(Starts Abruptly). Today, we will be making forward-looking statements during the call. There are many factors that may cause future results to differ materially from these statements. Please refer to our SEC filings for a discussion of these factors. Joining me this morning for opening remarks are Nick Akins, our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Brian Tierney, our Chief Financial Officer. We will take your questions following their remarks. I will now turn the call over to Nick.

Okay. Thanks, Julie. Good morning everyone, and thank you for joining us today at our second quarter 2014 earnings call. I am once again pleased to report a very positive quarter for AEP driven by strong regulated company results with a continued emphasis on the transmission business as well as our regulated utilities. Additionally, our unregulated generation, retail and river operations divisions performed well for the quarter. So, the headlines for the quarter very positive. AEP delivered GAAP and operating earnings of $0.80 per share compared with $0.69 per share GAAP and $0.73 per share operating earnings for the second quarter ’13. Year-to-date 2014 GAAP and operating earnings have now resulted in $1.95 per share compared with $1.44 GAAP and $1.53 operating for the same period in 2013. We are reaffirming our earlier adjusted guidance range for the year of $3.35 to $3.55 per share and remain committed to our 4% to 6% growth trajectory based on our original 2013 guidance range. AEP is allocating another $100 million of incremental capital in 2014 to our transmission business. As you may recall, we previously allocated $200 million of incremental capital of transmission in the first quarter so we are executing on our plan of advancing the transmission business model. Additionally ETT has been rated BAA1 by Moody’s and is now paying a dividend to its owners so good news from the Western front. Growth in our service territory continues for the quarter with weather normalized load increasing 2.3% overall for the year so far excluding the effects of Ormet, the industrial load that went bankrupt last year. In fact, once again excluding Ormet during the second quarter, the industrial load was up a healthy 4.5% and 3.4% year-to-date drilling by the shale gas, petrochemicals and all industrial sectors with the exception…

Thank you, Nick. And good morning everyone. On slide 5, you will see our comparison of 2014 results to 2013 by segment for both the quarter and the year-to-date periods. I plan on focusing your attention this morning mostly on the second quarter results. For those of you who are interested in the year-to-date comparison, you’ll find that in the appendix. I will say that the drivers we discussed at length during the first quarter earnings call remain the drivers for the year-to-date results. For the company overall, operating earnings for the second quarter, was $390 million or $0.80 per share compared to $0.73 per share or $357 million recorded last year. These results when combined with the first quarter, pushed first half 2014 earnings to $950 million or $1.95 per share compared to $1.53 per share or $744 million earned in the first half 2013. Looking at the slide, you can see that each business segment is either equal to or above results recorded in 2013. With that as an overview, let me step you through the major earnings drivers by segment for the quarter on slide 6. Second quarter earnings for the vertically integrated utility segment were $0.31 per share this year comparable to the results of last year. Rate changes across many of our jurisdictions added $0.06 per share for the quarter. The increase in rates is a result of incremental investment made to serve our customers. Higher wholesale power prices and the availability of our generating fleet bolstered off system sales which benefited both customers and shareholders resulting in improved earnings in the second of $0.03 per share. Normalized retail margins contributed $0.01 per share to the year-over-year growth. Weather for the quarter was comparable to last year. The quarterly increase in margins was offset by…

(Operator Instructions). And our first question will come from the line of Hugh Wynne, Sanford Bernstein. Please go ahead. Hugh Wynne – Sanford Bernstein: Good morning.

How are you? Hugh Wynne – Sanford Bernstein: Very well. Congratulations on a strong quarter.

Thanks. Hugh Wynne – Sanford Bernstein: I wanted to follow up a little bit on your comments on the new proposed regulation on CO2. And I was wondering if I could maybe draw you out a little bit on how you see the rule being implemented in the states where you have generation? I appreciate that you’re submitting comments and that the rule will be changed, but are you anticipating any particular form of regulation in the major states where you have coal-fired power plants?

