Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Brandy, and I am your event operator today. I would like to welcome everyone to today's conference, Public Service Enterprise Group Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call and Webcast. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session for members of the financial community. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded today, Friday, July 31, 2015, and will be available for telephone replay beginning at 1 PM Eastern today until 11:30 PM Eastern on August 7, 2015. It will also be available as an audio webcast on PSEG's corporate website at www.pseg.com. I would now like to turn the conference over to Kathleen Lally. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Brandy. Good morning. Thank you for participating in our earnings call this morning. As you are all aware, we released second quarter 2015 earnings statements earlier today. The release and attachments as mentioned are posted on our website at www.pseg.com, under the Investors section. We also have posted a series of slides that detail operating results by company for the quarter and the first half of the year. Our 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2015, is expected to be filed shortly. I won't go through the full disclaimer statement or the comments we have on the difference between operating, earnings, and GAAP results, however, as you know the earnings release and other matters that we will discuss in today's call contain forward-looking statements and estimates that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Although we may elect to update forward-looking statements from time-to-time, we specifically disclaim any obligation to do so even if our estimate changes unless, of course, we are required to do so. Our release contains adjusted non-GAAP operating earnings. Please refer to today's 8-K or other filings for a discussion of the factors that may cause results to differ from management's projections, forecasts and expectations and for a reconciliation of operating earnings to GAAP results. I'm now going to like to turn the call over to Ralph Izzo, Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Public Service Enterprise Group. And joining Ralph on the call is Caroline Dorsa, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. At the conclusion of their remarks, there will be time for your questions. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Thank you, Kathleen. And thank you, everyone, for joining us today. Earlier this morning, we reported operating earnings for the second quarter of 2015 of $0.57…

Your first question is from Daniel Eggers with Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your question. Dan L. Eggers - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Hey, good morning, guys. Can we just talk a little bit about the Keys plant and just your thought process on the capital allocation on that front, given the fact that you've looked at a variety of other brownfield type projects in generation that haven't passed muster from your cost of capital perspective? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah, Dan. So I think in general, we're somewhat cautious about injecting new supply into a market where demand isn't growing much. So most of the investments you've seen us make have been kind of upgrades to existing units, and we've talked a lot about (26:54) and replacement of existing units. This one is a little bit unique for us, in that A, it's not an existing asset, and B, it is a new development project. I think what makes this one a good fit for us is its location, it's in Southwestern MAAC, where we've seen some seasonal basis advantages. Number two, I think we're ahead of the market in terms of the future delivery of gas to that region, which will put a 6,400 heat rate unit in a very, very strong competitive position. And number three, this one went beyond the usual forecasting of forward price risk, and included an element of construction risk that we believe ourselves particularly well-suited to manage, given the project work we've done, both in power and in the utility, and how well that has all worked out. So for a combination of reasons, we were able to see clear to some value creation here that was different from other opportunities, where I can't believe…

The next question comes from Julien Dumoulin-Smith with UBS. Please go ahead with your question.

Hi, good morning. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning, Julien.

