Tag Archives: industry

Targa Resources’ (TRGP) CEO Joe Bob Perkins on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Targa Resources Corp. (NYSE: TRGP ) Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call August 4, 2015 10:30 AM ET Executives Jennifer Kneale – Senior Director of Finance Joe Bob Perkins – CEO Matt Meloy – CFO Analysts Matthew Phillips – Clarkson Sunil Sibal – Global Hunter Securities Brandon Blossman – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Company Darren Horowitz – Raymond James TJ Schultz – RBC Capital Jeremy Tonet – JPMorgan Schneur Gershuni – UBS Michael Blum – Wells Fargo John Edwards – Credit Suisse Faisel Khan – Citigroup Corey Goldman – Jefferies Gregg Brody – Bank of America Merrill Lynch Jeff Mccarter – Citadel Ethan Bellamy – Baird Charles Marshall – Capital One Securities Operator Good day, ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Targa Resources’ Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Webcast and Presentation. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. [Operator instructions] I would now like to turn the conference over to Jennifer Kneale, Senior Director of Finance. You may begin. Jennifer Kneale Thank you, Nicole. I’d like to welcome everyone to our second quarter 2015 investor call for both Targa Resources Corp. and Targa Resources Partners LP. Before we get started, I would like to mention that Targa Resources Corp., TRC, or the Company and Targa Resources Partners LP, Targa Resources Partners or the Partnership, have published their joint earnings release, which is available on our website at www.targaresources.com. We will also be posting an updated investor presentation to the website later today. I would like to remind you that any statements made during this call that might include the Company’s or the Partnership’s expectations or predictions should be considered forward-looking statements and are covered by the Safe Harbor provision of the Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934. Please note that actual results could differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statements. For a discussion of factors that could cause actual results to differ, please refer to our SEC filings, including the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. Speaking on the call today will be Joe Bob Perkins, Chief Executive Officer; and Matt Meloy, Chief Financial Officer. Joe Bob will start off with a high level review of performance and highlights. He will then turn it over to Matt to review the Partnership’s consolidated financial results, segments results and other financial matters. Matt will also review key financial matters related to Targa Resources Corp. Following Matt’s comments Joe Bob will provide some concluding remarks and then we will take your questions. There are also several other members of the management team available who may assist in the Q&A session. With that, I will turn the call over to Joe Bob Perkins. Joe Bob Perkins Thanks, Jen. Welcome everybody and thank you for joining us this morning. I’d like to remind you that this is the first reported quarter that includes the full quarter of results from our Targa Pipeline or TPL assets, which were a partner on merger that closed on February 27. As we describe our results from the quarter, the inclusion of TPL in Field Gathering & Processing segment, naturally will be the biggest factor in a number of increases as we compare results to last year and to last quarter. Turning to Targa’s second quarter results. Our reported second quarter adjusted EBITDA was $303 million as compared to $229 million for the second quarter of last year. This 33% increase was driven primarily by the inclusion of TPL’s assets for the full quarter, which more than offset lower commodity prices. Our distributable cash flow for the quarter of $219 million resulted in distribution coverage of approximately 1.1 times based on our second quarter declared distribution of $0.825 or $3.30 per common unit on an annualized basis. The Partnership’s second quarter distribution represents a 6% increase compared to the second quarter of 2014. At the TRC level, the second quarter dividend of $0.875 or $3.50 per common share annualized represents a 27% increase compared to the second quarter of 2014. Through the price swings we have seen to-date in 2015, our Field Gathering and Processing volumes continued to grow through the first six months of the year compared to the fourth quarter of last year. Natural gas inlet volumes increased in the second quarter compared to fourth quarter across eight of our nine systems. Overall, Field Gathering and Processing volumes were up more than 5% second quarter of 2015 over fourth quarter of 2014. For the second quarter versus fourth quarter, we experienced a slight volume decrease in North Texas from reduced activity levels and from the impacts of severe flooding in the area. In the absence of the commodity price rally, we expect that North Texas volumes are likely to decline for the balance of the year. All of our other field operations had volume increases versus the fourth quarter of 2014. And as we look at expected volumes for the balance of the year in the Permian Basin, the Badlands and SouthOK, we expect some continued growth in each of these areas. As you are all well aware, commodity prices continue to be volatile. In May and June, spot crude prices rallied to over $60 per barrel and recently fell below $50 per barrel. Yesterday WTI was about $46 per barrel. While there continues to be uncertainty on price and related activity levels, our current expectations for average 2015 field GMP volumes is 3% to 5% overall growth in 2015 versus Q4 2014. This is slightly higher than our previous guidance of flat to low-single digit growth on the same comparison. For the most part, we are seeing continued activity around our field GMP areas of operations, but obviously less than we were experiencing in 2014. We are also seeing Targa’s strong operational capabilities, reputation for customer service and willingness to spend capital selectively for attractive projects that have allowed us to capture some existing and future producer volumes from other Midstream companies. Predicting 2016 field GMP volumes continues to be more ordinate science. Producers have demonstrated their willingness to increase their pace of drilling in almost all of our areas if crude prices improve to for example $60 per barrel. However, our ability to predict 2016 prices and therefore produce our expectations for those prices has not improved. In April, we said that if commodity prices didn’t improve April levels, average 2016 field GMP volumes maybe lower than 2015. Predicting 2016 field GMP volumes continues to be difficult, but I want to say that we generally feel a bit more optimistic about volumes than we did at the first of the year. Now, as we said, we project that 3% to 5% volume growth from Q4 2014 to average 2015, which slightly puts Targa at a better 2016 beginning spot than we were expecting. Looking at DOE US onshore oil production data, we see a decline in April and May, which probably is a good thing for the industry. That’s obviously the net result of some areas growing and some areas declining. We are seeing growth in our most important areas and expect that to continue at least through the near term, proving that we have strong positioning. So we feel a bit more optimistic for 2015 and to some extent 2016, not because of an improved price outlook, but because of volume results to-date. Moving to downstream, our Logistics and Marketing division operating margin for the second quarter of 2015 was slightly higher than the same time period last year. As for full year 2015, I guess we reaffirm our guidance of Logistics and Marketing division operating margin may be modestly lower than 2014. In the second quarter, we exploited approximately 5 million barrels per month of LPGs, which was 3% higher than the second quarter of 2014. Demand for LPG exports has been impacted by global commodity prices in the tight shipping market, but we are seeing continued demand for short and long-term contracts and we have continued to add contracts for the second half of 2015 and beyond. We expect our LPG export activity levels to be at or above Q2 volumes for the remainder of the year. Given our contract portfolio, current market dynamics related to commodity prices shipping constraints and increased competition, we expect overall second half LPG export operating margins may approximate what we have seen so far this year. Across our other businesses, we have worked hard through the first two quarters of the year to reduce operating expenses, especially in the field GMP businesses without sacrificing safety or preventative maintenance and while still meeting customer needs for growing volumes. With the inclusion of TPL and the addition of assets throughout 2014 and early 2015, and because fuel and power consumption are included in expenses, it’s difficult to see the savings in our reported numbers. When we look at our internal numbers for full year 2015, we currently expect field GMP operating expenses to be approximately 8% lower than our budgeted expectations despite the increase in volumes we have been experiencing being gathered in process. Our performance in the second quarter highlights the diversity and resiliency of our business mix. There were some pluses and minuses, but overall it was a strong performance quarter in the context of weak commodity prices. Given the first two quarters of distribution announcements at TRP, our 2015 distribution growth over 2014 is likely to be towards the lower end of our 4% to 7% distribution growth guidance. At TRC, we continue to expect 25% or better dividend growth in 2015 over 2014. That wraps up my initial comments and now I will hand it over to Matt. Matt? Matt Meloy Thanks, Joe Bob. I’d like to add my welcome and thank you for joining our call today. As Joe Bob mentioned, adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was $303 million compared to $229 million for the same period last year. The increase was driven by the addition of the TPL assets, which are reported in our field GMP segment. Overall operating margin increased 17% for the second quarter compared to the same time period last year and I’ll review the drivers of this performance in the segment reviews. Net maintenance capital expenditures were $28 million in the second quarter of 2015 compared to $20 million in the second quarter of 2014 driven by the inclusion of TPL operations offset by some of the cost savings Joe Bob discussed across all of our operating areas. Turning to the segment level, I’ll summarize the second quarter performance on a year-over-year basis, and we will start with our downstream business. In our Logistics and Marketing division, our second quarter operating margin increased 1% compared to the first quarter 2015 driven by partial recognition of the payment received from Noble related to our condensate splitter project, increased terminaling and storage activities and higher fractionation volumes. Fractionation volumes increased by 3% versus the same time period last year and overall operating margin from fractionation was down slightly as a result of lower system product gains and higher maintenance cost. We loaded an average of 5 million barrels per month of LPG for exports and second quarter 2015 operating margin from LPG exports was approximately flat compared to the same time period last year. In our Gathering and Processing division, our Field Gathering and Processing segment operating margin increased by 41% compared to last year largely driven by the inclusion of TPL. Second quarter 2015 natural gas plant inlet volumes for the Field Gathering and Processing segment were 2.67 billion cubic feet per day, 195% increase compared to the same period in 2014. The overall increase in natural gas inlet volumes was due to the inclusion of TPL volumes in West Texas, South Texas, SouthOK and WestOK and increases in each of the following business units, 34% at SAOU, 23% at Badlands, 9% at Versado and 7% at Sand Hills. Inlet volumes at North Texas approximated second quarter 2014 levels and as Joe Bob mentioned, we are impacted by severe flooding conditions and subsequent impacts that affected the area throughout the spring. Crude oil gathered increased to 106,000 barrels per day in the second quarter, a 27% increase versus the same time period last year. For the Field Gathering and Processing segment, commodity prices were down across the board, with NGL prices decreasing by 52%, condensate prices decreasing by 47% and natural gas prices decreasing by 45% compared to the second quarter of 2014. Our hedging activities, which mitigate a portion of these price swings are included in our other operating segment. In our Coastal Gathering and Processing segment, operating margin was down 70% in the second quarter of 2015 versus the same time period last year as Gulf of Mexico and Onshore Gulf Coast volumes continue to decrease. Let’s now move to capital structure, liquidity and other matters. As of June 30, we had 878 million of outstanding borrowings under the Partnership’s 1.6 billion senior secured revolving credit facility due 2017. With outstanding letters of credit of 21 million, revolver availability was about 702 million at quarter end. Total liquidity, including approximately 86 million of cash on hand, was about 787 million. At quarter end, we had borrowings of 124 million under our 300 million accounts receivable securitization facility. Year-to-date, we have received net proceeds of approximately 375 million from equity issuances, including general partner contributions. For April through July, we received approximately 263 million of net proceeds from asset market equity issuances and obliged $316 million in net proceeds under the ATM equity program year-to-date. On a debt compliance basis, which provides us adjusted EBITDA credit per material growth projects that are in process but not yet in complete and makes other adjustments, TRP’s total compliance leverage ratio at the end of the second quarter was 3.8 times. Next, I’d like to make a few comments about our fee-based margin, hedging and capital spending programs for 2015. For the second quarter of 2015, our operating margin was 72% fee-based. For 2015, we now expect at least 70% of our operating margin to be fee-based. Since the end of the first quarter, we continue to layer on hedges using costless collars and swaps and for our current estimate of equity volumes from Field Gathering & Processing, we estimate we have now hedged approximately 70% of the remaining 2015 natural gas, approximately 60% of the remaining 2015 condensate and approximately 30% of remaining NGL volumes. For 2016, based on our estimate of our current equity volumes, we estimate that we have hedged approximately 45% of natural gas, approximately 35% of condensate and approximately 15% of NGL volumes. Moving on to capital spending. We continue to estimate approximately $700 million and $900 million of growth in capital expenditures in 2015, which includes ten months of CapEx related to the TPL systems. Next, I’ll make a few brief remarks about the results of Targa Resources Corp. Targa Resources Corp stand-alone distributable cash flow for the second quarter 2015 was $52 million and TRC declared approximately $49 million in dividends for the quarter, resulting in dividend coverage of approximately 1.1 times. On July 21, TRC declared a second quarter cash dividend of $0.875 per common share or $3.50 per common share on an annualized basis, representing approximately 27% increase over the annualized rate paid with respect to the second quarter of 2014. As of June 30, TRC had $460 million of outstanding borrowings and $210 million of availability under TRC’s $670 million senior secured credit facility and $160 million of outstanding borrowings