Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Eversource Energy Q3 2025 earnings 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'll need to press star one one on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising that your hand is raised. To withdraw your question, please press star one one again. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, Rima Hyder, Vice President of Investor Relations. Good morning, and thank you for joining us today on the third quarter 2025 earnings call. During this call, we'll be referencing slides that we posted this morning on our website. As you can see on slide one, some of the statements made during this investor call may be forward-looking. These statements are based on management's current expectations and are subject to risk and uncertainty, which may cause the actual results to differ materially from forecasts and projections. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any of these statements. Additional information about the various factors that may cause actual results to differ, and our explanation of non-GAAP measures and how they reconcile to GAAP results, is contained within our news release, the slides we posted, and in our most recent 10-Q and 10-K. Speaking today will be Joe Nolan, our Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer, and John Moreira, our Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer. Also joining us today is Jay Booth, our Vice President and Controller. I will now turn the call over to Joe. Good morning, and thank you for joining us today. Starting on slide four, over the past 10 months, our team's relentless focus on executing on our key strategic initiatives has driven strong results and consistent performance. We are well on our way to delivering against these initiatives and ending the year on a strong note. Our strong results have also greatly improved our standing among our peers. On a year-to-date basis, our share price has been a top performer among the EEI peer group. Today, I'll walk you through how we're capitalizing on our unique market position, fueling sustainable growth and strengthening the balance sheet to power our future outlook. Moving to slide five, in the last few months, we have gained more clarity on the Connecticut regulatory environment and the impact for our ongoing and future regulatory proceedings at PURA. Additionally, each day of construction that passes yields progress on the de-risking of Revolution Wind. We're seeing a constructive shift in Connecticut's regulatory landscape. Last month, Governor Lamont appointed four new commissioners at PURA, filling out the five-member requirement under Connecticut law. With this new commission on the way, there is now a genuine opportunity to collaborate with all parties on regulatory initiatives and to achieve more balanced regulatory outcomes. This will enable us to better serve the needs of our customers in this state and to do so with a strong focus on safety, reliability, and affordability. Critical needs exist for state and regional infrastructure investments to maintain a strong, reliable, and resilient grid that can accommodate new sources of generation to meet the increasing levels of projected electric demand. A transparent and predictable regulatory process is going to benefit all stakeholders, including our customers, and we are looking forward to getting back to work on Connecticut's energy goals. For our ongoing Yankee rate case, we submitted a motion to adopt an alternative resolution with PURA. This was in response to PURA's request for parties to reach a consensus-based resolution to reestablish trust and balance in the regulatory process and avoid further legal appeals. Our proposal includes important customer affordability provisions that we believe are supportive of all stakeholders' affordability goals. We expect to see a final decision from PURA today. We remain on schedule to receive a final decision for the sale of Aquarion Water on November 19, and we continue to expect to close the transaction by the end of this year. As you may be aware, we filed a comprehensive offer of compromise to address concerns raised by the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel. The commitments that were outlined in the offer of compromise provide additional assurances that the transaction will serve the interests of Connecticut and the customers served by Aquarion Water. Moving on to an update on offshore wind, we have substantially completed construction of the onshore substation for the Revolution Wind project. We expect to provide backfeed energization to the offshore facilities by the end of November, which will support testing and commissioning of those facilities. In parallel, we will complete the final testing and commissioning of the remaining onshore equipment. Overall, as Austin has stated, Revolution Wind is substantially complete and work has continued since the stop work order was lifted in September. We recognized an increase to our liability to GIP in the third quarter, which was largely offset by tax benefits. We continue to support the project's owners in their completion of this important generation