I would now like to hand the conference over to Ms. Naomi James, CEO. Please go ahead. Good morning, everyone, welcome to Refining NZ's 2021 interim financial results briefing. I'm Naomi James, CEO of Refining NZ, I'm joined by our CFO, Denise Jensen. I hope you're all keeping safe and well at home in your bubbles during this lockdown. Denise and I are thinking that there must be something about the timing of our results, having done our last full-year results in February when Auckland was in lockdown. Before getting started, I draw your attention to the disclaimer up front in the presentation on slide two. The briefing today will effectively be divided into two parts. The first, a briefing on our 2021 interim performance, then a strategic review update on the import terminal conversion. Please turn to slide four in the investor pack. Starting first with our performance in the first half, where the Refining NZ team has delivered what we set out to achieve. In short, that was to operate cash-neutral at the fee floor, while providing the time and space to assess the import terminal options, negotiate commercial arrangements with customers, and to ready our community and workforce for this change. We will go through the detail as we walk through the pack, but in summary, we have maintained our focus on safe operations and meeting our customer commitments. We have completed a major turnaround and the first statutory inspection of the CCR unit safely, on time, and below budget. We continued our financial discipline to maintain cash-neutral operations at the fee floor. This has enabled us to look to the future as an infrastructure business, negotiate a commercial agreement which was competitive for our customers, and also delivered fair value for shareholders for our infrastructure. We now have a mandate to progress to an import terminal model, having received strong shareholder support, with 99% of shareholders voting in favor of the proposal, including each of the oil company shareholders. Please turn to slide five. This slide shows a snapshot of some of our key metrics. Our personal safety performance was strong. We delivered to customer plans. With the simplified refinery changes, where we reduced capacity, changed maintenance philosophies, and reduced headcount, we were able to fund the turnaround and maintain cash-neutral operations at the fee floor, with net debt closing flat at NZD 230 million. Now to run through the details of our first half 2021 performance. Starting with safety and slide six. Safety, as we always do, we had no recordable cases in the first half of 2021, which means that we have not had a recordable personal safety incident for over 18 months. This is an outstanding result and more noteworthy for the fact that we completed a major turnaround during this period. A real testament to the skill and commitment of our people and the safety culture on display every day at our site. Two process safety incidents were recorded in the period, with both being responded to quickly, resulting in no significant damage to the plant. The company recorded several unauthorized releases outside of consent, where non-compliant firefighting foam was used during recent fire training exercises. With the company undertaking an independent investigation, and taking prompt action to mitigate the effects of the discharge through the strengthened on-site controls and undertaking testing to determine if any further treatment or remediation is required. From testing results to date, we have found that concentrations of contaminants discharged to the harbor were insignificant, and we're obtaining advice on what further remediation might be required on-site. During the period, we were granted a 35-year resource consent to operate both the refinery and import terminal operations at our Marsden Point site. As part of the reconsenting process, the company undertook an extensive assessment of the environmental impacts associated with continued operations at Marsden Point, including the effects of our activities on the harbor, land, air quality, and the surrounding community. Since this time, we have been engaging openly with our iwi partners to share the active management plans that we have in place to ensure that we do not have a negative impact on our surrounding environment. The conditions of our consent include protections to maintain the high standards that we have in place. For many of our team based up at Marsden Point, this is our community too, so we have a strong personal commitment to preserving and protecting the natural environment around us. Turning to slide seven. The simplified refinery was implemented from the start of this year, reducing refinery capacity by around 18%. This change, coupled with the impact of the four-week maintenance turnaround which impacted operational availability, reduced the refinery throughput by around 15% compared to the previous corresponding period. Demand for jet fuel remains weak at around 40% of pre-COVID levels due to the travel restrictions which continue to impact upon rack throughputs. Although gasoline and diesel demand prior to the current lockdown had recovered to pre-COVID levels. In terms of the impacts of this current