Again, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Lynas Rare Earths full year 2023 results briefing. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question- and- answer session. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one, one on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising that your hand is raised. To withdraw your question, please press star one, one again. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded, and I would now like to hand the conference over to Lynas. Please go ahead.
Good morning, and welcome to the Lynas Rare Earths investor briefing for the 2023 financial year. Today's presentation will be presented by Amanda Lacaze, CEO and Managing Director. And joining Amanda will be Gaudenz Sturzenegger, CFO, Daniel Havas, VP of Strategy and Investor Relations, and Sarah Leonard, General Counsel and Company Secretary. I'll now hand over to Amanda. Please go ahead, Amanda.
Thanks, Jen. Good morning, everybody, and as always, thank you for joining us today as we talk about our results. I'm sure that many of you will have already read all of the material which has been uploaded to the ASX, and you will see that in the year that's just passed, we've had some highlights and, you know, we've had some lowlights. I'm sure there are many questions, but before I take those questions, let me speak a little bit to some of the highlights and lowlights. You will have seen that we've described this as a productive year and, for anyone who's ever done any releases of any sort, you would know that we spend quite a lot of time thinking about what's really just the right way to describe the year that was.
We feel that productive is a very good description. Operationally, we had a very productive year, but we also made significant progress on our investments for the future. If we look, first of all, at our operating performance, it was indeed a highlight. In a year of two halves, in the first half, we had lower production, significantly affected by, seems like an ancient memory now, but the water challenges that we had in Malaysia when there was the huge burst water line, and higher prices. In the second half of the year, we had record production outcomes, in an environment with lower prices. The outcome of that was that our second half revenue and profit was pretty much equal to our first half, despite the significantly lower prices in the market.
That really demonstrates the strength that we have from our operating base and our experience. Mount Weld performed extremely well throughout the year with record production. That's really important because it meant that Mount Weld was able to not only feed our Kuantan facility, but also to build a stockpile for the startup of the Kalgoorlie Rare Earths Processing Facility. And if, as we indeed fervently hope, you know, we are in the near future operating two plants, then, you know, this bodes very well for us to be able to feed those two plants.
In Malaysia, the water problems have been put to bed for now, and we saw in the second half of the year when there were none of those external factors actually reducing availability, that we were able to record record production quarter on quarter, with 1,860 tons in the final quarter, which was really an outstanding result. Now, our focus turns to really continuing to optimize and improve the efficiency of both operations so that we can ensure that we protect our ability to succeed even when market dynamics are less favorable. As we then look to preparing for the future, well, yes, there are many highlights and some lowlights. We have a very ambitious growth program with our first large-scale projects since Mount Weld and Kuantan were constructed a decade ago.
And so the projects have been ongoing on each of the sites. So the growth program at Mount Weld, the very large installation that we're constructing in Kalgoorlie, and of course, additional work in Malaysia to ensure that it is prepared to receive the mixed rare earth carbonate from our Kalgoorlie Rare Earths Processing Facility. At Mount Weld, we continued our drilling program, and it's a program in two parts. So we are drilling out the ore body to improve our understanding of the current deposit and to undertake a proper update of our resource and reserve statement.
In addition, we have the true exploration program as we move further into the carbonatite to truly understand material there, its economic profile, and the ability for that to once again give us an opportunity to revise our mine life. Our capacity expansion at Mount Weld is on track, and in the presentation, we've included some photos from July, which actually show major earthworks, a significant amount of the concrete actually poured, and this is all in line with the early works approvals that we have received. In Kalgoorlie, we have highlights and lowlights. We are on the home stretch to completion of this facility. Only the waste gas treatment plant is still ongoing in terms of final construction. During the progress of this project, we have solved for a number of difficult issues.
For example, you know, we have not been able to get our gas come down the pipeline. We've had to make changes to our project to have on-site gas. We faced some issues with things like, for example, how the earth compacted as we were doing our dams associated with the facility, and we have taken the opportunity as we've moved through the project to progressively improve some elements of the design, some for safety and some for capacity. The outcome is that today, and this is definitely a highlight, is that we're able to announce that we have 30%, approximately 30% uplift in nameplate capacity to about 9,000 tonnes per annum. The lowlight, of course, is our announcement on a further increase in the cost to complete.
