With a combined revenue of $21 trillion and $2.1 trillion in profits, the 2026 Fortune 500 is the definitive list of America's largest companies.

Fortune 500

Almost $20 trillion in revenue—and a record-breaking $1.87 trillion in profits. Introducing the 2025 Fortune 500, the definitive list of the biggest companies in America.

Industries included in the sector are mining, oil and gas exploration and services, pipelines, refining, and utilities.

Fortune Sector Leaders: Energy

The Fortune 500, in its 70th year in 2024, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

The Fortune 500, in its 69th year in 2023, ranks the biggest U.S. companies by revenue.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 68th running of the list.

This year’s Fortune 500 marks the 67th running of the list.

F500-2021-318-PSEG

The diversified energy company provides electricity and gas to more than 5 million customers in New Jersey and New York.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 66th running of the list.

F500 2020 317 Public Service Enterprise Group

The New Jersey-based energy company provides electricity and gas to portions of New Jersey and New York and is one of the 10 largest electric companies in the U.S.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 65th running of the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 64th running of the list.

Here are the World's Most Admired Companies for 2017 as ranked in their industries. See who made the list.

World's Most Admired Companies

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 63rd running of the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 62nd running of the list.

This year's Fortune 500 marks the 61st running of the list. Wal-Mart claims the top spot again. See who made the list.

Wal-Mart stayed on top as its sales crept closer to half-a-trillion dollars. Apple moved into the top five. And UnitedHealth Group continued its steady climb. 

Fortune Global 500

Company Info

Industry

Location

Industry Rank

Website

Overall Score

Key Attributes Of Reputation

Innovation

People Management

Use of Corporate Assets

Social Responsibility

Quality of Management

Financial Soundness

Long-Term Investment Value

Quality of Products/Services

Global Competitiveness

Key Financials (last Fiscal Year)

Revenues ($M)

Profits ($M)

Assets ($M)

Total Stockholder Equity ($M)

Profit Ratios

Profit as % of Revenues

Profits as % of Assets

Profits as % of Stockholder Equity

Earnings Per Share (last Fiscal Year)

Earnings Per Share ($)

EPS % Change (from prior fiscal year)

EPS % Change (5 year annual rate)

EPS % Change (10 year annual rate)

Total Return

Total Return to Investors (last year)

Total Return to Investors (5 year, annualized)

Total Return to Investors (10 year, annualized)

The Public Service Enterprise Group has been a cornerstone in providing reliable electric and natural gas services for more than a century. Its principal subsidiaries include Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&amp;G), New Jersey's largest provider of electric and gas services; PSEG Power, which manages energy-supply operations; and PSEG Long Island, responsible for operating the electric transmission and distribution system for the Long Island Power Authority. Serving millions of customers across New Jersey and Long Island, PSEG is committed to delivering safe, affordable, and sustainable energy solutions.

Q2 2026

Q1 2026

Q4 2025

Q3 2025

Q2 2025

Q1 2025

Q4 2024

Q3 2024

Public Service Enterprise Group (PEG): Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings

legacy

Public Service Enterprise Group

public service enterprise group

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Shamali, and I am your event operator today. I would like to welcome everyone to today's conference Public Service Enterprise Group's First Quarter twenty twenty five 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, 04/30/2025, and will be available for replay as an audio webcast on PSEG's Investor Relations website at investor.pseg.com. I would now like to turn the conference over to Carlotta Jain. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and welcome to PSEG's first quarter twenty twenty five earnings presentation. On today's call are Ralph LaRosa, Chair, President and CEO and Dan Craig, Executive Vice President and CFO. The press release attachments and slides for today's discussion are posted on our IR website at investor.pseg.com and our 10 Q will be filed later today. PSEG's earnings release and other matters discussed during today's call contain forward looking statements and estimates that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. We will also discuss non GAAP operating earnings, which differs from net income as reported in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or GAAP in The United States.

We include reconciliations of our non GAAP financial measures and a disclaimer regarding forward looking statements on our IR website and in today's materials. Following our prepared remarks, we will conduct a thirty minute question and answer session. I will now turn the call over to Ralph LaRosa.

