Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us today as we review our results for the second quarter of 2026. Here with me are Xia Liu, our Chief Financial Officer, and Beth Straka, Senior Vice President of Corporate Communications and Investor Relations.

As you saw from our news release this morning, we reported second quarter 2026 earnings of 91 cents a share. Our results reflect our continued focus on execution, financial discipline, and operating efficiency.

We're on track to deliver results in line with our 2026 earnings guidance of $5.51 to $5.61 a share. This, of course, assumes normal weather for the remainder of the year.

In a few minutes, Xia will walk through our financial results and outlook in more detail. First, let me highlight the strong economic growth in our region that serves as a foundation of our robust capital plan.

Construction continues at the Microsoft site in Pleasant Prairie, and the first data center facility is fully operational. As a reminder, Microsoft has purchased more than 2,200 acres to date in that I-94 corridor south of Milwaukee.

We are preparing to serve a forecasted demand increase of 2.6 GW in this region through 2030 and an opportunity for further expansion. To the north of Milwaukee, you'll recall that Vantage Data Centers is developing facilities for Oracle on approximately 1,900 acres.

Construction continues on the initial phase of its data center project, which is being built on 670 acres. Vantage has stated that it expects to invest $15 billion to complete this phase in 2028.

Significant construction progress has been made with structural framework complete on multiple buildings. The first facility could come online as soon as late 2027.

We currently have 1.3 GW of demand for this Vantage site in our forecast over the next five years. Looking to the future, this site has the potential to reach 3.5 GW of demand over time.

There's other notable growth in our state. As a recent example, Rehlko, formerly known as Kohler Energy, has announced plans to expand its production operations in Kenosha.

The new facility is expected to complete in 2027 to produce backup generators for data centers. In addition, Waukegan Steel, a steel fabricating company, is looking to move its headquarters from Illinois to Pleasant Prairie.

Harley-Davidson has also announced plans to bring some motorcycle production operations back from overseas to Wisconsin facilities. Wisconsin continues to be an attractive location for a variety of businesses.

We are committed to meeting the growing demand across our service area as we invest in our systems for increased reliability and capacity. Our five-year capital plan includes $37.5 billion of projected investments.

It's based on projects that are low risk and highly executable, with a good portion serving our very large customers. In total, by the end of 2030, we expect approximately 15% of our asset base to be dedicated to these very large customers.

As you recall, we project long-term earnings per share growth of 7% to 8% a year on a compound annual basis between 2026 and 2030. This is based on the midpoint of our 2025 adjusted guidance.

We expect that growth rate to accelerate into the upper half of the range starting in 2028. As a reminder, on our major capital projects, construction continues on the new natural gas generation facilities in Paris and Oak Creek, Wisconsin.

We expect these facilities to start coming online in late 2027. Overall, we have a high level of confidence in our ability to execute on our capital plan and continue our growth trajectory.

We are in the process of updating our next capital plan, and we look forward to sharing the details with you on our third quarter call. Now turning to the regulatory front.

In May, the Public Service Commission provided the written order for our Very Large Customer tariff, or VLC. Under the tariff, the VLCs pay their full share of the cost.

This is important to us, to the Commission, and to our customers, including the data center companies we are working with. I'm sure many of you are aware of the credit support required from Oracle for the Port Washington project.

Oracle has stated it remains committed to the project, paying its full share of energy and providing the financial support needed so there's no risk to other Wisconsin customers. We are actively working with Oracle to update the financial security in line with the PSCW requirements.

We believe our VLC tariff provides a strong framework for data center growth in the region. For our non-VLC customers, progress continues on the rate request we filed in April for forward-looking test years 2027 and 2028.

Our proposed plan would help us continue to strengthen key infrastructure and deliver the energy our customers depend on while remaining focused on affordability. Staff and intervenor testimony is due in mid-August.

We expect final orders from the Commission by the end of the year, with new rates effective in January '27 and 2028. Turning to Illinois.

In May, the Illinois Commerce Commission unanimously approved the Rider QIP and bad debt rider settlements. The settlements resolve all issues relating to 12 open dockets.

We also continue to make progress on the rate request for our Illinois utilities. A key driver for The Peoples Gas is to support the pipe retirement program in Chicago.

