Note that this event is being recorded. I'd now like to turn the conference over to the Chief Financial Officer, Jeremy Sussman. Please go ahead. Thank you. On behalf of Ramaco Resources, I'd like to welcome all of you to our fourth quarter 2024 earnings conference call. With me this morning is Randy Atkins, our Chairman and CEO, Chris Blanchard, our EVP for Mine Planning and Development, and Jason Fannin, our Chief Commercial Officer. Before we start, I'd like to share our normal cautionary statement. Certain items discussed on today's call constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements represent Ramaco's expectations concerning future events. These statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are outside of Ramaco's control, which could cause actual results to differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made and except as required by law. Ramaco does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. I'd also like to remind you that you can find a reconciliation of the Non-GAAP financial measures that we plan to discuss today in our press release, which can be viewed on our website, www.ramacoresources.com. Lastly, I'd encourage everyone on this call to go onto our website and download today's investor presentation. With that said, let me introduce our Chairman and CEO, Randy Atkins. Good morning, and thank you for joining the call. On the met coal side of our business, the fourth quarter was clearly our strongest quarter of the year, both financially and operationally. This was despite continued market headwinds on pricing. We controlled what we could control, which were costs and volume. We also achieved three milestones for the quarter. We had record tons sold. We exited the year with cash cost well under $100 a ton, and we ended with record levels of liquidity. All in all, we had a very strong quarter. As a result of this solid performance, especially on cash mine cost, the fourth quarter margins remained at $33 a ton. This was down just $2 a ton since the second quarter, and despite an almost $30 drop in met coal prices between the second and the fourth quarters. Based on the results from all of our publicly traded peers in Central Appalachia, Ramaco's cash margins were almost 50% higher than the next highest public peer for both the third and fourth quarters. For that, I compliment both our mine operations and sales teams. The year-long negative pricing environment, of course, stretched into the fourth quarter. China continued dumping its overproduction of steel to all world markets. This has hurt prices. Steel companies have cut back their own production and reduced the price they can pay for met coal's feedstock. While the overall steel demand remains weak, there are reasons to hope that the met prices may hopefully increase in the second half of the year. Indeed, we've already seen a bump in the domestic steel HRC pricing from less than $700 per ton in Q3 to $940 per ton today. Looking at the supply side, I'm not sure the investing public understands how much carnage the drop in pricing has done to met coal production in the U.S. over the past year and is still doing. We believe that by the end of this year, as much as 16 million domestic tons of met production will have come out of the U.S. market since its peak in Q2 of 2024. If you take 16 million tons out of an overall U.S. met coal production that was 72 million tons last year, that 20% drop in supply is going to eventually impact the market. The main reason for the production drop at higher cost producers is simply the crushing negative cash burn. This has already caused a number of recent bankruptcies. In addition, there have been two large longwall mines that experienced ignition events that caused those mines to remain offline and, in one case, to declare bankruptcy as well. Also, in January, we began to notice an increase in inbound European customer interest for spot availability. We believe this was primarily due to an increase in demand from Ukraine as a result of the closure of the country's only domestic coal mine. Also in Poland, a large mine had an ignition event about the same time. The aggregate impact of all these factors has created a noticeable tightening of supply in the U.S. Going forward, we expect to see more domestic idling of high-vol production destined for Asian markets. Current netbacks are cash negative for high-cost operations. Several producers in this spot probably can't renew all of their annual Asian contract business, which would typically begin next month. Absent a large increase in pricing, we expect another round of high-vol supply cuts over the next few months. I would also note that Australian producers, in terms of volume shipped from Queensland, are off to their worst start of the year, going back for several years. The cyclone last week will not help. On the demand side, everyone is watching potential impacts of tariffs on steel imports. Our own analysis is that tariffs might produce roughly 2 million-3 million tons of potential increase in domestic coal demand. This happens when tariffs limit steel imports and domestic blast furnaces then ramp up production to fill the gap. You are starting to see that already in the run-up in domestic HRC pricing. I'd also like to touch on our balance sheet. We have recently been maintaining record amounts of liquidity. It was about $140 million at the year end. We regard keeping this high