Newsfilter article unlocker

ladies and gentlemen thank you for standing by my name is krista and i'll be your conference operator today i'd like to welcome everyone to the pg e third quarter 2026 earnings release 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 would like to ask a question please press star 1 on your telephone keypad to withdraw your question again press star 1. thank you at this time i would like to turn the conference over to jonathan arnold vice president of investor relations jonathan please go ahead good morning everyone and thank you for joining us for pg e's third quarter 2026 earnings call with us today are patty poppy chief executive officer and carolyn burke executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. We also have other members of the leadership team here with us in our Oakland headquarters. First, I should remind you that today's discussion will include forward-looking statements about our outlook for future financial results and other matters. These statements are based on management's current expectations, assumptions, and estimates. Some of the important factors which could cause our actual results to differ materially are described on the second page of today's earnings presentation. Today's discussion will also contain non-GAAP financial measures. The slides provide important information regarding these measures, including reconciliations between non-GAP and GAAP. They can be found online at investor.pgecorp.com, along with other relevant information. We also encourage you to review our quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30th, 2026. With that, it's my pleasure to hand the call over to our CEO, Patty Poppe. Thank you, Jonathan. Good morning, everyone. Our core earnings per share were $0.41 for the third quarter and $1.24 for the first nine months. Today, we're reaffirming our 2026 core EPS guidance of $1.64 to $1,66, up 10% from 2025 at the midpoint. We're also reaffirming our 2027 core EPS guidance of $178 to $182, up 9% at the Midpoint. While we're no longer providing guidance beyond 2027 during our strategic review, we already addressed our anticipated equity financing needs through 2030. On the common dividend, we typically set our annual rate for the upcoming year in December, and for 2027 you should expect our recommended increase to be consistent with our prior stated trajectory. Turning to slide four, we know there are two topics that are top of mind today, wildfire policy reform and our previously announced strategic review. First, on wildfire policy. Comprehensive reform has not yet been enacted, and action is needed to address the tail risk that exists under the current framework. At the same time, it's important to recognize that California's utility wildfire framework has evolved significantly from SB 901 in 2018 through AB 1054 in 2019, and most recently with SB 254 last year. Along that journey, our state policymakers have established important and substantive features including self-insurance up to one billion dollars liquidity from the wildfire fund and continuation account a revised prudency standard a presumption of prudence for utilities meeting rigorous safety certification limits on wildfire fond reimbursements if found imprudent and precedent for securitization of claims exceeding fund capacity collectively these protections have strengthened california's ability to compensate wildfire survivors while supporting safe reliable and affordable service yet key voices have plainly acknowledged that there is more work to do including governor newsom the cpuc the wildfire fund administrator and the credit rating agencies we remain committed to working constructively with policy makers and stakeholders to build on the progress california has made to date we look forward to the governor's requested cpuc report due november 1st which should further quantify the unsustainable impacts of the current framework on california and utility customers while legislative action has not materialized yet this year we're moving forward to unlock value for customers and investors as you know since 2020 we've been reinvesting nearly all of our earnings into the system to benefit customers however sustaining this level of investment requires a wildfire liability framework that supports affordable access to capital reflecting current high financing costs we previously announced a 2 billion reduction to our 2027 capital plan and we recently began notifying customers whose projects may be delayed these changes will affect the connection of new clean energy resources system expansion to meet growing demand, and new or upgraded customer projects, including those supporting much-needed housing in California. We do not take those impacts on our customers lightly, but our current financing cost is too expensive for them. With our strategic review, we've also taken the initiative to start exploring solutions which could add protections and unlock value for customers and investors. As we announced on September 2nd, we are assessing the full range of options for how PG&E is organized and financed. A key foundational objective is to achieve investment-grade credit ratings, which we view as critical to maximizing the value we can deliver for our customers. While policy reform through legislation remains the fastest and most effective solution, we are