Tag Archives: pennsylvania

Paying A Premium For Water

Summary Aqua America provides an essential business that churns out profits year after year. In 2005, investors were willing to pay an extraordinary premium for the company. This article details what occurred as a result of this valuation, along with some takeaways that can be gleaned. Roughly, 3 million people living in Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, Illinois, Texas, New Jersey, Indiana and Virginia likely know Aqua America (NYSE: WTR ) as their water utility. Income investors probably recognize the company by its dividend program: having paid consecutive quarterly dividends for 70 years and increased this payout for 24 years. Of course, to generate these payments you need a solid underlying business to fuel the payout growth. To this point, the company has been quite consistent – increasing earnings per share in nine of the last 10 years – and earning reasonable returns on shareholder capital. Of course, this is more or less to be expected. When you sell a good everyone desires and deems essential, it follows that even with regulation, you stand to make a profit. Comparing the major components of Aqua America over the years can better illuminate this strong history along with how investors have valued the company. Business performance is one thing, but investment results can be altogether different. Revenue By the end of 2005, Aqua America was generating nearly $500 million in revenue. Nine years later, that amount had grown to $780 million, or a compound annual growth rate of about 5.1% per annum. This represents reasonable, albeit not astounding growth. Earnings Based on the $500 million in revenue during 2005, the company earned about $91 million for a net profit margin of roughly 18%. By 2014, this margin had climbed to over 27%, resulting in total earnings of nearly $214 million. On an average compound basis, this represents 9.9% yearly growth. This is a bit more impressive. Naturally, the repeatability might be a bit more difficult – you can’t grow margins forever – but it nonetheless provided a nice boost during this time frame. Earnings Per Share If the number of shares outstanding remains the same over the period, total company earnings growth will be equal to earnings per share growth. Yet this situation rarely holds. Many dividend growth companies routinely retire shares over the years. Utilities tend to issue shares due to the capital-intensive nature of the business. At the end of 2005, Aqua America had about 161 million shares outstanding. By the end of 2014, this number had climbed to 179 million, or an increase of 1.1% per year. As a result, earnings per share did not grow as fast as total earnings, coming in at 8.6% per annum. Share Price This is where things get interesting (or cautious depending on your viewpoint) in reviewing the company’s history. At the end of 2005, shares of Aqua America were trading hands around $22. This represents a trailing earnings multiple of about 38. Now surely, Aqua America is a solid company with a proven track record and the ability to meaningfully grow both its business and payouts over time. Yet paying nearly 40 times for a water utility doesn’t appear especially compelling. Indeed, by the end of 2014, the share price had only climbed to $26.70, representing an earnings multiple of about 22. This is the type of thing that you have to watch out for. First, you want to find a solid business, but the next step is to determine whether or not the price paid is roughly fair. In this instance, investors saw the share price greatly underperform the business due to the initial valuation paid. Earnings per share grew by 8.6% per year, yet the share price only grew by 2.3% annually. Total Return Note that while the P/E compression was quite imposing – going from 38 to 22 – it wasn’t the difference between positive and negative. Over longer time periods, investors still would have seen positive (albeit greatly trailing) returns. Over this period, an investor would have collected about $4.30 in dividends, or roughly 20% of your beginning investment. This is a bit more impressive than it seems, it’s just that the starting price paid distorts the benefit of a solid and increasing dividend. Overall, investors would have seen annual returns of about 4% per year. Here’s a summary of the above progression: WTR Revenue Growth 5.1% Start Profit Margin 18.4% End Profit Margin 27.4% Earnings Growth 9.9% Yearly Share Count 1.1% EPS Growth 8.6% Start P/E 38 End P/E 22 Share Price Growth 2.3% % Of Divs Collected 20% Start Payout % 56% End Payout % 53% Dividend Growth 7.8% Total Returns 4.0% As noted, revenue growth was reasonable, while earnings growth was quite solid. (Although these growth rates are partially attributable to a robust acquisition strategy.) The company routinely issued shares, resulting in EPS growth of about 8.6% per year. The first few parts appear relatively normal. In knowing that a company grew earnings per share by 8% to 9% annually, you might suspect that the investment performance was strong as well. Yet this wasn’t the case. Instead, due to a high relative starting multiple, P/E compression gobbled up a lot of the potential. Business performance and investment performance were two drastically different things due to the value others were willing to pay. It’s not that the business wasn’t solid or that you didn’t keep enjoying a higher and higher dividend payment – both situations held. The cause of the disconnection was the willingness and a lack thereof in others of paying a large premium for a water utility. From this history, we can learn two important lessons. First, the price you pay is naturally important – no different than in the grocery store or at the gas pump. If you’re looking for your investment to track business results, you need the beginning and end multiple to be about the same. It’s hard to make a prudent expectation that a company with single-digit growth ought to routinely trade at 30 or 40 times earnings. This focus on value is important. You don’t have to be perfect, but it helps to be aware. From 2002 to 2014, Aqua America grew earnings by about 8.9% per year – quite similar to the 2005 through 2014 period. The difference was the relative valuation at the time. At the end of 2002, shares were trading around 23 times earnings. As a result, investors saw the share price increase by about 8.6% annually during this period – far greater than the period covered above. The price you pay has a lasting impact on performance. Most of the time it more or less works out, but occasionally investment performance will greatly lead or trail business performance due to investor sentiment. The second thing to take away is that the above example wasn’t the difference between positive and negative results. If you pay 38 times earnings for a company today and next year it’s trading at 22 times earnings, it’d be a reasonable bet that you’re carrying a paper “loss.” Yet over the long term, this doesn’t have to hold. Eventually a strong, profitable business will make up for “overpaying.” Granted you’re still going to trail business results, but you would nonetheless end up with positive performance results; thus the focus on wonderful businesses. Ideally, you’re looking for reasonable valuations throughout, but you can take solace in the fact that owning a collection of strong businesses can help alleviate some of your missteps along the way. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

