Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Turquoise Hill first quarter financial results conference call. At this time, all lines are in a listen-only mode. Following the presentation, we will conduct a question- and- answer session. If at any time during this call you need assistance, please press star zero for the operator. This call is being recorded on Thursday, May 13, 2021. I would now like to turn the conference over to Roy McDowall. Please go ahead. Thank you, Joanna. Good morning. I'm Roy McDowall, Head of Investor Relations and Communications. Welcome to our first quarter 2021 financial results conference call. On Wednesday, we released our first quarter 2021 results, press release, MD&A, and financial statements. These items are available on our website and SEDAR. With me today on the call are Steve Thibeault, our Interim CEO, Luke Colton, our CFO, and Jo-Anne Dudley, our COO. This call and presentation includes certain forward-looking statements and information. We refer you to the forward-looking statements section of the annual information form dated March 8, 2021, as supplemented by our MD&A for the three months ended March 31st, 2021. Now I'd like to turn the call over to Steve. Thank you, Roy. Good morning to everyone. Thank you for joining us for our first quarter 2021 financial earnings call. The first quarter of 2021 has proven to be an eventful quarter. Oyu Tolgoi reported exceptionally strong revenues in copper and gold production. Although we paid an unscheduled $356 million to the Government of Mongolia for tax assessment, modified our mine design to adapt to the Q4 geotechnical event, and faced increased safety measures due to the COVID surge in Mongolia, our expected funding gap has remained unchanged at $2.3 billion and our liquidity has also remained unchanged at Q3 2022. The Oyu Tolgoi team has continued to show their outstanding ability to adapt to the challenges they face, and we continue to focus on reaching sustainable first production in Q4 2022. Shortly after the quarter ended, we announced a binding head of agreement with Rio Tinto that provides an updated funding plan for the completion of the Oyu Tolgoi underground development. The impact of COVID-19 on our operation underground development continued to fluctuate through Q2, and we are proud of how the team has prioritized safety of our workers and local communities. I will now walk through the first quarter of 2021 update as efficiently as possible and open the call up to Q&A. Please note slide two and three contain our cautionary statements, and I encourage you to read through them. Please move forward to slide five. Operationally, the first quarter was extremely positive from both a safety and production perspective. Oyu Tolgoi achieved an all-injury frequency rate of 0.2 per 200,000 hours worked during the quarter and continued to maximize production from the open pit from Q1 production of 45,000 tons of copper and 146,000 ounces of gold. Oyu Tolgoi has updated the copper and gold production forecast for 2021 and is now expected to produce 150,000 to 180,000 tons of copper and 400,000 to 480,000 ounces of gold. This updated guidance incorporates the impact of the modified mine design due to the geotechnical issue in Q4 2020 and the impact of the increased precautionary measures we have had to introduce due to the recent COVID surge in Mongolia. The company is currently assessing the significance and extent of the impact resulting from the COVID-19 pressures. The vaccination program in Mongolia continued to roll out, and as of yesterday, it is estimated that over 80% of the adult population have received their first dose, while over 30% have received their second dose. We are seeing area of our operation where we believe we can start to relax some of the COVID-related precautionary measures but remain vigilant in ensuring the safety of our employees and the community. At the end of March 2021, Turquoise Hill had $700 million of available liquidity, which is expected to fund our operations and underground development into Q3 2022. As stated earlier, our expected funding gap remains unchanged at $2.3 billion. The improved copper price in Q1 largely mitigated the impact of the unscheduled tax payment, and we remain encouraged with the commodity pricing we have seen so far in the second quarter. Moving to slide six. Breaking down our operating performance during the first quarter. In addition to the strong production mentioned in the highlights, our mill throughput remained above nameplate capacity, while our C1 copper cash costs were $0.08 per lb. We'll also note the reduced 2021 production outlook we provided in the highlights. The reduction from our previous outlook reflects the modification of the mine design in Phase 4B to resolve the geotechnical concern related to a multi-bench failure in December 2020. The impact on productivity and increased uncertainty resulting from COVID-related control now in place at site. The challenges of managing the impact of COVID-19 on both our open pit and underground operation continued through the second quarter. The underground development and concentrate shipments continued to ramp up