Thank you, Rob, and good morning, everyone. Before we get started, let me remind you that during our prepared remarks, our comments regarding anticipated business and financial performance contain forward-looking statements, and actual results may differ materially from those discussed. For more information regarding forward-looking statements and some of the factors that can affect them, please refer to the company's second quarter 2025 earnings release and the associated SEC filing. Please also see these documents for information about our use of non-GAAP measures and their reconciliation to GAAP measures. Participating on the call today are Alpha's Chief Executive Officer, Andy Eidson; and our President and Chief Operating Officer, Jason Whitehead. Also participating on the call are Todd Munsey, our Chief Financial Officer; and Dan Horn, our Chief Commercial Officer. With that, I will turn the call over to Andy.

Thanks, Emily, and good morning, everyone. Today, we announced our second quarter financial results, which include adjusted EBITDA of $46.1 million and 3.9 million tons shipped in the quarter. In spite of the difficult market backdrop, the team executed at a world-class level, particularly from an operating cost perspective. We achieved significant quarter-over-quarter improvement in cost of coal sales bringing our costs down by more than $10 per ton as compared to the first quarter. This represents the best cost performance for the company since 2021. As a result, we have lowered cost guidance for the year, along with additional adjustments to our 2025 expectations for SG&A, net cash interest income and idle operations expense that Todd will cover in more detail. As we've demonstrated in prior years, we remain committed to fine-tuning guidance as we gain a better understanding of how the year is shaping up. The adjustments we're communicating today reflect our latest thinking about the back half of 2025 and our projected performance in the coming months. Metallurgical coal markets continue to be challenged with lingering concerns about weak steel demand and lackluster global economic growth expectations. Despite seemingly positive public statements in recent weeks from China committing to address their industrial overcapacity and despite announcements about trade deals between the United States and some countries, broader uncertainty remains around the global economy and what impact higher tariffs may have. Met coal indexes have stayed depressed in recent weeks. And in the case of U.S. East Coast High Vol A and High Vol B, both pricing mechanisms reached multiyear lows that were last seen in spring of 2021. With that said, we also see continuing supply disruptions across almost all producer regions for various reasons. Combined with the potential impact of Chinese evolution measures, the market could be heading toward a better supply-demand balance. This is a dynamic situation that we will continue to monitor closely. Especially in a cyclical business like ours with significant volatility, it's impossible to mark the top or bottom of the cycle when it’s happening. The catalyst that caused our market to shift in meaningful ways often reveal themselves in hindsight rather than real time. One way we have responded to this uncertainty is to strengthen our balance sheet and our liquidity position, and that simultaneously has positioned us for future opportunities when steel demand and market conditions improve. I'm pleased to report that we ended the second quarter with $557 million in total liquidity, nearly 15% higher than at the end of the first quarter, with the majority of that growth coming from an increase in our ABL facility. This morning, we announced the Board's decision to restart the buyback program on an opportunistic basis. While the program has been inactive for roughly the last 5 quarters, our commitment to shareholder return has not changed. We remain dedicated to cautiously observing the market shifts and the timing of the amount of share repurchases will depend on a number of factors, including, but not limited to market conditions, stock price and applicable legal requirements and covenants. With that, I will turn the call over to Todd for additional information on our second quarter financial results.

