管理層發言
Hello, and welcome to the Xcel Energy 2026 First Quarter Earnings Conference Call. My name is Jordan, and I'll be your coordinator for today's event. Please note this conference is being recorded. Reporters can contact media relations with inquiries and individual investors and others can reach out to Investor Relations. I will now turn the call over to your host today, Mr. Roopesh Aggarwal, Vice President, Investor Relations, to begin the conference. Please go ahead, sir.
Thank you, Jordan. Good morning, and welcome to Xcel Energy's 2026 First Quarter Earnings Call. Joining me today are Bob Frenzel, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Brian Van Abel, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. In addition, we have other members of the management team in the room to answer your questions if needed. This morning, we will review our 2026 first quarter results and highlights, provide updated 2026 assumptions and share recent business and regulatory updates. Slides that accompany today's call are available on our website. Some comments during today's call may contain forward-looking information. Significant factors that could cause results to differ from those anticipated are described in our earnings release and SEC filings. Today, we will discuss certain metrics that are non-GAAP measures. Information on the comparable GAAP measures and reconciliations are included in our earnings release. In the first quarter of 2026, the ALJ for the Prairie Island outage case recommended an additional $41 million disallowance of replacement power costs for power procured in 2024 associated with an extended outage at the plant starting late 2023. As a result, Xcel Energy recorded a charge of $37 million or $0.04 per share in the first quarter. Additionally, in the first quarter of 2026, Xcel Energy recognized $22 million or $0.03 per share due to an increase in estimated insurance proceeds for the Marshall Wildfire litigation. Given the nonrecurring nature of these items, they have been excluded from first quarter ongoing earnings. As a result, our GAAP earnings for the first quarter of 2026 were $0.89 per share, while our ongoing earnings, which exclude these nonrecurring charges, were $0.91 per share. All further references to earnings, drivers and variances in our discussion today will refer to ongoing earnings. For more information on this, please see the disclosures in our earnings release. I will now turn the call over to Bob.
Thank you, Roopesh, and good morning, everybody. At Xcel Energy, our mission is to make energy work better for our customers, helping them thrive. Our past quarter showcased our commitment to this mission through focused execution and delivering on our plans to strengthen and modernize the grid, expand our energy sources and deploy innovative technologies to ensure that the energy that we provide our customers remains reliable, affordable and safe both now and well into the future. And on these fronts, we are off to a great start this year. In the first quarter, Xcel Energy invested over $3 billion in new infrastructure to support our customers' and states' growing energy needs for increased resilience and cleaner energy, and we're on track to deliver our most extensive capital investment plan in the company's history this year. We identified additional transmission and generation needs in our states, delivering on our expectation of incremental investment above our base plan. We announced the details of our contract with Google for a new data center in the upper Midwest that we believe is a model for large load development that benefits customers and communities. We filed that contract with the Minnesota PUC. We continue to use our scale and our balance sheet to ensure that we have the right partnerships with critical suppliers, Tier 1 EPC firms, and developers to execute on budget, on time and on scope on our growing portfolio of projects. We delivered strong ongoing earnings of $0.91 per share, and we remain confident in our ability to deliver on our annual investment plans and our earnings guidance for the 22nd year in a row, one of the best track records in the industry. On our fourth quarter call, we announced progress on our data center pipeline with a signed ESA for a large data center in the Upper Midwest. During the first quarter, we provided further details about this groundbreaking agreement with Google. As demand for electricity accelerates across the country, we believe that utilities have a responsibility to lead with solutions that balance innovation, reliability, sustainability and affordability. Xcel Energy's customers already have some of the lowest energy bills in the country. In fact, when you adjust for inflation, the typical Xcel Energy residential energy bill is almost 25% lower today than it was 10 years ago. In nominal terms Xcel Energy residential electric bills are approximately 30% below the national average. Under a 15-year agreement, Google will cover the entire cost of its service and infrastructure requirements to power its new data center, including 1,900 megawatts of new wind and solar generation and long-duration storage using Form Energy's innovative 100-hour iron-air battery. With credit protections in place, we estimate this new data center will save customers $1 billion to $1.5 billion over the term of the ESA, helping keep customer bills low long into the future. In addition, and as part of our shared sustainability goals, water needs for the data center will be limited through Google's use of air-cooled technology in lieu of water-cooled. In April, we also reached a