relative to the TSR of the companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index as of December 31, 2020. Targets for the LTIP performance measures will include the same exclusions that will be used to determine the annual incentive financial measure targets.

2020 Incentive Payouts

Performance measures and targets for the 2020 annual incentive awards were determined by the Personnel Committee in January 2020 and the targets and measures for the 2018 – 2020 LTIP performance cycle were
470

Table of Contents
established in January 2018. In January 2021, the Personnel Committee certified the results for the EAM for the 2020 annual incentive awards and the 2018 – 2020 LTIP performance cycle. The Personnel Committee did not make any adjustments to the targets for either program for the impact of COVID-19 on Entergy Corporation and its subsidiaries.

Entergy Corporation believes the 2020 incentive pay outcomes for the NEOs demonstrate the application of its pay for performance philosophy.

Annual Incentive Awards

The Personnel Committee determined that the 2020 EAM would be based on two equally weighted performance metrics:

ETR Tax Adjusted Earnings Per Share (“ETR Tax Adjusted EPS”): Entergy Corporation uses a single non-GAAP earnings measure for guidance and investor reporting purposes that reflects its ongoing business. This measure, Entergy Adjusted Earnings Per Share (“ETR Adjusted EPS”) adjusts Entergy Corporation’s as reported (GAAP) earnings per share results to eliminate the impact of its Entergy Wholesale Commodities business, significant tax items and other non-routine items. ETR Tax Adjusted EPS is based on the externally reported ETR Adjusted EPS, which is then adjusted to add back the effect of significant tax items, and to eliminate the effect of major storms, the resolution of certain unresolved regulatory litigation matters, changes in federal income tax law and unrealized gains or losses on equity securities (the “Pre-Determined Exclusions”), as well as other items the Personnel Committee may consider appropriate adjustments based on management accountability and business rationale.

Entergy Adjusted Operating Cash Flow (“ETR Adjusted OCF”): ETR Adjusted OCF is calculated based on Entergy Corporation’s as-reported (GAAP) operating cash flow, adjusted to eliminate the effect of any Pre-Determined Exclusions.

The 2020 annual incentive award targets and results determined by the Personnel Committee were:

Annual Incentive Program Performance Goals2020 Targets2020 Results
ETR Tax Adjusted EPS$5.60$6.90
ETR Adjusted OCF ($ billions)$3.450$3.127
EAM as a percentage of target100%120%
Average NEO Payout (as a percentage of target)124%

In January 2021, the Personnel Committee determined that ETR Adjusted EPS exceeded the maximum by $1.30, but fell short of achieving its ETR Adjusted OCF target of $3.45 billion by approximately $323 million, leading to a preliminary EAM of 118%. In recognition of management’s success in achieving positive outcomes in 2020 on certain strategic efforts deemed critical to Entergy Corporation’s long-term success, the committee exercised its discretion to increase the EAM by 2% to 120%. Based on each NEO’s individual accountabilities and accomplishments, the committee then determined individual annual incentive awards of 115% to 150% of the target opportunity for each of the NEOs.

Long-Term Performance Unit Program

In January 2018, the Personnel Committee chose relative TSR and Cumulative Adjusted Utility, Plant & Other Earnings Per Share (“Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPS”), each weighted equally, as the performance measures for the 2018 – 2020 LTIP performance period. Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPS adjusts Entergy Corporation’s cumulative operational Utility, Parent & Other results to eliminate the impact of tax items and weather. Similar to the way targets are established for the annual incentive awards, the relative TSR and Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPS performance measures were established by the Personnel Committee after the Board’s review of Entergy Corporation’s strategic plan.
471

Table of Contents

The targets and results for the 2018 – 2020 LTIP performance period as determined by the Personnel Committee were:

LTIP Results2018 - 2020 LTIP Target2018 - 2020 LTIP Result
Relative TSRMedian
2nd Quartile
Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPS$15.20$15.25
Payout (as a percentage of target)100%126%

What Entergy Corporation Pays and Why

Principal Executive Compensation Elements

The principal components of Entergy Corporation’s 2020 executive compensation programs and the purpose of each component were:

Compensation ElementFormPerformance MetricsPrimary PurposeVesting PeriodSubject to Clawback
Base SalaryCashN/AProvides a base level of competitive cash compensation for executive talent.N/AN/A
Annual IncentiveCashETR Tax Adjusted EPS (50%)Motivates and rewards executives for performance on key financial measures during the year.1 yearü
ETR Adjusted OCF
(50%)
Long-Term Performance UnitsEquityRelative TSR (80%)Focuses the executive officers on building long-term shareholder value, growing earnings and increases executives’ ownership of Entergy Corporation common stock.3 yearsü
Cumulative ETR Adjusted EPS (20%)
Stock OptionsEquityN/AAlign interests of executives with long-term shareholder value, provide competitive compensation, and increase executives’ ownership in Entergy Corporation common stock.3 yearsü
Restricted StockEquityN/AAligns interests of executives with long-term shareholder value, provides competitive compensation, retains executive talent and increases the executives’ ownership in Entergy Corporation common stock.3 yearsü

Competitive Positioning

Market Data for Compensation Comparison

Annually, the Personnel Committee reviews:

Published and private compensation survey data compiled by Pay Governance, the Personnel Committee’s independent compensation consultant;
472

Table of Contents
Both utility and general industry data to determine total cash compensation (base salary and annual incentive) for non-industry specific roles;
Data from utility companies to determine total cash compensation for management roles that are utility-specific, such as Group President, Utility Operations; and
Utility market data to determine long-term incentives for all positions.

How the Personnel Committee Uses the Market Data

The Personnel Committee uses this survey data to develop compensation opportunities that are designed to deliver total direct compensation (“TDC”) within a targeted range of approximately the 50th percentile of the surveyed companies in the aggregate. In most cases, the committee considers its objectives to have been met if Entergy Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer and the eight other executive officers (including the applicable NEOs) who constitute the OCE each has a target compensation opportunity that falls within a targeted range of 85% - 115% of the 50th percentile of the survey data. In general, compensation levels for an executive officer who is new to a position tend to be at the lower end of the competitive range, while seasoned executive officers whose experience and skill set are viewed as critical to retain would be positioned at the higher end of the competitive range. Generally, differences in the levels of TDC among the NEOs are primarily driven by the scope of their responsibilities, differences in the competitive market pay range for similar positions, performance and considerations of internal pay equity.

Proxy Peer Group

Although the survey data described above are the primary data used in benchmarking compensation, the committee uses compensation information from the companies included in the Philadelphia Utility Index to evaluate the overall reasonableness of Entergy Corporation’s compensation programs and to determine relative TSR for the 2020 - 2022 LTIP performance period. The companies included in the Philadelphia Utility Index at the time the Personnel Committee approved the 2020 compensation model and framework were:

AES CorporationEl Paso Electric Co.*
Ameren CorporationEversource Energy
American Electric Power Co. Inc.Exelon Corporation
American Water Works Company, Inc.FirstEnergy Corporation
CenterPoint Energy Inc.NextEra Energy, Inc.
Consolidated Edison Inc.Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
Dominion EnergyPublic Service Enterprise Group, Inc.
DTE Energy CompanySouthern Company
Duke Energy CorporationXcel Energy, Inc.
Edison International
*El Paso Electric Co. is no longer included in the Philadelphia Utility Index.

2020 Compensation Decisions

Base Salary

When setting the base salaries of the NEOs who are members of the OCE, the Personnel Committee generally targets the range of compensation paid to similarly situated executive officers of the companies included in the market data previously discussed in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis under “Competitive Positioning.” For the other NEOs, their salaries are established by their immediate supervisors using the same criteria. The base salaries of the NEOs are considered annually as part of the performance review process, and upon a NEO’s promotion or other change in job responsibilities. Based on this review in 2020 and after reviewing the market data above, all of the NEOs, other than Mr. Denault, received increases in their base salaries ranging from approximately 2.5% to 6.15%. In 2020, Mr. Denault did not receive an increase in his base salary. Instead, the
473

Table of Contents
Personnel Committee increased Mr. Denault’s TDC by increasing his long-term incentive target opportunities; thereby, increasing the portion of his compensation that is “at risk” and further aligning his interests with those of Entergy Corporation’s shareholders.

The following table sets forth the 2019 and 2020 base salaries for the Named Executive Officers. Changes in base salaries for 2020 were effective in April.

Named Executive Officer2019 Base Salary2020 Base Salary
A. Christopher Bakken, III$654,078$673,700
Marcus V. Brown$666,250$690,000
Leo P. Denault$1,260,000$1,260,000
David D. Ellis$313,388$321,849
Haley R. Fisackerly$376,023$388,244
Laura R. Landreaux$316,470$326,755
Andrew S. Marsh$650,000$690,000
Phillip R. May, Jr.$392,043$404,784
Sallie T. Rainer$347,422$358,713
Roderick K. West$714,013$731,863

Annual Incentive Compensation

In 2020, annual incentive awards were tied to Entergy Corporation’s financial and operational performance through the EAM. Entergy Corporation uses the following process to determine annual incentive awards:

Establish Performance Measures to Determine EAM Pool.Annually, the Personnel Committee engages in a rigorous process to determine the performance measures used to determine the EAM. The Personnel Committee’s goal is to establish measures that are consistent with Entergy Corporation’s strategy and business objectives for the upcoming year, as reflected in its strategic plan, and are designed to drive results that represent a high level of achievement. These measures are approved based on a comprehensive review of Entergy Corporation’s strategic plan by its full Board of Directors conducted in December of the preceding year and updated in January to reflect key drivers of anticipated changes in performance from the preceding year.

Establish Target Achievement Levels.In January, after Entergy Corporation’s strategic plan is updated to reflect any changes from that reviewed in December, the Personnel Committee establishes the specific targets that must be achieved for each performance measure. The Personnel Committee also seeks to assure that the targets:

Take into account changes in the business environment and specific challenges facing Entergy Corporation;
Reflect an appropriate balancing of the various risks and opportunities recognized at the time the targets are set; and
Are aligned with external expectations communicated to Entergy Corporation’s shareholders.

Establish NEO Target Opportunities. In January of each year, the Personnel Committee establishes the target opportunities for the members of the OCE based on its review of the competitive analysis of job-specific market data prepared by Pay Governance as well as the officer’s role, individual performance and internal equity considerations. For the NEOs who are members of the OCE (Messrs. Bakken, Brown, Denault, Marsh and West), target award opportunities are established based on these factors. For the other NEOs, target award opportunities are determined based on their management level within the Entergy organization. Executive management levels at Entergy Corporation range from ML level 1 through ML level 4 (the “ML 1-4 Officers”). At December 31, 2020, Mr. May held a Level 3 position, and Mr. Ellis,
474

Table of Contents
Mr. Fisackerly, Ms. Landreaux and Ms. Rainer held Level 4 positions. Accordingly, their respective incentive award opportunities differ from one another based on either their management level or the external market data developed by the Committee’s independent compensation consultant. The 2020 target opportunities were increased for Mr. Bakken, Mr. Brown, Mr. Marsh and Mr. West to align more closely with market data and internal pay equity. Mr. Denault’s 2020 target opportunity was unchanged from the level set in 2019 due to the Personnel Committee’s decision to increase his TDC by increasing his long-term incentive target opportunities. The target levels for the other NEOs are comparable to the levels set for 2019.

Determine the EAM.In January, after the end of the fiscal year, the Finance and Personnel Committees jointly review Entergy Corporation’s financial results and the Personnel Committee determines the EAM, which represents the level of success in achieving the performance objectives established by the committee and determines the maximum funding level of the annual incentive plan, as a percentage of the total target opportunity.

Determine Annual Incentive Awards. To determine individual executive officer awards under the annual incentive plan, the Personnel Committee considers not only each executive’s role in executing on Entergy Corporation’s strategies and delivering the financial performance achieved, but also the individual’s accountability for any challenges Entergy Corporation experienced during the year.

Establishing 2020 Financial Measures and Targets

Using the process described above, in December 2019, the Personnel Committee decided to use ETR Tax Adjusted EPS and ETR Adjusted OCF, with each measure weighted equally, as the performance measures for determining the 2020 EAM pool. ETR Tax Adjusted EPS is based on ETR Adjusted EPS, which is the primary earnings measure used by Entergy Corporation externally and the measure on which it provides annual earnings guidance. To arrive at ETR Tax Adjusted EPS, ETR Adjusted EPS is adjusted to add back the effect of any significant tax items that were excluded to arrive at ETR Adjusted EPS and to eliminate the effects, if any, of the Pre-Determined Exclusions.  ETR Adjusted OCF is calculated based on Entergy Corporation’s as-reported (GAAP) operating cash flow, adjusted to eliminate the effect of any significant non-routine items not representative of the ongoing business, such as items associated with the decisions to sell or close the Entergy Wholesale Commodities nuclear plants, and any Pre-Determined Exclusions. The Personnel Committee determined that ETR Tax Adjusted EPS and ETR Adjusted OCF were the appropriate metrics to use for annual incentives in 2020 because:

They are based on objective financial measures that Entergy Corporation and its investors consider to be important in evaluating its financial performance;
They are based on the same metrics we use for internal and external financial reporting; and
They provide both discipline and transparency.

The Personnel Committee considered it appropriate to use ETR Tax Adjusted EPS, which adds back the effect of significant tax items that may have been excluded from ETR Adjusted EPS, as the earnings measure because of the significant financial benefits to Entergy Corporation resulting from such tax items and the management effort required to achieve them. The Personnel Committee also considered the appropriateness of excluding the effect of each of the specific Pre-Determined Exclusions it had identified from each of the financial measures. It viewed the exclusion of major storms as appropriate because although Entergy Corporation includes estimates for storm costs in its financial plan, it does not include estimates for a major storm event, such as a hurricane. The Personnel Committee considered the exclusion of any unanticipated effects of the tax reform legislation adopted at the end of 2017 to be appropriate because of the lingering uncertainty around those effects and the inability of management to impact those results. The Personnel Committee approved the other exclusions from reported results - for the impact of certain legacy unresolved regulatory litigation and unanticipated unrealized gains and losses on securities held by Entergy Corporation’s nuclear decommissioning trusts - primarily because of management’s inability to influence either of the related outcomes. The Personnel Committee further provided that in determining the 2020 EAM, the 2020 results would be subject to adjustment for other items the committee may consider appropriate in its review of 2020 performance, considering management accountability and business
475

Table of Contents
rationale, and the EAM as so calculated would be subject to further adjustment at the committee’s discretion based on business considerations.

In determining the targets to set for 2020,2023, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee reviewed anticipated drivers and risks to Entergy Corporation’sthe Company’s expectations for its adjusted earnings and operating cash flowETR Adjusted EPS for 20202023 as set forth in itsthe Company’s financial plan, as well as factors driving the strong financial performance achieved in 2019.2022. The PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee confirmednoted that the proposed plan targets for ETR Tax Adjusted EPS and ETR Adjusted OCF reflected significantyear-to-year growth in the core earnings and consolidated operating cash flow measuresmeasure underlying the annual incentive plan targets. The Personnel Committee also noted that while the 2020 ETR Tax Adjusted EPS target was less than the 2019 results, the 2020 target represented significant growth in the underlyingconsistent with Entergy’s stated objective of a steady, predictable ETR Adjusted EPS both from 2019 resultscompound annual growth rate of 6%-8%. The Talent and from the 2019 target, with the primary driver of the higher results in 2019 being certain one-time tax benefits that would not be recurring in 2020. The PersonnelCompensation Committee also considered the potential impact of a wide range of identified risks and opportunities and confirmed that both the relatedfinancial and non-financial annual incentive plan targets reflected a reasonable balancing of such risks and opportunities and an appropriate degree of challenge. The goals were designed to be achievable, but also to require the strong coordinated performance of the management team.

2020
496

Table of Contents
2023 Annual Incentive Program Performance Assessment

In January 2024, the Finance and Talent and Compensation Committees jointly reviewed the Company’s financial and operational results and assessed management’s performance against the performance objectives and targets described above in order to determine the EAM. Based on the plan design and targets set at the beginning of the year and prior to any discretionary adjustments, the committees determined that the EAM was 157%. The following table showssummarizes the 2020 annual incentive plantargets and performance metrics and targets established by the Personnel Committee to determine the 2020 EAM and 2020 results:results for 2023:

Annual Incentive Plan Targets and Results
Performance MeasureTargets and Results
WeightingMinimumTargetMaximum2023 ResultsLevel of Achievement
ETR Tax Adjusted EPS ($)(1)
60%6.356.707.058.83200%
Safety (SIF Rate)10%0.090.040.02
  0.03(2)
150%
Customer NPS10%Residential: 0.5
Business: 21
Residential: 5
Business: 28
Residential: -4.5
Business: 17
0%
DIB10%
Qualitative assessment(3)
110%
Environmental Stewardship10%
Qualitative assessment(3)
105%
Calculated EAM(4)
100%25%100%200%157%
Performance Goals(1)
WeightMinimumTargetMaximum2020 Results
ETR Tax Adjusted EPS ($)50%5.045.606.166.90
ETR Adjusted OCF ($ billions)50%3.0703.4503.8303.127
EAM as % of Target25%100%200%120%

(1)PayoutsETR Tax Adjusted EPS is a non-GAAP financial measure. See "What Energy Corporation Pays and Why - 2023 Compensation Decisions - Annual Incentive Program Financial Measure and Target" for information regarding this non-GAAP financial measure.
(2)2023 SIF results were 0.03 for employees and 0.03 for contractors. The employee and contractor targets and results were averaged to arrive at target and reported results. The 2023 target was top quartile employee SIF performance between achievement levels are calculated using straight-line interpolation, with no payoutamong electric utilities for 2023, as reported by the EEI, the maximum was top decile performance, belowand the minimum achievement level for both performance measures.was 2nd quartile performance.
(3)This qualitative assessment is informed by quantitative measures and is discussed below.
(4)Reflects the EAM as a percentage of target and as calculated in accordance with the annual incentive plan prior to the Talent and Compensation's discretionary adjustment noted earlier in this CD&A and discussed further below.

In January 2021,assessing 2023 performance, the Finance and PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committees jointly reviewed Entergy Corporation’s financial results againstmanagement’s performance under each of the performance objectives reflected in the tablemeasures referenced above. Management discussed withIn assessing financial performance, the committees Entergy Corporation’sevaluated various factors explaining how the 2023 ETR Tax Adjusted EPS and the ETR Adjusted OCF results for 2020, including primary factors explaining how those resultsresult compared to the 20202023 business plan and annual incentive plan targetstarget set in January 2020.2023. ETR Tax Adjusted EPS exceeded the ETR Tax Adjusted EPS target of $5.60$6.70 per share by $1.30, but management fell short of achieving its$2.13. This outperformance resulted in part from the fact that ETR Adjusted OCF targetEPS exceeded the midpoint of $3.45 billion by approximately $323 million, leading to a preliminary EAM of 118%. These results reflected a positive adjustment of $0.10 to ETR Tax Adjusted EPS and a positive adjustment of $274 million to ETR Adjusted OCF for the effects on earnings and operational cash flow of major storms impacting Entergy Corporation’s service area during 2020, consistent with the Pre-Determined Exclusions approved when the targets wereguidance set at the beginning of the year.year by $0.07 per share. The resultsETR Tax Adjusted EPS result also reflected a positive adjustment of $100 million$2.13 to ETR Adjusted OCFEPS for 50% of the effect on operational cash flownet benefit of tax strategy items impacting net income which had been excluded from ETR Adjusted EPS, as well as a negative adjustment of $0.07 to reflect the additional voluntary contributions madeexpense accrual that would be associated with funding anticipated payouts to Entergy Corporation’s pension plan in 2020 over and above the requiredemployees at a level of contributions, which adjustment was made because the committee did not consider it appropriate for management to be penalized in the incentive compensation process for choosing to make such elective contributions, consistentcommensurate with the Pre-Determined Exclusion for items the committee determined should be excluded based on management accountability and business rationale.calculated EAM.

The Personnel Committee considered whether 2020 ETR Tax Adjusted EPS or ETR Adjusted OCF should be adjusted for any other factors that had impacted 2020 results. The committee noted that 2020 revenues and cash flow had been adversely impacted by reduced sales resulting from unfavorable weather, the COVID-19 pandemic and, to a lesser extent, major storms, which collectively reduced ETR Adjusted EPS by approximately $0.71 per share, and ETR Adjusted OCF by approximately $663 million as compared to plan. In addition, the Personnel Committee noted that ETR Adjusted OCF had been further reduced by approximately $178 million due to increased customer arrearages as a result of regulatory moratoria on customer disconnects following the onsetrecognition of the pandemic. As noted, both ETR Tax Adjusted EPSsubstantial impact on the calculated EAM of the adjustment for 50% of the net benefit of tax strategy items for 2023 and ETR Adjusted OCF were adjustedthe fact that those items did not produce any current year cash benefit, the Talent and Compensation Committee exercised its discretion to reflectreduce the impactEAM from 157% to 138%. The Talent and Compensation Committee concluded that this result represented an appropriate recognition of management's strong performance over the course of 2023, including its important role in securing the significant tax benefits reflected in the tax strategy adjustment.

476497

Table of Contents
major storms as a Pre-Determined Exclusion. However,In assessing management’s 2023 performance on the committee decided not to adjustnon-financial measures, the results to reflectFinance and Talent and Compensation Committees noted that the impactDIB and Environmental Stewardship measures were qualitative measures that were informed in each case by certain quantitative measures. In each area, the committees reviewed certain key performance indicators and assessed progress on strategies and initiatives that had been identified at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic,performance period as important to achieving the disconnect moratoria or the unfavorable weather experienced in 2020.Company’s strategic objectives.

The following chart provides selected performance milestones and highlights considered as part of the assessments of the DIB and Environmental Stewardship measures:

Performance Measure2023 Developments
Diversity, Inclusion, & Belonging
Increased representation of women and underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in the employee population and at the director level and above in management from 2022
Level of Achievement
Held the "All In" five-month cohort development experience to increase inclusive leadership behaviors at all levels for the second year in a row, with over 200 employees in attendance
110%
Inclusive climate score increased from third quartile in 2022 to second quartile, with increases in all outcomes and continuing to score first quartile in our areas of focus (such as mentorship and idea integration)
Launched an enterprise-wide HBCU strategy with a differentiated Power of Prosperity Generational Wealth pilot, providing 1,500 freshmen students from Dillard University, Southern University, and Xavier University with $100 seeded investment accounts along with financial aid counseling / case management for students and families
Entergy's Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) placed fifth in the Enterprise-Wide ERG category of the Diversity Impact Awards during the 2023 Global ERG Summit; LeadERG placed second in the Top 25 ERG Award category
Received Top Workplace Awards from Times-Picayune and Houston Chronicle for New Orleans and Texas, respectively
Received for the sixth consecutive year the U.S. Department of Labor Platinum Vets Medallion Award for veteran talent pipeline development, recruitment, retention, and a Veteran's ERG
Named on Forbes' Best Employers for Diversity List for 2023; Newsweek's America's Greatest Workplaces for 2023; Time's World's Best Companies for 2023; and Black Enterprise's Best Companies for DEI
Decreased diverse supplier managed spend from 2022 levels
Environmental Stewardship
CO2 emission rate estimate of 670 lbs/MWh, which was slightly better than the emission rate representing minimum performance, with the increased rate partially attributable to higher summer load served by fossil fuel and coal generation due to extreme heat and adjustments in the energy mix based on generation resource availability
Level of Achievement
23% carbon-free energy capacity, which is maximum performance
105%
Initiated efforts and made fundamental progress on most of the targeted, resilience-related objectives of the New Orleans and Louisiana operating companies, including:
Entergy New Orleans filed its definitive accelerated resilience plan with the City Council for approval
Entergy Louisiana filed its accelerated resilience plan with the LPSC for approval
Developed implementation plan for Entergy’s 2023 commercial and industrial growth objectives
Executed on continued outreach to customers and commercial plan development for customer growth objectives
Demonstrated significant progress toward serving expected customer growth, such as through execution of various agreements with key customers and partners

498

Table of Contents
In addition to the foregoing financial and operational results, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee considered management’s degree of success in achieving various strategic operational and regulatory goals set out at the beginning of the yearobjectives and in overcoming certain challenges that arose in the business during the course of the year. The committee took note of not only the many ways management had created value for all Entergy Corporation’s key stakeholders during 2020, but also the major challenges that were overcome in the process, including the COVID-19 pandemic and the challenges of responding to three hurricanes in a record-breaking storm season for the Gulf Coast. The committee also noted that despite these challenges, management had remained focused on achieving strong financial results for the benefit of all of its stakeholders while at the same time driving positive outcomes in certain areas that would contribute to Entergy Corporation’s long term sustainability, including particularly the achievement of its 2020 CO2 emissions goal, development and announcement of its goal to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050, and significant enhancements to its sustainability disclosure and reporting, and substantial progress in other important ESG and sustainability efforts. In recognition of these accomplishments, which the committee considers to be critical to Entergy Corporation’s long-term success, the committee exercised its discretion to increase the EAM by 2% to 120%.

