Tag Archives: cash

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.

American Water Works’ (AWK) CEO Susan Story on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

American Water Works Company Incorporated (NYSE: AWK ) Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call August 06, 2015 09:00 AM ET Executives Greg Panagos – VP, IR Susan Story – President and CEO Walter Lynch – COO, President, Regulated Operations Linda Solomon – SVP, CFO Analysts Daniel Eggers – Credit Suisse Ryan Connors – Boenning & Scattergood Michael Lapides – Goldman Sachs Spencer Joyce – Hilliard Lyons Jonathan Reeder – Wells Fargo Securities Brian Chin – Bank of America Merrill Lynch Barry Klein – Macquarie Funds Group David Paz – Wolfe Research Operator Good morning and welcome to American Water’s second-quarter 2015 earnings conference call. As a reminder, this call is being recorded and is also being webcast with an accompanying slide presentation through the Company’s Investor Relations Web site. Following the earnings conference call, an audio archive of the call will be available through August 13, 2015, by dialling 412-317-0088 for U.S. and international callers. The access code for replay is 10068691. The online archive of the webcast will be available through September 8, 2015, by accessing the Investor Relations page of the Company’s Web site located at www.amwater.com. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to introduce your host for today’s call, Greg Panagos, Vice President of Investor Relations. Mr. Panagos, you may begin. Greg Panagos Thank you, Gary. Good morning, everyone and thank you for joining us for today’s call. As Gary said, my name is Greg Panagos, and I’m the new Vice President of Investor Relations for American Water. Before I read you our forward-looking statements, I would just like to say I’m happy to be here and excited about the opportunity with American Water. Before I read you our forward-looking statement I’d like to say I’m happy to be here and excited about the opportunity with American Water. While I haven’t had the chance to meet most of you yet, I look forward to working with all of you. We’ll keep the call to about an hour and at the end of our prepared remarks, we’ll open it up for your questions. Before we begin, I would like to remind everyone that during the course of this conference call, both in our prepared remarks and in answer to your questions, we may make statements related to future performance. Our statements represent our most reasonable estimates. However, since these statements deal with future events, they are subject to numerous risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause the actual performance of American Water to be materially different from the performance indicated or implied by such statements. Such risk factors are set forth in the Company’s SEC filings. I encourage you to read our 10-Q on file with the SEC for a more details analysis of our financials. Also reconciliation tables for non-GAAP financial information discussed on this conference call can be found in the appendix of the slide deck located at the Investor Relations page of the Company Web site. We’ll be happy to answer any questions or provide further clarification if needed during our question and answer session. All statements in this call related to earnings per share refer to diluted earnings per share from continuing operations. And now I would like to turn the call over to American Waters President and CEO Susan Story. Susan Story Thanks, Greg. Good morning, everyone and thanks for joining us. With me today are Linda Sullivan, our CFO, who will go over the second quarter financial results and Walter Lynch, our COO and President of Regulated Operations, who will give us key updates on our regulated business. I would also like to officially welcome Greg Panagos to our team as Vice President of Investor Relations. Greg has more than 20 years of corporate finance and investor relations experience, including several years in the energy industry. He has served in a number of senior investor relations and communication roles including Barrick Gold Corporation, Transocean, Nobel Energy, and Pennzoil. His knowledge and experience are a great fit for American Water and we’re happy to have him join our team. And now for the quarter, once again, our employees delivered solid operational and financial results. We continue to execute our strategies through ongoing investment into our infrastructure, a sharp focus on operational efficiency, and growth in our regulated and market-based customers. Turning to Slide 5, we reported earnings per share of $0.68 for the second quarter. Excluding the impact from the Freedom Industries chemical spill in 2014, this is about an 8% increase compared to second quarter 2014 and a 9% increase year-to-date through June. Based on our performance through the second quarter and also including our known July weather impacts, which Walter and Linda will discuss shortly, we are reaffirming our 2015 earnings guidance to be in the range of $2.55 to $2.65 per share. On Slide 6, you see that we continue to deliver on our strategies in both regulated and market-based segments for the quarter and year-to-date. The capital investments we make in our regulated segment continue to be the foundation of our consistent growth. So far in 2015, we’ve made about $474 million in infrastructure investments to ensure safe, clean and reliable water services for our customers. We plan to invest 1.2 billion to 1.3 billion in capital in 2015, with over a billion dollars of that to improve our water and waste water systems. About $200 million is allocated to regulated acquisitions and strategic investments. Through the second quarter, we invested $41 million in acquisitions, which does not include the Keystone Clear Water acquisition, which closed on July 9th. This is our last quarterly call. We’ve completed the purchase of water and wastewater systems in Haddonfield, New Jersey and Mishawaka, Indiana and in both Arnold and Redfield, Missouri officially adding 19,000 customers to our regulated segments. We also have 17 pending acquisitions which ones approved and closed will give us the opportunity to serve an additional 14,000 customers in several of our states. The largest of these acquisitions is the environmental disposal corporation, which serve 5,300 wastewater customers in Northern New Jersey. This acquisition is a great example of executing on our long-term strategy to focus on wastewater acquisition in areas where we already serve water. Our marketing base segment had a strong second quarter. Homeowner Services entered into an exclusive contract with the City of Rialto, California to offer service line protection programs to home owners. We’re also recently notified by Wilmington, Delaware of its intent to award an exclusive contract to offer our programs to its residential customers pending city council approval. If approved we expect both of these programs to launch by year end. As you know our long-term growth triangle includes a market based share component which we have shown could contribute from 0% to 2% of our long-term earnings growth. This is our last call we announced and closed on the acquisition of Keystone Clearwater Solution. Keystone is a water services provider to oil and gas companies in Appalachian Basin which includes the Marcellus and the Utica. Keystone’s leadership which we have left intact has over 30 years of experience in addressing water solutions for Appalachia’s oil and gas market. The tam of 350 employees has a strong reputation for meeting their customers need with a priority on safety and protecting the environment. These values are consistent with American Water’s value and they matter deeply to us and critically important. Keystone’s offering are aligned with America Water’s core competencies supplying, transmitting, pumping and storing water and developing the infrastructure that goes along with those services. Despite this fact that keeps on a relatively small part of our overall business portfolio we know it faces somewhat different risk than American Water’s traditional lines of business. As a result we set up legal structure to Keystone. For example we’ve established it under a holding company separate from our existing regulated segment and separate from our market based American Water Enterprises entity. As a reminder American Water Enterprises is the subsidiary that includes our military contract and homeowner services lines of businesses. We expect the shale market will continue to grow for many years given the critical role it plays in energy security and economic prosperity of the U.S. In addition we believe Keystone’s turnkey business model is repeatable in other areas of this industry creating opportunities for expansion in this sector. It’s important to note that over the past few years our non-regulated segment has averaged around 11% of our revenues and 9% of our earnings. We are not going to fundamentally change the risk profile of the company going forward and our long-term plan is that our non-regulated segment in total will not contribute more than 15% to 20% of earnings over the next five years. Additionally the upper part of that range will occur only if the meaningful part of the earnings is lower risk regulated like such as our military services business. Looking forward we remain confident in our ability to deliver on our long-term earnings per share growth of 7% to 10% through 2019 anchored from our 2013 earnings. Walter will now give an update on our regulated segment. Walter Lynch Thanks Susan. Good morning everyone. As Susan mentioned our regulated business has delivered positive results year-to-date and I’m especially proud of our progress on our efficiency ratio which I’ll talk about in a moment. Let me start by providing you with an update on California on Slide 8. California continues to experience the worst drive in the last 100 years. Based on an overall 25% state mandated reduction our California American Water customers have been asked to reduce water usage anywhere from 8% to 32% depending on their level of water use in 2013. One of our districts are exceeding those reduction goals. California American Water has launched ambitious conversation outreach programs to reduce water use. This includes mail, radio and social media and door to door efforts on programs such as Turf Rebate, replacement rebate, freely detection devices and water wide surveys. Our conversation stat is active at community events reaching after customers and equipping them with the tool they need to conserve water. As a reminder California American Water has rate decoupling so we do sale volumes do no result in reduced earnings. The other move in California is our water revenue adjustment mechanism or rent filing. As of June 30th we had an under collected rent receivable balance of about $50 million of which almost $45 million related to Monterey district. In order to assist with the impact on our customer bills in that area and to limited future accumulations we files the application with the California Public Utility Commission requesting recovery of the existing Monterey balance along with a return over a 20-year collection period. We also requested that the WRAM account be trued up annually going forward. We expect a decision on the Monterey WRAM Filing in mid to late 2016. As reminder, California American Water is approximately 8% of our total regulated revenue; however, we put a tremendous amount of focus there because issues the state faces offer us an opportunity to fully deploy our numerous water supply and service solution. Many of these, such as our AMI Customer Alert Pilot in Monterey, could apply in many other states where we operate. On July 31st Missouri American Water filed a request with the Missouri Public Service Commission for a general increase of about $51 million. This request includes about $25 million of new revenue and about $26 million of infrastructure surcharge revenue, known as ISRS in Missouri, which gets rolled into base rates at the end of the case. Consistent with our growth strategy, the filing includes $436 million in new infrastructure investments since 2012 to ensure reliable service to our customers. The Company’s last filing was more than four years ago, and since then the Company reduced its operations and maintenance expense by about $7 million, which means we’re able to invest over $40 million of capital with no impact on customer bills. We estimate that for every $1 of own and expense reduction allows a capital investment of about $6 with no impact on customer bills. I commend our team in Missouri for their disciplined approach to managing costs. The reprocess in Missouri takes approximately 11 months to complete, so we anticipate a decision in the second quarter of 2016. Lastly, in the second quarter we saw wet weather in the Midwest that was offset by dry weather in the northeast. However, we have seen above normal rainfall through much of our footprint in July, which resulted in modestly lower sales. Linda will talk about the known financial impact of this in a moment. Moving to Slide 9, we continue to make steady progress towards achieving our O&M efficiency ratio stretch goal of 34% or less by 2020. We achieved 35.9% for the last 12 months ended June 2015, which is a result of a disciplined approach to cost management by our employees. These efforts, of course, are driven by our focus on the customer and our commitment to clean, safe reliable and affordable water services. This is fundamental to our business. When we achieve smart O&M reductions, we can invest in our water and waste water systems, while mitigation the impact on our customer’s bills. Now, I’ll turn the call over to Linda for more detail on our second quarter financial results. Linda Solomon Thank you, Walter, and good morning everyone. In the second quarter we continue to deliver strong financial results. As shown on Slide 11, revenues were up almost 4% quarter-over-quarter and up 3% year-to-date. We reported earnings per share for the second quarter of $0.68, up about 8% over adjusted earnings for the same period last year. Year-to-date earnings were $1.13 per share, up about 9% over adjusted earnings in the same period last year. On the right side of the page, we show each business segment contribution to 2015 earnings per share. For the quarter, the regulated segment contributed earnings of $0.68 per share or an increase of about 6%. Our market-based segment contributed $0.06 per share in the second quarter, an increase of about 20%. Parent interest in other, which is primarily interest expense on parent debt, was a negative $0.06 per share for the quarter flat to the prior year. Now, I’ll go over the different components of our second quarter adjusted earnings per share growth on Slide 12. 