WGL Holdings’ (WGL) CEO Terry D. McCallister on Q3 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

WGL Holdings (NYSE: WGL ) Q3 2015 Earnings Conference Call August 6, 2015, 10:30 AM ET Executives Douglas Bonawitz – Head of Investor Relations Terry D. McCallister – Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of Executive Committee, Chairman of Washington Gas Light Company and Chief Executive Officer of Washington Gas Light Company Vincent L. Ammann – Chief Financial Officer, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer of Washington Gas Light Company and Senior Vice President of Washington Gas Light Company Adrian P. Chapman – President, Chief Operating Officer, President of Washington Gas Light Company and Chief Operating Officer of Washington Gas Light Company Gautam Chandra – Senior Vice President of Strategy, Business Development and Non-Utility Operations Analysts Operator Good morning, and welcome to the WGL Holdings’ Third Quarter Fiscal Year 2015 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, I would like to inform you that this conference is being recorded and that all participants are in a listen-only mode. We will open the conference call for questions and answers after the presentation. The call will be available for rebroadcast today at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time, running through August 13, 2015. You may access the replay by dealing 1 (855) 859-2056 and entering pin number 91131626. I will now turn the conference over to Mr. Doug Bonawitz. Sir, you may begin. Douglas Bonawitz Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining our call. Before we begin, I would like to point out that this conference call will include forward-looking statements under the federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements inherently involve risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those predicted in such forward-looking statements. Statements made on this conference call should be considered together with cautionary statements and other information contained in our most recent annual report on Form 10-K and other documents we have filed with or furnished to the SEC. Forward-looking statements speak only as of today and we assume no duty to update them. This morning’s comments will reference a slide presentation. Our earnings release and earnings presentation are available on our website. To access these materials, please visit wgl.com. The slide presentation highlights the results for our third quarter of fiscal year 2015 and the drivers of those results. On today’s call, we’ll make reference to certain non-GAAP financial measures, including operating earnings of WGL Holdings on a consolidated basis and adjusted EBIT of our operating segments. A reconciliation of these financial measures to the nearest comparable measures reported in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or GAAP is provided as an attachment to our press release and is available in the Quarterly Results section of our website. This morning, Terry McCallister, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer will provide some opening comments. Following that, Vince Ammann, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer will review the quarterly results. Adrian Chapman, President and Chief Operating Officer, will discuss key issues affecting our business and the status of some of our principal initiatives. In addition, Gautam Chandra, Senior Vice President of Strategy, Business Development and Non-utility Operations, is also with us this morning to answer questions. With that, I’d like to turn the call over to Terry McCallister. Terry D. McCallister Thanks Doug, and good morning, everybody. I am pleased to be able to report to you that WGL is on track to deliver strong results and record earnings per share in fiscal year 2015. Our non-GAAP operating earnings for the first quarter is shown on Slide 3 in our presentation were $10.7 million or $0.22 per share compared to $0.8 million or $0.02 per share in the third quarter of 2014. On a non-GAAP basis, consolidated operating earnings for the first nine months were $159.8 million or $3.39 per share. This compares to $147.8 million in the prior year or $2.85 per share. The increase in operating earnings in the third quarter were driven primarily by strong results in our retail energy-marketing segment as shown on Slide 5. Our commercial energy systems and midstream energy services segments also reported improved results year-over-year. At the utility, our customer base continued to grow as average active customer meters increased by approximately 13,000 meters year-over-year for the third quarter representing a 1.2% growth rate. Regulated utility and its customers benefited from asset optimization results in the quarter. We also saw increased earnings in the segments from rate recovery related to our accelerated pipe replacement programs. On the utility regulatory front we received positive news regarding our recent filings to expand both our Maryland STRIDE and Virginia SAVE accelerated pipe replacement plan. We’re also excited about our announcement in May regarding an investment in gas reserves, serve our utility customers in Virginia. Adrian will talk more about these developments shortly. On the non-utility side of the business, as previously mentioned, our retail energy-marketing business performed well. With electric margins significantly higher than third quarter of last year. Here we have continued to execute plans that we’ve laid out on past call, we’re focused on large commercial and government accounts where longer term strategic relationships could provide additional value. Also, our pricing practices now include managing the risk of higher PJM cost. We forecasted at the end of 2014 that business has continued on the path back to historical levels of profitability. The result in this segment during fiscal year 2015 has exceeded our expectations and partly reflect specific market opportunities unique to this fiscal year. Over the long term, we’re still targeting adjusted EBIT for the retail marketing segment in the range of $50 million to $55 million per year. Given our results through the first nine months and our earnings outlook for the remainder of the year, we are raising our consolidated non-GAAP earnings guidance by $0.20 per share, to a range of $2.90, to $3.10 per share for fiscal year 2015. I’m now going to turn the call over to Vince, who will review our third quarter results by segment. Vincent L. Ammann Thank you, Terry. First, I would like to remind you that beginning with the first quarter of fiscal year 2015, we’ve made a change to our practice of discussing earning results at the segment level. While we continue to use operating earnings per share at a consolidated level, we are now using non-GAAP adjusted earnings before interest and taxes or adjusted EBIT to discuss results at the segment level. This change provides more clarity by allowing us to discuss the performance of each business unit, prior to the impact of interest expense, taxes and accretion and dilution. Turning first to our utility segment. Adjusted EBIT for the third quarter of fiscal year 2015 was $6.5 million, a decrease of $1.4 million compared to the same period last year. The drivers of this change are detailed on Slide 6. Higher results from our asset optimization program added $5.2 million in adjusted EBIT. Higher revenues from our accelerated pipe replacement programs added about $1.2 million in adjusted EBIT. The favorable effect of changes in natural gas consumption patterns in the District