艾索倫電力 (EXC) 2021 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Hello, and welcome to Exelon's First Quarter Earnings Call. My name is Amanda, and I'll be your event specialist today. (Operator Instructions) Please note that today's conference is being recorded. (Operator Instructions)

您好，歡迎參加 Exelon 第一季財報電話會議。我是 Amanda，今天將擔任您的活動專員。（接線員指示）請注意，今天的會議將被錄音。（接線員指示）

It is now my pleasure to turn today's program over to Dan Eggers, Senior Vice President of Corporate Finance. The floor is yours.

現在我很榮幸將今天的議程交給企業財務資深副總裁 Dan Eggers。請開始。

Thank you, Amanda. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining our first quarter 2021 earnings conference call. Leading the call today are Chris Crane, Exelon's President and Chief Executive Officer; and Joe Nigro, Exelon's Chief Financial Officer. They're joined by other members of Exelon's management team who will be available to answer your questions during our -- following our prepared remarks.

謝謝你，Amanda。各位早安，感謝各位參加我們 2021 年第一季財報電話會議。今天由 Chris Crane（Exelon 總裁兼執行長）以及 Joe Nigro（Exelon 財務長）帶領本次會議。Exelon 管理團隊的其他成員也將一同參與，並會在我們的預備發言之後回答各位的提問。

We issued our earnings release this morning along with the presentation, all of which can be found in the Investor Relations section of Exelon's website.

我們今天早上已發布財報新聞稿並附上簡報，相關資料皆可在 Exelon 官網的投資人關係（Investor Relations）專區找到。

The earnings release and other matters which we discuss during today's call contain forward-looking statements and estimates that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ from our forward-looking statements based on factors and assumptions discussed in today's material and comments made during this call. Please refer to today's 8-K and Exelon's other SEC filings for discussions of risk factors and other factors, including uncertainties surrounding the planned separation, that may cause results to differ from management's projections, forecasts and expectations.

財報新聞稿以及我們在今天會議中討論的其他事項，包含前瞻性陳述與估計，並受多項風險與不確定性影響。實際結果可能因今天資料中所討論的因素與假設，以及本次電話會議中的評論，而與前瞻性陳述有所不同。請參閱今日提交的 8-K 以及 Exelon 其他向 SEC 申報的文件，其中包含風險因素與其他因素之討論（包括與計畫分拆相關的不確定性），這些因素可能導致結果與管理層的推估、預測與預期不同。

Today's presentation also includes references to adjusted operating earnings and other non-GAAP measures. Please refer to the information contained in the appendix of our presentation and our earnings release for reconciliations between the non-GAAP measures and the nearest equivalent GAAP measures.

今天的簡報亦包含經調整之營運盈餘（adjusted operating earnings）及其他非 GAAP 指標。請參閱簡報附錄與財報新聞稿中的資訊，以取得非 GAAP 指標與最接近之 GAAP 指標之間的調節表。

I'll now turn the call over to Chris Crane, Exelon's CEO.

接下來我把電話交給 Exelon 執行長 Chris Crane。

Thanks, Dan, and good morning, everybody, and thanks for joining us. As you've seen from our earlier releases and notifications, we had mixed results in the first quarter. We performed well across our businesses outside of the challenges from 5 days in February due to the Texas weather event.

謝謝，Dan。各位早安，感謝大家加入我們。正如各位從先前的新聞稿與通知中所見，我們第一季的結果好壞參半。除了 2 月因德州天候事件造成的 5 天挑戰之外，我們在各項業務的表現都相當不錯。

Overall, our first quarter GAAP loss was $0.30 per share and our non-GAAP loss was $0.06 per share. Exelon Utilities performed well operationally and financially during the quarter, delivering $0.72 per share, which is $0.11 better than the first quarter last year. At ExGen, we lost $0.58 per share overall, with the February weather event costing $0.90 per share in the first quarter. The event was unprecedented. We continue to investigate the multiple complex factors that led to our plant outages, and we are working with ERCOT regulators and other stakeholders to ensure an event like this does not happen again.

整體而言，我們第一季 GAAP 每股虧損為 0.30 美元，非 GAAP 每股虧損為 0.06 美元。Exelon Utilities 本季在營運與財務面表現良好，貢獻每股 0.72 美元，較去年第一季高出 0.11 美元。ExGen 整體每股虧損 0.58 美元，其中 2 月天候事件在第一季造成每股 0.90 美元的成本。該事件前所未見。我們仍在調查導致電廠停機的多項複雜因素，並正與 ERCOT 監管機構及其他利害關係人合作，以確保類似事件不再發生。

As you saw in our 8-K last week, we updated our full year losses at $150 million due to the updated load meter data in ERCOT default payments that differed from our original estimate. In addition, we reaffirmed our full year guidance of $2.60 to $3 per share. We continue to work on mitigating this approximately $1 billion loss, and expect to offset the loss by $410 million to $490 million after taxes through a combination of mostly onetime cost reductions and deferral of nonessential maintenance and revenue opportunities. Joe is going to go in much more detail on that in his presentation.

如各位在上週的 8-K 中所見，由於 ERCOT 違約付款（default payments）中更新後的負載電表資料與我們原先估計不同，我們將全年損失更新為 1.5 億美元。此外，我們重申全年每股 2.60 至 3.00 美元的財測指引。我們持續致力於降低這約 10 億美元的損失，並預期透過以一次性成本削減與遞延非必要維護為主、以及營收機會的組合，在稅後抵銷 4.10 億至 4.90 億美元。Joe 將在他的簡報中更詳細說明。

Turning to the operations. Despite the extreme cold winters, and the winter storms, the pandemic conditions, our utilities had a strong operational performance, delivering reliability, affordable electricity and gas for our consumers. All the utilities achieved first quartile operating performance in outage duration and frequency, BGE, ComEd and PHI were in top decile in outage duration. Customer operations metrics remained strong across the utilities. PECO and BGE's customer satisfaction levels were top decile. ComEd was top quartile and PHI just missed top quartile, but improved year-over-year.

接著談營運。儘管遭遇嚴寒冬季與冬季風暴，以及疫情環境，我們的公用事業仍展現強勁的營運表現，為用戶提供可靠且可負擔的電力與天然氣。所有公用事業在停電持續時間與停電頻率方面皆達到第一四分位（first quartile）的營運表現；BGE、ComEd 與 PHI 在停電持續時間方面位居前十分位（top decile）。各公用事業的客戶營運指標仍維持強勁。PECO 與 BGE 的客戶滿意度位居前十分位。ComEd 位居前四分位（top quartile），PHI 雖略低於前四分位，但較去年同期有所改善。

On the generation front, in the face of extreme temperatures, winter storms, our nuclear plants provided 37 terawatt hours of reliable, resilient and clean to the grid of the citizens of Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York and Maryland. The fleet capacity factor of 95.3% was what we reached for the quarter.

在發電方面，面對極端氣溫與冬季風暴，我們的核電廠為伊利諾州、賓夕法尼亞州、紐約州與馬里蘭州的民眾提供 370 億度電（37 太瓦時）的可靠、韌性且潔淨的電力輸送至電網。本季機組群容量因子達到 95.3%。

The spring has been active -- switching to policy. The spring has been active on the policy front with momentum building at both federal and state levels for policies that recognize the value of existing nuclear and would put the country on a path to a net 0 future. Both ExGen and the Utilities are well positioned to benefit from these policies and the transition to a clean energy economy.

今年春季在政策面相當活躍——轉到政策議題。春季在政策面相當活躍，聯邦與州層級的動能皆在增強，推動能夠認可既有核能價值、並使國家走向淨零（net 0）未來的政策。ExGen 與公用事業部門皆具備良好定位，可受惠於這些政策以及向潔淨能源經濟轉型。

On the federal level, the Biden administration has set out an ambitious goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% to 52% by 2030. Nuclear provides more than half of the carbon-free emission electricity in the U.S., with Exelon plants providing 12% of all the carbon-free energy in the United States. The administration is clear that preserving the existing nuclear fleet is key in meeting the goals that they have set.

在聯邦層級，拜登政府提出一項雄心勃勃的目標：到 2030 年將溫室氣體排放量降低 50% 至 52%。核能提供美國超過一半的零碳排電力，而 Exelon 的電廠提供全美 12% 的零碳能源。政府明確表示，保留既有核電機組群是達成其所設定目標的關鍵。

The administration's infrastructure proposal, the American Jobs Plan, would enact policies to help reach the goal. It includes a clean electricity standard that would require 100% clean electricity by 2035, with existing nuclear qualifying as clean; incentives to build 500,000 EV charging stations by 2030; and for 20 gigawatts of high-voltage transmission lines to be built to support the renewable build-out. We're encouraged that the administration and members of Congress recognize the importance of preserving the nuclear fleet to meet the country's clean energy and climate goals. The timing and the outcome of the federal legislation is highly uncertain. And in any case, it will be too late to reverse the retirement decisions for Byron and Dresden.

