Tag Archives: author

The AES’ (AES) CEO Andres Gluski on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

The AES Corporation (NYSE: AES ) Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call August 10, 2015 9:00 am ET Executives Ahmed Pasha – Vice President of Investor Relations Andres Gluski – President and Chief Executive Officer Tom O’Flynn – Chief Financial Officer Bernerd da Santos – SVP and Chief Operating Officer Analysts Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Ali Agha – SunTrust Chris Turnure – JPMorgan Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley Angie Storozynski – Macquarie Gregg Orrill – Barclays Charles Fishman – Morningstar Equity Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Operator Good morning. My name is Alica, and I will be your conference operator for today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the AES Corporation Q2 2015 Financial Review. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speakers’ remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Thank you. Ahmed Pasha, you may begin. Ahmed Pasha Thanks, Alice. Good morning, and welcome to our second quarter 2015 earnings call. Our earnings release presentation and related financial information are available on our website at aes.com. Today, we will be making forward-looking statements during the call. There are many factors that may cause future results to differ materially from these statements. Please refer to our SEC filings for a discussion of these factors. Joining me this morning are Andres Gluski, our President and Chief Executive Officer; Tom O’Flynn, our Chief Financial Officer; and other senior members of our management team. With that, I will now turn the call over to, Andres. Andres? Andres Gluski Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining our second quarter 2015 earnings call. Today, we reported second quarter EPS of $0.25 and proportional free cash flow of $62 million and we are reaffirming our 2015 guidance ranges for all metrics despite facing increased headwinds from foreign currencies. Before Tom and I provide more color on our results for the second quarter and first half of the year, allow me to review our progress on the priorities for 2015 that I provided on our earnings call in February. First, we are making good progress to reach closure on key pending issues that could impact some of our businesses. At Eletropaulo in Brazil, we have had a reasonable outcome in our four year rate case. At Maritza in Bulgaria, important milestones have been reached towards the resolution of our outstanding accounts receivable. Second, we are executing on our construction program and leveraging our platforms. In April, we commissioned our 1.2 gigawatt Mong Duong plant in Vietnam six-month early and under budget. Our remaining $7 billion construction program is advancing on schedule and we expect to bring 6 gigawatts online by the end of 2018. In July, we also broke ground on three new energy storage projects, including our first two in Europe. Third, we are expanding our access to capital through partnerships at the project and business level. Today, I’m very pleased to announce that we are forming a new 50/50 joint venture with Grupo BAL to invest in power and related infrastructure projects in Mexico. And finally, regarding capital allocation, we have delivered on our commitment to invest at least $325 million in share repurchases. Today, we are announcing that we intend to utilize the approximately $100 million left on our buyback authorization during the remainder of this year. In 2015, between buybacks and dividends, we will return $700 million to shareholders or approximately 8% of our current market cap. I will provide more detail on these achievements in a movement, but now I’d like to briefly discuss our financial results and our expectations for the remainder of the year on slide four. Our year-to-date 2015 adjusted EPS of $0.50 is in line with our results of last year and our proportional free cash flow of $327 million is well ahead of first half 2014 results. Our earnings and cash flow are typically weighted towards the second half of the year. We expect our second half results to benefit from improved availability due to less plant maintenance, better hydrology in Latin America and higher collections in Bulgaria and the Dominican Republic. Although, there is still a lot of work to be done to deliver on stronger cash flow in the second half of the year, we remain confident that we will achieve our financial guidance for 2015. Now, let’s discuss some key issues at our businesses in Brazil on slide five. As we discussed on prior calls, we have seen a decline in electricity consumption in Brazil, which is the result of the economic recession and higher energy prices. Today, economists are projecting a 2% contraction of GDP for 2015. In addition, dry hydrology is leading to high electricity prices by requiring the dispatch of more expensive thermal energy. As a result, we are forecasting a 4% year-over-year decrease in volume at our Brazilian utilities in 2015. Nonetheless, we have already factored in the softness in our prior forecast. As a reminder, every 1% change in volume in our Brazilian utilities has a $7 million pretax impact on our bottom line. Turning now to hydrology on slide six. In Brazil, we have seen rainfall improve more than expected since our last call. In July, rainfall was 156% of the long-term average and reservoir levels are projected to be 37% by the end of August materially higher than the 20% levels at the beginning of the year. Improvement in hydrology in Brazil is reflected in spot prices, which are now around 120 reis per megawatt hour significantly lower than last year. We now see the risk of rationing electricity in Brazil in 2015 as remote, but we continue to expect a negative earnings impact of $0.07 per share from poor hydrology this year. In Panama, we are observing a return to normal hydrology and spot prices are about $100 per megawatt hour, one-third of the prices we saw last year. In Colombia, our 1 gigawatt hydro plant Chivor is experiencing stronger inflows close to the historical average. While in the rest of the country, inflows are 90% of the long-term average. Turning to slide seven, we have received approval for Eletropaulo’s four-year tariff reset. This outcome sets a strong foundation for predictable cash flow and earnings from this business through 2019. Lastly, we have successfully negotiated the restructuring of Brasiliana, where we own various businesses in partnership with BNDES, the state-owned development bank. Through this restructuring, we are separating our generation business, Tietê, from other businesses under the Brasiliana umbrella. This separation will give us more control of operations and capital allocation decisions at Tietê. Once this transaction is completed, we will be in a more favourable position to grow Tietê by tapping into approximately $500 million of debt capacity at this business. Turning to slide eight, as you may recall, in April, Maritza signed an MoU with its offtaker, NEK, whereby Maritza would receive a full payment of all arrears, which as of June 30 were $281 million in exchange for a reduction in the capacity price of the long-term PPA. Since our last call, we have secured the required approvals from the project lenders and from the Bulgarian regulator. At the same time, the government of Bulgaria has taken concrete steps to improve NEK’s financial position. Parliament has approved the energy sector reforms to support NEK through a new 5% tax on generators income as well as allocating all proceeds from the sale of the state’s CO2 allowances to NEK. Finally, the regulator announced an increase in the tariff of up to 20% for certain classes of industrial users and reduce NEK’s commitment to procure more expensive renewable energy. These steps will strengthen NEK’s financial position and allow the Bulgarian public sector to raise the necessary financing to pay their outstanding receivables. We expect to sign a binding agreement and collect on all arrears in the second half of the year. Collecting from NEK will be an important contributor to the improvement in our free cash flow in the second half of the year. Now let’s turn to our progress towards our strategic objectives beginning with construction on slide nine. Our construction program is the most important driver of our 10% to 15% average annual growth in free cash flow over the next few years. This strong growth in cash flow is the foundation for our commitment to a 10% annual dividend increase as well as all other capital allocation decisions. From 2015 through 2018, we expect to commission 7 gigawatts of new capacity in comparison with roughly 600 megawatts we brought online in the three years from 2012 through 2014. Through June, we’ve already brought online 1.3 gigawatts, which is nearly 90% of the capacity we plan to commission in 2015. Moving onto slide 10, our remaining 5.8 gigawatts under construction are progressing well and remain on time and on budget. As you can see on the slide, roughly 80% of this new capacity is in the Americas. As a reminder, total CapEx for our projects currently under construction is $7 billion, but the AES’ equity commitment is only $1.3 billion and all but $400 million has already been funded. We expect an average return on equity from these projects of more than 15%. Turning now to slide 11, as we discussed on our last call, we achieved commercial operation on our 1.2 gigawatt Mong Duong project in Vietnam six months early and under budget. The plant is operating at full load and will help meet Vietnam’s rapidly growing demand for electricity and provides us with a solid platform in the country. Moving on to slide 12. We are the world leader in battery-based energy storage with 86 megawatts of installed capacity. We are seeing growing regulatory support and greater acceptance by utilities in our markets. As a result, we recently broke ground on three new energy storage projects totaling 40 megawatts in three countries. We are consolidating our global leadership and now have a total of 70 megawatts of energy storage under construction that we expect to come online through 2016 and 200 more megawatts in late stage development. We are very well-positioned to continue to take advantage of this emerging business opportunity given AES’ portfolio and eight years of successful and profitable experience operating battery-based energy storage. Turning to the new joint venture we are forming in Mexico on slide 13. Today, we announced that we signed an MoU with Grupo BAL, a Mexican business conglomerate with a market cap of $11 billion to pursue new power desalinization and natural gas projects. Grupo Bal is one of the largest and most respected business groups in Mexico and one of Grupo Bal subsidiaries, Grupo Penoles is the off-taker of our TEP plant in Mexico. As you may know, Mexico is in the process of implementing new energy sector reforms, which will allow for greater private sector participation. Over the next 10 years, it is estimated that Mexico will need 25 gigawatts of new or replacement generation. We have owned and operated a successful generation business in Mexico for more than 15 years and now with Grupo Bal we’re poised to take advantage of the opening of the energy sector. Turning to slide 14, looking at growth opportunities beyond our projects currently under construction, all of which we expect to complete by 2018, our future project mix is likely to be heavily weighted towards natural gas and renewable, while using our platforms to provide energy storage, desalinization and LNG related services. In particular, in arid and semi-arid regions such as Chile, where our plants on the coast are already providing desalinization for their own needs, long-term desalinated water contracts can be an attractive business. Using existing infrastructure and permits significantly reduces the cost of providing desalinated water to third-parties such as municipal water authorities, mining and industrial customers. Based on all of the opportunities we see across our portfolio, we believe we can invest $300 million to $400 million of AES equity in attractive growth projects each year, which is consistent with the amount of equity we are currently contributing to our growth projects. This amount of equity investment is quite moderate considering the strong growth in our free cash flow. In addition, we can use the debt capacity at our existing businesses such as Brazil, Chile, the Philippines and the Dominican Republic to fund growth projects. Recycling capital has been and will remain an integral part of our strategy. Over the past four years, we have raised $3.1 billion in asset sale proceeds and another $2.5 billion in partner equity at the business and project level. These actions have permitted us to reposition our portfolio, pay down our debt, improve risk adjusted returns, and accelerate our growth profile. Before turning the call over to Tom, I would like to emphasize that as we have demonstrated to date, we will continue to compete all new investments against share repurchases in order to ensure that we are maximizing risk-adjusted returns for our shareholders. To that end, as you can see on slide 15, we are returning $700 million to our shareholders in 2015, which is 8% of our current market cap. We have returned a total of $2 billion to shareholders since September 2011 and reduced parent debt by $1.5 billion or 25% while significantly lessening it’s average tenure. With that I will turn the call over to Tom to discuss our second quarter and year-to-date results and full-year guidance in more detail. Tom O’Flynn Thanks Andres and good morning everyone. Our first-half results and the reaffirmation of our guidance demonstrate the benefits of our proactive actions to mitigate the impact from currency devaluation in other macro factors we’ve experienced over the last several months. Today, I’ll review our second quarter results, including adjusted EPS, adjusted pretax contribution or PTC by strategic business unit or SBU, proportional free cash flow by SBU, then I’ll cover our 2015 guidance and our 2015 capital allocation plan. Turning to slide 17, second quarter adjusted EPS of $0.25 was $0.03 lower than second quarter 2014. At a high level, we were negatively impacted by the following, $0.04 operating impacts, including timing of plant maintenance of certain businesses, as well as lower demand in contracting strategy in Brazil. These were offset by favorable hydrology in Panama, in Colombia and new businesses coming online. We had a $0.02 impact from a stronger U.S. dollar, which appreciated roughly 20% against the Brazilian Real, Colombian Peso, and the Euro. Finally a $0.02 net impact from other adjustments, primarily the favorable reversal of liabilities in Brazil and Kazakhstan in 2014 offset by the favorable reversal of a liability at Eletropaulo in 2015. On the positive side, we benefited $0.04 from a lower tax rate of 30% this year versus 40% in the second quarter last year and a $0.01 from capital allocation net of asset sales, which resulted in 13% lower Parent debt, and a 4% lower share count relative to last year. Now, I’ll cover our SBU’s financial performance in more detail on the next six slides beginning on slide 18. In the U.S., adjusted PTC decreased by $24 million, due to planned maintenance in Hawaii and an IPL, as well as lower wind generation at Buffalo Gap in Texas. Proportional free cash flow was roughly flat, reflecting working capital recovery and lower interest at DPL. In Andes, PTC decreased $23 million, primarily due to the timing of planned maintenance in Chile and Argentina, as well as a weaker Columbian peso. Proportional free cash flow declined by $37 million, due to lower earnings and higher tax payment at Chivor in Colombia versus last year. In Brazil, PTC decreased $74 million. In addition to the $17 million impact from the depreciation of the Brazilian real, the decline was driven by approximately $13 million net impact from liability reversals in each period at our distribution businesses Sul and Eletropaulo. You may also recall that last year our generation business Tietê benefitted from spot sales at favorable prices, due to lower contract