resource for New England. As I said at the start of the call, our execution has delivered positive results, and we have made great headway on our many key strategic initiatives this year. We have continued to deliver on our operational metrics with top decile reliability performance among our peers. We have significantly improved our FFO to debt ratio through constructive regulatory outcomes and managed our balance sheet to support solid credit ratings, and we know we are not done yet. We have continued to invest in transmission and distribution infrastructure across our service territories. We are on track to invest nearly $5 billion this year. We have installed over 40,000 AMI meters in Massachusetts and completed the communication network deployment in the western portion of our service territory. These achievements are just a few that underscore the strength of our execution engine and the depth of our operational rigor. As you can see on slide six, we have many growth opportunities ahead of us. Our service area is truly the crown jewel of the country. This area is home to cutting-edge biotech and research and the best universities in healthcare in the world. As these industries expand, they turn to us for a reliable, resilient grid, making us an indispensable partner in their success. We're seeing robust load growth driven primarily by electrification of transportation and heating, decarbonization initiatives from both the public and private sectors, and economic expansion across manufacturing and commercial sectors. These factors help to ensure that our growth is broad-based, durable, and aligned with state sustainability goals. Year to date, we have seen weather-normalized load growth of 2%. This summer, we experienced a peak of over 12 gigawatts, the highest record since 2013, as load growth in our service territory has started outpacing the impacts of distributed generation such as rooftop solar. The evolving electric demand landscape presents a need for numerous transmission projects, such as upgrades linking onshore and offshore wind to load centers, interconnections, improving regional reliability, and addressing congestion as the generation mix for our region evolves. Some of the projects we are pursuing to get ahead of this continued low growth include the Cambridge Underground Substation, which will be the largest in the nation and one of 14 substations currently on the drafting table that we expect to build in Massachusetts alone to support future growth. Being opportunistic about land acquisitions in our service territory to support this growth, such as the Mystic land acquisition we did last year with more in the pipeline. Responding to requests for proposals from ISO New England to address longer-term transmission solutions, such as the most recent one to bring power from northern Maine to southern New England. These opportunities, some being outside of our five-year forecast period, could add billions of dollars to our future investment plans. Each project that we are considering not only supports our growth trajectory but also deepens our value proposition as a grid innovator. We also recognize that as demand increases, affordability must remain top of mind. We are working closely with our regulators to offer our customers various options to address affordability as shown on slide seven. We collaborate with large and small customers to design rate structures that incent efficiency. For example, earlier this year, we worked constructively with our regulators in Massachusetts to offer a 10% discount to our gas customers during the winter peak months and recover that in the summer months to smooth the impact of high bills. Similarly, starting this month, we are offering a seasonal heat pump rate in Massachusetts. Eversource Electric customers who use a heat pump to heat their homes can take advantage of a seasonal heat pump rate, which is a reduced rate during the winter months. We are expanding energy efficiency programs to provide incentives for residential and low-income customers who choose to adopt energy-efficient technologies. These programs, coupled with AMI, give customers greater transparency and control over their energy pocketbook. Our nation-leading energy efficiency programs have already generated $1.4 billion in savings for our customers. We have also implemented low-income discount rates for our most vulnerable customers, and we are recognized for our leadership in advocacy for state utility partnerships and hardship programs. We are excited about new energy supply coming into our region, which should alleviate supply cost pressure on customer bills. Over the next 12 months, Eversource is directly supporting new generation coming into the region totaling over 2,500 MW. We aim to deliver reliable, sustainable energy while keeping costs manageable and partnering with customers to ensure affordability through cost-effective investments, efficient operations, and equitable rate design. Before I hand the call over to John, I want to thank our 10,000+ employees for their dedication, our regulators for their collaborative spirit, and our shareholders for their trust. We're executing against a