Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the CMS Energy 2012 First Quarter Results and Outlook Call. This call is being recorded. Just a reminder, there will be a rebroadcast of this conference call today, beginning at noon Eastern time running through May 3. This presentation is also being webcast and is available on CMS Energy's website in the Investor Relations section. At this time, I would like to turn the call over to Ms. Laura Mountcastle, Vice President and Treasurer. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning and thank you for joining us today. With me are John Russell, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Tom Webb, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Our earnings press release issued earlier today and the presentation used in this webcast are available on our website. This presentation contains forward-looking statements. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties and should be read in conjunction with our Form 10-Ks and 10-Qs. The forward-looking statements and information and risk factors section discuss important factors that could cause results to differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. This presentation also includes non-GAAP measures. A reconciliation of each of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measure is included in the appendix and posted in the Investor section of our website. CMS Energy provides financial results on both a recorded GAAP and adjusted non-GAAP basis. Management views adjusted earnings as a key measure of the company's present operating financial performance unaffected by discontinued operations, asset sales, impairments, regulatory items from prior years, or other items. Certain of these items have a potential to impact favorably or unfavorably the company's reported earnings in 2012. The company is not able to estimate the impact of these matters and is not provided reported earnings guidance. Now, I’ll turn the call over to John.

Thanks, Laura. And good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us today on our first quarter earnings call. I'd like to being by first congratulating Laura Mountcastle on her upcoming retirement, which was announced yesterday. Laura will be leaving us effective July 1, having served as a key financial officer of our company for 18 years. Laura has held the role most familiar to those of you on the phone as Vice President of Investor Relations and Treasurer since 1999. I know you will join me in wishing Laura the best and Laura, I'll tell you, I've always enjoyed working with you and I want to publically thank you for your great years of service to the company and on behalf of everyone of the company, we'll miss you.

Thank you, John.

Good luck. Let me begin the presentation today with a few brief comments about the quarter before I turn the call over to Tom to discuss the financial results and outlook for the remainder of the year. Then we'll close with Q&A. First quarter adjusted earnings per share was $0.37, down $0.14 from 2011. The results were impacted by the warmest winter on record in Michigan, reducing earnings by $0.13 this year and $0.18 compared to the colder than normal weather a year ago. The good news is, we've identified a number of actions some of which have already been implemented to offset the adverse weather. Tom will discuss several of these with you later. As a result, we are reaffirming our full year adjusted EPS guidance of $1.52 to $1.55 a share. On the regulatory side, our electric and gas rate cases are proceeding on schedule. I'll give you an update on these two in a minute. In early April, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled in a DTE case that the Michigan Public Service Commission lacks statutory authority to adopt a revenue decoupling mechanism for electric utilities. As the result of this decision, we wrote off a $59 million regulatory asset covering the period from December 2009 through November of 2011. The Court's ruling does not affect our 2012 adjusted earnings guidance since the electric decoupling mechanism was only authorized through November of last year. And I also am going to talk about the bill to raise the retail open assess cap in Michigan and give you an overview on the operations for the quarter. Many of you are familiar with our rate case timeline. We are nearing the deadline for the Commission to issue a final order in our electric rate case. All of the testimony and…

My apologies to every – thanks, John. But my apologies to everybody. I'm coming through with a little bronchitis today. Let's go right to the next slide and talking about our results. Excluding the decoupling write-off that John just talked about, adjusted earnings were $0.37 a share and this is down $0.14 from last year reflecting the record warm winter. On a weather-adjusted basis earnings were $0.50 and that's up $0.04 from last year. Now, we are writing off our electric decoupling regulator asset because we no longer assess recovery as at least 80% probable. Two weeks ago the Michigan Court of Appeals found that the Michigan Public Service Commission does not have statutory authority for electric decoupling. Although gas decoupling is expressly addressed in the 2008 energy law and the intent may have been to include the electric business as well, the Appeals Court judge found that in a plain reading of the law, electric decoupling was established. This appeals case brought by ABATE against the Michigan Public Service Commission regarding the DTE rate case order reduces our confidence in recovery. The standard to maintain such a revenue regulatory asset is high. Please recall that for planning purposes we had assumed that present and future electric decoupling for the economy and weather was discontinued in any event. We were however surprised by the Appeals Court order and have taken the one-time write-off of the anticipated $0.14 recovery as you can see on this chart. Now importantly, gas decoupling continues and you see the numbers on the chart for that. And energy optimization incentives also continue for both electric and the gas business as shown above. In our service territory, the first quarter weather was the warmest on record. Personally, I'm hoping the graph shown here that looks like half…

Thank you very much, Mr. Webb. (Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Kevin Cole from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning, guys.

