XML 123 R32.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.1.9
Rate And Regulatory Matters (Tables)
 12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (b)

$2,798.8

 

$1,723.1

Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 – Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators)
736.2

 
786.8

Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (b)
513.8

 
447.6

Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9) (b)
245.1

 
188.9

Little Gypsy costs – recovered through securitization (Note 5 – Entergy Louisiana Securitization Bonds - Little Gypsy)
139.2

 
160.6

Under-recovered retail rate revenues - recovered through rate riders when rates are redetermined periodically
79.6

 
77.7

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
76.2

 
83.0

MISO implementation costs - recovery through retail rate riders (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
69.6

 
74.7

Transition to competition costs - recovered over a 15-year period through February 2021
66.2

 
74.4

New nuclear generation development costs (Note 2 - New Nuclear Generation Development Costs) (c)
58.4

 
115.2

Human capital management costs - recovery through retail rate mechanisms (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
42.3

 
45.0

Other
143.2

 
116.4

Entergy Total

$4,968.6

 

$3,893.4
Schedule of Regulatory Liabilities [Table Text Block]
 
2014
 
2013
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 17) (a)

$656.7

 

$529.6

Vidalia purchased power agreement (Note 8)
242.8

 
263.1

Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation (Note 2)
156.0

 
156.0

Removal costs - returned to customers through depreciation rates (Note 9) (a)
82.7

 
72.3

Grand Gulf sale-leaseback - (Note 10 - Sale and Leaseback Transactions)
79.5

 
92.3

Entergy Mississippi’s accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - amortized and credited through the UPSA
53.6

 
60.7

Entergy Arkansas’s accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - will be returned to customers when approved by the APSC and FERC
44.4

 
44.4

Asset retirement obligation - will be returned to customers dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (a)
27.7

 
31.5

Other
40.2

 
46.1

Entergy Total

$1,383.6

 

$1,296.0
Entergy Arkansas [Member]  
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
Entergy Arkansas
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (b)

$838.2

 

$517.1

Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (b)
254.8

 
225.9

Storm damage costs - recovered either through securitization or retail rates (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators)
125.6

 
115.2

Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9) (b)
59.0

 
18.6

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
26.2

 
28.8

MISO implementation costs - recovery through retail rates through 2018 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (c)
25.1

 
30.9

Under-recovered retail rate revenues - recovered through rate riders when rates are redetermined periodically
23.3

 
36.1

Human capital management costs - recovery through retail rates through June 2017 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings) (c)
17.3

 
22.0

Incremental ice storm costs - recovered through 2032
9.0

 
9.5

Other
12.8

 
10.3

Entergy Arkansas Total

$1,391.3

 

$1,014.4
Schedule of Regulatory Liabilities [Table Text Block]
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 17) (a)

$254.0

 

$214.1

Deferred capacity acquisition cost recovery - returned to customers through rate riders when rates are redetermined periodically
—

 
4.7

Other
—

 
0.6

Entergy Arkansas Total

$254.0

 

$219.4
The Amount Of Deferred Fuel Costs, That Entergy Expects To Recover (Or Return To Customers) Through Fuel Mechanisms, Subject To Subsequent Regulatory Review
The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 that Entergy expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review.
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas (a)

$209.2

 

$68.7

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (b)

$89.5

 

$109.7

Entergy Louisiana (b)

$17.6

 

$37.6

Entergy Mississippi

($2.2
)
 

$38.1

Entergy New Orleans (b)

($24.3
)
 

($19.1
)
Entergy Texas

$11.9

 

($4.1
)

(a)
2014 includes $65.9 million for Entergy Arkansas 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.
(b)
2014 and 2013 include $100.1 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $68 million for Entergy Louisiana, and $4.1 million 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.
Estimate Of Payments Or Receipts Among Utility Operating Companies
The filing shows the following payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$156
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($75)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($33)
Entergy New Orleans
($5)
Entergy Texas
($43)


Entergy Arkansas made its payment in January 2012.  In February 2012, Entergy Arkansas filed for an interim adjustment to its production cost allocation rider requesting that the $156 million payment be collected from customers over the 22-month period from March 2012 through December 2013.  In March 2012 the APSC issued an order stating that the payment can be recovered from retail customers through the production cost allocation rider, subject to refund.  The LPSC and the APSC have requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2011 order.  In December 2013 the LPSC filed a petition for a writ of mandamus at the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In its petition, the LPSC requested that the D.C. Circuit issue an order compelling the FERC to issue a final order on pending rehearing requests. In its response to the LPSC petition, the FERC committed to rule on the pending rehearing request before the end of February. In January 2014 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s petition. The APSC, the LPSC, the PUCT, and other parties intervened in the December 2011 compliance filing proceeding, and the APSC and the LPSC also filed protests.

