Oct 29, 2026 earnings call — Mild summer cuts earnings guidance
Revised full-year adjusted earnings guidance to $3.18-$3.28 per diluted share due to historically mild weather.
Revenue $1.0B (est $1.0B) · EPS $1.06 (est $1.11)
Key quotes
"As a result of weather-related headwinds, we are revising our full-year adjusted earnings guidance from $3.33-$3.53 to $3.18-$3.28 per diluted share."
"In fact, we concluded a significant agreement with Verrus for a facility of up to 420 MW, which is expected to be energized in 2028 and ramp to full capacity by 2033."
"As it relates to the proposal of the order out there on the HoldCo as it's both the one notch provision within the HoldCo agreement and the dividend restrictions are both red lines."
Analyst Q&A 11
2025 RFP and HoldCo decisions
Q (Julien Dumoulin-Smith · Jefferies): He asked what is happening with the 2025 RFP and whether it impacts company-owned assets or PPAs. He also asked about HoldCo retained earnings cap calculations, the one-notch credit threshold, and any wildfire impacts.
A: Management said they are exploring multiple procurement paths, not just a straight RFP, and are considering alternative paths like BTA. They said the HoldCo must be able to function normally to pay dividends and finance itself, and that the one-notch provision and dividend restrictions are red lines; they are in dialogue with rating agencies. On wildfires, they said the team executed well through long PSPS runs and they are watching PUC and other reports coming in the next couple of weeks.
"Really what you're seeing there is we're just talking that there are multiple paths to procuring assets, including BTA, not just the RFP." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
HoldCo timing and project financing
Q (Shar Pourreza · Wells Fargo): He asked whether staff and CUB align with AWEC and if a resolution before December 7 is likely or it could slide to 2027. He also asked how to think about equity for Biglow and Salmonfly and whether the HoldCo outcome changes financing.
A: Management said they are continuing to work through the process and expect the Commission decision soon. For financing the two projects, they start with tax credits from the 2023 RFPs, then look to debt for draws from 2025 forward, and expect minimal new equity; they noted $350 million to $400 million of tax credits from the 2023 RFPs and about $400 million left to draw.
"When we think to the financing of these two projects specifically, we start with the tax credit that we'll receive from the 2023 RFP." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
Commission timing and leverage risk
Q (Steve Fleishman · Wolfe): He asked for specifics on timing for the Commission decision and which clarification direction they expect. He also asked whether leaving double leverage open in the order is an acceptable risk.
A: Management said the outside date is December 7 and they expect a decision then after reviewing the record. On double leverage, they said it is a risk seen elsewhere, not always excluded, and that moving toward five-year rate cases should create more investor certainty as they work through it.
"The outside date is December 7, when we would expect to hear from them." — Maria Pope (CEO)
Load drivers and 2025 resource timing
Q (Chris Ellinghaus · Siebert Williams Shank): He asked whether the commission's deviations were errors or intentional and if they understand investor impact. He also asked what factors beyond weather might be dampening load and about timing for 2025 resources.
A: Management would not comment on commission intent during the pending decision and said they submitted minimal workable clarifications. They said residential weather-adjusted load was about 0.6 for the quarter and that data center usage can be choppy with less weather sensitivity; they added they have two announced projects with in-service dates in 2029 and continue working the RFP shortlist.
"For the quarter, just for the quarter, when we think of residential, we were at 0.6 on a weather-adjusted." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
Financing Washington acquisition
Q (Aidan Kelly · JPMorgan): He asked how the Washington acquisition would be financed without a HoldCo and whether that would change CapEx or require more equity. He also asked what staff concerns are most substantive in Washington.
A: Management said without a HoldCo they expect at least break even to slight accretion in the first full year and would finance the acquisition with a balanced capital structure without impacting PGE capital. They listed three main Washington issues: CETA compliance, the excluded Lewis River hydro facility, and a rate credit for customers.
"We would expect that we would not be impacting the capital at our PGE side, but we would be financing this at a balanced cap structure as it relates to that structure, assuming, again, no HoldCo." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
Capital plan vs higher equity costs
Q (Anthony Crowdell · Mizuho): He asked if higher cost of equity or no HoldCo would change the capital program, and what modeling spread to use between rate-based growth and earnings growth.
A: Management said there is currently no change to the capital plan and that additional financing costs from RFP projects have a negligible or slight impact on the equity plan; they said they can support 5%-7% growth without a HoldCo. They also said they will not update the spread until they formalize 2027 guidance.
"We continue to be able to support our 5%-7% growth with our current financings and without a HoldCo." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
Why projects outside CapEx table
Q (Gregg Orrill · UBS): He asked whether Biglow and Salmonfly were signed in October and therefore excluded from the $7.4 billion CapEx plan, and if they will provide guidance on EPS impact.
A: Management said the agreements became effective within the last couple days and the 10-Q is an as-of date, so those projects were not included for that reporting period. They also affirmed their 5%-7% guidance and said meaningful RFP years generally deliver growth at the midpoint or better and these projects do not change that.
"That is the only reason is because both agreements have effective dates within the last couple of days here." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
Q4 guidance bridge drivers
Q (David Rold · B of A): He asked for more granularity on the drivers behind the Q4 implied guidance and what puts and takes explain the step up from last year.
A: Management said the biggest drivers are weather (noting a material weather effect last December), the timing of DSP and Seaside recoveries, more favorable net variable power costs, additional cost management, and mechanical timing in the AUT. They said most of the variance is margin-related with some O&M favorability.
"So that in and of itself is $0.17." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
One-notch and Washington accretion
Q (JC Vidales · Ladenburg Thalmann & Company): He asked if staff's recommendations with a one-notch downgrade would be acceptable and whether the Washington utility's earnings would make the deal break even without a HoldCo; he also asked timing of the first Washington rate case.
A: Management said a one-notch credit downgrade before dividends stop would not be acceptable and that risking dividends is not something they will accept. For Washington, they reiterated the WashCo could be accretive with a HoldCo but without one they aim for break even in the first full year, and rate case timing is still being evaluated.
"Risk dividends is not something that we are willing to accept whatsoever." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
Large load tariff and batteries
Q (Travis Miller · Morningstar): He asked the impact of the large load tariff on net revenue or earnings for the rest of this year and next, and whether most incremental projects will include battery solutions.
A: Management said the large load tariff produced around $4 million in the first quarter it was in effect and they expect a similar or higher contribution in the second half; they noted these items roll into a rate case and that residential customers saw about a 1% rate credit. They said battery storage is an important part of reliability and they expect to continue adding batteries while noting many data center customers bring battery storage as well.
"For the third quarter, the first quarter the large load tariff has been in effect, I believe we disclosed it is around $4 million." — Joe Trpik (CFO)
Colstrip ownership plans
Q (Paul Fremont · Ladenburg Thalmann): He asked if they still plan to exit ownership of Colstrip in 2028 and whether they would consider continued ownership if they couldn't sell the power to retail customers.
A: Management said they continue to own their Colstrip interest and currently have no disposition plan. They said under current Oregon law coal-generated electrons are not to be served for retail load and they will work with constituents and regulators on alternatives and various scenarios.
"We do not currently have a disposition plan for Colstrip." — Joe Trpik (CFO)