Q4 2025 NorthWestern Energy Corp Earnings Call

February 12, 2026

Operator: NorthWestern Energy 2025 Year-End Financial Results Webinar. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you'd like to ask a question during this time, simply press star, followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. And if you'd like to withdraw your question, press star one again. Thank you. I'd now like to turn the call over to Travis Meyer. Please go ahead.

Speaker #1: NorthWestern Energy 2025 year-end financials results webinar. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session.

Speaker #1: If you'd like to ask a question during this time, simply press star, followed by the number 1 on your telephone keypad. And if you'd like to withdraw your question, press star 1 again.

Speaker #1: Thank you. I'd now like to turn the call over to Travis Meyer. Please go ahead.

Speaker #2: Good afternoon, and thank you for joining NorthWestern Energy Group's financial results webcast for the full year-end of December 31st, 2025. As Jordan said, my name is Travis Meyer.

Travis Meyer: Good afternoon, and thank you for joining NorthWestern Energy Group's financial results webcast for the full year ended December 31, 2025. As Jordan said, my name is Travis Meyer. I'm the Director of Corporate Development and Investor Relations Officer for NorthWestern. Joining us on the call today are Brian Bird, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Crystal Lail, Chief Financial Officer. They will walk you through our financial results and provide an overall update on progress this quarter. NorthWestern's results have been released, and the release is available on our website at northwesternenergy.com. We also released our 10-K pre-market this morning. Please note that the company's press release, this presentation, comments by presenters, and responses to your questions may contain forward-looking statements.

Speaker #2: I'm the Director of Corporate Development and Investor Relations Officer for NorthWestern. Joining us on the call today are Brian Bird, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Crystal Lail, Chief Financial Officer.

Speaker #2: They will walk you through our financial results and provide an overall update on progress this quarter. NorthWestern's results have been released in the releases available on our website at northwesternenergy.com.

Speaker #2: We also released our 10-K pre-market this morning. Please note that the company's press release this presentation, comments by presenters and responses to your questions, may contain forward-looking statements.

Speaker #2: As such, I'll direct you to the disclosures contained in our SEC filings in the Safe Harbor Provisions, included on the second slide of this presentation.

Travis Meyer: As such, I'll direct you to the disclosures contained in our SEC filings and the safe harbor provisions included on the second slide of this presentation. Also note that this presentation includes non-GAAP financial measures and information regarding the pending merger transaction. Please see the non-GAAP disclosures, definitions, and reconciliations, and the merger-related disclosures included in the appendix of the presentation materials. This webcast is being recorded. The archive replay will be available shortly after the event and remain active for one year. Please visit the financial results section of our website to access the replay. With that behind us, I'll hand the presentation over to Brian Bird for his opening remarks.

Speaker #2: Also note that this presentation includes non-GAAP financial measures and information regarding the pending merger transaction. Please see the non-GAAP disclosures definitions and reconciliations in the merger-related disclosures included in the appendix of the presentation materials.

Speaker #2: This webcast is being recorded. The archive replay will be available shortly after the event and remain active for one year. Please visit financialresults section of our website to behind us, I'll hand the presentation over to Brian Bird.

Speaker #2: For his opening remarks.

Speaker #3: Thanks, Travis. Speaking about 2025, first and foremost, I want to talk about how we've done in terms of executing on our strategic initiatives. First and foremost, we announced our agreement with Black Hills Corporation for an all-stock merger of Equals.

Brian Bird: Thanks, Travis. Speaking about 2025, first and foremost, I want to talk about how we've done in terms of executing on our strategic initiatives. First and foremost, we announced our agreement with Black Hills Corporation for an all-stock merger of equals. We patiently waited and ultimately closed our acquisition of the Avista and Puget Colstrip interests as of 1 January 2026. We recently submitted a $300 million, 131MW South Dakota natural gas project to SPP's expedited resource adequacy study, and we are now including that project in our ongoing capital plan. We acquired the Energy West and Cut Bank Gas natural gas distribution assets. On the legislative and regulatory front, we had very, very good outcomes in 2025.

Speaker #3: We patiently waited and ultimately closed our acquisition of the Vista & Puget Coal Strip interests. As of 1/1/26, we recently submitted a $300 million or $131 megawatt South Dakota natural gas project to SBP's expedited resource adequacy study, and we are now including that project in our ongoing capital plan.

Speaker #3: And we acquired the Energy West and Cut Bank Gas natural gas distribution. On the legislative and regulatory front, we had very, very good outcomes in 2025.

Speaker #3: On the legislative front, Montana Senate Bill 301 was signed into law, providing greater competence for transmission investment. In Montana, in Montana House Bill 490, signed into law, which clarifies and limits wildfire-related risks, protecting our customers, communities, and investors.

Brian Bird: On the legislative front, Montana Senate Bill 301 was signed into law, providing greater confidence for transmission investment in Montana. In Montana, House Bill 490 signed into law, which clarifies and limits wildfire-related risks, protecting our customers, communities, and investors. So again, a very good legislative outcome in 2025. On the regulatory front, speaking of wildfire, we also, as part of that legislation, we need to get our wildfire plan approved, and we did get that approval from the Montana Commission in 2025. And then also on the regulatory front, we did complete our Montana Electric and Natural Gas general rate reviews. And then moving forward, thinking about the data center growth opportunities, during the year, we signed our third letter of intent with Quantica, the 500+ megawatts data center.

Speaker #3: So again, very good legislative outcome in '25. On the regulatory front, speaking of wildfire, we also as part of that legislation, we need to get our wildfire plan approved, and we did get that approval from the Montana Commission in 2025.

Speaker #3: And then also on the regulatory front, we did complete our Montana Electric and Natural Gas General Rate Reviews. And then moving forward, thinking about data center growth opportunities, during the year, we signed our third letter of intent with Quantica.

Speaker #3: For 500-plus megawatts data center. And we progressed with SABI from a letter of intent to a development agreement. So that's 2025. More recently, in talking about financial results and Crystal will get into that here shortly, but the financial results for the full year we reported GAAP diluted EPS of $2.94.

Brian Bird: And, we progressed with Sabey from a letter of intent to a development agreement. So that's 2025. More recently, in talking about financial results, and Crystal will get into that here shortly, but the financial results for the full year, we reported GAAP diluted EPS of $2.94, and our non-GAAP diluted EPS of $3.58. We are increasing our quarterly dividend by 1.5% to $0.67 per share. We're initiating our 2026 earnings guidance range of $3.68 to $3.83, and we're updating our five-year capital plan to $3.21 billion, a 17% increase over our prior plan.

Speaker #3: In our non-GAAP diluted EPS of $3.58. We are increasing our quarterly dividend by 1.5% to $67 per share. We're initiating our 2026 earnings guidance range of $3.68 to $3.83.

Speaker #3: And we're updating our five-year capital plan to $3.21 billion, a 17% increase over our prior plan. Speaking of the merger with Black Hills, which we anticipate a closing in the second half of 2026, we filed joint requests for a merger approval in the states Montana, Nebraska, and South Dakota, but we also filed with FERC.

Brian Bird: Speaking of the merger with Black Hills, which we anticipated closing in the second half of 2026, we filed joint requests for a merger approval in the states of Montana, Nebraska, and South Dakota, but we also filed with FERC, and we recently filed also our Form S-4 and joint proxy. Regarding the Montana IRP, we initiated or submitted, I should say, our draft 2026 Integrated Resource Plan here about a month ago. From a Montana data center perspective, as of yesterday, we advanced our friends at Atlas Power from an LOI perspective to a development agreement. I'll speak to all of these topics a bit more after Crystal's presentation. With that, Crystal.

Speaker #3: And we recently filed also our Form S4 in joint proxy. Regarding the Montana IRP, we initiated or submitted, I should say, our draft 2026 integrated resource plan.

Speaker #3: Here about a month ago. And from a Montana data center perspective, as of yesterday, we advanced our friends at Atlas Power from an LOI perspective to a development agreement.

Speaker #3: And I'll speak to all of these topics a bit more after Crystal's presentation. With that, Crystal.

Speaker #4: Thank you, Brian. In my comments today, I will cover our fourth quarter and year-to-date results. I will also cover, as Brian mentioned, our outlook for 2026 and our updated capital and financing plan.

Crystal Lail: Thank you, Brian. In my comments today, I will cover our Q4 and year-to-date results. I will also cover, as Brian mentioned, our outlook for 2026 and our updated capital and financing plan. After listening to Brian there, it's been a really, really busy 2025 with a lot of accomplishments, and our team has worked super hard to also deliver on our results for 2025, achieving 5.3% growth off of 2024 on a Non-GAAP basis. We delivered GAAP earnings of $2.94, which included impacts of merger-related costs, the regulatory outcome rate case in Montana, and a very warm Q4. I'll describe those adjustments in a bit detail or further detail here on a later slide.

Speaker #4: After listening to Brian there, it's been a really, really busy 2025 with a lot of accomplishments and our team has worked super hard to also deliver on our results for 2025, achieving $5.3% growth off of 2024 on a non-GAAP basis.

Speaker #4: We delivered GAAP earnings of $2.94, which included impacts of merger-related costs. The regulatory outcome right case in Montana and a very warm fourth quarter.

Speaker #4: I'll describe those adjustments in a bit detail or further detail here on a later slide. Adjusting for those items, as I mentioned, we delivered $3.58, and that's the efforts after quite a few headwinds during the year to deliver upon our commitments to our shareholders.

Crystal Lail: Adjusting for those items, as I mentioned, we delivered $3.58, and that's the efforts after quite a few headwinds during the year to deliver upon our commitments to our shareholders. Moving on to slide 8. On an adjusted basis for Q4, we delivered $1.17. Our improved margin reflects new rates, a lot of regulatory execution involved in getting to those numbers, which were offset a bit by mild weather, as I alluded to in this Q4, very warm for us, and impact of market prices in our Montana PCCAM mechanism. That margin improvement was offset by a one-time charge in the Montana rate review, higher operating costs, and operating costs certainly include merger-related costs as well, and then depreciation and interest expense increases as well. Moving to slide 9 to talk about some of the adjustments for the quarter.

With that Crystal.

Speaker #4: Moving on to slide eight, on an adjusted basis for the fourth quarter, we delivered $1.17. Our improved margin reflects new rates a lot of regulatory execution involved in getting to those numbers.

Thank you, Brian and my comments today, I will cover our fourth quarter and year to date results I will also cover as Brian mentioned, our outlook for 2026 and are up.

Okay.

Speaker #4: Which were offset a bit by mild weather, as I alluded to in this fourth quarter, very warm for us, and impacts of market prices in our Montana PCAM mechanism.

2025, with a lot of accomplishments.

Okay.

And our team has worked super hard to also deliver on our results for 2025, achieving five 3% growth off of 2024 on a non-GAAP basis.

Yeah.

Speaker #4: That margin improvement was offset by a one-time charge in the Montana rate review. Higher operating costs and operating costs certainly include merger-related costs as expense increases as well.

We delivered GAAP earnings of $2 94.

Which included impact of merger related costs, the regulatory outcomes rate case in Montana, and a very warm fourth quarter I'll describe those adjustments and a bit detail further details here on a later slide adjusting for those items as I mentioned, we delivered $3 58, and Thats. The efforts after quite a few headwinds during the year to deliver upon our COVID-19.

Speaker #4: Moving to slide nine to talk about some of the adjustments for the quarter, weather for the quarter was unfavorable by three cents. But when you compare that to a very mild 2024, however, compared to normal, weather represented a 13-cent impact to us in Q4.

Okay.

Crystal Lail: Weather for the quarter was unfavorable by $0.03, but when you compare that to a very mild 2024, however, compared to normal, weather represented a 13-cent impact to us in Q4. The quarter was also impacted by $0.03 of merger costs. The one-time charge for the Montana Rate Review outcome related to the Yellowstone County Generating Station and the disallowance of certain costs related to that was $0.38, and $0.03 related to the PCCAM, reflecting the final order there, reflecting cessation of the sharing amount there, offset by a 12-cent tax benefit. You'll see that resulted in the $1.17 of adjusted earnings compared to a $1.13 in the fourth quarter of 2024.

Okay.

Speaker #4: The quarter was also impacted by three cents of merger costs. The one-time charge for the Montana rate review outcome related to the Yellowstone County generating station and the disallowance of certain costs related to that was $0.38.

To our shareholders.

Moving on to slide eight on an adjusted basis for the fourth quarter. We delivered $1 17, our improved margin reflects new rates a lot of regulatory execution involved in getting to those numbers, which were offset a bit by mild weather as I alluded to in the fourth quarter very warm for us and impacts of market prices and our Montana P. Chem.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

Speaker #4: And three cents related to the PCAM reflecting the final order there reflecting cessation of the sharing amount there. Offset by a 12-cent tax benefit.

Okay.

Speaker #4: You'll see that resulted in the $1.17 of adjusted earnings compared to a $1.13 in the fourth quarter of 2024. On a year-to-date basis, moving to slide 10, our performance is driven by, again, that improved margin driven by regulatory PCAM within that of nine cents from a full year basis.

