Unidentified Analyst: Thanks. Given the pretty constructive rate increase outcome and you’re guiding — you upgraded the guide from — on the low end of your long-term EPS CAGR, what are the different factors you observed that could help you get to the top end of your stated annual growth range? Is the growth rate fairly linear, or is it more lumpy perhaps depending on rate case filing?
Crystal Lail: Tanner, this is Crystal. I’ll take a shot at it, and then Brian can pile on here. But we certainly — everyone will acknowledge, we’ve been lumpy in the past and when you have a historic test period across our jurisdictions, lack of kind of a formulary or future looking, I think we will continue to be lumpy. And certainly, as you think of what drives us into the upper end of our range versus lower, it will be how that recovery is timed that will do that. And then the other piece is any opportunities incremental to what we’re doing here, obviously, would push us upward in that range.
Brian Bird: I would say this, I think we’re already demonstrating a tad lumpy this year. We used 2022 as a base year. Obviously, when you look at ’23’s results and then guides to ’24, that in and of itself demonstrates lumpiness. I think the previous question from Jonathan in terms of cadence here, it’s just hard and obviously we could offset in other jurisdictions when we’re coming in for rate reviews. But I just think it is going be a tad lumpy.
Unidentified Analyst: Understood. Thank you. And you stated in your investment program that it sides for no equity issuance unless there’s future generation capacity additions or other strategic opportunities. What could other strategic opportunities look like? Is there anything you guys would actively consider on that front?
Brian Bird: Yeah, that’s a great question. I think we continue to look at transmission investment opportunities, and something like that could come into play. And we just need to understand also those opportunities, the ability to how quickly we could recover those costs as well have to come into play. So things like that.
Unidentified Analyst: Understood. Great. Thank you very much, guys.
Travis Meyer: Thanks, Tanner. All right, we’ll take our next question from Jamieson Ward at Guggenheim. You should be unmuted, Jamieson.
Jamieson Ward: Yeah, can hear me?
Travis Meyer: Yeah.
Brian Bird: Yeah, we can hear you Jamieson. How you doing?
Jamieson Ward: Perfect. I did the star-nine, and the unmute on the screen, and I think I dialed in the code correctly, and did the formula, and you guys have made it simpler than it has been in the past while, so thank you for that. First of all, just quickly congratulations on a great result there. I wanted to ask specific to the HoldCo, because a few of my other questions have been asked already, so I’ll move past those. So basically, now that you have a HoldCo, should we read anything into the zero equity issuance plan associated with your current capital plan as implying that HoldCo leverage like many or all of your peers who have HoldCos have done will be a source of funding that will allow you to go from being an equity issuer in recent years to no longer being one while still kind of maintaining the same CapEx profile, or is there something else to read into there?
Crystal Lail: Jamieson, it’s Crystal, I’ll take that one. And I would say, no, there’s nothing to read into that. My comments on our structure are this, we’re still the same company in the capital structure. We don’t anticipate being different than it was before. We’ve always carried a degree of debt on our revolver to finance our program. We will continue to do that, but no intention to look at the capital structure in a different way. Our thoughts on equity in the plan are two things. It’s got to — if you’re going to issue equity currently in this environment and where utilities are trading, I think it’s really got to be for accretive growth. And so, regardless of the HoldCo structure or not, our plan is to issue equity when it makes sense and when investors will see the growth that’s behind that.