also evaluating other options, including possible regulatory reforms, further reassessing our capital allocation priorities and revisiting our corporate structure. On structure, options range from corporate ring fencing to sales and separations. Today, a discount for wildfire risk burdens all of our assets, including businesses with little or no exposure to that risk. Our review is evaluating whether alternative structures could better reflect the value and risk profile of those businesses in order to lower financing costs for customers. We expect to share the outcome of our review and our planned path forward with you no later than next summer. In the meantime, we plan to keep you updated on our progress through future earnings calls or sooner if there are material developments to share. The important point is this. PG&E has more than one way to move forward and create value. We have several attractive businesses with unique and hard-to-replicate assets providing essential electric and gas service to over 16 million people in a service area that includes the heart of the world's innovation economy. Turning to slide five, the story here is simple. Our investments are producing measurable results. Today, our Hazard Awareness and Warning Center has real-time visibility across our system through more than 700 AI-enabled cameras and 1,600 weather stations. The results are clear. We're now in our fourth year without a major wildfire associated with our equipment and our weather normalized ignition rate has declined 74% since 2017 to its lowest level since we began tracking the metric. We are also seeing tremendous progress in our gas business, where aerial and drone inspections have significantly improved leak detection efficiency and safety performance. Additionally, we remain first quartile in both dig-in performance and emergency response, with first responder arriving on site in an average of 20 minutes. We're also on track to achieve a 62% reduction in annual methane emissions compared to the 2015 CPUC-approved baseline, continuing to outperform our 2030 target. We've made similar improvements across our large and growing transmission and power generation businesses. Our electric transmission system spans 18,000 circuit miles with $13 billion of FERC rate base, along with significant opportunities to increase investment in the future, while our power generation portfolio includes 7.8 gigawatts of capacity, including our hydro system and top-performing Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. Turning to slide six, we're continuing to build a high-quality data center pipeline and providing visibility into how projects advance from application to energization. This quarter, we're showing a new category for megawatts that are now successfully connected to our system and receiving service. Since 2024, we brought approximately 174 megawatths of data center projects online. As we look to bring more of our pipeline into service, our focus will continue to be on doing so in a way that will improve affordability for existing customers. We're focused on connecting the right projects, pricing them right, and ensuring large load customers make meaningful financial commitments as they advance through the process. Turning to slide seven, there's a common thread across the themes I've discussed this morning. Whether it's continuing our transformation and strengthening our layers of protection, advocating for durable wildfire policy reform, advancing rate reducing load growth, or progressing our strategic review we're guided by a simple principle what's good for our customers is ultimately good for our investors and good for california we'll continue to stay grounded in our customer first approach and pursue opportunities to deliver a safer more reliable and more affordable system so that our customers and shareholders can prosper we're proud of the progress we've made and we're ready to tackle the work ahead with that i'll hand it over to carolyn to cover our financials in more detail thank you patty and good morning everyone turning to slide 8 we're showing you our earnings walk for the first nine months of 2026. our core eps year to date has reached 1.24 up from 1.14 in the same period last year keeping us on track to deliver on our full-year core EPS guidance. As in prior quarters, customer capital investment continues to be the primary driver of our earnings growth, contributing $0.12 over the first nine months. We also continue to make steady progress on our O&M savings goal, with $0,04 year-to-date. This puts us on pace to deliver our savings guidance once again, while redeploying $0 2. Timing and other items reduced earnings by $0.04 year-to-date. This mainly reflects the benefit we realized in the third quarter of last year from implementing a tax method change. While we benefited from the method change in the 3rd quarter of both years, last year's third quarter also included a catch-up for the first and second quarters. to slide nine our updated 2027 capital guidance of 11.4 billion dollars reflects the 2 billion dollar reduction we announced on september 2nd you might have noticed that our 2027 rate-based guidance remains unchanged many of the projects impacted by our capital deferral have longer development and construction timelines and were not expected to enter service until after 2027 limiting the