Julien Dumoulin-Smith: Excellent. All right guys. Thank you very much.
Pat Vincent-Collawn: Thank you, Julien.
Julien Dumoulin-Smith: Enjoy it.
Pat Vincent-Collawn: Thanks.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from Jonathan Reeder of Wells Fargo. Go ahead.
Jonathan Reeder: Hey, good morning, team.
Pat Vincent-Collawn: Good morning, Jonathan.
Jonathan Reeder: Just to follow up a little bit on the rate case. What’s your view of the intervener positions that have been filed? And when would a settlement if one is to be reached, need to be filed by?
Don Tarry: I mean, the positions of the interveners, they seem to be heavily focused on really our transition out of our generation resources. So I mean, whether it’s Four Corners, the Palo Verde lease, the 114 megawatts we transferred out of, they even have some San Juan in there as well. So that — if you look at the overall briefings that they’ve provided and the testament they provided has primarily been focused in that area. On the settlement side, I would never say never, but as I said, Jonathan, we’re focused on preparing and putting the best case forward that we have in September, so…
Jonathan Reeder: When would you need to reach a settlement, though, in our region, like does it need to be before the hearing or is that just kind of the preferred date?
Don Tarry: Ideally, you would like to before the hearings. But again, as I said, we’re focused on preparing for that case.
Jonathan Reeder: Okay. Would you say, like, are the parties motivated to reach a settlement? Or maybe to ask another way, do you believe like the newly constituted PRC would honor settlement agreement, whereas the prior PRC kind of had a reputation for modifying them?
Don Tarry: I’d probably be speaking for the commissioner. So I’d prefer not to hop into that. I think that they haven’t been against settlements. They haven’t taken the position that settlements are a bad thing at the commission, but we’ll have to wait and see how this commission reacts as we move forward. So…
Jonathan Reeder: Okay. But like past President, has that influenced, I guess, the parties like desire to reach a settlement or is that still something that you think parties are working towards?
Pat Vincent-Collawn: Jon, it’s just hard to say because we haven’t seen this commission make any major decisions, right? Remember, we only have two commissioners on this because Commissioner O’Connell — Chairman O’Connell recused himself because he had filed testimony with Western Research Advocates on some of the issues. So I think given all those factors and we’ve got some turnover among the intervenor staff themselves, it’s kind of hard to make a conjecture on this one.
Jonathan Reeder: Okay. All right. Shifting to the Four Corners, what has to happen, I guess, for you to refile the application, like, will the results of last November’s RFP, I guess, shape the replacement resource plan, which you could then include?
Pat Vincent-Collawn: Yeah.
Don Tarry: I mean from the Supreme Court ruling, it’s clear that we have to file actual resources and the timeliness of that. As I mentioned, we have a multiple set of RFPs ongoing right now, ’26, ’27 and ’28. So as you kind of look at those realms of things, you would want actual resources that you file in the next case. So you want as clean a case as you possibly can.
Jonathan Reeder: The results of that [Technical Difficulty] are expected here in the next few weeks?
Don Tarry: Our results, we issued those RFPs earlier this year, and they’ll come in over the next couple of weeks. And then we’ll — like Pat said, the key element is you got to look at the customer benefits and the timing of how it all aligns and we’re going to do the right thing that makes sense for the customers.