since the current force majeure towards the end of Q1. While Oyu Tolgoi continued to prioritize the health and safety of its employee and cooperate with the Government of Mongolia as vaccination program rolls out. With that, I will now hand the call over to Luke Colton, our Chief Financial Officer. Thanks, Steve. Good morning to everyone on the call. Please turn to slide seven for a summary of our key financial metrics for Q1. Revenue for Q1 2021 increased 303% versus Q1 2020, and that's driven by a 29% increase in copper production and a 462% increase in gold production, as well as increases of 52% and 14% in the average prices of copper and gold, respectively. The improved production metrics reflect the schedule move to the higher-grade areas of Phase 4B, which we expect to see continue throughout the remainder of the year. The increase in revenue was the primary reason for the $247 million increase in cash generated from operating activities before interest and tax. The revenue benefit was partially offset by unfavorable movements in working capital and deferred revenue relating to the force majeure that was announced in March of 2021. The $157 million increase in gold revenue credits was the main reason for the significant decrease in the unit cost basis for both C1 cash costs and all-in sustaining costs, together with the benefit arising from the increased copper production. The full year guidance range for C1 cash costs has been adjusted to - $0.20 to $0.20 per lb of copper produced, which is mainly a result of the decrease in gold production guidance for 2021. Capital expenditure in Q1 2021 was $250 million, comprising $242 million on the underground and $8 million on the open pit. The slowdown in spend so far in 2021, which is principally due to the impact of COVID-19 restrictions and controls, has led us to reduce our full year guidance for underground capital to a range of $900 million-$1 billion. For open pit capital, the full year guidance has been reduced to a range of $105 million-$125 million. If you can please turn to slide eight, you'll see that Turquoise Hill had liquidity of $0.7 billion at the end of Q1 2021, which is expected to be sufficient to meet our requirements into Q3 of 2022. Although the company made unscheduled tax payments to the Mongolian tax authority of $356 million in Q1 2021, operational performance, strong sales, and pricing allowed the company to maintain its liquidity horizon. Additionally, our base case incremental funding requirement has remained at $2.3 billion, and we of course, continue to monitor commodity markets, the undercut, COVID-19 impacts, and other key assumptions in assessing our future funding requirements. Looking forward, we are engaging with the relevant stakeholders to advance implementation of the head of agreement with Rio Tinto. We will continue to provide updates in due course with respect to progress made. Our liquidity outlook and estimated incremental funding requirement will continue to be impacted, either positively or negatively, by various factors, many of which are outside the company's control. Successful implementation of such options may require us to achieve alignment and agreement with the relevant stakeholders, which would include Rio Tinto, existing lenders, any potential new lenders, as well as the Government of Mongolia. With that, I will hand the call over to Jo-Anne Dudley, our Chief Operating Officer. Thank you very much, Luke. If we now turn to focus on slide nine. Despite COVID-19 impacts, the overall project construction progress on the Material Handling System 1, which is required for sustainable first production, remains broadly in line with the definitive estimate. During Q1 2021, the Primary Crusher 1 bottom shells were installed, and the top shells were moved to the crusher chamber for installation. In addition, conveyor belt pulling commenced on the main conveyor between Primary Crusher 1 and Shaft 2. Although progress on Material Handling System 1 is expected to slow in Q2 2021 due to site COVID restrictions, it's not expected to materially impact the timing of the undercut commencement and sustainable first production. Ongoing work suspensions continue to affect progress on Shaft 3 and 4, and the overall impact of these delays are under review. Progress of works remains dependent on mobilizing key vendors and additional sinking resources into country and clearing them from quarantine. Additional shaft sinking specialists are now in Mongolia and are expected to arrive on site during May. Shaft 3 and 4 are not required to support Panel 0 commencement. However, they are required to support production from Panels 1 and 2 during the ramp up to 95,000 tons per day. COVID-19 impacts are expected to continue through quarter two, despite the rapidly progressing vaccination program. The conveyor decline continues to progress with 800 equivalent meters completed in the quarter. Underground development progressed 3,500 equivalent meters, we completed 13,500 cu m of mass excavation. It's anticipated that lateral development rates will continue to be impacted into quarter two. Although development work has slowed as a result of the reduced