Good morning, and welcome to the Quanta Services Second Quarter 2025 E arnings Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question-and-answer session will follow management's prepared remarks, and we ask that you please hold all questions until that time. I will then provide instructions for the question-and-answer session. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. If you have any objections, please disconnect at this time. I will now turn the call over to Kip Rupp, Vice President, Investor Relations, for introductory remarks. Thank you, and welcome everyone to the Quanta Services Second Quarter 2025 Earnings Conference Call. This morning, we issued a press release announcing our Second Quarter 2025 results, which can be found in the Investor Relations section of our website at quantaservices.com. This morning, we also posted our Second Quarter 2025 operational and financial commentary and our 2025 outlook expectations summary on Quanta's Investor Relations website. While management will make brief introductory remarks during this morning's call, the operational and financial commentary is intended to largely replace management's prepared remarks, allowing additional time for questions from the institutional investment community. Please remember that information reported on this call speaks only as of today, July 31, 2025, and therefore you are advised that any time-sensitive information may no longer be accurate as of any replay of this call. This call will include forward-looking statements and information intended to qualify under the safe harbor from liability established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements reflecting expectations, intentions, assumptions, or beliefs about future events or financial performance that do not solely relate to historical or current facts. You should not place undue reliance on these statements, as they involve certain risks, uncertainties, and assumptions that are difficult to predict or beyond Quanta's control, and actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied. We will also present certain historical and forecasted non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations of these financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are included in our earnings release and operational and financial commentary. Please refer to these documents for additional information regarding our forward-looking statements and non-GAAP financial measures. Lastly, please sign up for email alerts through the Investor Relations section of quantaservices.com to receive notifications of news releases and other information while Quanta IR and Quanta Services on the social media channels listed on our website. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to Mr. Duke Austin, Quanta's President and CEO. Duke. Thanks, Kip. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Quanta Services Second Quarter 2025 Earnings Conference C all. This morning, we reported our Second Quarter 2025 results, which included strong double-digit growth in revenue, adjusted EBITDA, and adjusted EPS, along with a record backlog of $35.8 billion and a number of other record financial metrics. This morning, we also announced the acquisition of Dynamic Systems, a premier turnkey mechanical, plumbing, and process infrastructure solutions provider with a diversified customer base that strengthens Quanta's craft skill-led critical path capabilities to provide certainty for growing technology, manufacturing, and other load center markets. Dynamic Systems' highly synergistic mechanical workforce adds to Quanta's growth platform and expands our total addressable market across several strategic verticals. Additionally, Dynamic Systems brings an exceptional management team and a premier craft skilled workforce that complement Quanta's culture. As a result of our solid Second Quarter results and the addition of Dynamic Systems, we are increasing our full year 2025 financial expectations for revenue, adjusted EBITDA, and adjusted EPS. Additionally, in the second quarter, we made a strategic investment in Bell Lumber and Pole Company, which is the largest private producer of round wooden poles and other mass timber products, primarily serving the utility, telecom, and construction industries. Quanta's investment in Bell expands Quanta's portfolio of core utility infrastructure equipment and enhances Quanta's ability to offer critical path supply chain solutions to our customers. Quanta's core strategy is built on the foundation of craft skilled labor, execution certainty, investment discipline, and clear strategic rationale. At the heart of Quanta's success is our unmatched craft workforce, who deliver essential infrastructure solutions with dedication to safety, quality, and performance. Our execution certainty, combined with strategic investments in talent, technology, and complementary business strengths, strengthens Quanta's leadership position across our expanding addressable markets. Our investment decisions are guided by a disciplined strategic rationale aimed at reinforcing Quanta's differentiated platform, growing customer partnerships, and driving long-term sustainable value creation. Quanta differentiates itself through a unique solution-based approach that integrates craft labor with engineering, technology, and program management expertise to deliver comprehensive self-perform infrastructure solutions. Rather than providing isolated services, Quanta partners with customers to solve complex challenges across the full project lifecycle, which creates deeper strategic relationships. Our collaborative model drives higher value for our customers and positions Quanta as a trusted partner and solutions provider, not a contractor. As demand accelerates for resilient electric grids, power generation, technology expansion, and energy infrastructure, Quanta's large addressable market continues to grow. Quanta has a proven track record of consistent profitable growth across both favorable and challenging conditions, demonstrating the resilience and sustainability of our business model, which is a testament to the strength of our portfolio approach, a diversified solutions-based strategy that enables us to adapt to evolving industry dynamics while delivering mission-critical infrastructure. The energy and