政府的基礎建設提案《美國就業計畫》（American Jobs Plan）將推動有助於達成目標的政策。其中包括：潔淨電力標準，要求到 2035 年達成 100% 潔淨電力，且既有核能符合潔淨資格；提供誘因在 2030 年前建置 50 萬座電動車充電站；以及建置 20 吉瓦的高壓輸電線路，以支援再生能源擴建。我們樂見政府與國會議員認知到，為達成國家的潔淨能源與氣候目標，保留核電機組群的重要性。聯邦立法的時程與結果高度不確定。而且無論如何，對 Byron 與 Dresden 的除役決策而言，都將來不及逆轉。

Our states are also advancing clean energy policies. In Illinois, 6 energy policy reform bills have been introduced that would drive the transition to clean energy and address climate change. The legislative leaders are meeting to craft a package from the various bills that can be considered this session. We're encouraged by the expression of support that continued -- for the continued operation of the nuclear plants.

各州也在推進潔淨能源政策。在伊利諾州，已提出 6 項能源政策改革法案，將推動潔淨能源轉型並因應氣候變遷。立法領袖正會面，試圖從各項法案中擬定一套可在本會期審議的方案。我們對於外界表達支持——支持核電廠持續運轉——感到鼓舞。

However, the details really matter. A bill needs to pass before the end of the regular session, and it needs to provide adequate support for continuing to invest in the Illinois fleet. Current market prices do not continue to meet -- do not allow us to continue to meet our payroll, paying our property taxes and covering other significant costs and risks of operating these assets. Without adequate policy, as I've stated to you that we will retire uneconomic plants beginning this fall.

然而，細節確實至關重要。法案必須在例行會期結束前通過，且必須提供足夠支持，讓我們能持續投資伊利諾州的機組群。目前的市場價格無法讓我們持續——無法讓我們持續支付薪資、繳納財產稅，並承擔營運這些資產的其他重大成本與風險。若缺乏足夠的政策支持，正如我先前所述，我們將自今年秋季起除役缺乏經濟性的電廠。

If you take a look at what happened in New Jersey last week, the Board concluded that the financial challenges faced by nuclear plants there justified a maximum ZEC of $10 per megawatt hour. The same voices that are arguing in Illinois that our plants are profitable were overruled in New Jersey's decision. The commission in New Jersey emphasized that maintaining the existing nuclear plants was critical to achieving the state's emission goals and -- significantly less costly than replacing nuclear with other 0 free carbon generation.

如果各位看看上週新澤西州發生的事，委員會（Board）認定當地核電廠面臨的財務挑戰足以支持最高每兆瓦時 10 美元的 ZEC。那些在伊利諾州主張我們電廠有獲利的相同聲音，在新澤西州的決定中被推翻。新澤西州的委員會強調，維持既有核電廠對達成該州的排放目標至關重要，而且——相較以其他零碳發電取代核能——成本顯著更低。

This is true in Illinois. Keeping the nuclear plants running is better option for the customers than trying to replace them with all renewables in storage. At 12x the cost, higher cost than preserving the nuclear plants, it would cost the Illinois consumers over $80 billion more to achieve the same admissions. We've been advocating for policy changes in Illinois for more than 2 years because I feel that we have a duty to our customers to preserve every opportunity to correct flawed policies and keep these critical energy resources running. But we're almost out of time, and we'll prematurely retire these assets in the fall if the policy reforms are not passed in this session.

在伊利諾州也是如此。讓核電廠持續運轉，對客戶而言比起嘗試以全再生能源加儲能來取代，是更好的選擇。若成本為保留核電廠的 12 倍，伊利諾州消費者為達成相同的減排目標將多付出超過 800 億美元。我們已在伊利諾州倡議政策變革超過 2 年，因為我認為我們對客戶有責任，應盡一切機會修正有缺陷的政策，並讓這些關鍵能源資源持續運轉。但時間幾乎所剩無幾；若本會期未通過政策改革，我們將在秋季提前除役這些資產。

Turning to clean energy policy in Pennsylvania. The Senate is moving forward on a bill that would set a state goal for transportation, electrification and authorized electric utilities to develop EV infrastructure and plans authorize a recovery for these investments. We support these federal and state policy efforts and stand ready to enable this important transition to a clean energy future. Joe will talk about what our utilities are doing currently on EVs.

接著談賓夕法尼亞州的潔淨能源政策。參議院正推動一項法案，將為運輸電氣化設定州級目標，並授權電力公用事業發展電動車（EV）基礎設施與相關計畫，同時允許就這些投資進行成本回收。我們支持這些聯邦與州層級的政策努力，並已準備好促成這項邁向潔淨能源未來的重要轉型。Joe 將說明我們的公用事業目前在電動車方面所做的工作。

Moving on to the separation update. Our team is working to get the separation done. We filed our applications for regulatory approval at FERC, the NRC, New York Public Service Commission in February. The NRC has indicated that our application is complete, and they expect to rule by November 30. In New York, comments are due on May 24, and we requested that the commission rule no later than their December 16 meeting. We're on track to get the necessary approvals so that we can close in the first quarter of next year.

接著是分拆更新。我們的團隊正努力完成分拆。我們已於 2 月向 FERC、NRC 以及紐約公共服務委員會提交監管核准申請。NRC 已表示我們的申請資料完整，並預期將於 11 月 30 日前作出裁決。在紐約，意見提交截止日為 5 月 24 日，我們也要求委員會最遲於 12 月 16 日的會議前作出裁決。我們正按計畫取得必要核准，以便在明年第一季完成交割。

With that, I'll turn it over to Joe to go into the financial details.

接下來我把時間交給 Joe，請他說明財務細節。

Thank you, Chris, and good morning, everyone.

謝謝你，Chris，各位早安。

Today, I will cover our first quarter results, quarterly financial updates and our hedge disclosures.

今天我將說明我們第一季業績、季度財務更新，以及我們的避險揭露。

Turning first to Slide 9. As Chris mentioned, we recorded a loss of $0.06 per share on a non-GAAP basis for the first quarter, driven by the losses from the February weather event.

先看第 9 頁。如 Chris 所提，我們第一季在非 GAAP 基礎下每股虧損 0.06 美元，主要是受 2 月天候事件造成的損失所影響。

Our Utilities performed ahead of plan for the quarter, delivering a combined $0.72 per share this year, which was $0.11 per share higher than the first quarter of 2020. This was primarily driven by strong operational performance as well as the impacts of distribution rate cases.

我們的公用事業部門本季表現優於計畫，今年合計貢獻每股 0.72 美元，較 2020 年第一季高出每股 0.11 美元。這主要來自強勁的營運表現，以及配電費率案件的影響。

ExGen reported a loss of $0.58 per share for the quarter. Excluding the 5-day weather event in February, ExGen would have earned $0.32 per share as we had anticipated. However, specific to the weather event, we occurred -- we incurred a loss in the first quarter of $0.90 per share. A portion of this loss is due to some penalties or charges associated with our natural gas business, that we ultimately expect to be reduced through waivers and/or recovered from customers later in this year.

ExGen 本季每股虧損 0.58 美元。若排除 2 月的 5 天天候事件，ExGen 原本可如我們預期般賺取每股 0.32 美元。然而，就該天候事件而言，我們在第一季發生——我們承擔了每股 0.90 美元的損失。此損失的一部分來自與我們天然氣業務相關的部分罰款或費用，我們最終預期可透過豁免而降低，且／或在今年稍晚向客戶回收。

As we disclosed in our 8-K last week, we estimate our full year loss from the weather event to be approximately $900 million to $1.1 billion pretax or $670 million to $820 million after tax. We also continue to expect to offset between $550 million and $650 million pretax or $410 million and $490 million after tax for the full year 2021. These offsets will occur primarily at ExGen through a combination of enhanced revenue opportunities, deferral of selected nonessential maintenance and primarily onetime cost savings, and are mostly expected in the second half of this year.

如同我們上週在 8-K 中揭露，我們估計該天候事件造成的全年損失約為稅前 9 億至 11 億美元，或稅後 6.7 億至 8.2 億美元。我們也仍預期在 2021 全年可抵銷約稅前 5.5 億至 6.5 億美元，或稅後 4.1 億至 4.9 億美元。這些抵銷將主要在 ExGen 透過多項措施實現，包括提升營收機會、遞延部分非必要維護，以及以一次性成本節省為主，且多數預期發生在今年下半年。

Holdco recorded a loss of $0.20 per share for the quarter, which was a larger loss than is typical in the first quarter and was driven by a tax adjustment required by GAAP to partially offset the tax benefit recorded at ExGen due to the Texas losses. This amount will reverse over the next 3 quarters, and ultimately will not have an impact on full year results.