impact on next year's rate base. We also continue to see strong operational execution across the company including efficiently converting construction work in progress into rate base We expect to finance our 2027 capital investments with cash from operations and $4 to $5 billion of utility debt financing which includes around $1 billion of maturities. Importantly, with our updated capital plan, we remain fully committed to executing our wildfire mitigation plan, maintaining our annual safety certificate, and continuing the critical work required to operate our system safely every day. On slide 10, we've made significant progress over the past several years improving our credit profile. The rating agencies have recognized for some time that our financial metrics are consistent with investment grade performance. At the same time, they've also been clear that policy risk remains the primary constraint on further ratings improvement. That dynamic was reinforced during the quarter when Fitch revised its outlook on PG&E to negative, and S&P highlighted the heightened risk faced by California investor-owned utilities. Together, these assessments reinforced the importance of a durable wildfire liability framework, which would support investment grade ratings and more affordable access to capital for the benefit of our customers. On slide 11, we continued to execute our plan to reduce non-fuel O&M by 2 to 4 percent annually. Our results reflect the ongoing transformation underway at PG&E as we continue executing our performance playbook and eliminating waste. Turning to slide 12, we're highlighting several important regulatory and legislative milestones. In our 2027 general rate case, we received a favorable proposed decision that would authorize interim rate recovery of $456 million to be collected over 12 months, starting in January. If approved, this would promote more stable customer builds, better align cash flow with costs, and reduce financing expense. The Commission may take up the PD as soon as next Thursday's voting meeting. At the end of September, we filed our 10-year Electric Undergrounding Plan, or EUP, proposing 5,000 additional miles of undergrounding between 2028 and 2037, and building on the approximately 1,900 miles we expect to have completed by the end of next year. The plan contemplates an investment of $16.6 billion. That investment is expected to deliver approximately $117 billion of long-term customer benefits, while also avoiding $6 billion of future vegetation management, operations, and maintenance costs. Our safety regulator, OEIS, has nine months to review the filing, and if approved, we would then submit the plan and an application to the CPUC for approval of the cost, which is also a nine-month review. As a result, we expect to complete the approval process in the second quarter of 2028. Separately, last week the CPUC issued a proposed decision on the benefit-cost ratio methodology for utility EUPs. We're evaluating the PD and expect to submit comments by November 5th, ahead of a potential commission vote as early as November 19th. We are concerned that the proposed methodology would prevent undergrounding from reaching thousands of customers in high-risk communities, even where it offers the most effective means of reducing wildfire risk and improving reliability at the lowest cost. Next month we anticipate a proposed decision in our Kincaid and Dixie cost recovery proceeding. As a reminder, this is the first wildfire recovery case for a utility operating under AB 1054 safety certificate and benefiting from the associated presumption of prudency. Finally, turning to slide 13, the consistent execution, operational improvement, and financial discipline we've highlighted this morning demonstrate PG&E's differentiated story. Our continued transformation benefits customers and investors today while strengthening the foundation for the future. With that, I'll turn it to Patty. Thank you, Carolyn. The facts don't lie. The foundational operations of PG&E are strong and improving every day. Our performance playbook is doing what we designed it to do, deliver for our customers. In the absence of wildfire liability reform, we'll keep advancing our strategic review with the ambition of becoming a sustainable, investment-grade business that unlocks the full value of our company for our consumers, our state, and our owners. With that, operator, please open the lines for questions. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand and join the queue. And if you would to withdraw your question, again press star one. We do ask that you kindly limit yourself to one question and a single follow-up. For any additional questions, please and your first question comes from Steve Fleischman with Wolf Research. Please go ahead. Morning Steve. Hi Steve. Hey good morning. So I guess just curious what signals if any you're getting on on desire interest of the legislature to address the wildfire liability this year. I know So I know there's assembly hearings and maybe some more, maybe you could talk about what you've heard and know so far, just any sense that the Senate may want to look to do any hearings. Yeah. Well, thanks, Steve, obviously top of mind for everyone. And look, we continue to see progress. The hearing this week, I think, was effective at continuing to make the case that the status quo is