We expect a decision by the end of the year for test year 2027. In summary, we're excited about the strong economic development in our region.

We're focused on execution of our capital plan that is designed to support thousands of jobs and strengthen our local economy. Next, I'll turn it over to Xia.

Thank you, Scott. Our second quarter 2026 earnings of 91 cents per share reflects a 15-cent increase compared to the second quarter of 2025.

Our earnings package includes a comparison of second quarter results on page 15. I'll walk through the significant drivers.

Starting with our utility operations, earnings were 6 cents higher versus the second quarter of 2025. Weather negatively impacted quarter-over-quarter earnings by approximately 5 cents.

Compared to normal conditions, we estimate that weather had a 3-cent negative impact in the second quarter of 2026 compared to a 2-cent positive impact in the second quarter of 2025. Rate base growth contributed 13 cents to earnings.

This includes 9 cents of incremental AFUDC equity and 2 cents of incremental cash returns associated with projects under construction, mostly from projects supporting the VLC customers. In addition, sales growth, tax, and other items contributed a total of 6 cents to earnings.

These positive drivers were partially offset by 5 cents from higher depreciation and amortization expense and 3 cents from higher day-to-day O&M. Next, let me provide some additional color on our weather-normal retail electric deliveries.

Compared to Q2 last year, total weather-normal retail electric sales grew 4.2% this quarter, driven by growth from the VLCs. Excluding the iron ore mine and the VLC customers, we saw sales grow 1.2%, driven by higher volumes across all customer classes.

Although results came in slightly ahead of our forecast, we expect full-year 2026 weather-normalized electric sales, excluding the iron ore mine and VLC customers, to be relatively even with 2025. At American Transmission Company, significant capital investment growth contributed an incremental 3 cents to Q2 earnings compared to 2025.

Turning to our energy infrastructure segment, earnings were 11 cents higher in the second quarter of '26 compared to the same period in 2025. Remember, in Q2 last year, we recognized a loss related to an asset impairment due to storm damages.

This Q2, we received an insurance payment from some storm damages that occurred before. These two items account for a net 4 cents in total.

The rest of the positive variance was largely driven by O&M timing, PTCs, and other items. Next, you'll see that earnings from the corporate and other segment decreased 3 cents, driven by tax timing and higher interest expense.

In terms of common equity, we locked in about $760 million in the first half of this year. This includes about $40 million issued under our employee benefit plans and $720 million via the ATM program under forward contracts that we will settle in the future.

In total, we expect to issue about $1.1 billion of common equity this year. Going forward, as a reminder, any incremental capital beyond the current plan is expected to be funded with 50% equity content.

Finally, let me comment on guidance. As Scott mentioned earlier, we're reaffirming our 2026 earnings guidance of $5.51 to $5.61 per share, assuming normal weather for the rest of the year.

For the third quarter, we're expecting a range of 92 to 98 cents per share. This accounts for July weather and assumes normal weather for the rest of the quarter.

We look forward to updating you in the fall as we refresh our capital and financing plans. With that, I'll turn it back to Scott.

Thank you, Xia. Now as you may recall, our board, at its January meeting, increased the dividend by 6.7%.

This marks the 23rd consecutive year that our shareholders will be rewarded with higher dividends. The increase is consistent with our plan to grow the dividend at a rate of 6.5% to 7%.

We're optimistic about continued growth in our region and our company's future. Operator, we are now ready with the question-and-answer portion of the call.

Now

Hey, guys.

Hey, Shar.

Hey, Scott. Scott, let me just, I know it's on everyone's mind, just on the Port Washington project.

Obviously, there's a lawsuit out there, and you guys seem like you're assisting them sort of the collateral payment issue. I guess any risk to the current site timeline and even potential expansion opportunities?

Couldn't just the site be redeployed to another hyperscaler should the current customer not be able to fulfill its obligation, maybe with stronger credit? Just maybe bookend this, thanks.

Sure, a little color on that. We are working with the customer Oracle, and as we said in our prepared remarks, they're working to provide the credit support that we have in the updated tariff.

They're working to get that, and I have confidence in that. The site construction is continuing going.

They are moving along. It's on time.

It's on budget. They're moving forward and talking about continuing on their timeline, no questions on that in my mind.

