Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the EDF 2022 first quarter sales and highlights conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen only mode. After the speaker presentation, there will be a question and answer session. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one on your telephone. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. If you require any further assistance, please press star zero. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Xavier Girre, CFO. Please go ahead. Good morning, everybody. I'm pleased to welcome you to this conference call. I will present you the sales of Q1 2022, starting with the main highlights. As usual, I will leave as much time as possible for the Q&A session. This call is expected to end at 9:45 A.M. Paris time. Let's start with the key operational indicators of the first quarter. French nuclear output decreased by 7.5 TWh or -7.6% at 91.7 TWh. This is a consequence of lower availability of the nuclear fleet, mainly due to the impact of stress corrosion indications. Nuclear output increased by 8.6% in the U.K. at 11.4 TWh due to better availability of the fleet despite end of generation for Hunterston in January 2022. Wind and solar output reached 6.5 TWh, a 28% increase versus Q1 2021 thanks to the commissioning of new capacity in 2021 and to favorable wind conditions in the UK and the USA in Q1 2022. On the contrary, hydro output in France decreased by 31.5% year-on-year due to significantly lower hydraulic conditions during Q1 2022, whereas Q1 2021 was above average. Carbon intensity decreased to 54 g CO2/kWh this quarter from 56g CO2/kWh in Q1 2021. Last indicator, wind and solar capacities under construction remained very high at 7.9 GW gross the end of March 2022. Let me now update you on some highlights of the period. At Group level we strengthened the financial structure and liquidity of the Group with the rights issue for EUR 3.15 billion. We also signed three-year bilateral term loans for a total amount of circa EUR 12 billion. In France, the board approved the launch of the second phase of the Grand Carénage program for the period from 2022 to 2028. It will cover the first 10-year visit for the 1,300MW fleet and the studies and some works allowing the fleet to operate beyond 50 years. On the stress corrosion matter, investigations are underway. The Group has ongoing exchanges with the ASN. Régis Clément, Deputy Head of Nuclear Generation Division, is with me today to answer any question you may have on that matter. In the UK, the British government announced its target to triple nuclear installed capacity to 24 GW by 2050. The Nuclear Energy Financing Act was enacted on 31st of March, allowing the implementation of a regulated asset-based model for new nuclear projects. Renewables keep on developing with the award of the seabed lease in New York Bight to develop offshore wind energy of 1.5 GW with Shell and of 7 solar power plant projects in France for a total capacity of 410 MW. The first offshore wind turbine in France was installed in April in Saint-Nazaire. As regards innovation, the group has launched its hydrogen plan, aiming at becoming a European leader in 100% low- carbon hydrogen generation by 2030, and at developing 3 GW growth of low carbon hydrogen generation projects by 2030 worldwide. As regards customers, the number of electricity, gas, and services contracts has increased regularly since last September. In Q1 2022, it represented a 190,000 positive net variation versus a -126,000 in Q1 2021. Though it is a great long-term commercial news, it could have, nevertheless, a short-term negative impact on the EBITDA of the Group, depending on the price of the sourcing needed. ESG vote on climate resolution, and the Group's climate transition plan to contribute to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 will be submitted to the shareholders' assembly next week. As regards the Ukrainian conflict, to date, the group has no exposure to Russian companies affected by international sanctions. It has no long-term gas contracts with Russian companies. Edison has a 1 Bcm short-term contract for balancing purposes with Gazprom Italia, which is expiring end -2022. It represents less than 10% of Edison supply and is not significant at group level. The Ukrainian conflict has an indirect impact on the group related to the increase in market prices volatility, penalizing EDF in a context of significant buybacks on the market and to some tensions on supply chain, as of today. On top of that, some regulatory steps have a negative impact. In particular, in Italy, the taxation of extra profit has a significant impact on Edison net result, as you can see on Edison press release this morning. Let's now review the sales for the first quarter, which increased organically by +61% versus Q1 2021. Our prices have increased strongly as compared to Q1 2021, leading to a positive price effect on sales in the four key European countries of the group. At an EBITDA level, though, this impact is more than offset by significant buybacks at very high prices due to the level of output in France. Second element: the resale of purchase obligations in France at much higher prices in Q1 2022 versus Q1 2021. This has no impact on EBITDA because of the CSPE mechanism and has a temporary positive impact on working capital. Third element: the very significant rise in gas prices. As the sourcing cost has risen at the same time, the impact on the EBITDA