unacceptable. And, you know, as long as nothing happens, no legislation is passed, our customers continue to pay. And it's a status quo that needs to be resolved. The job's not done yet. So we found, you Know, the hearings that are scheduled next week, another one just got scheduled. So there's two next week that I think are addressing the right questions and the right issues, and we're encouraged by that. In the meantime, obviously, we continue to lean forward and move forward on other alternatives to unlock the value. Obviously, policy reform would be our number one desired next step, but we have a lot of value that is, I would suggest, trapped in the company right now. And so we're working hard to create parallel paths and move forward. But we're hopeful that the legislature does continue to act out. You know, the Senate, we're looking to see if they would schedule any hearings that hasn't happened yet. But obviously, these hearings are very public and the information is clear. And many people and many key leaders in the state continue to speak that action is absolutely required. and then I guess just related just I think we're still we're still supposed to get the PUC report on this topic November 1st and just any sense of what may come out of that yeah I think it'll be another good case in why the status quo is unacceptable I don't know how many different ways that people are going to be able to publish and say but i expect the the cpuc report to be substantive they've asked really um meaningful questions in their discovery so we were providing very important information to them uh it'll be good for them to be able to share that november 1st with the on at the request of the governor uh we expect that that is just another signal that the status quo is just unacceptable okay thank you yeah thanks steve your next question comes from the line of char parisa with wells fargo please go ahead hey good morning it's marcella on for sure oh hi marcello hi thanks for taking my question um thinking about the strategic review and without asking you to prejudge any specific outcome can you just frame kind of the criteria that you're using to evaluate potential pathways, specifically around weighing options' ability to unlock value with their potential regulatory risk or reliance on processes outside of your control? Yeah, great question, Marcella. Look, first and foremost, we want to unlock value. We want to target investment-grade business or businesses to unlock that value for customers and owners. obviously feasibility and ability to execute a transaction is a priority. You know, a lot of people ask us about PAC-GEN and what was different about PACGEN when the regulator didn't approve minority interest. You Know, there was a totally different time and a different set of facts. During that time, we were looking to raise cash and were unable to share benefits with customers. We think in this scenario we've got a much more compelling case to make with our regulator that, for example, our gas business, our 4 million gas customers are paying subinvestment-grade borrowing costs because it's part of the holdco related to wildfire risk. And that seems like an issue that should be resolved one way or another, whether it's resolved through policy reform, which would be great. And if not there, then would we unlock that value and lower borrowing costs for our gas customers through a regulatory approved spin or sale or separation of some kind? Got it. Appreciate that. And then you spoke a little bit about, you know, conversations around the current legislator and state leaders, but any sense of conversations with gubernatorial candidates or, you know, lawmakers who are running to be part of the next legislative body and how they're thinking about wildfire liability as potentially a day one priority? Yeah, it's, you know, the governor's race is not over yet. We do know that Javier Becerra, who's leading in the polls by a pretty wide margin today, has stated publicly support for action. I think he's hopeful, like we are, that it doesn't, we don't kick the can down the road into next year. That is certainly a possibility. But, you know, and so he's spoken publicly that he's supportive of reform. We're hopeful that that reform doesn't wait for that. Got it. Thank you. Thank you, Marcella. Your next question comes from the line of Nicholas Campanella with Barclays. Please go ahead. Morning, Nick. Good morning. I guess in the last legislative session, there was, you know, obviously heavy input from the insurance industry right at the end. And I'm just curious if you could kind of elaborate on how conversations with that stakeholder has trended since then. Is there a possibility to kind of come to some type of agreement with them just to help, you now, increase the odds of any kind of special session? Thanks. Yeah, you bet. So, look, the reality is nothing was passed. No law was passed at the end of the session, and I'm stating the obvious, but in the nuance of what does that mean to insurance, then that means insurance still needs to join in on discussions about what is going to occur to make sure that claims are limited and our customers are not the infinite backstop for insurance. insured properties. I would suggest that conversations have been productive. They've continued. Next week's hearing on the 29th is intended to discuss