2014 adjusted earnings were $0.63 per share. The second quarter of 2015 came in $0.05 above 2014 adjusted earnings at $0.68 per share. Reflecting increases in both our regulated and market-based segments. Our regulated segment benefited from both increased revenues and lower cost of $0.03 each. The higher regulated revenue was primarily from authorized rate increases and higher infrastructure charges. The lower operating and maintenance expense was mostly due to three factors. First, lower transportation expense as a result of lower fuel prices and leased vehicle costs. Second, lower uncollectible expense as we continue to bring collections back toward historical levels after implementation of our customer information system. And third, savings in employee related costs from lower wages, salaries and severance expense. For the market-based segment, earnings per share was up $0.01 due to additional construction projects under our military contracts and the addition of two new military bases in the second half of 2014. We also had contract growth and geographic expansion in our homeowner services business. Partially offsetting these improvements were higher depreciation, taxes and other costs of about $0.02 per share, mainly from growth associated with our capital investment programs at the regulated segment. In the appendix of this slide deck we have included our revenue and expense bridge slides to provide more detail to the variances I just discussed. Now let me cover regulatory highlights on Slide 13. We have three ongoing general rate cases in New Jersey, West Virginia and Missouri for a combined annualized rate request of $127 million. As Walter mentioned, these rate cases continue to reflect our disciplined approach to investing. For rates effective since July 1 of last year through today, we received a total of $55 million in additional annualized revenues from general rate cases, step increases and infrastructure charges. These are the highlights of these cases, and we encourage you review the footnotes in the appendix for more information. Slide 14 is a summary dashboard of our financial performance, which showed improvement across the board. During the second quarter of 2015, we made total investments of $348 million, primarily to improve infrastructure in our regulated segment and for regulated acquisitions. As Susan mentioned earlier, we expect to invest $1.2 billion to $1.3 billion for the full year of 2015. For the quarter, our cash flow from operations increased approximately $14 million, primarily from earnings growth. Our adjusted return on equity increased by approximately 40 basis points over the past 12 months compared to the prior year. We also paid a $0.34 quarterly cash dividend to our shareholders in June which represented about a 10% increase compared to last year, and on July 24, the board of directors approved a $0.34 per share dividend payable in September. As Walter mentioned in his comments related to the California Water Revenue Adjustment Mechanism or WRAM, we requested recovery of the Monterey WRAM balance over a 20-year period along with a return. Based on long-standing precedent in California, we expect to collect the entire WRAM balance; however, due to extending the recovery period, we will recognize a immaterial non-cash, timing-related adjustment to earnings in the third quarter. This adjustment has been factored into our reaffirmed 2015 earnings guidance. We have now closed the Keystone acquisition for a purchase price of about nine times the trailing 12 months EBITDA. Under our purchase agreement, we will have small purchase price adjustments for changes in working capital, capital investments, and the results of operations through the July 9th closing date. Once we record the acquisition in the third quarter, we will provide additional details. For segment reporting purposes, we will include the operating results of Keystone as part of our market-based business segment. The market-based segment will be comprised of American Water Enterprises and Keystone Clear Water Solutions. Keystone, as Susan noted, is a legally separate entity. Keystone has about 20 EMP and other large corporate customers in the Appalachian region. Today its business is relatively asset light. Its costs are largely variable, and we believe it will be able to capture synergies with American Water. We expect the acquisition to be earnings neutral in 2015 and accretive to earnings per share in 2016. We will provide you additional detail on Keystone during our Analyst Day presentation on December 15th. And, lastly, we mentioned earlier we experienced wet weather in July, which for the month is estimated to unfavourably impact net income by about $4 million. We will be updating you further on the third quarter earnings call. Building on our solid financial performance year-to-date and despite the wet weather in July, we are reaffirming our 2015 earnings guidance to be in the range of $2.55 to $2.65 per share, and with that I’ll turn it back over to Susan. Susan Story Thanks, Linda. Before taking your questions, I would like to take just a couple of minutes to highlight American Water’s sustainability leadership. Our Company treats and delivers over a billion gallons of water a day to our customers, and this is just a start of our environmental focus. We have some of the best people in the water industry, and they choose to work here because environmental leadership is a core value at American Water. When you marry great minds with a passion for innovation and sustainability, you can accomplish some pretty exciting results. Let me give you just a couple of examples. Reclaiming and reusing water is an imperative in the face of water supply and infrastructure challenges for future generations. And this isn’t just a California issue as some believe. In fact, 40 of 50 state water managers say they expect water shortages in some portion of their state in the next ten years. It will take bold strategies including public/private partnerships to address these challenges. This year Illinois American Water was selected by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of greater Chicago, or MWRD, to partner on a beneficial water reuse project. The agency is partnering with us to reclaim, treat and distribute waste water to large water users like manufacturing plants. Through this partnership, Illinois American will build the distribution infrastructure, very many the customer base, buy water from MWRD and resell the water. Once fully operational, this water reuse project will significantly reduce fresh water withdrawals from the Great Lakes. This project has already been recognized by the American Society of Civil Engineers as a game changer in its recent report regarding innovative infrastructure solutions. Let me giving you one other example where we’re using water in smarter ways. Geothermal heat pump technology is not new, but an innovative American Water R&D pilot could transform traditional geothermal HVAC systems and introduce a new application in renewable energy. American Water is piloting a geothermal innovation to heat and cool a 40,000-square-foot school on Long Island, New York. Our pilot geothermal system transfers ground temperature from a water main using a heat exchanger, allowing the same system to cool during the summer and heat during the winter. Once unable to have community events or classes during the summer months due to lack of air conditioning, this school has been fully utilized this year with a geothermal installation. This pilot project was actually highlighted at the NARUC Conference in New York City just last month. These exams are just two of our numerous sustainability efforts. We’re proud to note that we have already reduced our greenhouse gas emission by 17% since 2007, exceeding our initial target of 16% reduction by 2017, a full two years early. Additionally, our water pump efficiency efforts to date are expected to produce energy savings of 12 million kilowatt hours per year. These are just some of the reasons that American Water was ranked No. 24 of the almost 500 companies listed in Newsweek Magazine’s top green companies for 2015, one of only two utilities in the top 25 and the only water utility. We are proud of this recognition because we believe being green is not just good for the environment; it’s also good for the bottom line. We believe our company cannot only do well, but we can also do good and with that, we’re happy to take any questions you may have. Question-and-Answer Session Operator We will now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] And the first question comes from the Daniel Eggers with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Daniel Eggers Susan, you kind of talked about Keystone. Obviously, it’s an interesting opportunity but the trailing earnings contribution that you guys showed when you bought it wasn’t particularly all that large. Is that number of earnings contribution, has that changed since ’14 in some appreciable way? And then you kind of look out over forward, what’s going to drive that business, you know, with or without an improvement in drilling activity in the region? Susan Story We are going on December the 15th, at our Analyst Day, we’re going to be providing a deeper look forward in all parts of our growth triangle include Keystone and the shale area. Daniel Eggers Is that Southern for you’re not going to answer the question? Susan Story Yes, it is. Daniel Eggers On the growth triangle, you guys said that — you said non-reg is not going to be more than 15% to 20% of contribution from roughly 10ish % today. Is it that the correct messaging? Susan Story That’s correct. Currently, over the past three years, our earnings from the market-based business has been around 9%. So that puts it in context. In the past, Dan, we’ve talked mainly from revenue numbers, so we’ve actually added more transparency in talking about earnings from that segment as opposed to just revenues. Daniel Eggers Okay. I guess we didn’t really get into what all is going on with the core of that business these days, but just can you give an update on government contracting and the home businesses and kind of where you’re seeing the opportunities right now or where the action’s been this year so far? Susan Story Sure. You know, one thing because we won the two military bases last year, we’re starting to see the revenues as well as some of the working capital we’re putting into some of the projects on those bases. There are currently several outstanding RFPs, you know, as we’ve mentioned before, when they will be awarded is, you know, we never can predict with a tremendous amount of accuracy. There’s a chance maybe one could be awarded this year, maybe two to three next year that we’re involved with. But what’s important on military, and I think it’s important and you asked that in your question, on military, it’s not just the new bases but the continuing projects that are on the existing bases beyond just O & M contract that we have — the money we get paid each year for running the water and waste water systems. So I will tell you that we currently have on the books I believe another $200 million of backlog of existing projects to do on the bases that we already have. So for military services, we continue to ensure that we’re providing the best water and waste water services for those military men and