Under the annual incentive program, NEOs could earn a payout ranging from 0% to 200% of the NEO’s target opportunity, subject to the overall funding limitation determined by the EAM. To determine individual NEO annual incentive program awards for the NEOs who are membermembers of the OCE, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee considered individual performance in executing on Entergy Corporation’sthe Company’s strategies and delivering the strong financial performance and operational successes achieved in 2020. In addition,2023, as well as the Personnel Committeeexecutive’s success in achieving individual goals within the executive’s scope of responsibilities. The committee also considered certain challenges the individual’s keyCompany experienced during the year and each officer’s accountabilities and accomplishments in relation to certain operational and regulatory challenges Entergy Corporation experienced during the year. addressing those external challenges.

With these considerations in mind, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee approved the following annual incentive payouts ranging from 115% to 120% of target for each of the NEOs who are members of the OCE.OCE ranging from 120% to 156% of target.

After the EAM was established to determine overall funding for the annual incentive awards, Entergy Corporation’sEntergy’s Chief Executive Officer allocated incentive award funding to individual business units based on business unit results.Individual awards were determined for the remaining NEOs who are not members of the OCE by their immediate supervisor based on the individual officer’s key accountabilities, accomplishments, and performance.This resulted in payouts that ranged from 117%from 125% of target to 150%135% of targettarget for the NEOs who are not members of the OCE.

Based on the foregoing evaluation of management performance, the Named Executive OfficersNEOs received the following annual incentive payouts for 2020:payouts:

Named Executive OfficerNamed Executive OfficerBase SalaryTarget as Percentage of Base SalaryPayout as Percentage of Target2020 Annual
Incentive Award
Named Executive OfficerYear-End Base SalaryTarget as Percentage of Year-End Base Salary2023 Target AwardPayout as Percentage of Target2023 Annual
Incentive Award
A. Christopher Bakken, III$673,70075%115%$581,066
Marcus V. BrownMarcus V. Brown$690,00080%120%$662,400Marcus V. Brown$761,30280%$609,041156%$950,104
Leo P. Denault$1,260,000140%120%$2,116,800
David D. Ellis$321,84940%128%$164,955
Haley R. FisackerlyHaley R. Fisackerly$388,24440%150%$232,737Haley R. Fisackerly$438,20655%$241,013135%$325,368
Kimberly A. FontanKimberly A. Fontan$625,00075%$468,750138%$646,875
Laura R. LandreauxLaura R. Landreaux$326,75540%128%$167,153Laura R. Landreaux$411,35155%$226,243135%$305,428
Andrew S. MarshAndrew S. Marsh$690,00085%120%$703,800Andrew S. Marsh$1,100,000120%$1,320,000138%$1,821,600
Phillip R. May, Jr.Phillip R. May, Jr.$404,78460%117%$284,881Phillip R. May, Jr.$454,59360%$272,756125%$340,945
Sallie T. Rainer$358,71340%122%$175,713
Deanna D. RodriguezDeanna D. Rodriguez$362,27450%$181,137125%$226,421
Eliecer ViamontesEliecer Viamontes$365,38555%$200,962125%$251,202
Roderick K. WestRoderick K. West$731,86380%115%$673,314Roderick K. West$807,49180%$645,993120%$775,192

477

Table of Contents
Long-Term Incentive Compensation

Overview

Long-term incentive compensation consisting solelydelivered in shares of equity awards in 2020,Entergy common stock represents the largest portion of executive officer compensation, and as noted earlier, the increase in Mr. Denault’s TDC opportunity was delivered in the form of long-term incentive compensation. Entergy CorporationThe Company believes the combination of long-term incentives it employs provides a compelling performance-based compensation opportunity, acts inis effective at retaining thea strong senior management team, and aligns the interests of Entergy Corporation’sthe executive officers with the interests of itsEntergy’s customers and shareholders and customers by enhancing executivesexecutive officers’ focus on Entergy Corporation’sthe Company’s long-term goals. In general, Entergy Corporation seeks to allocate the total value of long-term incentive compensation 60% to performance units and 40% to a combination of stock options and restricted stock, equally divided in value, based on the value the compensation model seeks to deliver.

For each NEO, who is a member of the OCE, a dollar value is established to determine that NEO’s long-term incentive awards target.awards. The targetedtarget award value for each NEO is determined based on market median compensation data for the officer’s role,
499

Table of Contents
adjusted to reflect individual performance and internal equity. In the case of Mr. Marsh and Ms. Fontan, their target long-term incentive awards increased as compared to the prior year to reflect their promotions and the market data for their new roles.

2023 Long-Term Compensation Incentive Program Awards

In January 2020,2023 the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee approved the 20202023 long-term incentive award target amounts for each NEO withNEO. This amount for each NEO’s target amount increasing in recognition of the contributions made to Entergy Corporation in 2019. This target amountNEO was then converted into the number of performance units, stock options, and shares of restricted stock granted to each NEO based on thean allocation described above.of 60% performance units, 20% stock options, and 20% restricted stock.

In consultation with Entergy Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer,
NEOLong-Term Incentive
Grant Date Value
(As of January 26, 2023)
2023-2025 Target PUP Performance UnitsStock OptionsShares of Restricted Stock
Marcus V. Brown$1,516,8287,34514,4592,762
Haley R. Fisackerly$560,9472,7165,3461,022
Kimberly A. Fontan$1,440,7336,97713,7332,623
Laura R. Landreaux$466,2732,2584,444849
Andrew S. Marsh$6,379,92730,89560,81511,616
Phillip R. May, Jr.$568,1602,7515,4151,035
Deanna D. Rodriguez$334,5081,6203,188609
Eliecer Viamontes$411,7791,9943,924750
Roderick K. West$1,913,0239,26418,2353,483

All the Personnel Committee reviews each of the other NEO’s performance role and responsibilities, strengths, developmental opportunities and internal equity and allocates awardsunits, shares of restricted stock and stock options granted to eachthe NEOs in 2023 were granted pursuant to the 2019 OIP. The 2019 OIP requires a “double trigger,” meaning both a change in control of Entergy and an involuntary job loss without cause or a resignation by the NEO for good reason within 24 months following the change in control (a “double trigger”), for the acceleration of these officers based on these factors. Grants of long-term performance units for these NEOs were determined based on the average of the market data for the officers withinawards upon a specific management level, without regard to the officer’s specific job function, and allocated as described above.change in control.

20202023 Long-Term Incentive Award Mix

Long-Term Performance Unit ProgramUnits

The NEOs are issued performance unit awards under the LTIP.

Each performance unit represents one share of Entergy Corporation’s common stockPUP with payout opportunities established by the Talent and Compensation Committee at the endbeginning of theeach three-year performance period, plus dividends accrued during the performance period.
The performance units and accrued dividends on any shares earned during the performance period are settled in shares of Entergy Corporation common stock.
The Personnel Committee sets payout opportunities for the program at the outset of each performance period.
No payout under this program will be made if relative TSR for the performance period falls within the lowest quartile of the peer companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index and Cumulative ETR Adjusted EPS is below the minimum performance goal.
All shares paid out under the LTIP are required to be retained by Entergy Corporation’s officers until applicable executive stock ownership requirements are met.

The LTIPPUP specifies a minimum, target, and maximum achievement level,performance levels, the achievement of which will determinedetermines the number of performance units that may be earned by each participant. For the 202020232022 LTIP2025 PUP performance period, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee chose the performance measures, which were the same measures as used in the 2022-2024 PUP performance period, and established the targets set forth below.

478

Table of Contents
2020-2022 LTIP Unit Program2023-2025 PUP Performance Period: Measures and Goals(1)
Performance Measures(1)
LTIPPUP
Measure Weight
PayoutGoals(2)
Relative TSR80%
Minimum (25%) - Bottom of 3rd Quartile
Target (100%) - Median Percentile
Maximum (200%) - Top Quartile
Cumulative ETR Adjusted EPSFFO/Debt Ratio(3)
20%Minimum (25%) - $16.0714.0%
Target (100%) - $17.852023: 14.5%; 2024: 15.0%; 2025: 15.0%
Maximum (200%) - $19.632023: 15.5%; 2024: 16.0%; 2025: 16.0%

500

Table of Contents
(1)Payouts for performance between achievement levels are calculated using straight-line interpolation, between minimum and target and between target and maximum, with no payouts for performance below the minimum achievement level with respect to the applicable performance measure, and payouts capped at the maximum achievement level with respect to the applicable performance measure.
(2)There is no payout if the relative TSR falls within the lowest quartile of the peer companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index and the Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio is below the minimum achievement level.
(3)The Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio, a non-GAAP financial measure, is the ratio of: (i) adjusted funds from operations calculated as consolidated operating cash flow adjusted for bothallowance for funds used during construction, working capital and the effects of securitization revenue, and the Pre-Determined Exclusions to (ii) total consolidated debt, excluding outstanding or pending securitization debt. The Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio is evaluated on an annual basis against the target set for each year. The annual results are converted into payout percentages based on the annual minimum, target and maximum targets, and those percentages are then averaged to determine the Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio payout percentage. The calculated PUP result will then be adjusted by ±10 basis points for a change in Entergy Corporation’s corporate credit outlook and ±20 basis points for an upgrade or downgrade in the corporate credit rating for Entergy Corporation. The maximum increase or decrease from adjustments made under this modifier is 20 basis points, and performance measures.may not be reduced below zero or increased beyond 200%.

Performance Measures

Relative TSRTSR:

The PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee chose relative TSR as a performance measure because it reflects Entergy Corporation’sthe Company’s creation of shareholder value relative to other electric utilities included in the Philadelphia Utility Index over the performance period. By measuring performance in relation to an industry benchmark, this measure is intended to isolate and reward management for the creation of shareholder value that is not driven by events that affect the industry as a whole.

Minimum, target, and maximum performance levels are determined by reference to the ranking of Entergy Corporation’sEntergy’s TSR in relation to the TSR of the companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index. The PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee identified the Philadelphia Utility Index as the appropriate industry peer group for determining relative TSR because the companies included in this index, in the aggregate, are deemed to beviewed as comparable to Entergy Corporationthe Company in terms of business and scale.

Cumulative ETR Adjusted EPSFFO/Debt Ratio:

Cumulative ETR Adjusted EPS, which adjusts Entergy Corporation’s as reported (GAAP) results to eliminateTo emphasize the impactimportance of earnings or loss from Entergy Wholesale Commodities and other non-routine items, was selected in 2020 as a performance measure becausestrong credit for the Personnel Committee wished to incentivize management to achieve steady, predictable earnings growthlong-term health of our business, for Entergy Corporation over the 3 year2023 – 2025 PUP performance period and because it aligns withwe used the earnings measure used to communicate Entergy Corporation’s earnings expectations externally to investors.Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio credit measure.

InThe Talent and Compensation Committee decided to use this measure because it emphasizes financial stability, noting that a manner similarfinancially healthy utility creates the capacity to make investments on behalf of customers, addresses the way targets are established for the annual incentives, targets for the Cumulative ETR Adjusted EPS performance measure were established by the Personnel Committee after the Entergy Corporation Board’s reviewneeds of Entergy’s strategic plan for the three-year period beginning in 2020our communities, provides low-cost access to capital markets, and are consistent with the earnings expectations for Entergy Corporation that are communicated to investors. These targets also incorporate the Pre-Determined Exclusions discussed previously with respect to the annual incentive measures.promotes employee confidence.

To further underscore the importance of this measure, the calculated PUP result will be adjusted as described above for a change in the corporate credit outlook and corporate credit rating for Entergy Corporation.

Stock Options and Restricted Stock

Entergy CorporationThe Company grants stock options and shares of restricted stock as part of its long-term incentive award mix because they alignit aligns the interests of the executive officers with long-term shareholder value, provideprovides competitive compensation, and increaseincreases the executives’ ownership in Entergy CorporationEntergy’s common stock. Generally, stock options are
501

Table of Contents
granted annually on a pre-established schedule with a maximum term of ten years and vest one-third on each of the first three anniversaries of the date of grant. The date of grant for annual equity award grants is the date of the Talent and Compensation Committee meeting at which they are approved, which is regularly scheduled each year in late January or the first week of February. The Talent and Compensation Committee does not take material nonpublic information into account when determining the timing and terms of option awards. The exercise price for each option granted in 2020January 2023 was $131.72,$108.47, which was the closing price of Entergy Corporation’sEntergy’s common stock on the date of grant. Shares of restricted stock vest one-third on each of the first three anniversaries
479

Table of Contents
of the date of grant, are paid dividends which are reinvested in shares of Entergy Corporation common stock and have full voting rights. The dividend reinvestment shares are subject to forfeiture similar to the terms of the original grant.

2020 Long-Term Incentive AwardsPayouts for the 2021 – 2023 PUP Performance Period

In JanuaryDecember 2020, the Personnel Committee granted the following long-term performance units, stock optionsTalent and shares of restricted stock to each NEO. The number of long-term performance units, stock options and shares of restricted stock were determined as discussed above under “Long-Term Incentive Compensation - Overview.”

Named Executive Officer2020-2022
Target LTIP Units
Stock OptionsShares of 
Restricted Stock
A. Christopher Bakken, III7,75829,2793,104
Marcus V. Brown7,57128,5743,029
Leo P. Denault31,263117,99012,505
David D. Ellis9503,200500
Haley R. Fisackerly9504,300750
Laura R. Landreaux9504,300750
Andrew S. Marsh9,56036,0793,824
Phillip R. May, Jr.1,4007,3001,100
Sallie T. Rainer9504,300750
Roderick K. West8,40131,7053,361

All of the performance units, shares of restricted stock and stock options granted to the NEOs in 2020 were granted pursuant to the 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan or 2019 OIP. The 2019 OIP requires both a change in control and an involuntary job loss without cause or a resignation by the NEO for good reason within 24 months following a change in control (a “double trigger”) for the acceleration of these awards upon a change in control.

2020 LTIP Payouts

Payout for the 2018 – 2020 LTIP Performance Period. In January 2018, the Personnel Committee chose relative TSR and Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPSFFO/Debt Ratio as the performance measures each weighted equally, for the 201820212020 LTIP2023 PUP performance period. Cumulativeperiod, with relative TSR weighted 80% and Adjusted UP&O EPS, which adjusted Entergy Corporation’s operational Utility, Parent & Other results to eliminate the impact of tax items and weather (the “UP&O Adjustments”), was added as a performance measure because it aligned with Entergy Corporation’s externally communicated earnings measure on its core utility business and was the primary measure on which Entergy Corporation communicated its long term earnings outlooks in 2018. Similar to the way targets are established for the annual incentive program, targets for the Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPS performance measure were established by the Personnel Committee after the Entergy Corporation Board’s review of Entergy Corporation’s strategic plan. These targets also exclude the Pre-Determined Exclusions discussed previously with respect to the annual incentive measures, as well as the UP&O Adjustments.FFO/Debt Ratio weighted 20%. The payout was determined based on the achievement of the following performance goals established for both performance measures by the committee at the beginning of the performance period:

480

Table of Contents
2018-2020 LTIP2021 – 2023 PUP Performance Period MeasuresPeriod: Measure and Goals
Performance Measure(1)
LTIPPUP
Measure Weight
Payout(2)
Relative TSR50%80%
Minimum (25%) - Bottom of 3rd Quartile
Target (100%) - Median Percentile
Maximum (200%) - Top Quartile
Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPS ($)FFO/Debt Ratio(3)
50%20%Minimum (25%) - $13.6814.50%
Target (100%) - $15.2015.50%
Maximum (200%) - $16.7217.00%

(1)Payouts for performance between achievement levels are calculated using straight-line interpolation, withinterpolation. There is no payoutspayout for performance below the minimum achievement level and payouts are capped for performance at or above the maximum achievement level.
(2)There is no payout if the TSR falls within the lowest quartile of the peer companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index and the FFO/Debt Ratio is below the minimum achievement level.
(3)The Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio, a non-GAAP financial measure, is the ratio of: (i) adjusted funds from operations calculated as consolidated operating cash flow adjusted for allowance for funds used during construction, working capital and the effects of securitization revenue, and the Pre-Determined Exclusions to (ii) total consolidated debt, excluding outstanding or pending securitization debt. The Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio is evaluated on an annual basis against the target set for each year. The annual results are converted into payout percentages based on the annual minimum, target and maximum targets, and those percentages are then averaged to determine the Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio payout percentage.

502

Table of Contents
In January 2021,2024, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee reviewed Entergy Corporation’sthe Company’s relative TSR and the Cumulative Adjusted UP&O EPSFFO/Debt Ratio for the 201820212020 LTIP2023 PUP performance period in order to determine the payout to participants based upon the performance measures and range of potential payouts for the 201820212020 LTIP2023 PUP performance period as provided above. The committeeTalent and Compensation Committee compared Entergy Corporation’sthe Company’s TSR against the TSR of the companies that were included in the Philadelphia Utility Index throughoutas of the threelast day of the year preceding the three-year performance period, which were:

AES Corporation
Edison InternationalEversource Energy
Ameren Corporation
Eversource EnergyExelon Corporation
American Electric Power Co. Inc.
ExelonFirstEnergy Corporation
American Water Works Company, Inc.
FirstEnergy CorporationNextEra Energy, Inc.
CenterPoint Energy Inc.
NextEra Energy, Inc.Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
Consolidated Edison Inc.
PG&E Corporation
Dominion Energy
Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc.
DTE Energy Company
Southern Company
Duke Energy Corporation
Xcel Energy, Inc.
Edison International

As recommended by the Finance Committee, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee concluded that Entergy Corporation’s relative TSR for the 2018202120202023 PUP performance period was in the second quartile, resulting in an achievement level of 115% of target, and that Cumulativethe Adjusted UP&O EPSFFO/Debt Ratio was $15.25, yielding a10.74% for 2021, 14.30% for 2022 and 16.95% for 2023, resulting in an achievement level of 66% of target. These results yielded an overall payout of 126%105% of target for the NEOs.

Named Executive Officer2018-2020 Target
Number of Shares Issued(1)
Value of Shares Actually Issued(2)
Grant Date Fair Value(3)
A. Christopher Bakken, III7,90011,048$1,050,886$651,079
Marcus V. Brown7,90011,048$1,050,886$651,079
Leo P. Denault42,70059,718$5,680,376$3,519,121
David D. Ellis(4)
1,1001,488$141,539$90,657
Haley R. Fisackerly1,6502,307$219,442$135,985
Laura R. Landreaux(5)
1,3751,892$179,967$113,321
Andrew S. Marsh7,90011,048$1,050,886$651,079
Phillip R. May, Jr.2,5503,566$339,198$210,158
Sallie T. Rainer1,6502,307$219,442$135,985
Roderick K. West7,90011,048$1,050,886$651,079
Named Executive Officer2021 - 2023 Target PUP Performance Units
Number of Shares Issued(1)
Value of Shares Actually Issued(2)
Grant Date Fair Value(3)
Marcus V. Brown8,78410,344$1,022,608$946,617
Haley R. Fisackerly(4)
1,8892,209$218,447$203,570
Kimberly A. Fontan(4)
4,1794,777$472,254$450,354
Laura R. Landreaux(4)
1,8412,149$212,593$198,397
Andrew S. Marsh(4)
20,86623,917$2,364,435$2,248,645
Phillip R. May, Jr.2,1622,546$251,701$232,990
Deanna D. Rodriguez(4)
1,6091,849$182,927$173,395
Eliecer Viamontes(4)
1,9382,269$224,410$208,851
Roderick K. West10,72712,632$1,248,800$1,156,006

(1)Includes accrued dividends.
(2)Value determined based on the closing price of Entergy Corporation common stock on January 19, 202118, 2024 ($95.12)98.86), the date the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee certified the 2018-20202021 – 2023 performance period results.
(3)Represents the aggregate grant date fair value calculated in accordance with applicable accounting rules as reflected in the 20182021 Summary Compensation Table.Table in the Form 10-K filed for the year ended December 31, 2021, except for NEOs whose target award opportunities were increased in 2022, as discussed in footnote 4.
(4)Mses. Fontan, Landreaux, and Rodriguez and Messrs. Fisackerly, Marsh, and Viamontes each experienced a change in officer status in 2022, and accordingly, their target award opportunities were increased for the 2021 – 2023 performance period as follows: from 11,706 to 20,866 for Mr. Marsh; from 2,184 to 4,179 for
481503

Table of Contents
(4)As a new hire in 2018,Ms. Fontan; from 1,645 to 1,889 for Mr. Ellis received a pro-rata target award opportunityFisackerly; from 1,553 to 1,841 for the 2018 - 2020 performance period.
(5)As a new officer in 2018, Ms. Landreaux received a pro-rata target award opportunityLandreaux; from 1,301 to 1,609 for the 2018 - 2020 performance period.Ms. Rodriguez; and from 1,737 to 1,938 for Mr. Viamontes.

Benefits and Perquisites

Entergy Corporation’sThe NEOs are eligible to participate in or receive the following benefits:

Plan TypeDescription
Retirement Plans
Entergy Corporation-sponsored:

Entergy Retirement Plan - a tax-qualified final average pay defined benefit pension plan that covers a broad group of employees hired before July 1, 2014. As used in this CD&A, “Entergy Retirement Plan” refers to the final average pay defined benefit pension plan benefit provided to eligible employees pursuant to the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees.
Cash Balance Plan - a tax-qualified cash balance defined benefit pension plan that covers a broad group of employees hired on or after July 1, 2014 and before January 1, 2021. Effective January 1, 2022, the Cash Balance Plan was merged with and into the Entergy Retirement Plan as Appendix J of the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees, while maintaining the same cash balance pension benefit formula. As used in this CD&A, “Cash Balance Plan” refers to the cash balance defined benefit pension plan benefit provided to eligible employees pursuant to Appendix J of the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees.
Pension Equalization Plan (PEP) - a non-qualified pension restoration plan for a select group of management orcertain highly compensated non-bargaining employees who participate in the Entergy Retirement Plan.
Cash Balance Equalization Plan (CBEP) - a non-qualified restoration plan for a select group of management orcertain highly compensated non-bargaining employees who participate in the Cash Balance Plan.
System Executive Retirement Plan (SERP) - a non-qualified supplemental retirement plan for a select group of individuals who became executive officers before July 1, 2014.

See “2023 Pension Benefits” for additional information regarding the operation of the plans described above.
Savings PlanEntergy Corporation-sponsored 401(k) Savings Plan that covers a broad group of employees.employees and provides for an employer matching contribution.
Health & Welfare BenefitsMedical, dental and vision coverage, health care and dependent care reimbursement plans, life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance, business travel accident insurance, and basic long-term disability insurance.

Eligibility, coverage levels, potential employee contributions, and other plan design features are the same for the NEOs as for the broad employee population.
20202023 PerquisitesCorporate aircraft usage and annual mandatory physical exams. The NEOs who are members of the OCE do not receive tax gross ups on any benefits, except for relocation assistance.benefits.

In 2020,2023, the NEOs who are not members of the OCE also were provided in 2020 with club dues, relocation assistance, and tax gross up payments on this perquisite.these perquisites.

For additional information regarding perquisites, see the “All Other Compensation” column in the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table.
504

Table of Contents
Plan TypeDescription
Deferred CompensationThe NEOs are eligible to defer up to 100% of their base salary and annual incentive awards into the Entergy Corporation sponsored Executive Deferred Compensation Plan.
Executive Disability PlanEligibleThis plan pays eligible individuals who becomea supplemental long-term disability (LTD) benefit if they are disabled and receiving LTD benefits from the broad-based LTD Plan. The benefit payable under the terms of thethis plan are eligible foris equal to 65% of the difference between their annual base salary and $276,923 (i.e. the annual base salary that produces the maximum $15,000 monthly disability payment under the general long-term disability plan).our broad-based LTD plan, which is $15,000.

Entergy Corporation provides these benefits to the NEOs as part of its effort to provide a competitive executive compensation program and because it believes that these benefits are important retention and recruitment tools since many of the companies with which it competes for executive talent provide similar arrangements to their senior executive officers.
482

Table of Contents
Severance and Retention Arrangements

The PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee believes that retention and transitional compensation arrangements are an important part of overall compensation as they help to secure the continued employment and dedication of the NEOs, notwithstanding any concern that they might have at the time of a change in control regarding their own continued employment. In addition, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee believes that these arrangements are important as recruitment and retention devices, as many of the companies with which Entergy Corporation competes for executive talent have similar arrangements in place for their senior employees.