So, perhaps to follow-up on investment opportunities here. I'd be curious to – obviously we're moving forward or PJM is moving forward with Artificial Island at this point. I'd be curious to get your prospective on the future of FERC 1000 or FERC 1000-like investments in PJM. And specifically within that your views on the use of cost caps and just other mechanisms to be more "competitive," I suppose to what extent do you anticipate yourself and others continue to leverage those kinds of mechanisms to win as we saw with the Artificial Island example, and to what extent do you see that as impeding your ability or enhancing your ability to win, et cetera. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: So, it's interesting that I believe that PJM published an announcement that said that the identification of this project preceded the creation of Order 1000. So PJM did not feel obligated to achieve the strict terms of the tariff on Order 1000, which is a point that may be we would beg to differ on. Look, Julien, there is way to make this process look pretty. This was a painful process and I would like to chalk it up to the growing pains associated with Order 1000. My concern, and I've expressed this to FERC and to PJM, is that we may be heading for a ubiquitous dumbing down of the transmission system as opposed to robust solutions that have advantages over the long term. The cheapest solution in the short-term may not be the cheapest solutions of long term and I don't want to do get into a full-fledged debate over how you make comparisons across two projects. I still believe, based on everything that our engineering team has told us, that not only did we have a more robust solution, but we had a lower cost solution. So this is going to be challenging. I think efficient markets work when you have good information available to both suppliers and buyers and these are technically detailed, painful reviews done by a handful of assessors on the basis of a fairly robust set of bidders. It doesn't kind of lend itself to the transparency you see at the NYMEX on what's happening in gas markets. So I don't mean to give a speech, but it's showing some real challenges in terms of me having confidence that over the long term Order 1000 will yield a strong transmission system that won't be constantly second-guessed through a challenged – the quarters or more importantly over the long-term in the field as we head towards the least-cost solutions as opposed to the short-term least-cost solution.

Got it. And the complement – to complement that last question a little bit, PJM is talking about reducing their load forecast this cycle, given some adjustments for efficiency and solar et cetera. I'd be curious, does that impact your – A, your current spending plans, with B, your prospective plans when you are thinking about transmission, and obviously you guys are on the both sides of power and the wires business. What do you – how does that change your business at all, if you can elaborate? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Yes. So I think that PJM is still reviewing its re-forecasted load growth. And of course load growth is an important consideration in how one designs your delivery system. But don't underestimate this significant role played by the location of load and the location of supply in having to design the transmission system. I would contend, although I couldn't prove it to you in this call, that the reason why we've had such a strong need for transmission deployment is the fact that we no longer have an integrated system where utility planners go from generation all the way to the meter and PJM has had to respond to changes in supply, both in terms of unexpected retirements and unexpected injection of new supply. And that results in the need for an even more robust transmission system and one that you can plan from generation to user. Now, for Power, we had nearly all of this forecast in our fundamental model – or fundamental model already. So when we looked at something like Keys and when we looked at whatever else we might be bidding into RPM, we do scenario analysis that includes diminished demand as well as more robust growth. But well, one way of saying it, it's not a single variable model, it's not just what's the demand, it's – where is the load, where is the supply and what's happening to the infrastructure that connects all the above.

Excellent. Well, thank you. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Thanks, Julien. Next question.

Your next question is from Travis Miller with Morningstar Inc. Please proceed with your question.

Good morning, thank you. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Hi, Travis.

Ralph, just a follow-up on that, the transmission discussion. When you think about the investments you're making, what's on the table, how close do those investments get us to kind of next generation grid, a grid where you can have distributable generation, smart type of grid? Is that kind of what you're talking about there, in terms of robustness and where we need to get to relative to the future? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: So I think it does get us a long way there Travis, but I think of it more as building a set of highways, so that no matter what happens on one highway you could switch over to another one and not get stuck in a traffic jam. Other people though I think talk about the future grid as being a more flexible grid so that you don't have to build big highways and you could just direct traffic flows along the back roads intelligently so that nothing gets clogged. And that's probably not the best analogy. But I think the Internet of Things is what people speak about in terms of the ability to move power more flexibly. I'm not a big believer in that being an eventual outcome because of the connectivity that you need at the last mile, so to speak. And I'm more of a believer in the types of things that PJM is advocating, which is – look, the backhaul has to be robust, so that people can get on and off, people in the form of power plants can get on and off that backhaul system.

Okay. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: It's a central station dispatch model on a robust high voltage system that I think is ultimately one that will be economically more efficient.

