Good day and welcome to the Duke Energy Third Quarterly Earnings Call. Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Bob Drennan. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Mary. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Duke Energy’s third quarter 2013 earnings review and business update. Leading our call, this morning is Lynn Good, President and CEO; along with Steve Young, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Today’s discussion will include forward-looking information and the use of non-GAAP financial measures. Slide 2 presents the Safe Harbor statement, which accompanies our presentation materials. You should also refer to the information in our 2012 10-K and other SEC filings concerning factors that could cause future results to differ from this forward-looking information. A reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures can be found on our website at duke-energy.com and in today’s materials. Please note that the appendix to today’s presentation includes supplemental information and additional disclosures to help you analyze the company’s performance. Today, Lynn will begin with the highlights of our third quarter and Steve will provide a more detailed financial update. Then Lynn will review our near-term priorities and discuss our future growth opportunities. We will allow plenty of time for your questions. As many of you know, I am retiring from Duke Energy at the end of this year. So this is my final earnings call. Over 40 years ago, I began my professional career with Duke Power and have experienced a rare opportunity to come full circle in my career ending with Duke Energy. I have over 35 years of combined service to the company and its predecessors, including 25 years devoted to Investor Relations. During that time, I was fortunate to meet a lot of great people in the investment community. I especially appreciate all the wisdom, the guidance and feedback, many of you have shared with me over the years. The goal was always to move the Investor Relations function forward. Okay. So, Lynn, let’s talk about the quarter.

Good morning, everyone, and thanks, Bob. Before I get into my remarks, I also want to recognize, Bob. I had the pleasure of working with him over the last year and a half. And as a company, we’ve benefited not only from his industry experience and leadership in IR, but also his leadership in the company. So Bob, thank you for a great contribution to the company, and we all wish you and live the very best in the future. Let me also welcome to the call, Steven Young. As you know, Steve assumed his role as Chief Financial Officer in August. And I know a number of you have had an opportunity to meet with Steve. He brings a deep understanding of our business and is committed to the company and to achieving our financial objectives. So before turning the call over to Steve, let me begin with a brief highlight of our accomplishments for the quarter. We achieved adjusted diluted earnings per share of $1.46, compared with $1.47 for the same quarter a year ago. Our third quarter results were consistent with our plan for the year. Our results were impacted by unusually mild summer weather, $0.11 below the third quarter of 2012. At the same time, we benefited from updated customer rates and load growth. As we have previously highlighted, we expected our 2013 earnings to be shaped more toward the back end of the year due to the timing of regulatory outcomes. In late September, we received approval of our two rate cases for Duke Energy Carolinas, including approval for nuclear levelization. As a result, we expect to recognize significant benefits from these regulatory proceedings in the fourth quarter. As a result of the resolution on a number of important regulatory matters, we have raised the…

Thanks Lynn. Since taking over as CFO in early August, I have visited with many of you and described my background. During my 33 years with the company I’ve had the pleasure of getting to know many people at Duke Energy and the fine work that they do. I’ve held various roles in the finance group and worked closely with State and Federal Regulators. I look forward to continuing the company’s relationship with the investment community. Today I will begin with an overview Duke Energy’s third quarter earnings results for each of its business segments and will also update you on retail customer volume trends and the economic conditions in our regulated jurisdictions. Key earnings drivers to consider for the fourth quarter of 2013 and full year of 2014, the status of our merger integration and cost control efforts and our overall financial objectives. As Lynn highlighted, today we announce third quarter adjusted diluted earnings per share of a $46 compared to prior year quarterly results of a $47. On Slide 5, you will see a summary of the primary drivers of quarterly adjusted earnings for each of our segments. Note that beginning this quarter we are – our recording progress energies results within each of the respected drivers on this slide. The progress energy contribution will no longer be presented as a single line item. Let me start with the results U.S. Franchised Electric and Gas our largest segment, which recognized an increase in quarterly earnings of $0.02 per share. You will see that the implementation of updated customer rates added $0.16 hoping to offset the impact of unfavorable weather. Additionally, a 1.7% increase in weather normalized customer volumes and growth in our wholesale business added $0.07. I will provide more details on our customer volume and economic trends…