To achieve these objectives, Entergy Corporation has established a System Executive Continuity Plan (“Continuity Plan”) under which ML 1-4 Officers areeach of our NEOs is entitled to receive “change in control” payments and benefits if such officer’s employment is involuntarily terminated without cause or if the officer resigns for good reason, in each case, in connection with a change in control of the Company. Entergy Corporation and its subsidiaries. Entergy Corporation strives to ensure that the benefits and payment levels under the System Executive Continuity Plan are consistent with market practices. Entergy Corporation’sEntergy’s executive officers, including the NEOs, are not entitled to any tax gross up payments on any severance benefits received under this plan. For more information regarding the System Executive Continuity Plan,our severance arrangements, see “2020 Potential“Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”

Nuclear Retention Plan

Mr. Bakken participates in the Nuclear Retention Plan, a retention plan for officers and other leaders with expertise in the nuclear industry. The Personnel Committee authorized this plan to attract and retain key management and employee talent in the nuclear power field, a field that requires unique technical and other expertise that is in great demand in the utility industry. The plan provides for bonuses to be paid annually over a three-year service period with the bonus opportunity dependent on the participant’s management level and continued employment. Each annual payment is equal to an amount ranging from 15% to 30% of the employee’s base salary as of their date of enrollment in the plan.

In recognition of the value Entergy Corporation places on Mr. Bakken as a member of its senior management team and his extensive experience in the nuclear industry, and to keep his pay competitive, in May 2019, Mr. Bakken’s participation in the plan was renewed for another three-year period beginning on May 1, 2019. In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Nuclear Retention Plan, in May 2020 Mr. Bakken received, and in May 2021 and 2022, Mr. Bakken will receive a cash bonus equal to 30% of $654,078, his base salary as of May 1, 2019. The three-year period covered and percentage of base salary paid to Mr. Bakken under the plan are consistent with the terms of participation of other senior executive officers who participate in this plan.

Risk Mitigation and Other Pay Practices

Entergy Corporation strives to ensure that its compensation philosophy and practices are in line with the best practices of companies in its industry as well as other companies in the S&P 500. Some of these practices include the following:

Clawback ProvisionsPolicy for Recoupment of Compensation (Clawback Provisions)

In October 2023 the Talent and Compensation Committee approved and recommended that the Entergy Corporation has adopted aBoard adopt an amended and restated clawback policy that covers all individualsto comply with the final rules required by the SEC and the NYSE (the "new clawback rules"). On October 27, 2023, the Board adopted the amended and restated policy regarding the recoupment of certain compensation (the "Clawback Policy"), with an effective date of October 2, 2023. Any incentive compensation award granted or paid on or after this effective date is subject to Section 16the terms of the Exchange Act, including allClawback Policy. The board of directors of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas also adopted the NEOs. Under the policy, which goes beyond the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley), incentives paid to covered executive officers are required to be reimbursed where:Clawback Policy, effective October 2, 2023.

(i) the payment was predicated upon the achievement of certain financial results with respect to the applicable performance period that were subsequently determined to be the subject of a material restatement other than a restatement due to changes in accounting policy; or (ii) a material miscalculation of a performance award occurs, whether or not the financial statements were restated and, in either such case, a lower payment would have been made to the executive officer based upon the restated financial results or correct calculation; or
483505

Table of Contents
The Clawback Policy updates Entergy's prior clawback policy to comply with the new clawback rules and incorporate the terminology of the new clawback rules, but retains the provisions of Entergy’s prior clawback policy that were more stringent than the new clawback rules, including:

Mandatory recoupment of incentive compensation for a material miscalculation of a performance measure, regardless of whether it results in a financial restatement;
Recoupment of incentive compensation received by an executive officer in respect of the three-year lookback period, regardless of whether the recipient was an executive officer at the time of receipt of the incentive compensation or during the performance period to which it relates;
A broader definition of incentive compensation that includes compensation based on attainment of market performance metrics, as well as financial reporting measures; and
Discretionary recoupment of some or all incentive compensation if an executive officer engages in fraud resulting in a financial restatement or material miscalculation of a performance measure.

Under the Clawback Policy, Entergy will seek reimbursement of certain compensation from current or former executive officers subject to Section 16, including all of the NEOs, where:

Entergy is required to restate its financial statements due to noncompliance with any financial reporting requirement under securities laws; or
there is a material miscalculation of a performance measure related to incentive compensation, regardless of whether Entergy’s financial statements are restated.

In addition, Entergy may seek reimbursement of certain compensation from current or former executive officers subject to Section 16, including all of the NEOs, if the Board of Directors’ view, thedetermines that such executive officer engaged in fraud that caused or partially caused the need forresulted in either a restatement of Entergy’s financial statements or caused a material miscalculation of a performance award, in each case, whether or not the financial statements were restated.measure relative to incentive compensation.

The Clawback Policy applies to incentive compensation, including cash or equity-based bonus or incentive or profit-sharing awards paid in respect of the three-year period prior to the year in which Entergy is required to prepare such restatement or in respect of the three-year period preceding the material miscalculation. The amount required to be reimbursed is equal to the excess of the gross incentive payment madeactually paid over the gross payment that would have been madepaid if the original payment had been determined based on the restated financial results or correct calculation. Entergy may enforce all or part of any executive officer’s repayment obligation under the policy by reducing any amounts that may be owed from time-to-time by Entergy or any of its subsidiaries to such individual, whether as wages, severance, vacation pay or in the form of any other benefit or for any other reason. In addition, Entergy Corporation will seek to recover any compensation received by its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer that is required to be reimbursed under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 following a material restatement of Entergy Corporation’sour financial statements.

In addition to the above-described recoupment policy, in January 2024,the Entergy Board adopted an additional discretionary recoupment policy applicable to all officers of Entergy System companies, including the NEOs, that allows recoupment of incentive compensation from an officer who engages in certain detrimental conduct, including (i) commission of a felony or other crime that affects the officer’s ability to perform their duties, (ii) fraud in contravention of the officer’s duties to the enterprise, (iii) unauthorized disclosure of confidential or proprietary information of an Entergy System company or material violation of a material written Entergy System company policy or material agreement between the officer and an Entergy System company in either case that results in, or could have resulted in, termination for cause as defined in the 2019 OIP or that results in significant financial or operational loss, or significant reputational harm to Entergy; and (iv) other conduct that the officer knew or should have known could result in termination for Cause as defined in the 2019 OIP (regardless whether it does) and that results in significant financial or operational loss or significant reputational harm to Entergy. The new discretionary recoupment policy for detrimental conduct applies to all incentive compensation, including time-based awards, and allows for the claw back of compensation received after the detrimental conduct and within the three-year period preceding the detrimental conduct, provided the recoupment efforts are commenced within five years
506

Table of Contents
after the detrimental conduct and before a change in control. The additional discretionary recoupment policy applies to detrimental conduct committed on or after January 26, 2024, the effective date of the additional discretionary recoupment policy.

Stock Ownership Guidelines and Share Retention Requirements

For many years, Entergy Corporation has hadrequires its NEOs to own Entergy stock to further align their interests with Entergy’s shareholders’ interests. Stock ownership levels are achieved through ownership of any Entergy shares held by the officer, including shares held in the 401(k) plan, restricted stock, and dividends earned on restricted shares during the period of restriction. Performance units held under the PUP, stock options, whether vested or unvested, do not count toward achievement of stock ownership guidelines for executives, including the NEOs. These guidelines are designed to align the executives’ long-term financial interests with the interests of Entergy Corporation’s shareholders.levels. Annually, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee monitors the executive officers’ compliance with these guidelines with all of the NEOs satisfyingin compliance with the applicable ownership guidelines at that time.the time of the annual review. The ownership guidelines are as follows:

The ownership guidelines are as follows:
RoleValue of Common Stock to be Owned
Chief Executive Officer (ML-1)6 x base salary
Executive Vice Presidents (ML-2)3 x base salary
Senior Vice Presidents (ML-3)2 x base salary
Vice Presidents (ML-4)1 x base salary

Further, to facilitate compliance with the guidelines, until an executive officer satisfies the stock ownership guidelines, the officer must retain:

all net after-tax shares paid out under the LTIP;PUP;
all net after-tax shares of theour restricted stock and all net after-tax shares received upon the vesting of restricted stock units received upon vesting;units; and
at least 75% of the after-tax net shares received upon the exercise of Entergy Corporation stock options.

Trading Controls

Executive officers, including the NEOs, are required to receive permission from Entergy Corporation’sthe Company’s General Counsel or his designee prior to entering into any transaction involving Entergy CorporationCompany securities, including gifts, other than thean exercise of employee stock options.options that is not funded through a sale in the market. Trading is generally permitted only during specified open trading windows beginning shortly after the release of earnings. Employees who are subject to trading restrictions, including the NEOs, may enter into trading plans under Rule 10b5-1 of the Exchange Act, but these trading plans or any amendment to an existing plan may be entered into only during an open trading window and must be approved by Entergy Corporation. A NEO bears full responsibility if he or she violates Entergy Corporation’s policy by buying or selling shares of Entergy Corporation stock without pre-approval or when trading is restricted.the Company.

No Pledging/Hedging

Entergy Corporation also prohibits directors and executive officers, including the NEOs, from pledging any Entergy Corporation securities or entering into margin accounts involving Entergy Corporation securities. Entergy Corporation prohibits these transactions because of the potential that sales of Entergy Corporation securities could occur outside trading periods and without the required approval of the General Counsel. In addition, Entergy Corporation prohibits directors and executive officers, including the NEOs, from engaging in any hedging transactions with respect to Entergy securities.

Entergy Corporation also has adopted an anti-hedging policy that prohibits officers, directors, and employees from entering into hedging or monetization transactions involving Entergy Corporation’s common stock. Prohibited transactions include, without limitation, zero-cost collars, forward sale contracts, purchase or sale of options, puts, calls, straddles or equity swaps or other derivatives that are directly linked to Entergy Corporation’s stock or transactions involving “short-sales” of its common stock.
484507

Table of Contents
Compensation Consultant Independence

Annually, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee reviews the relationship with its compensation consultant to determine whether any conflicts of interest exist that would prevent Pay Governancethe consultant from independently advising the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee. Factors considered by the committee whenWhen assessing the independence of Pay Governance, its current compensation consultant, included,in 2023, the committee considered the following factors, among others:others:

Pay Governance has policies in place to prevent conflicts of interest;
No member of Pay Governance’s consulting team serving the committee has a business relationship with any member of the committee or any of Entergy Corporation’s executive officers;
Neither Pay Governance nor any of its principals own any shares of Entergy Corporation’s common stock; and
The amount of fees paid to Pay Governance is less than 1% of Pay Governance’s total consulting income.

Based on these factors, the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee concluded that Pay Governance is independent in accordance with SEC and NYSE rules and that no conflicts of interest exist that would prevent Pay Governance from independently advising the committee.

In addition, Pay Governance has agreed that it will not accept any engagement with management without prior approval from the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee, and Entergy Corporation’s Board has adopted a policy that prohibits a compensation consultant from providing other services to it if the aggregate amount for those services would exceed $120,000 in any year. During 2020,2023, Pay Governance did not provide any services to Entergy Corporation other than the services it performed on behalf of the PersonnelTalent and Compensation and Corporate Governance Committees, and it worked with Entergy Corporation’s management only as directed by thethose committees.

PERSONNELTALENT AND COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee Report included in the 2024 Entergy Corporation Proxy Statement is incorporated by reference, but will not be deemed to be “filed” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. None of the Registrant Subsidiaries has a compensation committee or other board committee performing equivalent functions. The board of directors of each of the Registrant Subsidiaries is comprised of individuals who are officers or employees of Entergy Corporation or one of the Registrant Subsidiaries. These boards do not make determinations regarding the compensation paid to executive officers of the Registrant Subsidiaries.

485508

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION TABLES

20202023 Summary Compensation TablesTable

The following table summarizes the total compensation paid or earned by each of the NEOs for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020,2023, and to the extent required by SEC executive compensation disclosure rules, the fiscal years ended December 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.  For information on the principal positions held by each of the NEOs, see Item 10, “Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance of the Registrants.”

The compensation set forth in the table represents the aggregate compensation paid by all Entergy System companies.  For additional information regarding the material terms of the awards reported in the following tables,table, including a general description of the formula or criteria to be applied in determining the amounts payable, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”

(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Name and Principal Position
(1)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Year
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Salary
(2)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Bonus
(3)
 
 
 
 
 
Stock
Awards
 (4)
 
 
 
 
 
Option
Awards
 (5)
 
 
 
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compen-sation
(6)
Change in
Pension
Value and
Non-qualified
Deferred
Compen-sation
Earnings
 (7)
 
 
 
 
All
Other
Compen-sation 
 (8)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total
 
Total Without Change in Pension Value
(9)
A. Christopher Bakken, III2020$693,819 $196,223 $1,666,710 $335,245 $581,066 $115,100 $85,846 $3,674,009 $3,558,909 
Executive Vice President and2019$649,507 $181,500 $1,273,399 $303,023 $618,104 $98,500 $62,407 $3,186,440 $3,087,940 
Chief Nuclear Officer of Entergy Corp.2018$632,967 $181,500 $1,041,479 $283,095 $544,959 $108,700 $452,012 $3,244,712 $3,136,012 
Marcus V. Brown2020$709,688 $— $1,626,512 $327,172 $662,400 $1,746,000 $78,631 $5,150,403 $3,404,403 
Executive Vice President and2019$661,563 $— $1,248,839 $297,182 $684,573 $1,455,300 $69,955 $4,417,412 $2,962,112 
General Counsel of Entergy Corp.2018$644,231 $— $1,041,479 $283,095 $546,000 $371,800 $61,885 $2,948,490 $2,576,690 
Leo P. Denault2020$1,308,462 $— $6,716,017 $1,350,986 $2,116,800 $4,416,700 $289,632 $16,198,597 $11,781,897 
Chairman of the2019$1,260,000 $— $5,391,253 $1,282,994 $2,416,680 $3,704,500 $208,822 $14,264,249 $10,559,749 
Board and CEO -2018$1,251,346 $— $4,744,977 $1,168,029 $2,041,200 $982,800 $138,104 $10,326,456 $9,343,656 
Entergy Corp.
David D. Ellis2020$331,803 $— $219,889 $36,640 $164,955 $32,200 $19,323 $804,810 $772,610 
CEO - Entergy2019$311,004 $— $188,861 $39,104 $159,804 $18,000 $15,267 $732,040 $714,040 
New Orleans2018$7,258 $200,000 $— $— $— $600 $35,308 $243,166 $242,566 
Haley R. Fisackerly2020$384,848 $— $252,819 $49,235 $232,737 $836,200 $48,101 $1,803,940 $967,740 
CEO - Entergy2019$373,313 $— $197,780 $51,584 $274,570 $644,700 $37,897 $1,579,844 $935,144 
Mississippi2018$363,089 $— $198,449 $46,134 $172,000 $— $35,982 $815,654 $815,654 
Laura R. Landreaux2020$323,907 $— $252,819 $49,235 $167,153 $330,700 $26,698 $1,150,512 $819,812 
CEO - Entergy2019$314,407 $— $188,861 $42,432 $263,523 $228,700 $26,536 $1,064,459 $835,759 
Arkansas2018$246,136 $— $273,062 $— $124,000 $21,500 $10,741 $675,439 $653,939 

(a)(b)(c)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)
 Name and
Principal Position
(1)
Year
 
Salary
(2)
Stock Awards
(3)
Option
Awards
 (4)
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compen-
sation
(5)
Change in
Pension
Value and
Non-qualified
Deferred
Compen-
sation
Earnings
 (6)
All
Other
Compen-
sation 
 (7)
Total
 
Total
Without
Change in
Pension
Value
(8)
Marcus V. Brown2023$753,419 $1,226,636 $290,192 $950,104 $731,700 $77,328 $4,029,379 $3,297,679 
Executive Vice2022$726,363 $1,144,238 $273,358 $761,302 $976,700 $93,793 $3,975,754 $2,999,054 
President and2021$705,286 $2,738,613 $268,787 $852,840 $491,400 $60,135 $5,117,061 $4,625,661 
General Counsel -
Entergy Corp.
Haley R. Fisackerly2023$431,421 $453,653 $107,294 $325,368 $247,800 $47,415 $1,612,951 $1,365,151 
CEO - Entergy2022$410,557 $752,209 $62,595 $319,427 $— $46,281 $1,591,069 $1,591,069 
Mississippi2021$396,604 $231,921 $50,319 $216,186 $190,000 $41,723 $1,126,753 $936,753 
Kimberly A. Fontan2023$625,000 $1,165,112 $275,621 $646,875 $409,600 $31,860 $3,154,068 $2,744,468 
Executive Vice2022$404,809 $1,034,293 $80,519 $379,688 $— $29,720 $1,929,029 $1,929,029 
President and CFO -
Entergy Corp.,
Entergy Arkansas,
Entergy Louisiana,
Entergy Mississippi,
Entergy New
Orleans, and
Entergy Texas
Laura R. Landreaux2023$406,405 $377,082 $89,191 $305,428 $175,600 $23,719 $1,377,425 $1,201,825 
CEO - Entergy2022$390,161 $341,381 $62,595 $271,015 $— $25,313 $1,090,465 $1,090,465 
Arkansas2021$350,660 $219,035 $47,522 $220,093 $125,000 $20,683 $982,993 $857,993 
Andrew S. Marsh2023$1,100,000 $5,159,370 $1,220,557 $1,821,600 $982,400 $89,281 $10,373,208 $9,390,808 
Chair of the2022$781,560 $4,598,890 $414,050 $960,700 $— $106,560 $6,861,760 $6,861,760 
Board and CEO -2021$705,286 $1,650,645 $358,235 $906,143 $213,000 $56,018 $3,889,327 $3,676,327 
Entergy Corp.
486509

Table of Contents
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Name and Principal Position
(1)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Year
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Salary
(2)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Bonus
(3)
 
 
 
 
 
Stock
Awards
 (4)
 
 
 
 
 
Option
Awards
 (5)
 
 
 
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compen-sation
(6)
Change in
Pension
Value and
Non-qualified
Deferred
Compen-sation
Earnings
 (7)
 
 
 
 
All
Other
Compen-sation 
 (8)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total
 
Total Without Change in Pension Value
(9)
Andrew S. Marsh2020$704,692 $— $2,053,717 $413,105 $703,800 $2,054,000 $77,741 $6,007,055 $3,953,055 
Executive Vice2019$641,923 $— $1,579,663 $375,914 $712,400 $1,554,300 $69,863 $4,934,063 $3,379,763 
President and CFO -2018$615,654 $— $1,057,095 $342,510 $531,188 $— $57,638 $2,604,085 $2,604,085 
Entergy Corp.,
Entergy Arkansas,
Entergy Louisiana,
Entergy Mississippi,
Entergy New
Orleans,
Entergy Texas
Phillip R. May, Jr.2020$416,677 $— $371,882 $83,585 $284,881 $1,072,100 $28,836 $2,257,961 $1,185,861 
CEO - Entergy2019$389,016 $— $294,183 $77,376 $407,922 $877,100 $28,297 $2,073,894 $1,196,794 
Louisiana2018$377,108 $— $288,238 $69,201 $270,000 $— $26,874 $1,031,421 $1,031,421 
Sallie T. Rainer2020$369,133 $— $252,819 $49,235 $175,713 $663,100 $33,383 $1,543,383 $880,283 
CEO - Entergy2019$344,722 $— $197,780 $51,584 $219,069 $617,200 $37,361 $1,467,716 $850,516 
Texas2018$335,263 $— $198,449 $46,134 $159,000 $— $35,379 $774,225 $774,225 
Roderick K. West2020$754,742 $— $1,804,816 $363,022 $673,314 $1,976,400 $59,730 $5,632,024 $3,655,624 
Group President2019$709,023 $— $1,340,679 $319,039 $674,742 $1,604,100 $67,191 $4,714,774 $3,110,674 
Utility Operations of2018$690,581 $— $1,057,095 $297,075 $560,762 $— $67,234 $2,672,747 $2,672,747 
Entergy Corp.
(a)(b)(c)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)
 Name and
Principal Position
(1)
Year
 
Salary
(2)
Stock Awards
(3)
Option
Awards
 (4)
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compen-
sation
(5)
Change in
Pension
Value and
Non-qualified
Deferred
Compen-
sation
Earnings
 (6)
All
Other
Compen-
sation 
 (7)
Total
 
Total
Without
Change in
Pension
Value
(8)
Phillip R. May, Jr.2023$449,491 $459,481 $108,679 $340,945 $114,400 $36,586 $1,509,582 $1,395,182 
CEO - Entergy2022$430,676 $957,246 $121,176 $326,732 $— $39,225 $1,875,055 $1,875,055 
Louisiana2021$413,752 $304,893 $66,160 $333,205 $2,000 $25,261 $1,145,271 $1,143,271 
Deanna D. Rodriguez2023$358,208 $270,525 $63,983 $226,421 $270,200 $23,671 $1,213,008 $942,808 
CEO - Entergy2022$342,565 $260,189 $48,328 $217,320 $— $27,087 $895,489 $895,489 
New Orleans2021$314,450 $339,833 $— $144,662 $144,900 $59,161 $1,003,006 $858,106 
Eliecer Viamontes2023$361,284 $333,024 $78,755 $251,202 $28,700 $25,846 $1,078,811 $1,050,111 
CEO - Entergy2022$347,459 $296,861 $53,528 $240,731 $11,800 $168,309 $1,118,688 $1,106,888 
Texas2021$324,120 $245,000 $53,154 $134,793 $22,300 $102,190 $881,557 $859,257 
Roderick K. West2023$799,130 $1,547,047 $365,976 $775,192 $204,800 $112,338 $3,804,483 $3,599,683 
Group President2022$770,432 $3,682,723 $402,025 $776,434 $— $101,107 $5,732,721 $5,732,721 
Utility Operations -2021$748,087 $1,512,547 $328,247 $844,277 $77,500 $75,540 $3,586,198 $3,508,698 
Entergy Corp.

