Thank you, and good morning, everyone. We are thrilled to welcome our in-person guests and also those joining by webcast to NuScale's 2023 Analyst Day. My name is Scott Kozak, and I'm the Director of Investor Relations. I'm excited for today's event and the opportunity to share our story. This morning, we posted a set of supplemental slides on our investor relations website. As reflected in the Safe Harbor on Slide 2, the information set forth in the presentation and discussed during the course of our remarks in the subsequent Q&A sessions include forward-looking statements, which reflect our current views of existing trends and are subject to a variety of risks, uncertainties, and uncertainties. You can find a discussion of our risk factors, which could potentially contribute to such differences in our SEC filings on Form S-1 and Form 10-Q. Here's the agenda we will cover today. Speakers will include John Hopkins, President and CEO, Dr. José Reyes, Co-founder and Chief Technology Officer, Maria Korsnick, President and CEO of NEI, Clayton Scott, Chief Commercial Officer, Tom Mundy, President, Voyager Services and Delivery, Carl Fisher, Chief Operating Officer, Stephen Burns, former NRC Chairman and Commissioner, Carrie Fosaaen, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, Ramsey Hamady, Chief Financial Officer. So as you see, in addition to hearing from us, we've invited some prestigious guests to add their perspective on business development in the SMR industry, as well as the regulatory environment for nuclear. For those joining us in person, we will conclude the day with a demonstration of our technology. For those joining by webcast, we would like to host you for a site tour in Corvallis, Oregon, so that you can see this demonstration for yourself and visit our other facilities. I'd also encourage you to visit our E2 centers, which simulate NuScale control rooms and are located at several universities across the U.S. and also in Romania. With that, I'll now turn the stage over to John Hopkins, NuScale's President and CEO, to discuss our vision and strategy. John? Appreciate it. I like that video and the fact, too, we've been strongly promote the fact that advanced nuclear and renewables can work together. So you saw that solar plant, it's right adjacent to where our, our small mod reactor plant is gonna be. So during periods of time when the sun's not shining, we can complement and work with that solar plant. So and I think we're gonna see more and more of that as time goes on. Today, I and other senior leaders will share how far we have come as a company and discuss the future of getting small mod reactors, or SMRs, deployed around the world to power the clean global clean energy transition. Our leadership status in the SMR space has earned us a seat at the table with global regulators to streamline and harmonize regulatory processes. With that, I'll kick off the presentation and provide an overview of our vision and our strategy. I'll start by providing some key messages that you're going to hear consistently today. NuScale's revolutionary SMR technology provides a big start in first-mover advantage, importantly, and sustainable. We are a long-term, committed SMR leader. NuScale is preparing to help solve the need for energy security and power the energy transition. The need is massive, and it continues to grow. Demand for new dispatchable, low carbon and zero carbon generation, as well as applications for process heat steam for industrial applications, is unprecedented. Our competitive advantages are significant and sustainable. Not only are we the only SMR design certified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC, we are also very cost competitive. NuScale employs an asset-light model and has established a comprehensive manufacturing and fuel supply infrastructure. In fact, we are already scaling to produce the forgings for our first six modules. I visited Doosan Enerbility and our Korean supply chain partner to see these long lead items firsthand being produced today, right now. NuScale's ability to leverage our mature design to help produce prefab materials in factories and ship to site rather than assemble in the field, is significant from a cost and a timing perspective. We will demonstrate today that NuScale is not a venture capital story, but rather a growth capital story, and we are not a startup. We are in project delivery and currently in manufacturing. As we've moved from R&D to product delivery, NuScale has significantly de-risked our modules. In contrast with SMR peers who remain in the R&D phase, NuScale is deployable and poised to take advantage of our first mover. In fact, we are commercializing our technology with committed customers right now. Beyond NuScale, there are currently no other publicly traded SMR technology companies. As a result, part of our job is to help educate the investment community. I wanna thank Wall Street. There was a major announcement today that I want to steal the thunder of our Chief Commercial Officer with Standard Power, where they just came out and said, in two states, we're going to have two 12-module NuScale power plants working with our partner and our developer, that we have an exclusive arrangement in for one, and we'll get in more on that. This is, for our industry, a massive move because that customer is oriented to working with data centers and what's gonna be a huge potential in AI. I want to be crystal clear on this point. NuScale is a technology provider and an OEM focused on delivering NuScale power modules for energy plants. In other words, NuScale has advanced our technology from R&D to commercialization. The technology we developed, the NuScale power module, is a critical component of a small modular reactor or SMR energy plant. Now that you know who we are, I want to be equally clear on what we are not. NuScale is not a builder or developer of energy infrastructure projects. We do not finance energy projects. We do not operate energy plants, and we do not generate revenue from power sales. We understand the strengths and where we are, and we need the expertise and capabilities of others. We are delighted to have established a strategic partnership with our developer, ENTRA1 Energy. For the past year, in fact, we announced last year, the relationship has been transformational for NuScale and is critical to our commercialization. This plant that we just got, Standard Power, became because we have a developer, and again, we'll talk at length about that in a minute. This is what this industry needs. We can provide the technology, we have the capacity to execute. Somebody like a developer has to be there to help bring the total package together. ENTRA1 Energy is an independent energy production company with 45 years of experience owning, financing, and developing significant projects in the global energy and infrastructure sector. I have known the CEO for many, many years. We used to have a joint venture partnership in a company I used to belong to. They are an American group with a strong and ready pipeline of energy projects around the world. Energy provides customized plant development, ownership, and operating structures that de-risk the project and meet each energy consumer's unique needs. So when you think about NuScale's emerging new business development pipeline, our customer will be ENTRA1 Energy. The energy consumer or end user, whether it be an industrial company, a technology business with data centers for support, or he does another permutation, that's ENTRA1 Energy's customer. ENTRA1 Energy is our exclusive global strategic partner for commercialization and development of energy plants with NuScale SMR technology inside. This partnership provides end users with a one-stop-shop solution to meet growing consumer demand for safe, reliable, 24/7 carbon-free baseload energy. To use more of an example, think of ENTRA1 Energy like a computer system, such as Dell or Hewlett-Packard, and NuScale is the Intel processor inside powering the computer. That's what we are. We are going to stay focused on commercializing technology and let ENTRA1 Energy do what they do best: development, financing, ownership, and more to support energy infrastructure projects. I'm pleased to reiterate that we have a new customer, as I just mentioned, in Standard Power. We, again, are leveraging our ENTRA1 Energy partnership to serve that project with our technology. You'll hear more details in the recent business development and the financial implications from our CEO, Ramsey Hamady, and Clayton, our head of BD. This slide is putting in perspective the size of the opportunity for SMR as an electricity market, estimated at 232 gigawatts by 2050. And keep in mind, this does not even take into account other applications like hydrogen, ammonia, desalination, which represents additional significant market potential. This is only electricity. On top of climate and economic development, energy security has become paramount in many countries around the world. I spoke at COP26, the UN Conference on Climate, and COP27, talking to representatives from Sub-Saharan Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, Eastern Europe. The groundswell that's building in these places and elsewhere for advanced nuclear is incredible, and customer engagement in our technology continues to advance. Nuclear adoption and acceptance are growing quickly in communities all over the world. They need the power, and they need the jobs. Jobs, jobs. Very important to many of these countries who are in decline. If you're gonna have segue from coal to another source, where's the jobs? We aren't content just to be a first mover. We expect to be a market leader over the long term. NuScale has invested $1.6 billion+ to mature and de-risk our power modules. A lot of that capital went to the upfront de-risking that power module, which Dr. Reyes will show you. NuScale is currently manufacturing, as I said, the first set of modules, and we have what's called, and I learned on the street, big kit. And we have poured metal for six modules at Doosan. It's pretty inspiring to go out there and see that happen. This will generate significant savings for our customers, de-risk their projects, and provide confidence in how they allocate site-specific resources. So what's next on the horizon? Nuclear will play an important role in the pursuit of a carbon-free energy transition in tandem with renewables, as I showed you with RoPower. Deep decarbonization will require emission-free baseload generation that can be easily integrated into a renewables-heavy system. Just look to Texas for an example of a state with energy imbalance. Heavily built in the west part of the state, they've got the T and D. We could easily set up plants and help implement and complement renewables in that state. In fact, we're talking to that state. Our technology can provide baseload power to meet flexibility to offset the intermittency of renewable power, as I just mentioned. NuScale's SMR technology can help avoid costly overbuilding of wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, and long-distance transmission lines. We also have the benefit of monetizing exciting alternative projects such as clean energy, such as ammonia for agriculture, working with oil refiners, and really important energy requirements for desalination. All the while, we are able to provide a highly reliable power source to critical public and private infrastructure, such as medical facilities, defense installations, digital data centers, and AI. I don't think any of us have an appreciation how much energy is going to be required with AI. The overall global needs for carbon-free capacity additions, additions for electricity is like 7,000+ gigawatts. Next, I'll touch on some upside opportunities. Achieving net zero targets requires a massive build-out of clean power resources that touch numerous aspects of the economy beyond the electricity market, such as process industries and transportation, each of which produce a similar amount of emissions. As seen in recent research, NuScale's technology enables industrial decarbonization across a broader stretch of applications for efficiently providing high temperature, high pressure, carbon-free steam. Therefore, industrial petrochemical and oil refiners and more have become a key customer target. We have a couple major distinctives that José will get into of why we're attractive to those industries. One is, having gone through the rigor of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, our emergency planning zone truly is a site boundary. It took us seven years to get to that point. Seven years of going through to prove that unlike most or all nuclear power plants that have a 10-mile evacuation zone, ours can literally be a site boundary. We also don't need to be connected to the grid for safety. That's a first in the industry. The other thing goes on is that government support has been key for us, and it's key for any new industry. It's an element in the development of our industry and NuScale, NuScale's technology specifically. I spend a lot of time on the Hill talking with senators and representatives on both sides of the aisle. So I can tell you from personal experience that NuScale support is bicameral, bipartisan, and longstanding. While the fiscal year 2024 appropriations process remains ongoing in Congress, we are encouraged by activity on Capitol Hill so far, with positive developments in both the House and the Senate that demonstrate committed financial support for not only NuScale, but other advanced SMRs to help power the energy transition. In addition, we continue to benefit from strong advocacy by the Department of State and Department of Energy. But let me be very frank, the nuclear industry needs success stories. We need U.S. technologies and projects to succeed, and traction and headway is being made and are being made. It stands right now, no other SMR technologies have submitted a design certification application to the NRC, but it's coming. There's gonna be a wave here in the near term, where other American technologies will enter into the design process. And if we're going to meet decarbonization and clean energy goals, and if we're going to have reliability in our energy source, and if we're going to want energy security, advanced nuclear has to be in the mix. I believe renewables is a great success story, but many of us don't believe they can do it just on the backs of renewables alone. The Inflation Reduction Act has helped advance nuclear, level the playing field with renewables somewhat. There's not a direct impact on us as a technology provider, but it certainly supports power customers and consumers. End users are taking notice, as they've understood that they have to be in construction by 2020, 2032, or risk not being able to take advantage of all the available IRA tax credits. Beyond just utilities, there's major industrials that need clean, reliable 24/7 energy sources as well. This includes clusters of industrial production facilities that share fence lines with one another. If you go to Baytown, Texas, or Geismar, Louisiana, there's multiple process plants. They're in close proximity. If you have the capacity to go and provide them, build, own, operate, build, own, transfer, give them the energy requirements they need for either process heat, or ammonia, or hydrogen production, it's huge. It's another new market that's emerging that's really starting to come on strong because they have an interest. They don't necessarily want to own or operate the plant, but they're open to entering into long-term power purchase agreements to support the construction and development of SMR plants. Glenn Clayton will discuss the relationship we have with ENTRA1 Energy and how they're making that happen. We're also well positioned for coal plant repurposing trends and have already begun executing on our first opportunity, as you saw with RoPower, and soon with Standard Power, that was just announced this morning. Regarding our first committed customer, UAMPS, and the Carbon Free Power Project, we have made substantial progress toward preparing our technology for deployment, maturing our design, and developing our supply chain. We still receive excellent support from the government, but despite our hard work, CFPP, the Carbon Free Power Project, has become a very challenging project. We believe we've been on a path to achieving a price target for the project, but as a result of delays outside of our and our suppliers' control, work is getting behind schedule. We are talking with the customer, and we are talking with government and performing internal analysis to find the appropriate path forward. Importantly, the critical work completed in good faith as part of the CFPP, has advanced our NuScale technology to the point that utilities, governments, industrials, can rely on a proven SMR technology that has regulatory approval, is an active production, and is ready for commercial deployment, positioning NuScale far ahead of the competition. We'll keep you up to date on this topic, but our primary focus today will be on our new customers, future plans, and measures we are taking to control our costs and manage our cash. Key focus areas for the company from the top down. I'm proud of the team we have assembled. We have gone from R&D and now into delivery. And it's a marked difference, 'cause now we're at the point of actually producing plants. We have brought in new experience and skill sets that position us for success as we enter our next phase of development. I'm very excited to hear. You'll be very excited also to hear from the experienced base of this team that we've put together, in particular, José Reyes, who is the developer and founder of this tremendous technology. Next, I'll provide an overview of our long-term strategy for profitable growth. We are accelerating our technology and supply chain readiness through comprehensive manufacturing trials and other measures. We are focused on deploying our SMR modules, which are best in class and we believe more advanced than others. We're going to be expanding into new markets, applications, and capabilities. While government support is important, it is our sustainable competitive advantages that fuel our leadership. Our strong SMR competitive position is enabled by our technology and IP, operational and regulatory excellence, deep nuclear experience, mature and de-risked partner and supplier ecosystems, the mission and safety-first culture, and I mentioned, as well as our management team, many of whom you'll get a chance to meet today. These advantages will support our ability to generate long-term value for all our stakeholders. With that, I'd like to turn it over now to Co-founder and Chief Technology Officer, Dr. José Reyes. José? Be that. Well, thank you. It's a, it's a real pleasure to be here. Whenever we're at Wall Street, we just feel the excitement, the ability to create not just new energy, but a new path forward in terms of investment, in terms of delivery of products. We're glad to share all the exciting news that we have with you today. I'm José Reyes. I'm the Chief Technology Officer and Co-founder of NuScale Power. A little bit about my background. I started my career with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, almost 10 years with the NRC, followed by 30 years working with Oregon State University as a professor and head of the Nuclear Engineering Department, and then co-founded NuScale in 2007. Worked as a passive safety system expert for the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency, and I'm a member of the National Academy of Engineering. So I'm really excited to be able to share with you the technology that we've developed. A lot of innovation happening within the company. I started the company with three base patents. Now I have 180 patents, either granted or pending in 20 countries. The company as a whole has 686 patents, so a lot of exciting work that's going on at NuScale. So let me just move on here. Our mission. Our mission is to provide advanced nuclear power to provide electricity, clean water, and heat, to improve the quality of life for people around the world. That's our mission, and that motivates each one of our team members. We want to improve the quality of life for people around the world. That's our mission statement. We strongly believe in progressing people, a plan, and prosperity, doing this through social equity through environmental stewardship and economic development. We are looking at some key global issues that we would like to help solve. As a community in nuclear and working with renewables, working with a lot of other energy technologies, we believe these problems can be solved. Decarbonization, providing power at large commercial scales, complementing solar and wind by providing grid stability. You heard John talk about repurposing coal-fired plants, the ability to do that because of our small site boundary, providing power for the emerging technologies like AI, and of course, the current issue of energy security. So we are motivated by our mission. It drives us in terms of our innovation and has driven us. We've incorporated safety, simplicity, a very high level of reliability into our design, and these things are important differentiators from traditional nuclear, renewables, and even our other SMR competitors. So we are poised to move forward in a very large market. We are creating a new opportunities in new markets, and you'll hear more about that in a moment with regards to hydrogen production and other areas. So this is our technology, and I'm here to tell you that we've done it. Okay, that's fine. I've been wanting to say this for a long time. We have done it. We have designed and are fabricating the first U.S. small modular reactors. Okay. Thank you. This, of course, this, of course, has been a dream of mine for... I'm gonna get emotional here. This has been a dream of mine for many, many years, and so I'm so excited to be part of this, this great adventure, and I'll try, I'll try to keep a, keep a steady pace here.... So, it's amazing. This is a 77 megawatt electric module. It's all factory fabricated. We've added lots of features in terms of safety that make it unique and that and able to be located near end users. Site boundary emergency planning zone, process heat for industrial processes, fully factory fabricated, reduced operation and maintenance. As you see on the right there, that's one of our reactor buildings, the 12-module plant, like we might build at the standard, six modules on one side, six on the other. That's a 924-megawatt capacity system. It's scalable. You can add modules as modules are needed. So we're excited about that. We are leveraging a tremendous amount of past experience, 67 years of civilian and naval operation of light water reactors, and that's what's given us the significant advantage in terms of our licensing, in terms of our computer code development, our database, is a very highly detailed database. So we leveraged, that was our starting point. We went from there, and we spent another $1.6 billion to de-risk this design, and $150 million just on state-of-the-art testing and demonstrations. And so, you're most