definitive non-exclusive agreement on our previously announced Memorandum of Understanding with NextEra Energy to co-develop generation, storage and interconnections to accelerate data center development across our operating companies. We expect this joint development agreement will deliver a balance of company-owned resources and purchased power agreements with NextEra across all forms of generation, including wind, solar, battery storage and natural gas. We are already underway developing solutions for 2 gigawatts of new data center capacity with plans to expand in the near future. In April, we also filed our large load tariff in Colorado with proposed terms that are similar in scope to our Google ESA and the Minnesota large load tariff filing. Data centers will commit to long-term contracts with minimum bills, termination fees, credit requirements and incremental cost tests to ensure that our existing customers are protected from new large load customer needs. In the coming months, we plan to make similar filings in Texas, New Mexico and Wisconsin. We believe our partnerships with hyperscalers, regulators, communities and developers set a high bar for responsible large load development. We're partnering to ensure large load growth strengthens our overall system, benefits our local communities and maintains our states' clean energy goals and doesn't increase cost for our existing customers. These collective actions give us confidence in our ability to deliver on our forecast to secure 6 gigawatts of data center load by year-end 2027 with in-service dates into the early 2030s. In October of last year, we outlined our plan to meet the growing infrastructure needs of our customers. We've detailed a $60 billion base investment plan to continue our energy transition and to make needed investments to strengthen our transmission and distribution systems. At that time, we also expected that our base plan would likely need to be augmented based on anticipated but unapproved transmission and generation needs. Through the first quarter, we now believe we have line of sight to at least $7-plus billion of the $10-plus billion opportunity that we highlighted last year. This incremental investment includes the 765 kV transmission line in our SPS company that was allocated by SPP in February, two-thirds or over 1,200 megawatts of the generation and storage needed for the Google data center project, and 800 megawatts of generation approved by the Colorado Commission in February and April as part of the near-term procurement portfolio. From here, we continue to see additional infrastructure investment needed to serve our growing customer needs, including active generation RFPs in PSCo, NSP and SPS, additional regional transmission investments in SPP and MISO and the generation to support the 3 gigawatts of data center demand that we added to our target plan on the Q4 earnings call. As these opportunities materialize, they will drive additional growth in investment, both within and beyond our 5-year capital plan. As we continue to add to capital backlog, it's also important to execute on the projects that are in the queue. In the first quarter, Xcel Energy invested over $3 billion in new infrastructure for our customers. We brought online nearly 500 megawatts of new solar generation and utility-scale battery storage in SPS and in Colorado. In total, these projects will deliver system resiliency and reliability as well as over $425 million of tax credit benefits to our customers over the life of the projects. Across our entire portfolio of projects from 2026 to 2030, we expect customers will see more than $7 billion in aggregate benefits from PTCs and ITCs associated with various generation and storage projects, helping keep our customer bills amongst the lowest in the country. With continued growth across our industry, we also recognize that supply chains and qualified labor for generation, transmission and distribution projects will become more constrained. That's why I recently announced alliances with GE Vernova and NextEra and strategic agreements with Tier 1 EPC firms across our portfolio of renewable and gas generation, transmission and distribution projects. These alliances and agreements are critical to delivering on our growing investment pipeline well into the 2030s. Finally, our field teams continue to operate at the highest levels and were recently recognized by EEI with an Emergency Recovery Award for outstanding efforts to restore service quickly and safely following severe thunderstorms that came through our Upper Midwest service territory in 2025. For the seventh year in a row, Xcel Energy was named one of the World's Most Ethical Companies by Ethisphere, which measures the company's corporate governance, culture of ethics and environmental and societal impact. As we look forward to the rest of 2026, Xcel Energy will continue our focus to deliver customers safe, clean, reliable and affordable energy, execute with excellence on our 2026 $14 billion capital investment plan, our most extensive in the company's history, to realize the unprecedented opportunities for growth that we laid out in our base and incremental investment plans, to secure incremental large customer loads that can benefit all customers and meet this moment in our country's growing demand for energy, to reach constructive outcomes on multiple rate cases and resource solicitations, make operational and system hardening investments to protect our communities from the risks of extreme weather and to deliver on our earnings guidance for the 22nd year in a row. With that, I'll turn it over to Brian.
