Filings Under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as Amended (“Act”), 59379-59380 [E5-5580]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices
have a record of their service and
compensation furnished to SSA by RRB.
The applicable Privacy Act Systems of
Records used in the matching program
are as follows: RRB–5, Master File of
Railroad Employees’ Creditable
Compensation; RRB–22, Railroad
Retirement, Survivor, Pensioner Benefit
System; SSA/OSR, 09–60–0090, Master
Beneficiary Record (MBR); and SSA/
OSR, 09–60–0059, Master Earnings File
(MEF).
Inclusive Dates of the Matching
Program: The consolidated matching
program shall become effective no
sooner than 40 days after notice of the
matching program is sent to Congress
and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), or 30 days after
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register, whichever date is later. The
matching program will continue for 18
months from the effective date and may
be extended for an additional 12 months
thereafter, if certain conditions are met.
The notice we are giving here is in
addition to any individual notice.
A copy of this notice will be or has
been furnished to the Office of
Management and Budget and the
designated committees of both houses of
Congress.
Dated: October 4, 2005.
By Authority of the Board.
Beatrice Ezerski,
Secretary to the Board.
[FR Doc. 05–20371 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7905–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 35–28043]
Filings Under the Public Utility Holding
Company Act of 1935, as Amended
(‘‘Act’’)
October 5, 2005.
Notice is hereby given that the
following filing(s) has/have been made
with the Commission under provisions
of the Act and rules promulgated under
the Act. All interested persons are
referred to the application(s) and/or
declaration(s) for complete statements of
the proposed transaction(s) summarized
below. The application(s) and/or
declaration(s) and any amendment(s) is/
are available for public inspection
through the Commission’s Branch of
Public Reference.
Interested persons wishing to
comment or request a hearing on the
application(s) and/or declaration(s)
should submit their views in writing by
October 27, 2005, to the Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:48 Oct 11, 2005
Jkt 208001
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–9303, and serve a copy on the
relevant applicant(s) and/or declarant(s)
at the address(es) specified below. Proof
of service (by affidavit or, in the case of
an attorney at law, by certificate) should
be filed with the request. Any request
for hearing should identify specifically
the issues of facts or law that are
disputed. A person who so requests will
be notified of any hearing, if ordered,
and will receive a copy of any notice or
order issued in the matter. After October
27, 2005, the application(s) and/or
declaration(s), as filed or as amended,
may be granted and/or permitted to
become effective.
Entergy Corporation (70–9049; 70–9123;
70–10202)
Entergy Corporation (‘‘Entergy’’), 639
Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, LA
70113, a registered holding company,
has filed post-effective amendments to
its original declaration/applications
(‘‘Amended Declarations’’) under
sections 6(a), 7, 9(a), 10, 12(b),
12(c),13(b), 32 and 33 of the Act and
rules 42, 43, 45, 46, 53, 54, 83, 90 and
91 under the Act.
I. Existing Orders
By order dated June 22, 1999 (Holding
Company Act Release No. 27039; File
No. 70–9123) (‘‘Original Order’’) Entergy
was authorized, among other things, to
finance its exempt wholesale generator
(‘‘EWG’’) and foreign utility company
(‘‘FUCO’’) (collectively, ‘‘Exempt
Projects’’) investments by providing
guarantees and other forms of credit
support regarding the securities and
other obligations of these entities in an
aggregate amount not to exceed $750
million.
By order dated June 13, 2000 (Holding
Company Act Release No. 27184; File
No. 70–9049) (‘‘2000 Order’’) the
Original Order was modified to
authorize Entergy, among other things,
to issue securities for the purpose of
investing in Exempt Projects and to
provide credit support for the securities
and obligations of the Exempt Projects
to the extent that its ‘‘aggregate
investment’’ (as defined in rule 53 of the
Act) in the Exempt Projects did not
exceed 100% of its consolidated
retained earnings.