Yes, so, that’s a great question. And I don’t know if I have a good answer at this point. I’m not sure anybody does. We’re working extensively and have outreach to all of our states, trying to understand exactly what this plan means. And even our generation, we’re just a part of each state that we serve. And that’s what I stress, these are state plans. So, we’re going through the process with them of understanding the generation is out there, the commitments made around the generation. What that means to the overall plan for the state in response. And some of our states obviously have taken a very aggressive in terms of litigation. And it remains to be seen how that whole process will work out. I think this plan is more far reaching than anything that’s ever occurred before. And when you change dispatch order of units within states, when you change resources within states and give guidelines that are fully significant, that really minimizes the other options available, it really makes it challenging for the states. And that’s something that we’re trying to work through the process to fully understand. We’ll get back with EPA on the facts that we see from a state by state perspective and have discussions about it and specific examples of areas that are of concern. And we’ll have to work it out. But I really can’t tell you what the process is at this point. As you know the rule provides for 2017 and then 2018 if the states decide to get together which then would be interesting in itself. And as one participant in part of that overall plan, it’s hard to imagine how these things are all going to come together in that timeframe. And then many of the requirements really hit in 2020. So you really don’t have much time, probably not enough time to get what you need done. So, this thing has a wrong way to play out. I think certainly the comments that the EPA are critical and certainly the EPA needs to be cognizant that these states are dealing with very, very detailed, very complicated issues and also the companies involved. So, Hugh, that’s a long answer – long way of saying we don’t know at this point. Hugh Wynne – Sanford Bernstein: I appreciate your time on that. Thank you very much. Have a good day.

Yes.

Your next question is from the line of Michael Lapides from Goldman Sachs, please go ahead. Michael Lapides – Goldman Sachs: Hi guys, congrats on a good quarter and also want to thank you. I know you implemented at the beginning of the year, but for the new disclosure methodology, it makes understanding AEP a little bit easier to do.

Brian’s happy about that comment. Michael Lapides – Goldman Sachs: One question on the transmission side, you did those in the first quarter and now you’re doing it again in terms of updating your transmission capital spending guidance for the year. Can you give us a little more insight on where that spending is occurring, meaning either specific jurisdictions, specific Transco, or even whether it’s just embedded within the VIU, T&I, or is it actually at the Transco sub? Just trying to tie together your CapEx versus your segments.

Yes, it’s occurring all over the place. But primarily in Ohio, Oklahoma and Indiana, and there are RTO mandated projects, there are other projects, reliability projects, customer connect projects. And about – is our call about 75% of the mix was in the Transco’s and 25% was in the regulated operated companies. So, this is all block and tackle, mandate and spending and we have a list of projects and it’s not block. We’re just allocating another $100 million that the transmission say go find something. We have a list of what exactly those projects are by individual project. And I know Brian’s like 20 to 25 separate projects on the page that certainly show the detail. Michael Lapides – Goldman Sachs: Yes. Does this mean that you’re moving stuff that you had planned on doing in ’15, ’16 and ’17 into 2014? So maybe ’14 CapEx, you’re kind of accelerating the earnings power, but you’re not necessarily making, I don’t know, for year five earnings power higher? Or is this an increase in capital spending if you think about three to five year budget?

Yes. So, it is obviously first of all taking care of that green section of the graph that, the incremental transmission that we had for the year. And then we also advanced some projects from future years into this year. But that doesn’t meant that all those, there is no additional identified projects along the way. There is a lot of other activity going on. The green sections were only defined projects that we knew exactly what they were and where they would be done. And then, of course the work continues on continued rehabilitation of the grid from a transmission perspective and additional projects. So, while it’s advanced from future years, that doesn’t mean that there won’t incremental projects as well. Michael Lapides – Goldman Sachs: Okay, and last item. Great. Brian, this may be more of a detailed one, on the O&M change for 2014 you’ve talked about, can you reiterate what’s the amount? You said that it’s largely going to be second half of 2014. In which parts of the business is that actually impacting, meaning VIU, T&I, elsewhere?