Morning.

Morning.

And thank you, Laura, for all your help over the last couple of years and keeping me up to speed. I guess – so I guess the first question would just be just on the change of decoupling. And so as I understand it the ruling even restricts very narrowed decoupling that would be focused on energy efficiency only. And so from here do you expect the MPSC to take this back to court or to abandon decoupling totally? Or can they just simply call it a tracker instead of decoupling and call it a day?

Kevin, it's really up to them to decide what they want to do. The unique position about us in this is that it is a DTE case. I mean, ABATE has also sued us and our case is pending. So we are a bit of an observer in this rather than an active party. So it's really up to the Commission to decide what they want to do. They have issued a request for parties to submit by I think the middle of May, comments about this ruling. So that's the first step that they've taken. They'll have to decide along with ABATE and DTE what they want to do in the next steps. So we'll kind of follow their action. It's hard for us to lead on this one because we really – it's not our case.

Okay. And then I guess on the – on your weather slide where you list the recovery actions. Should I read it as of the categories under complete, those are for the most already locked in for year and we should see them probably more so in the third quarter? And then the underway is – are still yet to be seen but are on your goals?

Good description. The complete categories are done. Decisions are done and actions have either been taken or completed. But you will see those roll into the second quarter and third quarter. Most of them, like the low cost financing, you're going to see that soon. The pension cost is actually one that is already been picked up upon. So there's a lot of good things happening there. The underway would be your interesting side because under efficiencies includes the restructuring program that John just described that we're doing. And on the economy, we are seeing a stronger tick-up in sales so there's a little piece of sales that's flowing through that we just didn't anticipate and we're still using our approach of being pretty conservative. We'd rather be wrong and surprised on the favorable side on this sort of thing. But it looked so good that we pretty much had to pick it up. So we feel pretty good about what's on the underway as well. But, yes, good characterization. Complete, we finished. Underway, coming events that are being worked on now.

Great. Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Paul Ridzon from KeyBanc. Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Morning.

Morning.

Congratulations, Laura, and again thank you for all your help over the years.

Thank you.

Can you give a sense of maybe a headcount or FTE count on the early out?

Yes. It's still early. I mean, Paul, we've – the request closed Tuesday of this week, Tuesday evening. And just for everybody's benefit, we do this a little bit different than most companies. It's not based on everybody that submits gets this. It's basically we select who gets it based on the fact can we do business without that position in the future. Right now, I'd say though we would probably be anywhere, it could potentially be anywhere from 5% to 7% of our salaried workforce, which is around 300 people. That doesn’t include the union results because as I said we're still in negotiations with them.

And is there – I guess the first question touched on this. But is there anything – legislative approach to getting decoupling reinstated?

There may be but, I mean, the fact that the Appeals Court looked at the law and what they ruled, even though it's disappointing for us particularly because of the write off, the word electric is not in the law. So it's hard to argue with a fact that if it was intentional they should have included it in there and since it was excluded their judgment seems logical. But there are other ways that we can get around this and I don't really want – and we're not getting around the law, but other things the regulators can do and I think that's why they're asking for the utilities to respond back to them in the next few weeks to decide what approach do we use. As Tom said, they resolved the – they ensured that the trackers – they supported trackers so there's ways you can track revenue. There's way you can track other things, which is fine. And I'm glad to see they endorsed that during the hearing so that'll be a published case, which means that that should have a lot of substance in the future for how we actually go about looking at this. So there are opportunities. We'll have to see what the Commission decides to do, what DTE decides to do and then we will certainly support what we can in that case.

And you just kind of touch on a big topic this quarter has been coal to gas switching and potential forced burns, just kind of where CMS stands on that regard?

