S.N. Nuclearelectrica S.A. (SNN) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Okay. So thank you, everyone. My name is Valentina Dinu. I'm with the Investor Relations department, and the reason for the conf call today is, of course, the publishing of the financial statements for the third quarter of 2022. I'm going to give the floor to my colleague, Mr. Dan Niculaie, CFO of the company, for the presentation, and then you can go to questions and answers. Dan, the floor is yours. Thank you.

Thank you, Valentina. Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you for joining this conference call, and welcome to this presentation. I'm going to present as briefly as possible being Friday, the financial statements for September -- for the first 9 months of 2022. Of course, these financial statements are unaudited. So I'm going to jump right in. The structure of the presentation is the one in front of you. We're going to go strictly through the highlights on the financial statements and then some operational data with regards to the sale of electricity, description of OpEx, CapEx, some technical performances, and of course, again, then some management details. So in terms of financial highlights, as you probably have heard, we had a very good quarter and a very good first 9 months. In terms of the quantity of energy produced and sold, we have produced 7.7 million megawatts hour, which is a slight decrease from the first 9 months period of last year. However, we've managed to sell, in terms of monetary value, more than last year. So we've generated accumulated revenue of RON 4.8 billion, an EBITDA of RON 2.6 billion which led us to a profit of RON 1.9 billion, which is a 203% more than the respective net profit of last year. In terms of the Q3 results, the sales were RON 1.7 billion. The net profit, RON 718 million, which is a considerable increase compared to the third quarter of 2021. In addition, we are well within the premises of our rectified budget with 100% achievement of revenue and with a new net profit which is well within our expectation. In terms of the evolution, the elements, which impacted the profitability of the company, as you can well see, the major driver of our financial performance was the increase in the price of electricity sold. And in terms of an impact on the cost, the windfall tax, which is -- you can see in the picture, is almost RON 900 million. Other than that, we had a pretty significant impact with the cost of energy purchased for our needs and in order to satisfy the existing contracts, and some less relevant increases in the cost of operational expenses, which will be further detailed in the next slide. Now in terms of balance sheet. Nothing really spectacular happening here with the exception of the fact that we generated a lot of cash in this period. And thus, our cash flow position has increased considerably as compared to the end of last year. We are reducing our long-term debt, and we anticipate that all our debt will be repaid in 2024, the old ones. In terms of fixed assets, there is an increase in the depreciation value but with a minor impact on the value of the fixed assets. So this is -- in terms of current liability, of course, since we are paying a significant windfall tax and we're paying it every month, we have an increase in current liabilities, but this is well within our policy of payment of current liabilities. In terms of income statement, you have in front of you, a more detailed presentation of the profit and loss statement or income statement. As mentioned before, in the first 9 months of this year, we've generated RON 4.84 billion revenue, and we have had operating expenses of RON 2.2 billion, out of which the largest cost items, of course, is the windfall of RON 872 million and the cost of traded electricity for RON 475 million. In terms of the first 3 months of -- this quarter presentation, we -- as presented before, we generated revenues of RON 1.7 billion and a net profit of RON 718 million and the largest expense was, again, the windfall tax and the cost of traded electricity. In addition, since we are having a very, very good cash position, we generated finance income, which, of course, offset any finance cost, which led to a net finance revenue for the first 9 months, and of course, even for the third quarter. A little bit of information with regards to the story of the sales of electricity. [ Most of ] our electricity was sold on regulated markets. So you will see that we have sold most of our energy in forward contracts, 86% out of the total and difference on spot markets. Overall, this led to this very good sales revenue, and very good overall and average price of electricity. This is further reflected in the next slide. You will see that in terms of quantity, there is the quantity sold in the first 9 months of the year was a little bit lower than the first 9 months of last year. However, for the reasons presented before, the revenue is higher. And you'll see in this slide, the evolution of each of the relevant