Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by and welcome to the First Commonwealth Financial Corporation's Second Quarter 2025 Earnings Release Conference Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question during that time, press star, followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, press star, followed by the number one. As a reminder, today's call is being recorded. I will now hand today's call over to Ryan Thomas, Vice President of Finance and Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you, Tameka, and good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today to discuss First Commonwealth Financial Corporation's Second uarter financial results. Participating on today's call will be Mike Price, President and CEO, Jim Reske, Chief Financial Officer, Jane Grebenc, Bank President and Chief Revenue Officer, Brian Sohocki, Chief Credit Officer, and Mike McCuen, Chief Lending Officer. As a reminder, a copy of yesterday's earnings release can be accessed by logging on to fcbanking.com and selecting the Investor Relations link at the top of the page. We have also included a slide presentation on our Investor Relations website with supplemental information that will be referenced during today's call. Before we begin, I need to caution listeners that this call will contain forward-looking statements. Please refer to our forward-looking statements disclaimer on page three of the slide presentation for a description of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statement. Today's call will also include non-GAAP financial measures. Non-GAAP financial measures should be viewed in addition to and not as an alternative for our reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of these measures can be found in the appendix of today's slide presentation. With that, I will turn the call over to Mike. Hey, thank you, Ryan. We are generally pleased with our performance this quarter. Our core earnings per share of $0.38 surpasses consensus estimates by $0.03 and was an improvement from the $0.32 reported in the first quarter. Our headline financial metrics were robust, with core return on assets of 1.31%, a core pre-tax, pre-provision ROA of 1.95%, and a core efficiency ratio of 54.1%. We've consistently worked towards building a high-performing franchise. This quarter's results reflect those efforts and occurred just one year after absorbing a $13 million down draft in annualized debit card interchange income due to the Durbin Amendment as we crossed $10 billion in assets. Let me highlight a few key drivers this quarter, many of which build on the trends we've discussed in past calls. First, our net interest margin expanded significantly from 3.62% in the first quarter to 3.83% in the second quarter, a 21 basis point increase. This was driven primarily by improved loan yields and lower deposit costs and aided by the Center Bank acquisition and the rollout of the macro hedges. This margin expansion, coupled with strong loan growth of 8.1% annualized, fueled a $10.7 million increase in net interest income over last quarter to $106.2 million. We've said before that our focus on optimizing our balance sheet and driving high-quality loan growth would position us well in a dynamic rate environment, and we're seeing those efforts bear fruit. Loan growth was broad-based with standout performance in equipment finance, alongside meaningful contributions from small business, commercial, indirect, and branch lending. Perhaps even more importantly, we grew both deposits and loans in four of our six geographic markets. On the fee income side, we saw a $2.1 million increase in non-interest income to $24.7 million, with strong contributions from mortgage, SBA, interchange, wealth, and other service charges. The growth reflects our ongoing efforts to deepen customer relationships and expand our non-interest income streams. Our deposit franchise remains a cornerstone of our bank. Total deposits grew 9% year- to- date, reaching $10.1 billion. Notably, our community Pennsylvania region, which accounts for 37% of our deposit funding, continues to perform exceptionally well. We're pleased with our continual progress in Ohio, where organic growth and small but strategic acquisitions have built a $4 billion bank. Ohio also accounts for the bulk of our new loan growth. The integration of Center Bank, which closed on May 1st and converted in early June, is progressing smoothly. Center added $295 million in loans and $278 million in deposits, bolstering our presence in Cincinnati. We're confident that the long-term value of this acquisition will enhance our Ohio franchise, as we've seen with prior integrations. On the credit front, we experienced the continuation of positive trends in charge-offs and delinquency. Our second quarter provision expense was $12.6 million, with $3.8 million tied to day one CECL provision for Center Bank, which we've excluded from our core income metrics. Of the remaining $8.8 million in provision expense, $2.6 million can be attributed to a net increase in specific reserves, which was driven by a $4.2 million specific reserve for a single commercial floor plan