All right, great. Good morning, everyone. I'm Evie Koslosky, the life science tools and diagnostics analyst here at Goldman Sachs. Joined here by Michael Petras, the CEO of Sotera Health. Thank you for joining us. Thanks for having us. Good morning. Good morning. You delivered us a solid start to the year, 6.5 constant currency revenue growth, 20 basis points to EBITDA margin expansion. You've also announced a CEO transition. I guess, can you talk through the timing and then anything in Alton's background that kind of stood out to you as you were deciding on the successor? Yeah. What you're referencing is I announced in the last couple of weeks that I'm going to transition from the CEO seat to the Executive Chair seat. I've been with the company 10 years now, I've been talking to the board for the last couple of years about trying to do an orderly transition. We decided, I decided that it was going to be something that would happen here in 2026. We found out, we put a pretty thorough process together. Alton's got 20+ years in the MedTech space. He worked at Baxter, he worked at Hill-Rom, his most recent job is at Vyaire Medical. By the way, he'd be with us here today, but he's out at Salt Lake City. I just hung up the phone from him. He's out at Salt Lake City visiting the Nelson team and having a business review out there, which is great. Getting started. Yeah. Alton's outstanding. He's going to be great. We looked at him. There's a couple of things we really liked him when we did the search committee. We liked the fact that he's got a great value set that seems to be very compatible with the culture we have within the company. He's got long-established experience in the healthcare space, we really liked his commercial expertise and his experience base on the commercial side that we thought would really help us in his growth mindset. Those are the things that really just stood out to us. Great. Awesome. Sterigenics, mid-single digit constant currency growth in one Q despite some weather-related headwinds. I guess, how should we think about the growth cadence as we move forward throughout the year, given the guide implies a slight step up? I guess is this mostly coming from the volume side or the price side? It's coming from the volume side. We'll have a little bit of price. The price in that business has been pretty consistent, 4%, slightly above, as we had in the first quarter. Overall, second quarter, we've guided to growth that's pretty similar to what you saw in the first quarter on a constant currency basis. We expect to see some step up as you get into the second half of the year. As I stated recently, we're pretty confident where we sit today looking at here we are sitting here June 8th and reaffirming our guide for the second quarter and the rest of the year across the whole company, not just Sterigenics. Awesome. Another thing we've kind of observed in some of the public MedTech companies is a bit of a concern around decelerating volume growth for them. Understanding this is only part of your Sterigenics business and outside of these few players you have broader exposure, I guess how should we be thinking about the Sterigenics volume growth in the face of some of these MedTech-related headwinds? There's been a lot of questions around the MedTech. There's winners and losers. We have thousands of customers in that segment. Overall, we feel pretty good about what the volume looks like. We think it should be slightly improved as we progress throughout the year. Always could be better. Overall, we feel pretty confident about what we're seeing for the rest of the year and the guide we've provided. Okay. Maybe talk to your ability to sort of drive pricing. We've seen in the past instances like when MedTech was de-stocking, maybe talk through some of your competitive advantages and your ability to drive price in those types of environments. Pricing is always a challenging conversation with customers, but we need to get rewarded for the value that we bring to our customers. Even in periods of decelerating stock, if you will, when they reduce the stock levels in 2023, 2024, we still achieved the price targets that we communicated. We feel confident in our ability to get 4%. The other thing that we've been talking about over the last several quarters is NESHAP. NESHAP is a new regulation that's coming out from the government. There's one that's been proposed, and now that's being revised again. We'll talk about that, I'm sure. We put in significant capital against getting those improvements. We put about $200 million in, and we're also starting to see some of the benefits of that in our price equation as we progress throughout 2026. Great. Then some of the other kind of end markets that you sell into, bioprocessing continues to be a high-growth area in pharma. I understand it's a smaller portion of your business today, I guess how are you thinking about potentially expanding into that market over time? I guess what levels of growth could you see from those more niche applications? Yeah. As you stated, bioprocessing is a category for us. It's a smaller category relative to our competitors. I think we're under-indexed. We should be gaining more share in that business. Our teams have been focused on that for at least the past 18 months or so. We're seeing nice growth year-over-year in that business, we're seeing in both Europe and the U.S., we'd expect that to continue. We have a lot of ways we go to catch our competition as far as how well-positioned they are there in bioprocessing. Awesome. Then I guess, how do you stand from a capacity perspective within Sterigenics? Are there any sterilization methods where you feel capacity is maybe tighter on an industry-wide basis compared to others? I'd say capacity on a global basis, we're