welcome to come visit us in Corvallis to see our test facilities. But that was big because each one of those tests had to be audited by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. So we have a very strong record of successful performance of these types of test facilities. So a little bit about our, what we've done in terms of, of, of our design and what's different about our design. We added a lot of functionality. So this is something that a lot of folks haven't thought about in the past, but this is something that makes us very different. So first is in terms of our safety, and I'll talk more about safety in just a moment. But we offer what we call a fully passive safety system, okay? We don't need any AC or DC power for safety. And in fact, for our design, the reactors will shut themselves down without any operator action, without any AC or DC power, and they remain cooled for an unlimited period of time without the need to add water. So that's a first in commercial nuclear power. And it was a significant foundational part of our design that allows us to do a lot of other things, which I'll describe, but everything is underpinned by our safety. Worst case conditions, reactor shut down without operator action, without AC or DC power, without the need to add water. So that's a key point. So we're the only SMR that's been approved by the NRC with this type of capability. It is significantly smaller. John mentioned our emergency planning zone. It took us seven years to get to that point, but we've also added black start and island mode capability. You'll see some of that displayed here later today on our E2 Center. So meaning by black start, you can start the plant from a one small module, powering up the entire plant, picking up all the house loads. First responder power. As we look at the increase in frequency of severe weather events, we start seeing that these our plants should be hardened, okay? We need to have hardened plants that will withstand these types of events. But how do you restore the grid? Well, the way in which we are able to restore the grid is we don't have to be connected to the grid for safety. So we can go into our island mode, we can be at hot operational conditions, and as soon as we receive notice that portions of the grid have been restored, we can immediately begin dispatching power. So we're the first to respond in those events to help restore the grid, as opposed to current nuclear today, which is by law required to be the last, I mean, to respond to or they're the first to get power to get to their safety system. So it's a very different model. So first responder power is unique to our design. And, of course, we're looking at the highly reliable power multi-modules, and we'll talk more about some of the... Well, John mentioned some of the mission-critical facilities that we're looking at. This key criteria, I think, is quite important. The idea that we are able to check all these boxes because this is something that's needed for the modern grid, okay? Base load capable, yes, we can do that. Zero emission, we can do that. And effectively deployable at scale. I think that's something that's been missing for nuclear. The ability to just add modules as modules are needed. So having this zero emission base load power is key, but also being able to do it in an affordable manner and in a scalable manner. So just a brief comparison, how it compares to a large plant. So, we announced today 2, 2 large nuclear plants, scalable plants. They're each about 924 MW apiece. So that's comparable in output to the large-scale nuclear power, which is typically 1,000 MW. We're a much smaller footprint, and with a site boundary Emergency Planning Zone, and because of our size and our ability to be located closer to the end user, I'll be talking a bit about some of the applications that go with that. So the fact that we have, we can have a site boundary Emergency Planning Zone allows us to be closer to the end users of different products, like chemical productions and things like that, hydrogen. We've got this new level of safety. We're looking at a 3-year build for our plants from first pour of concrete. And we have what I call staggered refueling. The ability to refuel one module while the rest of the modules continue to produce power, so we never shut down the entire plant. I hope you're writing down questions because I love questions. So there's a little bit about the competition. Of course, you've heard some from John, regarding the SMRs. There is a wave of SMRs coming... And we're excited about that, too. But in terms of our differentiators, we are a light water reactor technology, so it's very well known, and not just globally, in terms of all the reactors that are operating today, but also in terms of the regulatory framework. It really has been built for light water reactors. So a lot of, a lot of interest there. Our fuel supply, I think that's an important one. We use commercially available, low-enriched uranium, and we're not using the high-assay low-enriched uranium that's currently needed for some of the advanced designs. That, that can become a bottleneck for, for many, of these advanced designs. We don't use that fuel. We have, we have commercial, contracts with, with, fuel vendors who will provide us that fuel, and many, many, vendors actually provide that fuel today. So that's not a bottleneck for us. Of course, in the licensing space, we've made significant advancements with the regulator, getting a design certification. We've submitted our standard design approval for our uprated power for the 77-megawatt version, and that's well on its way. In terms of coping period, I think we've set the standard. This was kind of a goal of ours from the beginning, to be able to say: We no longer want to be a risky environment. We wanna be able to have a design which it has an unlimited coping period. We don't need to worry about having to add water long term for the cooling of a reactor. So many of the designs, and I think all of the advanced designs now, have included that as a design goal, and I think that's a very worthy goal. So what do we mean by a site boundary emergency planning zone? So, it does really provide a significant advantage. As we talk to many of the coal-fired plant operators, many of them are aging plants, so they want to retire those plants. We see an opportunity to repurpose those plants. We use some of the transmission, some of the water, some of the infrastructure to put a NuScale plant. You can see that little dot in the middle, that would be us, in terms of our boundary. You look at a 10-mile radius, that's what would be required for a typical large light water reactor, to give you a sense of scale there. This took a lot of work. We started interacting with the regulator seven years ago to talk about the methodology that you'd use to calculate the size of that emergency planning zone. That's a big deal because even though the NRC said at this point now, because of all the efforts, have come up with the emergency preparedness rule for SMRs and advanced reactors, you still have to have a methodology to do that calculation to present to the NRC. That methodology has to be approved. It took us seven years to get it approved for us, and our methodology is proprietary. So it's a big lift. It's a big lift for the SMRs that are coming behind us, because that took a lot of work to demonstrate that you meet all the regulatory requirements that you would meet at 10-mile radius, you meet that at 200-300 meters at your fence. It's a big, big lift, and we were able to do it. So this is a really important feature, but it's an enabler. It enables us to do a lot of different things. Back in 2014, we started looking at integrated energy systems. So we've been looking at this for many, many years, almost 10 years now, and how we can better utilize our plant effectively, for other markets. And part of it was driven, again, by the need for innovation and solving some of these global problems. I'll start with water, because I like to talk about that. Many parts of the world are undergoing droughts or don't have enough water. One of our modules, coupled to a reverse osmosis system, can produce 77 million gallons of clean water per day. That's one. Four modules would be enough for about 3-4 million people. Just to give you a sense of what could be done with this type of a system. Hydrogen production. One module can produce about 50 metric tons of hydrogen per day, if you use the high-temperature, solid oxide electrolysis cell systems. So that's a big deal. Coal fire plant replacement, we already talked about that, but all these things require power, and that's a, that's again, one of the enablers, because of our small footprint, our site boundary, emergency planning zone. What that allows us to do is to be closer to the end user. I'm going to talk about process heat in just a moment. It gets me all excited. We need to be closer to the end user because they don't necessarily want to be within your emergency planning zone. They'd like to be outside that fence, right? That's a big deal. That's an enabler for us, and it's allowing us to start talking to many, many different markets and opportunities. We haven't even included that yet in terms of our discussions with profitability and things like that. Here it is. Hi. This is something that's relatively new. Back in March of this year, I attended a meeting, a DOE meeting in Houston, where we unveiled this. We've been doing some studies on this, and the idea of producing process heat for lots of different, you know, chemical processes. What this shows on this chart, you can see that the bars there, synthetic fuels, ammonia. Now, our plant typically produces steam, you know, about 800,000 lbs per hour of steam at somewhere around just under 300 degrees Celsius. We can address some of these processes for the chemical plants, but we saw the need to go to higher temperatures and higher pressures. We teamed up with a compressor vendor, a commercial compressor vendor, and we found that we can take our steam, compress it, and heat it, because you're doing pressure work on the steam, to about 500 degrees Celsius, and we can still produce about 500,000 pounds of steam per hour. Very, very competitive and well within the requirements for many of these chemical processes. So now we've extended the output of our steam, temperatures and pressures, so that we can support these types of industries. Since March of this year, 19 oil and gas companies, steel companies, and chemical companies have contacted me. They wanna know about this. This is a real need for them, and they need to start looking at how they're gonna decarbonize their processes. So they are seriously looking at this. We are now also investigating the opportunities to go to higher temperatures. What's unique about this is now we're saying that light water reactors can be part of the solution in terms of these high-temperature systems. You don't only have to have a high-temperature reactor. You can take any light water reactor, and with our technology coupled to these, high-pressure, compression systems, you can actually become part of the solution for decarbonizing a very, very large market. So I'm really excited about this. So right now we're looking at, I mentioned about 500 degrees Celsius, 1,500 pounds per square inch. We're looking to go to higher, temperatures. We currently have a project with Shell Global, looking at hydrogen production. We just got announced with the, with the—for a DOE GAIN proposal accepted, to do a study on integrating our system with high compression, high temperature, with a large chemical plant. Of course, this is all because we started with that foundational aspect of safety, having a smaller footprint, having a site boundary EPZ. Just to sum up, you know, we're dedicated to our mission. We really wanna improve the quality of life for people around the world. In order to do that, we had to incorporate unparalleled levels of safety so that we can have a smaller footprint, be located closer to the end users in different markets. That's created very strong differentiators from traditional nuclear, renewables, and potential SMRs. And we really are well positioned for the application of our technology to entire new markets. So, with that, I'm gonna end my portion here. Looking forward to your questions, and I'll turn it over to Maria Korsnick, the CEO of NEI. Well, great. Thank you very much. Always great to hear you, Dr. Reyes, and I'll just put in a plug. He is also a University of Maryland grad. Happy to be here today, and a special thanks to NuScale for inviting me. I'm Maria Korsnick, President and CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute. We represent more than 340 different organizations in an industry that directly employs over 100,000 people throughout the United States. Our members range from advanced nuclear companies to developers to utility companies. And actually, we represent the entire supply chain for the nuclear industry. And today, I wanna talk to you about the incredible advances that we're making in advanced nuclear technology and really the enormous opportunity that we have, and companies like NuScale are showing and creating. I'm gonna get right down to it. This is a once-in-a-generation moment for nuclear. It really has emerged as the key to meeting energy security and climate goals, as well as rapidly increasing the demand for, meeting the demand for electricity around the world. You know, when I talk to the investment community, about nuclear, you know, I often get one question: "You know, what's driving all of this?" The best answer that I can give really is a single word, and that's demand. You saw it in some of the slides that John and, José both, presented. But really broadly, the demand is customers that are really demanding this affordable, reliable, clean energy. And then you have utilities that are demanding these clean sources that can power those communities, and they want that power 24/7, 365. You have businesses that are demanding versatile technology that can fuel their operations while reducing their carbon footprint. Why do they want to reduce their carbon footprint? Because that's what's being demanded of them. They wanna show that the product that they're making is green. Well, then the power that they're using to make that product needs to be green. Now, you have elected leaders that are demanding reliable and affordable options for that clean energy future, and they wanna make sure they're getting that clean energy future with good-paying jobs. When you add all of that up, these demands really all point to the expansion of nuclear energy. Honestly, there's no credible decarbonization scenario that does not include nuclear energy. You've got utilities, you've got policymakers, you've got private industry, and they're all going towards this sort of next generation of nuclear. Commitments for new projects are absolutely expanding. We'll talk about that. It's going across state lines, international borders, and across broad sectors of the economy. So at the same time that we're demonstrating this advanced technology, that's gonna completely reshape the energy landscape, and NuScale is one example, and as they've mentioned, there are other technologies that are coming down this pipeline. But NuScale's small modular reactors, which you're gonna hear even more about today, really cutting edge, because for some of the things that you've already heard this morning, that they've advanced quite a bit in the licensing process. So there's really no more question about whether these versatile, reliable, clean energy reactors are gonna get built. You know, I would really argue now it's really a matter of how fast can we build them, and who's gonna lead the way? Really, this is no time to hesitate. Over the past several years, we're really sort of doubling down, has been kind of the chosen course of the largest energy stakeholders in the world. The U.S. government is doubling down, and let's talk about that. There's a good reason for that, because nuclear is the most reliable, affordable, carbon-free source at our disposal. It's also the key to meeting our clean energy commitments and decarbonizing the entire economy. As you just saw in Dr. Reyes' slide, it's not just about electricity, it's also about high-temperature steam. It's also about hydrogen. And the nuclear reactors, they can do that. Actually, they can do it, you know, electricity during the day, and you can do hydrogen at night. You know, you can do the high-temperature steam. There's a versatility that's kind of built in to these designs. The federal government has created some unprecedented incentives to really take advantage of nuclear's versatility and to get these advanced reactors built. It's really reinforced that nuclear is an indispensable asset, and it's really at the center of the government's vision for clean energy, and it should be at the centerpiece of investment portfolios. Support starts at the White House. In 2021, the Biden administration declared the next four years a can't-miss opportunity. U.S. Energy Secretary Granholm, pictured here, has called nuclear a critical part of our decarbonization equation. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, a bipartisan majority in Congress really recognizes that the path to an affordable, clean energy future runs right through nuclear, and they've backed it up with unprecedented levels of funding. I'll mention just a few. Over the last several years, the United States enacted historic infrastructure legislation. These laws will preserve the existing nuclear generation, which supplies nearly half of America's clean energy, and it also will accelerate the deployment of technology like NuScale's. The 2021 infrastructure bill had $6 billion in a civil nuclear credit program, and it also directed $2.5 billion towards the advanced reactor demonstrations. Just last year, Congress added enormous new incentives for nuclear energy. The nuclear projects are now eligible for a clean energy production tax credit. They're also included in a clean electricity investment credit for zero-emission facilities. So this type of support is really unprecedented. In a hyper partisan political climate that we live in today, it's really a rare area of agreement. You know, nuclear energy had support under the Biden administration, and it also had support under the Trump administration. So it really should leave no question about the government's view. Nuclear is vital to a clean energy grid and to our economic future. And that commitment and that perspective is why you can expect support for nuclear to last Congress to Congress and administration to administration. And investors can also count on incredible support at the state level. State governments are realizing that advanced nuclear can absolutely satisfy their energy needs and help invigorate their economies. And they're not just, you know, reconsidering nuclear, they're really looking at what incentives they can offer and how can they attract nuclear to their state. And that's why we've seen more than 200 nuclear-related bills this year alone in states across our country. In years past, gosh, if we would have been lucky to even see a dozen nuclear-related bills. I wanna give you a feeling for the inflection point that we're finding ourselves at today. You have non-nuclear states like North and South Dakota, they've passed bills to study small modular reactors. Wyoming is determining how they can use nuclear to transform their state's energy economy. Indiana enacted a landmark law to pave the way for small modular reactors. California took advantage of the civil nuclear credit program that I mentioned to keep its Diablo Canyon plant online. West Virginia lifted its moratorium. They had a moratorium to build nuclear, and they lifted that so that they're able to build nuclear now in West Virginia. Virginia established a new energy R&D fund that's gonna help support nuclear workforce development and site selection. So these states are really recognizing that advanced reactors will be local economic engines, and they're gonna create quality, secure jobs. You heard that in what John Hopkins said. It's not just about creating that energy, but let's create some great jobs to go with that energy. You're closing down those coal plants? You don't need to lose those jobs. You don't need to lose those communities. We're gonna bridge that, and we can use that talent and build and operate these new reactors. And they're gonna do all of that without emitting pollutants that today, some of the way that we produce energy, actually impacts people's health. So the investment world is really recognizing that this commitment to next-generation nuclear, that it's real, and through things that you're gonna hear today, realize that it's not just here in the United States, it's around the world. Just a couple of examples. Pelican Energy Partners pivoted from its fossil fuel portfolio, and they announced a new fund strategy that was dedicated to the nuclear industry. MSCI listed nuclear as an ESG trend to follow in 2023, and I understand that BlackRock is considering a nuclear-themed investment security. The CEO of Brookfield Asset Management recently cited an emphasis on energy and security as a reason to invest in nuclear. Mark Carney, who heads Brookfield's transition fund, said that: "Energy transition does not work without nuclear energy." Investment is really following this trend, in part because nuclear technology promises to decarbonize the entire economy. Again, NuScale is really leading the industry in these applications. Nucor, the nation's oldest and largest steelmaker, is investing millions in NuScale's efforts to build their SMR technology as they consider using SMRs to power their steel production. Again, why? Because then that steel will be green steel. That's not the only industry that's exploring advanced nuclear. Data centers are looking at nuclear to run their power-intensive servers. Dow Chemical is looking at nuclear to power some manufacturing down in Texas. These projects don't even touch on one of the biggest applications of nuclear that you heard from Dr. Reyes, and that's hydrogen production. NuScale is partnering with Shell on that hydrogen production concept, and the Department of Energy is supporting other hydrogen projects that are in the planning phases now. What does this all have to do, and how is it that we're getting all of this demand? We're really talking about demand, not for one or two reactors. This pie is really big, so it's hundreds, I'll be honest, if not thousands of reactors. Let me give you an example of that. We recently polled our chief nuclear officers. Those are folks that are operating today's reactors. We said, "What are you guys looking at as you look ahead?" Together, they're expecting to add more than 100 gigawatts of new nuclear to the grid, the bulk of that coming online by 2050. Just for perspective, we have about 100 gigawatts of nuclear today, so that's talking about doubling the amount of nuclear. The Department of Energy came out with their report, their Advanced Reactor Liftoff report, and they see an even greater demand, right? They