In February 2014 the FERC issued a rehearing order addressing its October 2011 order. The FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing on the issues of whether the bandwidth remedy should be made effective earlier than June 1, 2005, and whether refunds should be ordered for the 20-month refund effective period. The FERC granted the LPSC’s rehearing request on the issue of interest on the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period, requiring that interest be accrued from June 1, 2006 until the date those bandwidth payments/receipts are made. Also in February 2014 the FERC issued an order rejecting the December 2011 compliance filing that calculated the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period. The FERC order required a new compliance filing that calculates the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period based on monthly data for the seven individual months including interest pursuant to the February 2014 rehearing order. Entergy has sought rehearing of the February 2014 orders with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest. In April 2014 the LPSC filed a petition for review of the FERC’s October 2011 and February 2014 orders with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The appeal is currently being held in abeyance pending resolution of Entergy’s request for rehearing with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest.

In April and May 2014, Entergy filed with the FERC an updated compliance filing that provides the payments and receipts among the Utility operating companies pursuant to the FERC’s February 2014 orders.  The filing shows the following net payments and receipts, including interest, among the Utility operating companies:

 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$68
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($10)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($11)
Entergy New Orleans
$2
Entergy Texas
($49)

These payments were made in May 2014. The LPSC, City Council, and APSC have filed protests.
Payments/Receipts Among The Utility Operating Companies To Achieve Rough Production Cost Equalization
 
Payments (Receipts)
 
2007
 
2008
 
2009
 
2010
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
(In Millions)
 
 
Entergy Arkansas

$252

 

$252

 

$390

 

$41

 

$77

 

$41

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana

($120
)
 

($124
)
 

($107
)
 

$—

 

($12
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Louisiana

($91
)
 

($36
)
 

($140
)
 

($22
)
 

$—

 

($41
)
 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Mississippi

($41
)
 

($20
)
 

($24
)
 

($19
)
 

($40
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy New Orleans

$—

 

($7
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

($25
)
 

$—

 

($15
)
 

($15
)
Entergy Texas

($30
)
 

($65
)
 

($119
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

 

$15

 

$15
Schedule of Comprehensive Bandwidth Recalculation Report Reflecting Payment (Receipt) Amounts [Table Text Block]
The filing shows the following additional payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$38
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($22)
Entergy Louisiana
($16)
Entergy Mississippi
$16
Entergy New Orleans
($1)
Entergy Texas
($15)
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana [Member]  
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (b)

$286.8

 

$194.2

New nuclear generation development costs - recovery through formula rate plan beginning December 2014 through November 2022 (Note 2 - New Nuclear Generation Development Costs) (c)
29.2

 
29.5

Spindletop gas storage facility - recovery period through December 2032 (a)
26.2

 
27.8

River Bend AFUDC - recovered through August 2025 (Note 1 – River Bend AFUDC)
18.6

 
20.5

MISO implementation costs - recovery through the MISO cost recovery mechanism beginning December 2014 through November 2017 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
15.7

 
15.3

Human capital management costs - recovery through formula rate plan beginning December 2014 through November 2017 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
11.2

 
10.0

Under-recovered retail rate revenues - recovered through rate riders when rates are redetermined periodically
11.1

 
3.0

Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (b)
10.8

 
11.0

Gas hedging costs - recovered through fuel rates upon settlement (Note 16 - Derivatives)
8.2

 
—

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
6.8

 
8.3

Other
1.8

 
1.9

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana Total

$426.4

 

$321.5
Schedule of Regulatory Liabilities [Table Text Block]
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 17) (a)

$85.9

 

$64.1

Removal costs - returned to customers through depreciation rates (Note 9) (a)
36.9

 
35.3

Asset retirement obligation - will be returned to customers dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (a)
27.7

 
31.5

Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation (Note 2)
25.5

 
25.5

Gas hedging costs - returned to customers through fuel rates (Note 16 - Derivatives)
—

 
2.2

Other
0.3

 
0.8

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana Total

$176.3

 