pretty good now. In any given pocket, you could have some more challenges. For example, a lot of people talk about ethylene oxide. ethylene oxide is challenged from a capacity perspective, but really it's large pallet chambers where there's the most challenging capacity situation. When I say large pallet, I'm talking 14 pallet and above. That is really tight in the U.S. Around the world, we feel we're pretty well situated with capacity to be able to achieve our plans that we've laid out for 2026 as well as 2027. I guess as you think about the global capacity expansion, is there any particular regions that you would look to expand into? Yeah. Today, we have presence in all areas around the world. I'd say we have lower presence in Europe. With Sterigenics, I think there's opportunities for us to expand our presence in those two geographies. Although we do have a nice base in Europe, I still think we're undersized to all of our competitors, clearly in Asia as well. Okay. I think you also talked about the decision to expand the X-ray capacity in the U.S. I guess, what goes into those decisions? What level of commitment do you have from customers before deciding to go ahead and build? For us, we do a three-year strategic planning process. We're in the midst of that right now. Alton and the team are working through that. We'll ultimately review that at the board level in August. This is something that we do every single year. When we lay out, we look at supply and demand curves, we look at our capacity situation, and try to figure out where we should make the investment. Right now, we've got an X-ray facility coming up latter part of this year, and then we have another facility coming up in late 2027, 2028. We try to do a long-term capital plan and making sure that we're situated for the supply and demand. We try to target 40% capacity, having a 40% commitment before we put it in. In particular with the X-ray, we decided to go in with less of a threshold there just because that was more of a strategic investment for us. Overall, we feel pretty good about where we sit in capacity today. Okay. I guess, do you see any competition come in from other sterilization techniques that maybe Sotera does not have in their portfolio? Maybe help us understand why EO and some of the other methods you have are insulated from newer techniques in terms of the breadth of applications. Yeah. There's newer technologies that are being explored by many in the industry, nothing of any scale. We've got R&D investments ourselves in a couple smaller opportunities that we've been taking to market over the last couple of years. Nothing material that could have the impact of what you see with gamma sterilization, nor ethylene oxide. Okay. You mentioned the pricing earlier, we talked a bit about that. I guess Sotera's business model is very critical for customers, and I think there's a lot of moving pieces around rising input costs for your customers. Has the environment changed your philosophy at all, and are you hearing more pushback from customers as they start to look at their margins and their input costs? Always, as I stated earlier, pricing is always a challenging conversation. We just got to make sure we don't outrun our value proposition. We feel confident in our ability. We guide across the company 3%-4% price, Sterigenics on the high end of that, and Nelson Labs and Nordion on the lower end of that. We've been able to deliver that consistently, and it's because we do a really good job with our customers, which our customer satisfaction scores continue to show, and we don't try to outrun our value proposition. We make sure we're getting paid appropriately, and we cover our costs of inflation and other costs that we may incur. We think we continue to be rewarded for the value we bring. Great. You mentioned the regulation front a bit earlier. I guess there's been a lot of noise around NESHAP regulations. It would help if you could put it into perspective, comparing the most recently updated rule versus previous versions, and then comparing that to the pre-2024 regulation. Okay. Yeah, let me try to make that simple. Yeah. Folks that may not be as familiar, NESHAP is the standard that is used for sterilizers that use ethylene oxide in this case. Pre-2024, I'm going to use numbers. The numbers aren't representative, but they'll just try to help context this. If the pre-2024, the regs were at two, and then the 2024 rule came out, and it's at 10. Let's say in the amount of regulation controls. There was a significant increase, is the point I'm making, in the regulation and controls that are put in. We've moved down that path, and we've spent nearly $200 million to put these controls in place. Now, that 2024 rule is being challenged and looked to be more practical with the new proposed rules. I'm making a number up again. It would be more like a seven, just to give you context, okay? Yeah. Two went to 10, and now we're at seven. It's significantly above the controls and regs that were pre-2024, but it's below, it appears, whatever's going to be approved may be lower than the 2024 rules. Does that make sense? Yeah. Sorry. Yes. Absolutely. Okay. Now let's talk about, we don't know exactly when these new rules are going to come out. We're hopeful it'll be over the next several months. There's some comment periods that just recently closed. We are building our facilities' controls to the level of the latest rule that was put out in 2024, okay? There's some modifications that we think were necessary, which have been incorporated in these new proposed rules, which we're hopeful to get out there to make it more realistic and practical. Overall, we're trying to put in the most stringent controls we can and make sure the environment continues to be safe and compliant with