Thank you, Carlotta, and thank you for joining us this morning to review PSEG's first quarter twenty twenty five results and discuss the outlook for the business. PSEG delivered a solid operating and financial performance at both our utility PSE and G and our nuclear units. Overall results for the first quarter benefited from a full quarter of regulatory recovery of and on our invested capital approved in the October 2024 base rate case settlement as well as the seasonality of gas revenues which are concentrated in the first quarter. Results also reflected the positive impact of our consistent and reliable nuclear generation performance which realized higher prices primarily driven by weather. Our service territory experienced multiple cold spells in January and February with temperatures remaining below 20 degrees Fahrenheit for several days in a row, which prompted our highest winter peak load for both gas and electric in the last six years.

During these challenging conditions, PSE and G maintained high levels of reliability and efficient customer response times, while PSEG Nuclear generated and supplied the grid with approximately 8.4 terawatt hours of 20 fourseven carbon free power. PSEG's focus on increasing the predictability of our results continues to benefit both customers and the company aided by our conservation incentive program, which decouples revenues from volumes and deferral mechanisms for pension and storms from the recently concluded rate case. This predictability combined with PSE and G's predominantly residential and commercial customer profile also reinforces our stability as a utility investment with defensive characteristics in a turbulent equity market. We consistently manage our cost structure to keep bills as low as possible while maintaining PSEG's financial flexibility to deliver safe and reliable service. The domestic concentration of our supply chain also limits the amount of tariff related cost pressure on our O and M, combined with our multi year labor agreements with all of our New Jersey Unions extending into 2027 provides stability for our largest operating costs.

As we've discussed previously, the Basic Generation Service or BGS default rate is scheduled to increase our residential electric bills by 17% starting June 1. As a reminder, BGS is a pass through cost for energy supply that PSE and G does not earn a profit on. The increase is largely due to July 2024 base residual auction result of $270 a megawatt day that was reflected in the latest BGS update as well as a true up for the prior two years of BGS auction, which had included proxy prices for capacity. Last week, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities directed the state's electric companies to submit proposals to mitigate the customer bill impacts of the BGS increase. PSE and G continues to work with the BPU and state policymakers to develop a solution.

We understand the real kitchen table difficulties these PGM related increases will have on our electric customers. However, until new generating supply is added to the grid given the existing resource adequacy imbalance, upward pressure on energy prices will persist. While these discussions are ongoing, PSE and G continues to offer an enviable record of reliability, affordability and customer satisfaction. PSE and G's combined electric and gas bill still compares favorably to all other utilities in New Jersey. Our reliability metrics continue to differentiate our service and our customer satisfaction rankings are second to none.

I would add that this last metric measures us against all of our large peers in the East, not just in New Jersey. Our regulated capital investment plan for 2025 remains focused on infrastructure replacement and modernization to ensure safe and and reliable service and to meet growing customer demand. These efforts are on track and on budget. PSE and G also began rolling out the second phase of its Clean Energy Future Energy Efficiency II program, which will help customers save energy, lower their bills and reduce carbon emissions, while supporting job training and economic growth here in New Jersey. In February, we mentioned a 12 fold increase in inquiries from large load or data center customers into

These numbers include both mature applications and initial leads. Our latest update now shows PSE and G experienced another quarterly increase in large load inquiries for new service connections and this pipeline now exceeds 6,400 megawatts of capacity requested as of March 31. Our engineers have been responding to these inquiries on a timely basis, still averaging about four months and our speed to response is supportive of the state objective to spur economic development. To the extent these large load prospects convert into new utility customers in the future, fixed costs are then spread over larger user base, which can help to lower existing customer bills. Turning now to PSEG Power and Other, our nuclear operations generated and supplied the grid with approximately 8.4 terawatt hours of clean and reliable baseload power and achieved a complete capacity factor of 99.9%.

Over the past quarter, there has been a lot of discussion in New Jersey about the need and potential for new generation in the region and potentially in the state. Specifically, legislation was introduced this past February that proposes to change the current New Jersey law that prohibits regulated utilities from building and owning new generation. We remain open to this possibility and we continue to work with New Jersey policymakers about this and other solutions to meet New Jersey energy needs. Regarding the ongoing discussion around the pending data center proceeding at FERC, we recently submitted PSEG's comments in support of colocation with the position that the behind the meter data center should pay for their actual use consistent with the treatment of other behind the meter customers on our system such as rooftop solar and universities. Several other large generators and data center developers have requested a ninety day settlement process, which could be a path towards timely establishment of rules for colocation.

To recap, we are reiterating PSEG's full year non GAAP operating earnings guidance at $3.94 to $4.06 per share, which is up by approximately 9% at the $4 midpoint over our 2024 reported results. We are also reiterating PSE and G's updated five year capital spending program at 21,000,000,000 to $24,000,000,000 which supports an expected rate base CAGR of 6% to 7.5% through 2029. This in turn drives PSEG's five percent to 7% non GAAP operating earnings CAGR using the nuclear production tax credit as our reference price per power. Before I conclude, let me again thank our 13,000 employees across PSE and G, Nuclear, PS Long Island and Ed Services for their dedication and positive difference they make every day for our customers, our company and the communities where we live and work. I'll now turn the call over to Dan, who'll walk you through the results for the quarter and our outlook for the remainder of 2025 and then rejoin the call for our Q and A.

Thank you, Ralph. Good morning, everybody. PCG reported net income of $1.18 per share for the first quarter of twenty twenty five as compared to $1.06 per share in 2024. And non GAAP operating earnings were 1.43 per share in the first quarter of twenty twenty five compared to $1.31 per share in 2024. We've provided you with information on slide eight regarding the contribution to net income and non GAAP operating earnings by business for the first quarter.

And slide nine contains a waterfall chart that takes you through the net changes quarter over quarter and non GAAP operating earnings per share also by major business. Starting with PSE and G, which reported first quarter net income and non GAAP operating earnings of $546,000,000 for 2025 compared to $488,000,000 in 2024. Utilities results were driven by the implementation of new electric and gas based distribution rates that went into effect 10/15/2024. And as Ralph mentioned, the recovery of previous capital investments totaling more than $3,000,000,000 Starting with the waterfall on slide nine, compared to the first quarter of twenty twenty four, transmission margin was $01 per share lower due to the timing of expense recovery. First quarter distribution margin increased by $0.20 per share compared to the year ago period and largely reflects the impact of the rate case, recovering return on and of our capital investments and in particular gas revenues as approximately half of our annual gas revenues are realized in the first quarter.

And margin also benefited from recovery of energy efficiency investment. Distribution O and M expense was $05 per share unfavorable compared to the first quarter of twenty twenty four with the year over year increase driven primarily by timing as well as higher distribution operational costs due to inflation and the cold weather in January and February. Depreciation and interest expense rose by $01 per share and $02 per share respectively compared to the first quarter of twenty twenty four, reflecting growth in investment and higher interest expense. Weather during the first quarter as measured by heating degree days was four percent warmer than normal, but 13% colder than the first quarter of twenty twenty four. As a reminder, weather variations have a minimal impact on PSE and G's utility margin because of the Conservation Incentive Program or SIP mechanism.

This decoupling mechanism limits the impact of weather and other sales variances positive or negative on electric and gas margins, while helping PSE and G promote the widespread adoption of energy conservation, including energy efficiency and solar programs. Under the SIP, the number of electric and gas customers is what drives margin and each segment grew by approximately 1% over the past year. On capital spending, as Ralph mentioned, PSE and G invested approximately $800,000,000 during the first quarter and we remain on track to execute on our 2025 regulated capital investment plan of $3,800,000,000 focused on infrastructure modernization, energy efficiency and meeting growing demand. We've maintained our five year regulated capital investment plan of 21,000,000,000 to $24,000,000,000 through 2029, representing a $3,000,000,000 increase from our previous plan, driven by reliability and resiliency investments, our expanded energy efficiency program and demand growth. As mentioned, we commenced this next phase of our energy efficiency program in the first quarter and we anticipate investing a total of $2,900,000,000 over a six year period.

The energy efficiency program totals include approximately $1,000,000,000 of on bill repayment options to help customers finance their energy efficiency equipment and appliances. Moving to Power and Other. For the first quarter of twenty twenty five, Power and Other reported net income of $43,000,000 compared to $44,000,000 in the first quarter of twenty twenty four. Non GAAP operating earnings were $172,000,000 in the first quarter compared to $169,000,000 in the first quarter of twenty twenty four. Referring to the waterfall on slide nine.

For the first quarter of twenty twenty five, net energy margin rose by $02 per share, driven by higher nuclear generation performance, coupled with higher realized prices due to the cold weather mentioned earlier. The weather conditions also contributed to a higher margin in our gas operations for the quarter. O and M increased by $03 per share compared to the first quarter of twenty twenty four, mostly driven by higher nuclear costs and interest expense rose by $02 per share, reflecting incremental debt at higher interest rates. Lastly, the timing of taxes recorded through an annual effective tax rate, which nets to zero over a full year and other items equally combined to have a net favorable impact of $04 per share in the quarter compared to 2024. Touching on some recent financing activity.

As of the March, PSEG has total available liquidity of $4,600,000,000 including approximately $900,000,000 of cash on hand. While PSEG had significant available liquidity in the year end 2024 at $2,600,000,000 this represents a significant improvement as we access the bond markets at both PSE and G and PSEG during the first quarter. In total this quarter, we issued $1,900,000,000 of long term debt, which reduced commercial paper outstanding and increased cash on hand. Our liquidity position was further enhanced during the first quarter by extending the expiration of our existing $3,750,000,000 revolving credit facilities by one year to March of twenty twenty nine. PCG's variable rate debt at the March was at PCG Power consisting of a $1,250,000,000 term loan, which matures this coming June and a three sixty four day term loan for 400,000,000 which matures in December of twenty twenty five.

As of March 31, we continue to have a low level of variable rate debt, representing approximately 7% of our total debt. On the financing front, in early March PSE and G issued a total of $900,000,000 of secured medium term notes, consisting of $400,000,000 of 5.05% medium term notes due March 2035 and $500,000,000 of 5.5% medium term notes due February. A portion of the proceeds will be used to repay $350,000,000 of 3% medium term notes due May 15. Later in March, CSEG issued $1,000,000,000 of senior notes consisting of $600,000,000 of 4.9% notes due March of 5.4% notes due March 2035. A portion of these proceeds will be used to repay $550,000,000 of 0.8% senior notes due August 15.

Looking ahead, our solid balance sheet supports the execution of PSEG's five year capital spending plan dominated by regulated CapEx without the need to sell new equity or assets and provides the opportunity for consistent and sustainable dividend growth. In closing, we delivered a solid operating and financial performance to begin the year and we are on track to deliver PSEG's full year 2025 non GAAP operating earnings guidance of $3.94 to $4.06 per share and we are also reaffirming our long term forecast of 5% to 7% compounded annual growth for non GAAP operating earnings through 2029 based upon the execution of our capital investment programs and the use of the nuclear PTC threshold as our reference price. That concludes our formal remarks. And operator, we are ready to begin the question and answer session.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question and answer session for members of the financial community. Our first question comes from the line of Shar Pourreza with Guggenheim Partners. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, good morning team. It's actually Constantine here for Shar. Thanks for taking the questions.

Good morning. Maybe just starting off on the 6,400 megawatts of large load interconnection that you've noted in

a timeline starting to form on the potential load inflection? And how is New Jersey thinking about resource adequacy with that load potential? You mentioned the legislative potential, but you envision a potential shift on gas generation policy or anything else?

Yes, you broke up a little bit at the end there, Constantine. But I think what I heard was when do we see that load coming in at six thousand four hundred and also the how resource adequacy is being thought about in New Jersey as a result of that. Is that some yes, okay, great. So look, we have always said, take that June and you apply a factor 10%, twenty %, and we'll leave that to you all to think what the right amount is. Again, remembering for us, we're from an earnings standpoint, we're decoupled.