loan that was moved to non-accrual and reserved for in the quarter. With respect to the floor plan credit, we are operating under a forbearance agreement, and as it remains an active workout, we appreciate your understanding that we'll not be able to provide a lot of further detail on today's call. The impact of this single credit and the inclusion of Center caused non-performing loans to increase by $40.1 million from the prior quarter. Absent these two events, our core credit metrics were criticized, classified, and non-performing loans were all neutral quarter- over- quarter. Looking ahead, we remain optimistic about our trajectory. The momentum we've built through disciplined execution, strategic acquisitions, a regional business model, and a customer-centric approach positions us well for the second half of 2025 and beyond. As we've said before, our goal is to be the leading community bank in our markets, delivering value to our stakeholders while staying true to our mission of improving the financial lives of our customers and communities. I'll now turn it over to Jim Reske for a more detailed review of our financials. Jim? Thanks, Mike. As Mike mentioned, the second quarter of 2025 was a strong quarter for us. Our earnings performance was driven by an expanding margin and strong fee income, so I'll focus on those two areas and wrap up with some brief thoughts on expenses and capital. The net interest margin, or NIM, expanded 21 basis points to 3.83%. We closed our acquisition of Center Bank in the quarter, so the natural question is, how much of that NIM improvement comes from the acquisition? Center's impact prior to March was actually fairly neutral, which is not that surprising considering that its first quarter NIM was almost the same as ours, just three basis points less, and it was a relatively small acquisition for us. The marks on their loan portfolio, however, added four basis points to our NIM in the second quarter. Of that four basis points, two were related to the acceleration of marks related to loan prepayments, but the other two should continue. All of that means that most of our NIM expansion was due to our organic banking business. We did have the benefit of a maturity of $150 million in macro swaps for two thirds of the quarter, which added about three basis points to NIM in the second quarter and should add another two basis points next quarter. The rest of the NIM expansion was split between assets and liabilities, with nine basis points of the increase coming from assets and five from liabilities. New organic loan growth was strong at 8% annualized, and those loans came onto the books at rates that were 42 basis points higher than the ones that ran off. The cost of deposits fell by eight basis points, but we had increased borrowings by the end of the quarter, so the total drop in the cost of funds was only five basis points. Our forward NIM guidance this quarter is based on a revised baseline forecast that now contemplates two Fed cuts by year-end, down from three in last quarter's forecast. In that case, we'd expect our NIM to expand to the low to mid 390s by the end of the year, give or take a few basis points as always. If there are no cuts at all, the NIM would expand another five basis points on top of that by the end of 2025. That guidance includes an additional two basis points in the third quarter of 2025 from the macro swaps that matured last quarter, plus macro swap maturities of $25 million on August 25th, $25 million on October 10th, and $50 million on November 5th. It also reflects expected pressure on loan spread and the need to price deposits to fund our loan growth. All told, with the loan growth, the acquired Center Bank portfolio, and the improved margin, we believe that our net interest income should be between $110 million - $115 million per quarter for the remainder of 2025. Turning now to fee income, our non-interest income increased by $2.2 million over the last quarter. There are about $600,000 of items here worth mentioning. First, we had about $375,000 in gains on the sale of OREO properties in the quarter. There's only about $1 million of OREO left in our books, so I wouldn't count on outside OREO gains again anytime soon. Second, the $436,000 increase in BOLI income included $166,000 from a debt claim, while the rest of the increase comes from higher crediting rates on the BOLI portfolio. Other than that, our fee income improvements for the quarter were broad-based and, as Mike mentioned, included improved performance in fee income businesses like mortgage, SBA, and wealth. Turning now to expenses, operating expense, which excludes merger expense, was up by about $1.1 million from last quarter. Increased salary expense associated with the newly acquired Center employees was offset by lower incentive expense compared to last quarter, leaving the salary and benefits line item relatively unchanged. Some of the increased expense that shows up in other this quarter was associated with increased loan volume in areas like SBA. Finally, with regard to capital, capital ratios improved due to retained earnings, along with a reduction in AOCI. Our tangible book