clear strategy, serving an extraordinary customer base, and working to build the grid for tomorrow responsibly and sustainably. I look forward to your questions and sharing more details on our path forward. With that, I'll turn the call over to John Moreira. Thank you, Joe. And good morning, everyone. This morning, I will review third-quarter earnings results, provide a regulatory update, and discuss our recent finances and progress on credit metrics. I'll start with our third-quarter results on slide nine. As announced last month, during the third quarter, we recognized a net after-tax non-recurring charge of $75 million, or $0.20 per share, related to our offshore wind liability. This charge increased our estimated liability for future payments to GIP by approximately $285 million, which was offset by $210 million of tax benefits. These tax benefits were the result of a change to previously estimated tax attributes primarily associated with Revolution Wind. Our GAAP earnings for the third quarter of this year were $0.99 per share, including the impact of this recent offshore wind net charge. GAAP EPS for the third quarter of last year was a loss of $0.33 per share, reflecting the impact of the sale transaction of South Fork and Revolution. Excluding the after-tax losses from offshore wind in both years, non-GAAP recurring earnings for the third quarter of 2023 were $1.19 per share, compared with $1.13 of non-GAAP recurring earnings per share last year. Now, looking at the quarter results by segment, starting with transmission, higher electric transmission earnings of $0.01 per share were due to increased revenues from continued investment in the transmission system. Next, we have higher electric distribution earnings of $0.03 per share that reflect distribution rate increases in New Hampshire and Massachusetts, providing for cost recovery for infrastructure investments in our distribution system. These higher revenues were partially offset by higher interest, depreciation, property taxes, and O&M. The improved results of $0.04 per share at Eversource's natural gas segment were due primarily to base distribution rate increases in both Massachusetts utilities and from capital tracking mechanisms to provide timely cost recovery of investments in our natural gas businesses. These revenue increases were partially offset by higher interest, depreciation, and property tax expenses. Water distribution earnings were lower by $0.02 per share for the quarter as compared with prior year, primarily due to higher O&M and depreciation expense. Eversource parent earnings results were flat for the quarter, excluding the net impact from offshore wind that I mentioned earlier. As a reminder, all of these segment results reflect the impact of share dilution. Overall, we are very pleased with the solid performance for the third quarter, and our recurring earnings are in line with our expectations. Moving to some key regulatory items as shown on slide 10. As Joe mentioned, we recently filed an alternative resolution proposal in the Yankee Ray case. If adopted by PURA without modifications, the alternative resolution would waive our statutory right to appeal the final decision, resulting in a fair and balanced outcome. The alternative resolution is an improvement over the draft decision, increasing revenues by approximately $104 million as compared with PURA's draft decision of $55 million. The alternative resolution would also provide customer relief this winter to a greater extent than the draft decision by accelerating the refund of an existing regulatory liability. Also, as Joe mentioned on the Aquarion sale, PURA has maintained its final decision date of November 19th, and pending that decision, we continue to expect to close the transaction by year-end. In Massachusetts, we received the approval of our NSTAR Gas PBR adjustment. We also filed a motion for reconsideration on the NSTAR Gas rate base reset. Next, let me reaffirm our five-year capital plan of $24.2 billion as shown on slide 11, which reflects our five-year utility infrastructure investments by segment through 2029. As a reminder, this plan only includes projects for which we have a clear line of sight from a regulatory perspective. Through September, we have executed on $3.3 billion of our $4.7 billion infrastructure investment plan. We are very pleased with this progress, and we are on track to meet our planned target for the year. We continue to see additional capital investment opportunities in the range of $1.5 billion-$2 billion within the five-year forecast period. We plan to update our next five-year capital plan in our fourth quarter earnings call. Turning to slide 12, we remain highly focused on improving our cash flow position and strengthening our balance sheet condition. As I have stated before, we expect our FFO to debt ratio for 2025 to be approximately 100 basis points above the rating agency thresholds by year-end. In fact, our Moody's FFO to debt ratio was 12.7% as of the second quarter of this year and reflects an improvement of over 300 basis points from December of 2024. We expect this ratio to be over 13% as of the third quarter. As we have shared with