Thank you, Steve. Let me close with the discussion of our strategy priorities. As a company, we've accomplished a great deal since we closed the merger with Progress in July of last year. We created the largest utility in the industry with a diverse set of customers, jurisdictions and generation sources. We resolved the near term priorities we established after the merger as outlined on Slide 11. Our regulatory proceedings are essentially complete with five rate cases approved and updated customer rates implemented. Clarity on the cost based capacity filing in Ohio will help inform our long-term strategic plans for the Midwest generation fleet. As Steve detailed, we have made significant progress in achieving the savings we anticipated from the merger, both fuel and joint dispatch, as well as non-fuel O&M savings. We also remain focused on ensuring consistently exceptional performance from our valuable nuclear fleet in the Carolinas. By resolving these issues, we have positioned Duke Energy as a low risk, highly regulated utility, operating in constructive regulatory environments. We have the financial strength and flexibility to consistently deliver on our commitments and grow the business. Let me spend a few minutes discussing our future growth opportunities as outlined on Slide 12. In Florida, the comprehensive settlement approved by the Florida Commission in October allows us to evaluate new generation investments to replace lost capacity due to plant retirements such as Crystal River 3 and a potential retirement of the Crystal River 1 and 2 coal units. In early October, we issued an RFP for approximately 1,640 megawatts of combined cycle generation capacity needs. We expect to finalize the RFP in late summer next year. As the company's self-build option is selected as the most cost effective alternative, we will file for a need certificate with the Commission. Construction…

Thank you (Operator Instructions) And we’ll take our first question from Shar Pourreza with Citigroup. Shar Pourreza – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, Shar.

Good morning. Shar Pourreza – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Bob, first congrats on the retirement. You’ve been a good friend and a great resource for us for several years, so congratulations.

Thank you. Shar Pourreza – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Let me ask you a question. With the approximate $700 million coming back to the U.S., any guidance on where you think you'll redeploy it? And I guess, with the rest of the cash from Latin America, curious if you see any further value creating opportunities in the U.S., like maybe solar that could potentially offset the tax leakage?

In the short-term, we will bring the $700 million back and use it to delay additional financing at the holding company, which effectively creates balance sheet flexibility for us to identify growth opportunities and invest in longer-term growth opportunities. Solar can certainly be a part of that as we look at renewables in our jurisdictions, and I also, as I went through Slide 12, gave you some perspective of other capital investment opportunities that exist in our jurisdictions. Shar Pourreza – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Okay. Terrific. And then just one question on the Ohio capacity case, given what's left with the procedural schedule on PUCO at least for November; are we thinking more we'll get an order in the cost-based approach sometime in December or we – is there still the potential for a November order?

At this point, I don't have any specifics on it, Shar. We believe, expect or anticipate it by the end of the year. With the holiday schedule, I think, we'll just have to evaluate it as the dockets and schedules are produced, whether it's November or December. Shar Pourreza – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Okay. Thanks very much. Congrats.

Thank you.

And we’ll take our next question from Greg Gordon with ISI Group.

Good morning, Greg. Greg Gordon – International Strategy & Investment Group LLC: You'll be missed. My question is on the commentary you just made with regard to your O&M growth or aspirations/your ability to control O&M growth. As we look into 2014, I guess, you've indicated you feel like it's possible that you'll outperform 1% to 2% O&M growth baseline that you've targeted. Can you – you pointed to some things that are driving that, is pension and the increase in expected discount rates a big factor in that, and are there other things on the list that you necessarily didn't call out earlier?

Greg, I think it's a combination of a number of things. What we try to emphasize with the merger synergies is we have effectively exceeded the 5% to 7% targeted savings and expect to deliver about $550 million of savings in 2014. That puts us in a position to maintain O&M flat from 2011 to 2014. So it's a combination of merger integration. Certainly, we believe that pension benefits will trend down as we are looking at discount rates and other factors, but we'll need to finalize the specifics on the pension when we set the discount rate at the end of the year.

