Michele Lopiccolo - IR Leo Denault - EVP and CFO Gary Taylor - Group President, Utility Operations Dean Keller - EVP and CFO, Enexus Energy Corp. Michael Kansler - President and Chief Nuclear Officer of Entergy Nuclear

Greg Gordon - Citigroup Scott Engstrom - Glennhymn Capital Management Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse Steve Fleishman - Catapult Capital Management Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co. Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs Annie Tsao - AllianceBernstein

Good day everyone and welcome to the Entergy Corporation Third Quarter 2008 Earnings Conference Call. Today's call is being recorded. At this time for introductions and opening comments, I would like to turn the call over to Ms. Michele Lopiccolo. Please go ahead, ma'am. Michele Lopiccolo - Investor Relations: Good morning and thank you for joining us. We'll begin this morning with comments and a review of our results from our Executive Vice President and CFO, Leo Denault. In an effort to accommodate everyone with questions this morning, we request that each person ask no more than two questions. After the Q&A session, I will close with the applicable legal statements. Leo? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Thank you, Michele and good morning everyone. Let me begin by offering Wayne's sincerest apologies for not being able to participate in the call this morning. In his absence, he asked me to give what could probably best be described as the injured reserved list for our senior team. In recent weeks, both Wayne and Rick have undergone successful surgeries. While they were both major both major procedures, out of respect for their privacy, I don't believe sharing details on those procedures is appropriate for this call. I can tell you that Wayne's issue was discovered very recently during an annual physical at the Mayo Clinic, which our Board of Directors requires for all senior officers. In abundance of caution, surgery is performed in the middle of last week and he was released on Saturday. Rick is home as well and all indications are that they are both on the road to recovery and they anticipate no lingering effects, assuming they follow doctor's orders. Actually, we believe they are likely to be in better shape and stronger going forward, compared to before these procedures. That said, their travel will be limited for several weeks. While they are both engaged in working from home, they will not be participating with us on the call today. Also, they will not be at EI due to these travel restrictions and they send their regrets. This will result in the need to combine our planned separate meeting schedules for Entergy and Enexus and to cancel the Enexus schedule. We apologize for any inconvenience this may create for you. As for the rest of the team, not only travel restriction is that Wayne will let us take vacation. As any of you who has attended EI know, it's clearly not vacation. So we'll be there and look forward to seeing you. Joining me in Phoenix will be Gary Taylor, Curt Hébert, Mike Kansler and Dean Taylor who is also on the call with us today. Moving now to the quarterly update, I will first review some activities and progress on a range of business initiatives then move to a more focused financial review. In looking back over the last three months, I suspect there are a few things we could all agree on. Events could have evolved have been among the most turbulent and trying since the historic Great Depression, with profound effects on all Americans' U.S. business and industry as well as the global economy. As you well know, Entergy has now walked away unscathed with the stock price dipping into the 60s and having been struck by back-to-back hurricanes over the course of just two weeks. In the midst of all of this however, we can look back on the quarter with a sense of accomplishment on a number of fronts. First the storms; Hurricane Gustav made landfall September 1st, followed 12 days later by Hurricane Ike, both as maximum Category 2 storms. Our utilities were prepared, having drilled for very similar scenario in early May. For Gustav, the largest team of restoration workers in Entergy's history was quickly assembled. Team members came from our own ranks and those of other utilities and contractors nationwide, including 165 companies from 26 states and Canada. Logistics for housing, seeding, transporting and organizing this massive effort were on the same scale as required for an army going into battle. After peak, 14,912 workers and 4500 support personnel were engaged. This army consumed 600,000 meals and used 1.9 million gallons of fuel. In the aftermath, Gustav and Ike were added to the utility's record books. These two storms were among the most destructive storms we've ever experienced and presented unique challenges. Hurricane Gustav caused severe damage to the transmission system and the violence was initially islanded from the transmission grid. Gustav also inflicted extensive damage to the distribution system, particularly in Baton Rouge area, with its hardest hit since Hurricane Andrew in 1992. Indeed, a case study prepared by GCR Associates concluded that Gustav had a much greater wind damage impact on the Louisiana population than Katrina. This impact was due to the high wind fields traversing higher population areas of the state. Then, close on the heels of Gustav was Ike. We were on the eastern side of this hurricane, which is the wrong side and Ike was not only a storm surge but a wind event as well. Hurricane Ike caused the most outages in Entergy Texas' history, knocking out power to 99% of its customers. The Sabine power plant sustained damage from flooding that spread throughout portions of Texas and Louisiana. Despite the challenges presented, the utilities set a record for the fastest and more importantly, the safest storm restoration efforts in the company's history. Crews restored power to 85% of customers within seven days of Ike and eight days of Gustav. When the costs were tallied, the combined estimate ranged from roughly $1 billion to $1.2 billion. Each affected utility company is responsible for its storm restoration cost obligations and for recovering storm-related costs. The utilities are considering all reasonable avenues to recover storm-related costs, including but not limited to accessing funded storm reserves, federal and local recovery, securitization and insurance. Given that most Gustav damage was to T&D facilities generally not covered by insurance, deductibles might not be met. On the other hand, flooding during Ike makes it more likely that the deductible will be met in some insurance received. On the regulatory recovery front, early action in October included drawing down funded storm reserves. Funds in the collective amount of $229 million were eligible to be drawn, where thresholds were met for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana and Entergy New Orleans. In addition, the LPFC approved Entergy Gulf States Louisiana and Entergy Louisiana's request to defer and accrue carrying costs on unrecovered storm expenditures during the period that company seek regulatory recovery. The approval was without prejudice to be ultimate resolution of the total amount of quickly incurred storm