Thanks, Andy. Adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter was $46.1 million, up from $5.7 million in the first quarter. We sold 3.9 million tons in Q2, up from 3.8 million tons sold in Q1. Met segment realizations increased quarter-over-quarter with an average realization of $119.43 in the second quarter, up from $118.61 in Q1. Export met tons priced against Atlantic indices and other pricing mechanisms in the second quarter realized $113.82 per ton, while export coal priced on Australian indices realized $109.75. These results are compared to realizations of $119.39 per ton and $107.44, respectively, in the first quarter. The realization for our metallurgical sales in Q2 was a total weighted average of $122.84 per ton, up from $122.08 per ton in Q1. Realizations in the incidental thermal portion of the met segment decreased to $78.01 per ton in Q2 as compared to $79.39 per ton in the first quarter. Cost of coal sales for our met segment decreased to $100.06 per ton in the second quarter, down from $110.34 per ton in Q1. Increased productivity, lower labor cost and reduced repair and maintenance expenditures were the primary drivers of the decrease in costs. SG&A, excluding noncash stock compensation and nonrecurring items decreased to $11.9 million in the second quarter as compared to $12.6 million in the first quarter. CapEx for the quarter was $34.6 million, down from $38.5 million in Q1. Moving to the balance sheet and cash flows. As of June 30, 2025, we had $449 million in unrestricted cash, compared to $448 million of unrestricted cash as of March 31. We had $182.9 million in unused availability under our ABL at the end of the second quarter, partially offset by a minimum required liquidity of $75 million. As of the end of June, Alpha had total liquidity of $556.9 million, up from $485.8 million at the end of March. Cash provided by operating activities was $53.2 million in Q2, up from $22.2 million in the first quarter. As of June 30, our ABL facility had no borrowings and $42.1 million of letters of credit outstanding. We are lowering our cost of coal sale guidance for the year to a range of $101 per ton to $107 per ton, down from the prior range of $103 to $110 per ton. The company is also reducing its 2025 guidance for selling, general and administrative expenses to a range of $48 million to $54 million, down from the previous range of $53 million to $59 million. We are increasing idle operations expense guidance for the year, moving to a range of $21 million to $29 million, up from the prior range of $18 million to $28 million. Lastly, we expect increased net cash interest income for the year and are moving this guidance to between $6 million and $12 million, up from the previously established range of $2 million to $10 million. In terms of our committed position for 2025, at the midpoint of guidance, 69% of our metallurgical tonnage in the met segment is committed and priced at an average price of $127.37. Another 31% of our met tonnage for the year is committed, but not yet priced. The thermal byproduct portion of the met segment is fully committed and priced at the midpoint of guidance at an average price of $80.52. Lastly, we have closely followed federal legislation related to metallurgical coal's designation as a critical mineral. Of note is the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which amends Section 45X of the internal revenue code. Section 45X is commonly referred to as the advanced manufacturing production credit and allows certain manufacturers to claim a tax credit for a percentage of their production costs. With President Trump's signing of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, metallurgical coal has been added to the list of applicable critical minerals and met coal produced between 2026 and 2029 will be eligible for the refundable tax credit. We are still analyzing the financial impact of this credit on Alpha. Based on preliminary analysis, we estimate that the cash benefit of the tax credit may be in the range of $30 million to $50 million annually, dependent upon the amount of qualifying production costs incurred in a given year. I will now turn the call over to Jason to provide an update on operations.

Thanks, Todd, and good morning, everyone. As I mentioned in our last earnings call, after the challenging winter months in January and February, we saw evidence of our cost reduction efforts beginning in March and continuing into April. And I'm pleased to report that we were able to build on that positive momentum within the second quarter. I want to commend the operations teams for once again showing why they are the very best at what they do. Cost reduction efforts carried out in Q2 were twofold, a 10% increase over Q1 in tons per man hour contributed to lower labor and other fixed costs, and the teams achieved these efficiency gains while reducing supply and maintenance expenses. So hats off to everyone for their continued relentless efforts in reducing spend and laser focus on safe production. At $100.06 per ton, the second quarter cost of coal sales represents our best quarterly performance since 2021. Given the challenging met coal pricing environment, we are also incurring lower sales-related costs. There's been a lot of good work throughout the organization to analyze our spending at the mine level and look for ways to safely reduce or eliminate unnecessary costs. This work continues and remains important, especially as some of our suppliers are passing along increased costs because of tariff impacts on their respective businesses. While we are proud of achieving our best cost performance in years, there's still more work to be done, and I look forward to our continued progress in these areas. Looking ahead, our Kingston team continues to develop work on the Kingston Wildcat, our new low vol mine. The slope development is now approaching 1,625 feet, approximately 93% of the way from the surface to the coal horizon. The mine is approaching the final stages before development production begins with significant progress occurring on the supporting infrastructure around the mine. We are still on track with our previously communicated schedule with expectations of first coal production and the ability to ship coal late this year. As we approach the slope bottom, our sales teams have had opportunities to take potential customers on site tours, we are seeing a lot of excitement building around this premium product as it comes close to hitting the market. With those operational updates, I will now turn the call over to Dan for some details on the market.

