Q4 2025 Public Service Enterprise Group Inc Earnings Call

February 26, 2026

Speaker #1: Service Enterprise Group fourth quarter and full year 2025 earnings conference call and webcast. At this time, all participants will be in listen-only mode. Later, we'll conduct a question-and-answer session.

Speaker #1: For members of the Financial Community, at that time, if you have a question, you'll need to press the star and the number 1 on your telephone keypad.

Speaker #1: To withdraw your question, press star and then the number 2. If anyone should require Operator Assistance during the conference, please press star 0 from your telephone keypad.

Speaker #1: As a reminder, today's conference is being recorded. Today, February 26th, 2026. I'll be available for replay as an audio webcast on PSEG's Investor Relations website, at https://investor.pseg.com.

Speaker #1: I would now like to turn the call over to Carlotta Chan. Please go ahead.

Speaker #2: Good morning, and welcome to PSEG's fourth quarter and full year 2025 earnings presentation. On today's call, Ralph LaRossa, Chair President and CEO, and Dan Cregg, Executive Vice President and CFO.

Speaker #2: The press release attachments and slides for today's discussion are posted on our IR website, at investor.pseg.com, and our 10-K will be filed later today.

Speaker #2: PSEG's earnings release and other matters discussed during today's call contain forward-looking statements and estimates that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. We will also discuss non-gap operating earnings, which differs from net income, as reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles or GAAP in the United States.

Speaker #2: We include reconciliations of our non-gap financial measures and a disclaimer regarding forward-looking statements on our IR website, and in today's material. Following our prepared remarks, we will conduct a 30-minute question-and-answer session.

Speaker #2: I will now turn the call over to Ralph LaRossa.

Speaker #3: Thank you, Carlotta. And thank you all for joining us to review PSEG's fourth quarter and full year 2025 financial and operating results. Our financial outlook for the year ahead, and our long-term projections through 2030.

Speaker #3: But before I dive in, I'd like to thank our employees who once again, this past week, prepared and restored our system from yet another intense combination of winter weather that brought over 2 feet of heavy snow and single-digit temperatures and 60 mile-per-hour winds to our service areas in New Jersey and Long Island.

Speaker #3: I can't say enough about our crew's dedication throughout this entire winter season. Working in freezing conditions to keep the lights on and our customers warm.

Speaker #3: Now, starting with our financial results, PSEG reported net income of $63 per share for the fourth quarter and $4.22 per share for the full year of 2025.

Speaker #3: Our non-gap operating earnings were $72 per share for the fourth quarter and $4.05 per share for the full year of 2025. Also, earlier today, we announced our dividend declaration for the first quarter of 2026.

Speaker #3: Setting the indicative annual rate at $2.68 per share. This is a 16-cent-per-share increase. An increase of approximately 6% over last year's dividend and higher than last year's increase of 12 cents per share.

Speaker #3: All reinforced by our confidence in our long-term projections. Now, starting with operations, on February 7th, 2026, we hit a seasonal gas send-out peak when temperatures dipped below 10 degrees Fahrenheit.

Speaker #3: Registering the fifth highest send-out in our history. During that same cold snap, PSEG's appliance service business responded to nearly 2,000 no-heat calls per day compared to an average of 600 calls on a typical winter day.

Speaker #3: In our electrical systems also performed well, with a comparatively small group of customers affected, and PSEG was able to restore service to virtually all customers within 24 hours.

Speaker #3: Beyond the storm seen in 2026 to date, PSEG's full-year results for 2025 were achieved while facing multiple severe storms and extreme weather events throughout the year, that stressed our electric and gas systems.

Speaker #3: PSEG's response guided by our operational excellence model achieved excellent results in safety, reliability, and customer satisfaction measures. I'm also very proud of the work PSEG is doing in support of New Jersey's efforts to minimize utility bill increases.

Speaker #3: Last July, we implemented several summer relief initiatives in cooperation with New Jersey regulators to help our customers manage the impact of PJM-related electric supply costs that PSEG passes through to customers.

Speaker #3: The latest example of our efforts occurred on February 1st, when PSEG held its residential gas rate flat for the remainder of the winter 2025 through 2026 heating season.

Speaker #3: Extending the stability of our gas rates further highlights PSEG's favorable residential gas bill profile, which is not only the lowest cost in the state, but also the lowest in the region.

Speaker #3: And there's more good news to report on the customer front. Earlier this month, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities approved the results of the latest electric supply auction.

Speaker #3: Known as the Basic Generation Supply Auction, or BGS, which will result in a $1.8% reduction in the average monthly bill for PSEG residential electric customers starting June 1st.

Speaker #3: When seasonal electric use is at its highest. Over the next several months, we will introduce even more ways to help our customers manage and save on their utility bills, with increased budget billing education, new time-of-use rates, and more energy efficiency solutions.

Speaker #3: PSEG also received approval to extend its three-year GSMP III program, which will continue our efforts to reduce methane emissions of powerful greenhouse gas. We note that our cumulative progress from these programs has reduced our methane emissions by over 30% system-wide from 2018 levels.

Speaker #3: In recent winter weather has validated how effective our gas system investments have been by reducing both the number of pipe breaks and low-pressure issues compared to similar low-temperature events in the past.

Ralph LaRosa: three-year GSMP3 program, which will continue our efforts to reduce methane emissions, a powerful greenhouse gas. We note that our cumulative progress from these programs has reduced our methane emissions by over 30% system-wide from 2018 levels. Recent winter weather has validated how effective our gas system investments have been by reducing both the number of pipe breaks and low pressure issues compared to similar low-temperature events in the past. Our operating performance continues to be a positive differentiator in the state and the region. PSE&G received the 2025 ReliabilityOne Awards for Outstanding System Resiliency, Outstanding Customer Engagement, and for the 24th year in a row, Outstanding Reliability Performance in the Mid-Atlantic region. PSE&G ranked number one in customer satisfaction among large electric utilities in the East region, according to the J.D.

Speaker #3: Our operating performance continues to be a positive differentiator in the state and the region. PSEG received the 2025 Reliability I Awards for Outstanding System Resiliency, Outstanding Customer Engagement, and for the 24th year in a row Outstanding Reliability Performance in a Mid-Atlantic region.

Spend 3 or gsmp 3 Program which will continue our efforts to reduce methane emissions, a powerful greenhouse gas.

We note that our cumulative progress from these programs has reduced our methane emissions by over 30% systemwide from 2018 levels.

Speaker #3: PSEG ranked number one in customer satisfaction among large electric utilities in the East Region, according to the JD Power 2025 U.S. Electric Utility Residential Customer Satisfaction Study.

Ralph LaRosa: Our operating performance continues to be a positive differentiator in the state and the region. PSE&G received the 2025 ReliabilityOne Awards for Outstanding System Resiliency, Outstanding Customer Engagement, and for the 24th year in a row, Outstanding Reliability Performance in the Mid-Atlantic region. PSE&G ranked number one in customer satisfaction among large electric utilities in the East region, according to the J.D.

In recent winter weather has validated, how effective our gas system Investments. Have been by reducing both the number of pipe, breaks and low pressure issues compared to similar low temperature events, in the past,

Speaker #3: Marking the fourth consecutive year PSEG has earned the top position in this segment. And PSEG Long Island—yes, PSEG Long Island—ranked number one in customer satisfaction among large electric utilities in the East Region, according to the JD Power 2025 U.S.

Our operating performance continues to be a positive differentiator in the state and the region.

CNG received the 2025 ReliabilityOne Awards for Outstanding System Resiliency, Outstanding Customer Engagement, and for the 24th year in a row, Outstanding Reliability Performance in the Mid-Atlantic region.

Speaker #3: Electric Utility Business Customer Satisfaction Study. Tapping an 11-year rise from the bottom of the rankings since PSEG Long Island took over the operation of the electric grid on Long Island.

Ralph LaRosa: Power 2025 U.S. Electric Utility Residential Customer Satisfaction Study, marking the fourth consecutive year PSE&G has earned the top position in this segment. PSEG Long Island, yes, PSEG Long Island, ranked number 1 in customer satisfaction among large electric utilities in the East region, according to the J.D. Power 2025 U.S. Electric Utility Business Customer Satisfaction Study, capping an 11-year rise from the bottom of the rankings since PSEG Long Island took over the operation of the electric grid on Long Island. By the way, PSE&G was number 2 in that same study. Finally, PSEG Long Island was awarded a 5-year contract extension to continue as the electric transmission and distribution operator on Long Island and the Rockaways through 2030.

Pcng ranked number 1 in customer satisfaction among large electrical utilities in the east region. According to, the JD Power, 2025 us electric utility residential customer satisfaction study.

Speaker #3: And by the way, PSEG was number two in that same study. Finally, PSEG Long Island was awarded a five-year contract extension to continue as the electric transmission and distribution operator on Long Island and the Rockaways through 2030.

Marking the fourth consecutive year PNC and G has earned the top position in this segment.

Speaker #3: We look forward to continuing our constructive partnership with LEIPA that has enabled us to become the best-performing overhead electric service provider in New York State.

And PSEG Long Island. Yes, PSEG Long Island. Ranked number one in customer satisfaction among large electric utilities in the East region, according to the J.D. Power 2025 U.S. Electric Utility Business Customer Satisfaction Study.

Speaker #3: And like PSEG in New Jersey, a top-performing nationally for reliability and safety. 2025 was a successful year for our company both operationally and financially.

Tapping an 11-year rise from the bottom of the rankings is PSEG Long Island. They took over the operation of the electric grid on Long Island.

and by the way,

CNG was number 2.

In that same study.

Speaker #3: PSEG executing on its capital plan, investing approximately $1 billion in the fourth quarter, and approximately $3.7 billion in total for the year, in regulated capital spend.

Finally, PSEG Long Island was awarded a 5-year contract extension to continue as the electric transmission and distribution operator on Long Island and the Rockaways through 2030.

Ralph LaRosa: We look forward to continuing our constructive partnership with LIPA that has enabled us to become the best-performing overhead electric service provider in New York State, and like PSE&G in New Jersey, a top performer nationally for reliability and safety. 2025 was a successful year for our company, both operationally and financially. PSE&G executed on its capital plan, investing approximately $1 billion in the Q4 and approximately $3.7 billion in total for the year in regulated capital spend. On the generating side, PSEG Nuclear posted a 91.2% capacity factor for the full year, producing approximately 30.9 TWh of 24x7 carbon-free baseload power for the grid, including during the intense June 2025 heatwave for when New Jersey needed it most.

Speaker #3: On the generating side, PSEG Nuclear posted a 91.2% capacity factor for the full year. Producing approximately 30.9 terawatt-hours of 24 by 7 carbon-free baseload power for the grid.

We look forward to continuing our constructive partnership with lifer that has enabled us to become the best performing overhead electric service provider in New York state.

And like, PSC and G in New Jersey, at top performing nationally for reliability and safety.

Speaker #3: Including during the intense June 2025 heatwave when New Jersey needed it most. PSEG's non-gap operating earnings for 2025 were at the high end of our narrow guidance range of $4 to $4.06 per share.

2025 was a successful year for our company, both operationally and financially.

PSC and G executing on its capital plan investing approximately 1 billion dollars in the fourth quarter and approximately 3.7 billion dollars in total for the year in regulated Capital spending.

Speaker #3: Extending management's track record of delivering results that either met or exceeded our earnings guidance for the 21st consecutive year. Turning to our outlook for 2026, first, we initiated a non-gap operating earnings guidance in the range of $4.28 to $4.40 per share.

On a generating side. PSG nuclear posted a 91.2% capacity factor for the full year.

Producing approximately 30.9 terawatt hours of 24 by 7 carbon-free base load power for the grid, including during the intense June, 2025 heat wave when New Jersey needed it. Most

Ralph LaRosa: PSEG's non-GAAP operating earnings for 2025 were at the high end of our narrowed guidance range of $4.00 to 4.06 per share, extending management's track record of delivering results that either met or exceeded our earnings guidance for the 21st consecutive year. Turning to our outlook for 2026, first, we initiated a non-GAAP operating earnings guidance in the range of $4.28 to 4.40 per share, an increase at the midpoint of 7% over 2025 results. Our 2026 guidance is based on our investment program at PSE&G and expected nuclear output, realizing market prices that exceed the nuclear PTC threshold, and we are approximately 95% hedged for the remainder of 2026.

Speaker #3: An increase at the midpoint of 7% over 2025 results. Our 2026 guidance is based on our investment program at PSEG and expected nuclear output realizing market prices that exceed the nuclear PTC threshold.

Ccgs, 9 Gap, operating earnings for 2025 were at the high end of our narrow guidance range of 4 to 4 dollars, 6 cents per share, extending Management's, track record of delivery results. That either met or exceeded, our earnings guidance for the 21st consecutive year.

Speaker #3: And we are approximately 95% hedged for the remainder of 2026. We will also keep to our longstanding practice of stringent cost control and continuous improvement to support affordability and benefit our customers.

According to our outlook for 2026. First, we initiated a non-gaap operating earnings guidance in the range of $4.28 to $4.40 cents per share.

An increase at the midpoint of 7% over.

Speaker #3: Second, we updated PSEG's capital program to 24 to 28 billion dollars for the 2026 to 2030 period. With over 90% focused on regulated investments.

20.

Speaker #3: Regulated capital spending is forecasted in the range of $22.5 to $25.5 billion and supports a rate-based CAGR of 6 to 7.5% over the same period.

2026 guidance is based on our investment program at psse and G and expected nuclear output realizing market prices, that exceed, the nuclear PTC threshold.

We are approximately 95% Hedge for the remainder of 2026.

Ralph LaRosa: We will also keep to our long-standing practice of stringent cost control and continuous improvement to support affordability and benefit our customers. Second, we updated PSEG's capital program to $24 to 28 billion for the 2026 to 2030 period, with over 90% focused on regulated investments. Regulated capital spending is forecasted in the range of $22.5 to 25.5 billion and supports a rate base CAGR of 6 to 7.5% over the same period. Our solid balance of the sheet supports execution of this robust five-year capital plan, still without the need to issue equity or sell assets. With these updates, we are raising PSEG's long-term non-GAAP earnings growth outlook to 6 to 8% through 2030.

Speaker #3: And our solid balance sheet supports execution of this robust five-year capital plan. Still, without the need to issue equity or sell assets. With these updates, we are raising PSEG's long-term non-gap earnings growth outlook to 6 to 8% through 2030.

We will also keep to our long-standing practice of stringent cost control and continuous Improvement to support affordability and benefit our customers.

Second, we updated psg's Capital program to 24 to 28 billion dollars for the 2026 to 2030 period.

With over 90% focused on regulated Investments.

Speaker #3: This higher growth rate is supported by our best-in-class utility operations executing on a customer-focused infrastructure modernization and energy efficiency investment programs. This regulated growth is supported by nuclear generation ownership, a significant cash flow generator, and therefore a differentiator among our peers.

Regulated Capital spending is 4 caps in a range of 22 and a half to 25.5 billion dollars and supports of rate, based kagar of 6 to 7 and a half percent over the same period.

And our solid balance sheet supports execution of this robust five-year capital plan.

Still, without the need to issue Equity or sell assets.

Speaker #3: Potential growth beyond our forecasted 6 to 8% CAGR range could be achieved through opportunities to contract existing and additional generating output and through incremental regulated capital investments.

These updates, we are raising psg's long-term non-gaap earnings growth Outlook to 6, to 8% through 2030.

Ralph LaRosa: This higher growth rate is supported by our best-in-class utility operations, executing on a customer-focused infrastructure modernization and energy efficiency investment programs. This regulated growth is supported by nuclear generation ownership, a significant cash flow generator, and therefore a differentiator among our peers. Potential growth beyond our forecasted 6% to 8% CAGR range could be achieved through opportunities to contract existing and additional generating output and through incremental regulated capital investments. The supply-demand dynamic we are seeing in New Jersey has prompted executive orders to be issued to explore supply options, including the development of an additional 3,000MW of community solar and battery storage. We have been cooperatively working with policymakers since last November. We look to help New Jersey achieve the high-priority goals of these executive orders, which include the exploration of regulatory reform.

Speaker #3: The supply-demand prompted executive orders to be issued to explore supply options. Including the development of an additional 3,000 megawatts of community solar and battery storage.

Investment programs.