value per share grew by 7.3% annualized from the previous quarter. There was very little buyback activity in the second quarter, but we ended the quarter with $6.2 million of share repurchase authority and just obtained an additional $25 million in share repurchase authority from our board yesterday. With that, we'll take any questions you may have. At this time, if you would like to ask a question, press star followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. If your question has been answered and you would like to remove yourself from the queue, press star followed by the number one. Your first question is from the line of Daniel Tamayo with Raymond James. Good afternoon, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. I apologize, Jim. Did you give a guidance range for expenses in the third quarter or the back half of the year? I didn't, Daniel. I looked at the expenses, and the expenses and the consensus seemed like they were pretty much on track. I think the consensus for the third quarter here, I'm looking at it now, is $72.8 million. Fourth quarter is $73.1 million. Since you asked the question, though, I will take the opportunity just to mention something. When we look at our internal budgeting and forecast, we see a little trail off in expenses and non-interest income together. They kind of offset each other, but we see a little trail off in the fourth quarter just due to seasonality, just the way we budget. There's some income, some business lines that have some seasonality where customers are shopping for cars and mortgages and buying homes more in the summer months, and it trails off a little bit, along with some expenses towards the end of the year, like hospitalization that trails off because of the way we operate our self-insurance or hospitalization expense. The consensus forecast has both those pretty consistent and not, I think, a notch expense from third - fourth quarter, and both of those should trail off a little bit in the third - fourth quarter. It doesn't matter that much because they kind of offset each other, but I appreciate you asking. They would both bounce back in the first quarter of next year? Yeah, probably. Because of seasonal items, yeah. That's right. That's right. We had pretty fairly, off the top of my head, like 4% growth in expenses year- over- year, pretty consistently. Okay. Helpful. Thank you. I guess secondly, you talked about it at the end there on the repurchases. The stock price is higher now. You didn't buy back much or any in the second quarter, but you had the deal happening. I'm just curious what the appetite is. Obviously, you've got the new authorization. You've got plenty of dry powder, if you will. How are you guys thinking about repurchases now? Yeah, we will go back into the market after a round of blackout and probably set a price, and we buy back our shares according to a pricing grid that we set with a maximum cap. For example, in the previous last quarter, I think towards the end after we got out of the Center Bank acquisition, once that was closed for a few days, we set the cap at $15.50 a share, but the price is going higher than that, so we were not really buying back stock. We are not like some companies that might say, you know, come hell or high water, no matter what the price, we are going to retire 3% of our shares this year. We do not care what the price is, we are just going to spend the money and buy it. We really have not done that. We try to keep some dry powder for dips in the price, and when it gets too expensive, we just come out of the market. We have not set that price yet for the fourth quarter. If I had a gun in my head right now, I guess it is somewhere in the $17 range, and we would say, okay, at that lowest price of $17 or $17.50, buy back stock. When it gets to be above that, wait, keep the powder dry, and then go back in on the buy on the dips. That is kind of how we do it. Okay. That's helpful. Lastly, you know, I appreciate you can't give more color on the loan that drove the increase in NPLs, but maybe you can give color on where you think charge-offs trend from here. They've been low for the first half of the year. You know, I think probably lower than expectations. You guys thinking that is there a reason that they would be moving back up to a more normalized range in the back half, or pretty clear in terms of the outlook for charge-offs? Yeah, I'll let Brian Sohocki, our Chief Credit Officer, answer that. Brian. Yeah, thanks, Mike. No, I mean, we're obviously pleased with the quarter. I'd highlight that after experiencing the centric charge-offs in 2023 and 2024, those really diminished in the third and the second quarter. We were down to $34,000 in that category. Across the portfolio, charge-offs have been at acceptable levels. Equipment finance, indirect have outperformed industry peers. As you mentioned, we reserved for this problem credit, as well as others, and worked through those resolutions. Absent that one large relationship, and with less headwind from centric, I feel we've been normalized. We've always referenced kind of a mid-20 base points charge-off range, 25 - 30. We could see a return