costs or the final allowed carrying cost. Entergy Arkansas also filed to implement a temporary surcharge during 2009 in the amount of $26 million. This filing is designated to recover extraordinary storm restoration expenses in excess of the $14.4 million, reflected in base rates. Preliminary regulatory recovery strategies for the other utilities affected are shaping up with filings generally expected no later than the spring of 2009. Once restoration is complete, it takes time to accumulate vendor billings to develop the final cost estimates to be submitted in a regulatory filing. Given the ability to draw on funded storm reserves, the utilities do not anticipate interim funding requests. Finally, the utilities are also working on a community development funding request. The necessary language allowing CDBG funding to be used for infrastructure was included in the Continuing Resolution Appropriations Bill recently passed in Congress. This is a critical first step in the process. In other utility matters, at the end of July, Entergy New Orleans filed its required rate case. This filing indicated a $23 million electric reduction, partially offset by a $9 million increase in gas base rates. The electric reduction includes $10.6 million to convert the voluntary recovery credit implemented earlier this year to a permanent reduction. Entergy New Orleans proposes to include the balance of the reduction in the fuel adjustment clause to realign Grand Gulf non-fuel operations and maintenance expense to base rates. Regarding the portfolio transformation strategy, Entergy Arkansas closed on the Ouachita acquisition at a cost of $325 per KW. As you may recall, Ouachita is a 789 megawatt gas-fired plant placed in service in 2002. This asset is the latest of our low-cost additions to our utility generation fleet. Entergy Louisiana supplemented and resumed the Little Gypsy Phase II proceeding, following the temporary suspension related to the need for additional environmental analysis. In the proceeding, Entergy Louisiana further recommended an allocation of one-third of the project to Entergy Gulf States, Louisiana. The procedural schedule was also established for the Waterford 3 steam generator replacement project. Just before hearings were set begin, the OPSC staff in Entergy Louisiana jointly requested a continuance pending settlement discussions that are in progress. We believe this is a positive development in this proceeding. In Texas last week, the PUCT deferred action on our rate filing until their next meeting scheduled on November 5th. While Entergy Texas respects the Commission's interest in fully considering all parties' views, it believes there are a number of reasons why a favorable decision should be rendered. The near-unanimous settlement is supported by virtually all of Entergy Texas' retail customers. Issues in the proceeding were fully weighted [ph] and the ALJ has rendered a proposal for decision recommending the settlement and this business has gone 17 years without a base rate increase. In addition, balance recovery outcomes are more important today than ever. Current challenges presented by the credit markets are coming at a time when Entergy Texas faces a near-term cash demand to fund up to $510 million in storm restoration costs. The company will pursue recovery of these costs over the course of the next year though a separate proceeding, but the need for financial release is real. In other utility filings, River Bend made a COL filing for a potential new nuclear unit at that site, using the General Electric ESPWR technology. Also non-guarantee applications were filed with the DoE for potential new plans at both Grand Gulf and River Bend. As a final note on portfolio transformation, in October the utilities suspended long-term resource procurement efforts and will reengage the market in the future. This action was taken in response to the current financial crises, the potential effects on the overall economy and significant uncertainty across all commodity markets. The utilities believe it's prudent to take a step back at this time and reevaluate a number of key considerations. We believe this is the appropriate course versus simply moving forward on what was a business as usual basis two months ago. For example, in recent months, we've seen a notable retreat in commodity prices for steel, copper, aluminum and concrete among others. This adjusts us that new build construction costs estimates need to be reevaluated. While the utilities continue to have long-term resource needs, the majority can be managed through shorter-term procurements for a period of time. This approach will provide an opportunity to reassess the market and solicit long-term resources at a future date. Turning to Entergy Nuclear; the nuclear fleet posted a strong operational quarter delivering a 95% capacity factor. On the license renewal front, significant milestone was achieved when the NRC renewed the license for the James A. FitzPatrick plant in September for another 20 years. Also, continued progress was achieved on the Indian Point license renewal initiative. While the projected license renewal date was pushed back a few months to January 2011, the contention set for hearing were narrowed from around a 160 to just 13. NRC on-site inspections and audits for license renewal are complete and the next major milestones are completion to address safety evaluation and environmental impact statements. Another Indian Point news; the independent safety evaluation panel released their report at the end of July. The two overarching conclusions are that Indian Point is safe. It meets NRC requirements and safety systems are well maintained and is reliable with performance, comparing favorable to high-performing plants in most safety aspects. However, relationships with the general public and officials, particularly on matters of emergency preparedness are not healthy and must be rebuilt. Entergy Nuclear applauds the panel's efforts and commitment and responded to the report with action plans to implement panel recommendations. These plans indicate that the comprehensive and unique evaluation will serve as a roadmap, as Entergy Nuclear continues to guide the Indian Point site to excellence. In August, the new state-of-the-art fire engine system for engine point was successfully placed into service. Performance evaluation is underway and the system has successfully completed two of the three tasks, demonstrating reliability of at least 97%. Regarding the nuclear spin-off, progress continued on the regulatory front. The internal revenue service issued its private letter ruling in September and the briefing and comment process is complete in Vermont and New York. In Vermont, a decision is pending from the Vermont Public Service Board. In New York, the ALJs have determined that no additional proceedings are necessary and the recommendation from the New York Public Service Commission is now open... from them to the New York Public Service Commission is now pending. Entergy continues to target receiving regulatory decisions in the fourth quarter. However, as a result of the unprecedented turmoil in the financial markets, it is uncertain whether or not financing fundamental to the spin-off transaction can be affected in the near