Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to Teck’s Q2 2024 Earnings Release and Investors Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. This conference call is being recorded on Wednesday, July 24, 2024. I would now like to turn the conference over to Fraser Phillips, Senior Vice President, Investor Relations and Strategic Analysis. Please go ahead.

Thanks, Kaylene. Good morning, everyone. And thank you for joining us for Teck’s second quarter 2024 conference call. Please note today’s call contains forward-looking statements. Various risks and uncertainties may cause actual results to vary. Teck does not assume the obligation to update any forward-looking statements. Please refer to Slide 2 for the assumptions underlying forward-looking statements. In addition, we will reference various non-GAAP measures throughout this call. Explanations and reconciliations regarding these measures can be found in our MD&A and the latest press release on our website. Turning to the agenda on Slide 3, Jonathan Price, our CEO, will begin today’s call with highlights from our second quarter results. Crystal Prystai, our CFO, will follow with additional color on the quarter, as well as the sale of our steelmaking coal business and the use of proceeds from that transaction. Jonathan will then discuss the transformation of our portfolio and our value creation strategy. We’ll then take your questions. With that, over to you, Jonathan.

Thank you, Fraser, and good morning, everyone. Starting with the highlights from our second quarter on Slide 5. At the very top of our list of highlights is the close of the sale of the remaining interest in the steelmaking coal business on July 11th. It’s not every day that we receive C$7.3 billion in cash proceeds, and this transaction marks an exciting new era for Teck as a company focused entirely on providing metals that are central to global development and the energy transition. We believe that the copper market has strong fundamentals and we continue to see ongoing urbanization and population growth driving increased copper intensity, with additional demand driven by power generation, technology, data, and increased electrification. The long-term outlook for copper is highly resilient. With the significant proceeds from this transaction, Teck is strongly positioned to capitalize on the growing demand for copper in our new era. With substantial funding retained for our near-term value-increasing projects, we have a pathway to increase total copper production once QB is at full capacity by a further 30% starting as early as 2028, with significant debt reductions further strengthening our resilient balance sheet and with the largest cash return to our shareholders in the company’s history. Crystal will speak to the use of proceeds in greater detail shortly. Beyond the transaction, there were several highlights from our strong operational and financial performance in the second quarter. We generated C$1.7 billion of adjusted EBITDA, a 13% increase from the same period last year, reflecting record quarterly copper production driven primarily by the ramp-up of Quebrada Blanca or QB. It was also another strong quarter for Red Dog, and we had very strong production in the steelmaking coal business despite two major planned maintenance shutdowns. At the same time, we advanced our industry-leading copper growth portfolio, having achieved several milestones in the permitting processes for the Highland Valley Mine Life Extension and for San Nicolás. We continued to focus on sustainability leadership, including improved safety performance. Our high potential incident frequency rate was 0.11 for the first half of the year, which is a 46% reduction in HPIs from the same period last year. Turning to the highlights from QB on Slide 6. We continued to advance the ramp-up during the second quarter. QB copper production increased quarter-over-quarter to 51.3 thousand tons from 43.3 thousand tons. Robust design and construction of the plant supported the bottlenecking, and we remained focused on recovery and throughput. We achieved first production and sales of molybdenum as planned, and the ramp-up of the molybdenum plant is progressing. Our QB net cash unit costs were in line with our expectations. QB is already starting to contribute to our strong financial results, with C$284 million in gross profit before depreciation and amortization generated in the first half of the year, while still in ramp-up. Turning now to the outlook for QB on Slide 7. We are seeing continuous improvements in throughput, which is now close to design rates. While we had recurring failures with a pulley in a key overland conveyor, these have now largely been mitigated. At the same time, recoveries have improved as we adjust the clays in the transition ores and improve slab stability. Our focus is on driving recoveries to design levels, and we are confident that we will achieve our target recoveries by year-end. Most importantly, we continue to expect to reach full throughput rates at QB by year-end. However, slightly lower than planned ore grades in the second half of the year, due to short-term mine access issues related to pit dewatering and a localized geotechnical issue, have resulted in an update to our 2024 production guidance for copper and molybdenum. We’ve revised our full-year QB copper production guidance to 200,000 tons to 235,000 tons, from 230,000 tons to 275,000 tons, and revised our full-year QB molybdenum production guidance from 1.8 thousand tons to 2.4 thousand tons, from 2.9 thousand tons to 3.6 thousand tons. In line with our production guidance changes, we’ve revised our full-year net cash unit cost guidance for QB to US$225 per pound to US$255 per pound, from US$195 per pound to US$225 per pound. While second-quarter sales from QB were impacted by a temporary filter plant issue at the port in June, it was resolved by quarter-end, and we expect to make up the sale volumes over the balance of the year. Production guidance for QB for 2025 to 2027 is unchanged. Once at full capacity, QB will double our copper production, and we expect our base metals operations to generate significant EBITDA. As shown on the slide, we have the potential to generate more than C$5 billion of annual EBITDA, and with sustaining capital and capitalized stripping expected to be in a range of C$1 billion per year to C$1.2 billion per year, Teck’s free cash flow generation potential is compelling. I’ll now hand the call over to Crystal to provide further details.