of the group remains limited. To wrap up, sales increased very significantly year-on-year, but only a small portion of it has an impact on EBITDA, as most of these effects are almost passed through or because the sourcing of costs has increased in a similar way. I will come back to 2022 EBITDA later on. This slide, number eight, shows the main variation of the sales by segment. As you can see, nearly all segments booked a positive variation, the most significant ones in value being France generation and supply, Italy, and the other activities segments. I will focus first on these segments with the most significant variation value and then come back to this slide for the other segments. Let's start with France generation and supply activities. Sales increased by EUR 4.1 billion from EUR 8.8 billion to EUR 12.9 billion, a 46.4% organic growth. Turnover increased mainly due to favorable price effects for an estimated EUR 2.3 billion. This is explained notably by the rise of power prices on the market, leading to an increase of the regulated sales tariff i.e. excluding taxes, as well as increased selling prices to professionals. Nevertheless, decline in nuclear output, and to a lesser extent in hydraulic generation, required buybacks at very high prices with negative impact on EBITDA. Second block, a negative volume effect for less than EUR 0.1 billion. Indeed, if the balance in electricity contracts is positive since September 2021, its level is still below the one of Q1 2021. A milder winter in 2022 represented a decrease for the sales estimated at -EUR 0.2 billion. The group presented a net purchasing position on the wholesale market for Q1 2022, which does not contribute to turnover, but to the cost of goods sold, unlike Q1 2021, when it had a net selling position. This reflects the lower sales volume in 2022 due to the decrease in nuclear and Hydro output. The impact on turnover was estimated at -EUR 0.2 billion. The resale of purchase obligations increased by an estimated EUR 1.5 billion in connection with the rise of spot prices. This is a pass-through mechanism and has no impact on EBITDA. Last, the other effects improved by EUR 0.8 billion. It is mainly linked to the energy sales by aggregator entities and to the gas supply sales with limited EBITDA impact. For example, Agregio is a subsidiary of EDF with a portfolio of more than 4 GW under contract in 2021, which optimizes renewable energy generation, demand response, and storage assets as flexibilities. The power prices increase has mechanically increased the value of their resales on the market. Sales of regulated activities increased by EUR 0.4 billion, a 7.2% variation. It is mostly explained by a positive price effect estimated at EUR 0.4 billion, due mainly to the increase in power and gas prices for island activities and Électricité de Strasbourg, and to the favorable revision of the TURPE 6 indexation on 1st August 2021. The growth in volumes distributed, excluding climate effect, also contributes to this positive evolution for an estimated EUR 0.1 billion. On the other hand, the milder weather in Q1 2022 versus Q1 2021 had an estimated impact of -EUR 0.1 billion. In the UK, sales increased by EUR 0.7 billion at +26.6% organic variation. It is mainly explained by the retail activity, which benefited from the sharp rise in electricity and gas prices. However, for the residential customer segment, the increase in energy prices was not fully passed on to the customers with a capped tariff. B2B volumes contributed positively year-on-year with a +9% increase. Italy's sales increased by 3.5 times, from EUR 2 billion to EUR 7 billion. It is mainly explained by the gas activities with a EUR 3.7 billion increase in sales in connection with the sharp rise in gas prices on the wholesale market. The impact on EBITDA is nevertheless limited as the sourcing costs have increased meanwhile. The electricity business increased by EUR 1.3 billion as a consequence of the rise in electricity prices with limited EBITDA impact and of a positive volume effect on thermal generation following the increase in the clean spark spread. Q1 2022 revenue for other activities segment is up 3.9x organically compared to Q1 2021. The group's gas activities revenue increased significantly in the context of a sharp rise in gas prices on the wholesale market for around EUR 1.3 billion and better use of the group's capacity for around EUR 1 billion, with a significant increase in the number of LNG cargo ships delivered to France. However, these effects are limited in terms of EBITDA. EDF Trading delivered once again a strong trading and optimization performance across all desks during Q1 2021, thanks to the high price and volatility market environment. Let's now have a look at the other segments. The sales of EDF Renewables increased by an 11% organic growth. Electricity output amounted to 5.5 TWh, with 30.4% increase, driven by the commissioning of new capacities and more favorable wind conditions in the U.K. and the USA. Positive price effects in the U.K. also contributed to this growth. Dalkia sales increased by EUR 0.7 billion, or close to 50%, mainly due to the pass-through of the sharp rise in gas prices since the end of 2021, multiplied by 5 compared to the first quarter of 2021, with no equivalent on EBITDA. It also benefited from the commercial dynamism in the U.K. and France. The sales of Framatome slightly decreased by 3% in organic terms, mostly linked to the decrease in deliveries of