It’s going to impact all of them Michael. It’s about $60 million and it’s going to impact the vertical integrated utilities and APGR in terms of planned outages. And it’s going to impact all of them in terms of – it’s going to impact vertically integrated utilities and transmission distribution utilities in terms of some transmission forestry spend that we’re going to do. And then there are other customer related projects that will be in all other segments that we deal with where we’ll be trying to pull those costs forward. Michael Lapides – Goldman Sachs: So its costs that you will pull forward into 2014, but therefore wouldn’t necessarily have recurring in 2015?

Yes, it’s really. We’re trying to take those ’16 cost out because we have that challenge associated with the capacity revenue fall-off in 2016. So, we’re trying to take cost out of ’16 and pull them into ’14 and then not have those costs be recurring again in 2016. So, if it’s plant outages, if we can get ahead on transmission tree trimming that we then get the benefits of that for our customers in 2014, but will have better resulting spend happening in 2016 to help us fill that gap. Michael Lapides – Goldman Sachs: Got it. Thank you. Much appreciated and congratulations on a good quarter.

Sure, thanks.

Your next question is from Dan Eggers from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: Hi, good morning.

Hi Dan, good morning. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: Listen, I guess, just, Nick, going back to your comment on the Ohio generation, you said you’ll address it in a timely fashion and enhance shareholder value. Can you give an update on progress you’re seeing as far as long-term contracting of those assets as an alternative to keeping them? And then with the pullback in power prices and that sort of thing, is that having a bearing on potentially delaying when you guys would want to do something hoping for a better environment, particularly after AES pulled their project?

Well, the way we look at it, the way we originally told you I guess last year or a year before. We’re looking for certain things. And certainly the hedging of that generation is critical. Certainly from maybe retail and the wholesale side, we continue to work on the PPA issue in Ohio focused on trying to bring some sensibility around the risk that customers are taking on in Ohio. And certainly the market areas that we’ve been working on with PJM and others to enhance capacity and then with the energy markets themselves and improving on average. Those are all things that help us determine what the future of that business look like. And obviously we’re not just stopping there we’re looking at all the cost structures around that business. And really treating it like any other investor would treat it. So, it’s really important for us to reach those milestones to fully understand what the valuation of that business looks like in the future. And then, the one thing we have is time to focus on those activities and make a decision. All along the way, we’re keeping our board up-to-date on what market conditions look like, what the areas look like in terms of the options available to us. And that’s all I’m saying, at that point is we will decide what to do with that business when we feel like the time is right to make sure we maximize shareholder value. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: So, that sounds like 2014 will be consumed with, or part of 2014 will be consumed with making a decision. But there’s not actually anything getting done this year?

Yes, the 2014 obviously is a year where certain milestones have to come into place. I mean, we have several – we’ve already gone through a capacity auction that was improved. We still have some changes that are permeating through PJM with the demand curve and so forth. We’ve got other things we’re doing with it and we believe that in 2015 like I mentioned with 80% that capacity running, it’s going to retire mid-’15. So, the very real impacts of the retirements that generation is going to be reflected through the capacity and energy markets. So that will give us a real view of what that valuation looks like. And also, from a call standpoint, Chuck Zebula is doing everything he can do down to get the cost structure itself down. And with the LEAN activities, the plants are running very differently than what they ran in the past. So, all those things are coming together. And 2014 is a year where we’re going through the process, determining what the milestones are and what the options are available. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: Okay. Thank you for that. And I guess, just one other question on kind of the load growth trends: obviously, there’s a lot of enthusiasm in the first quarter. And trying to decipher between weather and usage was a question, and we saw residential taper off comparably in the second quarter. How are you feeling about the outlook for demand growth kind of beyond 2014 and are you as encouraged today as you might of been, say, at the end of the first quarter?

I’d say, we’re just as encouraged because you look at residential for example, quarter by quarter I mean, it was pretty high change in first quarter and then it shows a slight decrease in second quarter. A lot of times, residential sort of gets skewed from quarter to quarter based on whether it be holidays, whether it be areas where we’re having to residential parties maybe dealing with their loads in different fashions and different parts of the year because you could have like last year there was that federal furlough that was done that people stayed home, residential went up. So this year, it sort of shows it goes down during this time last year. So, if things like that that will make the residential sort of come in and out each quarter. I tend to look more at the averages of residential load. You don’t see that so much with commercial and industrial loads. And with commercial, showing a consistently positive and then in particular the industrial continues to expand, expands more every quarter. That’s a good thing because we’ve always said industrial leads commercial, commercial leads residential. So I think it’s a good indicator for the future. Dan Eggers – Credit Suisse: Okay. Thank you, guys.