Thanks, Jonathan. Good morning, everyone. I’m going to start on Slide 9 with our financial performance in the second quarter. Given final regulatory approval of the sale of Elk Valley Resources or EVR, was not received until July 4th, we continued to report EVR in our operating results in the second quarter. Starting in the third quarter of 2024, EVR results will be presented as discontinued operations. There are a number of significant accounting and presentation items that impacted our first-quarter results, and these continue to impact our results in the second quarter. Consistent with our reporting in Q1, our second-quarter financial statements reflect the 23% minority ownership in EVR by NSC and POSCO, and we continue to consolidate 100% of EVR’s production and sales volume, revenue, gross profit, and EBITDA given our controlling shareholding position. Our profit attributable to shareholders is based on our 77% ownership of EVR. The remainder of EVR profit is attributable to non-controlling interest, which reduced our profit attributable to shareholders and related EPS compared to the same period last year. We continued to operate the steelmaking coal business in the second quarter and retained all cash flows from EVR until completion of the sale of our remaining 77% interest in EVR to Glencore on July 11th, 2024. Our finance expense and depreciation and amortization expense have both increased compared to the same period last year, as we are depreciating QB assets and no longer capitalizing interest on the project starting in 2024. Our solid financial performance in the second quarter reflects record copper production and strong copper prices, as well as strong steelmaking coal sales volume, which were partially offset by higher depreciation, amortization, and finance expense due to the QB ramp-up and the non-controlling interest resulting from the minority sale of EVR to NSC and POSCO, as I outlined earlier. We returned a total of C$346 million to shareholders in the quarter, including C$282 million in share buybacks executed under the C$500 million return previously authorized by the Board following receipt of the NSC proceeds, and we paid C$664 million of quarterly based dividends. Through the end of June, we had executed C$363 million of the Board-authorized C$500 million share buyback. Slide 10 summarizes the key drivers of our financial performance in the quarter. The increase in adjusted EBITDA in the quarter compared to the same period last year was primarily driven by higher pricing adjustments, primarily for copper, but also for zinc, increased sales volumes for copper with record quarterly production, as well as steelmaking coal sales volumes at the top end of our guidance range and the positive impact of a weaker Canadian dollar. These items were partially offset by higher operating costs across our business and lower steelmaking coal prices. We remain highly focused on managing our controllable operating costs. Higher overall operating costs in the quarter reflect elevated QB operating costs, as well as inflation that is expected to persist throughout 2024 and was contemplated in our guidance for sustaining capital and unit costs. As expected, QB costs were elevated in the first half of the year due to alternative shipping arrangements, the ramp-up of the molybdenum plant, and lower volumes as ramp-up of production continues. Now turning to each of our business units in greater detail, starting with copper on Slide 11. Overall, our gross profit before depreciation and amortization in copper increased 118% in the quarter compared with the same period last year, reflecting a significant increase in the copper price in the quarter and substantially higher sales volumes, partially offset by elevated QB operating costs as production ramp-up continues. Spot copper prices hit a record high of US$4.92 per pound at the end of May, and our realized copper price in the second quarter was US$4.44 per pound, up 17% compared to the same period last year. The ramp-up of QB drove our record quarterly copper production up 71% from the same period last year, and we also had higher production at Highland Valley and Antamina. This was partially offset by lower production at Carmen de Andacollo due to water restrictions as a result of ongoing extreme drought conditions. Water restrictions improved during the second quarter and are expected to continue to improve in the second half of this year. As expected, our cost of sales was higher year-over-year as QB operations ramp-up and we record depreciation of QB’s operating assets. Excluding QB, our net cash unit costs were US$1.82 per pound or US$0.10 per pound lower than the same period last year as a result of lower U.S. dollar denominated operating costs and lower smelter processing charges, partly offset by reducing by-product credits from Antamina. Looking ahead, as Jonathan outlined, we have updated our 2024 annual copper and molybdenum production guidance and our unit cost guidance for the full year, reflecting changes to QB guidance. We revised our copper production guidance to 435,000 tons to 500,000 tons from 465,000 tons to 540,000 tons, which still represents over 55% copper growth year-over-year at the midpoint. Our molybdenum production guidance is now 4.3 thousand tons to 5.5 thousand tons from 5.4 thousand tons to 6.7 thousand tons. Our net cash unit cost guidance has been revised to US$1.90 per pound to US$2.30 per pound from US$1.85 per pound to US$2.25 per pound, primarily as a result of lower molybdenum production, as well as lower copper production volumes. Looking now at our zinc business on Slide 12. We had another strong quarter at Red Dog with increased zinc and lead production, reflecting higher grade and recovery. Zinc sales of 53,000 tons were in line with guidance for the second quarter. However, Red Dog’s net cash unit costs were up US$0.04 per pound due to higher costs for