Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Rob, and I'm your event operator today. I would like to welcome everyone to today's conference, Public Service Enterprise Group's third quarter, 2025, opening conference call and webcast. At this time, all participants are in the smelly mode. Later, when we talk about questions and answers, remember the financial community. At that time, if you have a question, you will need to press star on the number one on your telephone p-pad. To throw your question, please press star on the number two. If anyone wants to require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, the conference is being recorded today, November 3, 2025, and will be available to replay an audio webcast on PSCG's Investor Relations website at HTTPS colon forward slash forward slash investor dot PSCG dot com. I would now like to turn the conference over to Carlotta Chan. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and welcome to PSPG's third quarter 2025 earnings presentation. On today's call, the President, the press release attachments and slides for today's discussion are posted on iOS. PSPG's earnings release and other materials discussed during today's call contain forward-looking statements and amendments that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. We will also discuss non-GAAP operating earnings, which differ from net income, as reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles of GAAP in the United States. We include reconciliation of our non-GAAP financial measures and a disclaimer regarding forward-looking statements on our IRF prepared remarks. We will conduct a 30-minute question and answer session. I will now turn the call over to Ralph Leroza.

The first nine months enable us to net a billion dollars in the nine months of meeting load growth that lower energy 2.9 terawatt hours of reliable carbon-free baseload energy while providing PSEG with the financial flexibility to fund our regulated investment. A 199-day continued operations service provider for the electric service and in the Rockaway's growth plan with a focus on operational excellence and rigorous cost discipline to maintain reliability have never been more evident than now. With the significant and growing supply-demand imbalance in New Jersey and the entire PGM region, resource adequacy and balance, which will adversely impact both reliability and affordability for customers in the future if it's not addressed, We are actively collaborating with current and potential future policy makers to develop real solutions in New Jersey and ensure we can affordably meet our customers' energy needs. The next government of New Jersey will be faced with addressing a broad set of rising costs, practical solutions to get to the root cause of these cost pressures. The Rutgers-Eagleton poll of likely voters cited taxes, while 21% said it was affordability, as low as possible in the short term, and work on longer-term solutions. High demand and balance capacity market impact on customer bills next June will be limited by 2% to at least the upcoming capacity auction in December. Of the basic generation for a three-year period, the supply-related costs remain the same, preserving the reduction from other charges expected to come off the bill. It is that New Jersey needs to add generation supply to reduce its over-reliance during reliability and afford 40% of our generation can introduce that allows electric distribution companies to compare supply solutions. A order of legislation that would increase in-state general is the in-house export plants and increase megawatt production. As I mentioned earlier, it will bring an incremental to large loads and await final action by April 30th of 2026. Positive elements to see the ultimate impact of our financial results for the first nine months enable us to now have non-GAAP operating earnings guidance of 394 affirming PSEG's five-year non-GAAP operating earnings growth outlook of 2029 as we continue to pursue incremental opportunities to our long-term forward. It continues to enable us to fund PSEG's five-year capital and recognize the outstanding performances over the last quarter. Personal reliability and resiliency for our customers. Active achievement reflects the hard work, dedication, and technical expertise of everyone at PSEG. Election Day in New Jersey. Let me say this clearly. PSEG has been around for over a century. New Jersey administration on both sides of the aisle with aligned objectives. We've seen our meetings with both candidates for governor, so again with the new incoming administration. I'll turn the call over to Dan. We'll walk you through our financial results and the outlook for the remainder of 2025, and then rejoin the call for Q&A.