into those levels with the problem assets, but no, nothing else to note. Okay, great. Thanks for all the color, guys. Thank you. Your next question is from the line of Karl Shepard with RBC Capital Markets. Hey, good afternoon, everybody. Hey, Karl. Jim, I guess I wanted to start on the margin. You mentioned loan yield, I think, replacing 42 bps higher this quarter? Yeah, that's right. Any guidepost to maybe how that's gone in July and any way you want to frame up, I guess, the quarter the best you can? Yeah, so all those forecasts we give on NIM really got predicated on continuing trends of the previous quarters and continuing that kind of loan growth trajectory. That's the best we can do. We think if we continue with the path repeats itself and we can go forward, we'll be able to keep that replacement rate up. It's been pretty consistent. It was a little few basis points higher in the first quarter. I think it was 46 off the top of my head and then 43 in the second quarter. As long as the Fed doesn't cut rates, that should persist for a while. Obviously, even if the Fed does cut once, it'll still probably be positive. There is somewhat of, there are some, definitely some estimates of loan production that go into that whole model that predicts the - that does the NIM forecast. Yeah. Okay. Karl, I would just add that, of a 42 basis points increase, commercial fixed is really dragging that number up at like 111. Indirect installment loan is probably 73 basis points. That's pulling it up. They had big volume. The mortgage and some of the other categories have nice replacement yields, but there's not a lot of volume, honestly. I would expect those dynamics to stay in place. If I could just pile on to that as well, just what Mike was saying. If you look at all the loan categories, about 40% of the new originations coming out were fixed and 60% were variable. The variable rate ones are just a matter of spread. The replacement yields on those, they were nine basis points positive, not that much this quarter. The fixed ones were 115 basis points positive. That's how you get to the overall 42 basis points. The fixed replacement yields at 115 positive last quarter, that'll persist even through a few Fed cuts. Okay. That's helpful. Shifting topics, I guess, M&A has picked up for the industry. You guys have a pretty good track record of looking at lots of stuff and doing a few things that make sense on the smaller side. Just kind of curious what discussions you guys are having and what makes sense and what your priorities are? Thank you. Just a discussion or two, not a lot. I mean, I think Jim and I always say we've looked at, I think, 70 loans or 70 opportunities over 10 years, so about 70 a year. I don't think that's really picked up for us. A big item, we just tend to bow out on price on larger deals, and the smaller deals remain interesting to us. We also have to see a pretty good path of low-risk execution before we get super excited as well. Maybe our box is a little tighter than others. We do like smaller deals. We think we can really leverage them into something a little bit more as we bring our different verticals in. I think Jane Grebenc over the years and Mike McCuen now, they're really good at indirect auto, mortgage, small business, and just bringing them into the mix, maybe a little higher-end investment real estate, and then just really creating some magic. The key is to make sure the deposits keep up with the loan growth, and the focus is on funding the loans. We'll be doing that even in quarters where the loans aren't growing. Mike or Jane, do you want to add anything to that? I don't think so, Mike. I think you did a good job of sort of explaining our psyche. Yeah, I agree. Great. Thank you. Thank you all. Your next question is from a line of Kelly Motta with KBW. Hi, guys. This is Charlie on for Kelly. Thanks for the question. Hey, hey. You guys saw some strong organic loan growth this quarter. Just wondering if you could expand on kind of what you're seeing in the pipelines at this level of growth is, and if general momentum is continuing? Thanks. I think the pipeline is pretty good. I do think that we're going to have a few more payoffs in the third quarter. Mike, do you want to expand on that? Yeah. I think a little bit of a summer lull on some payoffs from the permanent market, but I expect activity to stay at this pace in the fourth once we get into the fourth quarter, a strong finish to the year. Okay. Great. If you could touch on the equipment finance portfolio, you guys had some good momentum there. I know you brought on some new teams recently, just the growth there and if what you're seeing is sustainable and maybe what it could get up to in terms of a percentage of the portfolio? Thank you. Yeah, I'll start there and let Mike finish. We're about three, three and a half years in. Those loans are typically five-year loans. We're going to hit a wall here in about a year and a half. Even if we continue to put on loans at the pace we are, the portfolio will probably flatten out a bit. I'd start there. We just like the business. We have a professional that's been doing this for about three