This conference call transcript was computer generated and almost certianly contains errors. This transcript is provided for information purposes only.EarningsCall, LLC makes no representation about the accuracy of the aforementioned transcript, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the information provided by the transcript.
spk00: Good day and welcome to the SPIRE, Inc. third quarter earnings conference call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star, then one on your touch-tone phone. To withdraw your question, please press star, then two. Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Scott Dudley, Managing Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.
spk06: Good morning and welcome to SPIRE's fiscal 2021 third quarter earnings call. We issued an earnings news release this morning and you may access it on our website at spireenergy.com under newsroom. There's a slide presentation that accompanies our webcast and you may download it from either the webcast site or from our website under investors and then events and presentations. Before we begin, let me cover our safe harbor statement and use of non-GAAP earnings measures. Today's call, including responses to questions, may contain forward looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Although our forward looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, there are various uncertainties and risk factors that may cause future performance or results to be different than those anticipated. These risks and uncertainties are outlined in our quarterly and annual filings with the SEC. In our comments, we will be discussing net economic earnings and contribution margin, which are both non-GAAP measures used by management when evaluating our performance and results of operations. Explanations and reconciliations of these measures to their GAAP counterparts are contained in both our news release and slide presentation. With that, I'll turn the call over to SPIRE's President and CEO, Suzanne Sitherwood. Suzanne?
spk02: Thank you, Scott, and good morning, everyone. We appreciate you joining us for our third quarter earnings call. Today, Steve Lindsey, Steve Rasche, and I are joined for the first time by Adam Hoiter. Adam aspires treasurer and CFO of our gas utilities. Welcome, Adam. As the year progresses, we continue stepping forward to deliver on our mission to answer every challenge, advance every community, and enrich every life through the strength of our energy. And no matter how complicated the challenge, our 3,600 employees continue to deliver for our shareholders while building on our performance record of delivering safe, reliable, and affordable natural gas for our customers and communities. The ability to successfully execute reflects FIRE's culture and the hard work and dedication of our team. And while I'm proud of what the team consistently does day in and day out, I'm always heartened when I see how our employees lean into challenges like the coronavirus and winter storm Uri. Doing everything possible to ensure the continued operation of the STL pipeline is no exception. More on that in a moment. Stepping forward always means we're helping lead the conversation about natural gas. As we look ahead, we know that natural gas is key to America's reliable, affordable, and sustainable energy future. In that spirit, we continue to advance our commitment to be a carbon neutral company by mid-century, including consistently reducing methane emissions and exploring sustainable operations like RNG. Turning to our third quarter results, this morning we reported solid quarterly net economic earnings of $0.06 per share and delivered continued strong operating performance. Before turning to our operations report, I'd like to share our thoughts on the situation surrounding the STL pipeline. Make no mistake, the STL pipeline is critical to hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses and several million people in eastern Missouri. That's why we built it. The past year's extreme winter weather proved the importance of this critical infrastructure as the STL pipeline delivered reliable and affordable energy when other parts of the continent were gripped with supply disruptions and skyrocketing costs. So, the question is, why is the STL pipeline in jeopardy today? As you know by now, the Environmental Defense Fund challenged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's 2018 authorization for the construction and operation of the SPIRE STL pipeline in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Court. A pipeline that's been fully operational since 2019. On June 22nd, the DC Circuit Court issued its judgment against FERC, remanding the matter back to the agency for further consideration. And in a highly unusual action negatively impacting Missouri customers in our industry, vacating the FERC's 2018 authorization of the STL pipeline. I've been in the natural gas business for more than 40 years, and I've never seen another situation in which a fully operational, safe, and environmentally sound pipeline had its FERC certificate revoked. It's important to remember that we constructed the pipeline based on approval obtained from the FERC after a thorough and rigorous two-year regulatory review process, a process that has been in place for decades. The number one job in any utility or pipeline is to deliver safe and reliable energy to customers. 