Thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Xcel Energy second quarter 2007 conference call. (Operator Instructions) At this time I’d like to turn the presentation over to the Managing Director of Investor Relations, Paul Johnson. Please go ahead sir.

Thank you and welcome to Xcel Energy’s second quarter earnings release conference call. I’m Paul Johnson, Managing Director of Investor Relations. With me today is Ben Fowke, Vic President and CFO of Xcel Energy, and several others who are here to help answer your questions. This morning we’re going to discuss our financial results, the proposed COLI settlement, and updates on business developments and regulatory processes. I also want to point out on our web site there are slides that are available. Please let me remind you that some of the comments we’re about to make contain forward looking statements. Significant factors that could cause results to differ from those anticipated are described in our earnings release, and Xcel Energy filings with the FCC. With that I’ll turn it over to Ben.

Well thanks Paul and welcome everyone. It’s been an outstanding quarter for Xcel Energy, and we have a long list of accomplishments to prove it. We reached a positive settlement in principle in our COLI dispute with the IRS. We achieved constructive outcomes in our natural gas rate cases in both Colorado and North Dakota. Our King Plant came back into service on schedule, and our other major capital projects remain on track and on budget. We signed a contract for a wind farm development project in Minnesota, we filed a combined electric and gas rate case in Wisconsin, and last, but not least, our second quarter financial results were outstanding. Year-to-day, we’re on track with our financial plan. I’ll get into more detail in just a moment, but let me start with second quarter results. I’m very pleased to report earnings from continuing operations of $0.29 per share for the second quarter of 2007, which compares with $0.24 per share for the second quarter of 2006. As I mentioned last quarter, we expected that many of the items that reduced first quarter results would reverse as the year went on. Our strong second quarter indicates that’s exactly what’s happening. Earnings from continuing operations increased by $0.05 per share for the quarter, largely due to higher based electric utility margins, which increased earnings by $0.05 per share, higher short term wholesale and commodity trading margins, which increased earnings by $0.02 per share, lower utility O&M expense, which increased earnings by $0.01 per share, and higher natural gas margins, which increased earnings by $0.01 per share. These positive factors were partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expense decreased earnings by $0.02 per share, and a higher effective tax rate and other items which decreased earnings by $0.02 per share. Now…

(Operator Instructions). Our first question will come from the line of Daniele Seitz with Dahlman Rose. Please go ahead.

Hi Daniele.

Hi. I just wanted to ask you a couple of questions on the CapEx. Can you give us an idea of the estimates on the costs of the wind farm? Benjamin Fowke : Yea, the wind farm will be approximately 210 million Daniele.

Okay, and could you remind us of the total CapEx for this year and next year? Benjamin Fowke : It’s about 1.9 billion.

And same thing for both years? Benjamin Fowke : I’m sorry, what?

Same for both years? Benjamin Fowke : Yea, I’m sorry that’s about the number for both years.

Ok, great and when do you anticipate, what are you thinking of, in terms of schedule on the IGCC at this time? Benjamin Fowke : What we are planning to do is present it as an option for the commission to review when we file our least cost plan, our resource plan, in Colorado in the fall of this year Daniele.

Okay, and assuming that it takes a year for the decision to be made, would you start immediately at that point or is there some lead times, approximate dates you are thinking you could build it for? Benjamin Fowke : I’m sorry Daniele, yeah, there are certainly lead times. The next step in the process, in addition to filing as an option, is to then do the feed study, which will take us into next year. Then we will understand if the project’s approved or not, and we’ll go forward. And if the project were to go forward I think you’re looking at the 2013-2014 timeframe, correct me if I’m wrong.

Thanks, appreciate. Benjamin Fowke : Thank you.

Thank you. The next question will come from the line of Paul Ridzon with Key Bank. Please go ahead. Benjamin Fowke : Hey Paul.

How are you? Congratulations on the quarter. I had a couple of questions. You threw out a $31 million number, potential nuclear depreciation decrease. Is that for ’07 or is that on a four year basis? Benjamin Fowke : No, that number assumes that the commission approves it and follows the past present of putting it all the way back at the beginning of January 2007.

And would we see a revenue requirement decrease offsetting that, or would that drop to the bottom line? Benjamin Fowke : You would see a revenue requirement decrease when we filed a rate case.

So you keep the cash until the next rate case? Benjamin Fowke : Yes.

And what’s the magnitude of under recovery due to regulatory lag in Colorado that you’re currently experiencing? Benjamin Fowke : Well it’s a historic test here Paul so as you know, as you start to spend more than your depreciation, rate based lag becomes pretty significant. I mean, it depends on a number of factors, but once you get beyond that level that I mentioned, you can see lag eating away returns at about 100 basic points a year.

And how much of the drop in O&M was a mark on pension stock? Benjamin Fowke : Well, employee benefits I believe reduced O&M for the quarter by about 12million,and that ass driven by both medical and I think it was fairly balanced medical and performance based comp.