By order dated June 30, 2004 (Holding
Company Act Release No. 27864; File
No. 70–10202) (‘‘2004 Order’’) Entergy
was authorized, among other things, to
issue securities and use the proceeds
from the issuances to fund investments
in Exempt Projects, as long as the
‘‘aggregate investment’’ (as defined in
rule 53 of the Act) did not exceed 100%
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
59379
of Entergy’s consolidated retained
earnings as set forth in the 2000 Order.
II. Rule 54
The transactions approved in the
Original Order, 2000 Order and 2004
Order were each subject to the
provisions of rule 54 under the Act.
Rule 54 provides that, in determining
whether to approve the issue or sale of
any securities for purposes other than
the acquisition of any Exempt Projects
or other transactions unrelated to
Exempt Projects, the Commission shall
not consider the effect of the
capitalization or earnings of subsidiaries
of a registered holding company that are
EWGs or FUCOs if the requirements of
rule 53(a), (b) and (c) are satisfied.1
In the Amended Declarations, Entergy
states that it is ineligible for the safe
harbor provisions of rule 54 that were
relied upon by the Commission in
issuing the Original Order, 2000 Order
and 2004 Order because it no longer
satisfies the condition contained in rule
53(b)(1), as discussed below.2
Accordingly, Entergy requests authority
to issue and sell securities to continue
to finance the acquisition of EWGs or to
guarantee the security of an EWG when
the event described in rule 53(b)(1) of
the Act has occurred. Entergy must, in
1 Under rule 53(a), the Commission shall not
make certain specified findings under sections 7
and 12 in connection with a proposal by a holding
company to issue securities for the purpose of
acquiring the securities of, or other interest in, an
EWG, or to guarantee the securities of an EWG, if
each of the conditions in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(a)(4) are met, provided that none of the conditions
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of rule
53 exists.
2 Entergy states that all of the other criteria of rule
53(a) and (b) are satisfied, except with respect to
rule 53(a)(1). However, Entergy states that while its
‘‘aggregate investment’’ in Exempt Projects exceeds
the 50% of consolidated retained earnings
limitation of rule 53(a)(1), Entergy is in compliance
with the 2000 Order which allows Entergy to invest
up to 100% of its consolidated retained earnings in
Exempt Projects. As of June 30, 2005, Entergy’s
aggregate investment in Exempt Projects was
approximately $2.9 billion and was equal to
approximately 57% of Entergy’s consolidated
retained earnings of approximately $5 billion.
Entergy states that it has complied with, and will
continue to comply with, the record keeping
requirements of rule 53(a)(2), the limitation in rule
53(a)(3) on the use of Entergy system domestic
public utility subsidiary companies’ personnel in
rendering services to affiliated Exempt Projects, and
the requirements of rule 53(a)(4) concerning the
submission of certain filings and reports under the
Act to retail regulatory commissions.
Finally, none of the other conditions set forth in
rule 53(b) currently exists. Specifically, as required
by rule 53(b)(2), Entergy’s average consolidated
retained earnings for the four most recent quarterly
periods have not decreased by 10% from the
average for the previous four quarterly periods, and,
as required by rule 53 (b)(3), Entergy did not report
operating losses in its previous fiscal year
attributable to its investments in Exempt Projects in
excess of 5% of Entergy’s consolidated retained
earnings.
E:\FR\FM\12OCN1.SGM
12OCN1
59380
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices
accordance with rule 53(c), affirmatively
demonstrate that the issue and sale of a
security to finance the acquisition of an
EWG or the guarantee of a security of an
EWG will not have a substantial adverse
impact upon the financial integrity of
the registered holding company system
and will not have an adverse impact on
any utility subsidiary, its customers or
on the ability of State commissions to
protect the subsidiary or customers.
III. Rules 53(b)(1) and 53(c)
A. Rule 53(b)(1)
Rule 53(b)(1) states that the safe
harbor provided by the rule generally is
not available if: (1) The registered
holding company or any subsidiary
company having assets with book value
exceeding 10% or more of consolidated
retained earnings has been the subject of
a bankruptcy proceeding; (2) the average
consolidated retained earnings for the
four most recent quarterly periods have
decreased by 10% from the average for
the previous four quarterly periods and
the aggregate investment in EWGs and
FUCOs exceeds two percent of total
capital invested in utility operations; or
(3) in the previous fiscal year, the
registered holding company reported
operating losses attributable to its direct
or indirect investments in EWGs and
FUCOs, and the losses exceed an
amount equal to 5% of consolidated
retained earnings.