of Columbia added $1.5 million in adjusted EBIT. These items were offset by higher O&M expenses driven primarily by higher labour, marketing and employee incentives cost, partially mitigated by lower employee benefit cost. These impacts collectively reduced adjusted EBIT by $6 million. Higher appreciation expense also reduced adjusted EBIT by $1.9 million, reflecting growth in our investment and utility plan. Other miscellaneous items reduced adjusted EBIT by $1.9 million. Turning to the retail energy-marketing segment adjusted EBTI for the third quarter of fiscal year 2015 was $18.7 million, an increase of $13.7 million compared to the same period last year. On Slide 7, you will see that the increase was driven primarily by higher electric gross margins with higher natural gas gross margin also contributing. Electric margins increased by $9.9 million, mostly driven by lower capacity charges from the regional power grid operator PJM as well as slightly higher sales volumes. These positive benefits were slightly offset by increased PJM capacity costs that took effect in June 2015, which impacted the timing of margin recognition for fixed price retail contracts. Electric volumes increased 4% in the third quarter versus the prior year, primarily due to warmer weather and the recent growth in our large commercial market. As Terry discussed earlier, our retail energy marketing business, has increased its focus on large commercial and government account relationships. In the natural gas business, gross margins were $4.4 million higher, due to lower natural gas purchase cost and favorable gas supply and pricing opportunities. Natural gas volumes decreased 3% in the third quarter versus the prior year, primarily due to a decline in the mass market customers. This decline is also related to our increased focus on commercial and government account relationships. Next, I’ll move to the commercial energy systems segment. Adjusted EBIT for the third quarter of fiscal year 2015 was $7.8 million compared to $5.7 million in the same period last year. The increase reflects growth in distributed generation assets in service, partially offset by higher operating expenses. During the third quarter, our commercial distribution generation assets generated over 45,000 megawatt hours of clean electricity which was sold to customers through our purchase agreements. We remain on track to invest at least $150 million from commercial solar and other distributed generation projects during fiscal year 2015 with a potential to exceed that amount by 10% based on the timing of the projects in the pipeline. Next, I’ll move to the midstream energy services segment. Results for the third quarter of fiscal year 2015 reflect an adjusted EBIT loss of $1.4 million, compared to an adjusted EBIT loss of $4 million in the same period last year. The improvement is associated with storage transactions that occurred in this quarter. Results for our other non-utility activities reflecting adjusted EBIT loss of $1 million compared to a loss of $1.9 million, the same period of prior fiscal year. Improvement is primarily related to lower business development expenses in the current period. I’ll now move to discuss the interest expense on a consolidated basis to the third quarter. Interest expense increased to $13.1 million, during the third quarter compared to $9.5 million in the prior period. The increase was primarily driven by increased long term debt issued by both Washington Gas and WGL. As Terry stated earlier, we are increasing our consolidated non-GAAP operating earnings estimate as shown on Slide 8. We are forecasting non-GAAP earnings in the range of $2.90 to $3.10 per share. The increase is primarily due to strong performance at our utility and retail energy marketing businesses. Utility results are higher than expected, primarily due to asset optimization opportunities. On the non-utility side, we anticipate that excellent results on the retail energy marketing business will offset lower earnings from our midstream energy services business. I’ll now turn the call over to Adrian for his comments. Adrian P. Chapman Thank you, Vince and good morning, everyone. I’m pleased to provide you with an update on our operations and regulatory initiatives. In Maryland, we filed an application with the public service commission for approval of an amendment that expands our currently approved STRIDE plan. Washington Gas requested approval to add one additional program applicable to gas distribution system replacement and four additional programs applicable to transmission system replacements at an incremental investment of $31 million over the remaining four years of the STRIDE plan. This was our first inclusion of transmission pipe related replacement. On May 27, the chief public utility law judge issued a proposed order approving with modification the proposed amendment. Proposed order allowed accelerated recovery of cost related to transmission system replacements, located in Maryland, but excluded from the accelerated recovery program costs related to transmission system replacements, physically located outside of Maryland. This decision was contrary to how common transmission related costs have been recovered in rate case. Washington Gas appealed that portion of the decision to the full commission. On July 2nd, the PSC affirmed the proposed order, which approves an incremental capital expenditure of $18 million over the remaining four years of the plan. On July 30th, Washington Gas filed an appeal with the circuit court of Montgomery County to challenge the PSC decision to deny recovery through the surcharge mechanism of cost related to transmission system replacement projects located outside of Maryland. Notwithstanding the transmission related cost under appeal, we do have approval to spend an additional $4 million to $5 million per year on distribution and transmission replacements through 2018. In Virginia, we submitted an application to the state corporation commission in February, requesting approval to amend our current save plan to expand the scope of some existing programs to include new distribution facility replacement programs and to add new programs to replace transmission facilities similar to those proposed in Maryland. Washington Gas proposed investing an additional $75 million to replace, eligible infrastructure. The Company requested approval for the amended SAVE plan through December 31, 2017, which is the expiration date of the previously approved SAVE plan. On June 5th, the SEC approved the amended SAVE plan, however the commission excluded a small portion of the proposal to replace transmission facilities and the portion of the proposal to include new distribution facilities in the accelerated replacement program. The SEC in Virginia approved an incremental capital expenditure of $66 million through 2017, the new incremental billing factor which put in place on August 1st. Also in Virginia, a new law allows local distribution companies to recover a return of and a return on investments in physical gas reserves that benefit customers by reducing cost, price volatility or supply risk. On May 6th, Washington Gas entered into a 20-year agreement with Energy Corporation of America to acquire natural gas reserves through non-operating working interest in 25 producing wells located in Pennsylvania for $126 million. The purchase of the reserves is conditional upon approval by the Virginia SEC. Washington Gas filed an application with the SEC on May 12th for approval of the gas reserves purchase agreement, this