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

Forward-looking statements involve a number of risks and uncertainties. There are factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements, including those factors discussed or incorporated by reference in (a) Item 1A. Risk Factors in the Form 10-K, (b) Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis in the Form 10-K and in this report, and (c) the following factors (in addition to others described elsewhere in this combined report and in subsequent securities filings):

• resolution of pending and future rate cases and negotiations, including various performance-based rate discussions and implementation of Texas restructuring legislation, and other regulatory proceedings, including those related to Entergy's System Agreement, Entergy's utility supply plan, recovery of storm costs, and recovery of fuel and purchased power costs
• changes in utility regulation, including the beginning or end of retail and wholesale competition, the ability to recover net utility assets and other potential stranded costs, the operations of the independent coordinator of transmission that includes Entergy's utility service territory, and the application of more stringent transmission reliability requirements or market power criteria by the FERC
• changes in regulation of nuclear generating facilities and nuclear materials and fuel, including possible shutdown of nuclear generating facilities, particularly those in the Non-Utility Nuclear business
• resolution of pending or future applications for license renewals or modifications of nuclear generating facilities
• the performance of Entergy's generating plants, and particularly the capacity factors at its nuclear generating facilities
• Entergy's ability to develop and execute on a point of view regarding future prices of electricity, natural gas, and other energy-related commodities
• prices for power generated by Entergy's unregulated generating facilities, the ability to hedge, sell power forward or otherwise reduce the market price risk associated with those facilities, including the Non-Utility Nuclear plants, and the prices and availability of fuel and power Entergy must purchase for its utility customers, and Entergy's ability to meet credit support requirements for fuel and power supply contracts
• volatility and changes in markets for electricity, natural gas, uranium, and other energy-related commodities
• changes in law resulting from federal energy legislation
• changes in environmental, tax, and other laws, including requirements for reduced emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, carbon, mercury, and other substances
• uncertainty regarding the establishment of interim or permanent sites for spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste storage and disposal
• variations in weather and the occurrence of hurricanes and other storms and disasters, including uncertainties associated with efforts to remediate the effects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and recovery of costs associated with restoration
• Entergy's and its subsidiaries' ability to manage their operation and maintenance costs
• Entergy's ability to purchase and sell assets at attractive prices and on other attractive terms
• the economic climate, and particularly growth in Entergy's service territory
• the effects of Entergy's strategies to reduce tax payments

• changes in the financial markets, particularly those affecting the availability of capital and Entergy's ability to refinance existing debt, execute its share repurchase program, and fund investments and acquisitions
• actions of rating agencies, including changes in the ratings of debt and preferred stock, changes in general corporate ratings, and changes in the rating agencies' ratings criteria
• changes in inflation and interest rates
• the effect of litigation and government investigations
• advances in technology
• the potential effects of threatened or actual terrorism and war
• Entergy's ability to attract and retain talented management and directors
• changes in accounting standards and corporate governance
• and the following transactional factors (in addition to others described elsewhere in this and in subsequent securities filings): (i) risks inherent in the contemplated Non-Utility Nuclear spin-off, joint venture and related transactions (including the level of debt incurred by the spun-off company and the terms and costs related thereto); (ii) legislative and regulatory actions; and (iii) conditions of the capital markets during the periods covered by the forward-looking statements.  Entergy Corporation cannot provide any assurances that the spin-off or any of the proposed transactions related thereto will be completed, nor can it give assurances as to the terms on which such transactions will be consummated. The transaction is subject to certain conditions precedent, including regulatory approvals and the final approval by the Board.

Certain abbreviations or acronyms used in the text and notes are defined below:

1

Entergy operates primarily through two business segments: Utility and Non-Utility Nuclear.

• Utility generates, transmits, distributes, and sells electric power in a four-state service territory that includes portions of Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana, including the City of New Orleans; and operates a small natural gas distribution business.
• Non-Utility Nuclear owns and operates six nuclear power plants located in the northern United States and sells the electric power produced by those plants primarily to wholesale customers. This business also provides services to other nuclear power plant owners.