Ralph, and good morning to everybody. The PCG reported net income of $1.24 per share in 2025, compared with $1.04 per share in 2024. And non-GAAP operating earnings were $1.13 per share in 2025, compared with $0.90 per share in 2024. We've provided you with information on Slides 7 and 9 regarding the contribution to net income and non-GAAP operating earnings by business for the third quarter and nine months ended September 30th, 2025. Slides 8 and 10 contain waterfall charts that take you through the net changes for the quarter and year-to-date periods in non-GAAP operating earnings per share, also by major business. Let's start with PSE&G, which reported third quarter net income and non-GAAP operating earnings of $515 million for 2025, compared to $379 million in 2024. The utility's results were driven by the implementation to recover a return of and on previous capital investments totaling more than $3 billion in the PSE&G column. PSE&G's cap on the expense side, distribution O&M cost by a penny per share and two cents per share compared to the third quarter of 2020. The appreciable plan, investment, and long-term debt at higher interest rates. The favorable impact is 2 cents per share in the third quarter when PSE&G hit its electric system conditions during the third quarter as measured by the temperature humidity index were 3% cooler than normal and 7% cooler than the third quarter of 2024. As a reminder, the Conservation Incentive Program or SIP program mechanism decouples weather and other economic sales variances from a significant portion of our distribution margin while helping PSE&G promote the widespread adoption of energy conservation, including energy efficiency and solar programs. The SIP, the number of electric and gas customers, is the primary driver of distribution margin, and each segment grew by approximately 1% over the past year. The capital front, as Ralph mentioned earlier, PSE&G invested approximately $1 billion during the $0.7 billion for the first 2025 regulated capital investment, 3.8 billion year regulated capital investment plan of $21 billion to $24 billion through 2029, deploying the new energy efficiency to pay investing up to $2.9 billion over a six-year period under that program. customers finance their customers with energy information and options to manage their energy use reported net income of $107 million in 2025 compared to $141 million in 2024, and non-GAAP operating earnings were $50 million in 2025 compared to $69 million in 2024. Again, to the third quarter waterfall on slide 8, any per share compared to the prior year quarter was down in the quarter due to the Hope Creek refueling outage the third quarter of 2024, mostly driven by the scheduled refueling of our 100% owned Hope Creek Nuclear Unit. As Ralph mentioned, our Hope Creek Unit has successfully transitioned from an 18 to yield additional megawatt and interest expense rose by 2 cents per share, reflecting incremental debt at high, and taxes and other were a penny per share favorable. On the operating side, the nuclear fleet produced approximately 7.9 terawatt hours during the third quarter, compared to approximately 8.1 terawatt hours in the third quarter of 20 for the nine months ended september 30th 2025 23.8 slightly from 23.3 terawatt hours for the same period factors for the nuclear fleet were 92.4 percent and 93.7 percent for the quarter and nine month period ended september 30th 2025 respectively pcg nuclear cleared approximately 3 500 megawatts of its eligible nuclear capacity in PJM's base residual auction, $329 per megawatt day. For the energy year, June 1, 2026, PSEG had total available liquidity of 3.5%. In August, PSE&G issued $450 million of 4.9% secured medium-term notes. PSE&G redeemed at maturity $50 million, 0.8%. Significant liquidity remained relatively unchanged from the end of the second quarter. PSE&G's variable rate debt at the end of September consisted of a 364-day term loan at PSG Power for $400 million December of 2025, a full rate that represents approximately 4% of our money. Moody's published updated credit opinions on PSG and PSE&G with no change to either credit ratings. And our solid balance sheet supports the execution of PSG's five-year capital spending plan dominated by regulated CapEx without the need to sell new equity or assets, and provides for the opportunity for consistent and sustainable dividend growth. In closing, we are narrowing PSEG's full year 2025 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance from $3.94. This updates PSEG's solid results through the first nine months of 2025, compound annual growth in non-GAAP operating earnings through 2029, supported by our capital investment programs, and the nuclear PTC threat to introduce PCG's 2026 non-GAAP operating earnings guidance, investment plans, update our rate-based and long-term earnings CAGRs, and discuss this outlook all during our year-end call.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question and answer session for members of the financial community. If you have a question, please press the star and the number one on your telephone keypad. If your question has been answered and you wish to withdraw your polling request, you may do so by pressing the star and the number two. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before entering your request. One moment please for the first question. First question is from Char Perusa with Wells Fargo. Please proceed with your question. Hey guys, good morning.

Hey, who's that?