Holdco 本季每股虧損 0.20 美元，虧損幅度大於第一季通常水準，主要是因 GAAP 要求進行稅務調整，以部分抵銷 ExGen 因德州損失而認列的稅務利益。該金額將在未來 3 個季度回轉，最終不會影響全年結果。

As Chris stated, we are reaffirming our guidance range of $2.60 a share to $3 per share, and you can see the details on Slide 16 in the appendix.

如 Chris 所述，我們重申每股 2.60 美元至 3.00 美元的指引區間，相關細節可見附錄第 16 頁。

Moving on to Slide 10. Looking at our utility returns on a consolidated basis, our trailing 12-month ROE as of the first quarter has improved to 8.9% from 8.7% last quarter. The 20 basis point increase was primarily due to higher earnings across the operating companies in the first quarter. As a reminder, the calculation is backward-looking. So you should continue to see some pressure on ROEs over the next couple of quarters as we work off the impacts of COVID-19, low interest rates at ComEd and the 2020 storms. We do expect to be in our targeted range of 9% to 10% by year-end. And looking into the future, we remain focused on delivering strong earned returns at the utilities in supporting our growth targets.

接著看第 10 頁。從合併基礎來看，我們截至第一季的過去 12 個月 ROE 已由上季的 8.7% 改善至 8.9%。這 20 個基點的提升主要來自第一季各營運公司獲利較高。提醒一下，該計算為回溯性。因此，未來幾季在我們逐步消化 COVID-19 的影響、ComEd 的低利率環境以及 2020 年風暴影響時，ROE 仍可能承受一些壓力。我們預期到年底可回到 9% 至 10% 的目標區間。展望未來，我們仍專注於在公用事業部門交付強勁的實現報酬，以支持我們的成長目標。

Turning to the next slide, 11. Since the last call, there were some important developments on the regulatory front. First, on March 30, PECO filed an electric distribution case with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. PECO is seeking a revenue increase of $246 million for continued investments in electric distribution infrastructure, which will make the local energy grid stronger and more resilient, enhance service, and help the company deliver safe, reliable and clean energy for consumers. In addition, the filing proposes customer relief offerings for eligible residential and small business customers, and we expect an order in December of this year.

接著看下一頁，第 11 頁。自上次電話會議以來，監管面出現一些重要進展。首先，3 月 30 日，PECO 向賓夕法尼亞州公共事業委員會提交電力配電費率案件。PECO 申請增加 2.46 億美元營收，以持續投資電力配電基礎設施，強化在地電網的強度與韌性、提升服務，並協助公司為用戶提供安全、可靠且潔淨的能源。此外，該申請也提出針對符合資格的住宅與小型企業客戶的紓困方案，我們預期今年 12 月會有裁定。

Second, ComEd filed its annual distribution formula rate update with the Illinois Commerce Commission on April 16, seeking a $51 million increase to electric distribution base rates. This year's formula rate update filing March ComEd's first request for a distribution rate increase in 4 years. The filing will support investments to expand access to clean energy through private and community solar and support the growing demand for electric vehicles. Additionally, we continue to make investments and make the power grid more resilient to severe storms, such as those experienced in Northern Illinois last year. We expect to receive an order by early December.

第二，ComEd 於 4 月 16 日向伊利諾伊州商務委員會提交年度配電公式費率更新，申請將電力配電基本費率提高 5,100 萬美元。今年的公式費率更新申請，標誌著 ComEd 4 年來首次提出配電費率調升。該申請將支持投資，以透過民間與社區太陽能擴大潔淨能源可及性，並支援電動車需求成長。此外，我們也持續投資，使電網對嚴重風暴更具韌性，例如去年北伊利諾伊州所經歷的風暴。我們預期在 12 月初前收到裁定。

We also have several rate cases still in progress, including orders in multiyear plans for Pepco D.C. and Pepco Maryland, which are expected in the second quarter. We continue to have constructive regulatory relationships across our jurisdictions, and are working with our regulators, states and communities to support their clean energy and climate goals. More details on our rate cases can be found on Slides 20 through 28 of the appendix.

我們也仍有數件費率案件在進行中，包括 Pepco D.C. 與 Pepco Maryland 多年期計畫的裁定，預期將於第二季出爐。我們在各司法管轄區持續維持具建設性的監管關係，並與監管機關、各州與社區合作，以支持其潔淨能源與氣候目標。更多費率案件細節可見附錄第 20 至 28 頁。

Slide 12 provides one example of how Exelon Utilities are working with our regulators and states to make investments that will address the climate crisis and help our customers. Our Utilities pay -- play a critical role advancing electric vehicles in our communities. This includes both the installation of publicly available charging stations and investment in the system to support this infrastructure. Exelon Utilities have been leaders in this rapidly growing space by expanding charging infrastructure, offering rebates and incentives and innovative rates, while electrifying public transportation to deliver convenient, affordable and equally accessible clean transportation options.

第 12 頁提供一個例子，說明 Exelon 公用事業如何與監管機關及各州合作進行投資，以因應氣候危機並協助客戶。我們的公用事業在推動社區電動車發展方面扮演——發揮關鍵角色。這包括安裝可供大眾使用的充電站，以及投資系統以支援相關基礎設施。Exelon 公用事業透過擴充充電基礎設施、提供回饋與獎勵及創新費率，同時推動大眾運輸電氣化，提供便利、可負擔且同等可及的潔淨運輸選項，已在這個快速成長的領域中居於領先地位。

Our clean electric transportation programs aim to support nearly 100,000 current electric vehicle drivers across our service territories, aligned with state climate goals, and improve overall air quality for all our customers and communities. To date, electric vehicle programs have been approved in Maryland, D.C., Delaware and New Jersey, with approval pending in Pennsylvania, as part of PECO's recent rate case filing. ComEd also has several ongoing educational and outreach initiatives, and several of the bills Chris spoke about would provide incentives for EV infrastructure.

我們的潔淨電動運輸計畫旨在支援我們服務區域內近 100,000 名現有電動車駕駛，與州級氣候目標一致，並改善所有客戶與社區的整體空氣品質。迄今，馬里蘭、華盛頓特區、德拉瓦與新澤西的電動車計畫已獲核准；賓夕法尼亞州的核准仍在審理中，作為 PECO 近期費率案件申請的一部分。ComEd 也有多項持續進行的教育與外展倡議，而 Chris 提到的幾項法案將為電動車基礎設施提供誘因。

The transportation sector currently represents about 1/3 of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Urban areas, like many of our service territories, are disproportionately affected by air pollution and the negative effects of climate change. One way we aim to help address this is by advocating for and helping to usher in cleaner, zero emission transportation, particularly in underserved communities. Our programs are designed to reduce common barriers to electric vehicle adoption, including range anxiety, total cost of vehicle ownership and lack of education and awareness among consumers. Cleaner vehicles on the road help our cities and states meet their environmental goals, reduce their carbon footprint, bring cleaner air to communities, and create economic opportunity through job creation and reduced energy costs.

運輸部門目前約占美國溫室氣體總排放量的三分之一。都會區（如我們許多服務區域）受到空氣污染與氣候變遷負面影響的衝擊尤為不成比例。我們希望透過倡議並協助推動更潔淨、零排放的運輸來因應此問題，特別是在資源不足的社區。我們的計畫旨在降低採用電動車的常見障礙，包括里程焦慮、車輛總持有成本，以及消費者教育與認知不足。道路上更潔淨的車輛可協助城市與各州達成環境目標、降低碳足跡、為社區帶來更潔淨的空氣，並透過創造就業與降低能源成本帶來經濟機會。

Additionally, Exelon's Utilities are leading by example in setting an aggressive goal to electrify our fleet, including both light and heavy-duty vehicles. We have committed to electrify 30% of our fleet by 2025 and 50% by 2030. Electrifying 50% of the fleet could avoid more than 65,000 metric tons of emissions cumulatively from 2020 to 2030. That's the equivalent to the carbon removed by 1 million trees planted and grown for 10 years.

此外，Exelon 的公用事業公司以身作則，訂下積極目標推動車隊電動化，涵蓋輕型與重型車輛。我們已承諾於 2025 年前將車隊 30% 電動化，並於 2030 年前達到 50%。若車隊電動化達 50%，在 2020 年至 2030 年期間累計可避免超過 65,000 公噸的排放。這相當於種植並生長 10 年的 100 萬棵樹所移除的碳量。

On Slide 13, we provide a gross margin update. For 2021, total gross margin is down $150 million versus the fourth quarter call, due to the increase in the estimated impact of the February weather event. The midpoint of our current estimate of the gross margin impact from this event is $950 million. This number is lower than the midpoint of our loss range of $1 billion because it does not include bad debt, which is captured in O&M.