In addition to its two primary, reportable, operating segments, Entergy also operates the non-nuclear wholesale assets business. The non-nuclear wholesale assets business sells to wholesale customers the electric power produced by power plants that it owns while it focuses on improving performance and exploring sales or restructuring opportunities for its power plants.

In November 2007, the Board approved a plan to pursue a separation of the Non-Utility Nuclear business from Entergy through a tax-free spin-off of the Non-Utility Nuclear business to Entergy shareholders. Enexus Energy Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy and formerly referred to as SpinCo, will be a new, separate, and publicly-traded company. In addition, under the plan, Enexus and Entergy are expected to enter into a nuclear services business joint venture, EquaGen L.L.C., with 50% ownership by Enexus and 50% ownership by Entergy. The EquaGen board of members will be comprised of equal membership from both Entergy and Enexus.

Upon completion of the spin-off, Entergy Corporation's shareholders will own 100% of the common stock in both Enexus and Entergy. Entergy expects that Enexus' business will be substantially comprised of Non-Utility Nuclear's assets, including its six nuclear power plants, and Non-Utility Nuclear's power marketing operation. Entergy Corporation's remaining business will primarily be comprised of the Utility business. EquaGen is expected to operate the nuclear assets owned by Enexus. EquaGen is also expected to offer nuclear services to third parties, including decommissioning, plant relicensing, plant operations, and ancillary services.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., the current NRC-licensed operator of the Non-Utility Nuclear plants, filed an application in July 2007 with the NRC seeking indirect transfer of control of the operating licenses for the six Non-Utility Nuclear power plants, and supplemented that application in December 2007 to incorporate the planned business separation. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., which is expected to be wholly-owned by EquaGen, will remain the operator of the plants after the separation.  Entergy Operations, Inc., the current NRC-licensed operator of Entergy's five Utility nuclear plants, will remain a wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy and will continue to be the operator of the Utility nuclear plants. In the December 2007 supplement to the NRC application, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. provided additional information regarding the spin-off transaction, organizational structure, technical and financial qualifications, and general corporate information. The NRC published a notice in the Federal Register establishing a period for the public to submit a request for hearing or petition to intervene in a hearing proceeding. The NRC notice period expired on February 5, 2008 and two petitions to intervene in the hearing proceeding were filed before the deadline. Each of the petitions opposes the NRC's approval of the license transfer on various grounds, including contentions that the approval request is not adequately supported regarding the basis for the proposed structure, the adequacy of decommissioning funding, and the adequacy of financial qualifications. Entergy submitted answers to the petitions on March 31 and April 8, and the NRC or a presiding officer designated by the NRC will determine whether a hearing will be granted. If a hearing is granted, the NRC is expected to issue a procedural schedule providing for limited discovery, written testimony and a legislative-type hearing. Under the NRC's procedural rules for license transfer approvals, the NRC Staff will continue to review the application, prepare a Safety Evaluation Report and issue an approval or denial without regard to whether a hearing request is pending or has been granted. Thus, resolution of the hearing requests is not a prerequisite to obtaining the required NRC approval.

3

On January 28, 2008, Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. requested approval from the Vermont Public Service Board for the indirect transfer of control, consent to pledge assets, issue guarantees and assign material contracts, amendment to certificate of public good, and replacement of guaranty and substitution of a credit support agreement for Vermont Yankee. Two Vermont utilities that buy power from Vermont Yankee, the regional planning commission for the area served by Vermont Yankee, a municipality in which the Vermont Yankee training center is located, the union that represents certain Vermont Yankee employees, and two unions that represent certain employees at the Pilgrim plant in Massachusetts petitioned to intervene. Entergy opposed intervention by the Pilgrim unions but did not object to the other intervention requests, and the Pilgrim unions' petition to intervene was denied. The Vermont Public Service Board adopted a procedural schedule that includes hearings in July 2008 and final briefing in August 2008.

