Robert Stefani: Yes, James, I think clearly, the form of the transaction, again, will, to a large extent, dictate the FFO to debt type metrics. Certainly, at the utility, which it remains strong. We expect FFO to debt above the S&P FFO to debt kind of target metrics for our credit rating. I think the — at the holding company level, as you can imagine, if we were to consider transactional alternatives like an IPO with sell-down that has different leverage impacts than an IPO with — followed by a tax-free or other spin. And so I think for now, kind of as far as pro forma leverage metrics at the holding company, we’ll have to defer commenting on that until the form of the transaction is decided.
Tanner James: Got it. And just to clarify here, I think you guys have talked about this 14% FFO to debt through 25 or by 25 before I mean can you elaborate where you stand kind of status quo? I mean, is there any way to kind of frame the puts and takes around potentially raising proceeds whatever you can do? I know I know it’s complicated. .
Robert Stefani: Yes. The guidance on the FFO to debt, again, like as we look at those metrics at the holding company level, it depends we plan to separate Centuri. And so the timing of the Centuri separation will obviously impact those credit metrics and especially the forum. And so as far as if it’s status quo, and you were running forward with Centuri continuing to be in our financials, then we do recover, obviously, centuries recovered, their EBITDA has recovered. The utility continues to have success on rate case outcomes and with customer growth. And so our credit metrics continue to improve through that ’24, ’25 period.
Tanner James: Got it. Excellent. And then just — sorry, just pivoting back to the Centuri side real quickly. Obviously, a lot of comments here on offshore here, but just separately, even independent of offshore, just can you comment a little bit on what’s going on the core business ex OSW and what’s driving some of the declines there? And how are you seeing that outlook here? I know that you can’t comment too much on forward-looking guidance at this point. But — any commentary around on the ex-offshore business and prospects would be appreciated here, just given previous commentary about forward-looking. .
Robert Stefani: I don’t think we commented only in the slide deck about projects in the backlog and total in the backlog. And what we’ve provided here today as far as revenues realized against that backlog. But I don’t think we’ve provided other guidance there.
Tanner James: Maybe to make us a little bit more possible to answer. Just it seems like it was like down year-over-year ex offshore wind. Maybe you could speak to what drove that, for instance, and how you think about that fitting into the plan?
Robert Stefani: Yes. We talked a little bit about that the gas business was down a small amount and that was driven by an extraordinary year in Canada, which is — we’re seeing a more normalized year in Canada this year. So — the decline in Canada is masking the growth in the overall business. On the gas side, the electric business is growing. And so I guess I’m having a little bit of hard time tracking your comments around the business decline.
Tanner James: No. Got it. Yes. It’s clearly the gas piece there. I appreciate it. I know it’s difficult to comment too much on this point. Best the block speak to you guys soon.
Operator: The next question is from Stephen D’Ambrisi with Granite Lake.
Stephen D’Ambrisi: I just had two quick ones. Last quarter, I think in the slides, there was a disclosure of Sunrise contract size was, I think, $170 million. Do you have a similar number for what Ocean Wind One is?