$159.4
The Amount Of Deferred Fuel Costs, That Entergy Expects To Recover (Or Return To Customers) Through Fuel Mechanisms, Subject To Subsequent Regulatory Review
The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 that Entergy expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review.
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas (a)

$209.2

 

$68.7

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (b)

$89.5

 

$109.7

Entergy Louisiana (b)

$17.6

 

$37.6

Entergy Mississippi

($2.2
)
 

$38.1

Entergy New Orleans (b)

($24.3
)
 

($19.1
)
Entergy Texas

$11.9

 

($4.1
)

(a)
2014 includes $65.9 million for Entergy Arkansas 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.
(b)
2014 and 2013 include $100.1 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $68 million for Entergy Louisiana, and $4.1 million 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.
Estimate Of Payments Or Receipts Among Utility Operating Companies
The filing shows the following payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$156
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($75)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($33)
Entergy New Orleans
($5)
Entergy Texas
($43)


Entergy Arkansas made its payment in January 2012.  In February 2012, Entergy Arkansas filed for an interim adjustment to its production cost allocation rider requesting that the $156 million payment be collected from customers over the 22-month period from March 2012 through December 2013.  In March 2012 the APSC issued an order stating that the payment can be recovered from retail customers through the production cost allocation rider, subject to refund.  The LPSC and the APSC have requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2011 order.  In December 2013 the LPSC filed a petition for a writ of mandamus at the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In its petition, the LPSC requested that the D.C. Circuit issue an order compelling the FERC to issue a final order on pending rehearing requests. In its response to the LPSC petition, the FERC committed to rule on the pending rehearing request before the end of February. In January 2014 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s petition. The APSC, the LPSC, the PUCT, and other parties intervened in the December 2011 compliance filing proceeding, and the APSC and the LPSC also filed protests.

In February 2014 the FERC issued a rehearing order addressing its October 2011 order. The FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing on the issues of whether the bandwidth remedy should be made effective earlier than June 1, 2005, and whether refunds should be ordered for the 20-month refund effective period. The FERC granted the LPSC’s rehearing request on the issue of interest on the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period, requiring that interest be accrued from June 1, 2006 until the date those bandwidth payments/receipts are made. Also in February 2014 the FERC issued an order rejecting the December 2011 compliance filing that calculated the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period. The FERC order required a new compliance filing that calculates the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period based on monthly data for the seven individual months including interest pursuant to the February 2014 rehearing order. Entergy has sought rehearing of the February 2014 orders with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest. In April 2014 the LPSC filed a petition for review of the FERC’s October 2011 and February 2014 orders with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The appeal is currently being held in abeyance pending resolution of Entergy’s request for rehearing with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest.

In April and May 2014, Entergy filed with the FERC an updated compliance filing that provides the payments and receipts among the Utility operating companies pursuant to the FERC’s February 2014 orders.  The filing shows the following net payments and receipts, including interest, among the Utility operating companies:

 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$68
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($10)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($11)
Entergy New Orleans
$2
Entergy Texas
($49)

These payments were made in May 2014. The LPSC, City Council, and APSC have filed protests.
Payments/Receipts Among The Utility Operating Companies To Achieve Rough Production Cost Equalization
 
Payments (Receipts)
 
2007
 
2008
 
2009
 
2010
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
(In Millions)
 
 
Entergy Arkansas

$252

 

$252

 

$390

 

$41

 

$77

 

$41

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana

($120
)
 

($124
)
 

($107
)
 

$—

 

($12
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Louisiana

($91
)
 

($36
)
 

($140
)
 

($22
)
 

$—

 

($41
)
 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Mississippi

($41
)
 

($20
)
 

($24
)
 

($19
)
 

($40
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy New Orleans

$—

 

($7
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

($25
)
 

$—

 

($15
)
 

($15
)
Entergy Texas

($30
)
 

($65
)
 

($119
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

 

$15

 

$15
Schedule of Comprehensive Bandwidth Recalculation Report Reflecting Payment (Receipt) Amounts [Table Text Block]
The filing shows the following additional payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$38
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($22)
Entergy Louisiana
($16)
Entergy Mississippi
$16
Entergy New Orleans
($1)
Entergy Texas
($15)
Entergy Louisiana [Member]  
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (b)

$487.2

 

$318.4

Asset Retirement Obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning of nuclear units or dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (b)
156.7