And I would say that the pension expense is not the bigger driver of the $550 million by any means. It is primarily O&M savings within our corporate and functional areas. Greg Gordon – International Strategy & Investment Group LLC: Okay. Thank you, guys.

Thanks, Greg.

And we’ll take our next question from Jonathan Arnold with Deutsche Bank. Jonathan P. Arnold – Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.: Yes. Good morning.

Good morning. Jonathan P. Arnold – Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.: I’d like to – Bob, personally, good wishes as well. Thank you. On the – just on the last question around, you were saying flat into 2014 for O&M, but everything else in the prior guidance slides was talking about into 2015. Do you feel that you're just not quite ready to commit flat into 2015 or should we be thinking about back to that 1% to 2% growth trajectory on the extra year?

Jonathan, we haven't given specific guidance into 2015. What we did indicate in our remarks here today is based on where we're positioned and the aggressive cost control measures we have in place. We could exceed the 1% to 2% meaning a lesser growth in CAGR and O&M, but we haven’t given any specific guidance on that. We’ll continue to finalize our plans and you should know we’re aggressively working on cost to continue to drive cost out of the business and all of those factors are considered in our growth expectation of 4% to 6% through 2015. Jonathan Arnold – Deutsche Bank: Okay, thank you. And I just also notice that you don’t – you sort of take down your I guess long-term sales number to 1.5% to 1% now versus it was 1% before. So could you just provide in context of what you said about 2013 and one quarter not being a trend are you looking at 2013 really as an anomaly at this point or is that something else that’s kind of drive that additional caution further out?

Jonathan, I think we’re right on track with where we expected to be. Our guidance for the full year of 2013 was 0.5% and that’s where we see the growth. The third quarter was a bit stronger than what we anticipated coming in at 1.7 but there are some imprecision in those volume numbers particular in a soft weather quarter. Long-term we’ve been planning for 0.5% to 1% and we are actually challenging our team to think about an environment of that kind of load growth even trending to flat overtime potentially as we think about sizing our spending, O&M spending. Jonathan Arnold – Deutsche Bank: Great. Got it. Because I’m right on one other topic. Should we view the 700 million repatriation as what you consider to be the sort of the current excess or is this an initial cost of something that could be more substantial and then may be just could you clarify the structure you are using and what the tax implications are?

Jonathan, this is a one time opportunity to take advantage of a tax structure to bring home cash without a substantial tax liability, it’s effectively strips basis out of the structure of the international structure. And so that 700 will come home, you could consider that to be a one-time opportunity for us to take advantage of that tax structure. On an ongoing basis we continue to evaluate the use of international cash. We have not made a final decision to repatriate trade on an ongoing basis but that represents an opportunity for us in the future. Jonathan Arnold – Deutsche Bank: Okay. Great. Thank you, Lynn.

Thank you.

And we will our next question from Dan Eggers with Credit Suisse. Daniel Eggers – Credit Suisse: Hey good morning. First of all Bob congratulations we’ll see you next week so we can do it more personally and formally. But I guess just to the quarter or to the outlook. Can you talk a little bit more what you guys see is the big CapEx buckets maybe a little more detail beyond kind of the near-term plan if you think about infrastructure spending in Indiana if you think about the next wave of environmental CapEx what kind of rate base and growth you still see out there?

Looking at our CapEx over the next several years we see that we’re in the roughly $6 billion range slightly down from the combined levels we’ve seen in the past. We have had a lot of major projects complete recently, but going forward we’ve got a lot of maintenance CapEx in those numbers and there is nuclear infrastructure. Additionally when you get out into 2015, 2016 or 2017 you’ll start to see the next cycle of build in the CapEx with potentially Florida self-build combined cycle and self-build in the Carolinas as well. but that's kind of the broad picture of our CapEx. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: I think its you went southern on the earnings call, last week they talked about the idea that towards the end of the decade there should be reacceleration in environmental CapEx for their coal fleet. Where do you guys see that affecting your generation coal ash and water coming?