you last quarter and as shown on slide 13, we have executed on substantially all the items necessary to improve our cash flows and strengthen our balance sheet. As a result, our operating cash flows have continued to improve, increasing over $1.7 billion year-over-year through the third quarter. Moving on to our financing activity on slide 14. While earlier this year we did not anticipate issuing long-term debt at the parent company during 2025, however, we did see the need to capitalize on favorable credit spreads, proactively pre-funding an early 2026 maturity, and strengthening our liquidity position. Given where our short-term debt balances were forecasted to be and in order to maintain an appropriate level of liquidity, we issued $600 million of parent company debt. On the equity side, to date, we have issued $465 million of equity under the ATM program. We expect that this level will take care of our equity needs for the near term. We also continue to pursue recovery of our deferred storm costs. As of the third quarter, 98% of our deferred storm costs are either under review or already in rates. As a reminder, our previous cash flow improvement forecast did not assume securitization as the cost recovery mechanism for the Connecticut deferred storm costs. Next, I will turn to 2025 earnings guidance as shown on slide 15. As announced in October, we are narrowing our 2025 recurring earnings per share guidance to the range of $4.72-$4.80 per share to a higher midpoint and reaffirming our longer-term EPS growth rate of 5%-7% off of the 2024 non-GAAP EPS base. We remain confident in our EPS growth trajectory driven by disciplined execution of our strategic plan. Targeted customer-focused investments in transmission and distribution are backed by constructive regulatory frameworks that enable timely cost recovery for our operations. Continued progress on storm cost recovery, combined with strict O&M discipline, strengthens our financial foundation and positions Eversource to deliver consistent long-term value to customers and shareholders. I'll now turn the call back to the operator to begin our Q&A session. Thank you. At this time, we will conduct the Q&A session. As a reminder, to ask your question, you will need to press star one one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one one again. Please limit your questions to one question and one follow-up. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question today comes from Shar Pourreza from Wells Fargo. Your line is open. Hey, guys. Good morning. Morning, Shar. Morning, Shar. Morning, morning. Joe, just on Yankee Gas, obviously, everyone's watching this one. You've got this motion to adopt the alternative resolution out there. There's some stuff coming out now on it, I think. Is there anything you want to flag. Just remind us, what's kind of embedded in the plan around the outcome? Is it fair to assume that you're kind of conservative around what you're embedding there? Thanks. Any sort of updates? I think we're starting to see some things come across. Appreciate it. Sure. As you know, our call started at 9:00 A.M., and the commission went in, and the order is out. We need to go through it. As you know, the devil's in the details. We will continue to take a good look at that, and I think we'll have some answers for folks on this call later today, I can promise you. John can talk to you a little bit about what's embedded in the plan. Yeah. No, Shar, I would say it's in line with our plan, and it appears that the decision is a little bit better than the draft decision, which is very encouraging for us. As Joe mentioned, we have to go through it. The ink is not dry yet at this point. We will have much more information when we meet with you all at EEI. Perfect. I'm just glad we're getting through this process. That's good. Just on the NSTAR Gas PPR, right? I mean, you have a proposal for recovery of roughly $160. Just walking through what you did and didn't get, why did the Massachusetts DPU deny that? Is there kind of an opportunity to get it later? Does this mean you're filing a rate case? Obviously, the governor has been kind of warning around rates being too high and guiding the DPU to scrutinize everything. Just want to get a sense there. Appreciate it. Thanks. Good question, Shar. The $160 component, the piece, is really three major items. One is a roll-in of GSEP, which is about $107 million. That really has no impact to customers. It's just going from the right hand to the left hand. The normal PBR adjustment, which did get approved of about $10 million. What we had proposed as a mitigation plan for the DPU was to allow us to roll in rate base, similar to what we saw last year that the DPU approved for EGMA. That number was about $45 million. We were very specific when we made that mitigation filing that if we did not receive the rate base roll-in, then our alternative would be to file a general rate case. As of yesterday, we filed a motion for reconsideration, and we also filed our intent to file a rate case. There's been a lot of change, not only in the Connecticut PURA but also in Massachusetts. These two new commissioners really have not been