elements of our sales -- and as presented before our average revenue per megawatt, it's -- price per megawatt is RON 626. Moving further, we have a detailed presentation of our OpEx elements. Of course, the largest bit is the windfall tax. You probably note that in 2022, the legislation governing the taxation of supplementary revenues has changed several times. The latest change came in September 1 when the legislation detailed the fact that any revenue above RON 450 per megawatt will be taxed at 100%, and the company will have to pay this difference as windfall tax. In terms of depreciation and amortization, you may remember that we have increased the value of our assets through a revaluation report and therefore, the depreciation followed because of this increase in the value of the assets. In terms of personnel expenses, we have increased the number of employees with almost 20% (sic) [ 14.2% ] because we are preparing for our large investment programs, and this led to -- sorry, the increase in the number of employees was 14.2%, which led to an increase of almost 20% in terms of cost. Cost of uranium, there is no significant change. We're having no changes in the contribution ANDR for decommissioning. There is a slight increase in the cost of water, 6.8%, and this is mainly driven by the increase in the price of utility. As mentioned before, we have an increase in cost of traded electricity, and this is due because of the fact that the cost of electricity increased on the market. There are some increases in the expenses with imbalances with a total impact of RON 82 million as a result of the differences between the notified quantities and, of course, the delivered quantities. And this is mainly -- has happened because of the -- our unplanned interruption of production. All the other elements have a significant -- electricity transmission expenses, a percentage increase of 61%, but in real numbers, it's not that important. The same with the other -- ANRE contribution and cost with spare parts, repairs and maintenance. In terms of our CapEx program, we've managed to invest RON 422 million out of our program of RON 609 million, which is well above the 40% threshold that was budgeted. And you'll see here -- on the screen, you will see a breakdown on each type of investment with investments made on tangible assets, equipment and ongoing investments with also in comparison with the values which were approved via the budget. In terms of a little bit of context with the status of our large CapEx investments. Of course, you may remember that SNN is preparing the refurbishment of Unit 1 in anticipation of the closure of Unit 1 in 2027. We are preparing for an extension of another 30 years of life. This is a project of EUR 1.85 billion, which is well underway. We are working with our traditional partners in order to advance the engineering of the project. And we are also working with our traditional financing partners in order to secure the financing for the project moving forward. In terms of Unit 3 and Unit 4, we are continuing our efforts to advance the engineering of the project and to identify and negotiate the financing lines for this stage of the project. We -- and we have -- you may remember in August 2022, the shareholders of the company approved the continuation of Unit 3 and Unit 4 project and allowed us to move to the Stage 2 of the project, conditioned upon an agreement with the government to enter into a support agreement. In terms of small modular reactors, you remember that Romania has entered into an intergovernmental agreement with the U.S. government, and we are working closely with the newest company named NuScale in order to develop the first small modular reactor in Romania and the location, of course, it's Doicesti. And we are extremely pleased with the way in which the project is moving forward. Yesterday Fitch has reconfirmed the rating of Nuclearelectrica at BBB-. And this rating reflects the strong market position of Nuclearelectrica and the solid business profile and the ability to generate cash or sufficient liquidity, a strong shareholding structure. And the negative outlook, of course, reflects the potential deterioration of the economic climate in Romania, which is, of course, driven by shocks in the market and the current situation in Europe and worldwide, post-pandemic and in the context of the war in Ukraine. In terms of radioactive emissions, as always, nothing to report. We are within the stated limits. In terms of the nuclear fuel burn up factor, we are also very well situated. In terms of accumulated capacity, even though we had a little bit longer outage than we were supposed to, our cumulated 9 months capacity factor for Unit 1 and Unit 2 is still very high, considering that Unit 1 is close to its refurbishment date. So this is, in a nutshell, the presentation of the highlights -- financial highlights in the last 3 months and the cumulated 9 months in this year. I'm listening and I'm ready to answer to any questions that you may have. Thank you.