You are correct. I think if you go to a worst-case scenario that for some reason they decide not to expand, I think there's a lot of opportunities for that site for anyone else.

At this point, I have no indication that that's the case. As long as they have the credit support with us and provide all those financial requirements, I feel good with the continued expansion.

That's good. I appreciate that.

Then just lastly, Scott, as we're obviously approaching Q3, maybe this will be the final time we're going to be asking on Point Beach. Is it fair to assume you're going to be filing a generation plan in lieu of the PPAs later this year?

Shar, we're finalizing everything on our third quarter call. Just to remind everyone, the first 500 MW comes due in that PPA in December of 2030.

The next 500 is in March of 2033. Just as a rule of thumb, about a gigawatt is about $2 billion to $2.5 billion, half of that for the 500 MW.

As we said in the prior call, never say never. Things could always change, but capital is an option for this as we get to the fall.

We'll finalize it on our third quarter call because we have to get orders out, etc.

Got it. Great.

I appreciate it, guys. See you soon.

All right, thank you.

Hey, good afternoon, team. Thank you guys very much for the time.

I appreciate it. Looking forward for that 3Q update.

Oh, excellent.

Yeah. Look, let me ask you this.

How are the discussions going vis-à-vis potentially other counterparties here? Obviously we've seen success build upon success, especially geographically in regions like your own.

How are you feeling about potentially a third or other hyperscalers or other data center parties following the lead here and advancing negotiations with you? Can you give us any latest flavor as to where things stand?

Sure, and we continue to have really good discussions with potential new very large customers. I would have to say these customers are probably not as large as what we're seeing in our first two, more in that 400 to 500 MW size, but we're having really good discussions.

More to come on that, but like you said, they kind of grow in the region. They grow, and I think our Very Large Customer tariff has that transparency, has the complete openness that we're charging them their fair share, I think it's a really good step forward to have that been approved by the Commission now.

Absolutely. Thank you.

Then, what is the status of the VLC tariff? What do the PCA contracts cover?

Just to kind of talk a little bit about some of the nuance of this vis-à-vis Oracle and Vantage here. Then also maybe just related sub-piece on that is, following the PSC decision not to rehear the IG collateral requirements under the VLC, are there any other next steps there, or is that basically put to bed and is that final?

Sure, that's a great question. If you look at the Vantage Oracle site, currently they're under the payment cancellation agreements for them.

That kicks in, we have the credit support very similar to the tariffs now. They are in line with the tariffs for the credit support as we spend, that we don't spend without their credit support, and then it falls into the service agreements under the Very Large Customer tariff.

In Oracle's case, it's right now that site is being built by Vantage. We have the payment cancellation agreements with Oracle and getting that credit support, and then June 1st of next year, they'll enter into those service agreements for the site.

That's just a matter of timing because the site actually doesn't really get up until the end of '27. That's why it's just the timing.

Construction's going on right now. On the Very Large Customer tariff, we asked for a reconsideration or rehearing, it didn't get picked up.

Our tariffs are as they stand today with that credit requirement of an A-. There is a case that's currently with the courts that Oracle brought.

I think they're just trying to think about going forward where that credit need would be, and we'll see where that case goes. Regardless, a BBB- in what we filed in the rehearing request, what we actually asked for in the tariff, the original filing, would require a credit support, they're in the same position with the current rating of BBB-.

I don't think they're taken by a surprise of that at all as we already had that as a provision in our filing. This is more of, if they get back to that BBB or whatever as they work through their credit, how do they think about the future more long term, I think.

Awesome. Thanks for the details here, guys.

Appreciate it.

Speak to you soon.

See you soon.

Yep, thanks.

Hey, good afternoon. Thanks for all the updates.

I just wanted to ask, maybe coming back on the VLC but in a different manner. My understanding is the ATC line to serve the Vantage opportunity is going through the discovery phase at the Commission, and I'm just wondering if you could provide an update on where that's trending.

Is that in the formal capital plan today or, as we look towards the third-quarter refresh, how do we think about ATC's capital opportunity changing? Thanks.

Sure, and this current line is in our forecast in the current ATC plan. That is proceeding at the Commission.

You maybe seen some back-and-forth. As you can imagine, this site is on a very accelerated basis.