site workforce numbers, almost all of the development required for the commencement of the undercut is complete. The commencement of the undercut in mid-2021 is a key milestone. It is critical to ensure that once commenced, the undercut and drawpoint construction continues unimpeded. Achievement of the technical criteria required for a mid-2021 commencement of the undercut remains on track. However, the exact timing of the undercut is under increasing pressure, principally due to the rapidly evolving understanding of the recent COVID-19 impacts. In terms of exploration, Turquoise Hill, through its wholly owned subsidiaries, Asia Gold Mongolia, Heruga Exploration, and SGLS LLC, operates an exploration program in Mongolia on licenses that are not part of Oyu Tolgoi. In Q1 2021, Turquoise Hill successfully tendered for a new lease, Khatavch. With the addition of Khatavch, Turquoise Hill now has three licenses. The exploration work plans for the three Turquoise Hill licenses have been finalized and submitted to the local authorities. For Turquoise Hill Bag and Od-2 licenses, the exploration team plans to continue a geophysics program. On Khatavch lease, the team plans to undertake several geological surveys. Timing of the field season is dependent on the COVID-19 situation, but fieldwork is expected to begin in late Q2 or early Q3 2021 once the required approval has been received and the entire team is vaccinated. Due to our in-country expertise and experience, TRQ is well-placed to undertake regional exploration activities. With that, I'll now hand the call back to Steve. Thank you, Jo-Anne. Moving to slide 10. I'm going to use the key milestone outlined on slide 10 to provide an overview of what we are working through for 2021 and on to 2022 to keep us on track for first Sustainable First Production in October 2022. The first milestones are the ongoing negotiations with the Government of Mongolia, which are critical to ensure the undercut can commence. As Jo-Anne pointed out, from a technical perspective, the criteria required for the mid-2021 commencement of the undercut remain on track. It is a non-technical criteria, including confirmation of necessary regulatory and legislative approval required by the Government of Mongolia that are still pending and are critical elements for consideration to proceed with the decision to commence the undercut. Constructive engagement was achieved of the government working group in Mongolia in April, and we anticipate a resumption of discussion in June following the 2021 Mongolian presidential election. The second milestone of 2021 is the undercut blasting currently scheduled for mid-year. Once commenced, the undercut and drawpoint construction continues unimpeded, and we will be looking forward to ramping up to first sustainable production. The third key milestone is funding. In April, Turquoise Hill and Rio Tinto announced a binding HoA to provide the funding plan for the completion of the underground development. The funding plan is designed to address the estimated remaining funding requirement of approximately $2.3 billion, which is based on our current commodity assumptions. We remain committed to continue delivering benefit to all stakeholders, including Mongolia and its citizens, and to delivering significant long-term value for Turquoise Hill shareholders. I would like to thank you all for taking the time to join our conference call and would now like to turn the call back to the operator for questions. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question- and- answer session. Should you have a question, please press the star followed by the one on your touchtone phone. You will hear a three-tone prompt acknowledging your request. If you are using a speaker phone, please lift up the handset before pressing any keys. First question comes from Orest Wowkodaw at Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. I realize you've left all your official guidance kind of unchanged for the underground with respect to timing and CapEx and so forth. At the same time, your release is pretty clear that you're worried about increasing pressures, I guess both technical and non-technical. How should we think about this moving forward? It sounds like you're going to be likely increasing the CapEx and pushing back the schedule unless things radically improve. Is that the right way to think about it? Does this really revolve around both the government giving you the non-technical issues that you need, plus sort of the lifting of COVID restrictions? Okay, there's a couple of elements, Orest. Thanks for your question. There's a couple of elements in your question. What we're focusing right now is on the undercut decision, and we've been very clear that the undercut decision has two main elements. One of technical criteria, okay, which includes elements of drilling and all elements. As mentioned by Jo-Anne, okay, the achievement of the technical criteria required for the mid-2021 commencement, they remain on track. I mean, always, let's face it, we were like everybody, we had some headwind with the COVID, but definitely we believe that, and we're on track from our point of view for a midyear start on that one. The other elements relates to the non-technical that we refer, and you could see that as the approval from the Government of Mongolia related to our license to operate the underground. We need to work with the government to proceed with these approval. That's not different from any mine in the world, that you need some approvals on some elements. As of today, we haven't received those ones, but we keep working with the government to receive these approvals and be able to proceed. In term of COVID and the impact, the main impact of the COVID was in Q2, okay? As you've seen, there's some significant improvement in the vaccination and also the procedures that were put in place. We're focusing first on the safety of our employees. We expect that over the next couple of weeks, we should see an improvement in the situation in Mongolia overall and on our site. We should be able to ramp up the operation. I'm not telling you, but the important point is we need to evaluate what will be the impact. Today, I don't have the information related to it. As a follow-up, are you able to quantify, what does every one-month delay in the undercut, what does that translate in terms of, say, impact on the capital number? Yeah. Jo-Anne, would you like to comment on that, please? Yes, absolutely. Thank you for your question, Orest. It depends on the reason that the undercut may be delayed, and certainly, as Steve was indicating, we aren't planning for any particular delay in the undercut. It's certainly not a scenario that we've been putting a lot of work into understanding at this point, in that we're working towards that start of the undercut as soon as it's possible to do so. In terms of other work that continues, once the undercut starts blasting, we do continue work on the Material Handling System 1, as well as other important work in preparation for the start of production. Depending on the reason for a particular delay that could be encountered, preparatory work for commencing production could continue. This would obviously depend if the delay was as a result of low numbers on site and the inability to continue working, then that may impact that as a scenario. The Material Handling System 1 has remained ahead of schedule, actually. Even now we're seeing it's forecasting ahead of schedule. We can see that there has been pressure on the schedule in recent weeks due to the accelerated impacts of COVID controls at site. As a follow-up, are you able to quantify, if the undercut is delayed because the non-technical criteria is not met, what is the impact, say, per month of delay to the CapEx? Right. We still would be assessing that as known delays would start to occur. Given that quite a lot of work could continue, it's not something that we necessarily understand right at this moment, because there would be work that would be ongoing. Capital would continue to be spent in other areas, albeit potentially at a reduced rate. There will be ongoing assessments of the overall impact on costs and schedules as we understand the situation better. Orest, I think the best way to look at it, Orest, is that it's not the one month for this capital, because other words, it's a complex development, and other work will be done elsewhere, and some expenses will not be done, so there will be just a delay. That being said, it also depends on the timing. At the moment, we're saying that we're within the mid-year. I would not say a one month is equal to that much capital additional. I don't think that, we're not looking at the mid-year timing as having an impact or significant impact on the CapEx. You should not look at it this way, from that point. For now. Okay. Thank you. Just a final clarification. The $6.75 billion capital number for Phase 2. Does that include the sustaining capital related to the underground that we're now seeing being incurred? We saw some in Q1 here. Just curious if the sustaining capital between now and sustainable first production is included in that $6.75 billion number? Okay. Luke, you want to give the answer on that? Sure. Happy to, Steve. Thanks for the question, Orest. The answer to that question is no, the $6.75 billion is for underground development capital expenditure. It excludes underground sustaining capital expenditure. That's always been the case. If you go back and look at the different technical reports that TRQ has issued in 2016 and again last year in 2020, there's always been a distinction between the $6.75 billion underground development capital expenditure and then additional underground sustaining CapEx. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, Orest. Thank you. Next question comes from Craig Hutchison at TD Securities. Please go ahead. Good morning, guys. Morning, Craig. I'm trying to get a little more granularity around your guidance cut, particularly with gold going from 500,000 to 550,000 down to 400,000 to 480,000. How much of that is COVID related? How much of that is grade related? We're kind of halfway through Q2 here. Any kind of color in terms of what we should be thinking for throughput in grades here in Q2 would be appreciated. Thanks. Okay. I'll let Jo-Anne respond to that, Craig. Okay? Jo-Anne, can you take? Thank you, Steve. you, Steve. Thank you, Craig. Yes, no problem. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Yes. Okay. Sorry, just wanted to check there. Sorry. Yes. In terms of the change in particular around the production guidance of gold, the majority of the change, in terms of the gold production, has been the deferral of materials Phase 5 as a result of the mine redesign. We would see the delivery of that material in approximately two to three years' time. There are some other additions that have played into that change, and as you mentioned, COVID and assumptions around productivity over the next period have also been factored into that change. It is a combined change of the mine redesign, as well as some productivity impacts and then some other assumptions around the ore types being fed and the processing results we would expect from that. In terms of looking forward to the rest of the year, we have had a good quarter in terms of gold production. We do expect to see Q2 having some productivity impacts from the operation in terms of productivity from the open pit and the concentrator due to the COVID controls that have been implemented at site. However, with the vaccination program and the controls that are being used, we expect to see some recovery of that, and we will be remaining in that high-grade area of Phase 4B for all of the quarters of 2021. Of course, having just updated guidance, we do expect to remain within that guidance for 2021. Hopefully that draws enough of a picture for you there, Craig, in terms of how those quarters will play out. I guess something else to add would be, in this part of the pit, the grade is quite good. We can see the grade change when we move around in different areas of the pit. It isn't straightforward to just tell you that the grade's going to be the exact same over the next three quarters. Just to let you know, certainly what we can, which is we will remain in the high grade for the remaining quarters of this year. We do expect to meet that newly released guidance. Craig. Okay. The same way to look at it, if I would be you, I would say that, like Jo-Anne is saying, overall, the grade would be roughly the same on all the quarters, except because of the COVID situation in Q2, I would make an adjustment and probably spread it over the next quarters, roughly. Okay. Because grades were quite high in Q1, right? They were 0.68%, I think. Yep. You have to- We're expecting to be in that grade. There's always variability, okay, we're expecting to be in the high grade in the pit for pretty much all the year. I think maybe December a little bit, it's not even confirmed. I think that you should assume all year with good grade. Okay. Yeah, it seemed like the grades would have to fall quite sharply from Q1 in order to hit sort of mid-point of your guidance. Okay. Just in terms of sales, do you guys anticipate catching up here in Q2, or do you think there'll be some carryover into Q3? Luke, can you answer that, please? Yeah, no, I will. Happy to do that, Craig. It's a good question. We did obviously declare force majeure in, I think it was the 30th of March of this year. Concentrate shipments have started again. They started again kind of mid-April, we do expect them to continue to ramp up over the course of Q2, as the COVID situation in Mongolia hopefully improves with vaccinations, et cetera. That's what we're aiming to do, we're working very closely with the Government of Mongolia and the Government of China to sort of resume normal shipping operations as soon as possible. As Jo-Anne's alluded to, there have been COVID-related impacts. We are expecting to see some COVID-related impacts in Q2. What I would suspect is that you should see improvement over the course of Q2, but I expect there will probably still be a fairly high inventory balance at the end of Q2, which we will continue to draw down. Hopefully, in Q3, we'll get back to normal by the end of Q3. That's kind of what we're targeting at the moment in terms of getting our inventory balances back down to normal levels. I don't think it's something that will completely resolve itself in Q2, Craig, to answer your question. I think it's probably going to be something that resolves itself hopefully in Q3, but definitely over the remainder of the year. Okay, thanks. Maybe one last question. Craig. Sorry, go ahead. Craig, just to give you a bit of flavor, all truck drivers have been vaccinated, but there's additional procedures at the border, and that increased the cycle time of the delivery. Like I said, like Luke is saying, definitely we're working and putting additional resources to make sure that we can move that inventory, but that will take a while. Okay, thanks. Maybe just one last question from me. Just in terms of how important are the Mongolian presidential elections on resolving the Parliamentary Resolution 92, do you need presidential sign-off or, I guess I'm kind of wondering why those negotiations stalled and will resume post the presidential election outcome. Thanks. The context is more like, we had the TRQ and Rio Tinto teams were in Mongolia for discussion with the Government of Mongolia from the end of March to the end of April. Craig, Mongolia was facing a significant surge in the COVID. We were in an election, we believe that the best for everyone was to resume the discussion after the election, okay? Where that would be completed. I don't know exactly in terms of detail, a couple of points here. All the parties are committed. We all have a common interest, okay? Being the proceeding with the undercut decision, okay? We know that we need to resolve and have discussion around Resolution 92 or questions that have been raised by the government. We're definitely committed to have a sit down and have the proper discussion in order to have. It is also likely that there's some discussion to have related to the undercut criteria and the non-technical that we talked before. Like I said, these are license to operate or elements of license to operate that we need to have. I would expect that the discussion with the Government of Mongolia definitely will resume after, and we'll have also after Naadam, we'll have other period to have some discussions. The point I want to make, Craig, is that you should not necessarily link together the undercut decision with the discussion with the government. There are some elements that would be common, but not everything. Okay. Thanks, guys. Okay. Thank you. Next question comes from Ralph Profiti at Eight Capital. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. Morning, Ralph. Good morning. Steve and Jo-Anne, I wanted to come back to the development rates in Q1 and that are also going to impact Q2. If we just exclude the critical elements, these non-technical factors, what sits behind commencement of the undercut as the critical path? It doesn't seem like it's Shaft 3 and 4. Is it really drawbell development and construction or materials handling? Can you help me understand that a little bit better? Okay. I'll let Jo-Anne to answer your question, Ralph. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Ralph. You're correct in terms of what you're saying there with, it's not Shaft 3 and 4. They support the later ramp up. The Material Handling System 1 has been a key priority. As we've mentioned, it has been ahead of the definitive estimate in terms of schedule. We're seeing headwinds with these latest. The other piece is lateral development, as you mentioned, and almost all of the development required to commence undercutting is complete. The development is well advanced at the moment. We still do have aspects of the materials handling system that are under construction, and they'll continue right up until the start of production. The schedule is going relatively well, and they've really managed it extremely well, given the current, or certainly the situation with COVID we've had. It might be worth just mentioning site increase numbers on construction over the next few weeks as well, as well as the vaccination program progressing. We are certainly seeing green shoots here, but we also recognize that things have been difficult for the team. Just wondering, do you have a target rate for drawbell construction? Where are you now? Where do you expect to be, say, mid-2021, end of 2021? Can you help us with a little bit of a schedule on drawbell construction? Yes. There certainly is a schedule for drawbell construction. With the style of cave mining that we're using at this one of Oyu Tolgoi, Hugo North mine. The undercut passes over the extraction level prior to the development and the blasting of drawbells. We can't doing that work. That is something that is after the start of undercutting, if you like. In addition, in terms of the actual timing of sustainable first production, the estimate of the number of bells is a reasonable estimate as we understand the rock mass. Ultimately, the start of production is governed by the rock mass and its behavior after we undercut and we have the cave instrumented to understand when caving commences. That will be when the first sustainable production actually commences. Right. The number of drawbells is an approximation. It should be reasonably close. Ultimately, we will be looking to the rock mass to give us the go ahead there and meet the criteria to start production in 2022. Got it. Well understood. Yes. Got it. Thanks very much. Thank you. Next question comes from Jackie Przybylowski at BMO. Please go ahead. Thanks very much. I guess I just want to circle back to Steve's response to Orest and then to Craig. You've mentioned a couple times, Steve, that you need to see a license to operate in Mongolia, and I think this is specifically related to Resolution 92. Also, I mean, Jo-Anne, when she was answering Orest's question, she said that you're still doing prep work on materials handling and other items. Is it one or the other? Do you need a license to operate to do both the undercut and, I mean, spending any other capital underground? Wouldn't that kind of be the same? I'm a little confused as to activities, but not the undercut. Why wouldn't they be under the same kind of thought process? Let me answer that, Jackie. I think there are a couple of elements you had in your statement or your question here that I just want to