the requirements. These facilities are safe. The amount of ethylene oxide that's used and released out of these facilities is very, very small. Okay. You mentioned the CapEx component and maybe slight changes, but you're still going forward with that. Talk about maybe the extension and how that's changed the cadence of CapEx and when we should expect that to roll off. Yeah. We intend to have the improvements completed by the end of this year with very little tail running into next year. I think this year we're projecting $45 million-$50 million or something like that in the number for 2026 in our CapEx, and we expect to use most of that to complete our NESHAP compliance requirements. Okay. I guess the other component of NESHAP was the potential reevaluation of the 2016 EtO IRIS value. If that remains an appropriate way to assess the risk, I guess, what are the implications related to this metric, and why does this matter for Sotera? Thanks for asking. Not a lot of people ask that question. Embedded within this new proposed rule is to re-look the 2016 IRIS level, and that's a risk assessment that was put out, and it was a very conservative risk assessment. That has actually been the basis for a lot of the litigation. This very conservative assessment was put out, and plaintiff lawyers have rallied around that. I would just tell you that apparently in this new rule is being re-looked. I don't know exactly where that'll stand and what the end result will be. If a correct value is assigned in appropriate context to that risk assessment is presented, that should be a meaningful impact on the litigation going forward. Okay. That's still to be determined, right? How then that'll be absorbed and incorporated within a given jurisdiction is still to be determined, but I'm hopeful that that becomes more realistic than what the prior reg had. Okay. I think in the past, kind of as it relates to some of this regulation, you've talked about increased regulation actually means probably more outsourcing and kind of a better market environment for you, I guess. Do you think the kind of updated version of this rule still allows you to take some of the market share, and do you think there'll be additional outsourcing on the back of it? I would just say this company, Sotera Health, has regulations that impact this business all the time. If it's Nordion handling cobalt, Nelson Labs and the tests that they do, and making sure the customer's products are compliant with regulatory requirements, or Sterigenics and operating their facilities with all the different Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements or EHS requirements from the EPA. We're not afraid of regulation at all, right? To your point, it actually helps us because we have scale, and we're pretty darn good at what we do. We're not afraid of regulation. It's just clarity of what the rules are. Tell us what the rules are so we can abide by them and make sure they're realistic. As long as that happens, we think we'll be able to continue to perform and excel, and that'll create long-term opportunities for us on all three businesses. Great. You mentioned the litigation front. I just want to kind of get a quick update there. I think in Georgia, you had a judge dismiss five of the remaining eight bellwether cases, I guess. How should we think about this outcome regarding the remaining cases, and then what are the next steps within kind of the Georgia piece specifically? On Georgia specifically, I think at any of these courts, no court nor has any plaintiff lawyer been able to prove causation at this low level of ethylene oxide usage in emissions. I want to be very clear on that. There's been no causation proven anywhere in any of these courts, Atlanta's just further support of that. The other side tried to come in on general causation and specific causation and prove that ethylene oxide, these very low minuscule levels caused the cancer in these plaintiffs. Listen, we have empathy for anybody who has cancer. All of us have got that in our lives, right? I've got family and friends that have all gone through this, right? Ethylene oxide, these low levels are not the cause of the cancer here. Right now, we had a judge in Georgia that put science front and center and showed that causation doesn't exist. We're hopeful that that'll apply to the rest of the cases in Georgia. Obviously, the other side's going to appeal this, and it's going to run an appellate process, which we probably won't have better visibility to the outcome of that until 2027. At the end of the day, these facilities are safe, that we operate in a compliant manner, and most importantly, this is critical. Ethylene oxide is absolutely critical. 50% or 20 billion devices a year, according to the FDA, are sterilized with EO. This is what keeps patients safe, patients can have surgical procedures and get critical medical devices because we know that they've been sterilized properly with ethylene oxide, which could be the only source in a lot of these medical devices. I think we just got to have the proper context here of what's really going on. Okay, great. Any update in California, next steps we should look for? I'm not sure how current most people are. There were some recent motions filed in California. We motion for summary judgment we wanted to pursue. We thought the probability of winning that would be low at this stage of the trial, we thought any chance we can have to get in front of the judge and get the facts straight and clear, it's important for us. We did that. Listen, there's a lot of time left still here between January and April 27 of trials, we're hopeful that the courts continue to stay focused on science. If the judge continues to stay focused on science, we feel confident that we're going to prevail. At the end