infrastructure landscape is undergoing a fundamental transformation, and Quanta is positioned at its center. Utilities across the U.S. are experiencing and forecasting meaningful increases in power demand, which is being driven by the adoption of new technologies and related infrastructure, including data centers and artificial intelligence, policies intended to reinforce domestic manufacturing and supply chain resources, and the need for all forms of energy generation. We continue to believe these drivers are leading to a potential historic investment in and an expansion of high voltage transmission infrastructure, and that Quanta's self-perform platform, execution track record, and solution-based mindset enable us to capitalize on these expanding opportunities, positioning Quanta for sustained leadership and long-term growth. I will now turn the call over to Jayshree Desai, Quanta's CFO, to provide a few remarks about our results and 2025 guidance, and then we will take your questions. Jayshree. Thanks, Duke, and good morning, everyone. This morning, we reported strong second quarter results, including revenues of $6.8 billion, net income attributable to common stock of $229 million, or $1.52 per diluted share, adjusted diluted earnings per share of $2.48, and adjusted EBITDA of $669 million. Additionally, we generated healthy cash flows in the second quarter, with cash flow from operations of $296 million and free cash flow of $170 million. Our second quarter performance was ahead of our expectations across most financial metrics, and similar to the first quarter, is allowing us to increase our full year expectations before considering the contributions from acquisitions. Regarding our acquisition program, we take great pride in our ability to attract exceptional management teams and industry-leading solution providers into the Quanta family, and the acquisitions and investment we announced this morning are great examples of that core competency. As Duke mentioned, these strategic deployments of capital expand both our portfolio of solutions and our addressable markets, and we believe acquiring great businesses while maintaining a prudent leverage profile adds significant value to our customers and our stockholders. We are currently evaluating refinancing alternatives to increase our post-transaction liquidity profile, ensuring we can continue to support operations and opportunistically invest capital. As a result of the solid performance in the second quarter and the expected contributions from the acquisitions and the investment made subsequent to our first quarter release, we are raising our financial expectations for the year. Revenues are now expected to range between $27.4 and $27.9 billion, adjusted EBITDA between $2.76 and $2.89 billion, and adjusted EPS between $10.28 and $10.88. While we recognize the variability in the regulatory environment, demand for Quanta's differentiated portfolio of self-perform craft labor solutions remains strong. As our strategy continues to advance, we are deepening customer relationships and establishing new platforms for growth. As evidenced by another quarter of record backlog, we remain confident in our ability to continue growing revenues and earnings over the years ahead. We believe our increased 2025 financial expectations demonstrate the strength of our portfolio approach to the business, our commitment to our long-term strategy, favorable end market trends, and our partnership approach with our customers. Additional details and commentary about our 2025 financial guidance can be found in our operational and financial commentary and outlook expectation summary, both of which are posted on our IR website. With that, we are happy to answer your questions. Operator. Thank you. We will now move to our question and answer session. We ask that all participants limit themselves to one question. If you have additional questions, you may re-queue, and those questions will be addressed time permitting. If you have joined via the webinar, please use the raise hand icon, which can be found at the bottom of your webinar application. When you are called on, please unmute your line and ask your question. We will now pause a moment to assemble the queue. Your first question comes from the line of Andy Kaplowitz from Citi Research. Please unmute and ask your question. Hey, good morning, everyone. Can you hear me okay? Yes, good morning. Duke, obviously, this quarter, there's been, let's call it, some noise with the big beautiful bill and some increased politics out there. Of course, AI-related CapEx continues to ramp up. Maybe you can help us parse through the noise. Would you say even with the bill and its impact that you're more confident in sequential backlog growth for Quanta Services as you did again in Q2, really on the strength of the incremental transmission bookings you're seeing? At your last investor day, you talked about megatrends and capital deployment giving 15% plus EPS CAGR as sort of an upside. Should we start thinking about that kind of growth for 2026? Yeah, thanks, Andy. I think when you look at the company, it's 20-plus growth. In actuality, what we're talking about is the ability to do that and then 15 at the midpoint and tend to de-risk everyone. I want to be clear on that. The company over the nine-year, ten-year period that we've seen, it's 20-plus. Yes, I do believe the things that we're doing today set us up for the future of 2026, 2027, 2028, and 2029. You know, what we've done is we basically built platforms against TAMs that compound. When we make acquisitions, it starts day one and compounds for the future. I think it's our ability to acquire companies, great companies, great family businesses, and into the TAMs that we're addressing certainly is the strategic rationale around the company. It's something that I believe goes unnoticed about how we compound free cash into earnings streams. We've done it. We've done it over and over again. When we talk about TAMs of technology, the $300 billion or so of capital, you see it going up. The calls that I'm listening to on the utilities, such as AEP, others, every one of them basically have gone up in their CapEx as well. I don't see anything other than an upward trend of the business. The demand on power is exponential. It continues to come in. AI continues to prove out both economically as well as what we see from power demand under any scenario. If we're going to lead the country and the world, you have to have power and we're right in the middle of the infrastructures on both the largest TAMs that create the AI of the future. Appreciate it, Duke. Your next question comes from Jamie Cook with Truist Securities. Please unmute and ask your question. Good question. If you are called in by phone, please try star six to unmute, Jamie. Thank you. Sorry, Jamie, we can't hear you. We'll come back to you. How about that? Your next question comes from Sherif El- Sabbahy with Bank of America. Please unmute and ask your question. Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking the question. I guess I just want to touch on your backlog has continued to build fairly consistently. Just with the obviously large amount of work out there, has this changed the bidding process at all? Are terms becoming more favorable, and are you able to increasingly be selective on your projects? I mean, when we're looking at it, we're really trying to provide solutions. I think the strategic rationale around the solutions is something different where it's longer-term in nature. It's programmatic in nature. There are constraints in certain areas of craft, and our self-perform capabilities are what separates us. 80%, 85% of what we're doing is self-perform, so our ability to have certainty, if you think about Quanta, you should think about certainty. That certainty in the marketplace to be able to deliver on time, on budget, is something that allows us to have a different discussion. I would say, yes, it's longer in nature. We're talking about '26, ' 27, ' 28 type time frames of growth and CAGR growth and EPS growth and EBITDA growth and our ability to continue to compound. You can't do that without having longer-term discussions. I would say it's better and better as we move forward, those discussions. Understood. With those discussions, the longer-term work, and you touched on this a bit in your opening comments, we've seen increased signs of utility CapEx pivoting towards transmission projects, larger projects. There's clearly multi-year demand for this type of work. That's likely contributing to your backlog. Can you give us some color on what indication you've received from conversations with your customers on how they see the pipeline for this work evolving over the coming years? I mean, look, I still think the business is 85% is what I would consider base business. We're still 80 to 85%. It's still that way. The larger projects, the larger programs are stacking. Our LNTPs are probably, I'm sure, I'm confident they're at record levels. We convert the LNTPs into contracts. We can look at them. We don't talk about LNTPs, and we're not going to start it. I would say everything that we're seeing on both TAMs, large TAMs that are at record levels of inbounds or LNTPs or verbal or what we're discussing over the long term. I think those relationships and our collaboration are showing up daily. We're at the very early stages of a large transmission build that's coming. It continues to compound, and we really like where the company sits in that bill. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Ati Modak with Goldman Sachs. Please unmute and ask your question. Hey, good morning, guys. Duke, I guess wanted to ask on what prompted the acquisition of Dynamic Systems? Because it seems like it has a broader end market exposure, and how that fits into your strategy for the segment. It also seems like it will open up the door to other EPC domains? Is it reasonable to expect more M&A in that direction? I think when we looked at Dynamic Systems, we've said all along we're not out looking for M&A, but we are addressing the strategic rationale around the markets that we serve. When we looked at technology, it's really the customer asking us to do more. It's the customer saying, " can you build more? Can you give us certainty across their addressable markets? What does it take to go faster? What does it take to be certain?" when we're looking at it and we see a company like Dynamic Systems that culturally fits us, the craft is really the key to the company. They have advanced technology solutions on it. When you think about their digital solutions upfront and that advancement, what they do on the pre-engineering and things of that nature, it really complements Cupertino. It complements all the other companies that we have and is surrounded by craft. I believe that the craft-concentric nature of Dynamic and the TAMs that we're addressing, why wouldn't we look at that and why wouldn't we lean into that market with a great company? Yes, we will continue to look at great family businesses that add value to our strategy and our shareholders. I believe we've done that here. You've seen the numbers, and we've talked about it a little bit. What you haven't seen is the synergies that we believe we will get. We don't talk about synergies in these deals. Certainly, we believe it will cross both utility and technology addressable markets and give us something that we don't have today that we can grow exponentially with a solution-based approach. Got it. Appreciate that. Thank you. Your next question comes from Philip Shen with ROTH Capital. Please unmute yourself and ask your question. Hi, everyone. Can you hear me okay? Yep. Hey. Can you guys hear me? Good morning. Okay. Great. Hey, guys. Thank you. With the ITC winding down by year-end '27, to what degree can you pull forward renewables work? A lot of it depends on labor, and just wondering to what degree you guys are trying to accelerate that as much as you can. If you can, can you share what your outlook for renewables might be for 2028 and beyond after the credits wind down? Thank you. Yeah. I'll adjust your comment on some of the things that you're seeing. I do think when we look at our renewables and you look at really the low cost of energy, if you add solar, wind in some places, and batteries into a backstop of natural gas on a line, you get the lowest cost to the consumer. I still believe it's really about the lowest cost, the speed to market that the renewables provide. We are seeing pull-ins on LNTPs. I would expect us to. Our customer base has safe harbored nicely. We can see out multi-years here. I