On September 23, 2005, Entergy New
Orleans, Inc. (‘‘ENO’’), a public utility
subsidiary of Entergy, filed a voluntary
petition for relief under Chapter 11 of
the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (‘‘Bankruptcy
Code’’) in the United States Bankruptcy
Court for the Eastern District of
Louisiana. The book value of ENO’s
assets exceeded 10% of Entergy’s
‘‘consolidated retained earnings’’ as of
June 30, 2005. Consequently, the
circumstances described in rule 53(b)(1)
have occurred.
The bankruptcy petition was
precipitated by the unanticipated and
devastating impact of Hurricane Katrina,
which destroyed substantial portions of
ENO’s facilities, disrupted its revenues,
and, with the evacuation of the City of
New Orleans (‘‘City’’), eliminated at
least in the short term, the quality of
ENO’s customer base, which is directly
linked to the fortunes of the City. ENO
is continuing in possession of its
properties and has continued to operate
its business as a debtor-in-possession
pursuant to sections 1107(a) and 1108 of
the Bankruptcy Code.3
3 On September 26, 2005, the Commission issued
an emergency order (Holding Company Act Release
No. 28036) authorizing Entergy and ENO to enter
into a secured $200 million credit facility and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:48 Oct 11, 2005
Jkt 208001
ENO’s most pressing concern, and the
immediate cause of its bankruptcy
filing, is the liquidity crisis resulting
from the hurricane’s severe disruption
to operations. ENO estimates that over
one hundred thousand of its customers
are presently unable to accept electric
and gas service, and will remain unable
to accept such service for a period of
time that cannot yet be determined.
Other customers in the New Orleans
area who have had their utility services
restored have been displaced by
Hurricane Katrina. The ordinary cycle of
customer payment of utility bills has
been shattered. As a result, ENO’s cash
receipts have been significantly below
normal levels since the hurricane.
B. Rule 53(c)
In accordance with rule 53(c), Entergy
believes that the transactions authorized
in the Original Order, 2000 Order and
2004 Order (to the extent they involve
the issuance of securities by Entergy to
finance the acquisition of EWGs), (i)
will not have a substantial adverse
impact upon Entergy’s financial
integrity and (ii) will not have an
adverse impact on Entergy’s utility
subsidiaries (including ENO), their
customers or on the ability of Entergy’s
state and local regulators to protect the
subsidiaries or customers. In support of
its position, Entergy states that:
1. As of June 30, 2005, Entergy’s
aggregate investment in Exempt Projects
was equal to 17% of Entergy’s total
consolidated capitalization, 15% of
consolidated net utility plant and 18%
of the market value of Entergy’s
common stock. As of March 31, 2000
(the most recent calendar quarter
preceding the 2000 Order), Entergy’s
aggregate investment in Exempt Projects
was equal to 7% of Entergy’s total
capitalization, 7% of Entergy’s
consolidated net utility plant and 24%
of the market value of Entergy’s
outstanding common stock.
2. Entergy’s consolidated retained
earnings have grown by an average of
12% annually during the period since
the Commission issued the 2000 Order
(i.e., from June 30, 2000 through June
30, 2005).
3. Income from Entergy’s investments
in Exempt Projects has contributed
positively to its overall earnings during
the period since the Commission issued
the 2000 Order.
4. As of March 31, 2000 (the most
recent calendar quarter preceding the
allowing ENO to borrow up to $150 million under
the credit facility. In addition the order modified
two outstanding orders so as to eliminate the
requirements that ENO maintain common equity of
at least 30% of its consolidated capitalization and
investment grade credit ratings.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2000 Order), Entergy’s consolidated
capitalization ratio was approximately
50.0% debt and approximately 50.0%
equity, consisting of approximately
5.0% preferred stock and approximately
45.0% common stock. As of June 30,
2005, Entergy’s consolidated
capitalization ratio was approximately
50.6% debt and approximately 49.4%
equity, consisting of approximately
2.3% preferred stock and approximately
47.1% common stock. These ratios are
within industry ranges set by the
independent debt rating agencies for
BBB-rated electric utility companies.