I appreciate it. You almost had me tongue-tied and that never happened, so I appreciate that. So, Ralph, just obviously the elections could be kind of this key threshold for data center deals in the state we've seen you know data center customers walk away from local politics issues and kind of both the regulated and even deregulated markets you know artificial island is obviously it's a great asset so kind of curious if there is any pressure points forming there and then obviously one of your favorite questions is any updates on potential timelines yeah no thanks char um i'll let the election and a little bit further whether you look at rq

or PJM's queue as an example, and I'll just point you to one that project. So they continue to arrive here in New Jersey. We haven't seen it at the hyperscale level, and we have talked in big announcements about, and we don't expect the timeline.

No, I mean, I think Ralph covered it, and I think we'll get a little bit more color from both of the candidates. There's been a whole bunch of stuff they've talked about during the campaign. This hasn't been the highest topic with respect to data centers as much as with respect to affordability generally. on things that have touched us. But we'll get more color as the election ends and we find out where they're going to go. But in the meantime, I think it's everything that Ralph said, and we're continuing.

And then just lastly, that's helpful. And then just on the 11 gigawatts, the large load pipeline, it's obviously growing. I know I don't want to front run the CapEx update on the roll forward, but let me attempt it anyway. But just on the grid capacity, Dan, talk about it, Ralph, Just the grid capacity that's there to convert those into signed agreements versus how much transmission and distribution needs you're going to have as you start to convert.

Well, again, I think a little bit of that is front-running some policy that will exist here. We talk a lot about the new governor will help us. Right now, we have capacity on our grid. That may change the grid. We're going to give you that full.

Okay, perfect. No, thanks so much, guys. Appreciate it. see you in a few days. And Ralph, thanks for remembering me after the garden leave. Thanks, guys. Bye.

Our next question is from the line of Jeremy today with J.P. Morgan. Please receive your questions.

Hi. Good morning. Hey, Jeremy. Just wanted to pick up on the conversation with regard to potential data center contracting here and wondering if you might be able to comment, I guess, on the flavor of conversations between your New Jersey versus Pennsylvania assets. Is there any discernible difference, I guess, in the tone of those conversations?

I wouldn't say different. I think you have more of a New Jersey. I have not seen that as much with respect to the incentives. And so what you're seeing is still some interest in the state and some sizable interest in the state, but probably the biggest differentiation.

Got it. That's helpful. Thanks for that. And as it relates to, I guess, supply additions and working with stakeholders in state. Just wondering if you might be able to expand a little bit more beyond that, I guess, as far as what type of constructs Peg would be interested in, be it, you know, regulated generation, unregulated generation, or just any other color in general on this topic?

Yeah. So, Jeremy, it's a great question. Look, we have said for many months, And we have indicated in public settings, right, we absolutely think that we continue. We've done, we've done a few months. And we know that, now I'm doing nuclear, but we want to enable solutions for this, where our site comes in. And we think that long-term that will provide the maintenance activities or security activities, the way we've been approaching it. And that's the way we'd like to see that would be regulated. And certainly, candidates and their platforms, you really see, you know, one, they're both talking about everything, right? That they're looking at all these options that are out there. The real question is, to what degree? And I think you will see one with one candidate that might be leaning a little more towards gas-fired units and another candidate that leans a little more towards solar and batteries. But both candidates are talking about all of the above strategy, which we support and we will be part of.

Got it. That's very helpful. Thank you.

The next question is from the line of Nick Campanella with Barclays. Please receive your questions.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. How are you, Eric? Hey, I'm good. Hope you're doing well. So, look, just the contracting discussion, you know, we did see the multi-state kind of proposal advocating for bring your own generation and the need to kind of fast track and permit, you know, fast track the permitting for some of these data centers. But there just seems to be an overall stress on bring your own generation across the states in PJM. And how is that, you know, causing the conversation around the nuke to evolve? And is it fair to say that any deal at this point would now have to come with additionality commitments, whether that's upgrades, new gas, batteries, or otherwise? Just, you know, maybe you can kind of talk to that a little bit if that's the right take.

Are you talking about the DOE, Nick, in that? The DOE?

I think there's just been various calls by whether it's in Pennsylvania, New Jersey or, you know, Maryland on just the need for data centers to bring their own generation down. I'm just wondering how that impacts incumbent generators that were, you know, interested in, you know, potentially signing front of meter deals.