level of dry powder as both defensive as well as offensive. In a tricky market environment, it's prudent to have liquidity to meet whatever conditions might arise. We also want to position ourselves to execute on opportunities that might present themselves during market distress. One item I want to emphasize is that despite the current market gloom, we remain positive over the medium and longer term on our plan to increase future production. When we can finally see some stronger market clarity, we are ready to add roughly 2 million tons of low-vol production in relatively short order. Specifically, we would proceed with both the 1.5 million-ton deep mine expansion at our Maben complex and also continue mining into the number three and number four sections at our Maben complex, which would add another 500,000 tons. These low-vol additions would allow us to increase overall production to roughly 6.5 million-7 million-ton level within a 24-36 month period once we start. This would also shift our overall production slate to a majority of low-vol production, which we feel gives us a strong quality posture for the future. Now, switching gears to our Wyoming operations, I'm pleased to report that our rare earth and critical minerals project is moving forward at an accelerated clip. We have been delayed for months in receiving third-party chemistry and metallurgic test results. Almost all of that test data is now back. We expect later in April to release both Fluor's preliminary techno-economic analysis as well as an update from Weir on geology grade and concentration. When these reports are released, this will provide not only granular technical information on the development but also the economics and CapEx estimates. I would note that to date, considering the outsized potential impact on us, we have spent a relatively modest $10 million directly on this project. Upon release of these reports, we will have a great deal more to say and may indeed hold a special call on this as we did last year. To give you a sense of how we feel about the data that is coming in, we have decided to begin full-scale mining in July to provide the rare earth material for a pilot processing facility we will start construction on this fall. We are, of course, mindful of the U.S. government's interest in rapidly creating a domestic supply of critical minerals. I can disclose that we are in ongoing discussions with several arms of the federal government regarding our development. On the Wyoming front, we are pleased to have received a $6 million matching fund grant recommendation from the Wyoming Energy Authority, which is to be applied towards building our pilot plant. While we wait to disclose all the technical data with the release of the Fluor and the Weir reports, I will provide some preliminary results today. The overall size of the resource is now estimated in the range of 1.7 million tons. This increased from the 1.5 million size we disclosed last year and now includes results from all rare earth and critical minerals we will be focusing on. We will continue additional coring and exploration on the overall area. As you remember, to date, we have only tested about a third of the site at predominantly shallow depths. We will now core at deeper levels, which, frankly, in many instances, have shown higher concentrations of rare earth than at shallower formations. Any way you look at it, given both the size of the unconventional deposit and the fact that it is found in softer, non-radioactive material, makes this a generationally unique development. As we view the project today, we will concentrate our commercial efforts specifically on about seven rare earth and critical minerals. These comprise about 30% of the material discovered to date that are estimated to generate over 95% of the revenue. On the rare earth side, we will focus on the heavy and medium magnetic oxides of neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium, and terbium, which are all showing extremely strong rates of recovery. On the critical mineral side, as discussed in December, Fluor informed us that the Brook mine may be the only primary source mine in the world for gallium, germanium, and scandium. Indeed, scandium may be one of the strongest revenue components of the product mix. As you know, gallium and germanium were banned by China from export to the United States last year. One last point which should bear some emphasis, though, we will approach this project with the same conservative business discipline that has characterized all of our investment decisions. This is a new and complex business. It is one with a far different macro-competitive overlay than coal. Indeed, here, the Chinese have a monopoly on the space and want to make it commercially difficult for anyone else to even get a foothold. With that said, the Brook mine would be the first new rare earth mine in the United States in over 70 years. There is clearly a need for this strategic product. As I said, we will approach the investment and financing of what could be a transformative business in a measured fashion and ensure that it delivers a strong return to our shareholders. To wrap up my remarks, while the world's met coal markets still remain weak, we're cautiously optimistic that our price levels are near bottom. By late summer, we hope they begin to move higher throughout the back half. I'm also again incredibly proud of the Ramaco team for being able