在第 13 張投影片，我們提供毛利更新。就 2021 年而言，總毛利較第四季電話會議時下調 1.5 億美元，原因是對 2 月天候事件估計影響的增加。我們目前對該事件毛利影響的估計中點為 9.5 億美元。此數字低於我們 10 億美元損失區間的中點，因為其中未包含壞帳；壞帳已在 O&M（營運與維護）中反映。

Excluding the impacts of the February weather event, gross margin is flat to last quarter. Open gross margin is up $300 million relative to our prior disclosure, primarily due to higher prices in NiHub and West Hub. Our mark-to-market of hedges were down $200 million due to our hedge position, offsetting the increase in open gross margin partially offset by the execution of $100 million of power new business. We also executed $50 million in non-power new business during the quarter.

若排除 2 月天候事件的影響，毛利與上季持平。相較於先前揭露，未鎖定（open）毛利增加 3 億美元，主要因 NiHub 與 West Hub 價格較高。我們避險部位的按市價評價（mark-to-market）下滑 2 億美元，抵銷了未鎖定毛利的增加；此外，本季執行了 1 億美元的電力新業務，亦使未鎖定毛利的增幅部分被抵銷。我們在本季也執行了 5,000 萬美元的非電力新業務。

Thank you. And I will now turn back the call to Chris for his closing remarks.

謝謝。接下來我把電話會議交回給 Chris，請他做結語。

Thanks, Joe. Turning to Slide 14. I'll close on our priorities and commitments. We will deliver or exceed our financial commitments, delivering earnings within our guidance range and to maintain strong balance sheet. We will complete preparations to separate the businesses, including the regulatory approvals. At Exelon Utilities, we will prudently and effectively deploy nearly $6.6 billion of capital to benefit our customers and help meet the needs of our states' energy policy goals. We'll work with our regulators to ensure timely recovery on these investments. We'll continue to advocate for clean energy and climate policies with the new administration, Congress and our states to put our country on the path to meeting our carbon reduction goals. And we'll continue to partner with the support of our customers and our communities that we serve.

謝謝，Joe。接著看第 14 張投影片。我將以我們的優先事項與承諾作結。我們將達成或超越我們的財務承諾，在指引區間內交付盈餘，並維持強健的資產負債表。我們將完成業務分拆的各項準備工作，包括取得監管核准。在 Exelon Utilities，我們將審慎且有效地部署近 66 億美元資本，以造福客戶並協助滿足各州能源政策目標的需求。我們將與監管機構合作，確保這些投資能及時回收。我們將持續與新政府、國會及各州倡議潔淨能源與氣候政策，使國家走上達成減碳目標的道路。我們也將在所服務的客戶與社區支持下，持續建立夥伴關係。

So thank you all for joining us. And with that, we'll open it up for questions.

因此，感謝各位加入我們。有了以上內容，我們將開放提問。

(Operator Instructions) And your first question comes from Stephen Byrd with Morgan Stanley.

（接線員指示）第一個問題來自 Morgan Stanley 的 Stephen Byrd。

I wanted to just get your latest thoughts on ERCOT and market design. We've certainly seen a lot of activity. And you all gave some prepared remarks on that. But just curious, it strikes me it looks like it's a little less likely that the state may go in the direction of sort of fixed resiliency or capacity light payments. But just curious what you're sort of seeing and what direction you think we may take in terms of market design.

我想請教你們對 ERCOT 與市場設計的最新看法。我們確實看到很多動態，你們也就此做了準備發言。不過我好奇的是，看起來州政府走向某種固定的韌性（resiliency）或偏容量型（capacity light）的付款機制，似乎可能性稍微降低。但想請問你們目前看到的情況，以及你們認為市場設計可能會朝哪個方向發展？

Yes. Let me have Kathleen cover that.

是的。我請 Kathleen 來說明。

Stephen, yes, I think there are a number of ideas under discussion in the legislature. And I guess I wouldn't say that it's less likely that the state will ultimately choose to go down the path of setting a reliability standard. That idea does have some support and is being discussed openly, as are other changes, for example, to the ORDC curve to sort of lengthen it and lower the cap. And then there are other ideas out there as well.

Stephen，是的，我認為立法機關正在討論多項構想。我不會說州政府最終選擇走向設定可靠度標準（reliability standard）的路徑可能性變低。這個想法確實有一些支持者，也在公開討論中；同時也在討論其他變更，例如調整 ORDC 曲線，讓曲線拉長並降低上限。此外也還有其他想法。

So I think there's active discussion in both the House and the Senate over whether and when the legislature should act. There are some who think it should move forward and set some expectations and let the PUCT work on a market design over the balance of the year, whereas others are thinking maybe they'll wait and do it later in the year. So it's a little bit early to tell how those conversations are going to land. But I think the concept of setting, as all the other markets do, a reliability standard and letting the market operator design a market-based way to get there is still under active discussion.

因此，我認為眾議院與參議院都在積極討論立法機關是否以及何時應該採取行動。有些人認為應該往前推進，先設定一些預期，並讓 PUCT 在今年剩餘時間內著手市場設計；也有人認為也許會等到今年稍晚再處理。所以目前還有點早，尚難判斷這些對話會如何落定。但我認為，像其他所有市場一樣，設定可靠度標準，並讓市場營運者設計以市場為基礎的方式來達成該標準，這個概念仍在積極討論中。

That's really helpful. And then maybe going to PJM and FERC. We've seen a lot of activity around the treatment of MOPR. And just curious there, as well your latest thinking on sort of where we may be headed and kind of broader implications, given it looks like we may see a reversal.

這很有幫助。接著也許談談 PJM 與 FERC。我們看到關於 MOPR 的處理方式有很多動態。也想請教你們最新的看法：我們可能會走向哪裡，以及更廣泛的影響，因為看起來我們可能會看到政策反轉。

Yes. There are sort of 2 avenues where that's being discussed. First, at the RTOs themselves. And as you know, PJM has a stakeholder process to work through. How to reform MOPR, they have direction from their Board that they should reform it. But the question is how, and they've laid out a proposal, and they'll be taking comments and working towards the FERC filing in the summer to express their view of how it should be reformed.

是的。大致有兩條路徑在討論這件事。第一是在各 RTO 自身。如你所知，PJM 有利害關係人流程要推進，來討論如何改革 MOPR；他們的董事會已指示應該改革，但問題在於怎麼改。他們已提出一項提案，接下來會徵求意見，並朝著夏季向 FERC 提交文件的方向努力，以表達他們認為應如何改革。

And then, ultimately, of course, it will be up to FERC. You have 2 commissioners who are open that they think MOPR should be reformed. The other 3, less transparent in terms of how they would vote. So I think there's certainly going to be an effort on PJM's part to make a change. And then the question will be how the votes line up at the commission once that filing is made.

然後，最終當然將由 FERC 決定。目前有 2 位委員公開表示他們認為 MOPR 應該改革；另外 3 位在投票立場上較不透明。因此我認為 PJM 一定會努力推動變更，而接下來的問題是，一旦提交該申報案後，委員會內的票數將如何排列組合。

And your next question comes from Steve Fleishman with Wolfe Research.

下一個問題來自 Wolfe Research 的 Steve Fleishman。

So a couple of questions, I guess, focused on the nuclear. So first, in Illinois, I know there's been several proposals. The most recent, I think, was from the governor, related also to the audit that he set up. Could you give your views on whether that proposal would be sufficient to keep the Dresden and Byron open?

我有幾個問題，主要聚焦在核電。首先在伊利諾州，我知道有好幾個提案。最新的我想是州長提出的，且也與他設立的稽核有關。你能否談談你們的看法：該提案是否足以讓 Dresden 與 Byron 繼續運轉、不關閉？

Yes. I mean all of you have written on the economics of the plants and the reality of what the bill is starting at. I think it's -- from what we've heard, it's open negotiation. But just going from The Street analyst opinion and what we've seen, its starting point is not adequate to keep the plants continued operations going.

是的。你們各位都寫過這些電廠的經濟性，以及法案目前起點的現實。我認為——就我們聽到的——目前仍在開放協商中。但若僅從華爾街分析師的看法以及我們所看到的內容來看，其起始條件不足以讓電廠持續營運。

Okay. And then just to be clear on Illinois, in the event that maybe they just can't get a build on this session, and they try to go to the veto session. Obviously, you're targeting to shut the plants before then. So can you just confirm clearly whether, if they just don't get something done this session, the plants will shut, Dresden and Byron?