On May 7, 2008, the Vermont governor vetoed legislation approved by the Vermont General Assembly in its 2008 session that would have required Entergy to fund, beyond current NRC requirements, the decommissioning trust fund for Vermont Yankee as a precondition to the Vermont Public Service Board's approval of the spin-off transaction. The legislation would have required a determination that Vermont Yankee's decommissioning trust fund and other funds and financial guarantees available solely for the purpose of decommissioning were adequate to pay for a complete and immediate decommissioning of Vermont Yankee as of the date of any acquisition of control, including Enexus Energy's acquisition of control of Vermont Yankee in connection with the spin-off transaction.

On January 28, 2008, Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., and corporate affiliate NewCo (now named Enexus) filed a petition with the New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) requesting a declaratory ruling regarding corporate reorganization or in the alternative an order approving the transaction and an order approving debt financing. Petitioners also requested confirmation that the corporate reorganization will not have an effect on Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick's, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2's, Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3's, and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.'s status as lightly regulated entities in New York, given that they will continue to be competitive wholesale generators. The New York Attorney General has filed an objection to the separation of Enexus from Entergy and to the transfer of the FitzPatrick and the two Indian Point nuclear power plants, arguing that the debt associated with the separation could threaten access to adequate financial resources for Enexus' nuclear power plants, that Entergy could potentially be able to terminate revenue sharing agreements with the New York Power Authority (NYPA), the entity from which Entergy purchased the FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 nuclear power plants, and because the New York Attorney General believes Entergy must file an environmental impact statement assessing the proposed corporate restructuring. The Office of the County Executive of Westchester County, New York and Riverkeeper, Inc. also filed comments on Entergy's petition. Entergy submitted a responsive filing to the NYPSC on April 29, 2008, responding to the comments filed by the New York Attorney General, the Office of the County Executive of Westchester County, New York, and Riverkeeper.

4

Subject to market terms and conditions and pursuant to the plan, Enexus is expected to incur up to $4.5 billion of debt in the form of publicly or privately issued debt securities. Entergy expects Enexus to transfer to Entergy up to approximately $4.0 billion in the form of either cash proceeds from the issuance of debt securities or a portion of such debt securities, or both, in partial consideration for Entergy's transfer to Enexus of the Non-Utility Nuclear business. Entergy expects to use Enexus debt securities to reduce or retire Entergy debt by exchanging Enexus debt with certain holders of Entergy debt, and also expects to use proceeds from Enexus for share repurchases or other corporate purposes.  The amount to be paid to Entergy, the amount and term of the debt Enexus will incur, and the type of debt and entity that will incur the debt have not been finally determined, but will be determined prior to the separation. A number of factors could affect this final determination, and the amount of debt ultimately incurred could be different from the amount disclosed. Additionally, Entergy expects Enexus to enter into one or more credit facilities or other financing arrangements intended to support Enexus' working capital needs, collateral obligations, and other corporate needs arising from hedging and normal course of business requirements.

Entergy is targeting around the end of third quarter 2008 as the effective date for the spin-off and EquaGen transactions to be completed. Entergy expects the transactions to qualify for tax-free treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes for both Entergy and its shareholders, and Entergy submitted a private letter ruling request to the IRS in April 2008 regarding the tax-free treatment. Final terms of the transactions and spin-off completion are subject to several conditions, including the final approval of the Board. As Entergy pursues completion of the separation and establishment of EquaGen, Entergy will continue to consider possible modifications to and variations upon the transaction structure, including a sponsored spin-off, a partial initial public offering preceding the spin-off, or the addition of a third-party joint venture partner.

5

As a result of the effects of Hurricane Katrina and the effect of extensive flooding that resulted from levee breaks in and around the New Orleans area, on September 23, 2005, Entergy New Orleans filed a voluntary petition in bankruptcy court seeking reorganization relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. On May 7, 2007, the bankruptcy judge entered an order confirming Entergy New Orleans' plan of reorganization, and the plan became effective on May 8, 2007. See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the significant terms of Entergy New Orleans' plan of reorganization.