of the day, we still have to go into a local court in L.A. County, it's left up to a judge and a jury to decide the outcome there. We feel confident, science front and center, we're going to be in a good spot. Awesome. Okay. I guess shifting to Nelson Labs declined in 1Q. I guess, can you talk through some of the moving pieces across expert advisory services, testing, and validation, and then when you expect to lap some of the tougher comps in EAS? Yeah. Expert advisory services, we had a record year in 2024 and then probably the worst year in the company in 2025. We had the tale of the both cities going on within a very short window of time. If you exclude that out, which I never like to do because I don't like my team excluding anything out, because at the end of the day, we're accountable to all of it. If you exclude out the expert advisory services, the core lab business grew 5% last year, which is pretty darn good. This business does 30%-35% margin, and lab space has been a little choppy. Darn well. We'd like it to grow faster, obviously. As we look coming out of the first quarter, we said second quarter would have slight growth. We're very optimistic about our ability to deliver that. Sitting here on June 8th, we feel pretty darn confident we're going to be able to deliver that growth in the second quarter. The outlook, we're optimistic. The reason we're optimistic is routine testing continues to do well, but validation testing, which is based on new regulations and new product spend and some other things, we're seeing some nice activity there. We're very optimistic on what we see for the rest of the year on Nelson Labs as well. It's a good business that's very synergistic to what we do on the Sterigenics side as well. Yeah. I think you guided to margins low to mid-30s, but 1Q is maybe a little bit lower than that. Is it really just a function of better revenue growth, kind of getting the operating leverage on that? Yeah, in the volume. The first quarter, we're not surprised by the first quarter performance. We guided to that. We knew first quarter was going to be where it came in. About 60+% of the cost of that. You're coming out of fourth quarter where volumes are pretty good. There's a seasonality impact that comes down. The first quarter is always the slowest, and it's been 10 years I've been here. You have a choice. Do you get rid of the labor and then bring them back in the second quarter? That doesn't work, right? You've got to make sure you can give high quality, reliable service. We have to plow through. The first quarter is always a challenge, and that's what materialized in our numbers in the first quarter, but we expect that to be right on track the rest of the year into total margins to be right in that zone you just referenced. Great. Earlier you mentioned the synergy opportunities between Nelson Labs and Sterigenics. I guess maybe talk through some of the specific cross-selling initiatives that you have and any challenges that maybe you've run into as you start to build on your progress there. Yeah. As we look at that business, I'd say about 40% of the Nelson Lab business is sterility assurance, which is highly tied to a lot of the work that goes on within Sterigenics. Approximately 20% of the revenue within Nelson Labs comes from embedded labs within Sterigenics facilities, either embedded or real close proximity to it. There's a really unique value prop that we're able to give customers on lot release and then also more complicated validation testing. We've done a lot of work around this over the last couple of years. BJ Lehmann, who runs our strategy and business development effort, has been leading. She's done a really nice job on it, and we're getting it more and more into the organization. We've got a couple key priorities that we've been focusing around, guardian accounts, which are strategic accounts that are getting the benefit of the whole package of Sterigenics and Nelson. We've got a couple other key segments that we're really focused on that we talked about at our investor day that are growing a little bit faster in the marketplace, and we've gotten incremental resources and focus in that area. We're just measuring it and holding teams accountable and driving growth. We're very hopeful in what this looks like over the next couple of years as well. Great. Maybe speak to some of the end market dynamics within Nelson Labs. I may think those end markets maybe have been a little bit more challenged, maybe talk to how those are performing. How Nelson is doing specific to even some of the broader trends. Yeah. Nelson Labs is a business that focuses on microbiology and analytical chemistry testing. This business hasn't grown as much as we'd like over the last several years, but I think it's important to give context. During COVID, we had a big opportunity around PP&E testing. The business had pretty significant growth and high margins. We weren't going to pass on that opportunity. The volumes settled back down, you had the great resignation. After this you had a lot of activity by the FDA and our expert advisory services, as I stated earlier, had a record year in 2024 and then 2025. A lot of that business went down. Fundamentally, that Nelson Labs business is a darn good business. That's 30%-35% margin for a lab business that's not very capital intensive that we think should be growing mid-single digits over time. It's a really darn good business. We're looking at assets that we looked at three, four years ago that are down 40%-50% in revenue or value, and we're not anywhere near that. This business is pretty strong in the end markets. When customers spend on new products, venture capital money comes in, new regulations come in, sterility volume goes up. Those are the big four volume drivers that impact