don't think when you look at it long-term, we're not concerned with where renewables are going. There will be noise in it, but that's nothing new. It's been that way for two decades. I think our ability to work through that with our customers, our collaborators, is an opportunity for us. I see it nothing but an opportunity, but I'll let Jayshree comment on the overall market. Yeah, I echo everything Duke's saying firmly. I think working with tier-one customers who've lived through regulatory dynamics over 20-plus years, who understand how PTC, ITC cliffs can manifest, and then being able to get price discovery as they're working through their projects on the demand side, we just see more and more strength, especially with the customers we're working with. No doubt there's going to be some effects as the executive order comes in, as the tariffs come in, in terms of just getting that price visibility. The demand side from every one of our customers we keep hearing is as strong as ever. A lot of them are safe harbored well into '28 and even into '29. Beyond that, they're already starting to think through about their pipelines and how, with the speed to market that's necessary, the fact that data centers and technology continues to want power, capacity, solar, battery, and even wind provide value for both on the energy side as well as the capacity side. We just believe that it's going to continue to be a good market for us. If you recall, we actually entered the renewable market prior to the IRA because we understand these dynamics very well, we understand those customers, and we understand how to manage these things. I do believe that strength of being through this historically is going to be an advantage for us. We can be helpful to our customers as they as well navigate through these dynamics. Just continued positive momentum is what we see. Great. Thanks. One follow-up here. Can you give us some more color on the core growth in Q2? And then share any expectations for inside electrical growth and the outlook there? Thanks. I mean, I think the company itself organically is growing EPS very close to double digits. On the top line, I would tell you mid-single digits. The things that we're doing from supply chain and all the things that we're able to do is accomplishing you can't see the top-line growth, but you can sure see it on the ROIC accretion and the EPS accretion. We're really looking at quality of earnings where we don't believe that the risk is there on earning from a top line. We'll shrink it and figure out how to put it in the portfolio and expand it. Those things are always something we're looking at. Never happy with margins that are degradating. We continue to believe that we're getting better as a company overall, and you can see it in the margin profile and the quality of earnings. The top line will take care of itself. We're really focused on where it counts, and that's driving cash and EPS. Your next question comes from the line of Jamie Cook with Truist Securities. Please press star six to unmute and ask your question. This is modern technology. Jamie I'm sorry. Hi, Jamie. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Oh my. Yes. I'm so sorry. Two questions, Duke. Understanding you have a lot of growth opportunities ahead of you. You're very bullish on the market, and you can pivot to different directions. Are you doing any, understanding you're still bullish on renewables, are you doing anything internally to prepare for potential short-term slowdown in terms of allocating resources or people to other projects, maybe prioritizing transmission projects? I'm just trying to think about what you can do to manage for any sort of short-term hiccup in this business. That's my first question. My second question, and if this was asked, tell me, I can read the transcript later. My second question is just as it relates to Dynamic. I assume revenue synergies aren't in your targets. Can you talk to potential revenue synergies? Do you think this is a business that has an opportunity to improve margins relative to where it is today? Thank you again for bearing with me today. Thanks, Jamie. I struggle with that mute button too. I think we're not concerned with what we see with renewables at this point. We've talked about one of the reasons we didn't separate wind and solar when we bought Blattner is because we were fungible across wind and solar. Those same people can build transmission substations, all kinds of different things on the front side of the business. We do move labor quite a bit across segments, across TAMs. I think it's really important to realize that it's fungible and we're able to move in these different markets. Even with Dynamic Systems, they can move across markets. If you go, what about healthcare? What about farm? Yes, they're in it. What about technology? Yes, they're in it. What about power plants? Yes, they can do that. I think in general, we're able to move that craft across these markets. It's what we've done. We didn't do this today. We've been doing this for the last decade where we've de-risked this company in a portfolio way. Everything you're saying, we never intended to operate at 100%. We've always intended to operate at 80%. If we get to 90%, we'll blow the margins out the window. 80% of our work is better than expected. We do have downturns. We do have inefficiencies. We have this all the time. You've seen it with Canada. You've seen it across. We're able to operate through that because of the portfolio and because of the de-risk. What you're saying is absolutely right. When we hear a market, we've already moved past that. We've already thought about that. When we were looking at acquiring these companies, we're not acquiring them because of the data center boom. We're acquiring them because it's a great company that's long-standing well before data centers. When you think about what Dynamic does for us, yes, I mean, we're on the same job. The revenue opportunity is the 30%, 40% of the solution base that comes with it. When you start thinking about our Cupertino and Dynamic on the same project, yes. Are they talking to the same customer? Yes. Are we on the high voltage side? Yes. When you start to look at it and you have a large customer and they say, "well, that's Quanta, well, that's Quanta". It's just something that I believe will separate us over time. I think our strategies are sound. Actually, I'm thinking about 2030. Truthfully, and what we're doing in 2030, we'll let you know soon. I think that's where we're at. I continue to really like the markets that we're in today. We'll continue to earn. We'll continue to work through this nicely. We've de-risked the company with the portfolio, no question. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Brian Brophy with Stifel Nicolaus. Please unmute and ask your question. Yeah, thanks. Good morning, everybody. Appreciate you taking the question. Looks like you've made a couple of acquisitions in the civil space here recently. Obviously, that's a very fragmented industry and continues to be. Just curious how you're thinking about opportunity to continue to deploy capital here from an M&A perspective? And Just thoughts around doing a larger platform-like acquisition in the space. Thanks. I mean, I would consider Dynamic a platform for us, and we'll continue to grow off of it much like we've done with Cupertino and Blattner. That, to me, is a platform acquisition that has exponential growth to it. The synergies we don't put in, we've not talked about it. I would tell you that the deal model on Cupertino, we've blown it away. We call it you can't see it because we won't talk about it as organic growth. If you say organic growth is beating the deal model, we're killing it. I think in general, we see the synergies. We see what we're doing there on these platform-type acquisitions and our ability to exponentially grow. When we look at the civil piece of it, it's something that on every site we're in, on all the things that we do internally, that we're able to have self-perform capabilities, what we can do in the industrial space with our industrial business. It's something that was a great company, a great family company that the management team is fantastic and all the characteristics that we want and provides to the overall solution. Following the strategies of the TAMs and really addressing what the customer is asking us to do with great companies, we're not outlooking. I'll say this again. They're coming inbound, and we're really able to discuss the longer term. If they fit, they fit, and we'll lean into them when it makes sense. Thanks, Duke. I'll pass it on. Your next question. I do want to clarify. When I'm talking organic growth, organic growth, when I'm saying that the organic growth is what we stated in the past, but we don't get credit for beating the DEAL model. That was to clarify that so I can keep accounting and legal off me. I want to clarify that we beat the DEAL model and we don't get credit for that piece of the organic that I consider synergies that we don't talk about. Thank you. Your next question comes from Chad Dillard with Bernstein. Please unmute and ask your question. Good morning, guys. I was hoping to talk about the cross-sell opportunities with Dynamic. How much customer overlap is there with Cupertino? Is MEP usually an integrated service? What sort of white space do you see to actually make that so within your customers? Lastly, are there programmatic contracts in the space, or is this a potential expansion opportunity that you see ahead for Quanta? Yeah. I mean, I think when you think about Dynamic and Cupertino and really data centers, Dynamic's business in the past, about 30% was, call it data centers. The rest, 50% was technology or better. It really got there in chips. I mean, that's where they really started. It was Texas Instruments years ago. Following them across the country, they were a great supplier to Texas Instruments. I think the chip manufacturer, clean rooms, very technical, mechanical-type processing-type business, that's what they're known for. The advanced process technology that they have up front is superior. We really like that part of it. We're early, early in these projects. Cupertino is early in these projects. They don't really look at it. They look at them independent. The key to this is, can we provide the solution? Can we provide the high voltage? Are we providing the high voltage? I think, are we providing the transformers? Are we at the civil? What can we do to really expedite this to the client? How does that look in the next five years? Who are they asking? What we give them is certainty and self-perform capabilities of 85%. The markets that show up with both Dynamic, you can cross-sell from Dynamic's customers back over into Cupertino, Quanta. I just think there's a lot of customer synergies here that we're not discussing. There's a lot of things that we can do with craft and cross-selling many, many things. We really like this acquisition. We really like the craft piece of it and the family that's there. They're top-notch, best in class. We're super excited about having them on board and what we can do with the company. That's super helpful. Secondly, how are your renewable customers navigating the afe Harbor executive order? I know we're supposed to get some, I guess, some final clarity in later in August. Are they taking a wait-and-see approach before taking FIDs? Are they just going to the ground as soon as possible? Also, what sort of opportunities from an engineering or procurement standpoint does Quanta have to help customers given the situation? I mean, we can certainly help them with safe harboring and things of that nature. Certainty to get the projects done in the timeframe that's necessary. Yeah, a lot of inbounds there, a lot of opportunity there, and many, many things that we can do from the standpoint of helping them with the bill. It's noisy. Tariffs and everything's noisy. We put our head down. We operate. We really try to collaborate on that. Our job is to see the issues before they happen and help the client. I think our transformer acquisition is what we're doing with Poles now as part of that solution. Having certainty to these things and our craft skill labor and our completion. Customers lean on us to finish. I really, really like where we sit. We can cross different segments, bring different companies in for solutions, and cross-sell that across our customer base. Yeah, it's lots of inbound calls, lots of discussions there. I expect our backlog to continue to increase. I want to say too, you can have periods of backlog where you may sign large, large