women who serve our country. On the homeowner services, as we said, you know, we had mentioned about Orlando. We have launched it this year, so we’re starting to get customers signing up in Orlando. Orlando also presents for us the first place that we have a much deeper service offering beyond just water and sewer line but also HVAC and in-home plumbing. So that’s another opportunity there, and as I mentioned in my comment, we were awarded an exclusive contract that has been signed for Rialto, California, which is about 55,000 potential customers. And then we won the bid for exclusive contract with Wilmington, Delaware, but the City Council still needs to approve that. And we’re hoping to launch both of those by the end of the year. So in those two areas, that’s what we’re seeing from that market-based business. Daniel Eggers I guess just one last one too. When you think about moving into these new cities, is there a start-up cost associated with trying to recruit customers and acquisition-wise where you is more expense on the front end as you push into these towns as you get people and it pays off over time, or are you guys amortizing that expense over a longer period? Susan Story Dan, we love that you listen to us when you talk to us. Yes. The answer is yes. We have the upfront marketing expenses, and because we have to let people know that we’re there and one thing that’s important, we put a lot of emphasis on these exclusive partnerships. That’s important because in an exclusive partnership, our billing is typically on the city or the municipality or whatever the governmental entity or the entity is that’s on their water and/or waste water bill, so for us that tends to be a higher take rate. And that’s why those are so important for us as opposed to just we do have areas where we just generally market and we provide separate billing, but the exclusive contracts are really much more effective for us financially. Operator The next question comes from Ryan Connors with Boenning and Scattergood. Please go ahead. Ryan Connors A few questions this morning if I might, first, just on the guidance, it seemed like I noticed weather is still a $0.07 plus or minus swing point in the guidance, even here kind of midway through the third quarter I guess, so just wanted to get some color on that. That seemed like it was a little, you know, large in terms of a swing factor there at this point in the year, so I just want to get some flavor on why that’s such a large wild card at this point. Susan Story Ryan, the chart that we have in there shows the major variabilities as of February 26th, so that’s the full year variability. In terms of the impact of weather that we’ve seen thus far in July it’s about $4 million net income. And it’s due to wet weather across our system. Ryan Connors So it’s safe to say that that gap has closed then at this point and we’re largely — that gap has tightened up. Susan Story That’s right. And this variability chart is the one that we provided to you at the December 15th call. Ryan Connors Got it, okay. Susan Story One thing as we look at this too, you know, the reason we put multiple items up there is as we establish a range, we understand there’s going to be variability. Some of the variability offsets each other. So you don’t take each one in isolation, but as you remember, we started in 2013 saying, so why do we have a $0.10 range? Why do we have the range we do? Here are some factors, ups or downs, puts or takes. So it’s important to look at all in context [indiscernible]. Ryan Connors I wanted to talk a little bit just get some color on this WRAM application for the extension there. Now, you mentioned Walter, that the decision there is expected mid to late 2016. It seems like a pretty straightforward, filing and a pretty good deal for the rate payers. So I’m just wondering what the key points of debate are on that filing and where the push back is, if any, on the way that that’s structured. Walter Lynch Yes. Thanks for the question, Ryan. I think two things. One is the length of time over which we’re going to be able to recover it. And the other is the return that we’re asking for. It will take time to work through that and that’s why we say it will take to mid 2016 to get that decision. Ryan Connors And it’s my understanding that the application seeks to establish the WRAM balance itself as a regulatory asset. Is that correct? And if so, can you give us a very brief Cliff Notes version of how that works? Susan Story Yes, it’s essentially setting it up at an accounts receivable from the customer, which would be a regulatory asset. Ryan Connors And then, Susan, you mentioned that, you know, that the NARUC summer meetings, some of your sustainability initiatives were highlighted and that’s great. Good you also kind of give us any take-aways from those meeting in terms of what’s around the corner just looking ahead at the big regulatory developments, any big topics there about, you know, what might be next in terms of policy developments or regulatory, you know, evolution in the water space? Susan Story Sure, I’ll start it and then Walter may have a couple things since he was at the meetings also. One of the things that we’re very excited about that was launched at the summer NARUC meeting is a step forward in terms of not just water energy nexus but to look at — in most state utility commissions they look separately at electric, gas and water. One of the things that President Edgar rolled out was an effort at NARUC to start looking at where all utilities could come together on common items such as, for example, critical infrastructure, cyber security, looking at how we could work together, looking at the fact that now that things like the mechanisms for infrastructure replacement. There are a lot of issues at state utility commissions that really cross the boundaries of electricity, gas and water, and so there’s an effort to create this project or this task force at NARUC to look at what those are and where commissions can work with utilities in a state to find the areas that we can find some common ground and some common efforts. An example for us in California is the Monterey pilot, the AMI pilot that Walter mentioned. What that is, is that we actually partnered with specific gas and electric and we’re using some of their backbone to put the water meters there so we can send alerts to those customers they have a very steep tiered pricing structure for water in Monterey, so we can actually send, as part of the customers on the pilot, signals when they’re about to enter a new tier of pricing or they’ve set a budget and we can send them messages when they’re getting close to the budget. That’s just one an example. We’re very involved and actually American Water, we adopt the electric utility industry missed standards for cyber security. We’re very involved with the Department of Homeland Security and DOD in those things. So there’s a lot efforts like that, and we are very excited at NARUC where we’re looking at cross utility-type projects that can benefit all of us. Walter Lynch I think Susan did a great job recapping the meeting. I mean the four areas again that she mentioned, water energy nexus and opportunities for us to look for the electric and gases, cyber security in the same way, regulatory mechanisms that are going to be continued to incentivize us to invest and upgrade our water and waste water systems and where can we partner with electric and gases to drive better customer service. Those are the key themes that I saw coming out of NARUC. Operator The next question comes from Michael Lapides with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Michael Lapides One question on the Clear Water acquisition, Keystone Claire Water acquisition, keeping in a separate legal structure, how do you think about the optionality that creates if this business continues to grow in terms of potential revisions to the corporate structure, in terms of whether this is a business that, and I don’t know if legally it could, is this a business that could eventually wind up in an MLP structure? And if you don’t mind addressing that first and then I may do one follow-up. Susan Story Okay, sure. We did look at that and I will tell you that just a little more color around the legal structure. So there’s separate holding company, that Water Solutions Holding, that actually is the holding company for Keystone Clear Water, and that holding company is 95% owned by American Industrial Water, which is also a separate LLC, and 5% from Sand Hills Management, which is the founding members, which includes the current CEO and President and COO. So we’re glad they not only are staying to run the business, they continue to have an equity ownership. So that’s how it’s structured legally. We did actually, Michael, get — we took a look at MLPs. A few things just to let you know, so we are constantly monitoring it, the EBITDA last year of Keystone Clear Water was around $15 million. Even some of the smaller MLPs are between $50 million and $70 million EBITDA, so scale-wise, it’s just not quite large enough. No. 2, you know, we’ve just purchased Keystone. You have to have a predictability of the cash distributions. We’re continually looking at that as we get into looking at this business. And, of course, the big thing you’ve got to have really pretty clear visibility into the future growth potential. You know, kind of people talk about the feed the beast issue. So in terms of the future, we’re always open to all options that make sense to our shareholder interest, and we are looking at those variety of things. At this point, it doesn’t make sense to do a MLP. Michael Lapides One follow-up, actually, on the core regulated business and really an M&A question. You all have been excellent over the years in terms of doing kind of small bolt-on acquisitions. What’s your thought process around, or what’s your market dynamic and opportunity set around, kind of more larger scale M&A. It’s, obviously, a far more fragmented business than the electric and gas, but just trying to curious when you look at the landscape of publicly traded or kind ever larger private or municipal owned ones. Susan Story I will start and then I want Walter to fill in because he and his team have done a lot of work on this. In terms of looking at other IOUs, you’re always looking at the marketplace, but the fact is it’s a pretty well valued space out there, but we’re always looking at all options. Where I think our sweet spot is, though, something that Walter and his team have put a priority on, so Walter, do you want to talk about kind of the focus going forward on the regulated [indiscernible]. Walter Lynch Yes. We still pursue the smaller acquisitions but our focus is really on the five to 25,000 customer systems, and we see a number of opportunities. I’ve been in this business many years, two decades, and this is the best environment for acquisitions that I’ve seen. I think because municipalities are looking for options, and we, as the largest water and waste water company in United States, have tremendous expertise that we can share with these municipalities. So the opportunities are huge. They’re also with some of the fiscal issues that they’re facing. It’s a tough environment for some of these municipalities. I think the other thing is we work very closely with the legislatures to provide enabling legislation that allows us to pay a fair market value and really reduce the bureaucracy and some of these acquisitions. So that’s our focus. We have great people out in our state that are focused primarily on growing the business, from the state leadership teams to the growth teams, and we’ve — I think we’ve been doing a very good job and more to come. Operator The next question comes from Spencer Joyce with Hilliard Lyons. Please go ahead. Spencer Joyce Just one real quick one here from me, I want to jump back to keystone. Correct me if I misheard, but I believe the purchase may have been qualified as asset light earlier in the call. And when we think about water service, I mean trucks, pipes, tanks asset light is not what comes to my mind. And then to kind of follow-up, if it really were an asset light business, why you would you all have looked an at MLP structure? Can you speak to any of those points? Linda Solomon Absolutely, Spencer, let me start and then I’ll ask Susan if she has anything to add. In terms of the asset light, you’re right. The things that are owned by Keystone are really the pumps, the pipes, the valves and a temporary storage tank. We also see vehicles as part of the assets as well. Susan Story And so the current model includes both permanent pipelines as well as temporary pipelines that are owned by Keystone. So that’s one element of it today. The assets are — or the business is very asset light. The audited financials were about $36 million in assets at the end of December. So that gives you a feel for the size of it. As Susan mentioned on the MLP structure, I mean this is one of the things that we look at is what are the future growth potential and can you continuously have a transparent pipeline for growth