under TRC’s senior secured term loan resulting in about 2.6 times debt compliance ratio. At TRC, we continue to expect 5% to 10% effective cash tax rate for 2015 and in the near term beyond 2015 and effective cash tax rate of less than 15%. That concludes my review and I’ll now turn the call back over to Joe Bob. Joe Bob Perkins Thank you, Matt. Five months have passed since we acquired TPL. We really like the assets, our people are working as one team and the target team is continuing to mine opportunities across our combined footprint. We are working on connecting West Tex and SAOU later this year, enhancing options for producer customers and allowing us to spend capital even more efficiently with West Tex, SAOU and Sandhills connected together in the Permian Basin. These interconnections, you will recall that we connected SAOU to Sandhills last year for buy more flexibility to meet customer needs and to access existing capacity for growth. Along with the connection of West Tex and SAOU, we may also restart the idled 45 million cubic feet per day Benedum Plant in Upton County. These projects do not require much capital. Given that we are operating at near capacity in the Permian Basin, the flexibility associated with connecting existing systems and existing plants and having an idled plant to restart is very valuable. We also expect to complete the Buffalo Plant in Martin County in 2016 with timing dependent on volume growth. We can have that plant completed and running in six months, six months after we make the decision with our joint venture partner, Pioneer Natural Resources to go ahead with the final stages of construction. Similarly, activity around our Versado system in the western part of the Permian Basin continues. We are adding another compressor station and lined a new 16-inch line to better access available capacity at our Monument Plant, serving additional volumes from the Delaware Basin to the Southwest. This is an example of capital spending that isn’t significant enough to be a single line item on our published CapEx projects, but it is a capital well spent given the returns associated with bringing new volumes to an existing plant that has available capacity. In the Badlands, we are making solid progress in securing right-of-way to lay pipe on reservation lands, which will allow us to secure volumes from wells that have already been drilled. Due to time required to move from right-of-way acquisition to approval to construction, this progress will likely not impact volumes until late this year or in 2016. Our little Missouri 3 plant came online in the first quarter and we’re continuing to see natural gas volumes increase to more than 50 million cubic feet per day in July. At the same time, crude oil volumes also ticked higher in July to more than 110,000 barrels per day. Given crude prices to-date, we have seen a significant decrease in rig activity in the broader Bakken and in the number of well permits filed in North Dakota. If you look at our systems across Mckenzie, Dunn and Montreal Counties, we’re positioned in one of the most active areas of the basin, as evidenced by the number of rigs running around our system relative to the rest of the basin. The right-of-way progress on the reservation is particularly important because it will allow us to lay previously delayed pipe and capture volumes that will support our system in 2016 and beyond. We’re now seven months through a roller coaster year related to prices for crude and NGLs, where in the second quarter alone, Mont Belvieu propane prices, for example, moved from a high of $0.58 per gallon in April to a low of $0.31 per gallon in June and we’re at about $0.36 per gallon as of yesterday. During such times of price volatility, interconnected flexible facilities including LPG storage can become increasingly valuable. We’re optimizing the use of our facilities for customer and target business mix. As domestic production has increased this year, we’ve seen continued demand for fractionation services. Construction on train pipe continues and it should be in service mid-2016. We’re also through the first public notice period related to our Train 6 permit with a similar size and scope as Trains 4 and Trains 5. We continue to work closely with Noble as they neared decision point on determining whether to move forward with a new terminal at Patriot, a condensate splitter at Channelview or some combination of both projects. Subject of final project scope and permitting, we would expect that the splitter or terminal or both projects would be operational in 2017. In closing, we have been operating in an uncertain environment and I’m incredibly proud of our execution across the Targa footprint in the second quarter. We cannot control commodity prices but our day-to-day focus is on safety, meeting customer needs, cost savings and efficiency of capital spending, without sacrificing customer service or ignoring low cost options, which may benefit Targa in the event of increased activity in the future. Continued execution across our well positioned diversified asset base has resulted in a strong first half for Targa. There is upside potential in the balance of the year, most obviously from the following. First, tailwinds associated with potential improvements in commodity prices from our current levels. Secondly, in the field, achieving volumes that are greater than expected from existing production, continued success competing for takeaway gas and efforts to continue to drive costs lower. And third, improving LPG export volumes and/or LPG export unit margins from our expected levels, perhaps as the market benefits from additional vessels coming online in the back half of the year. Targa’s strong execution performance in the first half of the year is driving quarter-over-quarter distribution and dividend growth, consistent with our expectations for the year and we will continue to execute in the second half of the year. With that, let’s open up the line for questions, operator. Question-and-Answer Session Operator Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Matthew Phillips of Clarkson. Your line is now open. Matthew Phillips [indiscernible]. Joe Bob Perkins Hey, good morning. Matthew Phillips A quick question on the hedge book. You have an add-back on DCF of $24.8 million. I was wondering how that squares with the $17.1 million in gross margin on the commodity derivatives activity? Joe Bob Perkins Yeah, sure, good question. The $17.1 million in the other operating margin is essentially a legacy Targa or existing Targa hedge add-back. The TPL hedges in acquisition accounting were put on the book with fair value and so, as we collect those proceeds, it’s not hitting the income statement. So, we’re adding back the cash received in a quarter as those contracts settle. So, you’ll see that on a quarterly basis as we essentially receive the cash from the TPL hedge book. Matthew Phillips So, the TPL hedges are added back whereas the legacy Targa hedges are on the income statement? Joe Bob Perkins Yeah. They’re already in there. Yes. Matthew Phillips Okay. Great, thanks. And then moving on to LPG exports, you’ll add about 15% decline from 2Q – from 1Q and 2Q. However, looking at the vessel data, it looks like July was a record month for the U.S. Can you confirm if you’ve seen an uptick in July exports and what that might mean for margins? Matt Meloy We have seen some continued – I’d say seen some strong activity here thus far third quarter. As Joe Bob said, there were – we would the back half of the year to approximate Q2. Things might get a little bit better for us but that’s kind of what we’re seeing right now. Matthew Phillips Approximate to Q1 on a margin basis or both? Matt Meloy What we said was approximate Q2 for the back half of the year on a volume basis. I’d say, we’ve seen things a little bit stronger than we had in the previous few months, but we expect volumes to kind of approximate the second quarter. Joe Bob Perkins We also said that performing better than that was a potential upside and we said that our guidance continue to remain for the downstream to perhaps be modestly lower in 2015 than 2014. We like to outperform expectations. Matthew Phillips Yeah. Well, I mean margins from this have fallen off since 4Q, the past two quarters. But I mean, if volumes are coming back, I would think that might give you a little margin strength. Is that reasonable? Joe Bob Perkins I think we’ve kind of trying to relate it all. Matthew Phillips Okay, thank you. Operator Thank you. And then the next question comes from Sunil Sibal of Global Hunter Securities. Your line is now open. Sunil Sibal Hi, good morning guys, and congrats on a good solid quarter. Joe Bob Perkins Thanks, good morning. Sunil Sibal A couple of questions from me. In terms of the LPG export volumes that you saw second quarter, is it fair to assume they were all primarily contracted volumes or you had some spot volumes in there too? Joe Bob Perkins We haven’t given a detailed breakout of what is spot and what is contractive. I would say, we have seen as we’ve continued to over the previous quarters, a significant portion of our volumes loaded or contracted but we were able to load some shorter-term or spot cargos as well in the second quarter. Sunil Sibal And then on the hedge book for 2016, seems like on NGLs, you maintained your hedge positions from the first quarter. I was wondering if you could give us some – in terms of your thought process on that and what levels you feel comfortable hedging that ex-player? Joe Bob Perkins Yeah. We have layered on some hedges. In the first quarter, we layered on some hedges, in the second quarter, we actually layered on some additional hedges here early in the third quarter. We’ve added some costless collars, we’ve added some swaps for the various products, crude, NGLs and natural gas. In this environment, I don’t think we’re looking to kind of catch up to get back to those targeted levels all that once but we do continue to take a disciplined approach to try and continue to layer on some amount of hedges where it makes sense. Sunil Sibal Okay. And then lastly, some of your producer customers have been pretty vocal about economics of drilling even in the wake of this commodity price weakness. I was kind of curious does that jives activity levels you are seeing in your assets? Joe Bob Perkins We obviously read the same public statements and then we have communications that aren’t public. I would say that our broader knowledge is consistent with the public statements of our customer base and we even referenced in our comments that, for example, some producers intent to increase their activity levels at, for example, $60. We are encouraged by the activity levels to-date, but we are not very good at predicting prices. Sunil Sibal Okay, that’s very helpful and that’s all I had. Thanks guys. Joe Bob Perkins Okay, thank you. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Brandon Blossman of Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Company. Your line is now open. Brandon Blossman Good morning, guys. Joe Bob Perkins Good morning. Brandon Blossman Follow on to the gathering and processing throughput volume, so the comment was 3% to 5% up ‘15 over I believe Q4 ‘14. Joe Bob Perkins Yes. Brandon Blossman Is that just producer – your current customer base’s volume increase or is there some presumption of market share – incremental market share grab there? Joe Bob Perkins The actuals achieved to-date have been both. We tend to be conservative about our projections going forward. I would like to believe that we continue to benefit from takeaway gas, but we haven’t overestimated that. Brandon Blossman Okay, fair enough. I will try the LPG export at slightly different angle here, is there anything in the back half of ‘15 into ‘16 that would point to your volume throughput being different than kind of the US in total numbers as we see those data – that data role out? Joe Bob Perkins I am not sure we’ve got a real good projection of forward US data. We’ve got a pretty handle on how our volumes are likely to behave and we’ve built that into our comments in the answers to the last question. Brandon Blossman Okay, fair enough. And then more discretely, on a per unit basis, GMP OpEx looks like it’s trending down very nicely over the last two or three quarters. What should we expect as far again on a per unit basis the trajectory through the back half of ‘15 on that metric? Matt Meloy We are going to continue to work on maintaining the cost reductions that we’ve achieved and realizing additional cost reductions. I don’t have a prediction for you in terms of a percent trend, but the efforts are going to continue and our people are very focused on it. Brandon Blossman So, flat to down is a fair takeaway there? Matt Meloy We are pleased with the downward trend that we can see from our internal numbers and that are harder for you all to see from reported numbers despite increases in volumes and that’s pretty extraordinary in the gathering and processing patched. And with expected continued growth for 2015 in those important areas we still expect to do so without increasing our cost. Brandon Blossman Okay, awesome. Thank you very much. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Darren Horowitz of Raymond James. Your line is now open. Darren Horowitz Joe Bob, couple of quick questions on field GMP and I appreciate the comments around the plus 3% to 5% overall volume growth even that of what’s going on in North Texas, but what I am more concerned about is the margin expectation to the extent that you can comment, I am just trying to get a feel for the lower operating expense, expected to continue through the back of this year. With the regard to the aggregate impact on gross operating profit for field GMP, how much lower or what’s the variability in terms of your back half of ‘15 margin versus what you’ve already experienced in the first half of ‘15? Joe Bob Perkins As we look second half versus first half, we expect to achieve similar or better. I think that’s about as precise as I can be. Darren Horowitz Okay. Let me jump over to North Texas, specifically the amount from a contractual perspective, POP contracts, I think previously you had said it’s somewhere around 30% of the 2015 margin was going to be POP and a lot of that was really around North Texas. I am just curious, now that you’ve got half of the year behind you and you are looking forward with the TPL assets, what’s that level of expectation for POP exposure in the back half of this year and then into ‘16? And from a re-contracting perspective as maybe you think about shifting some of that exposure to a more fee-based composition of cash flow, how do you think about the margin degradation maybe being offset by volume improvement or cash flow security? Matt Meloy Hey, Darren, it’s Matt. I want to talk just about North Texas just to clear one thing up there first. The North Texas is a POP business up there, so we do have some fees kind of embedded in those contracts whether it’s gathering or compression or others, but we think of North Texas as POP and we don’t really see that changing as we come back of this year and into 2016. Darren Horowitz Okay. And then last question from me and Joe Bob, again I appreciate it being difficult to predict crude oil prices, we struggle from the affliction. But I am wondering just with regard to the balanced assets McKinsey down in Montrose counties right, like a lot of that hinges not just on the absolute price but on the discount to TI, because I think that’s probably where the greater challenge is. So what are producers telling you just from a net back perspective in terms of where the cash price gets more economic? Joe Bob Perkins As opposed to me describing what producers are telling me and not telling the public, what I can see is activity at the price levels that we’ve seen since the first