answer. The first one relates to the non-technical and the Resolution 92. You should separate those two, okay? In order to operate any mine in the world, you need some approval by the government and some elements that are related to your license to operate. For example, okay, an annual mine plan approved by the government, okay? That's just one example among other things that you would have. Government and the different departments to make sure that we're moving on these elements. Some of those ones have not been received yet, and we want to proceed there. The second element is that on the negotiation, you put that separate, okay? It's also important to understand that once you start the undercut, that's it. I mean, you cannot stop it. You need to make sure that you have the proper mining, but it's not necessarily the mining yet, okay? When you start the undercut, you're really starting the mining operation and you cannot stop it. We want to make sure that once we start, we won't have any delay, because what is the most important, during the undercut is to make sure that you progress at the right level so you guarantee the sustainable production at a specific time. Undercut can start before the investment agreement is finalized? I would say yes. Okay. I think that it would be reasonable, Jackie, it would be reasonable to say that we could proceed without having resolved these elements, because we are committed to resolving it, okay. That's important, it needs to be resolved. At the same time, we could definitely, when we get the approval to proceed with the undercut, we can move ahead. Got it. Thanks very much for that clarification. That's really helpful. Thanks, Steve. That's it for me. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Next question comes from Dalton Baretto at Canaccord. Please go ahead. Oh, I do apologize, Orest Wowkodaw at Scotiabank. Thanks for taking the follow-up. This one's actually for Luke. If you permit, the $2.3 billion, can you give us a little bit more color on minimum cash assumptions in that? I.e., does your existing debt require you to maintain a certain minimum cash, or is that not the case and does that estimate of $2.3 billion assume you're taking your cash effectively to zero at some point next year? The estimate of $2.3 billion would assume that we're taking the cash all the way down to zero. Obviously, we wouldn't want to get to that point, but the $2.3 billion does assume we take the cash balance all the way down to zero. Of course, the objective at the moment is to focus on implementation of the HoA, so we're able to resolve that funding gap well in advance of getting to that point. Thank you for that. Does your existing debt require you to maintain a certain minimum cash balance, or do you have no restrictions? I'm going to have to get back to you on that question. I don't believe it does, but I'll have to follow that question up and get back to you. Okay. Thank you. Orest, I would say that there's a lot of elements, you've seen I'm not saying that it's going to be less, guys. I'm not saying that. Our estimate is $2.3 billion, there's a lot of information in the pricing and all that that's happening. It's very variable environment at the moment. Like Luke is saying, we'll get back to you on that $100 million or any amount required if we have any. Thank you. Thank you. Next question is from Dalton Baretto at Canaccord. Please go ahead. Thanks. Good morning, everybody. Steve, I want to pick up on what Jackie. Good morning, Dalton. Good morning, Steve. I want to pick up on what Jackie was asking you about, specifically what you said in terms of the undercut being able to progress without Resolution 92 satisfied. Is that something you guys would be willing to do? My understanding was that Rio would refuse to progress unless that happens, specifically because, as you said, once you start the underground, there's no stopping. If Resolution 92 is not resolved, you're basically hostage now. Okay. There are a couple of elements there, okay? How can I approach that? The key element, okay, is that from the first element we need to resolve is make sure, Dalton, that we have the license, the element or the approval from the license to operate, okay? We are committed. Let's face it, there is differences and Resolution 92 brings some concern from the Government of Mongolia to be resolved, it's around the cost of the project and the distribution. This is negotiation that we're going to have and will take a certain time. Both party are committed to make sure that we are creating and we're proceeding with the value of the project. Despite the fact that it may take some time for all the detail of Resolution 92 with the approval of the, I would call it the regulatory approval, to proceed with the underground. We can work together to fix, or not to fix, but to discuss the Resolution 92 and be able to move forward. There's a scenario where you definitely can separate the two. How can I? Definitely that what is important for us. First, Dalton, we are aligned. The government and the company, we are aligned that we need to create and generate the value. The distribution of that value, it's said that this