I'll work through this step-by-step, analyzing NATURGY ENERGY GROUP SA's financial data to estimate the S&P-adjusted debt-to-EBITDA ratio for 2022.

## Step 1: Identify the Relevant Industry

NATURGY ENERGY GROUP SA is a Spanish energy company. Based on the name and the data provided, it operates in the **gas and power sectors**, with both regulated and unregulated activities. The company appears to be a **multi-utility** with significant presence in gas distribution, electricity distribution, and potentially generation/supply activities.

Given the mix of regulated network activities (gas/electricity distribution) and potentially unregulated activities (generation, supply, trading), I'll need to apply methodologies from both **Regulated Utilities** and **Unregulated Power And Gas** sections. However, for the core financial ratio calculation, I'll follow the general corporate baseline with utility-specific adjustments as applicable.

From the data, I can see:
- Revenue: €33,965M (2022)
- Reported EBITDA ("Beneficio Bruto De Explotacion Ebitda"): €4,954M (2022)
- Significant working capital items, derivatives, and financial assets/liabilities

The company has substantial regulated utility characteristics (network infrastructure, regulatory frameworks) but also unregulated merchant activities.

## Step 2: Estimate Adjusted_Debt

### Baseline Formula:
Adjusted_Debt = (reported_debt + leases + pension_deficit + guarantees + hybrid_debt_portion + other_debt_like_items) - eligible_cash

### Identify Reported Debt Components (as of 2022-12-31, i.e., 2023-01-01 balances):

**Noncurrent Financial Liabilities:**
- Longterm Borrowings: €12,689M
- Noncurrent Lease Liabilities: €1,309M
- Other Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: €1M
- **Total Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: €13,999M**

**Current Financial Liabilities:**
- Current Borrowings And Current Portion Of Noncurrent Borrowings: €2,110M
- Current Lease Liabilities: €177M
- Other Current Financial Liabilities: €15M
- **Total Current Financial Liabilities: €2,302M**

**Total Reported Debt (Borrowings + Lease Liabilities):**
- Borrowings (Long-term + Current): €12,689M + €2,110M = €14,799M
- Lease Liabilities (Noncurrent + Current): €1,309M + €177M = €1,486M

However, for S&P purposes, we need to be more precise. Let me use the total financial liabilities and adjust:

**Total Financial Liabilities:** €13,999M + €2,302M = **€16,301M**

But we need to separate debt-like items. Looking more carefully:

From the balance sheet at 2023-01-01 (year-end 2022):
- Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: €13,999M
- Current Financial Liabilities: €2,302M

**Total Financial Debt = €16,301M**

### Lease Adjustments:
Per S&P methodology, operating leases are already capitalized under IFRS 16. However, we need to check if there are operating leases not fully captured or if adjustments are needed.

The company shows:
- Right-of-use Assets: €1,162M (non-current) - this corresponds to leased assets
- Noncurrent Lease Liabilities: €1,309M
- Current Lease Liabilities: €177M
- **Total Lease Liabilities: €1,486M**

For S&P, lease liabilities are typically included in debt. Since IFRS 16 already capitalizes these, they're included in financial liabilities. However, S&P may make additional adjustments for certain lease-like arrangements.

### Derivatives and Other Debt-Like Items:

Looking at derivative positions:
- **Activo Derivados Comerciales No Corriente** (Noncurrent commercial derivative assets): €180M
- **Activo Derivados Comerciales Corriente** (Current commercial derivative assets): €210M
- **Pasivo Derivados Comerciales No Corriente** (Noncurrent commercial derivative liabilities): €1,664M
- **Pasivo Derivados Comerciales Corriente** (Current commercial derivative liabilities): €1,624M

Net derivative liability position: €1,664M + €1,624M - €180M - €210M = **€2,898M net liability**

For S&P, derivative liabilities that are not part of normal hedging operations may be considered debt-like. Commercial derivatives (trading/commodity derivatives) are typically not included in debt adjustments unless they represent structural positions.