believe the U.S. nuclear capacity has the potential to triple to around 300 gigawatts by 2050. Bless you. All driven by advanced nuclear technologies. We're already seeing movement from this, from conversations to commitments. Let's just look at last year. The Tennessee Valley Authority said they could use 20 or more SMRs. Duke Energy, in their integrated resource plan that they recently released, showed a need for a similar number. Dominion submitted their own plan in Virginia that included between 6 and 18 small modular reactors. When you look out at the number of builds on the horizon, nuclear is just one of the best bets that there is. Demand isn't limited to the United States. Demand is really growing around the world because leaders realize that energy security is national security. If you look over at Europe, I think it's a, an unfortunate, poignant example of that, with the unfortunate aggression of Russia on Ukraine, and our hearts go out to the Ukrainians. The idea of weaponizing energy and the impact and effect that that's having when Russia shut off the gas supply to Europe, it really makes people take stock of: How am I getting that energy, and who am I counting on to get that energy? As we look ahead, for example, NuScale is moving ahead with their project in Romania. The Biden administration, you saw the clip earlier, announced, along with other nations, partners, up to $275 million in support for deploying a NuScale small modular reactor. Elsewhere in Europe, KGHM, which is Europe's largest mining company, is looking to deploy NuScale technology in Poland. That country has also placed orders for three advanced reactors, with more in the works. Some of the most fervent support that we have for nuclear has come from Ukraine, a country that really knows the importance of energy and knows nuclear energy very well. They now know the importance of that energy security, unfortunately, better than anyone. As they look to their future and when it's time to rebuild in Ukraine, that country plans to add nine new large reactors as a centerpiece of its energy plan. They also announced plans to develop small modular reactors, which I know NuScale is joining. We have countries across Africa, like Kenya and Ghana, that are also joining the charge. In Ghana, the U.S. recently announced support to establish a regional training hub for small modular reactors, and in fact, I'm headed there later this month with a delegation from the Department of Energy. U.S. companies are also establishing exciting new partnerships in Asia. In Indonesia, for example, the United States has agreed to support SMR deployment using NuScale technology, and the pilot includes targeted support from the Department of State, as well as funding from the U.S. Trade and Development Agency. But global demand isn't only about new markets. We're witnessing really a sea change in opinion in countries where nuclear capacity had previously stalled. In the past year, South Korea has announced plans for new nuclear construction and license renewals or extending the life of the plants they have. India, where demand for electricity is skyrocketing, raised targets for their nuclear generation capacity and identified the development of SMRs with foreign technology partners as a priority for them. Earlier this year, I attended a G7 event where the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, and France all agreed to work together to strengthen the fuel supply chain and bolster nuclear energy. I was just in Vienna, speaking with more international partners on how they can strengthen their nuclear presence, and I'll be back there again next week. The U.K.'s latest energy strategy includes adding 24 gigawatts of nuclear by 2050, enough to power roughly 18 million homes. In June, the United States and the U.K. announced a framework for a 21st century economic partnership, which includes the deployment of advanced and peaceful nuclear technologies. Canada has established tax credits, interestingly, very similar to some of the pro-nuclear incentives that we did here in the United States. It's been interesting to watch as countries are sort of one-upping, each other, trying to ensure that they're getting in, the conversation. Those tax credits are already driving demand for both large and small reactors in Canada. Japan is extending and replacing its current fleet and committing to next-generation reactors as part of their clean energy mix. That's a complete reversal from the country's decision to completely shut down and phase out nuclear just a little more than a decade ago. France has also reversed its policy on reducing, nuclear capacity, and now they've introduced a plan to build six reactors, and I think you've seen President Emmanuel Macron went so far as to say it's now a nuclear renaissance, and the government is considering even more new builds. Sweden just updated its 100% renewable policy to a 100% fossil-free policy, which will enable new reactor construction, and their decision is part of a broader trend of policies that recognize and fully value nuclear's clean energy production. In fact, just this week, we had a Swedish delegation in our offices, and it included Minister Ebba Busch, and she is Minister of Energy and also the Deputy Prime Minister. And, you know, they really pointed out that they want more nuclear energy because from a scientific standpoint, that was the best way to achieve Sweden's goals. It's a conclusion that others around the world are also coming to. And I don't wanna pit nuclear against renewables. You know, it's not one or the other. It's and, right? It's a partnership between nuclear and wind and solar that's gonna give us the best solution, right, as we decarbonize. And these countries know that, that by making nuclear part of the centerpiece of those energy systems, that they can get their emissions cut, they can strengthen their energy independence, and they can even save money. And when we say energy security and energy independence, right, what are we talking about? Because when you put the energy in these cores, right, you're good to go for 18 months or 24 months, some designs even much longer. And so you're not counting on a pipeline, you're not counting on a delivery to keep that energy going. And so that's what we're talking about when we talk energy security. You know you have it. It's right there. So carbon emission credits today, if you look in the European Union, are trading at nearly $100 a metric ton. A carbon price that's that high will absolutely increase the cost to gas-fired electricity pretty significantly, which makes new nuclear even more attractive. In fact, power prices in Europe are often twice what we have here in the United States, and that's in large part because of that carbon cost. This creates really an incredibly strong export opportunity for NuScale and for other vendors that are providing this carbon-free technology. So there's no question that the global demand is gonna last. We're seeing it firsthand at NEI. It's just in the last 6 months, we've had international delegation visits in our office, and we host trade missions. We've had 18 different countries come through our offices just in the last 6 months alone, and in comparison, I would say last year and years past, we might have had 3 or 4 international visits and trade missions. Clearly, again, we're at an inflection point. The only question is how much that the U.S. industry and investors are going to benefit from this demand. What do I mean by that? Well, for U.S. companies, the opportunity is very clear and massive. According to one estimate, revenues for U.S. companies alone could be $1.9 trillion over the next 30 years. $1.9 trillion that the U.S. could benefit by having this U.S. technology exported to other countries. So U.S. companies are technology leaders. They're absolutely poised to take advantage. There are, again, dozens of SMR projects ongoing, and NuScale has received the first design cert from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. That paves the way for approval in other countries. NuScale has deliberately developed a supply chain, as John mentioned, through some of their global partnerships, and their growth and the growth of the industry as a whole, I think, really offers value that is very obvious. While this investment opportunity is undeniable, U.S. leadership also matters, and it matters for geopolitical reasons. You know, the world is really hungry for nuclear energy, as we shared, and so make no mistakes, someone is going to build it. The question is, who is that going to be? If the U.S. industry doesn't build it, there are some state-owned enterprises, for example, Russia and China. You can see right here on this map, right, where any place that you see something colored in, so whether it's green or whether it's blue, it's saying whether that's China or Russia or both. These are places that Russia and China have hard and soft MOUs, infrastructure development, and reactors contracted, proposed, or under construction. So make no mistake about it, right? There are countries that are very interested in deciding how they can be a part of, and control, energy in other people's countries. So when nations pursue nuclear power, think about what that does, right? Their choice of partner really matters, and it matters a great deal because nuclear development forges deep economic and long-term relationships. These relationships can last for 100 years, if not more. Right? You're going to build it, 5, 6 years. You're going to operate it, 60, 80, maybe even longer. You're going to decommission it. It's a long-term strategic relationship. So simply put, I would argue the world is safer and more secure when nations who share the highest standards are the preferred partners. So we not only export our equipment, we export our standards along with our technology. Russia and China don't play by the same rules. They have no qualms about weaponizing energy production. Russia has already showed that through their invasion of Ukraine. I think they've made that abundantly clear. So ceding leadership in nuclear exports to Russia and China would be a strategic disaster for the United States from a safety and security perspective. So there is a deep bipartisan commitment to preventing that outcome. But we can't lose ground, right? We have to act. Russia and China are in the process of signing agreements and starting builds around the world. Right now, 22 exported Russian reactors are under construction, including in Egypt, in Hungary, in Turkey, and in Iran. So it's quite clear that the world is better off when U.S. companies are the go-to partner for nuclear development, and private investment in American nuclear technology is a huge part of the solution. So by investing now and establishing our U.S. companies and as suppliers in these key markets, you can really open the door to exponentially greater opportunity down the road. And you can be confident that those investments will be aligning with the priorities of the U.S. government. So historic demand, it's here for a reason. We need to build that clean, reliable, affordable energy, and we need to help us decarbonize quickly. So thanks to NuScale and innovators across the industry, we have this technology to get the job done, and there's no question that the more we build, the better we're going to get. Today, investors are in a unique position to capitalize on this demand, and the world is really building this clean energy system, and next-generation nuclear is going to be at its core. The market opportunities are nearly endless. By doubling down now on nuclear, you can help shape the industry that's going to help shape the world's energy future. Thank you so much, and I'm happy to take any questions if you have them. ... No, I'm happy to stand if there's any questions. The bright lights are a little bit bright here, so. I have one from online. Okay. How much financial support will need to come from the U.S. compared to other developed nations to scale SMRs globally? Well, you know, it's a tough question to answer because the designs are all very different and unique. As you heard from Dr. Reyes earlier, some of these designs are gonna use light water fuel, if you will, low-enriched fuel. Some are gonna use that high-assay low-enriched fuel. But I do think that... And if you go back to that DOE report that I mentioned, the Advanced Reactor Liftoff, they're pretty clear that we need to build 4 or 5 of the same thing to really come down that cost curve. And from the first time you build it to the fourth or the fifth time, they're really expecting a significant reduction in cost and in schedule. So I would challenge us, you know, the thing that we have not been doing as a country is building nuclear very much. And so I'd say this new phase is really an opportunity to do that, and the more we do it, the better we're gonna get.... So again, really hard question to answer in terms of, you know, it's gonna be X dollars, it's gonna be design design dependent, but it behooves us as a country and as the government to continue this investment, because as you can see, this is simply a launching-off point in terms of how many of these things that will need to be will need to be built, not only here in the United States, but around the world. Another one I have from online: What are some of the most attractive market opportunities abroad in terms of countries fast-following the U.S. on SMR deployment? Yeah, well, it's interesting. You know, nuclear is hard to be first, but it's like everybody wants to be second and third. And so you're really, you're really seeing that, not only here in the United States, but but abroad. Honestly, I'd challenge you to maybe just read the headlines. Just off the top of my head, we've talked about France saying that they wanna go ahead and build, the United Kingdom, Romania, Poland. We were just in a trade mission to the Czech Republic. They have an open nuclear tender right now, which should be closing in this month, for them to begin their down-select process for which design. I'm headed to Ghana, as I mentioned in my talk. Any of those countries on the eastern part of Europe, for obvious reasons, many of them, I'll pick Finland as a great example. They were already building a Russian reactor. They have a partially built Russian reactor, and after what they saw happen in Ukraine, they said, "No, I'll leave this partially built reactor. I don't want to do business with you anymore." Who was in my office this week? Finland. So already you have these countries saying, "I do wanna still build nuclear, but I would like a different partner." And very much, these countries are looking to the United States. What do they wanna know? Are we serious? Okay. Are you guys serious? Because, you know, just a couple of years ago, I remember that you were shutting plants down. So do I wanna do business with you? 'Cause I wanna build that long-term relationship with somebody that's gonna stay in the business. That's why things you're hearing, like with NuScale, is so important, because it's demonstrating we are serious. We are gonna get in this business. It's why what we're seeing as investment from our U.S. government is so important because it says, "Look, they are serious." And it's not just gonna be this administration. I have confidence that it's gonna also be the next administration. I would say honestly, almost with the exception of Germany, I don't think that there's any country over in Europe that isn't taking a strong look at nuclear. If they have nuclear now, they're extending those plants and wanting to build. That's what the Swedish message was in our offices earlier this week. And there's also countries that don't even have nuclear. Poland is a great example, and they're willing to, you know, to jump in because, Poland is a great example. They're really heavily dependent on coal, and they know they have to change, and they wanna change, but they also wanna maintain those jobs, and they wanna be clean, and bingo, right? You come right to nuclear. And I just talked about Europe, but, you know, Asia and Africa as well, countries are looking to nuclear. It's actually amazing. And I think John mentioned in his comments earlier, almost we can't comprehend how big this pie is, and it's because there's so many things simultaneously changing. People talk about our U.S. electricity, and you look at a grid that we have today, and they say, "You know, when we're going to go through this decarbonization, the first thing you do is electrify." Now they're talking about a grid that's 2, 3, maybe even 4 times the size of the grid that we have today, right? That's an almost incomprehensible amount of energy that's gonna be needed, but that's just electricity. And honestly, electricity is the easiest thing to decarbonize, right? Now, you get into the steam systems, and you get into some of these manufacturing that need more than just electricity. Some of these steel companies or, like, chemical companies, they need that much higher energy source, and that's where the hydrogen's gonna come in, or the high-temperature steam is gonna come in. And again, that's additional demand, right? Additional demand. When you need that high thermal steam, et cetera, that's gonna have to come from a thermal plant. You're not gonna get that from a windmill, right? That's why we're saying it really needs to be a partnership so that we can answer all of these decarbonization needs. Yes, sir. Hi, this is George Gianarikas from Canaccord Genuity. I just wanted to follow up on a point you made when you showed that map of Russia and Chinese influence. I mean, you mentioned Finland, but how much, how big is the opportunity for the US to dislodge either of those two countries in some of the areas where they have significant influence already? Huge, and that's what I mentioned, $1.9 trillion. That's our opportunity, and that includes going to some of those countries that, in fact, have had these agreements, let's say, that they wanted to go Russian. I think everybody is taking stock. Now, Russia did just build a reactor in Turkey. They did just build a reactor in Egypt. You know, it's going forward. Honestly, you know, the United States has a different business proposition, right? We don't say: I'm gonna build it for you. I'm gonna be in your country. I'm gonna operate it for you. It's really mine, but it's in your country. That's not the U.S. proposition. What we say is: We'd like to work together with you. We'd like you to be a part of operating this. We'll make sure that your folks get the jobs and get the skills to safely operate this. It's a partnership. So we go in with a whole different message. And again, let's just watch what we all saw happen between Russia and Ukraine. The way that we're talking about doing business with countries is resonating a whole lot more....a whole lot more, $1.9 trillion. That's just between now and 2050. Can I ask you a question? The reason NuScale is in Romania, is because the U.S. government intervened and convinced them not to go ahead with that contract, utilize the U.S.. Yeah, thank you, and good morning. I had a question. You know, clearly, the current administration's been pro making announcements around wind generation. Obviously, the U.S. federal government consumes a lot of electricity. Is there any talk or thoughts about the U.S. kind of setting nuclear targets in the future of how much consumption of nuclear energy they would like, which could potentially help expand the demand for new nuclear reactors in the U.S.? Yeah, absolutely. I'm going to twist that, though, a little bit. You said, are they going to set targets? I don't necessarily see that as the case where they're going to say, as a government, "I want this much power from nuclear energy," kind of thing. But let's look at it in another way. The Department of Defense, they have a lot of places that need power for the things that the Department of Defense does. Think about the bases that they have in lots of different locations. They're really very interested in nuclear, and part of it is what you heard earlier, and that is: What if the grid goes down? Well, if the grid goes down, they still want to make sure that they have power at their places, and they want to now make sure that they have power at those places with clean energy. And so, you heard, I don't know, let's just say in the last several months, an official from the Department of Defense talked about we might need 150 or so, in this case, they were talking more microreactors. And so they're thinking about that, from a very, again, it's a large deployment, because, you know, that's wonderful from a technology like nuclear. Again, we just got to get good at this, and one of the ways you get good at it is you build a lot of them. So I would look to some signals that we'll see from the Department of Defense. Right now, I think they're funding three different microreactor technologies, that they're looking into in different places. But absolutely, you're going to see that come forward, and it's not that they're the only ones that would do micros. Micros are something that's maybe 20 megawatts or less. But any kind of remote location, think of on a remote place in Alaska or remote places in Canada. Well, if they're remote, kind of hard to get to. So if you put something there that needs a lot of replenishment for that fuel supply, well, that's hard to get it to also. Now, if you put something there that doesn't need as much replenishment in that fuel supply, bingo, that works. And so that's why nuclear looks like a great option. Maria, Thomas Meric, Janney Montgomery Scott. Just a question on the overall light water SMR market. How many designs do you think the market can sustain? As I mentioned, this pie is really big. You're asking specifically about light water, technology, but I think you saw in some of these charts, just how adaptable and versatile that this technology can be. And so, honestly, I think the fact that you're going to have multiple players in this space, whether it's light water or non-light water, we should, we should want that, honestly, because you want to diversify that supply chain. And, and so some of these designs, like what you saw here, those modules are going to be small enough that they can be factory built. Some other designs that you'll see come out are going to be a little bit larger, and so they'll have some factory construction, but, maybe not all. They're all going to have sort of their own maybe pluses and minuses. I think the fact that you know some of these light water technologies are going to use the current fuel that we're familiar with is helpful, and just from a you know risk perspective. But I also have confidence that we'll absolutely work through challenges in fuel supply and because this market is just too big, it's too hungry. So people are already coming forward to add that capacity on the fuel supply side. Maria, thank you so much. That's all the time we have for questions today. Great. Thank you. Just a little clicker. Okay. Well, good morning, everybody. Glad everybody is here, bright, early, ready to go. My name is Clayton Scott. I'm the Chief Commercial Officer for NuScale. I'm