David Arcaro: Okay. Got it. Thanks for that. And so at the end of the day no change to your projections in terms of what you had been expecting industrial sales growth to look like going forward?
Roderick West: That is correct. No change.
David Arcaro: Okay. Okay. Thanks. And then, I was wondering, if you could just comment on your competitiveness in renewable RFP, just any progress there. Thinking ahead to the potential opportunity in Louisiana with the enhanced renewable RFP three gigawatts. Just how are you situated as that comes closer?
Kimberly Fontan: Yeah. The pipeline continues from our perspective on our solar self-development continues to develop well. We have developed the capabilities to be competitive in that space and we are continuing to plan to support customer growth and desire for clean energy in the renewable space, as well as other clean energy they may warrant, but our team is continuing to ramp up and continuing to be quite competitive in that space. So we are excited to see that and see that support our customer’s growth.
David Arcaro: Okay. Perfect. Thanks for the color. I appreciate it.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Jeremy Tonet of JPMorgan. Your line is open.
Jeremy Tonet: Hi. Good morning.
Drew Marsh: Good morning, Jeremy.
Jeremy Tonet: Just wanted to follow up on the U.S. Gulf Coast industrial activity, if I could. Just curious, I guess, in your investor conversations or do you feel the market fully appreciates given where WTI has moved up versus relative to gas and what the spread is on a BTU basis for oil and oil byproducts versus gas and natural gas byproducts? How much of a material advantage that is for the U.S. Gulf Coast, both as a feedstock for the petchem industry, as well as power cost for industrial businesses down there, and I guess, the very long multiyear trend of growth that could underpin?
Drew Marsh: Yeah, Jeremy. Those economic indicators or things that we track closely. As you mentioned they are important to some of our industrial customers. Both the spread between natural gas and some of the oil products, those — that as you pointed out have widened out and are very supportive of the Gulf Coast here, particularly as European gas prices have gone up in the last month or so, as everybody knows. So that has made. It’s continuing what we already know. It’s a big macro trends around global geopolitical uncertainty and that has led to as you continue to be the case broken global supply chains and that brings a lot of investments in the U.S. when they look at the U.S. and the Gulf Coast. So whether you are talking about geographic spreads or commodity spreads. They are all very-very strongly supporting our industrial customers in the industrial growth along the Gulf Coast, and in particular, in our service territory.
Jeremy Tonet: Got it. Very clear. Thank you. Maybe just following up on some of your prepared remarks there with New Orleans, Louisiana resiliency filing comments. You mentioned that they are bearing options and opinions as how to — how much resiliency to do right now. Any sense as to how much variability you could see in the outcomes of these filings, other than affordability concerns, what are the other kind of big moving pieces here that are involved in these resiliency discussions?
Roderick West: It’s Rod. If you recall there were two primary areas, where we got initial feedback. One was a staff engineer and the other was the commission staff. We had strong alignment on the need for resilience. So we are not arguing about whether or not this is something we ought to be doing. There were two dynamics around the staff testimony that I think is instructive. One was they referenced their support for rider recovery for retired assets. That gave us a lot of comfort that we could come to a constructive resolution once we sort of decide the scope and they also recommended transparency and accountability features. But I think the work really for us is going to continue to align around scope, pace and ultimately cost.
When we ultimately decide on what could be a solid outcome, our objective is making sure on the back end that the recovery mechanism continues to support credit and our access to capital, but those sort of swim lanes are where the lion’s share of the debate is going to be as the commission will rightfully be looking to answer the resiliency bell, but around affordability for customers.
Jeremy Tonet: Got it. That makes a lot of sense. Just one last one if I could. Given that you have reaffirmed your 6% to 8% EPS CAGR through 2026 in line with the Investor Day commentary. Is it reasonable to assume rate base growth will also continue at a similar 7% to 8% CAGR through 2028? How would accelerated resiliency impact this similarly would how higher renewables win rate impact this? On the other side of the coin, do you see pressures against this, such as FRP taps as far as inflation is concerned, just trying to see both sides, how you see this playing out?
Kimberly Fontan: Sure. The rate base we would expect to continue to grow consistent with growing capital investment as those investments are made to support our customers and the objectives that we have to support them. From a pressure perspective, certainly, there are opportunities for additional capital around resilience. For example, we have assumed base level of resilience as we have discussed previously, but with accelerated mechanisms. For example, there is more resilience that could be placed, and if customers are interested in renewables at a faster pace that certainly could be additional capital that would drive additional spending as well and then it really is about making sure that we are supporting our customer’s growth and continuing to provide them with services and the reliable power that we offer.
Roderick West: And I will just add that as we get to EEI, we planned some additional disclosures around that potential capital increase above what we already have.
Jeremy Tonet: Got it. Thank you for that. Just real quick, the FRPs, any issues as far as caps against inflation that are something that we should be thinking about?
Kimberly Fontan: Jeremy, we pay attention to customer affordability and we certainly monitor the caps that we have to make sure that we are making investments that are staying within affordability for our customers. So that we have had constructive regulatory mechanisms in all of our jurisdictions and continue to expect to have that as we go forward.
Drew Marsh: And we always are talking about our continuous improvement efforts. Those are the things that help us manage against things like inflation and it is been a tough bear in the last couple of years. But we do believe that we can really hold the line, as I mentioned in my remarks, against inflation and all the other capital that we are putting to work, which also drives costs or can drive costs as well. So that’s our objective. So we don’t see it impacting our rates as much as just all the incremental investment really is.
