Davis Sunderland: Got it. That’s helpful. And one other question, maybe just about the PFOS legislation. You mentioned going into litigation against some of the parties that may have been responsible or the polluters. Is there any — on quantifying some of these benefits or time line associated with that? And then I know you guys called out some potential other sources of funding that could maybe offset a portion of the $200 million in CapEx costs. Just any other detail about what those funds may be or when those might be applied?
Marty Kropelnicki: Yes. We don’t know yet. And if you follow the litigation and the paper, these are multibillion-dollar settlements. And obviously, there’s a group of claimants to that settlement. We’re one of those claimants. So, we don’t know how it’s going to kind of work out or how it’s going to be distributed. I will tell you though, our General Counsel is very active and is the class representative in the lawsuit. So, we work very closely with the counsel, the group’s plaintiffs’ counsel to understand how those pieces will work. So once the settlements get more clarity and a judge approves them, then we’ll get into the position of working with the reps, the people involved in the litigation of how those funds will be distributed and then a proposal is made to the judge and the judge has to adopt it and then they start distributing those funds.
I anticipate, and this is just a personal opinion, but I anticipate that those settlements are going to be millions and millions of dollars. And again, the main point about it, it’s not going to help from an investor standpoint because those funds will all go to offset the capital costs associated with the treatment. So, it really benefits the customer, and that’s where it should be. And so, then what’s left over that doesn’t cover the invested capital for PFOA and PFOS treatment, that will get rate-based treatment. But obviously, we want to try to offset as much of that cost because it’s incremental to our capital program, that $1 billion that I talked about for 2022, 2023 and 2024, this $200 million is going to be on top of that.
And so, you run the risk of having rate shocks. We really want to try to minimize the effect of the customers. So, settlement funds, I think in 2024 or 2025, are very, very likely. In addition to that, we’re looking at trying to get grant funds and other money from the state and federal level, especially for underserved or poorer communities. It’s one thing to put in PFOS treatment in the Bay Area for Silicon Valley, it’s really different when you go to some of the rural areas of California that have the same water quality standards and it’s a much lower number of customers, a much lower number of connections and its overall economically not the same environment, as an affluent area like the Bay Area. So, grant funds and proceed dollars from the litigation will all go to offset those costs for custome’s.
Operator: That was our final question. I’ll now turn the call back over to Mr. Kropelnicki for closing remarks.
Marty Kropelnicki : All right. Hey Jack, first of all, thank you for getting my name right. You’re about 1 out of 100 who can get it right. And just for the record, it took me till about the age of 12 before I could spell it or say my name right. So, thank you for having my name correctly. Everyone, thanks for joining us. Again, all eyes on the general rate case, that’s a focal point. But while we’re doing that, we’re not taking our eyes off the business model and we’re going to execute our business plan to our full avail that we can. We’ll look forward to talking to everyone at the end of Q3 and our earnings call will be on October 26. So, thank you for being with us this morning. Apologies for the technical delays. We had some issues with technology and the lines working correctly. So, thanks for bearing with us, and we’ll talk to everyone later. Thank you and have a good day.
Operator: This concludes today’s conference. We thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.