Thank you. And our next question is from the line of Paul Ridzon with KeyBanc. Please go ahead. Paul Ridzon – KeyBanc: Just kind of on Dan’s question, just on the Ohio generation, is an outcome in Ohio around the PPA a gating issue for your decision?

I think certainly its part of the decision process. But I think the real reason why we’re doing the PPA arrangement. Number one, is bring some stability to the generation in Ohio, the second reason obviously is our customers, all right, we’re asking terms of the volatility of the market. So, it’s important for us to get some measure of that in place. It’s just like you buy fuel or anything else or stock, you’re in for the long-term, you’re in for the short term. Long-term capacity and energy needs to be there in Ohio. For the first time, Ohio is short and Ohio is going to be a purchaser on the market if it’s not careful in reinforcing the value of this generation. So, yes, it’s a big part of the decision process for us, because you make very different decisions about generation, unless you have long-term purchase power arrangements whether they’re formula-based rate or within the retail side that we’re talking about. So, there is an opportunity there. And I think there is legitimate concern on the part of many including the industrials. And they should be concerned. And that’s something I think that we’re focused on answering that question during this year. Paul Ridzon – KeyBanc: And just switching gears, the cost shift from ‘16 to ‘14, should we think about that as allowing you to get to the 4% or 6% or bring you comfortably within that 4% to 6% growth 2015 to 2016?

I think all of the activities that we talked about doing, the LEAN initiatives, the cost shifting and the incremental transmission spend are meant to have us inside that range. Paul Ridzon – KeyBanc: Okay. Thank you.

There are a number of other factors that will impact where we land in that range. And they are the normal factors that you normally think about. Load growth, our ability to contain cost and wholesale energy pricing. And also keep in mind that what we’ve done so far is what we’ve been able to identify in the prospects of what’s happened so far from LEAN activities and so forth. So, as far as 2016 is concerned, we still have a lot more work to do. I mean, we obviously wouldn’t have put our guidance for ‘16 if we didn’t feel comfortable within that range. Where we’re at within the range is, it will be a measure of how much work we can get done from this year, end of ‘15, end of ‘16. And then obviously in November, we’re going to give a view of what we see happening with additional guidance that we provide then. Paul Ridzon – KeyBanc: Thank you very much.

Yes.

Thank you. Our next question is from the line of Stephen Bryd from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Good morning, Stephen. Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Good morning. You gave some good color in the presentation on the growth of shale gas activity. Is the kind of growth that we’re seeing, is this in line with your expectations? Is it accelerating above your expectations? Can you give a little more color on the degree of activity that you’re seeing?

I think in some cases it’s above our expectations because and I know I heard the other day our President in AEP Texas said that we have in the last year put in like 20, 25 – about 25 substations in that territory, which means we’re connecting a lot of load. And we’re doing in terms of transmission, the substation in a box we call it but the skid stations, so that we can connect these customers more quickly, we’re expanding that effort because we definitely want to keep up with the expansion that’s occurring. So, I’d say it’s ahead of expectations in the areas and it’s probably at expectations than others.

Stephen, one of the things that we saw last year was lot of the shale gas load that we expected to come on earlier in the year last year did not come on until later in the year. And whether that’s logistics problems, permitting problems or whatever it was, it was stacked up and really didn’t come in until later last year, earlier this year. As we’re looking forward, our shale gas related forecasts are actually increasing from the base that we had. And as we look to the end of the decade, we just had to increase our load forecasts for those regions by 20% given some updates that we’ve had on some of the developments in those areas. Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Okay. And just wanted to speak about that increase in the supply, we’ve seen a lot of volatility in local gas prices. Do you have a point of view on the impact, either near-term or long-term, just on all this increase in shale gas and what that might mean for local gas prices versus what we might see quoted on Henry Hub?