projects. On a CAGR basis, we continue to see upward movement. You could get some quarter-over-quarter reflection. I don't expect it, but we could. On a year basis, you're going to continue to see backlog rise for sure. We see it coming in at this point. Thanks. I'll pass it on. Your next question comes from Justin Hauke with Robert W. Baird. Please unmute and ask your question. Oh, great. Thanks for taking my question here. Duke, I guess I just wanted to ask, I mean, you talked about the 85% of your work that's still that base business. You do have these bigger jobs. You booked the Boardman Hemingway job here. You had a big one last quarter. Another one that's been out there is the Grain Belt Express. You didn't comment on it here, but I guess that's been press released that you and Kiewit picked up work there. I guess the question is just thinking about the puts and takes on the start of those and the wind down with SunZia and the status of kind of all those and anything we should think about from, I don't know, a startup or shutdown noise thing between those as you navigate between those bigger jobs. Yeah. No, I think we're complete on the transmission line out of SunZia, and we haven't missed a beat yet. Our transmission business is growing. We didn't talk about Grain Belt. It's not in our backlog. It's a great project. All transmission at this point is NPV positive to North America and to the shareholders, I mean, to your stakeholders. I think in general, great project. It's certainly facing some political ramifications there. We're working with the client and been a great customer and great line. We'd love to build it. We'll work together to try to get it across the finish line. We really like the project. I do believe at some point it'll get built. In general, we watch this and watch what we put in our backlog. I think we want to be certain when it's in there. I don't like to pull things out of it, that's for sure. It's part of our conservatism as a company that we really try to give you the stories and make sure that we're transparent on how we look at work. That said, I think you're going to see compounding markets in large transmission that's just in the early stages. Some of the things that we've done as a company to create markets, to create our markets with larger transmission, I like it. I like the acquisitions that we've made there to help us and the front-end capabilities that we have as we collaborate with the client. You're going to see larger 765 builds across the country. We're excited about it. We're excited where we said early stages. As you start to see these things come along and you're seeing the capital budgets of the client, we'll follow those capital budgets. As they move forward, we'll move forward with them. I appreciate that. Just one more quick one maybe for Jayshree here on the free cash flow outlook is unchanged. Your adjusted EBITDA is a little bit higher. You still have some, I guess, some bigger collections here in the second half on that. Can you just maybe talk about the dynamics of why the free cash flow outlook is unchanged with the higher EBITDA? Yeah. I mean, we're pleased with what happened in the first half of free cash flow. Our operators are continuing to do a great job on DSOs and working capital. As I mentioned before, we want to give ourselves the best possible outcome around our large Canadian receivable. As you know, that's part of our, it's within our range. We do believe that's going to be settled favorably this year. Timing of cash, though, can sometimes be a little hard to predict. We want to give you guys a prudent range. I think it's the right number where we are, from $1.2 billion to $1.7 billion. Do I believe we can be at the high end of that? Yes, I do. We're seeing some things on the type of work mix as we move into the back half of the year that also gives us some confidence in that higher end. Right now, we think the right thing to do is stay where we are. Okay, thank you very much. As a reminder, we ask that all participants limit themselves to one question. If you have additional questions, you may re-queue and those questions will be addressed, time permitting. Your next question comes from the line of Drew Chamberlain with JPMorgan. Please unmute and ask your question. Thank you for taking the questions. Just one quick one for me, kind of following up on that last line of questioning. How do you think about the balance sheet leverage exiting the year now with this deal being done? What type of flexibility does that give you for deals throughout the rest of the year? A nd maybe what cadence we can expect there? I'll leave it at that. Thanks. Yeah. Yeah. We tend to want to stay between a leverage profile of 1.5 to 2 times. You've seen us do that even after significant acquisitions where we can push up above 2 times. We buy companies that we believe will allow us to rapidly delever, and this one is no different. We're right now a little bit above 2 times. We ended the second quarter at below 2. We're a little bit higher than that, but going towards the end of the year, we fully expect to be below 2 times. You'll see I made the comment that we're evaluating various refinancing alternatives to continue to ensure that we have the most flexible balance sheet and gives us the liquidity we need to ensure we can invest in organic growth as well as if there are opportunities to deploy capital in various ways, we want to be able to do so. We're going to continue doing that. You can expect that the types of companies we acquire, our capital allocation strategy, there is no change going forward. We still want to remain prudent in our balance sheet. We want to stay within that 1.5 to 2 times and do so in a way that continues to give great strategic value for our shareholders. Just to comment, we intend to remain investment grade. That's right. Great. Thank you. Your next question comes from Sangita Jain with KeyBanc. Please unmute and ask your question. Hi. Thanks for taking my questions. I don't know if you guys quantified the backlog for Boardman to Hemingway. If you did, I apologize. If you didn't, could you help us frame size that? It's meaningful. All right. That was quick. Another one I would say is on the Safe Harbor Treasury guidance that is pending. How are you safeguarding Quanta's backlog in