responsible for the global business deploy, commercial business of the company. You know, I've been with NuScale just a little over a year, and I'm actually kind of liking this building because the last time I was in this building was about a little over a year and a half ago when we were ringing the bell. And, and let me be more specific. Dr. Reyes was in here like a kid in a candy store, and he was hammering the bell, breaking gavels, you know, causing damage, having a great time. It was a miracle moment for us, so it was kind of good. Today, to be here to talk about where we are, how much we've accomplished, and the great announcement that we put out this morning is kind of exciting. So, it's. I'm kind of liking this spot. It's a good place. So having said that, a lot of things have happened. I mean, we put in $1.6 billion into our technology of getting us to where we are from an R&D perspective, from a certification perspective, and we've built this moat around... that's really created a foundation that nobody else has really come close to doing. So I think that is something substantive in the market.... We're ready for customers. Our readiness, our supply chain readiness, the fact that we have secured predominantly all of our supply chain at one level or another, is a given. It provides a lot of confidence for our future customers. Manufacturing. We're pouring. As John said, we're pouring metal. We're actually forging our first 6 modules today in the factory, and Tom is gonna show what I think is a pretty exciting video later on, and you'll see some of that activity happening as it's going. The other thing we'll talk about a little bit later is the relationship that we've created, this partnership of ENTRA1, that I'll go through the model, which I think is quite significant and different in many ways. A lot of the things I'm not, you know, have been discussed in a lot of detail from Dr. Reyes and from John, so I'm not, I'm not gonna go into a lot of those things in detail. But I think certain elements that you'll continually hear today, you kinda need to hear, 'cause they, they're important to hear. You know, we have a standard design that we're, we're to be manufactured in a factory. We're the only technology that's certified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We have best-in-class features. When, when Dr. Reyes designed this reactor, I have to admit it, you know, simple things are the most difficult things to achieve in life. And I have to say, hats off to Dr. Reyes, because he's come up with such a simplicity of design that you would go, "Wow, how come nobody else has thought of that?" But it's one of those types of situations where you need that different thinking to come up with these ways that make us first in so many ways, from a, from a technology, safety, improvement perspective, that, that it really sets, it really sets us apart in many ways. We have a first-mover advantage. We're, we're currently in projects, and we, you know, we just announced 2, 2 more opportunities with Standard Power this morning. I'll talk a little bit more about that later. And we continue to, to work on our regulatory and deployment progress, not only in the United States, but in other countries. We talked. Maria touched on this, John touched on this. The market is huge, and it's not gonna get any smaller. Population's increasing, energy demand is increasing, and energy demand is different than what we thought. It's not the traditional utilities that, oh, yeah, utilities are gonna build another plant. It's much different. It's data centers. It's coal plant repurposing. It's ammonia production, hydrogen production, steel producers, industrial heat. It goes on. Everybody needs electricity or process heat, and it's not gonna get any less, especially data centers and AI. Every time you look at your phone, you're sucking up power somewhere. That data center's gotta stay on 24/7. Their main concern is four nines. They want reliability and availability, 24/7. We, as a world, can't function without it. We have to have that. It's critical to our future. We, we depend on it. Everything we do is related to some type of data download somewhere. So this is an incredible market. Coal to nuclear. Tremendous amount of coal sites that need to repurpose, and we'll talk a little bit about that later. So there's a huge market. This market is not just United States. This is the same everywhere. It's a global issue. We need more power. We need more demand. How do we get there? We try to be accelerating to be first, take advantage of our benefits, take advantage of our certification, take advantage of what we can bring based on our existing technology. Deploying where we think is strategic for us to focus and expanding our pipeline, new capabilities with our partner, InfraOne. Target customers are large-scale industrial manufacturers, major utilities, coal power, refineries, et cetera, industrials, data centers, as I mentioned earlier. Also looking for importance is site selection. Trying to find sites that are pre-approved so that we can deploy quicker. Our goal is to be first to the market as best we can, so that we can deploy and prove this market, prove this technology. Finding sites that are ready to go gives us an advantage to do so. Demand for capacity of multiple plant configurations, which is something I'll talk about a little bit later, is that Dr. Reyes touched on it, is our flexibility and how we can service different markets, different applications from one site. The IRA is the Inflation Reduction Act, which came out earlier, I think, what, this year. It took some time, I think, for people to digest it. You know, it's not a couple of pages. It's pretty thick thing, pretty complex document. It took some time for people, I think, to really understand what it means. Now I think there's a grasp, and people know what it means. The fact that they can get 30% tax credit towards building costs, they can potentially get 50% cost reduction. You know, the fact that you can have clean electricity credits, you can get credits for steel, or you can get credits for employment, using certain domestic talent. The hydrogen aspects, $3 per kilogram, available for 10 years. There's a significant amount of incentive for customers to build, and the key is that as long as they have something in construction prior to 2032, they can take advantage of this opportunity. This is now starting to generate a lot of interest to us going forward. Coal repurposing, José talked about this a little bit earlier. This is a very unique situation. I mean, it's to John's point a while ago as well, this is an opportunity with our EPZ, where we can come in and we can put ourselves on that coal site, as you saw in the video at the Doicești site in Romania earlier as well. We can put it on the site, we can repurpose all the people, we can create jobs for the community during construction, during operations. This is an opportunity that gives you a clean environment, gives you the chance to move people into a brighter future, 60-year life of a plant. It gives them a long-term reassurance that their community is gonna survive. This is a big play. Not everybody can do this, and the EPZ really helps us because it allows us to put it right close to the existing infrastructure assets that are needed to connect. This is a big deal. You build a solar farm, what do you do? You create, what, 20 jobs, 15 jobs? We come in and we put in, we create 270, 280 jobs. It's a big difference. So this is something that I think is a game changer for everybody. Hydrogen, José touched on it a little earlier. I mean, I think that's, you know, what we've been doing with his analysis on increased temperature and being able to use our heat is something that I think is significant. Our goal is to have a green solution as a heat source to bring the cost factors down of hydrogen production. We all know the cost of hydrogen needs to drop. The target is $1 a kilogram, but we're trying to get there, trying to figure out how to get there. We're working with different companies on some studies, but this is a, this is an exciting future. Something that we haven't really talked about, as I mentioned, is desalination. Desalination is another significant opportunity for us because they need a tremendous amount of heat. There's a significant part of the world, Middle East, North Africa, that need water. We've been having those discussions in the desalination. And the fact that our plant can both operate wet or dry is a big difference because we're the only technology that can be in a dry, air-cooled situation. So putting us in a desert or putting us in an arid place that needs desalination sets us apart significantly. There we go. So you heard a lot about ENTRA1. So I'm gonna kind of spend some time explaining why and what this means. So ENTRA1, NuScale created this relationship about a year ago. And to Maria's point a while ago, you look at China and Russia, how they come in and they take this one-stop-shop approach, where they come in, they develop, they finance, they, they build, they own, they do the whole nine yards. Of course, it's got a big geopolitical position, and they have a lot of funding behind them. So we were thinking: Okay, how do we, at, at our level, compete? So what we decided is, let's create a relationship with ENTRA1 Energy. ENTRA1 Energy is an independent power producer, but they have a historical where they, they're an infrastructure company where they've come in and they've rebuilt countries. They've rebuilt Iraq, they've rebuilt Kuwait, they've rebuilt Turkey, they've built all over the world. So they understand how to do big projects. They understand how to put infrastructure in place. They understand how to finance. They have access to the capital. So having that partnership was key. So we, NuScale, we provide a reactor. That reactor goes in a reactor building, which is built by ENTRA1 Energy as a builder, owner, operator, to which offtakes to those various things that John had showed earlier. The thing that's interesting, or what I think is incredible, is that if you have 12 modules, which, by the way, most people that we're talking to today are interested in 12 modules. It's a better return on capital. It gives them more flexibility. They understand that as they grow, because you don't have to wait until you put 12. You can put 1 in and turn it on, put 2 in, turn it on, so you can slowly up to your demands. But they're, they're thinking, they're like: "Okay, well, if I build 6, what happens if I need more power? I got to build another one. So I'll just build an infrastructure for 12, and I'll populate it." That's very unique. Nobody can do this. And on top of that, each one of those have an individual turbine so that you can offtake. So we can actually service multiple offtakes, not just one. So if you want some dedicated modules to hydrogen, you can do that. You want some dedicated modules to power, you can do that, and you never shut down, as, as Dr. José Reyes mentioned earlier, because when you're refueling one, you've got 11 running, so you never shut down. So this allows us tremendous flexibility and opportunity. And having this relationship, which I'll show a little bit more here, what this means. You know, I travel with CEO of ENTRA1 globally. We've been working on opportunities in this pipeline, and this model is what's missing. Most, most, most places, the key thing is, how do you finance it? How do you develop it? Who puts it together? A lot of the, lot of the companies don't, the industrials don't, they don't, they, they just want the offtake. They want to do a PPA. They don't want to own the plant. They don't want to operate the plant. They just want, they just want the power or the heat. A lot of existing utilities, they're not sure on the first one either. They want to de-risk. They're kind of like: "Well, if you guys are willing to come in and do a one-stop shop and build and own, fine. We'll, we'll, we'll take a, we'll take a build-own transfer."... You, you guys can build it, and then we'll transfer it later. So this model, and I think it's important when you look at this drawing, this green box, that's, that's NuScale. We're the technology. ENTRA1 provides all the other top row. These are combined, obviously, the rest, but this is our focus. But collectively, we provide this one-stop shop that satisfies all those issues. This is key, and when we go around the planet, it's not just about decarbonization anymore, as everybody's mentioned, it's also energy security. Everybody wants this model because they don't want—they, they like the Chinese and the Russian model, but they don't want to deal with China and Russia, so they need something like this. This is what really drove the interest behind this, is to put this together so that we could come in and offer something that took risk off of their concerns. Collectively, the goal is we commercialize. ENTRA1 Energy is responsible for commercialization and deploying our technology in a build, own, and operate situation where they can build, own it, and operate it under a PPA to the client. They can build on transfer, where they'll build it, operations are transferred to a utility company later under a long-term operating lease, or they'll come in and develop and finance. As I said earlier, they're finance-backed, Western supply finance, very strong backing, very strong relationships. This model is something that I think is what everybody's been looking for and wanting, and we're excited to be offering it. Today, great news, Standard Power. We've announced this morning that we were gonna do 2 plants, 12 modules, 924 MW each, one in Ohio, one in Pennsylvania. This was because of our abilities to put the plant in the locations because of the EPZ, because of the flexibility of the technology, because of our certification with the NRC, and because of ENTRA1 being able to work with Standard Power under the models we described earlier, brought us this solution. And the fact that Standard Power, they need the power, like, last year. These guys are building data centers. They need it now. And they have the demands. And matter of fact, you know, they're looking long-term at a lot of opportunities. They have. They see the growth. As I said earlier, AI and data centers, it's a tremendous growth pattern for our future. So, you know, it's a great opportunity. We're excited. Now, the good thing is that this is an immediate situation. We're gonna start work right away. Actually, Standard Power has already been working substantially on their existing sites that they're working with, so they're invested. So we'll start immediate work with Standard, and this is an exciting opportunity for the company. And, you know, it's great to be in this building to talk about it, like I said. So we're excited to see this move forward. Again, we have three committed customers. John mentioned CFPP earlier, Real Power, you saw the video, and now today we have the announcement on Standard Power. Clearly, we continue to find further customers, and with our partner, ENTRA1, I won't say the number of gigawatts that we have in the pipeline, but I can tell you it's a pretty significant number of gigawatts. We've been, you know, traveling around the world, and as Maria mentioned, some countries. I mean, we certainly have—we've been talking in France, we've been talking in Turkey, we've been talking in Morocco, we're in Eastern Europe. All of these countries who have been very interested in what we offer from both being able to put our plants in a dry environment, a normal and wet environment, having the energy security, having the ability to decarbonize their needs is key. Recently, I think it was last week, I think we were announced as one of the down selects for Great British Nuclear in the UK. So we're one of the technologies that's that will proceed to the next level for evaluation. Ultimately, they're gonna pick one or two technologies to populate their country's SMR needs going forward. That's another exciting opportunity that was announced a few days ago. You know, things are moving. As Maria said, the world needs power. I think everybody kind of, you know, the light bulbs come on finally. It's like, yeah, this nuclear thing is not bad. You know, it's like, oh, I think clean, 24/7. Yeah, you know, it's good. You know, I think, I think people are, are starting to, to drink the Kool-Aid. Having said that, we have moat, we have deployability, we have big kit, and we have a developer partner, and we see growth, and we're excited to be here and look forward to answering your questions later on. I'll turn it over to the next speaker. Thank you. Well, thanks, Leighton. Hello, everyone. My name is Tom Mundy, and I am the President of Voyager Services and Delivery. That's the business unit with the NuScale, responsible for our scope of supply associated with the deployment and the operation of NuScale customer power plants.... I've served in multiple leadership roles since joining NuScale in 2012. Before NuScale, I spent 30 years in the U.S. utility business, including in a variety of positions in both existing nuclear plants and new nuclear initiatives. So with that, let me begin my presentation. Oh, I guess I need this. There we go. My team and I are focused on current customer project engagements as we optimize our service delivery and manufacturing capabilities to serve customers globally. This slide summarizes what you'll hear from me today. First, we're focused on driving successful project execution with our current and future customers, which is enabled by the rigor of our program development. Second, we have an established supply chain with a strong partnership model that enhances our ability to deliver for customers. Third, we have a build-to-print sourcing philosophy that drives efficient, lower-cost equipment and a strong security of supply for new customer orders. And finally, we're well-positioned to capture the significant long-term growth opportunity our services capabilities present in the periods before and after commercial operation of our customer power plants. Okay, you heard today, we are the only SMR with the NRC design approval and the only Western SMR technology that is in production mode of its long-lead equipment. My team is organized into three distinct groups to serve our customers: client project management, equipment supply, and services delivery. From meeting rigorous quality assurance and professional certification requirements to comprehensive manufacturing trials, we are well ahead of the competitors in terms of supply chain development and readiness. I want to be clear, what we are doing is not theoretical. Our simplified design and highly efficient manufacturing process capture the benefits of SMR modularity. The module takes a significant amount of work that has typically been performed in the field and moves those activities to the factory floor, taking advantage of repetitive assembly line production, which I'll speak to more in a moment. The module itself doesn't require any in-field construction, erection, or fabrication, and has been sized to be transportable to the site by truck, rail, or barge. Our assembly and delivery model reflects what module, the word module, as that term is in SMR, was intended to mean, enabling us to create enormous value to customers, whereas other SMRs that have simply shrunk down a conventional reactor that is neither modular in design or function. Our design maturity, production readiness, and program management execution all support profitability of current and future projects. NuScale has received high praise from our customers in how well we've managed our share of project activities, and how they've been executed. This has also been the case for the scope of work for the Carbon-Free Power Project, and the licensing and manufacturing achievements we have made are extremely relevant and reusable to other projects. I'd like to take a moment to provide an overview of our latest developments in our current international project for our customer, RoPower. You saw the video that John played earlier this morning, a video presented or prepared by our customer. In terms of an update for that project, project activities are going very well. The project has an identified site, and the project has completed phase one of what's referred to as the front-end engineering and design work, or FEED, F-E-E-D, and this phase is just now wrapping up. Funding committed at the G7 Leaders Summit in May, including a multinational public-private funding partnership, will continue FEED work under phase two, with a number of planned activities, including procurement of long-lead materials to completion of the FEED work and more. We're preparing to begin phase two FEED work, which is expected to formally commence at the end of this month or thereabouts. We believe our RoPower project will serve as a model for future international growth as, and showcases the ability to repurpose coal plant infrastructure for NuScale deployments. Did that advance? No. Okay. As I alluded to, we have a specific yet important scope of supply associated with the delivery of NuScale power plants, with that supply comprised of our engineered nuclear technology and related equipment. Obviously, the most critical component of that is the NuScale power module and the ancillary equipment that goes with the module. We also provide nuclear fuel bundles, mechanical handling equipment, and control systems, and some other pieces of equipment. The power plant structures and the balance of plant equipment is sourced and delivered by our engineering, procurement, and construction partner on the project. Our contribution to the delivery of NuScale power plants is premised on the equipment and services we have developed with a logical focus on achieving long-term profitable growth derived from activities that are reflective of our core competencies as the original engineered equipment designer and supplier, and as a service provider. We have de-risked our scope of supply significantly through our established ecosystem of suppliers and partners... which were chosen because of their extensive nuclear technology and manufacturing experience, and who have been working with our design team for many years to perfect the finished product. That is, ensuring that the final design can be made by any capable and competent supplier with expected and predictable cost and scheduling performance. It's key to the success of our supply chain delivery. Some SMRs that are not of the light water variety, they contemplate the use of materials or fuel that will require further qualification, developments, and approval, presenting additional commercialization challenges. Our program is premised on the use of materials and fuel that is well-established, approved, and readily available. We have spent years getting to this point, so that when we place an order, our suppliers are ready to produce what is needed. The NuScale difference starts with our approach to the relationship we develop and ultimately leverage with suppliers and vendors. These deep relationships are harnessed for operational and financial benefit. In fact, our program supply chain participants are truly