Good morning. My name is Laurel, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to The Hartford's Second Quarter Financial Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the call over to Ms. Sabra Purtill, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and welcome to the Hartford Second Quarter 2013 Financial Results Conference Call. Our speakers today include Liam McGee, Chairman President and CEO; Doug Elliot, President of Commercial Markets; Andy Napoli, President of Consumer Markets; and Chris Swift, Chief Financial Officer. Other members of our executive management team available for the Q&A section of this call today include Beth Bombara, President of Talcott Resolution; Brion Johnson, Chief Investment Officer; and Bob Rupp, Chief Risk Officer. As detailed on Page 2 of the presentation, today's presentation includes forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are not guarantees of future performance, and actual results may differ in a material way. We do not assume any obligation to update today's forward-looking statements, and investors should consider the risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ. Our news release, 10-Q, 2012 10-K and other filings we make with the SEC, contain a detailed description and explanation of those risks and uncertainties. Finally, please note our presentation includes non-GAAP financial measures. We provide definitions and reconciliations of these measures to the comparable GAAP measure in the news release, financial supplement and SEC filings. I'll now turn the call over to Liam.

Thank you, Sabra. Good morning, everyone, and thanks again for joining us today. We're pleased to report another quarter of strong execution at the Hartford. We continued to deliver on our objectives of generating profitable growth in the go-forward businesses and reducing the size and the risk of the legacy annuity blocks. In June, we also announced a significant expansion of our capital management program. As you saw last night, The Hartford delivered second quarter core earnings of $324 million, up 18% over the prior year. Driven by improving fundamentals, aggregate core earnings in Property & Casualty, Group Benefits and Mutual Funds were up 28%. This earnings growth reflects the continuation of positive pricing momentum in Property & Casualty and Group Benefits, as well as product and distribution initiatives that are generating profitable growth. We continue to achieve meaningful price increases in Property & Casualty commercial. Renewal written pricing increased 8% on average in the Standard Commercial lines in the second quarter, consistent with the company's last 3 quarters and well ahead of loss cost trends. Our philosophy and approach is unchanged, and we will continue to be aggressive and smart in our pricing actions. We are optimistic that this disciplined approach to pricing combined with loss costs that remained benign, would drive additional margin expansion going forward. In Consumer Markets, Andy and his team have continued to leverage our relationship with AARP, expanding margins and delivering 2% written premium growth. This was the third consecutive quarter of year-over-year written premium growth. For AARP sold to agents, which as you know, is a key growth opportunity for this business, written premiums were up 63% in the second quarter. In P&C Commercial, Doug and his team have complemented The Hartford's traditional expertise in workers' compensation with expanded product and underwriting capabilities…

Thank you, Liam, and good morning, everyone. I'm going to cover our P&C Commercial and Group Benefits results for the second quarter of 2013. I'll also provide some commentary on the marketplace and updates on several key business objectives. Margin improvement through effective underwriting and pricing actions remains at the top of our priorities, and we're pleased with our continued progress during the second quarter. Let me begin on Slide 5. P&C Commercial had a combined ratio for the quarter of 98.4%. We continued to experience very solid pricing gains at 8%, generally consistent with our prior quarters. Our results for the quarter include a charge of $80 million for the elimination of the New York Workers' Compensation, 25-A fund. Excluding this charge, our combined ratio was 93.2%, 7.3 points lower than the second quarter of 2012. Lower cat losses in the quarter accounted for 2 points of this improvement. Our prior year development, excluding the adjustment for New York 25-A was positive news of $43 million in the quarter. Underlining all of these factors, our second quarter combined ratio, x-cat and x-prior year development, was 93.1%, 1.4 points lower than the second quarter of 2012. Our focus on underwriting and pricing continues to drive favorable accident year profitability trends. Our Group Benefit business had an outstanding quarter. Core earnings of $37 million were up $7 million from the first quarter of 2013. On a year-to-date basis, earnings are up 72%. Before I review the results of our business segments, I'd like to spend a few minutes discussing our pricing approach and our supporting analytics. We have a highly segmented approach for determining the rate need within our book of business. This sophistication has allowed us to successfully target increases within underperforming segments, while retaining those segments that are adequately…