I know that you are all very much across the issues with cost inflation on projects in Western Australia. We're not Robinson Crusoe as far as this is concerned. We certainly went into this with a great optimism that by putting certain controls and strategies in place, we would be able to avoid some of those, you know, sort of general price cost pressures. And indeed, I think we have done so relatively successfully in some areas. But the key for really why we're now, as we come into the home stretch, looking at a further uplift in our forecast cost to complete is really our compressed timeline. I think, as everyone knows, the project has always been scheduled to meet an arbitrary timeline determined by the Malaysian operating license.
That's been further exacerbated by some of our early challenges, for example, getting final approvals, which was, you know, later than in our original project schedule, and that's seen us having to backload our work schedule. I've spoken before about running some areas of the construction on a 24/7 basis, and I think everybody knows that that doesn't come free of cost penalty. The license variation, which was announced in May, gave us some relief, but it's still a very challenging timeline, and we've had to apply significantly more resources as we approach completion. As detailed, we expect it will now be approximately AUD 730 million. That's on a like for like basis versus our original forecast for this project.
But it will give us an approximately 9,000 ton per annum capacity, compared to the originally envisaged 7,000 ton per annum capacity. The delay in startup leads to us having to capitalize some additional commissioning and pre-commissioning costs. We've put our operating team in place ahead of our forecast startup, and whilst they are very, very productively utilized in the commissioning process, that does see us having to capitalize some of those costs. But I guess in, you know, sort of summary, this is a really significant facility. It is the first of its type in Australia, and we have designed it for growth. Today, we're announcing the uplift in nameplate capacity, but we actually have designed this facility in a way that gives us the opportunity to both grow capacity and also grow activity.
So it truly is a foundational investment, and, you know, we think it is an investment very well made. Of course, the other exciting news on our growth projects is in the U.S., which is referenced in this, in today's outcome as a subsequent event, but I think you're all very much across that. The new contract that we signed and announced earlier this month is a cost recovery contract, which shows the U.S. government's commitment to completing this task.
In Malaysia, and you'll see the photos in the presentation, we have done significant works to ensure that we can receive and process the mixed rare earth carbonate from Kalgoorlie, and we have taken the opportunity there to put in some additional capability, for example, soda ash receival and management, and some other actions which will contribute to our continuing cost efficiency on that site. On the Malaysian license, we do continue to engage generally very productively, I think, with both federal and state governments in Malaysia on the importance of the rare earths processing industry as a source of growth of the Malaysian economy and the importance of Lynas operations as part of that.
I really would encourage you all to click through onto YouTube and see, you know, the ten years in Malaysia ad campaign that we've got, airing on television and also online at present. Of course, the other thing which is included within the report, and which is a matter that I know all investors are interested in, as well as, you know, sort of what we're doing in terms of ESG. We have a very strong culture and commitment to each of the E, the S and the G. And I think that it's really important. Quite often there's a lot written on ESG governance, as if it is something which is forced from the outside in onto organizations. In our case, this is not an external condition, but an internal drive.
Our people are absolutely driven by their commitment, not just to our communities, but also to ensuring that we run operations which are safe and environmentally sustainable. Whether it's environmental initiatives, for example, tree planting in Kalgoorlie, educational initiatives, back to school program in Kuantan, solar kits for your primary aged children in Kalgoorlie. Sports, like our wonderful sports carnival that we have each year in Kuantan. One year, my husband tried to teach the soccer-mad locals how to kick an AFL footy. That was sort of interesting and had some spotty success. Or just making sure that our people are front and center in our volunteering activities.
It is our people who drive our commitment and our culture to meet what is expected by the external world in terms of ESG, and we do it because it is the right thing to do. So as I said at the beginning, we see this as having been a very productive year. We are now phasing into a transition year as we look at, you know, we have a couple of different scenarios, but the current one is one where we get Kalgoorlie up and running, and then we transition to that as the feedstock for our downstream operations in Malaysia, continuing work at Mount Weld and also commencing the project in the U.S.