term on a cost-effective basis. As we assess the conditions of the market against our options for Enexus, we remind ourselves that we're in the enviable position of being able to simply wait. We believe the market will ultimately improve. We're not tied to a specific timeline to affect the transaction and we believe the value proposition remains intact. We will not take financing into market where conditions are clearly unfavorable, but we will be fully prepared when market conditions improve. Now that we have the private letter ruling in hand, we have requisite approvals to launch financing and we stand ready to act when we believe action will create value. It is noteworthy to point out that even in this extremely challenging market and Enexus has successfully secured bank commitment letters in excess of $1 billion. These commitments are in support of efforts by Enexus to sell out its liquidity needs through a corporate revolver. We believe this successful effort is an indication of the interest and support in the financial community for a business that is truly one of a kind. In closing our business review, I mentioned a couple of items that are among the accomplishments that we are most of proud of, because they reflect who we are as company. Earlier this month, remind that Entergy had garnered the distinctive recognition from two separate organizations for its corporate governance practices. First, Governance Metrics International assigned Entergy an overall global rating of 10 for the best-in-class corporate governance. Among the 4200 companies reviewed, 1% received the prefect score. GMI is an independent organization whose philosophy is based on the view that governance and transparency will over time generate superior returns in economic performance. Also, ISS Corporate Services awarded Entergy a 100% rating for corporate governance in utility ranking, reflecting Entergy's superior performance in this sector. In addition, Entergy received an index ranking of 98.5%, placing to near the very top performers in the S&P 500. I'll now cover some key financial topics related to our performance this quarter, including quarterly results, the latest on our share repurchase activity and brief comments on our '08 guidance. I will close with an update on cash flow, including the discussion of our overall liquidity position which is quite strong. You might find the webcast presentation useful, following our financial review. Looking at our financial results for this quarter, slide two shows an increase in the third quarter '08 as reported earnings compared to a year ago. This increase was achieved as we continued to expend resources associated with the nuclear spin-off and while we entered in two major hurricanes. As was the case last quarter, the spin-off expenses are reflected as a special item in the current period. Turning to operational earnings, we achieved a 9% improvement in results this quarter compared to the third quarter of 2007. The increase in operational earnings came primarily from higher result at nuclear, with utility, parent and other achieving a modest improvement in earnings. Partially offsetting the higher results in these businesses was an increased loss incurred at our non-nuclear wholesale business. Slide three presents the factors that drove the quarter-on-quarter results. The increase at utility, parent and other came primarily from lower income tax expense and lower operation and maintenance expense. The lower tax expense was associated with the liquidation of a subsidiary that resulted in a tax loss on Entergy's investment. The lower O&M resulted primarily from lower payroll-related expenses and the absence of minimum bill credit write-offs taken in the third quarter last year. A significant portion of these expense decreases were offset by lower net revenues, due to the effects of milder than normal weather, and lower usage during the storm-related customer outages. The weather effect this quarter was minimal on build sales. However, unbilled sales recorded at quarter end, reflect significantly milder weather verses the warm weather of a year ago. At Entergy Nuclear, we achieved an increase of 31% in operational earnings, with the primary contributor being higher pricing for energy sold. The nuclear fleet posted a strong operational quarter with a 95% capacity factor over the three-month period. The non-nuclear wholesale business recorded a loss this quarter, which exceeded the loss recorded in the third quarter of 2007.Results in the current period reflect higher income tax expense, driven primarily by the redemption of a previous investment in that business. As noted in our review of quarterly results, income tax expense this quarter had a material effect on our earnings. We anticipated a material tax benefit and in guidance this comes as no surprise, given taxes are one of the most significant expenses on our income statement. Given their significance, we believe it is important to use wealth for our tax planning that result in us paying only the amount of tax as appropriate for our business. We believe as owners, you expect this of us. I believe a few words on the effects of the storms on our results this quarter might be helpful as well. Hurricane Gustav and Ike had an overall impact of reducing our results this quarter by $0.14. There were basically three components that make up this decrease. Lower revenues due to outages were approximately $0.14. Lower O&M for resources deferred into the storm restoration was about $0.06 positive and increased O&M for Entergy Arkansas storm restoration was approximately $0.06, effectively offsetting the otherwise lower O&M in other jurisdictions. Recall that Entergy Arkansas has already exceeded its $14 million storm accrual in rates this year, and there is no regulatory provision for deferring additional storm costs. As I mentioned earlier, Entergy Arkansas recently made a filing with the APSC to address this issue with the regulatory process in Arkansas. The last item contributing to higher consolidated results this quarter was the accretive effect of our share repurchase program. We continued to utilize our share repurchase program during the quarter, the details of which are reflected on slide four. We repurchased one million shares in the third quarter at an average of $98 per share with roughly 70% of the repurchases coming through our $2 billion of authorization. At the end of the third quarter, we had approximately $640 million of repurchase authority remaining. With three quarters to go of the year behind us, we continue to see '08 as reported in operational earnings guidance in the range of $6.50 to $6.90 per share. Slide five includes the components of guidance. For the remainder of the year, we expect continue to strong performance at nuclear. The effects of hurricanes and mild weather will serve to moderate the utilities' contribution, but overall the year is still on track. Slide six includes a recap of our cash-flow performance this quarter, which shows a significant increase compared to the same period last year. The major items that contributed to our more than $1.1 billion increase in net cash flow provided by operating activities include receipt of $954 million in securitized debt proceeds associated with Entergy Louisiana and Entergy Gulf States Louisiana storm financings; increased collections of deferred fuel costs totaling $287 million, higher net revenues at Entergy Nuclear producing $78 million of cash and lower income tax expense... tax payments of $120 million. These items were partially offset in our cash flow results by higher working capital requirements of $144 million at utility, parent and other and higher pension funding payments of $103 million. No doubt, you've see how very expensive it can be to secure liquidity in a credit market in complete disarray. As you see our release this quarter, we've included a thorough update on our liquidity. This approach is in keeping with our policy of giving you detailed information so that you can fully assess our business. We believe these details support the view, that our liquidity is very solid today. This position is not a coincidence, it did not just happen. In the spring of this year, we saw signs of unprecedented volatility in the commodity markets. We were also heading into another hurricane season and the credit crisis was beginning to take shape. Assessing our liquidity position is an ongoing exercise, but these events sharpened our focus and our focus was on ensuring cash availability consistent with our liquidity strategy as highlighted on slide seven. As the financial market collapse unfolded, liquidity demands on some companies heightened and credit availability dried up. While these events and the crises have been and remained unpredicted, similar shocks have happened before, for example in the post-Enron environment earlier this decade. We have always taken our financial strength and flexibility seriously and this is why we spend so much time on risk management. The reality is that we were very concerned about what we saw in the markets and took additional action to protect your investment. These actions included accelerating plan to refinancing of $600 million, focusing our efforts to get regulatory approval and then successfully completing the Louisiana storm financings, taking a very measured approach to share repurchases, when undervalued shares could have triggered a less thoughtful approach, delaying discretionary tax payments and delaying dividends from operating companies to the parent. As slide eight indicated specifically, it's by design that our corporate revolver is heavily drawn today and that our ready liquidity totals approximately $3.9 billion. It's also by design that we expect to have approximately $2.4 billion of cash available at year-end, even after paying around $1 billion of storm expenditures. There is one other element of our liquidity planning that deserves additional comment. We have a debt covenant in some of our financing arrangements, limiting debt to no more than 65% of capital, otherwise certain accelerations may be triggered. The specific debt covenants define the components of the calculations. Some components required knowledge of confidential information on an interim basis, which we do not feel appropriate to share. However, I can tell you we are continuing to meet this covenant. I don't point this out as cause for alarm, but to be clear that it exists and provide some limit, in addition to our financing authorities. That said we have cushion between our current position and this limit and should we approach to a point where we are unreasonably close to this test, we can quickly respond by taking a variety of actions. Most notably, we could use some of our extensive cash resources to pay down our revolver. We want you to know that we are diligent, not complacent as we manage our cash sources and needs going forward. In summary, we share the same concerns that you understandably have in the current environment. We know you're concerned about overall liquidity. Our liquidity position is solid, as fully detailed in our release this quarter. We believe that access to capital is very limited and very expensive if available at all. We have no need to access the capital markets any time in the near future. You're thinking that liquidity triggers are looming and calls on cash could be significant. We have all of our cash needs covered and even in extreme circumstances have a projected $2 billion cash cushion. You are seeing more and more evidence of economic slowdown and expect week results in '08 for much of the sector. Storms and weather did affect our utility this quarter, but the business otherwise held up quite well. Nuclear had another outstanding quarter and it will be the engine that we expect to drive us to our earnings guidance for the year. And finally, you run easy about the things you don't know. The surprises that are all too often are unpleasant, once you learn at them. We have been and continue to inspire the most transparent disclosure in our business. And while we too have felt the effects of the financial meltdown we've all been witness to; these situations do create opportunities. Our focus on risk management has kept us on solid footing through this crisis and has prepared us well to play solid things [ph] in the trying financial market. This is a time when our focus on operational excellence on that leg of our business model must be at the forefront. Additionally, the same focus has enabled us to be ready, should strategic moves identified through our portfolio management leg of the business model provide new opportunities to create value. Now our senior team is available for your questions. Question And Answer

Thank you. Today's question-and-answer session will be conducted electronically. [Operator Instructions]. And we will take our first question today from Greg Gordon with Citi. Please go ahead sir. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: Thanks. Good morning and I hope that the rest of management improves back soon and be back at full health. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Thanks Greg. We do too. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: On the quarterly earnings, while they're not related, would it be fair to say that you are able to mitigate the... more than mitigate the impact of the storm and weather in the utility business through the sale... through the income tax impact of selling that asset? It seems that me while they are not related, they were offsetting? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: By and large from an amount perspective, they are offsetting and you're right, they're related. It's just the timing of when that would've occurred anyway. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: So if I look at 2009 versus 2008, I am thinking about your service territory... the disclosure you made on page 14, there's a little colored box at bottom that shows about $0.21 of impact from the storm and weather; $0.14 for sales and pricing; would it be fair to assume that in normal operating conditions, you see $0.21 improvement quarter-over-quarter, in those storm and normal weather? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: The weather that is both in the billed and then there was some significant weather in the unbilled period, that's just deviations from both normal and then also we had positive weather last year and then storms were just function of the last revenue offset by the lower O&M by which lower O&M diverted to the storms and most jurisdictions was offset by the higher O&M for storm cost in Arkansas almost exactly. Yes, so that's right that you have to put the weather and the storm effects back. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: At this point, while you haven't given guidance for 2009, what can you tell us with regard to the economic outlook in your regions and your expectation for sales growth? We've had several other utilities already comment early in the earnings season that it was the best to assume though, it had... the most pretty modest growth in sales if any at all next year. Given that... Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Yes. And I'll let Gary to go into detail on that. Certainly we've been benefited over the course of the last year by some of the drivers of our economics in this region, but with decline in commodity prices and the refining sector here also with the changes in the value of the dollar, with strength of the dollar that's going to offset from of the positives that we had, but I'll let Gary go into detail on that. Gary Taylor - Group President, Utility Operations: Hi good morning. We've actually as you would expect monitor economics in our area. If you look at it, it's really been kind of somewhat buffered from what you are seeing in the rest of the country. We've gone back and we don't...we see that the expansions that are planned, all indications are that those will continue forward and they are not being pulled back from. There is an additional federal relief assistance which comes into this area for Gustav and Ike of about $6.5 billion. There is about $1.5 billion that has been now appropriated to continue work on the levies. And as you might expect and as we've talked about the housing market in our territories really has not been to the overbuilt area or some of the concerns that you've seen in some of the others. We continue to see employment to be somewhat steady. We are not seeing a decline and I think that's reflected by one of the things that you would see in our areas as we closely monitor write-offs. The write-offs for us have not increased. They have stayed steady throughout the year, we monitor those as well as we actually went through the higher gas price earlier in the summer and with the lower commodity prices for us, especially in our area and a high percentage of this represents of our customers disposable income. Those will come down as the commodity prices come down, which is a positive again for our area. As Leo says, that we have basically have some of the same affects so that would impact the exports here from our... as the dollar increases and some of the projects that might go on as commodity prices for might be impacted. We've seen the typical things that you would see in wood products where it has we think bottomed out, but that again impacts a lot of our small industrials. And I think finally in closing, our sales expectations and growth in our area have been actually relatively modest over this time, typically the 1.5% to 2%. And if you look at where we are, we are slightly lower than about 1.5% year-to-date if you adjust for the hurricane, but we still continue to see growth in sales and that seem to be pretty close to what our projections are going forward. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: Okay. My last question is on that competitor business on the $0.11 delta, the result of a tax issue? Can you give a little bit more detail on that and give us sense of what the ... what the real sort of underlying run rate of earnings is on the nuclear wholesale? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Well I think what we had in guidance at the time at the beginning of the year was about a midpoint of about $0.05 around... loss around that business, which has been pretty consistent with the last several years. That was actually related to tax on a capital gain of the sale we had of an asset earlier and that's... the tax... the gain showed up earlier on the book. The tax gain is just showing up now just because of the timing and so it's associated with a capital gain that we didn't at the time think we would have capital loss to offset. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: Okay. So you took the gain in the prior quarter of this year and now you're taking the tax here, or was that ... were the gain be taken at a prior period? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: The gain was in a prior period now. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: Okay. So while it is an ongoing item, it is a non... sort of a non-recurring item? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Correct. Greg Gordon - Citigroup: Thank you.

Thank you. And we will take our next question from Scott Engstrom with Glennhymn Capital Management. Please go ahead. Scott Engstrom - Glennhymn Capital Management: Good morning. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Good morning. Scott Engstrom - Glennhymn Capital Management: I just had a ... I had a question Leo on the tax benefit as well on that same schedule Greg was referring to kind of B1. It shows the $0.34 and the footnote I think says it's mostly from the tax benefit. You'd also mentioned an associated loss on sale of asset. Is that tax rate in that line at $0.34 or is that a different period. I'm just wondering also I know there were some year-over-year changes within the segments on taxes for the guidance this year. Is this $0.34 part of what was in your original guidance for this year? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: In the original guidance, we did have some portion of tax benefits associated with our tax planning. This is going to be a little bit more favorable than what we had in guidance, because of the size of the tax benefit of the liquidation. The tax benefit itself shows up, because of the taxable entities being outside the consolidated group. There is not an associated book impact, because of the consolidation of it all up into Entergy Corp. I think that's what you're getting at. Scott Engstrom - Glennhymn Capital Management: Okay, so I guess what I'm getting here is kind of the opposite what Greg was asking about the $0.11 in terms of being operating, but non-recurring. How much of the $0.34 here would you say was operating, but non-recurring? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Well it's ... that specific item just occurred this year. There are typically item like that that come about every year. It's lowered our effective tax rate from about 36% to 34% this year. Last year it was about 31%. So, it's difficult to say that that item specifically won't show up again, but typically based on our tax planning, we have items like that and they reflect themselves at lower effective tax rate. Scott Engstrom - Glennhymn Capital Management: Okay, so you wouldn't expect a large delta in the tax rate for '09 guidance when that comes out? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: We wouldn't plan that is such now. We've looked at where we are at the beginning at the year and see what we think is coming in and plan accordingly, just like we did this year. Scott Engstrom - Glennhymn Capital Management: Okay. Great, thanks very much.

[Operator Instructions]. And we will take our next question from Dan Eggers with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: Hi good morning. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Good morning, Dan. Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: Great comment. I hope these guys are recovering good form quickly. Just real quickly, if you could explain something on Schedule 7 or Table 7, I guess you talked about; your ample liquidity remain at Entergy full-cycle structure, but corporate or Entergy Corporation has availability of $224 million. Can you explain to me kind of how that works as far as the ability to feed up additional liquidity at the parent or the corporate level and how we should think about money flows to support outside of the utilities? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Well, the majority of the capital that we have in the cash balance we have are really at core [ph]. So, we have not exactly sure what you're trying to get to. Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: I guess the issue is that the 244 it's really the liquidity there is substantially higher than just 244 because of the bulk of the cash balance would be sitting Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: The two hundred and... Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: 220 Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Okay well. Okay I see what you're getting in terms of how we get that moved around. We can move... we've ways to move the cash around the system between operating companies through the money pool. We also have ways to make loans and securities back and forth between the companies. We have ways in place to make sure that we can fund the system outside of each individual operating company. Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: Would you guys look to try and expand the authority at the corporate level or is that at Entergy Corporation level or is it just as easy to move money within the pool? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: At this point, we don't see any reason to how to expand that. We've got the ability to draw as much cash as we need. Right now Dan, we've drawn quite heavily on the revolver and we've got a lot of these liquidity needs, because as I said, we've just determined that that was the right thing to do in this environment. We made that determination earlier this year given where we were or where the markets were going and where we saw not only people in our space going but also the financial institutions themselves. The securitization proceeds, if you look at that table actually fit in that other category also and those can be lent around to be utilized as well. Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: And I guess on...with the kind of a notion that Enexus will get spawn or addressed when the credit markets are supportive. How do we think about may be some extra corporate overhead costs and when does that go from special items recurring through the income statement if this goes on for a period of time? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: That's actually something that when we get to you and we give guidance, we'll be giving you some more color on what those... the term we used more margin, de-synergies that we see by having three companies instead of just one. And we'll try to minimize those as much as we can and be as prepared as we can to move when the markets allow it. But there will be some element of de-synergies during that interim period, as I look across the table, Dean is kind of one of those de-synergies. Dean Keller - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Enexus Energy Corp.: Thanks a lot. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Although we love having him around but we'll give some color on that when we talk to you about guidance. Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: Is that, or should we expect that or are we going to wait longer to get an update on that? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Right now, we're looking through all the elements of it and a big part of it has to do with the financial markets in the spin and how we actually how we present it. But it's likely that it'll probably be around that time around, yes. Daniel Eggers - Credit Suisse: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

And will take our next question from Steve Fleishman with Catapult Capital Management. Please go ahead. Steve Fleishman - Catapult Capital Management: Yes hi Leo and please send my regards to Wayne and Rick as well. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Thank you. Steve Fleishman - Catapult Capital Management: A question in the work on the spin approval. Has there been any movement toward maybe trying to settle it? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: That's not the kind of thing that we would comment on certainly, the ALJs, so they've got all the information that they really need, that there is no need for further proceedings, so there won't be a hearing and so we just wait now to process and draw. Obviously we've provided a significant amount of information around not only what we proposed, but what everybody else has proposed and believe that the record is pretty clear that they should be allow to go forward that Enexus will be on solid financial footing and really be a great asset to the New York, Vermont and rest of the states where those plants operate. Steve Fleishman - Catapult Capital Management: Okay and I guess in the event that you would end up having that you do the spend? I mean is there any real significant difference in company value at its point either way and how are you thinking about the options? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: The spin rationale still exits. The ability to change the bottom line, the revenues by changing the hedging strategy, the ability to provide option value to owners by giving them two pieces of paper instead of one, the ability to optimize the cost of capital. Today that cost of capital would be probably too high, and I mean literally today given the financial markets and where they are for Enexus. But on the margin, if you think about financing that company the way it should be financed, it would still be better standalone and together. All of those elements still exist. We're just in an odd timeframe right now in terms of whether or not that financing could actually be done, if it could be done that cost effective basis. So all of the reasons for doing this spin still exists. That that said we've always pointed out there is a significant amount of value inherently within that business already and we would attempt if for some reason we couldn't go forward to try and capture as much of those others spin-related items as possible, realizing that we wouldn't able to capture them all. Steve Fleishman - Catapult Capital Management: Okay. Thank you. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Thank you, Steve.

[Operator Instructions]. We will take our next question from Jonathan Arnold with Merrill Lynch. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: Good morning guys. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Good morning Jonathan. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: To reiterate prior comments about the other members of management, recover back [ph]. My question actually relates again to Table 7 and on the cash position financing authority. I just wanted to clarify the authority ... where you list authority. Are these actual committed lines of financing or just what you would be able to have if you think the actual credit lines doesn't seem to gel with the numbers in the 10-Q on that? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: No that's the authorities that they have; the amount that they have authority to issue. It does not give right. It does not match up with the credit lines in existence, but they could go out and secure new financing at that level, within their authorities. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: But they'd still have to secure new lines to do that. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Correct, correct. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: So what's the number of actual available liquidity under lines that are in existence today? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Well that's 3.7... when you say available, do you mean available yet to go? Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: Financing that is in place as opposed to just authorized? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: That's the $374 million. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: And that compares to what numbers? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: It's actually if you look at the paragraph on the previous page and add up those. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: Okay. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Okay. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: So that would be kind of versus the 1954 in the table. Is that the right comparison? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: In terms of what of that amount is actually... already got a committed line to it, yes. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: Okay, thank you. And I just wanted to just ask. I heard your comment on the Texas rate case. It seems that the commission has said they were uncomfortable with the fact that staff wasn't part of the settlement. And I've also heard that there is some statutory deadline, they have to decide this by late November. Just wondering, what are the next steps and did anything that happened last week, sort of a bright user come to an agreement with staff or how should we think about, how this is resolves? Gary Taylor - Group President, Utility Operations: Okay, I think I need to say about of first I think, the other things the commissioner has also said that, when they reviewed the settlement that from a...they were two commissions I believe that there're from a high level view that they felt that the settlement number seem to be correct. And we said that as obviously very positive that through the process that represented most of our customers that we wound up with something which is for me equitable to for all parties. I think where the commissioners can't really speak for them. But that clearly, it is a complicated case. It is the first case that we've had in a number of years and I think they want to be diligent going through it. If I had to add to it, I think that the question that they really asked is make sure that the process was correct. And are they comfortable with that and I think based on their comments they want to make sure that they review the paperwork to ensure that. I haven't said that I think the next real decision and we extended of the decision you were talking about, to allow this to move to November 5th. We should have what that outcome is and then based on whether commission then decides then we would let avail ourselves so what the avenues are we need, based on that decision. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: Thank you. And then just one other follow-up in terms of guidance; is there a time period in which the spin could be delayed that might lead you to give some kind of entity consolidated outlook for 2009 and would that be as soon as... you got a option in the EI or is that something you would look away to do if it's delayed as well into the New Year? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Well when we give guidance, whether we give a combined or a part we'll have to give all the components. So it's likely that it will be some sort of hybrid. And if at that important of time we're looking at... giving guidance for the EI and still some uncertainty in the financial markets and not knowing the timing of the spin. That guidance whether we give it for each individual company or as one, we'll have to give it somewhat of a hybrid anyway for you. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: It would be somewhat but maybe not fully comparable to how you cost today. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Well it will have all the components, we'll be able to get there. Jonathan Arnold - Merrill Lynch & Co.: Okay, thanks a lot Leo.

Our next question will come from Paul Patterson with Glenrock Associates. Please go ahead. Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates: Good morning guys. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Good morning. Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates: I'll echo the comments previously of sympathy. Secondly I want to touch basically you guys on if on the buyback I saw the slide four and I see how much you guys accomplished. Are you guys still going to go forward with that or is the credit situation out there changing things at all and that I wasn't clear, I'm sorry if I missed it? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: No, that's alright Paul. We've continued to take advantage of the share repurchase program throughout this period. However, we've been pretty measured in how we've done it given the weakness in the stock price. We've not taken upon ourselves to be irresponsible given what's going on in the credit markets with liquidity. That's why we have significant liquidity, that's why we have the strength financial strength that we have today, that's one of the things that we've been measured about. But we've continued to utilize the program just on probably a more measured pace than you might think, if you just went into the same logic if your stock price was in the 70s, what would you do. We'd probably continue to look at it the same way to make sure that we balance what our liquidity requirements are, what our cash flow requirements are and what the market availability of liquidity is going forward? So, the authorization still exists in the table that we gave you. Going out through the end of the year in that table we've just put the assumption that we finished the $1.5 billion portion of the $2 billion of authorities that we have. That's just an assumption, it's not an indication of what we necessarily will or won't do but it's a very regular in fact day in-day out analysis that we do about what we should and shouldn't do in that program. Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates: Okay, great. And then with Enexus Dean, you're sort of talking about getting back to normal. I'm wondering if there is any sort of metric we should be following as to what you guys would consider to be sort of normal. I mean obviously I mean once you make the argument that, that the period before the credit crisis was kind of abnormal, what is normal not to get so possible but sort of, what is the specific spread we should be thinking about in terms of what you guess are looking at or needing to get to for further spin to take place? And also just when the status that you comment about additional sort of credit enhancement which I think is response to I mean, what you feel about that? But is there any thought...is there any change in that thought with respect to credit crisis or any other thoughts that how perhaps Enexus situation could change in light of what's happened? Or is it sort of like we are just going to wait till things get back to where they were before, before we do the spend? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Well, I might actually let Dean comment on some of that, but I think we'd agree that some of what we saw prior to the financial situation that we're in was not normal. On the opposite side of where we are not normal today, so I don't think we'll be waiting to get back to that point, but we will be waiting to get back to a little bit less volatility, a little bit more certainty, a little bit more clarity around what spreads our day inday out and what availability if capital is day inday out. Dean? Dean Keller - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Enexus Energy Corp.: No, I think on the first question, we can imagine, we've spent a lot of time thinking about all sorts of different scenarios for this business, both from an operational, from markets and from financing perspective. We have the benefit of a business that in almost any scenario shows a lot of free cash flow, has low operating costs and is really well positioned in the markets in which it's located. What we are focused on is delivering the best value package to shareholders that encapsulates the totality of the value delivering mechanisms that Leo talked about earlier. And so when we think about ranges of financing rates, we really focused on the totality of the package and this is not a deal that lives or dies on 25-basis point differentials in interest rates that we are thinking about. We are actually incredibly encouraged, as Leo mentioned earlier about the fact that we have actually been able to raise more than a $1 billion of bank commitments in this particular market. We think that says a lot about the quality of the business and we think that says a lot about the receptivity of investors in this business and we expect this to receive strong interest from bondholders when and when those markets open up. Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates: Okay great. Thanks guys. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Thank you, Paul.

