Jonathan Stein: And Jeremy, I think just to underline a point that you made in your question, which is robust growth through 2026. And I think as John and I both pointed out with the MVCs implying gas at 495 million cubic feet per day, really right at our capacity in 2026. And then you add $125 million cubic feet per day of incremental processing. That really implies that we really see robust growth, not only through 2026, but really whatever your assumption is on volume growth after that, really through the rest of the decade. And that means that we’re not only going to be able to continue the EBITDA growth and the volume growth and the free cash flow growth that we see through 2026, but really have visibility to really that continuing well beyond 2026 and really through the rest of the decade. So really just a robust plan based on all the factors that John said.
Operator: Thank you. [Operator Instructions]. And our next question comes from the line of Brian Reynolds from UBS. Your question, please.
Brian Reynolds: Hi, good afternoon, everyone. Appreciate the prepared remarks about the evolving situation at Hess Midstream sponsor level with the potential change of ownership to Chevron and also a GIP to Blackstone. Well, I know it’s a little too early to probably assume broad assumptions of what the sponsors may or may not do. Kind of just curious if you could talk about the implications to the board around the change of sponsor control and then perhaps through the lens of Hess Midstream’s financial flexibility as outlined in the long term outlook, could you perhaps talk about the opportunity set to buy back from sponsors going forward as these deals close or if we should be thinking about anything outside of that in terms of M&A as it relates to financial flexibility as well. Thanks.
Jonathan Stein: Thanks. I think in terms of the with regard to the Hess Chevron pending merger, we don’t have any additional information to share in the merger other than what I already said in my script, which is that Hess will have 37.8% ownership and the right to appoint their four board seats. As a reminder, the total board is four Hess, two Chevron, three GIP, and three independent directors. And as we said, Hess’s contracts remain in place as well as the dedication. On the GIP side, there’s no change to the fund that holds the Hess Midstream investment. There’s also no changes expected to GIP’s investment operating approach or even to the investment team involved with Hess Midstream. So we’re not expecting any changes there as well.
Brian Reynolds: Great. Thanks. And then maybe just to follow up on kind of the long term outlook in the Bakken, with the cost of service arrangement moving, to fix fee largely going forward, and Hess Stream being much more of a standalone midstream company relative to its inception, can you talk about, how Hess Midstream is thinking about anything strategically different than in the past as whether it’s pursuing third party volumes? I think you alluded to the third party volume mix should stay roughly the same. could that change over time? And then when you approach these processing expansions, how do you approach them a little bit differently? in 2027 in the past, are you still getting kind of guaranteed MVCs to support those volumes? Anything there in terms of, future capital investment will be helpful. Thanks.
John Gatling: Sure. I would say that from an overall operational perspective, we really our strategy remains unchanged. I mean, I think we’re our primary customer is Hess and we’re staying focused on that priority for sure. We’re always looking to pick up additional incremental third party volumes to fill any olage in our systems. We’re going to continue to operate under those that kind of strategic direction. as we add additional processing capacity, we are looking at what additional third party volumes are available in the area. As especially north of the river, so north of the Missouri River is kind of our stronghold. And that’s where Hess has significant development remaining. We as we’ve done in the past, we’re going to continue to build out kind of a standard modular philosophy, tightly integrated with our system.
A lot of the future development is in that kind of north of the river west area. And we have a really good understanding of that area and are well positioned to support Hess and third parties, third parties there. So from a from an overall strategic perspective, really transitioning from cost of service to the fixed fee period, nothing really, really changes strategically from our perspective.
Jonathan Stein: And I think, as I really had highlighted there on the question before, I think, the business model that we have and the financial strategy model that we have is really unchanged and really unique and differentiated as we go forward. In the sense that we have the volume growth that we’ve talked about, which is visible to our MVCs as we talked about even beyond that. And all that growth really being captured with stable capital levels in the 250, 275 level that includes the necessary investment to capture that growth. So that means with growing EBITDA and stable capital, that means we’ll continue to grow our free cash flow and that free cash flow is growing greater than our target distribution level, which means we’re also building free cash flow after distribution, as well as leverage capacity relative to our long term target.
All that is supporting just through 2026, the $1.25 billion that we talked about, which gives us capacity for potential ongoing multiple repurchases per year for that period. And on a longer term basis, you can see really how that model really has the potential to just really continue with the existing investments that we’re making really driving growth on stable capital, but with continued volume growth, continued EBITDA growth and therefore continued free cash flow growth.