24 by 7, 365 days a year. We've done that here at SPIRE for more than 160 years, and we take that job very seriously. That is why we emphatically are pursuing all legal and regulatory avenues to secure the uninterrupted operations of the pipeline, particularly on the eve of this winter, but also for the long term. So far, we've taken two big steps to protect the health and safety, property, and economic prosperity of the St. Louis region. First, last week, we asked the FERC to take an emergency action to grant a temporary certificate for STL Pipeline. That gives the FERC an opportunity to allow the pipeline to continue operating this winter so that natural gas customers in the St. Louis region would not be left without reliable gas service when they need it the most. It also gives the FERC an opportunity to more thoroughly evaluate the issues on remand without being rushed by the immediate needs of the winter heating season. Second, today we will be asking the D.C. Circuit Court to reconsider its decision to vacate the FERC's order authorizing the pipeline. To be clear, if neither the D.C. Court nor the FERC act on our request, the result would be an unprecedented forced shutdown of an operating natural gas pipeline, particularly one that is operating safely and consistent with all environmental considerations. The SDL pipeline is a project that, one, has proved its purpose of supply and operational diversity to the St. Louis region during extreme weather events such as winter storm Uri. Two, demonstrated its worth by saving St. Louis homes and businesses hundreds of millions in gas costs during URI. And three, was built with fire's environmental commitment in mind. It's important to understand how the St. Louis region was spared the devastation that occurred during URI. When gas supply from Texas and Oklahoma was disrupted, the competition for the remaining gas supply was in temp. Cities and communities throughout the mid-continent suffered from contrailments. and the devastation was well documented. But the St. Louis region did not suffer from those problems. Instead, the FGL pipeline did exactly what it was designed to do, provide alternative, reliable supply in gas-producing areas not impacted by a regional extreme weather event. As you can tell from our words and actions, we are laser-focused on ensuring the pipeline remains in service for the communities of eastern Missouri. Over the last several weeks, I'm pleased to know that many are raising their voices in support of the pipeline, including the Missouri governor, bipartisan elected officials, the Missouri Department of Economic Development, commercial and industrial customers, community leaders, and even a key interconnecting interstate pipeline, all voicing their concern over the potential loss of this critical infrastructure to meet the energy needs of the homes and businesses we serve. Now, I'll turn the call over to Steve Lindsey to share details about FIRE's overall STL pipeline operations and what we're doing to protect several million people in Missouri for losing the energy that they count on.
spk08: Thank you, Suzanne. I want to echo your acknowledgement of the efforts of our employees who continue their focus on maintaining safe and reliable gas delivery operations and outstanding service to our customers despite the challenges we face. As Suzanne noted, and as we are aggressively communicating, SPIRE STL pipeline is critical energy infrastructure. It is absolutely essential to our ability to fully serve more than 650,000 homes and businesses in the St. Louis region that count on this reliable and affordable source of natural gas. As we discussed, the pipeline was essential during winter storm year in February when Texas and the mid-continent encountered energy supply disruptions and skyrocketing prices. SDL Pipeline provides Spire, Missouri access to the Marcellus and Utica basins, which were largely unaffected by the cold weather event. To illustrate how important our pipeline was during URI, we estimate that up to 133,000 premises in eastern Missouri would have been without service had the pipeline not been in place. That's 20% of the homes and businesses we serve in the St. Louis region. On top of that, we estimate that Missouri East customers would have experienced hundreds of millions of dollars in higher natural gas costs. At that level, STL pipeline more than paid for itself just during this single extreme weather event. Going forward, our ability to continue to provide reliable and affordable energy to our customers this winter without STL pipeline is in jeopardy. That's because our ability to secure new pipeline capacity on other systems is extremely constrained. And given that regional gas flows and interconnections have changed since STL pipeline went into service, We are simply not able to replace that supply based on current market and operating conditions. As a result, there would be potential service disruptions. Up to 400,000 homes and businesses could be without service in an extreme cold weather scenario. That's more than 60% of our customer base in the St. Louis region. We've taken important steps to ensure that STL