fuel assemblies, including uranium, with limited impact on EBITDA. Moreover, revenue benefited from better contribution from the installed base business, particularly in North America. The other international sales nearly doubled to EUR 1.5 billion. In Belgium, it increased by EUR 0.6 billion, reflecting the strong increase in prices on the wholesale electricity and gas markets. However, the overall impact on EBITDA is limited as low output in the context of the unavailability of Chooz led to energy purchases at high prices. It also benefited from the increase in gas and electricity volumes sold to professional and industrial customers and the growth in ancillary services. As for Brazil, sales increased by 20.9% organically, mainly due to the 17.6% revaluation of the power purchase agreement price in November of 2021 in connection with the indexation to the gas price. This slide presents another view of the positive change in sales, focusing on the main effects. First, favorable price effect for EUR 12.9 billion. This was mainly due to positive gas price effect for EUR 6.1 billion, with limited impact on EBITDA. The positive increase in downstream prices in France for EUR 2.3 billion. The resale of electricity from purchase obligations at higher prices for EUR 1.7 billion, with no EBITDA impact, and other price effects for EUR 2.8 billion, out of which EUR 2.4 billion have a limited impact on EBITDA. Second, volume effect estimated at EUR 0.5 billion. It is split between a gas volume effect for EUR 1.1 billion, with limited EBITDA effect, a negative volume effect for the non-regulated activities in France for minus EUR 0.8 billion, and other volume effects for plus EUR 0.2 billion. Overall, out of EUR 13.4 billion sales increase, around EUR 10.5 billion have no or limited impact on EBITDA, and only around EUR 3 billion has a material impact on EBITDA. As France low output level leads to energy purchases at high prices, the overall EBITDA evolution is negative despite this very strong sales increase. This negative evolution of the EBITDA is in line with what we said during the full year 2021 presentation. To update the breaks of 2022 EBITDA trend, as you see on this slide, the cost of meeting nuclear volumes buybacks is re-estimated at around minus EUR 14 billion based on market prices on the 21st of April 2022, versus minus EUR 16 billion mid-March. 2022 remains a very challenging year. The volatility in the markets remains extreme. The impacts of the Ukrainian conflict are difficult to quantify. In the current situation, we will still not provide any guidance for 2022. The ambition for 2023 remains unchanged, with a net financial debt to EBITDA ratio at around 3x and an adjusted net debt to adjusted EBITDA as per current S&P methodology between 4.5-5 times. This ends my presentation for Q1 2022 sales and highlights, and I now open the floor to your questions. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If you wish to cancel your request, please press the hash key. Once again, please press star one if you wish to ask a question. The first question comes from the line of Vincent Ayral from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Yes. Thank you very much. Good morning, Xavier. Good morning, everyone. Two sets of questions. The first one is on the corrosion on the SI slides. Thank you for bringing a specialist on this important topic today. Would like to get more color. What's the percentage of the fleet which has been reviewed to date, when will the whole CPD rest? And basically, we understand that it is still progressing and superficial issue. Could the SM consider repairs during time now to just in the future? Really trying to get a sense of where we're going on this one and when we could have it all. The second set of questions is obviously post-elections. We know Hercule is dead, but vive Hercule or whatever, Hector. Macron said, I think in his program that potentially would consider the nationalization of some sovereign assets. We clearly think here about nuclear, hydro. Bercy said basically that discussions with the commission will restart as early as May. Clearly there is a follow-up on that, and that's highly needed. The question I will ask you is a bit different from what you may expect, so basically, when we look at Hercule, it's unlikely that a successor would be a perfect look-alike. What in your views are a couple of key points that potentially would be changed if he were to slide internally, national politics and with the European Commission, especially in the current context with Russia? Thank you. Thank you, Vincent. Régis Clément will answer your first question about stress corrosion indications. Good morning, everybody. First of all, I would like to make an overall situation about how many reactors to date are affected by stress corrosion phenomenon. To date, inspection and examination that have been carried out have confirmed the presence of stress corrosion in a section of piping in three reactors, Civaux 1, Chooz B1, only 1. Investigations are ongoing for 9 other reactors. Civaux 2, Chooz B2, Chinon 3, Cattenom 3, Bugey 3 and 4, Flamanville 1 and 2, and Golfech 1. Indications have been found during ultrasonic inspection process. We are not yet to date able to establish whether these are mineral flaws in the composition of the steel, traces of thermal fatigue or stress corrosion. To be able to answer this kind of question, we have to carry out some expertise in laboratory, and it's not