consumables and an increase in smelter processing charges. At Trail, refined zinc production was impacted by unplanned maintenance, and refined lead and by-product production was significantly lower, reflecting the planned 70-day shutdown for the replacement of a KIVCET boiler. The project was completed on time and on budget, and the boiler has been operating very well since the restart. Overall, our gross profit before depreciation and amortization in zinc decreased 53% in the quarter, primarily due to reduced refined metal sales and zinc premiums at Trail and lower zinc sale volumes from Red Dog compared to the same period last year. The shipping season at Red Dog commenced on July 12, and we expect Red Dog’s zinc and concentrate sales of 250,000 tons to 290,000 tons in the third quarter, reflecting our normal seasonality of sales. Our 2024 annual zinc and concentrate production guidance of 565,000 tons to 630,000 tons and our net cash unit cost guidance of US$0.55 per pound to US$0.65 per pound are both unchanged. At Trail operations, our 2024 annual refined zinc production guidance is unchanged at 275,000 tons to 290,000 tons. Turning now to steelmaking coal on Slide 13. This marks our last full quarter of reporting on EVR, and we are finishing on a high note. Sales volumes in the quarter of 6.4 million tons were at the top end of our guidance range, and steelmaking coal prices declined, but they remained strong. Despite two major planned maintenance shutdowns, we achieved very strong production across all of our plants. Adjusted site cash costs of sales per ton of C$112 were higher than the same period last year, driven by higher spend on labor, contractors, and diesel, and less favorable mining drivers. Given the ongoing shortage of skilled trade labor, we continue to have increased reliance on contractors. Transportation costs were C$1 per ton lower than the same period last year, due to lower demerit charges as a result of continued stable vessel queues. Overall, we generated C$1.1 billion in gross profit before depreciation and amortization, reflecting lower realized steelmaking coal prices and higher unit operating costs, partially offset by higher sales volumes and the positive impact of a stronger U.S. dollar. Turning now to the sale of EVR and our use of proceeds from the transaction. Starting on Slide 15, we completed the sale of the remaining 77% interest in EVR to Glencore on July 11, and received total transaction proceeds of US$7.3 billion, subject to customary closing adjustments. This transaction is a catalyst to transform Teck into a pure-play energy transition metals company. The proceeds position Teck for our next phase of responsible growth and value creation. As always, we remain committed to our disciplined capital allocation framework on Slide 16. This guided our deployment of the proceeds from the transaction. We have a disciplined approach to the deployment of capital, aiming to balance growth with cash returns to shareholders, while maintaining a strong balance sheet through the cycle. Slide 17 summarizes how we are allocating transaction proceeds. We announced the largest return of cash to shareholders in Teck history, with approximately C$3.5 billion in total share buybacks and dividends. The share buyback of up to C$2.75 billion is in addition to the C$500 million share buyback previously authorized following the minority sale of EVR to NSC and POSCO. Through the end of June, we had completed C$363 million of the C$500 million buyback. The Board also authorized a one-time supplemental dividend of C$0.50 per share for approximately C$250 million, which will be paid on September 27, in addition to our quarterly base dividend of C$0.125 per share. We announced a debt reduction program of up to US$2 billion and launched a cash tender offer of US$1.25 billion for our outstanding notes that was subsequently out sized. On July 15, we completed the purchase of approximately US$1.4 billion of our public notes and we are assessing further debt reduction opportunities. We expect to pay costs and taxes related to the transaction of approximately US$750 million in early 2025. The remaining net proceeds from the transaction will be retained to fund our near-term copper growth. Once QB is at full capacity, we have a pathway to increase our copper production by a further 30% starting as early as 2028 through our near-term projects. These include the Mine Life Extension at HVC, Zafranal, San Nicolás, and QB optimization and debottlenecking. Our attributable capital cost for these projects is estimated to be US$3.3 billion to US$3.6 billion. Turning now to Slide 18 in our resilient balance sheet. Following the close of the EVR transaction, we are now in a net cash position, including US$8.7 billion in cash as of today. With the purchase of US$1.4 billion of our public notes on July 15 through the cash tender offer, we have decreased our outstanding term notes to US$1.1 billion. Our total debt outstanding following the cash tender offer is US$4.3 billion and our net cash position is currently US$2.9 billion. We remain focused on maintaining our investment grade credit metrics supported by our resilient balance sheet. Going forward, we expect to generate higher interest income by the additional cash that we’re holding on the balance sheet. At the same time, our annual requirements for sustaining capital and capitalized stripping have declined to US$1 billion to US$1.2 billion following the sale of EVR. QB is expected to generate significant additional EBITDA and free cash flow at full production, which will further build on the resilience. As demand for copper continues to rise and constraints on new supply persist, the value of high-quality, low-cost copper assets will only increase. Overall, Teck is strongly positioned to execute on our strategy for responsible growth and value creation. With that, I’ll turn it back over to Jonathan.