Pipeline continues to operate and serve our customers. There are two paths that we are pursuing. On the regulatory front, STL Pipeline filed on July 26th an application with FERC for a temporary emergency certificate. This would allow the pipeline to remain in service while FERC reviews the matter on remand in the D.C. Circuit. We have asked for an expedited treatment of our application. We are also pursuing relief in the courts. Today, we are filing a petition for rehearing with the D.C. Circuit Court that issued the ruling. It's important to note that in making its ruling, the court looks only at the original records were accused to make its determination to issue the certificate for SDL pipeline. And that record reflected projections and estimates for operation of the pipeline years before the project began. In our request for rehearing, we have updated the record to include the pipeline's strong operating performance over the last 18 months, including during winter storm Uri, and have outlined the dire consequences to customers in the St. Louis region if we lose this critical energy infrastructure. we have specifically asked the court to reconsider its order vacating the FERC authorization for the pipeline. In summary, we remain confident that SDL pipeline is critical infrastructure that enables Fire Missouri to continue providing reliable and affordable energy for homes and businesses in the St. Louis region. While we are working to preserve critical energy infrastructure, we continue to make significant investments in our utility infrastructure to enhance our operating performance and service to customers. We are achieving further gains in safety, system integrity, and environmental sustainability. And we are on track with our methane emissions reduction goals in support of our commitment to be a carbon-neutral company by mid-century. We continued on pace with our CapEx plans through the first nine months of fiscal 2021. Total spend was $463 million, including just over $430 million for our gas utilities, focused on infrastructure upgrades and organic growth. Pipeline replacement remains the largest component accounting for more than half of our utility spend year-to-date and coming in at a level slightly ahead of last year. We've also been ramping up our investment in innovation, including installation of ultrasonic meters. New business totaled more than $100 million, up $30 million compared to a year ago. Meanwhile, we're progressing with our Missouri rate review, which is focused on recovering the investments we've made since 2018. Let me now turn the call over to Adam for an update on the rate review. Adam?
spk07: Thank you, Steve. And yes, we've been hard at work making our distribution system safer while continuing to minimize our environmental footprint. Spire Missouri has deployed nearly $1 billion of capital since the last rate case and is now requesting recovery for this investment. We filed the rate review last December and have been constructively engaged with interested parties in the month since then. the parties to the review filed a partial stipulation with the Missouri Public Service Commission that settled many of the items at issue in the case. Notably, agreement was reached on recovery of COVID-19 costs deferred under our accounting authorization order, or AAO, the creation of a combined cap for our infrastructure system replacement surcharge rider, and we have made strides toward unifying the tariff and purchase gas recovery mechanisms. We remain focused on working through the remaining issues in the coming weeks. The true-up period ended May 31st, and the parties have exchanged rebuttal testimony. Evidentiary hearings conclude tomorrow. Next steps include true-up testimony, hearings, and financial update later in August. The process remains on a positive trajectory, and we look forward to a constructive conclusion to the review for SPIRE and its customers. SPIRE takes its sustainability commitment seriously. We are fortunate to enjoy terrific support in our communities for these endeavors. Last quarter, the Missouri General Assembly passed new RNG-enabling legislation by an overwhelming margin, and the governor recently signed it into law. This new law, which contemplates hydrogen as well as RNG, allows for the investment in renewable gas infrastructure within rate base, the procurement of biofuels for our gas supply portfolio, and the implementation of RNG-based customer programs. The next step is rulemaking at the Missouri Commission. We will certainly keep you informed of developments on how we will use this opportunity to enhance the sustainability of our distribution system. Following a similar theme, we joined the One Future Coalition earlier this year, and this quarter SPIRE is pleased to announce that it is a founding limited partner in Energy Capital Ventures. We were initially joined by several peers in the investment in this first-of-its-kind with a focus on sustainability, reliability, and resilience in the natural gas utility sector. We are excited about this opportunity to accelerate innovation and transformation and push the boundaries of what's possible in delivering the affordable, reliable, and clean natural gas customers depend on. I will now pass things over to Steve for a financial update.