好的。那麼為了釐清伊利諾州的情境：如果這個會期可能就是無法通過法案，然後他們打算在否決會期（veto session）再處理。顯然你們的目標是在那之前關閉電廠。所以你能否明確確認：如果這個會期沒有完成任何方案，Dresden 與 Byron 會關閉嗎？

Yes. Sure. We've been real clear about that, but we're still optimistic. Most state or legislative bodies, the work comes to an end towards the end of the session. There's a lot of stakeholders involved here. There's a lot of voices that are inputting into it. And the legislature has a tough job of building a single bill out of 6 suggested bills and making sure that they take care of their constituents as well as all of the other stakeholders involved in the process. So we're not giving up. We're confident that we've got adequate support within the administration and within the legislature, and we'll see how it goes.

是的，當然。我們一直非常清楚地說明這點，但我們仍然樂觀。多數州或立法機關的工作通常會在會期接近尾聲時才收斂。這裡牽涉很多利害關係人，也有很多聲音在提供意見。立法機關的工作很艱鉅：要把 6 個建議法案整合成一個單一法案，並確保照顧到選民以及流程中所有其他利害關係人。因此我們不會放棄。我們有信心在行政部門與立法機關內獲得足夠支持，接下來就看進展如何。

That said, we have been clear for a couple of years. And it's just the reality, we cannot continue to run uneconomic plants and challenge the balance sheets of the Genco or the Holdco. We've got commitments. As I said earlier, we're going to make payroll. We've got to pay pensions. We've got to pay our bills. We have to have an investment grade credit rating that we can access capital markets. And when you have plants that are uneconomic and pulling you down, it's a tough decision, but it's one that we've made. And we'll continue to be optimistic that we can work with the stakeholders and the legislative body and the administration.

話雖如此，我們已經清楚說了好幾年。現實就是，我們無法繼續營運不具經濟性的電廠，並讓 Genco 或 Holdco 的資產負債表承受壓力。我們有承諾。如我先前所說，我們要發薪資；我們要支付退休金；我們要付帳單。我們必須維持投資等級信用評等，才能進入資本市場。當你有不具經濟性的電廠拖累整體時，這是艱難的決定，但我們已做出這個決定。我們也會持續保持樂觀，與利害關係人、立法機關以及行政部門合作。

But short of getting something done, we'll have to start to proceed what we are already doing the planning proceed for the shutdown. You can't order fuel. You can't do capital improvement. You can't do a lot of stuff in the face of uncertainty, which causes you to spend hundreds of millions to billions of dollars on plants that just aren't going to support themselves.

但如果無法把事情推進落實，我們就必須開始推進我們已經在做的規劃，也就是停機的規劃流程。在不確定性之下，你無法訂購燃料、無法進行資本改善，也無法做很多事情；這會導致你在那些根本無法自我支撐的電廠上花費數億到數十億美元。

Okay. One final question on nuclear. Just the -- there was a story, I think, in -- on Bloomberg this morning, talking about a nuclear [obscurity] being discussed in the Biden -- with the Biden administration and legislators. Could you talk about what you're hearing on that and whether we're seeing momentum in that as part of the Biden infrastructure plan?

好的。關於核能最後一個問題。就是——我想今天早上彭博有一則報導，談到在拜登政府與立法者之間正在討論核能的[聽不清]。你能談談你聽到的情況，以及這是否作為拜登基礎建設計畫的一部分正在形成動能嗎？

Steve, this is Kathleen. I can take that one. As Chris mentioned, the Biden proposal is for a clean energy standard. That's inclusive of existing nuclear and is technology neutral. That is what their proposal is. That's on the table. We saw the story this morning as well. But of course, their plan does not currently include a PTC for existing nuclear nor has one been introduced in either chamber. So it's obviously helpful that there is a growing focus on the fact that the existing nuclear fleet is integral to getting to any of the carbon targets that have been set. And we welcome that sort of change in focus and a growing understanding.

Steve，我是Kathleen。我可以回答這題。如Chris提到的，拜登的提案是清潔能源標準。這包含既有核能，且在技術上保持中立。這就是他們的提案內容，也確實在討論桌上。我們今天早上也看到了那則報導。但當然，他們的計畫目前並未包含針對既有核能的PTC（生產稅額抵免），而且兩院也尚未提出相關法案。所以，既有核電機組對於達成任何已設定的碳排目標都不可或缺，這一點正受到越來越多的關注，顯然是有幫助的。我們也樂見這種焦點的轉變與理解的提升。

But the challenge remains that we're not yet even to the point where we know, is Congress going to move forward on a bipartisan basis? Does a bill need to be drafted that would be consistent with reconciliation? And the timing and the outcome is just far too uncertain for us to make any decisions here based on that. Obviously, to the extent something happens in Congress, that's a long-term positive for the company. But just one Reuters story is not enough to -- we have to make decisions based on current economics and current policy.

但挑戰仍在於，我們甚至還沒到能確定國會是否會以兩黨合作的方式推進的階段；是否需要起草一項符合預算協調（reconciliation）程序的法案？而時間點與結果都太不確定，讓我們無法基於此在這裡做任何決策。當然，只要國會有所作為，長期而言對公司是正面因素。但僅憑一則路透報導還不夠——我們必須依據當前的經濟狀況與現行政策來做決策。

And your next question comes from James Thalacker with BMO Capital Markets.

下一個問題來自BMO Capital Markets的James Thalacker。

I just want to touch briefly on the governor's legislative proposal and I guess his proposal for an application of an $8 a ton carbon mechanism. I know it's early. And as you -- but as you think about the final market structure and a pretty clean generation stack in Illinois already, how do you see the pass-through of this potential tax on power prices?

我想簡單談一下州長的立法提案，以及我猜他提出的每噸8美元的碳機制的適用方式。我知道現在還早。而且如你——但當你思考最終的市場結構，以及伊利諾伊州本來就相當乾淨的發電組合時，你如何看待這項潛在稅負對電價的轉嫁？

In New York, you've seen about a 35% -- 25% to 35% pass-through, but it's not clear to me how you can sort of tax on the state supply from Wisconsin or Illinois. So where do you guys kind of see the potential uplift in power prices in its early stages, understanding the final market structure is yet to be determined?

在紐約，你看到大約25%到35%的轉嫁率，但我不清楚你要如何對來自威斯康辛或伊利諾伊州的州外供給課稅。所以你們怎麼看電價可能的上升幅度？目前仍在早期階段，也理解最終市場結構尚待確定。

It's a difficult -- I'm going to let Kathleen get into the technical details. But it's difficult for a single state that is an island surrounded by other states without the same policy not to have leakage coming in. So as we pointed out, if we shut down those 4 reactors that we're talking about, they will be replaced by leakage, the energy coming in. So we will go backwards in that area. How you monitor that and how you tax on it is a very difficult thing in an island.

這很困難——我會讓Kathleen談技術細節。但對於一個被其他州包圍、而周邊州沒有相同政策的單一州而言，要避免外溢（leakage）流入是很困難的。所以如我們指出的，如果我們關閉正在談的那4座反應爐，它們將被外溢所取代，也就是外來電力輸入。那樣我們在那方面反而會倒退。要如何監測、以及如何對其課稅，在一個「孤島」式的州內市場是非常困難的。

Kathleen, I don't know if you want to go into more technical.

Kathleen，我不知道你是否想補充更多技術面的內容。

I think you covered it. I mean, I think the issue is when you have a national carbon price, you would see a high pass-through rate given the amount of fossil that's still in the stack. But when it's a single state, it's just -- our estimates are that there would be a very small impact on carbon energy prices due to out-of-state plants running more frequently.

我想你已經涵蓋了。我的意思是，問題在於如果是全國性的碳價，因為發電組合裡仍有相當比例的化石燃料，你會看到很高的轉嫁率。但如果只是單一州，那就——我們的估計是，由於州外電廠會更頻繁地運轉，碳價對能源價格的影響會非常小。

Okay. Great. And I just wanted to see if you could kind of give me a quick update on the outage at the LaSalle plant and what's your outlook for the cost and the timing for its return.

好的。很好。我也想請你快速更新一下LaSalle電廠的停機狀況，以及你對成本與復運時程的展望。

Bryan Hanson, he's our COO of Generation. You want to cover that?

Bryan Hanson，他是我們發電事業的營運長。你要回答這題嗎？

Yes. Thanks, James. Yes, the LaSalle Unit 2 reactor was out of service for an extra 34 days when we found through maintenance activities higher-than-expected deterioration of 2,000 reactor recirculation system. And because of the size and location of these valves, we had to design and deploy special welding and machining tools to make the necessary repairs which were required prior to returning that unit to service.