With confirmation of the plan of reorganization, Entergy reconsolidated Entergy New Orleans, retroactive to January 1, 2007. Because Entergy owns all of the common stock of Entergy New Orleans, reconsolidation does not affect the amount of net income that Entergy recorded from Entergy New Orleans' operations for the current or prior periods, but does result in Entergy New Orleans' financial results being included in each individual income statement line item in 2007, rather than only its net income being presented as "Equity in earnings of unconsolidated equity affiliates," as will remain the case for 2005 and 2006.

Following are income statement variances for Utility, Non-Utility Nuclear, Parent & Other, and Entergy comparing the first quarter 2008 to the first quarter 2007 showing how much the line item increased or (decreased) in comparison to the prior period:

Refer to "ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES - SELECTED OPERATING RESULTS" for further information with respect to operating statistics.

6

The base revenues variance is primarily due to the interim surcharge to collect $10 million in under-recovered incremental purchased capacity costs incurred through July 2007 in Texas. The surcharge was collected over a two-month period beginning February 2008. The incremental capacity recovery rider and PUCT approval is discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K. The variance is also due to a formula rate plan increase effective July 2007 at Entergy Mississippi.

The purchased power capacity variance is due to the amortization of deferred capacity costs and is offset in base revenues due to the incremental purchased capacity costs recovered through the interim surcharge, as discussed above.

Net revenue increased for Non-Utility Nuclear from $422 million for the first quarter 2007 to $625 million for the first quarter 2008 primarily due to higher pricing in its contracts to sell power, additional production resulting from the acquisition of the Palisades plant in April 2007, and fewer outage days. Palisades contributed $78 million of net revenue in the first quarter 2008. Included in the Palisades net revenue is $19 million of amortization of the Palisades purchased power agreement liability, which is discussed in Note 15 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K. Following are key performance measures for Non-Utility Nuclear for the first quarter 2008 and 2007:

Other operation and maintenance expenses increased from $408 million for the first quarter 2007 to $420 million for the first quarter 2008 primarily due to:

• an increase of $13 million in fossil expenses primarily due to higher costs for plant maintenance outages as a result of differing outage schedules for 2008 compared to 2007; and
• an increase of $11 million in storm damage charges as a result of several storms hitting Entergy Arkansas' service territory in the first quarter 2008. Entergy Arkansas discontinued regulatory storm reserve accounting beginning July 2007 as a result of the APSC order issued in Entergy Arkansas' rate case. As a result, non-capital storm expenses are charged to other operation and maintenance expenses.

The increase was partially offset by a decrease of $8 million in payroll, payroll-related, and benefits costs and a decrease of $4 million in legal costs incurred.

Other operation and maintenance expenses increased from $147 million for the first quarter 2007 to $182 million for the first quarter 2008 primarily due to the acquisition of the Palisades plant in April 2007. Other operation and maintenance expenses associated with the Palisades plant were $29 million in the first quarter 2008.

Other income decreased primarily due to a reduction in the allowance for equity funds used during construction in the Utility due to a revision in the first quarter 2007 related to removal costs. Also contributing to the decrease were various other individually insignificant factors.

See "MANAGEMENT'S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources" in the Form 10-K for a discussion of Entergy's capital structure, capital expenditure plans and other uses of capital, and sources of capital. Following are updates to that discussion.

Net debt consists of debt less cash and cash equivalents. Debt consists of notes payable, capital lease obligations, and long-term debt, including the currently maturing portion. Capital consists of debt, common shareholders' equity, and preferred stock without sinking fund. Net capital consists of capital less cash and cash equivalents. Entergy uses the net debt to net capital ratio in analyzing its financial condition and believes it provides useful information to its investors and creditors in evaluating Entergy's financial condition.