This is all about ensuring that we are match fit for the future because we have absolutely, no, no concerns at all about the fact that this market is going to continue in value, to grow in value and in demand. And we need to make sure that we are ready for the next year when the market dynamics are as positive as they were last year. So with that, I'm very happy to take any questions. No questions.
As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one one on your touchtone telephone. To withdraw your question, please press star one one again. One moment while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question will come from Chen Jiang of Bank of America. Your line is open.
Good morning, Amanda. Thanks for taking my questions. A few from me, please. Firstly, on Kalgoorlie nameplate, 9,000 tons per annum, but Lynas's target is to achieve 12,000 per annum by FY 2024, sorry, FY 2025. I'm just wondering, what's the contingency plan where the recent conditions from Malaysia is unsuccessful? And how should we think of Kalgoorlie additional CapEx required and timeline to produce 12,000 tons per annum of MREC? Thank you. I have another, I have two more after this.
Thank you. So yes, this is a very good question, and we continue to fit the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together, in terms of ensuring that we have each of the different stages of production aligned. As we look at, you know, each of these capacity growth initiatives, we look at what is the optimum step in the first instance. So for example, as we think about moving through from, you know, the current sort of 7,000 tons up to, say, the 12,000 tons, we could have said, "Oh, well, at Mount Weld, we'll just go to, say, 10 in the first instance," but project planning, design, and efficiency said best to go to the 12.
In terms of the Kalgoorlie facility, our first milestone was that we needed to make sure on a risk management basis, that we were able to at least replace what we did in Malaysia. But as the project has progressed, we've actually made decisions, and we've disclosed those previously to allow us to confidently provide the target uplift in nameplate capacity. Now, further investment in that, while we are still in ongoing discussions with the regulator in Malaysia, we feel would not be prudent. However, as I indicated, the Kalgoorlie facility is, you know, sort of a really substantial foundational facility, which gives us room to grow, both in terms of capacity and activity. But we're not in a position to disclose specifically how that would operate today, but we are in a position to disclose the 9,000 tons per annum.
Sure. Thanks, thanks for that, Amanda. Another one, Kalgoorlie again. The CapEx increased to AUD 730 million. I'm wondering if you can provide any color, how much is due to inflation and how much is due to additional cost? You mentioned, you know, the additional costs incurred to accelerate the schedule in order to meet the deadline by the Malaysian operating license. Thank you.
So the major portion is associated with increased resources to meet the schedule.
Right. Okay, thanks. And how should we think about the operating costs in FY 2024 at Kalgoorlie, which is still early stage? Understand labor and utility costs will be higher versus you operate from Malaysia. Is there any indication what expected, like for like, such as your chemical reagents cost from Kalgoorlie versus what was achieved in Malaysia? Thank you.
Yeah. So we haven't disclosed that at this stage because there is a lot, you know, that goes on as we actually go through the commissioning process. But as we think about inputs like reagents, for example, what we find is that, you know, the price we're able to get very close to the inputs in Malaysia. But we are still working on optimizing logistics because land side logistics in Australia are really quite expensive, and that does give us a cost penalty on those elements. As I said, we're very focused across all three sites on continuing to drive down costs to ensure that we can be successful.
It will be some time before we're able to really be definitive on the cost structure in Kalgoorlie, because of course, in the ramp-up phase, there's going to be significant penalties associated with that ramp-up phase. We know what is the theoretical gap today between, you know, sort of a plant which has been operating for 10 years in Kuantan and has been optimized on several occasions through that versus a start-up plant in Kalgoorlie. But it would be misleading to, you know, sort of use those as being the basis for ongoing operations.
So we're working on it, but I think that it'll take us about six months after the plant's been started, before we would be able to give any, you know, sort of reasonable guidance on what we think the medium-term stable operating costs are gonna be.
Sure. Sure. Thanks, Amanda. I'll pass it down. Thank you.
Thanks again.
One moment for our next question. Our next question will be coming from Levi Spry of UBS. Your line is open, Levi.
Yeah. Good morning, Amanda. Thank you. Thank you for your, your time and the call. Some good questions there already. So just on Kalgoorlie, when we think about the AUD 50 million of capitalized operating costs, can you talk to some of the assumptions that are behind that? I guess the main one being time, but, and also how, you know, how long you're capitalizing them to what rate of nameplate capacity, I guess?
Sure. So those. A number of those costs have already been, actually, you know, when we do our quarterly reports with cash flow, I mean, a substantial, substantive part of that, about 60% of it, has already been expended. And as we've indicated in the announcement, that includes, you know, we have close to a full operating team. We've sent many of them to Malaysia for training. We've had a lot of work. You know, we've actually had to do all of the work on, you know, sort of operating manuals and all of those sorts of things. And that team is, in fact, assisting in the commissioning process.
We also have first fill has been completed, so we have soda ash in the soda ash silos, and we have gas in the LPG bullet, and we have. I think we have some acid and the sulfuric acid. We clearly have water and a whole series of those sorts of things, which, if we had commenced earlier, would have already, you know, sort of converted. But, you know, accounting principles being as they are, it says that these expenses will be capitalized until the plant commences operation of its purpose, or words to that effect. So we retain, you know, sort of our target date of end of September, but we clearly, in providing this, you know, sort of guidance, have, you know, sort of allowed some buffer.
you know, really it is about ensuring that we don't have to come back and give you a different set of numbers.
Okay, thank you. So still on track, end of September, and all of the costs are now included to make that happen.
Yes.
Okay. Thank you. And then just thinking about the mine, I guess. Can you just remind me what the capital estimate was for that, and I guess what stage that is at? So how much is left?
Sure. So in terms of the processing facility at Mount Weld, forecast total project cost is about AUD 500 million. We're still waiting for the final life of mine approvals, which actually encompass our ability to put some of the activities which are part of the expansion outside of our current disturbance footprint. And so the works which have been undertaken to date are the early works in accordance with EPA approvals. So that includes the bulk earthworks. It also includes, you know, sort of a fair bit of concrete already being poured. And we, you know, lodged orders for long lead time items now almost 12 months ago, particularly for our filter press and our filter building.
Because it's a more remote site in Kalgoorlie, when we did similar things, we constructed on site. At Mount Weld, we're doing a lot of modular work off-site, which we will then bring on-site for construction. It is part of the financial report. We've indicated that we expect in FY 2024, we've got about AUD 600 million in capital will be spent and the remaining and we expect that we will cover within that a lot of Mount Weld, although it will go through to the end of calendar year, FY 2024.
Thanks, Amanda. That was great. Thank you.
Thanks, Levi. Bye.
One moment for our next question. Our next question will be coming from David Deckelbaum of TD Cowen. David, your line's open.
Good morning, Amanda and team. Thanks for the time this morning.
Hi, David.
Hello. I wanted to just ask a question just to clarify on the capacity uplift at Kalgoorlie. You know, when you all gave a project update in October, I think you said that you were upgrading equipment and you had increased the budget at that point by, say, AUD 50 million or so, or AUD 75 million or so. Now, I guess the update is we're at 9,000 tons of capacity. I guess, could you give some color? Was 9,000 tons per annum always the number that you were just kicking around? Or, as you get closer, you just have more confidence around this? Or has something happened with the compressed timeline that you're adding extra dollars to accelerate that capacity expansion?
No. Sorry, I shouldn't say no. Option A is more the point. So when we started off, we looked at this, and we said, you know, our project director sort of says famously, "You only get one chance to be at the bottom of the cost curve, and that's when you construct." And so, you know, as we specified equipment right from the beginning, we specified it with a keen eye on the fact that we, whilst we needed to have a schedule that saw us be able to replace the Malaysian capacity, that we face into a growing market. And so therefore, having a facility which is able to grow in terms of capacity is really important. So in some of the initial equipment specification, we certainly had our eye on this ability to be able to upsize the facility.
