U-37425

The following is a timeline of key events and scheduled submissions in this proceeding:

- November 2024: The Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) directed that a final recommendation on the application be placed on the agenda for its October 2025 business and executive session (B&E).
- December 3, 2024: Initial status conference held and procedural schedule set.
- April 11, 2025: Deadline for commission staff and intervenor testimonies.
- May 9, 2025: Deadline for cross-answering testimony.
- May 30, 2025: Deadline for Entergy Louisiana, LLC (ELL)'s rebuttal testimony.
- June 30, 2025: Discovery deadline.
- July 3, 2025: Deadline for parties to brief contested issues.
- July 14–25, 2025: Two-week hearing on the merits scheduled to begin at 10:00 am on July 14, 2025.
- Quarterly Progress Reports: ELL is required to submit quarterly progress reports on the planned generation and transmission projects to staff and all intervenors by May 15, 2026; August 15, 2026; November 15, 2027; February 15, 2027; and on those dates each subsequent year. Informal reports are also required within 10 days of any significant project developments occurring between formal reports 1, 2.

These events outline the major procedural steps and reporting obligations established for this docket.

This docket before the Louisiana Public Service Commission concerns Entergy Louisiana, LLC's application for approval of generation and transmission resources needed to serve a substantial new load for a hyperscale data center project in North Louisiana. The customer for this load is Meta Platforms, Inc., which is developing a data center in Richland Parish. The project requires construction of three new combined cycle combustion turbine (CCCT) generators, customer-sited transmission, and additional system transmission upgrades. The application is supported by an Electric Service Agreement that defines cost and risk allocations between Entergy Louisiana and Meta.

The proceeding has attracted participation and intervention from multiple parties, including utilities (Cleco Power, SWEPCO, Northeast Louisiana Power Cooperative), advocacy groups (Sierra Club, Alliance for Affordable Energy, Union of Concerned Scientists), and independent power producers. Key issues center on infrastructure investments, environmental commitments (including 1,500 MW of proposed solar and/or hybrid storage resources), cost allocation, rate treatment (including a customer-specific rate rider), and procedural matters such as discovery and party status for Meta and related entities.

The project is described as providing reliability and affordability benefits to all Entergy Louisiana customers, as well as supporting environmental stewardship and Meta's corporate sustainability commitments. The commission's review includes consideration of potential discriminatory aspects of Entergy's proposal, resource planning, and the implications of the project for the wider electric grid and ratepayers 1 2 3.

The financial and timeline risks and concerns discussed in this docket include:

Financial Risks and Concerns:
- Ratepayers could be left with the costs of new generation assets if the customer does not maintain projected energy use in future years, allowing the customer to walk away from contracts and leave existing customers "on the hook" for these assets 1.
- The scale of the proposed project is enormous, with the data center representing a significant percentage of Entergy Louisiana's total forecasted energy load for decades. To serve this load, Entergy proposes to build three new combined cycle gas plants with a total nominal capacity of 2,262 MW, originally projected to cost $3.2 billion, exposing ratepayers to substantial costs if projections prove inaccurate or if the customer's needs change 2.
- There is concern that avoiding the required Request for Proposals (RFP) process could lead to overpaying for generation resources and limit cost-saving opportunities from competitive procurement, as the company seeks an exemption from the Market-Based Mechanism (MBM) order 1.

Timeline Risks and Concerns:
- If the upper limit on power delivery from the bulk power system to the customer load is less than required, further studies and upgrades will be necessary, with study deadlines set for September 1, 2025, December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2027. These studies could identify additional capital costs and operational constraints, potentially delaying the project or increasing costs 3.
- Risks related to the dynamic behavior of the data center's load, which can fluctuate significantly over short periods, may require ongoing study and mitigation. These risks could impact reliability, power quality, and equipment costs, necessitating collaborative evaluation between Entergy and the customer throughout the project lifecycle 3, 4.
- The complexity and scale of required transmission upgrades and the uncertainty over what infrastructure is needed for associated renewable projects introduce further potential for delays and cost overruns, as details and costs will only be known as resources are identified and evaluated 5.

In summary, the primary concerns are the potential for stranded costs borne by ratepayers if the customer's demand does not materialize, exposure to significant capital investment without competitive procurement, operational constraints or delays due to system limits, and ongoing risks from highly variable customer load.