Yes, we’re seeing some pretty significant basis differentials around our combined cycle gas plants. Waterford for instance which takes off with Texas Eastern and Zone M2, has frequently been trading at a significant discount to Henry Hub with our Lawrenceburg plant, which is on Texas gas translation zone 4 is frequently trading at $0.25 premium to Henry Hub. So, even in our own service territory, areas that are not that far apart, Indiana to Eastern Ohio, we’re seeing some pretty significant basis differentials. When you’re in the production area and you don’t have the infrastructure to take the gas out of the production area, we’re awash in gas and its depressing prices in places where you don’t have those constraints and you’re pulling from the Gulf, you’re trading at a traditional premium to the Henry Hub. So, it’s impacting local prices pretty significantly at our service area.

Little caution on that, when you look at the volatility of processing, it’s a matter of perspective how much of the processes are coming off. It’s still hard in our coal prices and when you look at the retirements that are about to occur next year, you really wonder what it’s going to do to natural gas prices going forward. And even it depends on even more with the Clean Power Plant, it’s – it will be amazing to see what the affect could be because I think the price is moving around in a relatively thin volume level. So you see storage creeping up a little bit, well, it wouldn’t take a hot summer, we’d lose storage if there is a hot September. But when you retire generation, particularly that’s running as much as that generation is running, it’s going to move the natural gas and I would probably expect energy processes move up as a result. Stephen Byrd – Morgan Stanley: Great. Thanks much for the color. I appreciate it.

Yes.

Thank you. Our next question is from the line of Paul Patterson from Glenrock Associates. Please go ahead. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates: Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates: Not to specifically ask about M&A, but there is, in Texas, a utility that looks like it’s for sale, potentially, and you guys are in Texas. But, also, you made some comments in your opening statement about potential M&A and what you were looking for, and I’m just sort of wondering about the potential deployment of leverage and whether or not you see opportunities such as Encore or what have you?

Yes. So, I guess first of all the patent M&A 101 answer, we look at a lot of things. But certainly when you make a decision like that it continues to be more of a strategic move. And with the amount of transmission spend that we have available to us with like I said with no premium. And I fully expect the Texas process to be pretty robust. It remains to be seen how that process is actually going to work out. And in fact, who all is involved with it. But our course of action is what we know today. And that’s focused on the transmission investment that we have indigenous that we can continue to improve earnings per share for our shareholders. And anything else beyond that would have to be something that achieves a strategic hurdle that overcomes the transmission spend, and that’s a hard thing to do these days. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates: Okay. And then I just wanted to turn back to sort of Ohio and this PPA rider. And just sort of generically speaking, what the interaction you guys are having, generally speaking with officials in Ohio and their thoughts about fuel diversity, what the market is providing them? And their appetite or their policy perspective on potentially going for something like the PPA rider or what have you, sort of a hybrid situation, in terms of if they want to have more fuel diversity or what have or if they’re willing to sort of just go pure market kind of thing? Just what kind of, incrementally, what have you been getting from, as you get further in the process from the officials in Ohio?

I think there is legitimate concern. What happens, I think probably the – you already have a test case out there with the ESP filing that we made last December that has a PPA for the OVEC generation. The staff recommended against it but they said well, commission, if you decide to do this, this is how to do it. So, basically they plan into the commission. And it will be a matter of the public policy in Ohio what the result winds up being. But that would be a clear indicator and you probably would see more of that as we go forward. Because there is a huge amount of generation out there that is at risk. And from an Ohio perspective, it needs to be locked in, in some fashion. Now that might not be all of it but certainly just as you do with any other portfolio, there needs to be a long-term approach. And for Ohio, it depends upon PJM market conditions to preserve some sense of lack of volatility for customers. That would be a huge error. So, we continue to have discussions and there are obviously others like industrials you’re concerned about it, from an economic development perspective in Ohio. There is concern about from that perspective. And we’ll continue to save the tree on that. And I think that’s important for us to progress. So I’d see that playing out this year. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates: Okay. Any sense of any sort of timing, I mean, you said this year, but I’m just wondering, do you think, is it going to be just basically, should we just check out the ESP process or do you think there might be another way this might manifest itself?