And then, just lastly, you mentioned the release at trading results, there was some impact from NSP-Minnesota entering into a wholesales margin settlement agreement, which kind of out of period, how much was that? Benjamin Fowke : I think you’re referring to what we entered into last year. Is that what you’re talking about? I mean last year, remember, as we were filing the retail rate case, we entered into, as part of the settlement, an agreement to share those margins pretty significantly, and that was reflected in the second quarter of 2006.

Okay, so we’ve already cycled through a full year of that? Benjamin Fowke : Yep.

Okay, those were my questions, thank you. Benjamin Fowke : Thanks Paul.

Thank you, our next question will come from the line of Charles Fishman with A.G. Edwards. Please go ahead.

Charles, good morning. Capacity cost projection for the full year decreased about 10 million? Benjamin Fowke : Yes.

What’s driving that? Benjamin Fowke : Basically, as we actually went through the process of contracting for purchase power, we did a better job in getting that power that we had originally anticipated.

Do you have any - as far as we look towards 2008, will we see a increase in the range of 25 million again? Would that be your best guess at this point. I mean, will this be ongoing? Benjamin Fowke: We’re always going to have some capacity calls, Charles, but I think the range is yet to be determined. One thing to keep in mind is that as SPS, we will have the ability to bring the lead power contract and start recovering that on an interim basis, provided we then follow our rate case, which we’re planning to do.

Okay. And then in Colorado you certainly expressed more confidence in this forward test than in the past. I mean, has something transpired recently that makes you talk more favorably? Benjamin Fowke: Well I think we’ve got a constructive regulatory environment there, and I think we’re working hard to prepare for, not only internally, but also, as I mentioned in the prepared remarks get the staff prepared on what a forward test filing looks like and what their concerns and what they’re going to need to see. And so it’s a focus of ours, and I think if past success is any indicator we will be successful there. We are putting a lot of effort into it Charles.

Ok, thank you.

Thank you, our next question comes from Dan Jenkins with the State of Wisconsin Investment Board. Please go ahead. Benjamin Fowke : Hi Dan.

Hi how are you? Just a couple of things, first of all, kind of related to the depreciation extension related to Monticello. Has that plan already received NRC approval for license extension? Benjamin Fowke : Yes, that happened last year.

How about Prairie Island? Is that part of this process as well? Benjamin Fowke : That is further behind in the curve. That’s an ’08 item. Dan Jenkins - State of Wisconsin Investment Board : Ok, so would you expect probably another change in the appreciation related to when you last got an extension approval for that?

Yeah, I mean I think that remains to be seen, but that’s a logical assumption. Dan Jenkins - State of Wisconsin Investment Board : I’m just curious on the industrial sales if you know what you’re seeing there. Not adjusted for weather, they look like they were somewhat weak. What are you seeing in your service territory as far as industrial demand?

Well, what we’re seeing is last year we started to see, and we reported on, a bit of an economic slowdown on the C and I side, Commercial and Industrial side, particularly in Minnesota, but the trend seems to be improving as of late. And that’s what you’re starting to see reflected in the stronger sales growth that we reported this quarter, Dan. Dan Jenkins - State of Wisconsin Investment Board : Ok, and then the last thing I’m wondering is, as far as there being a lot of construction going on, what do you see as your capital needs? For the second half of the year, do you expect to have to raise any new money, or what’re your plans there?

Well, we’ve outlaid the financing plans in the press release. I guess the big item is we are planning to do a hybrid instrument at the holding company later this year, looking at a range of about 500 million, but no unexpected surprises. Dan Jenkins - State of Wisconsin Investment Board : Okay, thank you.

Thank you, our next question will come from Ashar Khan at SAC Capital. Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Hi Ashar. Ashar Khan - SAC Capital : Hey Ben, if I understand, if this depreciation order goes through, that will be an improvement in earnings of around $0.05 or so, right?

Probably more like $0.04, but yes. Ashar Khan - SAC Capital : And then I just wanted to go over the financing. Is there opportunity to do more of hybrid beyond the 500? I’m just trying to see going forward how you plan to meet the gap. Is there more room at the parent to do hybrid in your capital structure?

George, do you want to comment? George Tyson is here, I’ll let him comment.

I think before we definitely want to conclude that we’d like to have the first issuance done. As Ben said, we’re targeting a size of around 500 million. I think if you look at the percentage of hybrid securities that can be accommodated in a capital structure, we think we can go to a higher lever, but we’d really like to complete this initial issuance to determine the market depth and reception for us. But it is a possibility. We could look for greater capacity after this year. Ashar Khan - SAC Capital : Ok great, and then Ben, could you just mention which forward test year are you going to be looking for in the Colorado filing? Is it going to be full year 2008? Is that what the aim is?

Yes. Ashar Khan - SAC Capital : OK, thank you very much.

Thanks Ashar.

At this time we have no additional questions in the queue and I’d like to turn the conference over to you for any closing remarks.

No, I appreciate everybody’s participation in the call. If you any follow-up questions, please feel free to give Paul Johnson in the IR team a call. Thanks to everyone.

Thank you management. (Operator Instructions).