vested, with several believing in our technology and future, so much so, they decided to become strategic investors in NuScale. Now, that commitment to partner with us for the long haul leads to sharpened pencils when it comes time to bid, because they don't see their contribution limited to a one-off project. They anticipate a steady stream of work, a robust book of business, and are pricing their scope of supply with that view in mind. The engagement and commitment of our suppliers was showcased at a recent suppliers meeting in August, where we had strong participation, engagement, and interest from those companies that are currently supporting our commercialization program. Our build-to-print approach allows us to scale our sourcing needs, should our book of business exceed the current capacity of our existing supplier base. As I mentioned earlier, not all SMRs are truly modular in the context of, of what this innovation enables for customer value. Many SMR vendors promote the modular aspect of their program through the use of modular construction techniques. In fact, most modern nuclear plants, large and small today, including NuScale, utilize modular construction techniques to the extent it makes sense. But such practices don't necessarily counter the effects of lower power output and working against economies of scale. The NuScale design moves expensive and complicated in-field construction activities to the factory floor, maximizing benefit from repetitive assembly line production of the entirety of what's referred to as the nuclear steam supply system and containment, all in one package, while also maximizing design simplification, with a resulting decrease in capital costs and operating costs, and therefore, also much lower schedule risk in production. Costs will come down over time as we learn from early production, and also by implementing advanced manufacturing techniques that the industry is currently perfecting, and we're working with them on that. Our build-to-print philosophy means that any qualified and capable nuclear supplier can produce our equipment, allowing us to expand capacity to meet our book of business and to receive multiple quotes to produce equipment and obtain competitive pricing for our customers. This is another one of the many differentiators from our competition. Now we've gotten to the favorite part of the presentation, another video. The video that you saw earlier, it was very exciting to see that station in Romania be decommissioned, the site cleared and ready for construction. We continue to lead the way in manufacturing readiness and execution across the advanced nuclear industry. In April, a significant milestone was achieved as we began forging of the first NuScale power modules. I'd like to share a video that showcases our long-lead forging work from our supply chain partner, Doosan Enerbility, at their facility in Korea. What you just saw was the result of forging a large hot ingot, weighing about 272 tons, shown in the previous video. This is the forged element that resulted from that ingot. And this, the weight of this particular element is roughly 56 tons. So this is the preliminary machining. This is what's referred to as the integral steam plenum. This component is located at the upper region of the reactor vessel. This will further be refined, machined down to about a 24-ton component. But you can see, this takes a substantial effort to get that molten steel, produce the ingots, to forge and form the ingots down to something like this, then machining and refining. But this is the work that is now undergoing being undertaken at the facilities in Korea. Looking forward to the end of the year, we'll continue to make progress on the production of the MPMs and the development of the remainder of equipment within our scope of supply. The completion of this work is sequenced with our customer project plans for timely transition to manufacturing and procurement activities that will ensure on-time delivery of our product. We are indisputably ahead of the peers in this critical respect, and as we start ramping up the manufacturing of our NuScale power modules and other equipment, it will mark a significant transition from planning to execution of our product delivery capability. I'll wrap things up by highlighting the services we provide to our customers throughout the entirety of our customer project and the 60-plus year life of the plant, which we believe creates considerable value for our shareholders. The chart here actually shows the continuum of work that occurs by year prior to commercial operation, beyond commercial operation. This is a fairly conservative view to take into consideration a variety of regulatory regimes, customer capability, a greenfield site, et cetera. Most of the activities that you see here before COD would occur roughly, excuse me, 6 to 5 years prior to commercial operation. Now, looking at NuScale's revenue model for the first 3 to 4 years, NuScale provides services to customers to assist in the establishment of its operational program, training and licensing of the plant, as well as startup testing and commissioning of the power modules and related equipment. Many of these services are already being delivered to our first customers. In parallel to these service delivery activities in the period prior to commercialization, we're receiving revenue associated with the sourcing of the equipment, including progress payments made in connection with the production of the NuScale power modules that occurs over a several-year period. In the period following commercial operation, we will be providing an assortment of support to our customers. While the level and capability of the customer, we expect to provide services to assist customers in support of safe and efficient operations, including support with maintaining an assortment of regulatory programs, ongoing and requalification training, refueling, and spare parts management. Some of this support is premised on the use of a proprietary computerized system that we've developed. It's known as the NuScale Operations Platform, which will enable our customers to save on their O&M costs through reliance on NuScale under a shared service model. Given the more than 60-year life of the power plant, we believe our service revenue has a very long tail, providing a large and predictable and profitable long-term revenue opportunity. Okay. Lastly, I wanna leave you with a few of the thoughts with which I started today. We are leveraging the practices, tools, and project control systems under our existing and well-developed program office. The focus of my organization is on delivering work scope, on budget and on schedule. Our mature program enables us to provide customers with cost estimates that are based on well-defined information and not just preliminary concepts. NuScale is much further along in the competition due to the status of our licensing and commercialization program, and that distance grows every day. And I'd also like to dispel the notion that regulatory approval means you're ready to go. It's just not the case. Much more funding and effort is needed following regulatory approval to be able to commence manufacturing and construction, and there's a huge body of information that needs to be produced. In our case, $1.6 billion or more has been invested to get to the point where we are. All of that now is in our rear view mirror, as evidenced by the commencement of production of long-lead equipment and real and ongoing customer projects. And lastly, a very exciting opportunity via our services solutions, many of which are already being provided to customers today. With that, I'll welcome my colleagues back up to the stage so that we can take some questions. Thank you. My fucking final script was not in there. Sameer Joshi from HC Wainwright, back here. So, congratulations on all the progress that you have made, and good luck for the future. A lot was talked today, but not much about fuel and spent fuel, the supply, safety, and security of those two things. Can you elaborate on that? ... Yeah, this gentleman came from 30 years with Framatome, so he is definitely our fuel expert. Clayton? Oh, I think José can add some stuff, but- Oh, okay. The key thing is that, you know, we are using traditional fuel, LEU fuel. So it's not, it's not something new. So it's something that's been used in, in, I would say, a good majority of the existing conventional reactors today. From a used fuel perspective, because I don't think it should be called waste because it's not appropriate. So from that side of it, our site has the ability to put a storage facility or a storage pad on site. It's about an acre, that can hold our fuel for the life of the plant, 60 years. Actually, we can hold it close to 100 years in keeping it in dry cask containers. Basically, when our fuel comes out, it goes into our fuel pool, stays in there for five years, and then from that point goes into a dry cask storage, and the dry cask storage can be sat outside and can be sat there for many years. After that, in the U.S., the Department of Energy has an obligation to take that fuel and take it to their repositories or to their vitrification plants, et cetera. Other countries, we basically have the same philosophy, but then we follow whatever regulatory or waste management program that they have in their countries. If they don't, they have a lot of time to put something in place. There's also opportunities where reprocessing between France and bringing it back to other countries is something that we also can look at, and this is something that we've had in discussions. José, I don't know if you want to add anything to this. No, I think, I think you did a good job of covering that. You know, it's 0.8 acres that we're looking at to store all the used fuel for the 60-year life of the plant. We're talking about a very, very small footprint. Dry cast storage is best practice in the industry in the United States today. I agree with everything Clayton was saying. Good. Can I add to that? We have an approved fuel from our certification. It's based on Framatome's latest version of this, with the relationship with Framatome. But it's currently available Framatome fuel, essentially, that they produce today for the existing fleet, and it's been reviewed and approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for use in our reactors as well. So we have a readily available fuel supply. If the customer has the enriched uranium product available, they could actually place orders for finished fuel bundles today. We're well-positioned on the fuel supply element of our program. Hi, this is George Gianarikas from Canaccord Genuity. So you spent a lot of time discussing this groundswell of opportunity and then a lot of discussions that you're having around deployment of nuclear. I'm wondering what any bottlenecks are. I mean, is it a cost discussion? Is it an evaluation of different technologies that are happening? I'm curious as to what's coming up in your customer conversations. Yeah, I'll just start. When I came into this industry, just 11 years ago now, I come out of the. At the time, I was working with an EPC. We were doing offshore wind, we were doing PV solar, fossil plants. And when I came into it, I didn't have the appreciation how difficult this industry is. And I was told, "You'll never get through the NRC. You'll never get on a federal facility." And then the waste issue. Today, it's more of what I hear more than anything else, because we've knocked down all those roadblocks, is commercial viability. You know, our ability to ensure that we're on schedule and on cost. And as we talked about today, that's the critical important of having a supply chain as a technology provider. So if I build a plant, there's the owner's cost, there's the contractor's cost, there's my cost, and that's delivering of these modules to the plant. So I'm very comfortable with our existing supply chain. We mentioned Doosan and Samsung and IHI in Japan. They have excess capacity. We went out and looked at their facilities, and they were building up and gearing up for the large renaissance that never occurred in this country. So their ability. And they're not looking at a one-off sale. They're looking at a holistic view of NuScale going global, and they're gonna be a strategic partner for us, and therefore, they're willing to sharpen their pencils and give us very competitive rates. Yeah, I guess I... Well, I would just add, you know, in general, you know, the challenge—one of the challenges if you're asking about is, Not In My Backyard, which I think has changed a lot. We're finding now today that it's a different view. People have a much different view of acceptance around nuclear. So, you know, the younger generation thinks nuclear is much different than what the older generation came from. And I think we're seeing that globally, it's not just in the U.S. So the whole, you know, acceptance of wanting to do this, and to John's point, it's not... That's not really the prime part of the discussion anymore. It's about how fast can you put this up, right? So the dynamic is changing. Guys, Mark Bianchi from TD Cowen. Congratulations on the project announcement today. I'm curious what extra steps are involved for that to be in a final investment decision position. So if we compare it to what we've seen with UAMPS, there's this cost estimate series that you're going through, there's subscription levels, there's, there's other sort of milestones that need to be met- Mm-hmm. -for that to move forward. What are the milestones for this to, for- For the new plant to just come online? Yes. Yeah, so thanks for the question. This guy, man, him working with Interone, spent a lot of midnight hours together, so. Yeah, I don't even have any hair to scratch off, you know? It's horrible. So thanks for the question. But no, the demand is already taken for, right? So they already have... It's a behind the grid situation for predominantly most of that use. And whatever's not behind the grid, they'll obviously dump to the market. But right now, the demand is taken forward at both facilities. So now we'll go through our immediate process of working with their AE, you know, doing our early works agreements and getting our licensing process, et cetera, going forward. And then it's from the financial perspective, they have their monies that is set aside and spoken for at certain levels. Obviously, ENTRA1 Energy is a component of bringing in some of that bigger capital that's gonna be needed after you do the FEED. As of right now, when you look at both Standard Power and ENTRA1 Energy combined, and when you look at their resource of capital, they seem to have actually, I would say, almost an abundance, because they're well satisfied on both sides. As you know, it's not an immediate deployment of capital, right? It's over a process of time. No, it's a very robust model that I can see from what I've been doing in my diligence as a company, looking from as a positive customer, and the fact that they have a demand already taken is a big plus. I said before, I applied Wall Street. The funding behind this is all U.S.-based capital coming from major institutionals. So, you know, it's, it's... The message is resonating, and that's why this—we believe this model is so important for us to take us forward, but. Great. I just want to follow up on the ENTRA1 relationship, and my memory is a little foggy, but I thought there was some sort of an agreement with Fluor around marketing NuScale power modules. Maybe that was a Western agreement, maybe it was a right of first refusal. But could you just remind us what that is and how ENTRA1 fits into that? Is Fluor involved in the projects, or how should we think about that? The CEO of ENTRA1 had a joint venture agreement with Fluor about 10 years ago, predominantly for reconstruction of Iraq and areas in the Middle East. And it was Fluor and, and some other majors are included within that joint venture. What happened at that time, the timing was, that's when the, the start of the Arab Spring, so security concerns and that came together. But we retained that relationship over the years. He's known the Bush group for quite some time. I've known him, and so the part... The—It's always been there. So we got together over a year ago and started a discussion about how would this model work. So we strategically went in, did the white room, and, and Ramsey knows intimately about the process himself. Do you want anything to add to that, Ramsey, or? Yeah. No, no. But anyway. I mean, we have an exclusive opportunity to present Fluor to the owner, but the owner, at the end of the day, ultimately has the final decision on who they want to decide to move forward, right? So Entra One, Standard Power, as an owner, I think we've, we've presented that. They've expressed. Now, Fluor could or may not be part of that ultimate solution. That's up to them, but we have, you know, we have presented that as according to our- You know, Mark, what I like about this deal, too, is we have limited resources with NuScale, so our ability to vet quickly and focus in instead of doing a shotgun where we get a mile wide, an inch deep, here, we're looking at specific opportunities and going in and offering de... energy solutions to customers that really have a need. That's how this materialized. They have a huge need. There's huge opportunities in data centers. We think AI is gonna be more than anybody can handle, quite frankly. They're helping us do that, you know, allowing them to go in and put the deal together. We bring the ma- the, our asset to the job site. That's great. Just, just one more on this whole project, while I've got it. The DOE cost share that goes to UA, to the UAM CFPP project, we saw with Xenergy and their ARDP money that was able to be transferred to a different project with Dow. Is that dynamic, possibility here? I was with DOE two days ago, having these type of discussions. You know, that, it's not only that, I think what's really important to us, too, is that if need be, we could relocate those modules as well, so. But we are in those discussions. Thank you. That's all the time we have for this Q&A. There'll now be a five-minute break, and then we'll resume. Okay. Stay the hell away from me. Oh, gravity. You're taking better men than me. How can that be? Just keep me where the light is. Just keep me where the light is. Just keep me where the light is. Come on, keep me where the light is. Come on, keep me where the light is. Come on, keep me where, keep me where the light is. Well, I won't back down. No, I won't back down. You can stand me up at the gates of hell, but I won't back down. No, I'll stand my ground. ... I stand my ground, and I won't back down. I won't back down. Hey, baby, there ain't no easy way out. Hey, I will stand my ground, and I won't back down. Now I know what's right, I got just one life in a world that keeps on pushing me around. But I stand my ground, and I won't back down. I won't back down. Hey, baby, there ain't no easy way out. I won't back down. Hey, I will stand my ground, and I won't back down. I won't back down. Hey, baby, there ain't no easy way out. I won't back down. Hey, I won't back down. I won't back down. Hey, baby, there ain't no easy way out. I won't back down. Hey, I will down. Hey, I will stand my ground, and I won't back down. I won't back down. Waiting on you to come around for not so long. Every time with you and you can feel it growing strong. Tell me Tell me what you want to 'cause I feel like you need it, you could trust. Everything is running out, it's running out of time. The day is done, out of time. The day is done, the lights are gone. There's something in the air. Tell me that I air. Tell me that I hear your voice again. I would stay, I'm loving you, you'll be staying with me. I love the way I got me. I love the way I got it going. I would stay, I'm loving you. My heart is beating like a drum, and my head is numb. We're getting lost in the rhythm of the ride home. When the day breaks, I'll wait as long as it takes. We can leave our hearts inside. Tell me that I hear your voice again. I would stay, I'm loving you, you'll be staying with me. I love the way I got it going. I I would stay, I'm loving you. When the day is done, and When the day is done, and the lights are gone. There's something in the air. Tell me that I hear Tell me that I hear your voice again. I would stay, I'm loving you, you'll be staying with me. me. I love the way I got it going. I would stay, I'm loving you. ...There's no gravity. We're somewhere in between. I'm a ghost to you, you're a ghost to me. Bird's-eye view of San Luis. Our highway boys all sleep now, with their dirty mouths and broken strings. Oh, their eyes are shining like the sea for you, the queen of San Luis. I'm a ghost to you, you're a ghost to me. A bird's-eye view of San Luis. Cutting through the avenues, I'd always find my way to you. Beside the hood, the hammered locks. Thumbing round in the smoke, spending time chasing ghosts. Hold me down, hold me down tight. Hold me down, hold me down tight. California called you queen, with your golden hair and magazines. Were you somewhere in between? Fast asleep, flying dreams. I'm a ghost to you, you're a ghost to me. A bird's-eye view of San Luis. I'm a ghost to you, you're a ghost to me. A bird's-eye view of San Luis. I'm a ghost to you, you're a ghost to me. A bird's-eye view of San Luis. I'm a ghost to you, you're a ghost to me. A bird's-eye view of San Luis. When I was young, I should've known better. I can't feel lonely no more, when you don't feel nothing back. I got a new girlfriend. He feels like he's on top. I don't feel lonely no more. You can't see past my blindness. Oh, oh, ee, you've been on my mind girl since the flood. Oh, oh, ee, heaven help a fool who falls in love. I got a little paycheck. You got big plans, and you gotta move. I don't feel nothing at all. You can't feel nothing some more. "Honey, I love you." That's all she wrote. Oh, oh, ee, you've been on my mind, girl, like a drug.... Oh, oh, ee, ee, ay! Heaven help the fool who falls in love. Oh, oh, ee, ee, ay! Moving on my mind girl, it's the flood. Oh, oh, ee, ee, ay! Heaven help the fool who falls in love. Oh, oh, ee, ee, ay! Moving on my mind, girl, like a flood. Oh, oh, ee, ee, ay! Heaven help the fool who falls in love. Can you hear me calling out your name? You know that I'm falling, and I don't know what to say. I keep turning the lighter, I need to shine. You know that I'm crying, and I can't get the words out. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. I wanna be with you everywhere. Something's happening, happening to me. My friends say my life's in peculiar. Come on, baby, we better make a start. You better make it soon before you break my heart. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. I wanna be with you everywhere. Can you hear me calling out your name? You know that I'm falling, and I don't know what to say. Come on, baby, we better make a start. You better make it soon before you break my heart. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. Oh, oh, oh. I wanna be with you everywhere. I wanna be with you I wanna be with you everywhere. She is something to behold, elegant and bold. She is electricity, running through my soul. Oh, oh, oh! And I could easily lose my mind. The way you kiss me will work each time. Calling me to come back, the best thing in Georgia on my mind. And oh, oh, oh. And oh, oh, And oh, oh, oh. Hello, everyone. So now we're gonna restart in 2 minutes. 2 minutes, please. Eyes, innocent and wild, remind me what it's like- I can easily lose my mind. The way you keep saying what each time, pulling me back into the flames, and I'm burning up again. I'm burning up, and I, I never understood what was at stake. I never thought it might be put this way. Now you've come and gone, I finally worked it out. I worked it out. I never should have told you. I never should have let you see inside. Don't want any trouble in your mind. Won't you let it be? I never should have told you. I never should have let you see inside. Don't want any trouble in your mind. Won't you let it be? I never should have told you. I never should have let you see inside. Don't want any trouble in your mind. Won't you let it be? I never should have told you. I never should have let you see inside. Don't want any trouble in your mind. Won't you let it be? Welcome back, everybody. I trust everyone had a great break. I'm Carl Fisher. I joined NuScale this summer as the new chief operating officer. I will tell you a bit about myself, my role, and the long-term value my team and I expect to create within the operations function at NuScale. First, a bit about myself. I spent decades in the nuclear industry with past positions at Framatome and Duke Energy, both domestically and internationally. My time in the field began in the United States Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. Key themes under my purview includes, first, as an organization, we have achieved tremendous operational success thus far, and we remain focused on delivering for our customers as we pivot from where we are currently to commercialization. Second, our focus on safety, quality, and performance results in our ability to consistently deliver best-in-class engineering and licensing expertise. This, in turn, drives our industry leadership and will continue to do so. Third, we have processes and tools in place to ensure that the manufacturing of our modules proceeds efficiently and effectively. Since I've been in the seat, my team and I have identified near-term and low-hanging fruit, opportunities that create company-wide operational value as we pivot to commercialization. And finally, the standardization NuScale will offer to our customers in terms of plant design, constructability, supply chain, and delivery, are a tremendous benefit in terms of predictability, timeliness, and cost effectiveness. I'll start with our philosophy and how this drives our pursuit of operational excellence. It centers around our relentless focus on safety, quality, performance, and delivery for our customers and our stakeholders. Our pursuit of excellence in these areas will fuel our success with customers, regulators, and supplier partners. As John and Dr. Reyes mentioned earlier, our culture sets us apart, and it's one of the main reasons I personally wanted to join this company. We are ensuring best-in-class nuclear and industrial principles are being implemented across everything we do. Safety is at the heart of any decision we make. It is our top priority and sets the foundation for everything else. The engineering talent we have at NuScale is remarkable, and we continue to ensure we attract and retain the best engineering and customer service talents. As Tom mentioned, together with our strategic partners who are committed to our shared success, we have established a quality assurance framework that emphasizes standardization and simplification to achieve cost efficiencies. This enables us to produce our deliverables consistent with the plan the first time. Our customers are well served by NuScale's commitment to rigorous analytical measurements and continuous improvement. We are focused on delivering a consistent experience, and our engineering and licensing advantages enable us to execute on schedule and cost promises. NuScale's advanced development, design, certification, and talent separate us from the competition. After spending a few months in the seat observing and learning, I'd like to share our top strategic priorities. These specific initiatives under my purview will feed continued development and growth. Combined with the top-of-the-house focus areas I mentioned on the last slide, these priorities will feed the growth, production, and delivery plans you heard about from Clayton and Tom. One, the manufacturing program and plant design we have in place position us well to accelerate deployment of our first-of-a-kind plant, and we have sustainable strategic advantages to optimize our cost structure. Two, we anticipate substantial potential to optimize our processes and design by swiftly applying learnings throughout the organization. This will benefit NuScale's operations, engineering, project management, and quality assurance. The resulting standardization will produce an Nth-of-a-kind power module that is cost effective, effective, and delivers a predictable process for our customers. Just as important, we can avoid producing a series of one-of-a-kind deliverables and the cost associated with that. Nuclear has already been acknowledged as a cost-competitive form of clean baseload energy. We have strong inherent benefits from the off-the-shelf design, components, and inputs. We're going to deploy best practices from past first-of-a-kind projects to drive first-of-a-kind optimization and significant reductions for customers as we move from first-of-a-kind to Nth-of-a-kind. Standardization is our focus. The extensive work we have put into our design and planning, as well as assessing, manufacturing, and material needs, position us to reap cost reduction as we optimize our Nth-of-a-kind costs for long-term standardization. We can do this by leveraging unique enablers such as standard design and exceptional program and project management functions, which leverage our very mature, de-risked supply chain, as Tom mentioned. We will also do this through our licensing progress and strategy, which Carrie will cover later. We will continue to put customers first in everything we do. We know in great detail what they need from a construction and operational perspective. We believe our enablers will help them minimize CapEx, maximize output, operate safely, flexibly, and profitability. Importantly, we are confident that execution will enable us to deliver at a competitive and predictable cost compared to other low-carbon options, all the while consistently providing unmatched safety, reliability, and resiliency that I and others have mentioned earlier. We have come a long way on the strength of a strategic investment and are poised to drive sustainable operational competitiveness over the long, over the long term. With that, I'll recap my key comments. Again, we are pivoting to a commercialized state of operation. Our philosophy, investments, and strategic focus are key differentiators, and we are further separated from competitors by support from our supplier chain partners, who are fully committed to NuScale's success because they understand that this isn't about one single project, but a long series of opportunities tied to construction of NuScale plants throughout the U.S. and all over the world. Our focus on safety, quality, and performance will remain relentless. We have strategies, processes, and tools to ensure we continue our manufacturing and deployment momentum. Lastly, we plan to further optimize and standardize for customers to deliver on time and on budget. Now it is my pleasure to welcome Mr. Steve Burns, former chairman of the NRC. Steve, the floor is yours. Great. Thanks. Glad to be here today, make this trip up to New York. Just to tell you a little bit about who I am, I graduated from law school in, from George Washington University in D.C. in 1978 and started working at the NRC then, and was a career employee there from 1978 to 2012. During that time, I took a number of roles, a lot of that as a lawyer at the NRC. You're working closely with the technical staff. I wound up, retiring in 2012 as the general counsel, and had also worked, as the chief of staff to former, Chairman Kenneth Carr, who was one of the first, sailors on the Nautilus in, in, in the 1950s. I was the head of legal affairs at the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency in Paris from 2012 to 2014. This is a multinational body. The interesting thing is, at the time, because Russia actually became a member, it ninety percent of the operating capacity in the world, the countries were members of the OECD. I was appointed by President Obama as a commissioner in late 2014, and was the chair of the agency from 2015 to 2017, and stayed on until close to the end of my term in 2019. I'm currently serving as the chair of the International Atomic Energy Agency's International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, which advises the director general on issues on nuclear safety. I'm a senior visiting fellow at Third Way, an NGO, center-left NGO, and they've had a big commitment to looking toward deployment of advanced nuclear as a way of addressing climate change. I'm gonna... Let me talk about the regulatory process some. Private use of nuclear energy and technology is an industry which I would call born regulated. That is basically, until 1954, after President Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace speech, in order to be able to deploy nuclear technology and get the nuclear fuel, you needed government permission, and that's what the 1954 act did. Originally, the Atomic Energy Commission was the agency responsible both for promotion and regulation of nuclear power and nuclear energy deployment. But the NRC was formed in 1975 to take on those regulatory responsibilities for nuclear facilities, you know, reactors and all, as well as radioactive materials. This is the idea of ensuring independence. The objectives of the NRC under the Act are essentially to provide reasonable assurance, not absolute assurance, reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety, and the common defense and security. Again, the NRC is an independent agency. For you, those of you in investment community, if you think about the Securities and Exchange Commission, it's the same type of thing. It does not report through a cabinet department. It directly reports to the president. There are five presidentially appointed commissioners at the NRC who serve staggered terms, subject to confirmation by the Senate, and the president alone designates the chair. And no more... This, again, for the idea of independence, no more than three commissioners can be the members of the same political party. The NRC has about 3,000 employee, career employees, covering its various regulatory functions. Just a note to emphasize again, the 5 commissioners and an inspector, independent inspector general, are the only presidential appointees within the agency. Let's go on. Let's talk about NRC's engagement in the international sphere. We've heard a lot this morning from Maria and John and José and others, in terms of the engagement in the international sphere. I wanna emphasize that even though the NRC is a regulator within the U.S., it has a lot of engagement overseas through the international organizations such as the IAEA and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, which are the major international organizations in the field. It has bilateral agreements with 45 countries worldwide, and then has a program called the International Regulatory Development Partnership, through which some 16 countries that are engaged in new or expanding nuclear power programs are supported by the NRC. NRC is widely respected internationally. It's often called the gold standard in regulation. And it is involved in multilateral and bilateral efforts to improve the regulatory process for greater harmonization and cooperation on SMR development. For example, the IAEA has what is called the SMR Regulators Forum, and more significantly, on a bilateral basis, the U.S. and the NRC and the Canadian regulator have a memorandum of cooperation in which they're sharing information and cooperating as both countries look at reviews of new technologies. And I think this is a very important effort that's going on between Canada and the U.S. Newcomer countries, such as we're seeing in Eastern Europe and other places, will look at the experience of mature regulators when they're considering designs, with... And particularly as those regulators consider approval or adoption of the design. And I think that's a real advantage for NuScale, which has achieved design certification or the design approvals from the NRC. If we're looking at ways of improving the regulatory process, to focus back in again on how regulation is undertaken, NRC has been focusing on enhancing its readiness and capacity to license SMRs and advanced technologies. For example, it developed a vision and strategy for improving the regulatory and technical readiness. Some of this, I will have to say, when I was on the commission, as this was going on, this was sort of with an eye on what some of the-- a lot of the engagement with NuScale was at the time, because NuScale was really, in the last decade or so, when the SMR and the advanced reactors starting to really emerge again, it was really the leader down the slope, if you will. And so that really, I think, helped. The NRC is engaged in its licensing modernization project to develop a more technology-inclusive, risk-informed, performance-based approach for assessing applications. It's issued guidance on pre-application engagement. That means before you actually put your application in, talk to the NRC in terms of what are the topical areas that you need to make sure to address, because some of the technologies are gonna deviate from sort of the standard criteria, standard criteria. So how do you look at that in terms of do you need exemptions or do you need to do other things? We've heard some things about the, you know, uniqueness of the NuScale technology, and that's part of that engagement was important for them. The NRC is looking at its emergency planning and its security review requirements to the Act in the SMR context. As we've heard, I think a good achievement for NuScale is this endorsement of its technical basis for determining the smaller size of the EPZ, the Emergency Planning Zone, or EPZ, for their facilities. Again, going from the 10-mile EPZ zone, which was established after the Three Mile Island accident in the early 1980s, to closer to the site boundary or something close to that. I think the NRC has also become more transparent on review schedules. Part of that is under the impetus of the Congress. There was a statute passed, I think shortly before I left the commission in early 2019, called the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act, often referred to as NEIMA, under which the NRC is required to issue a new regulation to improve the licensing pathway. This is, if you ever, any of you, if you really get down nerdy into this, if you hear about Part 53, that's what this thing is.... The thing about it is that new regulation doesn't mean all stops for SMRs or advanced reactors. It's just meant to be a way of thinking about this more technology-inclusive approach, but it doesn't undermine the ability to use the current licensing processes, which we'll talk about in a second here. And in fact, most, I would say, reactor developers who are ready to go down the path, and certainly NuScale did this because it was ready beforehand, are looking at the Part 50 or the Part 52 approach. So, we'll talk about what that means in a moment. One of the other things I would say with respect to human resources is this, the NRC has done, I think, a fairly good job of trying to organize its staff to prepare for new reactor licensing. It's important for applicants to communicate with the NRC, and helping for that planning and that resource application. But there are human resource challenges at the NRC. You've got an aging workforce. 33%, I think, are eligible for retirement. And there's, you know, there's competition, given this, you know, the new growth and interest in nuclear, competition to recruit staff. But it does have the NRC does have authorities that allow it to incentivize the recruitment. And there's some legislation, I think we saw some picture of the ad or a notation of the ADVANCE Act that's in the Congress that would assist them. NRC also has cooperative programs with universities that can assist in the development of entry-level staff. You basically, you can basically incentivize, you know, a new graduate to come to the NRC, get scholarship, you know, scholarship coverage and all that. And then there's an obligation that they need to stay with the agency at least a few years, and all. The one thing I will say on the human resources, there was a very recent Government Accountability Office report, in, I think, issued in July, that acknowledged NRC progress in its human resources development and monitoring, but it said that the NRC needs to do a little bit better job in benchmarking its overall effectiveness in this area. So let's talk a little bit more about the licensing process. When I talk about Part 50 and Part 52, and when I talk about that, again, if you wanna get a little lawyerly or geeky on this, what that refers to is a portion of the Code of Federal Regulations, where the NRC standards are embodied. Just like any agency that issues regulations, they're published in this, the official U.S. government publication, the Code of Federal Regulations. So historically, there was a two-step process in Part 50. It goes back to the 1950s, where an applicant for a facility, a particular site, has to get a construction permit and then an operating license. The advantage was viewed as that the two-step approach did allow some deferral of final design details to the operating license evaluation. But about 30 years ago, a little over 30 years ago, the NRC adopted what's called 10 CFR Part 52 to encourage standardization, greater standardization, and improve efficiency and certainty in the licensing process. And this is actually considered some of the lessons learned from Three Mile Island reviews in terms of getting a better handle on the licensing process. Part 52 allows for issuance of a combined license that authorizes construction and provisionally authorizes operation. However, basically, except for Vogtle 3 and 4 in Georgia, that have recently, one recent come online, I think 4 is about to come online or very shortly. All the plants in the United States had been, had been licensed under the two-step process. If you look at the timing, before Vogtle, all but one of those plants were licensed by the mid-1990s, and the exception was Watts Bar Unit 2, which had been deferred by Tennessee Valley Authority and came online, I think, about 2015. One of the things that we would say is that basically for Vogtle, it experienced a good, overall, a good licensing process. You know, there were lessons learned that came out of that. Again, particularly as it got to the point that it was ready for operation, that actually went very smoothly and very quickly, and that sort of showed where the combined license is. Now, that's about getting... What I've talked about right now is about getting the license for the facility, the particular site. One of the other things that Part 52 did is what NuScale has taken advantage of. That is, Part 52 went beyond site licenses to provide for a newer approach that focused on getting the approval of designs. So it provides for what we call a design certification, which is sort of the highest level, and that's what NuScale has done with its facility. And that design certification is actually adopted as a rule, a formal rule, and has, you know, is binding on the agency and, you know, for the period of time for which it's issued, which is, I think, 15 or so years, 15-20 years. Maybe slightly off on that timing. But it also provides for a step that gets you staff approval, called a Standard Design Approval, which is what they're going for now, with respect to the US460, the 77-megawatt unit. So that can build on the design certification. It isn't that matter of going back to square one. It's taking what has been done, what the NRC has approved, addressing what the changes are, the significance of those changes, and seeking then that Design Approval. That Design Approval is significant because, again, it's binding on the NRC staff, and in terms of going forward, and if it's referenced, it with respect to a specific license application. And again, that's the advantage of the Design Certification or the Standard Design Approval, is they can be referenced in site-specific licenses, and you don't go through the review of the design all over again. You have to have the site-specific license because you have to deal with, you know, basically how the plant is run, you know, what the management, quality assurance, you know, various types of things like that, environmental review, things like that. The standardization that you can achieve through the design certification or approval is very, very important. Again, the SDA is of, of, is provide staff approval of, you know, short of a formal rule, but still of great significance. In terms of experience with light water versus Gen IV designs, all operating nuclear power plants in the U.S. are light water reactors. All 7 NRC-issued design certifications have been for light water reactors. The NuScale being the one with, for the, in effect, a small modular unit. If you think of other things like the Westinghouse AP1000, more recently, the Korean APR1400, those are all light water reactors. And although there is some experience, early experience with non-light-water reactor designs, often referred to as Gen Four designs, consideration of those different technologies requires additional focus on their design aspects as well as the regulatory framework for the fuel, for example, the HALEU fuel, which has been referenced. And even if aiming for near-term deployment, advanced reactor designers at this stage have tended to pursue the Part 50 process, basically largely to allow them to tinker with the design as they build the safety case that they need to get to get approval from the regulator. As I've noted, Part 50 allows you to do that deferral of some design details to the operating license stage. But you know, there are some risks in that, in terms of where you you know, kind of finalize it. question is, you know, what do you need to do? Well, in seeking a license or design approval, you have to be prepared to provide substantial information to, among other things, show how the design will meet the technical standards in the regulations and implementing guidance, or how it is good if it doesn't, the regs or the standards of this sort of guidance don't quite fit what you're doing. And that includes assessment of deviations or inapplicability of technical criteria, such