in the business. And that’s one of the key elements to look at from a MLP structure. And Spencer, to add to that when we talk about asset light, we do it in terms of our business overall, which we’re so capital intensive in utilities in some spaces that may not seem as capital light. For us it does. However, one of the things we are looking at is the potential remember that as part of [indiscernible] as a 60% owner, there were capital constraints. One of the things we are looking at strategically is the possibly or potential of actually deploying more capital to build longer-term pipelines as opposed to having the ENP fund them. What if we now have the capital, Keystone has the capital to actually fund some of those constructions and entertain things like take or pay contracts or those type things. So the good news is you’ve got Keystone, which is an outstanding company. And I will tell you just to add to this, I spent a day with those folks out there before we closed, and after we announced the acquisition, and, culturally, they are — it’s been such an easy transition. They are from Pennsylvania. They grew up there. The CEO actually has a background in water, environmental remediation compliance. It’s just an outstanding group of people, but they’ve had a certain suite of services that now with the purchase by American Water, we can maybe can broaden some of those suite of services, which could include more capital. Spencer Joyce Just to kind of recap here, so when we think kind of asset light in air quotes, you know, we’re maybe drawing a comparison versus the utility, which would be perhaps more capital intensive. And then also from the standpoint of the business maybe a little bit lighter on assets versus what it could be given some of the constraints that [Rex] had previously. Susan Story You know what? I could not have said it better myself. Operator The next question comes from Jonathan Reeder with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead. Jonathan Reeder I’ll start out with the an easy point of clarify question. The $4 million net income headwind from weather that you mentioned, does that include July’s impact as well? I might have missed that. Linda Solomon That is the impact in July and it’s across all of our regions. Susan Story Yes. Jonathan, one thing we try to do, typically, we don’t talk about the month outside the quarter. But because we were able to get the information, we wanted to go ahead and share that. That was not from the second quarter. Jonathan Reeder Okay. So for the I guess the first half of the year, what was the weather impact? Linda Solomon In the first half of the year, we had an increase in demand, or in the second quarter we in an increase in demand, of about $2.7 million. Over half of that was associated with an increase in our commercial customers, and then the remainder of it was weather related. And what we saw was on the residential side, we had hotter or dryer weather in the northeast, and given our geographic diversity, that was offset somewhat by the wet weather that was in the central region. Jonathan Reeder So, pretty much if we if through July, I mean you’re kind of at break even or so from a weather impact and everything, nothing too major? Linda Solomon So we are negative all the way through July from a weather standpoint because we had that $4 million approximate net income impact in July, the month of July. Susan Story But yes. But January through June you could say it was break even. Jonathan Reeder Yes. Okay. And then… Walter Lynch One can offset the other, right. Jonathan Reeder Yes. Okay. Then the military bases that you mentioned, you might get awards for this year that they might announce, are these just the ones that you’re involved with, or is that kind of encompassing the whole RFP space? Linda Solomon We’re only tracking the ones we’re involved with, Jonathan, and we only — the ones that we’re involved with typically are medium to larger size. We don’t get involved with the smaller ones. So there could be. Jonathan Reeder Okay. And then do you expect a pickup in the pace of RFP awards going forward, or, you know, maybe you can talk about how many are open right now that you’re actively bidding on? Linda Solomon There are numerous ones that are open. You know, pretty much probably high single-digits that are open. They’re in varying stages. We have best guesses, and they’re pretty spread out over the next two or three years, so but you know, you never know. It depends what’s going on in Washington, what they’re going through. I will tell you that we have this year seen more interest from the air force. In the past the army has been the service that has been most interested, and we still are seeing some RFPs from the army, but we’re really seeing a lot of interest in the air force. And Jonathan, what we have disclosed previously is that we are active in several RFPs today with a gross revenue value of $1.5 billion to the extent that we would be successful in all of them. Jonathan Reeder You said $1.5 billion gross revenue and that’s for the 50 years? Linda Solomon Correct. Jonathan Reeder Walter, I didn’t know if you could give any kind of update on the New Jersey and West Virginia rate cases, how they’re kind of progressing and how you would handicap the prospects for reaching settlements? Walter Lynch Let me start by saying they’re both progressing on schedule. So, typically, New Jersey, it’s 9 months to 12 month to get a rate order. We filed in early January. That’s going according to plan. In West Virginia, there’s a 11-month rate case process, and again it’s moving according to schedule so nothing to be concerned about for both of those. Jonathan Reeder Okay. How about on West Virginia? I mean it’s been a bit of a challenge, you know, your past few cases there. You know, you, obviously, had the challenges last year that, you know, weren’t necessarily your fault but you needed to respond to them. You know, how is the outlook there? It was a pretty large, you know, ask in part because you haven’t gotten what you’ve needed in the past. What’s kind of been the response in West Virginia? Walter Lynch Well, our team’s doing a great job working through, the rate case process and talking about the value that we provide to our customers. And, we’re confident that we’re going to continue to make that case and we’re hopeful to get a fair outcome. Jonathan Reeder Okay. And then what would be the timing on the outcome 11 months would put us into is it early 2016? Walter Lynch Around April 1st of 2016. Operator [Operator Instructions] The next question comes from Brian Chin with Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Please go ahead. Brian Chin Just piggybacking on the last question, I know it’s really early on here, but for the Missouri rate case, just thoughts on possibility of a settlement there. That would be great. Susan Story So this we have just filed a rate case in Missouri on July 31st, and so we are going to be working through the process as we normally do in this case. Walter Lynch Yes. And, typically, in Missouri it takes 11 months, and we are working through that process and, you know, it’s right on schedule even though we just filed. Brian Chin Can you remind me again, historically, have you guys gotten settlements in Missouri or not? Walter Lynch Yes, we have. Brian Chin Great, and roughly at what point in the process does most of the leg work on that settlement and an agreement typically get reached? Linda Solomon You know, it really depends on rate case by rate case, company by company. It’s really hard to predict that, you know, you go through the process and it can happen as we work together. Brian Chin And then one last question for me, because most of my other questions were asked and answered, any update on sort of the corporate headquarters move? I would love to get an update there. Susan Story We are in the beginning stages of that. The latest information is that we have received approval of the tax credit in New Jersey, which if we determine that we would move to the Camden location, we would be able to effectuate those tax credits. We are currently in the process of looking for location, and so we are working through that. And to the extent that we can find a location in the Camden area, we are very excited about seeing part of the revitalization in that city. Brian Chin Is there a sense of timing as to when you guys will make a decision on what you want to do there? Susan Story The credits are for a three year period where the clock started in June. And then we have the opportunity to have an extension of six months automatically and a request of an additional six months that would be due — that would be met with approval requirements, so a three to four year period. Operator The next question comes from Barry Klein with Macquarie. Please go ahead Barry Klein This might be a little bit in-depth, but in the pyramid that you always put onto the slides in the presentation, you added — it looks like you added a new area entitled Other. And I was just wondering if you could please explain what it meant for that portion of the period — the pyramid. Susan Story Well, Barry, that’s a great question. We have actually included Other in the past couple of years, but we have not — you are correct. We have not talked about it a lot. We put that in there because one of the things, one of the advantages we have at American Water with our size and scale, we have our own R&B group and we have 20 scientists. And most of their work is dedicated to finding better ways to do our business, bring efficiency, water quality. We work along with the EPA. We work with foundations, actually, all over the world including Israel as opposed to Europe on new technologies in the water industry. What happens when we do that while the focus of making our business more efficient, we also, at times of opportunity with partnering up with starter companies where out of our deployment in testing we’re able to get small interests in some of these businesses. So, you know, not a big thing, but it’s called our — and we have an innovation development process. We actually came up with the process called TNT Express that is used in wastewater plants that reduces the energy of aeration by 50%, and it — carbon edition by up to 100%. We actually did an international license agreement with Abengoa on that, which, you know, last year maybe was a $0.5 million, not a lot of money. But this other is almost a [holding] category for lots of smaller things like that, that may or may not be something down the road. There’s no, in the long-term triangle, we don’t assign any weight to it in terms of how much of the growth is going to provide, but we put it up there because there could be some things like that that come up. And, again, this is not big investment into things for the purpose of creating new business. It’s investment into opportunities that help our base business be better, but, potentially, could result in some income. Operator The next question comes from David Paz from Wolfe Research. Please go ahead. David Paz Just on the regulated acquisition strategy, I know there have been some companies [indiscernible] on to expand their water business, you know. And they are seeking to buy small water companies. Have you seen competition pick up, or noticeably picked up, for your regulated acquisition? Walter Lynch You know, we have — we operate in 16 states, so we have varying levels of competition in each of the states where we operate, but by far we are the biggest and we have the biggest footprint. It gives us an opportunity to expand out, get to know different municipal leaders, so I think we have a competitive advantage there. I think the other huge competitive advantage we have is that we worked on legislation that allows us to buy wastewater systems and share those costs with our water customers. And, for example, in New Jersey, we have 650,000 customers. When we buy a system, we can spread the cost across that huge customer base and minimize the impact on those customers that we just acquired. So we use that for our advantage. We use that for advanced of our customers and providing great customer service for them. Operator This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to management for any closing remarks. Susan Story Well, thank you so much, Gary, and thanks to everybody for joining us today. We had a good quarter, and I just want to remind you that, you know, all of this happens because of the 6700 employees that we have out there every day. We talk about the facts, you know. We talk about the numbers, but these are our employees out there serving one customer at a time every day. And I tell you we are very fortunate in our industry to have some of the best people anywhere, making sure that we are able to be up here today talking about the numbers that we were able to accomplish. So I want to give a shout out to them and thank them for all their hard work. And thank you for all of your questions and for supporting our company. Operator The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today’s presentation.