Margin improvement was offset by a one time charge in the Montana rate review higher operating costs and operating costs. Certainly include merger related costs as well and then depreciation and interest expense increases as well.

Okay.

Crystal Lail: On a year-to-date basis, moving to slide 10, our performance is driven by, again, that improved margin driven by regulatory execution, offset by detriments of PCCAM within that of $0.09 from a full year basis. On an O&M perspective, certainly higher given new maintenance at the Yellowstone County Generating Station and some maintenance at our other electric generation. The amount we're spending importantly on wildfire mitigation and also insurance that is increased in labor and benefits. We also incurred higher depreciation expense of $0.27 and interest expense of $0.23.

Okay.

Moving to slide nine to talk about some of the adjustments for the quarter.

Okay.

Yes.

Weather for the quarter was unfavorable by <unk> <unk>, but when you compare that to a very mild 2024, however, compared to normal weather represented a 13 impact to us in Q4.

Okay.

Speaker #4: On an O&M perspective, certainly higher given new maintenance at the Yellowstone County generating facility as the maintenance at our other electric generation the amount we're spending importantly on wildfire mitigation and also insurance that is increased in labor and benefits.

Okay.

Quarter was also impacted by <unk> <unk> of merger costs. The one time charge for the Montana rate review outcome related to the <unk> County, generating station and the disallowance of certain costs related to that with 38 cents.

Perfect.

Okay.

Speaker #4: We also incurred higher depreciation expense of $0.27 and interest expense of $0.23. One item I would highlight on this slide is that taxes in the current period includes a 12-cent benefit while 2024 included a 39-cent benefit.

Okay.

Well.

And <unk> related to the PJM, reflecting the final order there.

Okay.

Crystal Lail: One item I would highlight on this slide is that taxes in the current period includes a $0.12 benefit, while 2024 included a $0.39 benefit, which is a good segue to the next slide, 11, to hopefully give you clarity on quite a few things that moved within our earnings from a 2025 full year basis. Weather, again, was unfavorable by $0.05. Compared to normal weather, that was $0.18 of detriment for us as we think about our impact to results for 2025. It was a very mild back half of 2025. Most of you won't recall, but we actually started the year through Q1 with favorable weather. So that reversal was really significant for us and impacts also, as we'll talk about later, cash, and the impact to financing plans.

Yes.

Reflecting cessation of the sharing amount there offset by a 12 tax benefit youll.

Okay.

Yes.

Youll see that resulted in the $1 17 of adjusted earnings compared to $1 13 in the fourth quarter of 2024.

Yes.

Speaker #4: Which is a good segue to the next slide, 11, to hopefully give you clarity on quite a few things that moved within our earnings from a 2025 full year basis.

Okay.

On a year to date basis moving to slide 10, our performance is driven by again that improved margin driven by regulatory execution.

Okay.

Speaker #4: Weather, again, was unfavorable by five cents compared to normal weather. That was 18 cents of detriment for us as we think about our impact to results for 2025.

Okay.

Yes.

Offset by Detriments of pecan within that of nine from a full year basis.

Okay.

Speaker #4: It was a very mild back half of 2025. Most of you won't recall, but we actually started the year through first quarter with favorable weather.

Okay.

On an O&M perspective, certainly higher given your maintenance at the Yellowstone County generating facility maintenance at our other electric generation. The amount we're spending importantly on wildfire mitigation and also insurance that is increase in labor and benefits. We also.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #4: So that reversal was really significant for us and impacts also, as we'll talk about later, cash and the impacts to financing plans. In addition, merger-related costs were 15 cents and the Montana rate review disallowance I spoke to was 38 cents, which notably we have sought reconsideration of that disallowance, but we do not have a clear timeline as to when we might see any impact of that.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

Crystal Lail: In addition, merger-related costs were $0.15, and the Montana rate review disallowance I spoke to was $0.38, which notably, we have sought reconsideration of that disallowance, but we do not have a clear timeline as to when we might see any impact of that. But that would certainly be a 2026 item if so. In addition, I spoke to tax benefits and quite a bit of noise within our tax number between last year and this year. There was $0.12 of discrete items benefit in 2025, and that compares to, if you'll recall, 2024, we had $0.28 in the prior period.

Okay.

Incurred higher depreciation expense of 27, <unk> and interest expense of 23.

Okay.

One highlight on this slide is the taxes in the current period includes a 12 benefit while 2024 included a 39 benefit which is a good segue to the next slide 11 to hopefully give you clarity on quite a few things that moved within our earnings from a 2025 full year basis, whether again was.

Okay.

Speaker #4: But that would certainly be a 2026 item if so. In addition, I spoke to tax benefits and quite a bit of noise within our tax number between last year and this year.

Okay.

Speaker #4: There was 12 cents of discrete items benefits in 2025. And that compares to, if you'll recall, 2024, we had 28 cents in the prior period.

Yes.

Unfavorable by <unk> <unk> compared to normal weather that was 18th a detriment for us as we think about our impact of results for 2025. It was a very mild back half of 2025.

Okay.

Speaker #4: All of that, if you'll follow the slide along, gets us to $3.58 of adjusted earnings for our 2025 number, which, as I alluded to earlier, was 5.3% of an increase over 2024.

Crystal Lail: All of that, if you'll follow the slide along, gets us to $3.58 of adjusted earnings for our 2025 number, which, as I alluded to earlier, was 5.3% of an increase over 2024. And my comment there is, given the significant headwinds, we've talked about the headwinds in our financials from our PCCAM mechanism, which again, I'll take a positive out of the Montana Rate Review outcome, indicating that, the sharing part of that will be suspended on an ongoing basis. That's important, but that was about $0.09 of impact to us, in 2025 total, which we've adjusted out the Q4 here. And then also, property taxes being higher, we collect a significant amount of property taxes through our rates.

Okay.

Most of you who won't recall, but we actually started the year through first quarter with favorable weather. So that reversal was really significant for us and impacts also as we will talk about later cash.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Perfect.

Speaker #4: And my comment there is, given the significant headwinds we've talked about, the headwinds in our financials from our PCAM mechanism, which, again, I'll take a positive out of the Montana rate review outcome indicating that the sharing part of that will be suspended on an ongoing basis.

Okay.

And the impact of financing plans.

Okay.

In addition merger related costs were 15.

Okay.

And the Montana review Disallowance I spoke to was 38.

Okay.

Which notably we have thought reconsideration of that.

Yes.

Speaker #4: That's important, but that was about nine cents of impact to us in 2025 total, which we've adjusted out the fourth quarter here. And then also property taxes being higher we collect a significant amount of property taxes through our rates.

Okay.

Disallowance, but we do not have a clear timeline as to when we might see any impact of that but that would certainly be at 2026 items. So in addition, I spoke to tax benefits and quite a bit of noise within our tax number between last year and this year. There was 12 of discrete items benefit in 2025 and that compares to.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #4: Those increased and we only recover a certain portion of that between rate cases. Those were pretty significant headwinds for us during the year, so we are pleased on top of the mild weather that I've talked about and the ongoing impact to our financials.

Crystal Lail: Those increase, and we only recover a certain portion of that between the rate cases. Those were pretty significant headwinds for us during the year, so we are pleased. On top of the mild weather that I talked about and the ongoing impact to our financials, we are pleased at delivering $3.58 for 2025. Slide 12, looking forward from a guidance perspective, we are initiating earnings guidance in the range of $3.68 to $3.83 per share, which represents 5% growth at the midpoint off of our 2025 results and remains anchored to our 2024 base. A significant part of that is moving to Slide 13 and updating our capital plan.

Okay.

If you'll recall 2024, we had 28 in the prior period.

Speaker #4: We are pleased that delivering $3.58 for 2025. Slide 12, looking forward from a guidance perspective, we are initiating earnings guidance in the range of $3.68 to $3.83 per share, which represents 5% growth at the midpoint off of our 2025 results.

All of that if you will all of this vital one gets us to $3 58 of adjusted earnings for our 2025 number which as I alluded to earlier was five 3% of an increase over 2024 and my comment there is given the significant headwinds we talked about the headwinds in our financials from our P. Chem mechanism, which again I'll take a positive out of the month.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #4: And remains anchored to our 2024 base. A significant part of that is moving to slide 13 and updating our capital plan. Brian mentioned the inclusion of the $131-megawatt generating facility in South Dakota.

Hannah review outcome, indicating that the sharing part of that will be suspended on an ongoing basis thats important but that was about nine cents of impact to us.

Okay.

Crystal Lail: Brian mentioned the inclusion of the 131 MW generating facility in South Dakota, and also we've updated to include our incremental Colstrip ownership. We're very proud of closing those transactions effective 1 January 2026, and being resource adequate to make sure that we can serve our customers. Those two things drive a 17% increase in our overall capital plan over what we've reflected before. You'll recall our dedication to having a self-funded capital plan and only issuing equity when it is accretive on an ongoing basis. I would tell you that the base capital plan that underlies the $3.2 billion you see here continues to be self-funded.

Okay.

Excellent.

And 2025 total, which we've adjusted out the fourth quarter here and then also property taxes being higher we wait.

Speaker #4: And also, we've updated to include our incremental coastal ownership. We're very proud of closing those transactions effective January 1, 2026, and being resource adequate to make sure that we can serve our customers.

Okay.

Collect a significant amount of property taxes through our rates those increase and we only recover a certain portion of that between rate cases, those were pretty significant headwinds for us during the year. So we're pleased on top of the mild weather that I talked about and the ongoing impact to our financials. We are pleased that delivering $3 58 for 2025.

Okay.

Speaker #4: Those two things drive a 17% increase in our overall capital plan over what we've reflected before. You'll recall our dedication to having a self-funded capital plan and only issuing equity when it is accretive on an ongoing basis.

Okay.

Yes.

Slide 12 looking forward from a guidance perspective, we are initiating earnings guidance in the range of $3 68 to $3 83 per share, which represents 5% growth at the midpoint of our 2025 results and remains anchored to our 2024 base.

Speaker #4: I would tell you that the base capital plan, the underlies the $3.2 billion you see here, continues to be self-funded. With the incremental South Dakota generation investment reflected here, we do expect to need equity beyond 2026 to fund that investment, which we expect that if you think about that to be on a 50-50 debt-to-equity basis that we would manage that incremental capital and that's consistent with our overall commitment to maintaining high credit quality in our ongoing plans.

Yeah.

Okay.

Crystal Lail: With the incremental South Dakota generation investment reflected here, we do expect to need equity beyond 2026 to fund that investment, which we expect that, if you think about that, to be on a 50/50 debt-to-equity basis, that we would manage that incremental capital, and that's consistent with our overall commitment to maintaining high credit quality in our ongoing plans. Moving to slide 14 to talk about financing for 2026. Again, I just mentioned that the incremental South Dakota generation investment, that would be beyond 2026. We expect to issue debt to refinance existing maturities and fund our existing capital plan. We closed out 2025 at a lower FFO to debt.

Okay.

A significant part of that is moving to slide 13, and updating our capital plan, Brian mentioned, the inclusion of the 131 megawatt generating facility in South Dakota and also we've updated to include our incremental pulsar ownership. We're very proud of closing those transactions effective January one 2026, and being resource adequate to make sure that we.

Okay.

Speaker #4: Moving to slide 14 to talk about financing for 2026. Again, I just mentioned that the incremental South Dakota generation investment, that would be beyond 2026.

Okay.

Yes.

Speaker #4: We expect to issue debt to refinance existing maturities and fund our existing capital plan. We closed out 2025 at a lower FFO to debt.

Okay.

Can serve our customers those two things drive a 17% increase in our overall capital plan over what we've reflected before.

Okay.

Thanks.

Speaker #4: That was driven by the things I mentioned earlier, of the combination of lack of margins from very mild weather, affecting our cash flows, and also being significantly undercollected as supply costs on the Montana side.

Crystal Lail: That was driven by the things I mentioned earlier, the combination of lack of margins from very mild weather affecting our cash flows, and also being significantly undercollected on supply costs on the Montana side. Those two things really drove us, closing out the year at a lower level than we would like to, but we remain committed to getting above and staying above our downside thresholds. And with that, I will turn it back to Brian.

You'll recall, our dedication to having a self funded capital plan and only issuing equity when it is accretive on an ongoing basis I would tell you that the base capital plan that underlies the $3 2 billion you see here continues to be self funded with the incremental South Dakota generation investment reflected here, we do expect to need equity beyond 2020.

[laughter].

Okay.

Speaker #4: Those two things really drove us closing out the year at a lower level than we would like to, but we remain committed to getting above and staying above our downside thresholds.

To fund that investment, which we expect that if you think about that to be on a 50 50 debt to equity basis that we would manage that incremental capital and thats consistent with our overall commitment to maintaining high credit quality.

Speaker #4: And with that, I will turn it back to Brian.

Okay.

Speaker #3: All right. Thanks, Crystal. On 16, we speak to the merger with Black Hills and the benefits to really to all stakeholders. And obviously, the strategic combination represents a highly attractive value creation opportunity for both companies.