yet done. Thank you, Régis. As regards your second question, Vincent, I mean, of course, we see. I mean, I do not have any specific insight about these questions. Just to remind you, as regards potential nationalization, there are two potential modalities of nationalization in France, either by law, in this case, I mean, there is a law which organizes the nationalization of the company as it was done 40 years ago, or via a public offer. As regards the potential reorganization of the group, I mean, it's also, of course, too early to tell. I mean, significant also today is to set the proper regulation in order to enable the proper financing of the EPR-2 that have been announced by the French president on the tenth of February. As far as this matter is concerned and the funding scheme of the potential future EPR, it's currently under discussion between EDF and the French authorities. The French authorities, of course, will have to submit the case to Brussels. This is also a part of your question. I mean, our main objective is to secure the financing of this program while preserving the group's ability to finance its development in other businesses and in all our businesses. One of the topics under discussion is a regulatory framework, which would guarantee a sufficient level of remuneration in relation to the investment and operating costs of the assets. Thank you. I just want to do a follow-up on the first question. We understand that there are some reactors which are being investigated. The question: what was the percentage of the fleet which has been reviewed? When do we plan, indeed, what's the timeline to have the whole fleet reviewed to be de-risked on the corrosion issue? To you, Xavier, I understand that we need a new investment framework for new nuclear, like in U.K., where they have a RAB. The question is on the existing assets, the ARENH, it's ending, I mean, the ARENH with all its flows is ending at the end of 2025. There is massive volatility in government power markets in Europe. Do you believe there is still indeed a very strong need to regulate the existing fleet without talking about rebuild? Thank you. Thank you, Régis, for the first question. Yes. Okay. Back to the first question, we have a forecast that all the reactor will be inspected by the end of the year 2023, and we will continue during the program, this program during the scheduled maintenance outage cycles of all our reactors. It means that at this time, more or less 20% of the fleet is undergoing examination and expertising program. By the end of the next year, we will carry out the inspections of all our reactors. It is due to the expectation and the high level of expectation of requirements in terms of stress corrosion or welding program survey. It's the reason why we will restart this kind of control related to this new topic, stress corrosion, for all our reactors. It is clear enough to your question? Yeah. I think it's another almost two years to come. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. As we get to your second question, Vincent, it's. You're right. I mean, there are today three key questions. I mean, the first one is the regulation of the future EPR-2, which is necessary to enable the financing of these new assets. You're right, I mean, there are different options, including the RAB option, which is currently worked upon, and of course, which still requires significant amount of work, and then discussions between the French state and the European Commission. You have the second question, which is the regulation of the existing assets. You referred to the Hercule project, which was based on the regulation of the existing assets by the reform of the current ARENH, and the consequence of which was some demand by the European Commission, which were very significant on the organization of the group and which led to limit the integrity of the group. The question that will have to be tackled is how to give visibility to the existing asset, because today, I mean, the assets of course are subject to the very high volatility with very high prices. We also experienced some very low prices, you'll recall that, in 2016. How to ensure to give visibility to these assets, and how to give also a sustainable price. It's important to give visibility to investors and sustainability, both to investors and to customers. The third question that has to be dealt with is the market design. Of course, because we all experience today the very high volatility, in particular linked to the link between the gas price and the electricity price. As you know, I mean, the French government has been pushing for reform also of the European energy market for several months to ensure that electricity prices are paid by European customers, consumers and companies are no longer so closely linked to gas price fluctuations. You have certainly noticed also that the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators, ACER, believe that the current electricity market design is worth keeping, as stated in their report published last Friday. I mean, this debate, I'm sure will take place about that. You're absolutely right. The three questions have to be tackled. Financing of the EPR-2, legal framework of the existing assets, and market design. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next question comes from the line of Ajay Patel from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Good morning and thanks for the presentation. A couple of questions, please. Firstly, just on the corrosion issue, when will we get a better assessment of what the CapEx will be to remedy the situation? Or will we get an initial stab and then maybe more clarity as we go along? When will this become clear, I guess is the main point. Then just on the investment side, you know, you have a huge opportunity to invest behind nuclear, and I know there's various models still being discussed. But just in concept, is the aim here to be under a regulated structure? And who would be, for new nuclear that is, and who would be the person that would bear the risk of construction and the provisions? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for your questions. As regard your first question, I mean, for the time being, it's too early to tell. I mean, as Régis Clément explained, we are still in an early phase during which we are assessing the situation about stress corrosion. It's too early to give you precise assessment about CapEx that will be needed. Of course, we will update you when possible, but today it's too early. Nevertheless, I'd like to tell you that of course our financial guidance for 2023 includes the necessity to finance this stress corrosion issue. I also remind you that our guidance for 2023 as we highlighted is also subordinated to the fact that there is no additional regulatory negative regulatory steps for 2023 as we are suffering for 2022. It's also linked to our nuclear generation goal for next year, which is in a range between 300TWh and 330TWh hours. As regards your second question, I mean, it's clearly a key point also. I mean, because what's important for this regulation to be set in order to enable the financing of this new EPR-2 fleet. It's important to give visibility to the investors from the outset, meaning not only at the start of the operations, but from the start of the construction in order to avoid a massive impact on the balance sheet. First point is to get pre-financing. Second point, of course, you're right, is to set the rule of sharing the risk between, of course, the industrial operator and investors. Third point is to get a price which is, at the end of the day, sustainable, acceptable for all the stakeholders. These are clearly the three main stakes that are currently considered in the work that are currently being done about this future regulation. I mean, there are, of course, different options, different formulas. It's also clearly, but you're right, this is one of the three key points of this future regulation. If you don't mind, if I could just have one follow-up on just on the corrosion issue. I know that we won't have a full assessment until the end of next year. In terms of narrowing down how much output can vary this year, as in could we see sizable changes to the output guidance over the course of this year? When can we actually maybe have at least narrowing down of what the program is for this year? Or is it just gonna be left open for the whole year, and we could see outputs all the way up to the end of the year, which could change the workload program for these assets? Régis Clément will answer your question. One of the key points is that the ASN, the safety regulatory authority, will give its position by the end we think by the end of May. It's a very important key aspect of the topic because related to the position of the safety authority, we will be able to confirm or to adjust the overall strategy of the topic. At this moment, it's the reason why Xavier Girre said it was too early to give a CapEx aspect of the topic. At this moment, we are still in the examination stage of the topic. It means that there are solutions. We are working on solutions, means of repair or replacement. We are working on the industrial program to be able to face the issue, and we are very confident about the way to face this issue. We are still waiting the key point of the safety authority position about the topic. Thank you very much. That's very clear. Thank you. As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from the line of Arthur Sitbon from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hello. Thank you for taking my question. The first question is, we've seen that the French government's decision to increase our volumes to 100TWh hour in 2022 was challenged by union. I was wondering if you could provide an update on that process, if you see any chance of that leading to a positive outcome for EDF and when we could hear something new news on that. The second question is actually on the visibility for the price of the existing nuclear fleet. You touched as well on a novel topic, maybe somehow related, which is European power market design. I was wondering if you believe that solving the question of the European market design comes as a priority to the French government before looking into anything at the ARENH level, or if the two projects can make progress simultaneously. That would be helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your question. As I said, first the additional volume that has been set for ARENH for 2022, I mean, there are different types of possible claims of this decision. One type of challenge is to challenge the decision itself, and this can be done through an appeal to the state council, the Conseil d'État, on the ground of an abuse of authority against the ruling modifying the volume and price of the ARENH. The second legal possibility is a request for compensation for the damage suffered by EDF based on the