5. As of the date of the Amended
Declarations, each of the considerations
set forth in the 2000 Order, in support
of Entergy’s assertion that its existing
and proposed level of investment in
Exempt Projects would not have an
adverse impact on any Entergy
operating utility subsidiaries or their
ratepayers, or on the ability of interested
state commissions to protect the utilities
and their customers, continues to apply.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Management, pursuant to
delegated authority.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5–5580 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–52563; File No. SR–Amex–
2004–74]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
American Stock Exchange LLC; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and
Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to
the Elimination of Commentary .01(5)
to Amex Rule 916
October 4, 2005.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’
or ‘‘Exchange Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that
on August 27, 2004, the American Stock
Exchange LLC (‘‘Amex’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’)
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the
proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items
have been prepared by Amex. On
September 26, 2005, Amex filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.3 The Commission is publishing
1 15
U.S.C 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 In Amendment No. 1, Amex proposed to amend
the rule text of Amex Rule 915, in order to
substitute the term ‘‘NMS stock’’ for the term
‘‘national market system security,’’ for consistency
2 17
E:\FR\FM\12OCN1.SGM
12OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 12, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59379-59380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-5580]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 35-28043]
Filings Under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as
Amended (``Act'')
October 5, 2005.
Notice is hereby given that the following filing(s) has/have been
made with the Commission under provisions of the Act and rules
promulgated under the Act. All interested persons are referred to the
application(s) and/or declaration(s) for complete statements of the
proposed transaction(s) summarized below. The application(s) and/or
declaration(s) and any amendment(s) is/are available for public
inspection through the Commission's Branch of Public Reference.
Interested persons wishing to comment or request a hearing on the
application(s) and/or declaration(s) should submit their views in
writing by October 27, 2005, to the Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303, and serve a
copy on the relevant applicant(s) and/or declarant(s) at the
address(es) specified below. Proof of service (by affidavit or, in the
case of an attorney at law, by certificate) should be filed with the
request. Any request for hearing should identify specifically the
issues of facts or law that are disputed. A person who so requests will
be notified of any hearing, if ordered, and will receive a copy of any
notice or order issued in the matter. After October 27, 2005, the
application(s) and/or declaration(s), as filed or as amended, may be
granted and/or permitted to become effective.
Entergy Corporation (70-9049; 70-9123; 70-10202)
Entergy Corporation (``Entergy''), 639 Loyola Avenue, New Orleans,
LA 70113, a registered holding company, has filed post-effective
amendments to its original declaration/applications (``Amended
Declarations'') under sections 6(a), 7, 9(a), 10, 12(b), 12(c),13(b),
32 and 33 of the Act and rules 42, 43, 45, 46, 53, 54, 83, 90 and 91
under the Act.
I. Existing Orders
By order dated June 22, 1999 (Holding Company Act Release No.
27039; File No. 70-9123) (``Original Order'') Entergy was authorized,
among other things, to finance its exempt wholesale generator (``EWG'')
and foreign utility company (``FUCO'') (collectively, ``Exempt
Projects'') investments by providing guarantees and other forms of
credit support regarding the securities and other obligations of these
entities in an aggregate amount not to exceed $750 million.
By order dated June 13, 2000 (Holding Company Act Release No.
27184; File No. 70-9049) (``2000 Order'') the Original Order was
modified to authorize Entergy, among other things, to issue securities
for the purpose of investing in Exempt Projects and to provide credit
support for the securities and obligations of the Exempt Projects to
the extent that its ``aggregate investment'' (as defined in rule 53 of
the Act) in the Exempt Projects did not exceed 100% of its consolidated
retained earnings.
By order dated June 30, 2004 (Holding Company Act Release No.
27864; File No. 70-10202) (``2004 Order'') Entergy was authorized,
among other things, to issue securities and use the proceeds from the
issuances to fund investments in Exempt Projects, as long as the
``aggregate investment'' (as defined in rule 53 of the Act) did not
exceed 100% of Entergy's consolidated retained earnings as set forth in
the 2000 Order.