However, looking at the nature - "Derivados Comerciales" (commercial derivatives) - these appear to be commodity/energy trading derivatives. S&P typically does NOT include working capital-related derivatives in adjusted debt unless they represent structural long-term positions.

### Pension Deficit:

No explicit pension liability is shown in the balance sheet. The "Noncurrent Provisions" of €1,656M and "Current Provisions" of €700M may include various items. Without specific pension deficit information, I'll assume no material pension adjustment is needed based on available data.

### Deferred Tax Liabilities:

Deferred Tax Liabilities: €1,951M - these are not debt-like per S&P methodology (not included in adjusted debt).

### Guarantees and Other Debt-Like Items:

No specific guarantees or hybrid instruments are identifiable from the data provided.

### Cash and Equivalents:

Cash And Cash Equivalents: **€3,985M**

### S&P Adjusted Debt Calculation:

For utilities, S&P typically makes specific adjustments:
1. **Securitized debt** - deconsolidated if specialized recovery provisions exist (not evident here)
2. **Seasonal working capital** - for gas utilities, may net inventory against short-term borrowings if cost recovery is certain

Looking at the data:
- Inventories: €1,828M (significant increase from €878M)
- Current Borrowings: €2,110M

For a gas utility with seasonal working capital needs, S&P may allow netting of inventory against seasonal debt if near-term cost recovery is very confident. However, given the high gas prices in 2022 and regulatory environment in Spain, I'll be conservative and not make this adjustment without explicit evidence of pass-through mechanisms.

**Base Adjusted Debt Calculation:**
- Total Financial Liabilities (borrowings + lease liabilities): €16,301M
- Less: Cash and Cash Equivalents: €3,985M
- **Adjusted Debt (baseline): €12,316M**

However, I need to check if there are other debt-like items. Looking at "Other Noncurrent Financial Liabilities" (€1M) and "Other Current Financial Liabilities" (€15M) - these are small.

Let me also consider if the derivatives should be included. For energy utilities, commodity derivatives related to normal operations are typically working capital items, not structural debt. However, if there's a structural net liability position in derivatives, S&P might consider it.

Given the significant net derivative liability (€2,898M), I should assess if this represents a structural position. For a utility with gas/electricity operations, commodity derivatives are typically for hedging supply costs or sales. If these are mark-to-market positions that will reverse, they're not debt-like. But if they represent long-term contractual obligations at unfavorable prices, they could be.

Given the volatility in energy markets in 2022, these derivatives likely represent hedging positions. I'll exclude them from adjusted debt as they're operational/hedging related, not financing.

**Final Adjusted Debt estimate: €12,316M**

Wait - let me recalculate more carefully using the specific debt components:

From S&P methodology for utilities, the standard approach is:
- Short-term borrowings + Current portion of long-term debt
- + Long-term debt
- + Capitalized lease obligations (already in IFRS 16)
- + Hybrid instruments (if any)
- + Pension deficit (if unfunded)
- + Other debt-like obligations
- - Cash and liquid investments

Let me use:
- Current Borrowings And Current Portion Of Noncurrent Borrowings: €2,110M
- Longterm Borrowings: €12,689M
- Lease Liabilities (current + noncurrent): €177M + €1,309M = €1,486M
- Other financial liabilities: €15M + €1M = €16M

Total debt before cash: €2,110M + €12,689M + €1,486M + €16M = €16,301M

Less: Cash and Cash Equivalents: €3,985M

**Adjusted Debt = €12,316M**

## Step 3: Estimate Adjusted_EBITDA

### Baseline Formula:
Adjusted_EBITDA = EBITDA (reported or reconstructed) + adjustment_leases (if any) + nonrecurring_losses - nonrecurring_gains ± pension_adjustments ± joint_venture_proportional_EBITDA ± other_normalization_adjustments

### Reported EBITDA:

The company explicitly reports: **"Beneficio Bruto De Explotacion Ebitda" = €4,954M** for 2022

### Lease Adjustments:

Under IFRS 16, EBITDA includes the depreciation of right-of-use assets and interest on lease liabilities is in finance costs. However, the reported EBITDA of €4,954M already reflects the IFRS 16 treatment.