this business. Yeah. I guess shifting to Nordion, you've been investing more recently to ensure future cobalt supply, including the Westinghouse partnership in the U.S. I guess, what drove this decision to invest in more capacity in the U.S., and how should we think about the cadence of CapEx investments there going forward? Yeah. There's cobalt development. We haven't done a significant cobalt development program since early 2000s in that business. We have two of them going on right now. I think it'd be helpful to give context on the two. One is Darlington. It's a nuclear reactor site, it's part of OPG, Ontario Power Group. They have been a longtime partner of ours for years. They had a facility at Pickering. That site was going down. We worked with them to get Darlington to start making cobalt to offset the Pickering. That's basically why we did one cobalt. One reactor was going down. Another one was going to be able to start to do cobalt. Just think of it as a replacement with a little incremental. The bigger one that you're referencing is Westinghouse. Most of the cobalt we get today is out of CANDU reactor platforms. The benefit with Westinghouse is between our technology and their capability, we're able to now go to utilities that have pressurized water reactors. Okay? That opens up a much larger base of nuclear reactors around the world, a lot of them here in the U.S. Just because you have this reactor doesn't mean you can make cobalt, though. You've got to get the recipe and the know-how from us and Westinghouse to make that happen. We are working with individual utilities to bring them up to speed. We have the first utility we're working on right now, and we're working with them on bringing cobalt into that reactor platform. That's a long process. We file the license amendment, or the utility file the license amendment request with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it'll take about a year to get approved. Sometime late fall, early winter, we should get approval for that. They'll be able to start making the cobalt, what then will get us cobalt in 2030. The reason we did this is that gives us more supply long term and also helps us with some of the geopolitical. Today we buy cobalt from Canada, as I mentioned. We buy from China, India, Russia, and Argentina. This will give us an opportunity, if we needed to be able to scale other utilities over the next decade, if that's what we so choose to do. It gives us some nice flexibility. When we think about the CapEx, when we get on the other side of these programs, which is why we're confident on the CapEx we've been talking about coming down. On the other side of the programs, the CapEx for Nordion will go down significantly because these cobalt development programs will be behind us. Okay. Sorry, long answer. No, it's really helpful. Usually we think about cobalt as kind of being an input for the sterilization process, are there any other kind of areas where you're seeing an increased use of cobalt, maybe like radiotherapy treatments in oncology or any other areas? The big use that we have today is for brain cancer treatment, and there's some other cancer treatments that are starting to explore the use of cobalt. We've been a very reliable supplier on the brain cancer side for many, many years. It's a good market for us. The capital equipment, what happens is there's capital equipment in the market, and we supply the cobalt into that capital equipment, and then what happens is it deteriorates at 12% a year, just like cobalt does everywhere. Then we replenish it. We see opportunities potentially over time in new cancer treatments. Right now, brain cancer is the big one that we're focused on. We use HSA, which is high specific activity cobalt, a little higher radiation flux than what you get with sterilization cobalt. Okay. I guess turning to your guidance in 2026 guide, 5%-6.5% revenue growth range, I guess walk us through some of the moving pieces in this and then any potential swing factors we should be aware of. Yep. Again, I go back to 5%-6.5%. I go back to looking at your price is 3%-4% in that area, then volume and mix will make up the rest of that. I think the opportunity to do better than that would be focused around volume and mix. If Sterigenics and Nelson Labs, if those two businesses had more volume influx, then that would help us over deliver there. Nordion's a little lumpy because it's depending on when the utilities harvest the cobalt out, but we've given pretty clear visibility. It's been our most predictable business over the last several years. I think that's pretty well situated for 2026 as well. Okay. I guess, there's been a lot of macro uncertainty, rising input costs, including freight. Maybe talk through how insulated your business is from some of these dynamics, and then give us a sense for maintaining your guide in sort of an ever-changing macro environment. Yeah. On the cost side, particularly let's take fuel for transportation would be one that people talk about a lot. We pass that through, so we don't incur transportation charges. Customers drop off the product at Sterigenics, and then they pick it up. Customers ship the product to us at Nelson Labs, we test it, and we get to report to them. At Nordion, we ship cobalt to them. We take it on with all kinds of vessels, if you will. It's pretty expensive to transport, that's a pass-through. We don't make margin on that. If costs go up on that, we just pass that through to the customer. We're insulated from that perspective and across all three businesses on transportation and energy costs. Okay. The other thing that kind of comes up is EO gas costs. Are you contracted out with those? Maybe talk through some of the dynamics with sourcing that. Yeah. We're multi-year contracts there. We