Sure. Okay. And then, more specifically on PSEG Power in the quarter, that re-contracting lower cost to serve, how one-time type of stuff is that? I'm guessing a lot of that was spark spread versus the BGS but the re-contracting part, what are you seeing on that part? Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Sure, Travis. This is Caroline. So yes, remember that when we talk about re-contracting as well as lower cost to serve, we give you that hedging data, right, so we give you all the details on our hedging data. And as I just said, we've moved up our hedges a little bit and the prices are basically the same as where we are. So the hedges prove to be very valuable on a year-over-year basis. I remember last year at about this time we talked about the fact that we had taken advantage of some better pricing last year to put on some incremental hedges. Now hedging doesn't last forever, but when we see those opportunities we've layered on hedges as to beneficial prices and so re-contracting, that's kind of what that benefit is about. The lower cost to serve, obviously there is lower cost to serve in terms of the wholesale market prices, but also as I mentioned in my remarks, $0.02 of that is our Leidy gas access. So, having that access to Leidy gas after the customers and PSE&G have the first call in that access, that contributed $0.02 of share in this quarter and you remember that's contributed pennies each quarters of the key quarters in the summer particularly and for each of the last two years. Now that benefit is one that we've never said we expect to continue in perpetuity. But if you look at the delta of Leidy gas cost relative to Henry Hub, you'll still see benefit. And because we have that access, that's what gives us part of our lower cost to serve, is that Leidy access. And as I mentioned, we have higher spark spreads. We've talked about this last year in the summer, as well as starting in 2013 summer, that our spark spreads for our access to that low cost gas tended to be about 30% or more higher than the sparks seen in the overall market. So, some of the things are a hedge position, some things are a little more structural, but together, we think they give us a nice position, with a combined cycle fleet, obviously, that operates very well.

Okay. Got it. Thanks so much, and congratulations on the work that you've done while you're at PG – PSE&G. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Thank you, Travis. Next question?

The next question is from Jonathan Arnold with Deutsche Bank. Please proceed with your question.

Yes, good morning, and my congratulations to Caroline. And thank you for all your help. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Thank you.

But just firstly, could we get – maybe get an update on the gas main replacement program case? If I'm not wrong, the first round of settlement talks, which have happened in July; didn't seem there was a whole lot of opposition in the hearings. So, any updated thoughts on when we might see that come to a head? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Yes, Jonathan. Thanks for your question. As you know, settlement discussions are confidential, so we can't give you a lot of detail. It's encouraging, though, that we've had them. And our hope really is that by year-end, or at the very latest early in 2016, we would have this resolved. As you correctly noted, it's something that the state recognizes needs to be done. The interventions in the case are not many, nor has there been any surprises. And I think lowering the supply tariff from $0.45 to $0.40 in October just once again points out the wisdom of doing this now. So, as I mentioned – as we've done visits with folks, I think that the debate and the arm-wrestling will be around the length of the program and the size, but we went out of our way to file conditions that were identical to what was approved at Energy Strong, and that was approved only 14 months ago. Interest rates are exactly where they were then, and return expectations are exactly where they were then. So right now, my number one nemesis is summer vacation schedules. So we'll – I think we have a couple more settlement dates that are on the calendar for the fall, and we're well on our way to spending the $250 million for gas that was in Energy Strong that goes through early 2016. So, we wouldn't be able – even if we had an agreement today, we wouldn't be able to add a bunch of new work in the next couple of weeks anyway.

Is there – do you see a path, a route that – where it might wrap up before these fall dates, or is that unlikely? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: No, that's possible, I wouldn't want to bet anything that I hold near and dear to my heart on that. What we really want to do is make sure we get this done well in advance of running out of the Energy Strong money, so we don't have to demobilize the contractor workforce, so we don't put pencils down on the engineering. So we just have a continuous flow and so, if we got it done in the fall, that would certainly assure that. If we get it done by the end of the year, we should be able to do that. If it gets done early in 2016, then we create a bunch of inefficiencies that the customers end up paying for, which we'd rather avoid.

