Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

DATE

Thursday, April 23, 2026 at 11 a.m. ET

CALL PARTICIPANTS

  • Chief Executive Officer — Patricia Kessler Poppe
  • Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer — Carolyn J. Burke

Need a quote from a Motley Fool analyst? Email [email protected]

TAKEAWAYS

  • Core EPS -- $0.43, a $0.10 increase year over year, attributed to capital investment and O&M savings.
  • 2026 Core EPS Guidance -- Reaffirmed at $1.64 to $1.66, implying 10% growth and marking a fifth consecutive year of double-digit growth at the midpoint.
  • Long-Term EPS Growth Target -- Guidance for 2027 through 2030 remains unchanged at 9% or more annually.
  • Capital Plan -- Five-year capital and financing plan totaling $73 billion is unchanged; management expects zero new equity needs through 2030.
  • Electric Rate Reductions -- Residential bundled rates for the most vulnerable customers are down 23%, and 13% for other residential customers, since January 2024.
  • Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant -- Secured final state permits for operation through 2030 and a 20-year NRC license extension; operation beyond 2030 requires further state action.
  • Undergrounding Progress -- Over 1,200 miles completed to date, avoiding more than $100 million in maintenance costs to customers; plan to file for an additional 5,000 miles covering 2028-2037.
  • Continuous Monitoring Program -- Prevented 12 million outage minutes in 2025 and another 4 million in 2026; identified 1,484 equipment issues, including 23 potential ignitions averted.
  • O&M Cost Savings -- $24 million expected annual O&M savings in 2026 from technology innovations including satellite and LiDAR use in inspections.
  • Cluster Study Demand -- New cluster study identified over 10 gigawatts of diversified customer interest for large load projects, including regions beyond Silicon Valley.
  • Rate-Reducing Load Growth -- Projects in final engineering have grown to 4.6 gigawatts; demand growth is characterized as diversified rather than dependent on a single project.
  • Financing Actions -- $1 billion in junior subordinated notes issued in February at the parent, $2.2 billion in first mortgage bonds at the utility, covering roughly half of 2026 utility debt needs.
  • Dividend Policy -- Plan to ramp to a 20% payout ratio by 2028 and hold that level through 2030 remains unchanged.
  • Investment-Grade Rating Trajectory -- Moody’s revised outlook to positive following improvements; management highlights potential customer savings if investment grade is achieved.
  • Regulatory Milestone -- CPUC issued the 2025 Safety Certificate, valid through early March 2027.

SUMMARY

PG&E Corporation (PCG 0.30%) delivered core EPS growth, reaffirmed all major financial and operational guidance for 2026 and beyond, and executed significant rate reductions benefiting vulnerable customers. Management articulated disciplined capital planning without new equity through 2030, highlighted concrete O&M cost declines from technological investment, and underscored progress toward investment-grade ratings and regulatory milestones.

  • Management stated, We remain encouraged by the progress toward meeting the commitment made by the legislature last year to find and implement a long-term, signaling optimism regarding legislative reform.
  • New large load growth from data centers and transmission projects is positioned as definitively rate-reducing, pending pricing structure, with no single project dominating the pipeline.
  • Moody’s positive credit outlook followed improvements in financial ratios and wildfire mitigation measures, which management believes will drive future customer savings.
  • No changes were made to the scope, size, or funding sources of the $73 billion five-year capital plan, with the company emphasizing flexibility and prioritization of investments that lower rates and enable beneficial load growth.