Yeah, Nick, I would say that if I'm capturing your question, there's not been anything requirements related to what must happen. And so I think from that perspective, I think it almost does tie in a little bit to what Ralph is talking about with respect, which is trying to set some things, but get things moving where there is a little bit of it. BYOG is one of them. There's nothing about additionality that's mandatory from that perspective, and different counterparties have different precluding anything from it.

Okay. All right. I appreciate that. And then, you know, there's been a lot of EPS CAGR updates this quarter. And, you know, I guess maybe you can kind of help position to the street. You know, you're doing 9.5% year-over-year growth, 25 through 20, off of 24. I see that on slide 5. I know the past 5% to 7% CAGR, that's not linear. But just from our perspective, you know, we know where the capacity auctions have cleared We know where prices have gone. Just what are some of the negatives that we should be thinking about that kind of put you back within the 5% to 7% range as we kind of think through what you can deliver on in We'll give you a full summary. No problem. Thank you.

The next questions are in the line of David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. Please receive your question.

Hey, thanks so much. One quick clarification or maybe additional piece of data. I was just wondering what the level of mature applications would be in that data center activity that you've quoted in the past.

Yes. I think we moved that from 2,600 to 2,800.

Got it.

I think that's the information.

Thanks for that.

That's the right number.

And then, you know, as you sketch out the utility growth outlook and roll forward, I was just curious if you'd give your perspective now on how do you manage the affordability concerns, maybe outside of just the generation front, you know, as you're planning the next iterations of your utility CapEx programs and looking at the T&D rate outlook. How are you weaving in just considerations around affordability?

Well, look, we always think about affordability no matter from the standpoint, whether it's, you know, I can point you to our O&M slides that are in the deck and how we've held O&M relatively flat over a longer period. You know, the way we're in right now and how we really is not something new to us in circles, but it's the way we've operated. And you've heard us many times making any big announcements. That said, I'll go back, you know, 20 years and change the depreciable life of our gas asset. There are things that we can do working with the regulator to come up with solutions to keep T&D. We'll continue to look at affordability issue, liability issue, and the resource adequacy is going to drive us to solutions that are going to increase supply as the demand comes online. We have to find supply. David, I don't know any other way to say it, and I think both of the candidates for governor in New Jersey recognize that. They've both said that. Again, their solutions might be a little bit different. How we get there is the only question. It's not if we're going to get there. We need more supply in the state.

Yeah, that's really helpful, Keller. Much appreciated, and see you soon.

Thanks, David.

The next question is from the line of Bill Apicelli with UBS. Please proceed with your question.

Hey, good morning. Hey, Bill. Just following up on some of those comments you just made about finding supply, I mean, there would be a sense of urgency, I think, behind that, right? Right. So is there an opportunity here in the veto session to push for some legislation that could support this? Or do you think this is more likely something has to be dealt with under a new administration?

I think there has been a lot of things that have happened in this state in the past. They can hear mostly would like to see us. I think it would help us, you know, both from an affordability standpoint, but also from an economic development standpoint. We as we continue to grow this candidates would like to see us continue to grow the state. then one of the fundamental things we'll need is enough supply.

And then just along those same lines, I mean, how do you evaluate the framework for that, right? Would this be in terms of evaluating how much generation you potentially would need from a regulated basis? Would there be sort of an RFP approach that you could then bid on? I mean, I'm not sure if you guys could sort of describe how you would envision such a mechanism coming out.

Yeah, look, I think that the BPU could. I think, again, I don't want to front-run anybody. I think it would be rude. I will tell you when it all starts, right, one. And then the last thing is define it, whether it's at the state level or at the federal level. It's going to be regional CPI. It's going to be state CPI. What is it going to be? And I think it's fundamental to putting together an integrated resource plan.

Thank you. And then just lastly on the outlook for the forward curves. I mean, can you maybe just speak to where you see those relative to maybe your fundamental view or at least relative to where the PTC floor is that's embedded in your outlook?

Yeah, I'm going to let Dan answer that one. He sees that a little bit more, but, I mean, fundamentally, we look out for you.