Speaker #3: We have been cooperatively working with policymakers since last November, and we look to help New Jersey achieve the high-priority goals of these executive orders, which include the exploration of regulatory reform.

it's regulated growth is supported by nuclear generation ownership, a significant cash flow generator and therefore a differentiator among our peers

Speaker #3: The executive orders also direct the BPU to provide for residential universal bill credits to, again, offset electricity supply rate increases. We look forward to constructive dialogue with the BPU on these issues.

potential growth beyond our forecast at 6, to 8% gig arrange, could be achieved through opportunities to contract existing and additional generating output and through incremental regulated Capital Investments,

the supply demand Dynamic. We are seeing in New Jersey has prompted executive orders to be issued to explore Supply options.

Speaker #3: Now, turning to the legislative front, in the past few days, a bill was reintroduced in the state legislature to establish a new natural gas power plant procurement program at the BPU.

Including the development of an additional 3,000 megawatts of community solar and battery storage.

Speaker #3: And the census, the development of new natural gas power plants in the state. This gas bill pairs with an earlier bill that established a new nuclear procurement program also within the BPU that was introduced at the start of this legislative session.

We have been cooperatively working with policy makers since last November and we looked to help New Jersey achieve. The high priority goals of these executive orders which include the exploration of regulatory reform.

Ralph LaRosa: The executive orders also direct the BPU to provide for residential universal bill credits to again offset electricity supply rate increases. We look forward to constructive dialogue with the BPU on these issues. Now turning to the legislative front. In the past few days, a bill was reintroduced in the state legislature to establish a new natural gas power plant procurement program at the BPU. This incentivizes the development of new natural gas power plants in the state. This gas bill pairs with an earlier bill that establishes a new nuclear procurement program, also within the BPU, that was introduced at the start of this legislative session. We look forward to working with policymakers to advance energy strategies and resources that secure affordable, reliable, and diverse energy supplies, and support legislation that would increase competition for generation supply, should New Jersey decide to pursue new in-state generation.

The executive orders also direct the vpu to provide for residential Universal. Bill, credits to again offset electricity Supply rate increases.

Speaker #3: We look forward to working with policymakers to advance energy strategies and resources that secure affordable, reliable, and diverse energy supplies and support legislation that would increase competition for generation supply should New Jersey decide to pursue new in-state generation.

We look forward to constructive dialogue with the BPU on these issues.

According to the legislative front in the past few days, a bill was reintroduced in the state legislature to establish a new natural gas, power plant procurement program at the BPO.

And the Sensei, the development of new natural gas power plants in the state.

Speaker #3: And as we have previously mentioned, we are well positioned to help meet that need. We have sites with grid connection capability and pipeline supplies as well as the in-house expertise to build new supply here in New Jersey with prevailing wage labor.

This gas bill pairs with an earlier bill, that establishes, a new nuclear procurement program. Also within the BPO that was introduced at the start of those of this legislative session.

Speaker #3: I will now turn the call over to Dan, who will walk you through our 2025 financial results and the outlook for 2026, and then rejoin the call for Q&A.

Speaker #2: Thank you, Ralph. And good morning, everyone. PSEG reported net income of $4.22 per share for the full year of 2025. Compared to net income of $3.54 per share for 2024.

We look forward to working with policy makers to Advanced Energy strategies and resources that secure affordable reliable and diverse energy supplies and support legislation. That would increase competition for Generations, Supply should New Jersey decide to pursue new in-state generation.

Ralph LaRosa: As we have previously mentioned, we are well-positioned to help meet that need. We have sites with grid connection capability and pipeline supplies, as well as the in-house expertise to build new supply here in New Jersey with prevailing wage labor. I will now turn the call over to Dan, who will walk you through our 2025 financial results and the outlook for 2026, and then rejoin the call for Q&A.

and as we've previously mentioned, we are well, positioned to help meet that need

Speaker #2: Non-gap operating earnings for the full year of 2025 were $4.05 per share compared to $3.68 per share for 2024. For the fourth quarter of 2025, net income was $63 per share compared to $57 per share in 2024.

We have sites with grid connection capability and pipeline supplies as well as the in-house expertise to build new Supply here. In New Jersey with prevailing wage labor

I will now turn the call over to Dan who will walk you through our 2025 Financial results and the outlook for 2026 and then rejoin the call for Q&A.

Dan Cregg: Thank you, Ralph. Good morning, everyone. PSEG reported net income of $4.22 per share for the full year of 2025, compared to net income of $3.54 per share for 2024. Non-GAAP operating earnings for the full year of 2025 were $4.05 per share, compared to $3.68 per share for 2024. For Q4 2025, net income was $0.63 per share, compared to $0.57 per share in 2024, and non-GAAP operating earnings were $0.72 per share in Q4 2025, compared to $0.84 per share in 2024. Slides 8 and 10 detail the contribution to non-GAAP operating earnings per share by business segment for Q4 and full year 2025.

Thank you, Ralph, and good morning, everyone.

Speaker #2: And non-gap operating earnings were $72 per share in the fourth quarter of 2025 compared to $84 per share in 2024. Slides 8 and 10 detail the contribution to non-gap operating earnings per share by business segment.

TCG, reported net income of $4.22 per share for the full year of 2025.

Compared to net income of $3.54, per share for 2024.

Non-gaap operating earnings for the full year of 2025.

$45 per share.

Speaker #2: For the fourth quarter and full year of 2025. Slides 9 and 11 contain waterfall charts that take you through the net changes for the quarter-over-quarter and full-year periods in non-gap operating earnings per share by major business.

Compared to $3.68 per share for 2024.

For the fourth quarter of 2025.

Net income was 63 cents per share.

Compared to 57 cents per share in 2024.

and non-gaap operating earnings were 72 cents, per share and the fourth quarter of 2025

Speaker #2: Starting with PSEG, which reported fourth quarter net income and non-gap operating earnings of $352 million for 2025 compared to $378 million in 2024. For the full year, PSEG had net income and non-gap operating earnings of $1.75 billion in 2025 compared to $1.55 billion in 2024.

Compared to 84 cents per share in 2024.

Provides 8 and 10 detail the contribution to non-gaap operating earnings per share by business segments.

For the fourth quarter and full year of 2025.

Dan Cregg: Slides 9 and 11 contain waterfall charts that take you through the net changes for the quarter-over-quarter and full year periods in non-GAAP operating earnings per share by major business. Starting with PSE&G, which reported Q4 net income and non-GAAP operating earnings of $352 million for 2025, compared to $378 million in 2024. For the full year, PSE&G had net income and non-GAAP operating earnings of $1.75 billion in 2025, compared to $1.55 billion in 2024. Utilities results for the full year were driven by the implementation of new electric and gas-based distribution rates that took effect in mid-October 2024, to recover a return of and on previous capital investments, totaling more than $3 billion and higher working capital balances.

By 9 and 11 contain waterfall charts.

That takes you through the net changes.

For the quarter over quarter and full year periods.

And non-gaap operating earnings per share by Major business.

Speaker #2: Utilities results for the full year were driven by the implementation of new electric and gas-based distribution rates that took effect in mid-October 2024 to recover a return of and on previous capital investments totaling more than $3 billion and higher working capital balances.

Starting with PSC and G which reported fourth quarter net income and non-gaap operating earnings of 352 million for 2025.

Compared to 378 million in 2024.

Full year psng, had net income and non-gaap operating earnings.

Speaker #2: Compared to the fourth quarter of 2024, distribution margin increased by 7 cents per share mostly reflecting incremental gas margin from the third quarter GSMP2 roll-in.

Of 1.75 billion in 2025.

Compared to 1.55 billion.

In 2024.

Speaker #2: An increase in the number of customers and higher gas demand. Higher investment in energy efficiency also contributed to distribution margin in the quarter. On the expense side, distribution O&M increased 4 cents per share compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 primarily due to higher reserves and operational costs.

Utilities results for the full year were driven by the implementation of new electric and gas.

Distribution rates that took effect in mid-October 2024.

To recover a return on previous capital investments totaling more than $3 billion.

And higher working capital balance.

Dan Cregg: Compared to Q4 2024, distribution margin increased by $0.07 per share, mostly reflecting incremental gas margin from the Q3 GSMP2 roll-in, an increase in the number of customers, and higher gas demand. Higher investment in energy efficiency also contributed to distribution margin in the quarter. On the expense side, distribution O&M increased $0.04 per share compared to Q4 2024, primarily due to higher reserves and operational costs. Depreciation and interest expense rose by $0.02 per share compared to Q4 2024, reflecting higher levels of depreciable plant investment and long-term debt at higher interest rates. Lastly, distribution-related taxes were $0.05 per share higher due to plant-related taxes and lower write-offs related to bad debt compared to 2024.

Compared to the fourth quarter of 2024.

Distribution margin increased by 7 cents per share.

Speaker #2: Appreciation and interest expense rose by 2 cents per share compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 reflecting higher levels of depreciable plant investment and long-term debt at higher interest rates.

mostly reflecting incremental gas margin from the third quarter, GSM P2 role in

an increase in the number of customers.

And higher gas demand.

Speaker #2: And lastly, distribution-related taxes were 5 cents per share higher due to plant-related taxes and lower write-offs related to bad debt compared to 2024. Whether during the fourth quarter, as measured by heating degree days, was 9% colder than normal in 23% colder than the fourth quarter of 2024.

Higher investment in Energy Efficiency, also contributed to distribution margin in the quarter.

On the expense side, Distribution on M increased 4 cents per share.

Compared to the fourth quarter of 2024.

Primarily due to higher reserves and operational costs.

Speaker #2: And as a reminder, the conservation incentive program, or SIP mechanism, decouples weather and other economic sales variances from a significant portion of our distribution margin all while helping PSEG promote the widespread adoption of energy conservation including energy efficiency, and solar programs.

Appreciation and interest expense Rose by 2 cents per share. Compared to the fourth quarter of 2024.

Reflecting higher levels of depreciable plant investment and long-term debt at higher interest rates, and lastly, distribution-related. Taxes were $0.05 per share higher.

Due to plant-related taxes and lower write-offs related to bad debt compared to 2024.

Dan Cregg: Weather during Q4, as measured by heating degree days, was 9% colder than normal and 23% colder than Q4 2024. As a reminder, the Conservation Incentive Program, or CIP mechanism, decouples weather and other economic sales variances from a significant portion of our distribution margin, all while helping PSE&G promote the widespread adoption of energy conservation, including energy efficiency, and solar programs. Under the CIP, the number of electric and gas customers drives margin, and the residential customer growth for both segments was approximately 1% in 2025. On the capital front, as Ralph mentioned, PSE&G invested approximately $1 billion during Q4. For the full year of 2025, our capital spending totaled approximately $3.7 billion, with continued investments in infrastructure modernization, energy efficiency, and supporting growing customer demand.

Speaker #2: Under the SIP, the number of electric and gas customers drives margin and the residential customer growth for both segments was approximately 1% in 2025.

Whether during the fourth quarter as measured by heating Degree Days, was 9%, colder than normal and 23% colder than the fourth quarter of 2024. And as a reminder, the conservation incentive program or sip mechanism,

Speaker #2: On the capital front, as Ralph mentioned, PSEG invested approximately a billion dollars during the fourth quarter and for the full year of 2025, our capital spending totaled approximately $3.7 billion with continued investments in infrastructure modernization, energy efficiency, and supporting growing customer demand.

decouples weather and other economic sales variances from a significant portion of our distribution margin.

all while helping psng, promote the widespread adoption of energy conservation,

Including Energy Efficiency and solar programs.

Speaker #2: For 2026, our planned capital investment program for the regulated business is approximately $4.2 billion. We also rolled forward our five-year regulated capital investment plan through 2030 amounting to $22.5 to $25.5 billion.

Under the Sip, the number of electric and gas, customers drives margin.

And the residential customer growth for both segments.

Was approximately 1% in 2025.

On the Capitol Front, as Ralph mentioned, PS Eng invested approximately a billion dollars during the fourth quarter.

and for the full year 2025,

Speaker #2: And that compares to our prior plan of $21 to $24 billion. The $1.5 billion increase in regulated investments is primarily driven by anticipated load growth due to data centers and other new customers plus other incremental distribution reliability and resiliency investments.

Our Capital spending totaled. Approximately 3.7 billion.

With continued investments in infrastructure, modernization Energy, Efficiency, and supporting growing customer demand.

Dan Cregg: For 2026, our planned capital investment program for the regulated business is approximately $4.2 billion. We also rolled forward our 5-year regulated capital investment plan through 2030, amounting to $22.5 to 25.5 billion, and that compares to our prior plan of $21 to 24 billion. The $1.5 billion increase in regulated investments is primarily driven by anticipated load growth due to data centers and other new customers, plus other incremental distribution, reliability, and resiliency investments. Our 2026 to 2030 regulated capital investment plan is expected to produce a compounded annual growth in PSEG's rate base of 6% to 7.5%, starting from a year-end 2025 balance of approximately $36 billion, which includes construction work in progress.

For 2026, our plan capital.

Investment program for the regulated business is approximately 4.2 billion dollars.

Speaker #2: Our 2026 to 2030 regulated capital investment plan is expected to produce a compounded annual growth in PSEG's rate base of 6 to 7 and a half percent starting from a year-end 2025 balance of approximately $36 billion.

We also rolled forward our five-year regulated capital investment plan through 2030, amounting to $22.5 to $25.5 billion, and that compares to our prior plan of $21 to $24 billion.

Speaker #2: Which includes construction work in progress. These investments help us maintain our best-in-class reliability and customer service as well as meet New Jersey's energy savings goals.

The $1.5 billion increase in regulated investments is primarily driven by anticipated load growth due to data centers and other new customers.

Other incremental distribution reliability and resiliency Investments.

Speaker #2: Earlier this month, the BPU certified the results of the annual New Jersey BGS auction that was held to secure electricity for customers that have not selected a third-party supplier.

Our 2026 to 2030 regulated. Capital investment plan is expected to produce a compounded annual growth in psg's rate base.

Speaker #2: And based on the competitive auction results, the cost of electricity supply on PSEG residential electric bills will decline by $1.8% starting June 1st, 2026.

Of 6 to 7 and a half percent, starting from a year-end 2025 balance of approximately 36 billion dollars which includes construction work in progress.

Dan Cregg: These investments help us maintain our best-in-class reliability and customer service, as well as meet New Jersey's energy savings goals. Earlier this month, the BPU certified the results of the annual New Jersey BGS auction that was held to secure electricity for customers that have not selected a third-party supplier. Based on the competitive auction results, the cost of electricity supply on PSEG residential electric bills will decline by 1.8% starting 1 June 2026. This decrease reflects the net impact of a lower overall 2026 BGS price that will replace the 2023 auction result that contained higher energy costs. Moving to PSEG Power and Other. For Q4 2025, PSEG Power and Other reported a net loss of $37 million, compared to a net loss of $92 million in Q4 2024.

Speaker #2: This decrease reflects the net impact of a lower overall 2026 BGS price that will replace the 2023 auction result that contained higher energy costs.

These investments help us maintain our best-in-class reliability and customer service, as well as meet New Jersey's energy savings goals.

Earlier this month.

Speaker #2: Moving to PSEG power and other for the fourth quarter of 2025, PSEG power and other reported a net loss of $37 million compared to a net loss of $92 million in the fourth quarter of 2024.

The BPU certified, the results of the annual New Jersey bgs Auction that was held to secure electricity for customers that.

Not selected a third-party supplier.

And based on the competitive auction results.

Speaker #2: Non-gap operating earnings were $10 million for the fourth quarter compared to non-gap results of $43 million for the fourth quarter of 2024. For the full year, PSEG power and other reported net income of $366 million in 2025 compared to $225 million in 2024.

The cost of electricity Supply on psng residential electric bills will decline by 1.8% starting June 1st 2026.

This decrease reflects the net impact of a lower overall 2026 BGS price.

That will replace the 2023 auction results that contained higher energy costs.

Moving to PSG Power and other.

Speaker #2: And non-gap operating earnings were $284 million in 2025 compared to $292 million in 2024. Referring to the fourth quarter waterfall on slide nine, net energy margin was flat compared to the prior year quarter as higher gas operations were offset by the absence of zero-emission certificates and lower generation volume due to the scheduled refueling at our 100% owned Hope Creek nuclear plant.