to improve our operational, sales, and financial metrics throughout 2024. To end by emphasizing again, this culminated in the fourth quarter being our strongest of the year despite being the period with the weakest pricing. We're looking forward to 2025 improving as the year moves along. Lastly, on the rare earth front, I will leave it to be further updated next month. With that, I'll turn the floor over to the rest of our team to discuss finances, operations, and markets. Jeremy, please start with a rundown on finance. Thank you, Randy. As you noted, fourth quarter 2024 operational results were the strongest of the year despite metallurgical coal indices being the weakest. One testament to all of the hard work of our mine employees is that cash margins have declined only $2 since Q2, while met coal indices have fallen $30 per ton. To get into specifics, Q4 Adjusted EBITDA was $29 million compared to $24 million in Q3. Q4 net income of $4 million compared to break-even in Q3. Class A EPS showed a $0.06 gain in Q4 versus a $0.03 loss in Q3. The primary reasons for the increase in both Q4 EBITDA and EPS were the $6 per ton sequential decline in our quarterly cash costs and the almost 100,000-ton increase in tons sold. On the cost front, we exited 2024 in the mid-$90s per ton range, which was the best among our publicly traded peers. We've always said that one of the pillars of Ramaco, going back to our pre-production days, was to operate in the first quartile of the U.S. cost curve. Indeed, that is where we now stand. On the ton sold front, we exited the year at a 4.5 million-ton per annum run rate for the highest level in company history despite challenging market conditions. Looking forward, we're maintaining all of our 2025 guidance other than bumping up our book tax rate to 25-30%, though we'd expect to pay minimal cash taxes in the current environment. In terms of our guidance, we're maintaining a meaningful spread between the low and high ends of production, sales, cash cost, and CapEx guidance. This is in large part due to current market uncertainty. To give you a little more color, if weak market conditions were to persist throughout the year, we'd likely come in towards the lower end of all four of these metrics of production, sales, cash costs, and CapEx by trimming back on some higher-cost production. At the same time, we hope that market conditions improve, especially in the second half of the year, given all of the potential supply curtailments that Randy discussed. Looking specifically at Q1 of 2025, all of us in Central Appalachia encountered two very challenging weather events. First, we experienced freezing temperatures for two weeks in January and then saw historic flooding in February. As a result, cost per ton sold are anticipated to come in towards the high end of the full-year guidance range in Q1. When coupled with the normal typical inventory build ahead of the Great Lakes opening in the spring, Q1 ton sold are anticipated to be 850,000-950,000, with Q2 shipments up by more than one-third sequentially. Moving to the balance sheet, our liquidity at year-end of $138 million was up more than 50% year-on-year. This was by far the highest year-end liquidity in company history. We also had nothing drawn on our revolver at year-end. At the same time, our overall credit metrics remain quite strong, with net debt to Adjusted EBITDA of just 0.5 times on a trailing 12-month basis. The bottom line is that despite challenging market conditions, our cash margins remained relatively unchanged for the past few quarters despite the meaningful decline in pricing. At the same time, we ended the year with record liquidity and minimal net debt to EBITDA. I'd now like to turn the call over to our EVP for Mine Planning and Development, Chris Blanchard, to discuss operations. Thanks, Jeremy. Thank you to everyone who joined us this morning. As we've discussed, it's nice to be able to talk about positive performance at the operations, even if the underlying market wasn't as strong as we would all prefer. The fourth quarter operational performance and the improvement seen throughout the full year was the result of both the diligent efforts of the entire team and commitment to the development and growth plans we put in place late in the preceding year. 2024 was always projected to be a transitional year as we completed development mining in some of our older and thinner reserves at our legacy mines and transitioned into new areas with favorable geology throughout the year. Among the most significant milestones was the completion of the construction of our Maben plant, which ended the need to transport raw coal to our Berwind complex and reduced net trucking costs by over $20 per clean ton. Work continues at Maben, completing final construction and optimization projects at the plant itself, but we are now processing on a regular schedule and working through the raw coal inventories we had stockpiled at the complex. Company-wide, while individual mines' production levels fluctuate normally as their conditions ebb and flow, we saw month-over-month increases in overall productivity throughout the fourth quarter. Some of this was attributable to easing employee turnover rates as the overall coal markets have cooled from what was an extremely tight labor market in the Central Appalachian region. Continuing into 2025, the labor market is still tighter than its historical average, and the