Brian Bird: All right, thanks, Crystal. On 16, we speak to the merger with Black Hills and the benefits to really to all stakeholders. And, obviously, the strategic combination represents a highly attractive value creation opportunity for both companies. On this slide, it really speaks to certainly from a shareholder perspective, but also customers, customers. So let me start with the shareholders. And it increases scale, position, and growth. I mean, think of moving two companies from a 4 to 6% EPS growth to 5 to 7%. Doubling of each company's rate base, totaling approximately $11 billion. Both companies having significant growth opportunities and ability to take advantage of this merger to, to truly capture those. And as it points out, a little bit lower on the slide, as a larger company, we'll be able to expand our investment opportunity.

Okay.

Our ongoing plan moving to slide 14 to talk about financing for 2026 again I just mentioned that the incremental South Dakota generation investment that would be beyond 2026, we expect to issue debt to refinance existing maturities and fund our existing capital plans.

Speaker #3: On this slide, it really speaks to certainly from a shareholder perspective, but also cost customers. So let me start with shareholders in increases scale, position, and growth.

Speaker #3: I mean, think of moving two companies from a four to six percent EPS growth to five to seven percent, doubling of each company's rate base, totaling approximately $11 billion.

We closed out 2025 at a lower <unk> to debt.

Okay.

Yes.

And that was driven by the things I mentioned earlier of the combination of.

Lack of margins from very mild weather affecting our cash flows and also being significantly under collected as supply costs on the Montana side. Those two things really drove us closing out the year at a lower level than we would like to but we remain committed to getting above and staying above our downside thresholds and with that I will turn it back to Brian Alright. Thanks Chrystal.

Speaker #3: Both companies having significant growth opportunities and ability to take advantage of this merger to truly capture those. And as it points out, a little bit lower on the slide is a larger company will be able to expand our investment opportunity.

Okay.

Speaker #3: And I should also acknowledge it reduced risk as a larger company risks like wildfire risk and other risks that we have in our business.

Brian Bird: I should also acknowledge it reduced risk. As a larger company, with risks like wildfire risk and other risks that we have in our business, we certainly can sustain those as a larger organization. Also, strengthen the balance sheet and the credit metrics. You heard Crystal speak to that just a moment ago. Obviously, as a combined entity, we have the financial wherewithal to invest more in our businesses as a larger company and do that cost effectively for our customers. And lastly, enhance business diversity. Not one entity will have more than a third in terms of ownership in terms of representation by a jurisdiction.

Okay.

<unk> 16, we speak to the merger with Black Hills, and the benefits to really to all stakeholders and so obviously the strategic combination represents a highly attractive value creation opportunity for both companies on this slide really speaks to certainly from a shareholder perspective.

Speaker #3: We certainly can sustain those as a larger organization. Also, strengthen the balance sheet and the credit metrics. You heard Crystal speak to that just a moment ago.

Speaker #3: Obviously, there's a combined entity. We have the financial wherewithal to invest more in our businesses as a larger company and do that cost-effectively. For our customers, and lastly, enhanced business diversity.

But also <unk> customers. So let me start with the shareholders.

<unk> scale position in growth when you think of moving two companies from a 4% to 6% EPS growth to 5% to 7% doubling of each company's rate base totaling approximately $11 billion, both companies, having significant growth opportunities and ability to take advantage of this merger to truly capture levels in there.

Speaker #3: Not one entity will have more than a third of terms of ownership in terms of representation by a jurisdiction. I think the largest would be approximately 31% for a particular jurisdiction.

Brian Bird: I think their largest would be approximately 31% for a particular jurisdiction, but also a very, very good mix of electric and gas, and what makes these two great companies, both combo utilities, even stronger on a combined entity. In the center of this page, and this is really the center of all we do, certainly in American Western, we'll speak for our friends at Black Hills. We think about our customers and the substantial long-term value for our customers. We're bringing these two teams together who are very complementary, and we both provide excellent customer service to our customers and are great operators. I will tell you, the savings generated from putting these two companies together ultimately accrue to customers in future rate review proceedings.

Speaker #3: But also a very, very good mix of electric and gas. And what makes these two great companies both combo utilities even stronger on a combined entity.

Good points.

The lower on the slide as a larger company will be able expand our investment opportunity and I should also acknowledge that reduce risk.

Speaker #3: And then the center of this page and this really the center of all we do, certainly in Northwestern, they'll speak for our friends at Black Hills.

As a larger company risks like wildfire risks and other risks that we have in our business. We certainly can sustain those as a larger organization.

Speaker #3: We think about our customers and the substantial long-term value for our customers from bringing these two teams together who are very complementary, and we both provide excellent customer service to our customers and a great operators.

Also strengthen the balance sheet and credit metrics, you heard Chris will speak to that just a moment ago, obviously as a combined entity, we have the financial wherewithal to do.

Speaker #3: And I will tell you the savings generated from putting these two companies together. Ultimately, accrued to customers and future rate review proceedings. And so obviously, in this time when people are thinking about affordability, our two companies are thinking about that certainly as we contemplate this merger on a going forward basis.

To invest more in our businesses as a larger company to do that cost effectively for our customers and lastly, enhanced business diversity not one entity, we will have more than a third.

Brian Bird: So obviously, in this a time when people are thinking about affordability, our two companies are thinking about that certainly as we contemplate this merger on a going-forward basis. Moving forward, in terms of a timeline, I mentioned earlier that we filed joint applications for approval in three states, Montana, Nebraska, and South Dakota. We did that in Q4, and we have hearings expected in Q2 2026 for those states. We also filed at FERC in Q4 2025. We filed our S-4 joint proxy statement on 30 January 2025, and we have shareholder votes both scheduled for 2 April 2026. Beyond that, we've also started our integration planning effort, and we do expect anticipated approvals and closing in the back half of 2026.

In terms of ownership in terms of your representation by jurisdiction I think the largest would be approximately 31% for a particular jurisdiction, but also a very very good mix.

Speaker #3: Moving forward in terms of a timeline, I mentioned earlier that we filed joint applications for approval in three states: Montana, Nebraska, and South Dakota.

Speaker #3: We did that in Q4. And we have hearings expected in the second quarter. Of '26 for those states. We also filed at FERC in Q4 of '25.

Electric ingest what makes these two great companies both combo utilities.

Even stronger on the combined entity and then the center of this page and this was really the center of all we do certainly in northwestern will speaker from Jed Black Hills, we think about our customers and the substantial long term value for our customers who are bringing these two teams together who are very complementary we both provide excellent customer service to our customers.

Speaker #3: We filed our S4 joint proxy statement on January 30th. And we have shareholder votes both scheduled for April 2nd. Beyond that, we've also started our integration planning effort.

Speaker #3: And we do expect or anticipated approvals and closing in the back half of 2026. Moving forward, kind of thinking about large load customers and obviously that leads you to discussions around data centers.

Great operators and I will tell you the savings generated from putting these two companies together ultimately accrue to customers from future rate review proceedings and so obviously this is a time when people are thinking about affordability. Our two companies are thinking about that certainly as we contemplate this merger on a going forward basis.

Brian Bird: Moving forward, kind of thinking about large load customers, and obviously, that leads you to discussions around data centers. On page 18, I mentioned the far right, you see the Montana large load opportunities. First and foremost, Sabey, I'm sure you've been reading about, they've had some issues in terms of property, in terms of their project. They have two sites, certainly, that they're considering, and right now they continue to... They got a favorable vote here recently to move forward, but they're still looking at the land concerns, and they're dealing with those issues. They have land both in Butte and Anaconda that they're considering. So we continue to work through them as they work through those challenges. We have a development agreement, and we expect to get to an ESA here, hopefully, by the end of Q2 2026.

Speaker #3: On page 18, I mentioned the far right, you see the Montana large load opportunities. First and foremost, SABI, I'm sure you've been reading about.

Going forward in terms of the timeline I've mentioned earlier that will be filed joint applications for approval in three states, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, we did at Q4.

Speaker #3: They've had some issues in terms of property, in terms of their project. They have two sites certainly that they're considering and right now they continue to they've got a favorable vote.

And we are hearing is expected in the second quarter of.

Speaker #3: Here recently to move forward, but they're still looking at the land concerns and they're dealing with those issues. They have land both in Butte and Anaconda that they're considering.

<unk> 26 for those states. We also filed at FERC in Q4 of 25.

We filed our S. Four joint proxy statement on January 30.

And we have shareholder votes, both scheduled for April 2nd.

Speaker #3: So we continue to work through them as they work through those challenges. We have a development agreement and we expect to get to an ESA here hopefully by the end of Q2 2026.

Beyond that we've also started our integration planning effort.

And we do expect anticipated approvals and closing in the back half of 2026.

Brian Bird: Also, we announced here recently, Atlas, Atlas Power. We've moved from an LOI to a development agreement, and they, they have been moving much, much quicker. It gives good signs, I think, would think from an offtaker or a customer from their perspective. They're getting ready to move forward, that's good news for us. With that development agreement, I would just tell you, in the benefit of development agreements, these two entities now are putting skin in the game. They—let's think of upwards of $500,000 of investment, if you will, for all the studies that are necessary that we need to complete as a utility. And so skin in the game, if you will, for those two entities as we move forward.

Speaker #3: Also, we announced here recently Atlas. Atlas Power, we've moved from an LOI to a development agreement. And they have been moving much, much quicker.

Moving forward kind of thinking about larger customers and obviously that due to discussions around data centers on page 18, I had mentioned in the far right you see the Montana large load opportunities first and foremost say, we I'm sure you've been reading about they've had some issues in terms of property in terms of their project. They have two sites certainly that there.

Speaker #3: It gives good signs. I think we'd think from an off-taker or a customer from their perspective, they're getting ready to move forward. That's good news for us.

Speaker #3: With that development agreement, I would just tell you the benefit of development agreements. These two entities now are putting skin in the game. Let's think of upwards of $500,000 of investment, if you will, for all the studies that are necessary that we need to complete as a utility.

Considering and right now they continue to they've got a favorable vote.

Here recently to move forward, but they are still looking at the land concerns and they are dealing with those issues. They have planned both in Butte and Anaconda that we're considering so we continue to work through them as they work through those challenges.

Speaker #3: And so skin in the game, if you will, for those two entities as we move forward. And I expect, as I mentioned, at least one of those ESAs to be completed for those two by the end of Q2 2026.

Brian Bird: I expect that at least one of those ESAs to be completed for those two by the end of Q2 2026. Quantica also making great progress, and hopefully, we'll see a development agreement from them relatively soon. As I think about the two states that we provide electric service to the load, one thing I would say about Montana, we ultimately hope to serve these large load customers on a state jurisdictional basis. And when we have an ESA with one of these parties, we'd like to make a filing with the MPSC, along with a large load tariff that protects customers, and we would like to think we're gonna do that here in the first half of 2026. Regarding South Dakota, there is a significant indication of interest by data centers in the state.

Speaker #3: Quantica, also making great progress. And hopefully we'll see a development agreement from them. Relatively soon. As I think about the two states that we provide electric business off to the left, one thing I would say about Montana, we ultimately hope to serve these large load customers on a state jurisdictional basis.

Have a development agreement and we expect to get to an Esa here hopefully by the end of Q2 2026 also we announced here recently Atlas.

Atlas power, we've moved from an LOI to a development agreement and they've been moving much much quicker as good signs I think we think from an off taker or a customer from their perspective, we're getting ready to move forward and Thats good news for us.

Speaker #3: And when we have an ESA, with one of these parties, we'd like to make a filing with the NPSC along with a large load tariff that protects customers.

With that development agreement I would just tell you the benefit of development agreements.

Speaker #3: And we would like to think we're going to do that here in the first half of 2026. Regarding South Dakota, there is a significant indication of interest.

These two entities are putting skin in the game.

Think of upwards of $500.

The investment if you will for all the studies that are necessary that we need to complete this utility and so skin in the game. If you will for those two entities as we move forward and I expect that at least one of those.

Speaker #3: By data centers in the state, the benefit there is any new large load customers that require incremental capacity. We have infrastructure riders that can help us with that generation cost recovery.

Brian Bird: The benefit there is any new large load customers that require incremental capacity. We have infrastructure riders that can help us with that generation cost recovery. And also the South Dakota PUC has an established process for large load customers with a deviated rate tariff. The last thing I'd say about South Dakota, as we sit during this legislative session. We're waiting on sales tax reform in the state, which is something that is very, very important to data centers before they move forward in South Dakota. So watch that in the coming weeks. The second slide I have on data center, slide 19. The middle of that slide shows letter of intent and development agreements, obviously moving from two letters of intents and the one development agreement to one letter of intent, two development agreements.

Speaker #3: And also the South Dakota PUC has an established process for large load customers with a deviated rate tariff. The last thing I'd say about South Dakota as we sit during this legislative session, we're waiting on sales tax reform in the state, which is something that is very, very important to data centers before they move forward in South Dakota.

<unk> completed for those two by the end of Q2 2026.

Monica also making great progress.

And hopefully we will see a development agreement from them relatively soon.

As I think about the two states that we provide electric business off to the left one thing I would say about Montana.

We ultimately hope to serve these large customers on a state jurisdictional basis.

