Good morning, and welcome to the PG&E Corporation 2017 Second Quarter Conference Call. At this time, I would like to pass the call to Ann Kim. Thank you and enjoy the conference. You may proceed, Ms. Kim. Ann Kim - PG&E Corp.: Thank you, Mallory, and thanks to those of you on the phone for joining us. Before I turn it over to Geisha Williams, I want to remind you that our discussion today will include forward-looking statements about our outlook for future financial results which is based on assumptions, forecasts, expectations and information currently available to management. Some of the important factors that could affect the company's actual financial results are described on the second page of today's slide deck. The deck also includes a reconciliation between GAAP and non-GAAP measures. We encourage you to review our quarterly report on Form 10-Q that will be filed with the SEC later today and the discussion of risk factors that appears there and in our 2016 annual report. With that, I'll hand it over to Geisha. Geisha J. Williams - PG&E Corp.: Thanks, Ann. Good morning, everyone. I'm pleased to report that we had a very strong quarter, one that was marked by continued impressive operational performance, encouraging progress on the regulatory front and solid financial results. I'll start this morning with an update on some important actions we've taken this past quarter to continue strengthening our safety culture and operations. I'll then highlight some key investments we're making to enable us to meet our customers' evolving expectations while also keeping bills affordable. And finally, I'll cover some of the recent steps we've taken to help advance California's clean energy economy and position PG&E for continued success. After that, I'll turn things over to our Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,…

Our first question comes from the line of Jonathan Arnold with Deutsche Bank. You may proceed.

Good morning, guys. Geisha J. Williams - PG&E Corp.: Good morning.

Could you just speak to what's driving the delay in the gas spending, the $100 million that you moved around from 2017 into 2018? Jason P. Wells - PG&E Corp.: Jonathan, this is Jason. It really is – we started to bundle some of our work in our gas transmission and distribution business so that we can better execute that work. As a result, this is really just sort of a timing shift where the final execution and work will fall into 2018. That's why we're really just highlighting its timing in nature.

Okay. And the lower equity is sort of partly that and partly other things by the sound of it. Jason P. Wells - PG&E Corp.: That's right. I mean, we have better visibility to our financing plan with two quarters under our belt. So we have a final decision in the GRC. We've resolved a number of our pending items impacting comparability which we started the year with. So we have a better line of sight to the equity needs for the full year here in 2017.

Okay. So, I'm trying not to ask something else that will burn up Jason's voice, but on Diablo, obviously you have the settlement under the charge this quarter. Can you talk about where that proceeding sits? And I remember there was a piece of it that used to relate to kind of replacement that got pulled out of the current case. And is this – should we view this charge as sort of the end of the first phase effectively and how do we think about the second phase? Steven E. Malnight - PG&E Corp.: Jon, this is Steve Malnight. In terms of where the proceeding sits, yes, the record in the proceeding is now closed and we're awaiting a proposed decision from the judge. It has evolved and changed pretty substantially since it was originally filed. So as you noted, we filed the settlement with the joint parties to withdraw some of the procurement that we had proposed to do in this proceeding and instead defer that to the commission's integrated resource plan proceeding. So we still have the energy efficiency replacement that is in this case but we've deferred the remainder to the IRP. In the case we still have a cost for employee retention programs as well as the retraining programs. We have the community mitigation payments that we proposed. And as David mentioned in the call, we recently filed an additional settlement that resolved some of the uncertainty around – that would resolve some of the uncertainty around both the license cost recovery as well as canceled projects. So at this point we're awaiting proposed decision from the judge on all those items.

Okay, great. Thank you, Steve.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Praful Mehta with Citigroup. You may proceed.

Thanks so much. Hi guys. Geisha J. Williams - PG&E Corp.: Hello.

My first – sorry. So my first question was on the power indifference charge or indifference adjustment around CCAs. Just want to understand a little bit more around the progress on that and when do you see timing of something happening around adjustments for that case? And how do you think that plays out over time. Steven E. Malnight - PG&E Corp.: Yes, so this is Steve Malnight again. Let me just give a quick update on that. As we mentioned in the original proceeding, the Power Cost (sic) [Charge] Indifference Adjustment, or PCIA, is really designed to ensure that the state law is fulfilled to maintain indifference as some customers choose to leave bundled service and go to either CCAs or direct access. As we have pointed out and as I think the joint utilities pointed out, the current mechanism as it stands today does not fully allocate those costs. So for us, about 35% of those costs really remain with bundled customers, which needs to be corrected as CCAs continue to become a bigger and bigger part of the load. With the PCIA OIR that the commission recently launched, we view that as a real positive. The commission has clearly recognized the need for reform in that proceeding and has laid out some guiding principles that highlight the need to really maintain what we call bundled customer indifference, which ensures that the state law is followed. So the commission has not yet issued a schedule, but in many different proceedings in areas they have mentioned the desire to handle this on an expedited basis and move through that quickly. So we're very hopeful that that comes to pass. And we'll see and follow this proceeding as it goes. I would expect it will hopefully be resolved sometime in 2018.

Got you. Thanks, guys. And then secondly, on the cost of capital, I know we have the good outcome around the 2019 timeframe. But just to understand from an ROE perspective and your authorized equity perspective, do you think that will be tougher to maintain your authorized equity at current levels going forward? And in terms of ROEs, do you think there's a risk at that time in terms of where the ROEs come out and how you think that plays out? Jason P. Wells - PG&E Corp.: Praful, this is Jason. I think it's way too early to tell. I mean clearly when we litigate cost of capital, they're going to look at the equity ratio, they will look at our return on equity, they will look at the adjustment mechanism. But frankly, I think it's just way too early in that process to think about what's going to happen two years down the road.