state's liability without fault. On the first of April, the unions and directors elected by the employees have announced their appeal to the Conseil d'État' to challenge the decree issued by the government, which obliges EDF to increase the volumes of electricity sold at low prices to other electricity suppliers. We will of course see what's the result of this process. As regards your second question, I mean, it's difficult to answer it to you, to your question about what's the priority because the market design reform and the regulation of the existing assets are not exactly on the same level. The market design reform requires clearly an agreement at the European level. I think it's important to get such a reform in order to limit the link between the gas price and the electricity price, and especially in particular for country like France, in which the electricity generated on the basis of thermal source of energy is so limited. However, of course, this requires an agreement at the European level. As regards the regulation of the existing fleet, as I said, I mean, it's important to get visibility and also to get sustainability. Today, as we see, we have neither of the first one nor the second one with low visibility and low sustainability, both of them impaired by the volatility. It's important to have also a frame that gives both to investors and to customers a clear visibility and sustainability. I mean, it's, as you see, I mean, the two questions are not in the same legal frame. We'll see. There is no direct immediate legal link between both of them. Thank you. Thank you. Next question comes from the line of Peter Bisztyga from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Yeah. Good morning, Peter Bisztyga here. Two questions from me. Firstly, just going back to this stress corrosion issue. Looking at the sort of first five reactors where you identified this, the indications, so the Civaux and Chooz, Penly. Looking at the outages for those, they seem to sort of vary anywhere between sort of 5 months for Civaux 1 to over a year for the others. I was just wondering if you could sort of elaborate why the length of the outages sort of differs between the plants and, you know, which ones we could use as a benchmark for what outages might look like at the other reactors where you're doing these investigations at the moment. A question on the sort of Hinkley Point C. Apologies if you mentioned this at the beginning, 'cause I missed the very start of the call. When can we expect an update on the timeline and the cost of that project? I was just wondering if you could say anything today about your experience of supply chain issues and the sort of raw material cost inflation. You know, whether you've locked in a significant number of components or you know, any kind of flavor you could give us would be useful. Thank you. Régis Clément for the first question, and I will take the floor for the second one. Yes. At this time, one aspect of industrial program is there is no standard timing for compliance restoration work. It will really depend on each reactor situation. Regarding the situation of Civaux 1 and Chooz 1, for example, we are facing some differences in between the situation of the reactor. It will be the same situation for all the reactor at this time which are facing stress corrosion issue. There is no standard timing approach, and it will really depend on the technical solutions that are implemented in each individual case. It's not a generic approach to our fleet. As you have mentioned, the situation is quite different in between each reactor. Thank you, Régis. As regards HPC, we had indicated earlier this year that a review is currently underway. We give also some elements on one of our sites in our book on page eight, on which we highlight the fact that the risks on the schedule and cost at completion have increased since the update that we had announced in January last year. Due to the impact of COVID, the impact of Brexit, the impact of lower civil productivity on the ground, and of course the impact of the Ukrainian conflict and some supply chain disruption for HPC and for the suppliers of course of HPC. On top of that, the project is impacted by material shortages and inflation. That's why the comprehensive review is currently underway about schedule and cost, and is expected to be completed in this second quarter of 2022, and expected to be finalized in the next weeks, so in this second quarter of 2022. That's very clear. Thank you. Thank you. Last question comes from the line of Sam Arie from UBS. Please go ahead. Oh, hi, good morning, everybody, and thanks, as always for this presentation. I have a few questions, but they're all kind of quite short answers, so I hope you don't mind if I just run through a couple of things. Firstly, on the reactors and the inspections, you said you have three reactors where issues were confirmed and 9 inspections in progress. Can you just remind me how many reactors have completed an inspection since you first found this issue in December? You know, the inspection was completed, and you found no issue at all. How many reactors have had a kind of clean bill of health at this point? Secondly, on guidance, obviously you put out your production guidance, I guess it was February, wasn't it, for this year and next year. I think everyone understood that was a kind of best estimate with quite uncertain information at the time. Just taking everything in the round, it's now May, and my question is, over the last two, three months, do you feel more or less confident in your initial production estimates based on what you've learned in the last couple of months? Number three is quickly on hedges. If you could tell us how much French power you've sold forward for next year. The reason to ask is just so we understand if there's any headroom at all to allow for, you know, any negatives on production versus guidance now, or would you have to go back into buybacks if there was any downgrade to next year's guidance? Lastly, on financing, just looking at your page 16 today and your kind of current EBITDA scenario for 2022, are you happy now with what you have with the rights issue done and the loans and credit facility set up, or if we were in the scenario on page 16, would you need any more financing arrangements? Thank you. Sorry, it's quite a few different things, but hopefully it's clear. Yeah. Régis, for the first one. The examination process is still in progress. It means that even on the three reactors on which we have already confirmed the presence of stress corrosion in section of piping, we still continue to the examination program on the Civaux 1, for instance, Chooz, and even Paluel. It will continue in the related root cause analysis program, but it has been taken at this time, so I can confirm you that we are close to the end of understanding and of the situation of stress corrosion, and it means that for Civaux 1, Chooz, and Paluel, most of the examination program have been already carried out. We are going from complementary re-examination, but not that much at this time. For the nine other reactors, it will, it's, at this time to date, for Chinon B3, for example, in these days, we are making examination. Bugey 3 and Bugey 4, it's, it will be, it will start by the next few days. Flamanville 1 and 2, Flamanville 1 and 2 is undertaken at this time. Golfech 1 is already carrying out. It's a progressing process of examination, and we are not yet at the end. Okay. Can I just jump in there? Thank you. That's so helpful. Can I confirm, so there are no reactors where you finished an inspection and found no problem at all? I confirm that at this time, we have not yet finished any inspection program, even if we are very close to the end, related to Civaux 1, Chooz, and Paluel. Okay, very clear. Thank you on that first point. Thank you, Sam Arie. As regards your second question, I mean about nuclear generation guidance. Our guidances for nuclear generation are 295-315 for 2022 and 300-330 for 2023. I fully confirm these goals and with the same caveat or prudencies that we already already highlighted, which is that we are still, as Régis Clément explained, in the early phase in the assessment of our stress corrosion situation. We are still waiting for ASN decision also about this program. I am neither less confident nor more confident than what I was in February. At this stage, and on the basis of all the information we have, I fully confirm these goals, these hypotheses that we have integrated in our communication. As regards 2023, you ask me about what are our hypotheses for also for EBITDA in 2023. Of course, as I already highlighted, the first key hypothesis is this nuclear generation range, 300-330 TWh, which is circa 10 TWh more than in 2022, if we take the middle of both ranges. There would be therefore less volumes to be bought back on the market for 2023 and at a significantly lower price than for 2022. We expect a further increase of the regulated tariffs that we consider could be capped at 4% for 2023 by the government like it did for 2022. It's just a hypothesis in our model. It's not anything else, not more than that. It's just an hypothesis. On the other hand, market offers contracts should keep on increasing as forward prices for 2023 are currently on average at a higher level than the ones for 2022. These are the hypotheses that we have cooked in our guidance for 2023. I want also to highlight that we have taken the hypothesis that the level of ARENH for 2023 will remain at 100 TWh without any government new measures on ARENH, and that the level of 2023 nuclear output will be once more in the range 300-330 TWh. These are the key hypotheses that we've taken in our 2023 guidance. As regards liquidity, we have, as you know, set and organized immediately both the rights issue for EUR 3.15 billion. We have also negotiated term loans for circa EUR 12 billion. As a whole, even if liquidity requirements have significantly increased due to the current extreme volatility of the commodities market, which is affecting all market participants, we are clearly managing the situation through the two elements that I referred to, rights issue and term loans. We are also managing the situation through letters of credit, parent company guarantees, intragroup financing provided to EDF Trading. You remember also that EDF had a 22.6 billion EUR liquidity at the end of 2021, to which you can add around 13 billion EUR undrawn credit facilities also at the end of 2021. If you consider that, plus all that we've done since the beginning of this year, clearly we have today a solid liquidity position. I think this answers all your questions. I think it does. Thank you very much. much. Thank you. Thank you very much for all your questions. Thank you for your presence, and I wish you a very nice day. See you soon. Bye-bye. That does conclude the conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may all disconnect.