part for the natural gas supply investment plan. Under the procedural schedule established to consider the application testimony from the Virginia SEC staff is due on August 26 and a public hearing is scheduled on September 30. Under the law, the SEC must issue a final decision of the application within 180 days or by November 8. Finally, I’m also pleased to announce that we’ve recently reached a new five-year collective bargaining agreement with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 96, that was effective June 1st and will continue through 2020. This contract, which covers approximately 520 employees strengthens our ability to work together with our unions to achieve excellence for our customers, investors and employees. I would like to now turn the call back to Terry for his closing comments. Terry D. McCallister Thank you, Adrian. I’d like to now highlight a few recent developments and provide an update over the status of our midstream and distributed generation investments. First, an update on our investments in the Constitution Pipeline project. We continue to wait for a permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. We remain optimistic that construction can begin in the next few months. As of June 6, WGL Midstream, had invested approximately $26 million on the Constitution Pipeline project. Next, I’ll turn to our investment in the Central Penn line. The Central Penn line is a greenfield pipeline segment of Transco’s Atlantic Sunrise Project. This project is on track and the development activities are proceeding as expected. The Central Penn line has a projected in service date in the second half of calendar year 2017. WGL Midstream will invest approximately $412 million in the Central Penn line project. As of June 30, our subsidiaries had invested approximately $22 million. Next I’ll provide an update on our investment in the Mountain Valley pipeline project. Mountain Valley pipeline is a 300 mile pipeline in West Virginia and Virginia, and will help meet the increasing demand for natural gas in the mid-Atlantic and Southeast markets. The project is on track and development activities are proceeding as expected. Mountain Valley pipeline has a projected in service date in the second half of calendar year 2018. WGL Midstream will investment between $230 million and $245 million on the Mountain Valley pipeline project. As of June 30, WGL Midstream has invested approximately $6 million. Finally, an update on additional opportunity to invest in infrastructure that we first announced last December. As we discussed with you previously, we have an option for a 30% interest in a $400 million plus gathering system in West Virginia. This gathering system will help move gas out of production field to West Virginia to an interstate pipeline system where transportation to the mid-Atlantic region. The anticipated in-service date is now late 2015 or early 2016. We continue to evaluate additional midstream opportunities similar to the projects announced to date as we pursue our strategy to provide infrastructure solutions to move gas from producing areas to consuming areas. Turning to our commercial energy systems business, we continue to add our portfolio of distributed generation assets. As of June 30, we have 115 megawatts of installed distributed generation. We also have an additional 40 megawatt currently under contract or in construction. In total, these projects represent over $520 million in capital investment and we continue to see a robust pipeline of future projects. I want to highlight one solar project in particular this quarter as it represents our first project in the State of Colorado. WGL Energy Systems recently signed an agreement to build and operate a 1 megawatt solar project in Fort Collins, Colorado. The project is expected to be in service by December 2015 and WGL Energy Systems will own and operate the solar project for 20 [ph] years as per our agreement. In July, Washington Gas celebrated the opening of the first of three plans public CNG fuelling stations for compressed natural gas vehicles. The new station located at Washington Gas facility in Frederick, Maryland will be operated and maintained by Trillium CNG. Later this summer Washington Gas and Trillium expect to open a second public fuelling station in Forestville, Maryland and a third station is being planned for the District of Columbia. We’re proud to add this service to the spectrum of energy answers we offer at WGL. In addition, WGL Energy Services, recently teamed up with SolarCity to offer our residential customers in Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia the opportunity to choose clean, renewable energy by installing a custom-designed solar energy system. Through this innovative marketing partnership our customers in these areas may now choose to install a SolarCity solar system at no upfront cost and pay less than traditional electric utility bills. This residential solar option will complement our existing operating business segment which includes wind power for electricity and carbon offsets matched to natural gas usage. We will provide detailed fiscal year 2016 guidance during our year-end conference call in November. However, based on the progress we’ve made in a number of important areas we feel confident and we’re on track to deliver the earnings growth goal in our long-range financial plan. That concludes the prepared remarks and we’ll now be happy to answer your questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator And our first question comes from the line of Michael Gallagher. Michael Gallagher Congrats on the really strong quarter. I’ve only got two questions. First, the performance from retail marketing was impressive. Just wondering, how we should think about fiscal 2016. Are these results sustainable or are they a potential headwind next year? Vincent L. Ammann Michael this is Vince. We’ve provided some guidance there, that there were some market opportunities that we saw this year that allowed us to really exceed our expected results, probably even exceeding the long term goal of $50 million to $55 million certainly at the high end of that range. So, we’re probably looking at a 2016 that will be slightly less than what we’re able to achieve this year. Gautam, if you have anything more to add? Gautam Chandra Yeah Michael, I will just add, I think we’re still looking at what we initially kind of projected. And a couple of years ago, we’ll bring this headwind back to its historical level, the $50 million to $55 million, we still see that as very achievable, going into next year, but probably not. I wouldn’t forecast the additional margins we would realize this year into next year. Michael Gallagher Then on Central Penn, I’m wondering if you’ve determined yet where the interconnect is going to be in Southern Pennsylvania. Vincent L. Ammann I think we have a pretty good idea, but I don’t think the partners have announced that yet. Terry D. McCallister Yeah, I don’t think that’s public information yet. Michael Gallagher Okay, that’s all I had gentlemen. Thanks. Operator [Operator Instructions] Again, I would like to remind everyone that you can listen to a rebroadcast of this conference call at 1 p.m. Eastern Time today, running through August 13, 2015. You may access the replay by dealing 1 (855) 859-2056 and entering your pin number 91131626. Douglas Bonawitz Thanks everyone for joining us this morning. If you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to call me. It’s Doug Bonawitz at (202) 624-6129. Have a great day.