spk04: Thanks, Adam, and welcome, everyone. Let me touch on a few highlights for the third quarter. We delivered consolidated net economic earnings of $6.9 million, or six cents per share, down $400,000, or one cent per share, from last year. Our gas utilities earned just over $12 million, up almost $4 million from the prior year. Key drivers include higher contribution margin due to higher rates in both Missouri and Alabama, customer growth, and higher depreciation costs tied to our infrastructure investments. Gas marketing posted a loss of just over $5 million, reflecting less favorable market conditions and slightly lower wholesale demand, especially power generation demand due to the cooler-than-normal weather this spring in the mid-continent and southeast, combined with higher demand charges and marginally higher costs as we position for the upcoming winter. I would also note that we continue to make progress on a handful of commercial disputes from winter storm during. Lastly, all other businesses and corporate costs improved by $1 million, reflecting better performance by Spire Storage. Looking at a few key other variances on slide 12, gas costs increased due to higher commodity prices. O&M expenses on a run rate basis were up 1% or $1.3 million, reflecting marginally higher operating and employee costs at the gas utilities and slightly higher cost of gas marketing. Other income, net of the reclassification, was essentially equal to last year. Finally, turning to our guidance, we reaffirmed our long-term net economics earnings per share growth target range of 5% to 7%, our fiscal 21 earnings target of $4.30 to $4.50 per share, and our five-year capital expenditure target of $3 billion. Our financing plan now includes the Spire Missouri successfully issued first mortgage bonds totaling $305 million, as well as retired $55 million of higher coupon debt, both in support of our ongoing rate proceedings. So, in closing, we continue to execute on our plan, delivering for our customers, our communities, and our investors. We're well positioned in our Missouri rate proceeding and will continue to emphatically support the SPIRE SDL pipeline. We look forward to updating you on those and other initiatives later this year. And as always, we appreciate the time you spent with us today and your continued interest in SPIRE. Now we're ready to take questions.
spk00: We will now begin the question and answer session. To ask a question, you may press star then one on your touch tone phone. If you are using a speaker phone, please pick up your handset before pressing the keys. To withdraw your question, please press star then two. At this time, we will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. The first question will be from Richard Sunderland of JP Morgan.
spk09: Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions today. Maybe starting on the SGL pipeline, can you outline what to watch for procedurally and timing-wise with regards to the two filings, the one from last week and today's filing as well?
spk02: I'll start. Rich and then others obviously can chime in. In terms of the certificate, the emergency certificate, there's no specific timeline in terms of the commission making that determination. They obviously are very familiar with the situation, and I mentioned in my opening remarks there's been a lot of voices that have weighed in to the significance of the pipeline. Of course, here we are in August, very hot weather, but the fall is not that far away, and so we're hopeful that the Commission will be deliberative and act with some pace to provide that temporary certificate. That is the primary focus. Again, we went through a very rigorous process, regulatory process, so that approval met all the requirements. And so they have that record. And so again, we're hopeful that it'll be an expedited process to get that temporary certificate.
spk08: And Rich, thanks for the question. This is Steve Lindsey. I would also say on the rehearing filing that is going on today, the same kind of thing. There is no definitive timeline. We've asked for expedited processing on these as we need to move, obviously, with the winter coming. So I think both those, the answer is somewhat the same in that there's no definitive timeline.
spk09: Got it. Understood. And maybe a related question here in terms of the filings and the fact record laid out, particularly the FERC application. Curious if you could speak more to the system changes, maybe broadly in the state, that have occurred on the back of the STL pipeline being put in service and the ramifications this upcoming winter without the pipeline. It sounds like there would be issues with pressure in certain parts and Just trying to get a feeling for would existing customers lose service immediately, or is this about the risk in very cold conditions?
spk08: Yeah, that's a great question. And there are quite a few configuration changes that have occurred since the pipeline's been in place now for two winters. So if you think about interconnections, and those can be on our system or even with other pipelines. And for example, with the MoGas interconnection, that gives us the ability to move gas to the western side of our system where over the years we've experienced a lot of growth, and that was needed. There are some other system configurations within our distribution system that because of this pipeline, we've not had to do that if this pipeline weren't there, we would have to do in order to continue to keep pressure up across the entire system. Another thing that I don't think a lot of people really understand is where the pipeline comes in, which is on the northern side of our service territory, is where our underground storage facility is. This gives us the ability, because of the elevated pressure that STL pipeline brings in, to really accommodate that storage facility and to be able to replenish it in a way that we weren't able to do before. And so there's a lot of interweavings to all these things that are going on. But really, if you go back to the two main reasons this pipeline is in place, it's for supply and operational diversity. Operational, obviously, is on being able to keep customers on during the most critical time. And that's what we've talked about. The supply piece is what we experienced just during the nine-day period in February. where hundreds of millions of dollars were saved on gas costs for our customers on the east side of the state because of that supply diversification. So I think this is almost a one plus one equals three if you really add up the benefits from the supply as well as the operational stability. And so if that pipeline weren't in place, obviously there are critical temperature parts of our modeling system to say when we would start to lose customers. If you combine that with once storage is depleted, then it really compounds. And so I think there's a whole lot of variables, but the bottom line is this pipeline has exceeded expectations and is very critical to the customers on Missouri East.