Congratulations for the results, and thank you for the presentation. This is [ Kyles ]. I have a question regarding the sales structure that you forecast for 2023 in terms of bilateral contracts versus spot markets, specifically considering the latest regulation where everything above RON 450 is being taxed by the state. So are you going to go less in the spot and more -- I mean, how do you see this strategy of sales structure going forward?

Thank you, [ Kyles ]. Of course, you probably know that yesterday, the government announced another change in the legislation applied to the energy market, including provisions with respect to the conditions under which producers are allowed to sell their energy in the market. And we are anticipating that irrespective whether it will be long forward contracts or other type of contracts, the revenue will still be maximum RON 450 per megawatt. So we have basically made our budget on the assumptions that, let's say, the net sales will be RON 450 per megawatt.

And no windfall tax?

We are currently studying the legislation. We are going to find out and if necessary, clarify with -- clarify whether or not the windfall tax is still applicable for any sales that were made before the introduction of this new piece of legislation. My hunch, let's put it this way, is that if there are any sales made outside OPCOM arrangement as it's currently described, these sales, if they're above RON 450, will be taxed accordingly and a windfall tax will be paid for the difference between the sales price and the RON 450 threshold.

But do you have any visibility how much of your volumes would need to be sold on this centralized market, the outcome, et cetera, because that's the bit that is not very clear.

It's -- no one is clear. And I think it's in terms of the impact on our financial performance is neutral. We don't anticipate that we'll be able to generate net revenue in excess of RON 450 per megawatt.

Yes, but [indiscernible] some clarity.[ It would have been ] useful exactly how the...

I think the government will clarify if there is any confusion with regards to the applicability of the new piece of legislation.

And there is something in the presentation, you're mentioning some imbalances, RON 82 million imbalances, something regarding imbalances, I guess. Where are they included -- I mean we are they in the expenses? Are they somewhere in revenues? I mean, are the revenues presented as net of these expenses? Or are they included somewhere within the cost of the energy acquired -- where do we find this?

This is in the cost of traded electricity.

So you split them in 2 basically. It's RON 208 million what you need to acquire to cover contractual obligations and the RON 82 million are imbalances.

So we are only looking at the net impact as a cost in our case.

Yes, of course, but I was wondering if there -- how should we see this -- I mean, should they separate them in any way or we should just take them as one? I'm sorry if I'm -- I mean are these -- these two are used -- both of these are used in the windfall tax to offset -- I mean, they're both deducted in the net revenues, right? They are both used in the calculation of the windfall tax, right, both this RON 82 million and the rest?

It's -- let me check, 1 second. Let me see if it's included or not in this complex formula. I will come back to you with the written reply on this because this does not represent a significant impact on our P&L. And also that I need to give you a more exact reply if it's -- how it is deducted in the windfall tax computation.

Yes. But I was -- just I was also wondering if we should -- how we should treat them? Is this any of this one-off or not, the imbalances or the rest? I guess not. So basically, when you're buying power to cover unplanned shutdowns, you're buying them spot, right? And the difference, how does it work the rest? On the imbalances because I'm not sure if you have provided these details before.

These imbalances -- we're talking about imbalances in relation with our transmission operator. Yes, and these are invoiced by our transmission operator. [indiscernible] And we are paying the invoice with the imbalances. We are not buying electricity in order to cover the imbalances. This is -- the imbalances appear because of the difference between the nominated quantities and the actual quantities delivered in the transportation to Transelectrica. And the difference is penalized by the transmission operator.

But it can be negative or positive, right?

Yes, of course.

So it's kind of a one-off? I mean, it's hard to measure -- it's hard to estimate this...

It fluctuates a lot during each month. So it's plus, minus, plus, minus and...

Okay. I just wanted to understand a bit better what this is. And yes, because you're just presenting here the difference, and I don't really see -- the table is too small for me to read exactly the numbers. It would have been useful to have the presentation as a PDF so I can look at it better because I don't know exactly if -- where this is included. So I was just wondering if this is included in the total cost of traded electricity, which was RON 475 million, right, for the first 9 months. So this include both imbalances and the rest, right? Is that true?

Right. Yes. So it's -- some of them are cost items, some of them are revenue items. And we're talking about increasing the expenses. Of course, it's a cost item. It's an expense, RON 82 million.

Because you're also presenting something regarding balancing in the -- when you're talking about revenues. So that's why I was a bit confused. I got this. I think it was in the report this morning. You're saying here PE, I'm not sure if PE is the same -- I thought it is the same thing. That's Slide 7, competitive market price, including PE, right? That should be balancing, right? And secondly, if you could talk us again through the time line for reactors 3 and 4 and for the SMRs, just so we know if anything has changed? And if you can clarify, you issued that statement about the U.S. EXIM Bank, the $50 million to finance the pre-feasibility whatever -- I can't remember exactly what the statement was, but that $50 million, would that come on top of your contribution to Energonuclear or it's financing that contribution?