(1)Mr. EllisMarsh was named Chief Executive Officer, Entergy New Orleans in December 2018,effective November 1, 2022, and Ms. LandreauxFontan was named Executive Vice President and Chief ExecutiveFinancial Officer, Entergy Arkansas in July 2018.on such date. Effective January 31, 2023, Mr. Marsh was elected Chair of the Board.
(2)The amounts in column (c) represent the actual base salary paid to the NEOs in the applicable year. The 2020 base salary amounts include an amount attributable to an extra pay period that occurred in 2020 as the NEOs are paid on a bi-weekly basis.  The 20202023 changes in base salaries noted in the Compensation Discussion and AnalysisCD&A were effective in April 2020.2023.
(3)The amount in column (d) in 2020, 2019, and 2018 for Mr. Bakken represents the cash bonus paid to him pursuant to the Nuclear Retention Plan. See “Nuclear Retention Plan” in Compensation Discussion and Analysis. The amount in column (d) in 2018 for Mr. Ellis represents a cash sign-on bonus paid in connection with his commencement of employment with Entergy New Orleans.
(4)The amounts in column (e) represent the aggregate grant date fair value of restricted stock and performance units granted under the 2015 Equity Ownership Plan of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “2015 EOP”) and the 2019 OIP, (together with the 2015 EOP, the “Equity Plans”), each calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, without taking into account estimated forfeitures.  The grant date fair value of the restricted stock, restricted stock units, and the portion of the performance units with vesting based on the Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio is based on the closing price of Entergy Corporation common stock on the date of grant.  The grant date fair value of the portion of the performance units with vesting based on the total shareholder returnattributable to relative TSR was measured using a Monte Carlo simulation valuation model.  The simulation model applies a risk-free interest rate and an expected volatility assumption.  The risk-free interest rate is assumed to equal the yield on a three-year treasury bond on the grant date.  Volatility is based on historical volatility for the 36-month period preceding the grant date.  The performance units in the table are also valued based on the probable outcome of the applicable performance condition at the time of grant. The maximum value of shares that would be received if the highest achievement level is attained with respect to both the total shareholder returnrelative TSR and Cumulative ETR Adjusted EPS,FFO/Debt Ratio, for performance units granted in 20202023 are as follows:  Mr. Bakken,
487

Table of Contents
$2,043,768; Mr. Brown, $1,994,504; Mr. Denault, $8,235,925; Mr. Ellis, $250,268;$1,593,424; Mr. Fisackerly, $250,268;$589,209; Ms. Fontan, $1,513,590; Ms. Landreaux, $250,268;$489,851; Mr. Marsh, $2,518,486;$6,702,361; Mr. May, $368,816;$596,802; Ms. Rainer, $250,268;Rodriguez, $351,443; Mr. Viamontes, $432,578; and Mr. West, $2,213,159.$2,009,732.
(5)(4)The amounts in column (f) represent the aggregate grant date fair value of stock options granted under the Equity Plans2019 OIP calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718.  For a discussion of the relevant assumptions used in valuing these awards, see Note 12 to the financial statements.
(6)(5)The amounts in column (g) represent annual incentive award cash payments made under the 2019 OIP.
(7)(6)For all NEOs, theThe amounts in column (h) include the annual actuarial increasechange in the present value of these NEOs’ benefits under all pension plans established by Entergy Corporation using interest rate and mortality rate assumptions consistent with those used in Entergy Corporation’s financial statements and include amounts which the NEOs may not currently be entitled to receive because such amounts are not vested (see “2020 Pension Benefits”). The increase in pension benefits for all of the NEOs in 2020 was driven by a decline in the discount rate that was a result of the decrease in prevailing interest rates.vested. None of the increases for any of
510

Table of Contents
the NEOs isare attributable to above-market or preferential earnings on non-qualified deferred compensation. For 2018, the aggregate change in the actuarial present value was a decrease of pension benefits of $52,000 for Mr. Fisackerly, $163,000 for Mr. Marsh, $700 for Mr. May, $110,700 for Ms. Rainer, and $149,300 for Mr. West.See “2023 Pension Benefits.”
(8)(7)The amounts in column (i) for 20202023 include (a) matching contributions by Entergy Corporation under the Savings Plan to each of the NEOs; (b) dividends paid on restricted stock and performance units when vested; (c) life insurance premiums; (d) tax gross up paymentsreimbursements on club dues; and (e) perquisites and other compensation as described further below. The 2023 amounts are listed in the following table:

Named Executive OfficerNamed Executive OfficerCompany Contribution – Savings PlanDividends Paid on Restricted StockLife Insurance PremiumTax Gross Up PaymentsPerquisites and Other Compensation
 
 
Total
Named Executive OfficerCompany Matching Contribution – Savings PlanDividends Paid on Restricted Stock and PUP AwardsLife Insurance PremiumTax ReimbursementPerquisites and Other Compensation
 
 
Total
A. Christopher Bakken, III$17,100 $52,032 $12,415 $— $4,299 $85,846 
Marcus V. BrownMarcus V. Brown$11,970 $56,953 $7,482 $— $2,226 $78,631 
Leo P. Denault$11,970 $173,952 $11,484 $— $92,226 $289,632 
David D. Ellis$17,100 $658 $745 $— $820 $19,323 
Haley R. FisackerlyHaley R. Fisackerly$11,970 $8,305 $5,705 $7,939 $14,182 $48,101 
Kimberly A. Fontan
Laura R. LandreauxLaura R. Landreaux$— $13,094 $493 $4,281 $8,829 $26,697 
Andrew S. MarshAndrew S. Marsh$11,970 $59,177 $6,594 $— $— $77,741 
Phillip R. May, Jr.Phillip R. May, Jr.$11,970 $10,902 $5,964 $— $— $28,836 
Sallie T. Rainer$11,970 $8,564 $1,580 $2,836 $8,433 $33,383 
Deanna D. Rodriguez
Eliecer Viamontes
Roderick K. WestRoderick K. West$11,970 $41,931 $4,002 $— $1,827 $59,730 

(9)(8)In order to show the effect that the year-over-year change in pension value had on total compensation, as determined under applicable SEC rules, we have included an additional column to show total compensation minus the change in pension value. The amounts reported in the Total Without Change in Pension Value column may differ substantially from the amounts reported in the Total column required under SEC rules and are not a substitute for total compensation. Total Without Change in Pension Value represents total compensation, as determined under applicable SEC rules, minus the change in pension value reported in the Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings column. The change in pension value is subject to many external variables, such as interest rates, assumptions about life expectancy, and changes in the discount rate determined at each year end, which are functions of economic factors and actuarial calculations that are not related to Entergy Corporation’s performance and are outside of the control of the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee.

488511

Table of Contents
Perquisites and Other Compensation

The amounts set forth in column (i) also include perquisites and other personal benefits that Entergy Corporation provides to its NEOs as part of providing a competitive executive compensation program and for employee retention. The following perquisites were provided to the NEOs in 2020.2023.

Named Executive OfficerPersonal Use of Corporate AircraftClub DuesExecutive Physical Exams
A. Christopher Bakken, IIIX
Marcus V. BrownXX
Leo P. DenaultXX
David D. EllisX
Haley R. FisackerlyXX
Kimberly A. FontanX
Laura R. LandreauxX
Andrew S. MarshX
Phillip R. May, Jr.
Sallie T. RainerDeanna D. Rodriguez
Eliecer ViamontesX
Roderick K. WestXX

For security and business reasons, Entergy Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer is permitted to use its corporate aircraft for personal use at the expense of Entergy Corporation.  The other NEOs may use the corporate aircraft for personal travel subject to the approval of Entergy Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer.  The PersonnelAnnually, the Talent and Compensation Committee reviews the level of usage throughout the year.usage. Entergy Corporation believes that its officers’ ability to use its plane for limited personal use saves time and provides additionalhelps to ensure their safety and security for them,while traveling, thereby benefiting Entergy Corporation.the Company. The amounts included in column (i) for the personal use of corporate aircraft, reflect the incremental cost to Entergy Corporation for use of the corporate aircraft, determined on the basis of the variable operational costs of each flight, including fuel, maintenance, flight crew travel expense, catering, communications, and fees, including flight planning, ground handling, and landing permits. The aggregate incremental aircraft usage cost associated with Mr. Denault’sWest’s personal use of the corporate aircraft was $86,618$32,773 for fiscal year 2020.2023. In addition, Entergy Corporation offers its executives comprehensive annual physical exams at Entergy Corporation’s expense. None of the other perquisites referenced above exceeded $25,000 for any of the other NEOs.

489

Table of Contents
20202023 Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The following table summarizes award grants during 20202023 to the NEOs.
  
Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards (1)
Estimated Future Payouts under Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2)
    
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)(l)
NameGrant DateThresh-oldTargetMaximumThresh-oldTargetMaximumAll Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or UnitsAll Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Under-lying OptionsExercise or Base Price of Option AwardsGrant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards
($)($)($)(#)(#)(#)
(#)
(3)
(#)
(4)
($/Sh)
($)
(5)
A. Christopher1/30/20$-$505,275$1,010,550
Bakken, III1/30/201,940 7,758 15,516 $1,257,851
1/30/203,104 $408,859
1/30/2029,279 $131.72$335,245
Marcus V.1/30/20$-$552,000$1,104,000
Brown1/30/201,893 7,571 15,142 $1,227,532
1/30/203,029 $398,980
1/30/2028,574 $131.72$327,172
Leo P.1/30/20$-$1,764,000$3,528,000
Denault1/30/20   7,816 31,263 62,526    $5,068,858
1/30/2012,505 $1,647,159
1/30/20117,990 $131.72$1,350,986
David D.1/30/20$-$128,740$257,480
Ellis1/30/20238 950 1,900 $154,029
500$65,860
3,200 $131.72$36,640
Haley R.1/30/20$-$155,297$310,594       
Fisackerly1/30/20   238 950 1,900    $154,029
 1/30/20      750   $98,790
 1/30/20       4,300 $131.72$49,235
Laura R.1/30/20$-$130,702$261,404
Landreaux1/30/20238 950 1,900 $154,029
1/30/20750 $98,790
4,300 $131.72$49,235
Andrew S.1/30/20$-$586,500$1,173,000
Marsh1/30/202,390 9,560 19,120 $1,550,020
1/30/203,824 $503,697
1/30/2036,079 $131.72$413,105

  
Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards (1)
Estimated Future Payouts under Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2)
    
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)(l)
NameGrant Date
Thresh-
old
TargetMaximum
Thresh-
old
TargetMaximumAll Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or UnitsAll Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Under-lying OptionsExercise or Base Price of Option AwardsGrant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards
($)($)($)(#)(#)(#)
(#)
(3)
(#)
(4)
($/Sh)
($)
(5)
Marcus V.1/26/23$-$609,041$1,218,082
Brown1/26/231,836 7,345 14,690 $927,042
1/26/232,762 $299,594
1/26/2314,459 $108.47$290,192
490512

Table of Contents
 
Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards (1)
Estimated Future Payouts under Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2)
 
(a) (a) 
Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards (1)
Estimated Future Payouts under Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2)
     (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)(l)
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)(l)
NameNameGrant DateThresh-oldTargetMaximumThresh-oldTargetMaximumAll Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or UnitsAll Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Under-lying OptionsExercise or Base Price of Option AwardsGrant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option AwardsNameGrant Date
Thresh-
old
TargetMaximum
Thresh-
old
TargetMaximumAll Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or UnitsAll Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Under-lying OptionsExercise or Base Price of Option AwardsGrant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards
($)($)($)(#)(#)
(#)
(3)
(#)
(4)
($/Sh)
($)
(5)
($)(#)
(#)
(3)
(#)
(4)
($/Sh)
($)
(5)
Phillip R.1/30/20$-$242,870$485,740     
May, Jr.1/30/20 350 1,400 2,800    $226,990
Haley R.
Haley R.
Haley R.1/26/23$-$241,014$482,028    
FisackerlyFisackerly1/26/23  679 2,716 5,432  $342,797
1/30/201,100 $144,892 1/26/23    1,022   $110,856
1/30/207,300 $131.72$85,585 1/26/23     5,346 $108.47$108.47$107,294
Sallie T.1/30/20$-$143,485$286,970     
Rainer1/30/20  238 950 1,900    $154,029
Kimberly A.
Kimberly A.
Kimberly A.
Fontan
Fontan
Fontan1/26/231,744 6,977 13,954 $880,595
1/26/231/26/232,623 $284,517
1/26/231/26/2313,733 $108.47$275,621
1/30/20   750   $98,790
Laura R.
Laura R.
Laura R.
Landreaux
Landreaux
Landreaux1/26/23565 2,258 4,516 $284,991
1/26/231/26/23849 $92,091
1/26/231/26/234,444 $108.47$89,191
1/30/204,300 $131.72$49,235
Andrew S.
Andrew S.
Andrew S.
Marsh
Marsh
Marsh1/26/237,724 30,895 61,790 $3,899,382
1/26/231/26/2311,616 $1,259,988
1/26/231/26/2360,815 $108.47$1,220,557
Phillip R.
May, Jr.
May, Jr.
May, Jr.1/26/23688 2,751 5,502 $347,215
1/26/231/26/231,035 $112,266
1/26/231/26/235,415 $108.47$108,679
Deanna D.
Deanna D.
Deanna D.
Rodriguez
Rodriguez
Rodriguez1/26/23405 1,620 3,240 $204,467
1/26/231/26/23609 $66,058
1/26/231/26/233,188 $108.47$63,983
Eliecer
Eliecer
Eliecer
Viamontes
Viamontes
Viamontes1/26/23499 1,994 3,988 $251,671
1/26/231/26/23750 $81,353
1/26/231/26/233,924 $108.47$78,755
 
Roderick K.Roderick K.1/30/20$-$585,490$1,170,980     
Roderick K.
Roderick K.
WestWest1/30/20 2,100 8,401 16,802    $1,362,105
1/30/20  3,361   $442,711
1/30/2031,705 $131.72$363,022
West
West1/26/232,316 9,264 18,528 $1,169,246
1/26/231/26/233,483 $377,801
1/26/231/26/2318,235 $108.47$365,976

513

Table of Contents
(1)The amounts in columns (c), (d), and (e) represent minimum, target, and maximum payment levels under the annual incentive program.  The actual amounts awarded are reported in column (g) of the 2023 Summary Compensation Table.
(2)The amounts in columns (f), (g), and (h) represent the minimum, target, and maximum payment levels under the LTIP.PUP.  Performance under the program is measured by Entergy Corporation’s total shareholder returnTSR relative to the total shareholder returnsTSR of the companies included in the Philadelphia Utility Index and Cumulative Entergy Adjusted EPSFFO/Debt Ratio with total shareholder returnTSR weighted eighty percent and Cumulative Entergy Adjusted EPSFFO/Debt Ratio weighted twenty percent. There is no payout under the program if Entergy Corporation’s total shareholder returnTSR falls within the lowest quartile of the peer companies in the Philadelphia Utility Index and Cumulative Entergy Adjusted EPSFFO/Debt Ratio is below the minimum performance goal. Subject to the achievement of performance targets, each unit will be converted into one share of Entergy Corporation’s common stock on the last day of the performance period for the 2023 - 2025 long-term PUP cycle (December 31, 2022)2025).  Accrued dividends on the shares earned will also be paid in Entergy Corporation common stock.
(3)The amounts in column (i) represent shares of restricted stock granted under the 2019 OIP.  Shares of restricted stock vest one-third on each of the first through third anniversaries of the grant date, have voting rights, and accrue dividends during the vesting period.
(4)The amounts in column (j) represent options to purchase shares of Entergy Corporation’s common stock.stock granted under the 2019 OIP.  The options vest one-third on each of the first through third anniversaries of the grant date and have a ten-year term from the date of grant. The options were granted under the 2019 OIP.
(5)The amounts in column (l) are valued based on the aggregate grant date fair value of the award calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718 and, in the case of the performance units, are based on the probable outcome of the applicable performance conditions.  See Notesfootnotes 4 and 5 to the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table for a discussion of the relevant assumptions used in calculating the grant date fair value.


491

Table of Contents
20202023 Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

The following table summarizes, for each NEO, unexercised options, restricted stock that has not vested, and equity incentive plan awards outstanding as of December 31, 2020.2023.
Option AwardsStock Awards
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
NameNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options ExercisableNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options UnexercisableEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned OptionsOption Exercise PriceOption Expiration DateNumber of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedMarket Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
A. Christopher Bakken, III— 
29,279(1)
$131.721/30/2030
— 
24,281(2)
$89.191/31/2029
— 
13,500(3)
$78.081/25/2028
1,940(4)
$193,640
19,136(5)
$1,910,538
3,104(6)
$309,903
2,403(7)
$239,916
1,667(8)
$166,433
20,000(9)
$1,996,800
Marcus V. Brown— 
28,574(1)
$131.721/30/2030
— 
23,813(2)
$89.191/31/2029
— 
13,500(3)
$78.081/25/2028
1,893(4)
$188,972
18,766(5)
$1,873,597
3,029(6)
$302,415
2,357(7)
$235,323
1,667(8)
$166,433

 Option AwardsStock Awards
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
Name
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Unexercisable
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexer-
cised
Unearned
Options
Option
Exercise
Price
Option
Expiration
Date
Number
of Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
Market
Value of
Shares or
Units of
Stock
That Have
Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
Marcus V.— 
14,459(1)
$108.471/26/2033
Brown5,607 
11,215(2)
$109.591/27/2032
— 
7,302(3)
$95.871/28/2031
28,574 — $131.721/30/2030
14,690(4)
$1,486,481
6,477(5)
$655,408
2,762(6)
$279,487
1,716(7)
$173,642
1,015(8)
$102,708
14,126(9)
$1,438,517
492514

Table of Contents
 Option AwardsStock Awards
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
NameNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options ExercisableNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options UnexercisableEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned OptionsOption Exercise PriceOption Expiration DateNumber of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedMarket Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
Leo P. Denault— 
117,990(1)
 $131.721/30/2030  
51,402 
102,804(2)
 $89.191/31/2029  
 111,400 
55,700(3)
 $78.081/25/2028  
 179,400 —  $70.531/26/2027
 167,000 —  $70.561/28/2026
 88,000 —  $89.901/29/2025
 106,000 —  $63.171/30/2024
50,000 — $64.601/31/2023
7,816(4)
$780,324
81,016(5)
$8,088,637
12,505(6)
$1,248,499
10,173(7)
$1,015,672
5,234(8)
$522,563
David D. Ellis— 
3,200(1)
$131.721/30/2030
1,566 
3,134(2)
$89.191/31/2029
238(4)
$23,712
2,900(5)
$289,536
500(6)
$49,920
334(7)
$33,347
Haley R. Fisackerly— 
4,300(1)
 $131.721/30/2030    
— 
4,134(2)
 $89.191/31/2029    
 — 
2,200(3)
 $78.081/25/2028    
238(4)
$23,712
  
2,900(5)
$289,536
750(6)
$74,880
400(7)
$39,936
267(8)
$26,657

 Option AwardsStock Awards
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
Name
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Unexercisable
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexer-
cised
Unearned
Options
Option
Exercise
Price
Option
Expiration
Date
Number
of Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
Market
Value of
Shares or
Units of
Stock
That Have
Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
Haley R.— 
5,346(1)
$108.471/26/2033
Fisackerly1,284 
2,568(2)
$109.591/27/2032
2,734 
1,367(3)
$95.871/28/2031
4,300 — $131.721/30/2030
4,134 — $89.191/31/2029
5,432(4)
$549,664
1,510(5)
$152,797
1,022(6)
$103,416
394(7)
$39,869
190(8)
$19,226
4,053(10)
$410,123
Kimberly A.— 
13,733(1)
$108.471/26/2033
Fontan1,651 
3,304(2)
$109.591/27/2032
3,630 
1,815(3)
$95.871/28/2031
6,400 — $131.721/30/2030
6,000 — $89.191/31/2029
2,500 — $78.081/25/2028
13,954 (4)
$1,412,005
5,302(5)
$536,509
2,623(6)
$265,421
506(7)
$51,202
253(8)
$25,601
Laura R.— 
4,444(1)
$108.471/26/2033
Landreaux1,284 
2,568(2)
$109.591/27/2032
2,582 
1,291(3)
$95.871/28/2031
4,300 — $131.721/30/2030
5,100 — $89.191/31/2029
4,516(4)
$456,974
1,769(5)
$179,005
849(6)
$85,910
394(7)
$39,869
180(8)
$18,214
493515

Table of Contents
 Option AwardsStock Awards
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
NameNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options ExercisableNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options UnexercisableEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned OptionsOption Exercise PriceOption Expiration DateNumber of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedMarket Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
Laura R. Landreaux— 
4,300(1)
 $131.721/30/2030
1,700 
3,400(2)
$89.191/31/2029
238(4)
$23,712
2,900(5)
$289,536
750(6)
$74,880
      
334(7)
$33,347
400(8)
$39,936
Andrew S. Marsh— 
36,079(1)
$131.721/30/2030
15,060 
30,122(2)
$89.191/31/2029
 32,666 
16,334(3)
$78.081/25/2028
 44,000 — $70.531/26/2027
 45,000 — $70.561/28/2026
 24,000 — $89.901/29/2025
 35,000 — $63.171/30/2024
 32,000 — $64.601/31/2023
 10,000 — $71.301/26/2022
4,000 — $72.791/27/2021
2,390(4)
$238,618
 
23,738(5)
$2,370,002
3,824(6)
$381,788
2,981(7)
$297,623
1,734(8)
$173,123
Phillip R. May, Jr.— 
7,300(1)
 $131.721/30/2030
— 
6,200(2)
 $89.191/31/2029
 — 
3,300(3)
 $78.081/25/2028
        
350(4)
$34,944
        
4,300(5)
$429,312
      
1,100(6)
$109,824  
      
600(7)
$59,904  
343(8)
$33,347

 Option AwardsStock Awards
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
Name
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Unexercisable
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexer-
cised
Unearned
Options
Option
Exercise
Price
Option
Expiration
Date
Number
of Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
Market
Value of
Shares or
Units of
Stock
That Have
Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
Andrew S.— 
60,815(1)
$108.471/26/2033
Marsh8,493 
16,987(2)
$109.591/27/2032
19,464 
9,732(3)
$95.871/28/2031
36,079 — $131.721/30/2030
45,182 — $89.191/31/2029
49,000 — $78.081/25/2028
44,000 — $70.531/26/2027
45,000 — $70.561/28/2026
24,000 — $89.901/29/2025
61,790(4)
$6,252,530
23,118(5)
$2,339,310
11,616(6)
$1,175,423
2,599(7)
$262,993
1,353(8)
$136,910
Phillip R.— 
5,415(1)
$108.471/26/2033
May, Jr.2,485 
4,972(2)
$109.591/27/2032
3,594 
1,798(3)
$95.871/28/2031
7,300 — $131.721/30/2030
6,200 — $89.191/31/2029
5,502(4)
$556,747
2,871(5)
$290,516
1,035(6)
$104,732
761(7)
$77,006
250(8)
$25,298
4,053(10)
$410,123
Deanna D.— 
3,188(1)
$108.471/26/2033
Rodriguez991
1,983(2)
$109.591/27/2032
3,240(4)
$327,856
1,254(5)
$126,892
609(6)
$61,625
304(7)
$30,762
412(8)
$41,690
494516

Table of Contents
Option AwardsStock Awards
(a) (a)Option AwardsStock Awards (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)
NameNameNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options ExercisableNumber of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options UnexercisableEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned OptionsOption Exercise PriceOption Expiration DateNumber of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedMarket Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not VestedEquity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not VestedName
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Unexercisable
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexer-
cised
Unearned
Options
Option
Exercise
Price
Option
Expiration
Date
Number
of Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
Market
Value of
Shares or
Units of
Stock
That Have
Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
Eliecer
Viamontes
Viamontes
Viamontes
2,888
2,888
2,888
3,988(4)
3,988(4)
3,988(4)
$403,546
1,577(5)
1,577(5)
$159,577
750(6)
336(7)
336(7)
336(7)
201(8)
201(8)
201(8)
(#)(#)(#)($)(#)($)(#)($)
Sallie T. Rainer— 
4,300(1)
 $131.721/30/2030    
Roderick K.
2,066 
4,134(2)
 $89.191/31/2029
Roderick K.
2,200 
2,200(3)
 $78.081/25/2028    
2,600 — $70.531/26/2027
  
238(4)
$23,712
     
2,900(5)
$289,536
750(6)
$74,880
400(7)
$39,936
267(8)
$26,657
Roderick K. West— 
31,705(1)
 $131.721/30/2030    
— 
25,564(2)
 $89.191/31/2029    
— 
14,167(3)
 $78.081/25/2028    
    
2,100(4)
$209,689
       
20,146(5)
$2,011,377
     
3,361(6)
$335,562  
     
2,530(7)
$252,595  
     
1,734(8)
$173,123  
Roderick K.
West
West
West
17,834
17,834
17,834
31,705
31,705
31,705
25,564
25,564
25,564
14,167
14,167
14,167
18,528(4)
18,528(4)
18,528(4)
$1,874,848
9,525(5)
9,525(5)
$963,835
3,483(6)
2,524(7)
2,524(7)
2,524(7)
1,240(8)
1,240(8)
1,240(8)
18,012(11)
18,012(11)
18,012(11)

(1)Consists of options granted under the 2019 OIP; 1/3 of the options vested on January 30, 202126, 2024 and 1/3 of the remaining options will vest on each of January 30, 202226, 2025 and January 30, 2023.26, 2026.
(2)Consists of options granted under the 2015 EOP;2019 OIP; 1/2 of the options vested on January 31, 202127, 2024 and the remaining options will vest on January 30, 2022.27, 2025.
(3)Consists of options granted under the 2015 EOP2019 OIP that vested on January 25, 2021.28, 2024.
(4)Consists of performance units granted under the 2019 OIP that will vest on December 31, 20222025 based on two performance measures: 1)measures- Entergy Corporation’s total shareholder returnrelative TSR performance and Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio over the 2020-20222023 - 2025 performance period and 2) Cumulative Entergy Adjusted EPS with total shareholder returnrelative TSR weighted eighty percent and Cumulative Entergy Adjusted EPSFFO/Debt Ratio weighted twenty percent, as described under “What Entergy Corporation Pays and Why - Long-Term Incentive Compensation - 20202023 Long-Term Incentive Award Mix - Long-Term Performance Unit Program”Units” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis.CD&A.
(5)Consists of performance units granted under the 2015 EOP2019 OIP that will vest on December 31, 20212024 based on two performance measures: 1)measures - Entergy Corporation’s total shareholder returnrelative TSR performance and Adjusted FFO/Debt Ratio over the 2019-20212022 - 2024 performance period and 2) Cumulative Entergy Adjusted EPS with total shareholder returnrelative TSR weighted eighty percent and Cumulative Entergy Adjusted EPSFFO/Debt Ratio weighted twenty percent.
(6)Consists of shares of restricted stock granted under the 2019 OIP; 1/3 of the shares of restricted stock vested on January 30, 202126, 2024 and 1/32 of the remaining shares will vest on each of January 30, 202226, 2025 and January 30, 2023.26, 2026.
495517

Table of Contents
(7)Consists of shares of restricted stock granted under the 2015 EOP;2019 OIP; 1/2 of the shares of restricted stock vested on January 31, 202127, 2024 and the remaining shares of restricted stock will vest on January 31, 2022.27, 2025.
(8)Consists of shares of restricted stock granted under the 2015 EOP2019 OIP that vested on January 25, 2021.28, 2024.
(9)Consists of restricted stock units granted under the 2015 EOP2019 OIP which will vest 1/2 on eachMay 17, 2024.
(10)Consists of April 6, 2022restricted stock units granted under the 2019 OIP which will vest on October 1, 2025.
(11)Consists of restricted stock units granted under the 2019 OIP which will vest in three equal installments on June 1, 2024, June 1, 2025, and April 6, 2025.June 1, 2026.