Duke Energy (DUK) Lynn J. Good on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Duke Energy Corp. (NYSE: DUK ) Q2 2015 Earnings Call August 06, 2015 10:00 am ET Executives Bill Currens – Vice President-Investor Relations Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Analysts Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities (NYSE: USA ) LLC (Broker) Shahriar Pourreza – Guggenheim Securities LLC Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Christopher J. Turnure – JPMorgan Securities LLC Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co. Jonathan P. Arnold – Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Operator Good day and welcome to this Duke Energy Second Quarter Earnings Conference Call. Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Bill Currens. Please go ahead, sir. Bill Currens – Vice President-Investor Relations Thank you, Shannon. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Duke Energy’s second quarter 2015 earnings review and business update. Leading our call is Lynn Good, President and CEO, along with Steve Young, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Today’s discussion will include forward-looking information and the use of non-GAAP financial measures. Slide 2 presents the Safe Harbor statement, which accompanies our presentation materials. A reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures can be found on duke-energy.com and in today’s materials. Please note that the appendix to today’s presentation includes supplemental information and additional disclosures to help you analyze the company’s performance. As summarized on slide three, Lynn will begin with an update on our principal strategic, operational and financial activities since our last call, then Steve will provide an overview of our second quarter financial results, including updates on economic activities within our service territories, as well as conditions in Brazil. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Lynn. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining us. Before I start today, I’d like to take a moment to introduce Doug Esamann. Doug recently joined our senior management team and will oversee our Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky and Florida utilities. Doug has over 30 years of experience with Duke Energy, most recently as the President of our Indiana utility. Doug’s depth of regulatory experience as well as his customer and strategic focus complements our leadership team. We look forward to introducing Doug to many of you over the coming months. Now, to the quarter. We are midway through 2015 and continue to execute our operational and strategic growth objectives while positioning the company to meet our financial objectives for the year. This morning, we reported second quarter 2015 adjusted EPS of $0.95, which is consistent with our plan. Our regulated and commercial businesses have performed well over the first half of the year. Additionally, we have completed the sale of the Midwest Generation and the purchase of the NCEMPA assets ahead of schedule. This has allowed us to effectively offset the challenging business environment in Brazil. As a result, we remain confident in our ability to achieve our full-year 2015 earnings guidance range of $4.55 to $4.75 per share. In June, we completed our $1.5 billion accelerated stock repurchase ahead of schedule. Further, last month, we announced that the Board of Directors increased the quarterly dividend to $0.825 per share doubling the annual growth rate to around 4%. This increase reflects our confidence in the strength of our core business and our cash flows. Our balance sheet provides continued support for growth in the dividend. For the past 89 years, the dividend has demonstrated our commitment to delivering attractive total returns to shareholders. I am pleased with the company’s operational performance during the quarter, particularly our response to the extended heat wave in the Carolinas in June. Temperatures were in the upper 90s for much of the month and our system met the increased demand for our customers. In June, we used a record monthly amount of natural gas, approximately 25 Bcf, surpassing the previous month high of 20 Bcf set in July of 2014. Additionally, our nuclear fleet delivered a record second quarter in terms of net megawatt hours of generation. Nuclear capacity factor was around 95% during the month of June. Lastly, our field operations teams met customer needs during the stress of the summer heat and storms. Our ability to meet extreme demand conditions demonstrates the quality of our operations. We’ve made significant headway on other strategic and regulatory priorities, which I’ll briefly cover on slide five. These priorities include investments in new generation, infrastructure and a focus on environmental compliance. Beginning with our investments in new generation. Just last week, we closed on the $1.25 billion acquisition of jointly owned generating assets from the North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency. We closed ahead of schedule, after receiving the required approval sooner than expected. This reflects the mutually beneficial nature of the acquisition and the widespread support we received here in North Carolina. We immediately began supplying power to the 32 municipalities through a long-term wholesale contract. In 2015, we expect a $0.04 earnings per share benefit based upon an expected full year EPS impact of around $0.07 to $0.08. During the second quarter, we also announced the $1.1 billion Western Carolinas Modernization Project. This project includes the early retirement of our Asheville coal plant, which will be replaced by a new 650 megawatt combined-cycle gas plant. We will also build new transmission assets that will improve reliability in the region. Finally, we will install solar generation at the site. The new gas plant is expected in service by the end of 2019 and the entire project will likely be completed by 2020. Before construction begins, various regulators including the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the Carolinas Utility Commissions will need to approve the plan. Our commercial renewables business continues to deliver on its capital growth projects. In April, we completed the 200-megawatt Los Vientos III project in South Texas, which is now delivering power under a long-term contract with Austin Energy. In July, we announced acquisitions of an additional 70 megawatts of solar capacity in California and North Carolina. Our commercial renewables business now has more than 2,000 megawatts of capacity in operation. In July, FERC approved our application to acquire the 599 megawatt combined-cycle Osprey gas plant in Florida from Calpine. The Florida Public Service Commission also voted to approve the acquisition. We remain on track to close by January of 2017 when our existing PPA with Calpine terminates and we have a need for additional generation capacity. Also in Florida, we announced an agreement to purchase a 7.5% stake in the Sabal Trail gas pipeline from Spectra Energy for $225 million. Similar to the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, the Sabal Trail investment will be a part of Duke’s Commercial portfolio. The pipeline is expected in service by the end of 2017 and will serve the growing natural gas needs in the state, including our 1,640 megawatt Citrus County combined-cycle plant, which is expected to be online in 2018. Duke Energy Florida and Florida Power & Light have entered into 25-year capacity agreements with the pipeline. Moving to Indiana, in May, we received an order from the Indiana Commission on the transmission and distribution infrastructure plan. The Commission denied our proposed $1.9 billion investment because they would like to see greater detail. We are working on a revised plan, which we expect to file with the Commission by the end of 2015. Modernizing our electric grid will provide great benefits to customers in Indiana, ultimately increasing reliability, decreasing the duration of power outages and improving customer communication. In the second quarter, we made significant progress on coal ash management activities. In May, we began moving ash at our River Bend site in North Carolina after receiving state permits. We are now excavating ash at three sites in the Carolinas. In June, we announced recommendations to fully excavate 12 additional ash basins in North Carolina, bringing the total ash in the Carolinas we have slated for excavation to about 30%. The remaining ash basins are being further studied to determine appropriate closure methods. We are pursuing solutions that balance safety, environmental stewardship and cost effectiveness. Given our efforts over the past year, we are ahead of the curve in adapting to changing regulations our industry faces with ash management. On the subject of environmental rules, on Monday, the U.S. EPA finalized a Clean Power Plan, a regulation aimed at reducing carbon emissions from existing power plants 32% by 2030. The guidelines issued this week are more than 1,500 pages long and among the more complex rules in recent history. This rule sets state specific reduction targets and builds upon the substantial progress we have already made to reduce our environmental footprint. Since 2005, we have reduced our total carbon dioxide emissions by 22% through retirement of older coal units, the transition to cleaner burning natural gas, as well as investments in renewables and energy efficiency. Our plans continue to move us toward a lower carbon future. We will work constructively with our states to identify solutions that preserve the reliability and affordability our customers expect. As we continue to modernize our system, managing energy diversity will be an important consideration. As I look back over the first half of 2015, I am pleased with what we’ve accomplished on multiple fronts across the business. I’m even more pleased with the groundwork we’re laying for the years ahead. We’re making strategic long-term investments that will benefit our customers and communities in addition to supporting growth for shareholders. We’re developing and executing strategies that will position the company well in a rapidly changing industry. Now, I’ll turn the call over to Steve to discuss the quarter in more detail. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Thanks, Lynn. Today, I’ll review our second quarter financial results and discuss the economic conditions in our service territories. I will also provide an update on the accounting and expected costs for our coal ash management activities and review our results in Brazil. Let’s start with the quarterly results. I will cover the highlights on slide six. For more detailed information on segment variances versus last year, please refer to the supporting materials that accompany today’s press release. As Lynn mentioned, we achieved second quarter adjusted diluted earnings of $0.95 per share compared to $1.11 in the second quarter of 2014. On a reported basis, 2015 second quarter earnings per share were $0.78 compared to $0.86 last year. A reconciliation of reported results to adjusted results is included in the supplemental materials to today’s presentation. Regulated Utilities adjusted results declined by $0.09 per share, primarily due to a prior year favorable state tax settlement, planned timing of O&M cost and higher depreciation and amortization. O&M cost increased this quarter due to the planned timing of outages across the generation fleet and approximately $0.05 due to nuclear outage cost levelization impacts recognized in the prior year. This is the last quarter in which we expect nuclear outage cost levelization to be a significant driver over the prior year results. We are on track to achieve our targeted full-year O&M budget and continue to look for opportunities to reduce costs. These negative drivers were partially offset by higher margins, resulting from growth in wholesale contracts and weather normal retail sales. We had favorable weather in the quarter as a significant heat wave gripped the Carolinas in June. Weather added around $0.03 over last year’s second quarter and $0.06 compared to normal conditions. We also experienced higher earnings of $0.03 this quarter from pricing and riders, primarily due to increased energy efficiency programs. International’s quarterly earnings declined $0.13 over last year, due to factors we continue to monitor, including the economic conditions and lower demand for electricity in Brazil. As you will recall, International also had a favorable income tax adjustment of $0.07 in last year’s quarter, associated with the reorganization of our operations in Chile. Our Commercial Portfolio, formerly Commercial Power, is primarily made up of our commercial renewables business. In the second quarter, we incurred slightly lower earnings, due to lower wind production. This decrease in wind production was experienced broadly across the United States. Turning to slide seven, I’ll now provide some insight into the second half of 2015. And the key drivers that give us confidence in our 2015 guidance range of $4.55 to $4.75 per share. Through the first half of the year, our adjusted earnings per share of $2.20 is consistent with our plan. The regulated business has experienced favorable weather, and has seen strong growth in wholesale contracts and weather normal retail sales. The sale of the Midwest Generation fleet, as a whole, has been favorable to our plan in the first half of the year. These positive drivers have helped offset continued weakness at International. In order to achieve our full-year 2015 earnings guidance range, we expect higher EPS contributions in the back half of the year, over what we earned in the comparable period last year. There are a few primary drivers that support this. First, we expect continued growth in contracted wholesale volumes, as well as organic growth in retail demand over the last half of the year. Second, we experienced unfavorable weather last year in the third quarter. Assuming normal weather for the remainder of this year provides an uplift of $0.05. Third, the early completion of the NCEMPA asset purchase will provide an additional earnings per share impact of around $0.04. Earnings from our Commercial renewables business should also see an improvement in the second half of the year. We are on track to put over 200 megawatts of additional wind and solar capacity into service later this year, which would bring 2015’s total additions to more than 400 megawatts. Related to O&M cost, we expect third quarter O&M to be higher than the prior year, while fourth quarter should be lower. As a result, O&M shouldn’t be a significant driver in the second half of the year. Similarly, we expect International’s earnings contribution in the second half of 2015 to be comparable to last year. This is not a full list of drivers for the rest of the year, but these represent variances that are likely to occur based on current expectations. As you are all aware, the third quarter is historically our strongest quarter. We will be in a position to provide more insight into the year after we see those results. Moving on to slide eight, I’ll now discuss our retail customer volume trends. On a rolling 12-month basis, weather normalized retail load growth increased by positive 0.1% driven by strong second quarter growth of positive 