I will present a little bit the project. The project of Unit 3 and Unit 4 is a product that will be developed by a subsidiary of Nuclearelectrica, our company, named Energonuclear. Energonuclear will finance the development of Unit 3 and Unit 4 for projects with a combination of equity and debt. The announcement that was made several days ago at COP 27 related to the fact that U.S. government is interested to finance engineering works provided by U.S. company with a total -- with a total value of $3.050 billion. It may be -- you may be a little bit confused why we put $50 million and $3 billion. The $50 million financing is made on medium-term loan contract in a special product of US EXIM which is called Engineering Multiplier Program, which allows the financing by U.S. government by US EXIM of engineering works which will later conduct to a CapEx investment. The $3 billion announcement relates to another type of financing that usually U.S. EXIM, as an export credit agency, provides, which means financing for U.S. exports in accordance with a piece of legislation, which is called OECD Consensus, which regulates the conditions under which export credit agencies provide governmental support for exports. Now in terms of time line, we are anticipating that the last reactor will be finalized 2031.

But I was more looking at the shorter time frame like, for example, the shareholders -- Nuclearelectrica shareholders agreed on a contribution to Energonuclear, right? You agreed that in August, if I remember correctly?

Yes, yes.

That $50 million would come on top of that? Because I guess that the $50 million would also be granted before the final investment decision, right? It doesn't finance the construction, it finances whatever comes before the construction, right?

Yes.

And I was wondering, you need the $50 million that will come on top of what you are going to contribute to Energonuclear after the support agreement or it finances that [ debt ] that you -- do you know where I'm coming from?

Yes, yes. I understand your question. So U.S. EXIM is an entity which is providing debt financing. So the $50 million and the $3 billion will be a debt financing for the company. The contribution of Nuclearelectrica, which is currently estimated at EUR 185 million for engineering works is an equity contribution. So yes, to come back to your initial question, yes, the $50 million for the EMP, Engineering Multiplier Program or engineering works, will come on top of the equity contribution of Nuclearelectrica for the engineering work. The other one is debt.

I was wondering if they're basically financing your equity, but okay. Okay. Will there be more debt needed until a final investment decision? Because this EUR 185 million basically finances, if my understanding is right, it's financing until final investment decision or something like that. You don't finance the construction right now. So would you need more debt and build them or this is it? This is all the financing that you're going to need until the final investment decision?

Part of -- one of the first elements of the engineering works will be an estimation of the revision of the actual budget and the supply chain that needs to be involved in the development of the project. So yes, I anticipate that up until the ready-to-build or final investment decision, we will need to invest more in engineering works and the long-lead items, of course.

So this one being 185 million plus -- and you don't know at this moment how much will be debt, right? Can you give us an estimate? Will -- I mean, it will be more equity or it will be debt?

The financial structure of the project will be determined when 2 things will become clear. And first of all, we'll need to determine the budget of the project with Class 2 estimate in accordance to U.S. standards. So that will mean a 20% margin of error. And of course, when we'll be able to really understand the exact time line of the development. At that moment, we'll be able to pinpoint exactly what is the equity and debt structure for the project. Up until then, we're working with assumptions, which are revised on a regular basis in accordance with the development of the engineering process.

Okay. Okay. And do you know -- do you have -- is there anything new regarding the support agreement, et cetera, and the time line for that?

We are currently engaged with the government in conversation in order to progress this support agreement. And we do hope that by middle of next year, we'll have the support agreement in place.

And -- but when you had the support agreement, at that time, you won't know exactly the budget right? Or do you need to know the budget by that time? I mean, and finally -- okay, so middle of 2023, you'll have the support agreement and then -- when is the FID plan?

The support agreement creates a framework for collaboration between the Romanian government or the other authorities with Nuclearelectrica, in support of the project. This is not linked to any budget determination whatsoever. The support agreement only allows the company to advance the project within a predictable framework.

And FID then, when do they come?

The FID is going to be determined after we progress with the engineering works. And we will understand more on the status of our supply chain and the ability of our potential contractors to deliver the project as planned.

Because I remember when you presented the stages, you already included there the time line. And I think it was about 3 years, right, from now. I mean, you were expecting -- we're still in Stage 1 of Phase 1. And you had Phase II, which I think was also around 18 to 24 months. So...

