Company: EAI
Filing Date: 2025-10-31
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0000065984-25-000132
Chunk: 96

Company: ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC
Filing Date: 2025-10-31
Form: 10-Q
Item: Item 3
Chunk 96
---
.  Certain intervenors requested that the PUCT impose various conditions upon the approval of the resources, including, among others, cost recovery limitations, a direction that Entergy Texas initiate a competitive tariff proceeding to facilitate industrial sleeving, a requirement for additional regulatory approvals related to hydrogen or carbon capture and storage implementation, limits on the recovery of supplemental filing costs, and calculation of AFUDC based on an adjusted weighted average cost of capital.  Reply briefs were filed in May 2025.  In June 2025 the ALJs with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued a proposal for decision, in which they recommended rejection of Entergy Texas’s application to construct the Legend Power Station and the Lone Star Power Station based upon their finding that Entergy Texas did not demonstrate the resources to be cost-effective alternatives to address the uncontested need for additional generation.  In the alternative, the ALJs recommended that if the PUCT approves the resources, that conditions be imposed, including a deferral of the finding that the resources were prudently selected until Entergy Texas’s next rate case, a prudence review by an external consultant if actual project costs exceed estimated costs by more than 10%, weatherization requirements, and a requirement that Entergy Texas obtain additional regulatory approvals prior to implementing hydrogen co-firing or carbon capture and storage.  The ALJs’ proposal for decision is an interim step in the certification process, and it is not binding upon the PUCT.  Entergy Texas filed exceptions in July 2025.  In September 2025 the PUCT issued a decision granting the application, subject to conditions that include a cost cap at Entergy Texas’s previously-filed modified estimated costs of $1.6 billion for the Legend Power Station and $799 million for the Lone Star Power Station, weatherization requirements, environmental compliance requirements, and a requirement to request additional authorization prior to implementing hydrogen co-firing or carbon capture and storage.  In October 2025 an intervenor filed a motion for rehearing requesting that the PUCT modify the Lone Star Power Station cost cap to reflect the estimated project costs associated with a new project site, clarify that the cost cap is inclusive of 

178

Table of ContentsEntergy Texas, Inc. and SubsidiariesManagement’s Financial Discussion and Analysis

transmission upgrades, and reconsider the intervenor’s prior proposal for a “soft cost cap” below the estimated project costs, and that Entergy Texas be directed to initiate a competitive tariff proceeding to facilitate industrial sleeving of purchased power