For the fourth quarter of 2025 tscg power and other reported a net loss of 37 million.

Compared to a net loss of 92 million in the fourth quarter of 2024.

Dan Cregg: Non-GAAP operating earnings were $10 million for Q4, compared to non-GAAP results of $43 million for Q4 2024. For the full year, PSEG Power and Other reported net income of $366 million in 2025, compared to $225 million in 2024, and non-GAAP operating earnings were $284 million in 2025, compared to $292 million in 2024. Referring to the Q4 waterfall on slide 9, net energy margin was flat compared to the prior year quarter, as higher gas operations were offset by the absence of Zero Emission Certificates and lower generation volume, due to the scheduled refueling at our 100% owned Hope Creek nuclear plant.

Non-gaap operating earnings were 10 million for the fourth quarter.

Compared to non-GAAP results of $43 million for the fourth quarter of 2024.

For the full year.

TCG, power and other reported net income of 366 million in 2025.

Speaker #2: O&M was 4 cents per share higher compared to the fourth quarter of 2024. Mostly driven by that Hope Creek refueling outage. As Ralph mentioned, PSEG nuclear also completed work during the Hope Creek refueling outage to transition the unit from an 18-month to a 24-month refueling cycle going forward, which will yield additional megawatt hours as well as O&M savings over the long term.

Compared to 2205 million in 2024.

And non-gaap operating earnings were 284 million in 2025, compared to 292 million in 2024.

Referring to the fourth quarter of waterfall on slide 9. Net energy, margin was flat compared to the prior year quarter.

Higher gas operations were offset by the absence of zero emission certificates and lower generation volume.

Speaker #2: Appreciation expense was a penny per share favorable and interest expense rose by 4 cents per share reflecting incremental debt at higher interest rates. Non-operating expenses were 2 cents per share higher driven by a contribution to the PSEG foundation and taxes and other were a penny per share quarter.

Due to the scheduled refueling at our 100% owned hope Creek Nuclear Plant.

Dan Cregg: O&M was $0.04 per share higher compared to the Q4 of 2024, mostly driven by that Hope Creek refueling outage. As Ralph mentioned, PSEG Nuclear also completed work during the Hope Creek refueling outage to transition the unit from an 18-month to a 24-month refueling cycle going forward, which will yield additional megawatt hours as well as O&M savings over the long term. Depreciation expense was $0.01 per share favorable, and interest expense rose by $0.04 per share, reflecting incremental debt at higher interest rates. Non-operating expenses were $0.02 per share higher, driven by a contribution to the PSEG Foundation, and taxes and other were $0.01 per share favorable compared to the year earlier quarter.

L&M was 4 cents per share higher compared to the fourth quarter of 2024, mostly driven by that hope Creek refueling outage.

Speaker #2: On the operating side, the nuclear fleet produced approximately 7.2 terawatt hours during the fourth quarter of 2025 compared to approximately 7.3 terawatt hours in the fourth quarter of 2024.

To transition the unit from an 18-month to a 24-month refueling cycle, going forward.

Which will yield additional megawatt-hours, as well as O&M savings over the long term.

Speaker #2: And for the full year 2025, nuclear generation was approximately 30.9 terawatt hours up slightly from 30.6 terawatt hours in 2024. Capacity factors for the nuclear fleet were 83.7% and 91.2% for the quarter and full year of 2025 respectively.

Depreciation expense was a penny per share, favorable and interest expense Rose by 4 cents, per share reflecting incremental, debt at higher interest rates.

Non-operating expenses were $0.02 per share higher.

Driven by a contribution to the PCG Foundation.

And taxes and other work penny per share, favorable compared to the year earlier quarter.

Dan Cregg: On the operating side, the nuclear fleet produced approximately 7.2 TWh during Q4 2025, compared to approximately 7.3 TWh in Q4 2024. For the full year of 2025, nuclear generation was approximately 30.9 TWh, up slightly from 30.6 TWh in 2024. Capacity factors for the nuclear fleet were 83.7% and 91.2% for the quarter and full year of 2025, respectively. Touching on some recent financing activity. As of the end of December, PSEG total available liquidity remained strong at $2.8 billion, including approximately $130 million of cash on hand. Liquidity was supported by solid cash from operations during 2025.

Speaker #2: Touching on some recent financing activity, as of the end of December, PSEG total available liquidity remained strong at $2.8 billion. Including approximately $130 million of cash on hand.

On the operating side, the nuclear Fleet produced approximately 7.2 terow hours during the fourth quarter of 2025.

Compared to approximately 7.3 to what hours in the fourth quarter of 2024.

and for the full year 2025,

Speaker #2: Liquidity was supported by solid cash from operations during 2025. On the financing front, in December, PSEG power amended its existing $400 million $364-day variable rate term loan which increased the balance to $500 million and extended its maturity to December of 2026.

Nuclear generation was approximately 30.9 towit hours up slightly from 30.6, towit hours in 2024.

Capacity factors for the nuclear. Fleet were 83.7% and 91.2%.

For the quarter and full year of 2025 respectively.

Touching on some recent financing activity.

As of the end of December.

Speaker #2: PSEG's variable rate debt at the end of December consisted of the $364-day term loan at power for $500 million which matures in December this year.

ECG total available liquidity remains strong at 218 billion.

Including approximately 130 million dollars of cash on hand.

Speaker #2: And commercial paper. As of December 31st, our level of variable rate debt represents approximately 6% of our total debt. Looking ahead, our balance sheet supports the execution of PSEG's five-year capital spending plan through 2030, which is dominated by regulated capex.

Liquidity was supported by solid cash from operations during 2025.

Dan Cregg: On the financing front, in December, PSEG Power amended its existing $400 million, 364-day variable rate term loan, which increased the balance to $500 million and extended its maturity to December 2026. PSEG's variable rate debt at the end of December consisted of the 364-day term loan at Power for $500 million, which matures in December this year, and commercial paper. As of 31 December, our level of variable rate debt represents approximately 6% of our total debt. Looking ahead, our balance sheet supports the execution of PSEG's 5-year capital spending plan through 2030, which is dominated by regulated CapEx, without the need to sell new equity or assets, and provides the opportunity for continued dividend growth.

On the financing front.

December PCG power amended its existing 400 million 364-day, variable rate Terminal loan.

Speaker #2: Without the need to sell new equity or assets, and provides the opportunity for continued dividend growth. Funds from operation to debt is projected to be in the mid-teens through 2030.

Which increased the balance to 500 million and extended its maturity to December of 2026?

Bcg's variable rate, debt, at the end of December, consisted of the 364-day term loan, at Power, for 500 million.

Which matures in December this year?

And Commercial paper.

Speaker #2: Comfortably above our minimum threshold. Now, before I conclude my remarks, let's review some earnings drivers for 2026 as outlined on slide five. First, we're starting with higher rate base of approximately $36 billion at year-end 2025.

As of December 31st, our level of variable rate debt represents approximately 6% of our total debt.

Speaker #2: And that's up about 7% over year-end 2024. In addition, clause-based recoveries for investments in distribution infrastructure and CEF energy efficiency two are expected to contribute to utility margin.

Looking ahead, our balance sheet supports the execution of psg's 5-year, Capital spending plan through 2030, which is dominated by regulated capex, without the need to solve new Equity or assets.

And provides the opportunity for continued dividend growth.

Dan Cregg: Funds from operation to debt is projected to be in the mid-teens through 2030, comfortably above our minimum threshold. Now, before I conclude my remarks, let's review some earnings drivers for 2026, as outlined on slide 5. First, we're starting with higher rate base of approximately $36 billion at year-end 2025, and that's up about 7% over year-end 2024. In addition, clause-based recoveries for investments in distribution, infrastructure, and CEF Energy Efficiency 2 are expected to contribute to utility margin. As we discussed on the Q3 call, PSE&G's annual FERC transmission formula filing was implemented on 1 January, with an $82 million increase in annual transmission revenue, subject to true-up. On the distribution side of the business, electric base rates for 2026 are projected to be...

Funds from operation to debt is projected to be in the mid-teens through 2030.

Speaker #2: And as we discussed on the third quarter call, PSENG's annual FERC transmission formula filing was implemented on January 1st with an $82 million increase in annual transmission revenue subject to true up.

Comfortably above our minimum threshold.

Speaker #2: On the distribution side of the business, electric base rates for 2026 are projected to be stable. At PSEG power and other, are expected generation output for 2026 is approximately 95% hedged.

Now, before I conclude my remarks, let's review some earnings drivers for 2026 as outlined on slide 5. First, we're starting with a higher rate base of approximately $36 billion a year in 2025. And that's up about 7% over year-end 2024,

In addition, Claus bass, recoveries for investments in distribution infrastructure and CF Energy Efficiency. 2 are expected to contribute to utility margin.

Speaker #2: Like last year, we do not expect to book nuclear PTCs in 2026 due to the higher price environment. And just as a reminder, the zero-emission certificate amounts earned by our New Jersey nuclear units concluded in May of last year.

And as we discussed on the third quarter call, the C's annual FERC transmission formula filing.

Was implemented on January 1st.

$82 million increase in annual transmission. Revenue subject to true-up.

Speaker #2: Our nuclear refueling cycle for 2026 includes a spring refueling at Salem unit two and fall refuelings at Salem unit one and Peach Bottom unit two.

On the distribution side of the business, electric bass rates for 2026 are projected to be stable.

Dan Cregg: At PSEG Power and Other, our expected generation output for 2026 is approximately 95% hedged. Like last year, we do not expect to book nuclear PTCs in 2026 due to the higher price environment. Just as a reminder, the Zero Emission Certificates amounts earned by our New Jersey nuclear units concluded in May of last year. Our nuclear refueling cycle for 2026 includes a spring refueling at Salem Unit Two and fall refuelings at Salem Unit One and Peach Bottom Unit Two. Hope Creek is scheduled for its next refueling in the fall of 2027, following the completion of fuel cycle extension work in Q4 of 2025, and a shift to a 24-month refueling outage schedule.

At PCG, power and other are expected generation output for 2026.

Speaker #2: Hope Creek is scheduled for its next refueling in the fall of 2027 following the completion of fuel cycle extension work in the fourth quarter of 2025 and a shift to a 24-month refueling outage schedule.

Is approximately 95% hedged?

Like, last year, we do not expect to look nuclear ptc's in 2026 due to the higher price environment.

Speaker #2: As we continue to stringently manage our controllable costs, we will see interest and depreciation expense that will rise with a higher investment balance at PSENG and higher interest expense at PSEG power and parent related to refinancing maturities at higher current interest rates.

And just as a reminder, the zero emission certificate amounts earned by our New Jersey nuclear units concluded.

In May of last year.

Our nuclear refueling cycle for 2026 includes a spring refueling at Salem unit 2.

And fall refueling at Salem unit, 1 and Peach, Bottom unit 2.

Speaker #2: In closing, we are proud to have delivered on our 21st year in a row of meeting or exceeding our earnings guidance. And we carry that confidence forward to our full year 2026 non-gap operating earnings guidance of $4.28 to $4.40 per share.

Oak Creek is scheduled for its next refueling in the fall of 2027, following the completion of fuel cycle extension work.

And the fourth quarter of 2025 and it ships to a 24-month refueling outage schedule.

Dan Cregg: As we continue to stringently manage our controllable costs, we will see interest and depreciation expense that will rise with a higher investment balance at PSEG and higher interest expense at PSEG Power and Parent, related to refinancing maturities at higher current interest rates. In closing, we are proud to have delivered on our 21st year in a row of meeting or exceeding our earnings guidance, and we carry that confidence forward to our full year 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance of $4.28 to $4.40 per share, 7% higher at the midpoint over 2025 results. We increased our dividend by over 6% and updated our long-term non-GAAP operating earnings CAGR to 6% to 8%, using a higher baseline for the second year in a row.

As we continue to stringently manage our controllable costs,

Speaker #2: 7% higher at the midpoint over 2025 results. We increased our dividend by over 6% and updated our long-term non-gap operating earnings CAGR to 6 to 8 percent using a higher baseline for the second year in a row.

we will see interest and depreciation expense that will rise with a higher investment balance at psng.

And higher interest expense at PSG power and parent related to refinancing maturities at higher current interest rates.

In closing.

Speaker #2: Earnings growth beyond our forecast is achievable through opportunities to contract our existing output and planned upgrades as well as from incremental regulated capital investments.

We are proud to have delivered on our 21st year in a row of meeting or exceeding, our earnings guidance.

And we carry that confidence forward to our full-year 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance.

4.28.

Speaker #2: That concludes our formal remarks. And we are ready to begin the question and answer session.

30 cents per share.

7% higher at the midpoint over 2025 results.

Speaker #1: Ladies and gentlemen, we'll now begin the question and answer session for members of the financial community. If you have a question, please press the star and the number one on your telephone keypad.

We increase our dividend by over 6% and updated. Our long-term non-gaap operating earnings kegger

Speaker #1: If your question has been answered and you wish to withdraw your polling request, you may do so by pressing the star and the number two.

to 6 to 8% using a higher Baseline for the second year in a row.

Dan Cregg: Earnings growth beyond our forecast is achievable through opportunities to contract our existing output and planned upgrades, as well as from incremental regulated capital investments. That concludes our formal remarks, and we are ready to begin the question-and-answer session.

Speaker #1: If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before entering your request. One moment, please, for the first question. The first question is from line of Shar Pourreza with Wells Fargo.

Learning to grow beyond our forecast is achievable through opportunities. To contract our existing output and planned upgrades, as well as for incremental regulated capital investments.

That concludes our formal remarks.

Speaker #1: Please just use your question.

And we are ready to begin the question and answer session.

Speaker #2: Hey, good morning.

Speaker #3: Hey, guys. Good morning. Good morning, Ralph. How you doing?

Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, we'll now begin the question-and-answer session for members of the financial community. If you have a question, please press the star and the number 1 on your telephone keypad. If your question's been answered and you wish to withdraw your polling request, you may do so by pressing the star and the number 2. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before entering your request. One moment, please, for the first question. The first question is from the line of Shar Pourreza with Wells Fargo. Please just give your question.

Speaker #2: We're good. How are you?

Ladies and gentlemen, we'll now begin the question and answer session for members of the financial community.

Speaker #3: Not too bad. Not too bad. Busy, busy. Ralph, just on the legislative side, I mean, you've been kind of front and center around this for some time, around new gas.

If you have a question, please press the star and the number 1 on your telephone keypad.

If your questions have been answered and you wish to withdraw your polling requests, you may do so by pressing the star and the number 2.

Speaker #3: Can you just maybe talk about the timing of the bill so next steps? Will there be an IRP process? Could there be a PPA structure where you earn a return on the PPA?

If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before entering your request.

1 moment, please for the first question.

Speaker #3: Assuming a generator wins the RFP. And how do we work through things like air permits and kind of turbine queue backlogs? So I guess just how do you think about this whole process?

Ralph LaRosa: Hey, good morning.

The first question is from line of sharp perusa with Wells Fargo, please just use your questions.

Shar Pourreza: Hey, guys. Good morning. Good morning, Ralph. How are you doing?

Ralph LaRosa: We're good. How are you?

Hey, good morning. You guys. Good morning. Good morning. Ralph how you doing? Good. How are you?

Shar Pourreza: Not too bad. Not too bad. Busy, busy. Ralph, just on the legislative side, I mean, you've been kind of front and center around this for some time, around new gas. Can you just maybe talk about the timing of the bill, so next steps, will there be like an IRP process? Could there be like a PPA structure where you earn a return on the PPA, assuming a generator wins the RFP? How do we, like, work through things like air permits and kind of turbine queue backlogs? I guess, how do you think about this whole process? Yeah.

Speaker #3: Yeah.

Speaker #2: Boy, there's a lot there. But you also answered your own question a little bit as you went through with Shar. Much of it's in play, right, as you said.

Speaker #2: And many of those variables that you laid out are the exact variables that policymakers need to come to grips with. Right? So there's a couple of bills that are floating down in Trenton right now that will help enable new nuclear and potentially new gas.