NiSource’s (NI) CEO Bob Skaggs on Q4 2014 Results — Earnings Call Transcript

NiSource, Inc (NYSE: NI ) Q4 2014 Earnings Conference Call February 18, 2015 09:00 ET Executives Randy Hulen – VP, IR Bob Skaggs – CEO Steve Smith – CFO Analysts John Barta – KeyBanc Carl Kirst – BMO Capital Chris Sighinolfi – Jefferies Becca Followill – U.S. Capital Advisors Charles Fishman – Morningstar Operator Welcome to the NiSource Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions]. As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Randy Hulen, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Randy Hulen Thank you and good morning everyone. On behalf of NiSource and Columbia Pipeline Partners, I would like to welcome you to our quarterly analyst call. Joining me this morning are Bob Skaggs, Chief Executive Officer and Steve Smith, Chief Financial Officer. As you know, the primary focus of today’s call is to review NiSource’s financial performance for the full year and fourth quarter of 2014 as well as provide an overall business update. Following our NiSource prepared remarks, we will also share a brief overview of the predecessor results for Columbia Pipeline Partners which were released this morning. We will then open the call to your questions. At times during the call, we will refer to the supplemental slides available on our website. I would like to remind all of you that some of the statements made on this conference call will be forward-looking. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the statements. Information concerning such risks and uncertainties is included in the MD&A and Risk Factors section of our periodic SEC filings. With all those items out of the way, the call is now yours, Bob. Bob Skaggs Thanks, Randy. Good morning and thank you for joining us. 2014 was a watershed year for NiSource. It was anchored by focused execution of a record infrastructure investment program and the initiation of strategic and transformational growth plans. Those notably included the creation of Columbia Pipeline Partners and the announcement of the Columbia Pipeline Group spinoff. If you will turn to slide 3 in the supplemental deck that was posted online this morning, you will see a few of the year’s highlights. The NiSource team delivered yet another year of solid operational performance and industry-leading financial results. In 2014, we generated net operating earnings from continuing operations, non-GAAP of $1.72 per share, exceeding our guidance range of $1.61 to $1.71 per share and up nearly 9% from 2013 and we delivered total returns to our shareholders of 32%, which outperformed the major utility indices for the sixth consecutive year. Our team executed on a record $2.2 billion capital investment program, made significant progress on various regulatory and legislative programs and originated several transformational growth projects at CPG. These initiatives synched closely with our company-wide modernization initiatives, delivered significant value to our customers by facilitating the development of significant shale resources and providing more modern, safe, efficient and environmentally friendly infrastructure. They also benefit our communities through job creation and economic development and our shareholders through sustainable long-term returns. During the year, we also expanded our projected long-term inventory of infrastructure investments which is now targeted at $12 billion to $15 billion at CPG over the next 10 years and $30 billion at NiSource’s utilities over 20 plus years. As I noted at the top of the call, 2014 marked the launch of two important strategic initiatives; the separation of CPG and the creation of Columbia Pipeline Partners. On that note, our team was pleased with Columbia Pipeline Partners’ $1.2 billion initial public offering in early February. The Partnership’s offering was enthusiastically received by investors. Steve will provide a brief update on the partnership as part of this morning’s call. We remain on track with the NiSource CPG separation process. A couple of weeks ago, we filed our initial form 10 registration statement with the SEC, have announced key expected board members and the majority of executive team members for both companies. Following the separation, both companies are expected to move forward as independent, investment grade pure play entities with experienced teams focusing on executing and elevating well-established platforms for growth. As we look ahead to NiSource and CPG operating, independent companies, I wanted to briefly highlight their growth expectations. As we first announced in our 2014 investor day, NiSource as a pure play utility expects its average annual long-term earnings and dividend to grow at 4% to 6% over the long term. As a pure play pipeline company with an MLP, CPG is targeting its annual adjusted EBITDA growth in the mid- to upper teens over the next several years. Its annual dividend growth is expected to be commensurate with this robust EBITDA growth. With these very strong growth rates and deep investment inventories, both companies will be positioned in the top tier of their peer groups. As the separation date gets closer, both NiSource and CPG will conduct roadshows to provide additional details on their projected performance profiles. And just to expand on the growth for one moment, we wanted to be absolutely clear on the fundamental baseline commitments of each company. Therefore, we provided earnings and dividend outlooks as well as capital expenditure outlooks. We wanted to be clear on what long-term drivers are for each of the businesses. We wanted to be helpful versus academic. And as you know, 2015 will be a split year for NiSource and CPG with significant developments unfolding during the first half of the year, including the IPO of CPPL, the recapitalization of CPG and NiSource, as well as the separation itself and the ongoing development of Mountaineer XPress and Gulf XPress. Again, we wanted to provide what was helpful, what was most constructive, therefore our key commitments are key fundamental drivers. As we mentioned, roadshows will occur prior to separation to provide additional detail on 2015, 2016 and the long term. Now with that, let me turn the call over to Steve Smith to review our 2014 financial results highlighted on page 4 of our supplemental slides. Steve Smith Good morning, everyone. As Bob mentioned, we’ve exceeded our guidance range for the year by generating non-GAAP net operating earnings of about $545 million or $1.72 per share, which compares to about $495 million or $1.58 per share in 2013. On an operating earnings basis, NiSource was up about $125 million. By GAAP comparison, our income to continuing operations was about $530 million for 2014 versus about $490 million for 2013. At the segment level, you will see in today’s release that each of our three core business units delivered solid financial results. CPG delivered operating earnings of about $491 million compared to about $441 million in 2013. CPG’s net revenues excluding the impact of trackers were up about $80 million. NIPSCO’s electric operations delivered about $288 million in operating earnings compared to about $265 million for the prior year. Net revenues excluding trackers were up about $47 million. And finally, our Gas Distribution business unit came in at about $517 million, compared to about $449 million in 2013. Net