So the way we think about it is more from a this good news for customers if we can spread any costs across additional megawatt hours, and that would certainly be a positive from a customer standpoint. For the timing of it, I think it's happening at different stages. We are seeing some interconnections take place already. Obviously, the ones that are a little bit larger in the couple of hundred megawatt requests we have, they still seem to be some folks that have been shopping for the best location for their particular application that they might have. But we just see that the state's economic development plan is taking hold and happy to see the amount of additional megawatts of requests that we've had come in.

As it relates to resource adequacy, look, that's a big conversation that's taking place across the entire RTO footprint right now. And we just saw some new planning numbers come out from PJM that we have some questions about. There's an upcoming TEAC meeting. We're going to be asking some questions at that TEAC meeting regarding some of the assumptions that are in there. And the one thing that we heard from our legislators over the last week or two was to be more vocal about that.

And you can certainly expect us to be more vocal with our questions as we move forward.

Yes. And the only the other part of your question, Constantine, is proposed legislation in New Jersey. We had some hearings last week. There's discussion of it. So I would say right now it's at the discussion point as opposed to certainly being active, but we are here and remain available as a resource to the state if they decide to take resource adequacy into their own hands through some legislation.

Understood. Appreciate that. And on the FERC two zero six with the comments that were filed last week and do you have a view on settlement process versus outright order kind of Any preferred route from your perspective? And how does that FERC process come up in your commercial discussions at all in artificial islands? And would you be able to kind of mitigate any of that through any kind of continued provisions?

Or are we kind of walking step by step there?

Yes. So I'll let Dan I think you asked a little bit about specific conversations. So I've always given that to Dan and I'll do that again as that is being led by his team. But generically, as it relates to the proceeding down at FERC, we would always like to see a settlement, right? I mean that to me is always the best solution.

I would love to see the industry come together and find solutions to help the tech industry out. It's pretty clear based upon some information I continue to see tech needs for generation continue to grow. And we as an industry need to find a common solution to meet that. I certainly think that in doing that, we need to make sure that we're not discriminatory in one customer class versus the other. And that has been the single concern that we've had since this process started.

But Dan, you want to talk a little bit about?

Yes. No, I agree with Ralph. That's I think the non discriminatory aspect is really important. I think I'll just leave the commercial aspect to just a single comment that I think that the counterparties are looking for the flexibility, the most flexibility that they can have. But right now, there's some uncertainty related to how much they will have.

And so they're waiting on this answer whether a settlement can get us the best answer, which it seems like it's going to be more representative of what the parties are looking for. I think that that would be ideal, but they're never easy to get. So, time will tell whether we can whether we'll have one of those.

Excellent. Appreciate that. Thanks for taking the questions.

Our next question comes from the line of Durgesh Chopra with Evercore ISI. Please proceed with your question.

Ralph, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Good morning, Dan. Hey, just on the commercial arrangements related to nuclear, just understand there's a lot of moving pieces and the timeline is uncertain. But just from a demand perspective and the tone from your large load customer perspective, has that changed over the last few months, maybe since February when we spoke last on earnings?

Has that changed? Obviously, there's a lot of news in the market. There's tariffs. We've seen Microsoft, Amazon or some of the other hyperscalers sort of pull off of some of their contracts. Just seeing if you're seeing any softness there?

No, I would definitely would not call it softness. I think there's still a demand for power. I think there's still a demand for that type of power. I think there's also a desire to have answers to some of the questions that remain outstanding. But I would say there continues to be interest in the nature of the power and the scarcity of the power that nuclear provides.

Durgesh, overall, that's why we included those numbers that we did in the new business activity that we're seeing. It has not slowed down. And again, maybe it's the same person calling 50 locations and asking the same question. I don't see that as the case. These are unique, at least for us, they're unique requests that are coming in.

And I continue to be surprised and impressed by the amount that we're seeing.

That's 10,000 megawatt peak, Priyanka, so 6,400 is not all coming in. I mean, Ralph talked about some lower percentage of that, but the requests do continue.

Got it. That's very helpful color. Just switching gears quickly on LiPA. Just what to expect there? I believe there are some meetings here May.

Do you expect a decision then? Or what are kind of the data points or dates we need to track throughout the year as this as they make a decision on whether you're going to provide services there or not?