Not too bad, not too bad, busy busy. Um, well, just on, on the legislative side, I mean, you've been kind of front and center around this for some time around new gas. Can you just maybe talk about the timing of the bill. So next steps will there be like an higher P process? Could there be like a PPA structure where you earn a return on the PPA assuming a generator wins the RFP? And how do we like work through things like air permits and kind of turbine Cube backlogs so I guess

Ralph LaRosa: Boy, there's a lot there. You also answered your own question a little bit as you're running through it, Shar. You know, much of it's in play, right? As you said, and many of those variables that you laid out are the exact variables that policymakers need to come to grips with, right? There's a couple of bills that are floating down in Trenton right now that will help enable new nuclear and potentially new gas. I think the governor already has the ability to move on a lot of solar and potentially battery storage. The way we've been thinking about it is trying to help policymakers think through and then enable the opportunities for gas or for new nuclear, right?

Speaker #2: I think the governor already has the ability to move on a lot of solar and potentially battery storage. So the way we've been thinking about it is trying to help policymakers think through and then enable the opportunities for gas or for new nuclear, right?

Speaker #2: And we've talked about that in quite a few different settings. And that's really what we've been trying to do is help them think through that at this point.

How do you think about this whole process? Yeah, where where there's a lot there? Um, but you also answer your own question a little bit as you run through it, you know, much of it, much of it is in play, right? As you as you said, and and many of those variables that you laid out, are the exact variables that policy makers, need to come the grips with

Right, so there's there's a couple of bills that are floating down in the in Trenton right now.

Speaker #2: But all the items you mentioned, whether it be turbine backlogs, air permits, so on and so forth, all of those items are still variables that are out there that policymakers have to work through the challenges they may face on any of them.

That will help enable the nuclear and potentially new gas.

Uh, I think the governor already has the ability to move on, a lot of solar and potentially battery storage.

so,

Speaker #3: And you can secure an IRP process relatively quickly for this?

The way we've been thinking about it is trying to help policymakers think through and then enable.

Speaker #2: Yeah. I mean, look, we could help out with an IRP for PSEG. We could help out with an IRP for New Jersey. But I think that process, again, just informs the output.

Ralph LaRosa: We've talked about that in quite a few different settings, and that's really what we've been trying to do, is help them think through that at this point. All the items you mentioned, whether it be turbine backlogs, air permits, so on and so forth, all of those items are still variables that are out there, that policymakers have to work through the challenges they may face on any of them.

Speaker #2: It doesn't drive the output because the policymakers will be the ones that really kind of own that as they go forward. The IRP will make recommendations as we do all the time on Long Island.

The opportunities for gas or for new nuclear, right? And we've talked about that in quite a few different settings. And that's really what we've been trying to do—help them think through that at this point. But all the items you mentioned, whether it be turbine backlogs or permits,

So on and so forth. All of those items are are still variables that are out there that that policy makers have to work through. Um the challenges they may face, I need on any of them.

Shar Pourreza: You can structure an IRP process relatively quickly for this?

Speaker #2: But they're not going to be definitive decisions. They don't carry the weight of law, , right?

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah. I mean, look, we could help out with an IRP for PSEG. We could help out with an IRP for New Jersey. I think that process, again, just informs the output. It doesn't, it doesn't drive the output because the policymakers will be the ones that really kind of own that as they go forward. The IRP will make recommendations, as we do all the time on Long Island.

And you can structure an IRP process relatively quickly for this.

Speaker #3: Got it. And then just lastly, can you just maybe help us quantify what level of hedges and upside versus the PTC you're kind of embedding in that 6 to 8 percent?

Yeah, I mean, look, we could help out with an IRP for PSEG. We could help out with an IRP for New Jersey. Um, but I think that process, again, just informs the output.

Speaker #3: Is the bottom end of that CAGR kind of anchored in PTC level assumptions? And is there kind of an expectation of future updates to include above PTC earnings?

Speaker #3: Thanks.

Speaker #2: Yeah. I'm going to give it to Dan to walk you through that. I talked about where we are for '26 in the prepared remarks.

Um, it doesn't, it doesn't drive the output because the policy makers will will be, will be the ones that really kind of owned that. As they as they go forward, they are a field make recommendations as we do all the time on on Long Island.

Shar Pourreza: Got it.

Ralph LaRosa: You know, definitive decisions. They don't carry the weight of the law.

Shar Pourreza: Got it.

Ralph LaRosa: Right?

Speaker #2: But Dan can give you a little bit more about that and been consistent with what he has spoken to before.

Shar Pourreza: Got it. Just lastly, can you just maybe help us quantify, like, what level of hedges and upside versus the PTC you're kind of embedding in that 6% to 8%? Is the bottom end of that CAGR kind of anchored in PTC level assumptions? Is there kind of an expectation of future updates to include above PTC earnings? Thanks.

But they're not going to be you know positive decisions. They they don't carry what they want, right?

Speaker #4: Yeah. Hey, Shar. And I think the way to think about it, we talked about the prompt year being about 95% hedged. And we're pretty well hedged through the next couple of years, but certainly less so in the out years.

Got it and then just lastly can you just maybe help us quantify like what level of hedges?

Speaker #4: And so I think you're looking more at a market view to try to get you to what that out year looks like. I think that market view is supported by some of the fundamentals that you're seeing out there.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah. I'm going to give it to Dan to walk you through that. I talked about where we are for 26 in the prepared remarks. Dan can give you a little bit more about that and, you know, being consistent with what he has spoken to before.

And upside versus the PTC, you're kind of embedding in that 6 to 8%—is the bottom end of that CAGR kind of anchored in PTC-level assumptions? And is there kind of an expectation of future updates to include above-PTC earnings? Thanks,

Speaker #4: And if and as that moves over time, which we would expect that it would, we'll take that into account as we're making our comments and updating what's going on.

Dan Cregg: Yeah, sure. I think the, you know, the way to think about it, we talked about the prompt year being about 95% hedged, and we're pretty well hedged through the next couple of years, but certainly less so in the out years. I think you're looking more at a market view to try to get you to what that out year looks like. I think that market view is supported by some of the fundamentals that you're seeing out there. If and as that moves over time, which we would expect that it would, we'll take that into account as we're making our comments and updating what's going on. I think that's the way to think of that.

Yeah, I'm going to give it to Dan to walk you through that. I I talked about where we are for 26 uh in the prepared remarks. Um but Dan can give you a little bit more about that and and you know it's been consistent with what he has. He has spoken to before

Speaker #4: But I think that's the way to think about it.

Speaker #3: Got it. That is perfect. Thank you, guys, so much. Much appreciated.

Speaker #4: Thanks, Shar.

Speaker #2: Thanks, Shar.

Speaker #1: Our next question is from the line of Nick Campanella with Barclays. Please just use your questions.

Speaker #2: Good morning, Nick.

Speaker #5: Hey, good morning, everyone. Thanks for the updates.

Speaker #2: Hey, thank you.

Speaker #5: So I guess just in the past, hey, good morning. I guess in the past, when you had a 5 to 7, you kind of talked about it being non-linear.

Speaker #5: And now you have this 6 to 8, which is great to see. And I just recognize you have things like we're feeling outages and timing of rate case outcomes, at some point in this plan.

Yeah, sure. And I think the, you know, the way to think about it, we talked about the the the prompt here being about 95% hedged and, and we're pretty well hedged through the next couple of years, but certainly less. So, in the out years and so I think, um, you're looking more at a, a, a market view to try to get you to what that out here. Looks like, I think that, that that market view is supported by some of the fundamentals that you're seeing out there. And if, and as that moves over time, which we would expect that it would, uh, will take that into account as as we're making our comments and updating what's going on. But I think that's the way to think about it.

Nick Campanella: Got it. That is perfect. Thank you guys so much. Much appreciated.

Dan Cregg: Thanks, Char.

Ralph LaRosa: Thanks, Char.

Much much appreciated. Thanks sure.

Operator: Our next question is from the line of Nick Campanella with Barclays. Please just use your question.

Speaker #5: So just maybe can you kind of talk to whether this CAGR is linear or not and where you may fall within the CAGR '27, '28, and just to kind of critical drivers that people should be paying attention to here?

Our next question is from the line of Nick Campanella with Barclays, please just use your questions.

Ralph LaRosa: Good morning, Nick.

Nick Campanella: Hey, good morning, everyone. Thanks for the updates.

Good morning, Nick.

Ralph LaRosa: Hey, thank you.

Hey, good morning everyone, thanks for the updates.

Nick Campanella: Hey, good morning. I guess in the past, you know, when you had a 5 to 7, you kind of talked about it being, you know, nonlinear, and now you have this 6 to 8, which is great to see. I just recognize you have things like refueling outages and timing of rate case outcome at some point in this plan. Just maybe, can you kind of talk to whether this CAGR is linear or not, and where you may fall within the CAGR, 2027, 2028, and just the kind of critical drivers that people should be paying attention to here? Thank you.

Speaker #5: Thank you.

Speaker #2: Yeah. So, Nick, I think we've look, we have talked about for the last three years about being more predictable. So with that is our effort to be as linear as possible.

Speaker #2: That doesn't mean we will be 100% linear. But we work really hard to do that. Right? There will be structural changes that happen. Where we have to modify and right now, I think the structural change has been the supply-demand curve.

Speaker #2: And we've seen that. And it's taken us above the PTC floor. Pretty clearly, as we look forward. So we adjusted. But I think our goal remains the same as to be a predictable investment for folks.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah. Nick, I think, you know, we have talked about for the last 3 years about being more predictable. With that is our effort to be as linear as possible. That doesn't mean we will be 100% linear, but we work really hard to do that, right? There will be structural changes that happen where, you know, we have to modify, and right now, I think the structural change has been the supply-demand curve, and we've seen that, and it's taken us above the PTC floor pretty clearly as we look forward. We adjusted. I think our goal remains the same, is to be a predictable investment for folks, and I think we've been able to achieve that by delivering the results that we said we were gonna deliver.

Thank you. Um, so I guess just in the past hey good morning. Uh I guess in the past um you know when you had a 5 to 7, you kind of talked about it being you know nonlinear and now you have this 6 to 8 uh which is great to see. And I just recognize you have things like refilling outages and timing of rape case outcomes at some point in this plan. Um, so just maybe can you kind of talk to whether this kager is linear or not and where you may fall within the kager um, 2728 and just to kind of critical drivers that people should be paying attention to here. Thank you.

Yeah, something like, I think you know, we've

Speaker #2: And I think we've been able to achieve that by delivering the results that we said we were going to deliver. So we feel confident in the plan that we put forth today.

Speaker #2: And yes, our goal remains to be as linear as possible.

Speaker #5: Thank you. And I recognize that you forecasted the base off a higher midpoint of '26 as well. So thank you for that. Maybe just you also kind of talked about.

Speaker #2: No, it wasn't, Nick.

Speaker #5: Nuclear contracting. Absolutely. Absolutely. You talked about nuclear contracting. Could kind of put you above that range? Just maybe what's the latest thoughts on that at this point?

We we have talked about for the last 3 years about being more predictable. So with that is our effort to be as linear as possible. That doesn't mean we will be 100% linear, but we work really hard to do that. Right there will be structural changes that happen where, uh, you know, we have to modify. And, and, and right now, I think the structural change has been the supply demand curve, and, and we've seen that, and it's taken us a month to PTC floor, pretty clearly as we look forward. Um, so we adjusted, um, but I think our, our goal remains the same as to be a predictable, uh, investment for folks, and I think we've been able to achieve that.

Ralph LaRosa: We feel confident in the plan that we put forth today. Yes, our goal remains to be as linear as possible.

by delivering the results that we said we were going to deliver

Ralph LaRosa: We feel confident in the plan that we put forth today. Yes, our goal remains to be as linear as possible.

Speaker #5: I know the prior state administration was very focused on bringing data centers to the state. How's that kind of looking under this new administration?

So, um, we we we feel confident in the in the plan that we put forth today. Um, and yes, our goal remains to be as linear as possible.

Nick Campanella: Thank you. I recognize that you forecasted the base off a higher midpoint of 26 as well. Thank you for that. Maybe just, you also kind of talked about.

Speaker #5: And just maybe anything you can kind of offer in what your conversations have kind of been with customers on that? Thank you.

Ralph LaRosa: Thanks so much, Nick.

Speaker #2: Yeah, Nick. And I think the story is fairly consistent. I think that obviously, the most near-term things that you ought to be able to think about as this administration comes in and settles in on their views on this is the facilities that we do have in Pennsylvania.

Nick Campanella: you know, nuclear contracting. Absolutely. Absolutely. You talked about nuclear contracting to kind of put you above that range. Just maybe what's the latest thoughts on that at this point? I know the prior state administration was very focused on bringing data centers to the state. How's that kind of looking under this new administration? Just maybe anything you can kind of offer in what your conversations have kind of been with customers on that? Thank you.

Thank you. And I I recognize that you forecasted the base off a higher midpoint of 26 as well. So um thank you for that maybe. Just um you also kind of you know nuclear Contracting.

Absolutely absolutely. Um,

Speaker #2: Where I think there's been a more firm view over time and more stability with respect to who has been in the governor's office there, as well as some of the smaller opportunities that we have more locally within New Jersey.

You talked about nuclear contracting to kind of put you above that range just maybe—what's the latest thoughts on that at this point? I know the prior state administration was very focused on bringing data centers to the state; how's that kind of looking under this new administration? And just maybe anything you can kind of offer in what your conversations have kind of been with customers on that. Thank you.

Speaker #2: And we've talked about a lot of the applications that the utility has seen. And so there's I think less opportunity for something of a sizable scale in New Jersey just from the standpoint of where the administration has been.

Dan Cregg: Yeah, Nick, I think the story is fairly consistent. I think that obviously, the most near-term things that you ought to be able to think about as this administration comes in and settles in on their views on this, is the facilities that we do have in Pennsylvania, where I think there's been a more firm view over time and more stability with respect to who has been in the governor's office there, as well as some of the smaller opportunities that we have more locally within New Jersey. We've talked about a lot of the applications that the utility is seeing. There's, I think, less opportunity for something of a sizable scale in New Jersey, just from the standpoint of where the administration has been.

Yeah, Nick. And I I, I think that the story is fairly consistent. I, I think that obviously, the, um,

Speaker #2: To the extent that that changes and the receptivity is increased there, there could be incremental opportunity. But I think for the time being, the more fertile ground right now would be Pennsylvania for something larger and some of the smaller New Jersey locations.

The most near-term things that you ought to be able to think about as this administration comes in and settles in on their views on this is the facilities that we do have in Pennsylvania.

Speaker #2: And I think those discussions have progressed well.

Speaker #4: Yeah. And I would just add, Nick, just from a normal rhythm of transition for an administration like this, the way it works in New Jersey, there'll be there's a real focus now.

Where I think there's been a more firm view over time. And more stability with respect to who has been in the governor's office there as well as some of the smaller opportunities that we have uh, more locally within New Jersey. And we've talked about a lot of the

Speaker #4: First of all, let's staff up. And I think the governor has done a great job of getting a number of people in place, not just in our industry, but in other areas that matter to the state running well.

Dan Cregg: To the extent that that changes and the receptivity is increased there could be incremental opportunity. I think for the time being, the more fertile ground right now would be Pennsylvania for something larger and some of the smaller New Jersey locations. I think those discussions have progressed well.

Speaker #4: And I think the second thing they need to do is really focus on the budget for New Jersey. And so that's where the my understanding from conversations we've had is the focus of the governor right now when she gets through that process, I think economic development will be right behind that as an area of focus.

Applications that the utility is seen and and so there's uh I think less opportunity for something of a sizable scale in New Jersey, just from the standpoint of of of where the Administration has been uh to the extent that that changes. And the receptivity is is increased, their there could be incremental opportunity. But I think for the time being the more fertile ground right now would be Pennsylvania for something larger and some of the smaller New Jersey locations.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, I would just add, Nick, just from a normal rhythm of transition for an administration like this, the way it works in New Jersey, there's a real focus now. First of all, let's staff up, I think the governor has done a great job of getting a number of people in place, not just in our industry, but in other areas that matter to the state running well. I think the second thing they need to do is really focus on the budget for New Jersey. So that's where, my understanding from conversations we've had, is the focus of the governor right now. Once she gets through that process, I think economic development will be right behind that as an area of focus.

And I think those discussions have progressed. Well,

Speaker #4: And we already have in conversations on that organization that I chair Choose New Jersey about the role we'll play in the areas of focus.

Speaker #4: But that has not been finalized yet.

