Daniel Cregg: Yes. So Paul, what we said is both — as we look at 2023, de minimis impact, not even worth kind of including within any models, very, very small impact anticipated. And then going forward, I’d say the same, right? There’s a very modest positive arbitrage. But by the same token, what we’re — what we’ve also talked about here is we will see a onetime charge come through from the standpoint of the unrecognized element. And so the absence of that going forward does provide somewhat of an offset. So I would not think about it as having much of an impact, ’23 or going forward. So the main tracker that we talk about is mitigating the volatility.
Paul Patterson: Okay. But the charge itself is not going to be big either, is what you’re saying?
Daniel Cregg: No, that 1 charge — so if you take a look at our year-end 2022, that unamortized amount was about $2 billion. So we’ve disclosed that we would see something in the low 200s after tax from the standpoint that was in the release of the amortization of that charge. So think about the pension as a whole, having that unamortized balance. And if this is about a 20% impact you’re seeing about that coming through on the onetime charge.
Operator: Our next question is from the line of Anthony Crowdell with Mizuho Securities.
Anthony Crowdell: You may have addressed this in Durgesh’s question, so I apologize. But if we think about from year-end to now, you had the approval from the BPU on the pension smoothing and now the lift-out. How much of your pension volatility have you reduced or removed from the end of 2022?
Daniel Cregg: A little less than half, somewhere between 40% and 50%.
Anthony Crowdell: Okay. And then I appreciate you did go through that this is for the PEG Power employees unregulated. And in the fourth quarter, you’re going to file the general rate case where I believe you’re going to request a pension tracker. If the company is unsuccessful or the regulators do not approve the pension tracker, I mean, is this an option that you would look deeper into for the regulated employees? Or just structurally, it just makes — it’s very hard to do it for existing employees, this type of lift-out?
Ralph LaRossa: Yes, Anthony. So we will absolutely have a conversation with the BPU about a mechanism to address pensions and the volatility around that. So — they worked with us on the last mechanism. They worked with other companies. So we’ll be in there having a conversation about it. It’s good for ratepayers as well as also it create — it reduces their volatility as well over a longer period of time as you are going from rate. So it makes sense for everyone. That said, we always will continue to take a look at things like we just executed on. But I would tell you that it’s really tough to figure out for active employees what the right formula is for all the reasons that Dan mentioned, I think it was to Durgesh earlier, how long is somebody going to work?
What’s going to be their earnings trajectory and so on and so forth. So I think those pieces of the puzzle make it tougher when you have a group of employees like we just went through, it was a lot easier to have that conversation. And again, got us in a really good place.
Operator: Our next question is from the line of Ryan Levine with Citi.
Ryan Levine: Given the range of gross receipt treatment outcomes from treasury, what’s the range of ’24 hedges that you’d be considering adding on to your nuclear plate?