spk02: So, Rich, I only want to add one point. I think Steve summarized all of it, really. But I do want to add one other point. The capital that we've deployed, say, the last handful of years, We've rebuilt the backbone system as a utility, and the diameter and the pressures and the flows of our backbone system contemplates exactly what Steve just described. So it's not just stopping at the point where we receive, but when we design, our engineering team designing our backbone systems and the arteries off those systems to meet the demand, where the growth is located versus communities where there's no growth or maybe even some moving out of areas to other areas. It's important how all this works together because it is a physical system and it does vary at temperatures and demand. So I just want to connect those two points as well.
spk09: That's very helpful, Collar. Thank you for letting that out. Maybe I'll just turn real quick to the rate case. The remaining items outside of this stipulation, do you have any sense on the ability to settle all of those items or if there are any issues in particular that would be kind of best put in front of the Commission for a ruling?
spk07: Hi, Rich. It's Adam. I don't think we want to predict outcomes at this point, but again, I feel like it's been a constructive process, and we feel optimistic we're going to get to a positive conclusion.
spk09: Fair enough. I'll leave it at that. Thank you. Thanks, Rich.
spk00: The next question comes from Julian DeMoulin-Smith of Bank of America.
spk03: Hey, good morning, team. Thanks for the opportunity to connect. I appreciate it. Perhaps if I could just go back to the STL angle here. Have you received any feedback at all with respect to the – from FERC? I mean, more so in sort of digesting the initial dissent from Glick here. I just want to break that down and perhaps just understand today if you've received any of the feedback therein and how you might – seek to mitigate some of those concerns, at least raised by Glick. I understand certainly the comments you provided thus far and the critical role the pipe played thus far, but curious if we can kind of frame it slightly differently in directly tackling and assuaging the concerns that came up earlier and or any of the other feedback that you've received thus far as we think about next steps here.
spk02: So I'll start, and some of my colleagues may want to add some more color, but I'll start regarding Chairman Glick. It's been some years, of course, since the pipeline was approved. And since that time, we have actual data, information, how the pipeline will operate. So there's been enough time, and he's got more information, and he's serving as chair. So I certainly would not want to get in front of Chairman Glick and speak about what he may or may not be thinking. But I do know that he's got new information in front of him, and that information is true operation of the pipe and what its performance has been and so forth and so on. Okay.
spk03: All right. Fair enough. And then maybe you can speak a little bit to the RNG strategy here. I think in your prepared remarks, you spoke to the Missouri process sort of kicking off now that you've got the legislation in hand, but maybe you can speak to your thought process in how you might want to participate and scale up therein and what opportunities could be afforded to you from the legislation as best you understand early in the implementation phase.
spk07: Hi, Julia. It's Adam. Thanks for the question. Yeah, it's probably on the regulatory front. We're excited about the opportunity that comes with the legislation. I think it's You know, and we were definitely strategizing around it, but probably a little premature at this point prior to going through rulemaking. We've, as you might expect, have had some preliminary discussions with staff. But, you know, again, I would just stress very preliminary at this point from a regulated approach. And we, as we've mentioned before, we are certainly exploring some non-regulated approaches as well. to RG, but again, nothing to announce at this point.
spk03: Sorry, and if I can squeeze in one more brief here. As you think about the partial stip in the case, and certainly surprising, can you speak to any thoughts or perspectives here from hearings that have taken place, and any further observations perhaps? And then in turn, from that you know, sort of the timeline on ultimately resolving the case itself, given that step.
spk07: Yeah, and again, we don't want to speculate on a specific timeline, but I think the hearings have been constructive as well. I don't think our tone or our view of the rate review has really changed, and we continue to, I think, engage with parties as demonstrated by the stipulation, which took gosh, I think 75% of the items that we had identified off the table. So a lot of them were minor items, but again, it's just taking those issues off the table we feel is a positive step to get to the right conclusions.
