Company: EAI
Filing Date: 2025-02-18
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0000065984-25-000012
Chunk: 384

Company: ENTERGY ARKANSAS, LLC
Filing Date: 2025-02-18
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 7
Chunk 384
---
 support 100% hydrogen operations in the future.  In December 2021 the PUCT referred the proceeding to the State Office of Administrative Hearings.  In March 2022 certain intervenors filed testimony opposing the hydrogen co-firing component of the proposed project and others filed testimony opposing the project outright.  Also in March 2022 the PUCT staff filed testimony opposing the hydrogen co-firing component of the proposed project, but otherwise taking no specific position on the merits of the project.  The PUCT staff also proposed that the PUCT establish a maximum amount that Entergy Texas may recover in rates attributable to the project.  In April 2022, Entergy Texas filed rebuttal testimony addressing and rebutting these various arguments.  The hearing on the merits was held in June 2022, and post-hearing briefs were submitted in July 2022.  In September 2022 the ALJs with the State Office of Administrative Hearings issued a proposal for decision recommending the PUCT approve Entergy Texas’s application for certification of Orange County Advanced Power Station subject to certain conditions, including a cap on cost recovery at $1.37 billion, the exclusion of investment associated with co-firing hydrogen, weatherization requirements, and customer receipt of any contractual benefits associated with the facility’s guaranteed heat rate.  In October 2022 the parties in the proceeding filed exceptions and replies to exceptions to the proposal for decision.  Also in October 2022, Entergy Texas filed with the PUCT information regarding a new fixed pricing option for an estimated project cost of approximately $1.55 billion associated with Entergy Texas’s issuance of limited notice to proceed by mid-November 2022.  In November 2022 the PUCT issued a final order approving the requested amendment to Entergy Texas’s certificate of convenience and necessity to construct, own, and operate the Orange County Advanced Power Station without the investment associated with hydrogen co-firing capability, without a cap on cost recovery, and subject to certain conditions, including weatherization requirements and customer receipt of any contractual benefits associated with the facility’s guaranteed heat rate.

In December 2022, Texas Industrial Energy Consumers and Sierra Club filed motions for rehearing of the PUCT’s final order alleging the PUCT erred in granting the certification of the Orange County Advanced Power Station, in not imposing a cost cap, in including certain findings related to the reasonableness of Entergy Texas’s request for proposals from which the Orange County Advanced Power Station was selected, and in other regards