reductions in the industry and the belt tightening have not yet translated into an abundance of skilled coal miners available. Pricing continues to languish in its current range. However, on our growth plan, we are still continuing to advance several development projects so that we're positioned to execute when there's a rebalancing of market dynamics. The biggest group of projects relates to the Maben complex. This will involve the development of the underground reserves, which will ultimately ramp the complex up to 1.5 million clean tons per year. At Maben, the permits are being advanced, and work related to opening these underground mines continues. We believe that these mines can be brought online and ramped within 12-15 months when they are greenlighted. Much of the lead time then will be the procurement of the underground mining equipment. Also, at our Berwind complex, several capital projects continue related to new ventilation shafts and a new portal area in the heart of Ramaco's fee coal position at this mine. These safety-related and cost-saving projects will continue. This will allow the Berwind mine to have the proper ventilation, safety, and logistical infrastructure to operate at its full planned capacity of four super sections when market conditions allow. We expect the first of the three new air shafts to be online late in the second quarter of 2025 after receiving the final federal permits needed for the approval of this work. Indeed, across all of our operations, we have started to see some of the permit backlog unwind and our minor permit revisions and additions to again be approved in a timelier manner. Turning briefly to 2025, as Jeremy mentioned, in Q1, the extreme winter snow and freeze events followed by historic flooding did impact operations and shipping. In West Virginia, the impacts to McDowell, Logan, and Wyoming counties, where we operate, were devastating. Beside the impact on actual mining operations, the damage to homes of the families of our employees was heartbreaking. We continue to work with some of the most stricken for relocation and recovery of their homes. Also, throughout the region, we continue to work with charitable organizations and local groups supporting the recovery however we can. More directly at the mining complexes, the biggest impact of this weather was hundreds of collective employee shifts missed during January and February. We also had some additional downtime and costs associated with the flooding in February, primarily from unusual accumulations of water in the sealed or inactive areas of our underground coal mines, as well as some slowing of surface and plant operations. Fortunately, as we enter March, all of these conditions have abated and subsided, and we have resumed our normal operational cadence. We continue to watch the markets and hope for price improvement. In the meantime, we remain disciplined in operational performance and costs to focus on those areas we do have some level of control over. We're positioned to be nimble to adjust as necessary to the economics of the market. To discuss all these factors driving the market right now, I would like to turn the call over to our Chief Commercial Officer, Jason Fannin. Thanks, Chris, and good morning, everyone. Today, I'll share our views on coking coal and steel markets as well as our sales outlook. Global coking coal markets have continued to weaken from a pricing standpoint, with average coking coal index prices down approximately 6% since the start of Q1. If current index levels remain flat through the end of March, Q1 index averages will also be down 6% versus Q4's. As of March 10th, the U.S. East Coast index values were $182.50 per ton for Low Vol, $179.50 per ton for High Vol A, and $166.50 per ton for High Vol B. Published U.S. East Coast price indices have drifted lower over the last two weeks. We believe these levels are not at all reflective of the supply-side tightness in Central and Northern App due to recent bankruptcies, mine idlings, operational cutbacks, and the extreme weather experienced in much of the Central Appalachian coal fields during January and February. The Australian Premium Low Vol Index currently sits at $181 per ton, a level last seen briefly in September and before that, not since mid-2021 during the China ban on Australian coal imports. The second-tier Low Vol coking coal index is priced at $142.50 per ton and has significantly underperformed relative to premium grades. As a result, many Australian producers in Queensland and the broader region are experiencing severe margin compression. We believe the majority of mines in Queensland are operating at break-even cash costs or worse. We're also witnessing profitability issues in the U.S. Producers with an inability to control higher costs are struggling. We have already seen a fair deal of idlings, bankruptcies, layoffs, and associated supply rationalization because of the continued poor pricing environment. Over the next few quarters, the dominant theme for smaller and less well-capitalized producers will likely be weak profitability and continued supply cuts. Investors will have an increased focus on liquidity management across the industry. This will be especially impactful for those smaller and/or private producers who are more heavily exposed to seaborne markets and perhaps are overlooked by public markets and industry reporting agencies. If these weak market conditions continue, we