Speaker #3: So watch that in the coming weeks. The second slide I have on data centers, slide 19. The middle of that slide shows letter of intent and development agreements.

And when we have an Esa with one of these parties, we'd like to make a filing with the FERC along with a large low tariff protects customers and we'd like to think we're going to do that here in the first half of 2026.

Speaker #3: Obviously, moving from two letter of intents and the one development agreement to one letter of intent, two development agreements. So shows progress there. We'd like to move all of those over into the ESA category, to the right here, relatively soon in 2026.

Brian Bird: Shows progress there. We'd like to move all of those over into the ESA category to the right here, relatively soon in 2026. To the far left, I would also talk about data center requests and high-level assessments. You may note that the queue count is actually down a little bit there. And I think what happens, there's a lot of developers here and they get to a certain point, and if they can't move forward fast enough, can't find an offtaker or a customer, that count can reduce, not necessarily surprised. I think from a high level assessment, there are some in there we believe certainly can move into that middle category of letter of intent and development agreements. So we're excited there.

Regarding South Dakota, there is a significant indication of interest.

By data centers in the state the benefit there is any new large load customers that require more capacity, we have infrastructure riders that could help us with that generation cost recovery and also the South Dakota PUC has established process for large load customers with deviated rates here.

Speaker #3: To the far left, I would also talk about data center requests and high-level assessments. You may note that the queue count is actually down a little bit.

Speaker #3: There. And I think what happens, there's a lot of developers here and they get to a certain point and if they can't move forward and fast enough, can't find an off-taker or a customer, that count can reduce.

Last thing I'd say about South Dakota, which we shipped during this legislative session.

Session.

We are waiting on sales tax reform in the state, which is something that is very very important to data centers before they move forward and South Dakota. So we'll watch that in the coming weeks.

Speaker #3: Not necessarily surprised. I think from a high-level assessment, there are some in there. We believe certainly can move into that middle category of letter of intent and development agreement.

Speaker #3: So we're excited there. If we do see some sales tax movement in South Dakota, I expect both of those queue counts to actually go up in 2026.

Brian Bird: If we do see some sales tax movement in South Dakota, I expect both of those queue counts to actually go up in 2026. Moving forward on Colstrip, happy to announce, as announced earlier, that we've closed those two portions of Colstrip. And, you know, in addition to our owned 222MW, we've added the Avista 222, that not only allowed us to achieve resource adequacy in Montana but increased our ownership from 15% to 30%. But knowing that we have not much control, certainly as a 30% owner, matter of fact, we didn't have control of the facility as a whole. The incremental Puget piece did 2 things for us.

The second slide I'd haven't datacenter slide 19, the middle of that slide shows letter of intents and development agreements, obviously moving from two letter of intent and the one development agreement to one letter of intent to develop agreements <unk> shows progress there we'd like to move all of those over into the Esa category.

Speaker #3: Moving forward on Colstrip, happy to announce earlier that we've closed those two portions of Colstrip and in addition to our owned 222 megawatts, we've added the AFISTA 222 that not only allowed us to achieve resource adequacy in Montana, but increased our ownership from 15 to 30 percent.

To the right here relatively soon in 2026 to the far left I would also talk about data center requests and high level of assessments. You may note that the Q count is actually down a little bit there and I think what happens theres a lot of developers here and they get to a certain point and if they can't move forward and fast enough can't find an off taker.

Speaker #3: But knowing that we have not as much control certainly as a 30 percent owner. Matter of fact, we didn't have control of the facility as a whole.

Speaker #3: The incremental Puget piece did two things for us. It moved us from 30 percent to 55 percent, giving us that ability to drive strategic direction for the overall facility, but also gave us the ability now to serve large load customers.

A customer that count can reduce not necessarily surprised I think from a high level assessment.

Brian Bird: It moved us from 30% to 55%, giving us, you know, that ability to drive strategic direction for the overall facility, but also gave us the ability now to serve large load customers. And so both of those interests are closed, and those plants, those interests are operating well for us, and we're excited to have them in the fleet. And I tell you what, I sleep much sounder when cold weather does come to us in Montana and South Dakota. One thing I'd just say real quickly about Avista and Puget. I think you're well aware, we acquired both of those units for $0, which is a fantastic thing for our customers, certainly from an affordability and reliability standpoint. But we do need to cover our operating costs.

There are some and there we believe certainly can move into that middle category letter in test and development agreements. So we're excited there we do see some sales tax movement in South Dakota, I expect both of those coupons to actually go up.

Speaker #3: And so both of those interests are closed and and those interests are operating well for us. And we're excited to have them in the fleet.

In 2026.

Speaker #3: And I'll tell you what, I sleep much sounder when cold weather does come to us in Montana and South Dakota. One thing I'd just say real quickly about AVISTA and Puget and I think you're well aware, we acquired both of those units for zero.

Moving forward on Colstrip happy to announce as announced earlier that we closed those two portions of colstrip.

In addition to our owned 222 megawatts. We've added the <unk> 222 that not only allowed us to achieve resource adequacy in Montana, but increased our ownership from 15% to 30%.

Speaker #3: Which is a fantastic thing for our customers, certainly from an affordability and reliability standpoint. But we did do need to cover our operating costs.

Speaker #3: And in Montana, for the AVISTA portion, we filed a temporary PCAM tariff waiver. With the MPSC in August, and that would provide a near-term cost recovery that is expected to largely offset the 18, approximately $18 million of incremental annual operating costs.

Brian Bird: In Montana, for the Avista portion, we filed a temporary PCCAM tariff waiver with the MPSC in August, and that would re-provide a near-term cost recovery that is expected to largely offset the approximately $18 million of incremental annual operating costs. That waiver, by the way, was temporarily granted in January 2026. So hopefully we'll learn more about that waiver in 2026. Hopefully, get full recovery for the full year of those operating costs at some point in the future. From the Puget perspective, we signed a contract in October 2025 to sell that electricity through late 2027. Think of when data centers could come on in the state.

But knowing that we have not as much control as certainly as a 30% or better if we didn't have control of the facility as a whole the incremental Puget piece to two things for US it's moved us from 30% to 55%, giving us that ability to drive strategic direction for the overall facility, but also gave us the ability.

Speaker #3: That waiver, by the way, was temporarily granted in January 2026. So hopefully we'll learn more about that waiver in '26. Hopefully get full recovery for the full year of those operating costs at some point in the future.

<unk> now to serve a large load customers.

And so both of those interests are both of those plants. Those interests are operating well for us and we're excited to have them in the fleet and I'll tell you with as much sounder.

Speaker #3: From the Puget perspective, we signed a contract in October of 2025 to sell that electricity through late 2027. Think of when data centers could come on in the state.

Cold weather does come to us in Montana, and South Dakota.

One thing I would just say real quickly about Vista in Puget I think youre well aware, we acquired both of those units for zero.

Speaker #3: And that revenue we have from that contract is expected to largely offset the approximately $30 million of incremental annual operating costs resulting from the transfer.

Brian Bird: That revenue, we, from that contract, is expected to largely offset the approximately $30 million of incremental annual operating costs resulting from the transfer. I think you're well, well aware; we filed with FERC for cost-based rates in October 2025, and we expect an approval from that filing in Q1 2026. Lastly, the NorthWestern value proposition slide. You might have noticed that two changes on the slide. The first, Chris will talk to, is the 17% increase in investment over on the right-hand side, up to $3.21 billion. The second is noting the dividend yield at the top of the page. You might recall that it used to say 4% to 5%. You know, I argue today, we're at, say, approximately 4%.

Which is a fantastic thing for our customers certainly from affordability and reliability standpoint, but we did do need to cover our operating costs.

And then in Montana for the disproportionate we filed a temporary pecan tariff waiver.

Speaker #3: I think your all well aware, we filed with FERC for cost-based rates. In October 2025. And we expect approval from that filing in the first quarter of 2026.

With the <unk> in August and that would.

Provide a near term cost recovery that is expected to largely offset the 18th approximately $18 million of incremental annual operating costs.

That waiver by the way was temporarily granted in January 2026, So hopefully we'll learn more about the waiver in 'twenty six hopefully get full recovery for the full year of those operating cost at some point in the future.

Speaker #1: Lastly , the northwestern value proposition slide . You might have noticed that two changes on the slide The first crystal talk to is the 17% increase in investment .

Speaker #1: Over on the right hand side , up to the 3.21 billion . The second is dividend yield at the top of the page .

From the Puget perspective, we signed the contract in October of 2025% to sell that electricity through late 2027 think of when the data centers could come on in the state and that revenue.

Speaker #1: You might recall that it used to say 4 to 5% . You know , I argue today we're say at approximately 4% . Keep that in mind as you think about our base plan on the left and our incremental opportunities there in the center from a base plan , taking that dividend yield plus our 4 to 6% EPs growth , you're looking at an 8 to 10% total return .

Brian Bird: Keep that in mind as you think about our base plan on the left and our incremental opportunities there in the center. From a base plan, taking that dividend yield plus our 4 to 6% EPS growth, you're looking at an 8 to 10% total return, just doing, and I'd argue, you know, what utilities are typically doing from electric and gas transmission, distribution, supply investments. This is a kind of bread-and-butter utility investment. And so even with that, thinking about an 8 to 10% total return, and obviously, we're able to capture any data center growth, any regional transmission, any incremental generating capacity, that return can certainly go over 10%. And so with that, I'm gonna, from a conclusion perspective, I think you've seen this conclusion slide for many years. I'm just gonna turn it over for Q&A perspective.

From that contract with respect to the is expected to largely offset the approximately $30 million of incremental annual operating costs, resulting from the transfer.

Speaker #1: Just doing what I'd argue . You know what utilities are typically doing from electric and gas distribution , transmission , supply , investments This is kind of bread and butter utility investment .

I think you are all well aware, we filed with FERC for cost base rates.

In October 2025, and we expect.

Approval.

From that filing in the first quarter of 2026.

Speaker #1: And so even with that thinking about an 8 to 10% total return . And obviously we're able to capture any data center growth , any regional transmission and incremental generating capacity .

Lastly.

Yeah.

North Western value proposition slide you might have noticed the two changes on this slide.

Crystal talk to is the 17% increase spend and investment over on the right hand side up to 321 billion.

Speaker #1: That return can certainly go over 10% . And so with that I'm going to from a conclusion perspective , I think you've seen this conclusion slide for many years I'm just going to turn it over from Q&A perspective

Okay.

Noting the dividend yield at the top of the page you might recall that used to say 45%.

Yes.

Our view today, we can say at approximately 4% keep that in mind as you think about our base plan on the left and our incremental opportunities there.

Speaker #2: As a reminder , if you'd like to ask a question during the question and answer session , simply press star , followed by the number one on your telephone keypad Your first question comes from the line of Shah Pourreza from Wells Fargo .

Operator: As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question during the question and answer session, simply press star followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. Your first question comes from the line of Shahriar Pourreza from Wells Fargo. Your line is live.

Center from our base plan, taking that dividend yield plus our 4% to 6% EPS growth you're looking at an 8% to 10% total return just doing it I would argue.

Okay.

Speaker #2: Your line is live .

Shahriar Pourreza: Good afternoon. This is Michelle. Char?

What utilities are typically doing from electric and gas distribution and transmission supply investments.

Speaker #3: Good afternoon . This is Mitchell Cha

Speaker #4: Hello

Brian Bird: Hello.

This is the kind of bread and butter utility investment and so even with that thinking about 8% to 10% total return and obviously, we were able to capture.

Speaker #5: Hi .

Okay.

Shahriar Pourreza: Hi. Thank you for the update and great capital plan roll forward. My first question is: Previously, you indicated that you would file a large load tariff in Q4 to dispense costs for new data center loads. Can you update us on the timing and scope? What's changed versus- and-

Speaker #6: Thank you for the update . And great capital plan . Roll forward . My first question is , previously , you indicated that you file a large load tariff and for Q to ring fence costs for a new data center load .

Any data center growth any FERC regional transmission and the incremental generating capacity that return can certainly go over 10%.

Speaker #6: Can you update us on the timing and scope What's changed .

With that I'm going to from a conclusion perspective, I think you've seen this conclusion slide for many years.

Speaker #3: Versus three , five .

Speaker #6: And and when stakeholders should expect a file tariff at PS

I'm, just going to turn it over for Q&A.

As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question during the question and answer session simply press Star followed by the number one on the telephone keypad.

Speaker #7: Yeah . You're cutting out a little bit , but I'll take that question . We had said we will file a large load tariff , but I would note that that was tied to signing an ESA .

Crystal Lail: ... Yeah, Whitney, you're cutting out a little bit, but I'll take that question. It-- We had said we will file a large load tariff, but I would note that that was tied to signing an, an ESA. So we want to go hand in hand to file a tariff with a specific contract. You know, part of that conversation, we have an existing GS2 tariff today. We think we could serve customers off of that tariff, but you want to strengthen that tariff and certainly get ahead of this argument that data centers aren't paying their fair share, et cetera. We expect to file that once we have a signed ESA, so that we can walk through the specific mechanics with the Montana Commission of what that looks like and why indeed they pay their fair share and likely, contribute broadly to the system benefits.

Your first question comes from the line of Sean <unk> from.