9

As discussed in the Form 10-K, Entergy Corporation has in place a $3.5 billion credit facility that expires in August 2012. Entergy Corporation has the ability to issue letters of credit against the total borrowing capacity of the facility. As of March 31, 2008, amounts outstanding under the credit facility are:

Entergy Corporation's credit facility requires it to maintain a consolidated debt ratio of 65% or less of its total capitalization. If Entergy fails to meet this ratio, or if Entergy or one of the Utility operating companies (except Entergy New Orleans) defaults on other indebtedness or is in bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, an acceleration of the facility's maturity date may occur.

See the table and discussion in the Form 10-K under "MANAGEMENT'S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Capital Expenditure Plans and Other Uses of Capital," that sets forth the amounts of planned construction and other capital investments by operating segment for 2008 through 2010. Following is an update to the discussion in the Form 10-K.

The preconstruction and operating air permits for the Little Gypsy repowering project was issued by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) in November 2007 under then-effective federal and state air regulations, including the EPA's Clean Air Mercury Rule that had been issued in 2005 (CAMR 2005). As discussed in more detail in part I, Item 1, "Environmental Regulation, Clean Air Act and Subsequent Amendments, Hazardous Air Pollutants" in the Form 10-K, in February 2008 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down CAMR 2005. The D.C. Circuit decision may require utilities to undergo a case-by-case Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) analysis for construction or reconstruction of emission units pursuant to the Clean Air Act before beginning construction. The Little Gypsy project as currently configured is expected to meet MACT standards. Because Little Gypsy received its construction permit before a formal MACT analysis was required, however, Entergy Louisiana will likely need to provide additional technical analysis to the LDEQ to show that the plant meets the MACT standards. Entergy Louisiana is in discussions with state and federal environmental agencies to identify the additional analysis that needs to be submitted. Onsite construction of the project was scheduled to begin in July 2008, but the additional analysis could cause a delay in the start of construction for several months. The ALJ in Phase II of the Little Gypsy proceedings at the LPSC, which are discussed further in the Form 10-K, has temporarily suspended the procedural schedule, subject to the LPSC's review, which could occur at its May 14, 2008 meeting.

The short-term borrowings of the Registrant Subsidiaries and certain other Entergy subsidiaries are limited to amounts authorized by the FERC. The current FERC-authorized limits are effective through March 31, 2010, as established by a FERC order issued March 31, 2008 (except for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Texas, which are effective through November 8, 2009, as established by an earlier FERC order). See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy's short-term borrowing limits.

10

In August and September 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused catastrophic damage to large portions of the Utility's service territory in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, including the effect of extensive flooding that resulted from levee breaks in and around the greater New Orleans area. The storms and flooding resulted in widespread power outages, significant damage to electric distribution, transmission, and generation and gas infrastructure, and the loss of sales and customers due to mandatory evacuations and the destruction of homes and businesses. Entergy has pursued a broad range of initiatives to recover storm restoration and business continuity costs, including obtaining reimbursement of certain costs covered by insurance and pursuing recovery through existing or new rate mechanisms regulated by the FERC and local regulatory bodies, including the issuance of securitization or bonds. See Note 2 to the financial statements herein for an update regarding Entergy Gulf States Louisiana's and Entergy Louisiana's storm cost financing efforts. Following is an update regarding Entergy's insurance claims.

See Note 8 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for a discussion of Entergy's conventional property insurance program and its Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita claims. In April 2008, Entergy received from its primary insurer $53.6 million of additional insurance proceeds on its Hurricane Katrina claim, and all of the April 2008 proceeds were allocated to Entergy New Orleans.

As shown in Entergy's Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, cash flows for the three months ended March 31, 2008 and 2007 were as follows:

Entergy's cash flow provided by operating activities decreased by $45 million for the three months ended March 31, 2008 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2007. Following are cash flows from operating activities by segment:

• Utility provided $168 million in cash from operating activities in 2008 compared to providing $335 million in 2007 primarily due to decreased collection of deferred fuel costs.
• Non-Utility Nuclear provided $340 million in cash from operating activities in 2008 compared to providing $216 million in 2007, primarily due to an increase in net revenue, partially offset by an increase in operation and maintenance costs associated with the acquisition of the Palisades power plant in April 2007.
• Parent & Other used approximately $60 million in cash from operating activities in both 2008 and 2007.