spk04: Julian, this is Steve. I think if you watch the hearings, the formal hearings with the commission will conclude tomorrow, and then after that, that's when the various parties will put together their summaries, including their financial analyses. And I think that's a good time to look at will there be other partial stipulations or will a full, wholesome settlement come forward. But we need to get through the rest of the hearings this week. So that would point to later in the month of August is when those substantial discussions would really be able to happen. But, again, if you kind of step back and look at it overall, this is playing out kind of as we all had hoped, that we have now taken a number of the smaller issues off the table. You may see other partial stipulations coming forward as you really hone in on just a few things that will ultimately be part of the final settlement.
spk03: Got it. Sounds like some good progress. Well, I wish you the best of luck tomorrow and in subsequent weeks here, and I'm sure we'll be connecting here soon. Thank you.
spk00: Thank you. The next question is from Gabe Maureen of Mizuho.
spk10: Hey, good morning, everyone. I just had a question, I guess, as a follow-up to sort of the R&G investments. I just want to clarify on the investment in energy capital ventures, whether that was really R&G-directed or is it broader? I was wondering if you can quantify that initial investment as well, just more color on that, if you don't mind.
spk07: Yeah, Gabe, and we'll certainly have more information on that in the near term, but it's not strictly an R&G investment. It's really looking at investments in innovation across the spectrum that would affect us as a natural gas utility.
spk10: Got it, got it. And I don't know, Adam, if you can talk about the discussions with the PSC thus far in terms of that rider that you're seeking in terms of how you're looking at this investment within the framework of your overall utility spend. Do you think this will be additive to that? Do you think this maybe replaces some of your pipeline spend, or is it just too early to know at this point?
spk07: Too early to know. I think you may have noted, too, that the RNG portions of our case or our review were in a stipulation. agree to move those into the future docket that would address the legislation. Again, more to come on that, but I would expect it most likely to be additive. I don't think we would take anything away from our capital spend on pipeline replacement.
spk10: Got it. And maybe if I can ask just two minor follow-ups. One is just kind of progress on winter storm, working capital recovery, how that's been going, and then You know, last year you had the benefit, I think, of a pretty steep winter-summer spread on gas storage and acted accordingly to your benefit this past year. Can you maybe just talk about how marketing's been positioning itself, given that there's been a bit of a narrowing in that spread?
spk04: Yeah. Dave, this is Steve. Let me take a shot. On the first point, no real substantial progress if you're speaking to the the legal action with the three marketers for Spire, Missouri, in regards to their inability or lack of willingness to pay for the covered charges and the damages as a result of us supplying gas. We'll have to watch that going forward. They have petitioned the Missouri Public Service Commission to consider waiving a portion or all of the current regulations that would direct them to pay those fines. I don't believe that that is going to be considered by the Public Service Commission until early in calendar 2022. So that may stick around for a while. But as we know more, we'll update you there. And on the marketing business, you're right. A year ago, I think gas was at 50% of the cost that it's trading at today at Henry Hub. And, you know, what a difference a year makes. We're above $4 at Henry Hub and and there's a lot of latent nervousness in the market. We aren't seeing quite the seasonal spreads between the cost to inject and the cost to deliver to customers in the winter heating season, but what we are seeing is not only higher prices, we're seeing higher volatility. Actually, in the last couple weeks, or few weeks, we're seeing some increased demand, not only for gas-fired generation, A lot of that due to the heat that we're now all seeing if you look at the newspapers. But two, the customers as they're now really in deep planning for the winter heating season are really making sure that they have an extremely resilient supply flow and storage in order to meet the worst case scenario for serving their customers. So we think that there's clearly going to be some more moves in the market as we go through the year. positioning ourselves as best we can, given those market dynamics, to make sure that we can take advantage of the market opportunities, but also serve the customers that we have now or will gain between now and the next winter heating season.
spk10: Great. Thanks, Steve.
spk00: The next question will be from Brian Russo of Sidoti.
spk05: Yeah, hi. Thanks for taking my questions. Just a quick clarification on the STL pipeline. In the event, hypothetically speaking, that the D.C. court denies your hearing request, does that start a timeline in which the FERC would need to issue the emergency certificate to technically avoid having to vacate the pipeline? Is there some sort of seven-day period? after the D.C. court potentially denies?
