1 2006 Long-Term RFP ENTERGY SERVICES, INC. February 2006 This presentation summarizes certain matters related to ESI’s 2006 Long-Term Request for Proposals

1

2006 Long-Term RFP

ENTERGY SERVICES, INC.

February 2006

This presentation summarizes certain matters related to ESI’s 2006 Long-Term Request for Proposals (as it may be amended or modified, the “2006 Long-Term RFP”).

2

Agenda Items

Introductions ESI’s RFP Process Overview Fall 2004 RFP Results RFP Process Safeguards Overview of Resource Plan 2006 Long-Term RFP Overview Proposal Evaluation Process Credit Analysis Proposal Submission Process Question and Answer Session

ESI requests that all questions be submitted in writing so as to allow ESI the ability to provide written responses which will be made accessible to all parties on the RFP website. ESI will respond orally to some questions during the Question and Answer Session today. However, to the extent that ESI also provides a written response to any question, the written response will be deemed to supersede any information provided orally.

3

Introductions

Entergy Services, Inc.

– Bill Mohl VP, Commercial Operations

– Tony Walz Director, Planning & Analysis

– Mark Strength Manager, Supply Procurement

– Charles DeGeorge Manager, Supply Planning & Analysis

– Lee Kellough Manager, Transmission Engineering

– Cory Burton Wholesale Executive

– Tom Moran VP, Credit Risk

– Laura Berryman RFP Administrator

Independent Monitors

– Process IM Elizabeth Benson, Energy Associates

– Evaluation IM Potomac Economics (David Patton, Robert Sinclair, Michael Chiasson)

4

ESI’s RFP Process

Overview

5

ESI’s Market-Based Resource Procurement Process Overview

Designed to support ESI’s resource planning objective to provide a portfolio of low-cost, reliable resources matched to both the near-term and long-term supply needs of Entergy System customers

Supply Procurement Process

– Formalized RFPs will be issued in accordance with regulatory requirements and policies, including the LPSC’s Market-Based Mechanisms Order

– Formalized RFPs will seek resources on an as-needed basis

– Formalized RFPs complement ESI’s on-going procurements via short-term purchases (e.g., one year or less) from the market

– Formalized RFPs seek to meet reliability and economic objectives, and limit exposure to fuel and market risks and uncertainties

Types of Resource Supply Roles

– Baseload (e.g., solid fuel)

– Dispatchable/Load-following (e.g., CCGT)

– Peaking/Reserve

6

ESI Resource Procurement Options Summary

Formal RFP Products

– Limited-term MUCPA/MUCCO, LD (1-3 year)

– Asset acquisition or long-term purchase from existing generation resources

– Acquisition, ownership position, or long-term purchase from new generation resources

– ESI also has committed to seek intermediate-term products on behalf of at least EGS and ELL in an RFP later this year

Ongoing short-term purchase process

– Annual Plan Products (e.g., call options, 5x16 block energy purchases)

– Weekly and Monthly RFP Products

– Hourly and Day-ahead Purchases

Self-Build/Self-Supply Options

– Identify and execute (when and if appropriate) “Real Options” for self-build and/or self-supply opportunities including:

» New Opportunities

» Repowering

» Upgrades of existing facilities

7

Market-Based Mechanisms (MBM) Overview

Key points and LPSC requirements for RFP process

– 60 days notice required prior to filing draft RFP

– 75 days notice required for review/settlement for draft RFP for long-term products

– Independent Monitor should be enlisted to ensure no undue preference to affiliate bids or self-build/self-supply options

– Documentation of procedures to enforce codes of conduct in handling of affiliate bids

– If self-build/self-supply options exist, they must be identified at the time the draft RFP is issued and provide cost support data

– Collaborative process regarding evaluation criteria between ESI, IM, LPSC, and Bidders

– Documentation of how transmission capability and costs will be evaluated

– MBM calls for part or all IM costs to be recovered through bid fees (capped at $5,000/bid)

Market Participation and Input Encouraged on Front-End

8

Market Collaborative re: Competitive Procurement Processes

From June through November 2005, the LPSC Staff conducted “a collaborative to study barriers that may exist to robust competition in the wholesale generation markets in the Entergy region”

The following companies participated in the collaborative:

Entergy Louisiana

Entergy Gulf States

Cleco Power

Calpine Corporation

Entegra Power

Apex Power

LS Power / Plum Point

Cottonwood Energy

Marathon Oil

Bayou Steel

NRG

Suez Energy Marketing

Longacre Partners

During the collaborative, the parties succeeded in defining and largely resolving eight issues pertaining to this RFP