Thanks, Bob. Good morning, everyone. Starting with our financial results. Xcel Energy had ongoing earnings of $0.91 per share for the first quarter of 2026 compared to earnings of $0.84 per share in 2025. The most significant earnings drivers for the quarter include the following: higher electric revenues due to rate case outcomes, nonfuel riders and sales growth, partially offset by weather reduced earnings by $0.23 per share and higher AFUDC increased earnings by $0.10 per share. Offsetting these positive drivers, higher interest charges and common equity financing decreased earnings by $0.18 per share, reflecting funding of our infrastructure investments and discipline to maintain a strong balance sheet. Higher depreciation and amortization decreased earnings by $0.05 per share, reflecting our capital investment programs and lower natural gas revenues due to weather partially offset by rate case outcomes decreased earnings by $0.03 per share. Turning to weather and sales. Colorado overall experienced its warmest winter on record during the first quarter. As a result, impacts from weather to electric and natural gas sales reduced earnings by $0.09 per share. On a weather-adjusted basis, first quarter electric sales increased by 2.8% driven by continued oil and gas growth in SPS and broader commercial and industrial growth across jurisdictions. For 2026, we continue to expect full year weather-adjusted electric sales to increase 3%. Moving to recent regulatory activity. In our North Dakota electric rate case, the commission approved our previously announced settlement authorizing a $27 million revenue increase. In our South Dakota electric rate case, we reached a constructive black box settlement with staff for a net revenue increase of $26 million; a commission decision is expected in the second quarter. This Tuesday, we received intervenor testimony in our Colorado electric rate case, which we believe provides a starting point for ongoing settlement discussions over the next month. Late yesterday, we received the ALJ report on our Minnesota electric rate case, recommending a 9.8% ROE and a 52.5% equity ratio, with a final commission decision early in the third quarter. In New Mexico electric rate case, intervener testimony was due on May 1, and we expect the commission decision in the fourth quarter. As we look to our financing plan, Xcel Energy continues our commitment to maintain a strong balance sheet to fund accretive growth with the balance of equity and debt. In the first quarter, we issued forward contracts for over $1 billion of equity from our ATM program. Additionally, we issued an $800 million junior subordinated note at the holding company, which received 50% equity credit with the rating agencies. This, combined with our unsettled forwards and collar forward contracts from 2025, addresses over half of our $7 billion of equity need in our 5-year base plan. We also continue to make strong progress on the Smokehouse Creek wildfire claims process. We've resolved 231 of the 300 submitted claims. We've reached settlements with 79 of 107 potential claims presented for mediation by parties represented by attorneys. And finally, 26 of 73 complaints have been settled or dismissed and have reached a statute of limitations for property loss claims. We've updated the low end of our estimated liability to $460 million. We have committed $397 million in settlement agreements, including agreements with the subrogated insurance plaintiffs in the three largest claims by acreage. In total, we have $525 million of insurance coverage. Moving to guidance. We are reaffirming our 2026 ongoing EPS guidance range of $4.04 to $4.16 per share. We remain confident in our ability to deliver 6% to 8-plus percent long-term earnings growth and expect to deliver 9% EPS growth on average through 2030. Updates to key assumptions are included in our slides and earnings release. With that, I'll wrap up with a quick summary. Xcel Energy posted strong ongoing first quarter 2026 earnings of $0.91 per share. We continue to lead a clean energy transition while ensuring safe, clean and reliable service and keeping customer bills as low as possible. We have line of sight to $7-plus billion of opportunities in our incremental $10-plus billion investment plan. We've announced details of our data center agreement with Google, which we believe is a model for driving large load growth while protecting and driving benefits to our other customers and communities. We partnered with multiple Tier 1 EPC firms, critical suppliers and developers to ensure we have the resources needed to execute on a growing portfolio of investment opportunities on budget, on time and on scope. We continue to work to reach constructive outcomes, including settlements in our active rate cases. We maintained a strong balance sheet and credit metrics and have addressed over half of our $7 billion 5-year base equity needs. We are reaffirming our 2026 ongoing EPS guidance of $4.04 to $4.16 per share. And finally, we remain confident in our ability to deliver 6% to 8-plus percent long-term earnings growth and expect to deliver 9% EPS growth on average through 2030. This concludes our prepared remarks. Operator, we will now take questions.