20202023 Option Exercises and Stock Vested

The following table provides information concerning each exercise of stock options and each vesting of stock during 20202023 for the NEOs.
Options AwardsStock Awards
(a) (a)Options AwardsStock Awards (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)
NameNameNumber of Shares Acquired on ExerciseValue Realized on ExerciseNumber of Shares Acquired on Vesting
Value Realized on Vesting (1)
NameNumber of Shares Acquired on ExerciseValue Realized on ExerciseNumber of Shares Acquired on Vesting
Value Realized on Vesting (1)
(#)($)(#)($)
A. Christopher Bakken, III38,174 $1,954,334 16,051 $1,701,473 
(#)(#)($)(#)($)
Marcus V. BrownMarcus V. Brown40,075 $2,081,630 16,366 $1,742,234 
Leo P. Denault— $— 77,044 $7,935,333 
David D. Ellis— $— 1,659 $164,028 
Haley R. Fisackerly
Haley R. Fisackerly
Haley R. FisackerlyHaley R. Fisackerly6,800 $351,077 3,122 $325,433 
Kimberly A. Fontan
Kimberly A. Fontan
Kimberly A. Fontan
Laura R. Landreaux
Laura R. Landreaux
Laura R. LandreauxLaura R. Landreaux— $— 3,059 $331,489 
Andrew S. MarshAndrew S. Marsh— $— 37,861 $3,959,325 
Andrew S. Marsh
Andrew S. Marsh
Phillip R. May, Jr.Phillip R. May, Jr.13,900 $774,394 4,650 $480,241 
Phillip R. May, Jr.
Phillip R. May, Jr.
Sallie T. Rainer— $— 3,140 $327,765 
Deanna D. Rodriguez
Deanna D. Rodriguez
Deanna D. Rodriguez
Eliecer Viamontes
Eliecer Viamontes
Eliecer Viamontes
Roderick K. WestRoderick K. West97,249 $4,940,267 15,436 $1,621,930 
Roderick K. West
Roderick K. West

(1)Represents the value of performance units for the 2018 - 20202021 – 2023 performance period (payable solely in shares based on the closing stock price of Entergy Corporation on the date of vesting) under the LTIPPUP and the vesting of shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units in 2020.2023.

496518

Table of Contents
20202023 Pension Benefits

The following table shows the present value as of December 31, 2020,2023, of accumulated benefits payable to each of the NEOs, including the number of years of service credited to each NEO, under the retirement plans sponsored by Entergy Corporation, determined using interest rate and mortality rate assumptions set forth in Note 11 to the financial statements.  Additional information regarding these retirement plans follows this table.
NamePlan NameNumber of Years Credited ServicePresent Value of Accumulated BenefitPayments During 2020
A. Christopher Bakken, IIICash Balance Equalization Plan4.74 $287,400 $— 
Cash Balance Plan4.74 $95,800 $— 
Marcus V. Brown(1)
System Executive Retirement Plan25.74 $7,889,100 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan25.74 $1,385,300 $— 
Leo P. Denault (1)(2)
System Executive Retirement Plan30.00 $30,747,600 $— 
 Entergy Retirement Plan21.83 $1,230,700 $— 
David D. EllisCash Balance Equalization Plan2.06 $15,200 $— 
Cash Balance Plan2.06 $35,600 $— 
Haley R. Fisackerly(1)
System Executive Retirement Plan25.08 $2,338,800 $— 
 Entergy Retirement Plan25.08 $1,249,300 $— 
Laura R. LandreauxPension Equalization Plan13.48 $258,600 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan13.48 $577,100 $— 
Andrew S. MarshSystem Executive Retirement Plan22.37 $6,543,400 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan22.37 $944,000 $— 
Phillip R. May, Jr. (1)(3)
System Executive Retirement Plan30.00 $3,747,400 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan34.56 $1,827,300 $— 
Sallie T. Rainer (1)(3)
System Executive Retirement Plan30.00 $1,850,000 $— 
 Entergy Retirement Plan36.00 $2,090,800 $— 
Roderick K. WestSystem Executive Retirement Plan21.75 $7,667,200 $— 
 Entergy Retirement Plan21.75 $994,300 $— 

NamePlan NameNumber of Years Credited ServicePresent Value of Accumulated BenefitPayments During 2023
Marcus V. Brown(1)(2)
System Executive Retirement Plan28.74 $10,108,100 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan28.74 $1,366,100 $— 
Haley R. Fisackerly(1)
System Executive Retirement Plan28.08 $2,414,900 $— 
 Entergy Retirement Plan28.08 $1,145,200 $— 
Kimberly A. FontanPension Equalization Plan27.56 $1,019,800 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan27.56 $808,600 $— 
Laura R. LandreauxPension Equalization Plan16.48 $422,200 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan16.48 $476,100 $— 
Andrew S. MarshSystem Executive Retirement Plan25.37 $6,186,700 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan25.37 $754,800 $— 
Phillip R. May, Jr. (1)(3)
System Executive Retirement Plan30.00 $3,022,800 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan36.56 $1,723,200 $— 
Deanna D. Rodriguez(1)
Pension Equalization Plan29.19 $743,100 $— 
Entergy Retirement Plan29.19 $1,277,600 $— 
Eliecer ViamontesCash Balance Equalization Plan3.95 $28,300 $— 
Cash Balance Plan3.95 $46,600 $— 
Roderick K. West(1)
System Executive Retirement Plan24.75 $5,794,600 $— 
 Entergy Retirement Plan24.75 $855,700 $— 

(1)As of December 31, 2020,2023, Mr. Brown, Mr. Denault, Mr. Fisackerly, Mr. May, Ms. Rodriguez, and Ms. RainerMr. West were retirement eligible.
(2)In 2006, Mr. Denault2022, the Company entered into a retentionan agreement granting him additional years of servicewith Mr. Brown and permissionamended the PEP and the SERP, pursuant to retire underwhich agreement and amendments if certain contingencies are met, the non-qualified System Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”) in the eventbenefit payable to Mr. Brown (or to his employment is terminated by his Entergy employer other than for cause (as defined in the retention agreement), by Mr. Denault for good reason (as defined in the retention agreement), or on account of his death or disability. His retention agreement also provides that if he terminates employment for any other reason, he shall be entitled to up to an additional 15 years of servicesurviving spouse) under the SERP onlywhen he separates from employment with the Company is fixed and will be determined as if such separation from employment occurred as of November 30, 2022 (including the use of final average monthly compensation, service and actuarial assumptions applicable to separations as of such date). If Mr. Brown separates from service and the contingencies are not met, then Mr. Brown (or his Entergy employer grants him permissionsurviving spouse) will receive the lesser of the previously described benefit amount under the SERP or the benefit that would have been payable to retire subjectMr. Brown under the PEP without regard to the overall 30 year cap on service credit under the SERP. The amount reflected in the table forabove-described amendments to the SERP is calculated based on 30 years of service. The additional years of service credited to Mr. Denault under his retention agreement increased the present value of Mr. Denault’s benefit by $4,020,200.and PEP.
(3)Service under the SERP is granted from the date of hire. Service under the qualified Entergy Retirement Plan is granted from the later of the date of hire or the plan participation date. The SERP amounts reflected in the table for Mr. May and Ms. Rainer areis calculated based on 30 years of service pursuant to the terms of the SERP.

497
519

Table of Contents


Retirement Benefits

The tables below contain summaries of the pension benefit plans sponsored by Entergy Corporation that the NEOs participated in during 2020.2023. Benefits for the NEOs who participate in these plans are determined using the same formulas as for other eligible employees.

Qualified Retirement Benefits

All of our NEOs, except Mr. Viamontes participate in the Entergy Retirement Plan, a tax-qualified final average pay defined benefit pension plan sponsored by Entergy. Mr. Viamontes participates in the Cash Balance Plan, which is a tax-qualified cash balance defined benefit pension plan Entergy sponsors for employees hired after June 30, 2014 and before January 1, 2021. Summaries of these plans are provided below. Benefits for the NEOs are determined using the same formulas as for other eligible employees:

Entergy Retirement Plan
Cash Balance Plan(1)
Eligible Named Executive OfficersMarcus V. Brown
Haley R. Fisackerly
Leo P. Denault
Andrew S. Marsh
Laura R. Landreaux
Phillip R. May, Jr.
Sallie T. RainerKimberly A. Fontan
Deanna D. Rodriguez

Roderick K. West
A. Christopher Bakken, III
David D. Ellis
Eliecer Viamontes
EligibilityNon-bargaining employees hired before July 1, 2014Non-bargaining employees hired on or after July 1, 2014 and before January 1, 2021.
VestingA participant becomes vested in the Entergy Retirement Plan upon attainment of at least 5 years of vesting service or upon attainment of age 65 while actively employed by an Entergy system company.A participant becomes vested in the Cash Balance Plan upon attainment of at least 3 years of vesting service or upon attainment of age 65 while actively employed by an Entergy system company.
Form of Payment Upon RetirementBenefits are payable as an annuity. For employees who separate from service on or after January 1, 2018, a single lump sum distribution may be elected by the participant if eligibility criteria are met.Benefits are payable as an annuity or single lump sum distribution.
520

Table of Contents
Entergy Retirement Plan
Cash Balance Plan(1)
Retirement Benefit Formula
Benefits are calculated as a single life annuity payable at age 65 and generally are equal to 1.5% of a participant’s Final Average Monthly Earnings (FAME) multiplied by years of service (not to exceed 40).


“Earnings”
Earnings for the purpose of calculating FAME generally includes the employee’s base salary and eligible annual incentive awards subject to limitations imposed by the Internal Revenue Code limitations,of 1986, as amended (the Code), and excludes all other bonuses. Executive annual incentive awards are not eligible for inclusion in Earningsearnings under this plan.


FAME is calculated using the employee’s average monthly Earningsearnings for the 60 consecutive months in which the employee’s earnings were highest during the 120 month
period immediately preceding the employee’s retirement and includes up to 5 eligible annual incentive awards paid during the 60 month period.


period, except that executive annual incentive awards are not included in the FAME calculation.
The normal retirement benefit at age 65 is determined by converting the sum of an employee’s annual pay credits and his or her annual interest credits into an actuarially equivalent annuity.


Pay credits ranging from 4-8% of an employee’s eligible Earningsearnings are allocated annually to a notional account for the employee based on an employee’s age and years of service. Earnings for purposes of calculating an employee’s pay credit include the employee’s base salary and annual incentive awards, subject to Internal Revenue Code limitations, and exclude all other bonuses. Executive annual incentive program awards are eligible for inclusion in Earningsearnings under this plan.


Interest credits are calculated based upon the annual rate of interest on 30-year U.S. Treasury securities, as specified by the Internal Revenue Service, for the month of August preceding the first day of the applicable calendar year subject to a minimum rate of 2.6% and a maximum rate of 9%.
498

Table of Contents
Benefit Timing(2)
Normal retirement age under the plan is 65.

A reduced terminated vested benefit may be commenced as early as age 55. The amount of this benefit is determined by reducing the normal retirement benefit by 7% per year for the first 5 years commencement precedes age 65 and 6% per year for each additional year commencement precedes age 65.

A subsidized early retirement benefit may be commenced by employees who are at least age 55 with 10 years of service at the time they separate from service. The amount of this benefit is determined by reducing the normal retirement benefit by 2% per year for each year that early retirement precedes age 65.
Normal retirement age under the plan is 65.

A vested cash balance benefit canmay be commenced as early as the first day of the month following separation from service. The amount of the benefit is determined in the same manner as the normal retirement benefit described above in the “Retirement Benefit Formula” section.

(1)Effective January 1, 2022, the Entergy Corporation Cash Balance Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees merged into and became Appendix J of the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees, but retained its eligibility, benefit formula, and all benefits, rights, and features.
(2)As of December 31, 2023, Messrs. Brown, Fisackerly, May, and West and Ms. Rodriguez were eligible for early retirement under the Entergy Retirement Plan.

Non-qualified Retirement Benefits

The NEOs are eligible to participate in certain non-qualified retirement benefit plans that provide retirement income in addition to the benefit provided under the qualified retirement plans, including the Pension Equalization Plan (“PEP”),PEP, the Cash Balance Equalization Plan,CBEP, and the SERP. Each of these plans is an unfunded non-qualified defined benefit pension plan that provides benefits to key management employees. In these plans, as described below, an executive mayUpon separation from the Company, those NEOs who participate in oneboth the PEP and the SERP will be paid only the greater of the benefit under the PEP or morethe SERP. Each of the SERP, PEP, and Cash Balance Equalization Plan is an unfunded non-qualified plans, but is only paid the amount due under thedefined benefit pension plan that provides the highest benefit.benefits to key management employees. In general, upon disability, participants in the PEP and the SERP remain eligible for
521

Table of Contents
continued service credits until the earlierearliest of recovery, separation from service due to disability, or retirement eligibility. Generally, spouses of participants who die before commencement of benefits may be eligible for a portion of the participant’s accrued benefit.

benefit under these plans.
Pension Equalization PlanCash Balance Equalization PlanSystem Executive Retirement Plan
Eligible Named Executive OfficersMarcus V. Brown
Haley R. Fisackerly
Leo P. Denault
Laura R. Landreaux
Andrew S. Marsh
Phillip R. May, Jr.
Kimberly A. Fontan
Deanna D. Rodriguez
Roderick K. West
Eliecer ViamontesMarcus V. Brown
Haley R. Fisackerly

Andrew S. Marsh
Phillip R. May, Jr.
Sallie T. Rainer
Roderick K. West
A. Christopher Bakken, III
David D. Ellis
Marcus V. Brown
Haley R. Fisackerly
Leo P. Denault
Andrew S. Marsh
Phillip R. May, Jr.
Sallie T. Rainer
Roderick K. West
Eligibility(1)
Management or highly compensated employees who participate in the Entergy Retirement PlanManagement or highly compensated employees who participate in the Cash Balance PlanCertain individuals who became executive officers before July 1, 2014
Form of Payment Upon RetirementSingle lump sum distributionSingle lump sum distributionSingle lump sum distribution
499

Table of Contents
Retirement Benefit Formula
Benefits generally are equal to the actuarial present value of the difference between (1) the amount that would have been payable as an annuity under the Entergy Retirement Plan, including executive annual incentive program awards as eligible earnings and without applying limitations of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) on pension benefits and earnings that may be considered in calculating tax-qualified pension benefits, and (2) the amount actually payable as an annuity under the Entergy Retirement Plan.
 
Executive annual incentive awards are taken into account as eligible earnings under this plan.
Benefits generally are equal to the difference between the amount that would have been payable as a lump sum under the Cash Balance Plan, but for the Code limitations on pension benefits and earnings that may be considered in calculating tax-qualified cash balance plan benefits, and the amount actually payable as a lump sum under the Cash Balance Plan.Benefits generally are equal to the actuarial present value of a specified percentage, based on the participant’s years of service (including supplemental service granted under the plan) and management level of the participant’s “Final Average Monthly Compensation” (which is generally 1/36th of the sum of the participant’s base salary and annual incentive plan award for the 3three highest years during the last 10 years preceding separation from service), after first being reduced by the value of the participant’s Entergy Retirement Plan benefit.
Benefit timing(2)
Payable at age 65


Benefits payable prior to age 65 are subject to the same reduced terminated vested or early retirement reduction factors as benefits payable under the Entergy Retirement Plan as described above.


An employee with supplemental credited service who terminates employment prior to age 65 must receive prior written consent of the Entergy employer in order to receive the portion of their benefit attributable to their supplemental credited service agreement.


Benefits payable
Payable upon separation from service subject to the 6six month delay requiredif the participant is a "specified employee" under the Code Section 409A.
Payable upon separation from service subject to 6six month delay required under the Code Section 409A.Payable at age 65

Prior to age 65, vesting is conditioned on the prior written consent of the officer’s Entergy employer.

Benefits payable prior to age 65 are subject to the same reduced terminated vested or subsidized early retirement reduction factors as benefits payable under the Entergy Retirement Plan as described above.

Benefits payable
Payable upon separation from service subject to the 6six month delay requiredif the participant is a "specified employee" under Internal Revenue Code Section 409A.

Additional Information
522


Table of Contents
(1)The SERP was closed to new executive officers effective July 1, 2014. Effective July 1, 2014, (a) no new grants of supplemental service may be provided to participants in the Pension Equalization Plan;PEP; (b) supplemental credited service granted prior to July 1, 2014 was grandfathered; and (c) participants in Entergy Corporation’s Cash Balance Plan are not eligible to participate in the Pension Equalization PlanPEP and instead may be eligible to participate in the Cash Balance Equalization Plan.
(2)Benefits accrued under the SERP, PEP, and Cash Balance Equalization Plan,CBEP, if any, will become fully vested if a participant is involuntarily terminated without cause or terminates his or her employment for good reason in connection with a change in control with payment generally made in a lump-sum payment as soon as reasonably practicable following the first day of the month after the termination of employment, unless delayed 6six months under Internal Revenue Code Section 409A.
(3)The SERP was closed to new executive officers effective July 1, 2014.

500

Table of Contents
2020 Non-qualified2023 Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation

As of December 31, 2020,2023, Mr. May had a deferred account balance under a frozen Defined Contribution Restoration Plan.  The amount is deemed invested, as chosen by Mr. May, in certain T. Rowe Price investment funds that are also available to the participantparticipants under the Savings Plan.  Mr. May has elected to receive the deferred account balance after he retires. The Defined Contribution Restoration Plan, until it was frozen in 2005, credited eligible employees’ deferral accounts with employer contributions to the extent contributions under the qualified savings plan in which the employee participated were subject to limitations imposed by the Internal Revenue Code.

Defined Contribution Restoration Plan
NameExecutive Contributions in 2020Registrant Contributions in 2020
Aggregate Earnings in 2020(1)
Aggregate Withdrawals/DistributionsAggregate Balance at December 31, 2020
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)
      
Phillip R. May, Jr.$— $— $80 $— $3,067 
NameExecutive Contributions in 2023Registrant Contributions in 2023
Aggregate Earnings in 2023(1)
Aggregate Withdrawals/DistributionsAggregate Balance at December 31, 2023
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)
Phillip R. May, Jr.$— $— $369 $— $3,623 

(1)Amounts in this column are not included in the Summary Compensation Table.

20202023 Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

Entergy Corporation has plans and other arrangements that provide compensation to a NEO if his or her employment terminates under specified conditions, including following a change in control of Entergy Corporation or its subsidiaries.Entergy.
Change in Control

Entergy does not have any plans or agreements that provide for payments or benefits to any of our NEOs solely upon a Change in Control (as defined below). Under Entergy Corporation’sthe System Executive Continuity Plan (the “Continuity Plan”), ML 1-4 Officersexecutive officers, including each of the NEOs are eligible to receive the cash severance payment and welfare plan benefits described below if their employment is terminated by their Entergy System employer other than for causeCause (as defined below) or if they terminate their employment for good reasonGood Reason during a period beginning with a potential change in control and ending 24 months following the effective date of a changeChange in controlControl (a “Qualifying Termination”). A participant will not be eligible for benefits under the Continuity Plan if such participant: accepts employment with Entergy Corporation or any of its subsidiaries; elects to receive the benefits of another severance or separation program; removes, copies, or fails to return any property belonging to Entergy Corporation or any of its subsidiaries or violates his or herthe non-compete provision of the Continuity Plan (which generally runs for two years but extends to three years if permissible under applicable law). Entergy CorporationThe Continuity Plan does not haveinclude any plans or agreements that provideprovisions for payments or benefits tothe waiver of a breach of any of these restrictive covenants.

In addition, under the 2019 OIP or an applicable equity award agreement issued under the 2019 OIP, upon a Qualifying Termination, our executive officers, including the NEOs, solely uponare eligible for the payments and benefits described in the table below under “Performance Units” and “Equity Awards.” Further, in the event of a changeQualifying
523

Table of Contents
Termination, our executive officers, including our NEOs, are eligible for the benefits described in control.the table below for “Retirement Benefits” under the terms of the SERP, PEP, and/or CBEP, as applicable.

In the event of a Qualifying Termination, the executive officers, including the NEOs generally willwould receive lump sum severance payments and welfare benefits described below. In the event of a Qualifying Termination, all of the NEOs would receive the treatment described below for their retirement benefits set forth below:and their outstanding performance units and equity awards:
501

Table of Contents
Compensation ElementPayment and/or Benefit
Severance*A lump sum severance payment equal to a multiple of the sum of: (a) the participant’s annual base salary as in effect at any time within one year prior to the commencement of a change ofin control period or, if higher, immediately prior to a circumstance constituting good reason, plus (b) the participant’s annual incentive award, calculated using the average annual target opportunity derived under the annual incentive program for the two calendar years immediately preceding the calendar year in which termination occurs.
Performance UnitsUnder the 2015 EOP and the performance unit agreements in respect of the 2019 - 2021 performance period, participants would forfeitFor outstanding performance units, and in lieu of any payment for any outstanding performance period, would receive a single-lump sum payment calculated by multiplying the target performance units for the most recent performance period preceding (but not including) the calendar year in which termination occurs by the closing price of Entergy’s common stock as of the later of the date of such termination or the date of the Change in Control. Under the 2019 OIP and the performance unit agreements in respect of the 2020 - 2022 performance unit period, participants would receive a number of shares of Entergy common stock equal to the greater of (1) the target number of performance units subject to the performance unit agreement or (2) the number of units that would vest under the performance unit agreement calculated based on theCompany performance of Entergy Corporation through the participant’s termination date, in either case pro-rated based on the portion of the performance period that occurs through the termination date.
Equity AwardsAll unvested stock options shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units will vest immediately, and restrictions will lift on restricted shares, upon a “double trigger” Qualifying Termination pursuant to the terms of the 2015 EOP and 2019 OIP.Entergy’s equity plans.
Retirement BenefitsBenefits already accrued under the SERP, PEP, and Cash Balance Equalization Plan,CBEP, if any, will become fully vested.
Welfare BenefitsParticipants who are not retirement-eligible would be eligible to receive Entergy-subsidized COBRA benefits for a period ranging from 12 to 18 months.

*    Cash severance payments are capped at 2.99 times the sum of (a) an executive’s annual base salary in effect at any time within one year before commencement of the change in control period, or, if higher, immediately prior to a circumstance constituting Good Reason under the Continuity Plan in effect at any time within one year before commencement of the change in control period or, if higher, immediately prior to a circumstance constituting Good Reason under the Continuity Plan, plus (b) the higher of his or herthe executive’s actual annual incentive payment under the annual incentive program for the year immediately preceding the calendar year in which termination occurs or his or herthe average of the executive’s target annual incentive calculated using the average annual target opportunity derived under the annual incentive programaward for the two calendar years immediately preceding the calendar year in which termination occurs. Any cash severance payments to be paid under the Continuity Plan in excess of this cap will be forfeited by the participant.
To protect shareholders and Entergy Corporation’s business model, executives are required to comply with non-compete non-solicitation,provisions (which generally run for two years but extends to three years if permissible under applicable law) and confidentiality and non-denigration provisions.provisions, as discussed above. If an executive discloses non-public data or information concerning Entergy Corporation or any of its subsidiaries or violates his or her non-compete provision, he or she will be required to repay any benefits previously received under the Continuity Plan.

For purposes of the Continuity Plan, the following events are generally defined as:

Change in Control: (a) the purchase of 30% or more of either Entergy Corporation’s common stock or the combined voting power of Entergy Corporation’s voting securities; (b) the merger or consolidation of Entergy Corporation (unless its Board members constitute at least a majority of the board members of the surviving entity); (c) the liquidation, dissolution, or sale of all or substantially all of Entergy Corporation’s assets; or (d) a change in the composition of Entergy Corporation’s Board such that, during any two-year period, the individuals serving at the beginning of the period no longer constitute a majority of Entergy Corporation’s Board at the end of the period.
524

Table of Contents

Potential Change in Control: (a) Entergy Corporation or an affiliate enters into an agreement, the consummation of which would constitute a Change in Control; (b) the Entergy Corporation Board adopts resolutions determining that, for purposes of the Continuity Plan, a potential Change in Control has occurred; (c) a System Company or other person or entity publicly announces an intention to take actions that would constitute a Change in Control; or (d) any person or entity becomes the beneficial owner (directly or indirectly)
502

Table of Contents
of Entergy Corporation’s outstanding shares of common stock constituting 20% or more of the voting power or value of the Entergy Corporation’s outstanding common stock.

Cause: The participant’s (a) willful and continuous failure to perform substantially his or her duties after written demand for performance; (b) engagement in conduct that is materially injurious to Entergy Corporation or any of its subsidiaries; (c) conviction or guilty or nolo contendere plea to a felony or other crime that materially and adversely affects either his or herthe participant’s ability to perform his or her duties or Entergy Corporation’s reputation; (d) material violation of any agreement with Entergy Corporation or any of its subsidiaries; or (e) disclosure of any of Entergy Corporation’s confidential information without authorization.