Stakeholders in Louisiana Public Service Commission Docket No. U-37425 include:

- Entergy Louisiana, LLC (ELL): The applicant, seeking approval to build new generation and transmission resources (including three new combined cycle generators and major transmission upgrades) to serve a hyperscale data center for Meta Platforms, Inc. in Richland Parish. ELL also proposes a Customer Sustainability Rider (CSR) and special cost allocation agreements. ELL is in favor of its proposal 1, 2, 1.

- Meta Platforms, Inc.: The customer for the planned data center. Meta supports ELL’s application, emphasizing the importance of meeting its energy needs and project timeline 2.

- Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) Staff: Staff expert R. Lane Sisung provides detailed analysis, noting the project’s potential benefits but recommending that some aspects of the application (notably carbon capture provisions in the CSR) be denied and that protective conditions and rate mitigation be adopted 1.

- Non-Profit Organizations (NPOs): Includes the Alliance for Affordable Energy and the Union of Concerned Scientists. NPOs have been critical, seeking more transparency, broader access to sensitive information, and expressing concern over ELL’s protective designations. They have challenged sufficiency of information provided on job impacts, energy needs, and sustainability goals, and have pushed for broader competitive procurement of renewables 3, 4.

- Sierra Club Environmental Law Program: Advocate for renewable alternatives and for ensuring fair competition through competitive solicitations (RFPs), objecting to ELL's request for exemption from the market-based mechanism order 5.

- SREA (Southeast Renewable Energy Association): Regional trade association concerned that ELL’s RFP exemption would limit competition and prevent renewable providers from offering lower-cost alternatives. SREA is against ELL’s proposal to bypass competitive procurement 5.

- Walmart: Intervenor emphasizing concerns about power quality impacts from the large data center load, recommending that ELL and the customer bear any mitigation costs 6.

- Cleco Power LLC and Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEPCO): Other utilities in the region, participating as interested parties for monitoring purposes, with no explicit position for or against the proposals 7, 8.

- EP2 Consulting, LLC: Requested to participate as an interested party; specific position not stated 9.

Summary of positions:
- In favor: ELL, Meta (customer).
- Conditionally in favor: LPSC staff (with modifications and protective conditions).
- Critical or opposed to specific elements: NPOs, Sierra Club, SREA, Walmart (on specific issues like transparency, competition, power quality).
- Monitoring/no explicit position: Cleco, SWEPCO, EP2 Consulting.

Key points of contention:
- Sufficiency of information and transparency regarding energy needs and economic impacts.
- Whether to exempt ELL from competitive procurement rules for new generation.
- Costs, risks, and power quality impacts associated with serving a large data center.
- The structure and content of the proposed Customer Sustainability Rider and its carbon capture provisions.

The docket identifies several areas of growth, primarily centered around:

1. Large-scale data center development
- The construction and operation of a hyperscale data center (Meta’s Richland Parish facility) is a major growth driver, requiring significant new generation and transmission resources, including three new combined cycle combustion turbine (CCCT) generators and extensive transmission infrastructure 1, 2.
- Key considerations include:
- The dynamic and highly variable load profile of data centers, which places complex demands on grid reliability and resource planning 3, 4.
- The timing and scale of infrastructure investments to align with the data center’s power needs and project timeline 2.
- The economic impact, including anticipated job growth and broader economic benefits to the region 2.

2. Expansion of Renewable Energy Resources
- The docket highlights a planned procurement of 1,500 MW of solar and/or hybrid storage resources for the customer, in addition to existing renewable commitments 5.
- Key considerations include:
- Ensuring the feasibility and integration of renewables given the reliability needs of large, dynamic loads 5.
- Addressing whether to include wind resources in the procurement process, as well as the ability to scale renewable procurement for other similarly situated customers 6, 7.
- The need for updated resource modeling and cost allocation to ensure affordability and environmental stewardship 6, 5.

3. Transmission Infrastructure Growth
- Major new transmission projects are proposed, including new substations and high-voltage lines to support both the data center and overall system reliability 8.
- Key considerations include:
- Exemptions from certain certification requirements for interim and point-of-delivery facilities to expedite construction 8.
- Cost allocation, with several substations funded by the customer, and implications for other ratepayers 8, 5.

Overarching considerations across all growth areas include ensuring reliability, affordability, and environmental stewardship in resource planning, as well as compliance with regulatory procedures and addressing potential discriminatory aspects in service offerings to large customers versus others 9, 6.