there that long. We're hopeful that the efforts that we will work very closely with the DPU will move in the right direction. Okay. Perfect. Big congrats, Joe, on sort of the traction. It seems like you guys are getting to a pretty good inflection point here. So congrats. Thanks, guys. Thank you. We're very, very proud of the team. We've worked very, very hard at that, getting our message out there. We've been all over, actually all the states, talking about the issues and engaging key decision-makers. We're really, really proud of the team. It took a village job. Thank you, and I will see you at EEI. I'm looking forward to seeing you. Ditto. Thank you. Our next question comes from Carly Davenport with Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Hey. Good morning, Carly. Good morning. Thanks for taking the questions. Maybe just to go back to Connecticut, I guess, just as you think about the recent changes from a regulatory standpoint, are there any updates you can share from conversations with credit agencies in terms of their views, just given the focus on the regulatory environment and some of the credit rating changes that they've made recently? Sure. I would say, and I always have discussions with the credit rating agencies, but I'm sure you can appreciate right now they're in a wait-and-see mode. They want to see some constructive regulatory outcomes to make the determination similar to what we expect and would like to see come out of PURA. Working collaboratively, we think that this new commission is focused on working collaboratively with all the utilities. I would say overall, they're in a wait-and-see mode right now. Got it. Okay. That makes a lot of sense. Just one other one, I guess, on Connecticut as well. I know you guys have talked previously about kind of timing to file another rate case at CLNP. Just kind of curious how the recent shifts kind of impact your views on timing there. Yeah. Sure. We had never really had any intention of filing prior to 2026. So we are looking at that. As you know, a filing of that nature is comprehensive. So we would need to get test year and that type of stuff. This would not be something that would happen until at least second, third quarter if we were to file. Obviously, we're going through that now, and that's what we're looking at at this point, Carly. Thank you so much. Thank you. Our next question is from Jeremy Tonet with JPMorgan Securities. Your line is open. Morning, Jeremy. Hey, good morning. This is actually Aidan Kelly on for Jeremy. You're breaking up. You're breaking up. You've got to really drive that line here. Can you guys hear me now? Yep. It's better now. Yep. All right. Sorry. I want to ask on the equity needs. Jeremy, we're losing you again. Can you call in, and we'll come back to you? We'll put you back in the queue. Sounds good. All right. Thanks. Thank you, Jeremy. One moment. Our next question is from Andrew Weisel with Scotiabank. Your line is open. Morning, Andrew. Hey. Good morning, everybody. First question, Joe, you talked about the land acquisition strategy. I know Mystic was a big one last year. Can you talk a little more how you're thinking about this? Is this kind of like a land grab where you're trying to get as much acreage as possible in strategic locations for your own standalone development, or is it working with potential customers or partners like large load customers or data centers? Would I be right to assume the dollars are small? It's more about optionality? Yeah, a couple of things. This would be for our own use, for our own regulated business. It's in locations that are strategic in nature to allow the injection of energy, whatever energy that is. We are not in the data center business. We're not attracting data centers. As you know, we have a finite amount of generation in the region. What we're working on, kind of the single and double strategy that I talked about, is to be able to unlock. Captive generation that might be in the New England market to allow it to flow freely, also to allow anyone else to interconnect into our territory. We did purchase the Mystic, and we will have some news on another very strategic site that we are excited about that will position this company for decades to come. Interesting. Looking forward to that. Okay. Great. On equity, just a couple of fine-tuning questions maybe for John here. It looks like the 2025 outlook went up by about $200 million, and you removed the comment that the majority of the outlook will be issued in the back half of the forecast period. John, I think I also heard you say that you are satisfied for the near term after the recent activity. I might have asked a similar question last quarter, just wondering about the outlook. Maybe you can detail some of these changes. Does that relate to kind of CapEx or the long-term thinking of how to get to your targeted credit metrics? Yes. Yes. So I mean, as I said in my formal remarks. For the near term, I believe we're done, right? Although we took that off the slide, it wasn't any indication that we're going to continue to issue equity. Still, the majority is we may have issued like 37%-38% thus far. I still stick to my position