Speaker #5: Okay. And then if I could just throw in one follow-up on Shar's question regarding kind of the new consumptions. I understand that this RBA process is going on right now.

Speaker #5: And there is discussions around extending the RPM collar for another two years and a week or two ago, a 420 per megawatt day number was kind of thrown out there.

Ralph LaRosa: You know, we are already having conversations on that organization that I chair, Choose New Jersey, about the role we'll play and the areas of focus, but that has not been finalized yet.

Speaker #5: Just what are your kind of thoughts on and extending at the current cap rate through 2030? And then what's kind of embedded in the plan right now?

yeah, and I would, I would just add Nick just from a normal rhythm of of transitions for administration like this. Uh, in the way it works in New Jersey, they'll they'll be, uh, there's a real Focus. Now, first of all, let's step up. And I think the governor has done a great job of getting a number of people in place not just in our industry but in our areas that matter to the state running. Well and I think the second the second thing they need to do is really focus on the budget for New Jersey. And so that's where the my understanding from conversations we've had is the focus of the governor right now uh when she gets through that process, I think Economic Development will be right behind that as an area of focus. And you know we we are already having conversations on that organization that

That I chair choose New Jersey about the role will play in the in the areas of focus. But that has not been finalized yet.

Nick Campanella: Okay. If I could just throw in one follow-up on Shar's question regarding kind of the nuke assumptions. You know, I understand that this RBA process is going on right now, and there is discussions around extending the RPM collar for another two years. A week or two ago, a 420 per megawatt day number was kind of thrown out there. Just what are your kind of thoughts on and extending, you know, at the current cap rate through 2030, and then what's kind of embedded in the plan right now?

Speaker #2: Yeah. Look, I think embedded within your question, Nick, is the fact that you've got to market out there where you can see what things are looking like.

Speaker #2: But it will remain somewhat dynamic as you step through time. And that's the best information that we have as well. And so what we're doing is trying to look at what that looks like.

Speaker #2: I think that arguably, you could have stayed at 5 to 7, been at the PTC, and been more firm. But I honestly think you'd be less realistic.

Uh, in the plan right now.

Speaker #2: And so what we're trying to do is take a realistic view as to what things will look like as we step out over the longer term.

Dan Cregg: Look, I think, embedded within your question, Nick, is the fact that you've got a market out there where you can see what things are looking like, but it will remain somewhat dynamic as you step through time. That's the best information that we have as well. What we're doing is trying to look at what that looks like. I think that, arguably, you could have stayed at 5 to 7, been at the PTC and been more firm, but I honestly think you'd be less realistic. What we're trying to do is take a realistic view as to what things will look like as we step out over the longer term.

Yeah. Look

um,

Speaker #2: I think we feel good about where we are and how it all fits together within the plan. But I think it's those same market signals that we see that you're seeing out there.

Embedded within your question, Nick, is the fact that you've got a market out there.

See what things are?

Speaker #2: I mean, as a reminder, I would highlight the fact that the location of our facilities is in the PICO zone. So if you're thinking about pricing and trying to do math to figure out what this means in the out years, that zone is most highly correlated to the actual generator buses where we run.

Somewhat dynamic, as you step through time and that's the best information that we have as well.

And so what we're doing is trying to look at what that looks like. I think that um,

Dan Cregg: I think we feel good about where we are and how it all fits together within the plan, but I think it's those same market signals that we see, that you're seeing out there. I mean, as a, as a reminder.

Speaker #2: So West Hub trades north of that. We said it trades about 20% above what we would be seeing from where our generator bus is.

Speaker #2: And so it's those market points that we look at to try to derive where we're headed within the plan and what we've put forth to you.

Ralph LaRosa: the fact that the location of our facilities is in the PSEG Zone. If you're thinking about pricing and trying to do math to figure out what this means in the out years, that zone is most highly correlated to the actual generator buses where we run. West Hub trades north of that. We said it trades about 20% above what we would be seeing from where our generator bus is. It's those market points that we look at to try to derive where we're headed within the plan and what we put forth to you. I think we're in a really good place against that backdrop, but that's what we look at as we go forward.

Speaker #2: And so I think we're in a really good place against that backdrop. But that's what we look at as we go forward.

Arguably, you could have stayed at 5 to 7, uh, been at the PTC and been more firm, but I honestly think you'd be less realistic. And so, what we're trying to do is take a realistic view as to what things will look like. As we step out over the longer term, uh, I think we feel good about where we are and how it all fits together within the plan, but I think it's those same market signals that we see, that you're seeing out there. I mean, as a reminder, I would, uh, highlight the fact that the location of our facilities is in the Pico zone. So if you're thinking about pricing and trying to do math to figure out what this means,

Speaker #5: Okay. I appreciate the thought. Thank you.

Speaker #2: Thanks, Nick.

Speaker #6: All right. Next question is from the line of Bill Appicelli with UBS. Please receive three questions.

Speaker #4: Good morning, Bill. Did you lose Bill?

Speaker #2: Morning, Bill.

Speaker #4: Rob, maybe you want to go to another one and see if Bill rejoins?

In the out years, that's that zone is most highly correlated to the the actual generator buses, where, where we where we run? So uh, West tub trades, north of that, we said it trades, it out to 20%, uh, above what we would be seeing from where our generator bus is. And so, it's, those Market points that we look at to try to derive where we're headed within the plan and what we put forth to you. And and so I think we're in a, in a really good place against that factory.

Speaker #6: Sure. The next question would be from the line of Tanner James with Jefferies.

Up. But, but that's what we look at, as we go forward.

Shar Pourreza: Okay, I appreciate the thought. Thank you.

Nick Campanella: Okay, I appreciate the thought. Thank you.

Speaker #7: Hey, good morning, team. It's Julien Dumoulin-Smith. How you guys all doing?

Ralph LaRosa: Thanks, Nick.

Okay, I appreciate the thought. Thank you. Thanks. Next.

Operator: Our next question is from the line of Bill Apicelli with UBS. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #4: Hey, Julien.

Speaker #2: Hello, Julien.

Speaker #7: Hey, hey. Good morning to you guys. Thanks for the time. I appreciate it. Look, let me follow and by the way, nicely done on the CAGR increase.

All right, next question is from the line of Philly with UBS. Please receive your questions.

Ralph LaRosa: Morning, Bill. Did we lose Bill? Morning, Bill. Rob, maybe you want to go to another one and see if Bill rejoins?

Morning Bill.

Speaker #7: Got to hand it to you guys. If I could follow up on the gist of what Shar and Nick were asking us about here.

You lose Bill morning Bill.

Speaker #7: Let's talk about the overlap between the BPU here and legislative process just a bit here in terms of what next steps are from both and how they might overlap, right?

Operator: Sure. The next question will be from the line of Tanner James with Jefferies.

Rob, maybe you want to go to another 1 and see if Bill rejoins.

Speaker #7: Because clearly, there's a certain degree of mutual alignment between the two in theory. Can you comment a little bit on maybe even more oriented was kind of pressing at that as well here.

Sure. The next question will be from the line of Tanner James with Jeffries.

Julian Wolesmith: Hey, good morning, team. It's Julian Wolesmith. How you guys all doing?

Julien Dumoulin-Smith: Hey, good morning, team. It's Julian Wolesmith. How you guys all doing?

Ralph LaRosa: Hey, Julian.

Hey, good morning, team. It's uh Julie myth. How you guys doing?

Shar Pourreza: Hello, Julian.

Julian Wolesmith: Hey, good morning to you guys. Thanks for the time. I appreciate it. Look, let me follow, and by the way, nicely done on the keger increase. Got to hand it to you guys. If I can follow up on the gist of what Sharon and Nick were asking us about here. Let's talk about the overlap between the BPU here and legislative process just a bit here, in terms of what next steps are from both and how they might overlap, right? Clearly there's a certain degree of mutual alignment between the two, in theory. Can you comment a little bit on, maybe even more oriented towards timeline? I know Sharon was kind of pressing at that as well here.

Julien Dumoulin-Smith: Hey, good morning to you guys. Thanks for the time. I appreciate it. Look, let me follow, and by the way, nicely done on the keger increase. Got to hand it to you guys. If I can follow up on the gist of what Sharon and Nick were asking us about here. Let's talk about the overlap between the BPU here and legislative process just a bit here, in terms of what next steps are from both and how they might overlap, right? Clearly there's a certain degree of mutual alignment between the two, in theory. Can you comment a little bit on, maybe even more oriented towards timeline? I know Sharon was kind of pressing at that as well here.

Speaker #4: Yeah. Look, I think that you're going to have a little bit of give and take that will continue as people find their footing in this new administration, right?

Speaker #4: And not from the administration's finding their footing, but how the legislators are going to work, legislative areas are going to work, and how the regulators are going to work.

Speaker #4: So these two bills that were introduced recently, kind of direct the BPU to do certain things. The BPU has the ability to do certain things today.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, I think that you're gonna have a little bit of give and take that will continue as people find their footing in this new administration, right? And not from the administration's finding their footing, but how the legislator is gonna work, legislative area is gonna work, and how the regulator is gonna work. These two bills that were introduced recently, kind of direct the BPU to do certain things. The BPU has the ability to do certain things today. You know, go out and procure gas, to go out and procure new nuclear, right? We had the ZEC process in the past, but they are limited in what they can do, so they need some more.

Hey, hey, good morning to you, guys. Thanks for the time. I appreciate it. Um, look, let me, let me follow. And by the way, nicely done on the kager, increase got to hand it to you guys. Um, if I could follow up on on, on the gist of what Sharon, Nick were asking us about here. Um let's talk about the overlap between the vpu here and and legislative process just a bit here in terms of what next steps are from both and and how they might overlap, right? Because I clearly there's a certain degree of of of mutual alignment between the 2 in theory. Can, can you comment a little bit on maybe even more oriented towards, uh, timeline? I know, sure. I was kind of pressing at that as well here.

Speaker #4: Go out and procure gas, go out and procure new nuclear, right? We had the ZEC process in the past. But they are limited in what they can do.

yeah, I look I I think

Speaker #4: So they need some more they could use a little more direction to make the process a little cleaner for them, buy some legislative changes.

Speaker #4: So I think that's just an open process that exists out there. It's something that's going to be I can't tell you it's going to happen in the next 30 days.

That you're gonna, you're gonna have a, a little bit of give and take, that will continue as people find their footing in, in this new Administration, right? And that not from the administration's, finding their footing, but how the legislator is going to work legislative area is going to work and how the regulator is going to work.

Speaker #4: And I can't tell you it's going to happen in the next six months. But the level of interest and the engagement by folks is pretty high.

So, these 2 bills that were, um, introduced recently, kind of direct the BPU to do certain things. The BPU has the ability to do certain things today.

Um, you know, go out and procure.

Gas to go out and procure, new nuclear, right? We we had the zec process in the in the past.

Speaker #4: And it all comes out of the back end of the last 12 months of discussions about higher electricity costs from a supply standpoint. And the need for us to change that balance somehow to scarcity is there.

Ralph LaRosa: They could use a little more direction to make the process a little cleaner for them by some legislative changes. I think that's just an open process that exists out there. It's something that's gonna be. I can't tell you it's gonna happen in the next 30 days, and I can't tell you it's gonna happen in the next 6 months. The level of interest and the engagement by folks is pretty high, and it all comes out of the back end of the last, you know, 12 months of discussions about higher electricity costs from a supply standpoint, and the need for us to change that balance somehow. The scarcity is there, and, you know, we've got load increases that have taken place across PJM, even if we don't have a data center in New Jersey, and we do have.

Speaker #4: And we've got load increases that have taken place across PJM, even if we don't have a data center in New Jersey. And we do have.

Speaker #4: We have the smaller ones as we've been talking about. But the load increases are happening right across the river. And it's impacting the pricing here in New Jersey.

Speaker #4: So I think the BPU has recognized that they do not want to be in the same level of import that they are. I mean, policymakers feel the same way.

But they, they are limited in what they can do. So they need some more. They could use a little more direction to make the process a little cleaner for them by some legislative changes. So I think that's just an an open process that exists out there. It's um it's something that's going to be. Uh I can't tell you it's going to happen in the next 30 days and I can't tell you it's going to happen in the next 6 months, but the level of interest and the engagement by folks is pretty high.

Speaker #4: And they want a little more control over the pricing of the product that ultimately the residents of New Jersey hold us all accountable for.

Ralph LaRosa: We have the smaller ones that we've been talking about. The load increases are happening right across the river, and it's impacting the pricing here in New Jersey. You know, I think the BPU has recognized that they do not want to be in the same level of import that they are. The policymakers feel the same way. They want a little more control over the pricing of the product that ultimately the residents of New Jersey hold us all accountable for.

Speaker #7: Got it. And if I can zero in a little bit, guys, on the 26th guide here, and thanks again for your help earlier. How do you think about what the breakdown is between the regulated utility side of that year-over-year increase versus what's reflected in power?

And it all comes out of the back. End of the last you know 12 months of discussions about higher electricity costs from a supply standpoint and the need for us to change that balance on how to scarcity is there. And, you know, we've got load increases that have taken place across pjm. Even if we don't have a data center in New Jersey and we do have, we have the, we have the, the smaller ones as we've been talking about

But the load increases are happening right across the river, and it's impacting the pricing here in New Jersey. So,

um,

Speaker #7: And then even within power, can you comment a little bit about where you guys are hedged? I know you said you're 95% for this year.

Speaker #7: Just comment a little bit about where you are relative to that floor, if you will, just as a starting point. Just want to make sure we're all on the same page here.

Speaker #2: Yeah. I mean, obviously, we're north of it because that's how we described it and how we put it out there. I think to go much beyond that, we'd start to kind of break down the pieces beyond what our overall guidance is.

You know, I think the BPU has recognized that they do not want to be in the same level of import that they are. The policymakers feel the same way, and they want a little more control over the pricing of the product that, ultimately, the residents of New Jersey hold us all accountable for.

Julian Wolesmith: Got it. If I can zero in a little bit, guys, on the 26 guide here, and thanks again for your help earlier. How do you think about what the breakdown is between the regulated utility side of that year-over-year increase versus what's reflected in power? Even within power, can you comment a little bit about where you guys are hedged? I know you said you're, you know, 95% for this year. Just comment a little bit about where you are relative to that floor, if you will. Just as a starting point, just want to make sure we're all on the same page here.

Julien Dumoulin-Smith: Got it. If I can zero in a little bit, guys, on the 26 guide here, and thanks again for your help earlier. How do you think about what the breakdown is between the regulated utility side of that year-over-year increase versus what's reflected in power? Even within power, can you comment a little bit about where you guys are hedged? I know you said you're, you know, 95% for this year. Just comment a little bit about where you are relative to that floor, if you will. Just as a starting point, just want to make sure we're all on the same page here.

Speaker #2: And so I think just maybe repeating a little bit what I said before, Julien, if you think about what the market signals are that are out there, that's what we're leaning on.

Speaker #2: I would say that 26, we gave you a 95% hedge. 27, I think we're fair to say that we are largely hedged for that year.

Speaker #2: And in 28, I think if you think about a radical approach over three years that we talked about, mainly, we would say that because the most liquid part of that curve is over those three years.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, I mean, obviously, we're north of it, cause that's how we described it and how we put it out there. I think to go much beyond that, we'd start to kind of break down the pieces beyond what our overall guidance is. I think, just maybe repeating a little bit what I said before, Julian, if you think about what the market signals are that are out there, that's what we're leaning on. I would say that 26, we gave you a 95% hedge. 27, I think we're fair to say that we are largely hedged for that year.

Think about what the breakdown is between the regulated, Utility side of that year-over-year increase versus what's what's reflected in power and then even within power, can you comment a little bit about where you guys are headed? I know you said you're you know 95% for this year just coming a little bit about where you are relative to that. That that floor if you will just as a starting point, just want to make sure we're all on the same page here.

Speaker #2: And so we have leveraged that liquidity to be able to hedge up a fair bit of 27 and 28. The 29 and 2030 remains more subject to market forces as we'll go forward.

Speaker #7: Well, let me try this differently. How do you think about year here for the utility and/or kind of what's implied year over year in growth on an EPS basis?

Ralph LaRosa: In 28, I think, you know, if you think about a ratable approach over 3 years that we talked about, mainly we would say that because the most liquid part of that curve is over those 3 years. We have leveraged that liquidity to be able to hedge up a fair bit of 27 and 28. 29 and 2030 remains more subject to market forces as we go forward.