Speaker #7: So we want to go hand in hand to file a tariff with a specific contract . Part of that conversation we have an existing G0s2 tariff today .

Wells Fargo. Your line is it slides.

Okay.

Thank you.

Speaker #7: We think we could serve customers off of that tariff . But you want to strengthen that tariff . And certainly get ahead of this argument .

Sure.

Hello.

Hi.

Speaker #7: That data centers aren't paying their fair share , etc. . We expect to file that once we have a signed ESA so that we can walk through the specific mechanics with the Montana Commission of what that looks like and why , indeed , they pay their fair share and likely contribute broadly to the system benefits .

Thank you for the update and Great capital plan Roll forward. My first question is for you.

So you indicated that you.

While a large loss for Q2.

<unk> costs.

Costs for our new data center loans.

Speaker #7: So once we have a ESA , we will plan to file that large load in sync with that .

Crystal Lail: So once we have assigned ESA, we will plan to file that large load tariff, in sync with that.

Peter on the timing and scope.

What's changed.

Speaker #1: And the only thing I'd add to that is I said in the presentation , there's an expectation we would do that by the end of the second quarter .

Brian Bird: Yeah, only thing I'd add to that is I said in the presentation, there's an expectation we would do that by the end of Q2. And, the reason being, that's when I expect an ESA to occur. And, I would say that the tariff is ready to go. We're waiting from an ESA perspective.

Hi.

Sure.

Our cash at P F.

Speaker #1: And the reason being , that's when I expect an ESA to occur . And I would say that the tariff is ready to go .

Yes, Whitney you are cutting out a little bit, but I'll take that question.

Had said, we will file a large low tariff and I would note that that was tied to signing.

Speaker #1: We're waiting for an ESA perspective

Speaker #8: Okay . Sounds good . Hopefully I'm much more audible now . Just for another follow up on the merger . There's been focused on large , low data costs .

Shahriar Pourreza: Okay, sounds good. Hopefully, I'm much more audible now. Just for another follow-up, on the merger, there's been focus on large load data cost - sorry, data center cost causation. Stakeholders need or want education, not just on the process. Can you give us an update on how the education plan to stakeholders to demonstrate no harm and affordability has been so far? That's it for me.

So we want to go hand in hand to voluntary with a specific contract part of that conversation, we have an existing GSP tariff today, we think we could serve customers off of that tariff, but you want to strengthen that tariff and certainly get ahead of this argument that data centers arent paying their fair share et cetera, we expect to file that once we have assigned Esa so that we can walk through.

Speaker #8: Sorry , data center costs , causation . Stakeholders need or want education , not just on the process . Can you give us an update on how the education plan to stakeholders to demonstrate no harm in affordability has been so far That's it for me .

The specific mechanics, with the Montana Commission of what that looks like and why indeed, they pay their fair share and likely contribute broadly to the system benefit for once we have assigned Esa we will plan to file that large of a tariff and think about that.

Speaker #1: I think if you're talking from a public process perspective , I think in our data , center , data centers have gotten quite a bit of attention .

Brian Bird: I think you're talking from a public process perspective. I think in-

Shahriar Pourreza: Yes.

Brian Bird: You know, where data centers have gotten quite a bit of attention, as you're well aware, throughout the country. And I would argue in Montana, in the community of Butte, obviously, as most of the discussion, because Sabey's furthest along in the discussion there. And I think the Butte-Silver Bow allowed a lot of conversation. The community ultimately voted 9 to 3 and 4 to letting Sabey move forward. So I think, I'd argue that the data centers are getting to be more vocal. It's talking to the benefits. We utilities certainly have been supportive of that effort.

I can answer that.

<unk>.

Speaker #1: As you're well aware , throughout the country . And I would argue in Montana , in the community of Butte , obviously , most of the discussion because surveys furthest along in the discussion there , and I think the Butte-silver bow out a lot of conversation .

Presentation. There is an expectation we would do that by the end of the second quarter.

The reason being that is what I expect and Esa to occur.

And.

I would say that the tariff is ready to go we're waiting for many years.

Speaker #1: The community ultimately voted 9 to 3 and four were to letting CB move forward . So I think I would argue that the data centers are getting to be more vocal .

Okay.

Hopefully much more audible now.

Another follow up on the merger.

Okay.

Speaker #1: It's talking to the benefits we utilities certainly have been supportive of that effort . And I think what we need to demonstrate , all of us need to demonstrate is from a tariff perspective .

Alright data center.

Hospitalization stakeholders need or want education, not just on the process can you give us an update on how the education plan to stakeholders to demonstrate no harm and affordability has been so far.

Brian Bird: And I think what we need to demonstrate, all of us need to demonstrate, is from a tariff perspective, and that's our plan: allow the MPSC to approve a tariff that we would put in front of them that's going to protect customers. And I think when customers understand that, they're going to feel much, much better about it. Obviously, they're reading what's happening in other parts of the country and how customers have been impacted by data centers, and it's easy to jump to conclusions. And so I think there's been a decent dialogue about this topic. Certainly, I and others have been out talking about it, but it...

Speaker #1: And that's our plan is and allow the mpsc to approve a tariff that we would put a tariff in front of them . That's going to protect customers .

Speaker #1: And I think when customers understand that , they're going to feel much , much better about it , obviously they're reading what's happening in other parts of the country and how customers have been impacted by centers .

That's it for me.

I think youre talking from a public process perspective I think.

Data center data centers have gotten quite a bit attention as you're well aware throughout the country and I would argue in Montana in the community of Butte.

Speaker #1: And it's easy to jump to conclusions . And so I think there's been a decent dialogue about this topic . Certainly I and others have been out talking about it , but I'm not saying it's going to be easy either .

Obviously, most of the discussion because savings furthest along in the discussion there and I think the Butte Silver Bowl allowed a lot of conversation that community ultimately voted nine to three and forward 11 loving savvy move forward. So I think.

Brian Bird: I'm not saying it's going to be easy either for data centers, but I think thus far, we're making good progress with Sabey, Atlas, and Quantica. I know is out there talking about this as well. So feel pretty good about where we're at.

Speaker #1: For data centers , but I think thus far we're making good progress with CB and Atlas , and I know is out there talking about this as well .

Speaker #1: So feel pretty good about where we're at

I would argue that the datacenters are getting to be more vocal talking.

Talking to the benefits, we utility certainly has been supportive of that effort.

Speaker #2: Your next question comes from the line of Aidan Kelly from JP Morgan . Your line is live .

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Aidan Kelly from J.P. Morgan. Your line is live.

And I think what we need to demonstrate all of us need to demonstrate is from a tariff perspective and Thats. Our plan is and allow the PSC to approve a tariff that we would put a tariff in front of them, that's going to protect customers and I think when customers understand that they're going to feel much much better about it obviously, we're reading what's happening in other parts of the country.

Speaker #9: Hey , good afternoon . Just wanted to touch on the load fund first . If I could . It seems like there's been a number of quarters , you know , in the past that we've been waiting for an ESA .

Aidan Kelly: Hey, good afternoon. Just wanted to touch on the load fund first, if I could. It seems like there's been a number of quarters, you know, in the past that we've been waiting for an ESA. And Brian, you mentioned in your prepared remarks, you know, some friction on the landing considerations with Sabey perhaps going longer than expected. Do you see this issue kind of percolating to other prospective loads, such as Atlas, and you know, others? I mean, just in general, like, what do you think is needed to push these development agreements into the goal line at this time?

Speaker #9: And , Brian , you mentioned in your prepared remarks , you know , some friction on the landing considerations with CB , perhaps going longer than expected .

<unk>.

And how customers have been impacted by data centers and it's easy to jump to conclusions and so I think theres been a decent dialogue about this topic, certainly I and others have been talking about it.

Speaker #9: Do you see this issue kind of percolating to other perspective loads , such as Atlas and , you know , others and just in general , like what do you think is needed to push these development agreements into the goal line at this time

But im not saying its going to be easy either for data centers, but I think thus far we're making good progress with <unk> and Atlas and Quantico that I know is out there talking about this as well so feel pretty good about where we're at.

Speaker #1: Yeah , I think you've seen and I'll , I'll take a bit of a mea culpa here myself . I think we've are thinking at ESA's , we at times are the holdup to getting these ESA's done and we're ready to go from our perspective .

Brian Bird: Yeah, I think you've seen... I'll take a bit of a mea culpa here myself. I think we, at times, were the holdup to getting these ESAs done, and we're ready to go from our perspective. And then, unfortunately for Sabey, they ran into this land issue, and obviously they're working through that. So I think, you know, this is not just on the utilities to get these things done. In many cases, developers also need to find customers, and before they're ready to sign ESAs, sometimes they need to have that done. It's much easier for hyperscalers, of course, who don't need to find customers. So I do think that Sabey's working awfully hard to get to an ESA. Atlas, obviously, moving to a development agreement, the next step is to get to an ESA.

Your next question comes from the line of <unk> <unk> from JP Morgan Your line is live.

Speaker #1: And unfortunately for CB they ran into this land issue . And obviously they're working through that . So I think , you know , this is not just on the utilities to get these things done .

Hey, good afternoon.

Speaker #1: In many cases , developers also need to find customers . And before they're ready to sign , ESA , sometimes they need to have that done .

Just wanted to touch on the load fund first if I could.

Seems like there's been a number of quarters.

Speaker #1: It's much easier for hyperscalers , of course , who don't need to find customers . So I , I do think that CB working awfully hard to get to an ESA Atlas , obviously moving to a development agreement , the next step is to get to an ESA .

Past that we've been waiting for Esa.

And Brian you mentioned in your prepared remarks, some friction on the landing considerations with CBD, perhaps going longer than expected.

Do you see this issue kind of percolating to other prospective loads such as Atlas.

Speaker #1: So I've seen that's taken a bit longer . Longer nationally for this process . And certainly it's impacted us a bit here . But I'm also very confident in terms of where we sit with these three providers today .

Brian Bird: So I've seen that it's taken a bit while longer nationally for this process, and certainly it's impacted us a bit here. But I'm also very confident in terms of where we sit with these three providers today or these potential data centers. I feel very good about where we ultimately will get to.

Others, I mean, just some general like what do you think is needed to push these development agreements into the go line at this time.

Speaker #1: Are these potential data centers ? I feel very good about where we ultimately will get to

Yes, I think you've seen.

I will take a bit of EMEA culpa here myself I think we've thinking at ESA is we at times, where the holdup to getting these Esa is done and we're ready to go on from our perspective and then unfortunately for safety. They ran into this land issue and obviously they are working through that so I think.

Speaker #9: Got it makes sense . And then just turning to the growth outlook , if I could I see you firmed the 4 to 6 rate base post the South Dakota plant , which I believe is directly around maybe 300 million in CapEx .

Aidan Kelly: Got it. Makes sense. And then just turning to the growth outlook, if I could. I see you affirmed the 4 to 6 rate base CAGR post the South Dakota plant, which I believe is directly around maybe $300 million in CapEx. And then obviously, you mentioned in the remarks, it's perhaps like a 50% equity source. So I guess my question would be: What do you see as the offsetting factors to that share dilution that kind of gives you the confidence of that reaffirming 4 to 6% EPS CAGR?

Speaker #9: And then obviously , you mentioned in the remarks that perhaps like a 50% equity source . So I guess my question would be , what do you see as the offsetting factors to that share dilution , that kind of gives you the confidence of that reaffirmed 4 to 6% EPs kegger

This is not just on the utilities to get these things done in many cases developers also redefined customers' and before then.

Ready to sign Esa, sometimes they need to have that done it's much easier for hyper scaler supports who don't need to find customers.

I do think that JV is working awfully hard to get to an Esa Atlas obviously moving to a development agreement. The next step is to get to an Esa. So ive seen it has taken a bit longer nationally for this process and certainly it's impacted us figure, but I'm also very confident in terms of where we sit with these three providers today are these potential data centers.

Speaker #7: Sure . The great thing about and we've talked about this , what are the incremental opportunities that , you know , total return the incremental opportunities to the right side , the incremental generation in South Dakota , we recover cash during construction .

Crystal Lail: Sure. The great thing about, and we've talked about this, what are the incremental opportunities that, you know, total return, the incremental opportunities to the right side? The incremental generation in South Dakota, we recover cash during construction. There's a phase and rate plan rider that allows us to recover. AFUDC is great. It, it's accretive to earnings, but it isn't accretive to cash. As we've talked about, how do you finance those things a long time? So the opportunity that presents itself with meeting the resource adequacy requirements of SPP, owning that generation here, and building that facility, that's the right kind of incremental CapEx that we've looked to layer into our plan. We're excited to do that.

Speaker #7: There's a phase in rate plan rider that allows us to recover a great . It's secreted earnings , but it is an accretive to cash .

Very good about where we ultimately will get to.

Speaker #7: And as we've talked about how do you finance those things a long time . So that opportunity that presents itself with meeting the resource adequacy requirements .

Got it.

And then just turning to the growth outlook, if I could.

I see you reaffirmed the 46 rate base CAGR post the South Dakota plant, which I believe is directionally around maybe $300 million Capex and then obviously you mentioned in the remarks that perhaps like a 50% equity source.

Speaker #7: And SVP owning that generation here and building that facility , that's the right kind of incremental CapEx that we've looked to layer into our plan .

Speaker #7: We're excited to do that . That's certainly the kind of stuff that gives us confidence to maintain or even push upward on our earnings range , while also financing that in terms that makes sense .

Crystal Lail: That's certainly the kind of stuff that gives us confidence to maintain or even push upward on our earnings range while also financing that in terms that make sense. So that's where we've been pretty clear. That's the type of incremental CapEx we're looking for. That's the incremental to our base plan, so we'll fund that in a 50/50 kind of approach. We'll recover cash during construction with the phase and rate plan, and then obviously, ultimately, see growth off of earnings out of that once it's in service.

So I guess my question would be what do you see as the offsetting factors to that share evolution in that kind of gives you the confidence of that reaffirmed at 4% to 6% EPS CAGR.

Speaker #7: So that's where we've been pretty clear . That's the type of incremental CapEx we were looking for . That's incremental to our base plan .

Speaker #7: So we'll fund that . In 50 over 50 kind of approach . We'll recover cash during construction with the phase in rate plan .

Sure.

Great thing about it and we've talked about this what are the incremental opportunities that total return the incremental opportunities to the right side the incremental generation in South Dakota, we recover cash during construction, there's a phase in rate plan rider that allows us to recover.

Speaker #7: And then obviously ultimately see growth off of earnings out of that once it's in service .

Speaker #9: Great . Thanks for the insight . I'll leave it there . Take care .

Paul Fremont: ... Great. Thanks for the insight. I'll leave it there. Take care.

Aidan Kelly: ... Great. Thanks for the insight. I'll leave it there. Take care.

Speaker #1: Thanks . Thanks , Aidan .

Brian Bird: Thanks, Aiden.

Speaker #2: Your next question comes from the line of Nicholas Campanella from Bank of America . Your line is live

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Nicholas Campanella from Bank of America. Your line is live.

<unk>, great if it's accretive to earnings but it is an accretive to cash and as we've talked about how do you finance that thing for a long time, so the opportunity that presents itself with meeting the resource adequacy requirement to SBB owning that generation here and building that facility. That's the right kind of incremental capex that we'd look to layer into our plan. We're excited to do that that certainly.

Speaker #1: Hey , Nick .

Nicholas Campanella: Hey, Nick. Hey, thanks for, Hey, how are you? Thanks for taking the questions. I just wanted to kind of clarify on the overall, like, ESA strategy. Is also my prior understanding was that this, like, the system is long, so you may not need for the first couple of deals, you know, a dedicated framework to, you know, pay for the depreciation, the interest, and what would be associated with, with new build. But just this ESA will inform how you propose an overall tariff for all of that in this, this upcoming first half year. Is that, is that just the general strategy? I'm sorry to make you go back and repeat yourself.

Speaker #10: Hey . Thanks for . Hey , how are you ? Thanks for taking the questions . I just wanted to kind of clarify the overall like ESA strategy .

Speaker #10: Just also my prior understanding was that the system is long , so you may not need for the first couple of deals . You know , a dedicated framework to pay for the depreciation , the interest and what would be associated with with new build .

They kind of stuff that gives us confidence to maintain or even push upward on our earnings range. While also.

Anything that it in terms that makes sense. So that's what we've been pretty clear that the type of incremental Capex. We were looking for that the incremental to our base plans and wolf on that 50, 50 kind of approach will recover cash during construction with the phasing right Lane and then obviously ultimately.

Speaker #10: But just this essay will inform how you propose an overall tariff for all of that . In this this upcoming first half year .

Speaker #10: Is that is that just the general strategy ? I'm sorry to make you go back and repeat yourself .

See growth off of earnings out of that once it's in service.

Great. Thanks for the insight I'll leave it there.

Speaker #1: Yeah , I think as an example for how we want to make sure we're protecting customers . And I think we're the discussions we're having with data centers , they want to protect customers to the folks that we're certainly talking to .

Brian Bird: Yeah, I think it's an example for how we want to make sure we're protecting customers. And I think the discussions we're having with data centers, they want to protect customers, too, the folks that we're certainly talking to. And so going hand in hand with them, with an ESA and a tariff, that is the plan, and that is, again, the plan by the first half of 2026.

Thanks.

Your next question comes from the line of Nicholas.

<unk>.

Of America your line is live.

Speaker #1: And so going hand in hand with them , with the with an ESA and a tariff , that that is the plan . And that's the plan by the first half of 26 .

Thanks for Hey, how are you thanks for taking the questions.

I just wanted to clarify on the overall.

Like Esa strategy.

Speaker #7: And Nick , I would add on to that just every data center site specific , some of them to your point , we are long generation .

Crystal Lail: Nick, I would add on to that, just every data center is site-specific. Some of them, to your point, we are a long generation. What is the transition needs? What is... Maybe some of them are not much CapEx. All of that, we do have an existing tariff. I know we talked about that a year ago. We felt like we can serve customers under that. We do till today. As you know, the national narrative on data centers has changed a bit, and there's a lot of, what I would call, misinformation about what they can do to certainly help shoulder the cost of the grid and, in fact, subsidize some of your other customers. I think everywhere you're going to see commissions want to understand that better.

My prior understanding was that the system is long suit you.

Speaker #7: What is the transmission needs ? What is maybe some of them are not much CapEx . All of that . We do have an existing tariff .

You may not need for the first couple of deals.

A dedicated framework to pay for the depreciation and the interest in <unk>.

Speaker #7: I know we talked about that a year ago . We felt like we can serve customers under that . We do still today , as you know , the national narrative on data centers has changed a bit .

Would be associated with it with new build but just.

This Esa will inform how you propose an overall tariff for all of that in this.

Speaker #7: And there's a lot of what I would call misinformation about what they can do to certainly help shoulder the cost of the grid .

This upcoming first half year is up is that just the general strategy I'm, sorry to make you go back and repeat yourself.

Speaker #7: And in fact , subsidize some of your other customers . I think everywhere you're going to see commissions want to understand that better .

Yes, I think.

As an example for how we want to make sure.

Speaker #7: We got feedback from the Montana Commission , and we certainly want to be transparent with them and bring that forth so that you have a positive construct under which you're doing that .

Crystal Lail: We got feedback from the Montana Commission, and we certainly want to be transparent with them and bring that forth so that you have a positive construct under which you're doing that. So while each one's unique, bringing something forth that demonstrates the value that a data center can have, a large load facility can have on the grid, and that they are indeed paying their fair share. While we would be comfortable serving them under existing tariffs, I think there's also a lot of value to making sure your regulators are understanding that and, of course, then the public sentiment around that maintains positive.

We're protecting customers.

The discussions we're having with data centers they want to protect customers two of the folks that were certainly talking to and so going hand in hand with them with the with an Esa and a tariff.

Speaker #7: So while each one is unique , bring something forth that demonstrates the value that a data center can have a large load facility can have on the grid , and that they are indeed paying their fair share .

That is the plan and as has been the plan by the first half of 2006 <unk>.

Speaker #7: While we would be comfortable serving them under our existing tariff , I think there's also a lot of value to making sure your regulators are understanding that .

I would add onto that just every data center site specific some of them to your point, we are along generation what is the transmission needs what it maybe some of them are now much capex all of that.

Speaker #7: And of course , then the public sentiment around that maintain positive .

Speaker #1: Yeah . One thing on that too , Crystal sparked a thought for me . I think this issue of protecting customers , I think there's been a confusion around why the Puget portion was put into a Ferc regulated entity .

Brian Bird: Yeah, one thing on that too, Crystal, you sparked a thought for me. I think this issue of protecting customers. I think there's been a confusion around why the Puget portion was put into a FERC-regulated entity. You know, our intent here is to actually protect customers. The need here, really for the Puget piece, we needed it to get control of the facility, but from a, you know, an energy perspective, we certainly didn't need it until the 2027 timetable. So instead of imposing $30 million of costs on our existing customers, we found a means to deal with that and protect customers while that's in a FERC-regulated entity. Our hope is, as I mentioned earlier, ultimately, to move that into a state-regulated entity when we have large load customers we can serve through that.

We do have an existing care of I know, we talked about that a year ago. We felt like we can serve customers under that we do sell today as you know the national narrative on data centers has changed a bit and there is a lot of what I would call misinformation about what they can do to certainly out shoulder the cost of the grid and in fact subsidize some of your other customers I think everywhere youre going to see commissions wanted.

Speaker #1: You know , our intent here is actually protect customers . The need here , really , for the Puget piece , we needed it to get control the facility .

Speaker #1: But from a , you know , an energy perspective , we certainly didn't need it until the 2027 timetable . So instead of imposing 30 million of costs on our existing customers , we found a means to deal with that and protect customers .

Understand that better we got feedback from the Montana Commission, and we certainly want to be transparent with them and bring that forward. So that you have a positive construct under which youre doing that though while each one is unique.

<unk> something fourth it demonstrates the value that a data center can have a large loan facility can have on the ground and that the R&D paying their fair share, while we would be comfortable serving them under existing tariff I think theres also a lot of value to making sure. Your regulators are understanding that and of course, then the public sentiment around that maintain positive yes, one thing on that too.

Speaker #1: While that's in a Ferc regulated entity . And if our hope is , as I mentioned earlier , ultimately to move that into a state regulated entity , when we have large load customers , we can serve through that .

Speaker #1: And so that is ultimately we're trying to do . We'd love to have see it . Everything on a on a state regulated basis .

Brian Bird: That, that is ultimately what we're trying to do. We'd love to have everything on a state-regulated basis, but we do want to serve large load customers in any way that is best to serve our customers today.

Speaker #1: But we do want to serve large customers in any way that is best to serve our customers today

Principally sparked a thought for me I think.

Issue of protecting customers think theres been a confusion around why the Puget portion was put into a FERC regulated entity. Our intent here is actually protect customers the need here really for the future piece, we needed it to get control of the facility but from a.

Speaker #10: Okay . Thank you . Thanks for the updated thoughts there . I appreciate it . And then maybe just going back to the the financing plan and the prepared , you just kind of mentioned the 13% debt , you know , is all incremental CapEx at this point going to require some equity .

Nicholas Campanella: Okay. Thank you. Thanks for the updated thoughts there. I appreciate it. And then, maybe just going back to the financing plan, quickly, and to prepare, as you just kind of mentioned, the 13% FFO debt. You know, is all incremental CapEx at this point going to require some equity now? And just can you talk a little bit about if these ESAs materialize and you get to load on the system, how that changes the equation around the financing for you guys?

Speaker #10: Now . And just can you talk a little bit about if these essays materialize and you get this load on the system , how that changes the equation around the financing for you guys ?

In energy perspective, we certainly didn't need it until the 2027 timetable so instead of imposing $30 million of costs on our existing customers. We found a means to deal with that and protect customers while thats in FERC regulated entity.

Speaker #7: Sure . We've we've said repeatedly that we size our base capital plan based off our cash flow availability and to hit our credit quality metrics .

Crystal Lail: Sure. We've, we've said repeatedly that we size our base capital plan based off our cash flow availability and to hit our credit quality metrics. Obviously, I mentioned 2025. The key drivers there are falling below the 14% FFO is lack of cash, and that comes from the very mild weather and the margins we would have expected to have, and then also material under collection, and the Montana supply tracker, I think that's around $80 million. So we expect that to come back in 2026. But we're always planning our capital plan to maintain a solid balance sheet and have credit quality. So your question of what happens with incremental capital, and again, as I alluded to the Aberdeen Generating Station, we recover cash during construction of that.

As I mentioned earlier ultimately to move that into our state regulated.

Speaker #7: Obviously , I mentioned 2025 . The key drivers there are falling below the 14% FFO is lack of cash . And that comes from the very mild weather and the margins .

Entity, when we have large load customers, we can serve through that and so that is ultimate we're trying to do we'd love to have to see at everything on a state regulated basis, but we do want to serve larger customers in any way that is best to serve our customers today.

Yeah.

Speaker #7: We would have expected to have . And then also material under collection and the Montana supply tracker . I think that's around $80 million .

Okay.

Yes.

Sure.

Speaker #7: So we expect that to come back in 2026 . But we're always planning our capital plan to maintain a solid balance sheet and have credit quality .

Okay. Thank you thanks for the updated thoughts there I appreciate it and then.

[laughter].

Okay.

Maybe just going back to the the financing plan quick in the prepared you just kind of mentioned the 13% of thought of that.

Speaker #7: So your question of what happens with incremental capital . And again , as I alluded to , the Aberdeen Generating Station , we recover cash during construction of that .

Okay.

As all incremental Capex at this point going to require some equity now.

Speaker #7: If you think about the ramp period of any data center and incremental capital , that would be required there , you'd have a very similar funding mechanism that you see cash during construction , and that's the kind of stuff that's accretive .

