Thank you for holding, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to Alliant Energy's Yearend and Fourth Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. AT this time, all lines are in a listen-only mode and today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to your host, Susan Gille, Manager of Investor Relations at Alliant Energy.

Good morning. I would like to thank all of you on the call and on the webcast for joining us today. We appreciate your participation. With me here today are Pat Kampling, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; Tom Hanson, Senior Vice President and CFO; and Robert Durian, Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller; as well as other members of the Senior Management Team. Following prepared remarks by Pat and Tom, we will have time to take questions from the investment community. We issued a news release last night announcing Alliant Energy's yearend and fourth quarter 2015 earnings, affirmed 2015 earnings guidance and provided updated 2016 through 2019 capital expenditure guidance. This release, as well as supplemental slides that will be referenced during today's call, are available on the investor page of our website at alliantenergy.com. Before we begin, I need to remind you the remarks we make on this call and our answers to your questions include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks that could cause actual results to be materially different. Those risks include, among others, matters discussed in Alliant Energy's press release issued last night and in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements. In addition, this presentation contains non-GAAP financial measures. The reconciliation between non-GAAP and GAAP measures are provided in the earnings release, which are available on our website at alliantenergy.com. At this point I'll turn the call over to Pat.

Thank you, Sue. Good morning and thank you for joining us for our yearend earnings call. I'll begin with an overview of 2015 performance and then provide an update on our forecasted capital expenditures and rate base. I'll also share the progress made in transforming our generation fleet, modernizing our electric system and expanding our natural gas system. I'll then turn the call over to Tom to provide details on our 2015 results and 2016 guidance as well as review our regulatory calendar. I am pleased to report we've had another solid year achieving a $3.57 midpoint of our November 2015 guidance range when adding back to negative temperature impact of $0.08 per share to the non-GAAP earnings of $3.49 per share. Our 2015 non-GAAP temperature normalized earnings reflect an increase of over 5% from comparable 2014 earnings as shown on Slide 2. The temperatures of late 2015 did impact our actual yearend results. For the first 10 months of 2015, our financial results were basically temperature neutral, but the one winter we experienced, especially in December resulted in a negative $0.08 per share variance in 2015 earnings. This was quite the opposite for 2014 where we experienced a $0.09 per share positive variance to earnings. Therefore, temperature swings did lead to a significant year-over-year variance of $0.17 per share. We also issued an updated capital expenditure plan for 2016 through 2019, totaling $5 billion as shown on Slide 3. In addition, we have provided a walk from the previous 2016 to 2019 capital expenditure plan to our current plan on Slide 4. As you can see, the $260 million increase in our forecasted 2016 through 2019 capital expenditure plan is driven primarily from accelerated investments from our electric and gas distribution systems. The December 2015 extension of bonus depreciation…

Good morning, everyone. We released 2015 earnings last evening with our non-GAAP earnings from continuing operations of $3.49 per share and our GAAP earnings from continuing operations of $3.38 per share. The non-GAAP to GAAP differences are due to a $0.07 per share charge resulting from the sale of IPOs Minnesota electric and gas distribution assets and a $0.04 per share charge resulting from the approximately 2% of employees accepting voluntary separation packages as we continue focusing on managing cost for our customers. Comparisons between 2015 and 2014 earnings per share are detailed on Slide 5, 6 and 7. Retail, electric, temperature normalized sales increased approximately 1% or $0.04 per share at IPO and WP&L between 2015 and 2014. This excludes the impacts of the Minnesota sale. The industrial segment continues to be the largest sales growth driver year-over-year. The 2015 results include an adjustment to our ATC earnings to reflect an anticipated decision from FERC expected to lower ATCs current authorized ROE of 12.2%. We reserve $0.06 per share for 2015 reflecting an anticipated all in ROE of 10.82%. This is a result of the FERC Administrative Law Judge's initial decision issued in December 2015. Now let’s review our 2016 guidance. In November, we issued our consolidated 2016 earnings guidance range of $3.60 to $3.90. The key drivers for the 5% growth in earnings relate to infrastructure investment such as the Edgewater 5 and Lansing emission control equipment and higher AFUDC related to the construction of the Marshalltown generating station. The 2016 guidance range assumes normal weather and modest retail electric sales increases of approximately 1% for IPO and WP&L excluding the impacts of the Minnesota sale. Also the earnings guidance is based upon the impacts of IPOs and WP&Ls previously announced retail electric base rate settlements. The IPO…

Thank you, sir. [Operator Instructions] Alliant Energy's Management will take as many questions as they can within the one hour timeframe for this morning’s call. [Operator Instructions] We will take our first question from Brian Russo with Ladenburg Thalmann.

Hi. Good morning.

Good morning, Brian.

Would you be able to possibly quantify the amount of equity you might need to help finance the riverside expansion?

Brian, as we said, our objective is to continue to maintain the targeted equity levels at both IPL and WP&L. So you can assume that with largest project here at WP&L that we will have incremental equity needs. We'll be sharing specifics as we issue guidance in later years, but what’s important are targeted incremental equity is included in our forward-looking guidance. So the delusion is reflected in our 5% to7% targeted growth rate.

Okay. Great and it looks like '15 over '14 and '16 over '15 you got to kind of gravitating towards the lower end of the 5% to 7% EPS CAGR. Is there something structural there that as rate base grows its harder to get in the middle or the higher end or is it just a function of lumpiness of the CapEx?

Yes, what really is Brian is that our sales forecast has come down a little bit. Originally we were about 2% at Wisconsin 1% in Iowa. Now we see it as overall 1% and that's what's really brought us down to more to the midpoint of the range, not to the higher end of the range.

Okay. And just to clarify, fourth quarter weather versus normal is negative $0.08?

That’s correct.

Okay. And what quarters did those two charges occur? Were they in the fourth quarter or earlier?

The third quarter we recorded the Minnesota charge and I believe second quarter was Minnesota's charge and then the third quarter was the charge associated with voluntary separation package. So second third quarter. Sorry Brian.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

We'll take our next question from Andrew Weisel with Macquarie Capital.

Thanks. Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, Andrew.

First question on the CapEx update. Help me understand is the $260 million net increase over the years, is that pulling forward from the existing 10-year CapEx plan or would that be incremental to the $10.6 billion that you've forecast through 2020 for?

Yes so this is -- it's incremental to what we had shown you in the 10-year plan.

Okay great. Next question I have is on a lot of the announcements you made on Riverside, I believe if I heard you correct, you said that the cash associated with incremental Columbia CapEx would be roughly offset by Muniz exercising the option for 55 megawatts, is that right and is there a scenario where you have one but not the other?

Andrew that is correct that they should offset each other as they both have been. We're not revising the CapEx until we know exactly what’s going to happen with the gracious options at this point, but the additional capital for Columbia would be offset by the co-ops purchasing Riverside. But it is possible that one of the options could occur without the other. They’re very independent of each other.

Okay. Could that be big enough to move the needle on equity needs?

I don’t think so. We're talking capital of under $100 million here.

Okay. Great. Then lastly I might be reading the subtleties of the wording a little too closely, but in the press release, you added -- you have the expression striving to achieve the projected earnings growth rate. And the last question you just talked about the lower sales growth. Any reason to think that the next years might be toward the low end of that range or do you still feel comfortable with the midpoint through the construction and maybe just commentary on how that -- how the outlook looks over the next several years.

Yeah, no, we're very confident and in keep in mind the reason we're gravitating towards the lower end right now is that when rate freezes and the sales forecast change from the timing you agree to rate freezes, but we're still very confident with our plan going forward especially as we enter rate cases about jurisdictions.

Great, thank you very much. I appreciate the detail.

Sure.

We'll take our next question from Steve Fleishman with Wolfe Research.

Hi, good morning.

Good morning.

Couple questions just to follow up on the one with you mentioned on Riverside and Columbia and the co-ops how about also with Wisconsin energy and MGE just how do we think about both the impact of what they decide and when they likely decide on whether they're going to take more Riverside and share some of Colombia.

Yeah. So the Colombia is -- that change is happening during the Riverside construction that's between now and 2019. The purchase option is 2020 and beyond and that's really not in our CapEx plans. That's something we're going to need to monitor. We'll be working with the other utilities as they develop their resource plans as well. But that's not something that we can actually estimate the probability of right now.

So that would be after the plant fully done and operating basically.

Except for the 55 megawatts for co-ops, that's during construction.

Okay. And just the growth rate the 5 to 7 is that through 2018 or 2019 to follow the CapEx period?

Yes, it does. Yes, the CapEx period Steve, that's right.

So it's 2019?

Yes.

Okay. And then a question on the -- as I'm sure you're aware, we had a recent acquisition announcement of ITC and you have the transmission involvement there I'm just curious if you're likely to get involved and have any issues with that transaction or any intervention?

Steve, we wish we're analyzing the transaction as you can imagine. We're very large customer of ITC. So this is of quite interest to us as you can imagine. So we've had open dialogue with the folks at ITC and we just plan on having the open dialogue and we'll figure out exactly what our position is in their dockets, they have several dockets over the next several months.

Is you intention just to file at FERC or do you think Iowa has a role at all?

We're still looking at what the different options are at this point Steve.

Okay. Thank you.

Our next question comes from [Raza with L&T Capital].

Thank you. Just a quick question, on the rate base that you commented on earlier, is the deferred tax portion of rate base going up while the entire rate base total phase constant versus your prior guidance. Is that the best way to think about it?

I would characterize it that the NOLs along with the additional CapEx are offsetting the effect of the bonus depreciation.

The earnings base stays constant?

Yes.

Yeah, I would say the net rate base remains constant.

Net rate base, okay and then I think you commented on it a little bit earlier, but this incremental CapEx that you added, how does that affect financing plans over this period? Does it potentially lead to little more equity or not or how should we think about that?

The modest amounts that we're adding will not significantly change our equity needs. As Pat made reference, some of this is due to the timing of Riverside. Some of that cost is being pushed out and then we do have the opportunity to backfill as Pat mentioned with some of the electric gas distribution. So it's not going to be materially changing any of our financing needs.

And then the load growth you talked about, I'm sorry if I missed this earlier, but what is the forecasted load growth for your planning period?

Sure. We're using 1% now to book utilities. But I would say the growth is out of the 1%. It's higher in the industrial sector and lower in the residential sector.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Sure. You're welcome.

We'll take our next question from Jay Dobson with Wunderlich

Hey good morning, Pat and good morning, Tom. Question just to follow-up on Raza's question. So the rate base with the change in bonus depreciation and CapEx is the expectation are flat. So the earnings growth will be flat. But it doesn't really change your tax position. So cash flow we would anticipate would in fact be negatively impacted by the rise in CapEx, which facilitates the increase modest as you just said Tom, increase in financing needs. Do I have it right?

In the near term, yeah because when we had our previous forecast assuming no depreciation or potential bonus depreciation we were looking at making modest tax payments beginning in '17 and '18 and now with the extension, we won't have that, but that delta in terms of cash is not that significant certainly in the '17 and '18 timeframe.

Right. Okay, great. And then earned ROEs at the utilities subs what were those in '15 on sort of a non-weather adjusted basis understanding that weather is going to.

Yes we definitely earned our authorized return with [them] which was about 10.4 and then in Iowa is around the around 10% again excluding the Minnesota sale though.

Got it. And those are weather adjusted or -- so that would reflect that $0.08 adjustment or maybe more like a $3.57 number. I know it's not fair to say that on a jurisdictional basis but…

Right I would say it's all in including the weather.

Got you. Okay fine. And then last one on trended, the transportation segment just what you see going forward there obviously a tough year in 2015 for that segment though it developed throughout the year. So not a great surprise but you look forward through '16 and beyond just volume trends you're seeing.

Trend it's actually going through our strategic planning process. Right now looking at other opportunities and where they can expand their current footprint. So I'm very optimistic about some possibilities that they're looking at right now, but they've been very proactive knowing the reduction in their business these are really basically cold transportation. They're looking forward at some other opportunities for them right now, some more to come on that.

Got it. But if we're thinking about '16 and it's probably within a broad range of guidance would you -- we certainly couldn't get back to the 2014 level of earnings from [Krandex but] probably do see some improvement with some of the strategic initiatives there we're reviewing currently, is that fair.

I would say it might be beyond '16. It would be hard to execute on projects for '16, but definitely going into '17.

Got it, no that's fair. Thanks so much Tom thank you.

Sure.

We'll take our next question from Paul Patterson with Glenrock Associates.

Good morning, guys.

Good morning, Paul.

Just what was the 2015 weather adjusted sales year-over-year? What was the growth rate?

It was 1% in both of our two utilities. Again that's adjusting for the Minnesota sale.

Okay. And then the sales forecast is now 1% what was it previously I apologize.

Sure previously and this goes back to year ago, it was 2% Wisconsin and 1% in Iowa and now it's 1% in both jurisdictions.

Okay. And then the incremental CapEx, I'm not exactly -- this is incremental above, this isn’t bringing it forward from what I understand. This is new stuff. What is that and what's driving that?

We have provided a slide in our supplemental slides that kind of highlight that but I would put it basically in two big buckets. The first is dealing with our electric area in terms of certainly continuing to replace existing distribution lines. So it's really trying to upgrade the distribution system and we also have then some modest gas expansion as well.

Okay. And I guess so I'm wondering though is that if this is incremental over a 10-year forecast that would indicate that something is driving those. I saw the slide, I guess what I'm wondering is what's kind of driving this. Is it something forward that would indicate that you guys see some new need and I am just wondering what that is or if there is one, what I am missing?

Yeah, I would just say that we're actually just taking the opportunity to expand some of these projects. We've had a replacement program for our overhead and underground system for years and we're just really increasing that taking the opportunity now to increase that and where we evaluate after this five-year program because actually for the next five years and if we want to accelerate even more in the second five-year time frame and again our customer's expectations are in liability and resilience you just keep increasing.

Okay.

This is our first stage of looking at that and putting good dollars to work for our customers.

And then just the Kewaunee power plant, I believe that the Wisconsin has halted implementation of that. Is there any impact that you guys see of that or how are you guys dealing with that served just on a high level. Any thoughts we should have on that?

Yes, at a high level, yes the safest [comment] is that they're not going to put any resources to work on any clean power plant implementation. However, the utilities are still working together to try to understand their own circumstances into the plan. So we're working very proactively with the other utilities and we'll just have to see how this plays out in the State.

Okay. My other questions have been answered. Thanks so much.

Sure. You're welcome.

And there are no further questions. I would like to turn the call -- we actually have a follow-up question from Brian Russo with Ladenburg Thalmann.

Yes, hi. Thanks for the follow-up. Just can you remind us what the base year and adjusted EPS is to formulate the 5% to 7% CAGR?

Brian, we update that every single year. You would want it, our non-GAAP temperature adjusted so similar to what we did in '14. So you would want to rebase that now that we reported our actuals for 2015. So the base for purposes that calculation would be $3.57.

Okay. Thanks a lot.

And there are no further questions at this time. I would like to turn the conference back over presenters for any additional or closing remarks.

With no more questions, this concludes our call. A replay will be available through March 01, 2016, at 888-203-1112 for U.S. and Canada, or 719-457-0820 for international. Callers should reference conference ID 8244179. In addition, an archive of the conference call and a script of the prepared remarks we made on the call will be available on the Investor section of the company's website later today. We thank you for your continued support of Alliant Energy and feel free to contact me with any follow up questions.

And that concludes today's presentation. Thank you for your participation.