II. Rule 54
The transactions approved in the Original Order, 2000 Order and
2004 Order were each subject to the provisions of rule 54 under the
Act. Rule 54 provides that, in determining whether to approve the issue
or sale of any securities for purposes other than the acquisition of
any Exempt Projects or other transactions unrelated to Exempt Projects,
the Commission shall not consider the effect of the capitalization or
earnings of subsidiaries of a registered holding company that are EWGs
or FUCOs if the requirements of rule 53(a), (b) and (c) are
satisfied.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under rule 53(a), the Commission shall not make certain
specified findings under sections 7 and 12 in connection with a
proposal by a holding company to issue securities for the purpose of
acquiring the securities of, or other interest in, an EWG, or to
guarantee the securities of an EWG, if each of the conditions in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) are met, provided that none of the
conditions specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of rule 53
exists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Amended Declarations, Entergy states that it is ineligible
for the safe harbor provisions of rule 54 that were relied upon by the
Commission in issuing the Original Order, 2000 Order and 2004 Order
because it no longer satisfies the condition contained in rule
53(b)(1), as discussed below.\2\ Accordingly, Entergy requests
authority to issue and sell securities to continue to finance the
acquisition of EWGs or to guarantee the security of an EWG when the
event described in rule 53(b)(1) of the Act has occurred. Entergy must,
in
[[Page 59380]]
accordance with rule 53(c), affirmatively demonstrate that the issue
and sale of a security to finance the acquisition of an EWG or the
guarantee of a security of an EWG will not have a substantial adverse
impact upon the financial integrity of the registered holding company
system and will not have an adverse impact on any utility subsidiary,
its customers or on the ability of State commissions to protect the
subsidiary or customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Entergy states that all of the other criteria of rule 53(a)
and (b) are satisfied, except with respect to rule 53(a)(1).
However, Entergy states that while its ``aggregate investment'' in
Exempt Projects exceeds the 50% of consolidated retained earnings
limitation of rule 53(a)(1), Entergy is in compliance with the 2000
Order which allows Entergy to invest up to 100% of its consolidated
retained earnings in Exempt Projects. As of June 30, 2005, Entergy's
aggregate investment in Exempt Projects was approximately $2.9
billion and was equal to approximately 57% of Entergy's consolidated
retained earnings of approximately $5 billion.
Entergy states that it has complied with, and will continue to
comply with, the record keeping requirements of rule 53(a)(2), the
limitation in rule 53(a)(3) on the use of Entergy system domestic
public utility subsidiary companies' personnel in rendering services
to affiliated Exempt Projects, and the requirements of rule 53(a)(4)
concerning the submission of certain filings and reports under the
Act to retail regulatory commissions.
Finally, none of the other conditions set forth in rule 53(b)
currently exists. Specifically, as required by rule 53(b)(2),
Entergy's average consolidated retained earnings for the four most
recent quarterly periods have not decreased by 10% from the average
for the previous four quarterly periods, and, as required by rule 53
(b)(3), Entergy did not report operating losses in its previous
fiscal year attributable to its investments in Exempt Projects in
excess of 5% of Entergy's consolidated retained earnings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Rules 53(b)(1) and 53(c)
A. Rule 53(b)(1)
Rule 53(b)(1) states that the safe harbor provided by the rule
generally is not available if: (1) The registered holding company or
any subsidiary company having assets with book value exceeding 10% or
more of consolidated retained earnings has been the subject of a
bankruptcy proceeding; (2) the average consolidated retained earnings
for the four most recent quarterly periods have decreased by 10% from
the average for the previous four quarterly periods and the aggregate
investment in EWGs and FUCOs exceeds two percent of total capital
invested in utility operations; or (3) in the previous fiscal year, the
registered holding company reported operating losses attributable to
its direct or indirect investments in EWGs and FUCOs, and the losses
exceed an amount equal to 5% of consolidated retained earnings.