decades and a good team. We just like the credit quality we're seeing and the types of assets he's putting on. Mike, what would you add? Mathematically, the growth looks huge because it's obviously a startup operation. I would just say that, so far, we're pleased with the type of assets we're financing and the credit quality of those assets. Furthermore, it's augmenting our bank relationships, where historically, we did not have equipment finance options for clients, especially tax leases. We now have that. We expect incremental value from that relationship. Yeah. We also are very focused on growing C&I through our regional model from the smallest small business out of branches and $50 million and $100 million loan hunks, up through commercial. Most importantly, getting operating accounts and core deposit relationships from businesses to fund our growth. That's great. Thank you. I'll step back. Your next question is from a line of Manuel Navas with D.A. Davidson. Hey, growth is really strong this quarter. You guys stay out in mid-single digits core ex-acquisition level of growth, or is there any upside to it? Maybe comment on a mix as well. Yeah. I think the guidance would need to be mid-single digits because funding for us is an imperative and keeping pace with the funding. The mix, we would love to see that continue to rotate towards CNI, commercial real estate, owner-occupied commercial real estate, and those loans that right now have a seven handle on them. That being said, we're a larger community bank than most banks of our size, with about 40% of the action. We know that credit leads to cornerstone deposit relationships, particularly with younger households. We want to have credit access for the good consumers, some $200,000 plus customers in our six markets. We will remain open there. We feel that even though the rates are a little lower, the replacement rates on those loans are very positive. Jane, anything you would add on consumer or Mike on commercial? We have had a good run in the consumer businesses, and that's all in-market existing bank customers. We have no interest in pinching that. Those are good relationships. As you said, small business, every one of those loans is really important to us. The other consumer businesses, indirect, you know, replacement yields have been good, and mortgage is generally a for-sale business for us. It's a fee business right now. We're not running it generally as a balance sheet business. We like them all. I would just say for the benefit of all the employees listening, Mike and Jane insist upon core deposit relationships with every loan. I appreciate the commentary. Shifting over to deposits, the NIM guide, I understand it. Can you just dive into some of the dynamics? You point out that there might be some expected loan yield pressure in the model and then some deposit cost increases to fund that future loan growth. Can you kind of flesh that out a little bit? Yeah, Manuel. Jim, I'll tell you exactly what I was thinking. I mean, the model is giving you numbers that are a little higher than the guidance I'm giving to you. I happen to know of some things that we're doing that are not in the model, and the model was last updated. For example, we looked at the deposit growth and loan growth in the second quarter and put the gas pedal down a little firmer on the deposit growth. The deposit rates we're paying to get that growth, we want to make sure that we fund our loan growth with deposits as we go along. That's probably going to put a little bit of pressure on the margin going forward. Anecdotally, we hear about tightening loan spreads. You might hear those anecdotes in a lot of quarters, but you hear them more and more. The model is saying that the NIM would be 3.97% and 4.00% in the third and fourth quarters, respectively. Knowing what we know, we haircut that a little bit to give the guidance that we do give, which is low to mid 390s. The loan replacement yields, we had nine basis points of that. If that just continues, that's nice. That just keeps going. If the Fed starts cutting rates, then that might be a little lower. You do have those macro swaps coming off, which would be positive towards the end of the year. All that goes into that guidance, and that kind of gives you maybe a little background of our thinking. That's great. That's the natural push against kind of the high end of the NIM, is that at some point, competition can step in. Like how high could this get into next year? Is that just, it just really depends on the rates? Any thoughts on that type of discussion? Yeah, thanks for asking. It's early to talk about next year. I mean, the math, if the Fed doesn't cut rates at all, the math just keeps clicking away, and the market just keeps going up, up, up, up, up. As someone actually pointed out in the last quarter's earnings call, you know, the industry generally doesn't sustain NIMs over 4% for very long. It gets competed away on both the asset and liability side. Just like I was saying, we've already seen some of that pressure on spreads on the commercial loan side and, you know, the need to price up deposits to get that growth. The model