believe the next phase will be more significant supply cuts, which may lead to a rebalancing of market dynamics. This will present many opportunities for Ramaco to capture market share, establish additional long-term customer relationships, and continue to grow our sales book. The weakness in coking coal prices is primarily a reflection of poor profitability at steel mills worldwide rather than an oversupply of met coal. Queensland, for instance, has seen its lowest shipment volumes in over a decade to start the year, yet prices continue to decline. According to MSHA data, quarterly production of coking coal in the U.S. has declined successively since Q2 of 2024. This underscores the broader struggles of the global steel industry, which remains in a prolonged downturn. A key factor in this dynamic is the surge in Chinese steel exports, which continues to pressure global steel mill profits. Since early 2022, annual Chinese steel exports have been 104 million tons on average, peaking at an annualized rate of nearly 150 million tons in October last year, a huge increase which has impacted steel pricing on a global scale. So far this year, Chinese domestic demand has failed to rise enough to push down steel exports from these astronomically high levels. We therefore continue to look for green shoots in the Chinese economy as it relates to potential steel consumption growth in their domestic market. Fortunately, many leading indicators have rebounded. This suggests the cycle is turning up again, although it will likely take some time for excess steel exports to decline meaningfully. In the Atlantic Basin, Ramaco's term volumes and demand from our usual specialty customers remain solid, while at the same time, the U.S. steel market is staging a prolific rebound in response to the Trump tariffs. With integrated blast furnace production currently holding a cost advantage over electric arc furnace operations, we may see domestic producers ramp up blast furnace output in response to rising steel prices. This would likely result in higher domestic coking coal consumption, which provides a natural hedge against weak pricing in the seaborne market. The potential for increased domestic demand later in the year aligns well with our sales strategy for 2025. So far, we have committed 3.5 million tons for sale during 2025. We have booked 1.6 million tons to North American customers at an average fixed price of $152 per ton and 1.9 million tons to the seaborne market at mostly index-linked pricing. Most of our uncommitted volumes are associated with production in the back half of the year as we are largely sold out in the first half. This leaves us with the flexibility to take advantage of evolving market dynamics and layer in additional sales opportunities with pricing arrangements we view as favorable from a risk versus reward standpoint. Turning to an overview of Ramaco's various seaborne markets, recent mine outages in the U.S. and in Europe have caused a tightening in U.S. supply markets as buyers seek supplemental met volumes. This trend began before the various major mine outages in the U.S. and Europe, as well as prior to the extreme weather in Central Appalachia in January and February, and continues today. The broader European steel market began 2025 on an upbeat tone with rising steel prices as potential safeguard measures threaten to cut off cheap competition from imports. While the European steel industry remains fragile due to slowing economic growth, we see indications that policymakers may shift away from long-standing fiscal conservatism toward expansionary pro-growth strategies. This would create a much-needed tailwind for investment and spur downstream steel consumption. South American markets continue to be stable, with modest demand growth expected as steel safeguard measures provide support for increased pig iron production in 2025. Ramaco's term contract order book in South America continues to perform well, and we have seen increased spot tenders from a few buyers, particularly on the low volatile side. Looking ahead, we expect Indian coking coal demand to strengthen later in 2025, supported by the addition of 11.5 million tons of new blast furnace capacity. Over the past two years, coking coal demand has lagged behind India's overall steel consumption, largely due to increased seaborne met coal imports. However, with the implementation of met coal import quotas late last year, we anticipate coking coal consumption will better align with blast furnace iron production trends going forward. Additionally, we are closely monitoring potential Indian steel import safeguard measures, which, if implemented, could enhance domestic steel mill profitability and support higher coking coal prices. In terms of our market strategy in the Pacific Basin, we continue to engage and supply a core group of customers in Asia. This is a group with whom we've fostered long-term relationships, even as the price environment in the Pacific has become challenging for many U.S. suppliers. As market headwinds persist, we are adopting a cautious, systematic approach to our remaining uncommitted volumes. We plan to allocate these volumes to the highest return sales opportunities while continuing to supply our long-term customer base, all with a focus strategically on future growth. With that said, I would now like to return the call to the operator for the Q&A portion of the call. Operator? Thank you, sir. We