Thanks, Crystal. So, going on to our transformation on Slide 20. As I said earlier, Teck is now entirely focused on providing metals that are essential to global development and the energy transition. I would like to take a moment to reflect on some of the strategic developments that we’ve executed on over the past couple of years to get to this point. Last year, we started to refocus our portfolio towards energy transition metals through the sale of our interest in Fort Hills, marking our exit from the oil sands business. We also modernized our share structure with the introduction of a sunset for our Class A shares, reflecting our commitment to strong corporate governance and acting in the best interest of all shareholders. At the same time, we continue to advance the projects in our industry-leading copper growth pipeline. Two key milestones we’re entering into joint ventures at NewRange in partnership with PolyMet and at San Nicolás in partnership with Agnico Eagle, which help us to advance and derisk those projects. This year, we completed construction of QB, which is the driver for our near-term growth. QB is a transformational Tier 1 asset for Teck with a long life, hesitant cost position, and meaningful expansion opportunities, and it will be a cornerstone of our copper portfolio for decades to come. Finally, we’ve completed the sale of our steelmaking coal business, transforming Teck into a pure-play energy transition metals company. As Crystal has just discussed, with significant transaction proceeds in hand, we’ve announced significant cash returns to shareholders and taken steps to ensure that Teck is strongly positioned to capitalize on the growing demand for copper. We remain committed to balancing our growth with further cash returns to shareholders. All of this evidences our willingness to both set a bold strategy and critically execute against it, always with a focus on value creation. Moving on to our current portfolio on Slide 21. With the strategic moves that we have made, our commodity mix is now 100% base metal. We have a solid foundation of long-life producing copper and zinc assets that generate strong cash flow today, including Antamina in Peru, Highland Valley Copper in British Columbia, and Red Dog in Alaska, and our cornerstone QB assets in Chile, which will generate strong cash flow at full production. We also have Mine Life Extension opportunities to maintain this foundation, including at Highland Valley and Antamina in the near term. Importantly, while our portfolio mix has changed, our focus on maximizing long-term value for shareholders has not. We remain committed to operational excellence, ensuring we deliver the full value from our premium base metals portfolio. Returning to our industry-leading copper growth on Slide 22. Over a decade ago, Teck recognized the value that could be created through a robust pipeline of copper projects. As a result, we have created a highly valuable portfolio of actionable copper growth projects, diversified by jurisdiction and scale. Each of these will be a low-cost operation, with competitive capital intensities already derisked through strategic partnerships. Teck is now on track to become a top 10 global copper producer, doubling copper production with QB as a pathway to further increase production by 30% starting as early as 2028. Our near-term copper projects are high-quality, capital-efficient, and low-operating-cost projects, which should enable us to move down the cost curve and generate strong returns. We are also exploring optimization of QB to increase production beyond design throughput capacity with minimal capital. Beyond this, by the end of the year, we will develop a definitive plan for near-term, low-capital-intensity debottlenecking at QB. We are progressing the Life Extension of Highland Valley to allow for continued production of this stable and profitable core asset for another 17 years. Export will be reviewing the Zafranal project for sanction as early as the second half of 2025. This capital-efficient growth project is expected to have a rapid payback driven by high grades in the early years. At San Nicolás, we continue to progress feasibility study work and our permitting application to position us to deliver this low-capital-intensity project that we expect to generate industry-leading returns. At the same time, we continue to progress our longer-dated projects to ensure that we retain a pipeline of future growth opportunities. Turning to Slide 23, we are continuing to create value for shareholders by driving best-in-class, safe, and sustainable operational performance from project delivery, including managing costs; incorporating learnings from the completed independent review of QB2 into our future projects; assessing value-accretive opportunities to expand and optimize our high-quality operating assets; ensuring we continue our disciplined capital allocation to generate strong returns; executing on our well-funded, capital-efficient, near-term copper growth projects; balancing growth with cash returns to shareholders. Overall, I believe that Teck is uniquely positioned as a pure-play energy transition metals company with both a premium portfolio of long-life cash-generating assets in well-understood jurisdictions and industry-leading copper growth. We’re working hard to unlock the full potential of growth with a focus on value creation. I believe that there is incredible value inherent within Teck, not just in terms of the quality of our assets and the depth of our copper growth pipeline, but also our responsible and ethical approach to resource development, which is critical to our ability to realize value. So to conclude on Slide 24, while we are entering an exciting new era as a pure-play energy transition metals company, we remain strongly committed to our purpose and values, which remain personal to me and to all of us at Teck. As we pursue responsible growth, always focused on value creation, our capital allocation framework continues to guide us in balancing that growth with cash returns to shareholders. We are strongly positioned to capitalize on the growing demand for copper, and we look forward to continuing to unlock significant value upside for our shareholders. With that, thank you, and Operator, please open the line for questions.