case that changes to, let's say, more than a 5% Safe Harbor rule or they pull that four-year window to complete a project down to, let's say, two or three years? Any of those would be better for us or as good for us. We're not seeing that. Anything that makes things go faster, people want certainty. I don't know what does it do for us. It just moves it forward. Like I said, we're not seeing that right now. If it happens, anything that people want to go faster and be more certain, they should call Quanta. What if the project sequencing changes as a result of that? It's not going to bother us. I feel like, look, the way that we look at this, and I hear this a lot. We hear it on the street a lot that the risk of Quanta Services is they have too much work. We come at it from 20 different ways. If you go to another company, they come at it from one. Would you rather de-risk from 20 different avenues, 20 different sources of labor, union, non-union, or would you rather go to one person? I just feel like we have a different way to deliver on scale, and we're proud of it. We're proud of the men and women in the field that build it every day. We like our chances on all of it. Thanks, Duke. Your next question comes from the line of Liam Burke with B. Riley. Please unmute and ask your question. Yes. Thank you. Good morning. Duke, Bell Lumber and Pole Company, is that a platform you can grow organically? or is that purchased just to serve your regional needs? I think it's a solution. It's 40% ownership in the business, and we really like the family, long-standing family in the business. I know more about timber and pole solutions than I've ever known in my life. I truly believe poles, wires, transformer are critical supply chain items as we look at this. What they do for us with certainty, with talking to the client about an overall solution. Long-term, I think it's necessary for us as we move forward in our projects, whether the third largest, fourth largest buyer of HV equipment, and our ability to, I mean, the transformer capabilities, it's just a different discussion with the client when we have the asset and are able to really sway where we can logistically source and how we source. I like it. It's a collaboration with the client, and what it does for us is certainly something that provides an overall solution to our supply chain initiatives. Great. Thank you, Duke. Your next question comes from the line of Adam Thalhimer from Thompson Davis and Co. Please unmute and ask your question. Morning, guys. Morning. Duke, has the one big beautiful bill come up at all in conversations with your customers? Just curious if there are provisions in there that could cause them to go faster. Yeah. I mean, we talk about it every day. You can't ignore that. I mean, I think it's part of the business and part of the discussions we have with them constantly about how do we get in front of it? How do we help them politically? How do we get in front and provide the overall solution that matters? If you see tariffs and if you look at what we've done in supply chain, all the things that we've done in supply chain are U.S.-based on purpose, not because of the big beautiful bill, because we thought we were going to move this way 10 years ago. The things that we've done really separate us with the client. If we can help them, yes. It's early stages in this and what they see and how we deliver. It doesn't go unnoticed at the client level. Those conversations to pull work in to go long-term in different areas to have sourcing capabilities is we're just scratching the surface. What we're going to do for solutions over the next decade, we're in early stages of that. Certainly, the difference, I've said it in Alaska, and I'll say it again. Five years ago, we were independent. We were a Cupertino and a Bladner and a Dynamic Systems. Today, we're Quanta. Quanta provides a solution, and we're having the Quanta discussion constantly. Thanks, Duke. Your next question comes from Ameet Thakkar with BMO Capital Markets. Please unmute and ask your question. Thanks for squeezing me in, guys. Just two quick ones for me. It looks like the portion of your backlog from MSAs is down, I think, $900 million quarter by quarter, and it's kind of flattish versus the prior year. I was just wondering, does this reflect some of your earlier comments on customers more focused on longer-term solutions? I was also wondering if you could give us a bit of a sense or a quantification on how much backlog will come from Dynamic Systems when you guys update this next quarter. Yeah, I'm not concerned with the timing of MSAs. Maybe Jayshree can comment on it. I'm not even looking at it. No, we're not at all. I mean, these are just timing issues. In electric, we continue to see growing backlog. You see a little bit of pullback maybe on the underground. Again, we just think it's timing. As for Dynamic Systems, that's not in our backlog because in the second quarter, we bought the company after the second quarter. They came in with about $1.8 billion of backlog, and we'll update that in the third quarter as we work through it with them. Yeah, that's multi-year backlog too. They can see out 2026, 2027, and even into 2028. Same scenario with them. I think it's really important that they're scaled, that they're having the same kind of conversations that we're having with the client. This is not a small company with no scale. It has a lot of scalability to it. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Mike Dudas with Vertical Research Partners. Please unmute and ask your question. Morning, Jayshree. Duke. Good morning. Duke, given the news we saw on the 765 build-out expectations in Texas, has that jarred some other RTOs to kind of get moved forward? Are utilities continuing to underestimate transmission and the ability it can have to solve a lot of their problems? I think yes. 765 is in MISO as well as PJM. There are some lines in both. I do believe 765 is going to be easier to build AC than trying to build DC these days. It's always easier to drop load in territories, states where states' rights come in and RTOs. I do believe you'll see more 765 due to load growth. Lots of 500 out there as well. It's probably a 10 to 1 when you build a big line, there are 10 more lines coming off of it. We continue to see those inbound. You can see it outside the capital budgets of utilities. You can see it in the RTOs as well. Lots of those projects are not in their budgeting. It's prevalent. I do believe utilities are seeing it. We're certainly in the middle of it with them. You can see debt offerings. You can see equity offerings. There's no question that it's on everybody's radar that the need for transmission and generation has never been more prevalent in this country. Excellent. Thanks, Duke. Your next question comes from Chris Tsiong with Wolfe Research. Please unmute and ask your question. Hey, good morning. Do you guys hear me? Hey, yes, thanks. Oh, great. Hey. Thanks, Jayshree. Thanks, Duke. Just wanted to ask, I think you noted large multi-year build programs in a data center market that's expanding your addressable market. I know this acquisition, while accretive, do you view these sorts of acquisitions like Dynamic as necessary to compete for that type of work? Or could you have addressed these opportunities organically? Thanks. Yeah. Certainly, we've done things organically and do things organically all the time. I felt like as fast as this is moving, the large market that we're in, and the things that we see, this was a market that we needed a platform company to exponentially grow. It was the right way to pursue capital and grow it from a standpoint, exponentially off a platform. Some things we'll look at platforms like telecom. We grew organically. Markets, different market. We're always growing things organically as well. There's things that we're doing that we're going to address different markets that you haven't seen yet organically that I really like, that I think will show up. There's things that we believe that you can build a platform off of with great craft skilled labor. This is something that we leaned into from a platform standpoint that provides a greater adjustable market, allows us to provide a solution. We look at them all. We look at it differently, but it's all following a strategy and best use of free cash flow for the shareholder. Great. Thanks, Duke. I'll turn it over. Your next question comes from the line of Steven Fisher with UBS. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Thanks. Can you hear me? Yes, sir. Okay. Great. Just to follow up, actually, on that last question, you clearly made the case, Duke, for the solution angle on this Dynamic Systems deal. It sounds like it, blending with everything else, it's a 1 plus 1 equals 3. I'm just curious how you compare that with the electrical side of things and wondering, as you make it a platform and build it out to something bigger over time, can you get the same returns on mechanical that you can from electrical? If not, is that sort of reflected in the upfront purchase price that you paid? I mean, we're always looking at returns. Your return on investor capital, your returns on the company are certainly every bit as good or better than our electrical use of capital. I think when you look at these acquisitions, what goes unnoticed is our fabrication capabilities at Quanta are well above 3 million square feet. You're also adding significant fabrication, which is an initiative of the company along with the mechanical processing and plumbing capabilities here. It goes unmatched. I like what we're doing. We'll speed the markets. Important in their advanced front-end services on technical capabilities are as good as anyone I've seen and will help the whole company be much better. We're definitely leaning into all the things that are great about these companies for a lot of different reasons. It's not just what you see on paper. It's what you don't see that shows up three years from now or four or five. We certainly have strategies that we follow. This is one of them that provides access to three or four markets as well as gives us more capabilities internally. Sounds good. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Spark Lee with Jefferies. Please unmute and ask your question. Can you hear me okay? Hey, can you hear me okay? Yes, yes, we can. Thank you. Just quickly, come back to the IRA-driven renewable pull-forward dynamic here. Is there really opportunity to increase near-term targets just by pulling forward renewable projects? Yeah. I mean, look, the LNTPs are coming in. We're not seeing—we gave you guidance for the rest of the year, '25, '26, '27, '28. It's too early to tell you what renewables are doing. ' 26, '27, I believe we'll have growth. I don't know how much. Anything I'd tell you would be a disservice at this point. We see growth in renewables in '26, '27, 28, and beyond. As long as the power demand stays where it's at, it'll be a part of the solution. Batteries are—you go look at the Texas curves and how much batteries are helping out during the heat. It's something that, to me, goes unnoticed about how renewables play into this. I know the rhetoric. I understand it. What it's doing for the grid and also the consumer, there's affordability issues that renewables absolutely help that. You're going to build a line. You add batteries and solar on there. It's going to be better. You're going to get pull-in. You're going to get stacking. Canada looks good from a renewable standpoint. Lots of opportunities there. I would see you'll have growth in the company for the foreseeable future. Got it. Thank you. There are no more questions at this time. I'd now like to turn the call back over to management for closing remarks. Yeah. Thank you. I do want to say a little bit about people in Texas on the floods. We had some heroic acts from our people here and saved lives at the call of, at the one step of a call, they went out and saved lives. The things that we do, the heroism of our people, the 64,000 people that are out there, men and women, they're incredible. They're incredible what they do from their heart, and they're incredible what they do every day. I would be remiss for not saying we stand behind the families that lost lives and what we did to help that. It's more than just an earnings call. It's something that I believe culturally we're there to help and guide and do some great things. Real proud of our people and proud of what they did there. I want to thank you for participating in our call. We appreciate the questions, ongoing interest of Quanta Services. Thank you. This concludes our call.