will now be conducting the question-and-answer session. To ask a question, you may press Star and then one on your telephone keypad. If you are using speakerphone, please pick up the handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you wish to withdraw your question, please press Star and then two. At this time, we'll pause momentarily to assemble our roster. Our first question comes from Nick Giles from B. Riley Securities. Please go ahead. Thank you, Operator. Good morning, everyone. Guys, congratulations on the lower cash costs and the successful additions of production at Elk Creek in 2024. My first question, if I saw correctly, you have some seaborne volumes fixed at $111 per ton, and so I was hoping you could add some color around where you see netbacks today for your various qualities. I think you mentioned that current Atlantic indices aren't fully reflective, so where do you see the highest return opportunities in the current market? Thank you very much. Nick, on the 111 there, those are index-linked prices that have settled out for January and February. A large portion of that were from a couple of our Asian high vol contracts that have since rolled off. That's the impact you're seeing there in that fixed price number. To your question on, you know, where we see the highest returns in the current seaborne market, certainly as you see in the Atlantic. You know, when you factor out the freight differential to the Pacific, and then, frankly, the near parity now with the Pacific indices versus the Atlantic indices, there's a differential there. In terms of current netbacks, just broadly speaking, where indices are at today, I think our high vol, you're in the $125 per net ton range, back at the mine, with Low Vol, you know, up, I'd say, $3-$5 above that. Yeah, not it. It's Jeremy here. If I could just add a couple of things to that. You know, just on the 111 number, I'd say about 40%-45% of what was shipped in January and February on the export market was to Asia. That's about double sort of our normal Asian cadence. I'd say it's a little bit, a little bit wonky from that perspective. But, you know, regardless of sort of the netbacks and whatnot, I mean, I think the key is, you know, our cash margins are, you know, call it $33 a ton. That's down $2 a ton since the second quarter, and, you know, certainly about 50% or so, more than 50% higher than, I think, the next highest in Central Appalachia when you kind of average Q3 and Q4 and, you know, frankly, competing with the Alabama longwall margins. All in all, again, kudos to Jason and Chris and their teams for keeping our margins, you know, very strong on a relative basis. Jeremy, Chris, I appreciate all that additional detail and for the clarification. Maybe just on the growth side and your guidance, you've noted that you could respond to higher prices with some of the growth projects you have at your disposal. Could you remind us of the capital intensity of each of those and what would you ultimately need to see to move forward? Is any of this potential growth CapEx included in your current guidance of $60 million-$70 million? Sure. Good, a few questions there, Nick. I guess, first, from the standpoint of our total capital, our guidance is about $60 million-$70 million. I'd say our normal sort of maintenance CapEx is around $9-$10 a ton. Embedded in that is about $20 million of growth capital. I'd say it's split pretty evenly between Elk Creek and Berwind. I mean, there's a few million in addition, but, you know, at Elk, really, it's, it's, you know, basically increasing the, you know, infrastructure for the most part to make sure that we can get to 3 million tons on a sustainable basis. You know, and at Berwind, Chris discussed, you know, a number of the projects that basically allow us to, you know, mine full out ultimately in the third and fourth section. I guess what I would say is, you know, if market conditions, you know, remain weak, there's probably some room in our CapEx to come down. At the same time, you know, as Randy sort of detailed in his remarks, there's a lot of carnage out there, and certainly we do think that, you know, the market is poised to move higher in the second half of the year. Yeah, I'll make one other comment. I mean, you know, basically, you know, in this kind of a sideways market, in terms of committing new capital to growth, we basically, as I said, want to see some clarity, whether that's one or two quarters of stabilized pricing or hopefully even increased pricing, remains to be seen. The nice thing about where we're teed up at Maben, of course, we already have a prep plant in place. We've got probably, you know, for the deep portion, about a $30 million spend, which will be graduated over a period of time. That's not a one-year spend. That's probably more like a two-year spend. At Berwind, you know, we're essentially just continuing through an existing mine to add more sections. That's a relatively modest spend, I'd say, in the beginning about the $10 million range. That's, once again, not a one-year spend. That's probably a two-year spend. You know, our CapEx requirements for these additions are in relative terms pretty darn modest. I can't think of too many people who can add 2 million tons for essentially $40 million in CapEx. That's how I'd look at it. Jeremy, Randy, thanks again for all the additional detail. Good to hear you have that optionality. Maybe just one last