If you go by the site and we've talked about how that construction is progressing, there's been some updates to the filing, there's been a little noise on updating stuff and make sure the Commission has all the latest and greatest information. That line in our last schedule looks like it should be decided by the end of the year to get approval to move forward with that construction.

That's right now on task. I think the staff just provided some testimony the other day, and now some testimony I think from American Transmission Company and others is due by the August 7th.

That's proceeding. If you think about transmission, this line in particular, because I think majority of it's in this forecast, but when you think about other transmission projects, I think that's an opportunity as we look at our third quarter as maybe a little more growth in the transmission area.

Great. Thank you for that.

Then, with all the kind of focus on Vantage and Oracle and the potential expansion down the road, maybe can you provide an update on how you're thinking about Microsoft and anything you'd be willing to share there? Thank you.

Sure, and Microsoft's been continuing to proceed. The first unit's online, the first data center is online, things are moving ahead at the site.

That's been progressing. Every year we've had an updated plan, there's always progression on the megawatts a little bit.

Remember, we'll add another year to the plan, I anticipate something a little bit more as we get to the third quarter, and we're working with them right now on what that number will be. Continued progression, the site's developing really well, the data centers are up and running and electricity is flowing, and all the substations are moving actually ahead of schedule.

Everything's been really positive direction down there.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Hey, good afternoon, everybody.

Good afternoon.

You've talked in the past about having maybe three or four potential additional data center customers. Obviously nothing to announce today, I'm not going to push you on that, but can you speak to whether those customers would either qualify for the VLC or how your conversations are going around the implications and potential collateral obligations?

Are the issues with Oracle causing any slowdown or any concerns among these customers?

Sure, just to get everyone's expectations, we're talking with a variety of customers. Really looking at just kind of do it one at a time.

I just don't want everyone to think there's three or four that are going to come in any day now. We're working on that.

I don't think the collateral will be an issue long term. I think what we had in our Very Large Customer filing was good.

In fact, all three rating agencies said it was really good. I think the key is we have true transparency so people know what that collateral need is, and as they look at our tariffs and look at the sites, they understand the requirements.

I don't think it's going to hurt at all as we look at those new customers.

Great to hear. Then as you think about serving these data centers, how should we think about future generation capacity additions?

You obviously have a lot of new build in the plan, nearly all related to various technologies around gas. You just talked about options to replace the nuke potentially, but to whatever degree you do get incremental data center contracts, how would you think about how you'd serve those?

Would it be mostly or entirely gas, or how do you think about that?

Sure, and the data centers have signed up both Oracle and Microsoft has signed up for the all-of-the-above approach with renewables, batteries, and natural gas for that good backup. I think as we think going forward in this next five-year plan, versus a simple cycle, you may see a combined cycle in our plans just because we may need a little bit more energy than just capacity.

We're going through those analysis right now, our engineering and planning team, just to make sure we have the right reliability and cost for all our customers. That make sense?

It does, yep. Very helpful.

One more if I may, on the regulatory side. You've obviously got the two rate cases in Wisconsin and Illinois, both expected to be resolved around year-end if they go to fully litigated orders.

How are you thinking about the potential for settlements? Wisconsin obviously has a good history of deal making, whereas it's a lot less common in Illinois, but you did have this settlement on the rider issue there.

How are you thinking about opportunities for each, especially given the timing coinciding with election season?

Sure, and when you think about settlement, like you said, in Wisconsin, there's been a history, and specifically with the individuals on this Commission, that there's been settlement like last year in two of the cases in the state. I think there's an opportunity, but that opportunity really doesn't happen till we start seeing the staff direct testimony and the intervenor direct testimony around mid-August.

I think it's August 10th and August 14th. Come after that, we'll always have discussions and hope there's an opportunity for that.

In Illinois, you're exactly right. Having a settlement on those 12 cases, it was great to see and great to see that movement forward.

Illinois's a little bit historically haven't had many settlements, I put that as a lower probability. That doesn't mean that we won't have a discussion, but I just would not handicap that being as a high probability just based on history.

All right, very helpful. Thank you so much.

All right, thank you.

Hi. Good afternoon.

Thank you for taking my question.

Absolutely.

I was just curious if you could discuss the political environment in Wisconsin given the elections. How would you characterize it, the overall atmosphere in the state, and have you engaged with any of the candidates yet or prospective candidates, I guess, before the primaries?

