Ryan Levine: Good morning. I was wondering if you could touch on how you may approach attracting data centers outside of Mississippi. You mentioned Arkansas and some other locations. Can you just provide us some context or some color around the regulatory attractiveness of those states on a comparison basis?
Rod West: Yes, this is Rod, again. And I think Kimberly alluded to it. The example in Mississippi, I think serves as a blueprint for other states when you think about how we shape both the legislation from the actual state, the contractual guarantees, if you will, from AWS, and the regulatory outcomes that facilitated our ability to meet AWS’ needs, I think plays well. It would certainly focus around job creation and economic development from a stakeholder engagement standpoint, similar to the way that we did in Mississippi. I see that being very relevant in, say, Louisiana and Arkansas. Certainly, there is going to be an expectation regardless of where these data centers are cited, that there is rate protection for the other customers in the service territory.
Notwithstanding any conversation around the green or the clean dynamics, we are going to serve that customer’s needs and the attributes that are important to them. But here is the piece that I think becomes really important as we are engaging our regulators and our customer stakeholders. What Mississippi was able to do was to expedite the CCN approval process to help us build the infrastructure around transmission and generation to serve that load, and also providing credit accretive, for instance, in Mississippi, line for cash, CWIP, during the construction of those facilities, allowing us to finance those projects and lower the overall cost for customers. If you think about those dimensions, the rest of the states are taking notice of the success in Mississippi, and from purely a competitive standpoint are trying to figure out how to replicate those types of frameworks in their jurisdictions.
But we think it’s a blueprint that really projects well for our other states.
Drew Marsh: Yes. And I will just add that given what Rod just outlined, our regulators and our communities are excited about these potential investments. There are large investments that are going to throw off a bunch of tax holders and provide some really good jobs. And there are areas in Central and Northern Mississippi, Northern Louisiana and in Arkansas, there is a lot of rural space out there that data centers can go to. And those jobs are meaningful in those areas. So, they are really excited about the opportunity for those investments and the economic activity that comes along with them. That’s why, as Rod said, they are competing to figure out how they can serve these potential customers.
Ryan Levine: Great to hear. And then on one other topic, just in terms of the Texas resiliency filing, given your service territory, is there any opportunity to add fire mitigation or wildfire mitigation risk management in the plan?
Drew Marsh: That’s a great question. And where we are along the coast in Texas, a lot of the resilience investments and the wildfire investments is going to be very similar and overlapping. So, yes, that is going to be part of it. I am sure that wildfire is going to be a part of the conversation or legislature coming up early next year. And so we do anticipate that there will be some overlap there. I will just mention, further away from the coast in Mississippi, Northern Louisiana, Arkansas, we are also thinking about wildfire mitigation investment there to complement all the things that we have already done to monitor and prepare and respond to potential wildfires and all the community work they were doing. But we realize that the next piece of that is investment to mitigate or eliminate wildfire risk.
And so that’s conversation is ongoing with our stakeholders. And so we will be looking to create opportunities to manage those risks for all of our stakeholders in the near future.
Ryan Levine: Thanks for taking my questions.
Drew Marsh: Thank you.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from Travis Miller from Morningstar. Your line is now open.
Travis Miller: Thank you. Hello everyone. One on the new industrial customers, including both data centers and the other industrial customers, what’s the general split in terms of the CapEx between T&D and generation that you are anticipating?
Kimberly Fontan: There is both there, Travis. The transmission certainly generally is less than the generation, but some of it is timing. When you think about it, we have long-term supply plans where we may have had generation in a plan and perhaps there is some earlier execution of it in order to meet that demand. And as you know, we are in MISO, so transmission is playing through MISO as well. So, we also have long-range cleaning on the transmission. So, I don’t have the exact split, and I know you can get with Bill and get that specifically. But generally, when you think about the data centers, probably heavier weighted to generation than to transmission.
Travis Miller: Okay. And then do you anticipate, on that generation piece, doing an RFP, or would you have first rights to any kind of new generation build?
Kimberly Fontan: In Mississippi, the legislation enabled us to – it effectively gave us CCN authority to build what was needed for that data center to meet their timeline. So, that doesn’t require an RFP process. Some of our jurisdictions have RFPs and others don’t. I think it comes down to a customer timeline and how you work with all your stakeholders to bring the customer on the timeline they are looking for, and then what that requires to ensure that we are building strong appropriate assets in order to support the customers overall.
Travis Miller: Okay. And then general, looking at comments there you just made in general for any industrial customer or more for data versus other chemical producers or factories, etcetera?
Kimberly Fontan: Yes, I mean the data center is – sorry, the data center unique in that it’s a larger customer coming in at one time on a faster timeline, but I would think about the planning principle is the same for all of our customers.