lockdown, which of course, is not covered by the period we're discussing today, it's simply too early to tell what effect this will have on demand at this stage. Turning to slide eight. Very little has changed in the border environment in which we operate. Refining margins continue to be weak and excess refining capacity in the Asia-Pacific region remains. While refining margins remain volatile, we have seen limited improvement in the supply-demand balance, and expert analysis agrees that we should not expect a significant improvement in margins in the near term. The Singapore complex margin averaged negative $209 /bbl, with the uplift earned by Refining NZ strong at $5.28 /bbl due to lower fuel and loss compared with the previous corresponding period when the plant was operated on a cyclic basis, coupled with a lower fuel oil make in the current half and a cheaper crude slate relative to the Dubai benchmark. The refinery earned an average GRM for the year of $3.19 /bbl, which was below the fee floor throughout the half, and our customers made fee floor top-up payments of NZD 29 million in the first half. GRM has now remained below the fee floor throughout the 18 months ended this June 2021. Our customers have made fee floor subsidy payments amounting to around NZD 118 million over this period of time. I will now hand over to Denise to take us through the financials. Thank you, Naomi, and good morning, everybody. Let's pick up on slide nine of the presentation and start with a snapshot of the financial results. Processing fee revenue was at the fee floor, as Naomi's mentioned, for the six months ending June 30, 2021, as it was in the previous corresponding period. Total refining revenue was down around NZD 6 million due to the constrained supply of natural gas in the New Zealand market, which of course, we procure on behalf of our customers. Although pipeline volumes were down by 5%, infrastructure earnings were up by NZD 2.5 million due to an additional NZD 5 million revenue earned from the import of refined products into Marsden Point by our customers during the four-week maintenance turnaround. While total revenue was in line with the corresponding period, adjusted EBITDA, which really means EBITDA adjusted for non-cash items, was up 70% or NZD 15 million higher, reflecting the impact of the simplification changes we have made at the start of the year. I'll come back to this shortly. CapEx was largely the same as the previous corresponding period at around NZD 21 million, of which NZD 12 million was spent on the maintenance turnaround, including the first statutory inspection of the CCR unit. Of course, as Naomi mentioned, that was completed below budget. The changes we made to the operating model, coupled with strong financial discipline, enabled us to maintain cash neutral operations at the fee floor with net debt closing at NZD 230 million. Overall, we report a net loss after tax of NZD 4.9 million, compared to the loss of NZD 186 million in the previous year, which of course, included a non-cash impairment of refining assets of around NZD 158 million. Now if we could just turn to slide 10. This slide really provides a waterfall between EBITDA for the six months ended June 30th, 2021 to the previous corresponding period. You'll see that overall EBITDA has increased by 169% or around NZD 26 million due to the successful delivery of our plans. You can see the split between the margin and volume impacts on refining revenue, noting that the margin was higher in the current period, but still below the fee floor as it was in the corresponding prior period. Our customers provided NZD 29 million worth of fee floor subsidy payments, increasing the gross refining margin by around $2.27 /bb l, which of course, protected us from the full impacts of that weaker business environment. You'll see the benefit of the refinery simplification on our cost base with savings of around NZD 14 million due to reduced variable costs, primarily electricity, and the impacts of other changes such as the campaign maintenance approach that we have adopted, and also the 25% reduction in our staff numbers on site. As Naomi James mentioned earlier, the refinery simplification really was necessary to enable us to maintain that cash neutral operations at the fee floor. In parallel, we've also undertaken a balance sheet optimization project, which included making offers to pensioner members of both our defined benefit pension plan and our post-retirement medical schemes to convert their benefit entitlements for cash sums. A large number of our pensioners chose to accept the offer on an actuarial-neutral term, which reduced the overall or gross balance sheet liabilities by around NZD 22 million, which resulted in a settlement gain of around NZD 9 million being reported in EBITDA, which is really due to the difference between the lower risk-free discounting rate used for financial reporting purposes. On that, I'll hand back to Naomi to provide a strategic review update. Thanks, Denise. We'll now move into the second part of today's presentation, which provides an update on our strategic review, and starting on slide 12 of the presentation. On this slide, we outline the significant milestones that