On September 23, 2005, Entergy New Orleans, Inc. (``ENO''), a
public utility subsidiary of Entergy, filed a voluntary petition for
relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (``Bankruptcy
Code'') in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District
of Louisiana. The book value of ENO's assets exceeded 10% of Entergy's
``consolidated retained earnings'' as of June 30, 2005. Consequently,
the circumstances described in rule 53(b)(1) have occurred.
The bankruptcy petition was precipitated by the unanticipated and
devastating impact of Hurricane Katrina, which destroyed substantial
portions of ENO's facilities, disrupted its revenues, and, with the
evacuation of the City of New Orleans (``City''), eliminated at least
in the short term, the quality of ENO's customer base, which is
directly linked to the fortunes of the City. ENO is continuing in
possession of its properties and has continued to operate its business
as a debtor-in-possession pursuant to sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the
Bankruptcy Code.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ On September 26, 2005, the Commission issued an emergency
order (Holding Company Act Release No. 28036) authorizing Entergy
and ENO to enter into a secured $200 million credit facility and
allowing ENO to borrow up to $150 million under the credit facility.
In addition the order modified two outstanding orders so as to
eliminate the requirements that ENO maintain common equity of at
least 30% of its consolidated capitalization and investment grade
credit ratings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENO's most pressing concern, and the immediate cause of its
bankruptcy filing, is the liquidity crisis resulting from the
hurricane's severe disruption to operations. ENO estimates that over
one hundred thousand of its customers are presently unable to accept
electric and gas service, and will remain unable to accept such service
for a period of time that cannot yet be determined. Other customers in
the New Orleans area who have had their utility services restored have
been displaced by Hurricane Katrina. The ordinary cycle of customer
payment of utility bills has been shattered. As a result, ENO's cash
receipts have been significantly below normal levels since the
hurricane.
B. Rule 53(c)
In accordance with rule 53(c), Entergy believes that the
transactions authorized in the Original Order, 2000 Order and 2004
Order (to the extent they involve the issuance of securities by Entergy
to finance the acquisition of EWGs), (i) will not have a substantial
adverse impact upon Entergy's financial integrity and (ii) will not
have an adverse impact on Entergy's utility subsidiaries (including
ENO), their customers or on the ability of Entergy's state and local
regulators to protect the subsidiaries or customers. In support of its
position, Entergy states that:
1. As of June 30, 2005, Entergy's aggregate investment in Exempt
Projects was equal to 17% of Entergy's total consolidated
capitalization, 15% of consolidated net utility plant and 18% of the
market value of Entergy's common stock. As of March 31, 2000 (the most
recent calendar quarter preceding the 2000 Order), Entergy's aggregate
investment in Exempt Projects was equal to 7% of Entergy's total
capitalization, 7% of Entergy's consolidated net utility plant and 24%
of the market value of Entergy's outstanding common stock.
2. Entergy's consolidated retained earnings have grown by an
average of 12% annually during the period since the Commission issued
the 2000 Order (i.e., from June 30, 2000 through June 30, 2005).
3. Income from Entergy's investments in Exempt Projects has
contributed positively to its overall earnings during the period since
the Commission issued the 2000 Order.
4. As of March 31, 2000 (the most recent calendar quarter preceding
the 2000 Order), Entergy's consolidated capitalization ratio was
approximately 50.0% debt and approximately 50.0% equity, consisting of
approximately 5.0% preferred stock and approximately 45.0% common
stock. As of June 30, 2005, Entergy's consolidated capitalization ratio
was approximately 50.6% debt and approximately 49.4% equity, consisting
of approximately 2.3% preferred stock and approximately 47.1% common
stock. These ratios are within industry ranges set by the independent
debt rating agencies for BBB-rated electric utility companies.
5. As of the date of the Amended Declarations, each of the
considerations set forth in the 2000 Order, in support of Entergy's
assertion that its existing and proposed level of investment in Exempt
Projects would not have an adverse impact on any Entergy operating
utility subsidiaries or their ratepayers, or on the ability of
interested state commissions to protect the utilities and their
customers, continues to apply.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-5580 Filed 10-11-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