Yes. We've seen the same thing. As I mentioned, our Zeeland plant, which I'm really glad we purchased a few years ago has gone from a peaking plant to a base load plant. We've even seen at times that the – certainly the combined cycle is dispatched ahead of coal at times, particularly some of our coal plans. But even peaking, even the simple cycle has dispatched some coal on a certain, some certain timeframes. So we're seeing that as an advantage that we have the gas plants. A disadvantage that we're really cycling the coal plants a lot more than we have in the past and right now some of the coal plants are out market. So it kind of fell in line with the strategy that we've had is to take some of these older units and mothball them in the next couple of years anyway.

There's another little benefit that comes with this. The downside is those coal inventories that I mentioned are a little high but a benefit is our PSCR costs are dropping sharply benefiting from these low gas prices. So you remember we talked a lot about keeping our base rate increases at or below the level of inflation. But we said GCR cost and PSCR costs were important to us. GCR cost are obviously negative each year creating lots of headroom for our customers. And PSCR costs, which we've been worried about, they're now half the size we were looking at maybe the last time we talked to you, everyone in New York. So there's a lot of benefits that come through this.

And, Paul, that’s the headroom we're looking for.

Got it. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Paul Patterson from Glenrock Associates. Please go ahead.

Can you hear me?

Yes. Welcome.

Yes.

First of all, congratulations, Laura. It's hard to imagine that it's kind of – I don't know. I'm surprised to hear it. So anyway, congratulations. So as I'm getting over that, let me – most of the questions have been asked but I want to sort of follow-up on and I'm sorry if I missed this. The weather adjusted numbers in the release, does those include leap year?

They do. So when you read our numbers we have a little lift for leap year this year and you'll have a little fall off from that next year. And I'll give you just a rough rule of thumb for us on the electric side. It would be – I'd round it up and call it 0.3% of sales. Does that help you?

Okay. So in other words wouldn't it be 1.7% of total system sales. It would be 1.4% more or less?

Yes. If you were to – if we looked at electric sales and I took you to our chart, which was Slide 14, where the weather-adjusted number was about 2% and I'm talking about the full year. You'd take about 0.3% off of that or if you went to the number without energy efficiency, more an economic look, would be about 3% and you'd take 0.3% off of that.

Okay. So the plus 2% that you have for 2012 would be – I guess what would the number, I'm sorry, what would the number be if we were to basically back out the impact of the leap year?

You'd take the full year number of 2%, which is just the weather-adjusted number and you'd make it 1.7%. Or you'd take the number that we show on the chart that says 3% without energy efficiencies, so more of the economic growth number and you'd make that 2.7%.

Okay. And then the number for the quarter itself – I mean, that's a full year number. Is that correct?

Same thing.

Okay. That makes it look like residential weather adjusted numbers would be considerably lower. I mean, it looks like commercial and what have you – how do you explain what's going on weather adjusted with respect to those – do you follow me?

We're seeing – I do. We're seeing good growth in the first quarter with residential up even if you took the leap year out. We are seeing industrial continuing up where we're talking about full year numbers in that 6% plus area. We already saw that again in the first quarter. But the commercial is the drag and it has been the drag for some time for us. We are watching our commercial customers hold back. So before they add on any headcount or add on another location or put back a location that they took out. Of if they're stores, reopening a store that’s in a mall or whatever. They're holding back. The industrial recovery leads big. We're not seeing a good residential turnaround, which lagged. And the commercial hasn't yet made that big turn. That's ahead.

Okay. So the residential would be about 0.6% basically? Is that how we should think about it?

And I don't know that I have – that number I gave you, that rule of thumb. I don't know if it's precise by class but it probably is close.

Okay. Listen, I appreciate it.

You're welcome.

And thanks a lot, Laura. Have a great one.

Thank you, Paul.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Mark Barnett from Morningstar Research. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning, everyone.

Morning.

Morning.

Congratulations, Laura. Just real quickly, you had kind of touched on this a little bit but with the voluntary separation program, I know your guidance assumes some cost reductions. I'm just wondering does that include also some assumption of charges for severance for the year in addition to the headcount reductions?