This is our program at this moment. Yes.

So in principle, it would be 2 to 3 years until FID if you look at what you...

Yes.

Okay. And as for SMRs, because you mentioned that it's progressing nicely. But what does that mean?

You probably know that Nuclearelectrica teamed up with a company owning a former coal energy factory in Doicesti. And you probably have heard that the U.S. administration has granted Nuclearelectrica and implicitly, the project company, whose name is RoPower Nuclear, a grant of $14 million for the preparation of the first phase of the engineering works, which we call it FEED 1, front end design end, which is the first bit of the engineering work in such a complex program. And this is part of a larger contract with the owner of the technology, which is a company called NuScale from U.S.

And you partner with Nova, yes. But I was wondering also on the time line, if you can detail a bit what's next in this project. I understand that you will be looking for partners here. So it won't be necessarily you and Nova Power. And will it benefit from Contract for Difference? How does that work? I mean, on reactors 3 and 4, you had the support of the state. In this case, in the SMRs, will that work the same or not?

In terms of time line, the first -- the FEED, as we call it, the front end design, will clarify the time line and we will see when the first module will be operational in the SMR. In terms of future equity structure, we are working with various parties in order to attract equity funding for the development of the project. And of course, so we anticipate that alongside Nuclearelectrica and Nova Power & -- Group, there will be other investors in the project.

But do you think you'll -- I mean, will you -- will the project benefit from the same support like reactors 3 and 4?

We are hoping that the Contract for Difference mechanism will apply also to this project.

Do you have a plan right now how much money would Nuclearelectrica be willing to spend in this direction or not yet?

No. It's -- as mentioned, the exact debt equity, the equity -- the full equity contribution will only be determined when we will progress with engineering works, and we will determine the budget for the project. Now it's early stage. We are currently engaged with this $28 million contract with -- with NuScale, which is partly financed by U.S [ loan, ] $14 million grant.

But when do you expect first sizable cash outflow? So I mean, the first sizable injections into this project like for -- like because when you have the support agreement in place for Units 3 and 4, you're going to need to pay out that EUR 185 million, right? In this case, when do you expect to see any equity injection in this project?

There will be any equity injection or the significant equity injections will happen between 2023 and 2026. And the exact staggering of such equity investment will be determined on the basis of the engineering studies for both projects.

Then I have another question regarding the same issue of next year contracts. I mean, did I understand correctly from your answer that you do have any long-term contracts due next year that are below the RON 450 threshold?

We don't have contracts below RON 450, of course. We've managed to, under the current circumstances, to sell, of course, at a higher than RON 450 per megawatt threshold.

Do you plan to develop the supply -- a supply business?

Suppliers, no. No, we are going to stay within our existing commercial arrangement. And of course, we will sell all our energy to OPCOM now in accordance with the new piece of legislation.

Hello, [ Alexandru Treila ] from [ BT Capital Partners. ] Congrats on the results. I have a few questions. First, regarding the windfall tax. Could you explain us why was the value of the tax so low in this quarter specifically? Because I was expecting something like in the first quarter, that windfall tax was around RON 500 million or RON 600 million, something like that. But now you only registered something like RON 200 million, if I'm right. If you could...

We had the planned outage in the period. So less electricity sold.

No, I mean in the third quarter, not in the second one, in the third quarter.

I don't know, to be frank. I'll have to come back to you with an answer to this.

Because my guess is that you somehow sold below RON 450 in some months or something to register such a low amount?

No, no. a lot of contracts were above -- if you look at our average quarterly price...

Yes, it's above. Yes.

It's above.

Okay. Second, regarding the cost of nuclear fuel, exactly, as you said, there was no significant impact from -- compared to the last year, but I was wondering why, because the international market regarding uranium has increased. And I know that you have a lag of something like 6 months, but we are beyond that. And I don't see why won't you have an increase in the cost of nuclear fuel? If you can provide us some insights on that part.

Yes. We are basically consuming from our inventory. And you probably know that we're using the weighted average cost of fuel bundles. And it's -- as you mentioned, it's a time lag.

Right. And do you have -- can you provide us an estimate on will that inventory deplete or...

No, no, unfortunately, I can't.

Or regarding the -- I know that you were searching for a long forward contract or a forward contract with Cameco and Kazatomprom, if you have any updates on that.