that a determination can be made that an exemption is permissible or the standard should not be applied. NuScale has had the advantage of completing, again, the regulatory process and obtaining the design certification. My assessment is that, you know, NuScale is very effectively engaged with the NRC. I know when I was still a commissioner, I used to meet with them. They dropped in on commissioners to tell them where they were and where they were going. But I think they did an excellent job in terms of their communication. Both the NRC and NuScale, in effect, issued lessons learned type reports. That's sort of given a general reference there that examined the lessons learned from the design certification review. And certainly, there are areas of improvement, probably on both ends, but NRC, in particular, credited NuScale's contribution to a number of best practices, such as the pre-application engagement to familiarize NRC with the design, development of a list of challenging issues that helped again the conversation, use of topical reports focused on particular subject areas. I think the NRC considered those lessons learned in addressing its improvements as it goes forward for other licensing, or the overall licensing process. With that, I'd be happy to answer some questions. Thanks. Thanks. There's a good overview on Part 50 and Part 52. So NuScale's chosen to go Part 52, and it seems like- ...the better way to go, but there are others that are electing to go Part 50. What are—Why would you choose to go Part 50 if Part 52 is available? Well, I think what, what it is for, for NuScale, I, I think for them, is they had the design. They were prepared to go through the process of design, get the design approved, and then that can, that, they can leverage that in terms of customers who may be in the United States, you know, siting at a particular place, and you don't have to go through the design again. The Part 50 process, what it does, what it allows, and that's why you're seeing, I think, a lot of the advanced reactor, you know, the non-light water technologies go through it, is it allows you to get down the, sort of, get down the path, but there may be some open questions that get deferred until the operating license stage. This is the way it's been, was in the 1950s. It was actually of some controversy. Actually, one of the few cases that ever went to the Supreme Court came out of whether or not that was a legitimate way of acting. But again, the idea is that you have most of the design, but there might be certain design issues that need to be resolved and would have to be resolved at the operating license stage. So if you're the de-developer or the basically the applicant, for because it's gonna be for an application at a particular site, if you're going down that path, some of the risk is, you know, how certain are things if you've got sort of the open issues? But in effect, you've also put on the table, we think it's gonna work fine. We think we'll need to address this, that, and the other, and then to get the process... Or to get, in effect, the construction permit to go forward. Yeah. Good morning, Ryan. Thanks, with B. Riley. You touched on it a little bit, but with all the advanced reactor designs expecting to apply over the next couple of years, do you think the NRC has the capacity to review those in a timely manner? Or we might see longer timelines for those companies, given the number that's expected? Yeah, I think they have the capacity. I think that... I won't say that there aren't challenges, because the challenges will be: Do you get this, you know, the staffing there, you get the funding support from the Congress, from the Congress, to do it? And, you know, where are you on the path? One of the things that the NRC does do, and partly this relates to, because it has to ultimately collect fees, is that they're ahead of where you go into the budget process. So I can't remember where we're going. They're almost ready to start 2025 in terms of the budget development, and they will reach out and say, "Hey, who's coming in here or expects to come in here and try to get a license from us?" And then that helps, that helps frame the scheduling and looking at that. And they've also been, I think, a lot better in terms of trying to be transparent about what they see as a licensing schedule. But I won't say it doesn't mean there can't be, you know, sort of, bumps along the road as we go down it. Steve, Thomas Meric. I wanna dig into Part 53 a little bit more. Yeah. I've got a couple questions here. So maybe just first, what do you think the biggest changes are needed, specifically as we think about passive safety measures? Yeah. Kind of update everybody on timing for that, when we should expect, you know, comments and proposals. Yeah. and final language. Yeah. Well, I mean, my own reaction, which is, I think a reaction others, I know, I think, heard out of NEI and some of the other NGOs and all, is that there are other things that have been sort of stuck into the staff's working draft of the proposed rule that really don't need to be there, or really are beyond just trying to make this the technology neutral regulation. Things like, what is it? The facility safety program, right? Yeah. It's like an additional program, even though this is the type of stuff that's already considered. It's certain ways of how a probabilistic risk assessment might be used or not used in it. The use of the... or addressing ALARA as low as reasonably achievable as a standard radiation exposure standard, even though that's usually something that you focus on in terms of operations. So those are the types of things that have been the more, I, I would say, sort of, high level things that have been challenging in it. The draft is in front of the commission for a vote in terms of whether to publicly go into the formal publication requirements under the in the Federal Register as a proposed rule. You've got a couple votes now that are not happy with where they are. I think the Chairman Hanson and Mr. Crowell have not voted, but I, I've gotten some indication. I'm not sure for at least, you know, the chair is real happy with all of the stuff that's in it. So again, in terms of timing, the legislation said they had till 2028 to adopt the rule. And the commission tried to accelerate that. My guess is you're probably gonna have another, maybe another six months, depending on what the outcome is here. And before you actually get something out to the Federal Register, for public comment. Super helpful. As we think about that, you know, down the line, what's maybe a blue sky scenario for licensing timelines for Gen IV reactors? You know, if everything goes well, everybody's happy. Yeah, well, again, I think part of it is gonna depend on what's the route you take. I think what you're seeing a lot of is you're seeing actually. I I think you're starting to see a push down from what was the 42-month schedule for some of these reviews, back to more like maybe a 3-year, maybe a little less. You know, it's gonna be, you know, I have to admit, it's gonna be a little bit of wait and see until how we get through it. What the good thing is is that if you look at the NRC website, and you look at some of the review schedules, they're fairly ambitious from the standpoint. So you're not talking about a 10-year review. You're talking about what maybe if you've got the two phases, you know, like a five-year review or, or, or at all. And again, remember, if you're going the two-step process, you've got to get that CP. You don't have to completely construct, it doesn't have to be ready to turn on when you go in for that operating license, 'cause you wanna actually do that a little before. So there's some overlap there, but it, it gets snapped. So I, I do think you're seeing some effort to put... you know, to push that down. And again, part of it is we need to see, you know, we need to see them, see them get, you know, get through that. To NuScale's credit, you know, I think on both sides, may have wanted to do it a little quicker, but again, I think it was an opportunity for lessons learned to how do you get this a little bit, you know, a little bit better. I would emphasize this communication, you know, and identification of key issues as, as important as a foundation, even to help you get that completed application in and then going on to work from there. Steve, we have time for one last question. Okay. Just on that very topic of lessons learned, with SMR having gone through the process, is your expectation that folks may actually move through more quickly, given they sort of plowed the road and processes have been adjusted a little bit? I think so, because I think part of it is there is pressure on the agency to do that, to be, you know, more, not precise, but more focused on what the review is and the need and to move through that and to get basically decisions made. You can't, you know, you can't sort of just say, "We'll get it to one again." I hate to say, back a long time ago, 40+ years ago, I remember talking to somebody on either on the staff, and he said, "Well, this is like Gallo wine." If you remember this, guys, there is no wine before it's time, and you kind of go, "What? That means we're just sitting here circling around and doing this stuff?" No, that is unacceptable. You know, that's unacceptable. It was frankly unacceptable back then, but, you know, it's an attitude change. And what I think I see is, in terms of how the NRC is trying to position itself, is that it is focused in trying to be transparent in getting those, you know, getting through those reviews and having the results done. Okay? Is that it? Yeah. Go. Thanks, Steve, and hello, everyone. I'm Carrie Fosaaen, NuScale's Vice President of Regulatory Affairs. I have responsibility for all our domestic and international licenses, relationships, and activities related to nuclear regulation for NuScale and to support our customers. My expertise is in advanced reactor licensing, and since I joined NuScale in 2015, I've led several developments of the major licensing applications. Overall, I have 13 years of experience in the nuclear industry, including previously serving in regulatory affairs for Xcel Energy, which helps give me a perspective from our customers' needs. Today, I'll further expand on regulatory dynamics with the NRC and other key global nuclear regulators. I'm excited to share why we're exceptionally positioned for continued licensing success with regulators and our customers. I'll start with my key messages. First, NuScale's proven track record of achieving regulatory firsts in the small modular, modular nuclear reactor industry. Next, I'll speak to some of our efforts to leverage our leadership position in the U.S. to advance nuclear regulatory maturity and acceptance globally. I'll then discuss why our approach to industry regulation gives us an edge throughout the process of obtaining commercial licensing and approval. Finally, I'll wrap things up with how we plan to continue to be a global SMR licensing trailblazer. As you've heard from my colleagues, NuScale is the first and only SMR to receive design approval from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. As Steve discovered, the new NRC maintains rigorous safety standards and globally is considered the gold standard nuclear regulatory body. As a result, the NRC has significant influence and offers important support to nuclear regulatory agencies all over the world. We're particularly proud of the speed and efficiency with which our team accomplished our regulatory approval. We did it in 42 months. That's the fastest the NRC ever provided for a certified design, which I think is both indicative of our safety and innovation. I'll provide a quick comparison. The previous design certifications for the large light water reactors Steve discussed, those were on the order of 6-9 years, so that was a significant improvement in the approval process. The swift and timely regulatory execution is something that our customers expect, and it's something we continue to push. As Clayton mentioned, our first mover advantage gives us an edge as we enter our commercialization and deployment phase. For our landmark design certification application, we invested over $500 million into maturing the design and completing the licensing activities. As an outcome, we received unmatched validation of our technology that we're already building upon with our next application with the NRC. We've successfully applied lessons learned from our design certification to our next round of licensing goals with our standard design application. In fact, the NRC's already accepted our next application for review, and we're currently in that process now. The updated design, featuring the 77 megawatt electric modular reactor, supports a wider range of capacity requirements for our customers. The fundamental aspects of our uprated design, most notably our safety case, have already been approved in our design certification application, which sets a stage for a much shorter review time with this application. We expect a 24-month review, which is as short as it gets in this industry. Importantly, we're still on a great pace relative to our customer needs, and as José discussed, we're several years ahead of our SMR peers, who've not yet submitted their applications to the U.S. NRC. We're confident in the timely approval of our 77-megawatt electric design, leveraging the foundations with our 50-megawatt design as approval as the foundation. Having said that, nuclear licensing is a relatively intense process. Typically, the reviews take longer than other types of large energy infrastructure projects. We're leveraging our experience, testing, validation, and mature design to expedite the review requests to the regulator. In addition, we hold a significant advantage in that the fuel we use in our plant is already commercially available, already widely utilized, and very familiar to regulators like the NRC. All of this has resulted in strong progress towards our commercialization goals, and we have a clear roadmap ahead of us for our uprated design and continued licensing progress with our customers. As an example, Carl and I are focused on continued licensing success for RoPower. We recently received Romanian regulatory approval for our licensing basis document for that project, which is another key milestone on the path to commercialization and operation. Our leadership status in the U.S. and broader regulatory advantages support global adoption, and we've earned our seat at the table with global regulators to streamline and harmonize regulatory processes. So why does streamlining the regulatory process matter to us? Well, the short answer is: regulatory maturity is just as important of a factor for nuclear advancement as the need for clean energy and energy security. We're active in harmonization efforts, collaborating with key industry advocacies worldwide. As an example, I serve as the chair of the SMR Licensing Task Force for World Nuclear Association's Cordell, whose mission is to drive regulatory harmonization worldwide. We also provide important input to the International Atomic Energy Agency in the development of the SMR guidance for the industry, which is ultimately adopted by many regulators as the foundation for their regulatory framework. We've supported engagements with regulators in Romania, Poland, Canada, and Ukraine as examples, to support the growth abroad, where regulators really appreciate the mature design and our ability to leverage our NRC engagements. We've also engaged with the UK regulator and incorporated feedback into our latest design and SDA application to the NRC. We actually believe this will help facilitate seamless future deployment in the UK and maintain that standardization. We're pushing licensing standardization to key regulatory decision makers. Widespread adoption of a standard design will reduce deployment costs and schedules and provide an easier path to technology scalability. While the NRC regulatory process is well-established, I understand it's not well understood by everyone, so I'd like to spend some more time simplifying important considerations in the process. Managing licensing and other project risks does not stop once you obtain design approval. In fact, the NRC remains heavily involved throughout construction, operation, and throughout the end of the life of the plant. In addition to the design approval, as Dr. Reyes alluded to, there's stringent regulatory work required to demonstrate various individual methodologies associated with the design, and we've already made those investments. In fact, we have almost 20 topical reports either approved or in approval now. Our SMR peers have not made that similar investment. The NRC also has to approve site-specific features in the site license, such as buildings and support systems. Our approach to standardization makes simplifying, satisfying these adjustments relatively easy to accomplish with less time and less cost. Regarding construction and operation approvals, we believe our chosen approach, which I'll cover in a little bit more in a second, is strongly supported by our design maturity. The licensing experience we've already garnered gives us a strong foundation to streamline future submissions and approvals with additional customers. History has shown that having a mature NRC standard design is critical to avoiding costly regulatory and construction risks that typically occur with immature designs. Blame has often been placed on the U.S. NRC for such project failures or delays, but the track record actually suggests that premature designs for project management and incomplete supply chains are really the primary driver of this deployment mishaps. We've strategically de-risked our design in all of these regards, especially when compared to non-light water SMR designs, and this puts us in a great position to execute on our chosen commercialization path. I'd like to dispel any confusion about our chosen licensing path, Part 52. While there are both advantages and disadvantages for both Part 50 and Part 52 pathways, we believe Part 52 best matches our strengths and strategy and best sets our customers up for success. As a reminder, per Part 52, a combined operating license is both the construction permit and the operating license application, which is the single-step process Steve just discussed. That means once our design is licensed to operate, it will be licensed to operate before it's even built. In comparison, the older Part 50 process, which you just learned about, involves two steps: the construction permit and a preliminary safety report, and then licensing process later in the construction to approve plant operations, and that occurs once the plant is built. This opens the plant owner to risks that the plant operations could be delayed, possibly significantly, after it's already been built. Many don't know this, but Part 52 was actually created in response to industry to address these vulnerabilities and the field and construction dynamics associated with delays I alluded to previously. We're pursuing Part 52, given our design standardization and maturity, and that de-risks the project profile from both a construction and operating license perspective. Any design can be conceivable on paper, but customers and regulators know that efficient construction and operation are vital factors to commercial success. We're confident our process will overcome any temporary advantage gained by pursuing Part 50 in order to start construction as early as possible. I'd like to give you a simple visual comparison of the two pathways, and this is built off historical data. This shows you where unexpected costs can arise in the Part 50 process, despite the shortcuts the path provides for commencing construction activities on nuclear aspects. These risks, including higher potential for costly delays from immature design and licensing litigation, on top of a second Part 50 required hearing, we believe the Part 52 process puts the customer first. So that's the comparison, particularly given the capital at stake. There are no shortage of examples demonstrating that getting the shovel in the ground as fast as possible on large projects is actually not the most efficient path to a successful project. NuScale's approach minimizes these risks while prioritizing our customer, regulatory approval, and setting up supply chain partners for success. Part 52 is a more holistic, long-term view we believe will derive successful deployments in a timely and cost-effective manner and increase customer confidence. It's also a shorter path to commercial operation. We have a clear strategy to continue to drive our success via Part 52. Our recent experience with the development of a first-of-a-kind limited work authorization is yet another example of our work to support more aggressive deployment schedules for our customers by allowing customers to proceed with non-nuclear site preparation activities earlier in the process. We plan to continue to accelerate review and approval timelines, deploy the necessary resources to preserve our standard design advantage, and expand on our already deep working relationships with global regulators. We believe we're well positioned for continued strategic execution, and our approach to regulatory affairs drives long-term commercialization. To summarize, we've proven to be an advanced nuclear trailblazer, and again, NuScale is the only SMR developer to have received NRC approval. We believe in a balanced approach to domestic and international regulatory harmonization, and our global efforts, regulatory efforts and relationships are vital to our commercial success. Our strategic approach and decisions regarding the NRC approval process give us an edge in achieving safe, efficient, scalable design that is both de-risked from a regulatory and operational challenge perspective relative to other SMRs. We believe we're best positioned to overcome any perceived challenges. Finally, we have a clear strategy to drive stakeholder value, both short and long term, and we've continued to focus on supporting customer needs rather than taking shortcuts which transfer the risk to our customers and can have costly ramifications. With that, I'll now turn it over to our new CFO, Ramsey Hamady, for an overview on our financial outlook. Ramsey? I'm gonna grab some water here. ... Thank you, Terry. Hello, everyone. I'm Ramsey Hamady. I'll start by saying that what you've heard today embodies why I chose to join this mission-driven organization. I'm the Chief Financial Officer of NuScale, and the newest joiner to the executive team. I'm proud to be responsible for financial leadership, risk management, and capital markets engagement. As with every NuScale employee, I answer to our investors. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to address analysts and shareholders today. The importance of NuScale technology cannot be overstated. Through our partnership, ENTRA1 Energy, we are able to seamlessly serve the needs of American oil and gas, utilities, heavy industry, semiconductor, and AI, for clean, sustainable, reliable baseload power, as well as addressing the needs for energy security, of particular importance in the EU. I'm thrilled to support NuScale as it enters this exciting growth phase. A bit of my background. Like many of you here today, I have a long Wall Street history with the world's leading financial institutions. I last stood here in this building 30 years ago as an intern for what was PaineWebber at the time, now UBS. Later, I worked as a bond trader for Lehman Brothers, and finally, as an investment banker for JP Morgan, the world's leading financial institution. I'm delighted that the most important global financial institutions today have embraced our mission and chosen to support the ENTRA1 Energy NuScale partnership. Finally, today, be clear, I am not prepared to offer financial guidance or projections. Rather, I'm here to discuss core themes, illustrate components of our revenue model, and offer a glimpse of near-term financial objectives. With that being said, let me start with how NuScale makes money. NuScale is a developer and integrator of SMR technology. Our revenue model is to make money by selling NuScale power modules, licensed technology, and supply services. As John had mentioned in his first presentation, NuScale is not a builder or developer of energy infrastructure projects. NuScale does not finance energy projects. We don't operate energy plants, and we don't sell energy. NuScale develops and integrates technology. Our revenue model is to make money by selling NuScale power modules. All that's good news for our investors, because we believe for all the reasons discussed today, NuScale is in a great position to make a lot of money. We're the sole U.S. NRC design-certified, near-term deployable SMR technology. Our exclusive global partnership, ENTRA1 Energy, has enabled and accelerated our commercialization process by de-risking power users, such as Standard Power. Today, NuScale maintains a healthy balance sheet and is in a comfortable position to continue to raise capital as we maintain a conservative liquidity reserve while we advance our projects and approach the cash flow positive operations. I'll say that NuScale today has always been, and today remains, a responsible steward of investor capital. While recent entrants spend investor money chasing unproven technologies, NuScale invests shareholder capital in commercialization, design finalization, supply chain readiness, all in support of actual ongoing production and real revenue-generating, cash-producing contracts. Our balance sheet's healthy. We ended the third quarter with cash of $197 million, approximately $79 million of that in cash flow LCs, and $118 million unrestricted cash. We have performed in line with our budget expectations. We are working diligently to advance through development stages of our current contracts and secure new ones, and will note that during this time, as a matter of financial prudence and conservatism, we will continue to actively engage capital raising and, pardon me, capital markets fundraising. So to date, as you've heard before, we've invested over $1.6 billion to develop our world-class SMR technology and ultimately to de-risk our customers. Having successfully achieved U.S. NRC design approval, near-term R&D spend is now focused on VOYGR plant design finalization, as Terry has just discussed, as well as addressing opportunities related to commercial-scale hydrogen production, desalination, and other process heat applications, among other items. While NuScale will always remain the world's leading innovator in SMR technology, we anticipate a near-term reduction in R&D investment as we continue to cross critical milestones years ahead of our competitors. NuScale anticipates SG&A expenses will grow modestly through to 2026, as we focus more on sales and delivery of products and services. So as we discussed earlier. We generate cash and revenue from three sources. First, the sale and delivery of NuScale power modules, also from upfront licensing fees, and lastly, from services provided. For our primary revenue source, the sale of NuScale power modules, there is no revenue recognition until vessels are delivered. I think this is an important concept to touch on. Cash is collected as we produce modules, and the financial impact of that is that customer orders are reflected in our balance sheet between cash, work in progress, and deferred revenues. Revenues are later recognized for NuScale when goods are transferred to the customer, as per accounting standards. The key takeaway here is that NPM orders generate cash flow and GAAP revenue is recognized only when NPMs are delivered, as we can see here. Depending on customer and site readiness, NuScale may earn cash and revenues for periods which can span many years pre-COD and extend for the 60-year life of the project. As NuScale commercial operations mature, more frequent deliveries will result in consistent revenue and income recognition. So for analysts in the crowd, we will have lumpy revenues in the first few years. It doesn't mean we're not receiving cash. We receive cash when we receive orders for NPMs. We spend that cash, we invest in our supply chain, and when NPMs are delivered from NuScale to our customers, we recognize revenues. As we have more consistent deliveries of NPMs, we'll have more consistent revenues. I think we'll try and find a way to communicate that more effectively so investors can see how much cash is coming in and how we can smooth our revenues out. So let me recap. I think this is interesting to see partnership with strategic shareholders. NuScale's strong support from strategic shareholders across the globe is a testament to the critical importance of the work that we do, and it also demonstrates strong conviction from leading industry players in the commercial potential of our world-class technology. I know a lot of our strategic partners are listening to this presentation. We're grateful for their support. They've been with us for a long time, and they continue to stay with us. I'm going to go quickly to a recap slide. I know that we're about an hour over. So, to recap, NuScale develops and integrates technology. Our revenue model is to make money by selling NuScale power modules. Our exclusive strategic global partnership, ENTRA1 Energy, has enabled and accelerated our commercialization process by de-risking power users. Finally, NuScale maintains a healthy balance sheet and is in a comfortable position to continue raising capital as we maintain a conservative liquidity profile while we advance our projects and approach cash flow positive operations. I couldn't be more excited to be here. I couldn't be more excited about the work that we're doing. And with that, I'll just welcome my colleagues back on stage. I think we have some questions to take. Sure. We just heard from a former commissioner. What do you think, Gary? We're here to help you. Is everybody supposed to have a lavalier mic on right now? I'm going to ask this guy. Who's up here? Everybody's up here? Yeah, all, all seven NuScale. And who does not have a lavalier mic on? He's short. Yeah, sure. Sameer again. Just a clarification on the design certification. Is it site agnostic and subsequent sites need only incremental approval? Yeah. So the Design Certification and our Standard Design Approval currently under review are site agnostic, so they use a bounding profile to make sure they're deployable on a wide range of sites. Every deployment will require a small amount of work for site-specific aspects. Would that be 24 months or 12 months, or? We're currently negotiating that with the NRC, so I can't give you a timeline, but we are looking to have more aggressive timelines as we've already pursued in our Standard Design Approval. Oh, okay. And then just, changing tracks. I know the ENTRA1 agreement is exclusive. Is it mutually exclusive from both sides? No, it's not mutually exclusive from both sides, but ENTRA1 has developed a pipeline that's very significant, and we are the power producer in every instance in that pipeline. I don't anticipate ENTRA1 going out and either using conventional nuclear or gas or coal or anything of that nature. Hey, Mark Bianchi from TD Cowen. So I understand you guys don't want to provide any kind of outlook on cash flow, but maybe we could talk through some of the moving pieces, as it relates to 2024. So my understanding is there's some uncertainty around appropriations, but you guys still have an R&D cost share, I think, coming to you. Could you talk about sort of the low end and the high-end expectation for that? I realize. A lot of uncertainty there, but just so that we could understand the boundaries around that, and then any other moving pieces as it relates to 2024 that you could talk through would be great. Sure. I wouldn't be able to comment as much on appropriations. I think what we would hope to see is about, yeah, I'll throw out a very specific number, but we're looking to see about $66 million from the government in 2024. With us. With us, with New, with NuScale. I think the remarkable thing here is that, first we have RS3, so we have a shelf registration now. We have our ATM facility in place, and I think you know, we would look to, if it's advantageous and the timing is right, we can employ our ATM facility. But NuScale has. We've been in a fortunate position. The company hasn't had an issue raising capital. I think you know, we've had some very supportive shareholders, we have some very supportive banks, we have some very supportive research analysts, and all of that has made for a very positive situation. And so, you know, I don't wanna just take a step back, Mark, and say, "Well, it's, you know, it's fluid." As we approach this, we're very conservative about it. We hope to get government money in. We're not reliant on it. I think that we have enough contracts in place that we'll have revenue coming up, and we should be in a very comfortable position. I'm not... You know, we watch it closely, but it's not like we have our backs to the wall on this. Yeah. To your point, we worked really hard last year, Mark, as I mentioned, on working both sides of the aisle. So when the House mark came out, we had quite a bit of money, and actually, when the Senate marks come out, if it holds, then we're actually could more money than we asked for. So that's how supportive the government's been. Mm-hmm. Okay, great. And then, the slide that you showed on the cash profile for year 6 ahead of the project, if I take the Central 1 project that you've got, if I look back at some of the materials you guys provided when you did the merger, the initial sort of analyst day, it looked like maybe a 12-module project would have around $300 million of revenue opportunity for you guys, not including services beyond. Is the right way to think about it that $300 million, whatever the margin is on that, you're gonna get 40% of that in the next couple of years, like 2024? 'Cause that would be 6 years ahead of delivery for that project, right? I don't know that $300 million is the right... I'm not, I'm not quoting prices on our projects, but- Yeah, but just, just that, like, if the project isn't gonna be COD in 2029- Yeah. Then you should be getting 40% of the cash flow in 2024. Yes. Yes, and that's right. That's that's exactly right, and that's exactly what I was trying to illustrate. I think maybe the quantum of numbers is off. If we, you know, for $300 million on a 12-module project, that's, that's not the right, that's not the right frame, and that's not the right scope. It'd be much more than that. Okay, great. It'd be much more than that. Yeah. Thank you. You know, we offer broad guidance on... Hi, this is George Gianarikas from Canaccord Genuity. This question is for Dr. Reyes, if that's you had a slide in the very beginning that talked about the, the breakdown of nuclear, you know, the demand to 20, from 2020 to 2050, and the certain market share for SMRs. And I'm curious as to whether or not you could share your thoughts on how that's gonna break down, you know, the, the, the percentage of wins for Gen IV, how successful that will be versus, you know, light water reactors. Thank you. I'm familiar with the slide. That was actually on John's presentation. Sorry. I'm gonna turn it over to John. All right. But it's a very conservative chart that's showing you. But I'll give it to John. You know, the numbers I showed on that, that pie chart was for electricity. What we don't know is, like Maria had commented about, for other applications that I'm seeing more and more hydrogen, if it comes to fruition, ammonia production, et cetera. So how big this market is, I just continue to see the groundswell continue to build because of the reasons stated, energy security. I'm in Eastern Europe a lot. You know, interesting about that, too, we're talking about first of a kind. When I'd first go over pre-Ukraine and talk to Czech Republic and others, they would say: Well, you know, we're probably looking at operational dates in early 2030s to mid-2035s, 2035. Now, when I go over there, because of post-Ukraine, how soon can you get them in the ground? So Romania, they're looking at a COD 2029. They need to order long lead items now. I just came back from there, and that's—they're in the process of looking at it. Within a short period of time, they'll be ordering more modules for their, their given plan, so. My question was more about technology breakdown, you know- Oh. not to talk about competition. I got you. Which technologies do you see proliferating more over time to? Yeah, certainly, in terms of what we can do with our technology, the process heat, I think, is a major development for us, to go—to provide high temperature and high pressure steam. So, it, this is a this type of scalable reactor design is uniquely well suited for a range of applications which you haven't seen for nuclear in the past. So I really do believe that the small modular reactor, our, in particular, our scalable design, is gonna be a very large player in that. Honestly, we hope that these other reactors, because of the market size, I stated earlier, they need to come to fruition and come forward. If we're gonna go out and compete against state-owned enterprises, I don't wanna be the only one in the industry that's publicly traded. We need to be able to have, you know, more information and more data to help support. None of them have yet submitted their design, so have you heard over and over that it, you know, and how fast they're gonna go through that, if it's a Part 50, Part 52, and I think it'll be different for the non-light waters, as the commissioner stated, additional resources may be required and understand if it's a sodium fast or a pebble bed versus a light water. GEH is one that's I hear a lot of, that they have an existing BWR that's a shrunk... Now, there's a shrunk down version, but you still have to go. My litmus test, it took us 42 months to get through it. I don't see anybody doing it faster than that. We were the quickest ever to do it. And so maybe it happens, but the rigor of the... There is no such thing as NRC light. I mean, it's rigorous. Thomas Mundy. A follow-on question to that, just in the sense of industrial heat applications and gas-cooled fast reactors. You know, A, how do you think your quality of steam, of temperature and pressure compare to Gen four reactors? You know, and then, B, kind of should we expect other reactors to get the EPZ similar to yours? And kind of C, just do some of the more advanced designs have a different EPZ? Those are great questions. I'll start with the EPZ first. You know, I mentioned it took us seven years to get that methodology approved by the NRC. The part of the secret, and I'll give you my secret here, part of the secret of this is you have a very small core. So we're able to passively cool our plants. And so when you get cores, you know, we're 250 megawatts thermal. When you start going to cores of 1,000 or 2,000 megawatts thermal, there's a big challenge to try to get that source term confined and keep it within the boundary of the site boundary. So part of that is developing a methodology which will describe your source term and the ability to calculate that accurately for the NRC. In terms of temperatures, the advantages that we're seeing now, and again, we just made this announcement back in March, working with oil and gas and steel and chemical companies. What is attractive right now is the fact that our modules will work at conventional reactor temperatures. So these are, you know, 300 degrees C or less. We can send that steam then to a commercially available steam compression system, which will do work on our steam, pressurize that, and also increase temperature to about 500 degrees C. As we talk to different oil and gas and chemical companies, this is now in the range of interest to them. More importantly, the quantity of steam. We're able to produce 500,000 lbs of steam per hour at these high temperatures and higher pressures. Because of our proximity to the end user, we have less heat loss, so that's a big factor. We're able to transport that even though it's at 300 degrees Celsius. We compress it and pressurize it at the site, so all the high temperature materials are after that compressor. It reduces wear and tear on our reactors in terms of high temperature materials, high temperature, and high pressure type of stresses that you place on your reactor. So we see multiple advantages to that, but it also opens it up for all light water reactors. This is, this is a, you know, commercially available compression systems. So now other light water reactors can actually play a role in that decarbonization process for the chemical plants. Hey, guys, Ryan Pfingst with B. Riley. John, you spoke about some of the challenges earlier to CFPP. To the extent that you can, could you provide any updates around, you know, COD timing or, anything we should be looking for in the near term on that project? The COD still remains the same at 2029 timeframe. It's just more about meeting with the customer and get them... As I said, you know, we're, we're the tech- There's three buckets of cost: the owner's cost, the EPC cost, and my cost. I know my cost is well in line of what it should be. If you look at a general configuration of manufacturing and, and offsite, 30% in the factory, 70% in the field. And so what we're doing with the customer is trying to enhance that project and figure out, can we do a better job on streamlining and get back to schedule? That's helpful. And then congratulations on the Standard Power announcement. Could you just talk about your confidence in securing another 2 customers this year as, your goal was to secure 3 more? Well, I'll speak for myself. Again, as I said before, I don't want to get a mile wide in each state and cheap. This whole intro one thing, it's gonna be a groundbreaker in terms of our ability to better focus and vet projects and then bring that... You know, we talked, somebody mentioned earlier about the capacity of a Russian, that they come in, they do a wraparound financing or whatever. We have that opportunity now. And as I mentioned before, what excites me, having come out of the process-oriented businesses, the... If I go talk to a Microsoft or Amazon or... They don't necessarily want to own the asset, they just want 24/7 reliable energy. If I can go and have them, and offer them an energy solution to provide, you know, build, own, operate—we will never be an operator, but you get a legitimate operator—build, own, transfer. Not only is that model here, but we're seeing it in Europe. The other area I like, as I mentioned earlier, you go into areas, Geismar, Louisiana, Baytown, Texas, you get a multiple of these process plants in close proximity to one another. You, again, you build that thing outside the fence line and offer the, if it's hydrogen energy that they want or electricity energy or... Because our modules are scalable... So you can have two or three provided energy for desalinization, two or three provided energy for electricity. It's this, and they like that model. I mean, you bundle 12 of them, you're at a gigawatt size, 924 megawatts. I think it's also worthwhile mentioning that, when we spoke about having three new customers in 2023, we had two projects that were each six modules, the two VOYGR sixes. Right now, what we announced with Standard Power and with ENTRA1 is two different sites, each site with 12 modules. Just from the idea of scaling and increasing our sales pipeline, that's a very substantial increase on what we have outstanding today. You know, I hope that we get many more projects. I hope we get more projects this year, but I think we can consider today a great win. If I look to see how the markets reacted, you know, at some point, we were up 21-22% today. I think the investment public sees this as a great win, so we're very happy with the performance we had today. And, I'll just add, KGHM in Poland is another customer that we're looking to move to the next level this year, which is one of the considerations. And the other thing is, it's October sixth. There's still time. Awesome. Okay, this concludes our Q&A session. John has some concluding remarks before we do the technology demonstration. I guess, to conclude, as we demonstrated today, we've moved from R&D to delivery. We've hired skill sets to deliver on our commitments, and we are laser focused on meeting or exceeding our objectives. I come from a world where you're only known for your last project. They say one, "Aw, shucks," can wipe out 10 attaboys. We have continued to deliver on key milestones that instill confidence in our customers, regulators, and our members and our employees. The renewed interest in nuclear and SMRs globally is remarkable, and NuScale is uniquely positioned to capitalize on this opportunity. I really believe that, and we all believe that. I am incredibly proud of my colleagues, and you heard from today and our entire team of employees and partners. The milestones that we have achieved over the past 16 years, thanks to this gentleman, has been truly astonishing. We're going to keep pushing as hard as we can to commercialize our technology in order to achieve our mission of improving the quality of life for all mankind, humankind. It's going to be an exciting journey, and for those of you who are invested or tracking us, you'll continue to see more revolutions and advancements in this critical mission. I thank you again for joining us here today, and for those with us in person, I hope you enjoy the, the demonstration that Dr. Reyes will show over there. I was just in Ukraine. We mentioned these E2 Centers. These are actual control room simulators that are in our, our NuScale plant. We have six universities now that have incorporated them in their training system. We just put them in Politehnica in Romania, at the university. When I was just there, Secretary Terry and the Romanian Prime Minister were sitting at the modules doing dynamic simulations of various events. And so we're looking to put them elsewhere in the world. We got one proposed in Korea, hopefully in Japan coming up. So we actually have our control rooms in major universities, and engineering students are learning how to run a nuclear NuScale Power plant. Pretty cool.