是的，謝謝你，James。是的，LaSalle 2號機反應爐因為我們在維護作業中發現2,000（聽不清）反應爐再循環系統的劣化程度高於預期，因此額外停機了34天。由於這些閥門的尺寸與位置，我們必須設計並部署特殊的焊接與機加工工具來進行必要的修復，而這些修復是在該機組復運前必須完成的。

It involves several hundred people given the difficulty of that work. That unit has since been returned to service. The cost was a significant impact for that particular plant. And these types of risks are the kinds of things that we have to take into account when we are assessing the financial viability of each of those plants. But that unit has been returned to service and ready for a summer run.

由於作業難度高，涉及數百人。該機組此後已恢復運轉。成本對該電廠而言造成了顯著影響。而這類風險正是我們在評估各電廠財務可行性時必須納入考量的因素。不過該機組已復運，並已準備好迎接夏季運轉。

And your next question comes from Shar Pourreza with Guggenheim.

下一個問題來自Guggenheim的Shar Pourreza。

Chris and Joe, have you had any conversations with the agencies kind of about the SpinCo since the fallout we saw in Texas? Just trying to get a bit of a sense if this is more of a structural risk going forward as we're thinking about sort of the general business model for the IPPs or just kind of an anomalistic situation. I mean, especially as we're sort of thinking about the standalone ExGen entity and maintaining IG ratings post spin. And obviously, we understand that the metrics are extremely healthy. But I'm just kind of curious how they're thinking about the business -- maybe a little bit more qualitative factors post the weather event. I just have a follow-up.

Chris和Joe，自從我們在德州看到的事件後續之後，你們有沒有和評級機構就SpinCo進行過一些對話？我想了解一下，當我們思考IPP的一般商業模式時，這是否會成為未來更結構性的風險，還是只是一次異常情況。我的意思是，特別是當我們在思考獨立的ExGen實體，以及分拆後維持投資級（IG）評級。顯然我們理解指標非常健康。但我有點好奇，在這次天候事件之後，他們如何看待這個業務——也許是一些更偏質性的因素。我還有一個追問。

Yes. Sure. As you could imagine, we've had numerous contacts with the agencies since the event in February. And you saw, after the announcement on our fourth quarter call of separation, they all -- that Moody's and S&P published some preliminary thoughts on both Generation and on the RemainCo or Exelon. On the 29th of April, S&P came out and updated some commentary on ExGen and affirm their investment-grade rating and the stable outlook. And it's important to note that they've also delinked them from the corporation effectively from the standpoint of the fact that we have announced separation.

是的，當然。如你所想，自2月事件以來，我們與各家機構有多次接觸。你也看到，在我們第四季電話會議宣布分拆之後，Moody’s與S&P都發布了對發電事業以及RemainCo（或Exelon）的初步看法。4月29日，S&P又更新了對ExGen的一些評論，並確認其投資級評級與穩定展望。重要的是，他們也已從某種意義上將其與母公司脫鉤，因為我們已宣布分拆。

So we continue to have dialogue with each of the agencies. All 3 of them have Generation rated investment grade currently. And we continue to expect that to happen in the future as we manage our business.

因此我們持續與各家機構對話。目前三家機構都給予發電事業投資級評等。我們也持續預期，隨著我們管理業務，未來仍會維持這樣的結果。

A key to that is managing the business and managing the risk and understanding the risk. It was an unprecedented weather event that was beyond potentially the design basis of the plants. And we have to take that into consideration as we look at our risk profile going forward. We will not continue to weather risk like that, that could challenge the balance sheet and the investment-grade ratings.

其中關鍵在於管理業務、管理風險並理解風險。那是一場前所未有的天候事件，可能超出電廠的設計基準。我們在檢視未來風險輪廓時必須將其納入考量。我們不會繼續承擔那種可能挑戰資產負債表與投資級評級的天候風險。

Got it. And then just lastly, there's been some noise building on the Chicago franchise agreement. Is there sort of a path forward there? Any sense on time line? Anything on expectations you can share? I mean I just were curious if this is going to turn into a San Diego situation or not.

了解。最後，關於芝加哥特許經營協議，最近似乎有一些雜音升高。那邊是否有可行的推進路徑？對時程有任何概念嗎？有沒有任何可以分享的預期？我只是好奇這會不會演變成像聖地牙哥那樣的情況。

Joe Dominguez, we'll let cover that. I believe he's on.

Joe Dominguez，我們請你來回答。我相信你在線上。

Yes. First of all, Chicago is a world-class city, and we're privileged to serve it. And we want to continue that relationship. And we've been working with the city for some time on terms for a new franchise agreement. As you know, the franchise agreement continues until a new one is approved or until a new franchise -- or franchisee is selected. They are going to explore all their options. And I think they are going to follow a blueprint like San Diego used to solicit ideas.

是的。首先，芝加哥是一座世界級城市，我們很榮幸能為其服務。我們也希望延續這段關係。我們已與市政府就新的特許經營協議條款合作一段時間。如你所知，特許經營協議會持續有效，直到新的協議獲得核准，或直到選出新的特許經營——或新的特許經營者。他們將探索所有選項。我認為他們會依循聖地牙哥用來徵求構想的藍圖。

We have an RFI that's been issued. We'll participate in that RFI. We'll see if others do. And we'll see what ideas come out of that process. That's expected to close on May 28. In the meantime, we are continuing with the discussions around the new franchise agreement. And we're pretty confident that ComEd is going to be successful at the end. We have a lot to offer. We're leaning in on the city's priorities around energy efficiency, jobs, support for low-income families, clean and renewable energy and more.

我們已經發布了一份 RFI。我們會參與這份 RFI。我們會看看其他人是否也會參與，並看看在這個流程中會產生哪些想法。預計將於 5 月 28 日截止。與此同時，我們仍在持續就新的特許經營協議進行討論。而且我們相當有信心，ComEd 最終會成功。我們能提供很多。我們正積極配合市府在能源效率、就業、對低收入家庭的支持、潔淨與再生能源等方面的優先事項，以及更多。

I think the most important thing for the city, and they've been very clear about this, is making the city reliable and resilient against some of the storms. We have talked on these calls about some of the storms we've experienced. We added [ratio] in August, where we had 110-mile per hour hurricane and force winds our service territory. 15 tornadoes landed. It was the second most expensive storm in the U.S. this year. And unfortunately, that event has not been an anomaly. We saw unprecedented flooding coming off the lake in the summer. And just maybe 12 months earlier, we saw polar vortex that brought with it negative 30-degree weather.

我認為對市府而言最重要的事情，而且他們在這點上說得非常清楚，就是讓城市在面對一些風暴時具備可靠性與韌性。我們在這些電話會議中談過我們經歷的一些風暴。我們在 8 月新增了 [ratio]，當時我們的服務區域遭遇時速 110 英里的颶風級強風。共有 15 個龍捲風登陸。那是今年美國第二昂貴的風暴。不幸的是，那次事件並非特例。我們在夏季看到來自湖面的前所未有洪水。而就在大約 12 個月前，我們還經歷了極地渦旋，帶來零下 30 度的天氣。

So the city, I think, is rightfully concerned about the changing weather from the climate crisis. And notwithstanding these weather events, Chris reviewed earlier some of our performance. We're not only top decile in SAIFI and CAIDI, but I think, best-in-class in both categories, first time for this company to achieve that. And we've been able to make the investments, keep residential rates low and so on. So I think we're doing what we need to do. We're investing philanthropically in the city.

因此，我認為市府對於氣候危機所帶來的天氣變化感到擔憂是合理的。儘管有這些天氣事件，Chris 先前回顧了我們的一些績效。我們不僅在 SAIFI 與 CAIDI 方面位居前十分位，我認為在這兩個類別中都是同業最佳，這也是本公司首次達成這樣的成績。而且我們能夠進行投資、維持住宅電價低廉等等。所以我認為我們正在做我們需要做的事。我們也以公益方式在城市投入。

And I think it's important to note. I think we all know this, that serving cities alone is a pretty expensive proposition. The infrastructure is expensive doing any work in the city is expensive just because of the density of existing infrastructure. You tend to have more of a concentration of low-income customers in the city for a variety of reasons. It's more expensive.

而且我認為有一點很重要需要指出。我想我們都知道，單獨服務城市本身就是一個相當昂貴的命題。基礎設施昂貴，在城市裡做任何工程都昂貴，主要是因為既有基礎設施的密度很高。由於各種原因，城市裡往往有更高比例的低收入客戶集中。成本更高。

When the city is part of a broader Chicago system, and the city accounts for about 1/3 of ComEd, we have the ability to use the horsepower and the talent not only within ComEd, but the Exelon family of companies to come in, repair the system when it's damaged as a result of weather. But also, we have the financial wherewithal of the industry and the businesses and the people that live outside of Chicago in the suburbs to cover some of the costs for the city's more economically challenged citizens.