pretty much have a price agreement on what we're going to pay for that product. We're pretty well protected on that. Just broadly, on energy costs and operating our Sterigenics facility, it's not a huge material number in our business. Okay. You ended 1Q with 3.2x net leverage. Is the priority still to get between the 2x-3x range? Maybe, are you becoming more aggressive on the M&A front as you get closer to this range, and where in your portfolio would you focus on? Yeah. Okay, our net leverage, as you stated, is 3.2x net leverage. We've guided towards, over time, we think we can get this to 2 x-3x. We're well on track to do that. Our free cash flow is going to continue to accelerate in the business as we go forward. As far as capital deployment on M&A, all three businesses have opportunity, but I would tell you the near term and midterm opportunities seem to be focused more on the Sterigenics side based on opportunities that are out there. Obviously, I want to make sure that Nelson Labs is in a more stable operating environment before we deploy a bunch more capital for M&A there. Strategically, we still want to build out pharma services over time in that business as well. Okay. That makes sense. I guess as we think about some of the announcements that have been made from pharma, on sort of reshoring in the U.S., have you seen any disruptions in terms of where your people are looking to build out capacity for sterilization on that front or any changes related to locations of your facilities? No. This isn't something you just go pop up a tent and start sterilizing tomorrow. It's pretty well thought out. I would just tell you that overall, if there's a big increase in sterilization volume, we're very well situated for that because we're one of the largest sterilizers, if not the largest here in the U.S., and we're very well situated. That'd be a good positive for us. Okay. That was a meaningful impact. Okay, great. Maybe talk through some of the competitive dynamics, if any. You talked a little bit about the outsourcing earlier, but any other kind of external sterilization companies and where you feel you are with the competitive side? We're very well-situated. Obviously, in Asia, we don't have as significant presence as we do in the U.S. and Europe. We're very well-situated competitively. We've got one global player that competes with us that is a very good company that we have to compete with all the time. There's a bunch of smaller regional players that are out there in the marketplace as well. I'd say in U.S. and Europe, we're very well-situated. Even in Latin America, South America, we've got some pretty good presence in what we do in Brazil, what we do in Mexico. I would tell you that in Asia, it's probably opportunity that we're not as big a force there outside of what we do in China and a little bit in Thailand. Okay. As you think to expand into that region, would it be more sort of organic build from the ground up greenfield type capacity expansions, or would you look to acquire some of maybe the smaller players in that region? Good question. A combination of both, and we'll look at the trade-offs. Speed to market is very critical for us and how quickly we have customers that want us in a given geography. We have to look at is it better off to build, and can we get there in the timelines they want and get exactly what we want, or do we buy something and then maybe have to adapt it to get to our standards? We'll look at both options and look at the most efficient way to deploy capital and get the best returns in the quickest period of time we can for our shareholders. Yeah. Are there any other regulation considerations as you look to expand into geographies to keep in mind relative to maybe what you see in the U.S. and Europe? Oh, yeah. As I mentioned earlier, these businesses all have, if it's a Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the FDA, the EPA, we look at these regulators around the world in the different places that we have to. There's one geography right now that we just talked with the team in the last week ago. Alton and I met with them and making sure we understood how the regulators thought about this one given modality going into their geography. That's absolutely something you got to be considering. I guess we have about a minute left. You recently paid down debt. Private equity sponsors sold off some of their positions, you've had some positive news on the litigation front. I guess, what do you think is the most underappreciated part of the Sotera Health story, and what are you most excited about as you move through the next year? Yeah, to your point, I want to double down on a couple of points. Our private equity ownership, they sold their last 31 million shares here in the last month, they're completely out, which is an exciting time for the company. We're well-positioned with the new shareholder base, it's great. Our leverage has come down to 3.2x. We just repriced our debt again. We've taken out probably 100 basis points out of our debt in the last year. That's about $14 million of incremental interest expense that we've been able to save. The company is very well-positioned. I would tell you, if you're looking to be in healthcare, this is a great company. We've grown 20 consecutive years. We get priced every single year. We've got big competitive barriers to entry. Our free cash flow is accelerating. If you want to be in a spot, this is a great place to be in healthcare with a lot of uncertainty. We're a stable force, and we're kind of guys behind healthcare that a lot of people know. It's a great company, great cash flow, and great employees that live safeguarding global health every day. Thank you for having us here. Yeah, great. I appreciate your time. Thank you so much. All right. Great.