INDUSTRY GLOSSARY

  • CPUC: California Public Utilities Commission, the state regulator overseeing rates, safety, and operations for investor-owned utilities like PG&E.
  • NRC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency granting operating licenses for nuclear power plants such as Diablo Canyon.
  • EPSS: Enhanced Powerline Safety Settings, a wildfire mitigation program involving rapid circuit shutoff during hazardous conditions.
  • PSPS: Public Safety Power Shutoff, a preemptive de-energization strategy in high fire-risk situations to prevent wildfires.
  • OEIS: Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, a California agency reviewing utility mitigation and system hardening filings.
  • Cluster Study: A staged review process for evaluating and advancing interconnection requests for large-scale electric projects.
  • SB 254: California Senate Bill on wildfire liability reform, referenced in the context of risk management and capital market access.
  • WMHZ: Wildfire Mitigation and Hardening Zone, relating to regulatory applications to recover costs for system upgrades.
  • CAISO: California Independent System Operator, manages electricity flow and grid reliability across California.
  • LiDAR: Light Detection and Ranging, a remote sensing method used for infrastructure inspection and vegetation management.
  • CEA: California Wildfire Advisory Commission (“Cost Estimate and Allocation”), involved in shaping recommendations for wildfire risk model reform.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Patricia Kessler Poppe: Thank you, Jonathan. Good morning, everyone. I am pleased to be with you this morning to report another quarter of strong progress on multiple fronts. Today, we announced core earnings per share for the first quarter of $0.43. This strong start puts us solidly on track to deliver again and reaffirm our full year 2026 core EPS guidance of $1.64 to $1.66. At the midpoint, our guidance implies 10% growth over 2025 and would mark our fifth consecutive year of double-digit core earnings growth. Looking forward, we are reaffirming our EPS growth guidance for 2027 through 2030, which is unchanged at 9% plus annually.

We are also reaffirming our five-year capital and financing plans, including zero new equity issuance needs through 2030. We continue to deliver for our customers on affordability. On March 1, we lowered electric rates for the fifth time since January 2024. For our most vulnerable residential customers, bundled rates are now down 23%. For other residential customers, rates are down 13% over that same period. In February, our Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant received the final state permit approvals needed to support extended operations through 2030, and in early April, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted Diablo Canyon a 20-year license extension.

These actions underscore Diablo Canyon's critical role in supporting California reliability and clean energy goals, although further action by the state is required in order to operate beyond 2030. Turning to slide four, we remain focused on helping California build a durable long-term wildfire solution. The CEA's report and recommendations provide a strong foundation as the legislature begins the next phase of this important work. We were encouraged to see the CEA emphasize the cost of inaction, noting that, and I quote, “inaction perpetuates unaffordability for consumers, and hinders the ability to attract the capital required to maintain safe, clean, and reliable infrastructure.” End quote. This is a strong call to act for California policymakers.

As we said last quarter, the CEA report marks the beginning of the legislative phase. With the session running through August, policymakers now have the opportunity to evaluate a menu of options across multiple pathways. We remain encouraged by the progress toward meeting the commitment made by the legislature last year to find and implement a long-term, whole-of-society solution. That commitment began with last year's SB 254 followed by the governor's executive order, the CPUC's submission to the CEA, and now the CEA's report.

As I said last quarter, the status quo is neither sustainable nor affordable, and California needs a model that works for all stakeholders, whether they are those affected by wildfires, utility and insurance customers, communities, the state, and the capital providers needed to support a safe, reliable, and clean energy system. Turning to slide five, our focus on wildfire mitigations remains clear and unwavering. We know this work is never finished, which is why we continuously look for better and more effective ways to strengthen our mitigation. Our operational mitigations, including PSPS, EPSS, and continuous monitoring, are making us safer every day and position us to respond effectively whatever the weather conditions.

Looking forward, our long-term infrastructure hardening plans will combine safety and improved reliability and lower maintenance costs. Undergrounding is an important driver of customer affordability, too, reducing the need for and expense of annual inspections and vegetation management. As you heard on our last call, the CPUC has now provided a clear path for us to request additional undergrounding through a ten-year plan. We are still on track to make this filing with the OEIS in the third quarter, including our next approximately 5,000 miles and covering years 2028 through 2037.

Combined with the 1,900 miles of undergrounding we expect to have completed by 2027, plus an additional 4,000 miles of overhead hardening, this would result in nearly 11,000 miles of planned system hardening through 2037, or more than three quarters of the high fire-threat miles we plan to harden based on our current risk modeling. We will provide more detail in our ten-year filing, but in the meantime, we calculate that our undergrounding to date—over 1,200 miles—has already allowed us to avoid more than $100 million of maintenance spend which otherwise would have been paid by customers. That is exactly the kind of durable affordability we are working hard every day to deliver for our customers.

Looking at slide six, you will see our simple, affordable model as amplified last quarter, giving us line of sight to customer bill growth of 0% to 3%. We call that our path to flat, a destination our customers would love. As noted earlier, in March, we implemented our fifth reduction in rates in two years. That is real progress on affordability, and this progress matters most for customers who need it most. Since January 2024, electric rates for our most vulnerable customers are down 23%. For our other residential customers, rates are now down 13%, about $300 less per year. That is real money.

Turning to slide seven, you can see the progress we are making in enabling rate-reducing load growth. Projects are moving through our development pipeline with our final engineering stage increasing to 4.6 gigawatts since our year-end update. This progression from application to preliminary engineering and on to final engineering is a natural and expected part of the project cycle and reflects healthy forward momentum. We also recently initiated our third cluster study, and the results reinforce that there is strong interest across our service area. In total, customer interest exceeded an additional 10 gigawatts spanning multiple regions including Silicon Valley and the Central Valley. Importantly, this demand remains diversified. There is no single project driving these totals.

We are committed to only adding load that is definitively rate reducing. We simply need to get the pricing right. Projects from this latest cluster study which meet the rate-reducing threshold will move through preliminary engineering over the next six months, refilling the pipeline funnel from the top as earlier projects mature. Importantly, this growth is occurring alongside significant resource additions across California. Since 2020, CAISO load-serving entities have added more than 33 gigawatts of new resources to the grid, including over 7 gigawatts in 2025 alone. In addition, the CPUC is continuing their practice of issuing new build procurement orders that have resulted in 22 gigawatts under contract through 2029.

This kind of growth is good for customers and good for California's economy. Every gigawatt of new data center load can contribute to affordability by reducing electric bills by 1% or more while also supporting thousands of construction jobs and generating hundreds of millions of dollars in additional tax revenue. Before I hand it over to Carolyn, I would like to tie all of this together with my story of the month. This quarter, that story is about continuous monitoring and how we are shifting from reactive maintenance to proactive, data-driven risk management. Continuous monitoring uses sensors, smart meters, analytics, and machine learning models to identify emerging issues on the system before they turn into outages, ignitions, or safety events.

It is allowing us to see developing conditions in real time and intervene earlier, often before there is any customer impact. We are seeing tangible operational benefits from this approach. Continuous monitoring helped us avoid approximately 12 million unplanned customer outage minutes in 2025 and another 4 million minutes in 2026. In many cases, these interventions occurred before customers were even aware there was a problem. Since the beginning of last year, we have had 1,484 good catches where sensor data flagged developing weaknesses or active events on the grid. Twenty-three of these could have become ignitions but did not.

Identifying stressed equipment early also allows us to fix issues at a lower cost and avoid more expensive emergency repairs down the road. In fact, over that same five-quarter period, early detection of stressed equipment helped us save an estimated $8 million of capital spend through lower-cost repairs and over $1 million in expense by reducing time spent responding to emergency asset failures. Continuous monitoring is also improving how our teams work in the field. More precise diagnostics mean our trouble crews spend less time searching for problems and more time fixing them, improving both productivity and safety.

Taken together, our continuous monitoring program is an important step forward and an example of how we manage risk, control costs, and deliver reliable service. With that, I will turn it over to Carolyn.

Carolyn J. Burke: Thank you, Patricia, and good morning, everyone. Turning to slide nine, you can see our first quarter 2026 earnings walk. Core earnings for the quarter were $0.43, up $0.10 from the first quarter last year, putting us in position to once again deliver on our plan. Customer capital investments contributed $0.06. Of that, $0.02 reflects ongoing execution of our capital plan and the associated return on rate base, including CPUC ROE. We also have a $0.04 benefit related to the February final commission decision in our 2023 WMHZ application. Non-fuel O&M savings contributed an additional $0.02, partially offset by our decision to redeploy $0.01 back into the business.

Timing and other was a $0.03 tailwind in the quarter compared to the prior year. As we look forward to the balance of 2026, you can count on us to remain focused on disciplined execution and delivering our guidance while taking a thoughtful approach to redeploying savings in ways that benefit customers and help to de-risk 2027 and beyond. On slide 10, there is no change to our five-year $73 billion capital plan through 2030. We continue to see strong demand for customer-beneficial investment across our transmission and distribution systems, and we still see at least $5 billion of incremental customer investment opportunity outside the current plan.

We have flexibility in how and when we may pursue these additional opportunities to ensure we are making the right decisions for customers and investors. Our preference today remains making the plan better—by prioritizing bringing in investments which enable new beneficial load and help lower rates for our core customers over time. Or we could make the plan longer by extending the duration of our top-tier rate base growth. A third option, though not one we are considering right now, is to make the plan bigger by adding to our current $73 billion plan envelope.