So Durgesh, I got to take a half step back for you. I don't know if you're aware of the meeting that just took place at LiPA on this subject. Are you up to speed on that?

The one the first I think there was a what I'm up to speed on is there was a first I guess you weren't awarded the first portion of the contract and then there's the bigger contract that's still Right.

Yes. No, there was actually so over the last twenty four hours, there's been a lot of activity on this front. So let me just try to summarize for everybody on the call what's taking place. There was a recommendation made by LIFO management to select a different service provider. That recommendation was just voted down by the Board.

That took place within the last half hour or maybe within the last hour is a better way to say that after we started this call. So we are we're just we're happy to see that we're still in consideration, but I don't know any more than that. And all I can promise to anyone who's on the call who lives on Long Island or to any customers on Long Island, we will continue to do the right thing and provide high quality service to the customers on Long Island as long as we can. So there was this flurry of activity over the last twenty four hours and that culminated in within the last hour, as I said, with a no vote from the LIFO board on the management recommendation to select a different service provider.

Got it. Sorry, missed that. So what do we know what the next step is here? Do they go back to the drawing board or what?

Yes. It gets right back to what you said. On May 22, there's going to be a next board meeting and I expect that we'll hear some next steps. They went into executive session after the public session. So I would imagine that that among other things are being addressed.

Perfect. Okay. I'll leave it there. Get back in the queue. Thanks so much.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of David Artaro with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question.

Maybe on New Jersey and affordability, I was just curious if you could elaborate on your strategy or approach to managing affordability, given some of the concerns, I think stemming from PJM capacity pricing. But what are approaches that you could take to manage some of the concerns that have popped up from both the governor and the commission?

Yes. No, I appreciate that question. Certainly, it has been a hot topic here. We look, our concern is trying to reach some consensus that helps customers over this peak that came in. We are listening to recommendations that come from the Board of Public Utilities.

They have a couple of ideas about how they can help mitigate by through some deferral of charges to customers that are is under consideration from all the electric distribution companies here in New Jersey. We would certainly be supportive of anything that comes out from Board. There are legislators that have proposed a number of different bills. I think the most significant one would be the one that would be addressing the core problem here, which is supply. And another way to procure supply in the state, some of them in D'Angelo put a bill in to look to bring generation into the state and to open it back up to regulated utilities to have that opportunity.

Again, Dan mentioned it a little bit in the beginning. We would certainly be willing to participate in that and help find solutions for the state. We think we have some unique sites that could be helpful in meeting that, ones that have pipes and wires already to it. And obviously, we to take some different actions on the site to generate there. But we're listening to everyone.

It's an issue that is going to face customers. And as I mentioned in the prepared remarks, it's going to hit every customer and we want to help our customers as best we can through this time. It's one piece of the affordability challenge that they're facing.

Yes. And the other things that are going on in the background, David, there's a lot of customer assistance like LIHEAP and we're making sure that customers are aware of the programs that are out there to help those in need that probably will be hit toughest from the standpoint of some of these increases. A lot of activity at the company and a lot of activity outside the company all addressing this particular issue.

And not to mention the timing of our rollout of the energy efficiency program, which again I mentioned in the prepared remarks is very helpful on that front as well, because we can help customers use less. As I said to an earlier question from as we're decoupled, we can help the customer and be supportive without any financial impact to us as a result.

Yes. Excellent. Okay, that's helpful. Thanks. And then on, I guess, your efforts to contract nuclear capacity with data centers, I was just curious where do things now stand like are your discussions and negotiations contingent on the FERC process and figuring out behind the meter colocation arrangements and frameworks or such that that timeframe is going to be important and then maybe critical to getting over the finish line here?

Or are there other approaches that may not kind of have to wait for the full FERC process and potential settlement to play out?

Yes. No, I'm going give that to Dan to give you any details he wants. I think he addressed a bunch of what you said before. But look, we think deferred process is helpful to show that the industry as a whole is meeting the needs. And again, I would encourage us to reach a settlement on that front so that we can show solidarity in meeting the customers' needs here and that customer being the technology companies that are so thirsty for generation.

no. It is not contingent upon that. I think it's helpful to have that move forward, but the simple answer is no.