would say if the Fed doesn't cut rates, it just could, it's tremendous. Realistically speaking, you know, as they say, the trees don't grow to the sky. Yeah, I would just add just a little counterintuitively, if rates settle a bit, I think it primes the pump for demand, and we have a broad business model for consumers' business. I think we have more business, more cross-selling opportunities, and consumers are in better shape as are small businesses, the SBA business. There's more fee income. I just think, you know, Jim and I and the team, Jane and Mike, we just have tried to make it 50/50 variable fix. We do well irrespective of where interest rates go. I think our fee income, our fee businesses would benefit from that. I think either way, we can do quite well. Yeah, that actually gives me an opportunity, Manuel, to mention Mike, since you're talking about that kind of view in the next year. We do have more macro swaps maturing next year. There's $150 million in May of 2026 and another $25 million in October of 2026. That will help the margin. Even in a world where the Fed, in our forecast, there are four more cuts in 2026, the model is predicting a NIM that stays slightly above 4% for next year. We'll know more as we really work on sharpening our pencils on budgets and get a more accurate forecast in the earnings calls for the third and fourth quarter of this year. That's great. Anything you want to add? I'm all ears. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks for the commentary. Thanks, Manuel. Your next question is from a line of Emily Brees with Stephens Inc. Hey, good afternoon, everybody. Hey, man. You know, maybe to start, just a modeling question. Securities were down a bit this quarter and now sit at 13.5% of total assets. That feels a little low versus where we've been recently. Maybe not, but it just feels a little low versus where we've been. Is that right? Do you like to be kind of in the 14% range, or is 13.5% adequate? No, we're okay with that. 13.5% is adequate. We want to make sure we have securities on hand to pledge against borrowings and other things we need to use those for. It's down a little bit this quarter because our purchase activity was slow this quarter. We had pre-purchased some in previous quarters to get ahead of it a little bit. I didn't feel the need to buy much this quarter. We don't feel from a liquidity standpoint that we need a higher percentage. We have so much available liquidity, and real good, there's a slide on our webcast presentation that talks about this. We have social liquidity backed by assets that we can pledge. I think it's over $5 billion. We don't feel like we need to keep 15% or 20% of our assets in securities just for the sake of on-balance sheet liquidity. Our liquidity is very strong without that. We're very, very comfortable with where it's at. Got it. Okay. A couple of bigger picture ones, strategically, just thinking about your markets. Where from a market share position standpoint do you feel like there's the most room for opportunity? We hear you talk a lot about Ohio as being an engine for growth. Can that well continue for a lot longer? If not, where on the map might you see you go that could be the next kind of vehicle for growth, the next Ohio for you? I honestly believe, and perhaps I'm delusional, but I think between Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Pittsburgh, and our community markets in Western PA, we could build out a bank that's two times the size because we're just not a market maker. We're kind of on the fringes of market share, and we just see a lot of crumbs coming off the table from bigger banks. I just feel like we can fill in and love to add some rural depositories, you know, fill in in those metro markets, maybe do a little bit of de novo. We have some cities in Ohio like Dayton. We also have opportunities in Western PA. We really haven't penetrated all of our lines of business in each of our markets. I just think within these markets, we can grow the company substantially. That doesn't mean we wouldn't go to Northern Kentucky or we wouldn't do something contiguous. We just feel like we have to be able to extend the brand thoughtfully and be able to cover, just not outkick our coverage, as they say in football. I don't know that we're super interested in just getting to the next market. I think we can grow where we're at, honestly. Jane or Mike, anything you would add there? The recent acquisition is a good example of that. It is in market. It gives us more of a higher profile. Even with that, we are still, you know, maybe 10th in market share in that market. We have a lot of upside. Those are the kind of things that we absorb quickly, and we can move on to the next one and grow that market further. Yeah. We haven't really penetrated our fee income businesses. We're really good in community PA and in Pittsburgh, but we're just getting there with our regional model, with businesses like wealth and insurance and other things that we do pretty well at and SBA. I'm pretty enthused just about Western PA and Ohio, honestly. Yeah. Mike, to put a finer point on it, two things. One, our product penetration