Thank you, Andy. Good morning, everyone. This morning, I will cover 3 topics: first, I will review key items from the quarter; second, I will update statutory capital and holding company resources, including VA impacts in the Group Benefits' legal-entity separation project; and third, I will provide a third quarter outlook. Let's begin on Slide 16. Second quarter 2013 core earnings were up 18% to $324 million or $0.66 per diluted share. We produced strong results this quarter, even before adjusting last year's results worth $39 million of earnings from the Individual Life and Retirement Plans businesses, which were sold in January of this year. This quarter's core earnings growth was driven by improved margins in the Commercial and Consumer Markets, which Doug and Andy just covered, and Mutual Funds growth. Excluding prior year development, core earnings per diluted share were about $0.85, which is above the outlook we provided in April of $0.65 to $0.70 due to better underwriting results, higher Talcott earnings and higher limited partnership returns. Annualized limited partnership returns were 13% this quarter, well over our 6% outlook, resulting in excess returns of about $0.05 in core earnings per diluted share. Mutual funds core earnings were up 5% relative to the second quarter of 2012. Jim Davey and his team continue to build momentum in key areas, including sales, distribution initiatives and fund performance. Sales were up 32% over the prior year. Net flows were negative, including $2.5 billion in 2 large redemptions, one of which was a $1.4 billion institutional account that was expected to redeem. In P&C other operations, core losses increased this quarter due to a $141 million pretax charge for additional reserves related to our annual asbestos and environmental study. $130 million of this charge or $85 million after tax, was for…

Thank you, Chris. We know our prepared comments went a little long this morning, but we've reserved about 30 minutes for Q&A. Please be considerate of others and limit yourself to 1 question and a follow-up. And you're, of course, welcome to requeue for additional question. Laurel, could you please give the Q&A instructions?

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Erik Bass with Citigroup.

Just the first question, just given the increase in the pace of runoff for the VA blocks, can you talk about the potential timing for taking a dividend from Talcott? And is there any possibility of taking out money in 2014?

I'll turn that over to Chris.

Well, thank you. I think just the context on that is, yes, we are pleased with what we're seeing in Talcott, both in Japan and the U.S. as far as increased lapses. I think what we said in our Investor April Day, it remains true today, is that we do expect to take dividends out of Talcott in early 2015 or possibly late 2014. But do -- surrenders do help? No doubt about it. But I think we'd like to see where they sort of normalize out on a basis going forward, and we'll revise our thinking probably in early '14. And once we do, we'll let you know if we have any changes to our dividend plans.

Okay. And just one follow-up. Any -- given the success of the ESV program, any interests or opportunities for further Enhance Surrender programs going forward?

Erik, Beth will take that.

Sure, thank you. So as both Liam and Chris said, we've been very pleased with the success of the ESV program. And we plan to continue to evaluate the potential for other types of programs, and we'd expect that we would continue to be very targeted in how we would look at those. I'd also point out, there are other things that we're doing, as it relates to just managing the book and looking at ways to reduce the risk. So we are in the process right now of utilizing certain provisions at our contracts to increase writer fees, to turn off some investment options for subsequent payments or transfer of funds, as well as enforcing, in some limited situations, investment allocation restrictions.

Your next question comes from the line of Jay Gelb with Barclays.

On the Japan surrenders, can you give us a sense of -- I know that the annualized surrender level came off a bit in July, but would you anticipate that we should approach a more normalized level at some point? Or can we still keep running at these double-digit levels?

Beth will take that, Jake.

Okay. Yes, so let me give you a little bit of color on the surrender rate. If we look back over the last several months, so as we said, 34.8% for the quarter. But if you look at it by month, in April we were running at about 23%. May, we spiked up to 50%. June was at 29.5%. And as Chris said, for July, we're running at about 30%. So it's hard for us to predict at to what levels things will level off at. But we are seeing that as markets continue to improve and as markets stay at these levels, the activity rates continue to be high.