of the year and that activity as you know isn’t driven by the spot price in the particular month, but their outlook for those prices. It’s one of the best oil basins in the world. The differentials as a percentage have moved around since the first of the year. Darren Horowitz Thank you. Joe Bob Perkins That’s about as best we can describe. And like we said, we have several reasons in the Bakken to be optimistic about volumes even at low North Dakota activity levels. The activity levels around our system are better and given the activity levels around our system, we still have some backlog of volumes that we are going to be getting to, thanks to progress on right of way on the reservation. That’s going to take us a little while and thanks to the progress at the Little Missouri 3. The Little Missouri 3 plant provided for helping to put out players and meet customer needs of gas production that was already there and not being captured. Operator Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of TJ Schultz with RBC Capital. Your line is now open. TJ Schultz Hey, good morning. Joe Bob Perkins Good morning. TJ Schultz On field GMP volumes, I guess just questions on 2016, I think the optimistic outlook that you guys kind of commented in the remarks, is that just a fact that you are likely to have a better beginning level or is there something specific maybe you guys gleaned here more recently with the swing and grew to 60 and now back down that gives you more optimism maybe about producer activity kind of within this oil range that we have been bouncing around? Joe Bob Perkins Our feeling a bit better about it has to be in the context of lot of those things you just mentioned, but it wasn’t kind of the short term movement in prices. Number one and the primary reason is volumes have performed better than we expected despite prices over the first half of the year. If you took our last quarter call, for example, spot prices and forward prices are lower than our last quarter call, but given those prices, the volumes have exceeded our expectation. So the volume to price relationship is important in our feeling a bit better. And then, yes, the US data around supply and demand and a break over on crude volumes which occurred a little later than we thought it would, I think works into the mix as you referenced. But that primary thing and we try to say it as we feel a bit better because volumes have done a bit better in spite of pricing. TJ Schultz Okay, thanks. On exports, I think you said you are adding contracts, just any color on the appetite for short term versus long term contracts and then also just any update on constraints that ship availability is having for you guys through the rest of the year? Joe Bob Perkins We’ve guided both since our last call. We are more contracted than not contracted in the near term. We know that ship constraints are a factor. Our ability to predict exactly how fast those additional ships come on or where they come on is not as good as other analysts out there, but we know our customers have felt the ship constraints. We sort of gave you an expectation and then also pointed to it as a potential upside relative to our overall expectations. TJ Schultz Okay, thanks. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Jeremy Tonet of JPMorgan. Your line is now open. Jeremy Tonet Good morning. Joe Bob Perkins Good morning. Jeremy Tonet Congratulations on the good quarter there. Just I had a question on the TPL hedge book. It came in a bit stronger than what we were anticipating. So just want to see if you have static commodity price environment, whether the pace of cash gains is going to be stable through ‘15 or if it is more front half of the year weighted. Matt Meloy So we will be filing the Q here shortly and it will have an update of all the hedges that we have on, so it really depends on your commodity price expectation for the amount of cash that we will receive in any quarter. Jeremy Tonet Exactly, I was just curious if there was – the contracts were more weighted to the first half versus back half for the TPL hedges you picked up? Matt Meloy Yeah, we will have less amount hedged and at lower prices kind of generally as we go through time. So I think that’s a fair assessment. Jeremy Tonet Got you. I appreciate that. And Joe Bob, want to touch on some of the things you are seeing before I know it’s a very difficult question, but I am just wondering system-wide, if you are looking at the futures curve, is there a number in your mind where you feel good about continued growth? Is 16, is that 50 versus 60, is there any goal posts you could give us there as far as how you think the target assets would react in when you’d see growth? Joe Bob Perkins Well, I wish I was that smart. I think I kind of admitted already that our first of year expectations, volume connected to price, volume was a little better than the price connection. I don’t have a magic milestone or goal posts for you out there. Jeremy Tonet Fair enough. Just one last one from me. As far the Noble payments around the splitter, I was just wondering for modeling purposes does that stop at a period of time, should we be taking that into consideration. Matt Meloy Yeah, it stops in the third quarter, partly through the third quarter. Jeremy Tonet Got you. And is there anything material that we should know just so we don’t overestimate there? Matt Meloy Yeah, good question. We haven’t’ given the specific number, so it’s going to be tough for you to triangulate. I will just say it’s not large enough so we had to disclose it as a dollar amount variance Joe Bob Perkins And we only disclose what we have to disclose as we put that out when we first – recognize we have confidentially – we’ve first of all good relationship with Noble and we have confidentiality requirements. Those confidentiality requirements say we disclose what we have to report and we spend a lot of time with accountants to make sure we got that right. Jeremy Tonet Fair enough. Makes sense. Thank you for the color. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Schneur Gershuni of UBS. Your line is now open. Schneur Gershuni Hi, good morning, guys. I was wondering if we can expand on the integration process with Atlas a little bit. It sort of sounded like if I heard correctly that you might be seeing some very large capital efficiencies. I believe you said at one point that you’ve got a plant that you can start up and connect and so forth. I was wondering if you can sort of lay that out for us as to how that could possibly impact margins on a go-forward basis. Is there lot more opportunities like this where you can have capital efficiencies or I guess capital avoidance and start pickup volumes? Does your margins further expand with capacity utilization picking up? I was just sort of wondering if you can sort of expand on that a little bit for us. Matt Meloy I certainly understand the question. Five months have passed since we did the acquisition. Assets are terrific, particularly in the Permian Basin mix terrifically with our existing assets. People are working as one team, one target team for target bottom line. We did sort of give early conservative synergies to you all which makes you want more and I understand that. You’d like more detail, you’d liked the variance analysis against the plans. What’s really going on is we want to have a separate report of the progress on those synergies instead, the way we are managing it, the way we are working it, as those become embedded in our results. It’s one of the ways we’ve kind of outperformed our expectations and it will continue to be. You pointed to a couple of the factors and we alluded to them. When you combine those systems, you have capital efficiency opportunities, you have the opportunity that we’ve always had but even more so of getting gas to available capacity and we started up idle plants throughout our whole history, it’s just another opportunity to do so for the benefit of the combined system. Hope that’s helpful but I also know it’s not exactly what you wanted. Schneur Gershuni Maybe I’ll ask this a little differently. Classic analyst question, ex-commodity impacts, I mean the commodity is going to move up and down and so forth, but should we expect the IRR on capital deployed at least over the next six to nine months to be significantly higher than it has been in the past or so differently, should we see ex-commodity impact margins improve just as you’re able to take advantage of these capital opportunities, is that a fair way to be looking at it? Joe Bob Perkins I understand that question and it’s an easier question to address than the question from like last quarter, are your IRRs going to go down in this environment. In reality, when we’re working hard in this environment doing a lot of smaller projects taking advantage of the low hanging fruit, benefiting from takeaway gas with small expenditures, those returns are very attractive, okay, they’re very attractive, they need smaller dollar amount and that’s showing up in our bottom line. I like expanding on the answer to your question because it works against kind of hypothesis which is not, we’re not seeing as the case that our returns are going to go down. We may not be spending this larger chucks of dollars, which is good and proper in this environment to takes those and defer them until needed but the dollars we’re spending are getting attractive returns and I think that flows to our bottom line. Schneur Gershuni Okay, now that’s actually a great answer. As a follow-up to all the questions about your positive outlook with respect to the Permian, I think you started off by saying hey; we were surprised on the volume side, so therefore we’re sort of carrying it through and so forth. I was wondering if maybe you can expand a little bit as to why the volumes are outperforming expectations. Is it producers using better completions, are they targeting better wells or they’re drilling more wells than you initially thought and I was just wondering if you can sort of carry that through as to why the volumes have actually been performing better or not, if that’s a bad thing and as to why that will continue to be the case over the next six to nine months. Joe Bob Perkins First of all, kind of the last factor, it’s not because they’re drilling more wells than we thought, not appreciably to any extent. But it is a combination of some of the factors you mentioned and some others. I would start with their drilling with a more limited budget in the best spots and their technology has improved such that the best spots are more productive than they have been in the past. And those best spots are where our systems are and that to a great extent and that’s the reason for us having underestimated it. Maybe we’re too conservative, I’m not terribly surprised but it is a pleasant surprise on the margin for the volumes to be outperforming where the prices have been. Secondly, we have been successful because we are working hard, willing to selectively spent capital and have a very good reputation with customers out there that we’re winning packages of gas that are coming up for renegotiation on the margin. And strong competitors do that during tough times, those two factors maybe a little bit of when you have a little less activity and you’ve been working to catch up all along and get pressures down where you want them to be in the field that benefits our customers and it benefits us on volumes. Those are kind of the three areas that are in my head and it’s not because drilling was a lot higher. Schneur Gershuni So weaker competitors with poor balance sheets are basically at disadvantage, right relative to somebody like yourself, is that a fair way to think about the volume or market share comment. Joe Bob Perkins I think I had put it a little softer than that. It’s not just the balance sheet; it’s also the reputation for customer service. Schneur Gershuni Okay, great. Alright thank you very much, I really appreciate all the color. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Blum of Wells Fargo. Your line is now open. Michael Blum Hi, thanks, I’ll try to be brief here. Just curious for what you’re seeing from the impact of ethane rejection, is there has been any change in the way you’re running your plants? Joe Bob Perkins For running our plants, we’ve looked at that every day and we’re doing more not less ethane rejection where we can. Michael Blum Would you say that’s from what you see out there from other volumes that are coming to your system, is that sort of consistent? Joe Bob Perkins Yes, broadly so. We see a lot of pipelines as you know coming into our CBF fractionation facility. And certainly across the board you would characterize it as getting lower on ethane content meaning that more ethane is being rejected. Michael Blum Okay, great. And then, you gave some pretty good updates on the various projects that you have in the backlog or the potential backlog. So it is fair for me to just take away from that that effectively you’re still seeing pretty good demand for incremental projects, we haven’t seen any really material change which I think is something that a lot of people are thinking about. Joe Bob Perkins Our backlog is a list of those defined projects that people have seen in the permitting process or customers have talked about us working on for the most part. There is not a decrease demand for any of them, as we said really back to the first year; it’s a matter of when not if for almost all those projects. Increasing NGLs coming into Mont Belvieu continue, they’re coming a little bit slower than we might have expected in the early part of 2014 but demand is still there back to that, when, not if. Michael Blum And then, Matt I apologize if I had missed it, because I was writing quickly. Can you just repeat what was the Q2 ATM equity issuance? Matt Meloy Yeah, I said that in the script, I think it was $263 million and that also includes July, which I think I’d – it will be in our queue as a subsequent of that about $23 million or something. Michael Blum Okay, great. Thank you. Joe Bob Perkins That includes the GP stuff? Matt Meloy That was ATM, so the GP amount is a separate number we gave, which we also put in the queue. That’s why my number was so high. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of John Edwards of Credit Suisse. Your line is now open. John Edwards Yeah thanks for taking my questions. Back to the LPG export, just asking it a different way, I think you said there was a mix of spot and contracted, would it be fair to say the majority is contracted. Joe Bob Perkins [indiscernible] setting a record, I’m trying to drill down on that. I know that some of our competitors may give more details than we do on our export volumes and our mix of contracts, but we’re really making a competitive decision on how much we want to say for the good of our unit holders and the good of our shareholders. So I appreciate you drilling down but –. John Edwards Okay. Fair enough. Joe Bob Perkins If the mix is correct, there is a mix. Yes. Matt Meloy The thing I wanted to make sure we take away, as we have said the majority of our volumes are on contracted volumes, because I don’t want you to take away that the majority is short term or spot con. Joe Bob Perkins Sounded to me like we’re trying to figure out, if on the increment that was added what was the percentage of increment. John Edwards No, no, no, okay. Alright fair enough. And then just kind of extending some of the earlier questions asked but you have expressed optimism in 2016 based on the volumes that have materialized so far and I was just curious to what extend pricing might impact that optimism. If we stay in this sort of sustained price environment that we’re currently in rather than the improvement that a lot of people are calling for, I’m just wondering, how would that temper your optimism if at all, I mean, as perhaps people are responding to things based on price expectations going forward not the current sloppy environment that we’re in. Joe Bob Perkins Our feeling a bit better about the volume outlet for the remainder for the year and for 2016 is not based on looking at a single case or a single – it’s based on us looking at multiple forecasts related to multiple pricing and what we think is likely. The most important thing that we are communicating is that our volumes and our volume outlook at whatever price scenario we’re looking at has done better, it did better against the actuals, which actually were lower prices than we expected and going forward in price environment that’s flat for today, are volume feeling would be better than it was at the beginning of the year for that same price outlook. And if you get to the higher price outlooks, would have volumes greater than we expected for higher price outlooks. Does that make sense to you? Otherwise we’re trying to predict the prices and I’m not trying to predict the prices. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of [indiscernible]. Your line is now open. Unidentified Analyst Thank you. Congratulations on a good quarter in a tough market. If we could just continue on the volume question for just one second if I could because I haven’t pretty kind of addressed this and I understand your cautious outlook on volumes and you’re pleased with the way things came in but in terms of just a forward look, anyway to talk about what the weather impact for this quarter in terms of your volumes? Joe Bob Perkins This quarter’s weather impact was primarily a North Texas and we pointed to it because it was a fact in some of the producers in the area have pointed to it. It’s difficult to extract, we might have been flat quarter-to-quarter in North Texas if it weren’t for the weather impact, I don’t know that for a fact, I do know that I project where we are and where we’re going and it was appropriate to signal that unless there is some bump due to price, North Texas is likely to continue to decline not dramatically but continue to decline. When we said weather impact, it was not just the flood, it was the impact post flood on electricity connections even some washed out pipelines that took a while to repair primarily on the electricity side because they just didn’t have the cruise to take care of everything it wants and some of them more remote locations didn’t get taken care for a quite a while. Unidentified Analyst Thank you very much. On the terminaling and storage fees, there was some incremental, is there more to be reprised or is there any additional color you can give there? Matt Meloy I think that comment Joe Bob referred to is just an environment where you have some contango in the forward curves, as storage becomes worth more and there are some opportunities for additional income. Unidentified Analyst And then the last one from me, on your coastal plants, is there any outlook for idling any more plants there or shall we assume that’s done? Joe Bob Perkins The consolidation of the coastal straddle has been going for in many ways much of our career. We’ve said before that Target is well positioned to benefit from those consolidations. We have one of the strongest positions we like to call it a catcher’s mitt and as less efficient plants are idled we tend to capture a lot more than our share of the remaining gas and I just want to credit the people working the coastal gathering and processing for figuring out ways to save dollars make more money with less volumes get richer gas when it’s available and the producers are working to get richer gas. It’s a small part of our operating margin but boy did they work hard to keep that small part as high as possible. Unidentified Analyst Thanks very much. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line Faisel Khan of Citigroup. Your line is now open. Faisel Khan Thanks its Faisel from Citigroup. Just a few questions from your press release, the condensate pricing were different quite substantially from field gathering from the coastal gathering systems and that difference was sort of wider in the quarter versus last quarter and even on a percentage basis versus last year. Can you kind of discuss what’s going on there, is that a quality differential, is that sort of a real transportation differential, it just seems a little bit wide even looking at WTI versus LLS [ph]? Joe Bob Perkins Yeah. Coastal is usually different than the field, it gets priced more of LLS, so if you look at the differentials from where we’re picking up that coastal of a field relative to the LLS which is typically a track closer to Brent. So it’s just those various differentials, I will say that the condensate does not have a big impact on our operating margins. So it’s not something that we focus a lot on. But it is due to this impact. Matt Meloy And occasionally there are quality differentials that might impact a single quarter. It’s – we market it the best we can, relative to supply and demand in the localized markets. Faisel Khan I’m just – because the differential has obviously narrowed in the quarter, so I just want to understand if maybe there is a constraint there, in the, I guess your field gathering system? Joe Bob Perkins No. I don’t have. I think we’re more talking about market dynamics than anything. Faisel Khan Okay. Fair enough. And then in your press release, you guys mentioned that the fractionation results were sort of impacted by lower system product gains, can you discuss exactly what that means, is that just you talking about rejecting ethane or you’re talking about sort of Joe Bob Perkins It really has more to do with our Mont Belvieu complex and volumes going through our fractionators. There are opportunities to blend the various products at the back of our fractionators before we sell those spec products to market, so there are pluses and minuses throughout the system and those amounts vary from quarter-to-quarter. Faisel Khan Okay. And then also you guys discuss in your results also lower refinery LPG supply, I would have thought with refiners sort of running all out in the quarter that LPG supply would have been up over the quarter, but because you’re talking about it being down, I didn’t sort of understand that dynamic too? Joe Bob Perkins I understand directionally what you’re describing, but what we always see in practice is about the time we think we’re going to be getting higher supplies from refineries, we don’t. It is pretty difficult to predict what we’re really good doing as managing it in the short term to do the best with what we get. There were some refining downtimes on the west coast, don’t really want to point or pick at any particular customer, but that shows up in our overall results. Faisel Khan Okay. So did you guys have access to the California refining LPG? Joe Bob Perkins Yeah. Some of those are our customers and what we also know on the margin is that not just pointing to West Coast, some refinery customers have actually used some of those products as fuel on the margin. So it’s a difficult trend to track, but we are as very opportunistic in adding that refinery services business to the overall propane wholesale marketing business. Faisel Khan Okay. And then last question from me, on your hedges, just want to make sure, is there a lag effect from the hedges or is it, as you guys show the volumes in the quarter, those volumes sort of are represented through your hedge contracts, I mean there is no difference from quarter to quarter, how to recognize that? Joe Bob Perkins No, there is no lag. The cash comes in for the month that we’ve had, we’ll recognize that as either income or we’ll put it as an addback in the cash flow statements to the extent the cash is received. Faisel Khan Okay, makes sense. Thanks for the time. Appreciate it. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Chris Sighinolfi of Jefferies. Your line is now open. Corey Goldman Hey, guys. Corey Goldman for Chris. Just a quick question, sorry to go back to Noble really quick, what is the threshold, I had a curiosity for what you have to disclose? Joe Bob Perkins Sorry. Good try. I understand the question. I can’t answer, and by the way, absent the Noble contract, I’m not sure that I would get a concrete answer from our internal accountants or auditors anyway, they sort of know it when they get there and at some point, we say okay, I think I understand and we report accordingly. Corey Goldman Got it. And I guess just to dovetail in that, I’m assuming because you’re recognizing revenue before any things in the ground yet, do you assume the projects that go, just had a curiosity, what would be the impact to you guys positive or negative, if the project is a no go? Joe Bob Perkins I’m not prepared to discuss that either. What we said when we announced the deal is that relative to the original channel view splitter agreement, we were not economically disadvantaged by renegotiating the agreements and that’s all I can say. Corey Goldman Okay. That’s helpful. And then just the last question for me, and I apologize if I misunderstood what you said, I think you said with respect to contracts, you’re more contracted than non-contracted in the near term, that implies let’s call 3.25 between, just wondering how you compare that what you said last quarter about more than 4.2 million, is it 1 million barrels a month for ‘15 and then around 4.2 million a month in ‘16? Joe Bob Perkins Okay. Just to be clear, we didn’t say, we said more which is greater than half, so we’re not saying we’re more or less in that previous number that we gave, we just said we’re not going to kind of get in to the dialing in the exact amount that we’re contracted in the exact amount of spot. So I wouldn’t read from that that we’re less. Corey Goldman Okay. So you can’t reiterate if you’re in line with the 4.2 million about a month in 15? Joe Bob Perkins Oh, I could but I’m not going to. Corey Goldman Okay. I appreciate it. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Gregg Brody of Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Your line is now open. Gregg Brody Hi guys. Just a quick one for you. I think you mentioned when you gave your hedge numbers for the NGLs that you were 80% hedged in ‘16, versus 30% for the rest of this year, did I hear that right and if I did, what’s the…? Joe Bob Perkins No, we’re not 80% hedged, I think for ‘16 for NGLs, I think I said 15%. Gregg Brody 15, then that would explain what I misheard, that’s perfect. Thank you, guys. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of [indiscernible] of Citadel. Your line is now open. Jeff Mccarter Hey, guys. This is Jeff Mccarter with Citadel. I was hoping you could elaborate a little bit on the point you made about transitioning packages of gas, what basins are you seeing those in and were there further opportunities? Joe Bob Perkins Okay. You may have interpreted transitioning from a term I used as takeaway, kind of going back, mostly, we’re finding volume increases from our dedicated contracts with existing producers and those volumes were better than we thought in our important basins, battling on the entire Permian basin. West, south, surprised us to the positive. Particularly those large Permian basin positions in bad lands are coming from our existing acreage, but across the board, we’ve also been successful and that’s a complement to our people of winning a whole lot more, many, many more deals and much, much more volume on takeaway than we have lost, takeaway being a contract came up for renewal with someone else and we got it. Now, that’s on the margin, it’s a positive on the margin. It’s part of the positive surprise, but I don’t have more information to provide you other than to say we track it by deal and track it by volume and report back to our board and the wins are a whole lot better than the losses. But mostly, the positive volume surprised us from our existing contracts and our existing dedications. Jeff Mccarter Okay. So no real color that you can offer on, is that part of what drove the Eagle Ford volumes or is it producers shifting to different processors in the Permian, nothing more you can offer? Joe Bob Perkins I will say that my win loss ratio on volumes or deals is weighed to the target side on every basin. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Ethan Bellamy of Baird. Your line is now open. Ethan Bellamy Bob, how would you handicap the potential for elimination of the crude oil export band and if that occurred, what would that be to your strategy? Joe Bob Perkins Everybody frowned at me, because they were afraid I would start talking. Ethan Bellamy I’d love to hear you do that. Joe Bob Perkins I won’t, I don’t handicap anything moving fast in Washington if it were to happen, we’re always trying to help as a midstream player. Everybody just did a big sigh of relief, I think that’s as much as I can dig in to. Ethan Bellamy So just to follow up there, how does that potential outcome factor in to your risk analysis on things like the condensate infrastructure and the agreement with Noble? Joe Bob Perkins That question, I can’t address. Recognizing even with export bands or opening up condensate, you still have needs for particular assets. Student body won’t go right or left based on a change in the law and our customers with their contracts and their portfolio of opportunities will decide whether those investments continue to make sense. That’s what we’ll respond to. And absent near term moves in Congress, that’s impacting people’s longer term outlook about assets. Even with the opening of selected condensate exports, you continue to need splitters on the US Gulf Coast to some extent within refineries, outside refineries, whereas going to splitters on the other side of the water. Where is the best place to be importing products, and moving it around, that’s a global, it’s a global market with lots of solutions. Ethan Bellamy Thanks so much. I guess I’m asking the right questions if you tell me no. Joe Bob Perkins I’m going to get a bad reputation. I’ve really tried to answer all the questions. We can only answer some of them so much. Operator Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Charles Marshall of Capital One Securities. Your line is now open. Charles Marshall Two quick follow-up on your opening comments regarding distribution growth for the year, expected to come in at the lower end of the range, given your sort of better expectations on the back half of the year and field GMP volumes, et cetera, is your guidance range at the low-end, that includes your updated forecast for the remainder of the year or could that slide more to the right on the higher end of the range. Matt Meloy NO, we took in to consideration both our outlook in the field and our logistics and marketing business in to that 4 to 7% and then towards the lower end of that, we’re also part way through the year, we had a distribution increase of a penny in the first quarter, and then half a penny in the second. So then, we’re part way through the year, so we have a better handle on just kind of how the average is going to shake out. Joe Bob Perkins And we try to drive it smoothly. Charles Marshall Okay. I appreciate that. One last quick one. Regarding potential ethane export projects, is there any update there you can provide for us? Joe Bob Perkins No update. Charles Marshall Okay, thanks. Operator Thank you. And I’m showing no further questions at this time. I’d like to hand the call back over to Joe Bob Perkins for any closing remarks. Joe Bob Perkins Thank you, operator. Thank you everybody for your patience and your interest and to the extent you have any follow-up questions, please feel free to contact Jim, Matt or any of us. Good day. Operator Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today’s conference. That does conclude today’s program. You may all disconnect. Have a great day everyone.

Northwest Natural Gas Company’s (NWN) CEO Gregg Kantor on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Northwest Natural Gas Company (NYSE: NWN ) Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call August 04, 2015 11:00 AM ET Executives Nikki Sparley – Investor Relations Gregg Kantor – Chief Executive Officer Greg Hazelton – Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Analysts Spencer Joyce – Hilliard Lyons Operator Good morning, and welcome to the Northwest Natural Gas Company Second Quarter Earnings Call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Nikki Sparley. Please go ahead. Nikki Sparley Thank you, Dow. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our second quarter 2015 earnings call. This is Nikki Sparley, acting IR Director and filling in for Bob Hess who is out on medical leave. Please feel free to contact me going forward on all IR related matters. As a reminder, some of the things that will be said this morning contain forward-looking statements. They are based on management’s assumptions, which may or may not come true. You should refer to the language at the end of our press release for the appropriate cautionary statements and also our SEC filings for additional information. We expect to file our 10-Q later today. As mentioned, this teleconference is being recorded and will be available on our website following the call. Please note that these conference calls are designed for the financial community. If you are an investor and have questions, please contact me directly at 503-721-2530. Media may contact, Melissa Moore at 503-220-2436. Speaking this morning are Gregg Kantor, Chief Executive Officer and Greg Hazelton, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Kantor and Mr. Hazelton have some opening remarks and then will be available to answer your questions. Also joining us today are other members of our executive team, who are available to help answer any questions you may have. With that, I will turn it over to Mr. Kantor for his opening remarks. Gregg Kantor Good morning, everyone and welcome to our second quarter earnings call. Before we begin today, I would like to take a few minutes to discuss some changes to our executive team. First, I’d like to introduce our new Chief Financial Officer, Greg Hazelton. As you know, after a long career with Northwest Natural, Steve Feltz retired in June. But we’re pleased to have Greg join us from Hawaii Electric where he was Treasurer and Controller. Greg started our his career here in Portland working on the electric side with Portland General Electric and then went on to work in the investment banking world for several years. He’s gotten impressive and diverse background and he’s already been a great addition to our team. I’m also pleased to announce David Anderson, who is promoted to President of the Company, effective August 1. Over the past 11 years, David has demonstrated exceptional leadership skills and help build a strong utility that leads the industry in a number of operational areas. David will also retain his role as Chief Operating Officer with responsibility for the bulk of the day-to-day operations and will continue to report directly to me. Now, moving on to the quarter, I’ll begin today with highlights from the period and then turn it over to the other Greg to cover the financial details. I’ll wrap up the call with brief comments about our priorities for the remainder of the year. In the period, we continued to work through our open dockets at the Oregon Public Utility Commission. As you know, in the first quarter, we received the commission’s decision on our environmental cost recovery proceeding and on how an earnings test would be applied to environmental expenditures we had incurred and will continue to incur in the future. As part of the decision, the OPUC required a compliance filing that describes how we would implement their order. We submitted that filing at the end of March and we’re currently working through the review process with OPUC staff and other parties. It will be subject to final commission approval which we expect by the end of the year. In addition, late yesterday, we received the OPUC’s decision on our pension docket, and you’ll recall, all of the investor owned utilities in Oregon requested that prepaid pension assets be included in rate base and allowed to earn a return. While we are continuing to evaluate the decision, which as I say we got yesterday afternoon, the commission’s order reaffirms the use of FAS 87 expense for recovery of pension costs but did not support the utilities request to include their prepaid pension assets and rate base. The decision is not what we had hoped for but the company still retains its pension balancing account which allows it to defer annual pension expenses above or below the amount set and rates. Recovery of these deferred amounts occurs over time as the balancing account fluctuates with higher and lower FAS 87 pension expense. Now shifting to the quarterly results, our performance was slightly better year-over-year; utility margin was up resulting largely from customer growth which increased to 1.5%. That growth rate translated into 10,000 new customers on a rolling 12-months basis and several economic factors suggest this uptick in activity should continue. For example, between the Portland area and Clark County, Washington, over 29,000 new jobs have been added year-over-year, which equates to about 3% increase. But the real headline for the quarter is the housing market. The homeowner vacancy rate was 1% and the rental vacancy rate was at 3.5% both in the Portland and Clark County creating a very tight housing market. For example, in June, a number of homes for sale represented less than two months’ worth of available inventory, well below the six to seven month timeframe you’d see in a more balanced housing market. The average sales price in June was up about 10% in the Portland area compared to a year-ago and up nearly 13% in Clark County. Compared to the second quarter of 2014, home sales in the period were up about 24% in Portland and up nearly 25% in Clark County. While Oregon’s single-family new construction activity is up over the past 12 months versus a year ago, it’s still not keeping pace with demand and while this imbalance may take some time to correct, we’re optimistic about the potential growth in new construction going forward. And with that, let me turn it over to Greg Hazelton to cover the financial details for the quarter. Greg Hazelton Thank you Gregg for the introduction, I’m very pleased to be part of the Northwest Natural team and on the earnings call with everyone this morning. Turning to our results, earnings for the second quarter of 2015 were $0.08 per share on net income of $2.2 million as compared to $0.04 per share and $1.1 million for the same period last year. Year-to-date earnings for the first six months of 2015 were $1.12 per share on net income of $30.7 million as compared to $1.43 and $39 million for the same period last year. As highlighted from our call last quarter, we recognized a $15 million pretax or $9.1 million after tax environmental regulatory disallowance in the first quarter. The charge to O&M was associated with the February 2015 OPUC Order on the recovery of past environmental cost deferrals. Excluding this charge, consolidated earnings for the first six months of 2015 were $1.45 per share or $39.8 million, which is slightly up from last year on higher utility earnings offset by lower gas storage results. Regarding our utility, we reported net income of $2.2 million in the second quarter of 2015, an increase of $40,000 from the prior year based on higher utility margins and decrease in interest expense offset by an increase in O&M. For the first six months, utility net income was $30.6 million or a decrease of $7.6 million from last year, mainly due to the $9.1 million environmental charge which was mitigated by improved utility results. Positive drivers included higher utility margins, an increase in other income, and lower interest expense partially offset by an increase in O&M expense. Utility margin for the quarter increased $920,000, driven by customer growth, rate base returns on tracked-in items, and gains from gas costs incentive sharing. Utility margins for the year-to-date period were impacted by record loan weather in our service territory during our peak, during our heating season in the first quarter, which continued into the second quarter. Overall, average temperatures for the first six months of 2015 were 18% warmer than year ago and 22% warmer than normal. Total gas deliveries decreased 12% and gross revenues were down 6% during this period. Although our utility margins are generally protected from weather, we do have about 11% of our customer base in Washington, which does not have a weather normalization mechanism and 7% of our Oregon customers elect out of weather normalization. In spite of the decline in volumes and gross revenues, net margins increased $1.2 million mainly due to continued customer growth, rate based returns on tracked-in items, and gains from gas cost incentive sharing. Moving to our gas storage segment, for the quarter, we reported a net loss of $90,000, reflecting $1.1 million improvement in results from a year ago. Drivers included $300,000 increase in operating revenues due to slightly higher contract prices for 2015-2016 gas storage year and $930,000 reduction in operating expenses. For the first six months, net income was $30,000 or a decrease in net income of $440,000 from the year prior. Results included $2.2 million decrease in operating revenues due to lower contract prices for the 2014-2015 gas storage year. This was offset by $1 million reduction in operating expenses. As we’ve mentioned in previous quarters, our Mist storage facility in Oregon continues to perform well due to limited storage capacity and growing demand in the Pacific Northwest. Our Gill Ranch facility in California continues to face headwinds as the oversupply of storage persist and demand for natural gas storage recovers slowly. We are seeing slightly higher pricing for the 2015-2016 gas storage year and we continue to remain optimistic on the value of gas storage in California over the long term. With regards to consolidated O&M, for the quarter, we reported an increase of $580,000 over last year. That increase primarily reflects utility cost increases for higher benefit in payroll costs. Offsetting the increase were lower repair and power costs at the Gill Ranch facility. For the first six months, excluding the disallowance, O&M increased $4.3 million over last year. Key drivers were increases at the utility for payroll and benefits, including higher wage rates under the union labor contract that was effective June 1, 2014, and increases in non-payroll costs primarily associated with ongoing growth initiatives and facility costs. These increases were offset by lower repair and power costs at our Gill Ranch facility. Meanwhile, other income for the quarter increased $870,000 compared to last year as we applied insurance proceeds under the environmental mechanism. Other income for the first six months increased $4.5 million compared to last year, primarily due to the recognition of $5.3 million of regulatory equity interest income on deferred environmental expense as was discussed on our first quarter call. This income was partially offset by higher interest expense on deferred regulatory balances. Regarding interest expense, over the last 12 months, the utilities – the utility has remedied $100 million of debentures without reissuance as a result of our using our environmental insurance proceeds to pay down debt. Consequently, interest expense decreased $1.2 million for the quarter and $2.3 million for the six months of the year. Cash flow from operating activities for the first six months of 2015 was $167 million as compared to $233 million a year ago. Last year’s cash flow was significantly enhanced by $91 million of insurance recoveries. This is partially offset by other working capital changes. As Gregg mentioned, we received the commission’s decision regarding the recovery of financing costs on our prepayment pension asset. As you may recall, the prepaid pension asset represents the timing difference between cash contributions made to the plans and the recognition of FAS 87 expense. Although we will not recover at these financing costs, there will be no financial impact to earnings from this order. We continued recovering our FAS 87 pension expense through current rates and our pension balancing account, which also earns our rate of return. Today, the company reaffirms its guidance for reported earnings in the range of $1.77 to $1.97 per share for 2015, which includes the $15 million pre-tax charge. Adjusting to exclude the charge, our guidance for 2015 remains unchanged at $2.10 to $2.30 per share. The company’s guidance assumes continued customer growth from our utility segment, average weather conditions going forward, slow recovery of the gas storage market and no significant changes in prevailing legislative and regulatory policies or outcomes. With that, I’ll turn it back over to Gregg for his concluding remarks. Gregg Kantor Thanks, Greg. At this point in the year, our focus is two-fold. First, we will be working hard to advance our growth initiatives and at the same time, we will be continuing our cost control efforts to help reduce the financial impact of a record warm winter. On our growth initiatives in July, we submitted our first carbon solutions program under Oregon’s greenhouse gas reduction legislation. As we’ve talked about before, Senate Bill 844 allows the OPUC to incent natural gas utilities to undertake projects that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our first proposal is designed to further the use of combined heat and power in Oregon, a goal that the state has had for many years. Under our CHP proposal, industrial and commercial customers in the market could submit CHP projects for consideration. Our program will then provide incentive funding based on the verified carbon savings, making the project more financially feasible from a customer’s perspective. Over the last year, we’ve been collaborating on this proposal with other regional and state organizations interested in helping CHP gain more traction. In our view, this is an important effort that could provide a very significant carbon reduction benefit for our customers and for Oregon. The OPUC has set a schedule for review of our CHP filing that calls for a decision by the end of the year. In parallel with that effort, we’ve also been working on an oil to gas furnace replacement program to serve the residential market. We’ve completed the stakeholder review process and hope to file the program later this fall. As I said before, overall, we’ve been very pleased with the level of interest and engagement we’re getting from the OPUC staff, customer groups, state agencies, environmental groups across the state and we’re proud to be one of the first gas utilities in the country to attempt this kind of program and I would say, we’ve learned a great deal about carbon accounting, what opportunities exist for reductions and how to best structure programs going forward. We believe this knowledge will be a real asset in navigating an energy landscape increasingly shaped by climate change policies. Finally this morning, let me give you a quick update on the potential expansion project at our underground storage facility in Mist, Oregon. As you know, last December, we received approval from Portland General Electric to move forward with the permitting and land acquisition work required for the expansion project. Project would provide no notice storage services to PGE’s natural gas fired generating plants at Fort Westwood and would include a new reservoir, providing up to 2.5 billion cubic feet of available storage, an additional compressor station and a new pipeline. In April, we submitted an application to the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council for an amendment to our existing Mist site certificate, a step required to support the expansion. In June, we received information requests about our application from the Oregon Department of Energy and in July, we submitted our responses. The next major step in the process will occur when the Department of Energy and the Siting Council publish a proposed order later this year. Between now and the issuance of that proposed order, we will continue to work with both organizations to address any questions about our filing. And our team also continues to work on obtaining other required permits and property rights. Assuming successful and timely completion of those items, the current estimated cost of the expansion is approximately $125 million with a potential in-service date in the 2018, 2019 winter season, again depending on the permitting process and the construction schedule. With that, thanks again for joining us this morning and now, I’d like to open it up for questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator We will now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Spencer Joyce at Hilliard Lyons. Please go ahead. Spencer Joyce First things first Greg, welcome to the team and welcome back to the mainland here. I know they’ve got a good culture there at Northwest, I’m sure you’ll enjoy it. Greg Hazelton Thank you, yeah. It’s one I’m familiar with. I started my career in Portland, it feels like coming back home. Spencer Joyce Perfect, even better there and then Dave, also congratulations in order there for the incremental promotion there and an additional responsibility, I’m sure that’s exciting. David Anderson Thank you, Spencer. I appreciate it. Spencer Joyce Turning towards the quarter here a little bit, and Greg, you touched on it there towards the end of the call, it looks like the Mist expansion potentially online for the 2018, ‘19 heating season. Just refresh us that is still on par with the initial schedule, correct and then secondarily the $125 million investment, that’s also still largely unchanged? Greg Hazelton Correct. Nothing has changed at this point. Still on schedule, still approximately $125 million. Spencer Joyce Yeah. Perfect, good to hear. Separately, wanted to turn towards the other income line of the income statement. I know there had been a couple of special items here over the last year or so, the deferred environmental expense accrual there and then the insurance item that have caused that to jump up a little bit as far as income is concerned. Can you talk a little bit about how that particular line item might play out over the next year or two, I’m kind of assuming that could trend a little bit lower or we could see a little bit less income there as we kind of model out ‘16, ‘17? Gregg Kantor Well, we have a number of things that flow through that line item. Usually, that would include all the interest that we accrue on our deferred balances, so that would be impacted by accruals on the liability, the insurance liability that would be also impacted by equity earnings on regulatory assets as well. We did highlight that we received a fairly large recognition with the recent order in February in the receipt of insurance proceeds against our environmental liabilities, which made that equity income higher than I would expect it to be going forward, absent something similar. So I think if you normalize out that $5.3 million pre-tax number, the run rate may be slightly impacted by higher – by some of the interest costs that we have going through there on the deferred balances. Greg Hazelton And Spencer, we’ve gotten all of the insurance, I should say, there is a small amount that I think is still possible in the million dollar range, but we’ve essentially gotten the insurance proceeds that we’re going to get out of our insurers. Spencer Joyce Okay, perfect. So I guess from a modeling standpoint, I mean, we’re not going to totally fall off a cliff here, but I would expect some of those balances that we’re earning or some of those accrued balances that we’re earning a bit on to trend a little lower? Greg Hazelton That’s fair. Operator [Operator Instructions] Gregg Kantor Okay. It doesn’t look like we’ve got any other calls. So thanks again for joining us and have a great finish to the summer season everyone. Take care. Greg Hazelton Thank you. Operator The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect.

PPL (PPL) William H. Spence on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

PPL Corp. (NYSE: PPL ) Q2 2015 Earnings Call August 03, 2015 8:30 am ET Executives Joseph P. Bergstein – Director-Investor Relations William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Victor A. Staffieri – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer, Kentucky Utilities Co. Rick L. Klingensmith – President, PPL Global, Inc. Analysts Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities (NYSE: USA ) LLC (Broker) Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates LLC Gregg Gillander Orrill – Barclays Capital, Inc. Keith T. Stanley – Wolfe Research LLC Neel Mitra – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Operator Good morning, and welcome to the PPL Corporation’s Second Quarter Earnings Conference Call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. After today’s presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Please note, this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Joe Bergstein, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Joseph P. Bergstein – Director-Investor Relations Thank you, Emily, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining the PPL conference call on second quarter results and our general business outlook. We are providing slides to this presentation on our website at www.pplweb.com. Any statements made in this presentation about future operating results or other future events are forward-looking statements under the Safe Harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Actual results may differ materially from such forward-looking statements. A discussion of the factors that could cause actual results or events to differ is contained in the appendix to this presentation and in the company’s SEC filings. We will refer to earnings from ongoing operations or ongoing earnings and other non-GAAP measures on this call. For reconciliations to the GAAP measures, you should refer to the press release which has been posted on our website and has been filed with the SEC. This time, I’d like to turn the call over to Bill Spence, PPL Chairman, President and CEO. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Thank you, Joe. Good morning, everyone. We’re pleased that you joined us this morning. With me on the call today are Vince Sorgi, PPL’s Chief Financial Officer; and the presidents of our three business segments. Moving to slide 3, you’ll see an agenda for today’s discussion. As we typically do, we’ll provide an overview of our quarterly and year-to-date earnings results, which I’m pleased to say include significant growth in earnings from ongoing operations. We’ll discuss our 2015 earnings forecasts, which we are increasing, along with our dividend, based on the continued strong performance of our utilities, and I’ll provide an operational overview as well. Vince will review our segment results and provide a more detailed financial overview. And as always, we’ll have plenty of time to answer your questions. But before we dive into the quarter results, I’d like to share with you my thoughts about the new PPL. As you know, June 1st marked a major milestone in our company’s history. On that day, we completed the spinoff of our competitive supply business. And in doing so, we completed a strategic transformation of PPL that began with our acquisition of two regulated utilities in Kentucky, followed by the expansion of our utility operations in the United Kingdom. It’s a transformation that has been exceptionally well executed, provides earnings and dividend growth potential, will create significant value for our share owners, and positions PPL well for continued growth and success. Today, in our first earnings call since the spinoff of the supply segment, our focus has never been clearer. Our ability to control our own destiny through our proven track record of execution has never been greater. And I, without a doubt, have never been more excited about where we’re headed. Moving to slide 4, let me expand on some of the reasons why. PPL is now a pure play, regulated utility investment, made up of seven high-performing, award-winning, and growing utility companies. Year in and year out, these utilities prove themselves to be among the best in our industry. They are diverse and located in different regions with different regulatory structures. They offer a mix of regulated assets you’d be hard-pressed to find anywhere else in our sector. Each utility operates in what we consider to be a premium jurisdiction. In addition, all of our utilities are investing heavily in infrastructure, producing robust rate base growth for PPL. In fact, organic growth in our domestic utilities is among the strongest in the U.S. utility sector with 8% to 10% earnings growth expected through 2017. We expect our combined rate base in the U.S. alone to grow by 47% over the next five years. That’s the equivalent of adding another major utility to our portfolio. Our balance sheet is strong and so are our cash flows, credit ratings and very competitive dividend. The bottom line, we believe the new PPL, with its strong growth profile, a solid dividend and a diverse mix of holdings, is a unique and very compelling investment option in the U.S. utility sector. Looking at slide 5, you can see that robust rate base growth, combined with jurisdictions that permit near real-time recovery of our infrastructure investments, is what will drive our targeted 4% to 6% earnings growth. I want to point out that the 2017 $2.35 of earnings per share shown here represents a projection based on the mid-point of our 4% to 6% compound annual growth target off our 2014 adjusted earnings. It does not represent earnings guidance for 2017. Across the portfolio, over $10 billion in CapEx spending is expected to produce compound annual rate base growth of more than 7% or $5 billion by the end of 2017. For 2015 through 2017, over 80% of that CapEx earns a return within 12 months and approximately 76% in less than six months. This combination creates a very strong foundation for future earnings growth. Let’s turn to slide 6. This slide offers additional detail on why we feel our U.S. operations in Pennsylvania and Kentucky operate in constructive regulatory environments. Domestically, we have favorable allowed ROEs in both Pennsylvania and Kentucky. When coupled with the numerous recovery mechanisms that reduce regulatory lag, including the DISC in Pennsylvania and the ECR in Kentucky, we are well positioned to achieve our earnings growth targets. We have excellent growth in transmission with allowed base ROEs of 11.68% to the formula rate and a 12.93% allowed ROE for the $630 million Susquehanna-Roseland project as well as a return on CWIP for the $335 million Northeast Pocono reliability project in Pennsylvania. It’s this list of trackers and recovery mechanisms that drive the rapid recovery I described on the prior slide of 76% of our CapEx earning and return in less than six months and over 80% earning return in less than 12 months. Turning to slide 7, we provide a more detailed look at why we also believe the UK offers a superior regulatory jurisdiction. The RIIO-ED1 framework in the UK provides long-term, inflation-adjusted rate certainty without volumetric exposure and Ofgem has accepted our business plans, which include total spend of over $19 billion over the eight-year regulatory period. About $11 billion of that spend will drive growth in our regulated asset value, or RAV. It also offers the potential to outperform through performance incentives which, as you know, WPD has been very successful at earning in the past, and it offers us the opportunity to earn an adjusted expected return on equity in the mid to upper teens through 2017. We’re uniquely positioned with our history of strong performance and innovation to earn these favorable returns in this premium jurisdiction. Our utilities in the UK are the four best performers in the country. They were the only utilities to be approved for fast tracking of their business plans under RIIO. This enables them to collect additional revenue of about $43 million annually and retain 70% of cost efficiencies, compared to about 55% for the slow track DNOs. And the UK business is self-funding and does not require any equity from PPL. In fact, we have the flexibility to dividend between $300 million and $500 million of cash back to the U.S. annually in a tax efficient manner. Turning to slide 8, our board approved an increase in our common stock dividend, raising it from $1.49 to $1.51 per share on an annualized basis. This marks PPL’s 13th dividend increase in 14 years. The quarterly dividend of $0.3775 per share will be payable October 1 to shareowners of record as of September the 10th. The increase in the dividend is consistent with our prior messaging that we would look to raise the dividend after the completion of the spin. Turning to slide 9, in summary, we’re confident in our ability to achieve our 4% to 6% earnings growth targets through at least 2017. We expect 8% to 10% growth in our domestic utility earnings and approximately 2% growth coming from our corporate restructuring efforts which, combined, are more than offsetting relatively flat earnings expectations in our UK business over this time period. There are several key drivers to our organic growth in the domestic utilities, and these include strong transmission rate-based growth of 18.9% through 2017 in Pennsylvania; limited volumetric risk in our distribution operation in Pennsylvania due to our rate structures and recovery mechanisms; environmental spending and favorable rate case outcomes contribute to our growth in Kentucky. And outside the U.S., the UK spending program of $4.8 billion, along with our projected incentive return, support our overall RAV growth and strong financial performance. Before turning to our quarterly results, I want to reiterate how optimistic I am about PPL’s future. I believe PPL’s diverse mix of assets, our low overall business and regulatory risk and our proven track record of earnings performance and transparency set us apart from our peers. It’s a new day for PPL, but we’ll continue to deliver for our customers and our shareowners. Turning to slide 11, today we reported a second quarter 2015 loss of $757 million or $1.13 per share. This reflects a $1 billion loss or $1.50 per share from discontinued operations associated with the June 1st spinoff of our competitive supply business. The loss from discontinued operations included an $879 million loss reflecting the fair value of the supply business at the time of the spinoff compared to the recorded value of the segment. Vince will address the loss from discontinued operations in more detail in his remarks. By comparison, second quarter 2014 reported earnings were $229 million or $0.34 per share. The reported loss for the first six months of 2015, which also reflects the loss on discontinued operations, was $110 million or $0.17 per share compared with reported earnings of $545 million or $0.83 per share for the same period in 2014. Adjusting for special items, including results from discontinued operations, second quarter of 2015 earnings from ongoing operations were $0.49 per share, up 11% from second quarter 2014 adjusted results. And year-to-date, ongoing earnings of $1.26 per share is 15% higher than 2014. As you’ll see on slide 12, because of the strong performance of our utilities year-to-date, primarily in the UK and Kentucky, we are raising the mid-point of our 2015 earnings forecast by $0.05. That increases the midpoint to $2.20 per share, an 8.4% increase from our 2014 adjusted ongoing earnings of $2.03 per share. For the full year, we see an improvement in our UK regulated segment as a result of lower depreciation expense, partially offset by the cost incurred to re-price some of the 2015 foreign currency hedges and lower operating and maintenance expense, coupled with supportive weather in our Kentucky regulated segment. Now, let’s turn to slide 13 for an operational update. In Pennsylvania, PPL Electric Utilities continues to meet with various state and federal agencies regarding its proposed compass regional transmission project and to study potential options for the transmission line. The project announced in July of 2014 would involve construction of a new multi-state transmission line that would improve electric service reliability, enhance grid security and provide cost savings to millions of consumers in the PJM and New York ISO regions. We will continue to provide updates as this project moves further along. Also in Pennsylvania, we’re awaiting a decision from the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission on PPL Electric Utilities’ request to replace its $1.4 million electric meters with new, more advanced meters. The company has proposed replacing its meters between 2017 and 2019 to provide expanded benefits to customers and to comply with state-mandated regulations on metering technology, estimated to cost about $450 million, of which $328 million is expected to increase rate base. A PUC administrative law judge has recommended approval of that plan. In addition, PPL Electric Utilities’ March 31 distribution rate case remains pending before the Pennsylvania PUC. As part of this regulatory process, the company has engaged in ongoing settlement discussions with the parties. We’ll of course keep you updated as the case proceeds. The company has requested an increase of $167.5 million in annual base distribution revenues. The request is driven by continued investments required to renew, strengthen and modernize our Pennsylvania distribution network. We’ve already seen significant improvement in system reliability based on the investments made to-date as we’re experiencing 38% fewer outages than five years ago. And the average length of time our customers are without power has been reduced by 43%. The investment being requested in this rate case is expected to further improve system reliability by another 20% over the next five years. We expect the revenue increase to take effect January 1st of 2016. In Kentucky, the Kentucky PUC in late June issued final orders that resulted in an increase of $125 million in annual base electricity rates at Kentucky Utilities and a $7 million increase in annual base gas rates at Louisville Gas & Electric. The new rates became effective July 1st as anticipated. And after more than two years and over two million construction hours, the new $530 million 640-megawatt Cane Run Unit 7 combined cycle gas plant is now commercially available. This unit is the first of its kind in the state and represents our commitment to put resources in place to meet the future energy needs of our customers. Since the start of the operations, the unit has been running as a baseload unit. Finally, our WPD subsidiaries in the UK transitioned to the new eight-year price control period, RIIO-ED1, on April 1, 2015. While it’s only been a few months under RIIO-ED1, so far, we’re performing very well in either meeting or exceeding our performance targets. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Vince to provide a more detailed look at our financial performance. Vince? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Thank you, Bill, and good morning, everyone. Let’s move to slide 15 for a review of segment earnings. Our second quarter earnings from ongoing operations increased over last year by $0.05 per share driven primarily by higher earnings from the UK Regulated segment and lower cost in Corporate and Other resulting from the corporate restructuring efforts which are essentially complete. As Bill mentioned earlier, PPL’s reported earnings for the quarter and year-to-date reflected losses from discontinued operations associated with the June 1st spinoff of our competitive supply business. The accounting rules required us to evaluate whether the fair value of the supply segment’s net asset was less than our carrying value as of the June 1st spinoff date, and we determined that it was. This resulted in a loss on spin of $875 million. In addition to the loss on spin, supply’s operating results and all costs associated with the spin are classified on the income statement as discontinued operations for all current and prior periods. You can find additional details on the spinoff, our valuation methodologies used in determining our estimated fair value for supply, and information on our transition services agreements with Talen in our second quarter 10-Q that we are filing today. Let’s briefly discuss domestic weather for the second quarter and year-to-date compared to last year and compared to the 2015 forecast. Overall, domestic weather was flat until last year for both the quarter and year-to-date periods. However, compared to our 2015 forecast, weather had a positive $0.03 impact year-to-date and was flat for the second quarter. Let’s move to a more detailed review of the second quarter segment earnings drivers starting with the Pennsylvania results on slide 16. Our Pennsylvania regulated segment earned $0.07 per share in the second quarter, a decrease of $0.01 per share compared with the year ago. This result was due to higher O&M expenses and higher depreciation due to asset additions, partially offset by higher margins from additional transmission investments. Moving to slide 17, our Kentucky-regulated segment earned $0.09 per share in the second quarter of 2015, flat compared to a year ago. This result was due to higher gross margins from returns on additional environment capital investments, offset by higher O&M expenses related to costs for the retirement of the Cane Run coal facility. Moving to slide 18, our UK-regulated segment earned $0.36 per share in the second quarter of 2015, a $0.03 increase compared to the same period last year. This increase was due to lower income taxes from a lower UK tax rate and lower U.S. taxes on dividends in 2015 compared to 2014 and lower depreciation expense from the asset life extension we discussed last quarter. These increases were partially offset by lower utility revenues as we transition to RIIO-ED1 on April 1 of this year and the effects from foreign currency. Moving to slide 19, on this slide, we provide an update to our GBP hedging status for 2015, 2016 and 2017 including sensitivities for a $0.05 and $0.10 downward movement in the exchange rate compared to our budgeted rate of $1.60. As you can see, we continue to be fully hedged for the remainder of 2015 at an average rate of $1.58. For 2016, we increased our hedge percentage from 72% at the end of the first quarter to 90% today at an average rate of $1.61. We also continue to layer in hedges for 2017 during the quarter, and we are now 40% hedged for 2017 at an average rate of $1.62, up from the 20% we reported in the first quarter. You can see from the sensitivity table that there’s basically no exposure for the remainder of 2015, minimal exposure in 2016 and about $0.03 of exposure in 2017 if the average hedge rate on our open positions is $1.55. Also on this slide, we have updated our RPI sensitivity. As we discussed last quarter, under the RIIO methodology, our revenues for the 2015, 2016 regulatory year were set using a 2.6% inflation rate. Our revenues in 2017-2018 will reflect the true-up for the actual inflation rate for the 2015-2016 regulatory year. Current RPI forecast using the HM Treasury forecast of the UK economy would suggest a 2015-2016 inflation rate of about 1.8% compared to the 2.6% included in our revenue. We are providing a sensitivity for a 0.5% downward move in RPI for the 2015-2016 period. RPI forecast for 2016 and beyond continue to be either above or at our assumed 3%. RPI affects three primary drivers for WPD: Our revenues, our O&M expenses, and the interest expense on index-linked debt. For 2017, since this is the first year we see the RPI true-up in revenues, a 2015-2016 RPI of 50 basis points below our budgeted rate, or an RPI of about 2.1%, would have a negative effect on earnings of about $0.02 per share in 2017. As noted in the footnote, we updated the sensitivity to include the partial O&M and interest expense offsets in the sensitivity. Let’s move to slide 20. As Bill mentioned earlier in his remarks, we have announced an increase in our common stock dividend to $1.51 per share on an annualized basis. We have received several questions regarding our ability to fund and continue to grow our dividend during this period of high CapEx spending. We’re providing a new disclosure this quarter which presents how we view our domestic cash flow picture. We start with our domestic cash from operations and subtract the domestic maintenance CapEx as represented by depreciation expense. We then add the cash distributions we received from the UK. But as you can see in the table, we have sufficient domestic cash flows to fund our maintenance capital and the common stock dividend. So, the debt and equity issuances in the U.S. are funding our domestic growth CapEx and ongoing debt maturities. From a cash perspective, we believe this is the appropriate way to look at it since the UK is a completely self-funding business. Before I turn the call back over to Bill for the Q&A, I’d like to reiterate Bill’s comments that we are confident in our ability to achieve our stated 4% to 6% earnings growth target through at least 2017. This growth directly reflects our robust capital expenditure plan combined with very constructive regulatory structures at significantly reduced regulatory lag, driving an expected 8% to 10% EPS growth at our domestic utilities. That level of growth, combined with lower corporate and other costs, which will add an additional 2% earnings growth over this period, more than offsets the relatively flat earnings growth profile expected from UK during the period. We continue to believe that U.K. is a premium jurisdiction, given an eight-year rate cycle with revenue and RAV index to inflation and an incentive-based model that, given our historical best-in-sector performance, provides us the opportunity to continue to earn very strong ROEs in the UK, expected to be in the mid to upper teens through 2017. We also believe our common stock dividend is not only very competitive, but very secure and poised for future growth. That concludes my prepared remarks, and I’ll turn the call over to Bill for the Q&A period. Bill? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Thank you, Vince, and operator, we are now ready for questions, please. Question-and-Answer Session Operator Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. Our first question is from Daniel Eggers of Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Hey. Good morning, guys. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Good morning, Dan. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Thanks for all the updates today. I guess, you know, always been a little bit greedy, you talk about through at least 2017. When we kind of look beyond that, the UK should be through the transition period as far as the normalization of incentives. When we look at the U.S. utilities, how do you guys think about the growth, and I guess with CPP coming today, how are you guys sort of think about layering that into your capital budgeting? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Sure. Well, with the Clean Power Plan just being released today, obviously, we’re going to need a little bit of time, as I think you are, to kind of look through what this all means. But I think as you noted in your note this morning, I think it does support potentially higher CapEx for the utilities segment, generally speaking. And I think the pieces that I’ve read about the Clean Power Plan are pretty consistent with what we would have expected. I think in Kentucky, we’ll need to study it a little bit more closely to kind of see what the impact on our Kentucky operations might be. But I think going beyond 2017, clearly, we’re going to look to incorporate whatever we may need to do to respond to the Clean Power Plan. And I think in PPL’s case, as I indicated in my prepared remarks, we do have the Compass program or project which is obviously a fairly large chunk of transmission spend that potentially start to come into our capital plans post-2017. So, we’ll continue to monitor that specific project and any other transmission projects as we go forward. So, I think those would be kind of the key drivers, Dan. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) And I guess, Bill, anything about the CPP? I know it’s early, but how do you – what kind of dialogs are you having with the states particularly in Kentucky? And how are you planning to work with those different states and trying to devise plans or work with them to try and meet with the EPAs laying out from a goal perspective? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Sure. Relative to Kentucky, I’ll ask Vic Staffieri to give you more color on that. Go ahead, Vic. Victor A. Staffieri – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer, Kentucky Utilities Co. Yes. We have been meeting with the state, as have the other utilities, to try to develop a program that best accommodates the earlier draft of the CPP. We now understand that the new one is coming out today. There may be some stricter requirements. I’m confident that we’ll go back to the commission and work with them to find a way that meets those requirements and in best interest of all of our stakeholders. I think we have, in place, the regulatory structures to allow us to recover the cost. We were looking at a power plant that we were going to put in place in 2018. We’ve delayed that a little bit, and we still have – we know where we want to put it. We know where the transmission would be. And those are kinds of some the options we would look at. We have a very favorable DSM program in recovery. If we have to accelerate that, we can. So, I think we have the regulatory tools to accommodate it, but until I see the final – we see the final requirements today, it’s hard for us to comment definitively. But we do have a good relationship with our commission. We have been working on putting in place a program to accommodate the previous draft of the CPP. And I’m confident that we’ll work again once we get these final regulations out. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Great. Thanks. I just want to ask one additonal one on the UK performance. Obviously, you guys keep doing better each quarter than probably we were expecting or even where guidance has fallen out. Can you just give a little color, more holistically, as to what’s going on in the UK that allows you guys to keep exceeding expectations? And are you set up in a way where you’re going to maybe do better than this normalized flat growth over the next couple of years? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Rick, why don’t you take that question? I think overall, Dan, that the UK continues for us to be a tremendous success story. I think you’ve seen us consistently outperform, and, obviously, we believe we’re the best network operator in the UK. And clearly, our integration of the central networks went exceptionally well and really was just flawless. So, Vince commented that we believe it’s a premium jurisdiction and it’s really going to help bring cash back. It’s going to help fund our domestic growth as well and support the dividend. So, in terms of outperformance going forward, maybe Rick, you could talk about some of the things that might drive the outperformance as we look to the future. Rick L. Klingensmith – President, PPL Global, Inc. Now, Bill, as you mentioned, the outperformance, especially in customer service, customer reliability, that we have announced in the last Q1 earnings call about $130 million of incentive revenue that resulted from our performance for the regulatory year ending in March. This year, though, as you look at our outperformance, we had also discussed that, in Vince’s remarks, that in Q1, we did talk about an asset life extension. We had a major engineering study that we had performed at the end of our last regulatory period here as we head into RIIO-ED1. And as a result, we did extend the asset lives of a number of our assets. And so the 2015 outperformance and the reason we can increase guidance for 2015 was really driven by the lower depreciation expense than what we had expected or planned for, for this year. Dan L. Eggers – Credit Suisse Securities ( USA ) LLC (Broker) Got it. Thank you, guys. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Thank you, Dan. Operator Our next question is from Julien Dumoulin-Smith of UBS. Please go ahead. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Hi. Good morning. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Good morning. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Morning. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Excellent. So, first, quick question here, just where do we stand on synergies and parent cost guidance after the spin here? I suppose that’s a first consideration? Then in tandem with that, I’d also be curious, given the charge today, how do you think about tax benefits and ability to bring back cash from UK to the consequence of the charge as well. How did that play into your tax planning, if you will? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Sure. Let me start and then I’ll ask Vince to supplement my comments. But I think first on the corporate shared services cost or what we’ve called dyssynergies of the spin transaction, we’ve done an excellent job of identifying how we were planning to reduce many of those shared services costs that otherwise would be stranded. And we’re well on track, if not ahead of plan on that. We’re actually looking at opportunities for additional synergies or cost reductions as we go forward. So, I think we’ve done a really great job of addressing what could have been a drag on earnings. And as I mentioned in my initial remarks, part of the growth, domestically, that we’re going to see comes from corporate shared services costs coming in lower than we had originally expected. So with that brief bit of background, maybe Vince, you want to put some more details around those two questions. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Sure. So, Julien, let me cover your tax question. So, the spin, as I think you know, was designed to be a tax-free spin, so the $875 million loss was a pre and post tax number. There was no tax consequence of that, so the whole thing was treated as a tax-free transaction. So, really, no impact on our future tax position. I think extending bonus is probably the biggest item that would favorably, actually, impact our tax position going forward. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Great. Thanks, Vince. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC And then just last one, it’s actually a little detailed question here. As you look at your FX hedging program, you’ve obviously shifted the – I suppose, the contango in the – or perhaps this contango that emerged in your hedging program for FX. Can you talk to that? Basically, in the quarter, did you shift hedges on FX or is this really just what’s arrived that we’re organically layering in FX hedges against each of the respective years 2015, 2016, 2017? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President We did, Julien. We did shift some hedges from 2015 now into 2016 and 2017. The total impact for 2015 is about $0.035. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Got it. And would it be fair to say that’s pretty similar to what the uplift is in subsequent years? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President It is. Yeah. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC Okay. Great. Well, thank you, guys. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Thanks, Julien. Operator Our next question is from Greg Gordon of Evercore ISI. Please go ahead. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Thanks. Just a quick follow-up on Julien’s last question. So, essentially, the way I think about the hedged disclosure is you’re doing well enough this year in terms of meeting your earnings guidance, that you’re able to raise lower end of the guidance range while still moving some of the impact – moving essentially some of the benefits of hedging out a year, is that right? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President That’s correct, Greg. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Oh, that’s good. Great. The second question is, as I think about the slide where you talked about the cash sources and uses, you give us a projection for 2015. If I look at that going out into 2016, it is right that the cash flow being repatriated back from U.K. rises to between $300 million and $500 million. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President That’s correct. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Okay. Fantastic. And then finally, the… Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Wait. I’m sorry. What – rephrase the question. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Yeah. You’ve got – page 16 of your cash repatriation guidance for the UK Regulated segment… Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Right. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI …has cash coming back going from $290 million to between $300 million to $500 million? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Oh, yes. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI So, all I’m saying is you show $290 million on the slide associated with cash coming back from the UK on that new cash sources and uses, on page 20. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Yes. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI And that goes up to somewhere between $300 million and $500 million as they go out to 2016 to 2018. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Yeah. I would expect the next few years to look – if you look at that cash available for reinvestment line, that $250 million, I would suspect it will be around that level improving a little bit over that period. Don’t forget, we also had net about $130 million that we received from supply. So, that’ll go away in the 2015 number, and that’ll be replaced by the higher dividends from the UK. So… Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Okay. Got it. Got it. Great. Okay. Thank you. And then, my final question is the CapEx and rate base forecast for 2019. I just want to be clear, does that include or exclude this potential Compass project in Pennsylvania? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer That excludes it, Greg. It’s not in there. Greg Gordon – Evercore ISI Okay. Great. Congratulations on the quarter. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Thanks very much, Greg. Appreciate it. Operator Our next question is from Paul Patterson of Glenrock Associates. Please go ahead. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates LLC Good morning. How are you? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Morning, Paul. Very good. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates LLC My question has been answered, really. But just – could you just go over again what happened in terms of the charge associated with supply? Just if you could just break it down like what exactly is causing it to – what’s actually driving that? I mean, if you could you just sort of break it down sort of layman’s terms. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Sure. I’ll let Vince take that one. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Good morning, Paul. So, yeah. So, what happened was, we need to do an estimate of fair value at the date of spin, and then, compare that to the book value. And what we did was we used the combination of thee different valuation methodologies, basically two market approaches and one income approach which is a discounted cash flow approach. One of the market approaches was the use of a Talen market value of their equity as of the spinoff date which was the last day, as you know, of their when issued trading period. And so, that number – and we waited about a 50% weighting to that because it was publicly available information. And that was a lower number than we were expecting to end up at the end of when issued. So that, I think, drove some of the decrease in fair value, say, since year end and then just power prices have come off in PJM. So, I think when you look at the DCF, that was lower and the market approach was lower than what we were expecting combined resulted in about a $3.2 billion fair value against the $4.1 billion book value. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates LLC Okay. Great. And is that pretty much over? We shouldn’t expect anything going forward on this? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Yeah. No. Yeah. That’s it. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates LLC Okay. Thanks so much. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer You’re welcome. Operator Our next question is from Gregg Orrill of Barclays. Please go ahead. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Good morning, Gregg. Gregg? Operator Mr. Orrill, your line… Gregg Gillander Orrill – Barclays Capital, Inc. Sorry. I was on mute there. Sorry about that. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer That’s okay. Go ahead. Gregg Gillander Orrill – Barclays Capital, Inc. I was wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the pay-out policy. As you look out into 2016 and beyond, I know you’ve talked about getting below a payout of the U.S. businesses and the cash flows from the UK. How are you looking at that going forward? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Just to be clear, Gregg, are you talking about the dividend payout ratio for the total dividend or just the dividends coming back from the UK? Gregg Gillander Orrill – Barclays Capital, Inc. I guess really the dividend policy 2016, 2017, et cetera. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Yeah. Yeah. So, I think where we sit today in the 65% to 70% range is, I think, a comfortable range for us to continue to be in. So, I think as Vince and I have stated in the past, we’ll continue to look for opportunities to modestly raise the dividend, particularly as we’re going through a fairly large CapEx spending program and post that large program look to see if we could enhance it even more. But I think where we are in terms of the dividend payout ratio today is fairly consistent with our new peer group, and we’re fairly comfortable with it. Gregg Gillander Orrill – Barclays Capital, Inc. Great. Thank you. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Sure. Operator Our next question is from Keith Stanley of Wolfe Research. Please go ahead. Keith T. Stanley – Wolfe Research LLC Hi. Good morning. One quick clarification on the asset life extension and depreciation changes in the UK this year. I think it was a $0.10 benefit for this year. How much of that benefit was in your initial 2015 guidance and is it fair to assume it’s fully baked into the updated guidance now? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President So, there was $0.10 year-over-year that represented about $0.06 better than expectation and yes, we have that. That basically continues going forward. So, that is in our updated guidance. Keith T. Stanley – Wolfe Research LLC Okay. So, there’s $0.06 increment from the initial guidance to the updated guidance. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Yes. Keith T. Stanley – Wolfe Research LLC Okay. Thank you. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Okay. Operator Our next question is from Neel Mitra of Tudor Pickering. Please go ahead. Neel Mitra – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc. Hi. Good morning. I had a question on the ROE in the UK. You guys mentioned that it’s roughly 15% to 18% through 2017. What’s your overall target, I guess, once the UK earnings start to grow off at the 2017 base for that ROE? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Well, go ahead, Vince. I’ll let you take a stab at that one. Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Sure. Neel, when you say ‘target’, you mean where do we think ROEs are going to be kind of in the middle of RIIO? Neel Mitra – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc. Yeah. After you start growing there again since, I guess, there’s three years of flat earnings there? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President Yes. So, I would say we kind of stay in the low to mid-teens out through 2019 would be our expectation. I think we’re going out a little – a little too far even at that level, to be honest with you, to give you ROE projections. But still quite healthy ROEs as, I would say, even throughout RIIO. Neel Mitra – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc. Okay. And is 2017 the last year, I guess, of flat earnings, you start growing off of that base or could there be further years out where there’s flat earnings? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer So, I think on the previous calls, we’ve really just talked about it being flat earnings through the 2017 period. And beyond that, beginning in 2018, we’ll kind of assess as we go forward. Obviously, a key, in terms of earnings, for bringing back to the U.S. is going to be what the FX rates are, the RPI. There’ll be a lot of other moving factors that could help or hurt the projection of earnings per share coming from the UK. So, I think it’s a little early to make any significant projection at this point. Neel Mitra – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc. Got it. And last question, with the RPI, if that were to come down, would there be some sort of – kind of pass-through with just lower O&M cost from your side or are you guys kind of managing the business as efficient as you can right now? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer We’re always managing as efficient as we can. But I think to the extent that inflation is driving the RPI down, that could have a ripple effect – a positive ripple effect on our cost of maintaining the networks through lower contracted cost for either labor or material. So, yes, it could have a potential offset. Neel Mitra – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc. And that’s not included in your sensitivity? Vincent Sorgi – Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President No. We did – we updated the sensitivity to include all three components. Neel Mitra – Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc. Okay. Great. Thank you. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer You’re welcome. Operator, we have time for one more question, please. Operator Our last question is from Brian Russo of Ladenburg Thalmann. Please go ahead. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Hi. Good morning. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Good morning, Brian. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Just referencing slide 5 and the pie chart with capital recovery and earning on investment, does that imply that you got a high level of confidence that you can earn your allowed ROEs or is there any sort of structural lag that we should incorporate in our outlooks? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer I think with the regulatory mechanisms we now have in place in Pennsylvania and Kentucky, our ability to earn near the authorized levels is greater than it’s ever been, quite honestly. And so, I think the regulatory lag is minimal, probably, looking forward. And I’d also point to the fact that in both Pennsylvania and Kentucky, we’re using forward test years which is the first time we’ve done that, historically. So, I think, those, combined with the regulatory mechanisms that we have all would suggest that we should be able to earn near the authorized levels with pretty minimal regulatory lag. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) So, you probably – so after the conclusion of the current pending Pennsylvania rate case and with the recent Kentucky rate case outcome, do you think you could stay out for a few years given the mechanisms you have in place? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer I think, in Kentucky, probably not because, number one, we’re going to have to comply with the Clean Power Plan as talked to earlier on the call, which probably will drive some different decisions that are not incorporated in the plan today. In Pennsylvania, that potential depending on the outcome, how strong the outcome is of the current rate case would be a possibility. But until we get the outcome from the rate case, it’s kind of hard to tell at this point. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Okay. And just lastly, can you quantify the lower amount of depreciation at the UK year-over-year? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Yeah. We had indicated it was about $0.10 per share year-over-year. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Okay. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer For the full year. On a full-year basis. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Okay. Got it. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Soon, we’ll be asset realized. I mean we are continuing to spend CapEx in the business, and so there is higher depreciation resulting from our additional spend. But just due to the engineering study that resulted in the asset realized, that the amount of $0.10 per share year-on-year change. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Okay. And lastly – and forgive me if I missed this earlier – but what’s the total potential upside of, on an annual basis, for performance incentive revenues in the UK? William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer We indicated what we have built into our plan at this point. I believe we laid those numbers out on the last call. And if you go to slide 9 in the deck, you can see there for 2015, it’s $125 million; 2016, it’s $122 million to $130 million; in 2017, $80 million to $100 million; and 2018, $60 million to $90 million. So, the upper ends of those ranges would be kind of our expectation of kind of the upper end of the outperformance. It’s not necessarily the maximum, but it’s kind of our guesstimate, if you will, at this point or best estimate of the ranges that we will likely fall into. Brian J. Russo – Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Inc. (Broker) Okay. Great. Thank you very much. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer No problem. William H. Spence – Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer Okay. Well, thanks, everyone, for joining us today and appreciate the questions and look forward to speaking with you on the next earnings call. Thank you, operator, as well. Operator The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect.