Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to the American States Water Company Conference Call, discussing the company’s First Quarter 2016 Results. This call is being recorded. If you would like to listen to the replay of this call, it will begin this afternoon at approximately 5 PM Eastern Time and run through Thursday, May 12, 2016 on the company’s website, www.aswater.com. Besides that the company will be referring to are also available on the website. [Operator Instructions] After today’s presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. [Operator Instructions] This call will be limited to an hour. Presenting today from American States Water Company is Bob Sprowls, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Eva Tang, Chief Financial Officer. As a reminder, certain matters discussed during this conference call may be forward-looking statements intended to qualify for the Safe Harbor from liability established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Please review a description of the company’s risks and uncertainties in our most recent Form 10-K and Form 10-Q on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, this conference call will include a discussion of certain measures that are not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or GAAP in the United States and constitute non-GAAP financial measures under SEC rules. These non-GAAP financial measures are derived from consolidated financial information but are not presented in our financial statements that are prepared in accordance with GAAP. For more details, please refer to the press release. At this time, I will turn the call over to Eva Tang, Chief Financial Officer of American States Water Company.

Thank you, Terry. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. In today’s call, I’ll review the company’s financial results for the first quarter, and Bob will discuss the liquidity and capital resources. Golden State Water’s pending rate case, California drought-related matters, and our contracted services business segment at American States Utility Services or ASUS. I’ll begin with an overview of our financial results. For the first quarter, diluted earnings were $0.28 per share, compared to $0.32 per share for the same period in 2015. Of the $0.28 per share earnings for the first quarter, $0.22 was from our water segment and our electric and contracted services segment each contributed $0.03. Net income for the quarter was $10.2 million compared to $12.1 million for the first quarter last year. I’ll discuss major items that impacted our revenues and expenses for the quarter. In the first quarter of 2016, water revenues decreased by $5.2 million to $66.3 million, as compared to the same period in 2015. As of today, Golden State Water has now received a decision on its pending water general rate case, which will set new rates for 2016 through 2018. The revenue requirements for 2016, once the CPUC issues a final decision on the current GRC are expected to be lower than the 2015 adopted levels. Major items impact – impacting the decrease in revenue requirements for 2016, includes a significant increase in supply costs caused by lower consumption, much lower depreciation expense resulting from an updated depreciation study filed with the rate case, and decreases in other operating expenses, due to the company’s improvement in operating efficiency. As a result of anticipated reduction in the 2016 revenue level, we adjusted our water revenues downward by $5.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2016, with…

Thank you, Eva. I appreciate everyone joining us today. Moving on to Liquidity and Capital Resources, net cash provided by operating activities for the quarter, decreased by $10.9 million to $27.6 million as compared to the first quarter of 2015. The decrease in operating cash flow was primarily due to a reduction in cash generated by contracted services, due to the timing of billing and cash receipts for construction work at military basis during the three months ended March 31, 2016. There was also a decrease in customer water usage for Golden State Water, increasing the Water Revenue Adjustment Mechanism or WRAM regulatory assets. We implemented surcharges in March to recover our net WRAM balances for 2015. In addition, tax payments during the three months ended March 31, 2015 were lower, due enlarge part to the implementation of the tax repair regulation. In regard to Golden State Water’s capital expenditures, we are pleased with our first quarter spending of $29 million on company funded capital work. Our water and electric utilities continue to invest and maintain and improve the reliability of our systems. Our capital investment program in the critical factor in delivering consistent high quality services to our customers. We are on track to invest $85 million to $95 million in capital projects during 2016, which may change somewhat once the decision issued by the CPUC on the pending water rate case. In addition, Standard & Poor’s rating services recently affirmed an eight plus credit rating on both American States Water Company and Golden State Water Company. S&P also affirm the stable reading outlook on both companies. You were pleased with the affirmation as these ratings are some of the highest in the U.S. Water Utility Industry. While we continue to produce solid financial results in the first quarter…

We will now take your questions. [Operator Instructions] We will begin with Jonathan Reeder with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning, Bob and Eva. I guess, on the West Coast, it’s still the morning. But I know, Bob, in your prepared ASUS remarks, you didn’t seem to indicate that this is the case, however, your main competitor indicated, they expect the slowdown on construction projects during the remainder of the year, due to military budget constraints. Is this anything that you’re seeing or expecting?

It is not. We – our projects are funded. The slowdown in the first quarter was largely due to the fact that we have to do the engineering and the bidding on the work that we have lined up. So, we’re expecting to really get the construction activity going here in the last three quarters of the year.

Okay. And I guess in the same vein you aren’t seen anything that would perhaps put downward pressure on the – the construction projects you would be awarded for the next one-year period in the fall this year?

We haven’t seen that. I will tell you we have a lot of projects in front of the government for the upcoming year. We’ve done our – but I think there’s a really good job of scoping out a lot of projects and getting that in front of the decision-makers at the military. So far we haven’t got the indication that we’re going to see a slowdown.

Okay. And then, I think, previously you said final GRC decision was likely in Q2. Are you implying that it slips further into the year now or just not really sure?

Yes, we’re just –we’re not really sure. We do know that the judge that’s on our case has a couple of cases ahead of this. And hopefully, you will get through those. I think is on the simper case and you probably know.

Okay. That’s fair enough.

We’re confident on it, maybe, but our sense is that that may come out before ours does. And so, we don’t want to get everyone’s sort of hopes up. And so, I understand the ALJs are a bit understaffed at this point. And so, they’re being challenged to do a lot of decisions. So we’re trying to be patient with them.

Sure. Okay. And then I don’t know, if you can go into a little more detail, but what do you think Golden State Water and ORA weren’t able to see eye-to-eye on CapEx levels, because it kind of looks like, the request of about $90 million a year of annual spend wasn’t all that different from the amount that you’ve expanded over the 2013 to 2015 period?

Yes, we were quite surprised that, particularly given the situation where we weren’t asking for, in fact, in many rate making areas, it was a revenue requirement – small revenue requirement decrease. As you know, that’s ORA’s role is to work hard to kind of reduce your request and that’s what they are doing in this case. So I understand other – some of our other colleagues at other companies are having similar issues though. So we are – we went to litigation on our entire capital budget and we think we put in a – put on a very good chase and hopefully the judge will recognize that.

Was there, I mean, were there any projects in there that were kind of unusual or different than the spend that you’ve been, I guess, undertaken in the past few years, or was it all similar type of spend?

Yes, really there weren’t really any out of the ordinary type project. So I think our spend historically had been, I wanted to say, $70 million to $75 million range. And so, we came in and asked for 90 and thought that was a reasonable request, particularly given the need to do pipe replacement and reduce unaccounted for in the State, so we’re – the company’s decision was to take our risk with the ALJ and the commission. So it was quite surprising to us to be honest, because for a company to come in with a flat rate request and then to have ORA push back on it is substantially just a little bit of a head scratcher. But sometimes either a function of the analyst you get at ORA on your capital projects.

It’s not unusual, I think the differences between the company and ORA’s position.

Yes, sure.

The rate case we experienced before. So we’ll say that we’ve made a good showing of the need for the project and provide the solid support, as Bob mentioned. So we will see hopefully judge will see that.

Okay. And then last question, I’ll hop out. What do you expect 2016 drought expenses will be in?

Just for the calendar year 2016?

Yes. Yes, just trying to get an idea of, I mean, I think you said you’re going to be filing for a little over million dollars of recovery from previous expenses. And our understanding is those, I guess, get turned around pretty quickly, kind of, like a 90-day period. So how that would, if that’s going to offset whatever your drought expenses would be this year?

I definitely expect it to offset whatever drought expenses we have this year.

Okay.

These are – we are not adding to the account as much as we did in 2015, as we are getting our arms around the whole thing, so…

Okay. So the heavy lifting is kind of over on that and just stay in the course, I guess?

Yes, I know we still have additional costs associated with notifying customers and making sure that everybody is completely up to speed. But I wouldn’t expect the expense to be – I would expect them to be less than they were in 2015.

And, Jonathan, Bob mentioned that we are going to file about $1.3 million scholars job for all related costs for 2014 and 2015 pretty shortly. So once that got approved, for accounting we have a reason to book our drought-related costs to a balance sheet as a regulatory act on that point on. So not only will get recover reverse expense we booked before and also we will probably reverse what we booked to-date to the reg act, so that’s a point.

Yes, good point, Eva.

Yes.

Once you’ve done it, once you’ve then can – you’ve convinced the accountants that it’s going to happen again.

Yes, it’s a probable [Multiple Speakers]

Programs recurring [ph.]

All right. Well, I appreciate the additional clarity.

Yes, thank you, Jonathan.

Our next question comes from Richard Verdi of Ladenburg. Please go ahead.

Hi, Bob and Eva, how are you guys doing?

We’re doing good.

Good, good. Thank, Verdi.

Good, here you go. I just wanted to focus a real quick on ASUS here. At least in my view that $0.28 to $0.38 or $0.32 guidance is kind of wide. Bob, can you give me some sort of idea of what you see maybe swinging closer to the top versus to the bottom? And also, is there any chance that that figure could be outperformed on the outside?

Sure. Yes, so the amount of construction that we do will dictate how well we do within that range. Additionally, we do have some price redetermination request and there is – though nothing like we’ve had in the past, there is some retroactivity to that, which could push us more to the upper end or slightly above the upper end. So it’s – that’s about as good – good a range as we can give at this point. I know you would like to see it a little tighter, but that that’s as good as we can do.

Okay, sure. And then on the proceeded new contracts, and I understand that for competition sake you need to keep the commentary somewhat limited, but we’ve been pursuing contracts here for a few years and of course there is going to be as you mentioned some new contracts or I should say new basis being option to you in the next few years? I’m wondering can you give us a sense of maybe how deep you are in negotiations on maybe some of these contracts that you’ve been pursuing for so many years.

Well, I will tell you and it probably doesn’t completely speak to your question. But we view this business as a real important part of our business going forward. We’ve institutionalized our response to RFPs and we’re working through the process. But I will tell, Richard, there was one contract that – then I took five years. So it’s something you have to have a lot of patience for and our company does and so you got to hang in there until you can get it across the finish line. So we are at various stages I would say on some of the contracts.

Okay, that’s great color. It’s actually great, thank you. And then the last question is this, if you look at some of the legislation, it’s been past couple of years as I say, it’s been very favorable for the privatization movement and you guys obviously do a good job, managing the company there. Any thought about pursuing a growth acquisition strategy and really trying to move outside account one year.

Are you talking about from the utilities – on the utility side…

Yes, for the water side. Yes, for the water side.

Yes, sure. We look at that and of course the things that we look at is that a favorable regulatory environment and to the degree there are businesses for sale in those particular states, we of course will look at that. And I’ll tell you though when those things due come up for sales. There is lot of folks that like that business. So it becomes a pretty competitive process and we’re not afraid of that. It’s just – you’ve got a look at these situations and make sure there is enough scale to attract you. You recall, Rich and this may have been a little bit before your time we sold our business in Arizona. That was largely because of the commission in Arizona. And it didn’t make sense for us to continue to spend all the time that we had on a 13,000 customer business there. However, if there is other businesses for sales and other states that have fair regulatory environment, we’re definitely considered those.

Okay, that’s great. Okay. I guess that’s it for me, thank you. I appreciate the time guys.

Thanks, Rich.

Thank you.

And this concludes our question-and-answer session. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Bob Sprowls for any closing remarks.

Yes, I just want to close today by thanking everyone for their continued interest in American States Water and wish you everybody a good.

This concludes today’s American States Water Company conference call. You may now disconnect your lines. Have a great day.