We are projecting over the next 10 year period $5 billion to $6 billion of environmental spend. In the near-term, over the next, through 2015 we will spending over $1 billion primarily on air and primarily in Indiana and in the Carolinas. As you move beyond that towards the back-end of the 10 year period you will start to pick up some of the water and ash expenditures. It's difficult to predict exactly what level of CapEx will be given that the rules are not finalized at this particular point in time.

It's that range of $5 billion to $6 billion Dan is what we are estimating based on a range of scenarios that could impact could result from those rules. So that's a good rule of thumb for you to think about. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: Okay. And I guess just on there has been some good success with the wholesale contracts where do you guys seen as far as maybe picking up some more of that kind of business and is that going to have any barrier on how you guys lay out the 2015, 2016 new build decisions for incremental generation capacity.

I think wholesale opportunities can exist from time to time Dan, they are opportunistic generally and we'll provide more specifics if we see clarity around those as we move forward. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: Got it. Thank you guys.

Thanks so much.

And we’ll take our next question from Stephen Byrd with Morgan Stanley Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: I just wanted to follow-up on the cash that's outside the U.S. As you look at read a point out actually outside of the U.S., can you just speak to the degree of opportunity you see there or do you see fairly limited opportunities there in the overall objective remains to try to continue to look for ways to bring as much of that cash back to U.S. as you can.

Steve I think it's a balance, we have continue to look for generation development opportunities and have made a number of investments over the last three to four years consistent with generation in countries that we are consisted with our risk profile. So you may recall in 2012 made investments in Chile. So we do continue to look for opportunities to grow the business consistent with a 4% to 6% growth rate, but that business also produces a lot of cash and finding ways to optimally use the cash is a key objective. Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Okay. So, it does sounds like perhaps on an overall basis, the cash flow is exceeding the opportunities sort of systematically as you look out.

Opportunities are a bit lumpy so it's hard to track it, to annual cash flows that grows. Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Okay, understood, understood. Shifting gears over as you assess new nuclear options I know that's something you have been looking at any further updates as you think about new nuclear?

Steve, we continue to look at the VC Summer plant which is under construction in South Carolina. We believe in regional nuclear, we certainly have a very supportive regulatory environment in South Carolina, but we have not made a final decision to move forward we continue to evaluate the opportunity and we'll provide update as our decision making progresses. Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Okay, understood. So there is no specific timeline we should be thinking about for that?

Not at this point. Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you.

And we’ll take our next question from Hugh Wynne with Sanford Bernstein. Hugh Wynne – Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC: Good morning, thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning. Hugh Wynne – Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC: You mentioned that you were going to bring back something on the order of 700 million in cash from your overseas operation to pay a maturing – debt maturity at the holding company, what are your plans for holding company debt over sort of a three year horizon, will that be reduced further in those years or do you think that we are basically in a steady state?

Hugh we are not trying to deliver the company our credit ratings and financial profile are very strong and well positioned within our ratings category. We just have this opportunity to provide some flexibility to the balance sheet by taking advantage of this tax structure and then overtime as growth investments materialize we’ll reinvest in the holding company becomes an opportunity to fund those investments. At this point, we do not see a need for equity through 2015.

And the use of this $700 million to take care of these holdco maturities we’ll give some uplift here in terms of displacing interest. Hugh Wynne – Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC: One quick follow-on question. You had mentioned that you’re expecting longer term sales growth of 0.5% to 1% per year. Can you break that down roughly into what your longer term expectations are for customer growth and usage per customer?

You know Hugh I don’t have underlying specifics on that. What I would say is in 2013 our customer count has grown almost 1% a bit stronger in the Southeast, but actually pretty strong in the Midwest as well. So, I think with housing markets improving with continued traction with the U.S. economy we believe that the Southeast and Florida in particular are well positioned for customer growth. But I don’t have any further break down for you on that guidance. Hugh Wynne – Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC: Is there a potential for meaningful volume sales growth on the wholesale side. You mentioned that as a potential driver of growth in the Carolina and Florida?