levels during the first half of the year. This benefit was more of a timing issue as Tietê had to purchase in this spot market in the second half. This year, Tietê’s contract levels are flat in the first and second half, so we expect contributions to be evenly distributed. Last but not least, Sul has been affected by lower demand and higher costs. Proportional free cash flow decreased $18 million, primarily driven by lower operating income at Tietê as I just discussed. In MCAC, PTC increased a $11 million, largely driven by improved hydro conditions in Panama, where we generated more this year versus buying in the spot market last year. Panama also benefited from the commencement of operations of our 72 megawatt thermal power barge. Proportional free cash flow improved by $12 million, primarily driven by improved operating performance. In Europe, adjusted PTC decreased by $32 million mainly due to lower energy prices and the timing of planned maintenance at Chilvers [ph] [0:18:16] in U.K. Despite the decline in earnings, proportional free cash flow was up $3 million, largely by improved working capital at Maritza. Finally in Asia, PTC increased $7 million, resulting from the early commencement of operations at Mong Duong in Vietnam, partially offset by the sale of minority interest in Masinloc in the Philippines in 2014. Proportional free cash flow was roughly flat. Turning to slide 24, overall, we earned $251 million in adjusted PTC during the quarter, a decrease of $89 million from last year and we generated $62 million of proportional free cash flow, an increase of $15 million. As you can see on slide 25, year-to-date adjusted PTC declined $80 million, largely driven by lower demand and contracting strategy in Brazil, a stronger U.S. dollar, as well as the net impact from reversal of liabilities in Brazil and Europe. These negative impacts were largely offset by the contributions from new businesses that came online earlier this year in our capital allocation decisions. Our proportional free cash flow increased $151 million to $327 million, primarily due to higher contributions from the U.S. and MCAC, including higher collections at DPL and improved working capital in Puerto Rico. Year-to-date adjusted PTC and proportional free cash flow by SBU are in the appendix of today’s presentation. Now to slide 26, comparing our first half results to our full-year guidance, our earnings and cash flow tend to be more heavily weighted towards the second half of the year. Consistent with our prior expectations in the second half of 2015, we expect EPS to benefit from improved availability as a result of planned maintenance that was completed earlier in the year in Chile, the Dominican Republic, and the U.S. Improved hydro conditions in Panama and Colombia, seasonality related to contract generation businesses in the U.S. and Chile as well as IPL, the previously expected benefit from tax opportunities at certain businesses and finally contributions from Mong Duong in Vietnam which came online in first half of the year. Regarding proportional free cash flow, improved results in the second half of the year versus the first half are driven in part by higher operating performance in the second half consistent with our earnings profile. The remaining increase is largely attributable to lower pension and fuel payments and IPL in the U.S., timing of income tax payments and VAT collections at [indiscernible], higher collection of receivables in the Dominican Republic and collection of receivables in Bulgaria, a portion of which will be used at the business for deleveraging and fuel payments. Bottom line is that, we have to execute on our plan, we feel confident in our ability to meet our objectives for the year and we are reaffirming our guidance on all metrics. Our reaffirmed guidance is based on forward curves as of June 30 reflecting a benefit of couple of entities relative to our prior guidance which is based on March 31. Client curves as of July 31 were effectively back to where we were as of March 31. Our gains also assumes the current outlook for hydro in Latin America, which is in line with our expectations and an unchanged full year tax rate of 31% to 33% versus year-to-date 2015 rate of 31%. Assumptions in sensitivities for our guidance are in the appendix of today’s deck. On to slide 27 in our parent capital allocation plan for the year, sources in the left hand side reflect total available discretionary cash for 2015 of roughly $1.65 billion which is $70 million higher than our last call. As a reminder, we previously announced asset sale proceeds in the sale of a portion of our interest in IPALCO and Jordan as well as the sale of the Armenia Mountain Wind farm. Today, we are also announcing the sale of our solar assets in Spain bringing our total asset sale proceeds this year to $573 million. We are also expecting an additional $45 million in return of capital from operating businesses which along with our parent free cash flow provides us with nearly $600 million available for dividend payments and growth, incremental share repurchases and other potential investments. In terms of incremental sources of discretionary cash, as Andres mentioned, we’ll continue to evaluate additional asset sale opportunities which could be $200 million to $300 million annually on average, but maybe lumpy year-to-year. Now to uses on the right hand side of the slide, we plan to invest about $350 million in our subsidiaries, 60% of which is at IPL and is already been funded. We’ve invested $345 million in prepayment and refinancing of parent debt leaving us with only $180 million in parent debt maturities through 2018. Finally, in addition to dividend, we are investing $420 million in our shares, which is $100 million more than we committed to on our last call. This brings total cash returned to shareholders through buybacks and dividends to $700 million for the year. We will continue to beat various investment opportunities to maximize per share value for shareholders. With that, I’ll now turn it back to Andres. Andres Gluski Thanks, Tom. To summarize, we continue to make steady progress on our objectives specifically we are pulling all levers to achieve our financial objectives despite the headwinds from poor hydrology in Brazil, lower foreign exchange and commodity prices. As I noted, overall hydrology in Latin America is improving as a result of the El Niño phenomena. We have achieved a number of milestones towards resolving Maritza’s outstanding receivables after signing an MOU with NEK in April. We expect to collect outstanding receivables in the second half of the year. We have completed the 1.2 gigawatt Mong Duong project in Vietnam six months ahead of schedule and we are making good progress on the remaining 5.8 gigawatts under construction. We are bringing in financial partners to leverage our platform and maximize overall returns by forming a joint venture with Grupo BAL, a strong partner with significant presence in Mexico. And in 2015, we are investing than a $1 billion in returning cash to our shareholders and debt pay downs, in addition to the $350 million we are investing in profitable growth projects. In conclusion, in line with the plans we laid out on previous calls, we continue to leverage our platforms and allocate our discretionary cash to maximize risk adjusted returns for our shareholders. Now, I’d like to open up the call for questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator [Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Greg Gordon with Evercore ISI. Your line is open. Greg Gordon Thanks. Good morning guys. Andres Gluski Good morning, Greg. Greg Gordon Great quarter. Your commitment to capital allocation should be – is best-in-class. So thank you very much and I know your shareholders are certainly very happy. The question – sort of an open ended question firstly, there are so many moving parts to the guidance. I know you are on track to hit earnings guidance for the year and doing a little bit better on proportional free cash but if you look at and for the balance of the year versus the plan you laid out in March, is there any specific areas where you’re a little bit ahead or little bit behind of where you would expected? I know overall you are still within the channel. Andres Gluski I would say that one of the key drivers we have as I mentioned on cash is Maritza and we had said that we would get this in the second half of the year. So we’ve really achieved the important milestones. We are quite impressed with the commitment of the Bulgarian government to fix the electricity sector and parliament approving some – important reforms. So I think that’s the key component, so we are on track there. I would say hydrology in July was quite frankly a little bit ahead of what we expected. And FX is more or less in line with what we expect. I think if anything, the demand in Brazil is softer – perhaps a little bit softer than we had expected even though we had those numbers in. So overall, we are kind of on track. I think the main points are that we have some seasonality and some of it in terms of collections, we tend to collect more in the Dominican Republic, we have Bulgaria, those are two discrete factors in the second half. And then we had a number of planned maintenance in the first half which won’t happen in the second half. So that’s sort of overall, it’s not too far from our expectations I would say on a case-by-case basis. Greg Gordon That’s good because one of your competitors in Brazil had a big disappointment in the second quarter as it pertains to their business. So I think there were some trepidation coming into your call that you might see a downward revision. Thank you. The second question is just to be clear, when you gave the first quarter guidance, you based your projections on March 31 index, so Tom, you’re basically saying that if we roll forward to the end of July, we look a little more or less like we looked like at the end of March, so obviously still inside the guidance range. Tom O’Flynn Yes, that’s correct. If you have asked us five weeks ago, we would have said we might be $0.01 or $0.02 up but I think we lost that in the last five weeks. So basically back to where we were end of March. Greg Gordon And then final question from me, the 104 to 204 of discretionary cash to be [implicated][ ph], if the stock price doesn’t respond you guys continuing to execute at what point would you go to the Board and potentially allocate that to further share repurchases? Andres Gluski Greg, as we’ve said in the past, our Board has been very supportive of our share buybacks and we’ve always been able to go back and get a share repurchase authorization when we felt we needed it. So I think that there is – our sector has that have been hit in the last month by negativism and certainly that’s been reflected in the stock price and certainly that affects our capital allocation decisions as we are comparing the value of buying back shares with our new projects. Greg Gordon Okay. Thank you, guys. Thanks again for a great quarter. Tom O’Flynn Thank you. Operator [Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from the line of Ali Agha with SunTrust. Your line is open. Ali Agha Thank you. Good morning. Andres Gluski Good morning, Ali. Ali Agha Good morning. Andres, first question to you on Brazil, so as you said the hydro situation appears to be improving but you still have the FX headwinds, the economic and political outlook there continues to be very challenging from what we can tell. I just wanted to get a sense what is your tolerance level to absorb all of this. I mean are you there indefinitely for the long haul regardless of how old this place or how are you thinking about that relative to all the other jurisdictions where you have better opportunities perhaps? Andres Gluski Sure. I think a lot of our countries have cyclical patterns. Right now Brazil in on the – certainly not at the peak of one of these patterns. I will remind people I think of two, three years ago. Lot of questions I would get on these calls is why wasn’t I investing more in Brazil and that we were slow. What we did at the time and continue to do today is we only invest when we see long term value. And we really see the value not quite frankly get caught in the trends. I think, you know Brazil is having a recession this year. It will probably have a flat 2017 and is expected, 2016, sorry and expected to pick up in 2017. Brazil is a big market, it is a country which has great potential and I think that us as a company of the Americas we should have a presence in Brazil. Now of course all of our assets we look at, what we consider their long term value. What we could sell them for and how they contribute to a balanced portfolio. So, overall what I would say is that I agree that the economic situations look challenging in Brazil, but realize this is a country with tremendous potential that could come back and we can’t come in and out on a short-term basis. And the final thing is look we have been very prudent about again investments in Brazil, we still have $500 million of debt capacity at Tiete. So, growth in Brazil will come from leveraging the Brazilian businesses. So, I hope that answers your question, but I think that the point is that they are cyclical patterns; Brazil has a lot of capacity to rebound and as always when times were very good in Brazil we were always looking at what is the value and I would remind people that we sold a lot of Brazil at the peak. We sold our telecom business there for billion dollars. We also sold 50% of our holdings in Eletropaulo back in 2005. So, we will continue to make those adjustments as we see fit. Ali Agha Okay. The second question, I wanted to just clarify the capital usage plan going forward. If I heard you right, Andres, you were saying you may be investing $300 million to $400 million a year in new opportunities on an annual basis. Your dividend is consuming about $300 million of your cash and that’s going to grow at 10% every year. So, where is the cash coming from? Because I’m looking at Parent cash and I think these investments and the dividend, I don’t think there’s any cash left. So am I missing something here or how is that being funded? Andres Gluski Well, yes, what you are missing from the equation is what Tom mentioned that we will be selling about $200 million to $300 million in our existing asset platform. So, if you include that the equation does close and realize that as our new plants come online they will be generating more cash as well. Ali Agha Okay. Got it. And then, lastly, to clarify your point, you benchmark everything obviously against share buybacks. So, are you seeing those opportunities out there that can still give you greater returns on a risk-adjusted basis than buying back your own share, that you’re confident you can spend $300 million to $400 million a year on new projects? Andres Gluski Yes, we do. It really gets back to utilizing our platforms. So, I did mention the example, for example of de-sal. If you – basically we are upgrading our plants to use reverse osmosis technology and once you have the permit for intake of salt water and discharge of saline and you can basically put these in a modular fashion. These are very attractive opportunities. We are also seeing it in other places where we can add-on energy storage and the new projects we are engaged in. So, what I can tell you is that we are seeing above 15% returns on equity from our projects on average. So, yes, we are seeing a lot of attractive opportunities. Of course we are being very selective with our stock at these prices. Ali Agha Thank you. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Chris Turnure with JPMorgan, your line is open. Chris Turnure Good morning, guys. I wanted to get a sense of the potential for GSF reform in Brazil and to get your opinion on the potential for that in general and then the potential structure if it does materialize. And then also, on the flip side, have you sought an injunction for Tiete there? And how would that work if others are successful with injunctions in penalizing of you and the remainder of guys out there that don’t get injunctions? Andres Gluski Okay. Let me take the first one. This year, GSF will be between 17% and 19% and it’s a considerable cost to the generators. I believe the total is somewhere above BRL 20 billion that people are paying. There has been discussions between the government, the Ministry of Energy and mines and the association such as [indiscernible] as well as you have a [indiscernible] and there has been talk about capping the GSF. The exact amount is being negotiated. Let’s just give a hypothetical so it’s capped 10%. The generators will be compensated for that difference between 7% or 8% additional to the cap for example this year by an extension of their contract so you’d receive a regulatory asset, especially of their concession, you’d receive a regulatory asset equivalent to that amount. So, there is nothing set as of yet. There’s certainly interest from the government interest from the regulators and we’ll keep you informed. In terms of the probability, I think on the previous call I was quite let’s say prudent about this thing, we will see, I think the chances of something like this happening have improved. Regarding the injunction, Tom. Tom O’Flynn I just see the – I haven’t got all the details here, but there was initially compensation to one or small group of generators that was actually detrimental to the rest of the generators and we did participate with the larger generator community and saying that any – any decisions, any compensation should be consistent across the sector. That was some time ago and I believe the discussions are now focused on sector reform as Andre said it goes into compensation that really gets into concession renewal, or mind you our concession is well after [indiscernible] it is 2028. In the GSF of 17 and 19 that’s the number that we’ve had now for a number of months. There is some possibility we’ve seen thermal dispatch come down recently from about 19, I think 15.5 gigawatts which may indicate there could be some greater thermal generation i.e. a little bit of improvement on the GSF, but it’s still far too soon to tell that just news over the last couple of weeks. Chris Turnure Okay. And then, switching gears, I just wanted to get an update on your Argentinian businesses or business down there. It’s a little bit tough to break out in and of itself, how have earnings maybe trended the past couple of years there? And are those trends a function of regulatory changes to power prices? And how do you think about that business going forward, with the potential maybe for other regulatory changes to those power prices? And how do you think about things post the election? Tom O’Flynn I think that’s a great question. I’d say of course if you take a longer-term view in terms of the past coming to the present you know pricing has deteriorated in Argentina, no question about that. On the other hand, I think we have fared very well from a regulatory position because as you know until last year we are exporting energy from Argentina to Chile, through our TermoAndes plant. We also have the only coal plant in the country. So, we have been selling energy under, in TermoAndes under the [indiscernible] which in the past was more favorable than it is today, but I’d say in general you know we have always been making positive earnings in Argentina. So, even though they’re less to say than they were four, five years ago, they continue to be positive. We have been receiving 96% payment on our accounts receivable, some of these are Fannie Mae bank bonds, these bonds are dollarized, they pay interest and for example like Guillermo brown plant where we have a considerable number of these bonds are basically being used to fund that plant. We’re going to receive that plant, our proportion of it, very soon, it’s being commissioned. So, I think overall in Argentina despite the challenging economic circumstances we’ve done well that the one thing is we haven’t been able to pay dividends out of Argentina for the last two years. Now, looking forward what do we see? I think the elections in October, the two leading candidates either one would be favorable. I think you’ll have a gradual return to market-based pricing and a listing of the exchange controls. So, we have a tremendous asset base in Argentina. Of course, we’re not putting any new money in at this stage, but I think we’ve handled it well and I firmly believe that within a year or two we’ll be paying dividends out of Argentina. It is basically considerably developed country and quite wealthy. So, it’s again, I think it’s probably on the rebound at this stage. Chris Turnure Okay. Would you characterize what you’ve embedded in your long-term EPS and cash flow guidance as incorporating a lot of upside there or you remain conservative there? Tom O’Flynn We’re always conservative. So we never embed big upside. So, what I can say is we do expect sort of a continuation of what we’ve been doing there, which I think is managing the situation quite favorably. Chris Turnure Great. Thank guys. Operator [Operator Instructions] Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Stephen Byrd with Morgan Stanley, your line is open. Stephen Byrd Good morning. Tom O’Flynn Good morning Steve. Stephen Byrd Wanted to echo Greg’s comments on capital allocations, very clear and I did want to take a little further into that following up on all these questions on the $300 million to $400 million in growth, in addition to asset sales and when you think about all of the other levers at your disposal in terms of just retain cash flow at the country level, the project level or other leveraged capacity etcetera, should we be thinking that those levers are quite significant and therefore could further reduce the amount of true equity at the parent or those more discretionary and not something that we should be thinking of as quite significant offsets in terms of the amount of equity needed at the parent. Tom O’Flynn Yes, Steven, certainly as we look for growth, we do look to drive as much as we can out of the businesses as possible, I think there are big growth drivers, certainly Hahn Air has been a big driver. They’ve brought in partners, they’ve done project finance and the only equity that’s been done in the last few years is a 150 million totally at the Hahn Air level. We did our 70% contribution. So that’s a great example of a multi-billion dollar construction program and instruction in the Hahn Air balance sheet, and Hahn Air cash flow growth as much as possible. I think Andres has mentioned a couple other examples, Dominican Republic, we have some unused debt capacity that’s currently being used to fund a facility upgrade and we look around the business to do that as much as we can. IPO has been growing quite a bit also that really grows in more of a classic utilities down that we maintain a capital structure 55, debt 45, equity 30, more came to the normal utility, but we do that and we’ll continue to look for leveraged capacity at the business, look to see whether a partner for a project or a business can come into help increase the value of the business and or bring in more effectively priced capital and then lastly if you will we’ll look at up to the parent. And the $300 million to $400 million is just a general range. I think that’s the number we’ve been at the last couple of years, you go back I think three years it was more in the mid-twos, so it’s just a general indication. Stephen Byrd Understood great. And then just shifting over to your announced joint venture, can you just discuss at a high level the nature of the arrangement, is this effectively exclusive on both sides, are there other elements of the joint venture in terms of more specific targets or anything else that you can just a little bit further color on the JV would be appreciated. Andres Gluski Sure, Grupo BAL is one of the most reputable business groups in Mexico and it has a long tradition having been established around 1901 I believe. They’ve been our off-taker at the TEP plant in – for the last 10 years and we’ve been very pleased with us. They have another small joint venture with EDP for some wind projects and we have our existing plants of TEG, TEP and [indiscernible] which will be outside this joint venture. However, going forward, it’s exclusive on both side that we’ll exclusively look at new deals. There’s no sort of target that we will invest X amount, it’s really that we will look at these projects together, we both bring strengths, we bring the global size, our successful E&C experience, our ability to manage these plants and they bring the local component and knowledge of the sector. So, Mexico is opening up the energy sector, there are I think going to be a considerable number of bids for power plants not only of CFE, but also of private sector clients and also with our strategy of using our platforms for adjacencies such as desalinization or energy storage or for example LNG services, we can add those on. So, this is a – going forward it will be exclusive 50-50, we both have to agree to make an investment. If one partner does not agree with the investment the other one can make it on its own. So, this is I think very favorable for both sides. It gives us a lot of flexibility and it’s really aiming to leverage off our strengths and the good thing is that we know each other, we’ve been working together for more than a decade. Stephen Byrd That’s great. Thank you very much. Tom O’Flynn Thank you. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Angie Storozynski with Macquarie, your line is open. Angie Storozynski Thank you. I wanted to talk about Eletropaulo. So, you have just concluded a rate case there. What kind of load assumptions do you have embedded in that rate case and secondly is the restructuring of Brazilian having any impact on Eletropaulo? Andres Gluski Okay. I would say in terms of growth and as we said we’re looking at a decline in growth and this – the numbers we gave are weighted average for Sul and Eletropaulo. The decline in demand is stronger in Sul than it has been in Eletropaulo. I think we’re looking at pretty much flat demand for next year and then growing moderately after that. I mean the long-term growth in Brazil is what you normally expect is about 3% to 4% has been the historical average over the last 10 years. The second is how Brazilian affecting Eletropaulo. As you know in 2005 we sold down 50% of our holdings both us and B&DS of Eletropaulo and we basically took that money and de-levered the company. Then in 2011, we spun off the telecom Achimos [ph] and sold that. So, right now, between the two of us, we have about 32% that is Braziliana has it, we have 16%, roughly a little bit more than 16%. I don’t really think that the Braziliana structure has been affecting Eletropaulo directly. I think that the distributors have been I think more fairly treated over the past six months than they had before and that’s why you’ve seen a recovery in the place. I mean Eletropaulo’s stock should be up I believe about 70% in dollars this year and in fact the sector it’s been the best performing within the sector by a considerable margin. I think part of that is perhaps it was dropped also more strongly because some of the let’s say decisions against us, but we got a good decision on a regulatory asset base, the WAC has been raised over 8%. So these are all favorable things. Now unquestionably other than the regulated part, which as I said the market is recognizing, it’s making certain investments to continue to improve quality of service and it will depend on the recovery of the Brazilian economy. I believe that the Brazilian government is doing the right things at this time and taking some very brave decisions, including cutting spending, raising interest rates and that these will have good long-term effects, but certainly they’re very tough in the short-run, but I really commend their bravery. So, I don’t know if that answers your question. I mean what we see in Eletropaulo is a tough 2016, I’m sorry a tough 2015, a more moderate 2016 and a recovery more in 2017, 2018. Angie Storozynski Okay. Thank you, just one more, on Mong Duong, so the plant came online six months ahead of time, the hydro conditions across the board seem to be in line with expectations, everything else is in line with expectations. So, should we just see this plant that’s potentially moving you beyond the midpoint of your guidance or what’s the potential offset if it’s not the case? Tom O’Flynn What I would say is that at this stage we are reaffirming the guidance ranges. I think there are – that’s not only earnings, but cash flow. Certainly, on cash flow depending on where we’d be in the range, the payment at Maritza is obviously a big mover because you talk about the range of a billion, 1.4 billion, 1.350 billion and 280 million will make a difference. On the other hand, right now I would say that we remain within that guidance range. Certainly, we don’t see in the five months that are left something that would likely move us outside of those ranges to the upside. Angie Storozynski Fantastic, thank you very much. Tom O’Flynn Thank you. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Gregg Orrill with Barclays, your line is open. Gregg Orrill Yes, thank you. Was wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the potential of caps on rationing exposure in Brazil and how that might affect that regulatory asset, might affect you either in magnitude going from the 10% to the 17% to 19% maybe how those things might be recorded financially? Would that help you from an earnings perspective as well as cash flow? Andres Gluski Let me answer the first part and then Tom can answer the second part how we’re looking. We see – the probability rationing this year is very low. And there are two drivers; one, the government has done a very good job of basically running thermals and saving water, and the rains did come in considerably stronger. Quite frankly as of mid July, the reservoir levels were at 41% which is very high. You should be quite frankly declining at this time of the year. So the likelihood of rationing this year not to say it’s impossible, it’s very remote and if rains continue as expected, it’s not very likely in 2016 again assuming the government continues this policy. In addition to that, you’ve had a decline in demand. So you put those two together, again it’s a much stronger position vis-à-vis having rationing this year and next than it was before and this year is substantially less. In terms of the regulatory asset, I mean that’s a considerable number but I will leave it to Tom in terms of how much we would actually book. Tom O’Flynn Yes, Greg. I think you’re ahead of us. If there is something that allowed for Tietê concession which is now ends in 2029, allows it to get extended, going to valued the economic value, does it turn into a regulatory asset that we would record, we are still early on to understand the detail. Certainly we’ll look at that from a GAAP standpoint, but I think it’s early to think – too hard about that. Gregg Orrill Okay. Thanks. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Charles Fishman with Morningstar Equity. Your line is open. Charles Fishman Good morning. In 2016, I see in slide 53 that you’re still seeing flat to modest growth. With what’s going on in Brazil with maybe your tax rate returning to a more normalized level, you won’t get as much incremental benefit from Mong Duong because it fortunately came on early. What gets you to the modest growth for next year, realizing its flat to modest growth, the guidance doesn’t change. Andres Gluski I think that the positives, we have the Cochrane coming on. This is a 552 megawatt construction project in Chile and that’s proceeding very well, and we also have rate based growth at IPL. We completed the 2,400 megawatts of upgrades and then of course you mentioned Mong Duong, but we have a full year. And the other thing is of course capital allocation and it will also depend on hydrology. If we have continued good hydrology and specifically for example in the case of Chivor, Chivor typically has a very – it’s a very good base that is in. So it tends to have less volatile hydrology than the rest of Columbia. So when you have right now, El Nino, it’s getting – the rest of Columbia is dry and actually Chivor is at average. And so then actually you get better prices for the energy you sell that you haven’t had contracted. And finally, we expect some normalization of the currencies as well. So all sorts of things that can cause this now. I agree 2016, if we look out the next three years, 2016 is on top this year because 2017 and 2018 we have a lot more projects coming online. The other thing is we realize that on some of these adjacencies such as energy storage or desal, these can be operational in a very short period of time. And desally will depend quite frankly, we have to build a pipeline to a client but some of those cases we don’t. So those are additional things that could help. Charles Fishman Okay. And then second question Andre, I realize you got a lot more going on in the U.S. but the clean power plant seems to have more benefit towards renewable. I would think that would be good for your storage business. Is that correct? Andres Gluski Yes, absolutely. I think that the clean power plant let’s say increase because it’s basically what they had laid out before, but accelerates it – increases the market for energy storage and California has really led the way requiring 1,325 megawatts of utilities to have by 2020. So this I think accelerates the adoption of energy storage. Charles Fishman And so you’ve got Ohio is going for storage and then California and Europe under construction, is that correct? Andres Gluski We are not under construction yet in California. That will be in 2019 when we start, but we have 100 megawatts with Southern California. Charles Fishman Okay. Thanks. Andres Gluski Thank you. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Mitchell [indiscernible]. Your line is open. Unidentified Analyst Hi guys. Could you discuss a little bit on some of the core outages, [indiscernible] mentioned some of its plans that are coned by you, experienced high outage rates in the second quarter and just wanted to get some color from you if you saw that at all of your plans or if it was just like [indiscernible] and what went on and how you guys are working on hopefully fixing that. Bernerd da Santos Hello, this is Bernerd da Santos. Yes, that plan is [indiscernible] beginning of the year. With the management we have implemented 180 days plan that is ongoing. We have already 30 days. We have our next preview with the team 50 days from now. I was present with the management team two weeks ago in Stuart and we have seen improvement. So we expect that we’re going to calculate whether it was the force outage rates in Stuart by the end of the year. Unidentified Analyst So you are finding it specifically to add Stuart? Bernerd da Santos Yes, that’s correct. Unidentified Analyst And is this going to impact your ability to get into the capacity performance Stuart planned. Tom O’Flynn No, we’ll factor that in. [indiscernible] are factored in but we would expect as Bernerd said an improving Ephod [ph] overtime. Unidentified Analyst Okay. Great. Thank you so much. Tom O’Flynn Thank you. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Julien Dumoulin-Smith with UBS. Your line is open. Julien Dumoulin-Smith Hey, good morning guys. Just checking in here, in terms of the next accretion, you guys are talking about for the asset sales and talk about share buybacks in place. What’s the net benefit of the $200 million to $300 million in asset sales you’re contemplating for this year relative to the share buybacks, break even or positive accretion? Tom O’Flynn That’s probably little positive. I think the overall PE of our sales about 13, we do split that between debt pay down and share buybacks. So net-net, it’s probably about maybe a breakeven – positive of breakeven. Julien Dumoulin-Smith Got it, excellent. And then can you just update us on what are the pending finalization of the issues in Bulgaria? From what I understand, that should be happening very soon. Or just is there anything really in the way there to make that happen? Andres Gluski At this point, we really have all the approvals necessary, so now it’s a question of the Bulgarian public sector raising the funds for the payment. So there is no sort of pending important approval at this stage as basically they have to do the market operations to get the funds and to pay us. Julien Dumoulin-Smith Great. And then lastly in terms of deleveraging the business in South America, what’s the timeline there, just the FX or so I mean how quickly should we expect these asset sales to come up and ultimately what’s your interest in these assets. I presume it’s pretty real [ph]. Andres Gluski Basically we will look for real value before we leverage up today as we have in the past. When you mentioned asset sales, perhaps I think you’re talking about Petrobras and hydro who may be selling some assets. We certainly look at them. What I want to say is that, we will never grow for growth sake and these really have to makes sense, and they have to make sense which should they in terms of a portfolio, there have to be things which would decrease its hydro risk. So it will depend on their contract position and other thing, so there is nothing really short term on this. We are looking at the possibility of doing something like [indiscernible] for example in Brazil as we did in Panama. But I think the main point is [indiscernible] not AES. Julien Dumoulin-Smith And just remind us what the target leverage at [indiscernible]. Tom O’Flynn Yeah. We looked at debt-to-EBITDA but right it’s quite unlevered and its dividends are restricted by earnings. So it’s not possible to do a recap and bring money upstairs. So if you want to use the leverage capacity it will be for growth within Tietê. And as Andrew said, the growth would be within Tietê funds rather than AES. Julien Dumoulin-Smith Right. And what’s the target leverage for GFA just to get a sense of how much capacity there is today. Tom O’Flynn We will use about $400 million to $500 million U.S. dollar capacity, that’s back into that – yeah, there will be capacity so you could obviously gross that up to the extension buying an asset that comes with cash flow, you could use a larger number. And that’s exactly goes upon the coverage ratio. Julien Dumoulin-Smith Excellent. Thank you guys. Operator There are no further questions at this time. I will now turn the call back to Ahmed Pasha. Ahmed Pasha Thank you everybody for joining us in today’s call. As always the IR team will be available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you and have a nice day. Operator This concludes today’s conference call. You may now disconnect.

Innergex Renewable Energy’s (INGXF) CEO Michel Letellier on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Executives Marie-Josée Privyk – Director Communications and Sustainable Development Michel Letellier – President and CEO Jean Perron – Chief Financial Officer Jean Trudel – Chief Investment Officer Analysts Rupert Merer – National Bank Nelson Ng – RBC Capital Markets Ben Pham – BMO Capital Markets Innergex Renewable Energy Inc. ( OTC:INGXF ) Q2 2015 Results Earnings Conference Call August 6, 2015 10:00 AM ET Operator Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for standing by. Welcome to Innergex Renewable Energy’s Conference Call and Webcast for the Second Quarter 2015 Results. [Foreign Language] [Operator Instructions]. I would like to remind everyone that this conference call and webcast is being recorded today, Thursday, August 6, 2015, at 10 a.m. ET. I will now turn the conference over to Marie-Josée Privyk, Director Communications and Sustainable Development. Please go ahead. Marie-Josée Privyk Thank you.[Foreign Language] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I’m here today with Mr. Michel Letellier, President and CEO of Innergex, and Mr. Jean Perron, Chief Financial Officer. Also joining us is Mr. Jean Trudel, Chief Investment Officer. Please note that the presentations will be in English. However, you are welcome to address your questions either in French or English.[Foreign Language] I’d also like to point out that journalists are invited to call us afterwards if they wish to address any question. In a minute, Mr. Perron will provide some details on our financial results for the second quarter, ended June 30th, 2015. Mr. Letellier will then provide an immediate review of our operating activities and outlook, and Mr. Trudel will present our financing activity. We will then open the Q&A session will all three senior executives. The financial statements and the MD&A have been filed on SEDAR and are readily accessible via the Internet. You may also access the press release, financial statements and the MD&A on the Internet website in the Investor’s section. During this presentation, we will refer to financial measures such as adjusted EBITDA, free cash flow and payout ratios that are not recognized measures according to International Financial Reporting Standards, as they do not have a standardized meaning. Please be advised that this conference call and webcast will contain forward-looking information that reflects the Corporation’s expectations with respect to future results or developments. For explanations concerning the principal assumptions used by the Corporation to derive this forward-looking information and of principal risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated, I invite you to consult the first pages of the Company’s MD&A, as well as its Annual Information Form. I now turn the conference to Mr. Perron. Jean Perron Thank you, Marie-Josée. Good morning. The quarterly results for Q2 2015 are showing production that was at 93% of the long-term average of 931 gigawatt-hours, due mainly to below-average water flows at the six 50%-owned facilities of the Harrison Hydro Limited Partnership in British Columbia. This translates into 904 gigawatt-hours of production, compared with production of 899 gigawatt-hours in Q2 2014. Production of the first six months of 2015 stands at 103% of long-term average. Revenues for the quarter were 70.2 million, compared with 69.6 million in 2014. Revenues for the first six months were 127.9 million compared to 107.2 million last year. The increase is due to above-average water flows in BC and higher wind regimes and to [indiscernible] of SM-1 in June 2014. Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter stood at 53.4 million, compared to 53.8 million in Q2 2014. Adjusted EBITDA for year to date stood at 96.4 million, compared to 79.1 million in 2014. The increase is mainly due to the higher production since the beginning of the year. Finance costs of 24.5 million for the quarter were similar to Q2 2014, while they stood at 41 million since the beginning of the year, down 3.2 million compared to last year due to the lower inflation compensation interest. During the quarter, a 24.7 million loss was realized on derivative financial instruments resulting from the settlement of the Big Silver Creek bond forward contract upon closing of the 197.2 million financing of the project. A similar 68 million loss was incurred in the previous quarter for the Boulder Creek and Upper Lillooet River upon closing of the 491.6 million financing of the projects. The realized losses are a result of decreases in benchmark interest rates since the date the bond forwards were entered into in late 2013, and the settlement date. It will be compensated by lower respective weighted average interest rates of 4.71% and 4.36% for the 25 to 40 years term loans, compared to higher interest rates set at the time of the issues. These losses were funded with proceeds from the project financing. For the same reasons, further losses could be recognized on closing the MU project financing in the coming months. The Corporation recognized unrealized gains on derivative financial instruments of 43.1 million, due mainly to the reversal of the unrealized loss accrued upon settlement of bond forward contacts of Big Silver Creek. Together with the settlements of the Boulder Creek and Upper Lillooet River bond forwards in Q1 2015, this resulted in a 55.1 million unrealized gain since the beginning of the year. Excluding the realized loss and unrealized gains on loss on derivatives and the related income taxes, net earnings would have reached 7.4 million for the quarter, compared with 8.5 million for Q2 2014, while it would have reached 13.6 million for the first six months, compared to a loss of 2.8 million in 2014. Overall, slightly below average second quarter, combined quarter, allowed us to achieve positive results since the beginning of the year. As a result, and combined with a very good fourth quarter 2014, our trailing 12 months free cash flow ending on June 30, 2015, reached 85.7 million, compared to 48.2 million for the same period ending in Q2 2014, and our payout ratio improved to 72% from 118%. Since the beginning of Q3 2015, power production has been somewhat above the long-term average at most facilities, at the exception of BC. We remain confident in our ability to reach our long-term average production, year over year. This concludes my review of the results. I’ll be happy to answer any questions later on during the call. I’ll now turn it back to Michel. Michel Letellier Thank you, Jean, and good morning, everybody. Just a little bit of, for people that can follow on the webcast, we are going to follow the presentation available on the website. The agenda is that we are going to recap the objectives that we had put forward at the beginning of the year, operating performance, project development; financing activities will be covered by Jean Trudel. I’ll then come back with an outlook on our 2017 run rate, and progress on the international expansion of the Company, and then we’ll follow it with period question. So, objective of performance, we had said that we would increase by 3% to 5% the revenue during 2015, compared to 2014. We will have a full contribution of SM-1 hydro facility, the acquisition last year, and we will increase the adjusted EBITDA by 1%. What we did up to date is that we have, actually, had a 19% increase on the year-to-date production, and 22% increase in EBITDA. That is basically the contribution of SM-1 for the six months that we didn’t have in 2014. Production year to date four to six months stands at 103% of the long-term average. As Jean mentioned, all our facilities across Canada is doing great, except for the Harrison LP, the six facilities that are southeast of BC that doesn’t have any glacier have had lower than long-term average. But the other ones has been very good performance up to now. So, we think we’re still on track to achieve the full year. If you remember, last year BC had been slow during summer time, but then the fall was very, very wet and we did catch up all of the power for the lack of production during early summer. So, for us, a quarter, two quarters, it’s difficult to call, but we’re still very confident on the long-term average for the corporation. Objective for the development, we said that we would advance the four projects under construction Tretheway, Upper Lillooet, Boulder, Big Silver, and start the construction on the wind farm in Quebec, Mesgi’g Ugju’s’n soon. We’re renewal of the Saint-Paulin, Windsor PPA, and we would begin commercial operation of Tretheway. I’m glad to report that the constructions are advancing very well. We’ll talk a little about the Upper Lillooet and Boulder fire. It’s unfortunate, but as we describe it, we’re very well covered with the insurance. We were also lucky to have most of our equipment and assets to be minor — well, they have minor. There’s no major losses on those assets, so, we’re still working on the insurance company, and with the firefighters to come back on site. The firefighters are basically fighting. The fire is still active. It’s about 45% contained. So, there’s still a lot of smoke in the valley. So, it’s not yet safe for our people to come back to work, but things are improving. There’s a little bit of rain in BC yesterday and tonight. So, things are cooling down a little bit, but it’s a little bit too early to call for the start of the construction onsite. Very happy, also, to have started construction on Mesgi’g Ugju’s’n in May. Things are going very well. We’re very accustomed to build wind firms in Quebec, so, don’t see an issue of going forward and make these units here. Contractual renewal process is pending with Hydro Quebec. Hydro Quebec is right now under an arbitrages system with three other smaller producers, independent producers in Quebec, so, they’re working the result to reinitiate the discussion with the other [IPB]. And we’re on track to the commissioning of Tretheway in Q4. We have received– all the equipment are installed in the power plant. Water division into the waterway has been initiated. So, things are going very well in Tretheway. So, if you flip the projects under development, I just gave quite a bit of development on Tretheway, Boulder Creek, and Upper Lillooet. Big Silver is going very well, as well. We have finished the tunnel in the last quarter. So, that is a big milestone in Big Silver. The water intake is almost finished, the diversion work very well. So, Big Silver is doing, I guess, very well in terms of civil work, and there’s no issue in the timing. Mesgi’g Ugju’s’n I just mentioned. Just a reminder, this COD date is with Hydro Quebec is the first of December. That’s a firm date in Hydro Quebec. Again, the impact of the forest fire on Upper Lillooet and Boulder I think it’s important to reiterate that we have all the coverage and insurance to have late start, so, if we’re late, the insurance would cover the interest costs or the lost revenue and, obviously, all the assets are protected, as well. So, on that note, I’ll let Jean update you on all of our financing. Jean Trudel All right. Thank you, Michel. So, the next page, that would be page 9 on the presentation, what we had mentioned early in the year is to pursue financing activities. So, therefore, close the financing of Upper Lillooet, Boulder, and Big Silver, and the MU project, and also refinance the Umbata Falls project finance that we have. So, I’m glad to report that we– well, as you’ve seen, on March 17 we closed the Upper Lillooet and Boulder Creek financing. Then the Big Silver financing was closed just late, June 22nd and we are now proceeding with the financing of the MU project. So, we have signed an engagement letter and a term sheet, and we’re in the process of putting the documentation in place to close this financing during the month of September. And, as for Umbata, we refinanced Umbata Falls on March 30th, earlier this year. So, everything is going according to plan. We actually were successful in putting financing that attractive condition that were actually a bit more attractive than what we anticipated. The market was quite receptive to our financings, and so, it provides us with additional flexibility in the future with these financings that are at the lower cost. On the next page, you see the amounts and the financing. It was a pretty significant program and so, we’re close to ending that leg of the work that we had to do. It’s very important to note that with all these projects that we are building, there is actually no additional equity component that is required to complete all these projects. So, the financing that we are putting in place will be sufficient, coupled with the use of the revolving facility and the cash flow that we generate to complete all these projects. On the next page, just an update on the corporate finance activities, we issued, as you’ve seen, I suppose, $100 million convertible debenture. Basically, the market was very favorable, a very attractive coupon at 4.25%. We took the opportunity to issue this convert, taking the advantage, of course, of the low rates, but also having in mind to potentially affect the redemption of the existing convert and, therefore, to reduce, potentially, the dilution to our shareholders. So, if we are not successful at redeeming the existing debenture in cash, well, it will provide us, actually, greater flexibility to conduct our development activities and/or potential acquisitions. So, Michel will talk about our international activities later on and I think that would provide us with great flexibility to do this. And also, the excess cash can also be used to buy back our shares and, coupled with that, I guess, we also eliminated the discount on the DRIP program today. That’s what we announced. I think we don’t– management doesn’t feel that the share price actually should offer an additional discount under the DRIP, so, it was a good thing to do to cancel the discount and also to potentially buy back shares if the situation remains. So, on this, I guess I’ll turn back to Michel. Michel Letellier Thank you, Jean. So, all good news on the terms of financing. So, 2017 run rate, I like that slide very much. Just to remind that this has been built and updated for taking into consideration the better financing that we had anticipated. Important to remember that this slide takes into consideration only the projects that the Company has existing PPA and has under developed, as I mentioned, the four hydro facilities in BC and the one wind facility in Quebec. So, we reiterate the EBITDA target rate for 2017, without having into consideration any other future project in mind, or future acquisition, only the existing projects that we have. The EBITDA takes into consideration about $8 million of prospective expenses. We always forecast those amounts. So, the EBITDA is net of those expenses. We have showed or reported $180 million of EBITDA last year. We’re forecasting for 2017, based on the long-term average $295 million of EBITDA. So, that’s an increase of about 63% from 2014 up to 2017, and the good news is that we had given the guidelines of $95 million of free cash flow for 2017. Based on the good financing and better financing than we had anticipated, we have now a conservative forecast of $105 million for 2017, so that’s 10 million more cash flow available in 2017. When we say “free cash flow,” our definition of free cash flow for us is important to remember that we take into the calculation the full reimbursement of our project finance. It’s after the dividend, and after $8 million of prospective projects. So good news for us in terms of the availability of internal cash flow. The growth opportunity after 2017, or even earlier, obviously we said that we would pursue Greenfield unlocking activities. We’re getting prepared to submit projects in the Ontario RFP. We have advanced, also, the Nulki Hills wind of BC. We have an agreement now with the Saik’uz First Nation on a fifty-fifty partnership program joint venture. And the RFP in Ontario is for the first of September. So, we’re getting very close to the date for submitting projects. We intend to have at least two very good projects. Ontario it’s very competitive, as you know, so we’re confident, but we’re cautious into the optimism of winning projects from Ontario, very busy, and it’s not a big RFP, if you remember. It’s about 300 megawatt of wind, and 150 megawatt of solar. But there’s another RFP in 2016 for roughly the same amount of power. Also, we said that we would go with the external growth opportunity. We would pursue partnership, acquisition, development opportunity in Europe and Latin America, and may be looking for acquisitions. We are focusing our international activity. We have been a little bit more focused on Europe, mainly France, for wind and solar. Latin America is big, but we’re now focusing more on Mexico than a couple of times in Mexico, meeting with very promising future partners. The market in Mexico is very dynamic. It’s in right now a little bit, I guess, in waiting for the new rules to free up the market, but the potential is great. So, we like what we have been seeing, and have been meeting with very interesting folks in Mexico. And, obviously, we’re looking into North America, as you know. Saskatchewan has said that they might come up with a new RFP for wind in the future. Alberta, with the new government, is talking about renewable energy, as well. So, still very open with Canada and the U.S. Obviously, it’s very active, but it’s very competitive, as you know. So, in summary, I just wanted to make sure that people remember that we have a sustainable dividend. I think that, given the profile of the portfolio that we have, just remember that we have one of the longest durations on the existing PPA. We have more than 70% of our revenue coming from hydro, fairly new asset, visible cash flow expansion with existing projects with PPA. As we mentioned, a internal growth with organic assets that we already have for EBITDA about 63% and for the cash flow, 54% from 2014 up to 2017. We have also, obviously, the payout ratio, given the cash flow that we’ll have, will go down. We have said that we have a target payout ratio of roughly 80%. Given the cash flow that we have announced, the $105 million of free cash flow, and given the amount of shares outstanding, you can make the calculation that this target is easily reachable for us and something else we have room there, as well. So, we will concentrate on capital deployment. We will have internal cash flow. For us, that’s something that’s a new era for Innergex. As you know, since the merger in 2010 with the income trust, the payout ratio has been always an issue but, given the advancement of our projects, this is behind us, so we can now focus a little bit more on the growth. So, on that note, we’ll be happy to answer the questions. Thank you. Marie-Josée Privyk This completes our presentation. Thank you, Michel and Jean. We now invite you to ask your questions. [Foreign Language]. Question-and-Answer Session Operator Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Rupert Merer with National Bank. Your line is open. Rupert Merer Good morning, everyone. Michel Letellier Good morning, Rupert. Rupert Merer I wanted to follow up with a few questions on your development plans, your growth plans. You mentioned the Nulki Hills project in BC. Can you talk a little about how that project might develop? Do you expect to enter direct negotiations with BC Hydro, for example? And how much longer do you think this project would be in development if it was to move successfully to construction? Michel Letellier Well, this a big question mark. It’s a good question, Rupert. We don’t know exactly how fast BC could come up with an RFP or to start direction negotiations with the First Nation joint venture project in the northwest of BC but it’s definitely a region where it’s very sensitive in terms of, I guess, being positive towards bringing renewable energy to offset a little bit of the future CO2 emission from the LNG, if LNG’s getting built, so, it’s very linked with the development of the LNG. So far, in that area there’s Petronas and Shell that have proposed and be, I guess, aggressively pursuing the development of a LNG project. So, I guess it’s a little bit of a Catch-22 there. If the LNG goes forward, I think that demand in that area will increase and, hence, maybe more possibility will be done. We also have some good prospects in Port Nelson area where a lot of the extractions are going to be happening. We’ve been monitoring wind for the last eight or nine years in that area, so there potential, as well, in that area. But BC is, I guess, a little bit on a standby to see how much LNG projects will be developed. And, as you know, Site C is being built, and I think that more and more people are thinking that Site C is going to be a reality, even though there were a lot of pushback from First Nation and local community. I think that BC Hydro has succeeded in signing some of the First Nation that [were] against the project. So, the odds of seeing Site C being built are greater now. Rupert Merer Great. And then, on Ontario, what do you think it’s going to take to win in this RFP? Do you think the prices will be comparable to what we saw in the last Quebec RFP? And do you have any particular strengths in your bid that will make it competitive? Michel Letellier I hate to talk about active bids, as you know, Rupert. But it will be competitive, but contrary to Quebec, Ontario has a system of points where, depending on how much points you get, and those points are basically given if you have support of the population, if you have support of the land involvement around your project, both on wind and solar. So, we’ve been concentrating on obtaining the maximum of points in the project that we’d like to submit. So, these points is giving you a discount when you compare your price to the others. So, prices are obviously sensitive, but if one has all the social acceptability points, then the project can be– even if the price submitted is a little big higher, you can win the project if the project gets all the points. Obviously, most of the developers are focused that aspect of the bid, as well. But we intend to have 100% of the points, so, maybe those will help. In terms of competitive price, Quebec is a little bit different. If you remember, Quebec is paying the interconnection. So, the price is net of the interconnection, where in Ontario, the IPB has to pay for the interconnection. So, when the prices of a win might be a little bit higher than in Quebec, and the win in Ontario is a little bit less variable than in Quebec. But, in general, the prices will be competitive, and certainly below what we have seen in the FIT in the past. Solar will also be I think in Ontario they’ll be certainly below $0.20, so, a fair discount compared to the $0.42, $0.44 the FIT program was giving in the past. Rupert Merer Great. Well, thanks for the color. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Nelson Ng with RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open. Nelson Ng Thanks and good morning, everyone. Michel Letellier Good morning to you, Nelson. Nelson Ng Just a quick question on the generation this quarter. Have you seen continued weakness in the hydrology in BC? And what about wind? Have you seen continued strength into the second quarter — sorry, third quarter? Michel Letellier Yes. We’ll start with the positive, Quebec and Ontario are doing great, and they are — for July they have been over the budget. BC, it’s not a secret. BC is dry. Like Jean was mentioning, the worst effected plants are the plant that doesn’t have glacier or very little glacier component into the hydrology, and that are the six Harrison Hydro facilities that we own 50%. The rest Ashlu, Miller Creek, Fitzsimmons, Rutherford have been doing fairly good so far. But, obviously, August is also a little bit dry. So, eventually it will rain in BC and the Harrison Hydro facilities, just like last fall, were over-producing. We had a tremendous quarter with those plants last fall with the rainy season. But, again, quarter-to-quarter for us I think that, again, the diversification across Canada, both in wind and hydro has shown a great flexibility to be able to face specific dry conditions in one part of the country. Nelson Ng Okay, thanks for that. Just a clarification. Did you say Ontario and Quebec both wind and hydro were above budget in July? Michel Letellier Yes, they were even over budget. Nelson Ng Okay, got it. And then my next question relates to, you mentioned the forest fire in Upper Lillooet. When do you think you’ll be able to have a like finish, or have a detailed assessment of what the total impact would be and how much of that would be offset by insurance? And then, just more on the construction schedule. How much flexibility was kind of built into the original construction schedule? Michel Letellier That’s a couple of components. We’ve been on site. The assets, apart from two or three kilometers of transmission line, have not been touched. It’s really funny. We’ve been looking at the aerial photo and stuff like that. You can see the power houses, the [indiscernible], the intake, even the big crane at the intake of Boulder, the fire went all over or around, but didn’t touch the big crane. So, material is very limited. The camp has been also saved. The camp now is hosting about 85 firefighters. We’re glad to see these guys occupying the camp. I think it’s a mutual win/win because they have better access to both the Boulder Creek fire and the Elaho fire from this camp. It’s saving them about an hour and a half of travel morning and night. So, the firefighters are on site and, obviously, protecting the camp if they’re living in them. So, that’s a good news. They’re very dedicated fellows. It’s a hard job. They’re working hard. We were supposed to have some of our people being reintroduced