Just any color on that could be helpful.

Sure, just to remind everyone, Wisconsin's a pretty purple state. We know the Republican candidate for the primary is Tom Tiffany.

That's who's slotted there, there's only one real candidate out there. Then the Democratic candidates, there's about five of them out there.

The primary's August 11th, and we'll see who comes out of that primary to work against in the general election against Tom Tiffany. When you think about our positions and what we've been fortunate enough to do is been we've been working with both sides of the aisle and been very successful over several decades, working on both sides of the aisle to promote a strong economy with a strong, reliable distribution electric gas distribution systems.

I feel good, we'll continue to work progressively with our governor and the legislature. In the debates, there's been several items that have come up, talk about inflation, economy, public safety, education, and then, of course, infrastructure comes up.

It's important for every official, the governor as they get elected to make sure they understand data centers, make sure they understand the economy and how that works. I think when you look at our tariffs, having very much transparency in our tariffs for the very large customers is going to be very helpful, and all the customers we work with, they are committed to paying their fair share.

I think when you think about the transparency, they're paying their fair share, the benefits in property taxes, and they see the complete story and true transparency, I think that's going to be helpful as they look about where they govern the state of Wisconsin. We've had some discussion with some of them.

I think as we see who's the next people who are running for governor, we'll probably have more. The key is, we work with both sides.

It's just a matter of how do we make Wisconsin successful from economic and for all the residents of Wisconsin. More to come, as you can imagine, through the race over the next couple months.

All right. Thank you so much.

That's all I had.

Thank you.

Hey, good afternoon. Just following up on that, another on just the political front.

If you could just give us some perspective on potential for data center pushback, whether it be moratoriums at a state level or local siting issues. Obviously you have two very good and well-established sites with your existing customers, but just as you think of future new opportunities, whether you're seeing that potential pushback.

Sure, and one of the candidates has identified that they potentially would do a moratorium on data centers. I think, right now everyone's on the campaign trail, that we really got to get them understanding the facts.

There have been several communities that have brought up moratorium on data centers, but that's, once again, they all are looking at getting those fact-finding. When you look at our rate case that we filed and you look at the cost from corporate allocations to more efficiently working with our generation fleet and how you allocate costs, there's about $100 million of savings for our customers over the next two years from the value of the data centers, and there's probably more when you factor in gross receipts tax and state taxes.

Then some of the other items that are out there is the narrative about water usage, and when you think about water usage, people are looking at data centers and their closed-loop systems, and then they talk about generation. When we look at our generation and you look from 2015 at the time we did the Integrys acquisition to our projections in 2030, our water consumption through generation is down about 25% to 30%, we project it'll be.

Water, it's not really on the generation side. We just got to make sure each of these candidates understand the facts and the economic benefits from jobs to property taxes to even cost allocations for customers.

I think there's a lot of positive, we just got to make sure everyone has the facts in front of them.

Very helpful, thanks. Just on the funding and financing side, appreciate kind of the guidance of 50% equity for anything incremental.

Just as you think about the capital plan continuing to grow, does it still make sense to primarily lean on the ATM for that? Then, we had one of your peers earlier this week do something a little strategic with non-utility renewables.

I know your setup is a little bit different, but is that something you would consider as a way to recycle capital to help on the funding of higher CapEx?

Sure, and I'll let Xia, because she's been looking at it, and over the next couple months before we get to the third quarter, we'll be looking at it even more. Xia, your thoughts?

Yeah. We're very, very comfortable relying on the ATM program.

I think it's very efficient. Last year, we raised $800 million.

This year, we're on track to accomplish the $1.1 billion. We feel really good about the capability through the ATM program.

Having said that, we're also looking at a variety of things. How do we make sure that the cash side is accumulating faster?

You saw that in my prepared remarks, I called out some current returns on projects. Under our tariff, customers have the option to pay either AFUDC or we call current return, basic cash returns.

If you switch to more of the cash returns, that would give you more cash, that would help us manage the funding need. We're thinking through all the angles to try to be efficient.

Nothing is off the table right now.

Great. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Michael.

Hey, good afternoon. Thanks for the time today.

Just turning back to Illinois, I'm curious how work is trending on the pipe program as you've been reramping that, any recent learnings or takeaways and anything there that's informing the rate proceedings in the backdrop?