Good Reason: The participant’s (a) nature or status of duties and responsibilities is substantially altered or reduced; (b) salary is reduced by 5% or more; (c) primary work location is relocated outside the continental United States; (d) compensation plans are discontinued without an equitable replacement; (e) benefits or number of vacation days are substantially reduced; or (f) employment is terminated by an Entergy employer for reasons other than in accordance with the Continuity Plan.

525

Table of Contents
Other Termination Events

For termination events, other than in connection with a Change in Control, the executive officers, including the NEOs, generally will receive the benefits set forth below:

Termination EventCompensation Element
SeveranceAnnual IncentiveStock Options
Restricted Stock(2)
Performance Units
Voluntary ResignationNone
Forfeited*Forfeited(1)
Unvested options are forfeited. Vested options expire on the earlier of (i) 90 days from the last day of active employment and (ii) the option’s normal expiration date.Forfeited
Forfeited**Forfeited(3)
Termination for CauseNoneForfeitedForfeitedForfeitedForfeited
RetirementNonePro-rated based on number of days employed during the performance periodUnvested stock options granted prior to 2020 vest on the retirement date and expire on the earlier of (i) five years from the retirement date and (ii) the option’s normal expiration date. Unvested stock options granted in 2020 continue to vest following retirement, in accordance with the original vesting schedule and expire the earlier of (i) five years from the retirement date and (ii) the option’s normal expiration date.ForfeitedOfficers with a minimum of 12 months of participation are eligible for a pro-rated award based on actual performance and full months of service during the performance period
Death/DisabilityNonePro-rated based on number of days employed during the performance period
Unvested stock options vest on the termination date and expire on the earlier of (i) five years from the termination date and (ii) the option’s normal expiration dateFully VestOfficers are eligible for pro-rated award based on actual performance and full months of service during the performance period
503

Table of Contents(1)
*    If an officer resigns after the completion of an annual incentive plan, he or she may receive, at Entergy Corporation’sEntergy’s discretion, an annual incentive payment.
**    (2)This column refers solely to restricted stock awards. Certain officers are occasionally granted restricted stock units for retention purposes, to offset forfeited compensation from a previous employer or for other limited purposes. The treatment of restricted stock units depends on the terms of the individual restricted stock unit agreement, which terms can vary. The standard off-cycle restricted stock unit agreement approved by the Talent and Compensation Committee provides that the units are forfeited if employment is terminated for any reason before the vesting date, except in the case of a termination other than for cause or voluntary termination for Good Reason during a Change in Control period. However, individual restricted stock unit agreements may provide for accelerated vesting in certain events, such as death or disability. Messrs. Brown, Fisackerly, May, and West each have outstanding restricted stock units, the treatment of which upon various events of termination is disclosed in connection with the table below.
(3)If an officer resigns after the completion of a LTIPPUP performance period, he or she maywill receive a payout under the LTIPPUP based on the outcome of the performance period.

Mr. Denault’s 2006 Retention Agreement
526


Table of Contents
In 2006, Entergy Corporation entered into a retention agreement with Mr. Denault that provides benefits to him in addition to, or in lieu of, the benefits described above. Specifically, in the event of a Termination Event (as defined in his agreement): 1) Mr. Denault is entitled to a Target LTIP Award calculated by using the average annual number of performance units with respect to the two most recent performance periods preceding the calendar year in which his employment termination occurs, assuming all performance goals were achieved at target; and 2) all of Mr. Denault’s unvested stock options and shares of restricted stock will immediately vest.

In the event of death or disability, Mr. Denault would receive the greater of the Target LTIP Award calculated as described above or the pro-rated number of performance units for all open performance periods, based on the number of months of his participation in each open performance period.

Under the terms of his 2006 retention agreement, Mr. Denault’s employment may be terminated for cause upon Mr. Denault’s: (a) continuing failure to substantially perform his duties (other than because of physical or mental illness or after he has given notice of termination for good reason) that remains uncured for 30 days after receiving a written notice from the Personnel Committee; (b) willfully engaging in conduct that is demonstrably and materially injurious to Entergy; (c) conviction of or entrance of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a felony or other crime that has or may have a material adverse effect on his ability to carry out his duties or upon Entergy’s reputation; (d) material violation of any agreement that he has entered into with Entergy; or (e) unauthorized disclosure of Entergy’s confidential information.

Mr. Denault may terminate his employment for good reason upon: (a) the substantial reduction in the nature or status of his duties or responsibilities from those in effect immediately prior to the date of the retention agreement, other than de minimis acts that are remedied after notice from Mr. Denault; (b) a reduction of 5% or more in his base salary as in effect on the date of the retention agreement; (c) the relocation of his principal place of employment to a location other than the corporate headquarters; (d) the failure to continue to allow him to participate in programs or plans providing opportunities for equity awards, incentive compensation and other plans on a basis not materially less favorable than enjoyed at the time of the retention agreement (other than changes similarly affecting all senior executives); (e) the failure to continue to allow him to participate in programs or plans with opportunities for benefits not materially less favorable than those enjoyed by him under any of the pension, savings, life insurance, medical, health and accident, disability or vacation plans or policies at the time of the retention agreement (other than changes similarly affecting all senior executives); or (f) any purported termination of his employment not taken in accordance with his retention agreement.

Aggregate Termination Payments

The tables below reflect the amount of compensation each of the NEOs would have received if his or her employment had been terminated as of December 31, 20202023 under the various scenarios described above. For purposes of these tables, a stock price of $99.84$101.19 was used, which was the closing market price of Entergy Corporation stock on December 31, 2020,29, 2023, the last trading day of the year.

Benefits and Payments Upon
Termination
Voluntary
Resignation
For
Cause
Termination for
Good Reason or
Not for Cause
RetirementDisabilityDeath
Termination
Related to a
Change in
Control
Marcus V. Brown(2)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $4,111,030 
Performance Units(3)
— — — $684,752 $684,752 $684,752 $684,752 
Stock Options— — — — $38,847 $38,847 $38,847 
Restricted Stock— — — — $595,530 $595,530 $595,530 
Welfare Benefits(4)
— — — — — — — 
Unvested Restricted Stock Units(6)
— — $1,257,387 — $1,257,387 $1,257,387 $1,438,517 
Haley R. Fisackerly(1)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $1,292,709 
Performance Units(3)
— — — $193,576 $193,576 $193,576 $193,576 
Stock Options— — — — $21,817 $21,817 $21,817 
Restricted Stock— — — — $172,833 $172,833 $172,833 
Welfare Benefits(4)
— — — — — — — 
Unvested Restricted Stock Units(7)
— — — — — — $410,123 
Kimberly A. Fontan(2)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $3,130,156 
Performance Units(3)
— — — — $593,075 $593,075 $593,075 
Stock Options— — — — $28,967 $28,967 $28,967 
Restricted Stock— — — — $361,522 $361,522 $361,522 
Welfare Benefits(5)
— — — — — — $33,129 
Laura R. Landreaux(2)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $1,213,486 
Performance Units(3)
— — — — $195,600 $195,600 $195,600 
Stock Options— — — — $20,604 $20,604 $20,604 
Restricted Stock— — — — $153,407 $153,407 $153,407 
Welfare Benefits(5)
— — — — — — $33,129 
504
527

Table of Contents
Benefits and Payments Upon TerminationVoluntary ResignationFor CauseTermination for Good Reason or Not for CauseRetirementDisabilityDeathTermination Related to a Change in Control
A. Christopher Bakken, III(1)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $3,435,870 
Performance Units(3)
— — — — $895,065 $895,065 $1,086,858 
Stock Options— — — — $552,353 $552,353 $552,353 
Restricted Stock— — — — $764,339 $764,339 $764,339 
Welfare Benefits(5)
— — — — — — $22,248 
Unvested Restricted Stock Units(7)
— — — — — — $1,996,800 
Marcus V. Brown(2)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $3,570,750 
Performance Units(3)
— — — $876,595 $876,595 $876,595 $1,080,668 
Stock Options— — — $547,368 $547,368 $547,368 $547,368 
Restricted Stock— — — — $751,664 $751,664 $751,664 
Welfare Benefits(6)
— — — — — — — 
Leo P. Denault(2)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $10,993,273 
Performance Units(3)(4)
— — $4,512,768 $3,736,712 $4,512,768 $4,512,768 $5,902,641 
Stock Options— — $2,306,895 $2,306,895 $2,306,895 $2,306,895 $2,306,895 
Restricted Stock— — $2,966,300 — $2,966,300 $2,966,300 $2,966,300 
Welfare Benefits(6)
— — — — — — — 
David D. Ellis(1)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $386,219 
Performance Units(3)
— — — — $128,194 $128,194 $216,353 
Stock Options— — — — $33,377 $33,377 $33,377 
Restricted Stock— — — — $87,425 $87,425 $87,425 
Welfare Benefits(5)
— — — — — — $19,908 
Haley R. Fisackerly(2)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $543,541 
Performance Units(3)
— — — 128,194 $128,194 $128,194 $216,353 
Stock Options— — — 91,899 $91,899 $91,899 $91,899 
Restricted Stock— — — 150,174 $150,174 $150,174 $150,174 
Welfare Benefits(6)
— — — — — — — 
Laura R. Landreaux(1)
Severance Payment— — — — — — $457,457 
Performance Units(3)
— — — — $128,194 $128,194 $216,353 
Stock Options— — — — $36,210 $36,210 $36,210 
Restricted Stock— — — — $157,978 $157,978 $157,978 
Welfare Benefits(5)
— — — — — — $19,908 

505

Table of Contents
Benefits and Payments Upon TerminationBenefits and Payments Upon TerminationVoluntary ResignationFor CauseTermination for Good Reason or Not for CauseRetirementDisabilityDeathTermination Related to a Change in Control
Benefits and Payments Upon
Termination
Voluntary
Resignation
For
Cause
Termination for
Good Reason or
Not for Cause
RetirementDisabilityDeath
Termination
Related to a
Change in
Control
Andrew S. Marsh(1)
Andrew S. Marsh(2)
Severance Payment
Severance Payment
Severance PaymentSeverance Payment— — — — — — $3,622,500 
Performance Units(3)
Performance Units(3)
— — — — $1,108,224 $1,108,224 $1,146,862 
Stock OptionsStock Options— — — — $676,227 $676,227 $676,227 
Restricted StockRestricted Stock— — — — $908,105 $908,105 $908,105 
Welfare Benefits(5)
Welfare Benefits(5)
— — — — — — $29,862 
Phillip R. May, Jr.(2)
Phillip R. May, Jr.(1)
Phillip R. May, Jr.(1)
Phillip R. May, Jr.(1)
Severance Payment
Severance Payment
Severance PaymentSeverance Payment— — — — — — $1,295,309 
Performance Units(3)
Performance Units(3)
— — — $189,796 $189,796 $189,796 $361,121 
Stock OptionsStock Options— — — $137,838 $137,838 $137,838 $137,838 
Restricted StockRestricted Stock— — — — $215,243 $215,243 $215,243 
Welfare Benefits(6)
— — — — — — — 
Welfare Benefits(4)
Unvested Restricted Stock Units(8)
Sallie T. Rainer(2)
Deanna D. Rodriguez(1)
Deanna D. Rodriguez(1)
Deanna D. Rodriguez(1)
Severance Payment
Severance Payment
Severance PaymentSeverance Payment— — — — — — $502,198 
Performance Units(3)
Performance Units(3)
— — — $128,194 $128,194 $128,194 $216,353 
Stock OptionsStock Options— — — $91,899 $91,899 $91,899 $91,899 
Restricted StockRestricted Stock— — — — $150,174 $150,174 $150,174 
Welfare Benefits(6)
— — — — — — — 
Welfare Benefits(4)
Roderick K. West(1)
Eliecer Viamontes(2)
Eliecer Viamontes(2)
Eliecer Viamontes(2)
Severance Payment
Severance Payment
Severance PaymentSeverance Payment— — — — — — $3,732,501 
Performance Units(3)
Performance Units(3)
— — — — $950,177 $950,177 $1,108,324 
Stock OptionsStock Options— — — — $580,531 $580,531 $580,531 
Restricted StockRestricted Stock— — — — $811,984 $811,984 $811,984 
Welfare Benefits(5)
Welfare Benefits(5)
— — — — — — $29,862 
Roderick K. West(1)
Roderick K. West(1)
Roderick K. West(1)
Severance Payment
Severance Payment
Severance Payment
Performance Units(3)
Stock Options
Restricted Stock
Welfare Benefits(4)
Unvested Restricted Stock Units(9)

1)See “2020 Pension Benefits” for a description of the pension benefits Mr. Bakken, Mr. Ellis, Ms. Landreaux, Mr. Marsh, and Mr. West may receive upon the occurrence of certain termination events.
2)(1)As of December 31, 2020,2023, Mr. Brown, Mr. Denault, Mr. Fisackerly, Mr. May, Mr. West, and Ms. Rainer areRodriguez were retirement eligible and would retire rather than voluntarily resign, and in addition to the payments and benefits in the table, Mr. Brown, Mr. Denault, Mr. Fisackerly, Mr. May, and Ms. Rainereach also would be entitled to receive their vested pension benefits under the Entergy Retirement Plan.Plan and their benefit under the PEP or the SERP, to the extent applicable, the latter of which requires the prior written consent of the officer’s Entergy employer to separate prior to age 65. As previously discussed, Ms. Rodriguez does not participate in the SERP. For a description of these benefits, see “2020“2023 Pension Benefits.”

3)(2)See “2023 Pension Benefits” for a description of the pension benefits Ms. Fontan, Ms. Landreaux, Mr. Marsh, and Mr. Viamontes may receive upon the occurrence of certain termination events since they are not yet retirement eligible.
528

Table of Contents

(3)For purposes of the table, in the event of a qualifying termination related to a change in control, each NEO would receive a payment in respectnumber of his performance units for the 2019202220212024 performance period and a number of performance units for the 2020202320222025 performance period, calculated as follows.follows:

For the 2019 – 2021 performance period, each NEO would be entitled to receive a single-lump sum payment calculated using the target number of performance units that the officer would have been entitled to receive under the 2015 EOP with respect to the most recent performance period that precedes and does not include the officer’s date of termination. The value of Mr. Denault’s payments was calculated by multiplying the target performance units for the 2017 – 2019 LTIP performance period (48,700) by the closing price of Entergy Corporation stock on December 31, 2020 ($99.84), which would equal a payment of $4,862,208 for the forfeited performance units for the 2019 – 2021 performance period. The value of Mr. Bakken’s, Mr. Brown’s,
506

Table of Contents
Mr. Marsh’s, and Mr. West’s was calculated by multiplying the target performance units for the 2017 – 2019 LTIP performance period (8,300) by the closing price of Entergy Corporation stock on December 31, 2020 ($99.84), which would equal a payment of $828,672 for the forfeited performance units for the 2019 – 2021 performance period. The value of Mr. May’s payment was calculated by multiplying the target performance units for the 2017 – 2019 LTIP performance period (3,150) by the closing price of Entergy Corporation stock on December 31, 2020 ($99.84), which would equal a payment of $314,496 for the forfeited performance units for the 2019 – 2021 performance period. The value of the payments for the other NEOs was calculated by multiplying the target performance units for the 2017 – 2019 LTIP performance period (1,850) by the closing price of Entergy Corporation stock on December 31, 2020 ($99.84), which would equal a payment of $184,704 for the forfeited performance units for the 2019 – 2021 performance period.

For the 2020 – 2022 performance period, in the event of a qualifying termination related to a change in control, each NEO would be entitled to receive a number of shares of Entergy Corporation stock equal to the greater of (1) the target number of performance units subject to the 2020 – 2022 performance unit agreementagreements or (2) the number of performance units that would vest under the 2020 – 2022 performance unit agreementagreements calculated based on Entergy Corporation’s actual performance through the NEO’s termination date, in either case pro-rated based on the portion of the performance periodperiods that occurs through the termination date.

For purposes of the table, the values of the performance unit awards for the 2020 – 2022 performance periodperiods for each NEO were calculated as follows, based on the assumption that the target number of performance units was the greater number:

Mr. Bakken: 2,586 (12/36*7,758)Brown’s:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 4,318 (24/36x6,477) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $258,186$436,938

Mr. Brown: 2,5242023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 2,449 (12/36*7,571)36x7,345) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $251,996$247,814

Total: $684,752

Mr. Denault: 10,421 (12/36*31,263)Fisackerly’s:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 1,007 (24/36x1,510) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $1,040,433$101,898

Mr. Ellis: 3172023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 906 (12/36*950)36x2,716) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $31,649$91,678

Mr. Fisackerly: 317 (12/36*950)Total: $193,576

Ms. Fontan’s:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 3,535 (24/36x5,302)) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 $101.19 = $31,649$357,707

Ms. Landreaux: 3172023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 2,326 (12/36*950)36x6,977) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 $101.19 = $31,649$235,368

Mr. May: 467 (12/36*1,400)Total: $593,075

Ms. Landreaux’s:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 1,180 (24/36x1,769) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $46,625$119,404

Mr. Marsh: 3,1872023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 753 (12/36*9,560)36x2,258) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $318,190$76,196

Ms. Rainer: 317 (12/36*950)Total: $195,600
529

Table of Contents

Mr. Marsh’s:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 15,412 (24/36x23,118) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $31,649$1,559,540

Mr. West: 2,8012023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 10,299 (12/36*8,401)36x30,895) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84$101.19 = $279,652$1,042,156

The total values of the single sum payment for the 2019 – 2021 performance period and the performance units award for the 2020 – 2022 performance period upon a change in control for each NEO is as follows:Total: $2,601,696

Mr. Bakken: $828,672 + $258,186May’s:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 1,914 (24/36x2,871) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $1,086,858$193,678

2023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 917 (12/36x2,751) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $92,791

Total: $286,469

Ms. Rodriguez’s:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 836 (24/36x1,254) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $84,595

2023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 540 (12/36x1,620) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $54,643

Total: $139,238

Mr. Brown: $828,672 + $251,996 Viamontes’:

2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 1,052 (24/36x1,577) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $1,080,668$106,452

2023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 665 (12/36x1,994) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $67,291

Total: $173,743

Mr. Denault: $4,862,208 + $1,040,433 = $5,902,641West’s:

Mr. Ellis: $184,704 + $31,649 2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period: 6,350 (24/36x9,525) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $216,353$642,557

Mr. Fisackerly: $184,704 + $31,649 2023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period: 3,088 (12/36x9,264) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $101.19 = $216,353$312,475

Ms. Landreaux: $184,704 + $31,649 = $216,353Total: $955,032

In the event of retirement, in the case of Mr. Brown, Mr. Fisackerly, Mr. May, Mr. West, or Ms. Rodriguez each would receive a prorated portion of the applicable Achievement Level of PUP Performance Units for each open
507
530

Table of Contents
Mr. May: $314,496 + $46,625 = $361,121

Mr. Marsh: $828,672 + $318,190 = $1,146,862

Ms. Rainer: $184,704 + $31,649 = $216,353

Mr. West: $828,672 + $279,652 = $1,108,324

PUP Performance Period, based on his or her full months of participation in such PUP Performance Period, provided he or she has completed a minimum of 12 months of full-time employment in the applicable PUP Performance Period. For purposes of calculating for the above table the valuesnumber of the awards payable in the event of retirement in the case of Mr. Denault,performance units Mr. Brown, Mr. Fisackerly, Mr. May, or Ms. Rainer or upon death or disability, other than Mr. Denault, for each NEO were calculated as follows:
Mr. Bakken’s:

2019 – 2021 LTIP Performance Period: 6,379 (24/36*9,568) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $636,879
2020 – 2022 LTIP Performance Period: 2,586 (12/36*7,758) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $258,186
Total: $895,065

Mr. Brown’s:

2019 – 2021 LTIP Performance Period: 6,256 (24/36*9,383) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $$624,599
2020 – 2022 LTIP Performance Period: 2,524 (12/36*7,571) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $251,996
Total: $876,595

Mr. Denault’s:
2019 – 2021 LTIP Performance Period: 27,006 (24/36*40,508) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $2,696,279
2020 – 2022 LTIP Performance Period: 10,421 (12/36*31,263) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $1,040,433
Total: $3,736,712

Mr. Marsh’s:

2019 – 2021 LTIP Performance Period: 7,913 (24/36*11,869) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $790,034
2020 – 2022 LTIP Performance Period: 3,187 (12/36*9,560) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $318,190
Total: $1,108,224
Mr. May’s:

2019 – 2021 LTIP Performance Period: 1,434 (24/36*2,150) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $143,171
2020 – 2022 LTIP Performance Period: 467 (12/36*1,400) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $46,625
Total: $189,796
Mr. Ellis’s, Mr. Fisackerly’s, Ms. Landreaux’sWest, and Ms. Rainer’s:
2019 – 2021 LTIP Performance Period: 967 (24/36*1,450) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $96,545
508

Table of Contents
2020 – 2022 LTIP Performance Period: 317 (12/36*950) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $31,649
Total: $128,194

Mr. West’s:

2019 – 2021 LTIP Performance Period: 6,716 (24/36*10,073) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $670,525
2020 – 2022 LTIP Performance Period: 2,801 (12/36*8,401) performance units at target, assuming a stock price of $99.84 = $279,652
Total: $950,177

4)For purposes of the table, the value of Mr. Denault’s retention payment was calculated by taking an average of the target performance units from the 2016 - 2018 LTIP (41,700) and from the 2017 - 2019 LTIP (48,700). This average number of units (45,200) multiplied by the closing price of Entergy stock on December 31, 2020 ($99.84)Rodriguez would equal a payment of $4,512,768.

5)Pursuant to the SERP,receive in the event of retirement, it is assumed the achievement levels for the 2022 – 2024 PUP Performance Period and the 2023 – 2025 PUP Performance Period are at target. The resulting number of performance units and values are the same as calculated above for a qualifying termination related to a change in control, Mr. Bakken, Mr. Marsh, and Mr. Westcontrol.

In the event of death or disability of any NEO, the NEO or his or her estate would be eligible to receive Entergy-subsidized COBRA benefitsa prorated portion of the applicable Achievement Level of PUP Performance Units for 18each open PUP Performance Period, based on his or her full months and Mr. Ellis and Ms. Landreaux would be eligible to receive Entergy-subsidized COBRA benefits for 12 months.of participation in such PUP Performance Period, with no required minimum amount of full-time employment in the applicable PUP Performance Period.

6)(4)Upon retirement, Mr. Brown, Mr. Denault, Mr. Fisackerly, Mr. May, Mr. West, and Ms. RainerRodriguez would be eligible for retiree medical and dental benefits, the same as all other retirees.retirees who are eligible for post-retirement benefits.

7)(5)Pursuant to the Executive Continuity Plan, in the event of a termination related to a Change in Control, Ms. Fontan, Ms. Landreaux, Mr. Marsh, and Mr. Viamontes would be eligible to receive Entergy-subsidized COBRA benefits for 18 months.

(6)Mr. Bakken’s 20,000Brown’s 14,216 restricted stock units are scheduled to vest 100% on May 17, 2024. Pursuant to his restricted stock unit agreement, any unvested restricted stock units will vest in two equal installments on April 6, 2022a pro rata portion in the event of his termination of employment due to Mr. Brown’s total disability, death, or termination without cause (each, an Accelerated Vesting Event). The pro rata portion is determined by multiplying the total number of restricted stock units by a fraction, the numerator of which the number of days between May 17, 2021 and April 6, 2025.the Accelerated Vesting Event and the denominator of which is 1,096. In the event of a changeChange in control,Control, the unvested restricted stock units will fully vest upon Mr. Bakken’sBrown’s Qualifying Termination during a change in control period. Pursuant to his restricted stock unit agreement, Mr. BakkenBrown is subject to certain restrictions on his ability to compete with Entergy and its affiliates or solicit its employees or customers during and for 12 months after his employment with Entergy, or to solicit its employees or customers during and for 24 months after his Entergy employer.employment with Entergy. In addition, the restricted stock unit agreement limits Mr. Bakken’sBrown’s ability to disparage Entergy and its affiliates. In the event of a breach of these restrictions, other than following certain constructive terminations of his employment, Mr. Bakken will forfeit any restricted stock units that are not yet vested and paid, andBrown must repay to Entergy any shares of Entergy stock paid to him in respect of the restricted stock units and any amounts he received upon the sale or transfer of any such shares.