Um, I think to go much beyond that would start to kind of break down the the pieces beyond what our, what our overall guidance is. And so I think, uh, just maybe repeating a little bit what I said before, Julian, you can think about what the market signals are that are out there. That's what we're leaning on. I would say that 26, we gave you the 95% Edge 27. I think we're fair to say that we are largely headed for that year and and in 28 I think um

Speaker #4: Yeah. Look, Julien, I think we've been pretty clear about the fact that where there are structural changes, we'll make changes. And when the changes aren't structural, we'll look at what opportunity sets we have for maintenance activities that might be in a four-year cycle.

you know, if you think about a ratable approach over 3 years that we've talked about, uh, mainly we, we would say that because the most liquid part of that curve is over those 3 years and so we have leveraged that liquidity to

A fair bit of '27 and '28. Uh, but '29 and 2030 remains, uh, more subject to market forces as we’ll go forward.

Speaker #4: And try to look at that from a predictability standpoint for the investment community. So we look at our plans every year. We adjust to that.

Julian Wolesmith: Well, let me try this differently. How do you think about earned returns in the current year here for the utility and/or, you know, kind of what's implied year-over-year in growth on an EPS basis?

Julien Dumoulin-Smith: Well, let me try this differently. How do you think about earned returns in the current year here for the utility and/or, you know, kind of what's implied year-over-year in growth on an EPS basis?

Speaker #4: And again, I just want to reinforce the really happy with the top end of the 5 to 7 that we've been running for the last couple of years.

Or let me try this differently. How do you think about earned returns in, uh, the current year here for the utility and or, you know, kind of what what's implied over year in growth on an EPS basis?

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, look, Julian, I think we've been pretty clear about the fact that where there are structural changes, we'll make changes, and when the changes aren't structural, we'll look at what opportunity sets we have for maintenance activities that might be in a four-year cycle, and try to look at that from a predictability standpoint for the investment community. We look at our plans every year, we adjust to that. Again, I just want to reinforce the really happy with the top end of the 5 to 7 that we've been running for the last couple of years, but we thought it was struck the scarcity issue of power was enough to structurally change the thought process to be in that 6 to 8, based upon where prices are, driven by both the capacity and the energy side.

Speaker #4: But we thought it was struck the scarcity issue of power was enough to structurally change our thought process to be in that 6 to 8 based upon where prices are.

Yeah, I look Julian. I think we've we've been pretty clear about the fact that where there's structural changes will will make changes. And when the changes aren't structural, we'll look at what opportunity sets we have.

Speaker #4: Driven by both the capacity and the energy side. So it is I know you're trying to push us into a little bit of a conversation about ROEs in the utility and that.

For maintenance activities, that might be in a four-year cycle, and try to look at that from a predictability standpoint for the investment community.

Speaker #4: And we just feel comfortable talking right now about that predictable pattern that we've talked about from an earnings standpoint.

Speaker #7: Yeah. No, but I hear you. The increase here is principally predicated on the power side of the business, for sure, on future years. Excellent, guys.

Speaker #7: Thank you so much.

Speaker #4: Thanks, Julien.

Ralph LaRosa: It is, I know you're trying to push us into a little bit of a conversation about ROEs and the utility and that, and we just feel comfortable talking right now about that predictable pattern that we've talked about from an earnings standpoint.

Speaker #8: The next question is from the line of Bill Appicelli with UBS. Please proceed with your questions.

So um, we look at our plans every year we adjust to that and again I I just want to reinforce the really happy with the top end of the 5 to 7 that we've been running for the last couple years, but we thought it was struck the scarcity. Issue of power was enough to structurally change, the our thought process to be in that 6 to 8 based upon where prices are driven by both the capacity and the energy side. So

um,

Speaker #4: Welcome back, Bill.

Speaker #8: Yes. Hi, Ralph. Hi, Dan. Thank you. Apologies for that technical problem. Just maybe building on some of these other incremental regulated capital investments and forgive me if you already addressed it and I missed it, but I guess where in the spectrum would those fall?

It. It is, uh, we I I I know, I'm, you're trying to push this into a little bit of a conversation about Roes in the utility and that and and we just feel comfortable talking right now about that predictable um pattern that we've talked about from an earnings standpoint.

Bill Apicelli: Yeah. No, but I hear you. The, the increase here is principally predicated on the power side of the business for sure, on future years. Excellent, guys. Thank you so much.

Julien Dumoulin-Smith: Yeah. No, but I hear you. The, the increase here is principally predicated on the power side of the business for sure, on future years. Excellent, guys. Thank you so much.

Speaker #8: And what types of projects are we talking about there?

Ralph LaRosa: Thanks, Julian.

Yeah, no, but I I hear you the the increase here is principally predicated on the the parasite of business for sure on future years. Excellent guys, thank you so much. Thanks, Julia.

Speaker #4: I think they come in really two buckets, right? There's incremental transmission that's in the PJM region. We've been active in that process. And we're successful as we've talked about a bunch of times in Maryland.

Operator: The next question is from the line of Bill Apicelli with UBS. Please just give us your question.

Ralph LaRosa: Welcome back, Bill.

The next question is from the line of Phil Apicelli with UBS. Please proceed with your question.

Welcome back bill.

Bill Apicelli: Yes. Hi, Ralph. Hi, Dan. Thank you. Apologies for that technical problem. Just maybe building on, you know, some of these other, you know, incremental regulated capital investments, and forgive me if you already addressed it and I missed it, but I guess, you know, where in the spectrum would those fall, and what types of projects are we talking about there?

Speaker #4: And we continue to look at those opportunities when they present themselves. There's a very specific effort going on in the state of New Jersey right now about being ready for solar.

Yes, hi Ralph. Hi Dan, thank you. Uh, apologies for that technical problem. Uh, just maybe building on, you know, some of these other, you know, incremental regulated capital investments—and forgive me if you already addressed it and I missed it—but, um, I guess, you know, where in the spectrum would those fall? And, uh, what types of projects are we talking about there?

Ralph LaRosa: I think they come in 2 buckets, right? There's incremental transmission that's, you know, in the PJM region. We've been active in that process and more successful, as we've talked about a bunch of times in Maryland. We continue to look at those opportunities when they present themselves. There's a very specific effort going on in the state of New Jersey right now about being ready for solar and the need for us to make sure that our distribution system is ready. That's been an ongoing process down at the Board of Public Utilities. There were comments received on that in the last 2 weeks down there, if I recall correctly, that we submitted in another state.

Speaker #4: And the need for us to make sure that our distribution system is ready. That's been an ongoing process down at the Board of Public Utilities.

and really, to

Commission.

Speaker #4: And there were comments received on that in the last couple of weeks down there, if I recall correctly, that we submitted in other states.

Speaker #4: So that could drive some incremental investment for us as we continue to make sure that this focus on solar and batteries can be enabled by the distribution system that they're going to be interconnecting to.

You know, at in the pjm region, uh, we've been active in that process and more successful. As we've talked about a bunch of times in, in Maryland, and we continue to look at those opportunities. When they, when they present themselves.

Speaker #4: And then the third bucket is the opportunity for us to participate on a generation side. Again, depending upon where policymakers land on that front.

There's um, a very specific effort going on in the state of New Jersey right now about being ready for solar.

Speaker #4: So I would say all three of those are the areas that we talk about around the table on a regular basis.

Speaker #2: And then on top of that, though, I would just add that embedded within kind of the base plan that we have in front of us, which the things that Ralph mentioned could add to that, I would still characterize what we've put out as the updated Capital Forecast as there's nothing in there that's a single project that's a huge part of the capital.

Ralph LaRosa: That could drive some incremental investment for us as we continue to make sure that this focus on solar and batteries can be enabled by the distribution systems that they're going to be interconnected to. The third bucket is the opportunity for us to participate on the generation side, again, depending upon where policymakers land on that front. I would say all three of those are the areas that we talk about around the table on a regular basis.

Um, and the need for us to make sure that our distribution system is ready, that that's been an ongoing process down at the Board of Public Utilities. And there were comments received on that in the last couple weeks down there. If I recall correctly that we we submitted another state so that could drive some incremental investment for us. As we as we continue to make sure that this

Speaker #2: It's going to require a whole bunch of permits to be able to get done. It's all stuff that sits in front of us and is shorter-term in nature.

Speaker #2: And we can kind of knock out without a whole lot of red tape that we got to get through or challenges we got to get through.

Dan Cregg: On top of that, Bill, I would just add that, you know, embedded within kind of the base plan that we have in front of us, which the things that Ralph mentioned could add to that. I would still characterize what we put out as the updated capital forecast, as there's nothing in there that's, you know, a single project that's a huge part of the capital. It's going to require a whole bunch of permits to be able to get done. It's all stuff that sits in front of us and is shorter term in nature, and we can kind of knock out without a whole lot of red tape that we got to get through, or challenges we got to get through. It's just kind of a basic set of capital that-

focus on solar and batteries can be enabled by the distribution system that they're going to be interconnecting to. Uh, and then the third bucket is uh the opportunity for us to participate on a generation side. Uh again depending upon where policy makers land on that front. So I would say, all 3 of those are the areas that we talked about around the table, on a regular basis.

Speaker #2: It's just kind of a basic set of capital that we know we can achieve.

And then, on top of that, though, I would just add that, you know, embedded within kind of the base plan that we have in front of us which which the things that Ralph mentioned could could add to that.

Speaker #4: Yeah. No, it's a really good point that Dan's saying. I mean, everything I just said is above and beyond. We're not building in a percentage of any one of those buckets as we put out this Capital Forecast.

Speaker #4: These are small projects that are really 90% of them are being based upon end-of-life on a regulated side. So I kind of have been telling my family anyway, if you think about what we do every day in replacing the infrastructure, it's just like the portal bridge.

sits in front of us and is shorter term in nature and we can kind of knock out without a whole lot of

Tape that we got to get through a challenges, we got to get through it. It's, uh,

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah

Dan Cregg: that we know we can achieve.

Speaker #4: For those of you that are in the New Jersey region and see New Jersey Transit delays right now as they upgrade that, the infrastructure in New Jersey is old.

Ralph LaRosa: No, it's a really good point that Dan's saying. I mean, everything I just said is above and beyond. We're not building in a percentage of any one of those buckets as we put out this capital forecast. These are small projects that are really 90% of them are being based upon end of life on the regulated side. We, you know, I kind of... I've been telling my family anyway, if you think about what we do every day and replacing the infrastructure, it's just like the Portal Bridge, for those of you that are in the New Jersey region and see New Jersey Transit delays right now as they upgrade that.

Speaker #4: And we have an opportunity to make upgrades as a result of that.

A basic set of capital that that we know we can achieve know. It's, it's, it's a really good point that, that, Dan say I mean everything I just said, is above and beyond, we're not building in a percentage of any 1 of those buckets. As we, as we put out this Capital forecast, these are

Speaker #8: All right. No, that's very helpful. And then just one other one on the O&M side. I guess what's embedded in the plan in the 6 to 8 on that front?

Speaker #8: Just at the utility level.

Speaker #2: Yeah. As we build our plan and Ralph has often described it this way, we take a look at what's in front of us and whatever kind of an inflationary assumption we have there.

Ralph LaRosa: The infrastructure in New Jersey is old. We have an opportunity to make upgrades as a result of that.

Speaker #2: And then we look to the businesses to try to pull back on that to end up in a more reasonable place from a cost-cutting perspective and overall cost management perspective.

These are small projects that are really 90% of them are being based upon end of life on on the regulated side. So we um, you know, I I kind of I've been telling my family. Anyway, if you think about what we do every day and replacing the infrastructure, it's uh it's just like the portal bridge. For those of you that were that that are in the New Jersey region in C, New Jersey Transit, delays, right now as they upgrade that. Um the infrastructure in New Jersey is old and we have an opportunity to make uh, upgrades as a result of that.

Bill Apicelli: All right. No, that's very helpful. Just one other one on the O&M side, I guess, what's embedded, you know, in the plan, in the 6 to 8 on that front, just, you know, at the utility level?

Speaker #2: So if you've got a 3% inflationary assumption, you can pull that back down to 2 to 2 and a quarter as everybody's looking for opportunities within those budgets to try to move to a better place.

All right. Now that's very helpful and then just 1 1 other 1 on the, on the on side I guess what's embedded in, you know, in the plan in the 6 to 8 on that front. Um, just, you know, at the utility level

Dan Cregg: Yeah, as we build our plan, and Ralph has often described it this way, you know, we take a look at what's in front of us, and whatever kind of an inflationary assumption we have there, and then we look to the businesses to try to pull back on that, to end up in a more reasonable place from a cost-cutting perspective and overall cost management perspective. If you've got a 3% inflationary assumption, you can pull that back down to, you know, 2% to 2.25%, as everybody's looking for opportunities within those budgets to try to move to a better place. That's kind of how we structure it and how we move forward on it.

Speaker #2: So that's kind of how we structure it and how we move forward on it. We know that we do have our labor agreements that are running out through '27.

Speaker #2: And those will get re-up. And that'll have an effect as well. But we kind of lay out a baseline plan and then pull back some efficiencies to get to where our final plan lands.

Speaker #4: Yeah. Bill, I mean, relatively flat with some inflation. And then we back it off, as Dan said. I know some people think we talk about finding pennies in the couches, which is a which I actually like.

Yeah. We as we build our plan and Ralph is often described it this way. You know, we take a look at what's in front of us uh and whatever kind of an inflationary assumption, we have there. And then we look to the to the businesses to try to pull back on that to, to end up in a in a more reasonable place from a cost cutting, uh, perspective and overall cost management perspective. So,

Speaker #4: My wife and I still have a little bucket that we put our pennies in. So it's not the worst thing in the world to go looking for them because they all add up at some point.

Dan Cregg: We know that we do have our labor agreements that are running out through 2027, and those will get re-upped, and that'll have an effect as well. We kind of lay out a baseline plan and then pull back some efficiencies to get to where our final plan lands.

Speaker #8: Okay. But some assumption on the re-upping of those labor agreements is reflected in this plan?

The 3% inflationary assumption, you can pull that back down to, you know, 2 to 2 and a quarter as everybody's looking for opportunities within those budgets to to try to move to a better place. So that's that's kind of how we structure it and how we move forward on it. Uh, we know that we do have our our labor agreements that are running out through 27 and those will get reopened and that'll have an effect as well. But we kind of lay out a baseline plan and then pull back some efficiencies to get to where our final plan lands.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, Bill, I mean, relatively flat with some inflation, and then we back it off, as Dan said. I know some people think we talk about, you know, finding pennies in the couches, which I actually like. My wife and I still have a little bucket that we put our pennies in. It's not the worst thing in the world to go looking for them because they all add up at some point.

Speaker #4: Oh, yeah. That's all in there. There are no yeah, no expectations of major dislocation there, so.

Speaker #8: Okay. All right. Thanks very much.

Speaker #4: Thank you.

Speaker #8: The next question is from the line of Michael Sullivan with Wolf Research. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #9: Hey, there.

Speaker #4: Good morning, Michael.

Speaker #9: Hey, Ralph. I think for a while now, you all have had in your slide deck over the forecast period, 90% regulated earnings. Is that still true under this updated plan or any sense you can give us of what the mix is?

I mean, relatively flat with some inflation and then we back it back. It off. As Dan said, I I I know some people think we were, we talked about, you know, Finding pennies in the couches, which is, which is a, which I actually like we my wife and I still have a, a little bucket that we put our pennies in. So it's, uh, it's it's not the worst thing in the world to go looking for them because they all add up at at some point.

Bill Apicelli: Okay. There's some assumption on the re-upping of those labor agreements is reflected in this plan?

Ralph LaRosa: Oh, yeah. That's all in there. There are no, yeah, no expectations of major dislocation there, so.

Okay. But that some some assumption on the, on the reopening of those labor agreements is, is reflected in this plan. Oh yeah, that's all in there. There's no, there are no, uh, yeah, no, no expectations of, uh, of

Speaker #4: No, I mean, what I would tell you, Michael, is I hope that number goes down a lot because that means power prices are going to go up.

Bill Apicelli: Okay. All right. Thanks very much.

Of major dislocation there. So,

Ralph LaRosa: Thank you.