Okay. And then separately in Commercial P&C, premium growth turned positive for the first time in a few quarters. I'm trying to get a sense of whether you feel that's sustainable. And I think there was also a bit of confusion about the pace of rate increases in Standard Commercial having flattened, whereas based on some of the prior disclosure, it looks like it dipped a bit.

Jay, this is Doug. So a few comments. One is the overall Standard Commercial is generally flat, so we were 8% in the quarter, and I think that's about where we were in first quarter. I did give you some commentary about Middle Market versus Small. And in the Middle Market, we were off sequentially a point or so from first quarter, but still very strong at 8%. So I think you've got to get inside the markets to understand that. And we feel good about that progress, and given the amount of positive change we've had the last couple of years, feel good about sustained margin improvement. The question about new business, we had a good new business quarter and our overall Middle Market growth up a touch. It's -- my comment was, it's the first quarter we've seen growth in the Middle Market in quite some time. We have done a lot of work, particularly in our worker's comp book, but we feel like a lot of that work is behind us and we're looking good about moving forward.

I appreciate that. Just to clarify on that Standard Commercial renewal pricing, the disclosure looks a bit different in 2Q than 1Q in terms of the pace of rate increases. What changed there in terms of how that's being calculated?

So we refined our approach to calculations just slightly. And first, I would say that the overall trends are very consistent throughout the periods but have moved to more an effective policy-month basis, which means that we continue to follow policies and we'll adjust accordingly on mid-term cancels, and cancels flat out an extended period and push the results back into prior periods. So with those changes, from time-to-time, you'll have some slight deviations from prior periods, and I think it's a much more effective, more accurate way for us to watch the book of business performing.

You're next question comes from the line of Mark Finkelstein with Evercore.

Maybe stick with Doug for the first question. I guess just on Specialty, I'm trying to understand kind of the story a little bit on the program business. I think I heard you say that much of the actions have been completed and that the pricing levels are hitting targets, I may have mis-, kind of, characterized that a little bit. But then you look at the combined ratio for the quarter x-cat x-development 105.7%. So I guess I'm just trying to kind of put those -- put everything together and think about where -- like, where is Specialty in terms of the culling of the unprofitable programs and kind of repricing those? And the combined ratio outlook on that?

Good question, Mark, this is Doug. So keep in mind, inside Specialty, there really are 3 very different books of business. Our national casualty book, which essentially is an excess casualty book, well performing at our targets. We had a good quarter of new business. And again, those targets, the target combined ratios for 10% to 15% return are much higher than our normal Standard or Small Commercial targets. They're in excess of 105% and they move based on yield levels. So that's why the overall segment will never perform at a combined ratio equal to Middle, because they've got different targets. Secondly, our financial product book. Over the last couple of years, we've done a lot of work, and that book has really shaped nicely over the last couple of years, as we've moved away from some of the larger financial institution business. And as you saw, we had a release in quarter, so we feel good about that book of business. And then in the programs area, there are about 50 programs and we've worked our way through all those 50 programs. And in some cases, we're taking very aggressive corrective strategies, in some cases, exit. I'll share with you that in the specialty auto programs, where we've had some degree of pain over the last couple of years, essentially are exiting those programs, have largely nonrenewed those blocks. So we've taken some balance sheet work in the quarter, where we strengthen reserves, and I think underwriting lies. We're in a much better spot moving forward.

Just to follow up on that. So it's essentially the actions that you need to take, whether it's on the culling or the pricing side, largely complete at the end of the second quarter, is that the message on the kind of the third book of business that you're referring to?

Yes, I think that's very accurate -- definitely accurate on the auto liability programs. And obviously, as we shift our way through the rest, we'll spend more time. But much better shape of that overall book of business than a year ago.

Okay. I guess maybe just going back to the life side. I'd seem to recall, Chris, you mentioning at the Investor Day or maybe it was somebody else, but that you go through a third quarter assumption review on the life side. I'm trying to think about how the surrenders are going to factor into that, and is there any early read on how we should think about that?