I think, you know, you've seen it happen from a load perspective, but the numbers are a little bit staggering. And so even a lower end of the range would imply a need for incremental supply. And then if you think about the supply discussions, those have always moved towards the concept of we need to move quickly because at the end of the day, it generally isn't going to come out all that fast. You just think about time for turbines and everything else. And so all of that leads you to a little bit of a more bullish place. And if you look out the forward curve, you haven't seen quite as much bullishness. And we've seen some of that come up. And so I think that that feels a little bit more like a fundamental move than just some interim period of time, although we do end up having some of those, too. It seems like every time we go into winter and we get a cold day, you see a little bit of movement out the curve. But I do think fundamentals should support a stronger price as we go forward.

Okay, great. Thank you.

The next question is from the line of Nick Amacucci with Evercore ISI. Pleasure to see you with your question.

Hey, good morning, guys.

Welcome as well. I think this is our first quarterly call with you asking a question.

Oh, well, thanks. I appreciate that. I just wanted to dig in a little bit on Hope Creek, just kind of the extension of the fuel cycle there. Kind of what undertakings were done? I mean, was that kind of an enhanced fuel offering, or how should we kind of think about that? Is there opportunity to kind of extend that even further?

Yeah, no, Nick, it really is a lot simpler than people might make it out to be. It's just shuffling of the fuel, some different changes in the fuel design. But we didn't change, right? So this is something that's been done in the industry quite – he did the right thing and held us accountable to a little longer-term life before we made long-term investments. So while Dan did that, we were getting smart about the changes that we could make there, and the industry is done. I will tell you, though, we also at the same time did a lot of other things at that plant that you might not pay attention to, but, you know, we changed out some of the insulation in the cooling tower. You know, just changed the tower, and it just allows us the draft that the cooling tower is going to increase, which allows you to keep the megawatt heat and humidity might return for it. And in that case, you know, no big announcements, but summer months, different things that we're doing down there and identifying those opportunities. But specific to your question on the fuel operators that are looking at moving from a 12 to 18 year cycle at PWRs, the BWR, I'm sorry, 18 to 24 months, the BWRs is what we just.

Thanks. That's all I got.

The next question is from the line of Paul from Bardo with Jeffries. Let's just see what's your question.

Hi, thank you. Good morning, team. Good morning.

Good morning, Paul.

I don't know. Yeah, and just to follow up on the conversation on the forward curve, obviously there's been a pretty big move even as of late. Could you share some light on kind of what the hedging profile looks like at power for the next few years? And just if there's been any changes, I know we had the nuclear PTC a little bit ago, just any overall thoughts you could give in the positioning would be great.

Yeah, and Paul, it isn't much, and it's not very different from the characterization that we provide. The PTC changed that, the whole hedging portfolio that you're trying to manage. It varied from that a little bit because of the way we've described it. It's just not, I think, if you think about it generally.

Okay, that makes sense. And then on the capital refresh, just to make sure I understood correctly, it sounds like you will have kind of a bigger capital refresh when we do that fourth quarter roll forward. Is that a fair interpretation, or do you need some of that political and regulatory clarity and just it's not a fourth quarter event, but sometime later in 2026?

No, we will be doing a normal roll forward of everything on our fourth quarter call. I think that's the...

Thank you, team.

Yep. Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from the line of Carly Davenport with Goldman Sachs. Please receive your question.

Hey, good morning. Good morning. Thanks for taking the question. Just one quick one from me on the utility side, just as you get towards kind of the end of the GSMP to extension period, can you just share sort of the latest there and discussions about refreshing that program as we near 2026?

Yeah, we're continuing to have those discussions, Carly, and I wouldn't, again, I wouldn't want to front run any of that in continuous.

Okay, got it. Great. I'll leave it there. Thank you.

Thanks, Carly.

Thank you. The next question is from the line of Anthony Crudell with Mizuho. Please receive your question.

Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks. Thanks for squeezing me in with all the welcome greetings.

Anthony, my only question was, am I welcoming you to this? We'll talk about that.