當城市是更廣泛的芝加哥系統的一部分，而且城市約占 ComEd 的 1/3 時，我們就有能力運用不僅是 ComEd 內部的動能與人才，還包括 Exelon 企業家族的資源，在系統因天候受損時進場修復。此外，我們也具備產業的財務實力，以及居住在芝加哥以外郊區的企業與民眾所提供的支撐，來分攤部分成本，以照顧城市中經濟條件較弱的市民。

So we think the whole package is going to be valuable. You mentioned the San Diego process. We've followed that for some time. I don't think there was, at the end of the day, anyone who actually competed for the franchise there. But it is a process. And it's a transparent process that we need to go through, and we appreciate that. And in the meantime, as I said, we're going to lean into it. If the city decides to go into in a different direction, they would have the pay ComEd upwards of $7 billion for the system, depending on the timing of the transaction. And because these systems were built in an interconnected way, we anticipate that there would be about $5 billion or more in separation costs that would take upwards of a decade to complete new substations, control centers, computer platforms alike.

因此我們認為整體方案將會很有價值。你提到聖地牙哥的流程。我們追蹤那個流程已有一段時間。我不認為到最後真的有人在那裡競標特許經營權。但那是一個流程，而且是一個我們必須走過的透明流程，我們也很感謝。與此同時，如我所說，我們會積極投入。如果市府決定走不同方向，他們將必須向 ComEd 支付高達 70 億美元以上來購買該系統，取決於交易時點。並且由於這些系統是以互聯方式建置的，我們預期將會有約 50 億美元或更多的分離成本，且需要長達十年以上才能完成，包括新變電站、控制中心、電腦平台等。

So this is going to be a long road if the city goes in that direction. We understand this move within the fabric of the negotiations that we've been having with the city. And I'm confident that the proposal we're going to offer is going to allow us to continue this long-standing relationship. And we will be very fortunate to be able to continue to serve this great city.

因此如果市府走那條路，這將是一條漫長的道路。我們理解這項動作是在我們與市府談判脈絡中的一部分。我有信心我們將提出的方案能讓我們延續這段長期關係。而我們也將非常幸運能夠繼續為這座偉大的城市提供服務。

And your next question comes from Michael Weinstein with Crédit Suisse.

下一個問題來自 Crédit Suisse 的 Michael Weinstein。

On electric vehicle charging infrastructure, this is still pretty early days, I understand that. But is there -- at what point does this become a significant portion of CapEx opportunity? What do you think that opportunity is? And when do you think it really starts to kick in?

關於電動車充電基礎設施，我理解目前仍是相當早期的階段。但在什麼時間點，這會成為一個顯著的資本支出（CapEx）機會？你認為那個機會有多大？以及你認為它何時會真正開始加速？

Michael, this is Calvin. I would say we continue to look at EV infrastructure and partner with all of our jurisdictions on how we go about it. And Chris, I think it was -- no, Joe outlined in detail what we're doing in each of our jurisdictions in terms of EV adoption, charging infrastructure and the like. Right now, it is not a significant piece of our capital plan. Chris alluded to the $6.6 billion that we will execute this year, and it's just scratching the surface. But at the end of the day, it is part of our business priorities moving forward.

Michael，我是 Calvin。我會說我們持續關注 EV 基礎設施，並與我們各個轄區合作，討論我們要如何推進。Chris，我想是——不，Joe 已經詳細說明了我們在各個轄區在 EV 採用、充電基礎設施等方面所做的事情。目前，它並不是我們資本計畫中的重要部分。Chris 提到我們今年將執行的 66 億美元，這只是觸及表面。但歸根結底，這是我們未來業務優先事項的一部分。

As you laid out, 50% of our fleet will be electrified internally by 2030. And we continue to look at working with each of our jurisdictions to encourage them in that way in investing in infrastructure. So the bottom line is that it's a small portion of our total capital investment, but it is on our plan to continue to grow.

如你所述，到 2030 年我們內部車隊的 50% 將完成電動化。我們也持續與各個轄區合作，鼓勵他們朝這個方向前進並投資基礎設施。因此結論是，這在我們總資本投資中占比不大，但已納入我們的計畫並將持續成長。

The infrastructure investment beyond the EV charging stations is something that our engineering units are working on. Between EV and distributed generation, upgrading lines, changing voltage levels, that gets into a lot more complicated, but it's a bigger part of the investment.

除了 EV 充電站之外的基礎設施投資，是我們工程單位正在處理的事情。在 EV 與分散式發電之間，升級線路、調整電壓等，這會變得更複雜，但也是投資中更大的一部分。

Yes. That's what I was thinking of. Is there a tipping point or a point where the curve starts to really kick in gear? And what year do you think that approximately happens? And is this a 2030s type opportunity or more of a maybe late 2020s? That's -- just trying to think the outcomes.

是的。那正是我在想的。是否存在一個臨界點，或是曲線開始真正加速的時間點？你認為大約會發生在哪一年？這是 2030 年代的機會，還是更可能在 2020 年代後期？我只是想推演可能的結果。

Yes. It's something we're working on now, more for the distributed generation. There's analysis that goes into the circuits to make sure that we're not overloading them, and we're upgrading them as we see the demand go up. And so I think we're investing now. A tipping point, I think it's going to be a gradual investment over a 10-year-plus period. It's not going to all of a sudden hit immediately one day.

是的。我們現在正在做這方面的工作，更多是針對分散式發電。需要對電路進行分析，以確保我們不會讓它們超載，並在需求上升時進行升級。所以我認為我們現在就在投資。至於臨界點，我認為這將是在 10 年以上期間逐步投入的投資，不會在某一天突然一下子就發生。

And I'll give you an example. Philadelphia Electric and BGE are upgrading their voltages on their distribution systems from 4,160 to 13,800 in anticipation of more distributed generation, but that will also support EV. So it gives us more capacity on the circuits to allow the customers to get the services they want.

我舉個例子。Philadelphia Electric 和 BGE 正在把他們配電系統的電壓從 4,160 升級到 13,800，以因應更多分散式發電的需求，但這也會支援 EV。這能在電路上提供更大的容量，讓客戶能獲得他們想要的服務。

Got you. Just one last question. On the New York Public Service Commission filing for separation, is there any reason why you think it might take longer than the end of the year to get an approval there?

了解。最後一個問題。關於紐約公共服務委員會（New York Public Service Commission）針對分離的申請案，是否有任何原因讓你認為取得核准可能會比年底更久？

This is Kathleen, Michael. I can take that. I mean we haven't even seen comments yet on the New York application. They were due at the end of the month. We had to ask for action by the end of the year, and we think the agency is capable of acting in that period. But of course, we need to see what the comments are. And we'll have a better sense once we do. We have targeted close in the first quarter of next year. So if we need a little bit extra time, whether in the New York case or at the NRC, we have accounted for that. But again, we think that acting by the end of the year is doable in New York.

Michael，我是 Kathleen。我可以回答。我的意思是，我們甚至還沒看到對紐約申請案的意見評論。它們在月底到期。我們必須要求在年底前採取行動，而我們認為該機構有能力在那段期間內作出決定。但當然，我們需要先看看評論內容。等我們看到之後會更有把握。我們的目標是在明年第一季完成交割。因此如果需要多一點時間，不論是在紐約的案件或是在 NRC，我們都已將此納入考量。不過再次強調，我們認為在紐約於年底前作出決定是可行的。

And our final question comes from Michael Lapides with Goldman Sachs.

我們最後一個問題來自高盛（Goldman Sachs）的 Michael Lapides。

Two questions for you, actually unrelated. One, some of the potential draft Illinois legislative approaches have pretty decent changes to how Commonwealth Edison's ratemaking process would work. Could you just give an update on what you think the puts and takes are? What are the things that could actually be a benefit to ComEd's earnings power? What are the things in there that could be a headwind if implemented to ComEd's earnings?

其實有兩個問題，彼此無關。第一，一些伊利諾伊州可能的立法草案方向，對 Commonwealth Edison 的費率制定（ratemaking）流程如何運作，提出了相當不錯的變更。你能否更新一下你認為其中的利弊取捨？哪些內容可能實際上有利於 ComEd 的獲利能力？又有哪些內容若實施，可能會對 ComEd 的獲利造成逆風？

Joe Dominguez, do you want to cover that?

Joe Dominguez，你要不要先回答這題？

Yes. There's a lot of different proposals at this point, Michael. I think the common thread in all of them is that we would come out of the formula rate. And so -- as you know, the formula rate historically for the last 10 years, really throughout the entirety of EMA, has produced an ROE that is significantly lower than the national average. And that's resulted in billions of dollars of savings for our customers over that period of time.