Crystal Lail: If you think about the ramp period of any data center and incremental capital that would be required there, you'd have a very similar funding mechanism that you see cash during construction. And that's the kind of stuff that's accretive, and we certainly would look to issue equity for that kind of accretive growth. So that's where we've had a dividing line all along, is we will be very disciplined about our base capital plan, and that's a regulatory lag. That's 18 to 24 months off of putting that in the ground to recovery. For that kind of stuff, we need ongoing cash flows to support that. For stuff that drives growth, as anything large load would, that's the type of stuff we'd look to maintain equity issuances where that makes sense. But again, nothing in 2026.

Okay.

Yes.

And.

Just can you talk a little bit about if these esa has materialized and you'll get the float on the system how that changes the equation around the financing for you guys.

Speaker #7: And we certainly would look to issue equity for that kind of accretive growth . So that's where we've had a dividing line all along is we will be very disciplined about our base capital plan .

Sure. We've said repeatedly that we size our base capital plan based off of our cash flow availability and to hit our credit quality metrics. Obviously I mentioned 2025. The key drivers there are falling below the 14% <unk> with lack of cash and that comes from the very mild weather in the margins. We would have expected to have and then also material under <unk>.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #7: And that's a regulatory lag . That's 18 to 24 months off of putting that in the ground to recovery for that kind of stuff .

Okay.

Speaker #7: We need ongoing cash flows to support that , for stuff that drives growth as anything large load would . That's the type of stuff we'd look to maintain equity issuances where that makes sense But again , nothing in 26 , just to make sure I was clear it would .

Okay.

Action and the Montana supply tracker, I think thats around $80 million. So we expect that to come back in 2020, but we're always planning our capital plan to maintain a solid balance sheet and have credit quality. So your question of what happens with incremental capital and again as I alluded to the Aberdeen generating station, we recover cash or destruction of that.

Okay.

Yes.

[laughter].

Nicholas Campanella: Okay.

Crystal Lail: Just to make sure I was clear.

Okay.

Speaker #10: Be 27 .

Nicholas Campanella: Nothing in 26.

Crystal Lail: It will be 2027 and beyond. Nothing in 2026.

Speaker #7: And beyond . Nothing in 26 .

Okay.

Yes.

Speaker #10: Thanks for the time . Thank you . Thanks , Nick

Nicholas Campanella: Thanks for the time. Thank you.

Okay.

Brian Bird: Thanks, Nick.

Yeah.

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah.

If you think about the ramp period of any data center and incremental capital that would be required. There you would have a very similar funding mechanism that you see cash during construction and thats, the kind of stuff thats accretive and we certainly would.

Speaker #2: Your next question comes from the line of Paul Fremont from Landenberg . Ladenburg . Your line is live

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Paul Fremont from Ladenburg Thalmann. Your line is live.

Yes.

Sure.

Okay.

Paul Fremont: Thank you very much. My first question has to do with, for the South Dakota plant, are you in the queue for a turbine, and what would be the commercial operation date of that plant?

Speaker #11: Thank you very much . I my first question has to do with the for the South Dakota plant . Do you have a are you in the queue for a turbine ?

Paul Fremont: Thank you very much. My first question has to do with, for the South Dakota plant, are you in the queue for a turbine, and what would be the commercial operation date of that plant?

Perfect.

Look to issue equity for that kind of accretive growth. So that's where we've had a dividing line all along as we will be very disciplined about our base capital plan and that the regulatory lag that.

Thanks.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

Speaker #11: And what would be the commercial operation date of that plant

Okay.

18 to 24 months off of.

Great.

Putting that in the ground to recovery for that kind of stuff, we need ongoing cash flows to support that for stuff that drives growth as anything large load would that's the type of stuff we've looked at maintained.

Okay.

Brian Bird: I'll start with the commercial operation date. We're looking at. First of all, we have a plant in construction now. I think you're speaking to the 131MW.

Speaker #1: I'll start with the commercial operation day . We're looking at . First of all , we have a plant in construction now . I think , but I think you're speaking to the 131MW .

Brian Bird: I'll start with the commercial operation date. We're looking at. First of all, we have a plant in construction now. I think you're speaking to the 131MW.

Okay.

Speaker #1: That $300 million investment . We're already making an investment in 26 for turbines . And so I'd say approximately a third of that investment will be made in 2026 to get our turbines in place .

Paul Fremont: Right.

Brian Bird: That's a $100 million investment. We're already making an investment in 2026 for turbines, and so I'd say approximately 1/3 of that investment will be made in 2026, to get our turbines in place, and the plant is expected to be completed in 2030.

Okay.

Equity issuances, where that makes sense.

Okay.

But again nothing until topic just to make sure I was clear.

Okay.

Yes.

<unk>. Thanks for your time thank.

Thank you. Thank you.

Yes.

Speaker #1: And the plant is expected to be completed in 2030 .

Yeah.

Your next question comes from the line of call Fremont from Ladenburg.

Yes.

Speaker #11: Okay . And you're in the queue , or you have the turbines are lined up for that for that 2030 in-service date .

Paul Fremont: Okay. And you're in the queue, or you have the turbines lined up for that 2030 in-service date?

Okay.

Your line is live.

Thank you very much Mike.

Speaker #1: Well , we're we're buying turbines

Okay.

Brian Bird: Well, we're buying turbines.

Question has to do with.

Okay.

Yeah.

For the South Dakota plan do you have.

Speaker #11: Okay My next question has to do with if the endangerment finding is reversed at EPA . What is that ? Does that change the potential investment in environmental upgrades at Colstrip ?

Paul Fremont: Okay. My next question has to do with if the endangerment finding is reversed at EPA, what does that change the potential investment in environmental upgrades at Colstrip? And can you also update us on where things stand in terms of environmental upgrades?

Okay.

Are you in the queue for turban, and what would be the commercial operation date of that plant.

Yep.

I'll start with the commercial operation date, we're looking at it first of all we have a plant in construction now I think you're I think you're speaking to the 131 megawatts, that's right at $1 million investment, we're already making an investment in 'twenty six four turbines.

Yep.

Okay.

Speaker #11: And can you also update us on where things stand in terms of environmental upgrades ?

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #1: Yeah , I think obviously we'll do whatever we need to , in essence , to keep Colstrip open as long as it's economic and obviously , if we're forced to do something , we think is not necessary , you know , we would probably invest in a gas plant if we're required to do something sooner rather than later .

Brian So I would say approximately a third of that investment will be made in 2026.

Brian Bird: Yeah, I think obviously we'll do whatever we need to, in essence, to keep Colstrip open as long as it's economic. And obviously, if we're forced to do something we think is not necessary, you know, we would probably invest in a gas plant if we're required to do something sooner rather than later. It has always been our hope here with this investment in Colstrip, we can keep that plant open and operating through the depreciable life that we expected into the 2040 timetable. And again, hopefully, that technology, possibly nuclear, possibly long-duration storage, whatever, storage, whatever that is, to help us replace Colstrip with something that's cleaner. But if we're forced to do something sooner, either investing in environmental controls, if you will, or ultimately building a gas plant, we will do that too.

Okay.

To get our turbines in place and the plant is expected to be completed in 2000 <unk>.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

And.

You are in the queue or you have the turbines are lined up.

Yes.

Speaker #1: It has always been our hope here with this investment in Colstrip , we can keep that plant open and operating through the life that we expected into the 2040 timetable .

[laughter].

For that for that 2030 in service date.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, we're buying turbines.

Okay.

Speaker #1: And again , hopefully that technology possibly nuclear , possibly long duration story , whatever storage , whatever that is , to help us replace Colstrip with something that's cleaner .

Okay.

Yes.

My next question has to do with if the endangerment finding is reversed at EPA.

Yes.

Okay.

What is that.

Yeah.

Speaker #1: But if we're forced to do something sooner , either investing in environmental controls , if you will , or ultimately building a gas plant , we will do that too .

Does that change.

Yeah.

Yes.

The potential investment in environmental upgrades at Colstrip and can you also update us on.

Yes.

Yep.

Speaker #1: We need to serve our customers with Colstrip or it's replacement . And so it's hard to answer that question today . Paul , until we see ultimately what's happening .

Brian Bird: We need to serve our customers with Colstrip or its replacement. And so it's hard to answer that question today, Paul, until we see ultimately what's happening. But I have to say, what we're expecting out of the administration is certainly helpful for our long-term plans for Colstrip at this point in time.

Where things stand in terms of environmental upgrades.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes, I think obviously, we'll do whatever we need to in essence to creep closer both as long as its economic and obviously, if we're forced to do something.

Yeah.

Okay.

Speaker #1: But I have to say what we're expecting out of administration , certainly helpful for our long term plans for Colstrip at this point in time .

Yeah.

Okay.

Yes.

Thanks.

Okay.

Necessary, we would probably invest in a gas plant if we're required to do something sooner rather than later it has always been our hope here with this investment and Colstrip, we can keep that plant.

Speaker #7: I would also just clarify our five year capital plan . We did roll in Colstrip related CapEx , but that's maintenance CapEx . Paul , is how I would refer to that .

Crystal Lail: I would also just clarify our five-year capital plan. We did roll in Colstrip-related CapEx, but that's maintenance CapEx, Paul, is how I would refer to that.

Okay.

Paul Fremont: Right.

Speaker #7: There's no material environmental CapEx in that number . So if something changes over time , certainly we we talk about that at the time , we talked about the mass ruling previously and how that might impact culture , but we never had any numbers in our capital plan related to that .

Crystal Lail: There's no material environmental CapEx in that number. So if something changes over time, certainly we talk about that at the time. We had talked about the MATS ruling previously and how that might impact Colstrip, but we never had any numbers in our capital plan related to that.

Okay.

Often in operating through their depreciable life that we expected in the 2040 timetable and again, hopefully that technology, possibly nuclear possibly long duration story water storage whatever that is to help us replace colstrip with something thats cleaner, but if we're forced to do something sooner either investing.

But.

Scott.

Okay.

Yes.

Speaker #11: And is there I mean , is there any update in terms of whether those rules will be voted on or applied by the EPA or for the time being , should we just assume that nothing is moving forward along those fronts along that front ?

Paul Fremont: Is there, I mean, is there any update in terms of whether those rules will be voted on or applied by the EPA, or, for the time being, should we just assume that nothing is moving forward along those fronts, along that front?

Okay.

Yes.

And environmental.

Okay.

Controls, if you will or ultimately building a gas plant, we will do that too we need to serve our customers.

Yep.

Okay.

With coal strip or its replacement and so it's hard to answer that question that they fall until we see ultimately what's happening, but I have to say what we're expecting of administration certainly helpful for our long term plans for coal strip at this point in time.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #1: Yeah , I think we're we've been expecting to hear something on this any day now . And I guess until we actually see what what the rules say , I'll kind of hold off on how to respond to that

Brian Bird: Yeah, I think we've been expecting to hear something on this any day now. And I guess until we actually see what the rules say, I'll kind of hold off on how to respond to that.

Okay.

I would also just clarify our five year capital plan, we did rolling Colstrip related capex, but that maintenance Capex. Paul is how I would refer to that right. There's no material environmental capex in that number.

Okay.

Speaker #11: And then lastly , any any updates on the remaining portion of Colstrip ownership where the parties most likely will need to divest their ownership interests

Paul Fremont: And then lastly, any updates on the remaining portion of Colstrip ownership, where the parties most likely will need to divest their ownership interests?

Sure.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

If something changes over time, certainly we talk about that at the time, we are talking about the mass rolling previously and how that might impact closer, but we never had any numbers in our capital plan related to that.

Okay.

Thanks.

Brian Bird: You know, Paul, we just grabbed these two pieces from Puget and Avista, that 592, we're extremely happy with those. We'd like to certainly understand how the commission looks at it and ultimately how things are working out with data centers. You know, we're, we're extremely happy with being able to get to 55% ownership and I'll stop there.

Speaker #1: You know , Paul , we just grabbed these two pieces from Puget and Avista . That 592 were extremely happy with those . We'd like to certainly understand how the commission looks at it and ultimately how things are working out with data centers .

Okay.

And is there I mean.

[laughter].

Is there any update in terms of.

Yeah.

Okay.

Whether those rules will be voted on are applied by the EPA or for the time being should we just assume that.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #1: You know , we're extremely happy with being able to get to 55% ownership and I'll stop there

Okay.

Yes.

Nothing is moving forward along those fronts along that front.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yes, I think we've been expecting to hear something on this.

[laughter].

Speaker #11: Right . But I mean , theoretically , how would those costs be picked up if if the other owners were forced to exit

Paul Fremont: Right. But I mean, theoretically, how would those costs be picked up if the other owners were forced to exit?

Okay.

Any day, now and I guess until we actually see what the rules say.

Excellent.

Hold off and how to respond to that.

Tibet.

Okay.

And then lastly, any.

Speaker #1: Are you talking environmental costs would have to be applied ?

Brian Bird: Are you talking environmental costs that have to be applied? What other costs are you talking about?

Yeah.

Any updates on the remaining portion of colstrip ownership, where.

Okay.

Speaker #11: You know , in other words . Well , in other words , if if the other partners are forced to exit the plan , ownership because of state laws .

Okay.

Paul Fremont: Well, in other words, if the other partners are forced to exit the plant ownership because of state laws, then what would happen to their share of the operating costs? So would they... I guess, would they still be on the hook for that, or how would that work?

Yes.

Parties, most likely will need to divest their ownership interests.

Yeah.

Okay.

Speaker #11: Then what would happen to their share of the operating costs ? Or would they ? I guess , would they still be on the hook for that ?

Yeah.

Okay.

Paul We just grab these two pieces for Puget and Avista that 592, we're extremely happy with those we'd like to certainly understand.

Yes.

Speaker #11: Or how would that work ?

Yeah.

Yes.

Speaker #1: Yeah , I think I think they would be in a tough spot . I'm guessing . And I'm guessing all of them are looking for means to exit .

Brian Bird: Yeah, I think, I think they would be in a tough spot. I'm guessing, and I'm guessing all of them are looking for means to exit other than Talon doesn't need to exit, but I, I'm sure they're talking to folks about that.

Okay.

How the commission looks at it and ultimately how things are working out of data centers.

Okay.

Speaker #1: Other than Talen doesn't need to exit , but I'm sure they're talking to folks about that .

Yes.

We're extremely happy with being able to get to 55% ownership in <unk>.

Okay.

Speaker #11: Great . That's it . Thank you very much

Paul Fremont: Great. That's it. Thank you very much.

But.

I'll stop there.

Right, but I mean theoretically.

Yeah.

[laughter].

How would those costs be picked up.

Speaker #2: Your next question comes from the line of Rex Savage from Clear Street . Your line is live

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Rex Savage from Clear Street. Your line is live.

Okay.

If the other owners, we're forced to exit.

Yes.

Speaker #11: Hi .

Rex Savage: Hi, thank you. I wanted to ask just quickly on merger state regulatory. We've seen a bit of a delay in South Dakota. Was curious if there's anything to be concerned about there. In the Montana review, it looks like some of the interveners have made the claim that the application is incomplete, perhaps because there's not a benefits study that's in there, maybe for other reasons. So, I mean, do you feel comfortable with the Montana timeline as it stands, or might we also see a delay in Montana? Thank you.

Speaker #12: Thank you . I wanted to ask just quickly on merger state regulatory . We've seen a bit of a delay in South Dakota .

Are you talking environmental cost of it have to be applied.

Okay.

No no im sorry.

Okay.

Yeah.

Well in other words, if the other partners are forced to exit the plan ownership because of state laws, then what would happen to their share of the operating costs I would day I guess would they still be on the hook for that or how would that work.

[laughter].

Speaker #12: I was curious if there's anything to be concerned about there in the Montana Review , it looks like some of the Intervenors have made the claim that the application is incomplete .

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Adam.

Speaker #12: Perhaps because there's not a benefits study that's in there . Maybe for other reasons . So do you feel comfortable with the Montana timeline as it stands , or might we also see a delay in Montana ?

Yes, I think I think they would be in the top spot I'm guessing.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

I'm guessing all of them are looking for means to exit other than talent doesn't need to exit.

Okay.

But I am sure they are talking to folks about that.

Okay.

Speaker #12: Thank you .

Great.

That's it thank you very much.

Speaker #7: Sure . I'll take that one . So first , your question with regard to South Dakota and the timeline there , South Dakota has a six month statute , which I would acknowledge is a bit of a quick shot clock on getting through all the process and procedure and making sure they're comfortable with it , that we are working with staff on resetting a bit of an extension to that procedural schedule .

Crystal Lail: Sure. I'll take that one. So first, your question with regard to South Dakota and the timeline there. South Dakota has a six-month statute, which I would acknowledge is a bit of a quick shot clock on getting through all the process and procedure and making sure they're comfortable. But we are working with staff on resetting a bit of an extension to that procedural schedule. I don't have any concerns there. They're asking the right questions and going through the right process. They just need a little bit more time than they would have been in front of both Nebraska and Montana. So we're working with them on resetting the procedural. I still think that they'll likely, in the end, be well ahead of Montana ordered, even with a revised procedural schedule. So no concern there.

Okay.

Your next question comes from the line of Rick Savage from crude Street. Your line is live.

Okay.

[laughter].

Hi, Thank you I wanted to ask just quickly on.

Okay.

Merger state regulatory we've seen.

Okay.

Speaker #7: I don't have any concerns there . They're asking the right questions and going through the right process . They just need a little bit more time and they would have been in front of both Nebraska and Montana .

A bit of a delay in South Dakota was curious if there is anything.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

To be concerned about there and in the Montana.

Speaker #7: So we're working with them on resetting the procedural . I still think that they'll likely , in the end , be well ahead of Montana .

Yes.

Okay.

Review it looks like some of the intervenors have.

Okay.

Yes.

Speaker #7: Order , even with a revised procedural schedule . So no concern there . You've also seen it progressing in Montana . And what I would say is a bit normal , given the nature of the intervenors there and who they are .

Made the claim that the application is incomplete, perhaps because theres not a benefit.

Uh huh.

Crystal Lail: You've also seen it progressing in Montana, and what I would say is a bit normal, given the nature of the intervenors there and who they are. So we've responded to the motions there. You also have intervenors' testimony come in, and overall, again, exactly as we would expect the docket to progress. There's the comments as to maybe commitments that we could make, what they'd like to see to better understand that. We do certainly recognize that in each of the jurisdictions we serve, not just the ones we're in, a big part of your local commitment is your utility, and we want to make sure and work through that in the right sorts of ways. So I wouldn't say there's any concern in how those dockets are progressing.

Study that's in there.

Yes.

Maybe for other reasons so.

Okay.

[laughter].

Do you feel comfortable with the Montana timeline as it stands or might we also see a delay.

Speaker #7: So we've responded to the motions there . You also intervenors testimony come in and overall , again , exactly as we would expect , the docket to progress .

Hi.

But.

Montana. Thank you.

Okay.

Sure I'll take that one so first your question with regard to South Dakota in the timeline there South Dakota has a six months statute, which I would acknowledge is a bit of a quick shot clock on getting through all the process and procedure and making sure. They are comfortable that we are working with staff on resetting a bit of an extension to that procedural schedule.

Yes.

Speaker #7: There's the comments as to maybe commitments that we could make , what they'd like to see to better understand that we do certainly recognize that in each of the jurisdictions we serve , not just the ones we're in a big part of your local commitment is your utility , and we want to make sure and work through that in the right sorts of ways .

[laughter].

Yes.

Okay.

Yep.

Yes.

Sure.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #7: So I wouldn't say there's any concern in how those dockets are progressing . The concerns expressed are , I think , typical for each of those intervenors and the intervenor testimony .

Okay.

Any concerns there, they're asking the right questions and going through the right process. They just need a little bit more time than they would've been in front of both Nebraska, Montana. So we're working with them on resetting the procedural I still think that they will likely.

Crystal Lail: The concerns expressed are, I think, typical for each of those interveners, and the intervener testimony, I think paints the path towards the direction of the things they'd want to make sure are considered in an eventual outcome.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #7: I think , paints a path toward the direction of the things they want to make sure are considered in an eventual outcome

Okay.

Got it.

And be well ahead of our Montana order, even with a revised procedural schedule. So no concern there.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #12: Thank you . And as a follow up on Montana , I believe you're going through this IRP process now as well . How does that , if at all , fit in to the review ?

Rex Savage: Thank you. And as a follow-up on Montana, I believe you're going through this IRP process now as well. How does that, if at all, fit in, you know, to the review? Not, maybe not necessarily the review directly, but the timing of the review for the deal versus the review of the IRP. I believe the final draft is due in maybe a couple of months, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

Oh.

So seeing that progressing in Montana, and what I would say is a bit normal given the nature of the intervenors, there and who they are.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

So we've responded to the motion theory up the intervenors have somebody come in and overall again exactly as we would expect the docket to progress there.

Okay.

Speaker #12: Not maybe not necessarily the review directly , but the timing of the review for the deal versus the review of the IRP . I believe the final draft is due in maybe a couple of months , but please correct me if I'm wrong .

Okay.

Yes.

Sure.

There's that comments as to maybe commitments that we could make what they'd like to see to better understand that we do certainly recognize that each of the jurisdictions. We serve not just the ones. We're in a big part of your local commitment as your utility and we want to make sure and work through that in the rates worked away. So I wouldn't say there is any concern and how those buckets are progressing that concerns us.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Sure.

Speaker #1: Yeah , the IRP is is out and we'll have a chance to see . I do not I don't anticipate there's any connection between the IRP and the merger process

Okay.

Brian Bird: No, the IRP is out and we've had a chance to see. I do not, I don't anticipate there's any connection between the IRP and the merger process.

Okay.

Expressed or I think typical for each of those intervenors in the intervenor testimony I think paints a path towards the direction of the things. They wanted to make sure are considered in an eventual outcome.

Okay.

Speaker #12: Thank you

Rex Savage: Thank you.

Okay.

Speaker #2: That concludes the question and answer session . I'll now turn the call over to Brian Bird for closing remarks .

Okay.

Operator: That concludes the question and answer session. I'll now turn the call over to Brian Bird for closing remarks.

Thank you and as a follow up on Montana.

Okay.

I believe youre going through the IRB process now as well.

Speaker #1: Well , I think Crystal pointed out earlier on the call , we actually it was a it was a really very , very good 25 .

Brian Bird: Well, I think Crystal pointed out earlier on the call, we actually, it was a really very, very good 25. I mean, obviously, we ran into some issues in terms of the rate review and outcome there. But I remember. I think we need to think about the revenue requirement associated with that. That certainly continues to help us invest as those things we need to continue to provide good service to our customers.

Yeah.

Yes.

How does that if at all.

Understood.

Speaker #1: I mean , obviously we ran into some issues in terms of the rate review , and I'll come there , but I remember the I think we need to think about the revenue requirement associated with that .

Okay.

In.

So the.

But.

Review, not maybe not necessarily review directly but the timing.

Yes.

Okay.

Uh huh.

Speaker #1: That's continues to help us invest as those things we need to to continue to provide good service to our customers . But if you think about our ability to certainly announce the merger and all the work we're doing with our friends at Black Hills to get that across the goal line , I think about our ability now to have Colstrip to be resourced , adequate in Montana , and certainly in this age when people are certainly very , very concerned about reliability and affordability , to feel much , much better about that in terms of how we serve our customers and also thinking about longer term , how can we continue to make investments ?

The review for the deal versus the review of the ERP I believe the final draft with you and maybe a couple of months, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

Brian Bird: But if you think about our ability to certainly announce the merger and, and all the work we're doing with our friends at Black Hills to get that across the goal line, I think about our ability now to have Colstrip to be resource adequate in Montana, and certainly in this age, when people are certainly very, very concerned about reliability and affordability, to feel much, much better about that in terms of how we serve our customers. And also thinking about longer term, how can we continue to make the investments we have, but also earn the appropriate returns we have for our shareholders? And I think 2025 set us up very, very good for that on a going-forward basis.

Yep.

The IOP is is out and.

Okay.

You've had a chance to say I do not I don't anticipate there's any connection between the IRB in the merger process.

[laughter].

Thank you.

Right.

Yeah.

That concludes the question and answer session I will now turn the call over to Brian Bird for closing remarks.

Yes.

Speaker #1: We have , but also earn the appropriate returns we have for our shareholders ? And I think 2025 set us up very , very good for that .

So I think crystal pointed out earlier on the call. We actually it was really very very good 25, I mean, obviously, we ran into some issues.

Okay.

Speaker #1: On a going forward basis . And with that , just want to thank all of you for your support of the company and your interest in what we're doing here at northwestern .

Okay.

Brian Bird: And with that, I just want to thank all of you for your support of the company, and your interest, in what we're doing here at NorthWestern. I certainly want to thank everyone at NorthWestern for all the hard work in 2025 as well. So with that, I want to say thanks.

Yes.

In terms of the rate review and I'll come there, but remember the I think we need you can think about the revenue requirement associated with that that certainly continues to help us invest those things we need to to continue to provide good service to our customers, but if you think about our ability to certainly announced the merger and all the work we're doing with our friends at <unk>.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Speaker #1: And we certainly want to thank everyone at northwestern for all the hard work in 2025 as well . So with that , let me say thanks

Okay.

But.

Okay.

Operator: That concludes today's meeting. You may now disconnect.

Yeah.

Okay.

Black hills to get that across the goal line to think about our ability now to have colstrip to be resource adequate in Montana.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

In this age when people are certainly very very concerned about reliability and affordability to feel much much better about that in terms of how we serve our customers and also thinking about longer term how can we continue to make the investments we have but also earn the appropriate returns we have for our shareholders and I think 2025 set us up very very good for that on a going forward basis and with that just.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yes.

Got it.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Got it.

Okay.

Wanted to thank all of you for your support of the company.

Thank you.

Yes.

And your interest in what we're doing here at northwestern.

Okay.

Yes.

Certainly want to thank everyone at northwestern for all the hard work in 2025 as well so with that let's say thanks.

Yes.

That's correct.

Okay.

Sure.

That concludes today's meeting you may now disconnect.

Okay.

Q4 2025 NorthWestern Energy Corp Earnings Call

Request a DemoDemo

NWE

NorthWestern Energy

Earnings