Mark, it's Chris. I'm not sure who talked about it. But I think the context maybe just for this year's study, is if you particularly look at some of the items that we've taken already, meaning like the Japan DAC write-off in the first quarter due to expanded hedging, when I look at the assumption update, I see very minor GAAP and stat impacts, just given some of the things we've already dealt with. I think as we look out net-net, higher surrenders will most likely -- I'm hedging a little bit, but most likely be positive on a GAAP and stat basis. But we're in the midst of that study, but I generally don't expect any material surprises, charges as we complete that study, Mark.

Okay. And then just final one, one quick question on the quality of the Japan surrenders. I mean, I know that you're going to always be distorted towards -- the more out of the moneyness, but is it a cross-section across the book? Or is it really kind of mainly the stuff that's out of the money?

So when we look at the -- where the lapses are coming from, it really is once we see the account value exceed the guarantee. And I would say, it's very sensitive right at that -- right when we get to that 100% level. So that is where we see the increase a little bit, maybe, when they're in that 95% to 100%, but it really is when they cross that line. So as markets continue to improve, and we just see more and more of the book, and it's hitting that point, that's where we're seeing the surrenders come from.

Your next question comes from the line of Jay Cohen.

I'm with BofA Merrill Lynch. A couple of questions. For the third quarter guidance, Chris, you had mentioned a somewhat lower run rate for the performance of some of the alternative investment funds. Is that because these are reported on a lag, you have a sense of the performance already?

Yes, I would say a combination of that, and then just the early read into July's performance. So I would say July was pretty volatile and some of our alternative allocations actually went negative for July. So as we look really at the remaining 2 months, August and September, Jay, we just are heavily influenced by what we're seeing through June and July.

Got it, got it. Second question, on asbestos. You've been at this a long time, still taking material charges. Do you feel as if you are getting down to the short strokes? Do you have any more confidence that next year will be a much lower number than what we've seen this year?

Jay, it's Chris. I understand the question, and all I could tell you is when we study our process -- I mean, you know it's a comprehensive ground up process where we'd look at detailed coverage charge on our individual insurers and see the entire picture. We react to, I'll call it, the new data that we're seeing. And as I -- we wrote about in the queue, we're seeing just a little uptick in frequency compared to prior year, and again, modest severity. So there's no fundamental trends that are different this year. It's still a peripheral issue for us. I would say that plaintiff counsel has continued to be expansive in some of their theories. So as I really sit here, honestly, and look at, I'll call it, our reserves, look at our survival ratios, I mean, I feel good about what we'd reacted to this year and what we're seeing and we've made our best estimate. But as you know, it's awful hard to predict where this is going to go 2, 3 years out. And all I could tell you is, well, we do our best job every year and make the appropriate adjustments that we see are needed.

Your next question comes from the line of John Nadel with Sterne Agee. John M. Nadel - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: Two quick questions. I realize there's so much that goes into the calculation of a market consistent approach. But recognizing that the statutory accounting gets in the way, the reserves in Japan, the hedges in the U.S., that sort of thing, can you give us some sense given the significant surrender activity, as well as the reduction in the moneyness? Can you give us some sense for percentage-wise, maybe how much you think the market consistent value of the VA blocks increased?

John, it's Chris. I understand your point. Again, I think the context is, as we explained in Investor Day, particularly in Japan, that we are really sort of market-neutral at that point for Japan. So as our hedging losses -- as we hedge, I mean, the hedging losses are virtually offset entirely by gains in our MCV. And as we looked at results this quarter, that pattern, all the -- exactly the same. So that our hedging programs, as I said, are working as designed. We're hedging the economics. We took risk off the table completely in Japan. And that's a change from the first quarter where we were still under our tail hedge program. So the losses might seem large, but I can tell you that it was virtually offset by an increase in our MCV. John M. Nadel - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: That's helpful. And then the second question I have for you is just thinking about the third quarter guidance maybe relative to second quarter results, and most specifically just thinking about non-cat weather. It seems to me that you're either building in, maybe it's just some seasonality, maybe it's some normalization of non-cat weather, but it seems like it's material. You mentioned a favorable or somewhat favorable non-cat weather in 2Q. I was just hoping you could maybe quantify for us or give us some sense for how much non-cat weather is playing into the guidance in 3Q versus 2Q?

John, as I just roll forward, I'll call it, second quarter to the third quarter, I think the 2 big items are lower partnership alternative returns and lower Talcott earnings. I think if I look at Doug's book of business in Commercial, I don't see that much seasonality. I think Andy probably has a little bit more with driving patterns, weather patterns. So I would say that there's some, but I wouldn't describe it as ordinarily immaterial. The more seasonalities in the second quarter with obviously a higher cats, and you saw our cat load for the quarter. So it's me, it's Talcott and it's just lower partnership returns which, again, we're reacting to data that we've seen through July here.

Your next question comes from the line of Brian Meredith with UBS.

Just a couple of quick questions here. First, I'm just curious, the impact of the ESV program here going forward on Talcott results, should we see that largely go away in the third quarter? Or when is that going to start going away, that $23 million?

Brian, I think in my guidance and hopefully on the slide, I know it is. We described the ESV expenses for the third quarter estimated to be lower at $7 million after tax.

Okay. And will that continue to kind of run down at that trend? Do you think in the fourth quarter is that better?

Yes. Again, it's -- I think Beth expects. And she could describe it, the take rate at 30%. Yes, we see the sort of -- a dissipation of that take rate, so we don't think it's going to increase material -- materially going forward. So $5 million, $3 million a quarter probably -- is probably a better number going forward.

Great. And then Andy hasn't talked -- a quick question for Andy. On the questions, Andy, at looking at the underwriting expense, they've been dropping at about 5% a quarter for the last couple of quarters in your area, is that something we should continue to see going forward? Or is there something unusual happening in the first half? André A. Napoli: Brian, it's Andy. Thanks. Yes, so you saw a 1 point improvement on a year-over-year basis in the quarter. I would say about 1/3 of that is sustainable going forward. The rest of it was sort of one-timers around timing and some other things. But it's an area that we pay really strict attention to, but I would say 1/3 of that is sustainable.

Your next question comes from the line of Chris Giovanni with Goldman Sachs.

I guess first question for you, just following up on the ESV program, the higher lapses in Japan and all. Certainly, I think, the pace is above what many of us have thought. I'm wondering if it at all changes kind of the leverage you would be considering in terms of accelerating the runoff of the block.

Well, certainly, Chris, it's an important variable. As Chris Swift said, just a few moments ago, as we look at the business, we're going to monitor both the U.S. and Japan lapse rates very closely. And we are positioned -- I would describe as, largely unchanged. We're going to do what's in the best interest of shareholders, whether -- and watching lapse rates will be a part of that, and exploring potential permanent transfer of the Japan book, in particular, is something we'll explore as well. So having said that as a high-level comment, I'll -- if Beth has anything to add, I encourage her to do so.

No, Liam, I think you said it very well. Our view of the ways that we look to manage this block have not changed, and we'll continue to look at solutions that are in the best interest of shareholders.

Okay. And then I just wanted to see if you guys had any comments on any potential impacts from a regulatory standpoint on some of the recent topics that have been out there around maybe your captive implications from new derivative rules. And then lastly, any backlash from the ESV programs that seem to be coming on more frequently from other carriers as well?

Chris, I'll cover the first 2. Beth can maybe comment upon the ESV. So the simple answer is there's really no backlash. There really isn't anything going on with our captives. We got rid of one related to the life business. We have White River, which is our Vermont onshore captive that follows USVA accounting rules, so I think it's pretty straightforward. I think all the derivative actions, as far as Dodd-Frank, we're adopting. There's really no material impact on liquidity or any issues with those related to derivatives. Beth?

Yes, on your last comment, no, we do not -- have not seen any issues that relate to regulators with the activities that we have underway. Our process, I think, is very transparent. And we continue to be very clear with our policyholders as to what their options are, and we will continue to do that.

Your next question comes from the line of Jimmy Bhullar with JPMorgan. Jamminder S. Bhullar - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Some of my questions were answered. But on the Group Benefits business, can you talk about how far along you are in your repricing of the disability block? And what the environment is like in terms of what competitors are doing? And then secondly, on commercial auto, you've had several quarters of adverse development. Maybe if you could just give us some insight on what's going on there?