(7)Mr. Fisackerly’s 4,053 restricted stock units are scheduled to vest 100% on October 1, 2025. In the event of a Change in Control, the unvested restricted stock units will fully vest upon Mr. Fisackerly’s Qualifying Termination during a change in control period. Pursuant to his restricted stock unit agreement, Mr. Fisackerly is subject to certain restrictions on his ability to compete with Entergy and its affiliates during and for 12 months after his employment with Entergy, or to solicit its employees or customers during and for 24 months after his employment with Entergy. In addition, the restricted stock unit agreement limits Mr. Fisackerly’s ability to disparage Entergy and its affiliates. In the event of a breach of these restrictions, other than following certain constructive terminations of his employment, Mr. Fisackerly must repay to Entergy any shares of Entergy stock paid to him in respect of the restricted stock units and any amounts he received upon the sale or transfer of any such shares.

(8)Mr. May’s 4,053 restricted stock units are scheduled to vest 100% on October 1, 2025. In the event of a Change in Control, the unvested restricted stock units will fully vest upon Mr. May’s Qualifying Termination during a change in control period. Pursuant to his restricted stock unit agreement, Mr. May is subject to certain restrictions on his ability to compete with Entergy and its affiliates during and for 12 months after his employment with Entergy, or to solicit its employees or customers during and for 24 months after his employment with Entergy. In addition, the restricted stock unit agreement limits Mr. May’s ability to disparage Entergy and its affiliates. In the event of a breach of these restrictions, other than following certain constructive
531

Table of Contents
terminations of his employment, Mr. May must repay to Entergy any shares of Entergy stock paid to him in respect of the restricted stock units and any amounts he received upon the sale or transfer of any such shares.

(9)Mr. West’s 18,012 restricted stock units are scheduled to vest in three equal installments on June 1, 2024, June 1, 2025, and June 1, 2026. In the event of a Change in Control, the unvested restricted stock units will fully vest upon Mr. West’s Qualifying Termination during a change in control period. Pursuant to his restricted stock unit agreement, Mr. West is subject to certain restrictions on his ability to compete with Entergy and its affiliates during and for 12 months after his employment with Entergy, or to solicit its employees or customers during and for 24 months after his employment with Entergy. In addition, the restricted stock unit agreement limits Mr. West’s ability to disparage Entergy and its affiliates. In the event of a breach of these restrictions, other than following certain constructive terminations of his employment, Mr. West must repay to Entergy any shares of Entergy stock paid to him in respect of the restricted stock units and any amounts he received upon the sale or transfer of any such shares.

Pay Ratio

As required by Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the following disclosure is being provided about the relationship of the annual total compensation of the employees of each of the Utility operating companies to the annual total compensation of their respective Presidents and Chief Executive Officers. The pay ratio estimate for each of the Utility operating companies has been calculated in a manner consistent with Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K.

Identification of Median Employee

For each of the Utility operating companies, October 2, 202020, 2023 was selected as the date on which to determine the median employee. This date is different from the date used in the prior year; however, the methodology used to determine the date is consistent with that used in the prior year. Both dates correspond to the first day of the three month period prior to fiscal year-end for which information can be obtained about employees and all subsidiaries have the same number of pay cycles. To identify the median employee from each of the Utility operating companies’ employee population base, all compensation included in Box 5 of Form W-2 was considered with all before-tax deductions added back to this compensation (“Box 5 Compensation”). For purposes of determining the median employee of each Utility operating company, Box 5 Compensation was selected as it is believed to be representative of the compensation received by the employees of each respective Utility operating company and is readily available.
509

Table of Contents
The calculation of annual total compensation of the median employee for each Utility operating company is the same calculation used to determine total compensation for purposes of the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table with respect to each of the NEOs.

Entergy Arkansas Ratio

For 2020,2023,
The median of the annual total compensation of all of Entergy Arkansas’s employees, other than Ms. Landreaux, was $135,370.$132,296.
Ms. Landreaux’s annual total compensation, as reported in the Total column of the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table, was $1,150,511.$1,377,425.
Based on this information, the ratio of the annual total compensation of Mrs. Landreaux to the median of the annual total compensation of all employees is estimated to be 8:10:1.

532

Table of Contents
Entergy Louisiana Ratio

For 2020,2023,
The median of the annual total compensation of all of Entergy Louisiana’s employees, other than Mr. May, was $131,155.$143,608.
Mr. May’s annual total compensation, as reported in the Total column of the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table, was $2,257,961.$1,509,582.
Based on this information, the ratio of the annual total compensation of Mr. May to the median of the annual total compensation of all employees is estimated to be 17:11:1.

Entergy Mississippi Ratio

For 2020,2023,
The median of the annual total compensation of all of Entergy Mississippi’s employees, other than Mr. Fisackerly, was $111,238.$146,022.
Mr. Fisackerly’s annual total compensation, as reported in the Total column of the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table, was $1,803,939.$1,612,951.
Based on this information, the ratio of the annual total compensation of Mr. Fisackerly to the median of the annual total compensation of all employees is estimated to be 16:11:1.

Entergy New Orleans Ratio

For 2020,2023,
The median of the annual total compensation of all of Entergy New Orleans’s employees, other than Mr. Ellis,Ms. Rodriguez, was $150,102.$115,593.
Mr. Ellis’sMs. Rodriguez’s annual total compensation, as reported in the Total column of the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table, was $804,810.$1,213,008.
Based on this information, the ratio of the annual total compensation of Mr. EllisMs. Rodriguez to the median of the annual total compensation of all employees is estimated to be 5:10:1.

Entergy Texas Ratio

For 2020,2023,
The median of the annual total compensation of all of Entergy Texas’s employees, other than Ms. Rainer,Mr. Viamontes, was $160,680.$153,165.
Ms. Rainer’sMr. Viamontes’ annual total compensation, as reported in the Total column of the 20202023 Summary Compensation Table, was $1,543,383.$1,078,811.
Based on this information, the ratio of the annual total compensation of Ms. RainerMr. Viamontes to the median of the annual total compensation of all employees is estimated to be 10:7:1.
510533

Table of Contents
Item 12.  Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

Entergy Corporation owns 100% of the outstanding common stock of registrant Entergy Texas and indirectly 100% of the outstanding common membership interests of registrants Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, and Entergy New Orleans.  The information with respect to (i) the beneficial ownership of Entergy Corporation’s directors and NEOs is included under the heading “Entergy Share Ownership - Directors and Executive Officers;” and (ii) persons known by Entergy Corporation to be beneficial owners of more than 5% of Entergy Corporation’s outstanding common stock is included under the heading “Entergy Share Ownership - Beneficial Owners of More Than Five Percent of Entergy Common Stock” in the 2024 Entergy Corporation Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.  The registrants know of no contractual arrangements that may, at a subsequent date, result in a change in control of any of the registrants.

The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of common stock of Entergy Corporation and stock-based units as of January 31, 20212024 for allthe directors and NEOs.NEOs of Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas.  Unless otherwise noted, each person had sole voting and investment power over the number of shares of common stock and stock-based units of Entergy Corporation set forth across from his or her name.

Name
Shares (1)
Options Exercisable Within 60 Days
Stock Units (2)
Entergy Arkansas   
Marcus V. Brown**19,060 51,909 — 
Kimberly A. Fontan***17,081 28,225 — 
Laura R. Landreaux***9,028 17,322 — 
Andrew S. Marsh**151,338 309,714 — 
Peter S. Norgeot, Jr. *37,770 62,245 — 
Roderick K. West***59,000 120,759 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (8 persons)319,670 622,834 — 
Entergy Louisiana
Marcus V. Brown**19,060 51,909 — 
Kimberly A. Fontan***17,081 28,225 — 
Andrew S. Marsh**151,338 309,714 — 
Phillip R. May, Jr.***24,299 25,668 15 
Peter S. Norgeot, Jr. *37,770 62,245 — 
Roderick K. West***59,000 120,759 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (8 persons)334,940 631,180 15 
Entergy Mississippi
Marcus V. Brown**19,060 51,909 — 
Haley R. Fisackerly***8,672 16,885 — 
Kimberly A. Fontan***17,081 28,225 — 
Andrew S. Marsh**151,338 309,714 — 
Peter S. Norgeot, Jr. *37,770 62,245 — 
Roderick K. West***59,000 120,759 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (7 persons)301,277 596,840 — 
511
534

Table of Contents
Name
Shares (1)(2)
Options Exercisable Within 60 Days
Stock Units (3)
Entergy Corporation   
A. Christopher Bakken, III**18,115 35,399 — 
Marcus V. Brown**38,813 34,930 — 
John R. Burbank*3,353 — 563 
Patrick J. Condon*9,333 — — 
Leo P. Denault***324,528 899,634 — 
Kirkland H. Donald*8,590 — 3,668 
Brian W. Ellis*64 
Philip L. Frederickson*7,889 — 805 
Alexis M. Herman*14,780 — — 
M. Elise Hyland*1,663 563
Stuart L. Levenick*22,920 — — 
Blanche L. Lincoln*16,654 — — 
Andrew S. Marsh**90,482 281,147 — 
Karen A. Puckett*9,333 — — 
Roderick K. West**33,757 37,517 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (20 persons)680,178 1,429,697 5,599 
Entergy Arkansas   
A. Christopher Bakken, III**18,115 35,399 — 
Marcus V. Brown**38,813 34,930 — 
Leo P. Denault**324,528 899,634 — 
Andrew S. Marsh***90,482 281,147 — 
Laura R. Landreaux***5,678 4,833 — 
Roderick K. West***33,757 37,517 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (8 persons)556,160 1,390,535 — 
Entergy Louisiana
A. Christopher Bakken, III**18,115 35,399 — 
Marcus V. Brown**38,813 34,930 — 
Leo P. Denault**324,528 899,634 — 
Andrew S. Marsh***90,482 281,147 — 
Phillip R. May, Jr.***23,383 8,833 13 
Roderick K. West***33,757 37,517 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (8 persons)573,865 1,394,535 13 

512

Table of Contents
Name
Shares (1)(2)
Options Exercisable Within 60 Days
Stock Units (3)
Entergy Mississippi
Marcus V. Brown**38,813 34,930 — 
Leo P. Denault**324,528 899,634 — 
Haley R. Fisackerly***7,760 5,700 — 
Andrew S. Marsh***90,482 281,147 — 
Roderick K. West***33,757 37,517 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (7 persons)540,127 1,356,003 — 
Entergy New Orleans   
Marcus V. Brown**38,813 34,930 — 
Leo P. Denault**324,528 899,634 — 
David D. Ellis***3,332 4,199 — 
Andrew S. Marsh***90,482 281,147 — 
Roderick K. West***33,757 37,517 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (7 persons)535,699 1,354,502 — 
Entergy Texas   
Marcus V. Brown**38,813 34,930 — 
Leo P. Denault**324,528 899,634 — 
Andrew S. Marsh***90,482 281,147 — 
Sallie T. Rainer***13,437 12,566 — 
Roderick K. West***33,757 37,517 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (7 persons)545,804 1,362,869 — 

Name
Shares (1)
Options Exercisable Within 60 Days
Stock Units (2)
Entergy New Orleans   
Marcus V. Brown**19,060 51,909 — 
Kimberly A. Fontan**17,081 28,225 — 
Andrew S. Marsh**151,338 309,714 — 
Peter S. Norgeot, Jr. *37,770 62,245 — 
Deanna D. Rodriguez***8,974 3,044 — 
Roderick K. West***59,000 120,759 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (7 persons)301,579 582,999 — 
Entergy Texas   
Marcus V. Brown**19,060 51,909 — 
Kimberly A. Fontan***17,081 28,225 — 
Andrew S. Marsh**151,338 309,714 — 
Peter S. Norgeot, Jr. *37,770 62,245 — 
Eliecer Viamontes***9,677 7,836 — 
Roderick K. West***59,000 120,759 — 
All directors and executive officers as a group (7 persons)302,281 587,791 — 
*Director of the respective company
**NEO of the respective company
***Director and NEO of the respective company

(1)The number of shares of Entergy Corporation common stock owned by each individual and by all non-employee directors and executive officers as a group does not exceed one percent of the outstanding shares of Entergy Corporation common stock.
(2)For the non-employee directors, the balances include phantom units that are issued under the Service Recognition Program. All non-employee directors are credited with phantom units for each year of service on the Entergy Corporation Board. These phantom units do not have voting rights or accrue dividends, and will be settled in This column also includes shares of Entergy Corporation common stock followingheld in the non-employee director’s separation from the Board.Entergy Savings Plan (401(k)) by Messrs. Brown, Fisackerly, Marsh, May, Viamontes, and West and Mses. Fontan and Rodriguez. For Mr. Viamontes, this column includes shares of Entergy Corporation common stock held by him indirectly through his spouse.
(3)(2)Represents the balances of phantom units each director or executive holds under the defined contribution restoration plan and the deferral provisions of Entergy Corporation’s equity ownership plans.  These units will be paid out in either Entergy Corporation Common Stockcommon stock or cash equivalent to the value of one share of Entergy Corporation common stock per unit on the date of payout, including accrued dividends.  The deferral period is determined by the individual and is at least two years from the award of the bonus.  Messrs. Donald and Frederickson have deferred receipt of some of their quarterly stock grants.  The deferred shares will be settled in cash in an amount equal to the market value of Entergy Corporation common stock at the end of the deferral period.

513535

Table of Contents
Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table summarizes the equity compensation plan information as of December 31, 2020.2023. Information is included for equity compensation plans approved by the shareholders. There are no shares authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans not approved by the shareholders.
PlanNumber of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights (a)
Weighted Average Exercise Price (b)(2)
Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance (excluding securities reflected in column (a))(c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders (1)
2,399,379 $89.636,108,451 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders— — — 
Total2,399,379 $89.636,108,451 

Plan CategoryNumber of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants, and Rights (a)
Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants, and Rights
(b)(2)
Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a))
(c)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders (1)
2,898,708 $97.667,546,825 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders— — — 
Total2,898,708 $97.667,546,825 

(1)Includes the 2007 Equity Ownership Plan, the 2011 Equity Ownership Plan, the 2015 Equity Plan,EOP, and the 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan.  The 2007 Equity Ownership Plan was approved by Entergy Corporation shareholders on May 12, 2006, and only applied to awards granted between January 1, 2007 and May 5, 2011.OIP (collectively, the “Plans”).  The 2011 Equity Ownership Plan was approved by Entergy Corporation shareholders on May 6, 2011 and only appliedapplies to awards granted between May 6, 2011 and May 7, 2015.  The 2015 Equity PlanEOP was approved by Entergy Corporation shareholders on May 8, 2015 and only appliedapplies to awards granted between May 8, 2015 and May 3, 2019. The 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan was approved by the Entergy Corporation shareholders approved the 2019 OIP on May 3, 2019 and approved the issuance of 7,300,000 shares of Entergy Corporation common stock can be issued from the 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan, with allOIP for equity-based incentive awards. On May 5, 2023, the Entergy Corporation shareholders approved Amendment No. 1 to the 2019 OIP, which increased the aggregate number of shares available for equity-based incentive awards. The 2007 Equity Ownership Plan, the 2011 Equity Ownership Plan, the 2015 Equity Plan, andawards under the 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan (collectively,OIP by 4,900,000 shares of Entergy Corporation common stock, and extended the “Plans”)term of the 2019 OIP by approximately four years to January 27, 2033. The Plans are administered by the PersonnelTalent and Compensation Committee of the Entergy Corporation Board of Directors (other than with respect to awards granted to non-employee directors, which awards are administered by the entire Board of Directors).  Eligibility under the Plans is limited to the non-employee directors and to the officers and employees of an Entergy employer or an affiliate of Entergy Corporation.  The Plans provide for the issuance of stock options, restricted stock, equity awards (units whose value is related to the value of shares of the common stock but do not represent actual shares of common stock), performance awards (performance shares or units valued by reference to shares of common stock or performance units valued by reference to financial measures or property other than common stock), restricted stock unit awards, and other stock-based awards.
(2)The weighted averageweighted-average exercise price reported in this column does not include outstanding performance awards.
514


Table of Contents
Item 13.  Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions and Director Independence

ForThe additional information regarding certain relationship, related transactionsrequired by this item will be set forth under Director Independence and director independence of Entergy Corporation, see the Entergy Corporation Proxy Statement under the headings “Corporate Governance - Director Independence” and “Corporate Governance - Corporate Governance Policies - Review and Approval of Related Party Transactions.”

Entergy Corporation’s Board of Directors has adopted a written Related Party Transaction Approval Policy that applies to any transaction or series of transactions in which Entergy Corporation or a subsidiary is a participant:

When the amount involved exceeds $120,000; and
When a Related Party (an Entergy Corporation director or executive officer, any nominee for director, any shareholder owning an excess of 5% of the total equity of Entergy Corporation and any immediate family member of any such person) has a direct or indirect material interest in such transaction(s) (other than solely as a result of being a director or a less than 10% beneficial owner of another entity).
The policy is administered by Entergy Corporation’s Corporate Governance Committee. The committee will consider relevant facts and circumstance in determining whether or not to approve or ratify such a transaction, and will approve or ratify only those transactions that are,Transactions in the Corporate Governance Committee’s judgment, appropriate or desirable under2024 Entergy Proxy Statement, to be filed in connection with the circumstances. The Corporate Governance Committee has determined that certain typesAnnual Meeting of transactions do not create or involve a direct or indirect material interest, including (i) compensation and related party transactions involving a director or an executive officer solely resulting from service as a director or employment with Entergy Corporation so long as the compensationShareholders to be held May 3, 2024, which is approvedincorporated herein by the Entergy Corporation Board of Directors (or an appropriate committee); (ii) transactions involving public utility services at rates or charges fixed in conformity with law or governmental authority; or (iii) all business relationships between Entergy Corporation and a Related Party made in the ordinary course of business on terms and conditions generally available in the marketplace an in accordance with applicable law. To Entergy Corporation’s knowledge, since January 1, 2020, neither Entergy Corporation nor any of its affiliates has participated in any Related Party transaction.reference.

515536

Table of Contents
Item 14.  Principal Accountant Fees and Services (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Aggregate fees billed to Entergy Corporation (consolidated), Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy for the years ended December 31, 20202023 and 20192022 by Deloitte & Touche LLP (PCAOB ID No. 34) were as follows:

 20202019
Entergy Corporation (consolidated)  
Audit Fees$9,323,550 $8,710,000 
Audit-Related Fees (a)786,000 775,000 
Total audit and audit-related fees10,109,550 9,485,000 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees (b)183,060 31,835 
Total Fees (c)$10,292,610 $9,516,835 
Entergy Arkansas  
Audit Fees$1,137,507 $1,015,125 
Audit-Related Fees (a)— — 
Total audit and audit-related fees1,137,507 1,015,125 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (c)$1,137,507 $1,015,125 
Entergy Louisiana  
Audit Fees$2,302,851 $1,871,918 
Audit-Related Fees (a)360,000 360,000 
Total audit and audit-related fees2,662,851 2,231,918 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (c)$2,662,851 $2,231,918 
Entergy Mississippi  
Audit Fees$982,507 $1,005,125 
Audit-Related Fees (a)— — 
Total audit and audit-related fees982,507 1,005,125 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (c)$982,507 $1,005,125 

 20232022
Entergy Corporation (consolidated)  
Audit Fees (a)$9,850,000 $9,335,000 
Audit-Related Fees (b)2,235,668 3,018,228 
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees12,085,668 12,353,228 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees (c)1,895 1,895 
Total Fees (d)$12,087,563 $12,355,123 
Entergy Arkansas 
Audit Fees (a)$1,221,014 $1,215,943 
Audit-Related Fees (b)— — 
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees1,221,014 1,215,943 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (d)$1,221,014 $1,215,943 
Entergy Louisiana 
Audit Fees (a)$2,172,029 $2,136,886 
Audit-Related Fees (b)1,209,547 1,472,751 
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees3,381,576 3,609,637 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (d)$3,381,576 $3,609,637 
Entergy Mississippi 
Audit Fees (a)$1,246,014 $1,025,943 
Audit-Related Fees (b)— — 
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees1,246,014 1,025,943 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (d)$1,246,014 $1,025,943 
Entergy New Orleans
Audit Fees (a)$1,121,014 $1,110,943 
Audit-Related Fees (b)576,121 785,477 
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees1,697,135 1,896,420 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (d)$1,697,135 $1,896,420 
516537

Table of Contents
 20202019
Entergy New Orleans  
Audit Fees$1,027,507 $950,125 
Audit-Related Fees (a)— — 
Total audit and audit-related fees1,027,507 950,125 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (c)$1,027,507 $950,125 
Entergy Texas  
Audit Fees$1,258,220 $1,165,125 
Audit-Related Fees (a)— — 
Total audit and audit-related fees1,258,220 1,165,125 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (c)$1,258,220 $1,165,125 
System Energy  
Audit Fees$1,017,507 $930,125 
Audit-Related Fees (a)— — 
Total audit and audit-related fees1,017,507 930,125 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (c)$1,017,507 $930,125 
 20232022
Entergy Texas  
Audit Fees (a)$1,296,014 $1,410,943 
Audit-Related Fees (b)— 300,000 
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees1,296,014 1,710,943 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (d)$1,296,014 $1,710,943 
System Energy 
Audit Fees (a)$1,136,014 $1,025,943 
Audit-Related Fees (b)— — 
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees1,136,014 1,025,943 
Tax Fees— — 
All Other Fees— — 
Total Fees (d)$1,136,014 $1,025,943 

(a)IncludesAudit Fees include fees for the audit of the registrant’s annual financial statements and internal control over financial reporting, reviews of financial statements including in the registrant’s quarterly reports, services that are normally provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements, and services associated with securities filings, such as comfort letters and consents.
(b)Audit-Related Fees includes fees for employee benefit plan audits, consultation on financial accounting and reporting, storm examination services in 2022, accounting due diligence services related to the gas business in 2023, agreed upon procedures for storm securitizations in 2023 and 2022, and other attestation services.
(b)(c)Includes fees for cybersecurity assessment andthe license fee for the accounting research tool.
(c)(d)100% of fees paid in 20202023 and 20192022 were pre-approved by the Entergy Corporation Audit Committee.Committee in accordance with the policy described below.
517

Table of Contents
Entergy Audit Committee Guidelines for Pre-approval of Independent Auditor Services

The Audit Committee has adopted the following guidelines regarding the engagement of Entergy’s independent auditor to perform services for Entergy:

1.The independent auditor will provide the Audit Committee, for approval, an annual engagement letter outlining the scope of services proposed to be performed during the fiscal year, including audit services and other permissible non-audit services (e.g. audit-related services, tax services, and all other services).
2.For other permissible services not included in the engagement letter, Entergy management will submit a description of the proposed service, including a budget estimate, to the Audit Committee for pre-approval.  Management and the independent auditor must agree that the requested service is consistent with the SEC’s rules on auditor independence prior to submission to the Audit Committee.  The Audit Committee, at its discretion, will pre-approve permissible services and has established the following additional guidelines for permissible non-audit services provided by the independent auditor:
aAggregate non-audit service fees are targeted at fifty percent or less of the approved audit service fee.
bAll other services should only be provided by the independent auditor if it is a highly qualified provider of that service or if the Audit Committee pre-approves the independent audit firm to provide the service.
3.The Audit Committee will be informed quarterly as to the status of pre-approved services actually provided by the independent auditor.
4.To ensure prompt handling of unexpected matters, the Audit Committee delegates to the Audit Committee Chair or its designee the authority to approve permissible services and fees.  The Audit Committee Chair or designee will report action taken to the Audit Committee at the next scheduled Audit Committee meeting.
538

Table of Contents
5.The Vice President and General Auditor will be responsible for tracking all independent auditor fees and will report quarterly to the Audit Committee.

518539

Table of Contents
PART IV

Item 15.  Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

(a)1.Financial Statements and Independent Auditors’ Reports for Entergy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy are listed in the Table of Contents.
(a)2.Financial Statement Schedules
Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (see page 542)565)
Financial Statement Schedules are listed in the Index to Financial Statement Schedules (see page S-1)
(a)3.Exhibits
Exhibits for Entergy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy are listed in the Exhibit Index (see page 520541 and are incorporated by reference herein).  Each management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed as an exhibit hereto is identified as such by footnote in the Exhibit Index.

Item 16.  Form 10-K Summary (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

None.

519540

EXHIBIT INDEX

The following exhibits indicated by an asterisk preceding the exhibit number are filed herewith.  The balance of the exhibits have previously been filed with the SEC as the exhibits and in the file numbers indicated and are incorporated herein by reference.  The exhibits marked with a (+) are management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements required to be filed herewith and required to be identified as such by Item 15 of Form 10-K.

Some of the agreements included or incorporated by reference as exhibits to this Form 10-K contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement.  These representations and warranties were made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and (i) were not intended to be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate; (ii) may have been qualified in such agreement by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement; (iii) may apply contract standards of “materiality” that are different from the standard of “materiality” under the applicable securities laws; and (iv) were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement.

