Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to Ramaco Resources, Inc. Fourth Quarter 2024 Results Conference Call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star and then one. To withdraw your question, please press star then two. Please note that this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to the Chief Financial Officer, Jeremy Sussman. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. On behalf of Ramaco Resources, Inc., I would like to welcome all of you to our fourth quarter 2024 earnings conference call. With me this morning is Randy Atkins, our Chairman and CEO, Chris Blanchard, our EVP for mine planning and development, and Jason Fannin, our Chief Commercial Officer. Before we start, I would like to share our normal cautionary statement. Certain items discussed on today's call constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements represent Ramaco's expectations concerning future events. These statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are outside of Ramaco's control, which could cause actual results to differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made; except as required by law, Ramaco does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. I would also like to remind you that you can find a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measures that we plan to discuss today in our press release, which can be viewed on our website, www.ramacoresources.com. Lastly, I would encourage everyone on this call to go onto our website and download today's investor presentation. With that said, let me introduce our Chairman and CEO, Randy Atkins.

Good morning, and thank you for joining the call. On the met coal side of our business, the fourth quarter was clearly our strongest quarter of the year, both financially and operationally. This was despite continued market headwinds on pricing. We controlled what we could control, which were cost and volume. We also achieved three milestones for the quarter. We had record tons sold, we exited the year with cash costs well under $100 a ton, and we ended with record levels of liquidity. All in all, we had a very strong quarter. As a result of this solid performance, especially on cash mine cost, the fourth quarter margins remained at $33 a ton. This was down just $2 a ton since the second quarter, and despite an almost $30 drop in met coal prices between the second to the fourth quarters. Based on the results from all of our publicly traded peers in Central Appalachia, Ramaco's cash margins were almost 50% higher than the next highest public peer for both the third and fourth quarters. For that, I commend both our mine operations and sales teams. The year-long negative pricing environment, of course, stretched into the fourth quarter. China continued dumping its overproduction of steel to all world markets. This has hurt prices. Steel companies have cut back their own production and reduced the price they can pay for met coal feedstock. But while the overall steel demand remains weak, there are reasons to hope that the met prices may increase in the second half of the year. Indeed, we have already seen a bump in the domestic steel HRC pricing from less than $700 per ton in Q3 to $940 per ton today. Looking at the supply side, I'm not sure the investment in the U.S. over the past year is sufficient. We believe that by the end of this year, as much as 16 million domestic tons of met production will have come out of the U.S. market since its peak in Q2 of '24. That was 72 million tons last year. That 20% drop in supply is going to eventually impact the market. The main reason for the production drop at higher cost producers is simply the crushing negative cash burn. This has already caused a number of recent bankruptcies. In addition, there have been two large longwall mines that experienced ignition events that caused those mines to remain offline, in one case to declare bankruptcy as well. Also in January, we began to notice an increase in inbound European customer interest for spot availability. We believe this was primarily due to an increase in demand from Ukraine as a result of the closure of the country's only domestic coal mine. And also in Poland, a large mine had an ignition event about the same time. The aggregate impact of all these factors has created a noticeable tightening of supply in the U.S. Going forward, we expect to see more domestic idling of high-vol production destined for Asian markets. Current netbacks are cash negative for high-cost operations. Several producers in this spot probably cannot renew all of their annual Asian contract business, which would typically begin next month. Absent a large increase in pricing, we expect another round of high vol supply cuts over the next few months. I would also note that Australian producers in terms of volume shipped from Queensland are off to their worst start of the year going back for several years. The cyclone last week will not help. On the demand side, everyone is watching potential impacts of tariffs on steel imports. Our own analysis is that tariffs might produce roughly 2 million to 3 million tons of potential increase in domestic coal demand. This happens when tariffs limit steel imports, and domestic blast furnaces then ramp up production to fill the gap. You are starting to see that already in the run-up in domestic HRC pricing. I would also like to touch on our balance sheet. We have recently been maintaining record amounts of liquidity. It was about $140 million at the year-end. We regard keeping this high level of dry powder as both defensive as well as offensive. In a tricky market environment, it is prudent to have liquidity to meet whatever conditions might arise. Also, we want to position ourselves