this week on the construction, but we had a little bit of a drawback because of this weekend was very dry and warm. But with the rain that we had yesterday and today, conditions are a little bit improving. So, slowly, we’re getting back into the camp. To answer your question how much — when are we going to be able to fully assess the timing, it’s a little bit difficult to say. We definitely have insurance coverage on everything from delay start, delay construction, to all our assets the same thing with the contractor. The deductible for assets is about $150,000, so it’s very– it’s not material compared to the size of the construction budget there. We have two deductibles possible in terms of construction delay or startup delay. One, if we trigger from the first measure is only two days of delayed construction. If we go with natural disaster, fire and what-have-you, it’s then 30 days waiting time, so the maximum impact to the Company could be 30 days of delay start. And when we say that coverage, that means they would cover all the interest costs, all the acceleration costs related to try to catch up on the construction. It’s the equivalent of protecting your future revenue, so it’s a very comprehensive insurance package– expensive, but when you need it, it’s very handy to have that. And the other component of your question was, do we have a little bit of a buffer? Well, we had– we always had the winter of 2016 as a buffer, so it’s two, three months. We didn’t have the plan to work during winter, because it’s a little bit more expensive to clear out the road and what have you. But we had that as a buffer, so, we had three to four months as a buffer. So, we’re just hoping that that buffer would be enough to catch up and still meet COD date in 2016, might be late in 2016, but we’re still confident that we can reach the COD about that time. Given the fact that insurance might cover the acceleration cost to work during winter 2016. Does that cover your question? Nelson Ng Yes. No, that was a lot of detail. That’s good color. My next question relates to the four prospective projects with the First Nation groups. I guess, from your perspective, is there any– is there like one project that is kind of ahead of the other projects, or more advanced in terms of having a process and a more visible timeline? Michel Letellier We have an ongoing discussion with the Inshaka [ph] First Nation and their government. The issue with this government, they’re very focused on not having any impact on the cost, on the electricity for the rate payers. So, it’s– we’re very, I guess, sympathetic to that. So, we’re trying to work the prices. We’re trying to work the schedule with them to try to meet their targets with BC Hydro as well, so it’s an ongoing discussion. It’s positive. We’re talking. We’re still talking. That’s positive. But we have a little bit of a challenge trying to make sure that we get to a point where everybody’s satisfied, First Nations are very supportive, and government BC Hydro, are still engaged, so still positive but a little bit of challenge to get into the schedule and prices. Nelson Ng I see. Okay and then a quick question on the MU wind project financing. I guess that’s for Jean, but are you looking to also have an interest-only period, similar to some of your hydro facilities, or is that option limited due to the shorter PPA period relative to hydros. Jean Trudel Yes, of course, it’s limited because of the shorter period. And when you analyzes the financing, and we received, actually, a tremendous– tremendously great amount of offers, so we [indiscernible] many institutions, and we received very good term sheets. So, when we analyze the terms and conditions, that’s one of the aspects to analyze to see if it’s a better or not a better transaction for us, and we look at the IRR of the project, the NPV, the cash-on-cash profile to determine which is the best term sheet that we should finance, so, the one that we are working with is using a structure similar to the structure we’ve put in place with Upper Lillooet and Big Silver. So, there’s a dual-tranche, if you want, in it, and it’s going to be– we’re implementing it now, so you’ll see all the details if it gets announced. But it’s going to be a very favorable financing again. Right now, the market is very hot from our standpoint. There’s a lot of demand for our product, I guess, from the financial institutions. And so — Michel Letellier And I think– it goes, also, to the credit of the project. We’ve been fortunate to have had the ability to renegotiate the prices and the model of the turbine, with the same deal so, the profile of the cash flow of this project is very robust. So, it helps, also, to have very good financing conditions. Jean Trudel That’s totally right, Michel. So, the debt service coverage ratio profile of the Mi’kmaq project is very high. So, it provides a very good credit rating. So, institutions are very– can be more aggressive when that’s the case, so, we’re benefiting from that, for sure. Nelson Ng Okay, got it. And then, just one last question. You mentioned that the free cash flow guidance for 2017 is 105 million, and the increase was, I think, mainly due to have an interest-only period, I presume. I was just wondering, given that the free cash flow benefit was from having an interest-only period, like, can you comment in terms of targeting the 80% payout ratio profile, whether you’ll be targeting that 2017 80% payout, or are you thinking about longer-term normalized full debt amortization 80% payout profile? Michel Letellier Well, that’s very deep [indiscernible]. I don’t want people thinking that post-2017 only 80% payout is sustainable. I think that 80% payout means that we would have a lot of room to increase the dividend. On that basis, I think that if we don’t increase dividend, the payout ratio will be much lower than 80%, and it’s not only because we interest-only period, I think that given the fact that we have also indexation in our PPA and when I view that $105 million is sustainable going forward. It’s not just a few years and there’s a drop. Whenever we’re getting engaged in long-term forecasts and sustainability, I think, hopefully, by the time you have been following Innergex, we’ve been quite consistent in our longer view. So, if we’re giving guidance of $105 million, it’s because it’s sustainable. Jean Trudel And to add on this one, when we establish a program of debt financing, we rarely put in consideration the possibility of having a delay in capital payment. So, when it occurs, when it happens, it’s just additional cash, which is a bonus. I think our target payout ratio is 80%. It has been like this for a while now, even before what were the terms and conditions of our financing, I mean, [indiscernible]. Michel Letellier And we have a little bit of a corporate finance, as Jean has mentioned, but we have 13, 14 power assets to support that debt, and all the rest we are fully amortizing, except for a $50 million balloon payment for [upward-lowered] in 40 years. So, contrary to maybe some other player that does a little bit more project finance or bond, that we are capital — we are reimbursing the capital of those project finance in our long-term forecast for EBITDA cash. Nelson Ng Great. Thanks for that clarification. Those are my questions. Operator Your next question comes from the line of Ben Pham with BMO Capital Markets. Your line is open. Ben Pham Okay. Thank you and good morning, everybody. Michel Letellier Good morning. Ben Pham Many of my questions have been asked, and so, I just had one follow up on the fire situation in BC. You mentioned that there’s a bit of rain over the last few days, which is contained it, and I’m just wondering, just because you have a pretty big portfolio in BC, is there any potential risk that that fire could expand to some of your other facilities, or is it pretty much all contained at the moment? Michel Letellier The problem in BC is that it’s dry all over the place. There’s another fire that has started up south of Tretheway. It’s about 40 kilometers from Tretheway. For the time being, it’s not a threat for that particular asset, and Elaho fire, right now, is north of Ashlu, but quite far north, and there’s a glacier in between. So, there’s no big danger there. But obviously it’s, BC is in a situation where there’s a lot of potential fire, and people have to be very careful. The last fire that was lighting up not so far from Tretheway was a human error. I don’t know if it was a fire camp or a cigarette butt that was thrown, but I think that BC government is doing a great job in trying to educate people that the fire danger is extreme. So, who knows? There’s many places where fire can be started again in BC. Hopefully, we’re getting towards September and rainy season should start, and that should be behind us, but for the time being, the fire danger is extreme. Jean Perron And just to be clear, we have the same insurance package everywhere, if it ever happens, we’re well covered everywhere. Michel Letellier Yes, it’s in place, not only on construction site. We have the insurance coverage, which is roughly the same package that I’ve described for all our operating assets. Ben Pham Okay, great. Thanks for the update, everybody. Michel Letellier Thank you. Operator [Operator Instructions] Ms. Privyk, there are no further questions at this time. Marie-Josée Privyk Thank you, and thank you, everyone. We appreciate this opportunity to provide an update on our Company and please don’t hesitate to contact us if you have any other questions. [Foreign Language]. Michel Letellier Thank you very much. Operator Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our conference call and webcast. Please note that a replay of the conference call and webcast will be available on the Innergex website. The press release, financial statements and the management’s discussion and analysis are also available on the Innergex website at www.innergex.com in the Investors section. Thank you. You may now disconnect at this time.

Hawaiian Electric Industries’ (HE) CEO Constance Lau on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Hawaiian Electric Industries’ (NYSE: HE ) Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call August 10, 2015, 1:00 PM ET Executives Clifford Chen – Manager, Investor Relations Constance Lau – President and Chief Executive Officer James Ajello – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Alan Oshima – President and Chief Executive Officer Tayne Sekimura – Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Analysts Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates Charles Fishman – Morningstar Michael Weinstein – UBS Nick Yuelys – Gabelli & Company Andy Levi – Avon Capital Sachin Shah – Albert Fried Operator Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Hawaiian Electric Industries, Incorporated Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to introduce your host for the conference call Mr. Cliff Chen. You may begin. Clifford Chen Thank you, and welcome everyone to Hawaiian Electric Industries second quarter 2015 earnings conference call. Joining me this morning are Connie Lau, HEI President and Chief Executive Officer; Jim Ajello, HEI Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Alan Oshima, Hawaiian Electric Company President and Chief Executive Officer as well as other members of senior management. Connie will provide an overview of followed by James, who will update you on Hawaii’s economy, our results for the quarter and outlook for the remainder of the year. Then we will conclude with questions-and-answers. In today’s presentation, management will be using non-GAAP financial measures to describe the company’s operating performance. Our press release and webcast presentation materials, which are posted on HEI’s Investor Relations website, contain additional disclosures regarding these non-GAAP measures, including reconciliations of those measures to the equivalent GAAP measures. Forward-looking statements will also be made on today’s call. Actual results could differ materially from what is described in those statements. Please refer to the forward-looking statements disclosure accompanying the webcast slides, which provides additional information on important factors that could cause results to differ. The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, including EPS guidance, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. I’ll now turn the call over to our CEO, Connie Lau. Constance Lau Thank you, Cliff and aloha to everyone. Turning to our results announced earlier today, both our utility and bank are on track to meet our 2015 earnings guidance. At the utility, we have been working hard to advance the energy transformation plans that we filed with our commission last August, which would triple distributed generation including rooftop solar in Hawaii by 2030. Increased renewable energy to 65% by 2030 and also position us to achieve Hawaii’s new goal of 100% renewable energy by 2045. At the bank, we are working hard to deliver stable, profitable performance. Year-to-date deposit growth was strong and credit quality remained sound. On June 10, we achieved an important milestone for our pending banks spin and utility merger with HEI shareholders approving the merger with NextEra Energy with a 90% mandate from shares voted. In addition the process to obtain Hawaii’s Public Utilities Commission approvals and other approvals is underway. As many of you know the governor of Hawaii made public statements regarding the proposed merger following testimony that was filed on July 20 by interveners to the merger. In a press conference, the governor said the state is taking the position of opposing the merger as proposed. Later today, the consumer advocate is expected to file his position with the Public Utilities Commission that will complete filings by all parties and we and NextEra Energy will file our rebuttal to those positions on August 31. We believe that as we and NextEra Energy, provide more information and engage in additional discussions, the commission and others will conclude that our merger will provide significant benefits for our customers and the entire state and will further underscore Hawaii’s global leadership in clean energy. The governor also stressed the importance of having a partner who shares the vision of having 100% renewables for Hawaii, a new law, which is signed on June 8. Both Hawaiian Electric and NextEra Energy each have made clear that we are fully committed to achieving Hawaii’s new goal of 100% renewable energy by 2045. NextEra Energy has made it clear that it is committed to Hawaii and will bring a combination of renewable energy expertise, strong technological and operational knowledge, financial strength and access to capital necessary to support Hawaiian Electric’s plans. For our part, we believe NextEra Energy is the right partner for Hawaiian Electric to help us accelerate the achievement of the Hawaii’s clean energy goals. Given all the attention that has been placed on our utility transaction, I would be remiss in not mentioning our other major operating company, our bank American Savings Bank. American Savings Bank has been diligently preparing for their cross conditional spin off in parallel with our utilities – Public Utilities Commission approval process. Just as we firmly believe in the positive impact our utility merger will have on Hawaii the addition of American Savings Bank to the ranks of independent publicly traded companies based here in Hawaii will also provide significant benefits for our Hawaii customers and communities as well as for our shareholders. Back on our utility merger, last week the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission issued an order establishing the remaining timeline for the review of the merger transaction. We are currently in the discovery or information request phase of the PUC process. As I mentioned earlier, our consumer advocate is expected to file his testimony later today and we and NextEra will file our reply on August 31. All parties may then ask each other any final questions with all discovery scheduled to conclude by the end of September. Thereafter, the Public Utilities Commission will host a series of public listening