Taken together, these options give us confidence that we have flexibility in the plan and that we can continue to deploy growth capital in a disciplined way while at the same time supporting affordability, growth, and long-term value creation for owners. Turning to slide 11, our five-year financing plan is also unchanged from our prior call. The plan continues to be built on conservative assumptions which align with the guideposts I have previously shared. First, our plan is built to require no new common equity through 2030. Second, we remain focused on achieving investment-grade ratings, including sustaining FFO to debt in the mid-teens.

And third, we continue to target ramping up to a 20% dividend payout ratio by 2028, then maintaining that level through 2030. In February, we took advantage of favorable market conditions to execute two financings. We issued $1 billion of parent-level junior subordinated notes, opportunistically starting to address 2027 parent funding needs. There is no change to our guidance for a net $2 billion of financing from parent debt and other through 2030. At the utility, we issued $2.2 billion of first mortgage bonds, covering roughly half of our 2026 utility debt needs, which remain unchanged.

From a capital allocation perspective, and in light of encouraging indications that the state is serious about pursuing additional wildfire reform, we continue to see our current plan as the right one for both customers and investors. However, I will reiterate that if we stop seeing progress towards reforming the wildfire risk model, you can be sure that we will actively reevaluate all aspects of our capital allocation plan. On slide 12, we continue to make steady progress toward investment-grade credit ratings, and I am encouraged by the momentum we are seeing. Following our fourth quarter call, Moody's revised their outlook to positive, reflecting continued improvement in our credit trajectory.

Our focus on strong financial ratios, disciplined holding company leverage, and continued progress on wildfire mitigation directly supports the criteria for potential upgrades. As I have noted before, achieving investment grade is a key milestone for us. It will lower our borrowing costs and translate into hundreds of millions of dollars in customer savings over the life of the debt we issue, creating a durable affordability driver for customers not currently assumed in our plan. On slide 13, we are reinforcing that we continue to see a path to deliver 2% to 4% long-term reductions in non-fuel O&M even after absorbing inflation and other cost pressures.

Executing against our simple, affordable model is how we keep our capital program affordable for customers, and sustained reductions in non-fuel O&M are a key element allowing us to grow our plan and fund the investments our system needs while also protecting customer bills. In addition to the great example of continuous monitoring Patricia mentioned, we continue to innovate and drive efficiencies in our field operations by applying technology. By leveraging satellite and LiDAR, we are improving the quality and consistency of inspections while reducing the volume of patrols, lowering contractor reliance, and enhancing safety in the field. Taken together, these changes are expected to deliver $24 million in annual O&M savings this year alone.

This is another tangible example of how targeted technology investments support our long-term non-fuel O&M trajectory. Slide 14 highlights major regulatory and legislative milestones we are monitoring this year. On the regulatory front, following our fourth quarter call, we received our 2025 Safety Certificate from the CPUC, which is valid for twelve months through early March 2027. Additionally, as Patricia mentioned, we are on track to file our ten-year undergrounding plan with the OEIS in the third quarter. I will end here on slide 15 by pointing out our differentiated story.

We are proud of what we have accomplished, and we know there is still plenty of opportunity in front of us to continue delivering for our customers and our investors. We are focused on doing just that, day in and day out. With that, I will hand it back to Patricia.

Patricia Kessler Poppe: Thank you, Carolyn. Before we take your questions, I would like to recap where we stand as we are building California's energy future. We delivered a strong first quarter, putting us firmly on track for another year of double-digit earnings growth. Safety remains our highest priority. We continue to strengthen our wildfire layers of protection. We continue to make real progress on affordability, with a 23% reduction for our most vulnerable customers since January 2024. At the same time, we are seeing good progression of our rate-reducing large load pipeline, and we are encouraged by California's focus on constructive wildfire reform. We will now open the call for questions.

Operator: And your first question comes from the line of Shar Pourreza with Wells Fargo Securities. Please go ahead.

Shar Pourreza: Good morning, and thanks for taking the question. Patricia, you have been vocal about not wanting to see the can kicked down the road on legislation. How should we think about capital allocation, like buybacks, if some aspects of the CEA report get passed but we do not get something all-encompassing? Is some progress a bad outcome if certain key aspects get pushed into 2027?

Patricia Kessler Poppe: Yes, thanks, Shar. First and foremost, I would just reiterate that we are encouraged by the progress to date. We do think the right conversations are happening with the right folks, and we feel good and encouraged about that. I will just offer that there is obviously a minimum outcome to prevent additional costs being borne by shareholders and this tail risk being able to be measured and understood. We know that is a very important floor for an outcome here. And as we have been very clear, we have been reiterating wide and far the value of the investor-owned utility model.

We have been advocating for the importance of the capital that we are able to attain from the capital markets, from our investors, and how important that is to making our infrastructure investments affordable for Californians. As we spread out the cost of infrastructure over time because of the great capital that is deployed by our important owners, that is good for customers. An important outcome of SB 254 is that we can attract low-cost capital to invest in that infrastructure to help California grow and make our energy costs more affordable for customers here. All that backdrop to say, we feel like our capital allocation and our model is working.

We are lowering rates while we are deploying our capital today. We think right now is not the time to change that plan. We know that the simple, affordable model is the best plan for customers and investors, and we are very bullish on that. Now to the ultimate heart of your question: if that does not occur, if we do not get a minimum outcome that is essential, then we obviously have to look at—and we will not avoid looking at—our entire capital allocation plan, the whole financial plan.

I am not going to rack and stack how we would think about that here on this call, but I will just say that all aspects of the plan will have to be on the table, and we will take a look at doing what is best in totality. But for now, we are encouraged by the progress that is being made and the level of attention to the issue.

Shar Pourreza: Got it, thanks. And just lastly, you keep highlighting the data center opportunity in the context of savings and bill reductions. Is there a point you can convert that into an earnings impact like some of your peers? At what point does large load growth drive significant new transmission investment?

Patricia Kessler Poppe: I would say that it is. We shared on our Q4 call that we have added more CapEx for transmission into our $73 billion capital plan. Given all of our circumstances, we think our $73 billion plan is the right plan. The idea that we would make that bigger would take some other changes, I would say, over time. Right now, as Carolyn has been very consistent in sharing, we want to make the plan better. When we say better, what we mean by that is pulling in that transmission and data center load growth if it makes it more affordable for customers—that is better.

We have been very disciplined about our cluster study work, and when we talk about final engineering, we are sharing real costs with our potential large-load customers, and they are signing on for them. These are absolutely, not just from a sound bite or a marketing perspective, but an absolute rate-reducing new CapEx investment. That makes our capital plan even better. There will come a time, I think, particularly after SB 254 phase two resolution at the end of the legislative session, that we should look at, if the conditions are such that we could make the plan bigger, but that time is just not now.

Patricia Kessler Poppe: Thanks, Shar.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Nicholas Campanella with Barclays. Please go ahead.

Nicholas Joseph Campanella: Hey, good morning, and thanks for all the updates. I wanted to follow up on legislation. There was a lot put forward by the CEA—three separate phases. Where are you drawing the line and what is sufficient? Is it more about having some type of permanent cap? And in the last legislative session, shareholders did have to participate in some instances. How are you thinking about that for phase two?

Patricia Kessler Poppe: Thanks, Nick. The most important thing, we think, is the whole-of-society approach. We think the governor was clear, and the CEA report reflects, that multiple aspects of wildfire liability reform would be important for all Californians. Remember, all fires in California are not caused by utilities. Insurance access in California is a real challenge to homeownership. We have a housing crisis in California—making sure that we have an insurable housing market, with utility concerns addressed, is very essential for the state. So the CEA report reflects a whole-of-society approach. We think that is smart because we are Californians, too, and we care about what happens here and what happens to all Californians, not just those impacted by a utility wildfire.

That said, I am the CEO of the utility, so I do have a point of view: we need to make sure that the tail risk of wildfire liability is one that shareholders and investors can model, can predict, and know how great the risk is so that you can feel comfortable investing your clients’ pension funds and retirement funds into our infrastructure here in California. Our minimum is very important—that we have the ability to see, model, and quantify what that tail is. On shareholder contributions, as were required in the SB 254 phase one, that is a question that is part of a total look at the value of the fix.

The totality of the legislative action will determine whether there is any reason to make additional contributions. The package would have to be looked at as a package, and if it does not improve the status quo, then contributions would be unacceptable. But if there is a dramatic improvement to the status quo, we obviously would be in dialogue with policymakers.

Nicholas Joseph Campanella: Thank you. That is very clear. And then another question: the governor election has been more of a focus. There have been calls from various candidates on returns and affordability, and notably a rate freeze. What is the strategy to make your simple, affordable model resonate with new policymakers? How high-graded is the plan if we were to go toward some of the more draconian ideas being pitched?

Patricia Kessler Poppe: The good news is this: whomever is elected governor of the state of California is going to want what we want, and that is affordable utility rates. The even better news is performance is power, and we are performing. As I mentioned, we have reduced rates five times in the last two years. Our most vulnerable customers' bills and rates are down 23%. That is meaningful progress that we can point to.

Politicians have to say what they have to say to get elected, but when it comes down to brass tacks and we actually have to do what is promised, I think our performance is a key enabler to our ability to work with whomever is elected to do exactly what these politicians want. We want the same thing. We want a healthy, vibrant California powered by PG&E Corporation, and the IOU model is essential to the growth and prosperity of California. Thank you.

Operator: Next question comes from the line of Steve Fleishman with Wolfe Research. Please go ahead.

Steven Isaac Fleishman: Good morning, Patricia, Carolyn. When you look at the different proposals and structures in the wildfire report, are there any that best meet what you want and that you think other stakeholders can support?

Patricia Kessler Poppe: I think, Steve, the whole-of-society look is super important. The three pillars—hardening our communities from spread, liability reform, and a potential state backstop—are all important. It is one thing to prevent an ignition, but when the 100 mile-per-hour winds are here, we need to make sure that our communities are ready and built for purpose. Just like in hurricane zones, making sure that we get those building codes and implementation of those codes will be very important to de-risking our communities. Liability limits and liability reform should be looked at, particularly when a utility can demonstrate prudence and can demonstrate that through their wildfire mitigation plan they are prudent.

Finally, any kind of state backstop obviously helps to manage that tail risk. There are lots of paths to odds here. There are all sorts of vehicles and methods and mechanisms. The report did a good job of outlining multiple paths. We do not need everything in that; in fact, some of them were intentionally this-or-that. Now it is the heavy lifting for the legislature to really consider what is the totality package—what is the state's ambition to truly create a wildfire liability construct that works for everyone and works best. We are encouraged by the conversations that have been pursued so far.

Steven Isaac Fleishman: One related question: with the governor election and the recent shakeup, does that add more impetus to address this wildfire law this year, or is it disruptive to it?

Patricia Kessler Poppe: I would say Governor Newsom has done incredible work over his time as governor to address major fundamental issues with wildfire risk in the state. He is probably the leading governor in the nation who has taken and led his legislative bodies through major reform in this area on his watch. As he indicated, and from the reports and the executive order that he issued, I think he has expressed interest in having a real fix. But he cannot act alone; he has to have the legislature with him. It has been good to see legislative leadership describing a desire to really get into this issue.

I look forward to them being able to do their job, and I think—unrelated to the governor's election, but given that it is Governor Newsom's last year in office here in California—he has made it clear that he would really like to see action on this.

Patricia Kessler Poppe: Thanks, Steve.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Patricia Kessler Poppe: Hi, David.

David Keith Arcaro: On the data center side of things, when might you expect to refill that bucket of application and preliminary engineering within the pipeline? And more broadly, what has been the pace of data center demand and conversations that you have been seeing?

Patricia Kessler Poppe: First of all, the cluster study that we have initiated—we call it Cluster 26, our third cluster study—has shown significant demand. As we look at how we do the engineering, we do that over the next six to eight months. We do parallel engineering of all the projects. This has been a real enabler to minimizing cost for any one project, maximizing shared infrastructure investment, and really getting a clear eye of where the capacity needs to be either added or leveraged where we have existing capacity. One of the big developments we are seeing lately is more interest outside of just the Bay Area, and that is exciting.

I was at an EEI key accounts conference with our large customers, and I was on a panel with a Class A data center developer. As he and I were talking before we went on stage—this is a major data center developer—he was unaware we had additional capacity here in California. I think we still have a job to get the word out that California is open for business. We have added 33 gigawatts of capacity across California since 2020.