subrogation, my understanding is. Given that, I think we'll hear continued discussions with insurance as well as all of the stakeholders. There's a wide coalition of interested parties, our builders, our real estate agents, our plaintiff's attorneys, our environmental groups. There are large groups of stakeholders who are interested, obviously, in making sure that this is an affordable framework and that it's a sustainable framework. And so those, I would suggest those discussions continue and are constructive and we'll hear more publicly next week through the hearing process. Thanks for those thoughts. And then I guess just you're telling folks that, you know, no later than summer, I guess you'd have an answer on the strategic review. Is this really that you guys are going to take time to do the work and finalize the plan by then? Or could you be actively kind of pursuing things today that could result in things happening to the corporate structure or maybe regulatory filings being made ahead of that summer date? Thanks. Yeah, we'll definitely be updating through our normal quarterly process, and what we've said is we'll have more definitive determination by next summer, but as things occur, we'll obviously be communicating, and if there's something to be discussed between quarterly calls, we will certainly do that. We are moving with a sense of urgency. We see real opportunity here. These assets are extraordinarily valuable, and they're operated by the best in the world, I would argue. We have incredible people who operate these assets. They become very valuable. And I think our ability to unlock that value could take a lot of different forms. And as we've said, policy reform is our first preference. And so hopefully we could have some update on that sooner than next summer. But otherwise, these other alternatives, as they materialize and as concepts and opportunities and potential filings become possible, we'll do it. We're not going to stick to the timeline of we have to wait until next summer. We're going to work aggressively between now and next summer, we just wanted to be clear that there was, you know, a finish line in mind. Thank you very much. Yep, thanks, Nick. Your next question comes from the line of Ross Fowler with Bank of America. Please go ahead. Morning, Patty. Morning, Ross. How are you? Good. Morning. So a couple of questions. obviously it seems like investment grade is sort of the foundational objective of the strategic review so a couple things on that what's kind of the realistic time to get there can you do it on your own does it depend on legislative and regulatory outcomes and is 14% kind of what we should mark to for an FFO at that level so I would say a couple of things we do think it's realistic it's very realistic that this business be investment-grade. The question is, what's the best framework and organization of our lines of business that we have today to maximize the value for our customers as well as our owners? And so some things we can do on our own, like capital allocation strategy, that would be a strategy to unlock value. As you know, we've held back on an aggressive dividend because we've been reinvesting in the business for the benefit of customers and for stabilizing the financials of the company and making our investment grade credit rating. We would look at capital allocation as a strategy. That's more, that's probably the most independent. We Would look at ring fencing. We Would look at, as we've said, other corporate structures that would enable unlocking that growth. In those cases, the regulator obviously has an important decision-making role to play in that, but we would only bring it to the regulator if it was truly in the best interest of customers and actually created real value for them that we can pass along to customers. And I think given our valuation today and the valuation of these assets and their actual physical value, there's some real arbitrage in that distance between the current valuation and what we think the true value of these assets are to provide benefits for customers. And so we would think that we would have a compelling case for our regulator. So all that to say, I'll just reiterate that the fastest way to unlock the value is policy reform, which, of course, we are not giving up on. Yeah, I'll just add that as we look at all of the alternatives through a lens of investment grade, we want to continue to target that mid-teens FFO to debt. So that's how we model things. That's how мы look at things. And so that's the goal. Yeah, that makes sense, Carolyn. And then one more from me. I'm just trying to square these of things. I mean, clearly I understand why there's no sort of guidance beyond 27 at this point as you go through the strategic review and you look over everything as you get to next summer and you Look at all the alternatives in front of you pending where policy goes and all the other things we're dealing with right now. But you have made a declarative financing statement through 2030. So what gives you the level of certainty that there's no equity needed in this business through 2030 when there's all the uncertainty related to CapEx, rate-based growth, earnings growth, guidance, et cetera, past 27? So we funded our equity under our plan, our original plan of a $73 billion capital program. And so we know that our equity program