Certainly. Our first question is from Orest Wowkodaw with Scotiabank. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning. Nice to see the progress at QB2. I was wondering if you can give us some more color on this localized geotech issue, and specifically, what does it mean for grade profile for H2 on copper? And then I’m also wondering if it’ll impact 2025 grade?

Yeah. Thanks, Orest. We are very pleased with the ongoing progress at QB2; the quarter-over-quarter improvement, again, is very encouraging. What I’m going to do is hand over to Shehzad Bharmal, our SVP of Operations. He’ll give you a bit of an overview as to where we are now and the outlook for the second half and beyond.

Thanks, Orest, and perhaps, best if I give a broad overview of the status and the accomplishments of QB to date. As we published, QB continued to have month-over-month improvement in performance and copper production over the last quarter. April was at 14,600 tons, May came in at 17,300 tons, and then June at 19,300 tons. The operations design is robust, and no critical issues have been identified. Throughput, recovery, and head grades are, of course, the three factors that drive copper production, and we have continued to make excellent progress in throughput. Over the last while, we have run between 90% to 95% of design rates. We are very confident of reaching full rates here over the next coming months and our focus here is really on stable operations with improved online time. On recovery, we are managing through higher amounts of clays that are in the transition ores between the supergene and hypogene mineralization, and we are making good progress. This is being done with selecting different reagents, fine-tuning the dosing, and of course, modifying some other operating parameters. As a result, we are a few points behind on recovery, but with the adjustments and more stable operations, we expect to hit target rates in the months ahead. The head feed grade, that you mentioned with this geotech issue, is generally very consistent with our block model, and that is really the key point and very reassuring. In the second half, we expect to have more than planned feed head grades. These temporary access issues were related to access to the higher-grade areas in the mine sequence as we had planned originally. This localized geotechnical issue is for the access ramp to these areas. We are working through reorienting the access ramp a little bit and adding additional support and buttressing, which is going to take several months. We expect to complete this work late this year and have full access by early next year, and actually, in December, we plan to have access to this. The implications for 2025 and 2026 are minimal. Some of this higher grade will bleed into 2025 and will change the mine sequence and the balance of it will feed into 2026 as well. Overall, really not a meaningful impact into 2025 or 2026, but a meaningful impact in Q3 in particular and Q4 as well.

Thanks, Shehzad. Can you actually give us a rough guide for the copper grade in H2?

Fraser will provide some of those details later.

Thank you very much, Operator. Good morning, everyone. My first question is on Slide 22, where you show your near-term growth project and I’m sure you’re putting them into a funnel, and I wondered in which order would the project kind of come out of the funnel, and what are the key attributes you’re screening for as you decide the ranking? Thank you very much.

Yeah. Good morning, Lucas, and thanks very much for that question. Yes. I mean, we are managing this as a portfolio. These projects all have different risk-return characteristics, as you would expect. Of course, with QB and Highland Valley, these are both brownfield expansions, and at QB in particular, there’s a process there of optimization of the existing operation, the bottlenecking of that operation, and then a potential expansion of that operation. Zafranal and San Nicolás, of course, are greenfield projects, both in jurisdictions where we don’t currently operate. We have good experience in Peru, of course, through Antamina, and at San Nicolás, bringing Agnico Eagle into that joint venture with their experience in Mexico significantly derisks our entry there. So, we evaluate all of these projects. We’re progressing them in parallel through the completion of studies, through engineering, and through the application for permits. We will evaluate the economics of each of these projects against the relative risk and make those decisions accordingly. The one project where, of course, we do have particular timing considerations is the Highland Valley Mine Life Extension. The current mine comes to end of life there around 2028, and we would like to see continuity of operations through the extension. That’s one that we very much expect to take forward to sanction next year, 2025. With Zafranal and San Nicolás, as I said, of course, it will be dependent on the outcomes of those studies and engineering. In the case of Zafranal, as you know, we already have a permit, and that’s one, again, we have some confidence we’ll be ready for sanction within the second half of 2025. It’s great to have a portfolio like this, so we can think about the balance of risk and reward associated with each of these opportunities. We continue to work very hard to progress all of these opportunities in parallel today.