that the majority of that will be issued towards the latter half of next year. With the approval of Aquarion, once we get that decision, that's going to bring in net cash of $1.6 billion. With the securitization of Connecticut's storm costs likely coming in the door in 2027, I think we're primarily covered for those years. My position still stands. As I said in my formal remarks, the near term, we're good for now. I have the appropriate level of liquidity. I'm very happy with that, given the finances that we did in the last two months. Okay. That's very clear, and it sounds like you're in a good position. Thank you so much. Thank you. Our next question is from Anthony Crowdell of Mizuho. Your line is open. Hey. Good morning, team. I guess JPMorgan did an update to phone system in a new building there. Just, I guess, quickly on Revolution. I think it was reported from Ørsted this morning it's 85% complete. Revolution, just if you could talk about what are maybe the critical parts left, bringing the project to completion at the end. Is it second half, 2026, when you believe it's all finished? Yeah. Good morning, Anthony. Yeah. Revolution's going very, very well. Right now, Ørsted announced this morning that 52 of the 65 turbines are installed. I will tell you that the work that we're doing in Rhode Island is pretty close to being finished. We've got a great job at that onshore substation. We're going to begin to see some power there at the substation very, very soon. Right now, I know that Ørsted is talking about a second half of 2026, but I will tell you that we've made significant progress. We've brought the dates in by four to five months. We're hoping that we can see that improve. I will tell you that I feel very, very good about the project and the work that's been done down there. I think we'll see that project schedule improve. When's the first. Megawatt first power expected to come online from the project? Yeah. That's an issue for Ørsted to discuss. We are basically a partner that's building the onshore piece. They are the conductor of this particular train. They can tell you what's going on. Got it. Just flipping to the storm cost securitization in Connecticut, I know it's with PURA. I know that recent change there, and it only recently has a change. Any update on maybe the timing of getting resolution on the storm cost securitization? Yeah. A couple of things. I mean, our focus has been on the Yankee case. It has been on the Aquarion sale. When we start to sequence these items, those are the things that were top of the list for us. We now shift our focus onto storms. I think the team has done an extraordinary job of documenting everything. We've had tremendous success in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire. I don't think it'll be any different in Connecticut. We are going to ask that we pull that ahead. Right now, it's a second quarter event, second, third quarter that we'll see a decision. We think, given that the decks have been cleared at PURA, we're hoping that that can improve. We can get a decision that'll allow us to go forward with securitization and get that money in the door for us. Yeah. The other issue is the interest cost, which that will provide us a great opportunity there to stop the interest cost. Great. Thanks for taking my questions and seeing EEI. Yep. Thanks. Thanks, Anthony. Thank you. Our next question is from Julien Dumoulin- Smith from Jefferies. Your line is open. Morning, Julien. Hey. Good morning. Hey. Good morning, team. Thank you guys very much for the time. Look forward to seeing you guys next week. Look, I wanted to just follow- up on the Massachusetts backdrop. I know Shar asked it, but just how would you frame expectations here from gas onto the electric PBR? Just with respect to the backdrop here, anything to read? Again, I get that the gas PBR had very specific metrics, but anything that you'd read into the backdrop here on the electric or EGMA? Similar to what we have on the electric side, we have the same composition on the gas side. We have to perform. And on the gas side, this was the first. This was the first touchpoint. Being under the PBR structure for NSDAT gas. So there's several performance metrics. There's really three criteria that you have to meet. One of them is you have to meet the performance measures that have been approved by the DPU. There were 18, actually. We performed very well on 15. Three we did not perform. Those three are very, let's call it, very subjective opinion surveys like JD Powers and surveys that we do, which are very driven by how the customers perceive us. The history or the precedent in front of the DPU as it relates to these performance measures is always viewed as, well, the company did not have control. The company could not have done anything. Obviously, in a high-cost environment, it is very challenging. That was the reason that the DPU took the action and did not allow us to roll the $45 million into rate base. As I mentioned earlier, yesterday we did file for a motion for reconsideration. We will continue to work with the DPU. Obviously, as I mentioned, we have some new players sitting at the table, and we