Yes, it is -- we are going to collaborate with both of them depending on who's going to have the lowest price.

And are those contracts on 1 year, 3 years, 5 years or...

It's a framework contract.

Okay. Okay. And last, regarding the small nuclear reactors. I have a question, if -- have you encountered any impediments from some NGOs because I saw that on the news -- and if you see somehow that this can affect your investment in the project or the development of the project itself?

So far, we haven't encountered any relevant or significant opposition to our project. We are well engaged with the community, and you probably know that the new sector is well regarded in Romania since the operational capability of Nuclearelectrica, it's excellent.

Why do you sell for a price more than RON 450? Anyway, they will take the money from you.

Sorry, could you please repeat the question? I'm not sure if I followed.

All the money you make over RON 450 will be taken for you by the state. So why don't you sell the electricity at RON 450? Anyway, for you, it's the same.

As mentioned before, we -- in accordance with the new legislation, this is practically what we are going to do. We are going to sell the entire electricity to OPCOM at RON 450, and OPCOM will further sell it to other participants in the market in a preestablished manner described in the law.

So in order to calculate your profit for the next year, we must multiply your capacity or your installed power with RON 450, reduce some costs like wages, personnel, I don't know. And that's it. This will be your net profit for the next year.

Yes, if the legislation will be implemented as it is, this is basically the phenomenon -- the economic phenomenon.

[ Cristian Trateforme. ] Just 1 follow-up on the $3 billion loan. So if I understood correctly, this can be supplemented if the project costs would -- will be higher by a maximum 20% -- that's what you are saying?

Yes, basically, I have to zoom out a little bit and explain the technology behind CANDU. CANDU Technology is a Canadian-based technology. It was developed by governmental entities long time ago. So therefore -- and in addition to Canadian, U.S. technology, there will be Italian and potential French technology. So we're anticipating that the development and the financing of the project will be made with a contribution from 4 export credit agencies, of course, starting from Canada with EDC, Export Development Canada; U.S. EXIM from U.S; SACE from Italy and Bpi from France. And each of these export credit agency will finance with debt type financing in accordance with OECD consensus, the export of Canadian, U.S., French and Italian technology in Romania in support of the project.

So what's the plan structure, equity versus loans?

As mentioned before, the exact debt-to-equity ratio will be determined when 2 things will emerge with a decent degree of accuracy. First of all, a Class 2 budget, which means that you have in accordance with U.S. standards, which means that you have a 20% margin of error in terms of the overall budget and the clear definition of the program, which is linked to basically -- and constrained by the existing of raw materials, the availability of manpower and any supply chain disruptions. Now I know that I may not give you enough answers at the moment, but these elements are confidential because we are in constant negotiations with our partners. And as soon as we reach agreements with [ all these ] partners, we will publish relevant information on media. However, I encourage you to read the latest featured report because it's a good report, and it gives you a lot of answers that are not maybe presented in the third quarter report.

Then my question is, I mean, if this project is mostly -- I mean, the technology is not global in any case. So of course, you have financing available from the U.S., from Canada, from France, et cetera. So a large part of the project, I mean, even those $3 billion, they are already, hopefully, financing a very good part of the CapEx. So that's why I was wondering how much equity will there be left? Because if each of the partners would be financing its own part, then there's not that much equity needed basically in the project, but this is what I want to understand.

Yes. We anticipate that the equity structure will be heavily geared towards debt because we anticipate that the government will provide sovereign guarantees for this project and thus the need for equity will be reduced accordingly.

But how much, I mean, even the $3 billion, how much would that finance -- how much of the U.S. part would that finance? Or it's not clear yet?

Yes. Because in order to better understand the products of the ECAs, I encourage you to read the OECD Consensus, but I will make a short presentation. In accordance with the OECD consensus on export credit agency activity, the export credit agencies are allowed to finance up to 85% of the export value and up to -- and depending up to 40% or 50%, depending on the ECA. For local value, local component...

40% for local components, sorry?