supports that. And so any alternative, and we love that plan, by the way. We absolutely love that plan and want to execute for our customers under that $73 billion plan. Any other alternative would need to, would support that 73, any other alternative that we're looking at is equal or is equal, would be equal to trying to support the $73 billion plan as well. And so that's where we feel comfortable that under any other, any other option that we're considering, that we would not need new equity through 2030. Yeah, and I'll just reiterate, we would not issue equity at these current stock price, our valuation. That's not an option for us. Yeah, that's certainly the wrong cost of capital, I would say. Yeah. I'll Just say, as we continue to look forward on our financing plans, the principles that we've talked about before still hold under this strategic review. We plan conservatively, we plan with customers at heart, we're always mindful of market conditions, and particularly our current value discount, and our primary focus continues to be IG supportive metrics. That makes sense, Carolyn. And then you do talk about this amortization or the faster amortization of the wildfire fund um you're calling that out this quarter um that i mean i don't think that accelerated amortisation would that seems like an accounting consequence i should say um rather than an economic and credit consequence because i think it's pretty well known that that might that wildfire finance that might change um given other things going on california but kind of just i'm just trying to check in and make sure that really has no bearing on your financing plan credit objectives strategic review analysis that's right it has no bearing you're right it's an accounting charge we're just waiting for the right trigger okay makes sense to me thank you thanks ross your next question comes from the line of carly davenport with goldman sachs please go ahead morning carly good morning good morning thanks so much for taking the questions. Appreciate the time. Maybe just one on the data center pipeline. Any guidance on how we should just think about the pace and the opportunity to connect data center load in the face of the reduction to the capital plan? Any guidance that you can share sort of on where the data centers may fall in the queue of projects that could be impacted by potential capex reductions? Yeah. So, first of all, keeping in mind that our pipeline is a multiyear pipeline and our capital reduction is today specifically for 2027 uh we have we see that our 1.8 gigawatts of projects that we have previously signaled would be online by 2030 remain in that plan um you know when we talk about our capital reset we reduced two billion dollars of capital but we're still spending 11.4 billion dollars in capital next year so there's still obviously capital to deploy to our critical safety issues, our critical compliance issues, and projects that are well on their way to reducing rates for customers, those are obviously very important to us. As we think further on down the line during the strategic review, obviously, as we've said, capital allocation will be an area of focus, and we'll look at how we can continue to help power California's prosperity and our growth. But certainly, under this liability framework, we're limited in that way. That's why when Carolyn says we love our $73 billion plan, it can help fuel that growth and prosperity for customers and lower bills and bring jobs and new tax revenue to the state. I would just advocate strongly that a healthy PG&E, a wildfire reform, our wildfire liability policy that enables us to grow, enables California to grow and prosper. And so we're fans of what we've referred to as our Goldilocks data center pipeline and our ability to serve the tech industry of California is an honor and a privilege, but we need a liability reform that enables that to happen sustainably and for the long haul. Great. Very clear. Thank you. And then, just a housekeeping item. On the dividend, is the shift in presentation there in the slides just a function of the strategic review, or is there anything more explicit that you're messaging there with the consistent growth versus the prior 20% payout guidance? No, I don't think it's any new signaling there. As we've said before with our strategic review everything's on the table, including the dividend policy but we've also been very consistent that for 2027 in particular where we get a lot of questions is that you should expect 2027 to be in line with our prior trajectory which is in line 20 by 2028 we've noted that it would be ratable ultimately our board will set the dividend in december of this year but that's that's what we were signaling but everything's on the table under the strategic review Great. Thank you so much for the time. Your next question comes from the line of Anthony Cordell with Mizuho. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, Kim. Good morning, Anthony. Just a quick question, quick follow-up, I guess. One on the strategic review, is there a point, you're very clear, you hope to have it no later than next summer. Is there a place where that review becomes more urgent, whether it's a credit rating action or another wildfire season, I guess, how flexible is that date on external factors? And then I have a follow-up. Yeah, it's a great question, Anthony. You know, obviously, as we go through the reform, we'll be watching current conditions and whatever conditions within which we're operating will have an influence on our trajectory. But what we're really looking for is a long-term, sustainable business organization and financing model that delivers value. And we know that it can, and we know that this model works. We know that the investor-owned utility model works for customers as well as shareholders and investors and owners and financing entities. And so we'll just, we'll obviously respond to current conditions, but more importantly, have an eye on the horizon for what is our long-term value proposition and actually unlock that value. Great. And the follow-up, it may be more focused for the legislature, but I'm just wondering, it seems like the cycle of decisions, or when I think about the success of AB 1054 and SB 254 were both after catastrophic events and the legislature acted. This year, again, all of the physical enhancements that companies have made across the state, we really didn't, you know, Fortunately, they didn't have an event this year, but also weren't a success in the legislature. I mean, what decouples that of in order to get supportive legislative action, we don't want to have to have a catastrophic event? Well, I will remind us we did have a catastrophe event, obviously a significant one back in 2025, which is when this legislative package started. So this has been a two-year package in response to the issues in 2025, and I would just suggest that the PG&E remaining sub-investment grade is a major issue that must be solved. And, you know, when Fitch put us on negative outlook, I think that really reiterated that inaction will continue to get increasingly expensive for our customers. In fact, for all of the debt that we've issued in sub-investment grade since 2017 will cost our customers an incremental $4 billion in interest expense over the life of that financing. That is a cost that can be immediately remediated with good long-term policy. So I'd like to think, Anthony, that we've got a real sense of urgency because customers are paying today, and our customers are waiting on our legislature to take the necessary actions to put us back in a position to be investment grade, given we meet all of the criteria for investment grade but for California liability policy. Great. That's all I had. Thanks for taking the questions. Thanks, Anthony. Thanks, Antony. Your next question comes from the line of David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Good morning, David. Thank you. Good morning. Sorry if this is a little duplicative, but I was just wondering if there is no special session, if there weren't legislation passed this year, would you consider that to be a potential catalyst for accelerating and taking additional actions within the strategic review? Well, it definitely is a driver for the fact that the strategic review has been initiated. so we will continue to do the work of that strategic review. I will, you know, reiterate that we didn't just start thinking about the strategic review, we started our internal process a year ago, thinking about what would be a response or what would Be our actions that we could take in the event of inaction. And so we've been working on this for some time. So we're not starting from a standing start, we've got a lot of momentum, we're doing been doing a lot work and so we want to make sure uh that we continue to operate with a sense of urgency yeah get understood um thanks and then you know as you've had to make tough decisions around capital prioritization um and deferring some of your capex i guess i was wondering you know with the um with the undergrounding plan you know very big amount of capital that you've proposed here i guess how do you think about that in the prioritization of you know within the strategic review you know how you how you prioritize capital is that something that that would be a kind of an anchor um in your overall you know longer term capex um you know intentions um and um you how important is that um in you're overall thinking yeah we think undergrounding is incredibly important not for every mile but for the most uh risky miles and so our 5000 mile plan, which we've spread out over 10 years, takes in mind spreading that cost out over a longer period of time. It's just over a billion dollars a year throughout the life of that 10 year plan. We think it's a very important part of risk reduction and cost reduction, the annual cost for inspections and vegetation management for those miles and the reliability impact and the cost of the reliability impact for our customers is real. And so on those 5,000 miles, we think it's the most and best prudent deployment of capital. Obviously, that has to be approved by the commission. And as Carolyn mentioned in our prepared remarks, we're concerned with the current PD on the benefit-cost ratio that would dramatically reduce the number of miles we would do. We've got a lot of talking to do here in the state about that because we know that customers should not have to choose between being safe and being reliable and affordable. We think that undergrounding is the best answer in certain miles. And so we would say even in a capital recapital allocation world that undergroundning is an important part of the plan. Now, I will also say when