好的。目前有很多不同的提案，Michael。我認為它們的共同主軸是：我們將會退出公式費率（formula rate）。因此——如你所知，過去 10 年、其實在 EMA 的整個期間，公式費率歷來所產生的 ROE 都顯著低於全國平均。而這在那段期間為我們的客戶帶來了數十億美元的節省。

As we emerge from the formula and we come to a more normalized ROE, there will be an opportunity for expanded earnings at ComEd. At the same time, one of the things we very much liked about the formula is our ability to plan work for years in advance. We don't -- as you well know, we don't do radically different things year-to-year. We kind of continue to invest in poles, wires, smart devices, those sorts of things over the course of years. And the formula had given us some certainty that we were going to be able to continue those investments, and that allowed us to kind of make arrangements with our vendors so that we could maximize efficiencies there, both from a supply standpoint as well as from a labor standpoint.

當我們退出公式費率、轉向較為正常化的 ROE 時，ComEd 的獲利擴張將會有機會。同時，我們非常喜歡公式費率的一點，是它讓我們能夠提前多年規劃工作。我們——如你很清楚的——不會每年做截然不同的事情。我們會在多年期間持續投資於電線桿、電線、智慧裝置等這類項目。而公式費率給了我們一定的確定性，讓我們能夠持續這些投資，並使我們得以與供應商做安排，以在供應面與勞動面最大化效率。

So one of the things I worry about coming out of the formula is that planning process. Are we going to continue to see volatility from rate case to rate case? So some of the ideas that have been proposed are aimed at looking at a longer-term transparent investment direction coming out of the company and being reviewed by the commission.

因此，我對退出公式費率後的其中一個擔憂，是那個規劃流程。我們是否會在每一次費率案件（rate case）之間持續看到波動？所以，目前提出的一些想法，是希望在公司退出公式費率後，能有一個更長期、透明的投資方向，並由委員會審視。

For example, the labor proposals would have us produce reports every 4 years, showing all the investments that we're going to make. And it would give stakeholders an opportunity to take a look at that. We wouldn't necessarily get an approval from that. But it would give people a good understanding of what we're trying to do, what we're trying to invest in the system as we integrate renewables and build on the resilience of the system. So that would be, I think, helpful, so that we have some clarity in the process about where we're going next.

例如，勞工相關的提案會要求我們每 4 年提出報告，列示我們將進行的所有投資，並讓利害關係人有機會檢視。我們不一定會因此獲得核准，但這能讓大家更清楚我們想做什麼、我們打算如何投資系統，以在整合再生能源的同時提升系統韌性。因此我認為這會有幫助，讓流程對我們下一步要往哪裡走更清楚。

It's clear to me that to continue the level of reliability that we've been able to attain and meet the challenge of these storms, integrate renewables, integrate fleets of electric cars, trucks and buses, we're going to need to continue to invest in the system the way we have been investing in those technologies. The formula gave us a clearer path for doing that.

在我看來很明確的是：若要維持我們已達成的可靠度水準、因應這些風暴的挑戰、整合再生能源、整合電動車（含卡車與巴士）車隊，我們就必須持續以我們過去投資這些技術的方式來投資系統。公式費率讓我們在這方面有更清晰的路徑。

And one of the concerns I have about just returning to traditional ratemaking is we don't have that year-over-year clarity. And you could get the volatility and rate outcomes, and that turns into volatility in terms of your workforce, volatility in terms of your suppliers and the loss of efficiency there. So I think those are the puts and takes, at least as I see the legislation right now. And I think as Chris said, the policymakers have been meeting routinely on that. And I think those are the issues they're worried about as well.

而我對回到傳統費率制定的一個擔憂是：我們缺乏逐年（year-over-year）的清晰度。你可能會看到費率結果的波動，而這會轉化為人力的波動、供應商的波動，並造成效率流失。所以至少就我目前看到的立法內容而言，我認為這些就是利弊取捨。如 Chris 所說，政策制定者一直在例行會面討論，我想這些也是他們所擔心的議題。

Got it. And then one quick follow-up, unrelated, on taxes. You can't necessarily rely on ERCOT or the PUCT to act quickly and make market design changes. Often, they've been very reticent to do so. Is there anything you're thinking about doing, either from a contracting standpoint or something physical at the plant, aka maybe backup generation on site with storage tanks or something like that to forestall potential risk like what just played out happening in the future?

了解。接著一個很快的追問，與前題無關，關於稅務。你不能一定指望 ERCOT 或 PUCT 會迅速採取行動並做出市場設計變更；他們往往相當保守、不太願意這麼做。你們是否在考慮做些事情——不論是從合約安排的角度，或是在電廠的實體面，例如在現場加裝備援發電並配備儲槽之類——以避免未來再次發生像剛剛那樣的潛在風險？

Right now, the design of ERCOT does not compensate for reliability, availability. It's a pure energy market only. We would have to take into consideration, as ERCOT and the commission continues to deliberate on what the design could be is what we could afford to invest into those plants for that resiliency.

目前 ERCOT 的設計並不對可靠度、可用性提供補償；它是純粹的能源市場（energy-only market）。我們必須把 ERCOT 與委員會持續就市場設計可能方向的審議納入考量，才能判斷我們能負擔在那些電廠為提升韌性而投入多少投資。

In PJM, it's a very resilient market. We're compensated. And we're penalized if we don't produce. That is not the structure that ERCOT has taken in the past. And so it leaves the generators competing against significant amounts of wind suppressing the prices during the shoulder months, especially. And then you have to look at your return on capital to make the investments for that. So going to a dual fuel, going to a different design basis for temperatures can be an expensive proposition. And if you're not getting rewarded for that and the market doesn't prioritize that, it would be difficult to do.

在 PJM，市場非常有韌性。我們會獲得補償；若未能發電也會被處罰。這不是 ERCOT 過去採行的架構。因此，發電商必須與大量風電競爭，尤其在淡季月份（shoulder months）風電會壓低價格。接著你就必須評估資本報酬，才能決定是否進行相關投資。因此，改成雙燃料（dual fuel）、或採用不同的溫度設計基準，都可能是昂貴的方案。如果你沒有因此得到回報、而市場也不把這件事列為優先，就會很難推動。

Got it. Okay. I was just thinking, is it materially expensive to add things like fuel oil tanks to some of the gas plants that could store a couple of days for use in emergency only? Is that prohibitively expensive relative, I guess, if I were to compare it to what just happened?

了解。好。我只是想，像是在某些燃氣電廠加裝燃料油儲槽，能儲存幾天、僅在緊急狀況使用，這在成本上是否非常高？我想把它和剛剛發生的情況相比，是否會是難以承受的昂貴？

No. It is expensive, but it's more complicated than just having oil on site. The plants are designed for a gradient of temperatures. And we're starting to see those temperatures expand in the variants. And so you have to do more than just put oil tanks on in dual fire, make the modifications on the firing jets, in the turbines -- excuse me, in the generators. And so you would -- it is much more complicated than just a couple of oil tanks to make sure that the resiliency is there.

不。確實昂貴，但比起只是把燃油放在現場，事情更複雜。電廠是依一個溫度梯度來設計的，而我們開始看到溫度變化的範圍在擴大。因此你必須做的不只是加裝燃油儲槽、改成雙燃料，還要對噴嘴、渦輪——抱歉，是在發電機上——進行改造。所以，為了確保韌性到位，遠不只是加幾個燃油槽那麼簡單。

And then you've got to make sure that you're being compensated, like PJM does, for those investments. And we stand up. We made those investments in PJM. And we also know that we'll be penalized if we don't produce in PJM. So if and when ERCOT decides that availability and reliability of the fleet is a priority, which thus far, they have not, we would be able to participate in that market and make whatever modifications make economic sense to weather the storm. It's a pretty good cliche there.

此外，你還得確保你能像在 PJM 一樣，對這些投資獲得補償。我們在 PJM 已經做了那些投資；我們也知道若在 PJM 未能發電就會被處罰。所以，如果、以及當 ERCOT 決定把機組群的可用性與可靠度列為優先事項——到目前為止他們還沒有——我們就能參與那個市場，並進行任何在經濟上合理、足以挺過風暴的改造。這裡用「挺過風暴」算是個不錯的老套說法。

All right. Okay. Thanks, everybody, for joining the call today. I hope you all stay and your families stay safe and healthy. And with that, I'll close out the call.

好。好的。感謝各位今天參加電話會議。希望大家以及你們的家人都能平安、健康。那麼我就結束今天的電話會議。

That does conclude today's call. You may now disconnect. Thank you for your participation.

今天的電話會議到此結束。您現在可以掛線。感謝您的參與。