9


Resolutions reached by participants

1. Timing of next RFP

– 60-day notice issued 11/30/05; draft posted as planned on 1/31/06

– Issue resolved

2. Selection of IM

– Two new IMs were selected for this RFP, including one IM that was suggested by various merchants

– Issue resolved

3. Transmission evaluation of proposals

– Merchants requested more transparency in the methodology

– New procedures have been developed by ESI, including posting load flow cases and input files on RFP website

– Issue resolved for purposes of the collaborative; market participants are invited to comment on ESI’s proposed methodology through RFP comment process

10


Resolutions reached by participants (cont’d)

4. Credit/collateral requirements

– Some merchants urged flexibility with regard to requirements

– ESI agreed to consider alternate forms of collateral (Appendix F reflects flexibility regarding collateral types)

– Discussions resulted in a substantial narrowing of differences; market participants are invited to comment on ESI’s proposed methodology through RFP comment process

5. Use of debt imputation

– Debt imputation will not be used in Stage 1 of the evaluation process

– Although the issue was not fully resolved, substantial progress in narrowing differences was made

6. RFP planning information

– Some merchants requested that information on the Entergy System resource plan be provided in the RFP

– ESI provided a description of the Entergy System’s Strategic Supply Resource Plan in the Draft RFP (Appendix H)

– Issue resolved

11


Resolutions reached by participants (cont’d)

7. Power plant retirement

– In response to Staff requests, the Draft RFP:

» states that ESI will examine the potential for proposed resources to displace existing resources in addition to seeking incremental baseload and load-following capacity

» includes a status report on “Downstream of Gypsy” project

8. Product types

– Merchants have expressed interest in offering 5 to 10 year PPA products

– Although there is a preference for long-term resources, proposals with a shorter Delivery Term will not be rejected as non-conforming in the 2006 Long-Term RFP

– ESI also has committed to seek intermediate-term products on behalf of at least EGS and ELL in an RFP later this year

While not all of these issues were fully resolved in the collaborative, the parties regarded the progress achieved to be substantial

12

Other Key Elements of the 2006 Long-Term RFP

Self-build / self-supply options are being considered in this RFP

– Solid Fuel self-build option in the Amite South planning region of the Entergy System

ESI is no longer considering a load-following CCGT self-supply project for EAI in this RFP

Entergy Competitive Affiliates are allowed to participate in this RFP

Proposal submittal fees will be required for each registered proposal

No Bidder will be excluded or prohibited from participating in this RFP on the basis of credit

Proposals from QFs will not be provided any form of preference or enjoy any priority of selection in the RFP based solely on their QF status

13

Fall 2004 RFPResults

14

RFP Response

Fall 2002 Supplemental Spring 2003 Fall 2003 Fall 2004

PROPOSALS

1-3 Years 68 24 44 137 83

Long-Term 23 n/a 30 n/a n/a

Other 42 n/a n/a n/a n/a

Total 133 24 74 137 83

BIDDERS 30 11 22 12 15

RESOURCES 45 13 40 18 18

CAPACITY (MW) 17,856 2,828* 17,950 5,315* 7,409*

Note: Non-conforming proposals are not included in the summary“n/a” indicates that the proposal type was not solicited

* Mutually exclusive capacity bid into multiple proposals

15

Summary of Contracts Resulting From Previous RFPs

RFP Short- term

3rd Party

Limited- term Affiliate

Limited-term

3rd Party

Long-term Affiliate

Long-term

3rd Party

Total

Fall 2002 0 MW 185-206 MWa 231 MW 101-121 MWb 718 MW 1,235-1,276 MW

January 2003 Supplemental

222 MW n/a n/a n/a n/a 222 MW

Spring 2003 n/a 0 MW 381 MW c 0 MW 381 MW

Fall 2003 n/a 0 MW 390 MW n/a n/a 390 MW

Fall 2004 n/a n/a 1,250 MW n/a n/a 1,250 MW

Total 222 MW 185-206 MW 2,252 MW 101-121 MW 718 MW 3,478-3,519 MW

These totals represent 17 different contracts with 11 different counterparties

AIncludes a conditional option to increase the capacity up to the upper bound of the range.bThe contracted capacity will increase from 101 MW to 121 MW in 2010.cIt should be noted that this table does not reflect (i) the River Bend 30% life-of-unit power purchase agreements totaling approximately 300 MW between EGS and ELL, and between EGS and ENO related to EGS’s unregulated portion of the River Bend nuclear station, which portion was formerly owned by Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. or (ii) the EAI wholesale base load capacity life-of-unit power purchase agreements totaling approximately 220 MW between EAI and ELL and between EAI and ENO related to the sale of a portion of EAI’s coal and nuclear base load resources (which were not included in retail rates) to ELL and ENO executed in 2003; or (iii) the 12 month agreements between EAI and EGS and between EAI and EMI relating to the sale of a portion of EAI’s coal and nuclear base load resources (which were not included in retail rates) to EGS executed in 2005, which agreements have been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) and, in the case of the agreement between EAI and EGS, by the LPSC. These resources were identified outside of the formal RFP process but were submitted as formal proposals in response to the Spring 2003 RFP, which confirmed the economic merits of these resources.

16Note: Purchases include Joint-Account Purchases, individual Operating Co. Purchases, and QF Put

ESI Gas/Oil Generation and Purchases 1999-2005

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Jan

-99

Ap

r-99

Jul-

99

Oct

-99

Jan

-00

Ap

r-00

Jul-

00

Oct

-00

Jan

-01

Ap

r-01

Jul-

01

Oct

-01

Jan

-02

Ap

r-02

Jul-

02

Oct

-02

Jan

-03

Ap

r-03

Jul-

03

Oct

-03

Jan

-04

Ap

r-04

Jul-

04

Oct

-04

Jan

-05

Ap

r-05

Jul-

05

Oct

-05

GW

h

Gas/Oil Generation Purchases Linear (Purchases)

17

2006 Long-Term RFPProcess Safeguards

18

RFP Process Safeguards

Independent Monitors

Code of Conduct

RFP Process Design and Implementation

Confidentiality Protections

19

Role of Independent Monitors

ESI has retained two Independent Monitors (IMs) to assist in the development of the RFP solicitation, evaluation and selection process in support of ESI’s efforts to ensure that the RFP and its evaluation process will be objective and impartial

– Process IM – Elizabeth Benson, Energy Associates

– Evaluation IM – Potomac Economics (David Patton, Robert Sinclair, Michael Chiasson)

The Independent Monitors also will monitor the design of the RFP and the conduct of the RFP solicitation, evaluation, selection and contract negotiation processes to provide an objective third-party perspective in support of ESI’s efforts to ensure that all proposals are treated in a consistent fashion and that no undue preference is provided to Entergy Competitive Affiliates or self-build/self-supply options

The specific roles of each IM are described in the Scope of Work Activities of the Independent Monitors that is posted on the RFP Website

20

RFP Process Safeguards

Code of Conduct

– All employees of ESI, any Entergy Operating Company, or any Entergy Competitive Affiliate, including those involved in the RFP process, must adhere to the appropriate Affiliate Rules and Codes of Conduct as applicable and further outlined in the RFP

– Link provided on ESI RFP website

Additional protocols

– Each RFP Proposal Evaluation Team is made up of designated personnel. Team composition is overseen by the Process IM

– ESI personnel involved with the 2006 Long-Term RFP evaluation process will adhere to the provisions of a confidentiality acknowledgement that governs access to and uses of information contained in proposals and proposal documents

– The Self-Build Commercial Team will be segregated from the RFP proposal evaluation process

RFP Process Design and Implementation

– Various elements of the RFP process have been designed to assure fair treatment of all Bidders (as described in the following slides)

21

RFP Process Safeguards Communications with ESI before Proposal Submission

All issues related to the RFP should be directed to Ms. Laura Berryman, the RFP Administrator

– Potential bidders wishing to communicate with the IMs may contact Ms. Benson

Any inquiries about the Entergy Transmission System should be directed to the Transmission Organization through the OASIS web site http://oasis.e-terrasolutions.com/OASIS/EES

Unapproved contact with ANY other ESI Employee for ANY purpose in connection with the RFP is prohibited, and may, depending on the circumstances, constitute grounds for disqualification

All questions from market participants relating to the RFP should be submitted through the question and answer process outlined in Section 2.5 of the RFP. The procedure for issuing questions regarding the transmission system is outlined in Section 2.6 of the RFP

ESI will have an RFP “Hotline” available from April 18th through May 19th to assist Bidders only with respect to technical questions regarding the electronic registration or proposal submission process

22

RFP Process Safeguards Data Segregation

The objective of the proposal segregation process is to limit data distribution on a “need-to-know basis” within the RFP evaluation teams, and to reduce to the extent possible the distribution of confidential information

Segregation of information obtained from proposals is performed automatically by electronic processing of all proposals

– Pre-formatted proposal data reports with information about proposals are prepared by the automated process prior to the distribution of reports to the evaluation teams

– This process captures relevant information submitted in “Special Considerations” fields

The proposal data reports are reviewed by the Process IM before distribution to the RFP evaluation teams

– This process supports the effort to keep the Bidder identity unknown to the RFP evaluation teams

Proposal data reports are limited to the data necessary for each team to perform its specific analysis

– Economic Evaluation requires details regarding dispatch flexibility, pricing, availability, and mutual exclusivity of the proposals

– Other evaluation processes require details regarding that specific area of evaluation (i.e., Fuel, Transmission, Credit)

23

RFP Process Safeguards Communication with Bidders During Evaluation

No communication with Bidders is expected during the initial evaluation process

– ESI retains the right to contact Bidders via the RFP Administrator to obtain clarification or request additional information

Bidders should direct any questions to the RFP Administrator

Any communication with Bidders will be under the supervision of the Process IM

24

RFP Process Safeguards Q&A Process

The objectives of the Question and Answer Process include the following:

– To ensure to the extent practicable that all Bidders have equal access to information that may be potentially relevant to their proposals

– To minimize the need for either ESI or Bidders to disclose confidential information

– To maintain to the maximum extent practicable the confidentiality of proprietary information that is disclosed in Bidders’ proposals or otherwise in connection with the RFP

– To ensure compliance with all applicable affiliate rules and codes of conduct and other information sharing rules

25

RFP Process Safeguards Q&A Process at Today’s Conference

At today’s conference, all questions will be submitted in writing

– Oral responses will be provided where practicable

– Written answers will be posted on the RFP Website

– Written answers may contain information different from, or in addition to, information provided orally at the Conference, in which case the written answer will supercede the oral response

26

2006 Long-Term RFP

Overview of Resource Plan

27

Supply Objectives

Risk Mitigation – Supply Diversity – Mitigate the exposure to major supply disruptions that could occur from concentrated or systematic risks, for example outages of a single generation facility

The supply needs that determine the resource requirements of the Operating Companies are driven by six basic resource supply objectives:

Provide adequate resources to meet customer peak demands with adequate reliability

Provide low cost baseload resources to serve baseload requirements (the firm load level that is expected to be exceeded for at least 85% of all hours per year)

Reliability

Provide efficient, dispatchable load-following resources to serve the time varying load shape levels that are above the base load requirement load levels

Provide a generation portfolio that is more efficient and avoids an over-reliance on aging resources

Mitigate the exposure to price volatility associated with uncertainties in fuel and purchased power costs

Production Cost – Baseload Supply Requirements

Risk Mitigation – Supply Diversity

Production Cost – Load Following Supply

Requirements

Generation Portfolio Enhancement

Risk Mitigation – Price Stability

System Resource Needs

28

Summary of Resource Requirements System Resource Needs

Summary System of Resource Needs(MWs)

SSRP anticipates 1500-3000 MWs of short-term and limited-term products acquired through ongoing RFP efforts.

Long-term and limited-term additions include resources added to the utility portfolio since the adoption of the SSRP.

Resources exclude short-term, seasonal, monthly and weekly purchases.

2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 24,956 25,917 26,760 27,919 28,820

RESOURCESLegacy Resources 20,703 20,917 20,809 20,809 20,809 Long-term Additions 1,811 1,811 1,831 1,831 1,831 Limited-Term Additions 889 - - - - TOTAL RESOURCES 23,403 22,728 22,640 22,640 22,640

REMAINING REQUIREMENTS 1,553 3,189 4,120 5,280 6,180

29

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

10,328

7,452

1,735

1,042

3,541 10,469

5,006

3,681

3,4731,439

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

Entergy System 2006 Resource Requirements and Capability

Intermediate

Peaking

Base

Reserves

Purchases

High CF LF

The following chart compares 2006 functional requirements for the Entergy System with long-term controlled resources.

Resources (MW) 7,452 1,042 10,469 3,681 22,644Requirement (MW) 10,328 1,735 3,541 8,479 24,083Excess / (Deficit) (MW) (2,877) (693) 6,928 (4,798) (1,439)

TotalBase Load HCFLF Intermediate Peaking Plus Reserve


Capacity (MWs)Load Shape Requirements (MWs)

Existing PortfolioRequirements

Existing intermediate units are capable of serving the Peaking/Reserve role

30

Key Considerations in Procurement Design

AMOUNT

Total resource requirement for 2006 exceeds long-term controlled resources by over 1400 MWs

System needs are increasing with load growth (~500 MWs/Year)

TYPE

The Entergy System determines the type of generation needed to serve its load shape requirements at the lowest reasonable cost given current expectations and supply options

System baseload requirement exceeds long-term controlled baseload resources by nearly 3000 MWs

– Solid Fuel resources are sought to address baseload needs – CCGT can serve baseload requirements economically under some circumstances

CCGT resources needed to serve load-following requirements

Current portfolio is highly gas correlated (about 50% on an energy basis)– Solid Fuel resources sought to increase fuel diversity and reduce exposure to fuel

price fluctuations


31

Two Distinct ProductsSystem Resource Needs

Solid Fuel

Production Cost – Baseload Risk Mitigation – Price Stability Risk Mitigation – Supply Diversity Reliability

Secondary Planning Objectives In Product Design

Load-following CCGT and baseload Solid Fuel products respond to distinct planning objectives

Production Cost – Load Following Generation Portfolio Enhancement Reliability

Gas-Fired CCGT

Generation Portfolio Enhancement

Production Cost – Baseload Risk Mitigation – Price Stability Generation Portfolio Enhancement

Primary Planning Objectives In Product Design

32

2006 LONG-TERM RFP

Overview

33

2006 Long-Term RFP - Highlights

ESI will accept written feedback from market participants and other interested parties on the draft RFP, provided that such comments are provided to the RFP Administrator by no later than March 17, 2006

Final RFP will be issued on or about April 17, 2006

– CCGT proposals will be due by 5:00 p.m. CPT on May 5, 2006

– Solid Fuel proposals will be due by 5:00 p.m. CPT on May 19, 2006

In accordance with the requirements of the LPSC’s Market-Based Mechanisms Order, ESI has retained Independent Monitors to oversee the design and implementation of this RFP and provide an objective third-party perspective

The electronic proposal submission process used in previous RFPs is used in this RFP as well to simplify the proposal submission process for Bidders and to help streamline and make ESI’s RFP evaluation process more efficient

» All proposals must be registered during Bidder Registration

ESI will have an RFP “Hotline” available during April 18th through May 19th to assist Bidders only with respect to technical questions regarding the electronic registration or proposal submission process

Long-term resource proposals are being requested in the 2006 Long-Term RFP

ESI intends to solicit intermediate-term products in an RFP later this year

34

RFP Participants –2006 Long-Term RFP

Potential RFP Participants

– Electric Utilities

– Marketers

– Wholesale Generators

– Independent Power Producers

– Qualifying Facilities

– Entergy Competitive Affiliates

35

CCGT Preliminary Shortlist Notification

9/15/06

Bidder RegistrationProcesscompleted

4/21/06

Final RFP Issued

On or about4/17/06

CCGT Proposals

Bidders Notified of Final Selection

12/01/06

CCGT Proposals Due

5/05/06

2006 Long-Term RFP Process Timeline

Evaluation & Negotiation

Tech. Conf.w/ LPSC &Bidder’s Conf.

Houston2/23/06

Solid Fuel Proposals

Execution of DefinitiveAgreements

4/13/07

CCGT Proposals

Execution ofDefinitive Agreements

2/01/07

Solid Fuel Proposals

Bidders Notified of Final Selection

1/14/07

Formal Solicitation Process

Payment of Proposal Submittal Fees

4/27/06

Solid FuelPreliminary Shortlist Notification

10/13/06

Solid FuelProposals Due

5/19/06

Timeline is subject to change

36

2006 Long-Term RFP Products

ESI is soliciting proposals from Bidders for long-term capacity provided by load-following combined cycle gas turbine (“CCGT”) generation resources and/or baseload Solid Fuel resources

– Load-Following CCGT » A load following resource should have scheduling or operational flexibility to respond to

changing load requirements and must be capable of cycling (i.e., start-up and shut-down) on a daily basis and operating across a range of utilization and output levels.

» The resource is expected to dispatch between the unit minimum (typically 30-40% of unit capability) and maximum in a timely manner based on short notice changes (with the notice period to be specified by contract), including hourly swings, start-ups and shutdowns.

» The ability of a unit to be placed on automatic generation control (“AGC”) is considered to contribute to the load-following capability of the resource, although AGC is not required.

» In addition, the resource must have available to it sufficient fuel supply arrangements in order to meet the dispatch requirements of a load-following resource.

– Baseload “Solid Fuel”

» (1) coal, lignite, nuclear, petroleum coke,

» (2) other thermal technologies, provided that any proposal for such other thermal technology provides fuel at a guaranteed fuel price, or

» (3) renewables

» Baseload resources are expected to be available and operate in most hours

37

2006 Long-Term RFP Products

Long-Term Non-Tolling PPA – Load-Following CCGT (Product Package A)

Long-Term Tolling PPA – Load-Following CCGT (Product Package B)

Ownership Acquisition – Load-Following CCGT (Product Package C)

Long-Term PPA – Baseload Solid Fuel (Product Package D)

Ownership Acquisition – Baseload Solid Fuel (Product Package E)

38

Long-Term Non-Tolling PPA – Load-Following CCGT (Product Package A)

Product

– Scheduling on a Day-Ahead and/or Intra-Day basis

– Buyer prefers a minimum Delivery Term of 20 years

– Start date of the proposed Delivery Term must occur no later than June 1, 2009; however, ESI prefers proposals with a Delivery Term Start Date as early as June 1, 2007

Capacity Quantity

– Minimum Capacity - one entire 1X1 CCGT train (~250 MW to 400 MW) or a portion of a 2x1 CCGT train

– For cogeneration units, neither ESI nor any Entergy Operating Company is obligated to assume responsibility for any host load requirements

Pricing

– Option Premium ($/kW-year)

– Fixed Heat Rate multiplied by Gas Price Index (Henry Hub or Houston Ship Channel)

– Variable O&M Payment in $/MWh

– Fixed Start-up Payment $/MW per Start Fuel

– Seller provides fuel

Term Sheet A of Appendix C summarizes the specific requirements for this product

39

Long-Term Tolling PPA – Load-Following CCGT (Product Package B)

Product

– Scheduling on a Day-Ahead and/or Intra-Day basis


– Start date of the proposed Delivery Term must occur no later than June 1, 2009; however, ESI prefers proposals with a Delivery Term Start Date as early as June 1, 2007

Capacity Quantity

– Minimum Capacity - one entire 1X1 CCGT train (~250 MW to 400 MW) Pricing


– Guaranteed Heat Rate, guaranteed by Seller within a +/- 3% bandwidth

– Variable O&M Payment in $/MWh

– Fixed Start-up Payment $/MW per Start Fuel

– Buyer provides fuel

– If the proposal is not for the entire facility, Seller must provide sufficient revenue quality metering to allow for the segregation of fuel and all electrical output associated with the Buyer’s generating unit or portion of the facility

Term Sheet B of Appendix C summarizes the specific requirements for this product

40

Ownership Acquisition – Load-Following CCGT (Product Package C)

Product

– Outright acquisition of a combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) generating unit

– Buyer requires 100% ownership of the generating unit and prefers to purchase existing operating assets

– The proposed generating unit in this product category must be operational by no later than June 1, 2009; however, ESI prefers proposals that currently are operational or will be operational as early as June 1, 2007

Capacity Quantity

– 100% of generating unit


Purchase Price

– Single fixed payment

Term Sheet C of Appendix C summarizes the specific requirements for this product

41

Long-Term PPA – Baseload Solid Fuel (Product Package D)

Product

– Scheduling on a real time basis


– The start date of the proposed Delivery Term must occur no later than December 31, 2012 Capacity Quantity

– Minimum Capacity - 50 MW


Pricing


– Fixed Heat Rate multiplied by the Fuel Price

– Variable O&M Payment in $/MWh Fuel

– Seller provides fuel

– A guaranteed fuel price is required if technology is something other than Coal, Petroleum Coke, Lignite, or Nuclear; if renewable, a guaranteed energy price is required

Term Sheet D of Appendix C summarizes the specific requirements for this product

42

Ownership Acquisition – Baseload Solid Fuel (Product Package E)

Product

– Outright acquisition of baseload Solid Fuel generating unit

– Buyer will accept partial ownership of the generating unit

– Buyer requires a Commercial Operation Date no later than December 31, 2012 Capacity Quantity

– Minimum Capacity - 50 MW


Purchase Price

– Single fixed payment

Term Sheet E of Appendix C summarizes the specific requirements for this product

43

Other Key Considerations

Regulatory Approvals

– All definitive agreements shall be conditioned upon receipt of regulatory approvals, including the recovery of the cost of the resource, acceptable to ESI in its sole discretion

– Potential for short-term bridge agreement

Contract Terms and Conditions

– Term Sheets detailing terms and conditions have been provided

– These Term Sheets are expected to serve as the basis for final contract negotiations and execution without any material changes

– Bidders should take the terms and conditions specified in these Term Sheets into consideration in the pricing of their proposals

44

2006 Long-Term RFP

Proposal Evaluation Process

45

Proposal Evaluation Process - Objective

The primary objective of the proposal evaluation is to identify the proposals that result in the highest benefit to Entergy System customers

The highest benefit is realized through proposals that

– Meet the supply objectives of the Entergy System

– Minimize total production cost

– Satisfy reliability criteria

Evaluation designed to be

– Fair

– Impartial

– Applied consistently

46

Stage 2

(EET)

Stage 1

(EET)

Proposal Evaluation Process – Overview

ILLUSTRATIVE

All Conforming Proposals

Screening Analysis ($/MWh)

Preliminary Shortlist

Net System Benefit (NPV $/MW)

Preliminary Due Diligence

Additional Evaluation

Final Shortlist

Final Selection & Awards

Negotiation &Comprehensive Due Diligence

Deliverability Evaluation (TAG)

Fuel Evaluation (FET)

47

Proposal Evaluation Process – Separate Evaluations

Evaluation of CCGT and Solid Fuel proposals will be performed separately

– Similar but distinct processes

– Proceed on different schedules

– Tools and assumptions may differ

Solid Fuel evaluation process will

– Require a longer evaluation period

– Allow for refinement of proposals

– Acknowledge that the development status will likely differ among proposals

– Consider development risk

48

Proposal Evaluation Process – Stage 1

Stage 1, Screening Analysis

Proposals will be ranked based on the levelized cost of each proposal expressed in $/MWh over the relevant planning horizon

– 20 years for CCGT proposals

– 30 years for Solid Fuel proposals

Operating assumptions will reflect the planned operating role

– High Capacity Factor Load Following for CCGT proposals

– Baseload for Solid Fuel proposals

Transmission deliverability benefits and costs will be considered

Resulting in Preliminary Shortlists for

– CCGT proposals

– Solid Fuel proposals

49

Proposal Evaluation Process – Stage 2

Stage 2, Detailed Evaluation

Proposals will be ranked based on the net system benefit of each proposal expressed in net present value $/MW added over the relevant planning horizon

– 20 years for CCGT proposals

– 30 years for Solid Fuel proposals Detailed fuel evaluation will be considered Effects of imputed debt for PPA proposals will be performed Normalizing term adjustment may apply

– January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2026 for CCGT proposals

– January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2036 for Solid Fuel proposals Terminal value consideration may apply Resulting in Final Shortlists for

– CCGT proposals

– Solid Fuel proposals

50

Proposal Evaluation Process – Deliverability Evaluation Overview

Proposals ultimately are expected to qualify as Long-Term Network Resources

Bidders will have access to the same information that SPO’s Transmission Analysis Group (“TAG”) uses to

– Identify whether potential constraints exist

– Estimate transmission upgrade costs

– Identify other potential constraint mitigation alternatives

Bidders may provide their best recommendation to alleviate potential constraints

TAG will consider the validity and estimated cost of any Bidder identified constraint mitigation recommendations

For each Candidate Proposal, TAG will submit SIS requests to TBU; however, if these results are not received in time, EET will use TAG-developed estimates to develop the Preliminary Shortlist

51

Proposal Evaluation Process – Initial Transmission Analysis

Initial Transmission Analysis

TAG will identify

– Proposals that exhibit relatively fewer potential constraints

– In which of the 4 planning regions the proposed resource is located

– Any potential benefits that may be derived from a proposal

» Relieving reliability must run constraints

» Providing counter-flow on constrained transmission elements

» Delaying approved transmission projects

TAG will provide this information to the EET for use in developing the

– Preliminary CCGT Shortlist

– Preliminary Solid Fuel Shortlist

52

Proposal Evaluation Process – Detailed Transmission Evaluation

Detailed Transmission Evaluation

TAG will identify potential alternatives to alleviate constraints that may prohibit a proposed resource from qualifying as a Long-Term Network Resource

– Transmission upgrades (long-term)

– Delisting of existing network resources (long-term & short-term)

– Counter-flow portfolio selection (short-term)

– Active transmission management (short-term)

TAG will develop Delivery Cost Adders for each viable mitigation alternative

TAG will determine the lowest cost mitigation alternative or combination of mitigation alternatives and will provide the associated Delivery Cost Adder to the EET for use in developing the

– Preliminary CCGT Shortlist

– Preliminary Solid Fuel Shortlist

53

2006 Long-Term RFP

Credit Analysis

54

Development of Credit Requirements

No Bidder will be excluded or prohibited from participating in this RFP on the basis of credit

Through the Market Collaborative process, companies have urged flexibility in collateral types

ESI has agreed to consider alternate forms of collateral including liens on assets

All Bidders have the same credit requirements from initial proposal submission, through Preliminary Shortlist, up to the signing of a Letter of Intent

55

Credit Requirements

None at time of Proposal Submission

None at time of Preliminary Shortlist

$2,000,000 Letter of Credit for all Bidders upon execution of a Letter of Intent

Credit support requirements per 100 MW at execution of Definitive Agreement

Solid Fuel:

Long-Term PPA $20 million per 100 MW contracted for life of contract

Acquisition $20 million per 100 MW contracted until close of acquisition

CCGT:

Long-Term PPA $10 million per 100 MW contracted for life of contract

Acquisition $10 million per 100 MW contracted until close of acquisition

Acceptable forms of collateral for consideration by ESI may include:– Parental Guaranty– Letters of Credit– Cash– Lien On Asset– Other acceptable solutions suggested by Bidder

56

Credit Review and Collateral Timeline

Bidder Credit Rating (or Bidder’s Credit Support Provider’s Credit Rating) will be assigned by the Credit Evaluation Team (CET) for all proposals when they are received

Based on Bidder Credit Rating, determine the Maximum Uncollateralized Supplier Exposure for each Bidder

– The Bidder Credit Rating and Maximum Uncollateralized Supplier Exposure has no impact on the selection of proposals to each Preliminary Shortlist

Credit exposures will be evaluated and discussed with Bidders who are selected for the Preliminary Shortlists. During the due diligence process that occurs after selection of the Preliminary Shortlists, Bidders will be asked to discuss the form(s) of collateralization to be offered for their proposal(s).

Upon execution of a Letter of Intent (“LOI”), each Bidder will be required to provide a letter of credit in the amount of $2,000,000. The parameters and levels of collateral required at the execution of a Definitive Agreement will be described and included in the executed LOI.

During the negotiation of the Definitive Agreement, ESI will determine the required form of the collateral requirements, if any, for the selected proposal. This requirement will be due at execution of a Definitive Agreement and the $2,000,000 letter of credit will be returned to the Bidder at that time.

57

2006 Long-Term RFP

Proposal Submission Process

58

Bidder Registration & Proposal Submission Sequence

Final RFP Posted to Website

Bidder prepares proposals*

ESI’s automated data review

After conclusion of Proposal Submission period, segregated data reports generated for evaluation by

RFP Proposal Evaluation Team

ESI’s automated data review

Bidder electronically submits Bidder

Registration Form (Appendix B) to ESI

Return email sent to Bidder by

ESI

Bidders electronically

submits proposals to ESI

ILLUSTRATIVE

Return email sent to Bidder by

ESI

These data reports are reviewed by Independent Monitor and RFP Administrator prior to distribution to RFP Proposal

Evaluation Team

Registrationconfirmed

Registrationrejected(incomplete)

Proposal confirmed

Proposalrejected(incompleteor invalid orNon-payment ofProposal Submittal Fee)

Bidder faxes executed Bidder Registration Form

to ESI

ESI sends Bidder the invoice(s) for proposal(s)

submitted

Bidder remits wire payment of the Proposal

Submittal Fee(s)

Appendix B – Bidder Registration

Appendix D – Proposal Submission

* Proposals must be registered and Proposal Submittal Fees paid to ESI no later than April 27, 2006

59

Electronic Bidder Registration Process

Proposal Submittal Fee

– Within two (2) Business Days of receiving the executed Bidder Registration Form, ESI will invoice Bidder, by Proposal Identification Number, the Proposal Submittal Fee that is due for each registered proposal

– Bidders will be invoiced a $5,000 Proposal Submittal Fee for the first registered proposal from a generating plant and $1,000 for each additional registered proposal from that same generating plant

– ESI must receive the Proposal Submittal Fee for each registered proposal no later than 5:00 p.m. CPT on April 27, 2006

60

Question & Answer Session

Documents

1 2006 Long-Term RFP ENTERGY SERVICES, INC. February 2006 This presentation summarizes certain matters related to ESI’s 2006 Long-Term Request for Proposals