spk07: It does. That would set a seven-day period before that order would be effective, and we would, so you're correct.
spk05: Okay, got it. And then also, just to clarify, Can the D.C. Court actually review new information or only information and data that was on record, you know, at the time of the EDF, you know, appeal of the FERC certificate?
spk07: They will be provided with new information, and they can certainly choose to review it at that point.
spk05: Okay, so legally they can review the new information.
spk07: Correct.
spk05: Okay. And then the same with the FERC. With the FERC, if they hypothetically look to recertify, then they could take the new information, i.e., you know, the Winter Storm URI performance, or do they have to fall back on what was on record, you know, at the time that the certificate was issued two years ago? We would hope that they would review the updated information. Okay. And then in terms of, you know, support from the governor, I would imagine the commission, what can they actually do? Can they be witnesses, you know, in any new, you know, court of appeals rehearing and or for recertification? Just curious.
spk08: Yeah. And I think there are varied levels of what different parties could do. But in the instance, perhaps, of the governor, the Department of Economic Development, different chambers, even local nonprofit organizations. I think basically what they are filing in support of the critical need of this infrastructure for the St. Louis region. And so that's really what we're looking for is trying to have a very collaborative engagement from all third parties. So whether that's elected officials, whether it's businesses, we have a large contingency of industries that are going to file for support of this. I think it depends on what that party is relative to what they can do, but in some cases you could have potential intervention as you go through the procedure. So I don't think it's any one-size-fits-all, but I think what we have seen is overwhelming support, again, from the political community, from the business community, from nonprofits, and really it's one that once we've educated people on what this is, it's been a very easy position for them to provide support for.
spk05: Right, got it. And then is Spire Missouri still the only shipper on the pipeline? I recall you had some excess capacity. Was that ever contracted to someone outside of the Spire utilities?
spk04: Yeah, Brian, this is Steve. Yeah, we've actually, on a short-term basis, we have customers who are tugging on the pipeline, including Spire Marketing, taking some of that volume because they see the opportunity to take the flowing natural gas and create some value with it. And there are a few other small customers we haven't contracted out on a long-term basis for that remaining 50-day.
spk05: Okay, and then lastly, on the rate case, is it customary to leave you know, cap structure and ROE, et cetera, up for the commission to decide? Or, you know, is that something that you could possibly, you know, partial settlements on, you know, as you move through procedural schedule?
spk07: We certainly expected it to go through hearing. It's something that the commissioners, I think, would like to hear the party's positions on so that not a – Not something that we were surprised by at all, but really anything's possible in a settlement.
spk04: Yeah, and Brian, I agree wholeheartedly with that observation that every case we've been in, the commissioners want to hear that because, let's face it, those are two of the big dials that move the rates more than just about anything else. And then whether or not they actually settle on and announce a cap structure or ROE or whether they black box settle those and any other open issues, that will be one of the many things that all the parties will evaluate as they move forward after the hearings are over and briefs are filed.
spk02: And the only point I would add on that is it's not uncommon for commissions to want to build a record around those two bigger pieces, and that's not uncommon at all. And so I kind of consider it more normal course.
spk05: Right. Understood. Thank you very much.
spk00: Thank you. The next question will come from Selman Ackel of Stiefel.
spk01: Thank you. Just trying to put some Dates on the calendar, and there's no action taken by either the FERC or the courts. Is by-plan has to be shut down by August 12th, or is there a date you could give us when time runs out?
spk07: No, any timeline would start moving once the court responded to us.
spk01: And then it's the seven days from that response?
spk07: If the response was negative, yes.
spk01: Got it. Understood. Okay, thank you very much.
spk00: Thank you, Tom. Once again, if you have a question, you can press star, then 1. Seeing no further questions, this concludes our question and answer session. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Scott Dudley for any closing remarks.
spk06: Well, thank you all for joining us today. We know it's a very busy earnings season for all of you. Thank you for your interest to inspire, and we'll talk soon. Thank you.
spk00: Thank you. The conference is now concluded. Thank you all for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect. Have a great day.
Disclaimer