Yes. Before we get the final numbers in and we're only in the middle of that process as John mentioned. Our estimates would be that the upfront cost of this will be somewhere between $5 million and $10 million. And that's all based on the number it takes that we approved. Because as people come in we have to say yes or no. And then the savings that we would get from that, we think will probably give you about a 12-month payback. So we will take the upfront one-time piece, call that out so that you can see that separately not let that impact your future if you choose, and then we will give you the ongoing savings that we get. Obviously a half a year this year and then the impact for the full year next year and tell you about that. And I would tell you that the savings this year probably be over $5 million and on a full year basis probably closer to $10 million. Now those are rules of thumb just at the moment and we will know more the next time we're with you in an earnings call. We'll have it all complete and lay it out for exactly what it is.

Okay. Thanks for that.

You’re welcome.

And I know that you like to look over the long-term and a little bit further over the cycle with big investment plans, but with your environmental CapEx where you [ph] sold (31:16) out. Given the current dispatch fundamentals, are you taking another look at any of your plants and investment decisions you started to make already? Or how is that affecting your thinking?

Yeah, Mark, we looked at that carefully. The – we're comfortable and confident the decision made with a small seven to mothball those and maybe ultimately retire the right move. The big five coal plants, the work that we’ve done already makes sense because they are competitive. Although as I said earlier, we're moving them around a little bit, cycling them a little bit more than we have in the past. But the – also the belief we have that by 2015 when we see some of the environmental rules, math’s and others go into effect, what we’re going to see is capacity prices rise, gas prices begin to trickle up at that point and at that point, there's – we believe that these high efficient coal plants will be in the money. So as far as the decision we’ve made, the decision we made to put full environmental controls on the big five coal units makes sense in the short term and the long term, mothballing the small seven makes sense in the short term and the long term.

All right. Thanks. That’s all for me.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Ali Agha from SunTrust. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Tom, going back to your offset that you laid out for us for the – and through the quarter, could you give us a sense of what your interpretation was for the ELJ recommendation on your electric rate case? And some sense of what may have been assumed by you guys to keep you on your guidance track? Any color or thoughts there?

Well, Ali, you know by now that we don’t usually predict rate cases. We talked about our self-implementation, and where we are. For me to start giving you numbers that we've assumed is kind of self-defeating. So I won’t add much to that except to say that we try to self-implement the appropriate numbers so that there isn’t a large refund of any kind and just do the right thing there. But all the other assumptions you'd look at, we plan on normal weather, for example, and last year we were cooking. So there would be an upside if that were to happen again. On the other hand, if it were a very mild summer, we'd have to take a hard look at what we’re doing. That would be a big challenge on top of this mild winter. So I would say look for normal things not extraordinary things. Normal weather, reasonable recovery in our rate cases and the like, as you look for the future numbers. We've tried not to be aggressive anywhere here. One thing that John and I probably didn’t make really clear is that none of the recovery items we've shown you today cause us to do anything to the business that we think is unusual or make any sense. Sometimes you’ll hear us talk about if we got some upside we'll put some more money in tree trimming or even the other way around. We haven’t touched our forestry program. We haven’t touched our outage program, because we want all of those things to hold their own if we can. We've worked at the things that are all good business decisions. So I hope that helps a little bit.

Sure. But I guess from another perspective, let me ask you this. Were you folks surprised by the number that the ELJ put out there? And relative to what your interim rate increase had baked into them?

Well, I don’t know if surprised is an important kind of view, but it’s inconsistent with what we think the ultimate recovery should be.

Okay. Okay. And separately, John, to you. There have been rumblings that in Michigan at some point the governor himself is planning to lay out an energy plan or an energy vision. Which side do you have on that? Do you have in your mind any implications as far as whether it’s open access or any other electric-related issues are concerned?

Yes. I expect something to come out this fall. We’ve talked to the administration. They’re going through their plans right now for this. Most of the focus I think he is going to talk about, and it’s still being developed right now so let me say that, is it doesn’t have anything to do with retail open access or anything like that. It has more to do with infrastructure. And so, how do we have electric and gas infrastructure in place for the future of this state. And I expect, and this is my assumption, I expect he’ll also look at some of the natural resources that we have here in the state with some of the best storage facilities for gas in the country. The gas plays that we have, particularly up north. The Great Lakes that we have with water, I mean, we’ve got some incredible natural resources here in Michigan and how do we position those for the future success of Michigan. He tends to be looking at the impact both from a financial impact to the state as well as an impact to the residents of this state in a favorable way. So that’s what I think the focus is going to be. But we’ve got a lot of work to do with them between now and then, and again I don’t think he's landed on it yet. He's got some budget issues, which he's dealing with right now.

I see. And last question just to keep a track of this bill you referred to retail open access. My understanding, it’s still in Committee, hasn’t come out. Is that where you think it basically ends up? And I mean is there a particular cut-off date by which we know that this bill is pretty much dead?

Year-end.

Year-end.

Yes, you’re right. I expect it’ll stay in Committee. It doesn’t have any traction and year-end it'll die if nothing is done with it.

I see. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Brian Russo from Ladenburg Thalmann. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning.

Morning.

Morning.

Congratulations, Laura, and best of luck.

Thanks very much.

In terms of the timing of the electric rate case final order, I think it’s ripe for decision. Do we expect the Commission to rule on that by June 8? Or is there something that we can expect kind of any day now?

No. Usually they make the decision close to the deadline. I mean with the new Chairman they may advance it a little bit, but at the end of the day there isn’t a lot of motivation to make the decision earlier rather than later. But yes, I expect it just before. I don’t think they'll go beyond the deadline because then as you know the law indicates that we can move forward and their rates are final. So expect just close to it. Although as I mentioned – I’m sorry.

No, go ahead.

On the gas side, I’d – maybe a little bit different on the gas side.

Understood. My other questions have been asked and answered. Thank you.

Thanks, Brian.

Thanks, Brian.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Steve Fleishman from Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Hi. Thanks. Good morning.

Morning, Steve.

Morning.

Laura, 18 years, oh my gosh.

I know. Hard to believe.

Congratulations. Couple of questions. First, on the – I believe there was another provision in the DTE order about smart grid spend and potentially not allowing that. Can you just talk about the order there and how you're thinking about it and implications?

Yes. The one thing that came out there is the courts ruled that there wasn’t a sufficient record in that case to move forward. I think as you know, we’ve been pretty slow and methodical in our rollout of smart grid and implications to us; we’ve already done what the court is asking DTE to do. And I think you’ll have to ask them, but I think they’ve already done it too. So we’ve got the full business case reviewed with the staff and it’s in our plan. So it really was that first case, that 2009 case they were focused on for them.

Okay, great. And then, second kind of a high-level question. Obviously you guys did that nice additional dividend hike earlier this year. Should we assume now that you have the payout ratio in line that you’ll grow dividends kind of in-step with the earnings growth?

That would be a good assumption.

Yes, that would be a good assumption.

Okay. One last question. On – I don’t know if you have handy the data on capacity factors of your coal fleet this quarter versus last and maybe also of your combined cycles. Or your – or otherwise your mix?

Yeah, I can get – I don’t -- let me try to find it right here. I don’t know. Do you guys have it real quick? We don’t – yes, I don’t think we have it by quarter, Steve. We can give you...

Okay, no we can do it.

Did you do it by quarter? Good. Okay. I don’t have it here.

So let me just make sure I'm getting this read right. Campbell 1 about 68% capacity factor in the –

That’s coal.

First quarter. And Campbell 3, another big coal unit, about 50% and then the KARN units run about 35% and 50% in the first quarter. There’s two of them over there, coal units. And then jump down to like Zeeland, the combined cycle is 71% in the first quarter. So if that gives you a little sense as to what you’re seeing.

Do you by any chance have what those would have done last year’s first quarter as a comparison?

I tell you, Steve, I mean Laura's stepping down and now you're asking all the detailed questions. All right. Here you go. Let me do Zeeland first. So the 71-ish percent in this quarter, same quarter a year ago was 27%. And the – let me use the Campbell 3 unit because it's the big coal unit that’s up on the west side of state where it was about 50% in the first quarter. It was about 77% in the first quarter a year ago.