from the existing households we have still leaves a lot of room for growth. As our execution gets better, there's a lot of embedded upside there. There's a lot of terrific small businesses and lower middle market companies as we drive from Pittsburgh to Cleveland. We're interested in all of those. We've spent some money on our treasury management offerings so we can bank those companies in addition to just lending to them. I appreciate all that. Maybe just as a follow-up, you know, Senator McCormick a couple of weeks ago, a few weeks ago, held a conference in Pittsburgh around AI and data centers and power investments in Pennsylvania. I think to the tune of maybe like $90 billion or just a huge number. I'm curious if you attended, what you heard, how beneficial could this be to the area and if any of these forms of real estate or investments are, you know, directly or indirectly helpful to you all? That's all I had. Thank you. Yeah. We see it all over. We see it right in our backyard in Indiana County. There's a $10 billion investment for a power plant just for a data center. It's a conversion of a coal and natural, and it'll be a natural gas power plant. They're really firing up, really, the Marcellus Shale to help fuel that. We're seeing it all over. We're seeing it in the infrastructure with the gas pipelines, the trucking, everything. Not to mention the plastics that complement the natural gas. I don't know. I just think, you know, this area, particularly Pennsylvania, has been harder hit over the last 25 years. I just think, you know, the future could be brighter, and we're seeing a significant investment everywhere. Appreciate it. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, press star one on your telephone keypad. Your next question is from the line of Dan Carnedes with Janney. Hey, good afternoon, guys. Jim, just quickly returning to credit quality. Of this floor plan non-accrual, what% of your total non-accrual portfolio does this represent? What's the overall health of the remainder of the portfolio? Sure. I could take that. I might have to have you repeat the second part. I couldn't hear it entirely, but it's approximately just over 30%. Our non-accruals, as you saw that, I mean, I've referenced the non-performing bucket increased $40 million to just shy of $100 million. And $31.8 million of that was the floor plan. Pretty straightforward on that $100 million basis to be just over 30%. Brian, could you mention the remainder of the increase in NPLs was from the acquisition, right? Sure. Yeah. That's a good point, Jim. The remainder, if you look at the $40 million increase, $31.9 million from the dealer floor plan, $8.4 million from Center Bank acquisition. Absent those two events, we had a $300,000 minimal, but a $300,000 decrease in the quarter. We would have went from 65 basis points to 63 basis points. Okay. Is this larger loan, the floor plan loan, a legacy, an FCF legacy loan, or was that acquired? No. Yeah, I'll tell you a little bit about the dealer floor plan portfolio. It is legacy. None of our floor plans have been acquired. At the 6/30, our floor plan segment was $154 million of outstandings, so a rather manageable and small portfolio, 23 customers. This was the only one over $20 million of exposure. We just have two others over $15 million, with the rest really being granular inside $10 million of exposure. The portfolio is performing well. Strong weighted average risk rating in compliance. You know, here we really had an isolated event with the one dealer, happened to be the largest. In terms of just your larger relationships, is this like in the top 20 or 25 overall? It was. You know, we manage our borrowers over, you know, really, we've monitored internally over $15 million. There's really about 10 relationships over $25 million. This was one of the larger. How are those relationships performing? Very well. You know, that portfolio is very strongly risk-rated. All but one or two would be better than pass watch. It's a strong portfolio. No early signs or any early indications of weakness in that portfolio. Okay. Did this credit have any impact on the margin this quarter? There was a move to non-accrual late in May, about $300,000. It did. Yeah, it probably took away a basis point or two. It was a reversal of interest in May. In April. That's right. I don't know if you heard that. We went to non-accruals, reversal of interest, about $300,000. That would have hit them into maybe rounded to one basis point. Excellent. I think that's it. You've answered all my other questions. I appreciate the time. Thank you. Thanks, Dan. At this time, there are no further questions. I will now hand the call back over to Mike Price, President and CEO. Very good. Thanks for the questions. It's always good to engage. Excited about the future of our company to grow organically, remain disciplined with M&A, to make sure that our low-cost deposits keep pace with our commercial loan growth, and do a better job of cross-selling our clients and bringing them fee income opportunities. Thank you and have a good day. This concludes today's call. Thank you for joining. You may now disconnect your lines.