Sure, great question. You may have seen we updated our filing a little bit, reducing our spending in 2026.

To be quite honest, things are going really well. We're moving along well.

However, the hardest part is trying to get a labor force on some of the work that we need. It's just been more challenging, as you can imagine, and what from our conference call and other, there's a lot of economic development from data centers to generation to a variety of items that are challenging to get ramping up that workforce.

We are working through a variety of methods to bring in talent and do the proper training to get the workforce ramped up, but it's going a little bit slower than we'd like in 2026 here, but we anticipate to be able to ramping that up as we move forward in '27. It's going fine from an execution plan, etc., just a little bit hard to get those resources that we need.

Got it. Appreciate the color there.

I'll stick with Illinois and I guess zooming out to the topic of future of gas, and we've talked about a number of ways over the past few years. How do you see that conversation currently standing and I guess how is that standing amid national and state affordability backdrops as well?

The future of gas has been kind of moved out over the last couple years. They're still having sessions, they're still talking about it.

I think what we're learning is gas is very valuable, and in the backdrop of the tremendous electricity demand, that it probably isn't as much as the pushing of the electrification at one time just because of pure economics and costs along with where you need the electricity. They're still having the future gas, they're still having discussions, but I think by the end of the year something's supposed to come out on that.

Great. That's all for me.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Just want to come back, I guess, to some of the earlier points you were discussing and see what's in the capital plan, what would be upside to the capital plan. Just want to confirm, are you talking about Point Beach replacement capital, if you're talking about another data center, a third customer there?

These are all upside to the capital budget. If any of this comes in, would you think of this as kind of lengthening the EPS CAGR as you see it or presenting upside to the current five-year range?

We're pulling those plans together, but you nailed the drivers. The growth in the current data centers, specifically, where do we think that I-94 corridor will go, the growth of a potential another large customer, the transmission growth, and then we talked about the generation potentially for Point Beach.

All that is upside. A lot of that as you think about it is in that 2030-31 time frame because it'll be adding a year on and it really takes that long from a supply chain.

We'll evaluate everything on our third quarter call, but feel really good about the tools that are coming in as we move forward and we pull that plan together. I think it's going to be long for sure, and we'll see where the numbers go in the next years.

As we're at the high end of our range right now in that '28 time frame, we'll see if there's anything more in it as we pull it together.

Got it. That's helpful, thanks.

Just wanted to shift gears here towards new nuclear, if we could. Obviously WEC is looking to make sure that shareholders are protected, but the federal government is kind of pushing forward DOE loans program and other initiatives as well to support this as far as at least long-lead items.

Just wondering, is there a scenario where you think that WEC could participate here, or just any thoughts on that in general?

Sure, and we have been actively working with DOE as it relates to fossil, trying to get potential loans as it relates to some of our gas generation. That's, if you hear our name associated with it, it may be related to some of that fossil stuff.

As we said before, and more thinking long term, we have a site called Kewaunee that we kept through the Integrys acquisition that we have options for that land there. Longer term, nuclear maybe a potential, I just wouldn't look for it in the short term here.

We do think longer term, nuclear across the country is a potential option.

Got it. That's helpful.

I'll leave it there. Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. I guess my first question relates to just understanding the collateral a little bit better with respect to the Oracle contract.

Does the collateral essentially track which phase they're going forward with? Does it track to your construction?

How should we think about sort of the initial collateral requirement that's required?

Sure. The collateral, as you think about the collateral through the payment cancellation agreements or as you get to the VLC tariff, the collateral is really based on the assets and the expenditures that we're putting in.

It kind of ramps up over time as more and more construction happens, just so we don't have a stranded asset or an issue for our other customers or shareholders. That kind of ramps up.

Remember, when that Very Large Customer tariff goes into service, just like the collateral on the spending, it gets to the depreciable value that they have to support. We look at that as very protective, and I think we have one of the most protective in the country because, remember, they got to sign up for 20 years for wind and solar and the depreciable life for batteries and gas assets, and they need to come up with that net book value to make sure we have collateral in place.

It's very stringent, but also very credit supportive, like I said. All the rating agencies thought it was really good what we filed, and now even a higher rating is even stronger.