1.7%. This was the first quarter we have experienced positive growth across all customer classes in over a year. Although, one quarter does not make a trend, this recent uptick is encouraging. Within the residential sector, we continued to experience strong growth in the number of new customers, approximately 1.3% over the same period last year. The growth in the Carolinas and Florida regions has been particularly strong, at around 1.5%. The Carolinas and Florida also saw usage per customer level off, after trending lower over the past several quarters. We continue to see favorable trends in the key indicators for the residential sector including, employment, median incomes and household formations. In fact, the 6 states we serve captured over 20% of the additional nonfarm job growth over the last year. The commercial sector grew by 0.3% on a rolling 12-month basis. This sector continues to benefit from declining office vacancy rates, and expansion in the medical and restaurant subsectors. We’ve also experienced some growth in the tourism related businesses, in certain markets. The industrial sector grew by 1.3% on a rolling 12-month basis. This growth was led by metals, transportation, construction and chemicals. Additionally, we are starting to see textiles in the Carolinas build momentum. We will continue to monitor the impact of the strengthening U.S. dollar on manufacturing activity. Our economic development teams remain active, successfully helping attract new business investments into our service territories. So far this year, these activities have led to the announcement of another $1.7 billion in capital investments, which is expected to result in over 5,000 new jobs, across our six states. We are encouraged by the continued strengthening of the economy, particularly in the Southeast. We remain on track to achieve our full-year 2015 weather normalized load growth of between 0.5% and 1%. Moving on to slide nine. Let me update you on our coal ash management activities. First I’ll cover adjustments to our asset retirement obligations related to coal ash basin closures. As you’ll recall, in the third quarter 2014, we recorded an approximate $3.5 billion ARO, reflecting our best estimate to comply with the newly enacted Coal Ash Management Act or CAMA. In April, the U.S. EPA published its final Coal Combustion Residuals Rule in the Federal Register. The EPA’s final rule is consistent with our compliance plan for basins in North Carolina under CAMA. However, the final rule did create a legal obligation related to ash basins outside of North Carolina and existing landfills across our system. Therefore during the second quarter, we recorded an additional $1 billion obligation representing our best estimate of cost to comply with the new Federal EPA rules. As of June 30, we now have total ARO obligations of $4.5 billion, which represents our best estimate to comply with state and Federal rules. These costs will be spent over the next several decades. We will continue to refine this estimated liability as plans are finalized. Next, let me summarize our cash spending assumptions for our coal ash activities. In February, we estimated $1.3 billion in spending from 2015 to 2019, to close the initial high-priority sites under CAMA. During the quarter we announced our recommendation to fully excavate 12 additional basins in the Carolinas. Our estimate of cost to close these additional basins ranges between $700 million to $1 billion. Ultimately, we expect these costs will increase our five year capital spending plan that was disclosed in February. However, we are unable to predict the precise timing under which we will incur these costs until the final risk classification is set by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the Coal Ash Commission. We will continue to provide updates as our plans become finalized. There is still work to do with our remaining basins and we will keep you updated as we continue to refine our estimates. Taking a look at slide 10. Let me provide an update on our International business. As we entered the year, we anticipated challenges at International due to one, the prolonged drought conditions in Brazil, causing thermals to dispatch of hydros for the entire year. Two, unfavorable Brazilian foreign exchange rates. Three, declining earnings contributions from our interest in National Methanol, which sells products that are correlated to Brent crude oil prices. And four, a prior year Chilean tax benefit. We also assume no energy rationing and around 2% growth in demand for electricity. During 2015, reservoir levels continue to be low. Rainfall has recently been above average in the Southeast region of Brazil, where our assets are located. Reservoir levels stood at about 37% at the end of July, higher than the 20% level they started the year. However, they are still low for this time of the year. These conditions have caused the system operator to continue to dispatch thermals ahead of hydros. Additionally, the government is continuing to encourage customers to voluntarily reduce electricity consumption. The economy in Brazil continues to weaken as evidenced by S&Ps recent change in outlook for the country’s credit ratings. The softer Brazilian economy, higher tariff prices for end users and the voluntary conservation measures have placed additional pressure on electricity demand so far in 2015. As a result, we now expect 2015 electricity demand in Brazil to be lower than 2014. Taking this all into account through the second quarter of 2015, International’s earnings have declined by $0.26 per share, compared to last year. As you will recall, our original full year forecast of International contemplated about $0.12 per share of lower year-over-year earnings. We do not expect these levels of year-over-year weakness to continue into the second half of 2015. We expect the third and fourth quarters to be more comparable to the second half of 2014 for the following reasons: First, the system operator began to change the dispatch order to the detriment of hydro generators in the second quarter of 2014. So in the second half of 2015, generation dispatch order will be similar to what it was in the second half of 2014. Second, the shaping of our contract should create a less significant short position in the second half of the year than we saw last year. Finally, we have seen recent declines in the market settlement prices or PLD. In June and July, these prices fell below the established ceiling of R$388, averaging approximately R$300 per megawatt hour. These lower spot prices should provide some relief as we continue to cover our short position through market purchases, helping offset the impact of lower demand. Our International team continues to manage well in this difficult environment, concentrating on items within their control. We actively are managing our ongoing contracted levels and focusing on our cost management during this downturn. However, we do not expect International to meet its original financial plan for the full year. Before moving on, let me mention a recent development in Brazil that has received some media attention. There have been recent discussions aimed at providing some financial relief to the hydro generators. These discussions are in the early stages and it is difficult to speculate on how they may play out. We’ll keep you updated as events unfold. Slide 11 outlines our financial objectives. The balance sheet is strong and our credit ratings are in line with our target levels, allowing the company to access the financial markets on reasonable terms. We are executing our plan to access $2.7 billion of international cash over several years. In June, we returned approximately $1.2 billion to the U.S. The strength of our balance sheet and cash flows helps fuel our growth strategy, support the dividend and maintain low cost rates for our customers. Our dividend continues to be a very important piece of our shareholder value proposition. In July, we were pleased to announce an increase in our quarterly dividend growth rate from 2% to approximately 4%. In 2010, we have been working to reach our target payout ratio of 65% to 70% of adjusted EPS. Now that we are at the high end of that ratio, we will continue to target dividend growth more in line with our long-term earnings growth targets. Let me provide an update on our earnings growth objectives, both short term and long term. We are on track to achieve our 2015 guidance range of $4.55 to $4.75 per share. Near-term headwinds at the International business have been offset by strength in Regulated Utilities and early execution on some of our strategic initiatives. On a longer term basis, we continue to target earnings per share growth of 4% to 6%, underpinned by the strength of our domestic businesses. We are executing on our strategic growth initiatives, which provides a foundation for growth through 2017 and beyond. Our International business however, continues to face unfavorable macroeconomic trends such as poor hydrological conditions and a weakened economy in Brazil. As we look beyond 2015, the extent and duration of these challenges is uncertain. We will learn more as the year progresses, and we’ll evaluate the longer term impacts as we finalize our financial plans for 2016 and beyond. We remain committed to delivering long-term value for our investors. With that, let’s open the line for your questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator Thank you. And we will first go to Daniel Eggers with Credit Suisse. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Hey. Good morning, guys. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Hi, Dan. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Hello, Dan. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Hey. On the load growth numbers in the second quarter, I guess both customer gains, weather adjusted usage, both looked pretty good and kind of broke from trend that we’ve seen the last couple quarters. Should we read much into things getting better and this being perpetuated or this is just kind of the – some of the volatility that comes with quarterly adjustments in numbers? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Well, Dan, as we said, I’m always careful when I just look at one quarter’s results. I think we have to always have that in the back of our mind. We are seeing some pretty good trends here, though on a few factors that I will mention. The growth of customers into the Carolinas and Florida has been ramping up from 1% now to 1.5% and that’s got to be a good metric there for the future as we move forward. We’re also seeing some favorable statistics when we look at new housing starts in our service territories, meaning new homes are starting to get actually built. We’re also starting to see a lower number of rejections of mortgage applications which say that people are having the funds to buy a home or a place to live, some of those statistics are certainly compelling. We’re always cautiously optimistic on one quarter, but there are some good results here. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer And Dan, one thing I would add that Steve talked about in the script, we’ve been tracking lower usage per customer kind of quarter-after-quarter and actually, saw a leveling-off of that reduction this quarter as well, which is another thing that I would point to as a bit of a new trend for us. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) When we think about the load growth and you guys were at 0.5% to 1%, this year, I know you’ve kind of talked about 1% being more of a normalized long-term target. How important is getting to that 1% number to the utilities being able to support their end of the 4% to 6% growth target? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer It’s important, Dan. As you know on our sensitivity, a 1% increase in our organic load growth would translate to about 2% earnings growth, and it is essential to us to see growth in our service areas. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) The trends you’re seeing right now, are they giving you encouragement that 1% is feeling a little bit better after maybe feeling a bit shaky the last couple quarters? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Well, as I mentioned, I think some of these trends behind the good quarter we had in the second quarter do make us feel well. As Lynn mentioned, the usage decline stopping per customer and some of the raw data on employment, median household income starting to pick-up and get a bit of traction in our service territories, do give us some comfort there. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Okay. I’m sure, that folks are going to ask about it, but just on the international side. Looking past this year, are you guys thinking that things that are happening this year are structural or do you think they’re situational to these market conditions? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Dan, I think there are a combination of things going on. The hydrological conditions, I believe were seasonal, right. So, if we have a strong rainy season that starts in the fall, continuing into 2016, we may see a situation where dispatch order changes. I think the regulatory body in Brazil has learned a lot about the changing generation mix and how that fleet has reacted in this environment. So, over maybe a short-term to medium-term, we could be some mitigation of some of the pressures there, or changes in regulation that could be helpful to the hydro operators. I think the long-term issues are more around the Brazilian economy. And does the Brazilian economy get traction again and start growing at a pace that would be more consistent with what we have seen over the last decade. So, I think you’ve got a combination of shorter-term and medium-term to longer term issues. And so, our focus is to be as transparent as we can on what we see, and we’ll continue to update you as the year progresses. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Very good. Thank you, guys. Operator Next question comes from Shar Pourreza with Guggenheim Partners. Shahriar Pourreza – Guggenheim Securities LLC Good morning. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Hello. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Hi, Shar. Shahriar Pourreza – Guggenheim Securities LLC Steve, I think you sort of touched on this in your prepared remarks, but on the injunctions in Brazil, is there preliminary, is there any procedural process that we could follow to see how things are transpiring? And then the second question is Brazil does have relatively high rates. So is there any talk on how – the potential of passing these costs onto customers? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Yeah, Shar, on the injunctions, in talking with our teams in Brazil, I don’t know that there is a set timeframe or schedule that you can look to to determine resolution of this. I think these initial injunctions and discussions around the market, by various stakeholder groups are a positive step. But we expect that it will take quite a bit of time to resolve this issue, and get new processes and settlements in place. So that’s just the nature of the way these negotiations often go in Brazil. So I wouldn’t look for a timeframe there. Regarding Brazilian retail rates, they did jump up quite a bit over the past year. And certainly that is something that is on the minds of Brazilian politicians, as to how do we deal with the cost of this out of dispatch situation due to hydrology issues. And right now, the hydro generators are bearing a lot of that burden, and the customers have borne some burden as well. That’s part of the debate that will be worked upon over the next year or so in Brazil. Shahriar Pourreza – Guggenheim Securities LLC Got it. Got it. And then on slide 11, you added a new footnote, footnote 3. Just curious, this footnote, is it basically inferring that the 4% to 6% is embedding some of the challenges you’re seeing in the International business, or it’s sort of pending some of the challenges that you’re seeing in International business? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer You know, Shar, what I would say is, given the depth of the challenge we’ve experienced during the first six months, and the fact that we’ve seen hydrological conditions really coupled with some of the complexities around other economic factors including Petrobras, and other things going on in Brazil. That the duration of this challenge is uncertain to us as we look past 2015. So when we look at the back half, we believe the back half of 2015 will be reasonably comparable to 2014. We’ll be anxious to see how the rainy season begins, but we need more information and time to look at our forecast for 2016 and 2017. And so, we wanted to just provide some transparency on that, and that’s the – really consistent with the remarks we shared with you today. Shahriar Pourreza – Guggenheim Securities LLC Got it. Got it. And then just lastly, on the weaker wind resources was a little bit of a theme this quarter. Is this something that we should think about from a structural standpoint just given that the El Nino cycle is just starting or is this something that’s sort of a bit of an normally? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer I don’t know that I’ve heard anybody profess to understand the wind patterns that well, Shar, that they could predict them. So I don’t know that it’s anything more than an anomaly now. We’re heading into the second half of the year where the wind traditionally picks up. So we’ll get a better idea after that. Shahriar Pourreza – Guggenheim Securities LLC Excellent. Thanks very much. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Thank you. Operator Next question comes from Greg Gordon with Evercore ISI. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Good morning. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Greg. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Hey, Greg. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI So, I just wanted to go over some of the things you said just to make sure I understand them in terms of looking on actually slide 14, which is your original assumptions put up against your year-to-date results. It looks like you’re basically telling us that if International is flat in the second half versus the second half last year, that you’re $0.10 behind plan. On the other hand, you’re saying you’re $0.04 ahead of plan at the utility because of the early close of the NCEMPA acquisition and then you’re also – see better results in the second half versus the second half of last year in the Commercial business because of the 400 megawatts of new renewables and that’s how you sort of get back to plan. Is that a reasonable summary of what you said or am I missing something? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer I think you’ve hit on some of the elements there. Assuming normal weather over the last half of the year, and we have had warm weather in July, you get a pick up there. Certainly, the wholesale contract associated with the NCEMPA acquisition provides about $0.04 there. We’ve also seen growth in our retail load year-over-year, even at modest percents that can add several cents to it. If it stayed like the second quarter’s results, it would be more than that. Our wholesale business has also picked up through new contracts with co-ops and munis in the Carolinas and in Florida in particular. So, those are some of the things that we look to to continue provide growth over the second half of the year. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer And, Greg… Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Great. I understand that. I guess to clarify my question, many of those things were baked into the $2.95 billion budget. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Yes. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI I assume normal weather was baked in there. The wholesale pickup was – you were very, very clear on in your disclosures on the expectation there. So, I’m just focused on what’s changed from the plan. I guess you’re a little bit ahead of normal going into July which is good, NCEMPA closed early which is good. So, I’d really like to circle back to your answer and focus on what’s changed that’s not in the plan. $0.04 from NCEMPA… Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer So, let me give it a try. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Okay. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Yeah, Greg, let me – so, if we step back from this, as we started the year, we expected the back half to be stronger than the first half from the get-go. And then, if you look at the first half of the year, the weakness in Brazil has basically been offset by strength in the regulated business. We had weather that was strong and comparable to last year, even a bit ahead. We had an early closing in the Midwest Generation sale, which gives us incremental. When you go to the back half, we expect the back half to be stronger, wholesale growth, retail growth. Our O&M outage was more in the first half than the second half. And then, we have the sweetener of the NCEMPA transaction closing. And so, the weakness that we offset in the first half with weather and strong results, we don’t expect to see in the back half because we think Brazil will be comparable to 2014. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Great. And that 400 megawatts… Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Does that help? Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI …of new renewables coming in, in the back half of the year is baked into your $185 million plan or is that stuff…? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer It is. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Yes, it is. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Okay. Great. That’s much clearer. Thank you very much. Have a good morning. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Thank you. Operator Next question comes from Julien Dumoulin-Smith with UBS. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Hi. Good morning. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Hi, Julien. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Hi, Julien. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC So, perhaps to follow-up on Greg’s question just a little bit and be clear. First, where do you stand in the context of 2015, if you can specify? And then, perhaps more broadly as you think about the 4% to 6%, is there any thought or expectation to update that and specifically rebase at any point or how do you think about that given where you stand on hydro and obviously 2015 is – could be a weather event related, but I’d be curious if you want to just elaborate on the 4% to 6% at this point too? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer So, Julien, we are on plan through the first half. And for the reasons we just discussed, we’re confident we’ll remain within the range of $4.55 to $4.75. In terms of guidance, our current thinking is that we will approach that in the same way we always do. So, you’ll have February of 2016 for 2016 and for the longer-term outlook. We will continue to update you in third quarter on any further developments we see in any part of the business as we also normally do. So that’s the schedule we’re thinking about at this point. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Got it. But perhaps just more specifically, rebasing, is there any thought process of rebasing the base year of that 4% to 6% at all? And then, perhaps the second bigger picture question if you will, with regards to the Clean Power Plan and I know, obviously incredibly complex as you already alluded to. Could you elaborate how the company is positioning to capture opportunities there and obviously you’re involved in many of the key angles that would benefit in theory from the CPP, but could you elaborate how you are thinking about taking advantage of each of those respective niches? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer And on rebasing, Julien, we’re anchored in 2013 at this point. We will rebase at some point. We haven’t made a final decision on that and we’ll update guidance in February of 2016. The Clean Power Plan appreciates those questions and we are continuing to digest, we do not have a definitive plan in any of our jurisdictions. Of course it will impact our IRP planning, and impact our thinking on state-by-state. As I’m sure you’re aware, the plan did change emission reduction targets. So we have more stringent targets in the Midwest. We have moderately less stringent targets in the Southeast, North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida. There’s a notion being introduced of a market trading platform, which is new, which we’ll need to evaluate, and then the compliance period with these incentive credits and so on, in 2020, 2021, I think, will also be something that we digest. So, we’re beginning to understand the elements, I think there is flexibility here. It will be important to involve a stakeholder and state process. These are the states’ implementation plans ultimately. But we believe that much as we’ve delivered consistent carbon reductions over the last 10 years, we’ll be looking for a way to continue progress in that direction, at the lowest cost to our customers. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Great. Thank you. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Thank you. Operator Next question comes from Steve Fleishman with Wolfe Research. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Yeah. Good morning. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Hi, Steve. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Hi, Lynn. A couple questions. First, just specific details. So, I think you guys said, you expect it to be $0.12 down in 2015 in International versus 2014 and in the first half, you’re down $0.26. So, assuming it’s flat the rest of the year, that means you’re kind of off by about $0.14 from plan. Could you maybe just break up, what makes up that $0.14, how much is it below average? How much is it the hydro versus some of the other, the economy or currency or other things, at least a rough cut of that? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Yeah, Steve. The bulk of that is – and you’re just talking about International, the delta in International? Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Yes. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer From the original expectations versus where we’re at now, is that correct? Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Yes. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Yes. The biggest difference that we’re seeing is the impact of informal rationing, if you will, and the weak economy, those two impacts on the demand for power in Brazil. When we set up our assumptions in February, we stated we had no assumption of informal rationing and we had over 2% demand growth. And now what we’re seeing is that the demand is actually slightly negative. Because thermals are dispatched first, all of that delta, all of that swing comes out of hydros. And of course, we’re a hydro owner here. So that is the big difference that we did not have in the $0.12 downtick for International back in February. And we stated we didn’t have any view on rationing in the numbers if rationing came about or lower demand, the results would be lower. So that is by far the bulk of the difference in International. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Okay. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Steve, one thing I might just point out, Chile, the Chilean tax adjustment that was reflected in second quarter of 2014 is $0.07 of that $0.26 that was planned. We were aware of it. And the additional weakness is in Brazil and NMC [National Methanol Company], the oil prices have deteriorated slightly, but we saw a lot of that at the beginning of the year. And then all the conditions, we’ve talked about here on further weakening in Brazil is where the larger challenge has originated. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Okay. So when we think about beyond 2015 and if we made the jump that hydro might actually normalize. The issues outside of that are primarily related to the economy, I assume somewhat currency and are those two main issues? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer I think those are two main issues, Steve. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Okay. Any thoughts to reconsider strategic alternatives for the business? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Steve, that’s a question we’ve spent a fair amount of time on as you imagine. We thought our process and I still believe our process last year was a good one, very thorough. We were looking at growth, we were looking at cash and we solved the cash, which we believe is important to supporting the dividend. We’ve already brought home, $1.2 billion of that $2.7 billion. There is no question we’re operating in a challenging environment, and all of the factors we talked about today are something that the team in International is focused on. I am pleased with the way they’ve responded to these challenging conditions. And at this point, I don’t have anything further to share on how we think about this business strategically, but we’ve certainly learned a lot about volatility in this business as a result of these recent events, and that’ll factor into our planning in the future. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Okay. And then one last question maybe at a high level. Between the balance sheet and position you have now, and things like the securitization coming in Florida some point soon, how much available cash or balance sheet capacity do you have for investment in growth opportunities, right now? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Well, we have a solid balance sheet and we have a number of growth opportunities, where our capital spend is typically in the neighborhood of $7 billion a year. So, there is… Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC I’m sorry. I want to make sure – I mean above kind of what you’re planning to do right now? So, like if you had opportunities that go above the current investment plan? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer We do. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC And how much upside? Yeah. Okay. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer We haven’t quantified that specifically. The one thing I would say, Steve, is if you look at the leverage in the business, the utilities are situated relative to their cap structure that they earn on, capacity sits at the holding company and we’re probably at 27%, 28% of HoldCo debt. There’s probably capacity at HoldCo, up to 30% or maybe a little bit above, depending on how the credit rating agencies look at that. So, can’t quantify it any more specifically than that, but we’re committed to our ratings. We think we have an incredibly strong balance sheet with flexibility, to address and we think the business requires. And we’ll continue to manage that accordingly. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC And how much will you get from securitization? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer We will get about $1.3 billion from the securitization process. We’re targeting the first quarter of 2016 to get those funds. About half of those funds will be used to displace Florida – Duke Energy Florida OpCo debt, the other half of the funds will come up to the parent. Steven I. Fleishman – Wolfe Research LLC Okay. Thank you. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Thank you. Operator Next question comes from Chris Turnure with JPMorgan. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Good morning. Christopher J. Turnure – JPMorgan Securities LLC Good morning, guys. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Hello. Christopher J. Turnure – JPMorgan Securities LLC You kind of mentioned in your prepared remarks and then in response to an earlier question that, it’s too early to tell what’s going to happen potentially with GSF reform (49:07) in Brazil and I can definitely appreciate that. But, do you have at least a sense as to what the EPS impact would be there, if we went from say a 20% now to a 10% or a 5% protection type level, just versus normal in any given full year? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer We don’t have any sensitivities on that, Chris. There is a lot of variables here? Where is our contracted load? What is the PLD price? So there is just variables there that are too multiple for us to try to put a metric on. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer And I think… Christopher J. Turnure – JPMorgan Securities LLC Okay. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer …as we get to a point of clarity on the way the courts and the way the regulation will change, we’ll be in a position to give you a better sense of timing, what our contracted position is, where we we’re forecasting PLD. But it’s premature to do this at this point, because there are too many moving parts. Christopher J. Turnure – JPMorgan Securities LLC Okay. Fair enough. And then, just kind of going back to the 2016 and beyond picture, it’s still pretty early here to talk about any potential growth guidance changes. But I just wanted to address maybe balance sheet capacity like we were talking about in the last question or just your ability to do other things outside of what you’ve already talked about, whether it’s accelerating more repatriation of cash or doing other securitizations outside of the Florida one that you already have in plans or maybe pulling forward Carolina’s rate cases earlier than the kind of 2017 to 2018 timeframe than you’re currently thinking about right now? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer In connection with our planning process, Chris, we’ll look at every element of the business to ensure we’re delivering as much value as we can. I think we’ve demonstrated an ability to identify investment projects that are beneficial to customers and also delivering returns to shareholders. We do have flexibility in the balance sheet for additional investment. So, we’ll be evaluating all of those alternatives in connection with our business planning process. Christopher J. Turnure – JPMorgan Securities LLC Okay. But at this time nothing is seeming more likely than not or nothing’s standing out in your mind? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Yeah. Nothing that I would share at this point. Christopher J. Turnure – JPMorgan Securities LLC Okay. Great. Thanks. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Thank you. Operator Next question comes from Michael Lapides with Goldman Sachs. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co. Hey, guys. Just wanted… Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Hi, Michael. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co. …to revisit – hi, Lynn. Just wanted to revisit a few things on the Regulated side of the house. First of all, can you remind us for the spend you do on coal ash in North Carolina what the cost recovery process is, meaning, how do you actually – how and more importantly, when do you actually get this in rates? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Yes, Michael. There is no definitive plan for collection of the coal ash in rates. We spent about $100 million to-date on this and that will ramp up over the next several years. And the way this will work, we’ll start spending and acting on our plans in conjunction with CAMA over the next several years. And then at some point, an appropriate point, we can go in for a rate case, and we can incorporate coal ash spend into that rate case. So we have flexibility there, there is no set timeframe for this. And you might look in time and think about the next rate case, being associated with the completion of a large power plant, a combined cycle or a completion of a lot of nuclear work in Duke Energy Progress area. That might put you in the later part of the teens, for going in for a rate increase. At that point in time, we would probably request an increment in base rates for coal ash recovery. And the Commission would then begin to monitor coal ash cost recovered through rates versus coal ash spent and adjust it from there, this is not like a normal capital project, where you spend over in a short intense period and then are completed, the spend will go on for a long time. So I think it will have that type of nature of recovery to it. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co. There is precedent in North Carolina for more real-time recovery of environmental cost, thinking back to like Clean Smokestacks from a number of years ago, just curious, is there an opportunity, whether via a regulation or via legislation – and I’m not sure which one it would require – to get more real-time recovery of coal ash spend and more kind of the certainty of recovery over time? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Yeah, Michael. I’ll take that one. I think North Carolina has demonstrated over a long period of time recovery of mandated cost and certainly coal ash, whether it’s at a state level or Federal level, those are required costs of decommissioning the plants. I don’t see in the next year or two, any change in the recovery mechanism that Steve just described and given the magnitude of the spend that we’re talking about, I think that’s reasonable. So, we’ll be addressing it in connection with the general rate case and evaluating what else might make sense over time. I think about Clean Power Plan, I think about – we have trackers for renewables. There are a variety of events that could trigger consideration of other forms of recovery. But I don’t see coal ash as being one that would – we would approach as a single item at this point. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co. Got it. One last question on utility O&M. Did I hear correctly that what you’re basically saying is, O&M levels in the second half of 2015 will be flat to second half 2014? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Yes. That’s correct, Michael. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co. When you look at broader O&M, what are you – at the Regulated businesses and especially in the Carolinas – what do you see as potential – you’re a couple of years out post-merger, but continued cost saving opportunities to where instead of flat, it’s even potentially down? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Some of the cost savings opportunities that we are now pursuing are the rollout of work management systems. We’ve already done a lot the corporate work. We’ve rolled out work management systems in the fossil area. We’ve done a lot of nuclear work. But now we’re rolling out into T&D and that’s more dispersed in asset location and employee workforce. So, that’s an area that is ripe for some benefits. So, we’ll continue to roll these projects out and have some opportunities here to offset some of the cost increases that we face, such as cyber security, normal inflation, Fukushima and that kind of thing, but I do believe there are efficiency opportunities still out there. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co. Got it. Thank you, Steve, and much appreciated. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Thank you. Operator Next question comes from Jonathan Arnold with Deutsche Bank. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Hi, Jonathan. Jonathan P. Arnold – Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. Good morning, guys. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Good morning. Jonathan P. Arnold – Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. Sorry to revisit this, but you’ve said a couple of times, you want to be clear about and transparent about what you’re saying on growth. And I just on this – we’ve already talked about the footnote on the slide around long-term earnings growth. You also changed the word you’re using from deliver to target. And I’d hate to read too much into that, but I just – Lynn, are we saying that if International kind of doesn’t rebound post-2015 in a decent way that you may not be able to stay at the low end of the 4% to 6% or are we not saying that? I’m not feeling I heard the clarity. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Yeah. And you know, Jonathan, I’m not trying to reset guidance range at this point. But I am trying to flag for you that we see uncertainty in the International business that is difficult sitting here in early August of 2015 to predict duration and extent. And so, a rebound, if we see a rebound in 2017, that’s certainly positive. But it’s more challenging today than I would have said to you it was in January of this year and that’s what we’re trying to signal or trying to say. And we’ll continue to update you as we see rainy season starting to develop and we see any potential changes in the regulatory scheme, the injunctions and other things, but it’s more challenging based on what we see right now. Jonathan P. Arnold – Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc. Great. Thank you. And again, apologies for the revisit. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer No. That’s fine. Great. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer All right. Operator Next question comes from Ali Agha with SunTrust. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Thank you. Good morning. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Hello. Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Good morning. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Hi. Listen, with regards to the securitization proceeds, Steve, you said half of them will be used for OpCo debt reduction, half going to the parent. Any thoughts on how that other half gets used? The reason I ask is on the original settlement agreement you were going to be earning an ROE on it, granted it was a 30% reduction, but there was earnings coming from that and so is there a dilutive potential given securitization that may not have been part of the original plan. Is that a fair way to think about this? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer You’re correct there. We are giving up the equity return that was baked into the Crystal River 3 recovery mechanism from the settlement in 2013, albeit it was a haircut return. Whether it’s dilutive or not depends upon the redeployment of the proceeds here. And again we will be looking for growth opportunities to help replace that equity return loss. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey So at this point you would not assume that that is used for any HoldCo debt reduction. It probably goes into some rate base kind of investment? Steven K. Young – Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Well, it will move into our general funds and help fund growth. Ideally we’d like to find an investment to put it right into, but certainly it will be utilized to reduce HoldCo debt that then helps fund other acquisitions, other purchases, other investments more efficiently. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer And Ali, what I would say to that, we haven’t earmarked a specific investment for those funds, but there have been a lot of questions today about holding company capacity for additional investment, this would be part of that. And so our objective will be to deploy that in a way that maximizes the value. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Yeah. And Lynn, what’s the latest on the Edwardsport investigation in Indiana? Is that still out there? I thought it should have been done by now. What’s the latest? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer So there is a rate proceeding in front of the Indiana Commission, Ali, on the regulatory every six month rider mechanisms as well as the fuel clauses. And we would expect an order from the Commission before the end of the year, perhaps even as early as the third quarter. So, that does remain out there. In the slide deck we’ve given you kind of a chart of what the open proceedings are, I think it’s on slide 21 just to give you a sense of where these are. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Okay. Yeah, I thought it was a summer timeframe, I guess it’s a little later. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer I think it’s a little later. Yeah. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Okay. And last question, the timeline for some of you investments, you’ve made that investment in the pipeline and you’ve got the other bigger pipeline out there. Are you thinking, Lynn, when you update your long-term growth rates perhaps next year, that you may stretch it out over a five-year period as opposed to the three-year periods that we’ve been doing currently, given that some of the stuff won’t hit until later in the decade? Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Ali, it’s a good question, we debate the period internally. We had a longer term one, we moved it to three years, five years is a possibility. But I think the point you’re making is a good one, which is infrastructure investment occurs over a longer period of time. So, we haven’t made a final decision on that, but we are – we will evaluate it. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey Okay. Thank you. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Great. Thanks so much. Operator And ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude today’s question-and-answer session. I’d like to turn the conference back over to Ms. Lynn Good for closing remarks. Lynn J. Good – President and Chief Executive Officer Thanks, everyone for being on the call, for your interest and investment in Duke Energy. We are scheduled for a third quarter call on November 5, and look forward to seeing many of you in the coming months. Thanks again. Operator Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude today’s conference. We do thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect. Have a great rest of your day.