分析師問答
The first question comes from the line of Richard Sunderland from Truist Securities.
Starting with some of the regulatory progress this week. I guess Colorado with the intervenor testimony, could you expand a little bit more on the sort of settlement potential over the next month that you referenced in the script? And I guess just curious about any other takeaways you'd highlight there? And then similarly on Minnesota with the ALJ recommendation. Just any other thoughts you could offer would be helpful.
Yes, absolutely. I think I'll start with Colorado Electric. I think maybe we'd take a step back a little bit from a macro view. We have the lowest bills in the country. In Colorado, a 1% share of wallet. We have one of the fastest transitioning clean energy generation fleets in the country. And so we're achieving state policy. Hopefully that is recognized by our policymakers in the state. Now specifically about the rate case, we look at the intervenor direct testimony and it's relatively consistent with what we saw in the last case. If you look at our last case in Colorado, we had near unanimous settlement and we've settled three of the past four electric cases. So we think we have a decent starting point. If you look at the procedural schedule, the settlement deadline is on May 28. We'll start settlement discussions and look forward to working with the parties early in May. Hopefully we can reach a constructive settlement like we have in the last few rate cases. On the Minnesota side, for those of you who didn't catch it, we received the Minnesota ALJ report late yesterday. It was after we had already filed our 10-Q draft for the quarter, so it's not referenced in our earnings release. You will see details in the 10-Q that we file later today. We think it's generally a balanced overall recommendation. It's constructive to see a 9.8% ROE and a 52.5% equity ratio. We're digesting a few of the other trackers and other pieces in it. But overall, we think it's a constructive recommendation. Procedurally, we'll see MPUC deliberations in June and then a commission order in July. As we talked about, we're working through a lot of rate cases and looking to reach some constructive outcomes this year and deliver for both our customers and our shareholders.
Great. Thanks for running through all of that. And then turning to some of the data center activity. Obviously, you had a lot of commentary around the Google agreement and the landmark effort there. But I'm curious, in Slide 14, I think the 4 gigawatts contracted by year-end '27, just any thoughts on sort of the gating factors to signing the $6 billion to $8 billion incremental CapEx framework you called out elsewhere in the deck, is that applicable there? And I guess just anything you can highlight on the financing side of those advances as well. Any unique ways to finance that?
It's Bob. Let me kick it off, and then I'll ask Brian to weigh in with anything extra. Not surprisingly, recent hyperscaler announcements continue to show high interest in data center development, and we're seeing a lot of interest across all eight of our states in terms of activity and backlog. At the top of the slide you mentioned, Richard, is a greater-than-20-gigawatt backlog, and that continues to grow. We've got a gigawatt either built or under construction, another one that we're in front of the commissions with approvals on, particularly this Google transaction, and as we said in our fourth quarter call, we expect to execute on enough ESAs this year to get to a 3-gigawatt target, and another 3 gigawatts next year. These are long and deliberate discussions to make sure that we can reach innovative and constructive outcomes like we did with Google. We've proven that we can do competitive, highly renewable, low-carbon data center development in our regions. I'd say we have the most depth in the Upper Midwest, and that's been a focus area for us and a focus area with our JDA with NextEra. As we think about the large load tariff filing in Colorado and the abilities that it allows us to bring generation, transmission and load together in a package to the Colorado Commission, we have those capabilities as well through both SPP and SPS processes in Texas and New Mexico. We expect to file a large load tariff in Texas this year to help expedite development, but it doesn't preclude us from coming forward with contracts in the near term. We're active on the engagement front with all the hyperscalers and all the data center developers and there's a lot of interest in the footprint that our company provides in terms of high penetrations of low-cost renewables that our existing customers have benefited from, and we think these large load customers can benefit from as well.
Just a couple of things to make sure we get all parts of your question. You referenced a $6 to $8 billion number; that's something we've had in our slides before in terms of what we view as incremental investment opportunity for every gigawatt of data center when served with a high-renewable, long-duration storage model versus a simple CCGT build. When we think about moving forward, our clean energy policies and priorities and meeting our state objectives give us a really good investment opportunity when we think about how we're going to serve these loads. If you look at the slide, when we talk about our incremental $10-plus billion pipeline, we talked about active RFPs of 10 to 12 gigawatts in flight plus the 3 additional gigawatts of data centers that we expect to contract. Those 3 gigawatts of data centers will require another 6 to 10 gigawatts of generation and storage. So it's a huge long-term opportunity that extends investment into the early 2030s. It also drives customer affordability opportunities. Regarding alternative financing, we're certainly evaluating all options like our peers. Right now, our base plan assumes funding incremental CapEx with roughly 40% equity. We're already ahead of the plan: one quarter into our 5-year plan, we've addressed over half of our equity needs through forwards and other mechanisms. We'll continue to be proactive and maintain a strong balance sheet while funding accretive growth.
We appreciate the comprehensive response.
The next question comes from the line of Nicholas Campanella from Barclays.
And appreciate all the regulatory follow-up. Maybe just on the line of sight now to the $7 billion of incremental versus, I think, $10 billion of upside. Just maybe give us some clarity on the shaping of that spend and as you roll forward the plan, I believe, to 2031, just how much of that is going to get encapsulated?
Nick, I can take that. On Slide 8 in our earnings deck, we highlighted the pieces of that $7-plus billion. Think of the 765 kV transmission line in SPS that should be in service by our goals around 2031. A lot of that will be captured in our current 5-year plan, particularly in the back half of the plan. The Colorado generation approvals—about 800 megawatts including some gas and approximately 600 megawatts of wind—should be in service around 2030, particularly the wind when the goal is to capture production tax credits. We haven't specified in-service dates on all of the assets to serve Google since those are not fully public, but if they're wind and solar, the goal is to capture tax credits to ensure low-cost renewables. Long-duration storage may have a longer runway in terms of tax credits. As we roll forward, we provide comprehensive updates in Q3, but that's a good way to think about how this rolls into the front end of the next decade with some flow into the early 2030s.
Okay. That's great. I really appreciate that. And then maybe just a follow-up is, as you get to the back end of that plan, the large loads are going to be ramping hopefully and at what point would you revisit the 40% equity financing assumption? And then secondly, any thoughts on defending the Baa1 outlook here with Moody's?
We think it's important to maintain a strong balance sheet and good credit metrics over the long term. We understand where we are with Moody's. Over the long term, maintaining around a 17% CFO to debt type of metric is important. In a large build cycle it can get pressured a bit, but we remain committed to balance sheet strength. The 40% equity financing is a rule of thumb; each time we roll forward a 5-year plan we reassess based on cash generation, timing of projects, tax benefits, and other factors. So 40% is a guideline, but we'll be flexible to maintain our credit metrics. We've already locked down a large portion of our equity needs and will continue to be proactive.
Great. And then just one more on the MISO capacity print. I know it came down a little earlier this past week. Do you see that as a tailwind at all to the territories that you're operating in? And then as you think about capacity planning where you're doing data center development, how is that maybe changing thoughts there?
Nick, it's Bob. One of the interesting things about the MISO market and the capacity auction itself is that it's been more volatile and less predictable than some other regions, given the large bilateral nature of the MISO market. The auction print itself isn't something we focus on in the near term because we have a bit of length in the Upper Midwest and we've been able to sell into that market. Over time, it's not the signal we use to drive new capacity additions and new load forecasting. So it's relatively uninteresting in the short term. Our long-term forecast in partnership with MISO for asset additions, retirements and load growth still points to an attractive region where data centers want to be energized. So not much to the auction itself from our perspective.
The next question comes from the line of Julien Dumoulin-Smith from Jefferies.
Let me nitpick on a few things you guys have already said. On Colorado intervenor testimony and settlement potential, how do you think about the prior guidance of this 50 to 60 basis points of lag being attainable? What are the permutations? And given in parallel the comprehensive capital riders now available, how do you think about the future cadence of cases and establishing a longer duration settlement path?
Julien, I can take that. If we can reach a constructive settlement, that prior guidance remains attainable. Looking at where staff and intervenors are—midpoints around 9.0% to 9.2% ROE—that's a reasonable starting point for negotiations. Equity ratios are an important part of maintaining credit quality in Colorado. We have a strong track record of settling on the electric side, and there is an opportunity to establish a longer-term path that could reduce the frequency of rate case filings. That would depend on constructive settlements to set a baseline framework. We're thinking about that and look forward to engaging with parties over the next month.
Excellent. Going back to the data center large loads and geography: what geographic footprint are you contemplating for incremental announcements? How disproportionate might that geography be relative to your other states, and how might that impact Colorado? Also, the NextEra partnership: you mentioned 2 gigawatts in that pipeline— is that separate and distinct from the 3 gigawatts by '27?
Julien, thanks. Let me clarify. Demand has been strongest where we have generation capacity and transmission capabilities, which leads to significant interest in the Upper Midwest—Minnesota, Wisconsin and the Dakotas—where we have more length. In the longer term, Colorado is a focus area where legislation and tariff frameworks could make it attractive, and the Southwest, including Texas and New Mexico, is also very popular given electricity prices. Hyperscalers like that we can provide solutions across multiple regions for portfolio needs. When we talk about high-probability pipeline, we expect four more gigawatts to be contracted by the end of 2027; that figure is inclusive of the two gigawatts referenced with NextEra. The NextEra partnership could be larger than that; the 2 gigawatts is a starting point within a broader potential scope.
Thanks. One more on Sherco—any updates and the timeline? I believe planned retirement is still in 2026?
Our plans are to continue to retire Sherco at the end of this year, and we have both the transmission and generation needed to serve that interconnection on a go-forward basis in the Upper Midwest. It's part of our long-term resource plans in the Upper Midwest. Those plans remain intact and we've not seen anything that would change them at this point.
The next question comes from the line of Carly Davenport from Goldman Sachs.
Maybe just a couple quick ones on Colorado. The PUC Sunset Bill came out of committee last week. Any views on provisions around securitization and potential changes like expanding the size of the PUC? What are your thoughts?
Sure. Each agency undergoes sunset review on a multi-year cycle to assess effectiveness. One provision in the legislation expanded the use of securitization as a tool. We've been thoughtful in proposing securitization where it makes sense. For example, we have permission to securitize the remaining balance of Comanche 3 when that plant retires in 2030. We've considered securitization for portions of wildfire investments and previously proposed securitization around fuel costs for events like winter storm Uri. It's a useful tool, but it should be used appropriately. We're engaged in the legislation and discussing with stakeholders how to bring efficiency to the state regulatory process, including speed of filings and decision-making on resource plans, which matters in this era of energy growth.
Got it. As we move into wildfire season in Colorado over the next couple months, can you talk about expectations given current weather forecasts and the actions you've taken in recent years to reduce risk?
Thanks. We continue to build capability in multiple areas. We focus on situational awareness and our ability to understand weather patterns and take action more discretely and accurately with less customer impact. Our ability to reduce wildfire risk and make the system safer in fire-prone areas has grown over the years. We've implemented new outage management systems, new customer notification systems and increased community engagement. We are seeing lower-than-average snowpack and drier conditions in Colorado this year. Given the operational, situational awareness and community measures we've put in place, we expect to manage the season safely and proactively.
The next question comes from the line of Jeremy Tonet from JPMorgan.
On the Google agreement, what does it mean more broadly if Google is willing to pay for newer technologies like Form Energy? What do you see as a trend and appetite across other hyperscalers?
Great question. If we think about alignment with state policies, there are opportunities where hyperscalers could fund advanced technology projects. For example, Colorado has an advanced geothermal bill moving through the legislature, and a hyperscaler could help finance an advanced geothermal project in Colorado as part of a clean energy strategy. New technologies are generally more expensive and need investment to commercialize. We think the Google model shows a blueprint for aligning hyperscaler investments with state clean energy objectives, and that could apply in Minnesota and other parts of our service territory.
Jeremy, we believe these large customers are committed to long-term sustainability. They want renewable, reliable supply and they're highly interested in our regions where wind and solar resources are abundant. We've seen receptivity at the commission level when projects protect existing customers. We'll continue to be innovative and partner with these customers who are aligned with our sustainability goals.
If you step back, why do you think you have an advantage versus others in winning more data center load? Is it speed to market, type of solutions, or something else?
Great question. The diversity of our company and regions, the ability to deliver various fuel sources and types, and speed to power are all important. Speed is very important for these customers. Sustainability matters too. The ability to partner on solutions—like air-cooled data centers to limit water use in regions where water is a concern—can be a differentiator. We serve a portfolio of hyperscaler needs across states, and we can meet different developer and customer preferences.
I'll add on execution. Sitting in the middle of the country, delivering a portfolio of clean energy resources takes a development platform and scale. Our base plan includes developing 10 gigawatts of generation and storage, with 7 gigawatts of that being renewable. That scale supports confidence by hyperscalers, and our partnerships with EPCs and OEMs are important for execution.
Last quick one: after seeing the ALJ, any thoughts on prospects for settling given this early stage?
On the electric side, settlements often happen leading into hearings. We've already had hearings for Minnesota. We remain open to settlement discussions, but the typical impetus for settlement is prior to hearings, which have already occurred. We'll see MPUC deliberations in June and an order in July.
The next question comes from the line of Ross Fowler from Bank of America.
For the JDA with NextEra, do you see potential to expand beyond 2 gigawatts and how are you thinking about that expansion?
The JDA itself is not limited in scope. We partnered with NextEra to pair their national development platform with our local generation and transmission strength for speed to power and to expand the opportunity. The partnership could be larger and support broader needs, but it is non-exclusive. We maintain relationships with other developers and can expand the partnership as needed.
On execution risk: you mentioned alliances with GE Vernova and others. Regarding those five natural gas turbines, are they just in the queue or are they priced and secured? And more generally, can you point to things that reduce your execution risk profile relative to peers?
We have 24 gas turbines through Siemens and General Electric that are slotted and in various stages of production and delivery over the next five years. I feel comfortable about access to gas turbines and our ability to meet our base and upside cases. Regarding execution risk, we've negotiated framework agreements with key vendors and suppliers across transmission, distribution and gas businesses. We have access to wind turbines, solar equipment, breakers and high-voltage transformers through our partnerships. We feel confident in our ability to meet our capital plans.
Scale matters here. The EPCs and OEMs see our long pipeline and that helps secure resources and crews across sites for efficiency. Ordering multiple gigawatts of equipment leads to benefits of scale and helps derisk execution. That also makes us more competitive in RFPs and helps deliver projects for the benefit of customers.
Yes. That was complementary—appreciate the color.
The next question comes from the line of Steven Fleishman from Wolfe Research.
On Slide 8, can you spend a minute on the non-checked items and when we'll have visibility on them? Also, how much of the CapEx would show up by 2030 on some of those?
Steve, the nearest-term items include the SPS RFP; we received bids in January and are evaluating them. We'll make a filing with the New Mexico Commission later in Q2; that RFP contemplated 1,500 to 3,000 megawatts of nameplate capacity and a lot of renewables to meet the New Mexico Renewable Energy Standard, with resources expected prior to the end of 2030. The NSP RFP bids were recently received; we expect a filing with the Minnesota Commission later this year with opportunities to capture tax credits and get resources in by 2030—likely several thousand megawatts of renewables and storage. In Colorado, we're working through the near-term procurement and expect to file an RFP later this year; some resources could slip into the early 2030s depending on timing. The 765 kV transmission in SPP is a competitive bid with decision timing into next year. On data centers, we expect to execute on 1 gigawatt this year and see a significant opportunity for the additional 3 gigawatts next year. Overall, a good portion of the incremental investment filters into the back half of the 5-year plan and into the early 2030s depending on resource types and tax credit timing.
On the NSP and SPS renewables RFPs, do you expect most of that to be company-owned or PPAs? How should we think about that?
We typically guide to a balance—around 50-50 company-owned versus PPAs as a rule of thumb. We've done better on ownership in some RFPs, such as in SPS where we achieved north of 75% ownership in a recent procurement. Minnesota presents opportunities to reuse interconnections. Our guiding framework remains 50-50, but the goal is to bring forward the most competitive projects for customers and to do better when possible.
The next question comes from the line of Sophie Karp from KeyBanc.
Congrats on a good update. Is there a way to quantify customer benefits from incremental data center load as it materializes, like some peers are doing? Beyond community relations issues, could quantifying benefits be helpful?
Sophie, on the Google data center itself, the addition of close to 1 gigawatt led to $1 billion to $1.5 billion of customer savings across customers, which translates to roughly a 1% to 2% net benefit for residential electric customers—roughly a thumb rule. A lot of the benefit comes from sharing fixed grid costs—transmission investment and rates—and adding load allows fixed costs to be spread across more megawatt-hours. In the Google example, the 1,900 megawatts of wind, solar and storage also provide dispatch and carbon benefits that are beneficial to customers. We haven't issued firm guidance beyond the Google example, but that gives a useful benchmark.
The next question comes from the line of Anthony Crowdell from Mizuho Securities.
Two quick ones. You've already taken down about half of your five-year equity need in the first quarter. Any cadence on the remaining half? Are you looking to take care of it all in 2026? And one follow-up.
Anthony, we don't give specific timing on equity issuance. We've been proactive—our ATM and forward program provides flexibility and we've locked a large portion already. The forward component can be extended to match capital timing, which helps us time issuance with need. We'll continue to be proactive and manage cadence to maintain balance sheet strength.
Great. On Smokehouse Creek, you gave detail on settlements and insurance coverage. You're still under the insurance cap of $525 million and have resolved many claims—any color on resolving the remaining potential claims and the outlook there?
We've been working through the claims process and are making strong progress. The statute of limitations for many property claims passed at the end of February, and we've finalized settlements of approximately $397 million so far. Our low-end accrual is $460 million, and we have $525 million of insurance coverage. There's about a $60 million delta relative to the low-end estimate, and we'll continue to work expeditiously through the remaining claims. We will continue to provide quarterly updates.
Our final question will come from the line of Stephen D'Ambrisi from RBC Capital Markets.
What do large loads do for earned returns or structural under-earning that you have in jurisdictions as they come online? Rate base growth is front-end loaded and capital plan back-end loaded—what's the shape of earned returns as rate base growth accelerates?
We think about closing gaps, particularly in jurisdictions like Colorado where structural lag has been a factor. We have previously referenced roughly 50-plus basis points of structural lag. Sales growth from large loads or from other sources like oil and gas in SPS can improve earned returns in between rate cases and potentially reduce rate case frequency over time. The data center load rollout is a longer process, so benefits to earned returns will ramp as sales materialize and resources come into service, but it's an important long-term opportunity for affordability and earned returns.
That concludes the question-and-answer session. I'll now turn the call over to Brian Van Abel for closing remarks.
Thank you all for participating in our earnings call this morning. Please contact our Investor Relations team with any follow-up questions. Have a great day.
That concludes today's meeting. You may now disconnect.