And we will take our next question from Michael Lapides with Goldman Sachs. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs: Hey guys. A real quick question; could you give us an update regarding Indian Point and the need for environmental CapEx, the discussion about potential environmental CapEx related to Cooling Towers? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Sure. Mike? Michael Kansler - President and Chief Nuclear Officer of Entergy Nuclear: Thanks. Good morning. Right now the process of that were before the administrative law Leo stated for the state of New York in environmental conservation is changing a little bit and when we actually hear the case on our permit is probably going to be delayed somewhat may be upwards to a year or 18 months. So a decision on whether their requirement is going to be Cooling Towers or whatever is getting delayed as it has been able over the past several years. We still believe that Cooling Towers aren't required and aren't necessary and that will be the case that we present. So, it continues to be delayed by process and we continue to build our case there and that we do not need to go these Cooling Towers. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs: Okay. And is there a kind of formal docket or formal procedure that lays out a timeline or is that still kind of uncertain and that's part of the... partly what's driving the delay? Michael Kansler - President and Chief Nuclear Officer of Entergy Nuclear: Yes, that's kind of what the delay is because there is change in the requirements. It gives a lot of the steady work that would have been done. Once the apartment was issued down upfront and so that may have to be done before we actually give them any kind of proceedings and that's still being laid out in the state. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs: Got it and what about the federal litigation and how that could potentially impact... how that could impact Indian Point and actually impacted it? Michael Kansler - President and Chief Nuclear Officer of Entergy Nuclear: It ends of turning out, whether they are going to require regular fitting just in facilities with best available technology et cetera. I know that's a question but I am not sure what's schedule is these days. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs: Okay, thank you guys. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Thanks Michael.

And we will take our final question today from Ms. Annie Tsao with AllianceBernstein. Please go ahead. Annie Tsao - AllianceBernstein: Good morning, Leo. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Good morning, Annie. Annie Tsao - AllianceBernstein: The best for both of them getting well. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Thank you. Annie Tsao - AllianceBernstein: Anyway a question on, in this quarter you have increased the pension funding payment of $103 million. Now for '08 in your guidance, what kind of number that you forecast vis-à-vis pension liability? And can you give us a sense of how we should think about your pension liability in '09? Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: That was the cash payment, this year and that was actually just the normal cash payment that we would have made into it. It's different from moving for last year. Annie Tsao - AllianceBernstein: Okay. Leo Denault - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer: Yes, so that really is not a change from the funding that we have planned in 2008 as it stands anyway. Certainly as we look to 2009, we are in the process of assessing with that pension funding estimate will be. In terms of the estimate for funding in the funding and the expense are two completely different animals driven by differences in GAAP and IRS regulations, which I'm not going to attempt to reconcile for you a bit. As far as about funding levels go, we're going have to look at what our unfunded balance is and what's happened to plan assets by the time we get to year end. What the segment rate looks like in terms of how we split that out. And then as you know in the funding category there are some smoothing rules. They go into effect in terms of how long you have to make up funding deficits. That said, we're going closely look at what happens in the market and what happens in the market and what happens at the federal level, given that there is no doubt that the funded balances are the... of making of the trusts associated with pensions are going to have fallen for just about everybody in all industries. And so there might have to be some sort of change in regulations going forward in that as well. We don't anticipate that it's going to have an impact of great proportions, but it will be an impact given the fact that what's happened in the market at least to-date this year has driven down the value of the fund assets. Annie Tsao - AllianceBernstein: Thank you.

Thank you. And I would now turn the call back over to Michele Lopiccolo for any closing remarks. Please go ahead. Michele Lopiccolo - Investor Relations: Thank you, operator and thanks to all for participating this morning. Before we close, we remind you to refer to our release and website for Safe Harbor and Regulation G-compliance statements. Our call is recorded and can be accessed for the next seven days by dialing 719-457-0820, replay code 3834525. This concludes our call. Thank you.

And once again, that will conclude the Entergy Corporation conference call for today. Thank you all for your participation and have a wonderful rest of the day. .