I think it’s something that it’s opportunistic Hugh. So, we were able to sign up and extend the contracts back in 2010, 2012, we will continue to evaluate those opportunities but don’t have anything specific to share with you at this point. Hugh Wynne – Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC: Great, all right. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And we’ll take our next question from Julien Dumoulin-Smith with UBS. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC: Hi, good morning.

Good morning. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC: So first perhaps following up a little bit on the last question. With regards to the summer site, is it more around the need and projected demand that holds you back from pulling the trigger or is it more around structuring a transaction and concerns around I suppose site specific issue. If you could just give us a sense and maybe going back to it with regards to Carolinas, do you have any sense initially as to what their reaction would be and the structure would be under which you would acquire any nuclear generation?

So Julien, if you look at our integrated resource plans for both Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, we do show a need that could be filled by nuclear in the back part of the decade. And I’m not going to comment specifically on negotiations it’s an important asset for the region. We’re continuing to evaluate it, but have not reached a point of terms that we’re ready to move forward at this point. As you know, the asset is strongly supported by South Carolina, if we were to acquire up to 10% somewhere around 70% of that investment would be dedicated to North Carolina. so it’ll be important to receive appropriate regulatory recovery in North Carolina as well. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC: Excellent. And then going back to Ohio quickly I mean if you could just give us an update on your thoughts around timing for potential revaluation of that business, specifically the generation side of that business. And secondly, what are the switching trends you’ve seen particularly a very late if you will?

We are at this point waiting for the Ohio Commission order, Julien and are anticipating it by the end of the year. we don’t have any specifics on the exact timeframe between now and then. We are agnostic as to switching, because we are fully decoupled. The generation is fully merchant, all of the load it serves under auction for Duke Energy Ohio. So the switching is not relevant to us any longer. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC: Fair enough. And then lastly just with regards to Indiana, if you would, I know you provided some good detail on Edwardsport. But just from a regulatory perspective all those okay on that front, the regulators are kind of seeing this as appropriate just the gradual ramp up.

We’re certainly keeping the regulator informed, Julien for the progress at Edwardsport. You may recall that the recovery of Edwardsport cost is in accordance with a tracker, under the terms of a tracker that we file twice a year, giving us an opportunity to fully update the Commission on our results or cost structure et cetera. So we are continuing to maintain those updates and providing the commission with the status of the project. Julien Dumoulin-Smith – UBS Securities LLC: Got you. Excellent. Well, thank you very much.

Thank you.

And we’ll take our next question from Brian Chin with Merrill Lynch. Brian J. Chin – Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.: Hi, good morning.

Good morning, Brian.

Good morning. Brian J. Chin – Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.: On the improved O&M containment efforts, is there a way you can break down between whether most of those incremental savings are coming from the USFE&G segment or Commercial Power?

The majority of these savings, given the size of the segment were newer to the FE&G segment. Right now, we’re recognizing a lot of benefits in the corporate areas and those corporate areas get allocated to all segments including the international and commercial, but the lion’s share of that would newer to the FE&G segment. As you go forward, efforts such as nuclear generation, fossil generation, T&D those are more focused on the regulated businesses, because that’s primarily what progress was. So that’s what we’re integrating and finding benefits to. So the majority of merger integration will newer to the FE&G segment, logically there, but a lot of these corporate benefits will pass through to other segments as well. Brian J. Chin – Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.: Understood, understood. And then going over to Slide 9, just to be clear, I know that you’re going to give more color on this in February, but for those data points that are the blue boxes Ohio cost-based capacity, energy margins in Midwest generation is the point that year-over-year, we should be thinking about 2013 to 2014, those are going to be relatively flat. And that’s why there is no down, to be fair on that?

Brain, what I would say on Ohio cost-based capacity, because we don’t have an order yet it’s difficult for us to project implications to 2014. Energy margins will be dictated by commodity prices similarly the FX and the NMC. So those will be able to give you some specific guidance as these trends develop between now and February.

So it’s more uncertainty at this point. Brian J. Chin – Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.: Got it. Got it. And then lastly, you had said that your load growth long-term assumptions were generally still on the 0.5% to 1% range. Would you say that that’s probably appropriate for thinking about 2014?

I think that’s a reasonable range, Brain, 0.5% to 1%, yes, to 2015, right. Brian J. Chin – Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.: Great, thank you very much.

Thank you.

And we’ll take our next question from Michael Lapides with Goldman Sachs. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Few things. First of all, thank you for taking my call. Second, Bob, I hope you don’t mind, I’m going to show up on your doorstep in the mountains of Western North Carolina, I look forward to going fashion one day. I want to ask, I want to make sure we understand two things. So the $6 billion number you referenced in the footnote on O&M, that’s kind of the starting point and then you’re basically assume you’ll be in or around that same level in 2014, but I think it talks about excluding recoverable items. Can you just kind of quantify how much those recoverable items are or is that kind of a GAAP expected O&M number?

I can give you a flavor for them, Michael. The net of recoverables you might be looking at $5.5 billion and you’ve got some recoverables on Edwardsport, you’ve got some recoverables with Energy Efficiency, SmartGrid, we’ve got some rides like that, but the $5.5 billion is a number net of recoverable. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: And the GAAP number – I’m sorry and I want to make sure I follow this. So that $5.5 billion is the expected 2014 number and then that’s after accounting for the recoverables or is that 2011 base to start from?

Well that’s both actually we’re starting from that base and even with inflation and emergent work in particularly in nuclear Fukushima and cyber security we think we’ll able to offset all of the data in 2014 be at a level of $5.5 billion. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Okay. And then the recoverables are about $500 million, so that’s how you get to the $6 billion number?

Roughly, that’s correct. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Okay. On the nuclear – on the nuclear levelization, can you just kind of walk us through how that flows to the income statement, meaning is that an offset to O&M, is that an offset to D&A, does it have an unusual impact in the third and fourth quarter of this year and first and second quarter of next year, but then kind of normalizes after that?

Yes. The way the accounting will work, it will be an offset in O&M costs. It will be in that line item. It will, with its initiation result in lower O&M in the fourth quarter of 2013 and that’s a big driver that we are pointing to the fourth quarter. We will see some benefits in 2014, as you continue to defer cost, but there will be less benefits in 2014 than they were in 2013. And then after 2014, the amortization of the deferrals will have caught up if you will to the actual expenses and there won’t be much difference there. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Okay. When did this go into effect and is there a way to just kind of quantify what we’re talking about the dollar millions impact on O&M?

We began this in the third quarter actually in terms of levelizing nuclear outage cost I believe for the most part and we’ve got four refueling outages, an outage will run roughly $20 million, $30 million per outage. We can give you more details on the specifics in terms of the cost incurred. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Okay.

Michael, for the full year nuclear levelization is about $0.10 to $0.12 and the majority of that will sit in the fourth quarter, because of the refueling Steve just spoke about. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Meaning the full year impact in 2013 is $0.10 to $0.12, but if I would annualize, if I would use it on an annualized basis, it’s doubled that, because it only started in September?

No.

No, it’s – the full year impact about the $0.10 to $0.12, most of that will be in the fourth quarter and then when you look perspectively in 2014, you’ll have new outages being deferred, but you’ll have amortizations of previous outages catching up to it if you will. So the impact in 2014 will be a net reduction of O&M, but not as significant as what we saw in 2013. Michael J. Lapides – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Got it. Okay, guys. Thank you much appreciated and I’ll see you at EEI.

Yes. Thanks, Michael.

And we’ll take our next question from Kit Konolige with BGC. Kit Konolige – BGC Partners LP: Good morning.

Good morning, Kit.

Good morning. Kit Konolige – BGC Partners LP: I don't know what your retirement says about my career, but we’ve been doing this together for a long time.

I’m quite... Kit Konolige – BGC Partners LP: So just a couple of details to follow-up. A lot of my questions have been answered, but can you review, I guess this would be for Steve; can you review why the decision in the Ohio capacity case would have an impact on O&M in the fourth quarter, I’m just on earnings in the fourth quarter?

Well the decision on Ohio, it could have an impact if we get a decision in the calendar year, and it depends on what the decision is. We may have to book some effectively cost deferrals or revenues based on whatever the order says. So it could impact the 2013 earnings. It depends on what the order says and what calendar year do we get it in. So we’ve taken that into account and we’ve updated our guidance in the range we still think regardless of outcomes in Ohio we can be within our range. Kit Konolige – BGC Partners LP: So you're anticipating that, that whatever the decision is it potentially could affect the adjusted earnings not just GAAP earnings?

It could, we have to look at what the order said in the so forth. But it could affect adjusted earnings. That’s correct. Kit Konolige – BGC Partners LP: And then once – so once that’s received, I think in the past Lynn, you’ve said that order in the fourth quarter.

Kit, I’m not going to comment strategic decision at this point until we see the order and understand the implications to the business. And so if we receive the order by the end of the year, we’ll have opportunity to evaluate that and understand next steps and we’ll share that with you when it’s appropriate. Kit Konolige – BGC Partners LP: And how about on international is do you consider that a non-core business like DukeNet obviously it’s different in size, but does that – is that under review for possible different relationship with Duke Energy or do you consider that part of the business on a permanent basis?

If you look at the international business as an important part of Duke contributes about 10% up to 15% of our earnings. It’s been a strong contributor to the company, certainly strong cash flow. Our strategic focus over the last 16 months has really been on the regulated business working through these regulatory proceedings, focus on merger integration, we’ll focus on Midwest generation over the next year or so, as we evaluate the impact of the cost-based capacity filing. And we’ll continue to look for opportunities to optimize the value of the international business, but we don’t have any specific strategic review that I would share with you at this point. Kit Konolige – BGC Partners LP: Okay, thank you very much. See you all at EEI.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And we’ll take our last question from Ali Agha with SunTrust Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey: Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey: Good morning, Lynn or Steve, just wondered to clarify a couple of quick things, one is, you’ve kept a pretty wide range for your 2013 guidance all of that will come up in the fourth quarter, is it fair to say that wide range is primarily driven by the Ohio capacity tooling that would be the same factor, is that a way to think about it?

I think that’s the best way to think about it, Ali. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey: Okay, okay. And then second, you shared with us based on your CapEx program, you’re looking at rate base growth, 2012 through 2015 on a 4% CAGR. When you look at these opportunities that you highlighted on that slide about beyond 2015, is 4% roughly still the CAGR we should think about beyond 2015 given the opportunities you are seeing out there?

We haven’t given guidance beyond 2015, although there’ll certainly be a focus as we come to the street in February. Some of the items we have talked though could impact capital through 2015. For example, if we pursue the South field option in Florida et cetera. so we will also be refining CapEx through 2015 when we provide guidance early next year. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey: I see. And last question just to be clear on your plans on Ohio. Regardless of whatever decision comes out from the commission, do you still see the merchant business as core to Duke, given as you mentioned a few times the low risk profile portfolio that you currently own, does it really fit in with your overall business outlook?

Ali, that’s certainly a strategic question that we will need to answer as we move forward. Our focus at this point is on securing the order from the Ohio commission. We’re also focused on cost effective operation of those assets, we are engaged in the discussions with PJM on the structuring of the market. So far, the – our focus over this near-term is on those specific items. Ali Agha – SunTrust Robinson Humphrey: Fair enough. thank you.

All right. Thank you. Well, I’d like to thank all of you for questions and for your interest in Duke Energy. We look forward to talking with many of you next week at EEI Financial Conference in Orlando. Thank you.

And that does conclude today’s conference. Thank you for your participation.