Thanks, Jason, and good morning, everyone. Metallurgical coal markets heavily influenced by depressed steel demand continue to experience lackluster pricing and, in some cases, further deterioration over the course of the second quarter of 2025. The quarter brought continued economic uncertainty due to policy changes, geopolitical unrest and ongoing trade negotiations and shifting trade policies across the globe. Further information from the United States about exemptions to its proposed tariffs and trade agreements negotiated between certain countries and the American administration have provided some insight into the isolated impacts of the change in trade strategy. However, significant uncertainty remains about the broader implications of the trade war and how it will influence global growth prospects. Many economists cite trade uncertainty in their projections of slowing growth for the remainder of 2025 and potentially higher inflation levels as a result. Global economic conditions will continue to be shaped by changes in trade, monetary and fiscal policies and the metallurgical coal market will also be influenced by these factors. Of the 4 indices that Alpha closely monitors, the U.S. East Coast High Vol B Index represents the largest move within the quarter, a reduction of 5.1%. The Australian Premium Low Vol Index increased from $169 per metric ton on April 1, 2025, to $173.50 per metric ton on June 30. The U.S. East Coast Low Vol Index rose from $174 per metric ton in April to $175 per metric ton in June. U.S. East Coast High Vol A Index fell from $168 per metric ton at the beginning of the quarter to $161 per metric ton at quarter close. And the U.S. East Coast High Vol B Index decreased from $157 per metric ton to $149 per metric ton at quarter end. Since the quarter closed, the Australian Premium Low Vol Index has seen modest improvement, while the 3 U.S. East Coast indices have remained roughly flat or fluctuated slightly lower. As of August 7, the Australian Premium Low Vol Index increased from quarter close levels to $183.20 per metric ton. The U.S. East Coast Low Vol, High Vol A and High Vol B indices measured $175, $157 and $147.50 per ton, respectively, as of the same date. Since then, the API2 Index has dropped to $103.75 per metric ton as of August 7. With regard to logistics, the team at DTA completed the previously discussed Q2 outages in connection with the multiyear infrastructure enhancement project. We are pleased to report that the planned work during these periods occurring on time and with minimal disruption at the facility. While the coal markets remain challenging, we maintain our focus on providing excellent service as we fulfill contracts with our long-term customers. As is customary at this time of year, we are currently engaged in discussions with North American customers about contracting these tons for 2026. Those conversations are ongoing, and we will announce the result of these negotiations at the appropriate time. Operator, we are now ready to open the call for questions.

Our first question comes from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities.

Guys, your cost improvements quarter-on-quarter were astounding. So I want to commend you on that. Can you walk us through where the savings came from? I mean how much was attributable to lower labor costs, how much to repair and maintenance, and how much on other operating efficiencies? And my second question is really, can you speak to the sustainability of these costs?

Nick, thanks for the comment. I appreciate that. As far as the piece parts of the cost breakdown, I'll probably look to Jason or Todd to comment on that. I think the bigger move and if you look at it relative to Q1, which was on the trend we've been, it was atypically high just because of some weather issues and other things we discussed in the Q1 earnings call. Some of this has been mean reversion, particularly on the surface mines. But just across the board, the higher productivity, getting more tons out, increasing the denominator, that was a force multiplier on the initiatives that we've been taking on internally, particularly the operations team, to take down the absolute dollars of expense we've been seeing in supplies and maintenance. So it's kind of a twofold attack. Comments on the sustainability, I don't want to get too early into Q3, but we're doing pretty well. I do think that the changes we've made are kind of fundamental to what we do. And we're certainly hopeful that we can maintain this run rate. But again, I'll turn it over to Jason and Todd for more detailed comments.

Thanks, Andy. Nick, this is Jason. I don't have much to add. Andy covered it. I would say the savings was split evenly between productivity and actual spend. The 10% increase in productivity from the previous quarter is significant. As Andy pointed out, the first quarter faced challenges due to weather-related delays, absenteeism, and other issues.

Guys, that's really helpful. Maybe just a follow-up. As we start to think about 2026, Andy, you used the word fundamental, how much further improvement could we see? I know some of that will come from the 45X tax credit. But is it fair to assume that we could see 2026 costs dip below the $100 mark?

Well, Nick, you've put me in the spot here because I typically don't like to talk about '26 before we have a budget in front of us, so I really don't want to comment there. I mean I'm always hopeful and Jason always, he really drives the ops team to find every nickel and dime they can. So look, we missed sub-$100 by $0.07. So is it possible? Certainly, it's possible. And we're going to do everything that we possibly can to continue pulling down. I think we've already found all the lowest hanging fruit. It gets more difficult. And obviously, the curve gets steeper as you dig deeper in. But Jason always refers to the land of opportunity. Every time you think you found everything there is, you stumble on something else. So we're hopeful we can continue to make improvements. We'll just have to wait and see to the degree that we can achieve those gains.

Andy, I appreciate that and don't want to get too ahead of myself there either, so I do appreciate that. But my next question is really turning to how you're approaching domestic contracting? I mean even if you priced in line with others on a 2025 basis, I think that could imply a downward move of over 10%. So how are you holding the line here, especially as steel makers might be looking for pricing to be more market-based in nature?

Nick, this is Dan. We're going into this like we do probably every year at this time. We go in with our view of the market and remind the buyers, and I'll remind you that we're selling a 12-month term piece of business, we're not selling a spot ton today. There's a world of difference between the two. And so our view is that we need to sustain our business in 2026, we need pricing that works for us over 12 months. Of course, there's an eye on what today's price is, you can't ignore that. But we're going in without giving you numbers saying that we need pricing that sustains us next year regardless of what the seaborne market does.

Dan, I appreciate that. Maybe one more for you. I mean, in Q2, there was almost a swap sequentially in volume terms of tons that were priced using other pricing mechanisms versus ones that were priced using Australian indices. Any color you can add on that? Really nice to see that realizations were able to tick up quarter-on-quarter. I know that can't be said for everyone.

I would just say that in any given quarter, it's not unusual for us to have heavier shipments to Asia, or maybe next quarter more to Europe. It can happen depending on the buyer's schedule. We certainly don't plan that. It's up to the buyers bringing in their vessels. Over the entire year, the tons remain the same, but there can be some variability on a quarter-to-quarter basis. We don’t control that.

Our next question comes from Nathan Martin with The Benchmark Company.

Just to echo Nick's comments, congrats on the strong cost quarter. Sticking with that, just for a second, guys, the updated cash cost guidance for the full year, what net price are you assuming in the back half of the year?

Yes. I think we're just kind of holding flat with where we are. I mean we've already got the domestic piece, the fixed price portion has been there all year long. I think we're just kind of holding us where we are. If you look across from January to now, there's not been a whole lot of variation. So it's a pretty tight band. And that's usually how we do it.

Okay, Andy. Got it. And I guess maybe taking a step back, macro type question. Alpha sells a large portion of its exports to India and Brazil. So it would be great to get your thoughts around some of the recent escalation in trade tensions and tariffs there. And how you think that could impact your business? Have you had any conversations with the customers?

Yes, this is Dan. At this point, we haven't had any pushback or negative feedback along those lines. In fact, we continue to get solicitations from the 2 countries you mentioned, business as usual. So to date, we've had no negative feedback at all.

Okay, Dan. I appreciate that. Everyone's focused, I think, on the persistently weak export markets for the most part; but Alpha is one of, if not, I guess, the largest seller of met coal to domestic markets, where again, pricing is more favorable this year, at least to export. I was hoping you could share with us, first, how many domestic tons you guys now have contracted for 2025? And then have you been able to pick up any business given the hardship some of your peers have had in this market as we've had idlings, bankruptcies, etc.

Well, this year, I think we will ship around 3.5 million tons, give or take. We really haven't seen much spot activity domestically this year. Some years, there is activity, but not so much this year. The amount we get will largely depend on our customers. Price negotiations are essential, but there are also royalties tied to specific brands and technical goals that play a role. You don’t see as much substitution as you do in the seaborne market; it's more stable from year to year, if that's helpful.

Yes, that makes perfect sense, Dan. I appreciate that. And then maybe while I have you, just coming back to DTA, I appreciate your prepared remarks. Can you just remind us, are you guys still expecting to spend, I think, roughly around $25 million a year or so on that project? And then again, when are you hoping that gets completed?

Yes, this is Andy, Nate. That's about the same cadence. I don't think that's changed any. I think repairs and enhancements should be finished by what, 2028?

Okay. Great. And then just one final one while I have you too. I mean just given Alpha is a customer of both Eastern rails, just wondering if you could share your thoughts on the recently announced Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern merger and how you think that potential combination could impact your business?

Yes, that's a challenging situation to assess. I would defer to Dan for any specific comments. However, our relationship with Norfolk Southern has always been very strong, and they've provided us with excellent service. We're quite comfortable with them. It's a bit uncertain when it comes to Union Pacific, so we will have to wait and see what happens. Overall, we've had great service from Norfolk Southern, making it hard to envision a significant improvement.

Yes, I'll just add, Alpha's footprint, we don't have many operations west of the Mississippi, nor do we ship any met coal out west. Our network is essentially mining coal in Central Appalachia and taking it to the ports of Hampton Roads, and we'd hope that there would be minimal impact because of that.

We have reached the end of the question-and-answer session. I will now turn the call over to Andy Eidson for closing remarks.

Thanks again for everyone who dialed in to be with us this morning. We appreciate your interest and your support of Alpha, and we hope you all have a great weekend.

This concludes today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and we thank you for your participation.