Okay, all right. Thanks very much. Thank you.

Operator: The next question is from the line of Michael Sullivan with Wolfe Research. Please just give us your question.

Speaker #4: We're going to do better. I would think about the utility side of the business continuing to do what it does. And to the extent that we see some movement up from a power price perspective, given the demand supply dynamic that you're seeing, you might see a modest shift there.

The next question is from the line of Michael Sullivan, with wolf research. Please receive your question.

Michael Sullivan: Hey, hey there.

Ralph LaRosa: Good morning, Michael.

Michael Sullivan: Hey, Ralph. I think, for a while now, you all have had in your slide deck, over the forecast period, 90% regulated earnings. Is that still true under this updated plan? Any sense you can give us of what the mix is?

Speaker #4: And again, my kind of tongue-in-cheek way of saying it is I hope it goes down a lot because that means that we're doing better on the other side of the business.

Hey, hey there. Good morning, Michael. Hey Ralph, I think uh, for a while now you all have had in in your slide deck. Uh, over the forecast period, 90% regulated earnings is, is that still true under this updated plan? Or any sense you can give us of of what the mix is?

Speaker #4: But I wouldn't think about any major shifts that compared to what we've seen in the past. It's going to be more modest as we step through time.

Dan Cregg: No, I mean, what I would tell you, Michael, is I hope that number goes down a lot because that means power prices are going to go up, and we're going to do better. I would think about, you know, the utility side of the business continuing to do what it does, and to the extent that we see some movement up from a power price perspective, given the demand supply dynamic that you're seeing, you might see a modest shift there. Again, my kind of tongue-in-cheek way of saying it is, I hope it goes down a lot because that means that we're doing better on the other side of the business. I wouldn't think about any major shifts that compared to what we've seen in the past.

no, I mean what I would

down a lot, because

Speaker #9: Okay.

Speaker #4: Michael, I may be even I may even be a little bolder than that. I almost and we've said this also for many a long time in our decks.

Power prices are going to go up. We're going to do better. I would I would think about um you know the Utility side of the business continuing to do what it does and to the extent that we see some some movement up from a power price per

Speaker #4: The PTC floor is a regulated type return. And so when we think about it from that perspective, you could argue that the merchant is only above the PTC floor, right?

Supply dynamic that you're seeing, you might see a modest shift there, and again, my kind of tongue-in-cheek way of saying it is, I hope it goes down a lot because that means that, that would—

Speaker #4: Because the federal government has regulated that PTC floor as the return for the nuclear plants. So I know it's not traditional regulated. But when we think about it from a risk profile standpoint, it sure feels a lot like that.

I wouldn't think about any major, uh, shifts that.

Dan Cregg: It's going to be more modest as we step through time.

Compared to what we've seen in the past, it's going to be more modest as we step Through Time.

Jeremy Tonet: Okay.

Ralph LaRosa: Michael, I may even go be a little bolder than that. I almost, and we've said this also for long time in our decks. The PTC floor is a regulated type return. When we think about it from that perspective, you could argue that the merchant is only above the PTC floor, right? Because the federal government has regulated that PTC floor as the return for the nuclear plants. I know it's not traditional regulated, but when we think about it from a risk profile standpoint, it sure feels a lot like that.

Speaker #9: Okay. No, that's totally fair. But it just sounds like you're not going to tell us what your merchant assumption is above the PTC floor out in time.

Okay, I may be even I may even go be a little Bolder than that. I I almost and we've said this also for many time long time in our in our decks the the ptc4 is a regulated type return.

Speaker #4: Well, we're going to tell you what our earnings projections are. And we're going to meet them as we have done, so.

And so, when we think about it, from that perspective, you could argue that the, the merchant is only above the PPC floor, right? Because they they the, uh,

Speaker #9: Okay. Okay. And then on the utility side, I just think historically, the rate-based kind of rebase of the CAGR has been a bit higher than we saw this past year.

The the federal government has regulated that PTC floor as the return for the nuclear plants. So I I I know it's not traditional regulated but when we think about it from a risk profile standpoint, it sure feels a lot like that.

Speaker #9: Anything to make of that or what's kind of driving that? Last year and the year before might have been double digits. And then you grew 6 to 7 and a half off of that.

Jeremy Tonet: Okay. No, that's totally fair. It just sounds like you're not going to tell us what your merchant assumption is above the PTC floor out in time.

Okay. No, that's totally fair. Um but it just sounds like you're you're not going to tell us what your Merchant assumption is about the PTC 4 out in time.

Ralph LaRosa: Well, we're going to tell you what our earnings projections are, and we're going to meet them as we have done, so.

Speaker #2: Oh, from the speed you're talking about, from the standpoint of the baseline, look, I would think about that rate base as growing the 6 to 7 and a half percent that we've put out for the past couple of years.

Jeremy Tonet: Okay. Then on the utility side, I just think, historically, the rate base kind of rebase of the CAGR has been a bit higher than we saw this past year. Anything to make of that or what's kind of driving that? If you know, last year and the year before might have been double digits, and then you grew 6 to 7.5 off of that.

Speaker #2: And I think that that's still consistent. I would say to our credit that has been on a growing base that for some years has been above that.

the rate base kind of

Speaker #2: And so continuing to grow, I guess, embedded within your question, 6 to 7 and a half percent has been a consistent CAGR growth to the extent that what you're implying is correctly that that rate base has grown more than that the last few years we've continued to grow 6 to 7 and a half percent off of that higher base, which implies a little bit higher growth.

rebase of the kegger has has been a bit higher than we saw this past year and anything to make of that or what what's kind of driving that it you know last year and the year before might have been double digits and then you grew 6 to 7 and a half off of that.

Dan Cregg: Oh, Steve, you're talking about from the standpoint of the baseline. Look,

Jeremy Tonet: Correct, yeah.

Dan Cregg: I would think about that rate base as growing to 6 to 7.5% that we've put out for the past couple of years, I think that that's still consistent. I would say to our credit, that has been on a growing base that for some years has been above that. Continuing to grow, I guess, embedded within your question, 6 to 7.5% has been a consistent CAGR growth to the extent that what you're implying is correctly, that that rate base has grown more than that the last few years. We've continued to grow 6 to 7.5% off of that higher base, which implies a little bit higher growth.

Speaker #9: Okay. Great. Thank you.

Speaker #2: You're welcome.

Speaker #8: The next question's in the line of Anthony Crowdell with Mizuho Securities. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #10: Hey, good morning, team. Hey, Ralph, are you at the double game last night? I hear the opening ceremonies are really exciting.

Speaker #4: We did not make it down there, last night. But our esteemed CFO did.

Speaker #2: It was fantastic.

Speaker #10: Was he the fan applauding in the beginning? I know there was some booing going on of some of the elected officials.

Jeremy Tonet: Okay, great. Thank you.

Oh from Steve you're talking about from the standpoint of the Baseline? I look I would I would think about that rate base as as growing the 6 to 7 and a half percent that we've put out for the past couple of years and I think that that's still consistent I would say to to our credit that has been on a growing base that that for some years has been above that. And so continuing to grow I guess embedded within your question 6 to 7 and a half percent has been a consistent. Kerr growth to the extent that what you're implying is correctly. That that rate base has grown more than that. The last few years, we've continued to grow 6 to 7 and a half percent off of that higher base, which implies a little bit higher growth.

Speaker #2: Anthony, all I heard was USA chants. And they were deafening. It was fantastic.

Dan Cregg: You're welcome.

Okay, great. Thank you. You're welcome.

Operator: The next question is in the line of Anthony Crowdell with Mizuho Securities. Please proceed with your questions.

Speaker #10: That's awesome. Hey, I just have a clean-up question. I believe that BPU is in a $180-day pause right now coming from the governor's executive order.

The next question is in the line of Anthony krao with m security, please just leave your questions.

Anthony Crowdell: Hey, good morning, team. Hey, Ralph, were you at the Devils game last night? I hear the opening ceremonies were really exciting.

Speaker #10: If you could talk about one is maybe thoughts of what happened at the end of the 180-day pause, maybe some of the outcomes you think.

Ralph LaRosa: We did, we did not make it down there last night, but our esteemed CFO did. It was fantastic.

Speaker #10: And then also, I believe it's a 180-day pause of no increase in rates. Just curious if that includes any of the rate riders.

Hey, good morning, team. Hey, Ralph, you had the devil game last night, I hear the opening ceremonies are really exciting. I we did, we did not make it down there, uh, last night, but uh, our 16 C did.

Anthony Crowdell: Was he the fan applauding in the beginning? I know there was some booing going on of some of the elected officials.

It was fantastic.

Speaker #4: No. So the pause that they put in place was on regulations that were passed from the prior administration. And so they paused them. I don't know if it's 180 days or 90 days.

Ralph LaRosa: Anthony, all I heard was USA chants, and they were deafening. It was fantastic.

We see the fan applauding in the beginning. I know there was some booing going on of some of the elected officials. Anthony, all I heard was was USA chance and they were deafening. It was fantastic.

Anthony Crowdell: That's awesome. Hey, I just have a cleanup question. I believe that BPU is in a 180-day pause right now coming from the governor's executive order. If you could talk about one is, maybe thoughts of what happened at the end of the 180-day pause, maybe some of the outcomes you think. Then also, I believe it's a 180-day pause of no increase in rates. Just curious if that includes any of the rate riders.

Speaker #4: But they basically said, "Hey, listen. If we were going to change the speed limit on the turnpike and that was a change that was put in place by the prior administration, that won't go into effect for another 90 or 180 days." And so there were a few things there that were on the fringes to our business, but nothing after we did the review that would impact our business.

Ralph LaRosa: No. The pause that they put in place was on regulations that were passed from the prior administration. They paused them. I don't know if it's 180 days or 90 days, but they basically said, Hey, listen, if we were going to change the speed limit on the turnpike, and that was a change that was put in place by the prior administration, that won't go into effect for another 90 or 180 days. There were a few things there that were on the fringes to our business, but nothing after we did the review that would impact our business. I mean that from a labor wage standpoint, from a benefit standpoint, from any of the above.

That's awesome. Hey, I just have a clean up question. I believe that BPU is in a 180 day. Pause right now. Coming from the, uh, Governor's executive order. If you could talk about 1 is, um, maybe thoughts of what happened at the end of the 1888. Pause, maybe some of the outcomes, you think? But, and then also I, I believe it's 180. Paws of no increase in rates. Just curious if that includes any of the rate Riders.

Speaker #4: And I mean that from a labor-wage standpoint, from a benefits standpoint, from any of the above. So no impact on that as a change.

No, so, like, the pause that they put in place was on regulations that were passed in PRI, from the prior administration.

Speaker #4: But those regulations were regulations that were changed by the prior administration in the months leading up to the election.

Speaker #2: Yeah. And I think that was a 90-day timeframe, yeah.

Speaker #4: Yeah. I didn't want to correct for.

Speaker #10: No, that's fine. I know you're looking for pennies in the couch. But you know when the 90-day ends?

Speaker #4: Yeah. No, it's 90 days after she took office. So I want to say it's I think she took office on the 12th of January, if my memory serves me right.

Ralph LaRosa: No impact on that as a change, but those regulations were regulations that were changed by the prior administration in the months leading up to the election.

And so they they paused them. I don't know if it's 180 days or 90 days. But uh, they basically said, Hey listen. If if we were going to change, uh, the speed limit on the turnpike and that was a change that was put in place by the prior Administration that won't go into effect for another 90 or 180 days. Um, and so, there were a few things there that were on the fringes store business, but nothing after we did the review, that would impact our business. I and I, I mean, that from a labor wage standpoint from a benefit standpoint, from, from any of the above. So, um, no impact on that as a as a change. But those

Speaker #4: So 20th.

Speaker #10: Perfect.

Speaker #2: April, May.

Speaker #10: Thanks so much.

Speaker #2: Fantastic. Thanks, Anthony.

regulations were regulations that were changed by the prior Administration in the, in the months leading up to the, uh,

Dan Cregg: Yeah, I think that was a 90-day time frame.

Speaker #8: Our next question is from the line of Jeremy Tonet with JPMorgan. Please proceed with your questions.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, I didn't want to correct Mark.

Anthony Crowdell: No, that's fine. I know, I know you're looking for pennies in the couch, but do you know when the 90 day ends?

Speaker #10: Hi. Good morning.

Speaker #4: Good morning, Jeremy.

Uh, the election and I think that was a 90-day uh a 90-day time frame. Yeah. Yeah, I didn't want to. I didn't want to correct for no, that's fine. I know. I know you you're looking for pennies in the couch but you know, when the 90-day ends,

Speaker #10: Thanks for all the calls today. Just one last question for me as we think about future generation in the state of New Jersey. You've talked about the ability to host SMRs in the past.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, it's 90 days after she took office. I want to say it's, you know. I think she took office on the 12th of January, if my memory serves me right.

Speaker #10: And just wondering, any updated thoughts you might be able to provide on how likely that is to, I guess, come to fruition or just thoughts on the topic in general?

You know, it, I think she took off on a 12th of January, if my memory serves me, right? So,

Anthony Crowdell: Perfect. Thanks so much.

Ralph LaRosa: Thanks, Anthony.

Dan Cregg: Thanks, Anthony.

Perfect. Thanks so much. Thanks, Anthony. Thanks, Anthony.

Operator: Our next question is from the line of Jeremy Tonet with J.P. Morgan. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #4: Yeah. I would put our look, if we were advocating, we're advocating for on a nuclear front for big nuclear. We think that that makes the most sense based upon our property and our footprint.

Our next question is from the line of Jeremy tonight. With JP Morgan, please just use your questions.

Jeremy Tonet: Hi, good morning.

Ralph LaRosa: Good morning, Jeremy.

Jeremy Tonet: Thanks for all the color today. Just one last question from me. As we think about, you know, future generation in the state of New Jersey, you've talked about the ability to host SMRs in the past. I'm just wondering, any updated thoughts you might be able to provide on how, you know, likely that is to, I guess, come to fruition or just thoughts on the topic in general?

Speaker #4: But there could be other places where the it makes sense for people to put small SMRs and to try that technology out. I think also from a gas facility standpoint, we've said that we have a site that makes a ton of sense where we have pipes and wires ready to it as well.

Uh, thanks for all the colors today. Just one last question for me, as we think about, you know, future generation in the state of New Jersey. You've talked about the ability to host SMRs in the past, and just wondering,

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, I would put our. Look, if we were advocating, we're advocating for, on a nuclear front, for big nuclear. We think that that makes the most sense based upon our property and our footprint. There could be other places where it makes sense for people to put small SMRs and to try that technology out. I think also from a gas facility standpoint, we've said that we have a site that makes a ton of sense, where we have pipes and wires already to it as well. Yeah, I would. SMRs, from our standpoint, would not be the highest and best use of our property, but one that would be open to if that was really what folks wanted us to enable.

Any updated thoughts, you might be able to provide on you how you know, likely that is to I guess come to fruition or just thoughts on the topic in general.

Speaker #4: So yeah, I would SMRs from our standpoint would not be the highest and best use of our property. But one that would be open to if people if that was really what folks wanted us to enable.

Speaker #4: Remember, our early site permit is technology-agnostic. So we could go in any direction on that.

Speaker #8: Got it. That's helpful. I'll leave it there. Thanks. Our next question comes from the line of Nick Amicucci with Evercore ISI. Please proceed with your questions.

Yeah, I I would I would put our look if we were advocating we're advocating for on a nuclear front for big nuclear. We think that that makes the most sense based upon our property and our footprint but there could be other places where the uh it makes sense for people to to to put small smrs and and to try that technology out. I think also from a a gas facility standpoint. We've said that we have a site that makes a ton of sense where we have pipes and wires ready to do it as well. So, um,

Speaker #11: Hey, good morning, Ralph and Dan. How are you?

Speaker #4: Good morning, Ralph. I would hold on to those pennies because there's probably some scarcity value associated. Exactly. Exactly. They get added up. They add up.

Yeah I would smrs for more standpoint would would not be the highest and best use of our property, but 1 that would be open to if people if that was really what folks wanted us to enable.

Ralph LaRosa: Remember, our early site permit is technology agnostic, so we could go in any direction on that.

