Bert Subin: Okay. Thanks. I just have one follow-up for Susan. Do you guys contemplate Section 174 in your guidance in ’23? Is that having an impact? And what’s your general assumption about working capital? I’m just wondering if that’s a material headwind as we head into this year?
Susan Lynch: Yes. So we did contemplate Section 174 in our guidance. It’s a little bit more than $4 million. I would use that $4 million to $5 million in your estimates. And working capital, we expect as we grow to maybe be a slight user of working capital, but nothing material.
Bert Subin: Thanks for the time.
Chuck Prow: Thank you. Appreciate it.
Operator: The next question comes from Brian Gesuale with Raymond James. Please go ahead.
Brian Gesuale: Yes. Good evening. And thanks for taking my questions. Wondered if you could just expand on the pipeline. It sounds like there’s a lot of opportunities out there. You’ve got 2 billion bids submitted, sounded like another $12 billion on top of that. But they’re a little bit slower to matriculate. Can you maybe talk about how you think that rhythm will change as customers want to spend before the budget uncertainty at the end of the year? And then maybe some of the areas you’re most excited about within that pipeline?
Chuck Prow: Sure. We continue to see a very healthy aerospace pipeline. Last year, I think you remember, we were awarded a Naval Test Wing Atlantic in our pipeline for this year and Naval Test Wing Pacific. Again, we feel very good about our offering there. And I’ll also tell you that the significant number full and open bids and INDOPACOM, but many of them are Navy now in places like Diego Garcia, Singapore, Guam and a few other places. We see an emerging pipeline in INDOPACOM that are complementary to our Indo Pacific footprint in LOGCAP. So those are two areas specifically where we’re very bullish. I’ll also say that we have an emerging advanced technology business with 1,000-plus engineers, 500 specialty engineers where we really like the pipeline that’s emerging behind our advanced technology business.
So as both Susan indicated in her remarks and myself in my prepared remarks, the balance that we have now with the business both from a contract-type perspective, from a capability perspective, from a geographic perspective, is really astonishing compared to just a year ago.
Brian Gesuale: That’s really helpful. Thank you. As we think about your 5% organic guide for the year, and the amount of visibility you have and particularly some of those first half kind of tailwinds that you have with some of the wins you had in the second half of last year. How should we think about the way you’ve contemplated the organic growth rhythm throughout the year? It seems like it could be a little bit front-end loaded organic growth-wise and then you just given yourself some room for contracts to matriculate in the second half. Is that a fair way to think about it?
Chuck Prow: We do like our momentum. But as you know, from following the business for a while now, we really do have this kind of — this 40% first half, 60% second half. There really remains kind of a characteristic of our business. So while yes, we do have momentum, we may, particularly on the revenue side, a bit more than 40% this year. But I would stick with that 40-60 characteristic that had been with the business now for several years.
Brian Gesuale: Fantastic. And then last one before I jump in the queue. I think I understood that you talked about generating roughly $100 million in free cash. Can you just prioritize the use of that capital and where we might think net leverage might be at the end of the year? Thank you.