Okay. Got it. Thanks so much. I'll leave it there.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Nick Campanella with Barclays. Please proceed with your question.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for that real time update on LIFO. That was impressive. Hey, I just wanted to follow-up on the prior line of questioning just in regards to the commercial agreement. And we kind of talked about this prior just being maybe a more realistic opportunity for 2025.

And just given everything that's transpired, can you I just wanted to be clear, like do you still see executing on a nuclear deal in 2025 as still on the table before the governor leaves office in your mind?

Yes, no change, Nick. We are still what we've been saying with respect to how we are progressing and what we're doing is still where we are today.

Yes. And I don't have a real time update for you other than to tell you the following from the governor's standpoint. He is on another economic development mission in The Middle East and is talking about continued attraction of technology jobs to the state. So I'll get an update on that as that progresses and there's some news reports about what he's doing, but he is working until his last day here and one of the topics is to continue to attract technology companies.

Okay. That's helpful. And then just maybe remind us on like the quantum of megawatts that could potentially be part of a commercial agreement. Would you be open to doing more than a third of it at this point? Just trying to take your temperature on that.

Yes. There's not a target number, but I would say that there's no restriction on anything that we have within the portfolio to the extent that there's interest related to some kind of a commercial agreement.

you. Our next question comes from the line of Jeremy Tonet with JPMorgan. Please proceed with your question.

maybe building a little bit on prior comments here and appreciating PJM's color for the next capacity auction. How do you think about the potential capacity price outcome in the next auction as it relates to customer bill growth at this point? And do you see the price forward carries enough substance to incent ongoing investments in capacity supply? Just any other thoughts on the market there?

Well, look, I'll we'll tag team this one again. I would say a couple of things. I'll turn around and make the comment. I've seen a bunch of reports that would indicate that the price that we could expect would be on the northern side of that collar and from a range standpoint, somewhere between the midpoint and the top, I think is what we continue to see in the consensus of documents that I've read. We have an internal opinion.

We really don't talk about that. But I would say, turn it back around and mention what I've read from others. The good news from that standpoint for our customers, if there is good news in this, is that the because we have rolled in three years' worth of capacity increases because we had that proxy price in the BGS auction before, we would not expect to see a large increase for customers in the forward years as a result. So that's a positive. What's a negative is the prices are not coming down if that if those projections are right.

It would kind of keep it in that same range, some percentage up or down, but not the double digit increases that we've all seen here in New Jersey. And again, that was a combination of delays at PJM and the capacity market as well as a lack of generation, which gets to your second question, which is do we think at those prices and Jeremy, I'd be way in front of my skis on that since we're not in the merchant generation business at the moment here and don't expect to be ever again in the merchant generation business. We have not done a lot of homework on costs and how that would wind up playing out and with tariff increases and so on. So look, if we have an opportunity to do something to rate base, I'll be able to answer that question in a lot more detail. But Dan, you want to add anything?

Public Service Enterprise Group Q1 2025 Earnings Call Transcript | Fortune

Companies

John Kell

How brokerage Compass sold its 83,000 real estate agents on the use of AI

/2026/09/23/compass-ai-assistant-real-estate-agents/

Phil Wahba

Steve Jobs made Apple iconic. Tim Cook made it a $5 trillion behemoth

/2026/09/22/tim-cook-apple-ceo-legacy-stock-price-growth-services-supply-chain/

Indrani Sen

Apple’s first 50 years: Charts show how the iPhone maker became a $4.85 trillion giant

/2026/09/22/apple-first-50-years-history-iphone-mac-services-revenue-growth-timeline/

Fortune Editors

Fortune 500 Power Moves: Which executives gained and lost power this week

/2026/09/18/fortune-500-power-moves-september-12-18/

AI agents are going rogue. CIOs are racing to put guardrails around them

/2026/09/16/ai-agents-are-going-rogue-cios-are-racing-to-put-guardrails-around-them/

Fernanda Tronco

Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer of Meta Platforms Inc., during the Meta Connect event in Menlo Park, California, US, on Wednesday, Sept. 17, 2025.

Public Service Enterprise Group (PEG) Q1 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Company Participants