Speaker #11: Yeah. So I actually wanted to kind of continue down the nuclear rabbit hole here if we could for a little bit. Just as we think about kind of the nuclear fuel availability and how you guys are hedged out through over the course of the capital plan and just knowing that Russia is kind of going offline, 2028, how are you guys kind of are you guys kind of front-loading or kind of pre-buying any type of nuclear fuel just to ensure that affordability kind of doesn't go too haywire?

Life permit is is technology agnostic, so we could go in any direction on that.

Bill Apicelli: Got it. That's helpful. I'll leave it there. Thanks.

Got it. That's helpful. I'll leave it there. Thanks.

Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Nick Amicucci with Evercore ISI. Please proceed with your question.

Nick Amicucci: Hey, good morning, Ralph and Dan. How are you?

All right. Next question comes from the line of Nick Amakuchi with Evercore ISI. Please just give us your question.

Ralph LaRosa: Good morning, Nick.

Nick Amicucci: I would hold on to those pennies because there's probably some scarcity value associated with them.

Ralph LaRosa: Exactly. Exactly. They get added up. They add up.

Nick Amicucci: Yeah. I actually wanted to kind of continue down the down the nuclear rabbit hole here, if we could, for a little bit. Just as we think about, you know, kind of the the the nuclear fuel availability and how you guys are hedged out through, you know, over over the course of the capital plan, and just knowing that, you know, Russia is kind of going offline in 2028. How are you guys kind of? Are you guys, you know, kind of front-loading or kind of pre-buying any type of nuclear fuel just to ensure that, you know, affordability kind of doesn't go too haywire?

Hey, good morning, Ralph and Dan. How are you? I would hold on to those pennies because there's probably some scarcity value Associated. Exactly. Exactly. They get added up. They add up. Yeah.

Speaker #2: Yeah. Look, when I start thinking about nuclear fuels, the first thing I think about is the fuel in the reactor because that's most of what we're going to be using for the next couple of years.

Speaker #2: Then I look to where we have contracted and we're contracted out for the next few years for most of what we're going to need.

Speaker #2: And it's only when you get to the tail end of that five-year period when things are going to change. I also think just not to get too deep into world markets, but I think conceptually, the fuel that's being produced is the fuel that's going to be produced.

Speaker #2: And if Russian fuel doesn't come here, Russian fuel will go somewhere and that will displace what's going to be purchased from places where we're going to purchase from.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, Look, when I start thinking about nuclear fuel, the first thing I think about is the fuel in the reactor, because that's most of what we're going to be using for the next couple of years. I look to where we have contracted, and we're contracted out for the next few years for most of what we're going to need, and it's only when you get to the tail end of that 5-year period when things are going to change. You know, I also think, just not to get too deep into world markets, but I think conceptually, the fuel that's being produced is the fuel that's going to be produced. If Russian fuel doesn't come here, Russian fuel will go somewhere, and that will displace what's going to be purchased from places where we're going to purchase from.

So, um, I actually wanted to kind of continue down the, uh, down the nuclear Rabbit Hole here. If we could for a little bit. Um, just as we think about, you know, kind of the, the, the nuclear fuel availability and how you guys are hedged out, um, through uh, you know, over over the course of the capital plan and just knowing that, you know, Russia's kind of going offline. Uh, 2028, how are you guys kind of um, are you guys you know, kind of front loading or kind of a pre buying any type of nuclear fuel? Just to ensure that you know, affordability kind of doesn't go, doesn't go too haywire.

yeah, we

and when I start,

Speaker #2: And so you could see some modest movements with respect to supply-demand pricing. But I don't think anything that's going to be all that dramatic.

Nuclear fuels. The first thing I think about is the fuel in the reactor because that's most of what we're going to be using for the next couple of years.

Speaker #2: And if I think about prices that sit somewhere around 50 bucks and fuel that sits somewhere around 7, 8 bucks, on the overall scheme of things, the availability is a critical aspect for us.

Speaker #2: And I have no question that we're going to continue to see availability of fuel. And you could see some modest movement in prices. But I think we're hedged out for the next couple of years in pretty good shape.

Speaker #11: Got it. Got it. Great. And then if I just if I could as well, I know, Ralph, you've been kind of a big proponent on more large nuclear relative to SMRs.

Ralph LaRosa: You could see some modest movements with respect to supply-demand pricing, but I don't think anything that's going to be all that dramatic. If I think about, you know, prices that sit somewhere around $50 and fuel that sits somewhere around, you know, $7, $8, on the overall scheme of things, it's the availability is a critical aspect for us, and I have no question that we're going to continue to see availability of fuel, and you could see some modest movement in prices, but I think we're hedged out for the next couple of years in pretty good shape.

Then I looked to where we have contracted and we're contracted out for the next few years for most of what we're going to need. And it's only when you get to the tail end of that 5 year period, when things are going to change. I, you know, I also think just not not to get too deep into World Markets, but but I think conceptually, uh, the fuel that's being produced is the fuel that's going to be produced and if Russian fuel doesn't come here, Russian fuel will go somewhere and that will displace. Uh, what's going to be purchased from places where we're going to purchase from and so uh, you could see some modest

movements with respect to supply demand pricing, but

Speaker #11: But I think if I understand correctly, Governor Sherrill is more she's just given her naval background more in tune with SMRs. But is there anything any kind of, I guess, appetite from her just given that we did have the couple of months ago the Brookfield Westinghouse DOE type of procurement of the 10 AP1000s?

Some fuel that sits somewhere around, you know, $7–8 bucks on the overall scheme of things. It's the availability that's a critical aspect for us, and I have no question that we're going to continue to see availability. Fuel, and you could see some modest movement in prices, but I think we're headed out for the next couple of years in pretty good shape.

Nick Amicucci: Got it. Great. If I could as well, I know, Ralph, you've been kind of a big proponent on more large nuclear relative to SMRs, but I think if I understand correctly, Governor Sherrill is more, she's, just given her naval background, more in tune with SMRs. Is there anything, any kind of, I guess, appetite from her, just given that, you know, we did have the couple of months ago, the Brookfield, Westinghouse, DOE type of procurement of the 10 AP1000s? I mean, is there any opportunity for you guys to partake in that, those allocations?

Speaker #11: I mean, is there any opportunity for you guys to partake in those allocations?

Speaker #4: Yeah. Look, I think we have said probably ad nauseam now that we want to help enable exactly that. And so we will continue to educate and advocate on behalf of the state for something like an AP1000.

All right, great. Um and then if I just if I could as well, I know Ralph you've you've been kind of, um, a big proponent on on more large nuclear relative death and Mars, but I think if I, if I understand correctly Governor, um, Cheryl is more, uh, she's just giving her a naval background, more more in tune with smrs. But is there is there anything? Um any kind of uh I guess.

Speaker #4: I don't want to I don't want to predetermine that selection. I think that's one that it appears the DOE has firmed up on. But I also hear that all the eyes are being dotted and T's crossed.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, I look, I think we have said probably ad nauseam now, that we want to help enable exactly that. We will continue to educate and advocate on behalf of the state for something like an AP1000. I don't want to predetermine that selection. I think that's one that it appears the DOE is firmed up on, but I also hear that, you know, all the I's are being dotted and T's crossed. We'll be there advocating, but that's as far as we're going right now. I think the education that's ongoing for the incoming administration is something that we're also trying to help with.

Speaker #4: So we'll be there advocating. But that's as far as we're going right now. And I think the education that's ongoing for the incoming administration is something that we're also trying to help with.

Um appetite from her just given that, you know, we did have the the couple a couple months ago, the the Brookfield. Um, Westinghouse doe type of uh procurement of the 10 AP 1000. I mean, is there any opportunity for you guys to partake in in that those allocations? Yeah, I look I I think we have said,

Probably a nause now that we want to help enable exactly that. Um and so um we will continue to to educate and Advocate on behalf of the state.

Speaker #8: Perfect. Thanks, guys.

Speaker #4: Thanks.

Speaker #8: Thank you. Our last question is from the line of David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #12: Hey. This is Amanda On for Dave. Thanks so much for taking my questions.

Speaker #4: Hi, Amanda.

Speaker #12: Hey. So maybe lastly, just on the executive orders, how are you thinking about the scope of the current BP study? And are there any financial impacts currently contemplated in the long-term plan based on any potential changes?

For something like an AP 1000, I don't want to, I don't want to predetermine um that selection. I think that's 1 it, it appears that. Doe is firmed up on, but I also hear that, you know, all the eyes are being dotted and sees cross. So uh, we'll we'll be there advocating. But um, that's as far as we're going right now. And I think the education that's ongoing for the incoming Administration is something that we're also trying to help with.

Nick Amicucci: Perfect. Thanks, guys.

Perfect.

Ralph LaRosa: Thanks.

Speaker #12: Or do you think it's still too early to assess those changes?

Thanks guys.

Thanks.

Operator: Thank you. Our last question is from the line of David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question.

Speaker #4: Yeah. I think it's too early right now. There's a lot of conversations going on. But I know we have looked at a number of different ways that things have changed from a regulatory standpoint and how utilities have been compensated.

Thank you. Our last question is from the line of David araro with Morgan Stanley. Please just see you with your questions.

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): Hey, this is Amanda on for Dave. Thanks so much for taking my questions.

Amanda Sabia: Hey, this is Amanda on for Dave. Thanks so much for taking my questions.

Ralph LaRosa: Hi, Amanda.

Hey, this is Amanda on for Dave. Thanks so much for taking my questions. Hi, Amanda.

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): Hey. Maybe lastly, just on the executive orders, how are you thinking about the scope of the current BPU study? Are there any financial impacts currently contemplated in the long-term plan, based on any potential changes, or do you think it's still too early to assess those changes?

Amanda Sabia: Hey. Maybe lastly, just on the executive orders, how are you thinking about the scope of the current BPU study? Are there any financial impacts currently contemplated in the long-term plan, based on any potential changes, or do you think it's still too early to assess those changes?

Speaker #4: You can look across the country and see many of those. And I think many of those at the end of the day have worked out for the utilities that have been involved.

Speaker #4: It's just a different way of thinking about things and providing those returns for those utilities. So we have not changed we haven't put any different regulatory process in place in the projections that we've made.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, I think it's too early right now. There's a lot of conversations going on, I know we have looked at, a number of different ways that, you know, things have changed from a regulatory standpoint and how utilities have been compensated. You can look across the country and see many of those, I think many of those, at the end of the day, have worked out for the utilities that have been involved. It's a, it's just a different way of thinking about things and providing those returns for those utilities. We have not changed.

Hey, um, so maybe lastly just on the executive orders. How are you thinking about the scope of the current BP study, and are there any financial impacts currently contemplated in the long-term plan, um, based on any potential changes, or do you think it's still too early to assess, um, those changes?

Speaker #4: But we fully expect that the outcome is going to be an outcome that makes sense for both us and for the customers.

Speaker #12: Great. Thanks so much. And maybe just a quick follow-up. With the two new commissioners in the BPU, any, I guess, initial comments on conversations with them just based on the first few months of their appointment?

Speaker #4: Yeah. No. Our team has continued to meet with folks. But our conversations have been limited to, I would base way to put it, meet and greets at this point.

Ralph LaRosa: We haven't put any different regulatory process in place in the projections that we've made, but we fully expect that the outcome is going to be an outcome that makes sense for both us and for the customers.

Yeah, I think it's too early right now. There's a lot of conversations going on, but I know we have looked at um, a number of different ways that, you know, things have changed from a regulatory standpoint and how you utilities have been compensated. You can look across the country and see many of those. And I think many of those, at the end of the day have worked out for the utilities that have been involved. Um, it's a, it's just a different way of thinking about things and, and, and, and providing those returns for those utilities. Um, so we have not changed.

Uh we have we haven't put any any different um regulatory process in place in the in the projections that we've made.

Speaker #12: Got it. Thanks so much again.

We fully expect that the outcome is going to be an outcome. That makes sense for both us and for the customers.

[Analyst] (Morgan Stanley): Great. Thanks so much. Maybe just a quick follow-up: With the two new commissioners, in the BPU, any, I guess, initial comments on conversations with them, just based on the first few months of their appointment?

Amanda Sabia: Great. Thanks so much. Maybe just a quick follow-up: With the two new commissioners, in the BPU, any, I guess, initial comments on conversations with them, just based on the first few months of their appointment?

Speaker #8: Thank you. This is all the time we have for questions. I would like to turn the floor back to Mr. LaRossa for closing comments.

Speaker #4: Thank you, Rob. So I had a couple of comments prepared. But I actually started this call, as you heard, talking about the great work of our team during the last storm.

Great, thanks so much. And maybe just a quick follow-up with the two new Commissioners, um, in the BPU—any, I guess, initial comments on conversations with them? Um,

just based on the first few months of their appointment.

Ralph LaRosa: Yeah, no, I. Our team has continued to meet with folks, our conversations have been limited to, best way to put it, meet and greets at this point.

Yeah, no, I—I, our team.

Folks. Um,

Speaker #4: And our facilitator here today, Rob, actually started our morning off by thanking us for the work that was done and the way that we responded and communicated during the storm.

But our our conversations have been limited to. I would I base why you put it meet and greets at this point.

Shar Pourreza: Got it. Thanks so much again.

Got it. Thanks so much again.

Dan Cregg: Thank you. That's all the time we have for questions. I would like to turn the floor back to Mr. LaRosa for closing comments.

Speaker #4: So I just want to reinforce the thank you to the team. We could talk all we want about finances and the outcomes that we have here.

Ralph LaRosa: Thank you, Rob. I had a couple of comments prepared, but I actually started this call, as you heard, talking about the great work of our team during the last storm. Our facilitator here today, Rob, actually started our morning off by thanking us for the work that was done and the way that we responded and communicated during the storm. I just want to reinforce the thank you to the team. We can talk all we want about finances and the outcomes that we have here, but if we don't deliver on our operational mandates day in and day out, no regulatory construct is going to matter for us, and, you know, our plants won't run.

Thank you. This is all the time. We have for questions, I would like to turn the floor back to Mr. LaRosa for closing comments.

Speaker #4: But if we don't deliver on our operational mandates, day in and day out, no regulatory construct is going to matter for us. And our plants won't run.

Thank you Rob. So, um, I had a couple of comments prepared, but I actually, uh, started this call as you heard talking about the great work of our team.

Speaker #4: So I thank the employees every day. And when I get comments like we just received from Rob when we opened up this call, it makes it all worthwhile.

Speaker #4: So Rob, thank you. Not only for facilitating the call, but for reinforcing for all of us that what matters is the work that's being done day in and day out by our employees in the field.

Speaker #4: And with that, thank you, Rob. And with that, I'm going to close. And I look forward to seeing you. We're going to be out quite a bit over the next month and a half and look forward to the in-person conversations.

Uh, during the last storm and our facilitator here today, Rob. Uh, actually, uh, started our morning off by by Thanking us for the work that was done. And and the way that uh, we responded and communicated during the storm. So uh I I just want to reinforce the thank you to the team. We can talk all we want about finances in the outcomes that we have here, but if we don't deliver on our operational uh mandates day in and day out. Uh no regulatory construct is going to matter for us and

Ralph LaRosa: I thank the employees every day, and when I get comments like we just received from Rob when we opened up this call, it makes it all worthwhile. Rob, thank you, not only for facilitating the call, but for reinforcing for all of us that what matters is the work that's being done day in and day out by our employees in the field.

Dan Cregg: Thank you, Mr. LaRosa.

Ralph LaRosa: With that. Thank you, Rob.

And, and, you know, our plants won't run. So, um, I thank the employees every day, and when I get comments like we just received from Rob when we opened up this call, it makes it all worthwhile. So Rob, thank you—not only for facilitating the call, but for reinforcing for all of us that what matters is the work that's being done day in and day out by our employees in the field.

Ralph LaRosa: With that. Thank you, Rob.

And with that. Okay, thank you Rob.

Dan Cregg: Thank you.

Ralph LaRosa: With that, I'm going to close, and look forward to seeing you. We're going to be out quite a bit over the next month and a half, and look forward to the in-person conversations.

Thank you. And with with that, I'm going to close and uh, look forward to seeing you. We're going to be out quite a bit over the next month and a half and look forward to the uh, in-person conversations.

Dan Cregg: Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.

Please and gentlemen, this concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.

Q4 2025 Public Service Enterprise Group Inc Earnings Call

Request a DemoDemo

PEG

Public Service Enterprise Group

Earnings