revenues, again excluding the impact of trackers, were up about $126 million. As our numbers attest, it was another strong year for the NiSource team. Full details of our results are available on our earnings release issued and posted online this morning. Now turning to slide 5, I would like to briefly touch on our financing and liquidity positions. We retained a strong liquidity position with approximately $720 million of net available liquidity at the end of the year. Of our record $2.2 billion capital investment program, approximately 76% of these investments were focused on revenue-generating opportunities. Our debt to capitalization came in at about 62% of the end of the year. And as Bob mentioned, we remain on track with the NiSource CPG separation. In that regard, we have taken several key steps to establish a strong financial foundation for both companies. The first step was to secure two separate credit facilities that will become effective at the separation. We entered into two $1.5 billion five-year credit facilities, one for NiSource and the other for CPG. These facilities will replace NiSource’s existing $2 billion agreement. At the same time we entered these agreements, we also entered into a $500 million five-year facility at Columbia Pipeline Partners which went into effect at the time of the IPO. The next major step in this process is the recapitalization, which is on schedule to commence in the second quarter. We will provide additional updates on this process in our first quarter earnings update and through other public announcements. With that, I will turn the call back to Bob to discuss a few execution highlights from each of our business units. Bob Skaggs Thanks, Steve. Let’s start with CPG highlights on slide 6. The CPG team continues to advance a steady stream of transformational growth and modernization projects. As I noted earlier, CPG expects to invest up to $15 billion in growth capital over the next 10 years, with most major projects currently in execution or in advanced stages of development. During 2014, CPG placed more than $300 million in system expansion projects and service, adding approximately $1.1 billion cubic feet of system capacity. An additional $200 million in midstream projects were put in service during the year and CPG’s modernization work approached $320 million. So in total for 2014, we added more than $800 million in new revenue-generating assets in service all on time and on budget. Meanwhile, the CPG team is in full execution mode on several ongoing and transformational growth projects. In December, the FERC approved the construction of the East Side expansion project which will provide approximately 315 million cubic feet per day of additional capacity for Marcellus supplies to reach growing mid-Atlantic markets. This $275 million project is expected to be placed in service later this year. In addition to the East Side expansion, CPG has more than $3 billion of growth projects in progress that will add approximately 4 billion cubic feet of transportation capacity. These projects include the Leach and Rayne XPress projects, the WB XPress project and the Cameron Access project. The Rayne and Leach projects collectively involve about $1.8 billion in system expansion, creating a major new pathway for transporting shale production to attractive markets and liquid trading points. Both projects are expected to be in service by the end of 2017. WB XPress is almost a $900 million project to transport about 1.3 billion cubic feet of shale gas to East Coast markets and various pipeline interconnects including access to the go point LNG terminal and Cameron Access is a roughly $300 million investment that involves new pipeline facilities to connect with the Cameron LNG terminal in southern Louisiana. The project will offer initial capacity of up to 800 million cubic feet per day. Our Columbia midstream team also is continuing to capitalize on CPG’s strong asset position in the Marcellus and Utica regions. Midstream projects currently in progress include $120 million Washington County gathering project and the $65 million Big Pine expansion project. Big Pine in the first phase of Washington County will be placed in service before the end of the year. As you may recall during our prior discussions, we’ve outlined plans for the potential Mountaineer XPress project. We’re now in advance commercial discussions with customers on this major project, as well as a complementary project called Gulf XPress. If implemented, these projects would provide substantial transportation capacity out of the Marcellus and Utica shale regions. These two projects could involve an investment as large as $2 billion to $2.5 billion. We hope to complete commercial terms and clear all contractual outs by July. As you can see, on all fronts, the CPG team is executing against an impressive and indeed transformational growth agenda. In 2015, we’re targeting a capital investment level of approximately $1.1 billion of CPG. As you’ve heard us say before, our intent is to triple our net asset base over the next five years. With that, let’s now shift to our utility businesses starting with NIPSCO, our Indiana electric and natural gas business summarized on slide 7. NIPSCO is continuing to deliver on its commercial and customer strategy with an inventory of investment opportunities approaching $10 billion for electric infrastructure and $5 billion for gas infrastructure over the next 20 plus years. 2014 was a strong year for NIPSCO as well. In the first half of 2014, NIPSCO commenced its seven-year natural gas and electric infrastructure modernization programs now expected to reach an investment level of nearly $2 billion and completed approximately $120 million of projects in 2014. These investments will help improve reliability, maintain system safety for the next generation. On the environmental front, in December NIPSCO placed the final FGD new unit in service at Schahfer Generating Facility. This unit, like the one placed in service during the fourth quarter of 2013 was delivered on time and on budget. A third FGD unit at NIPSCO’s Michigan City Generation Facility is on schedule to be placed in service by the end of 2015. Following the completion of the Michigan City units, all of NIPSCO’s coal burning facilities will be fully scrubbed. On the growth side, progress also continued on two major NIPSCO electric transmission projects. Right of away, acquisition and permitting are underway for both projects and preliminary construction will begin on the 345 kV Reynolds to Topeka line in the first half of this year. If you recall, these projects involve an investment of about $0.5 billion for NIPSCO and are anticipated to be in service by the end of 2018. Finally, in addition to the continuation of NIPSCO’s electric energy efficiency programs, the IURC approved the extension of the green power rate program. NIPSCO also reached a settlement on the continuation of its feed-in tariff program. NIPSCO’s agenda in 2015 remains focused on enhancing the reliability and environmental performance of the systems through modernization and replacement investments. In addition to delivering customer programs that help reduce energy usage and manage bills, these investments expected to reach nearly $400 million in 2015 deliver significant economic development and job creation activity in northern Indiana, while at the