look forward to working with them very closely as we progress on this motion. Right. The PBR metrics on the electric side kind of have that same composition, though. We have performed well. It's not an annual assessment. With NSTAR Electric, it's a 10-year deal. You have a 5-year. The 5th year happens in 2028. Excellent. No, indeed. If I can, I mean, obviously, you guys roll forward typically with Q4. Any early indications, especially as it pertains to transmission and long lead time investments where you perhaps have some visibility here already? Any indication to ISO New England's planning process this year? As you have seen in the last 5-year plan that we rolled out, the latter years are no longer a dip. I expect that trend to continue where the outer periods will be more increasing versus what we have seen historically. That is the reason that is the primary driver. That is because we have the clarity, and we have the projects that are in the queue to allow us to roll that into our plan. Got it. All right. Excellent. Look forward to it, team. Nicely done. Appreciate the discussions on the credit side, and we will talk to you soon. Sure thing. Thank you. Operator, I would like to correct a statement that I made earlier to Andrew Weisel's question. I think I may have spoken. I just want to get that on the record. The equity, I said that our equity needs. In the near term are taken care of. I stay with my statement that I had made previously that the majority of the equity needs will be towards the tail end of our forecast period. I think in my answering Andrew's question, I may have said next year. That is not the case. Thank you for that clarification. Our next question is from Paul Patterson from Glenrock Associates. Your line is open. Good morning, Paul. How are you doing? Great. Just on, I'm having a little trouble with this. How should we think about your tax rate on an adjusted basis for the quarter and how you see it going forward? Hey, Paul. This is John. As I've said previously, over the past several years, we have taken advantage of some very attractive tax benefits. Last year, and I may have said this previously, we were in the high teens. The expectation is this year is probably be in the low 20%. I think next year in 2026, we probably would get to more of a normal sustainable level. We have taken full advantage of some nice tax benefits for the past several years, and we will continue to harvest any and all tax benefits that we can actually achieve. Okay. Because when I look at the after-tax benefit or the exit—excuse me—the hit on the offshore wind that was offset by the tax benefits. Are all of those tax benefits reflected in the non-adjusted number? In other words, they seem to be allocated. When you talk about the write-off, it seems like that is being allocated to the write-off. That is not leaking into the—correct? That is not the case. So. The percentages that I just mentioned only relate to our normal recurring results. The $210 million that we harvested to offset the tax liability is directly related to offshore wind. And it is primarily the final change in estimate from where we were at the end of the year 2024. The characterization of that benefit is really we were able to deem the loss on wind as more ordinary versus capital. We changed the percentage that we had used in 2024 versus that tax split of capital and ordinary increased in this year when we filed our tax return in the third quarter. We were able to allocate more as ordinary versus capital. Ordinary, we can carry forward for 15-plus years. That is really what changed in our tax position as it relates to offshore wind. Okay. No, that answers the question. That's kind of what I thought. Okay. I appreciate the clarity. Thank you. One moment. Our next question is from Sophie Karp with KBCM. Your line is open. Good morning, Sophie. Hello. Good morning. Thank you for taking my question. I don't know if you guys know this off the top of your head, but I'm curious what legally constitutes kind of the end of the Revolution Wind project as far as your agreement with Ørsted. At what point are you no longer on the hook for anything there? Is that first power? Is that some kind of other milestone? Any color would be helpful here. Thank you. Sure. It's just similar to the protocol we're using on the South Fork project. It would be COD. At COD, we will hand that over, and that is when we are off the hook. What is COD specifically? Full operation. Turning over of all of the documents. Anything associated with the work that we have done. The PPA is in full force. Got it. Thank you so much. Appreciate the color that you have. Thank you. I am showing no other questions at this time. I would now like to turn it back to Joe Nolan for closing remarks. Thank you once again for taking the time to join us today. We know many of you have been patient investors over a long time, and we will continue to execute our key strategic initiatives that create value for our customers and shareholders. We look forward to seeing many of you at EEI next week. Safe travels. Operator, this ends our call today. Thank you. This does conclude the program, and you may disconnect.