Well, I think certainly the ESP case is a clear indicator because that may be the first thing that the commission actually deals with. But there could be other filings that we would make as a result as well. Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates: Okay. Thanks a lot. I appreciate it.

Yes.

Our next question is from Ali Agha from SunTrust. Please go ahead. Ali Agha – SunTrust: Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning. Ali Agha – SunTrust: I wanted to clarify a couple of points. First, on the transmission side, so, on the slide that you all lay out for us, the base case and the high case. So, just to be clear, if I look at the 2016 numbers, you still have about a $0.06 differential earnings-wise between base and high. So does some of the incremental investment that you’ve made capture that, or when should we see that $0.06 starting to get captured visibly from our side?

Yes, so you should, you should it’s inclusive in that. And you should see that rolling through when the projects are completed.

With a very short lag that we have on translation spend if we make incremental this year, you’ll start to see that in earnings next year. Ali Agha – SunTrust: I see. Okay. Secondly, on your Ohio thinking, Nick, as you laid out various milestones, etcetera. Is it still a scenario for you to look at that portfolio and think of either a tax-free spin-off, or a sale to unlock some equity value? Is that still something you’re considering, or is the focus primarily on trying to make it, as “you’d really like as possible”?

I think all those options are still open because we have to credibly look at this business, do everything we can to fortify the value of it. And the make decisions about what the optionality is concerning that set of businesses. And I think I mean, we’re looking at that in terms of maximizing shareholder value and you have to look at all the options when you do that. Ali Agha – SunTrust: Okay. If I heard you right, the EEI is probably not the forum where you’d give us your strategic conclusion, but maybe year-end earnings for next year, would that be the time frame we should be looking at?

Well, I certainly would be hesitant to talk about the timing of that. I doubt that we’ll be saying anything about the disposition of our decisions on those particular assets at that point in time. November would really be a time where we focus on the guidance for the forward looking years. So, you’ll see a new version of that. But in terms of – in terms of the end regulated generation, we’ll have to see how the processes are moved through in Ohio and other areas. Ali Agha – SunTrust: Okay. Last question, can you just remind us for budgeting and planning purposes, what is the weather-normalized load growth you assume for this year and normalized longer-term?

Yes, so when in our budget for this year, we were assuming negative 1.1% including format and excluding format positive one tenths of a percent. Obviously as we’ve come in hotter for the first half of the year, weather normalized we would be off those numbers today. And we generally don’t reforecast what the individual components going into the guidance once we get into the year. We had been forecasting negative five tenths of a percent to positive five tenths of a percent in our guidance. And we will be revisiting that as we work our way towards putting together more formalized guidance at EEI. Ali Agha – SunTrust: Thanks Brian, thank you.

Thank you. We probably have question time for one more question operator.

Thank you. Our next question will come from Greg Gordon from ISI Group. Please go ahead. Greg Gordon – ISI Group: Thanks guys. I’ll make it quick since you’ve answered a lot of, just stopped by. I wanted to ask the – looking at one of your slides, year-to-date you’ve put 36% of your volumes at the Generation Resources business into the spot market. Obviously you’ve done very well because we had a lot of volatility in the first and second quarter but prices are off quite a bit. Did you take advantage of higher prices out the forward curve in the second quarter to hedge out better prices, some of your load for next year or do you expect to run substantively open again?

Yes, they’re continually hedging in the market. And really those hedges have continued to be of benefit to us. Greg Gordon – ISI Group: And my question is, did you take advantage of higher prices out the forward curve that kind of – that have since fallen off precipitously to change the mix of what you might be putting into the spot market next year?

Greg, we’ve taken some advantage of that. But a significant portfolio of that portfolio is going to be open to spot markets going forward, probably in that 30% to 40% range. Greg Gordon – ISI Group: Okay, thanks guys. Take care.

Yes, okay.

Thank you. And please go ahead with any closing remarks.

That’s all. You can give the replay information please.