I'm on it. Much better than my Rangers. I guess two questions. One is, I'm sure you guys have met with both candidates. It's when they talk about affordability, do you think they're focused on the supplier generation side or the wire side? Do they understand the differences in the PGM impact versus just investing in the grid infrastructure? And then I have a follow-up.

Yeah, no, Anthony, great question. And so what we need to do is the lane, but we lived on the backs in the area for quite a while.

And then the follow-up, kind of the same topic. Your company is the only company with both, you know, PJM wires exposure, but also, you know, merchant generation PJM. And as we're all looking for, whether it's a data center contract or a large load customer contract, is it possible that both segments of your business, the wires company and the generation, given the backdrop of affordability and everything else, that they actually both could win or outperform at the same time. The worry is when you see this election going on and that a very high attractive price on a generation if something came about on a data center or any type of large contract would actually hurt the wires business or vice versa. I'll just leave it there.

At the end of the day, we're hiring. We do think that there continues to be an operable financing utility holding on to nuclear. I'm a union there, so just to remind everybody of that That is laser-focused on antivalue for the shareholder, and we're trying to look at that balance every day to get that optimization. So I think there is a win-win, and how it plays out will be.

Thanks for taking my questions, and if Newark gets some air traffic controls, we'll see you down in Hollywood.

Thank you. Our last question is from the line of Andrew Weisel with Scotiabank. Please receive your question.

Hey, good morning, everybody. Thanks for including me. The first question is on the balance sheet. you've obviously long touted the strength of that and the lack of need for external equity but i am expecting in a few months we'll see a pretty sizable increase to the capital plan uh maybe how are you thinking about that at this point uh i don't expect specifics but are you thinking that you'll be able to continue to say no equity we're off and give it the damn really well and i don't i don't think any of that's going to change we've been able to manage to continue to be able to do that include capital rate base okay great uh next on affordability Yeah, obviously, it's been talked a lot about today, and I can't watch a World Series or football game without being reminded about it. But one different approach I want to maybe think about is obviously no one likes seeing their bills go up, and it's been a real hard slog to get new supply added. But New Jersey is a pretty wealthy state overall. How are you thinking about it in terms of not only overall affordability but focusing on low and lower income customers? There's a lot of existing programs and talk about expanding or adding new programs. Is that maybe a different strategy that maybe could be pursued both by you and the state overall?

They may have to look at things a little bit differently, dependent upon the customer point and the impact on ours that could be impacted in, you know, how we could think about our in period now for collections and how that's all handled. So our team looks at that level of detail on a rat at the end of the day brings us a lot of only from our customer percent of wallet slide in our in our decks.

We have for a long time. And if you take a look at that slide, there's actually two lines on that. One of them is for the average customer. One of them is for a lower income customer. And given the lower income and given the share of wallet, you would think that it would be a higher percent of their income, given the fact that the denominator is lower. And in fact, it's not. And that, I think, is a credit to the programs that are in place and the things that are done throughout the state and that we do ourselves to help some of those that are most in need. So, that is always a – Great.

Yep, I appreciate how much you guys have been proactive on that front. One last one, if I could, just on the large load inquiries, pretty significant pickup there to 11.5 gigawatts. Can you detail how much of that is data centers versus manufacturers, and then just very roughly the timing of the ramp-up schedules, how much of that is kind of 26, 27 versus the outer years, like 29, 30, or beyond?

Yeah, no, vehicle loads that were coming on, it hasn't had. Another thing that's really falls ago, we thought that was going to be in the numbers. Again, proud of the team and the forecasting that's been done there and give you a little bit of more.

Very good.

Thank you for all the info. thank you ladies and gentlemen i'd like to turn the floor back over to mr la rosa for closing comments well thanks i i got i have a planned comment i'm going to open aside we said a lot of thank yous and and and and good luck to people moving into new world in uh in trenton as we go through the next campaign and it's close uh we'll see how this plays out but what will not be close is our ability to work with stand ready whatever else we need to do to make sure that we uh good luck to both candidates as they enter the last 24 hours of the campaign and I look forward to seeing you all in the next.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time and thank you for your participation.