Fair enough. Thanks guys.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Lapides with Goldman Sachs. You may proceed. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Hey, guys. A couple of CapEx questions. Just in the TO cases, and if you don't mind to address TO18 and TO19, the one that just got filed, what is the CapEx for those TO cases relative, I think it's to the roughly $1.1 billion that you're assuming in 2017? Jason P. Wells - PG&E Corp.: Hi, Michael, this is Jason. In TO18, we filed for a CapEx of $1.3 billion. As you know, that case is still pending. Hearing is the next – the first quarter next year. Currently, we're forecasting spend for this year in our electric transmission business of $1.1 billion. That compares to what we filed in TO19 of CapEx of $1.4 billion. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: So you filed for TO18 of $1.3 billion, TO19 of $1.4 billion. If you were to actually get that CapEx spend, that adds another $500 million to $600 million to your CapEx and then after bonus P&A, all that good stuff, it kind of creates an uplift potentially to rate base. Jason P. Wells - PG&E Corp.: It does create potential upside, but obviously we're going to have to work through the hearings process in that we just filed the TO19 case. So I have to work through what we anticipate to be settlement discussions early on and I think a lot of this will be tied up to the resolution of TO18. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Got it. Okay. And finally, Geisha, when you look at other opportunities for rate base growth, and you've laid several out on the slides, which ones do you think have the potential to be the most material? Meaning, when I think about it on a dollar of capital invested, which ones do you see that are not in your current CapEx forecast or you can see, hey, that can wind up being a pretty big number over time? Geisha J. Williams - PG&E Corp.: Yeah, you know the ones we've talked about historically which are outside this period is, what ultimately happens with high-speed rail, what ultimately happens with some of these really large state-sponsored projects. I think that provides an opportunity. More near term, I continue to think that there's great opportunity around electrification of transportation. I think at this continued improvement or opportunity for us to continue making investments and our bread-and-butter work, modernizing the electric lines and modernizing our pipes. So longer term, it's the things that are outside the range like the high-speed rail. Short term, it's our bread-and-butter work. Michael Lapides - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Got it. Thank you, guys. Much appreciate it.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Anthony Crowdell with Jefferies. You may proceed.

Hey, good morning. Just quickly, you talk about our earnings at 10.4% on the entire enterprise. As you shift into a lower ROE with this cost of capital extension, is that a good metric to use for the whole enterprise earning at 10.25% or do we expect, as Michael just brought up, as the transmission rate base maybe continues to grow has the ability to earn above the 10.25%? Jason P. Wells - PG&E Corp.: We're still signaling to earn the CPUC authorized return on equity in 2018 and 2019 which is 10.25%. We did file a TO19 for 10.75%. That's the 10.25% plus the 50 basis point adder that are for participating in the competitive transmission process. But the electric transmission rate base still represents a little less than 20% of the overall rate base. So that differential isn't very significant to earnings.

Great. Thanks for taking my questions. And I hope you feel better, Jason. Jason P. Wells - PG&E Corp.: Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Travis Miller with MorningStar Capital Group. You may proceed.

Good morning. Thank you. You answered my primary question on Diablo Canyon earlier. But we step back and think about the next however many years here before the proposed closure. At what point do you get clarity in terms of recovering any kind of stranded capital cost that haven't been depreciated or then potentially a bigger issue on the decommissioning costs? Steven E. Malnight - PG&E Corp.: Hey Travis, this is Steve Malnight again. So thanks for the question. I should say another important part of the existing proposal that I failed to mention before actually is the mechanism to ensure that the rate base for Diablo Canyon is appropriately depreciated through the rest of its useful life. So under our proposal, we will put in place the mechanisms to ensure that the depreciation is fully recovered in that plant by the time it shuts down. So that's part of the proposal we have now. On the decommissioning, as you know, that's going to be a very long-term endeavor at Diablo Canyon as we go through that. We have regular proceedings to look at the cost of decommissioning. We recently had the decision in the current case that did not fully support our estimated cost. But we will have the opportunity in 2018 to come back and re-file that. And as a part of our plans for decommissioning, we're now going to be conducting a site-specific study, which will look in detail at the estimated cost. So we will be litigating that again in 2018.

Okay. And when you talk about the fully recovered depreciation over this next period if you receive this terms of settlement, it would accounting-wise increase depreciation but then you'd collect those back from ratepayers through higher rates, is that what happened on a very high level? David S. Thomason - PG&E Corp.: This is David Thomason. We've already actually been depreciating Diablo to fully recover the asset balance by the end of its current license term, so there is no increase necessarily in depreciation as a result of that path.

Okay. So it would be at a zero rate base number by that time? David S. Thomason - PG&E Corp.: Correct. So $2.2 billion roughly in Diablo rate base today, we hope to be or plan to be at zero by the end of the current license term.

Got it. Great. Thanks so much.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Ashar Khan with Visium Fund Management. You may proceed.

Thank you. My questions have been answered. Thanks.

Thank you. Ann Kim - PG&E Corp.: All right. Well, this is Ann. It appears we have gone through the queue of questions. So thanks, everyone, for joining us this morning. We wish you a safe and happy day.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for attending the PG&E Corporation 2017 second quarter conference call. This now concludes the conference. Enjoy the rest of your day.