session throughout the Hawaiian Islands starting in September and continuing through October 2015 to provide the public the opportunity to address the commission concerning the proposed transaction. Evidentiary hearings are scheduled to begin on November 30 and continue through December 16, 2015. Following the evidentiary hearing, the parties will file closing briefs and thereafter the commission is expected to issue its decision. Turning to slide four, in addition to the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission approval, the major items remaining for the merger with NextEra Energy and the spin off for our bank to shareholders are the following conditions. The receipt of all other required regulatory approvals from among others the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Reserve Board related to the bank spin and expiration of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act Antitrust period, which we filed just last Friday. I would now like to highlight the status of key utility developments. On June 29, our utility submitted their final statement of position in the distributed energy resources proceeding, which included new customer options and programs to support continued growth of rooftop photovoltaic systems in Hawaii. Recommendations included nation leading technical standard for advanced inverters, which will improve the integration of high levels of rooftop PV. New options for customers including battery equipped with rooftop PV systems, a pilot time of used rate to offer customers, the opportunity to save money by shifting their energy use to different times of the day, particularly when PV panels are most productive, as well as, a new pricing structure for new rooftop PV systems that more fairly distribute costs for operating and maintaining the electric grid. Hawaiian Electric continues to lead the nation in the integration of customer cited solar with 13% of residential customers having with rooftop solar year-to-date through June 30. Our customer adoption of solar energy in Hawaii is 20 times the national average. The utility proposals would provide greater access to rooftop PV, while helping ensure the longevity of programs in a way that protects reliability, safety and fairness for all customers. Ultimately, the Public Utility Commission will determine how and when any changes impact customers. Back in October 2014, Hawaiian Electric committed to clear a backlog of about 2,800 then pending net energy metering or NEM applications of which we have only 15 remaining. Since then, more than 15,000 additional applications have been approved to install or interconnect. As of July 15, a total of approximately 70,000 rooftop solar NEM applications have been approved by Hawaiian Electric, Maui Electric and Hawaii Electric Light Company for the five islands we serve. For our main islands of Oahu, this has resulted in close to a 30% of the single-family homes on a Oahu approved for solar PV, a very high penetration rate. On July 15, Hawaiian Electric Company proposed a community solar pilot program. If the PUC approves the pilot about 50 Oahu utility customers who don’t currently have access to rooftop solar will be able to enjoy the economic benefits of rooftop PV. Lessons learned from this pilot will help with the design of expanded programs under a community-based renewable energy tariff to be filed in October. On July 31, the PUC approved four major solar energy projects on Oahu, totaling approximately 137 megawatts, in time to meet the federal 30% tax credit, currently set to expire on December 31, 2016. The PUCs approval of these projects will provide all our customers by the end of next year with the lowest price of any solar electric city on Oahu. More than 30% lower than previous solar projects. On August 5 Maui Electric filed contracts subject to the Public Utilities Commission review and approval to purchase up to 5.7 megawatts of solar power at $11.06 per kilowatt hour. More than 30% of the electricity used in Maui County currently comes from renewable sources. So these contracts will take that percentage up even higher. Moving on to the demand response docket on the next slide. On July 28, the PUC issued an order advancing our Integrated Demand Response Portfolio Plan or IDRPP, appointing a special advisor to help with further development of the plans. The commission observed that the overall strategic and conceptual direction of the IDRPP is positive and notes that there are many welcome aspects to the proposed process and methodology. In other developments on May 28, the PUC issued an order related to our utilities revised annual decoupling filings. As a result the utilities filed revised 2015 annual incremental RAM revenues of $11.1 million. The tariff rates are effective from June 8, 2015 to May 31, 2016. In addition in the Public Utilities Commission, March 31, D&O on decoupling, the PUC also indicated that the utilities may apply for recovery of revenues for major projects, including baseline project grouped together for consideration as major projects above the RAM cap. The utilities are currently reviewing different projects and maybe submitting some for approval for recovery above the RAM cap. Finally under the required schedule for decoupling, we gave notice of our intent to file the Hawaii Electric Light Company 2016 test year rate case by December 31, 2016. Normally a general rate case using a calendar 2016 test year would be filed in the second half of 2015. However in light of the pending merger application Hawaii Electric Light has requested an extension of the date by which it must file its rate case to December 30, 2016. I’ll now ask Jim to cover Hawaii’s economy and then our financial results and outlook for the economy. Jim? James Ajello Thanks, Connie. I’ll begin by briefly commenting on Hawaii’s economy. June 2015 visitor arrivals on expenditures were up 6% and 4.4%, respectively from the same month last year and still robust after many years of strong growth. Year-to-date June 2015 visitor arrivals reached 4.3 million with total spending at $7.6 billion. Tourism is on a record trajectory in 2015. Statewide unemployment edged downward to 4% in June 2015, compared to 4.4% a year ago and still significantly below the national unemployment rate of 5.2% as of June. Recent Hawaii real estate activity remained strong during July 2015 with the median sales price for single-family homes on Oahu at $710,000, up 4% from last year and up 2.3% year-to-date July. This year through July, the pace home sales on Oahu is up 4.8%. Year-to-date May 2015 construction activity was reflective of value private building permits increased 41% compared to year-to-date May 2014. This increase is reflected by the increase in new residential, commercial and industrial projects. Overall, Hawaii’s year-to-date economic performances is being sustained by continuing strong activity in the construction and tourism industry and the University of Hawaii forecasters expect state GDP to grow 3.8% this year. As shown on slide eight second quarter 2015 GAAP earnings per share were $0.33. Core earnings per share which excluded merger expenses were $0.39 compared to $0.41 in the second quarter of 2014. Consolidated core net income was $0.9 billion higher than the prior year, but EPS was $0.02 lower due to the increased number of shares settled due to equity forward agreement. On slide nine, utility earnings were $32.8 million in the second quarter of 2015 compared to $34.2 million in the second quarter 2014, the detailed variances are shown on the slide and I’ll just highlight a few. Depreciation expense was $2 million higher, due to increasing investments for the integration of energy, improved customer reliability and greater system efficiency. Operations and maintenance expense was $1 million, higher compared to the prior year, largely due to higher consulting costs for our energy transformation plans, higher transmission and distribution costs and higher benefits expense. These partially offset by lower overhaul and smart grid costs in the second quarter of 2015. At the bank, net income for the second quarter of 2015 was $12.9 million, $0.6 million lower than the linked quarter, primarily due to $1 million in higher interest income, primarily driven by higher interest earning assets and fees, related to the early payoff of commercial loans. This was offset by $1 billion higher provision for loan losses and $1 million in higher non-interest expense, primarily to higher medical expense and the timing of professional fees and a reserve for unfunded commercial commitment. Compared to the second quarter of 2014, net income at the bank was $1.3 million higher primarily due to $1 million higher net interest income, due to higher average loan balances, $2 million in higher noninterest income, primarily from higher mortgage banking and fees on deposit products, these were partially offset by $1 million and higher noninterest expense in the second quarter of 2015, due primarily to higher pension and benefit expense. As shown on slide 10, HEI’s quarter ROE for the last 12 months was 9%, ROE contributions of 7.7% from utility and 9.6% from the bank. Slide 11, shows the utilities actual ROEs for the last 12 months, and consolidated core utility ROE of 7.7%, declined from 9% in June of 2014, primarily due to higher O&M and depreciation expense, partially offset by the RAM increase. On slide 12, you could see that American continues to deliver solid profitability metrics generally in line with targets. We have maintained a competitive return on assets of 93 basis points through the first half of the year. Year-to-date annual loan growth was 1%, and currently lower than our mid-single-digit loan growth target, mainly due to the timing of loan closures expected in the second half of the year. We continue to expect to achieve our target of mid-single-digit loan growth for the year. In the second quarter, loan growth was driven primarily by higher commercial market and residential loans and home equity lines of credit, offset by payoffs in the commercial real estate and consumer portfolios. Year-to-date net interest margin remains in line with expectations, benefiting from interest and fees related to prepays and payoff of commercial real estate and commercial and industrial loans. Year-to-date credit cost remain low, as our solid asset quality and strong risk management, resulted in year-to-date net charge-off ratio of 8 basis points, still very attractive relative to peers. Overall, the bank continues to maintain its low risk profile, strong balance sheet and straightforward community business banking model. On slide 13, our net interest margin was 3.52% in the second quarter of 2015, consistent with the linked quarter. Our interest earning asset yield declined by 1 basis point. Our liability cost of 22 basis points remained unchanged from the linked quarter. On slide 14, we show an improving trend in year-to-date 2015 noninterest income, which was primarily driven by higher mortgage banking income, as we have made a conscious decision to sell a larger portion of our low rate mortgage loan originations, increasing fee income on deposit liabilities, due to deposit related initiatives and increasing fee income on other financial products. Credit quality continues to be strong, reflecting prudent credit risk management and the healthy local economy. Second quarter of 2015 net charge-off ratio was 11 basis points, compared to 4 basis points in the linked quarter. The increase in that charge-off ratio was due to the charge-off of two commercial loans and higher charge-offs associated with growth in the consumer portfolio. Provision for loan losses was higher than the linked quarter and prior year quarter mainly due to the downgrade of one large commercial lending relationship and higher charge-offs. The allowance for loan losses was 1.04% of outstanding loans at $46.4 million at quarter end compared to 1.03% at the end of the linked quarter and 0.99% of the prior year end. On slide 16 nonperforming assets ratio was 70 basis points, 10 basis points lower compared to the end of the first quarter and lower than the 1.05% at the end of the second quarter last year. This is consistent with our solid credit quality and effective credit management. Slide 17, illustrates Americans continue to do attractive asset and funding mix relative to our peer banks. Americans June 30, 2015 balance sheet is stacked against the last accretive billable data sets for our peers, which is as of March 15. 99% of our loan portfolio is funded with low cost core deposits versus the aggregate of our peers at 88%. Year-to-date total deposits increased $180 million or 7.8% annualized, while maintaining a very low cost of funds of 22 basis points. 18 basis points lower than the median of our peers. American remains well-capitalized at June 30, with a leverage ratio of 8.8%, tangible common equity to total assets ratio of 8.2% and total capital ratio of 13.5%. In the second quarter, American paid $7.5 million in dividends to HEI, while maintaining healthy capital levels. Now I’ll address HEIs outlook for 2015. Utilities updated three year capital expenditures consisting of both foundational and transformational investments is forecast to be $0.8 billion to $1.7 billion. Our foundational investments represent core investments needed to continue to in deliver safe, reliable and efficient service to our customers. They include projects to replace aging infrastructure, to improve reliability, making or upgrading customer connections and improving our internal structure, to be more efficient and effective. Many of our major transformational initiatives depend on external factors, which could impact our ability to execute. Our applications for approval of The Schofield Generating Station is at the PUC and we expect to file applications for battery storage, LNG and smart grid later in 2015. For 2015, we expect rate base growth to be in the range of 1.5% to 3%. On our 2014 ending rate base balance of $2.7 billion. We would note that our long-term rate-base growth forecast is subject to PUC approval of our major capital expenditures. We are reaffirming HEI’s earnings guidance of $1.64 to $1.74 per share, excluding any expenses relating to the pending merger and spin off transactions. Last quarter we guided towards the low end of the range as a result of the early equity forward settlement of 4.7 million shares in March of 2015. The March 31 PUC decision and order on the Schedule B decoupling mechanism issues. The 2015 impact of the dilution in the early equity forward settlement is approximately $0.04 a share. At utility, there is no change to the EPS guidance. Guidance range that we are guiding towards the lower end of that range to offset the impact of the PUCs May 28 decoupling order, we are carefully managing expenses and we are revising our O&M guidance to approximately, a 2% decline compared to 2014 levels, instead of prior guidance of a 2% increase. As we have mentioned in the first quarter 2015 in our earnings release, we lowered the 2015 CapEx to $250 million from $420 million. And correspondingly revised our three year forecast range of $0.8 billion to $1.7 billion. In 2015 rate-based growth is now expected to be 1.5% to 3%. At the bank, there are no changes to the EPS guidance range and key assumptions. Connie, now I will turn the call back to you. Constance Lau Thanks, Jim. In summary, our utility is leading the industry and integrating renewables and distributed generation and continues to be focused on expanding customer options and lowering customer bills. Our bank continues to be a solid performer and will continue to focus on its core banking business targeting mid-single-digit loan growth and strong credit quality. Last Friday our board maintained our quarterly dividend of $0.31 per share. The dividend yield continues to be attractive at 4% as of Friday’s market close and we have paid our dividend uninterrupted since 1901. Finally, we firmly believe that as the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission merger review process continues that we NextEra Energy have the opportunity to provide more information and engage in additional discussions with the PUC, the commission and others, should conclude that