11

Net cash used in investing activities increased by $321 million for the three months ended March 31, 2008 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2007 primarily due to the following activity:

• Construction expenditures were $71 million higher in 2008 than in 2007, primarily due to increased spending on various projects by the Utility that are discussed further in "Capital Expenditure Plans" in the Form 10-K.
• In March 2008, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana purchased the Calcasieu Generating Facility, a 322 MW simple-cycle, gas-fired power plant located near the city of Sulphur in southwestern Louisiana, for approximately $56.4 million.
• Non-Utility Nuclear made a $72 million payment to NYPA under the value sharing agreement associated with the acquisition of the Fitzpatrick and Indian Point 3 power plants. See Note 8 to the financial statements in the Form 10-K for additional discussion of the value sharing agreement.
• Entergy Mississippi realized proceeds in 2007 from $100 million of investments held in trust that were received from a bond issuance in 2006 and used to redeem bonds in 2007.

Net cash used in financing activities increased by $39 million for the three months ended March 31, 2008 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2007. The following significant financing cash flow activity occurred in the first quarters of 2008 and 2007:

• Entergy Corporation increased the net borrowings under its credit facilities by $225 million in the first quarter 2008 and by $615 million in the first quarter 2007. See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the Entergy Corporation credit facilities.
• Entergy Corporation repaid $87 million of notes payable at their maturity in March 2008.
• Entergy Mississippi redeemed $100 million of first mortgage bonds in 2007.
• Entergy Corporation repurchased $158 million of its common stock in the first quarter 2008 and $558 million of its common stock in the first quarter 2007.
• Entergy Corporation increased the dividend on its common stock. The dividend was $0.54 per share for the first quarter 2007 and $0.75 per share for the first quarter 2008.

See "MANAGEMENT'S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Significant Factors and Known Trends" in the Form 10-K for discussions of rate regulation, federal regulation, and market and credit risk sensitive instruments. Following are updates to the information provided in the Form 10-K.

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of federal regulatory proceedings. Following are updates to that discussion.

Production Cost Equalization Proceeding Commenced by the LPSC

See the Form 10-K for a discussion of the June 2005 FERC decision in the System Agreement litigation that had been commenced by the LPSC, which was essentially affirmed in the FERC's decision in a December 2005 order on rehearing. The LPSC, APSC, MPSC, and the

12

AEEC appealed the FERC's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Entergy and the City of New Orleans intervened in the various appeals. The D.C. Circuit issued its decision in April 2008. The D.C. Circuit affirmed the FERC's decision in most respects, but remanded the case to the FERC for further proceedings and reconsideration of its conclusion that it was prohibited from ordering refunds and its determination to implement the bandwidth remedy commencing with calendar year 2006 production costs (with the first payments/receipts commencing in June 2007), rather than commencing the remedy on June 1, 2005. The D.C. Circuit concluded the FERC had failed so far in the proceeding to offer a reasoned explanation regarding these issues.

Rough Production Cost Equalization Rates

The intervenor AmerenUE has argued that its current wholesale power contract with Entergy Arkansas, pursuant to which Entergy Arkansas sells power to AmerenUE, does not permit Entergy Arkansas to flow through to AmerenUE any portion of Entergy Arkansas' bandwidth payment.  According to AmerenUE, Entergy Arkansas has sought to collect from AmerenUE approximately $14.5 million of the 2007 Entergy Arkansas bandwidth payment.  The AmerenUE contract is scheduled to expire in August 2009. In April 2008, AmerenUE filed a complaint with the FERC seeking refunds of this amount, plus interest, in the event the FERC ultimately determines that bandwidth payments are not properly recovered under the AmerenUE contract.