have been achieved in the last six months to progress strategic review outcomes. We reached in-principle agreement in February with BP, followed by Z Energy in May, and are well progressed now with Mobil. We received strong shareholder support at the special meeting held on August 6th, with 99% voting in favor of the proposed import terminal model, including Mobil, BP, and Z Energy, our oil company shareholders. This gives us a mandate from shareholders to finalize customer negotiations and for the board to proceed to a final decision. Since the vote, we have announced this morning that we have received consent from all of our lenders for the conversion and signed facility agreements to secure the funding for conversion costs. These are subject to the satisfaction of conditions precedent, such as signing of terminal services agreements with each of our customers and a final investment decision by the board. Front-end engineering and design and detailed planning work is now well progressed, with a strong focus as we prepare for a final decision on supporting our people through the change. We have also completed our initial assessment of potential Marsden Point repurposing options, with a number of options being progressed, and we will talk to this more shortly. This means we remain on track for a final investment decision around the end of September this year, which would enable a conversion to occur by mid-2022. Moving now to slide 13. This slide presents the stages of our strategic review to this point, as well as those still to come. The key aspect for us to finalize before a final investment decision is taken is negotiation of binding terminal services agreements with our customers, consistent with the terms approved by shareholders, as well as the detailed planning required to confirm conversion plans and timing. We are working to complete both of these by around the end of September. Once a final investment decision is made, the next phase is then focused on running the refinery through to closure and processing and cleaning out the product on-site, as well as undertaking the work needed for commencement of terminal operations and preparing our organization and workforce to operate as a terminal, decommission the refinery, and support the transition of our staff through this change. Following refinery closure, the decommissioning works will continue for around two years, and terminal upgrade works for five to six years. We understand that the transition to an import terminal over this time will involve significant change for our highly capable employees who have been committed to operating the refinery safely and to a high standard over many, many years. I want to once again thank our whole team for their professionalism and dedication to maintaining safe operations throughout this period of change for us all. We remain focused on supporting our workforce through this transition and are continuing to work with members of the Refinery Transition Working Group, including central government, Northland councils and Regional Development Authority, iwi, and unions, to put in place the plans needed to support this transition. Turning to slide 14. We have now completed our initial assessment of the range of opportunities to repurpose the Marsden Point site. There is a very long list of opportunities raised. We have focused on those opportunities that have nearer-term potential, including to create jobs and economic development in Northland, as well as those opportunities to utilize Marsden Point's unique capabilities to support the decarbonization of transport fuels over time. We're continuing to negotiate with customers additional private storage arrangements, which would increase our utilization of existing tank capacity at Marsden Point and provide incremental returns for shareholders. We also remain ready to support any government measures to support minimum stockholding levels in New Zealand. We are also exploring opportunities for other imports into Marsden Point, such as very low sulfur fuel oil and bitumen. We have recommenced work on our Maranga Ra solar project to determine the best approach to secure competitive long-term electricity supply to the terminal. We are engaging with the New Zealand government in relation to their proposed biofuels mandate and the opportunity to manufacture sustainable aviation fuel at Marsden Point in the future, which will be needed to decarbonize longer-haul aviation, as well as opportunities to use Marsden Point infrastructure to support biofuel imports. Longer-term, we're parties interested in the potential for hydrogen production import for storage at Marsden Point, looking at the opportunity to do that at Marsden Point with its export and import capacity and proximity to the largest population base in New Zealand. Each of these opportunities is likely to involve partnership with others as we reposition our company as an infrastructure business underpinned by long-term customer contracts and a disciplined approach to investment. Each of the opportunities has differing time horizons, giving our company a long-term future contributing to New Zealand's energy needs. That concludes our formal presentation for today, and I will now hand back to the operator for questions. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. We'll now pause momentarily to order the queue. Your first question comes from Andrew Harvey-Green from Forsyth Barr. Please go ahead. Good morning, Naomi and Denise. A couple of questions from me. First one is actually just around the discussions with the customers and I guess in particular Mobil is the one we still haven't heard from. Is it right, probably for us to assume that unlikely to have an in-principle agreement announced from them, it's going to be going straight to the sort of formal TSA agreement. Timing, I got the sense you're talking about the back end of September, so we shouldn't necessarily expect any announcement until then. Hi, Andrew. Yeah. Thanks for the question. In terms of will there be a term sheet or do we go straight to terminal services agreement? I'd just say there, watch this space. We obviously don't comment on specifics of customer negotiations as they're continuing. What I can say is we're working with all three, including Mobil, to get to a point where we've got those detailed binding terminal services agreements in place, by the end of September. To the second part of your question, the timing one and when that's all likely to come together, both the customer agreements as well as a board decision. I think your assumption there is right, that will happen at the same time when we've been able to finalize all the aspects. What we are working to timing-wise right now is around the end of September. Call that in September, start of early October. Okay. That's great. Thanks. Just a couple of things, I guess, from the result itself and that the CapEx number seemed to be a little bit lighter than certainly what I was looking for for the first half. I guess a chunk of that's due to the outage coming in below budget. Are you able to just give an idea of what CapEx there is left to go for the rest of this year in terms of just operating the refinery there? I'll pass that one to Denise to respond on. Yeah. Morning, Andrew. Look, yes, you're right. We were very pleased that the turnaround did come in under what we were expecting from a budget perspective. As I sort of look forward to the balance of the year, obviously, we'll be spending less in the second half given that we don't have that major turnaround. In the results, we did say that we had spent about NZD 12 million on that turnaround in this half. I would sort of guide you towards less than what we spent in the first half and if you adjust for that turnaround would be what we're planning for. Okay. That sort of sounds around about 10-ish based on what you did in the first half for a non-turnaround period. Maybe slightly higher than that, Andrew, I think. Okay. Second question I just had was, around the redundancy costs and I guess the treatment of the defined benefit obligations and the accounting around that. Am I right in saying that all of those costs, all the cash has gone out and those redundancy costs are built into that gain that you had because it looked like there wasn't much in the OpEx side of things to show for that? Yeah. Thanks, Naomi. Just on the defined benefit, obviously sitting within the defined benefit itself, there are cash reserves and investments to enable those liabilities to be paid out from the fund itself. Really what flows through the P&L into EBITDA, it's because we have a different discounting rate for obviously what was actuarially neutral for the members. They were paid out their complete entitlements from the fund, and that's based on long-term investment rates being the discounting factor that's applied, where for accounting purposes, we have to apply a risk-free rate, which is significantly lower than that. When you reduce the liability, you get a flow-through into the P&L, which is the settlement gain. The redundancy costs, I think that's a separate question. The redundancies that were made as part of the simplification changes at the start of the year were actually provided in the full-year results in 2020. Obviously, some of that cash was paid out from the company earlier on in this year. Okay. That makes sense. Finally, one for another accounting one, Naomi. It is just in terms of going through your accounts. If I am right in saying that the impairment that will go against the refinery, that will be based on the FID decision. Assuming that goes through to potential conversion, that impairment will take place this financial year as opposed to the next financial year. That's right, Andrew. I think, at the moment, the final investment decision really is the trigger to record an impairment of those refining assets. As we announced and detailed in the conversion proposal that was presented to shareholders, we will, at the same time, be looking to revalue the infrastructure assets that would sit within Channel Infrastructure. If a final investment decision is made at the end of September, there'll be some work to be done to flow that through in the current year's financial results. Sure. Okay. That's all I have. Thanks. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press dial one on your telephone keypad and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from Nevill Gluyas from Jarden. Please go ahead. Good morning, team. Can you hear me? We can. Hi, Nevill. You're coming through loud. Loud? Yes. Very good. Thank you. Okay, just two from me. The first one really is just to confirm that you expect to continue cash neutral operation for the rest of the year. I think that's implied in what you've said. Also that if you do proceed to FID, that cash neutral operation will continue through up to the point of conversion mid-2022? The thing I think to highlight there, Nevill, and why we are yet to give guidance around this is from a refinery operations perspective, that absolutely is the case. What we will start to see post-FID is increasing spend in preparing for terminal operations. Just as we finalize those plans, we will get to that clear view on the exact timing of that spend profile. I think we have given a view in the explanatory booklet on sort of pre-conversion, post-conversion splits and things like that. We are just continuing as we finalize the detailed planning to get the cash timing and profile for that finalized. Right. In terms of how we think about it's clean and correct to think of it as sort of cash neutral operation for the refinery and any additional cost during the period between now and mid-2022 has been included in the costing for the NZD 200 million-NZD 220 million CapEx you've already outlined as indicative for conversion cost. Yes. Spot on. Great. That's useful. Thank you. The second question is in respect of the private storage option, which appears, but I guess this applies to Maranga Ra as well. The near-term CapEx outlay opportunities. Obviously, you've got bank support for the conversion, but it's limited to the conversion. What is your thinking now about the financing of those potential near-term expansion options around storage and Maranga Ra? Really, what we're looking to do there, Nevill, is first get to a final view on the level and timing of that spend. We've indicated on private storage in the shareholder materials that we see that as at the most up to NZD 60 million if all customers were to take that up. That is spread over a period of time. Those customer negotiations are also ongoing. We don't have a final view on how much of that might ultimately be required or when. Once we have come to a conclusion on that, we will look at what's the best funding options for that. We've had some preliminary discussions with lenders on that, but are keeping sort of an open mind just as that comes together and reaches a conclusion in the negotiations. Maranga is a bit too early to tell there. I think Nevill had obviously previously with that project looked at doing more of a sort of an off-balance-sheet financing type structure. There's also partnership options with that project. Step one is really getting clear on the best electricity supply options, whether that's contracting the market or doing something ourselves. Then we'll follow the questions around commercial structure, ownership structure, and funding. We've still got a little bit to go before we get to that stage. Great, thanks. Just some follow on that. In terms of the private storage, what is your equivalent FID timeframe for that, do you think? When would the completion of that project, however it turns out, when would that be likely? Yeah. It is still very much a work in progress, Nevill. It really depends on how much capacity is required and therefore which tanks are involved and the level of conversion work involved. It's certainly fair to say those tanks would become available after the commencement of import terminal operations. We'd expect certainly within a year of that. Exact timing is very dependent on finalizing how much capacity is needed, and then matching our infrastructure plans to those requirements. Right. Thank you. I guess just the last follow-on to that. I formed the impression at the last discussion of this that the banks probably would limit their lending to the extent of the conversion. You said you are having active discussions with them regarding the private storage options. It's still on the table that those could be debt-funded. Yeah. We certainly haven't ruled that out. The key thing, much like obviously what we've done with the base shared terminal, is making sure we've got contracts that are going to underwrite the return on those investments. Once we get clear on that, from a customer perspective, I think there'll be a range of options for funding that, and we'll work through what we think is the best way to go. Okay. Thank you. That's all from me. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star then one on your telephone keypad and wait for your name to be announced. We'll now pause momentarily as anyone else wishes to enter the queue. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star then one. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Ms. James for closing remarks. Thank you. Denise and I would like to thank all of you for your time this morning. Stay safe, take care in this period of lockdown, and thank you very much for joining us today. Thanks all. Bye for now. That does conclude our conference call today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.