Tom, let me just on that one, though, we had a large outage on that plant this year in this quarter. So Campbell 3 would – because it’s efficient, very efficient it would normally run. So that is one exception, Steve, when you look at it –

So let me round the Campbell units out just in my way of doing it because there was an outage on one of the other units last year that I was going to skip. I'd say that coal, the big coal units on the west side of the state were around 70-plus percent and what you’re seeing now if I kind of average them out and think about some changes, well Campbell 1 was running at about 68%. So you can see that transition. But the big deal is to see the shift on the gas side. Because remember even though they're big coal units, they're still big efficient base load units. Zeeland going from 27% capacity factor in the first quarter of last year up to 71% in the first quarter of this year. That’s probably the best indicator for you to see what we're looking at. Does that help?

That’s great. Thank you so much.

You are very welcome. Thanks for joining.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Jonathan Arnold from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.

Good morning. My questions were asked and answered but, Laura, congratulations and good luck. We’ll miss you.

Thank you, Jonathan.

Thank you. Our next question then comes from Andy Levi from Avon Capital. Please go ahead.

Hi. Can you hear me?

Yes. We can.

Yes.

Hi. Good morning. And, Laura, I thought it was 20 years I knew you.

(inaudible)

Yeah, so I think still have that San Francisco 49ers hat you sent. So I wish you luck, Laura and I’ll miss you. Just three very quick questions. Could you just talk a little bit more about you mentioned a possible settlement in the gas case. Any other details you can give us on that as far as kind of –?

Why don’t I just jump in and say that kind of thing, it's really too soon to talk about. You can imagine if settlement discussions are ahead people don’t like talking about them. So I think John described it well saying it’s small. It's a good candidate for that. So it’s something we’ll talk about later.

Okay. And then as far as the employee reductions. Is there kind of a rule of thumb that we can use as far as cost per employee savings wise?

You can but I will tell you, the real issue there will be our choice on how many we actually replace and how many we take that savings on. So even though I give you a number like that, I think it'd be better to see sort of the whole millions and that indication I gave earlier that the upfront cost for the size of the pool we’re talking about, $5 million to $10 million. And then the savings being a little over $5 million for this half a year, closer to $10 million for a full year, so one year payback. If you don’t mind, I'd rather leave you with that instead of employee indicators because the incrementality will have a big factor.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you.

And one last question. On the decoupling case are you guys going to make comments on that too?

On the DTE case?

Yes. File comments or are you going to leave it to everyone else?

Yeah. Depending on what the parties that were sued decide to do. So it is really their lead and it was ABATE bringing the case to DTE with the Commission. So it really will follow – we'll work with DTE and the Commission to decide what they want to do and then, yeah, we can file amicus briefs and other things to support that. But it really is their lead because we are not a party to this case.

Right. Okay. Thank you.

Thanks Andy.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Paul Ridzon from KeyBanc. Please go ahead.

I have a follow-up on the coal. Can you talk about your rail contracts and your coal contracts and is there any take or pay risk we have to worry about?

No. We've got multiple contracts – we got contracts that are laddered in over several years, Paul. Right now though as Tom said, we’ve got a lot of capacity in our coal and so what we’re working with is to burn that coal whether it's Eastern or Western, to work with the rails, to try to improve the delivery, maybe delay the delivery to do the best that we can from that standpoint. But, no, it's not really take or pay. I mean we’ll take the coal. We would just rather not have the inventory if we can avoid it.

So I think a lot of companies are facing this right now and therefore the rail companies and the coal companies are talking to everybody about the right thing to do. And recall we used to have a lot of long-term shipping contracts. Today, they're more short-term in nature. So there’s actually an opportunity to address this economic issue maybe for the benefit of our customers here. So we'll be working in a cooperative way with our suppliers to do the best we can.

And just one thing that may separate us from others is that we do have the barge. I mean because we are in the Great Lakes. So we have both rail and barge so we're not fully dependent on the rail.

Okay. Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you for your question there. We've got no further questions currently in the queue.

All right. Well let me wrap it up. Thank you all for joining our call today. I do appreciate the questions. They were very good and also the recognition for Laura who we will all miss as everybody else will. And it does seem odd only 18 years with us. I mean, geez, too early, Laura. First quarter weather presented a challenge for us, I think we covered that. We're taking a number of steps, recovery actions to keep us on track and to deliver our 2012 financial goals. We remain committed to delivering on our promises, providing value to our customers and to you, our shareholders. So thank you for your interest in CMS Energy. We look forward to seeing you at our next meeting.

This concludes today’s conference and we thank you, everyone, for your participation.