 
139.2

Little Gypsy costs – recovered through securitization (Note 5 – Entergy Louisiana Securitization Bonds - Little Gypsy)
139.2

 
160.6

New nuclear generation development costs - recovery through formula rate plan beginning December 2014 through November 2022 (Note 2 - New Nuclear Generation Development Costs) (c)
29.2

 
29.5

MISO implementation costs - recovery through the MISO cost recovery mechanism beginning December 2014 through November 2017 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
21.4

 
20.8

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
14.3

 
15.2

Human capital management costs - recovery through formula rate plan beginning December 2014 through November 2017 (Note 2 - Retail Rate Proceedings)
13.8

 
13.0

Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through retail rates (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators)
13.7

 
3.4

Other
38.7

 
15.4

Entergy Louisiana Total

$914.2

 

$715.5
Schedule of Regulatory Liabilities [Table Text Block]
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Vidalia purchased power agreement (Note 8)

$242.8

 

$263.1

Louisiana Act 55 financing savings obligation (Note 2)
130.5

 
130.5

Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 17) (a)
123.2

 
98.9

Removal costs - returned to customers through depreciation rates (Note 9) (a)
45.7

 
37.0

Other
3.9

 
3.7

Entergy Louisiana Total

$546.1

 

$533.2
The Amount Of Deferred Fuel Costs, That Entergy Expects To Recover (Or Return To Customers) Through Fuel Mechanisms, Subject To Subsequent Regulatory Review
The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 that Entergy expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review.
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas (a)

$209.2

 

$68.7

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (b)

$89.5

 

$109.7

Entergy Louisiana (b)

$17.6

 

$37.6

Entergy Mississippi

($2.2
)
 

$38.1

Entergy New Orleans (b)

($24.3
)
 

($19.1
)
Entergy Texas

$11.9

 

($4.1
)

(a)
2014 includes $65.9 million for Entergy Arkansas 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.
(b)
2014 and 2013 include $100.1 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $68 million for Entergy Louisiana, and $4.1 million 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.
Estimate Of Payments Or Receipts Among Utility Operating Companies
The filing shows the following payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$156
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($75)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($33)
Entergy New Orleans
($5)
Entergy Texas
($43)


Entergy Arkansas made its payment in January 2012.  In February 2012, Entergy Arkansas filed for an interim adjustment to its production cost allocation rider requesting that the $156 million payment be collected from customers over the 22-month period from March 2012 through December 2013.  In March 2012 the APSC issued an order stating that the payment can be recovered from retail customers through the production cost allocation rider, subject to refund.  The LPSC and the APSC have requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2011 order.  In December 2013 the LPSC filed a petition for a writ of mandamus at the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In its petition, the LPSC requested that the D.C. Circuit issue an order compelling the FERC to issue a final order on pending rehearing requests. In its response to the LPSC petition, the FERC committed to rule on the pending rehearing request before the end of February. In January 2014 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s petition. The APSC, the LPSC, the PUCT, and other parties intervened in the December 2011 compliance filing proceeding, and the APSC and the LPSC also filed protests.

In February 2014 the FERC issued a rehearing order addressing its October 2011 order. The FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing on the issues of whether the bandwidth remedy should be made effective earlier than June 1, 2005, and whether refunds should be ordered for the 20-month refund effective period. The FERC granted the LPSC’s rehearing request on the issue of interest on the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period, requiring that interest be accrued from June 1, 2006 until the date those bandwidth payments/receipts are made. Also in February 2014 the FERC issued an order rejecting the December 2011 compliance filing that calculated the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period. The FERC order required a new compliance filing that calculates the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period based on monthly data for the seven individual months including interest pursuant to the February 2014 rehearing order. Entergy has sought rehearing of the February 2014 orders with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest. In April 2014 the LPSC filed a petition for review of the FERC’s October 2011 and February 2014 orders with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The appeal is currently being held in abeyance pending resolution of Entergy’s request for rehearing with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest.