same time delivering value to our investors. Turning to our Gas Distribution Operations on slide 8, you can see a similar story of large-scale infrastructure investment paired with complementary regulatory and customer initiatives. Touching on a few highlights from the year, in November, the Pennsylvania Commission approved the settlement in Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania’s base rate case. The case provides for recovery of CPA’s investments in its well-established infrastructure modernization program and will increase annual revenues by approximately $33 million. New rates went into effect in December. Also in December, Columbia Gas of Virginia reached a settlement with customers for its rate case, which if approved would increase base rates by about $25 million. Notably in January, the hearing examiner in the case recommended approval of the settlement. Final commission decision is expected by the end of the first quarter. These rate cases, along with one completed in Massachusetts, provide for continued recovery of investments related to our well-established infrastructure programs which are designed to maintain and improve the safety and reliability of our systems. Also in the fourth quarter, Columbia Gas of Massachusetts filed its 2015 system, gas system enhancement plan under new legislation authorizing accelerated recovery of gas infrastructure modernization investments. If approved as filed, cost recovery would increase annual revenues by approximately $2.6 million. Across the gas utilities, we expect to invest almost $900 million in 2015. Together, NiSource’s industry-leading platform for utility growth provides significant reliability, safety and environmental benefits to our existing and new customers while also delivering shareholder returns through transparent recovery mechanisms. Shifting to slide 9, our key takeaways for 2015, we plan to execute our current business and customer plans while at the same time delivering the CPG spinoff on schedule in mid-2015. We’re moving ahead with another year of record capital investments, targeted at $2.4 billion across our utilities and pipelines and a complementary regulatory and customer service agenda. As for the separation, we’re well on our way to standing up two premier companies, with an experienced slate of management and directors at both companies. CPG and NiSource will be well-financed and strongly positioned to execute on their distinct strategies and deliver enhanced long-term earnings and dividend growth. As I mentioned, both NiSource and CPG will conduct roadshows prior to separation to provide detailed business profiles. With those highlights for NiSource, we will now shift to slide 11 in the NiSource deck and Steve will discuss Columbia Pipeline Partners IPO and its predecessor results. Steve? Steve Smith Thanks, Bob. With the launch of CPPL, we’ve introduced a best in class MLP to the market. One with a strong supportive sponsor, stable and predictable cash flows that are virtually insensitive to fluctuations in commodity prices and volumes, a robust growth profile with a deep inventory of long-term infrastructure investments. The strategic footprint overlaying the Marcellus and Utica shale production areas. The financial strength and flexibility and a premier execution focused and experienced leadership team. Our offering was very well received and we’re very pleased with the continued positive response. Let’s quickly touch on our IPO and predecessor results on page 12. The offering of approximately 54 million units at $23 per share raised nearly $1.2 billion. The pricing offering on February 5 and subsequently began trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol CPPL the following day. These units include the full [inaudible] allotment executed by the underwriters. And as I mentioned previously, our $500 million five-year revolving credit facility we entered into in December came effective upon the IPO. Now let’s turn to our predecessor results issued this morning for periods prior to the IPO. As we outlined during our earlier NiSource remarks, Columbia Pipeline Group executed on and placed into service a wide variety of high-value projects during the year. These projects recorded CPPL’s predecessor growth and will serve as the model for the partnerships growth in 2015 and beyond. The predecessor reported net income of about $269 million for 2014 compared to about $267 million for 2013. The increase is primarily a result of new growth projects placed in service, new firm contracts and higher mineral rights royalties. On an adjusted EBITDA basis, the predecessor reported about $599 million in 2014 versus about $543 million in 2013. These results provide us with a solid footing as we move forward with CPPL’s strategy. Bob? Bob Skaggs Thanks Steve and thank you for participating today and for your ongoing interest and support of NiSource and Columbia Pipeline Partners. With that Nicholas, we’re ready to open the call to questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator [Operator Instructions]. Our first question comes from the line of John Barta with KeyBanc. Your line is now open. Please proceed with your question. John Barta Bob, thanks for the color on the Columbia kind of growth rates there. First off, are there any certain milestones we should be looking for regarding Mountaineer and Golf pipeline or did you say everything was going to be finalized in July? Bob Skaggs Yes, we mentioned we hope to clear all of our contractual outs by July. At the moment, we’re still working on agreements with the foundation shippers. One event that we would point you to is open seasons, both Mountaineer XPress and Gulf XPress. If you see those in the coming weeks, or so, that would be a positive sign that the projects continue to be moving forward. I would add those open seasons will be binding open seasons. That would be one guidepost. Operator Our next question comes from the line of Carl Kirst with BMO Capital. Your line is now open. Please proceed with your question. Carl Kirst If I could just maybe stay with Mountaineer and Gulf XPress for a second but perhaps ask it in a way to see if there has been any shift in tone in producer conversations and in particular, if you’ve seen any reticence or pulling back midstream versus pipeline? Certainly your enthusiasm for the pipelines to hopefully have contracts by July would indicate that they are staying pretty positive and constructive. But I just wanted to make sure I’m getting the right read here. Bob Skaggs Yes. You’ve hit the nail on the head. It remains positive, constructive. We have been in very, very close contact with our producer shipper customers both on the big work projects as well as the midstream projects. Carl Kirst Do you find a difference in the tenor of conversations between the midstream and the pipelines, or just given the exposure to the region, both are continuing to move forward? Bob Skaggs It’s the latter. There is not a material difference in tone. As you know, folks are being prudent with their CapEx for 2015. Having said that, they still remain fully committed to the Marcellus and Utica and they still focus on take away capacity particularly when you get into the 2017, 2018, 2019 timeframe. Carl Kirst And then maybe one last question on the larger pipes and recognizing hopefully we have a binding open season not too far away. I guess should we think about the risk to the project? Is this more of a — do you guys feel like you are in a competitive shootout with anybody, or is this just a matter of getting the producers comfortable with the economics and trying to get to the right region, but once they make that decision, you guys or these projects are the obvious choice? I just want to make sure I got a good sense of that. Bob Skaggs I wouldn’t go so far as to say obvious choice, but I would say that the focus tends to be on your latter point. That being the economics, the in service date and the like. Carl Kirst And then last question if I could and then maybe one for Steve. I know of very tiny thing, but I’m just curious given the difference of commodity prices, is there any way we should think about the delta or the change in mineral or royalties that you guys are getting from the upstream exposure between 2015 and 2014? Steve Smith This is Steve. I would say it’s immaterial to the overall results going forward. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Chris Sighinolfi with Jefferies. Your line is now open. Please proceed with your question. Chris Sighinolfi I just wanted to follow-up on of couple things. I appreciate your color and comments on the CPG ex EBITDA and dividend growth profiles. I was just curious assuming that you’re not going to answer a question as to where the starting point is for 2015, if you could just help us frame as you think about it and the board thinks about it the policy considerations around the initial level. I get the growth rate, but as we think about where — the variables that might shape where you guys ultimately set the starting point upon which we’re going to grow at that mid to upper teens level. Can you just give us some additional color on that front? Bob Skaggs Yes. Two key considerations. Number one, as you know we’re very sensitive to credit. We’re fully committed to investment grade credit. We need to go through the credit rating process in the March timeframe as we prepare for recap. So that starting point quite frankly is somewhat sensitive, somewhat dependent on credit considerations. The other is that the huge CapEx needs we have and so it’s balancing credit, CapEx and financing coming out of the gate. Those are the key considerations for starting point. Chris Sighinolfi Okay. And so to dovetail on prior questions, if some of the projects that are currently in discussion, sounds like they are moving forward into execution, like Mountaineer and Gulf that could be significant capital deployment. I would imagine then that would be part of this conversation. Bob Skaggs Correct. As I pointed out in my prepared remarks that we do have the significant events as we come up to separation and that’s certainly a huge, huge variable as we look at the financials and the outlook for the business. Chris Sighinolfi Perfect. And I guess switching and perhaps this is a question for Steve. Given the IPO, I know priced 15% or so above the range and I’m imagining the full overallotment exercise. Does that change at all the amount you had talked previously about a $3 billion debt recap. Does that shape at all the expectations around that modestly or at all? Steve Smith Not to a large extent. I mean, it does help obviously from a credit perspective, so we’re very pleased with the outcome of the IPO. With respect to the recapitalization, it is not going to move the needle too dramatically either way. Bob Skaggs We suggest still thinking in terms of $3 billion. Chris Sighinolfi Okay. And that I imagine will be profiled out in various tranches the various duration. Am I incorrect in thinking that? Steve Smith That is correct. Our current debt portfolio has a weighted average life of approximately 13.5 years. We would shoot for something north of 10 years, weighted average life. So probably issue a basket of 5, 10 and 30s to achieve that. Chris Sighinolfi One final question for me, there was a slight uptick even if I exclude the transaction costs for the fourth quarter that you reported in your corporate segment. There was an uptick in the corporate line item. Is there anything specific that’s driving that or is that just a variance from year-to-year? Bob Skaggs That’s just a variance from year-to-year. We have a bit more outside services costs in there as well as a result of all the activities we have going on here currently with respect to the separations. Operator Our next question comes from the line of Becca Followill with U.S. Capital Advisors. Your line is now open. Please proceed with your question. Becca Followill The growth rate that you’ve outlined for CPG of mid- to upper-teens, over what time frame is that? Bob Skaggs Next three to five years. Becca Followill And are you willing to talk at this point about what type of payout ratio that assumes? Bob Skaggs Not at this point, Becca. Becca Followill Okay. I understand. And then the large CapEx program that you have at CPG, how do you finance that going forward? Bob Skaggs Well, the MLP is the sole source of equity through the period and we will be using it frequently to support that. Operator [Operator Instructions].Our next question comes from the line of Charles Fishman with Morningstar. Your line is open. Please proceed with your question. Charles Fishman I assume you will take a couple questions on NIPSCO. Slide 7, Bob, the $67 million of the electric modernization plan to be expected to be spent in 2015. 100% of that is covered by trackers? Bob Skaggs That’s correct. Charles Fishman And then I would assume if my math’s correct $1.1 billion over seven years, that’s probably likely going to accelerate that number in 2016 or is this thing backend loaded? Bob Skaggs It gradually steps up and you may have heard us say in prior calls, prior discussions, as we complete the scrubber program, the modernization program begins to tick up or step up. Charles Fishman Okay. And then last question on NIPSCO, the clean power plan, if you look at what the EPA is proposing for Indiana, a lot of coal plant heat rate improvement, a lot of renewables, a lot of efficiencies at the customer level. Not a lot of gas CCDTs, but have you had any initial discussions with Indiana about what, what would be expected of NIPSCO if this thing comes in even close to what they are proposing? Bob Skaggs Yes. We’re in constant communications with our stakeholders, with the state. At this point nothing definitive has really been exchanged or decided. But clearly we’re working day to day with all those folks. Charles Fishman Now in the CPP plan for Indiana, a lot of renewables, is that something that’s even on the radar screen as far as the electric utility or the NIPSCO that’s after the separation that that’s an investment opportunity that they might consider? Bob Skaggs Yes, it could be down the road, but I would say over the next few years, still continues to play a modest role in the portfolio. Operator Thank you. And with no further questions in the queue, I will now like to turn the call over to the speakers for any closing remarks. Bob Skaggs Thank you and thank you once again for your ongoing interest in NiSource and your ongoing support. We greatly appreciate it. Have a good, safe day. Thanks, everyone. Operator Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today’s conference. This does conclude the program and you may all disconnect. Have a good day, everyone.