Thank you very much. A quick clarification question for Slide 7 and a higher-level question as well. The capital requirements of C$1 billion to C$1.2 billion, I believe that’s Canadian, in sustaining capital and capitalized stripping, I assume that would be too low for 2025, because there’s always some spending on development CapEx. So, if you kind of were to fully bake the capital spending for 2025, what would be a reasonable zip code? And then the higher-level question is that from this side of the border, it appeared that the approval of the EVR sale was somewhat begrudging. I wondered if you could maybe speak on the industry’s reaction and general appetite to invest in Canada and if this could have any impact on future interest in Teck. Thank you very much for your perspective on that.

Thanks, Lucas. You’ve managed to sneak in a couple of questions there. Look, on the first one, the C$1 billion to C$1.2 billion is very much within our expectations for sustaining capital and capitalized stripping for the years ahead. With the development work that we’re doing on the projects that we just discussed, of course, we are incurring spend on studies, engineering, and permitting processes. This year, that’s amounting to around C$500 million in aggregate. Of course, projects in the advanced stages of feasibility study and engineering, tend to incur the highest pre-execution spend. While those projects remain at this stage, you could expect to see us spending at a similar rate through 2025 is probably the best way to articulate that at the moment. Look, in terms of the Canadian Government, we don’t see any changes there from our perspective. There’s nothing in there that prevents us from executing this organic project portfolio, which of course is the key element of our strategy for Teck. We continue to invest both within Canada and outside of Canada, as you see here through commitments in Chile and also the potential for major investments in Peru and Mexico. The execution of that strategy and our focus on creating value for all shareholders remains at the front and center of what we do. So, we don’t see any immediate impacts of anything we’ve heard lately from the government here in Canada.

Thanks very much. My first question, I think I’d like to follow up on Orest’s question about the geotechnical issues at QB2. I understand that you have just given us pretty rough guidance on the impact. I mean, first of all, just a comment. I would also like if you could follow up with me on those grade profiles for the second half as well. But my question is, do you expect these geotechnical issues, anything serious, faulting or anything that could impact mining operations going forward? Thanks.

I’ll pass that back to Shehzad again. The high-level answer is no, but I’ll let Shehzad provide a bit more color.

Jackie, this instability has been a known instability, so it didn’t come out of the blue. It just was a bit deeper than what we had planned. As we are operating around that with blasting, we are taking extra precaution to make sure that we do buttress it right and reorient it for the longer term. So, really, normal operations, these things are fine. It’s early in the mine plan, and if it was an advanced and mature mine, we would have other phases to be able to address this. These are not abnormal instabilities that we have in place.

I appreciate that. Thanks, Shehzad. As a follow-up second question, maybe this one’s for Crystal. On the share buyback plan, I understand you’ve got two plans on the go right now. The C$500 million that was approved in January, and then the new C$2.75 billion plan. Can you give us some color on when you expect the C$500 million buyback to be completed? Should we assume that’s completed in the third quarter and then the new buyback starts in the fourth quarter? And over which period do you expect to do that C$2.75 billion? Is that like a multi-year program? Thanks.

Thanks, Jackie. Welcome back. Nice to hear from you. Yeah. Good questions. I think just in relation to the buyback, we’ll be back obviously executing on the C$500 million. I’d expect us to close that in the third quarter, subject to valuation considerations, which always drive us when we’re considering our buyback approach. In regards to the C$2.75 billion, we’re targeting 12 months to 24 months to complete that. But again, it depends on valuation and market conditions. So, I think it’s probably sooner than the fourth quarter in terms of us getting into starting to buy on that. We have to go through the ordinary course regulatory approval to renew our NCIB, which happens at the end of October.

So, I think, Jackie, just to answer that, you don’t need to think of those really as two separate authorizations anymore. That is the total capital that we have committed to buying back our shares, and we’ll undertake that on a continuous basis.

Good morning, everyone. First question is just on the independent review that’s been completed now at the Q or regarding the QB project. Can you just share some of the key findings from that and how that’s going to benefit project execution going forward? And do you think you’ve now got the right people in place across the organization to begin this next phase of growth that you’re now talking about?

Yeah. Thanks very much for that, Liam. I’ll just focus on the second question. The answer is yes, but we still will continue to build more depth and bench strength in the project team here. Of course, given the slate of activity we have ahead of us, we go to world-class project managers. We have some of those today assigned to these projects, but we’ll need more of them to execute the growth strategy going forward. We’re also building out other areas of the team that support those project managers. So, we have world-class people now assigned to the projects in the near term, but we’ll continue to build that bench going forward. Talking of world-class people, I’m going to hand you on to our Head of Project, Karla Mills, who will talk a little bit about the results of the QB review and how we’re applying those in your area.