Entergy acknowledges that, notwithstanding the inclusion of the foregoing cautionary statements, it is responsible for considering whether additional specific disclosures of material information regarding material contractual provisions are required to make the statements in this Form 10-K not misleading.

(2) Plan of Acquisition, Reorganization, Arrangement, Liquidation or Succession

Entergy Arkansas
(a) 1 --

Entergy Louisiana
(b) 1 --
(b) 2 --
(b) 3 --

Entergy Mississippi
(c) 1 --

Entergy New Orleans
(d) 1 --

(3) Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws

Entergy Corporation
(a) 1 --1--
(a) 2 --2--

520541

System Energy
(b) 1 --
(b) 2 --

Entergy Arkansas
(c) 1 --
(c) 2 --

Entergy Louisiana
(d) 1 --
(d) 2 --

Entergy Mississippi
(e) 1 --
(e) 2 --

Entergy New Orleans
(f) 1 --
(f) 2 --

Entergy Texas
(g) 1 --
(g) 2 --

542

(4)Instruments Defining Rights of Security Holders, Including Indentures

Entergy Corporation
(a) 1 --See (4)(b) through (4)(g) below for instruments defining the rights of security holders of System Energy, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas.
521

(a) 2 --
(a) 3 --
(a) 4 --
(a) 54 --
(a) 65 --
(a) 76 --
(a) 87 --
(a) 8 --
(a) 9 --
(a) 10 --
(a) 1011 --
(a) 12 --
(a) 13 --
*(a) 1114 --

System Energy
(b) 1 --
Mortgage and Deed of Trust, dated as of June 15, 1977, as amended and restated by the following Supplemental Indenture: (4.42 to Form 8-K filed September 25, 2012 in 1-9067 (Twenty-fourth)).
543

(b) 2 --
(b) 3 --
(b) 4 --
(b) 5 --
(b) 46 --
(b) 7 --

522

Entergy Arkansas
(c) 1 --
Mortgage and Deed of Trust, dated as of October 1, 1944, as amended by the following Supplemental Indentures: (7(d) in 2-5463 (Mortgage); 7(b) in 2-7121 (First); 4(a)-7 in 2-10261 (Seventh); 2(b)-10 in 2-15767 (Tenth); 2(c) in 2-28869 (Sixteenth); 2(c) in 2-35107 (Eighteenth); 2(d) in 2-36646 (Nineteenth); 2(c) in 2-39253 (Twentieth); 4(c)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-10764 (Thirtieth); 4(c)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-10764 (Thirty-first); 4(c)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-10764 (Thirty-ninth); 4(c)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-10764 (Forty-first); 4(d)(2) in 33-54298 (Forty-sixth); C-2 to Form U5S for the year ended December 31,1995 (Fifty-third); 4(c)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 in 1-10764 (Sixty-eighth); 4.06 to Form 8-K filed October 8, 2010 in 1-10764 (Sixty-ninth); 4.06 to Form 8-K filed December 13, 2012 in 1-10764 (Seventy-first); 4(e) to Form 8-K filed January 9, 2013 in 1-10764 (Seventy-second); 4.06 to Form 8-K filed May 30, 2013 in 1-10764 (Seventy-third); 4.05 to Form 8-K filed March 14, 2014 in 1-10764 (Seventy-sixth); 4.05 to Form 8-K filed December 9, 2014 in 1-10764 (Seventy-seventh); 4.05 to Form 8-K filed January 8, 2016 in 1-10764 (Seventy-eighth); 4.05 to Form 8-K filed August 16, 2016 in 1-10764 (Seventy-ninth); 4(a) to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2018 (Eightieth); 4.1 to Form 8-K12B filed December 3, 2018 in 1-10764 (Eighty-first); 4.39 to Form 8-K filed March 19, 2019 in 1-10764 (Eighty-second); and 4.49 to Form 8-K filed filed September 11, 2020 in 1-107641-10764 (Eighty-third); 4.49 to Form 8-K filed March 30, 2021 in 1-10764 (Eighty-fourth); 4.66 to Form 8-K filed January 6, 2023 in 1-1-764 (Eighty-fifth); and4.66 to Form 8-K filed August 17, 2023 in 1-10764 (Eighty-sixth)).
(c) 2 --
(c)June 3, --
(c) 43 --
(c) 4 --
(c) 5 --
544

(c) 6 --
*(c) 76 --

523

Entergy Louisiana
(d) 1 --
Mortgage and Deed of Trust, dated as of April 1, 1944, as amended by the following Supplemental Indentures: (7(d) in 2-5317 (Mortgage); 7(b) in 2-7408 (First); 4(d)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-32718 (Sixth); 2(c) in 2-34659 (Twelfth); 4(d)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-32718 (Thirteenth); 2(b)-2 in 2-38378 (Fourteenth); 4(d)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-32718 (Twenty-first); 4(d)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-32718 (Twenty-fifth); 4(d)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-32718 (Twenty-ninth); 4(d)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-32718 (Forty-second); A-2(a) to Rule 24 Certificate filed April 4, 1996 in 70-8487 (Fifty-first); B-4(i) to Rule 24 Certificate filed January 10, 2006 in 70-10324 (Sixty-third); B-4(ii) to Rule 24 Certificate filed January 10, 2006 in 70-10324 (Sixty-fourth); 4(a) to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 in 1-32718 (Sixty-fifth); 4(e)1 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 in 1-132718 (Sixty-sixth); 4.08 to Form 8-K filed September 24, 2010 in 1-32718 (Sixty-eighth); 4.08 to Form 8-K filed March 24, 2011 in 1-32718 (Seventy-first); 4(a) to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 in 1-32718 (Seventy-second); 4.08 to Form 8-K filed December 4, 2012 in 1-32718 (Seventy-sixth); 4.08 to Form 8-K filed August 23, 2013 in 1-32718 (Seventy-eighth); 4.08 to Form 8-K filed June 24, 2014 in 1-32718 (Seventy-ninth); 4.08 to Form 8-K filed July 1, 2014 in 1-32718 (Eightieth); 4.08 to Form 8-K filed November 21, 2014 (Eighty-first); 4.1 to Form 8-K12B filed October 1, 2015 (Eighty-second); 4(g) to Form 8-K filed March 18, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-third); 4.33 to Form 8-K filed March 24, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-fourth); 4.33 to Form 8-K filed August 17, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-sixth); 4.43 to Form 8-K filed October 4, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-seventh); 4.43 to Form 8-K filed May 23, 2017 in 1-32718 (Eighty-eighth); 4.43 to Form 8‑K filed March 23, 2018 in 1-32718 (Eighty-ninth); 4.43 to Form 8-K filed August 14, 2018 in 1-32718 (Ninetieth); 4.43 to Form 8-K filed March 12, 2019 in 1-32718 (Ninety-first); 4.53to Form 8-K filed March 6, 2020 in 1-32718 (Ninety-second); 4.53(b) to Form 8-K filed November 13, 2020 in 1-32718 (Ninety-third)1-32718 (Ninety-third); and 4.53 to Form 8-K filed November 24, 2020March 10, 2021 in 1-32718 (Ninety-fourth)(Ninety-fifth); 4.53 to Form 8-K filed October 1, 2021 in 1-32718 (Ninety-sixth); and 4.70 to Form 8-K filed August 24, 2022 in 1-32718 (Ninety-seventh)).
(d) 2 --
(d) 3 --
(d) 4 --
(d) 5 --
(d) 56 --
(d) 67 --
(d) 7 --
(d) 8 --

524545

(d) 9 --
(d) 10 --
(d) 11 --
(d) 12 --
Indenture of Mortgage, dated September 1, 1926, as amended by the following Supplemental Indentures: (7-A-9 in Registration No. 2-6893 (Seventh); 4(d)15 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 in 1-32718 (Eighteenth); 2-A-8 in Registration No. 2-66612 (Thirty-eighth); 4(b) to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,1999 in 1-27031 (Fifty-eighth); 4(a) to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 in 0-20371 (Seventy-seventh); 4.07 to Form 8-K filed July 1, 2014 in 0-20371 (Eighty-first); 4.2 to Form 8-K12B filed October 1, 2015 in 1-32718 (Eighty-second); 4.3 to Form 8-K12B filed October 1, 2015 in 1-32718 (Eighty-third); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed March 24, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-fourth); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed May 19, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-fifth); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed August 17, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-sixth); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed October 4, 2016 in 1-32718 (Eighty-seventh); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed May 23, 2017 in 1-32718 (Eighty-eighth); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed March 23, 2018 in 1-32718 (Eighty-ninth); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed August 14, 2018 in 1-32718 (Ninetieth); 4.42 to Form 8-K filed March 12, 2019 in 1-32718 (Ninety-first); 4.524.52 to Form 8-K filed March 6, 2020 in 1-32718 (Ninety-second); and 4.52(b)4.52(b) to Form 8-K filed November 13,, 2020 in 1-32718 (Ninety-third))(Ninety-third);4.52 to Form 8-K filed March 10, 2021 in 1-32718 (Ninety-fourth); 4.52 to Form 8-K filed October 1, 2021 in 1-32718 (Ninety-fifth); and 4.69 to Form 8-K filed August 24, 2022 in 1-32718 (Ninety-sixth)).
(d) 1013 --
(d) 1114 --
(d) 12 --
(d) 1315 --
(d) 1416 --
(d) 1517 --
546

(d) 1618 --
(d) 1719 --
(d) 1820 --
525

(d) 1921 --
(d) 2022 --
(d) 2123 --
(d) 2225 --
(d) 2326 --
(d) 27 --
(d) 28 --
(d) 29 --
(d) 30 --
*(d) 2431 --

547

Entergy Mississippi
(e) 1 --
(e) 2 --
(e) 3 --
(e) 4 --
*(e) 25 --

Entergy New Orleans
(f) 1 --
(f) 2 --
526

(f) 3 --
(f) 4 --
*(f) 45 --

548

Entergy Texas
(g) 1 --
Indenture, Deed of Trust and Security Agreement dated as of October 1, 2008, between Entergy Texas and The Bank of New York Mellon, as trustee, as amended by the following Supplemental Indenture: (4(h)2 to Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 in 0-53134 (Indenture) and 4.61 to Form 8-K filed September 20, 2019 in 1-34360 (First)).
(g) 2 --
(g) 3 --
(g) 4 --
(g) 53 --
(g) 64 --
(g) 75 --
(g) 86 --
(g) 97 --
(g) 8 --
(g) 9 --
(g) 10 --
(g) 11 --
(g) 1112 --
(g) 13 --
527549

(g) 1214 --
(g) 15 --
*(g) 1316 --

(10)  Material Contracts

Entergy Corporation
+(a)1--
+(a) 2 --
+(a) 3 --
+(a) 4 --
+(a) 5 --
+(a) 6 --
+(a) 7 --
+(a) 8 --
+(a) 9 --

+(a) 10 --
*+(a) 11 --
+(a) 1112 --
+(a) 1213 --
550

+(a) 1314 --
528

+(a) 1415 --
*+(a) 16 --
+(a) 1517 --
+(a) 1618 --
+(a) 1719 --
+(a) 1820 --
*+(a) 21 --
+(a) 1922 --
+(a) 2023 --
+(a) 2124 --
+(a) 22 --25--
+(a) 2326 --
+(a) 2427 --
+(a) 28 --
+(a) 29 --
+(a) 30 --
+(a) 31 --
551

*+(a) 32 --
+(a) 33 --
*+(a) 34 --
*+(a) 35 --
*+(a) 36 --
*+(a) 37 --
+(a) 2638 --
+(a) 2739 --
+(a) 2840 --
+(a) 2941 --
+(a) 3042 --
529

+(a) 3143 --
+(a) 3244 --
+(a) 33 --
+(a) 3445 --
+(a) 3546 --
*+(a) 47 --
+(a) 3648 --
+(a) 3749 --
552

+(a) 38--50 --
+(a) 51 --
+(a) 52 --
+(a) 53 --
+(a)39-- 54 --
+(a) 55 --
+(a) 56 --
*+(a) 40 --
+(a) 41 --
+(a) 4257 --

+(a) 4358 --
+(a) 4459 --
*+(a) 60
+(a) 4561 --
*+(a) 4662 --
+(a) 63 --
+(a) 64 --
+(a) 65 --
+(a) 66 --
+(a) 67 --
553

+(a) 68 --
+(a) 69 --
+(a) 70 --
+(a) 71 --
*+(a) 72 --

System Energy
(b) 1 --
(b) 2 --
(b) 3 --
530

(b) 4 --
(b) 5 --
(b) 6 --
(b) 7 --
(b) 8 --
(b) 7 --
(b) 8 --
(b) 9 --
(b) 10 --
(b) 11 --
554

(b) 12 --
(b) 13 --
(b) 14 --

Entergy LouisianaNew Orleans
(c) 1 --

(14) Code of Ethics

Entergy Corporation
*(a)

*(21)  Subsidiaries of the Registrants

(23)  Consents of Experts and Counsel
*(a)
531


*(24)  Powers of Attorney

(31)  Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certifications
*(a)
*(b)
*(c)
*(d)
*(e)
*(f)
*(g)
*(h)
*(i)
*(j)
*(k)
*(l)
*(m)
555

*(n)

(32)  Section 1350 Certifications
**(a)
**(b)
**(c)
**(d)
**(e)
**(f)
**(g)
**(h)
**(i)
**(j)
**(k)
532

**(l)
**(m)
**(n)

*(97) Entergy System Policy Regarding Recoupment of Certain Compensation adopted separately by each of Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans and Entergy Texas, effective October 2, 2023.

(101)  Interactive Data File
*INS -Inline XBRL Instance Document - The instance document does not appear in the Interactive Data File because its XBRL tags are embedded within the Inline XBRL document.
*SCH -Inline XBRL Schema Document.
*CAL -Inline XBRL Calculation Linkbase Document.
*DEF -Inline XBRL Definition Linkbase Document.
*LAB -Inline XBRL Label Linkbase Document.
*PRE -Inline XBRL Presentation Linkbase Document.

*(104) Cover Page Interactive Data File (formatted in Inline XBRL and contained in Exhibits 101)
_________________
*Filed herewith.
**Furnished, not filed, herewith.
Management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements.

533556

Table of Contents
ENTERGY CORPORATION

SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.

ENTERGY CORPORATION
By  /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: February 26, 202123, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SignatureTitleDate
   
/s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson

Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
February 26, 202123, 2024

Leo P. Denault (ChairmanAndrew S. Marsh (Chair of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and Director; Principal Executive Officer); Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Principal Financial Officer); Gina F. Adams, John H. Black, John R. Burbank, Patrick J. Condon, Kirkland H. Donald, Brian W. Ellis, Philip L. Frederickson, Alexis M. Herman, M. Elise Hyland, Stuart L. Levenick, Blanche L. Lincoln, and Karen A. Puckett (Directors).

By: /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
February 26, 202123, 2024
(Kimberly A. Fontan,Reginald T. Jackson, Attorney-in-fact)

534557

Table of Contents
ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC

SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC
By  /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: February 26, 202123, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SignatureTitleDate
   
/s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson

Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
February 26, 202123, 2024

Laura R. Landreaux (Chair of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director; Principal Executive Officer); Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Director; Principal Financial Officer); Paul D. HinnenkampPeter S. Norgeot, Jr. and Roderick K. West (Directors).

By: /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
February 26, 202123, 2024
(Kimberly A. Fontan,Reginald T. Jackson, Attorney-in-fact)

535558

Table of Contents
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC

SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC
By  /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: February 26, 202123, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SignatureTitleDate
   
/s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson

Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
February 26, 202123, 2024

Phillip R. May, Jr. (Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director; Principal Executive Officer); Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Director; Principal Financial Officer); Paul D. HinnenkampPeter S. Norgeot, Jr. and Roderick K. West (Directors).

By: /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
February 26, 202123, 2024
(Kimberly A. Fontan,Reginald T. Jackson, Attorney-in-fact)

536559

Table of Contents
ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC

SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
By  /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: February 26, 202123, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SignatureTitleDate
   
/s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson

Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
February 26, 202123, 2024

Haley R. Fisackerly (Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director; Principal Executive Officer); Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Director; Principal Financial Officer); Paul D. HinnenkampPeter S. Norgeot, Jr. and Roderick K. West (Directors).

By: /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
February 26, 202123, 2024
(Kimberly A. Fontan,Reginald T. Jackson, Attorney-in-fact)

537560

Table of Contents
ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC

SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC
By  /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: February 26, 202123, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SignatureTitleDate
   
/s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson

Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
February 26, 202123, 2024

DavidDeanna D. Ellis (ChairmanRodriguez (Chair of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director; Principal Executive Officer); Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, and Director;Officer; Principal Financial Officer); Paul D. HinnenkampPeter S. Norgeot, Jr. and Roderick K. West (Directors).

By: /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
February 26, 202123, 2024
(Kimberly A. Fontan,Reginald T. Jackson, Attorney-in-fact)

538561

Table of Contents
ENTERGY TEXAS, INC.

SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC.
By  /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: February 26, 202123, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SignatureTitleDate
   
/s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson

Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
February 26, 202123, 2024

Sallie T. Rainer (ChairEliecer Viamontes (Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director; Principal Executive Officer); Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Director; Principal Financial Officer); Paul D. HinnenkampPeter S. Norgeot, Jr. and Roderick K. West (Directors).

By: /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
February 26, 202123, 2024
(Kimberly A. Fontan,Reginald T. Jackson, Attorney-in-fact)

539562

Table of Contents
SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.

SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.  The signature of the undersigned company shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to such company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
By  /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: February 26, 202123, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  The signature of each of the undersigned shall be deemed to relate only to matters having reference to the above-named company and any subsidiaries thereof.

SignatureTitleDate
   
/s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson

Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
February 26, 202123, 2024

Roderick K. West (Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director; Principal Executive Officer); Andrew S. MarshKimberly A. Fontan (Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Director; Principal Financial Officer); A. Christopher Bakken, IIIKimberly Cook-Nelson and Steven C. McNealBarrett E. Green (Directors).

By: /s/ Kimberly A. FontanReginald T. Jackson
February 26, 202123, 2024
(Kimberly A. Fontan,Reginald T. Jackson, Attorney-in-fact)

540563

Table of Contents
EXHIBIT 23(a)

CONSENTS OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-233403333-266624 on Form S-3 and in Registration Statements Nos. 333-140183, 333-174148, 333-204546, 333-231800, 333-251819, and 333-251819333-275398 on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 26, 2021,23, 2024, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries, and the effectiveness of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Entergy Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-233403-05333-266624-05 on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 26, 2021,23, 2024, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Entergy Arkansas, LLC for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 233403-04333-266624-04 on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 26, 2021,23, 2024, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10‑K of Entergy Louisiana, LLC for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 233403-03333-266624-03 on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 26, 2021,23, 2024, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10‑K of Entergy Mississippi, LLC for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 233403-02333-266624-02 on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 26, 2021,23, 2024, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Entergy Texas, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 233403-01333-266624-01 on Form S-3 of our report dated February 26, 2021,23, 2024, relating to the financial statements of System Energy Resources, Inc. appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of System Energy Resources, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2020.2023.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024
541564

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



To the shareholders and Board of Directors of
Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries


Opinion on the Financial Statement Schedule


We have audited the consolidated financial statements of Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “Corporation”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020,2023, and have issued our reports thereon dated February 26, 2021.23, 2024. Our audits also included the consolidated financial statement schedule of the Corporation listed in Item 15. This consolidated financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Corporation’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Corporation’s consolidated financial statement schedule based on our audits. In our opinion, such consolidated financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024


542565

Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



To the shareholders and Board of Directors of
Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries

To the member and Board of Directors of
Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries
Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries


Opinion on the Financial Statement Schedules


We have audited the consolidated financial statements of Entergy Arkansas, LLC and Subsidiaries, Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Subsidiaries, Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries, Entergy New Orleans, LLC and Subsidiaries, and Entergy Texas, Inc. and Subsidiaries and we have also audited the financial statements of Entergy Mississippi, LLC (collectively the “Companies”) as of December 31, 20202023 and 2019,2022, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020,2023, and have issued our reports thereon dated February 26, 2021.23, 2024. Our audits also included the financial statement schedules of the respective Companies listed in Item 15. These financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the respective Companies’ management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Companies’ financial statement schedules based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedules, when considered in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


New Orleans, Louisiana
February 26, 202123, 2024

543566

Table of Contents
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES



Schedule Page
   
IIValuation and Qualifying Accounts 2020, 2019,2023, 2022, and 2018:2021: 
 
 
 
 
Entergy Mississippi, LLC and Subsidiaries
 
 

Schedules other than those listed above are omitted because they are not required, not applicable, or the required information is shown in the financial statements or notes thereto.

Columns have been omitted from schedules filed because the information is not applicable.

S-1

Table of Contents

ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Column AColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn EColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn E
 Other
Balance atAdditionsChangesBalance
Description
Description
DescriptionDescriptionBeginning of PeriodCharged to Income
(1)
Deductions (2)at End of Period
Balance at
Beginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions
(2)
Balance at
End of
Period
Allowance for doubtful accountsAllowance for doubtful accounts    Allowance for doubtful accounts 
2020$7,404 $111,687 $1,297 $117,794 
2019$7,322 $2,806 $2,724 $7,404 
2018$13,587 $3,936 $10,201 $7,322 
2023
2022
2021
Notes:Notes:    Notes: 
(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.
(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-2

Table of Contents

ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Column AColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn EColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn E
 Other
Balance atAdditionsChangesBalance
Description
Description
DescriptionDescriptionBeginning of PeriodCharged to Income
(1)
Deductions (2)at End of Period
Balance at
Beginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions
(2)
Balance at
End of
Period
Allowance for doubtful accountsAllowance for doubtful accounts    Allowance for doubtful accounts 
2020$1,169 $17,307 $142 $18,334 
2019$1,264 $1,000 $1,095 $1,169 
2018$1,063 $810 $609 $1,264 
2023
2022
2021
Notes:Notes:    Notes: 
(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.
(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-3

Table of Contents

ENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY LOUISIANA, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Column AColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn EColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn E
 Other
Balance atAdditionsChangesBalance
Description
Description
DescriptionDescriptionBeginning of PeriodCharged to Income
(1)
Deductions (2)at End of Period
Balance at
Beginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions
(2)
Balance at
End of
Period
Allowance for doubtful accountsAllowance for doubtful accounts    Allowance for doubtful accounts 
2020$1,902 $44,542 $751 $45,693 
2019$1,813 $762 $673 $1,902 
2018$8,430 $2,395 $9,012 $1,813 
2023
2022
2021
Notes:Notes:    Notes: 
(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.
(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-4

Table of Contents

ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC
ENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY MISSISSIPPI, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Column AColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn EColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn E
 Other
Balance atAdditionsChangesBalance
Description
Description
DescriptionDescriptionBeginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions (2)at End of Period
Balance at
Beginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions
(2)
Balance at
End of
Period
Allowance for doubtful accountsAllowance for doubtful accounts    Allowance for doubtful accounts 
2020$636 $19,081 $190 $19,527 
2019$563 $406 $333 $636 
2018$574 $265 $276 $563 
2023
2022
2021
Notes:Notes:    Notes: 
(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.
(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-5

Table of Contents

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIESENTERGY NEW ORLEANS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTSSCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
(In Thousands)(In Thousands)(In Thousands)
Column AColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn EColumn AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn E
 Other
Balance atAdditionsChangesBalance
Description
Description
DescriptionDescriptionBeginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions (2)at End of Period
Balance at
Beginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions
(2)
Balance at
End of
Period
Allowance for doubtful accountsAllowance for doubtful accounts    Allowance for doubtful accounts 
2020$3,226 $14,204 $0 $17,430 
2019$3,222 $316 $312 $3,226 
2018$3,057 $187 $22 $3,222 
2023
2022
2021
Notes:Notes:    Notes: 
(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.
(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-6

Table of Contents

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018
(In Thousands)
Column AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn E
  Other
 Balance atAdditionsChangesBalance
DescriptionBeginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions (2)at End of Period
Allowance for doubtful accounts    
2020$471 $16,554 $215 $16,810 
2019$461 $321 $311 $471 
2018$463 $279 $281 $461 
Notes:    
(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.
(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.

ENTERGY TEXAS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
SCHEDULE II - VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021
(In Thousands)
Column AColumn BColumn CColumn DColumn E
 Additions
Other
Changes
Description
Balance at
Beginning
of Period
Charged to Income
(1)
Deductions
(2)
Balance at
End of
Period
Allowance for doubtful accounts    
2023$2,352 $4,579 $5,447 $1,484 
2022$5,814 $4,042 $7,504 $2,352 
2021$16,810 $2,166 $13,162 $5,814 
Notes:    
(1) A portion of the charges to income are deferred as a regulatory asset.
(2) Deductions represent write-offs of accounts receivable balances and are reduced by recoveries of amounts previously written off.

S-7