project is mostly completed, and we need to make sure that we're proceeding and moving with the important element, which is the undercut. We need to find a way to resolve the funding, at the appropriate time and have the dedication to do it on both sides. I think that's doable. That's my view. Negotiations where, you're at an impasse on Resolution 92, how do you handle that then, if you can't stop the undercut? I mean, definitely, I'm confident that we can find a path forward, Dalton. Definitely. Okay. Maybe switching gears to something else Craig asked you about, but I was sort of confused as to the answer, and that's got to do with the gold production this year. If your gold grades are going to stay approximately the same, what's driving the lower guidance? Is it throughput? I mean, where exactly is COVID-19 impacting you? Okay. Jo-Anne, you want to answer that, please? Yeah, sure. I think I'm really pleased you asked that question, Dalton, because I don't think that was the right takeaway. It certainly wasn't what I was trying to say. What I was trying to say is that there has been, if we look at the guidance for the year and we do some simple math on the gold that has been produced in Q1, then we look at the remainder of the year, we're still going to have production in each of those quarters from the higher grade area. There will be an impact on Q2. We do remain in those high grades, and we've just updated the production guidance. Is that helpful? It is. I'm just trying to understand where- Sorry, I've lost you. I think we lost you, Dalton. Operator, are you still? Dalton is still connected. Perhaps his line may have gotten muted. Dalton? I'm still here. Can you hear me now? Yes, go ahead. Now we can. Oh, sorry. Yeah. I've been having issues with this call for the last 30 minutes or so. Yeah, I guess my question is, if you're going to be in the higher grade, should we then assume that the impact is on the amount of material you're mining and processing? Then is that restricted just to Q2 or the rest of the year? I guess I was not, to be clear, I was not saying we would be processing the same grade for every quarter of the year. What I was saying is that we will be in the high- grade areas of the pit for the remainder of the year. If we do some math between the production guidance just released and what's being produced in Q1, we'll see what we think will happen over the remaining three quarters. That's as much guidance as I can give. There is variability in these high-grade areas. We're not mining iron or bauxite. There is a lot of difference in the grades in these parts of the pit, and there is variability with COVID that we're seeing for the rest of the year. I'd love to provide you with a bit more granularity, but I just don't think it's appropriate given the uncertainties around which we're talking. Dalton, another way to. Understood. Dalton, another way to look at it is that. I guess you're speaking mostly around the gold, okay? When you look at the gold, the gold is at more specific area in the pit. It's right at the bottom, okay? Very specific area. You can see it that way. Because of the slip, we had to do a step in. That means that we have to lost some benches, okay? Make it less accessible at the bottom of the pit. Technically, okay, with that current 4B, we modified the current 4B, where we don't have all the access that we wanted to have at the bottom of the pit once, okay? It will be mined later, okay? We'll be able to mine it later, this year we don't have access. On the copper side, we have other area because the distribution of the ore, the copper ore, is different. We have access elsewhere, that's why we have less of a change in the copper guidance. That's mostly what it is. Okay, that's more clear because, we keep talking about the COVID-19 impact, but what you just said is it's a function of the pit wall slip. That's kind of what I was trying to get at because in your Q4 disclosure, it said that there wasn't going to be an impact on guidance. I just wanted to clarify. This is a function of the pit wall slip and access to certain zones that you had planned on mining but can't right now. It is. The reason why we said that, it takes a while. You understand that with evaluating the fault and how it will behave, and you try something and it doesn't work, you have to step in more. That has an impact eventually. That's what we're saying this quarter, that finally it had a bigger impact than what we originally had planned because we had not finished all the analysis. Understood. Thank you, guys. Okay, thank you. Thank you. That concludes today's Q&A session. I will now turn the call back over for closing remarks. Yes, thank you very much, everybody, for attending this call. Really want to appreciate your time and your interest. If there's any follow-up questions, you can reach out to myself, Roy McDowall, info@turquoisehill.com, or my email address. On that, thank you again for attending and hope everybody has a great day. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes your conference call for today. We thank you for participating, and we ask that you please disconnect your lines. Have a great day.