this merger can and will provide significant benefits for our customers and can help accelerate achievement of the clean energy future that we all want for Hawaii. And with that, we look forward to hearing your questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Paul Patterson with Glenrock Associates. Paul Patterson Aloha. Constance Lau Hi, Paul. How are you? Paul Patterson All right. How is it going? Constance Lau Good. Paul Patterson On the merger, and the governor’s comments and everything, what is the outlook for the potential for settlement versus a fully litigated case? Could you just give us a little bit of a flavor for that? Constance Lau I’m not sure I can really an answer that question Paul, because we’re still in that discovery phase and so there’s quite a bit of discussion that still needs to occur. I think as the Public Utilities Commission order that came out establishing the remainder of the process, it shows that a lot of that will occur this fall. I think as we go forward, we will probably get greater clarity in that question. Later today, CA needs to file, so we still need to see his testimony as well. Paul Patterson Sure. Okay, but I mean, so should we think, maybe after discovery processes completed that that might be a more likely time that settlement discussions could take place. Does that make sense? Constance Lau As you know settlement discussions can occur any time along the way, but certainly we would think that you we would at least want to see the initial positions of all the parties. Paul Patterson Okay. And then on the RAM order, in the PSIP. I guess, the changes that they made, my understanding was that that was pending the outcome of the PUCs review of the PSIP. I’m wondering what the schedule looks like regarding that and what we might see if you have gossip out there? Constance Lau Sure. And actually I think Alan is with us and perhaps I can turn that question over to him on the PSIPs. Alan Oshima Yeah, Paul, good morning. Paul Patterson Good morning. Alan Oshima Actually the RAM decoupling and the PSIPs, we don’t believe are connected at all. I think the PSIP will go on its separate track. It’s more of a technical discussion as to our power supply moving forward. The RAM is more financial based and operational, so I think it’s a transition year this year, it’s a first year that we’re having to comply with some of the new changes to the decoupling and we’re doing that, as we speak. Paul Patterson Okay. So I mean, my understanding that the RAM was being amended on interim basis, pending the outcome of PUCs review PSIP plans. I mean, I believe I read that in the order, I guess. I guess, so I’m wondering is is how do you think the – I mean, are you saying they’re not connected. I mean, that’s what I’m sort of a little bit confused on. James Ajello Capital expenditures are always connected and how the RAM decoupling will operate. Of course, will be somewhat affected by what PSIPs come up with. But they’re separate dockets and they’re not directly connected. Paul Patterson Okay. Just one final one here, a couple of things. You guys have pushed back the LNG stuff and oil prices are down. I’m wondering one of the reasons why you wanted to do the LNG was that you thought it would have environmental, but also substantial cost benefits for the ratepayers and that was an issue that I think the PUC was concerned about. How should we think about the pushback in the LNG importation? The lower price of oil in terms of what we’re seeing in terms of customer’s rates and stuff right now. Constance Lau So Paul, I think as with any major project and this would be quite a major project for Hawaii to be bringing another fuel source. You only have to take into account the changing conditions and as you pointed out there was a pretty significant change in some of the basic assumptions with the shift in the oil prices. So I think the way you want to look at it is that we are continuing forward, but we’ve got to make sure that bringing LNG into Hawaii still makes sense because at the end of the day, our ultimate goal is to bring it into lower cost for our customers. I think as you know, you know the commodity price with LNG is only a very small portion of the total cost to customers. A lot of it really is in building what I call the virtual pipeline across the water and it’s really the logistics that are most important in designing this project. So there’s been quite a bit of work that’s been going on in that regard in advancing the ideas on the most economical and efficient way to bring the liquefied natural gas into the state, while still assuring reliability of supply. So we are proceeding forward. I think we still believe that there is benefit for our customers, but we need to work through all of the changing analysis. I’ll ask Alan, if he’d like to add anything to that. Alan Oshima No. That’s totally correct. I mean, we’re looking at all the environmental benefits as well. I mean, it’s not a one-sided view of this, we have to look at it from all sides. Paul Patterson Sure. Any timeframe in terms of when might hear about what your revised analysis or any key date we should be thinking about? Alan Oshima Yeah, we’ll be I think making some decisions later this year and then probably moving forward. Depending on those decisions in early 2016. Paul Patterson Okay. Great. I’ll let people ask questions. Thanks a lot. Operator Our next question comes from Charles Fishman with Morningstar. Charles Fishman Thank you. If you’d give me some help here I think my notes on your status of the Public Service Commissioners might be out of date. Were all three commissioners, the current reserve appointed by the former governor? Constance Lau No, the Chair is new and was appointed by our new governor earlier this year. Charles Fishman And previous governor was Democrat as well, Connie. Wasn’t he? Constance Lau Yes, correct. Charles Fishman Okay. And then is Champley is still on and his term is up next year. Constance Lau Yes. Commissioner Champley is still on and also Commissioner Akiba. Charles Fishman Okay. Well, thanks for updating me. Just one other comment. I was at my church yesterday, an electrical engineer came up to me and said that the local utility in St. Louis had a meeting last week among electrical engineers and the integration of solar going on in Hawaii was a big topic of discussion. So you can pass on to your operation people that what they’re doing has some very far reaching input to other places. Constance Lau Thanks, Charles. As I mentioned in my comments, particularly on the use of the advanced inverters, we really are setting a tone for the nation and better use of that technology to help in the integration of rooftop PV. Charles Fishman Good luck on the merger. Constance Lau Thank you. Operator Our next question comes from Michael Weinstein with UBS. Michael Weinstein Hi, Connie, how are you doing. Constance Lau Hi, Michael, how are you? Michael Weinstein Good. My question, I don’t want to prejudice the merger outcome or anything like that. But I was just curious how separate is the spin of ASB from the merger process with NextEra? Is it possible that, for instance, and just really hypothetical of the Commissioner rejected, the merger would you still want to spin ASB in, could that still happen, given the tax implications? Constance Lau That we would go back to the analysis that we normally have had with respect to the separation of the two companies and we’d have to analyze it at that point in time. But at the moment the spin of the bank is cross conditional with the merger application, so that that would only occur if the merger goes forward. As you know a real key piece of the agreement with NextEra is that they will be paying the tax on the spin for our shareholders, so that our shareholders can receive the shares tax free, plus there is a great benefit to the bank in the step up of the tax basis. So it’s very positive transaction when it is combined with the merger with NextEra. If there is no merger, we’d have to analyze it as a standalone transaction. Michael Weinstein Got you. Okay, thank you so much. Constance Lau Sure. Operator Our next question comes from Nick Yuelys with Gabelli & Company. Nick Yuelys Congratulations on a good quarter. Constance Lau Thanks, Nick. Nick Yuelys I was just wondering following up on that last question, if all the regulatory approvals necessary for the bank spin off weren’t completed by the time the PUC approves the merger. What would happen? Constance Lau So let me just address that basic proposition because we really haven’t talked much about all the preparations going on at the bank for the spin. We are not expecting that the bank will not be prepared for a spin. As you know, we’ve got a very, very good team in at the bank. Many of whom have been with publicly traded companies previously. So we feel that there are quite well prepared to handle the bank when it spins off. And they have been having ongoing discussions with their regulators, the office of the Comptroller of the Currency and Jim Ajello has been having similar discussions with the Federal Reserve Board on behalf of the holding company. So we’re expecting that the bank will be quite well prepared for the spin. There may be some timing issues with respect to closing of quarters and years and that. But otherwise we believe the bank will be quite well prepared. Nick Yuelys Okay. Great. Then my guess is, do you need to make a filing with the FCC or how will that approval process work? Constance Lau On the FCC, the utility has some licenses with respect to communications that need to be transferred. So that one is while we mentioned that it’s one of a lot of little approvals that need to occur, but it’s not a major one at all. Nick Yuelys Okay. Great. Then my last one on the four solar project that the PUC approved at the end of July. Are those included in the CapEx numbers or are those some a little bit of upside to that? Constance Lau So those are actually by IPPs. Remember we had that so-called waiver group of projects where we went out for an RFP and so those are all by independent developers. Nick Yuelys Okay. Good, that’s all I have. Thank you very much. Operator Our next question comes from Andy Levi with Avon Capital. Andy Levi Hi, good morning. Constance Lau Hi, Andy. Andy Levi Just two quick questions, if as we look at your CapEx numbers and you included the transformational piece as well in ’16 and ’17, which CapEx in the $700 million range. What would and again, assuming standalone. What would the equity needs of the company be? Constance Lau So Andy, let me ask Jim to address that because we’ve looked at that, not with respect to the transformational capital, but the overall picture. So, Jim? James Ajello Thanks, Connie, and hi, Andy. So we haven’t yet sketched out the capital needs entirely yet. We’ll make sure that the utilities, regulatory ratio is about 58% equity, and 42%, 43% debt will be observed. I will tell you in general, I think there will be well under $200 million, but we haven’t put a fine point on that as yet. Andy Levi And that would be for both years or …? James Ajello I’m just talking about prompt year 2016. Andy Levi Okay. And then just on the RAM, could you just explain to us kind of what was changed in the order, the preliminary order relative to how the RAM worked before. Constance Lau Sure. Jim, I don’t know if, Tayne, is there, she’s probably the best to go into those details. Tayne S. Y. Sekimura I’m here. So basically the change in the RAM, what the commission did was, it focused on a target level of revenues and was based on what was included in the last rate cases and the last RAMs, and basically escalated it for inflation and that served as the cap for the RAM. And that’s a lot different from the previous RAM that was in effect, which actually went through a series of looking at, what was included in the rate case with escalated by the components of O&M, rate base and depreciation. So what commission did in the revised RAM was not make any differentiation between the RAM component, but just calculated based on a level of revenue. Constance Lau So, Andy, I don’t know, if you remember under the capital RAM they were looking at both the major projects and in the so-called baseline projects. The baseline projects went in at a historical five-year average. What they did was they just and talked about CapEx in total with as James said an inflationary adjustment similar to the inflator on the O&M side. Then said, we want to take a look at all the projects over that and review and that’s where we’re now looking at any projects that would be above that cap and reviewing whether to submit additional filings. They actually left the door open to design additional processes to process those amounts that are over the cap. Andy Levi And so with that being the case, the $11 million increase that you talk about in your handout, was that under the new method or the old method? Constance Lau That was the $11 million is under the new method. Andy Levi Okay and what was the increase the year before, I’m just curious, if you remember, I don’t if you have that number, but. So under the old method. James Ajello So, Andy, we’ll follow-up with you after the call. Andy Levi Yeah, that’s fine. And then just one last question, and I’ll let somebody else go. So under the new method, I guess, if I’m not mistaken the way you describe and having read a little bit about it, that would I guess, lead to more frequent rate filings, is that how we should view it, so you could recover your capital cost on more timely basis? Constance Lau No. Not necessarily. The RAM mechanism still provides for the triennial review, but what it may mean is that we may be processing some of the CapEx under mechanisms that are supplemental to the RAM. Andy Levi And that’s I guess, what they’re working on now? Constance Lau Correct. Andy Levi Perfect. Thank you very much. Constance Lau Yeah, that’s part of that transitional issue that Alan alluded to. Andy Levi I understand now. Thank you. Operator Our next question comes from Sachin Shah with Albert Fried. Sachin Shah Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking call. Just to understand the governor’s recommendation. From past precedence, is there any past precedence of the governor making such a recommendation and the PUC going along with the governor or going against the governor? I know that you’re going to make a compelling case, the companies are going to make compelling case against that recommendation and other opposition. But just trying to understand you know how much influence does the governor’s recommendation subjectively have on the PUC? Constance Lau Yeah, so this is a very new process within our Commission because while there has been some utility mergers throughout Hawaii’s history. They really have been much smaller than this proposed transaction. And particularly for this governor, this governor just came in this year, so everybody is really looking very carefully, but I’d say with new eyes at this particular transaction because they really haven’t been a lot of other transactions that one can point to. Sachin Shah Okay. So this is just new process, new ground for everybody and so the contentions as that we may be seeing are opposition comes along with the territory of this new process I guess. Constance Lau Yes, yeah. It’s part of the process and as the governor also said, it’s early in the process and he’s sure that there will be lots more discussion and that we haven’t heard the last on it yet. Sachin Shah Okay. Fair enough. Thank you. Alan Oshima Hi, Connie, this is Alan, it’s not a new process per sequential, it’s a process in this case, but there are regulatory frameworks for this from past transactions, that I think the electrical regulatory process will continue as they have described that in the filings. Constance Lau Yeah, thanks Alan. Operator And this is company operator; I’m actually showing no further questions at this time. Clifford Chen Thank you, Kevin. If there are no further questions, I would like to thank everyone for their participation today and have a good week. Bye-bye. Operator Well, ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s presentation. You may now disconnect and have a wonderful day.