we think about our $73 billion plan that we had previously declared, it's a small percentage of the total plan. So the plan doesn't hinge on an underground. And I guess I just want to say out loud for the world to hear, we're not doing undergrounding to make our earnings numbers and to grow CapEx. We're doing undergroundning to keep people safe. So, you know, as we think about the role that undergrounding plays, it's a key part of our safety investments on behalf of customers. Yeah, great. Thanks for that. Really appreciate it. Yep. Thanks, David. Your next question comes from the line of Richard Sunderland with Truist Securities. Please go ahead. Hey, morning, Rich. Good morning, Richard. Hey, good morning. Good morning. Thanks for the time. I'll follow up on that last point around undergrounding and the methodology concerns. Could you speak a little bit more to how many miles of your filing would be impacted by that? I think you said significant potentially, but I guess more importantly, how that would impact the quantified benefits you laid out in your filing? Yeah, we're still working through that on the exact number of miles that would result if we use this benefit cost ratio. I think the thing that we're concerned about is it doesn't match the standard that we use for all other investment benefit cost ratios that we make. And so we're definitely concerned about the impact on our customers to that. So we're working through what those miles would be. obviously it's a proposed decision and and hopefully we'll we'll see some uh movement got it that's helpful and then switching gears back that november one cpc report i know you addressed this earlier but thinking about the strategic review context alongside that i'm curious if you have any sense of you know if this could have potential signals from the commission that could inform your strategic review or i guess maybe putting this another way do you see review opportunities that appeal logical to pursue and put in front of your regulators, even if there is legislative action later this year? Well, that's a good question, Rich. You know, we are thinking about that as we do all of this analysis and we see the value of our assets and the incredible people who operate them, you know, and the benefits to customers. If there's a customer beneficial outcome that even with legislative action would still be considered, we obviously we'll keep that on the table. We do know that the fastest way to unlock value is policy reform. And so if that were to occur here in the near term, we'd be thinking hard about the scope and scale of the strategic review. But obviously, we're learning a lot about where we think the full potential of our businesses are. And like any good management team and board of directors, we're looking at the best way to unlocking that value for customers and investors. Very clear. Thank you for the time today. Your next question comes from the line of Aiden Kelly with JPM. Please go ahead. Good morning, Aiden. Hi, Aidan. Hey, guys. Good morning. Thanks for the time today, maybe just going on the like the debt front of the strategic review. Carol, I know you mentioned kind of mid-teens FFO to debt as maybe a North Star to think about long term i think like previously you also mentioned like holdco debt below the 10 of total debt is that also kind of intact as well or is there kind of flexibility to revisit that threshold yeah as i as we've said everything's on the table um and so we are considering both our our debt profile our capital growth and our capital return um so i would say that we're we're not necessarily indicating any target for parent debt at this point in time. Got it. And then just one kind of lingering question on the timing of the strategic review. I believe in the past, in September, you kind of mentioned there's like a, maybe of a default 12 to 18 month timeline. And now we're kind of seeing summer of 2027 as the target. Is there any kind of rationale behind like the acceleration in that timeline over the past month and a half? I know you kind mentioned the urgency Is it just simple as taking that as the reason or is there anything kind of deeper to read into that? Yeah, when we had previously mentioned 12 to 18 months, Aiden, we were talking about that's typically what you would see from companies. We weren't intending to signal our timeline, so that's why we wanted to clarify today. We want to really push to have a definitive direction forward that we can communicate by summer of next year. Understood, understood. Well, appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude our question and answer session. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Patty Poppy for closing comments. Thank you Krista. Thank you everyone for dialing in today. Look, our electric gas and generation businesses are strong and they're operated well and they are getting stronger every day. Now while legislative action is still possible this year we're moving forward and we're advancing our strategic review we're evaluating all our available paths to unlock value for customers and owners and you can imagine that we're doing that with a sense of urgency we look forward to seeing you at eei please stay safe out there and ladies and gentlemen this does conclude today's conference call. Thank you for your participation and you may now disconnect.