Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the NRG Energy Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Matt Orendorff, Managing Director of Investor Relations. Please begin.

Thank you, Latoya. Good morning, and welcome to NRG's second quarter 2015 earnings call. This morning's call is being broadcast live over the phone and via webcast, which can be located on the Investors Relations section of our website at www.nrg.com, under Presentations & Webcasts. Because this call will be limited to one hour, we ask that you limit yourself to only one question with one follow-up question. As this is the earnings call for NRG Energy, any statements made on this call that may pertain to NRG Yield will be provided from NRG's perspective. Please note that today's discussion may contain forward-looking statements, which are based on assumptions that we believe to be reasonable as of this date. Such statements are subject to the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. We urge everyone to review the Safe Harbor statement provided in today's presentation as well as the risk factors contained in our SEC filings. We undertake no obligation to update these statements as a result of future events, except as required by law. During this morning's call, we will refer to both GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures of the company's operating and financial results. For the information regarding our non-GAAP financial measures and reconciliations to the most recently comparable GAAP measures, please refer to today's press release and this presentation. With that, I will now turn the call over to David Crane, NRG's President and Chief Executive Officer. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you, Matt, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us an hour earlier than our usually 9:00 scheduled time. As always, joining me today are Kirk Andrews, our Chief Financial Officer, and Mauricio Gutierrez, our Chief Operating Officer and President of NRG Business. Both…

Thank you. And the first question is from Dan Eggers of Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Dan L. Eggers - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Hey. Good morning, guys. Just can you maybe help us understand, I guess, when we should expect the board to think about authorization of expansion of the share buyback program? And then that $400 million that Kirk laid out in his slide, how you guys are looking at using that capital? And when do you think you might come to terms with what to do with it this year?

Kirk, do you want to...? Kirkland B. Andrews - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Well, as to the $400 million, the second half of your question, Dan, as I indicated, that is available for further allocation in 2015. We have, including the anticipated impact from the dropdowns of yield, over $250 million remaining repurchase capacity, which obviously gives us the ability to utilize that towards share repurchase over the balance of the year. As we continue to execute on those share repurchases, we would look at that remaining $400 million as additional capital allocation as we complete those share repurchases either towards additional growth CapEx or, if compelling, to augment our share repurchases subject to approval by the board. It's also, of course, available to fund the remaining growth capital, which, pursuant to our conversation in the first quarter, is still relatively robust in 2016 in similar amounts as the 2015 numbers across the 70/20/10 complex. Dan L. Eggers - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Okay. And I guess even if you look at – as you guys showed the mid-teens free cash flow yield on this year's numbers, how you rank out the return profile of other investments you're making, whether it be on the more green side of the business, the conventional side, versus the free cash flow yield being offered in the stock particularly as you look out over the forward years where that number seems to get bigger? Kirkland B. Andrews - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Well, I think our approach certainly through returns on any capital allocation towards growth investments is done on a risk-adjusted return basis. So when we look at contracted assets, which are obviously earmarked for yield, certainly they reflect the lower cost of capital as yield. But specifically and looking at more conventional traditional investments that comport with kind of the core generation portfolio, we do, and then our discussions with the board are informed by our current share price, which I've said in past conversations represents an opportunity cost. And so we look and proactively compare the risk-adjusted return on our own portfolio as represented by the opportunity to deploy capital towards repurchases, relative to the risk-adjusted return we see in similar investments on growth investments, and that's exactly the way we think about that comparison on an apples-to-apples basis on growth investments versus repurchasing or expanding repurchases of our own stock. Dan L. Eggers - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Okay. So the view is that the investments you're making are risk-adjusted as compelling as buying back share at the margin today? Kirkland B. Andrews - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Yes. Dan L. Eggers - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Okay. Thank you, guys.

Thank you. And the next question is from Stephen Byrd of Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Stephen Calder Byrd - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Good morning. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning, Stephen. Stephen Calder Byrd - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: I wanted to talk about Texas a bit. Mauricio, you had mentioned just given the very low prices that we're currently seeing that, over time, NRG wouldn't hesitate to make the right decisions for shareholders, but you also noted you've got an excellent hedge position. When you think about the pain caused by low prices, there are obviously others that have generation assets in the state. Many of those assets are not in full environmental compliance. When you think about sort of the pain and how that may shake out, how do you think about your portfolio relative to the competition in the state? And sort of over time, would it be likely that others would effectively feel that pain first and there'd be some more rationalization or how should we think about that? Mauricio Gutierrez - Chief Operating Officer & Executive Vice President: Hey. Good morning, Stephen. I think as I said on my remarks, and I will re-characterize it again. Our portfolio – the scale of our portfolio, the size of our plants, they are environmentally controlled, and they're in the low cost of the stack. We think that we are very – pretty well-positioned to weather this low commodity price scenario, and we expect to see other portfolios succumb to these very low prices. Just look at the second quarter as an example. I think you would agree with me that prices were significantly low with gas tinkering around $2.50 per MMbtu. I mean, our generation was…

Thank you. The next question is from Greg Gordon of Evercore ISI. Your line is open.

Thanks. Good morning. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning, Greg.

One ticky-tack question. The free cash flow before growth number hasn't changed despite the surge in spending in California because there's a reduction in what you're – in one of the other line items which was – and so, can you explain what that is, that offset? I'm looking for it in the slides here. Bear with me a second. It was with distribution to non-controlling interests. Sorry. Kirkland B. Andrews - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Yeah. There is a slight change in distributions to non-controlling. It's just some of that has to do with timing. Some of it has to do with one of the tax equity facilities that we inherited as a part of the EME transaction. But overall, in 2015, in particular relative to, let's say, 2014, the benefits we get from the reduction in net working capital, in particular as you'll recall, we built greater inventories specifically on the oil side, as well as on the coal side moving into 2015. As we move throughout the year, we benefit from the fact that we have less investments in working capital and, in fact, a reduction in working capital, and that helps to serve to offset some of that increase in Home Solar cash flow.

Great. And, David, I just wanted to ask you a bigger picture question. It's on a lot of people's minds given the significant decline in the share price. I personally think that there's dis-synergies for doing some sort of aggressive corporate separation to reposition the company to be more attractive to investors who want a pure-play green-co versus, let's say a pure-play brown-co? I think the sum of the parts are greater than their whole. So I agree with your perspective on it, but how long do you wait before you sort of say, look, the market is not realizing the value and even though there are just synergies to creating pure play, that's the way we need to go? David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Well, Greg, I mean, you sort of hit the question on the head. The first thing I would say is: I agree with you that there is, while it may not be immediately apparent there, there is actually industrial logic to keeping the conventional side of our business to get the renewable side, together with the renewable side. And I tried to allude to that in my comments. The world of energy is trending green at a very decisive pace, but the one thing that trumps being green for everybody is making sure that the lights stay on, making sure that you have electricity. And the best companies that can do that, given the fundamental intermittency of renewable power, companies are doing both conventional and doing green. So the industrial logic to me favors the path that NRG is on. But we are a public company, and we suffer whether you call it the conglomerate discount or the constant refrain that we hear that we are more complex than some…

Thank you, David. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you.

Thank you. And the next question is from Michael Lapides of Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Michael J. Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Yeah. Hey, guys. One question, just trying to think through the hedging detail you provide in the back of the slide deck. You've basically increased the amount of hedges kind of pro rata but decreased significantly the hedged price. Is there a scenario where you would just say, you know what, I think the market's wrong; I'm willing to stay a lot more open than maybe I am currently. And kind of taking more of a directional view relative to continue hedging at what seemed like depressed pricing? David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Michael, it's a good question and I can always count on you to try and ask another hedging question that you know Mauricio and Chris won't answer with any specificity. But nonetheless, here they go, not answering your question.

Yes. Sadly, actually, I had an answer to the question. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Oh, you have an answer.

Yeah. Not to throw a wrench into that; now I don't know – okay. So what you have to think of, Michael, is, first, yes, of course, we take an opportunistic view on the hedging and we will leave things open if we think it's not priced very well. But in direct answer to your question, some of the hedging that happened between Q1 and Q2, you have to remember – yeah, between Q1 and Q2, you have to remember that we have assets in a lot of different markets, and some of the markets are higher priced than others. So to the extent that we are hedging in areas which are not as highly priced, you're going to see the average hedge price come down. Mauricio Gutierrez - Chief Operating Officer & Executive Vice President: And Michael, just, I mean, keep in mind that the hedging decisions are not just based on a directional view on the commodities. It's also a combination of the free cash flow profile that we want to have and, honestly, the absolute level of CapEx. So in the next two years we're executing a significant amount of environmental retrofits and repositioning our portfolio to benefit from very positive market developments. We felt compelled to really have more visibility in these two years. But make no mistake, I mean, if – when you go out 2017 and beyond, we're very open and I think that basically tells you a little bit our point of view in terms of the future of commodity prices. Michael J. Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Understood. One quick environmental CapEx question. We've seen one or two of your peers, when talking about long run environmental CapEx, they kind of have the Post-MATS skip in the 2017-2018 timeframe but then…

Thank you. And the next question is from Julien Dumoulin-Smith of UBS. Your line is open.

Hi. Good morning. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning, Julien.

So, first quick question, maybe to follow up on Greg a little bit. As you're thinking about the potential to break apart this business, what is the gating item? Is it really going to be a decision around how the Street perceives the company or is it more around reaching maturation in the business itself? So I suppose the key question here is, given the cash burn associated with NRG Home this year, how do you think about the spin of a company that has cash burn this year and prospectively ramps up? What's the ideal – how much – what's the ideal timing? How long do we need to wait? David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Well, the specific question about the cash burn, Kirk will add to that. But I mean, the other factors you mentioned, what are we waiting for or what's more important in terms of timing, the industrial logic or Wall Street receptivity or lack of receptivity to the company as it is currently structured. It's really hard to weigh those two since they are both important variables. I'd say there is actually a third variable, Julien, which is how receptive is the company to, let's call it, a green NRG based on what we see with other companies out there. Because, obviously, there are pure play solar companies out there which sometimes seem to be in great favor and other times it would be seen in less favor. So it's really those three factors that we have to weigh all at once. I mean, for now, I mean, from our perspective, the key is to get ourselves in a position where we have the option to do something like that in fairly short order and then see how it goes. In terms of the impact of the cash burn on the overall decision, Kirk, do you want to specifically address that? Kirkland B. Andrews - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Well, what I would say is, as I mentioned in response to Greg Gordon's question earlier, that is: we are focused on the same thing with the Home Solar business with NRG that we would believe any pure play investors should be focused on. And that's demonstrating the ability to monetize those leases at a compelling premium that meets and exceeds the amount of operating cash flow drag we have there. So we are focused on building those volumes and demonstrating the ability that that pace of installations is on a trajectory and a run rate that will allow us to demonstrate the ability to do exactly that, and that is have the proceeds from monetization exceed the operating cash flow so that the comprehensive cash flow story is a positive and growing one.

Excellent. And perhaps the follow-up, just to think about the investment, the $175 million in NRG Home, and both in terms of targets, how are you ramping as you think about the expansion in California? How does that jibe relative to what you discussed earlier this year at the Analyst Day? And then separately, related to that, to what extent is your NRG Home disclosures and prospective cash flows coming from these leases somewhat similar? And can we think about it in terms of guiding forward to peers in terms of the cash flow generated by these leases (46:23)? Kirkland B. Andrews - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Well, on the second component of that question, Julien, if I understand you correctly, partially because we believe given that NRG, as I went through on the final slide of my presentation, is all about free cash flow, that's part of the reason why we have focused on telling the story around Home Solar as a comprehensive positive cash flow story along the lines of what I just discussed. That is, the receipt of proceeds from monetization of leases exceeding the operating cash flows is what we're focused on, rather than necessarily focusing on the residual value on a per-watt basis. And so that is the reason why we've kind of talked about things in that fashion. And as we move closer, and I'll ultimately give guidance in 2016, you should expect to see us provide you at least a more comprehensive view as we ramp into higher volumes in 2016 as to how that plays out in that positive cash flow story. I'm not sure if that answered completely your question. I may ask you to repeat the first part of it because I'm not sure I exactly followed what you're asking in the first piece of it, Julien.

Yeah. I simply asked: how are you doing relative to the targets you laid out at the Analyst Day given the decision to move into California? David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Well, what I would say, compared to where we were on Analyst Day, and, Kelcy, I don't know if you want to add to this, is as we disclosed on the last quarter call, I mean, when we were at Analyst Day, we gave sort of a target for the year. Since our business is an East Coast business that – which the strongest sales channel is door-to-door – we got off to a very slow start with the weather situation in the East. So I would say, in terms of achieving the total number of installations or bookings over the year that we talked about in the Analyst Day in January, it's probably too early to say whether we'll get fully where we wanted to get because it was a very ambitious goal. So to get there from where we are now is a long putt. But in terms of the rate of growth, our – by the end of second quarter on sort of a daily run rate, we were up 90% over the end of the first quarter. So we're sort of blowing and going in terms of our momentum. And that's really before hitting California. And so, California is upside to that. Kelcy, do you want to add to that?

No, I think what's been discussed here today is we are a growth business, positioned in this sophisticated corporation. And we're tasked with building the strongest and most sustainable Home Solar business with what's complete awareness for our position in the space with our pure play competitors. But really, we're resolved in building a long-term sustainable approach around some of the competitive advantages that we have and certainly the customer base that exists. I think the past year, what we've seen is the top tier has really come into focus. A year ago, if you said: who are the top tier players; there'd probably be double-digit companies that were vying to be included in that. Today, I think what you've seen is this top tier, which would be four or five companies, gain share, us included in that. And the rest of the space has moved backwards. So we're pleased with the success we have, which has mainly been built on our East Coast performance, and we're excited about a lot of the seeding and developments that we've done in half one, that we believe will deliver results. And that conviction is built on best months in business consecutively both June and July. So we have a lot to be optimistic about.

Great. Thank you. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from Steve Fleishman of Wolfe Research. Your line is open.

Yeah. Hi. Good morning. Just on the PJM auction and your conversions, do you still have flexibility to kind of adjust your conversion plan in the event the auction goes one way or the other, or are you kind of full bore no matter what? David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: The answer to that question, Steve, is the shortest answer I've ever given on a – is yes. We have flexibility. And you are right in assuming that the auction represents an important set of indicators for us. So, yes, you're right. The next month is important and decisions will be made based on what we see.

Okay. And then, just maybe, I apologize, one other question on the Home Solar. So just the actual individual contracts and leases that you're signing, just how is that – ignore the customer growth, et cetera. Just how are the pricing and returns relative to what you anticipated? Kirkland B. Andrews - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: From a returns perspective – it's Kirk. They are in line with our expectations. The dropdowns, for example, the best illustration is the dropdowns that we have achieved during the second quarter are consistent on those leases that we did drop down that were installed, with the overall guidance that we showed on aggregate proceeds relative to capital expenditures.

Okay. Okay. Thanks. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Okay. Thank you, Steve.

Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from Jonathan Arnold of Deutsche Bank. Your line is open.

Good morning. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Good morning, Jonathan.

My main question was asked. But I'd like just to follow-up on Home Solar, right? On your slide you say that what you are showing is where you've either installed or contracted to install. And one of your main competitors sort of called out the difference between installs and deployment and changed the basis of guidance this quarter. Can you just talk to what's the – how different would your number be if it was actual installs? And are you also seeing some challenges getting systems up and running when they're already on the roof, effectively? David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Well, Kelcy will certainly be answering the second part of that question. But I mean – and he probably will answer the first part of the question, too. But I mean it's a good question that we talk about here often because as you can imagine, when you're increasing your pace of sales, 90% by quarter-on-quarter, the difference between – and it's roughly – what, Kelcy, still somewhere between 70 and 100 days to full installation from booking. The number between bookings and installations is dramatically different by quarter. So do you want to start with the second half of this question and move backwards?

Yeah. What I can say is this also would be a California-centric topic. What you see in California is more market maturity with permit authorities and interconnection utilities. What you see on the East Coast beyond seasonality is some longer time lines. I think we fare well competitively as it refers to time, but we're committed to time cycle reduction. We used to – a year ago, I think you could say it would be at least 90 days. I think today you see a path to around 75 days is where we're living on timed install from signature to energization. And as California becomes a more material portion of our business and as we continue to focus on time cycle reductions, both those metrics will continue to improve. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: And just one thing to add to that, and, Kelcy, correct me if I'm wrong, but if you think about how long it takes to get solar energized on your roof from the time you order, there's almost no consumer decision in America that takes longer to create consumer gratification. So it's something that we are very focused on, and in fairness to the other people in our industry, they're very focused on it as well. But the single biggest delay within that period is beyond the control of the solar installer. It's the time that the utility takes to interconnect. And there's been some recent study of that in the press that indicates at least one East Coast utility that's the worst at getting systems energized. And so the more that a light is shined on the fact that that has a potential to hurt customer satisfaction, then I think that's important. I draw the analogy: it's like when you ask for the check at the restaurant and you're anxious to get home and they take half an hour to give you the opportunity to pay for your meal, it's very frustrating to the customer. So that's probably the main thing within the time cycle that we'd like to see shortened. And right now, it's beyond our control.

Just the pace of these kind of energized graphics sort of looks similar though. I guess that's, in essence, my question. Or is the lag sort of dampening the growth? David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: You mean, is this a real inhibitor to sales that when you -

The graph would look similar. It would trail about a quarter right now, so if you were to look at energized systems graphically, it would show similar to booking.

Sort of a 1,000 to 2,000 lag by the sound of it.

That's fair.

Okay. Thank you. David Whipple Crane - President, Chief Executive Officer & Director: Well, thank you. And Latoya, we're very close to the top of the hour. And so, I think we'll conclude the call here. Again, we appreciate everyone taking the time, starting an hour earlier, and we'll look forward to talking to you next quarter. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's program. You may now disconnect. Good day.