Sure, Jimmy, this is Doug. Let's start on disability and just give you a sense on where that cycle is. We started repricing the disability book in the early part of 2011. But I would say probably more the second quarter into the third quarter did it pick up quite a bit of steam, which is why I made the comment today that the January 2014 block really does largely complete that cycle. So we're working, as you know, in the midst of that as we speak. And hopeful that we'll see a continued rational environment, which is how I described kind of the marketplace we're competing in today with Group. In the commercial auto space, we have seen some dynamics of severity and weakness in performance across really our middle and small books, and have been working aggressively on those strategies, if you will. Obviously, I've talked a lot about the program space, and those reiterating actions are well underway. But it's an area that has caught our attention, and I would say for the last year or so, we've really spent a lot of time focused there. And I feel like our behavior is clearly in line with improving trends that we're starting to see. And also the fact that we are, state-by-state, looking at our rate adequacy in certain places taking rate, we're moving our rate to the extent we need to move. Jamminder S. Bhullar - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Has the development been more concentrated in a certain region or certain customer group?

No. Certainly, the development has been concentrated in our program group. I think it's more of a go-forward look at the trends coming at us and making sure that we're out in front of those trends from a pricing perspective, that are margins are improving in auto the same way they are across other lines of business.

Your last question comes from the line of Randy Binner with FBR Capital Markets. Randy Binner - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: I just had a quick question. I think this is best for Doug, and it has to do with worker's compensation. I know that's been an area that you've been working on from a pricing and kind of a risk-reduction perspective and it's worked very well, but the top line growth is still low, as some of the other questioners kind of pointed out. And so I'm wondering now that you're expanding margins in workers' comp and the economy is getting better, which is kind of a driver of the risk in workers' comp, but you might think about increasing your appetite again there, especially in a state like California.

So Randy, the workers' comp question is a complicated one, and I would just ask you to think about the different dynamics across our markets. In the case of Small Commercial, where we're clearly a leader, our rate adequacies and our performance has been excellent. We look forward and still see tremendous opportunity. And so as we grew in the quarter, I feel good about the quarter and good about our returns. In the middle, we've made material changes, and our performance has improved greatly. And I would describe the overall adequacy of the product and the opportunities as much enhanced today versus where they would have been a year ago and certainly 2 years ago. And one of the reasons that we grew in the quarter is that we're feeling slightly better about the rate adequacies across that overall book, including comp. So yes, we'll be looking at opportunities moving forward. We're clearly looking at those opportunities on an all lines basis, where comp is a part of it, but not the only product we'll be offering. And I feel good about our opportunities as we get those competencies really lined up and well in good shape to compete in the marketplace effectively. Randy Binner - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: And is there any commentary you can give us on the states? I know that you've gotten smaller in California, in particular. Is that a place where you might look to be more competitive again on package?

So there's several key states. Obviously, the big 4 or 5 are states that we spend a lot of time on, California, New York, Texas, et cetera. But all those states have their own nuances. And I would just point out, in the case of New York State, with what looks like an improved workers' comp pricing filing coming through. We're feeling better about the opportunity for us to do a little bit more in New York. So all those states have very state-specific strategies. Their class strategies are overlaid across the states, and I think it would be a little bit unfair for me to characterize across the top in terms of exactly California. But we're feeling much better about the adequacy and the performance of our book and feel like we're clearly a little bit more in an offensive zone than we have been over the last couple of years. Randy Binner - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: Just one follow-up on comp. With the New York charge, is that -- I mean, should we think of that as being a kind of a nonrecurring item?

That's certainly the way we think about it. Yes, we looked at our histories. I think you know the law changed, and we put up the $80 million to deal with what we think will be the impact for our understanding of essentially the fact that 25-A goes away.

Thank you, everyone, for joining us today. We appreciate your interest in The Hartford. And we are here at The Hartford this afternoon to follow up with any additional questions you might have. Thank you and have a good day.

That concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect.