NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

Property, Plant And Equipment

NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

Property, Plant And Equipment

NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

Property, Plant And Equipment

NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

Property, Plant And Equipment

NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

Property, Plant And Equipment

NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

Property, Plant And Equipment

NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.

Property, Plant And Equipment

NOTE 11. PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy)

Construction Expenditures in Accounts Payable

Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at September 30, 2013 are $91.5 million for Entergy, $25.6 million for Entergy Arkansas, $17.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $12.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $0.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.4 million for Entergy New Orleans, $4.7 million for Entergy Texas, and $5.2 million for System Energy. Construction expenditures included in accounts payable at December 31, 2012 are $267 million for Entergy, $56.3 million for Entergy Arkansas, $9.7 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $110.4 million for Entergy Louisiana, $4.8 million for Entergy Mississippi, $1.9 million for Entergy New Orleans, $8.6 million for Entergy Texas, and $13.5 million for System Energy.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

See "Impairment of Long-Lived Assets" in Note 1 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the periodic reviews that Entergy performs whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the recoverability of long-lived assets is uncertain. Following are updates to that discussion regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.

First, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy was seeking a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (VPSB) for operation of Vermont Yankee until March 2032. In June 2013 the VPSB completed hearings on that petition and established a schedule providing for proposals for decision and initial briefs to be filed in August 2013 and reply briefs to be filed in September 2013. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in the fourth quarter of 2014, as discussed below, Entergy amended its Certificate of Public Good request to seek authorization to operate Vermont Yankee only through 2014. The VPSB thereafter postponed the date for reply briefs to be filed until October 2013 and invited comments on the reply briefs to be filed in November 2013. Second, as discussed in the Form 10-K, the New England Coalition in December 2012 filed a complaint in the Vermont Supreme Court seeking an order to shut down Vermont Yankee while its Certificate of Public Good application is pending, and Entergy moved to dismiss that complaint. On March 25, 2013, the Vermont Supreme Court granted Entergy's motion and dismissed the complaint. Third, as discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy appealed a January 2013 order of the VPSB that made ripe for appeal two earlier orders in which the VPSB had found that the state's timely renewal law, 3 V.S.A. § 814(b), did not apply to certain conditions in the orders issued by the VPSB in 2002 and 2006 precluding Vermont Yankee's operation after March 21, 2012. Briefing of this appeal has been completed. After Entergy announced its plan to close Vermont Yankee in 2014, the Vermont Supreme Court placed the appeal on waiting status until after the VPSB has ruled on Vermont Yankee's pending petition for a Certificate of Public Good. Fourth, as discussed in the Form 10-K, in February 2013 the VPSB issued a notice allowing comments to be filed regarding Vermont Yankee's petition for a Certificate of Public Good to install a diesel generator to enable it to comply with the NRC's station blackout requirements. On June 6, 2013, the VPSB issued a Certificate of Public Good for the diesel generator. The generator was installed and put into service before the September 1, 2013 deadline for compliance with these NRC requirements. Fifth, on August 14, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the January 2012 District Court decision that the Atomic Energy Act preempts Vermont's laws requiring the Legislature's authorization for Vermont Yankee to operate after March 21, 2012 and to store spent nuclear fuel from some operation and also affirmed the District Court's permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of these Vermont laws. The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's decision that Vermont's efforts to condition a CPG upon the existence of a below wholesale market power sales agreement violated the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and affirmed the District Court's decision that such efforts were not preempted by the Federal Power Act, on the ground that these claims were not yet ripe.

Impairments of Vermont Yankee

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the impairment charge recorded for the Vermont Yankee plant in the first quarter 2012.

On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced its plan to close and decommission Vermont Yankee. Vermont Yankee is expected to cease power production in the fourth quarter 2014 after its current fuel cycle. This decision was approved by the Board in August 2013. The decision to shut down the plant was primarily due to sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices, the high cost structure of the plant, and lack of a market structure that adequately compensates merchant nuclear plants for their environmental and fuel diversity benefits in the region in which the plant operates.

As a result of the decision to shut down the plant, Entergy recognized non-cash impairment and other related charges of $291.5 million ($183.7 million after-tax) during the third quarter 2013 to write down the carrying value of Vermont Yankee and related assets to their fair values. Entergy performed a fair value analysis based on the income approach, a discounted cash flow method, to determine the amount of impairment. The estimated fair value of the plant and related assets was $62 million, while the carrying value was $349 million. The carrying value of $349 million reflects the effect of a $58 million increase in Vermont Yankee's estimated decommissioning cost liability and the related asset retirement cost asset. The increase in the estimated decommissioning cost liability resulted from the change in expectation regarding the timing of decommissioning cash flows due to the decision to cease operations. The impairment and other related charges are recorded as a separate line item in Entergy's consolidated statements of income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and is included within the results of the Entergy Wholesale Commodities segment.

The estimate of fair value was based on the price that Entergy would expect to receive in a hypothetical sale of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets to a market participant. In order to determine this price, Entergy used significant observable inputs, including quoted forward power and gas prices, where available. Significant unobservable inputs, such as projected long-term pre-tax operating margins (cash basis), and estimated weighted average costs of capital were also used in the estimation of fair value. In addition, Entergy made certain assumptions regarding future tax deductions associated with the plant and related assets. Based on the use of significant unobservable inputs, the fair value measurement for the entirety of the asset group, and for each type of asset within the asset group, is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements.

The following table sets forth a description of significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets:

Significant Unobservable Input		Amount

Weighted average cost of capital		7.5%
Long-term pre-tax operating margin (cash basis)		7.0%

Entergy's Accounting Policy group, which reports to the Chief Accounting Officer, was primarily responsible for determining the valuation of the Vermont Yankee plant and related assets, in consultation with external advisors. Entergy's Accounting Policy group obtained and reviewed information from other Entergy departments with expertise on the various inputs and assumptions that were necessary to calculate the fair value of the asset group.

In addition to the impairment charge and depreciation of the remaining plant balance by the end of 2014, Entergy expects to record additional charges through the end of 2014 totaling approximately $55 million to $60 million related to severance and employee retention costs relating to the shutdown of Vermont Yankee.