For S&P purposes, when using reported EBITDA under IFRS 16, we typically:
- Add back lease depreciation (or use pre-IFRS 16 EBITDA conceptually)
- But since the company reports EBITDA explicitly, and IFRS 16 EBITDA includes lease depreciation instead of operating lease expense...

Actually, let me think more carefully. Under IFRS 16:
- Operating lease expense is replaced by depreciation of ROU assets and interest on lease liabilities
- EBITDA under IFRS 16 typically excludes both (depreciation is below EBITDA, interest is finance cost)

Wait - let me check: EBITDA = Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization. Under IFRS 16:
- Depreciation of ROU assets is part of depreciation/amortization, so added back to get EBITDA
- Interest on lease liabilities is part of finance costs, so also excluded from EBITDA

So IFRS 16 EBITDA should be comparable to pre-IFRS 16 EBITDA for operating profit purposes, but the operating profit itself is different because there's no operating lease expense.

Actually, for EBITDA calculation starting from operating profit:
- Operating profit under IFRS 16 includes depreciation of ROU assets but not operating lease expense
- To get EBITDA, we add back all depreciation and amortization including ROU asset depreciation

The company's reported EBITDA of €4,954M is the starting point.

### Nonrecurring Items Adjustment:

Looking at the P&L for 2022:
- "Other Gains Losses": -€111M (loss)
- "Gains On Disposals Of Property Plant And Equipment": €8M
- "Increase Decrease In Allowance Account For Credit Losses Of Financial Assets": -€228M (negative means release/credit)

For S&P, we typically adjust for nonrecurring or non-operating items:
- Gains on disposals: typically deducted from EBITDA if non-recurring
- Other gains/losses: need to assess if non-recurring

The "Other Gains Losses" of -€111M appears to be a loss. If this includes non-recurring items, we would add back losses or subtract gains.

Looking more carefully at what's in EBITDA already:
The EBITDA is explicitly reported. Let me see if it already excludes or includes certain items.

From the structure:
- Revenue: €33,965M
- Raw Materials And Consumables Used: -€27,194M
- Other Income: €183M
- Employee Benefits Expense: -€547M
- Miscellaneous Other Operating Expense: -€1,511M
- Various other items...

The EBITDA of €4,954M is after these operating items.

For S&P adjusted EBITDA, typical adjustments:
1. **Non-recurring items**: Add back non-recurring losses, subtract non-recurring gains
2. **Provisions/credit losses**: If significant and non-cash or non-recurring

Looking at "Increase Decrease In Allowance Account For Credit Losses Of Financial Assets": -€228M

This is a negative expense (i.e., a credit/release of provisions). This could be:
- If it's a reversal of prior provisions, it's likely non-recurring or at least non-cash
- For S&P, we might adjust for this as it's a non-cash item that affects operating profit

However, this item is likely already reflected in the path from operating profit to EBITDA or in the operating profit itself.

Let me reconstruct to understand better:

From the data:
- "Profit Loss From Operating Activities" (Operating Profit): €3,083M
- "Amortizacion YPerdidas Por Deterioro De Activos" (Depreciation and impairment): €1,532M
- "Increase Decrease In Allowance Account For Credit Losses": -€228M
- "Other Gains Losses": -€111M

Check: €3,083M + €1,532M - €228M - €111M ≈ ? This doesn't directly sum to EBITDA.

Actually, looking at typical Spanish reporting:
EBITDA = Operating Profit + Depreciation + Impairment + other non-cash items

€3,083M + €1,532M = €4,615M, which is less than €4,954M reported EBITDA.

The difference (€339M) likely comes from other items included in EBITDA calculation.

Given the explicit EBITDA figure of €4,954M, I'll use this as the base and make selective adjustments.

### Joint Venture Adjustments:

"Investments In Associates Accounted For Using Equity Method": €656M (balance sheet)

For S&P, when using EBITDA, we typically want to include proportional EBITDA from JVs rather than just equity income. However, we don't have the proportional EBITDA from JVs directly.

Equity income from associates would be in the P&L but likely below operating profit (in finance income or share of profit of associates). Looking at the P&L structure, I don't see explicit "Share of profit of associates" in the detailed items, but there is "Share Of Other Comprehensive Income Of Associates" in OCI.

Actually, looking more carefully: "Share Of Other Comprehensive Income Of Associates And Joint Ventures Accounted For Using Equity Method" = €128M (this is in OCI, not P&L)

For the P&L, there might be equity method income included in "Finance Income" or other items. Without explicit disclosure of share of profit of associates in the P&L, I'll assume it's either immaterial or included in operating activities.

Given the balance sheet investment of €656M and typical utility JV returns, proportional EBITDA could be estimated, but without specific data, I'll make a rough estimate. For regulated utilities, JVs often earn returns similar to the parent. If we assume a 10-15% return on investment, equity income would be €65-98M. EBITDA would be higher (add back depreciation, interest, tax).

However, this is speculative. I'll conservatively not adjust for JVs unless clearly material and identifiable.

### Pension Adjustments:

No explicit pension information. The defined benefit plan remeasurements in OCI (€97M before tax) suggest there are defined benefit plans, but the net position isn't clear. Without a clear pension deficit, I'll not make a pension adjustment to EBITDA.

### Non-recurring Items Assessment:

For 2022, energy markets were extremely volatile. The company likely had:
- Significant mark-to-market on derivatives
- Potential non-recurring items from asset sales, impairments, etc.

From the data:
- "Other Gains Losses": -€111M - this could include various non-recurring items
- "Gains On Disposals Of Property Plant And Equipment": €8M - clearly non-recurring gain

For S&P, we typically normalize by:
- Removing non-recurring gains (subtract from EBITDA)
- Adding back non-recurring losses (add to EBITDA)

However, the EBITDA of €4,954M is already computed. I need to determine what's in it.

Given that "Gains On Disposals Of PPE" is €8M and "Other Gains Losses" is -€111M, if these are below EBITDA line, they don't affect EBITDA. But if they're in operating profit, they might already be reflected.

Actually, in typical reporting:
- Gains on disposals are often in operating profit or below
- "Other Gains Losses" could be in operating profit

Looking at the path: Revenue - costs = various profit measures.

The €4,954M EBITDA is likely before these items or they might be included. Without a detailed bridge, I'll use the reported EBITDA and make minimal adjustments.

### Final Adjusted EBITDA Estimate:

Given the uncertainty about specific adjustments and the volatile 2022 energy market, I'll make the following conservative adjustments:

1. **Base reported EBITDA**: €4,954M

2. **Lease adjustment**: Under IFRS 16, if we want to compare to pre-IFRS 16 metrics, we might add back the lease depreciation and subtract the operating lease expense. But since S&P now generally accepts IFRS 16 EBITDA for leverage metrics with lease liabilities in debt, no adjustment needed for lease accounting consistency.

3. **Non-recurring items**: Given the volatile 2022 with extreme energy prices, some portion of EBITDA may be non-recurring. However, for a utility with regulated and merchant activities, it's hard to distinguish "non-recurring" from normal operations in a volatile year.

Let me consider if there are specific items to normalize:

From the cash flow statement:
- "Other Adjustments To Reconcile Profit Loss" = €1,525M (large amount)

This suggests significant non-cash or non-recurring items in the reconciliation from profit to operating cash flow.

Actually, looking at the EBITDA to operating cash flow bridge would help, but we have explicit EBITDA.

Given the complexity and lack of detailed breakdown, I'll use **€4,954M as the base Adjusted EBITDA**, with potential upside or downside depending on normalization.

However, for S&P ratings, they often make adjustments for:
- Non-recurring commodity gains/losses
- Derivative mark-to-market
- Regulatory lag effects

In 2022, with extreme gas and power prices in Europe, utilities had significant working capital and margin impacts. Spanish gas utilities benefited from regulated mechanisms but also faced cost pass-through challenges.

Let me check if there's evidence of non-recurring benefits:

Revenue increased from €22,140M to €33,965M (+53%), while Raw Materials increased from €16,529M to €27,194M (+65%). The EBITDA margin improved from 15.9% to 14.6%... actually decreased slightly in percentage terms but increased in absolute terms.

The €4,954M EBITDA vs €3,529M prior year (+40%) reflects the volume and price effects.

For S&P, they might view 2022 as somewhat exceptional due to energy crisis dynamics, but the core operations are ongoing.

Given data limitations, I'll use **Adjusted EBITDA = €4,954M** with minimal adjustments.

Wait - I should reconsider lease adjustments. Under S&P methodology for IFRS 16, when calculating metrics like Debt/EBITDA where both debt and EBITDA include lease effects, we need to be consistent. Since I've included lease liabilities in debt, and EBITDA under IFRS 16 excludes lease interest (it's in finance costs), the metric should be comparable.

Actually, let me verify: IFRS 16 EBITDA includes depreciation of ROU assets in the D&A addback, so it's higher than pre-IFRS 16 EBITDA would be. But since debt also includes lease liabilities, the ratio should be roughly comparable.

For precision, S&P sometimes calculates "EBITDA pre-IFRS 16" by adding back the lease depreciation and subtracting estimated lease expense. But this is complex and often not material to the ratio if both sides are treated consistently.

I'll proceed with **Adjusted EBITDA = €4,954M**.

But wait - let me check if there are adjustments needed for the derivatives or trading activities.

Looking at the income statement items:
- "Ganancia Perdida Por Cambios En Valor Razonable Instrumentos Financieros" (Fair value changes in financial instruments): €13M

This is below operating profit (in finance costs area). So not in EBITDA.

The EBITDA appears to be clean of these financial instrument fair value changes.

### Reconsidering Adjusted Debt:

I want to double-check the debt calculation. For S&P utility methodology:

From "Corporate Methodology: Ratios And Adjustments" (referenced but not fully provided), typical adjustments include:

For utilities specifically mentioned:
- **Purchased power contracts**: debt-like obligations for third-party power contracts
- **Seasonal working capital**: net inventory against short-term borrowings for gas utilities
- **Securitized debt**: deconsolidate if specialized recovery provisions

For NATURGY:
1. **Purchased power/gas contracts**: The company is a gas utility with supply obligations. Long-term purchase contracts at above-market prices could be debt-like. However, without specific disclosure of such contracts, I cannot quantify this.

2. **Seasonal working capital**: For gas distribution, inventory (gas stored) of €1,828M vs short-term borrowings of €2,110M. S&P may allow netting if pass-through is certain. Given Spanish gas regulation typically allows cost pass-through for supply costs, this might be supportable. However, in 2022 with extreme price volatility, there might have been regulatory lags or restrictions.

Let me be conservative and not make this netting adjustment, or make a partial adjustment.

Actually, re-reading the methodology: "we adjust inventory and debt balances by netting the value of inventory against outstanding short-term borrowings. This adjustment informs balance sheet analysis by reducing seasonal debt balances when we are very confident of near-term cost recovery."

For a Spanish gas utility in 2022, given the regulatory environment and energy crisis, near-term cost recovery was somewhat uncertain due to regulatory lags and government interventions (Iberian gas price cap, etc.). So I'll not make this adjustment.

3. **Derivatives**: Net derivative liability of €2,898M. For trading/commodity derivatives, these are typically not debt-like unless structural. However, if the company has "normal purchase normal sale" contracts that are marked-to-market due to IFRS, or if there are long-term forward purchase obligations, these could be debt-like.

Given the "Activo/Pasivo Derivados Comerciales" labeling (commercial derivatives), these are likely trading/hedging positions, not structural debt.

### Final Adjusted Debt: €12,316M

Let me verify components once more:
- Long-term borrowings: €12,689M
- Current borrowings and current portion: €2,110M
- Lease liabilities (noncurrent): €1,309M
- Lease liabilities (current): €177M
- Other noncurrent financial liabilities: €1M
- Other current financial liabilities: €15M

Total: €16,301M

Less: Cash and cash equivalents: €3,985M

Adjusted Debt = **€12,316M**

## Step 4: Calculate Adjusted_Debt / Adjusted_EBITDA

Adjusted Debt: €12,316M
Adjusted EBITDA: €4,954M

Ratio = €12,316M / €4,954M = **2.486**

Rounding to two decimal places: **2.49**

However, let me reconsider if I should make any adjustments to EBITDA that I missed.

### Re-evaluating EBITDA Adjustments:

Looking at the data again, I want to check if the reported EBITDA includes any non-recurring items that S&P would adjust.

From the equity statement and comprehensive income:
- The company had significant cash flow hedging activity
- OCI includes large cash flow hedge movements

But these don't affect EBITDA directly.

From the P&L structure, looking at what might be non-recurring in 2022:
- The energy crisis created exceptional conditions
- Revenue and costs both spiked due to commodity prices

For a utility, S&P typically focuses on "normalized" EBITDA that reflects sustainable operations. In 2022, European gas utilities had:
- High pass-through revenues (inflated by commodity prices)
- High pass-through costs (similarly inflated)
- Potential margin volatility due to regulatory lags

The EBITDA margin of 14.6% (€4,954M/€33,965M) is actually lower than 2021's 15.9% (€3,529M/€22,140M), suggesting that cost pass-through wasn't perfect or there were margin pressures.

For S&P, they might view the 2022 EBITDA as somewhat depressed by regulatory lag and volatile conditions, or they might normalize it. Without specific guidance, using reported EBITDA is reasonable.

But let me check if there are items in the operating profit reconciliation that should be adjusted:

From the cash flow statement:
- "Adjustments For Reconcile Profit Loss" = €3,057M
  - Depreciation and amortization: €1,532M
  - Other adjustments: €1,525M

The "Other adjustments" of €1,525M is large. This could include:
- Impairment losses/reversals
- Provisions
- Fair value changes
- Other non-cash items

If there are significant non-recurring items in this €1,525M, they might affect the appropriate EBITDA.

However, EBITDA already adds back depreciation (€1,532M). The "Other adjustments" in the cash flow reconciliation starts from Profit Loss, not Operating Profit.

Let me trace:
- Profit Loss: €1,826M
- Adjustments: €3,057M
- Working capital: -€272M
- Other operating cash flows: -€1,089M
- Interest paid: -€520M
- Interest received: €87M
- Dividends received: €106M
- Taxes paid: -€762M
- Operating cash flow: €4,242M

From €1,826M profit to €4,242M operating cash flow (before working capital etc.):
€1,826M + €3,057M (adjustments) - €272M (WC) - €1,089M (other) - €520M + €87M + €106M - €762M = €4,242M? Let me check: €1,826 + €3,057 = €4,883; €4,883 - €272 - €1,089 - €520 + €87 + €106 - €762 = €2,433... that doesn't match.

Actually, the cash flow statement items are likely presented as inflows/outflows with signs. Let me re-read:

"Cash Flows From Used In Operating Activities" = €4,242M (positive, so inflow)

The components:
- "Adjustments For Reconcile Profit Loss" = €3,057M (positive, added back)
- "Increase Decrease In Working Capital" = -€272M (negative, outflow)
- "Other Inflows Outflows Of Cash Classified As Operating Activities" = -€1,089M (negative, outflow)
- "Interest Paid Classified As Operating Activities" = €520M? Wait, the sign convention is confusing.

Looking at the labels: "Interest Paid" is typically an outflow. But the value is shown as €520M without negative sign in the label. However, in the data it's listed as "Interest Paid Classified As Operating Activities" 2022: 520000000 EUR.

In the original data format, the signs might be embedded in the values or implied by the labels. Given "Cash Flows From Used In Operating Activities" is positive €4,242M, and the components need to sum to this:

If Interest Paid is -€520M (outflow), Interest Received is +€87M, Dividends Received is +€106M, Taxes Paid is -€762M:

Let me try: €1,826M (profit) + €3,057M (adjustments) - €272M (WC) - €1,089M (other) - €520M (interest paid) + €87M (interest received) + €106M (dividends) - €762M (taxes) = €2,433M... still not €4,242M.

Hmm, there seems to be a sign issue. Perhaps "Interest Paid" and "Taxes Paid" are presented as positive numbers but are deductions, or perhaps some items are inflows.

Actually, re-reading: "Interest Paid Classified As Operating Activities" = 520000000 EUR. In many IFRS statements, interest paid can be presented as a negative (outflow) or as a positive number with the understanding it's an outflow. But in this data extraction, the values seem to be absolute values or have inconsistent sign conventions.

Given the complexity and that the explicit EBITDA is €4,954M, I'll rely on that rather than trying to reconstruct from cash flows.

### Final Verification of Adjusted Debt:

Let me recalculate debt more carefully, considering what S&P typically includes:

S&P Adjusted Debt typically includes:
1. Short-term borrowings (including current portion of long-term debt)
2. Long-term debt
3. Capitalized lease obligations
4. Securitized debt (if not already in above)
5. Hybrid instruments (debt portion)
6. Pension deficit (unfunded)
7. Guarantees and other debt-like items
8. Less: Cash and liquid investments

From balance sheet 2022 (2023-01-01):
- Current Borrowings And Current Portion Of Noncurrent Borrowings: €2,110M
- Longterm Borrowings: €12,689M
- Noncurrent Lease Liabilities: €1,309M
- Current Lease Liabilities: €177M

Total debt items: €16,285M

Other financial liabilities:
- Other Noncurrent Financial Liabilities: €1M
- Other Current Financial Liabilities: €15M

Total: €16,301M

Less: Cash and Cash Equivalents: €3,985M

Adjusted Debt = €12,316M

Should I include the derivative liabilities? For "Pasivo Derivados Comerciales" (noncurrent €1,664M + current €1,624M = €3,288M), netting against derivative assets (€180M + €210M = €390M), net liability €2,898M.

S&P guidance on derivatives: Typically, derivative liabilities that are part of normal operations (commodity hedges, FX hedges) are not included in adjusted debt. However, if there are structural derivatives or embedded derivatives in contracts that are debt-like, they might be included.

For a utility, commodity derivatives related to fuel purchases and power sales are operational hedges. The net liability in 2022 reflects mark-to-market positions, likely due to the extreme price environment. These are not debt-like in the sense of representing permanent financing needs.

I'll exclude derivatives from adjusted debt.

### Final Calculation:

Adjusted Debt = €12,316 million
Adjusted EBITDA = €4,954 million

Ratio = 12,316 / 4,954 = 2.48607...

Rounded to two decimal places: **2.49**

Wait - I want to double-check if there are any adjustments I should make for the 2022 energy crisis environment. S&P sometimes makes "normalized" adjustments for exceptional years. However, without specific guidance on what to normalize, using reported figures is standard.

Let me also verify if the EBITDA should include any adjustments for associates or JVs. The company has €656M investment in associates. If these are significant infrastructure JVs, S&P might want proportional EBITDA. But without the proportional EBITDA figure, I cannot adjust.

Given the equity income from associates appears to be relatively small (if we assume 10-15% return, ~€65-100M), and EBITDA would be perhaps 2-3x that, maybe €150-300M. This would be 3-6% of total EBITDA. Not material enough to significantly change the ratio without precise data.

### Alternative Consideration - Should EBITDA be lower?

In 2022, European utilities had various windfall taxes and regulatory interventions. Spain implemented various measures affecting utility revenues and costs. If there were significant non-recurring gains in EBITDA, S&P might adjust them down.

However, looking at the EBITDA margin compression (14.6% vs 15.9%), it seems 2022 was actually tougher, not easier. The absolute EBITDA increase was driven by volume/price inflation, not margin expansion.

Government grants of €50M are small relative to €4,954M EBITDA.

I think €4,954M is a reasonable EBITDA figure to use.

### Final Answer:

Adjusted Debt / Adjusted EBITDA = €12,316M / €4,954M = 2.49

<answer>2.49</answer>