That's how it kind of ramps up over time.

Just to clarify that, if they were to move forward into a phase two, that we should assume that that would require a step-up in the level of collateral. Is that sort of a logical way to look at it?

Correct, as long as their credit rating would be at where it's at.

Right. Then what if they're downgraded further by Moody's or S&P?

How much additional collateral would that involve, since they're sort of on the border here between investment grade and sub-investment grade?

That's an interesting question. However, we're getting all the collateral we need at this level, if it goes down, we already have all the collateral we need for the full amount.

Paul, we require in the original filing as well as the PCAs that as long as they're BBB- or worse, they would need to post collateral. We kind of already kicked that in before they go any further down.

I think from that protection perspective, like Scott said, all the rating agencies recognized this, you're not requiring them to kick in collateral when they become junk, we are actually one layer better protected. There's no more we would need to protect the entire book value on the books.

Great. Where does their legal challenge currently stand?

They've just filed it. Should we assume that this will take years to play out in the courts, or what would be this sort of a normal expectation?

It would take some time, and I don't know how long it would take. It would take a while.

However, even what we refiled for in our reconsideration had the requirements that there needed to post at a BBB-. I think they're really looking at longer term.

If it takes several months or six months or so to get out and maybe ask for reconsideration, it still doesn't change anything at this moment. I think they're looking at the future.

Then

I think on the first quarter call, you talked about potentially having another announcement by the end of the year. Are you feeling sort of comfortable with that still?

We're still having really good discussions with potential other large customers that would fall under the tariff that are probably not as big as the current two customers we have, but more in that 4 to 500 MW size. We're having some discussions, and I feel good about it, but more to come, hopefully.

Then

maybe last question for me, sort of a lot of turmoil on the Democrat side in terms of running for governor with Rodriguez sort of exiting. I guess the most recent polls had the Democrat socialist sort of ahead.

Who would be sort of the other ones that would be close to Hong in terms of the primary?

There's five right now in the primary. You have Hong, you have Mandela Barnes, you have an individual who's a previous lieutenant governor, you have Joel Brennan, who was a former state administrative secretary, Department of Administration, David Crowley is also the Milwaukee County Exec here in Milwaukee, and Kelda Roys.

There's five of them out there right now. They just had a debate.

It's kind of interesting, cuz a lot of activity has happened in the last couple weeks, and the primary is August 11th, not much happened until all of a sudden we're getting into the last month here of the primary. There's several out there.

Great. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Hey, thanks for squeezing me in. Just to follow up on all this Oracle stuff, if I understand you correctly, tell me if I'm wrong, you don't expect this lawsuit and its outcome, assuming let's say that Oracle loses, as having a significant impact on the project going forward.

Am I boiling it down to its essence there, or am I misunderstanding

it? You nailed it.

This current project, we've talked to them several times. The construction is moving extremely well, things are getting done, I don't think anything in this particular project is tied to that at all.

Okay. That's very helpful.

Then just to clean up here, and I apologize if I missed it, but on the waterfall chart on slide 15, the WECI, the infrastructure segment, could you just give a little bit more color on the moving parts here? I think I understand the absence of the 2025 impairments, but could you give us a little bit more flavor about the insurance recovery on '26 and the O&M timing issue and how that might work out going forward?

Sure, happy to. As I called out, the lack of impairment in the quarter this year and the fact that we received the insurance payment this year, so that accounts for a net of 4 cents out of the 11.

We have $0.01 that's PTC, additional PTCs. The rest of them are a combination of O&M timing, and there's a little bit capacity payment from the market, we sold too, generation was a little bit better, it's a variety of things added to the remaining 6 6 cents.

O&M timing is a big big piece of that.

Will that be coming back? This year or next,

or? It will.

Hopefully some of the favorability will stay, but we expect in the fourth quarter some of that will go back.

Okay. Then just the insurance recovery, as a part of the 4 cents, is how much of that was this quarter's insurance recovery?

I apologize for being slow on this.

2 cents. 2 cents was insurance payment, yep.

2 cents. Okay.

Gotcha.

Yep.

Okay. Thanks so much.

All right, thank you. That concludes our conference call for today.

Thank you for participating. If you have more questions, feel free to contact Beth Straka at 414-221-4639.

Thank you, everyone.