to execute on opportunities that might present themselves during market distress. One item I want to emphasize is that despite the current market gloom, we remain positive over the medium and longer term on our plan to increase future production. When we can finally see some stronger market clarity, we are ready to add roughly 2 million tons of low vol in relatively short order. Specifically, we would proceed with both the 1.5 million ton deep mine expansion at our Maven complex and also continue mining into the number three and number four sections at our Maven complex which would add another 500,000 tons. These low vol additions would allow us to increase overall production to roughly 6.5 million to 7 million ton level, within a 24 to 36 month period once we start. This has also shifted our overall production slate to a majority of low vol production which we feel gives us a strong quality posture for the future. Now switching gears to our Wyoming operations, I am pleased to report that our rare earth and critical minerals project is moving forward at an accelerated clip. We have been delayed for months in receiving third-party chemistry and metallurgic test results. Almost all of that test data is now back. We expect later in April to release both Fluor's preliminary technoeconomic analysis as well as an update from Weir on geology grade and concentration. When these reports are released, this will provide not only granular technical information on the development but also the economics and CapEx estimates. I would note that to date, considering the outsized potential impact on us, we have spent a relatively modest $10 million directly on this project. Upon release of these reports, we will have a great deal more to say and may indeed hold a special call on this as we did last year. To give you a sense of how we feel about the data that is coming in, we have decided to begin full-scale mining in July to provide the rare earth material for a pilot processing facility we will start construction on this fall. We are, of course, mindful of the U.S. Government's interest in rapidly creating a domestic supply of critical minerals. I can disclose that we are in ongoing discussions with several arms of the federal government regarding our development. On the Wyoming front, we are pleased to have received a $6 million matching fund grant recommendation from the Wyoming Energy Authority, which is to be applied towards building our pilot plant. While we wait to disclose all the technical data with the release of the Fluor and the Weir reports, I will provide some preliminary results today. The overall size of the resource is now estimated in the range of 1.7 million tons. This increased from the 1.5 million size we disclosed last year and now includes results from all rare and critical minerals we will be focusing on. We will continue additional coring and exploration on the overall area. As you remember, to date, we have only tested about a third of the site at predominantly shallow depths. We will now core at deeper levels which frankly in many instances have shown higher concentrations of rare earth than at shallower formations. Any way you look at it, given both the size of the unconventional deposit and the fact that it is found in softer non-radioactive material, makes this a generationally unique development. As we view the project today, we will concentrate our commercial efforts specifically on about seven rare earths and critical minerals. These comprise about 30% of the material discovered to date, and are estimated to generate over 95% of the revenue. On the rare earth side, we will focus on the heavy and medium magnetic oxides of neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium, and ytterbium, which are all showing extremely strong rates of recovery. On the critical mineral side, as discussed in December, Fluor informed us that the Brook mine may be the only primary source mine in the world for gallium, germanium, and scandium. Indeed, scandium may be one of the strongest revenue components of the product mix. As you know, gallium and germanium were banned by China from export to the United States last year. One last point which should bear some emphasis though, we will approach this project with the same conservative business discipline that has characterized all of our investment decisions. This is a new and complex business. It is one with a far different macro competitive overlay than coal. Indeed, here, the Chinese have a monopoly on the space and want to make it commercially difficult for anyone else to even get a foothold. But with that said, the Brook mine would be the first new rare earth mine in the United States in over seventy years. There is clearly a need for this strategic product. But as I said, we will approach the investment in financing of what could be a transformative business in a measured fashion and ensure that it delivers a strong return to our shareholders. So to wrap up my remarks, while the world's met coal markets still remain weak, we are cautiously optimistic that our price levels are near bottom. By late summer, we hope they begin to move higher throughout the back half. I am also, again, incredibly proud of the Ramaco team being able to improve our operational sales and financial metrics throughout 2024. And to end by emphasizing again this culminated in the fourth quarter being our strongest of the year despite being the period with the weakest pricing. Looking forward to 2025 improving as the year moves along, and lastly, on the rare earth front, I will leave it to be further updated next month. With that, I will turn the floor over to the rest of our team to discuss finances, operations, and markets. So Jeremy, please start with a rundown on finance.

Thank you, Randy. As you noted, fourth quarter 2024 operational results were the strongest of the year despite metallurgical coal indices being the weakest. One testament to all of the hard work of our mine employees is that cash margins have declined only $2 since Q2 while met coal indices have fallen $30 per ton. To get into specifics, Q4 adjusted EBITDA was $29 million compared to $24 million in Q3. Q4 net income of $4 million compared to breakeven in Q3. Class A EPS showed a $0.06 gain in Q4 versus a $0.03 loss in Q3. The primary reasons for the increase in both Q4 EBITDA and EPS were the $6 per ton sequential decline in our quarterly cash costs and the almost 100,000-ton increase in tons sold. On the cost front, we exited 2024 in the mid-nineties per ton range, which was the best among our publicly traded peers. We have always said that one of the pillars of Ramaco, going back to our preproduction days, was to operate in the first quartile of the US cost curve. Indeed, that is where we now stand. On the tons sold front, we exited the year at a 4.5 million ton per annum run rate for the highest level in company history despite challenging market conditions. Looking forward, we are maintaining all of our 2025 guidance other than bumping up our book tax rate to 25% to 30%. We would expect to pay minimal cash taxes in the current environment. In terms of our guidance, we are maintaining a meaningful spread between the low and high ends of production, sales, cash cost, and CapEx guidance. This is in large part due to current market uncertainty. To give you a little more color, if weak market conditions were to persist throughout the year, we would likely come in towards the lower end of all four of these metrics of production, sales, cash costs, and CapEx by trimming back on some higher-cost production. At the same time, we hope that market conditions improve especially in the second half of the year given all of the potential supply curtailments that Randy discussed. Looking specifically at Q1 of 2025, all of us in Central Appalachia encountered two very challenging weather events. First, we experienced freezing temperatures for two weeks in January, and then saw historic flooding in February. As a result, cost per ton sold are anticipated to come in towards the high end of the full-year guidance range in Q1. When coupled with the normal typical inventory build ahead of the Great Lakes opening in the spring, Q1 tons sold are anticipated to be 850,000 to 950,000 with Q2 shipments up by more than one-third sequentially. Moving to the balance sheet, liquidity at year-end of $138 million was up more than 50% year on year. This was by far the highest year-end liquidity in company history. We also had nothing drawn on our revolver at year-end. At the same time, our overall credit metrics remained quite strong with net debt to adjusted EBITDA of just 0.5 times on a trailing twelve-month basis. The bottom line is that despite challenging market conditions, our cash margins remained relatively unchanged for the past few quarters despite the meaningful decline in pricing. At the same time, we ended the year with record liquidity and minimal net debt to EBITDA. I would now like to turn the call over to our EVP for mine planning and development, Chris Blanchard, to discuss operations.

Thanks, Jeremy. Thank you to everyone who joined us this morning. As we have discussed, it is nice to be able to talk about positive performance at the operations even if the underlying market was not as strong as we would all prefer. The fourth quarter operational performance and the improvement seen throughout the full year was the result of both the diligent efforts of the entire team and commitment to the development and growth plans we put in place late in the preceding year. 2024 was always projected to be a transitional year as we completed development mining in some of our older and thinner reserves at our legacy mines and transitioned into new areas with favorable geology throughout the year. Among the most significant milestones was the completion of the construction of our Maven plant, which ended the need to transport raw coal to our Berlin complex and reduced net trucking costs by over $20 per clean ton. Work continues at Maven completing final construction and optimization projects at the plant itself, but we are now processing on a regular schedule and working through the raw coal inventories we had stockpiled at the complex. Company-wide, while individual mines' production levels fluctuate normally as their conditions ebb and flow, we saw month-over-month increases in overall productivities throughout the fourth quarter. Some of this was attributable to easing employee turnover rates, as the overall coal markets have cooled from what was an extremely tight labor market in the Central Appalachian region. Continuing into 2025, the labor market is still tighter than its historical average and the reductions in the industry and the belt-tightening have not yet translated into an abundance of skilled coal miners available. Pricing continues to languish in its current range; however, on our growth plan, we are still continuing to advance several development projects, so that we are positioned to execute when there is a rebalancing of market dynamics. The biggest group of projects relate to the Maven complex. This will involve the development of the underground reserve which will ultimately ramp the complex up to 1.5 million clean tons per year. At Maven, the permits are being advanced and work related to opening these underground mines continues. We believe that these mines can be brought online and ramped within 12 to 15 months when they are green-lighted. Much of the lead time then will be the procurement of the underground mining equipment. Also at our Berwind complex, several capital projects continue related to new ventilation shafts, and a new portal area in the heart of Ramaco's fee coal position at this mine. These safety-related and cost-saving projects will continue. This will allow the Berlin mine to have the proper ventilation, safety, and logistical infrastructure to operate at its full planned capacity of four super sections when market conditions allow. We expect the first of the three new air shafts to be on the line late in the second quarter of 2025 after receiving the final federal permits needed for the approval of this work. Indeed across all of our operations, we have started to see some of the permit backlog unwind and our minor permit revisions and additions again be approved in a timely manner. Turning briefly to 2025, as Jeremy mentioned, in Q1, the extreme winter snow and freeze events followed by historic flooding did impact operations and shipping. In West Virginia, the impacts to McDowell, Logan, and Wyoming counties where we operate were devastating. Aside from the impact on actual mining operations, the damage to homes of the families of our employees was heartbreaking. We continue to work with some of the most stricken for relocation and recovery of their homes. Also throughout the region, we continue to work with charitable organizations and local groups supporting the recovery however we can. More directly at the mining complexes, the biggest impact of this weather was hundreds of collective employee shifts missed during January and February. We also had some additional downtime and costs associated with the flooding in February, primarily from unusual accumulations of water in the sealed or inactive areas of our underground coal mines, as well as some slowing of surface and plant operations. Fortunately, as we enter March, all of these conditions have abated and subsided, and we have resumed our normal operational cadence. We continue to watch the markets and hope for price improvement. In the meantime, we remain disciplined in operational performance and costs, to focus on those areas we do have some level of control over. We are positioned to be nimble to adjust as necessary to the economics of the market. To discuss all these factors driving the market right now, I would like to turn the call over to our Chief Commercial Officer, Jason Fannin.

Thanks, Chris, and good morning, everyone. Today, I will share our views on coking coal and steel markets as well as our sales outlook. Global coking coal markets have continued to weaken from a pricing standpoint, with average coking coal index prices down approximately 6% since the start of Q1. If current index levels remain flat through the end of March, Q1 index averages will also be down 6% versus Q4's. As of March 10th, the U.S. East Coast Index values were $182.50 per ton for low vol, $179.50 per ton for high vol A, and $166.50 per ton for high vol B. Published U.S. East Coast price indices have drifted lower over the last two weeks. We believe these levels are not at all reflective of the supply side tightness in Central and Northern App due to recent bankruptcies, mine idlings, operational cutbacks, and the extreme weather experienced in much of the Central Appalachian coalfields during January and February. The Australian premium low vol index currently sits at $181 per ton, a level last seen briefly in September and before that not since mid-2021 during the China ban on Australian coal import. The second-tier low vol coking coal index is priced at $142.50 per ton and has significantly underperformed relative to premium grades. As a result, many Australian producers in Queensland and the broader region are experiencing severe margin compression. We believe the majority of mines in Queensland are operating at breakeven cash costs or worse. We are also witnessing profitability issues in the U.S. Producers with an inability to control higher costs are struggling. We have already seen a fair deal of idlings, bankruptcies, layoffs, and associated supply rationalization because of the continued poor pricing environment. Over the next few quarters, the dominant theme for smaller and less well-capitalized producers will likely be weak profitability and continued supply cuts. Investors will have an increased focus on liquidity management across the industry. This will be especially impactful for those smaller and/or private producers who are more heavily exposed to seaborne markets and perhaps are overlooked by public markets and industry reporting agencies. If these weak market conditions continue, we believe the next phase will be more significant supply cuts which may lead to a rebalancing of market dynamics. This will present many opportunities for Ramaco to capture market share, establish additional long-term customer relationships, and continue to grow our sales book. The weakness in coking coal prices is primarily a reflection of poor demand at steel mills worldwide rather than an oversupply of met coal. Queensland, for instance, has seen its lowest shipping volumes in over a decade to start the year yet prices continue to decline. According to IMSA data, quarterly production of coking coal in the U.S. has underscored the broader struggles of the global steel industry which remains in a prolonged downturn. The key factor in this dynamic is the surge in Chinese steel exports, which continues to pressure global steel mill profits. Since early 2022, annual Chinese steel exports have been 104 million tons on average, peaking at an annualized rate of nearly 150 million tons in October last year. A huge increase which has impacted steel pricing on a global scale. So far this year, Chinese domestic demand has failed to rise enough to push down steel prices or reduce steel exports from these astronomically high levels. We therefore continue to look for green shoots in the Chinese economy as it relates to potential steel consumption growth in their domestic market. Fortunately, many leading indicators have rebounded. This suggests the cycle is turning up again although it will likely take some time for excess steel exports to decline meaningfully. In the Atlantic basin, Ramaco's term volumes and demand from our usual specialty customers remain solid, while at the same time the U.S. steel market is staging a prolific rebound in response to integrated blast furnace production currently holding a cost advantage over electric arc furnace operations. We may see domestic producers ramp up blast furnace output in response to rising steel prices. This would likely result in higher domestic coking coal consumption, providing a natural hedge against weak pricing in the seaborne market. The potential for increased domestic demand later in the year aligns well with our sales strategy for 2025. So far, we have committed 3.5 million tons for sale during 2025. We have booked 1.6 million tons to North American customers at an average fixed price of $152 per ton and 1.9 million tons to the seaborne market at mostly index-linked pricing. Most of our uncommitted volumes are associated with production in the back half of the year, as we are largely sold out in the first half. This leaves us with the flexibility to take advantage of evolving market dynamics and layer in additional sales opportunities with pricing arrangements we view as favorable from a risk versus reward standpoint. Turning to an overview of Ramaco's various seaborne markets, recent mine outages in the U.S. and in Europe have caused a tightening in U.S. supply markets as buyers seek supplemental met volumes. This trend began before the various major mine outages in the U.S. and Europe as well as prior to the extreme weather in Central Appalachia in January and February and continues today. The broader European steel market began 2025 on an upbeat tone with rising steel prices as potential safeguard measures threatened to cut off cheap imports. While the European steel industry remains fragile due to slowing economic growth, we see indications that policymakers may shift away from long-standing fiscal conservatism toward expansionary pro-growth strategies. This would create a much-needed tailwind for investment and spur downstream steel consumption. South American markets continue to be stable with modest demand growth expected as steel safeguard measures provide support for increased pig iron production in 2025. Ramaco's term contract order book in South America continues to perform well and we have seen increased spot tenders from a few buyers particularly on the low volatile side. Looking ahead, we expect Indian coking coal demand to strengthen later in 2025 supported by the addition of 11.5 million tons of new blast furnace capacity. Over the past two years, coking coal demand has lagged behind India's overall steel consumption largely due to increased seaborne met coal imports. However, with the implementation of met coal import quotas late last year, we anticipate coking coal consumption will better align with blast furnace iron production trends going forward. Additionally, we are closely monitoring potential Indian steel import safeguard measures, which if implemented, could enhance domestic steel mill profitability and support higher coking coal prices. In terms of our market strategy in the Pacific basin, we continue to engage and supply a core group of customers in Asia. This is a group with whom we have fostered long-term relationships even as the price environment in the Pacific has become challenging for many U.S. suppliers. As market headwinds persist, we are adopting a cautious systematic approach to our remaining uncommitted volumes. We plan to allocate these volumes to the highest return sales opportunities while continuing to supply our long-term customer base. All with a focus strategically on future growth. With that said, I would now like to return the call to the operator for the Q&A portion of the call. Operator?

Thank you, sir. We will now be conducting the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star and then one. If you are using speakerphone, please pick up the handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you wish to withdraw your question, please press star and then two. Our first question comes from Nick Chile from B. Riley Securities. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Good morning, everyone. Guys, congratulations on the lower cash costs and the successful additions of production at Elk Creek in 2024. My first question, if I saw correctly, you have some seaborne volumes fixed at $111 per ton. And so I was hoping you could add some color around where you see netbacks today for your various qualities. I think you mentioned that current Atlantic indices are not fully reflective. So where do you see the highest return opportunities in the current market? Thank you very much.

Nick, on the $111 there, those are index-linked prices that have settled out for January and February. A large portion of that was from a couple of our Asian high vol contracts since rolled off. That is the impact you are seeing there in that fixed price number. To your question on where we see the highest returns in the current seaborne market, certainly as in the Atlantic, we factor out the freight differential to the Pacific and then frankly, the near parity now with the Pacific indices versus the Atlantic indices, there is a differential there. In terms of current netbacks, just broadly speaking, where indices are at today, I think our high vol, you are in the $125 per net ton range back at the mine, with low vol up, I would say, $3 to $5 above that.

It is Jeremy here. If I could just add a couple of things to that. So on just on the $111 number, I would say about 40% to 45% of what was shipped in January and February on the export market was to Asia. That is about double sort of our normal Asian cadence. So I would say it is a little bit wonky from that perspective. But, you know, regardless of sort of the netbacks and whatnot, I mean, I think the key is, you know, our cash margins are, you know, call it $33 a ton. That is down $2 a ton since the second quarter. And you know, certainly, about 50% or so more than 50% higher than, I think, the next highest in Central Appalachia when you kind of average Q3 and Q4 and, frankly, competing with the Alabama longwall margins. So, you know, all in all, again, kudos to Jason, Chris, and their teams for, you know, keeping our margins, you know, very strong on a relative basis.

Jeremy, Chris, I appreciate all that additional detail and for the clarification. Maybe just on the growth side in your guidance, you have noted that you could respond to higher prices with some of the growth projects you have at your disposal. And could you remind us of the capital intensity of each of those and what would you ultimately need to see to move forward? And then is any of this potential growth CapEx included in your current guidance of $60 million to $70 million?

Sure. A few questions there, Nick. So I guess first, from the standpoint of our total capital, our guidance is about $60 million to $70 million. I would say our normal sort of maintenance CapEx is around $9 to $10 a ton. So sort of embedded in that is about $20 million of growth capital. I would say it is split, you know, pretty evenly between Elk Creek and Berwind. I mean, there is a few million in addition, but you know, at Elk, really, it is basically increasing the infrastructure for the most part to make sure that we can get to 3 million tons on a sustainable basis. And as Berwind and Chris discussed, a number of the projects that basically allow us to mine full out ultimately in the third and fourth sections. So I guess what I would say is, you know, if market conditions remain weak, there is probably some room in our CapEx to come down. At the same time, as Randy detailed in his remarks, there is a lot of carnage out there. And, certainly, we do think that the market is poised to move higher in the second half of the year.

Yes. I will make one other comment. So I mean, basically, in this kind of a sideways market, in terms of committing new capital to growth, we basically want to see some clarity, whether that is one or two quarters of stabilized pricing or hopefully even increased pricing. Remains to be seen. But the nice thing about where we are teed up at Maven, of course, we already have a prep plant in place. We have got probably for the deep portion about $30 million spend, which would be graduated over a period of time. That is not a one-year spend. That is probably more like a two-year spend. And at Berwind, we are essentially just continuing through an existing mine to add more sections. So that is a relatively modest spend, I would say in the beginning about the $10 million range. And that is once again not a one-year spend, that is probably a two-year spend. So our cap requirements for these additions are in relative terms pretty modest. I cannot think of too many people who can add 2 million tons for essentially $40 million in CapEx. So that is how I would look at it.

Randy, thanks again for all the additional detail. Good to hear you have that optionality. Maybe just one last one on the rare earth side. I mean, this is seemingly a project of tremendous scale. So what kind of order of magnitude should we be anticipating as far as developing CapEx and is there a CapEx level you would be able to point us to that is required for the construction of the pilot plant later this year?

Sure. So the way that I teed it up, I think, both in our earnings release as well as in my remarks, we will have a pretty granular description of not only the technical aspects of the deposit, the grades, the recovery rates, but also, of course, the economics and the CapEx, which are inclusive in the Fluor techno-economic report. That has been hung up because there is such an overwhelming demand for people doing testing of various rare earth projects at the labs that do the chemistry and metallurgic analysis; those labs are quite backed up, and we have been having delays in getting the test results back. We have got those results back. And Fluor is telling us by the middle or latter part of next month they will have completed the report. And so, instead of front-running that report by kind of drip-feeding out CapEx numbers and pilot plant numbers, we will let the report speak for itself. And as I said, once we put that out there, we will be even happy to have a separate rare earth call, which we have done before to go into far more detail than we would on this call today or on a normal earnings call where we are talking about our met operations as well.

Fair enough, Randy. Well, guys, I appreciate all the color. Nice work, and continued best of luck.

Thanks, Nick.

Our next question comes from Chris Lefenma of Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Thanks, operator. Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Just want to ask first around the reduction in unit costs. I mean that has been an impressive performance there. And obviously, it has helped offset some of the weakness in prices. But I am wondering to what extent, let's assume that met coal prices begin to really recover in the next year. Does some of the cost reductions that you have realized so far begin to reverse? That is my first question.

So largely — that is Chris speaking — the cost reduction has been driven by the move from more challenging geology in some of our older mines into thicker horizons where clean tons per foot is higher and it drives down the unit cost. Obviously, we have seen a little bit of benefit, I guess, by the lower sales price in our royalty costs and other sales-related items that would reverse as the prices go back up. But absent a spike in pricing, we would not expect to see major labor increases, which is what sort of drove a lot of it in 2022 and 2023. So I think structurally, the lower cost should be in place with just the normal moves around sales-related expenses.

And Chris, this is Randy. I would add as you heard from our remarks, we were seeing a lot of supply reductions out there. So in the space, not only vis-à-vis labor, but some of the other types of equipment and services, we are seeing a softening somewhat in the market. So we would not expect that trend to reverse given the amount of supply coming out of the market unless there is really, as Chris said, a real spike because we are just going to see somewhere around 15 to 20 million tons come out of the Central App and Northern App markets. That is going to create a large hole for not only suppliers but also the labor markets.

And does that capacity come back online in a better market, or is some of this capacity, you think, permanently gone?

I think a lot of that capacity may be gone on a permanent basis. One thing a lot of people do not appreciate as much is really the depletion that is in the Central Appalachian Basin. It is a mature basin. A lot of these mines, particularly for many of the larger legacy producers, are in mines that are very mature. They are coming not to the end of their useful life but certainly to a point where the geology is declining. That is why we have relatively new mines with fresh geology and thicker seams, which is obviously an advantage to us from a cost perspective.

That is very helpful. I appreciate that. Good luck.

Thanks, Chris. Appreciate you getting on the call.

Our next question comes from Nathan Martin of The Benchmark Company. Please go ahead.

Thanks, operator. Good morning, guys. Congrats on the fourth quarter results and the continued cost per ton progress. Maybe just starting there and more of a clarification question. You mentioned the commissioning of the Maven prep plant in the fourth quarter reduces trucking costs by roughly $20 a ton at that complex. However, I know you guys had previously talked about a number around $40 a ton. Is there more savings potentially there, or is that just maybe a clean versus raw ton comparison? Just wanted to get clarification.

Yeah. So good question. The trucking cost on a raw basis converted back to clean was about $40 a ton. So we are avoiding that. However, until we build the railroad out directly on-site, we are now trucking our clean coal, which has approximately the same unit cost of $20 per ton. When we build our loadout and rail cars directly at Maven, then that additional $20 will come out as well.

And Chris, when do you expect that to be complete?

The project is under consideration. We are going ahead with engineering work and some of the design work on that. But probably not this calendar year.

Okay. But is it right to assume then that would potentially improve those costs even more?

Yes. Absolutely. As soon as that project is put in place, we would expect just on the top side a $20 cost savings.

Okay. Perfect. Thanks for clarifying that. And then maybe just sticking with the cost per ton, you guys just talked about some of the variable costs associated with price. What price range are you assuming in your full-year cost per ton guidance range?

Hey, Nate. We are just generally using the forward curve for planning purposes.

Okay. Thanks, Jeremy. And then maybe finally, you know, you guys have touched on this a bit, but I wanted to ask how would you rank or prioritize your capital spending today? Obviously, liquidity position is strong. You have got the dividend policy in place. But we continue to see this prolonged weakness in the market. You mentioned there could be some opportunities for M&A because of that. You are also continuing down the path of the rare earth process at the Brook mine. How do you see balancing growth whether it is internal or external, shareholder returns, and then protecting your business during this downturn?

Sure. To your question about M&A, as I have said before, we are not too fond of the 'M,' but we are happy to look at the 'A.' So, in this kind of a down or distressed market, we will try to be opportunistic if we see situations where particularly reserve plays or perhaps infrastructure plays that might become available at opportunistic prices, we will take a look at that. That is something you cannot really plan. You kind of hope for it, but you certainly do not expect it. As far as our normal cadence for growth CapEx, I think we have explained that. We have got a very modest growth CapEx laid out for 2025, obviously reflecting the market. We are not ready to push the start button on some of these projects at Maven and Berwind until we see a little bit more clarity. As far as what is going on in Wyoming, we have been frankly surprised at how modest our spend has been to take this project to where it is for about $10 million. I think that has been a very well-used amount of our capital to advance that project that has transformative potential. But as we move forward right now, we have gotten a recommendation from the Wyoming Energy Authority for $6 million which is certainly appreciated. That will be focused on the pilot plant. We do not have too much additional drilling that we have to do. We will probably continue to drill throughout the years because this is such a prolifically large site. To really prove it up is going to take a good deal of time. Somebody remarked to me it is almost like you have got a Permian Basin of rare earth. So you have got a lot of work to do to geologically scope it out. As far as the pilot plant and the future commercial plant, those will be dictated in some instance by the nature of the process we will ultimately use chemically and metallurgically to actually refine the rare earths and the critical minerals. We are going through that testing now. Obviously, the pilot plant is designed to refine that testing and come up with a solution that will be optimized as we move forward. So we do not have too much capital that we have allocated to that for 2025. And on the mining, the same thing. We have already started doing some of the mine mobilization there now. We will start really moving some dirt around probably in the June and July timeframe. And then we will start construction on-site for the pilot plant sometime, I would say, late summer to early fall. We are going to bifurcate the pilot process because we are going to have some of it designed and tested off-site in a test facility at one of our chemical testing third-party laboratories, and then we will take that process essentially, move it to the Wyoming site and that is what will start to occur this fall.

Very helpful, Randy. I guess just one thought there too: is that pilot plant CapEx included in the current $60 million to $70 million CapEx range for this year?

Yes. It is.

Okay. Perfect. Alright, guys. Very, very helpful. Appreciate the time. And honestly, we did not include originally the $6 million that we have now been recommended to receive an award from Wyoming. So that is an extra bit of wind in our sails, so to speak.

Got it. Appreciate it.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes our question and answer session. I would now like to turn the conference back over to the Chairman and CEO, Randy Atkins, for closing remarks.

Well, I would like to thank everyone for being on the call today. We will certainly look forward to our next earnings call and then also hopefully in the interim to have a call with you all related to our rare earth project. So once again, thanks very much.

Thank you. The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. And we now disconnect your lines.