Sure. Thank you, Jonathan. It’s important to start with the fact that from the outset, we knew that QB2 was a complex and challenging project, especially given the altitude and scale of the project. Along with those factors, the project review has highlighted additional areas for improvement and learning, which we are taking forward in our project execution. In a number of cases, it validated learnings we’d already identified and have been actioning over the last several months. Some highlights from our findings include the need for increased geotechnical drilling. This impacted construction at the port, the tailings management facility, and the pipeline. We also need to be more conservative in our assumptions around things like labor productivity estimates and inflationary pressures, which were exacerbated by COVID and supply chain constraints when we became constrained. Enhancing oversight from our Teck owners team when we switched to a time and materials execution basis is also a focus. We’re taking a number of steps to ensure we are embedding all of the learnings and the best practices for our projects going forward. This includes building out our project teams with additional capacity and expertise. Teck’s project team continues to grow, and we are, in fact, attracting more world-class talent who are really excited to work in and on our growth strategy. We’re also upgrading our project management system to better identify trends and risks, to proactively analyze and interpret information and boost our efficiencies. This will lead to more informed and faster decisions. We’re enhancing our project readiness and assurance practices specifically around engineering design and capital cost estimates. Collectively, the improvement opportunities identified through this review will be baked into our project moving forward and contribute to strengthening execution as we advance our copper growth strategy.

Thank you for the detailed information. I would like to follow up on the bottlenecking at QB. Could you remind us of the additional permits you might need to acquire before you can move forward with that?

Yeah. Again, I’ll ask Shehzad just to talk to sort of the three phases we see going forward here and the associated permitting strategies that we’re deploying.

As Jonathan mentioned, we have the three phases of optimization of debottlenecking, and then we will consider later after that a more robust expansion project. For the optimization, we do not expect to need any permits. That would be within our permitted ranges, and we’re talking 5% to 15% throughput increase, which would include things like increasing redundancies to get better online times and some minor modifications of some equipment that might need a little bit more throughput capacity. When we come to the debottlenecking study, we will need to make some more meaningful modifications and some additional equipment, and that is repowering conveyors and having bigger pumps to handle higher capacities, whether it be of material flows or conveying systems. This will be very low capital intensity because most of the major infrastructure, like desal, pipelines, and transmission, would not need any increases. For that, we will need a permit and we are developing that permit right now and expect to submit it before the end of the year. Once we receive that permit, we would continue with making those changes to achieve the higher throughput rates, and we’re looking at somewhere between 10% to 15% further increase.

Hey. Good morning. Thanks for the detail. I wanted to clarify, please, on the guided US$3 billion to US$3.6 billion for copper growth. What exactly is in that? Is that San Nicolás and Zafranal and Highland Valley Extension? Does that already include the revisiting of the total capital cost you had told us you were going to conduct for? And then, I guess, along those same lines, when are we going to get updated costs, both on an operating basis and capital costs? Thanks.

Yeah. Thanks, Timna. Essentially, that range does capture the projects that you mentioned. There’s some allowance in there for QB. Some of the work that Shehzad was just discussing as well. They are our best estimates at the moment. I don’t use estimates in the rigor of a project organization, but our best understanding of the forward capital costs associated with those projects in aggregate, taking account of the joint ventures we have or partners we have in these projects. Those capital costs will be finalized through the work we do in studies and engineering, of course, when we get to those definitive estimates. We’ve done this with a forward view as to our best understanding today as to where those costs are likely to land.

Okay. So, thank you for that. As a follow up, when can we expect further detail on the adjusted go-forward costs of production? Also, can you remind us what additional volumes and when you would expect as a result of those investments? Thanks again.

Yeah. Thanks, Timna. I think you’re just asking; you kind of mixed up maybe operating capital. Can you clarify whether you’re referring to an update on operating costs or capital costs?

I was asking for all of the above. So, sorry for the confusion.

Oh! It’s okay. As part of our normal process, we’ll provide our guidance update in January, like we’ve done in recent years, and that will reflect our updated look at CapEx and OpEx for 2025, including a view on QBs, the cost once operations are ramped up at the end of the year. In regard to capital development, capital updates to what Jonathan noted already, we’ve provided that range based on the best information we have available as of today. The timing of that will depend on when the engineering study work is completed.

Hi. Hello. Good morning. Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Great. Sorry, I was on mute. Yeah. A follow-up on the CapEx discussion. Do you have a broad ballpark range of the CapEx per project? The four maybe that we have been discussing, QB expansion, Zafranal and Carmen, and HVC Life Mine Extension?

The short answer is yes, of course, we use ranges associated with each of those projects to provide the range of aggregate guidance in terms of what we expect to spend over the years ahead. As I said, we need to complete the work on studies, engineering, estimates, etc., to have more confidence in those ranges. But in aggregate, that is the best understanding of the capital profile for that.