one on the rare earth side. I mean, this is seemingly a project of tremendous scale. What kind of order of magnitude should we be anticipating as far as development CapEx? Is there a CapEx level you'd be able to point us to that's required for the construction of the pilot plant later this year? Sure. The way that I teed it up, I think both in our earnings release as well as in my remarks, we will have a pretty granular description of, you know, not only the technical aspects of the deposit, the grades, the recovery rates, but also, of course, the economics and the CapEx, which are inclusive in the Fluor techno-economic report. that's been hung up bluntly because there's such an overwhelming demand for people doing testing of various rare earth projects that the labs that do the chemistry and metallurgic analysis for those are quite backed up, and we've been having delays in getting those test results back. We've got those results back, and Fluor is telling us by the middle of the latter part of next month, they will have completed the report. and so, you know, instead of front-running that report by kind of dripping and drabbing out, you know, CapEx numbers and pilot plant numbers, we'll let the report speak for itself. and as I said, once we put that out there, we'll be even happy to have a sort of a separate rare earth call, which we've done before to go into far more detail than we would, on this call, you know, certainly today or, or certainly even on a normal earnings call where we're talking about our met operations as well. Fair enough, Randy. Guys, I appreciate all the color, nice work, and continued best of luck. Thanks, Nick. Our next question comes from Chris LaFemina of Jefferies. Please go ahead. Thanks, Operator. Hi guys. Thanks for taking my questions. just want to ask first around the, the, the reduction in unit costs. I mean, that's, that's been an impressive performance there. And, obviously, it's helped offset some of the weakness in prices. I'm wondering to what extent, let's assume that met coal prices begin to really recover in the next year, does some of the cost reductions that you've realized so far begin to reverse? That's my first question. Largely the—that's Chris. Oh, I'm sorry, this is Chris. Largely the cost reduction has been driven by the move from, you know, more challenging geology in some of our older mines into thicker horizons where the clean tons per foot is higher and it drives down the unit cost. Obviously, we've seen a little bit of benefit, I guess, by the lower sales price in our royalty costs and other sales related. That would reverse as the prices go back up. Absent a spike in pricing, we would not expect to see major labor increases, which is what sort of drove a lot of it in 2022, 2023. I think, structurally, the lower cost should be in place, with just the normal moves around sales related. Chris, this is Randy. I would add, you know, as you heard from our remarks, we are seeing a lot of supply reductions out there. In the space, not only vis-à-vis labor, but some of the other types of equipment, steel related and other, we are seeing a softening somewhat in the market. We would not expect that trend to reverse, given the amount of supply coming out of the market, unless there is really, as Chris said, a real spike, because if we are just going to see, you know, somewhere around 15-20 million tons come out of the Central App and Northern App markets, that is going to create a large hole for not only suppliers, but also the labor markets. Does that capacity come back online in a better market, or is some of this capacity, you think, permanently gone? I think, Chris, a lot of that capacity may be gone on a permanent basis. The one thing, of course, a lot of people do not appreciate as much is really the depletion that is in the Central Appalachian Basin. You know, it's a mature basin, and a lot of these mines, particularly for a lot of the larger legacy producers, are in mines that are very mature, and they are coming, if not to the end of their useful life, they're certainly coming to a point where the geology is declining. That's why, you know, we've got relatively new mines, sort of fresh geology and thicker seams, which is obviously an advantage to us from a cost perspective. Thanks. That's very helpful. I appreciate that. Good luck. Thanks, Chris. Appreciate you getting on the call. Our next question comes from Nathan Martin of The Benchmark Company. Please go ahead. Thanks, Operator. Good morning, guys. Congrats on the fourth quarter results and the, the continued cost per ton progress. Maybe just kind of starting there and more of a clarification question. You know, you mentioned the commissioning of the Maben prep plant in the fourth quarter, you know, reduced those trucking costs by roughly $20 a ton at that complex. However, I know you guys had previously talked about a number around $40 a ton. Is, is there more savings potentially there, or is that just maybe a clean versus raw ton comparison? Just wanted to get clarification. Yeah. So, good question. This is Chris again. The trucking cost on a raw basis was converted back to clean was about $40 a ton. So we are avoiding that. However, until we build the rail load out directly on site, we are now trucking our clean coal, which has approximately the same unit cost of $20 per ton. When we build our load out and rail load the rail cars directly at Maben, then that additional $20 will come out as well. Chris, when do you expect that to be complete? The project is, I guess I would say, under consideration. We are going ahead with engineering work and some of the design work on that, but probably not this calendar year. Okay. Is it right to assume then that would potentially improve those costs even more? Yes, absolutely. As soon as that project is put in place, we would expect, you know, just on the top side to $20 cost savings. Okay. Perfect. Thanks for clarifying that. Maybe just sticking with the cost per ton, you guys just talked about some of the variable costs associated with price. You know, what price range are you assuming in your full year cost per ton guidance range? We're just, hey, Nate, it's Jeremy. We're just generally using the forward curve for planning purposes. Okay. Thanks, Jeremy. And then maybe finally, you know, you guys have touched on this a bit, but, you know, I wanted to ask, you know, how would you rank or prioritize your capital spending today? Obviously, liquidity position strong. You've got the dividend policy in place. But, you know, we continue to see this prolonged weakness in the market. You mentioned there could be some opportunities for M&A because of that. You know, you're also continuing down the path of the rare earth process at the Brook Mine. So, you know, how do you see balancing, you know, growth, whether it's internal or external, you know, shareholder returns, and then, you know, protecting your business during this downturn? Sure. This is Randy. I think, you know, to your question about M&A, as I've said before, we're not too fond of the M, but we're happy to look at the A. You know, in this kind of a down or distressed market, we will try to be opportunistic if we see situations where, particularly reserve plays or perhaps infrastructure plays that might become available at opportunistic prices, we'll take a look at that. That's something you can't really plan, you can hope for, but you certainly don't expect. As far as our normal cadence for growth CapEx, I think we've explained that. We've got a very modest growth CapEx laid out for 2025, obviously, reflecting the market. You know, we're not ready to push the start button on some of these projects at Maben and Berwind until we see a little bit more clarity. As far as what's going on out in Wyoming, you know, we have been, you know, I frankly am surprised at how modest our spend has been. You know, to take this project to where it is for about $10 million, I think has been a very well used amount of our capital to advance a project that has, you know, transformative potential. As we move forward right now, you know, we've gotten a recommendation from the Wyoming Energy Authority for $6 million, which is certainly appreciated. That will be focused on the prep plant or the pilot plant rather. We do not have too much, you know, additional drilling that we have to do. We'll probably continue to drill, you know, throughout the years because this is such a prolifically large site that to really prove it up is going to take, you know, a good deal of time. You know, somebody remarked to me, it's almost like you've got a, a Permian Basin of rare earth, so you've got a lot of work to do to geologically scope it out. As far as the pilot plant and the, the, you know, future commercial plant, you know, those will be dictated in some instance by the, the nature of the process we will ultimately use chemically and metallurgically to actually refine the, the rare earth and the critical minerals. We're going through that testing now. Obviously, the pilot plant is designed to refine that testing, and come up with a, you know, a solution that will be optimized, as we move forward. You know, we do not have too much capital that we have allocated to that for 2025. On the mining, the same thing. We have already started doing some of the mine mobilization there now. We will start really moving some dirt around, probably in June and July timeframe. Then we will start construction on site for the pilot plant, sometime, I would say late summer, early fall. We are going to basically bifurcate the pilot process because we are going to have some of it designed and tested offsite in a test facility at one of our chemical testing third party laboratories. Then we will take that process and essentially move it to the Wyoming site. That is what will start to occur this fall. Very helpful, Randy. I guess just one thought there too. Is that pilot plant CapEx included in the current $60 million-$70 million CapEx range for this year? Yes. Yes, it is. Okay. Perfect. All right, guys. Very, very helpful. Appreciate the time. And honestly, we did not include originally the $6 million that we've now been recommended to receive an award from Wyoming. So that's an extra bit of wind in our sails, so to speak. Got it. Appreciate it. Thanks, Nate. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes our question and answer session. I would now like to turn the conference back over to the Chairman and CEO, Randall Atkins, for closing remarks. I would like to thank everyone for being on the call today. We will certainly look forward to our next earnings call and then also hopefully to, in the interim, have a call with you all related to our rare earth project. Once again, thanks very much. Thank you. The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation, and we now disconnect your lines.