Okay. Great. And then, one other topic, just strategically, you've always been of the view that the retail business is not somewhere you want to be. But we did notice one of your merchant power peers, who have been of a similar view, is evolving somewhat in that direction this quarter, and citing poor liquidity in the forecast. I was just wondering whether you're seeing similar challenges in terms of hedging, and whether there might be any change of thought on your part on the same? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: So, I don't want to send off shockwaves in a third quarter call, I'm not a big fan of retail, but my short answer to your question is a qualified yes. I do think that, given challenges in hedging and matching those hedges with asset locations and some of the basis challenges one has seen, (44:34) the effectiveness of hedges has to be taken into consideration, in terms of whether or not some consideration has to be given to that. So, I don't know the details behind what Calpine did, but I can certainly understand why they would think of that, given the diminishing liquidity and the effectiveness of hedges in terms of where the consumption is and where the supply is, and where one hedges relative to those two. So – but again, please don't interpret this to expect any announcement in the next few days that PSEG is launching into the retail business, but it is something we are looking at now.

That you're at least exploring some options on that front there. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: That's right.

Okay. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: And mostly – absolutely from a defensive posture, about how do we maximize the effectiveness of our Power business, as opposed to retail being a new growth strategy or anything of that sort.

Okay, that makes it. Thank you. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Next question?

The next question is from Michael Lapides with Goldman Sachs. Michael J. Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Hey, guys. Congrats, and Caroline, congrats on your announcement. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Thank you, Michael. Michael J. Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: One question on CP. Everybody – most people have been pretty bullish in terms of what the impact of CP would be. From a contrarian standpoint, what's the bear case? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: I have no idea. I'm sorry, Michael. Caroline and I are looking at each other and like, no, you take it. No, I don't – so well, I guess I will default to our usual we don't forecast bullish or bearish prices. I guess the good news is today is July 31 and in 21 days we'll know the outcome. But I don't mean to be flip, I mean the bear case would be massive injection of new supply with an economy growing at 2.3%, demand growing at fractions of that. You'd have to be pretty undisciplined to inject a whole bunch of new supply but I guess that would be the bear case (46:49). Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Maybe there is a bear case if you are just a single asset, but we're a fleet, right? Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Right, right. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: So it feels like this is a good product from our perspective. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah, that would be more of a bear outcome in terms of penalties that you may incur... Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer &…

Your next question is from Ashar Khan with Visium (49:32). Please proceed with your question.

I'm sorry, my questions have been answered. Thank you. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Thank you, Ashar. (49:43) Next question?

Mr. Izzo, Ms. Dorsa, there are no further questions at this time. Please continue with your presentation or closing remarks. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Okay. Thank you, Brandy. So, we tried to do a count – I think this is Caroline's 26th call. I've teamed up with her on 25, there was an August vacation I couldn't change if I remember correctly. She is going to tire of hearing me say these things, I'm not going to tire of saying these things and I'm going to do them for every one of the different audiences that we somehow manage to find ourselves in front of. I know you've all met Caroline and have been impressed by what she has done for us as a company. I can only tell you that no matter how high your opinion is of her, you probably only know a fraction of what she's done for us as a company and what she's done for me as the leader of this company. Her presentation – preparation for these calls is just the tip of the iceberg. Her discipline, day in and day out, her knowledge of the business, her knowledge of financial markets, and while all of that isn't superstar category, all of that pales in comparison to just what a pleasure she is to work with. (50:58) from the times when we've travelled around that people think that we actually like each other, but we really do like each other and I can remember the earliest days of those visits and in these calls, she would say, Ralph, you focus on the strategic issues, I'll answer the factual questions which was her delightfully professional way of saying, Ralph, you'll get it wrong (51:19). So Caroline, I can't say thank you enough for our shareholders, for our investors and for me and I know I have many opportunities to repeat that in front of employees, in front of customers and various other folks. Caroline D. Dorsa - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Thank you. Ralph Izzo - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: So, thank you and thank you for all you've done. With that, we'll wrap up the call. Hope for a hot, sticky humid weather for the balance of this summer, and we'll see you, I'm sure, at various conferences. Thank you all for joining us today.

Thank you, Brandy.

Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude your conference call for today. You may now disconnect and thank you for your participation.