We’re looking forward to the breakdown when you’re ready to provide that. Regarding San Nicolás, have you received any confirmation or indication that if you decide to proceed with this project, it could be built and brought online, considering the potential constitutional reform in the country that may prohibit open-pit mining? Basically, the question is...

Okay.

Yeah. We’re not sure if the ban would be on new operating concessions or but those that already have exploration permit and are under development, in a way, would be okay?

Look, we acknowledge the uncertainty, Carlos, with respect to San Nicolás and that permit. Our experience to date is that the permit process continues to proceed as planned, and we got over a significant milestone recently with respect to that process, so indications at that level are good. We’ll have to see how things evolve more broadly in terms of legislation, including changes in the judiciary, perhaps, in the country. A few things are at play there. From what we can see on the ground today and our experience opposite the regulator, the data looks positive. We continue to remain very engaged in that permitting process. We continue to work on closing out the studies and bottoming out the capital estimates associated with that, and we're hopeful we can bring that to a point where we achieve the permit and take it forward to sanction.

Hi. Good morning and thanks for taking the questions. I want to come back to QB2. So, on this access issue, can you provide a little bit of extra color on the timeframe issue? Did this have any impact, I guess, quarter-to-date? And trying to think about the production rates through the remainder of the year, should we think of it actually taking a slight step down in the third quarter before, I guess, improving in the fourth quarter to what would appear to be, I think, you said earlier, you hope to be at full production, so around 25 kilotons? Just trying to get a sense for the trajectory here.

At a high level, we expect to continue to see the quarter-over-quarter improvement continue through this year, and by the end of the year, we expect to be producing at full rates. I’ll, again, add to Shehzad to give a little bit more detail on the underlying issues associated with the geotechnical problem with grade and with the transition rules.

Like I mentioned before, this was a known area of instability and it was late in the quarter when we understood the implications for filling a different access rather than just buttressing or reorienting the access and that would prevent access to these higher-grade areas. It’s mostly an H2 issue, and as Jonathan mentioned, it’s not to take a step down; it’s to continue the improvements we’ve had in throughput, continue the throughput rates, and improve on grade compared to plan to have slightly lower grade.

Thanks, Bill. I want to switch topics to zinc. Just trying to get a sense for what you’re seeing in the zinc markets, considering where TCRCs are, global smelter output, which appears to be contracting. What are you assuming for supply-demand balances in the back half of the year and into next year?

What we’re seeing currently is that the zinc market is definitely in deficit. The reason for that is, of course, you saw not only the mine shutdowns that occurred as a result of lower zinc pricing last year, but also some disruptions this year. There have been an initial start, for example, at Collahuasi. We’re expecting over the medium-term, a restart at Trail, for example. Of course, Ozernoye is also predictive, but really those don’t come on this year. The reflection you’re seeing in the very low TCs for zinc is a result of that deficit. Just an interesting fact, concentrate imports in China, for example, are down significantly this year and that is attributed to a lack of available feed. We’re seeing support for pricing in the zinc market. Conditions in finished metal are really coming along, and stable premiums there. We anticipate that it will remain in slight deficit for this year and expect the same thing for the first half of 2025 as well.

Thank you and thank you for taking my questions. My first question is just I appreciate all the guidance for EBITDA and the ongoing CapEx, but as I think about the jurisdictions you’re getting cash flow earnings from in the future, can you give any guidance for one, A, tax rates going forward, and B, cash tax rates as I try and figure out free cash flow, which is kind of the missing part of taxes in this equation?

I’ll hand you over to Crystal.

Thanks, Brian, for the question. I think 2024 is going to be a bit of an anomalous year. We expect our overall effective tax rate on a continuing operations basis to be in that 41% to 43% range. That obviously includes the impact of the sale of the full business and the anatomy dividend. Beyond 2024, we still continue to think that 41% to 43% is a reasonable guideline where we’re profitable across all our business units and we have aggregate operating margins that are relatively large in comparison to corporate costs and finance costs. That doesn’t necessarily build in our growth projects, and there’ll be some work that we have to do in that regard. But I would just encourage you to continue to use 41% to 43% and we can provide more guidance when we have it, and obviously, Fraser can provide more and the team can provide more support offline on the modeling aspect.

Thanks, Jonathan, and thanks for your question. I didn’t expect one this round. What I’d say about the quarter is the Coal business is operating as it was prepared to for many years, and we had a strong quarter because all the operations combined are in extraordinarily good shape right now. The best safety performance we’ve ever seen in history. Our water treatment plants are all performing well. All the plants ran really well through the quarter. This is really business as usual from my perspective. I’m proud of the team that got us to the point we are today, and it’s up to the new owners now to take it forward. But the business is in exceptionally good shape and that was demonstrated in that quarter.

Thank you, Robin.

This brings to a close today’s conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating and have a pleasant day.