In April and May 2014, Entergy filed with the FERC an updated compliance filing that provides the payments and receipts among the Utility operating companies pursuant to the FERC’s February 2014 orders.  The filing shows the following net payments and receipts, including interest, among the Utility operating companies:

 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$68
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($10)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($11)
Entergy New Orleans
$2
Entergy Texas
($49)

These payments were made in May 2014. The LPSC, City Council, and APSC have filed protests.
Payments/Receipts Among The Utility Operating Companies To Achieve Rough Production Cost Equalization
 
Payments (Receipts)
 
2007
 
2008
 
2009
 
2010
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
(In Millions)
 
 
Entergy Arkansas

$252

 

$252

 

$390

 

$41

 

$77

 

$41

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana

($120
)
 

($124
)
 

($107
)
 

$—

 

($12
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Louisiana

($91
)
 

($36
)
 

($140
)
 

($22
)
 

$—

 

($41
)
 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Mississippi

($41
)
 

($20
)
 

($24
)
 

($19
)
 

($40
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy New Orleans

$—

 

($7
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

($25
)
 

$—

 

($15
)
 

($15
)
Entergy Texas

($30
)
 

($65
)
 

($119
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

 

$15

 

$15
Schedule of Comprehensive Bandwidth Recalculation Report Reflecting Payment (Receipt) Amounts [Table Text Block]
The filing shows the following additional payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$38
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($22)
Entergy Louisiana
($16)
Entergy Mississippi
$16
Entergy New Orleans
($1)
Entergy Texas
($15)
Entergy Mississippi [Member]  
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (b)

$224.3

 

$135.3

Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9) (b)
76.3

 
64.3

Under-recovered retail rate revenues - recovered through rate riders when rates are redetermined periodically
28.7

 
39.2

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
8.2

 
8.9

Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (b)
6.3

 
5.9

Baxter Wilson outage costs - recovered through retail rates over two years beginning February 2015 (Note 8 - Baxter Wilson Plant Event)
6.0

 
—

MISO implementation costs - recovery through retail rate riders (Note 2 – Retail Rate Proceedings)
4.0

 
4.2

New nuclear generation development costs (Note 2 - New Nuclear Generation Development Costs)
—

 
56.2

Other
10.9

 
4.5

Entergy Mississippi Total

$364.7

 

$318.5
The Amount Of Deferred Fuel Costs, That Entergy Expects To Recover (Or Return To Customers) Through Fuel Mechanisms, Subject To Subsequent Regulatory Review
The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 that Entergy expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review.
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas (a)

$209.2

 

$68.7

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (b)

$89.5

 

$109.7

Entergy Louisiana (b)

$17.6

 

$37.6

Entergy Mississippi

($2.2
)
 

$38.1

Entergy New Orleans (b)

($24.3
)
 

($19.1
)
Entergy Texas

$11.9

 

($4.1
)

(a)
2014 includes $65.9 million for Entergy Arkansas 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.
(b)
2014 and 2013 include $100.1 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $68 million for Entergy Louisiana, and $4.1 million 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.
Estimate Of Payments Or Receipts Among Utility Operating Companies
The filing shows the following payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$156
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($75)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($33)
Entergy New Orleans
($5)
Entergy Texas
($43)


Entergy Arkansas made its payment in January 2012.  In February 2012, Entergy Arkansas filed for an interim adjustment to its production cost allocation rider requesting that the $156 million payment be collected from customers over the 22-month period from March 2012 through December 2013.  In March 2012 the APSC issued an order stating that the payment can be recovered from retail customers through the production cost allocation rider, subject to refund.  The LPSC and the APSC have requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2011 order.  In December 2013 the LPSC filed a petition for a writ of mandamus at the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In its petition, the LPSC requested that the D.C. Circuit issue an order compelling the FERC to issue a final order on pending rehearing requests. In its response to the LPSC petition, the FERC committed to rule on the pending rehearing request before the end of February. In January 2014 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s petition. The APSC, the LPSC, the PUCT, and other parties intervened in the December 2011 compliance filing proceeding, and the APSC and the LPSC also filed protests.

In February 2014 the FERC issued a rehearing order addressing its October 2011 order. The FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing on the issues of whether the bandwidth remedy should be made effective earlier than June 1, 2005, and whether refunds should be ordered for the 20-month refund effective period. The FERC granted the LPSC’s rehearing request on the issue of interest on the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period, requiring that interest be accrued from June 1, 2006 until the date those bandwidth payments/receipts are made. Also in February 2014 the FERC issued an order rejecting the December 2011 compliance filing that calculated the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period. The FERC order required a new compliance filing that calculates the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period based on monthly data for the seven individual months including interest pursuant to the February 2014 rehearing order. Entergy has sought rehearing of the February 2014 orders with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest. In April 2014 the LPSC filed a petition for review of the FERC’s October 2011 and February 2014 orders with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The appeal is currently being held in abeyance pending resolution of Entergy’s request for rehearing with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest.

In April and May 2014, Entergy filed with the FERC an updated compliance filing that provides the payments and receipts among the Utility operating companies pursuant to the FERC’s February 2014 orders.  The filing shows the following net payments and receipts, including interest, among the Utility operating companies:

 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$68
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($10)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($11)
Entergy New Orleans
$2
Entergy Texas
($49)

These payments were made in May 2014. The LPSC, City Council, and APSC have filed protests.
Payments/Receipts Among The Utility Operating Companies To Achieve Rough Production Cost Equalization
 
Payments (Receipts)
 
2007
 
2008
 
2009
 
2010
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
(In Millions)
 
 
Entergy Arkansas

$252

 

$252

 

$390

 

$41

 

$77

 

$41

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana

($120
)
 

($124
)
 

($107
)
 

$—

 

($12
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Louisiana

($91
)
 

($36
)
 

($140
)
 

($22
)
 

$—

 

($41
)
 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Mississippi

($41
)
 

($20
)
 

($24
)
 

($19
)
 

($40
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy New Orleans

$—

 

($7
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

($25
)
 

$—

 

($15
)
 

($15
)
Entergy Texas

($30
)
 

($65
)
 

($119
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

 

$15

 

$15
Schedule of Comprehensive Bandwidth Recalculation Report Reflecting Payment (Receipt) Amounts [Table Text Block]
The filing shows the following additional payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$38
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($22)
Entergy Louisiana
($16)
Entergy Mississippi
$16
Entergy New Orleans
($1)
Entergy Texas
($15)
Entergy New Orleans [Member]  
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (b)

$115.8

 

$76.8

Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9) (b)
35.2

 
34.9

Michoud plant maintenance – recovered over a 7-year period through September 2018
7.2

 
9.1

Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through retail rates and securitization (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators)
5.0

 
4.6

Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of dismantlement of non-nuclear power plants (Note 9) (b)
3.8

 
3.7

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
1.8

 
2.0

Other
6.8

 
6.1

Entergy New Orleans Total

$175.6

 

$137.2
The Amount Of Deferred Fuel Costs, That Entergy Expects To Recover (Or Return To Customers) Through Fuel Mechanisms, Subject To Subsequent Regulatory Review
The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 that Entergy expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review.
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas (a)

$209.2

 

$68.7

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (b)

$89.5

 

$109.7

Entergy Louisiana (b)

$17.6

 

$37.6

Entergy Mississippi

($2.2
)
 

$38.1

Entergy New Orleans (b)

($24.3
)
 

($19.1
)
Entergy Texas

$11.9

 

($4.1
)

(a)
2014 includes $65.9 million for Entergy Arkansas 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.
(b)
2014 and 2013 include $100.1 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $68 million for Entergy Louisiana, and $4.1 million 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.
Estimate Of Payments Or Receipts Among Utility Operating Companies
The filing shows the following payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$156
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($75)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($33)
Entergy New Orleans
($5)
Entergy Texas
($43)


Entergy Arkansas made its payment in January 2012.  In February 2012, Entergy Arkansas filed for an interim adjustment to its production cost allocation rider requesting that the $156 million payment be collected from customers over the 22-month period from March 2012 through December 2013.  In March 2012 the APSC issued an order stating that the payment can be recovered from retail customers through the production cost allocation rider, subject to refund.  The LPSC and the APSC have requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2011 order.  In December 2013 the LPSC filed a petition for a writ of mandamus at the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In its petition, the LPSC requested that the D.C. Circuit issue an order compelling the FERC to issue a final order on pending rehearing requests. In its response to the LPSC petition, the FERC committed to rule on the pending rehearing request before the end of February. In January 2014 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s petition. The APSC, the LPSC, the PUCT, and other parties intervened in the December 2011 compliance filing proceeding, and the APSC and the LPSC also filed protests.

In February 2014 the FERC issued a rehearing order addressing its October 2011 order. The FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing on the issues of whether the bandwidth remedy should be made effective earlier than June 1, 2005, and whether refunds should be ordered for the 20-month refund effective period. The FERC granted the LPSC’s rehearing request on the issue of interest on the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period, requiring that interest be accrued from June 1, 2006 until the date those bandwidth payments/receipts are made. Also in February 2014 the FERC issued an order rejecting the December 2011 compliance filing that calculated the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period. The FERC order required a new compliance filing that calculates the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period based on monthly data for the seven individual months including interest pursuant to the February 2014 rehearing order. Entergy has sought rehearing of the February 2014 orders with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest. In April 2014 the LPSC filed a petition for review of the FERC’s October 2011 and February 2014 orders with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The appeal is currently being held in abeyance pending resolution of Entergy’s request for rehearing with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest.

In April and May 2014, Entergy filed with the FERC an updated compliance filing that provides the payments and receipts among the Utility operating companies pursuant to the FERC’s February 2014 orders.  The filing shows the following net payments and receipts, including interest, among the Utility operating companies:

 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$68
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($10)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($11)
Entergy New Orleans
$2
Entergy Texas
($49)

These payments were made in May 2014. The LPSC, City Council, and APSC have filed protests.
Payments/Receipts Among The Utility Operating Companies To Achieve Rough Production Cost Equalization
 
Payments (Receipts)
 
2007
 
2008
 
2009
 
2010
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
(In Millions)
 
 
Entergy Arkansas

$252

 

$252

 

$390

 

$41

 

$77

 

$41

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana

($120
)
 

($124
)
 

($107
)
 

$—

 

($12
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Louisiana

($91
)
 

($36
)
 

($140
)
 

($22
)
 

$—

 

($41
)
 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Mississippi

($41
)
 

($20
)
 

($24
)
 

($19
)
 

($40
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy New Orleans

$—

 

($7
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

($25
)
 

$—

 

($15
)
 

($15
)
Entergy Texas

($30
)
 

($65
)
 

($119
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

 

$15

 

$15
Schedule of Comprehensive Bandwidth Recalculation Report Reflecting Payment (Receipt) Amounts [Table Text Block]
The filing shows the following additional payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$38
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($22)
Entergy Louisiana
($16)
Entergy Mississippi
$16
Entergy New Orleans
($1)
Entergy Texas
($15)
Entergy Texas [Member]  
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Storm damage costs, including hurricane costs - recovered through securitization and retail rates (Note 2 - Storm Cost Recovery Filings with Retail Regulators)

$591.7

 

$663.6

Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans, Other Postretirement Benefits, and Non-Qualified Pension Plans) (b)
217.0

 
143.0

Transition to competition costs - recovered over a 15-year period through February 2021
66.2

 
74.4

Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9) (b)
18.9

 
15.1

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
10.5

 
7.7

Rate case costs - recovered through retail rates (c)
8.4

 
10.8

Other
9.4

 
4.6

Entergy Texas Total

$922.1

 

$919.2
Schedule of Regulatory Liabilities [Table Text Block]
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Transition to competition costs - returned to customers through rate riders when rates are redetermined periodically

$5.1

 

$4.2

Line loss adjustment - returned to customers through fuel rates
—

 
1.0

Entergy Texas Total

$5.1

 

$5.2
The Amount Of Deferred Fuel Costs, That Entergy Expects To Recover (Or Return To Customers) Through Fuel Mechanisms, Subject To Subsequent Regulatory Review
The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 that Entergy expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review.
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas (a)

$209.2

 

$68.7

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (b)

$89.5

 

$109.7

Entergy Louisiana (b)

$17.6

 

$37.6

Entergy Mississippi

($2.2
)
 

$38.1

Entergy New Orleans (b)

($24.3
)
 

($19.1
)
Entergy Texas

$11.9

 

($4.1
)

(a)
2014 includes $65.9 million for Entergy Arkansas 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.
(b)
2014 and 2013 include $100.1 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $68 million for Entergy Louisiana, and $4.1 million 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
Estimate Of Payments Or Receipts Among Utility Operating Companies
The filing shows the following payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$156
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($75)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($33)
Entergy New Orleans
($5)
Entergy Texas
($43)


Entergy Arkansas made its payment in January 2012.  In February 2012, Entergy Arkansas filed for an interim adjustment to its production cost allocation rider requesting that the $156 million payment be collected from customers over the 22-month period from March 2012 through December 2013.  In March 2012 the APSC issued an order stating that the payment can be recovered from retail customers through the production cost allocation rider, subject to refund.  The LPSC and the APSC have requested rehearing of the FERC’s October 2011 order.  In December 2013 the LPSC filed a petition for a writ of mandamus at the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In its petition, the LPSC requested that the D.C. Circuit issue an order compelling the FERC to issue a final order on pending rehearing requests. In its response to the LPSC petition, the FERC committed to rule on the pending rehearing request before the end of February. In January 2014 the D.C. Circuit denied the LPSC’s petition. The APSC, the LPSC, the PUCT, and other parties intervened in the December 2011 compliance filing proceeding, and the APSC and the LPSC also filed protests.

In February 2014 the FERC issued a rehearing order addressing its October 2011 order. The FERC denied the LPSC’s request for rehearing on the issues of whether the bandwidth remedy should be made effective earlier than June 1, 2005, and whether refunds should be ordered for the 20-month refund effective period. The FERC granted the LPSC’s rehearing request on the issue of interest on the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period, requiring that interest be accrued from June 1, 2006 until the date those bandwidth payments/receipts are made. Also in February 2014 the FERC issued an order rejecting the December 2011 compliance filing that calculated the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period. The FERC order required a new compliance filing that calculates the bandwidth payments/receipts for the June - December 2005 period based on monthly data for the seven individual months including interest pursuant to the February 2014 rehearing order. Entergy has sought rehearing of the February 2014 orders with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest. In April 2014 the LPSC filed a petition for review of the FERC’s October 2011 and February 2014 orders with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The appeal is currently being held in abeyance pending resolution of Entergy’s request for rehearing with respect to the FERC’s determinations regarding interest.

In April and May 2014, Entergy filed with the FERC an updated compliance filing that provides the payments and receipts among the Utility operating companies pursuant to the FERC’s February 2014 orders.  The filing shows the following net payments and receipts, including interest, among the Utility operating companies:

 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$68
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($10)
Entergy Louisiana
$—
Entergy Mississippi
($11)
Entergy New Orleans
$2
Entergy Texas
($49)

These payments were made in May 2014. The LPSC, City Council, and APSC have filed protests.
Payments/Receipts Among The Utility Operating Companies To Achieve Rough Production Cost Equalization
 
Payments (Receipts)
 
2007
 
2008
 
2009
 
2010
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
(In Millions)
 
 
Entergy Arkansas

$252

 

$252

 

$390

 

$41

 

$77

 

$41

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana

($120
)
 

($124
)
 

($107
)
 

$—

 

($12
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Louisiana

($91
)
 

($36
)
 

($140
)
 

($22
)
 

$—

 

($41
)
 

$—

 

$—

Entergy Mississippi

($41
)
 

($20
)
 

($24
)
 

($19
)
 

($40
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

Entergy New Orleans

$—

 

($7
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

($25
)
 

$—

 

($15
)
 

($15
)
Entergy Texas

($30
)
 

($65
)
 

($119
)
 

$—

 

$—

 

$—

 

$15

 

$15
Schedule of Comprehensive Bandwidth Recalculation Report Reflecting Payment (Receipt) Amounts [Table Text Block]
The filing shows the following additional payments/receipts among the Utility operating companies:
 
Payments
(Receipts)
 
(In Millions)
Entergy Arkansas
$38
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana
($22)
Entergy Louisiana
($16)
Entergy Mississippi
$16
Entergy New Orleans
($1)
Entergy Texas
($15)
System Energy [Member]  
Details Of Other Regulatory Assets
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Pension & postretirement costs (Note 11 – Qualified Pension Plans and Other Postretirement Benefits) (b)

$191.0

 

$132.9

Asset retirement obligation - recovery dependent upon timing of decommissioning (Note 9) (b)
80.4

 
60.8

Removal costs - recovered through depreciation rates (Note 9) (b)
55.7

 
56.0

Unamortized loss on reacquired debt - recovered over term of debt
8.5

 
12.0

System Energy Total

$335.6

 

$261.7
Schedule of Regulatory Liabilities [Table Text Block]
 
2014
 
2013
 
(In Millions)
Unrealized gains on nuclear decommissioning trust funds (Note 17) (a)

$193.6

 

$152.4

Grand Gulf sale-leaseback - (Note 10 - Sale and Leaseback Transactions)
79.5

 
92.3

Entergy Mississippi’s accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - amortized and credited through the UPSA
53.6

 
60.7

Entergy Arkansas’s accumulated accelerated Grand Gulf amortization - will be returned to customers when approved by the APSC and FERC
44.4

 
44.4

System Energy Total

$371.1

 

$349.8