In the FERC's April 2006 order that approved Entergy's ICT proposal, the FERC stated that the weekly procurement process (WPP) must be operational within approximately 14 months of the FERC order, or June 24, 2007, or the FERC may reevaluate all approvals to proceed with the ICT.  The Utility operating companies have been working with the ICT and a software vendor to develop the software and systems necessary to implement the WPP. The Utility operating companies also filed with the FERC in April 2007 a request to make certain corrections and limited modifications to the current WPP tariff provisions. The Utility operating companies have filed status reports with the FERC notifying the FERC that, due to unexpected issues with the development of the WPP software and testing, the WPP is still not operational. The Utility operating companies filed a revised tariff with the FERC on January 31, 2008 to address issues identified during the testing of the WPP. The Utility operating companies requested the FERC to rule on the proposed amendments by April 30, 2008 and allow them to go into effect May 11, 2008, following which the WPP would be expected to become operational. In May 2008, the FERC determined it would be premature to implement the WPP on May 11, 2008 as the WPP has not been shown to be just and reasonable. Accordingly, the FERC conditionally accepted and suspended Entergy's proposed tariff amendments for five months from the requested effective date, to become effective October 11, 2008, or on an earlier date, subject to refund and subject to a further order on proposed tariff revisions directed to be filed in the order.

13

The FERC stated that it will consider allowing an effective date earlier than October 11, 2008, if the ICT agrees that the model is ready and Entergy files the required tariff revisions no later than 60 days before that date. The FERC also denied the requests for a technical conference at this time and indicated it will reassess the need for such a technical conference after the WPP is functioning.

Power Generation

As discussed more fully in the Form 10-K, the sale of electricity from the power generation plants owned by Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear business, unless otherwise contracted, is subject to the fluctuation of market power prices. Following is an updated summary of the amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' output that is sold forward as of March 31, 2008 under physical or financial contracts (2008 represents the remaining three quarters of the year):

Some of the agreements to sell the power produced by Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear power plants contain provisions that require an Entergy subsidiary to provide collateral to secure its obligations under the agreements. The Entergy subsidiary is required to provide collateral based upon the difference between the current market and contracted power prices in the regions where Non-Utility Nuclear sells power. The primary form of collateral to satisfy these requirements is an Entergy Corporation guaranty.  Cash and letters of credit are also acceptable forms of collateral.  At March 31, 2008, based on power prices at that time, Entergy had in place as collateral $899 million of Entergy Corporation guarantees for wholesale transactions, including $63 million of guarantees that support letters of credit. The assurance requirement associated with Non-Utility Nuclear is estimated to increase by an amount of up to $328 million if gas prices increase $1 per MMBtu in both the short- and long-term markets. In the event of a decrease in Entergy Corporation's credit rating to below investment grade, Entergy will be required to replace Entergy Corporation guarantees with cash or letters of credit under some of the agreements.

In addition to selling the power produced by its plants, the Non-Utility Nuclear business sells installed capacity to load-serving distribution companies in order for those companies to meet requirements placed on them by the ISO in their area. Following is a summary of the amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' installed capacity that is currently sold forward, and the blended amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business'

14

planned generation output and installed capacity that is currently sold forward as of March 31, 2008 (2008 represents the remaining three quarters of the year):

As of March 31, 2008, approximately 96% of Non-Utility Nuclear's counterparty exposure from energy and capacity contracts is with counterparties with public investment grade credit ratings.

See "MANAGEMENT'S FINANCIAL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - Critical Accounting Estimates" in the Form 10-K for a discussion of the estimates and judgments necessary in Entergy's accounting for nuclear decommissioning costs, unbilled revenue, impairment of long-lived assets, qualified pension and other postretirement benefits, and other contingencies.

In March 2008 the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 161 "Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133" (SFAS 161), which requires enhanced disclosures about an entity's derivative and hedging activities. SFAS 161 requires qualitative disclosures about objectives and strategies for using derivatives, quantitative disclosures about fair value amounts of and gains and losses on derivative instruments, and disclosures about credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative agreements. SFAS 161 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008.

15

16

(Page left blank intentionally)

17

19

21