Up to 40% for local component, computed with reference to the value of the export contract. So the export credit agencies are financing 85% of, let's say, U.S. EXIM is financing, for example, in accordance with their standard policy. 85% out of the export -- U.S. export contract, and if this export contract is $100, then in [indiscernible] $85 that EXIM is financing for the U.S. product, EXIM is usually able and willing to finance up to $30 for local content. Each export credit agency is following the same guidelines in terms of foreign content and local content, in terms of cost or price and in terms of maturity of the loans.

Absolutely. And the 30%, where does that come from? Because you said 40%. So the 30% comes, is that 40% out of 85%? Is that how you would reach the 30%?

The 30% is completed with a reference to the export contracts. So coming back to my previous example in...

Okay. So up to 30%. Not up to...

EXIM is up to 30%. Other ECAs are financing up to 50%. But we are aiming for a 40% financing because the 40% or 50% or 30% depends on the level of the development of the host country of the project. And since Romania is judged in accordance with the World Bank rankings, currently, most of the financing provided by the ECAs will be geared towards 40% local content financing.

But you don't know exactly how much that local component would be basically?

This is the local or the foreign component and the mix of products, will be determined when the engineering is close to finalization. Because as you can imagine, you can buy a certain piece of technology from various places around the world. You can buy it from Europe, from Canada or from U.S. And depending on cost consideration, delivery considerations and financing consideration, the actual mix of equipment materials will vary. So it's too early to tell exactly what is the type of -- the exact mix of financing that will be applied to this project because the engineering is not yet complete, and we do not have yet full visibility on the country of origin mix of products.

But you mentioned something in the -- when you -- in this release that you said was subject to change. You mentioned some local component. I don't think it was necessarily -- you mentioned something -- a local contribution, let's put it like this. So it's about EUR 1 billion to EUR 1.6 billion. This has nothing to do with what we're talking about right now or does it?

I'm not really sure what you're referring to.

It's in -- you cited a ROMATOM study based on the capability of the Romanian industry to participate in the development of the Romanian nuclear...

I know what you're saying. This is an estimate. This is a theoretical capability. We'll find out what is the actual capability of the Romanian industry the moment they'll sign the contract. And it will be a complex analysis.

Okay. And the guarantees from the state will come for everything, right? For the financing provided by the U.S. EXIM Bank, for everything, for all the financing that you'll be requiring, right? Including the financing for the local component, if it's done by foreign entities or by local banks, et cetera, it will finance -- the guarantees will be covering everything, right, by the state -- from the state in the [ spot ] agreement?

The financing would -- the state guarantees, if any, will cover any debt portion of the project.

But all the debt portion, meaning whatever is provided by the foreign entities and whatever you will need to build -- you will take directly from local banks, if any, will be needed, right? Everything, all the debt.

It really depends when the sovereign guarantees will be issued. If there will be issued before ordering the long-lead items or after the ordering of long-lead items. So this is a complex discussion and this -- it really depends on the moment when the Romanian government will issue the sovereign guarantees.

But anyway, who would be willing to finance Nuclearelectrica? You're relatively tiny compared to the size of the project. I think in -- all these institutions will be requiring state guarantees, right? Yes. Okay. I guess we are going to see.

We are currently in a very good cash position. We are -- we have negative net leverage, and we have BBB-.

But yes, but you also need to finance a refurbishment. It's EUR 2 billion.

The overall indebtedness level or our capacity to fund the project, it's only restricted by the net leverage ratios that we are going to negotiate with our lenders.

When are we going to have a new estimate for the cost of the refurbishment?

When the engineering will progress, this will be informed through the usual channels, when our shareholders will approve any revised investment program or budget.

But there's an estimate that -- will it be next year or in 3 years from now? Because works, in principle, start [ latest ] 2026. So will it be closer to that year or sooner?

Well, I think that whoever has this answer will be able to have better visibility on the supply chains worldwide. You probably know that currently, there is a lot of stress on the materials markets, on the energy market. And it's extremely difficult now to foresee with accuracy, a project that will be developed over up until 2029, over a 6-year time frame. So as soon as we have more visibility, of course, we'll inform all the concerned parties.

Any other questions? Okay. Thank you. If not, thank you very much for taking part. Thank you, Dan, for the presentation and the answers. As usual, I'm going to send the presentation, and you can also find it, both the presentation and the audio file, on the website on Investor Relations page. Thank you very much. Have a good evening, and a good weekend. Thank you.

Thank you. Bye-bye.