When we made the update last October, we had identified additional areas where we needed to make additional investments to be able to support that. And then, just as you've said, David, as we've got closer to it and we've got the facilities in place, we have now the confidence level to speak to that being the nameplate where, you know, when we started the project, it was an option.
I appreciate that. It's helpful color. I guess this, the follow-up for me in that context is the AUD 500 million anticipated spend for the Mount Weld expansion. Now, given that, that estimate is about a year old at this point, how do you think about, like, the contingency around that budget? Or is that easier for you to control on the upstream side and have confidence around when you're not racing towards a deadline?
Yes, your second point is certainly relevant. I mean, we don't have a requirement there racing towards a deadline to just, you know, sort of, put additional resources on and have more crews, you know, deal with some of the contractor management issues in the way that we've been required to deal with them. It's also a brownfield site, and so, therefore, we face a different set of challenges, but we have a much greater familiarity with what we're doing. In phase one, so we think of, you know, sort of phase one, which is this early works phase, and then phase two. We have had some draw on the, on the contingency.
However, we still have contingency headroom, but the team is currently conducting a further cost review on that as well, to see whether there's going to be any further changes. But it is quite a different set of challenges associated with that project compared to the project in Kalgoorlie.
If I could just sneak, do you know when that cost review will be completed by?
Soon.
Fair enough. Thank you.
One moment for our next question. Our next question will come from Austin Yun of Macquarie. Austin, your line is open.
Morning, Amanda and the team. My first question was also on Kalgoorlie project. I was just wondering, for the remaining capital and also the commissioning costs at Kalgoorlie, how much of the spend has been locked in? As we all know that inflation remains quite sticky, for the next few months or in the very near term. Thank you.
We've spent a lot of time pulling this to pieces and understanding exactly what sits in outstanding purchase orders, what sits within what we think will be claims from contractors and what we see as further costs to completion. So, the amount, which is still at an estimated rather than at an actual level, is quite small within that overall number. I mean, I think everyone would expect that, we're a month or so out. So if we didn't know actually what the costs were now, then that would be problematic.
Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Amanda. And just the second one is on the grants received during the year, which was AUD 15 million. Wondering if you could provide some color on that and how to think about that grant for the next 12 months. Thank you.
So the grant monies just come back in as we actually complete. The grant money at Kalgoorlie was specifically related to one process element, which was the carbonation circuit and a novel flow sheet, which we're implementing there, which I'm not going to share with the world at large, but which is, you know, this, this is granted under a scheme which was for novel development, you know, new initiatives in Australia. So we simply claim that back, and at this stage, I think that we've received about AUD 10 million out of the AUD 14.9 million or thereabouts.
Thank you, Amanda.
Thanks, Austin.
One moment for our next question. Our next question will come from Paul Young of Goldman Sachs. Your line is open, Paul.
Hi, Amanda. Good morning. Hope you're well. Amanda, I'm trying to figure out now with this CapEx increase at Kalgoorlie, what the, you know, total capital outlay could be for Lynas 2025, to achieve the 12,000 tons. So we have the 780 on Kal, but the 500 as it stands today on Mount Weld, and you previously sort of outlaid some, you know, indicated, a modest sort of capital to expand LAMP. And then we have, you know, possible debottlenecking or brownfield CapEx for Kalgoorlie, cracking and leaching and also possible CapEx for the light rare earths refinery in the US. So...
I know you're probably trying to figure out this as well as it stands based on the options, but do you get a sense of what the total capital will be to achieve Lynas 2025?
So we have given guidance within the or in an indication within the financial reports under capital commitments, where we've affirmed an expectation that we will spend AUD 600 million in the year ahead. And we have not provided further data on the following year, but you know, this year still includes Kalgoorlie. It includes you know, sort of the bulk of Mount Weld. It includes the lab you know, sort of activities at the lab, as you've identified. We've disclosed previously that our share of the light rare earths in the U.S. is about $30 million. I expect that that will come into FY 2025 or maybe at the very back end of FY 2024.
But we expect it's about AUD 600 million this year, and it will be something less than that the following year.
Okay. Thanks, Amanda. And then maybe just switching to the U.S. I mean, great update on the, I guess, the, on the U.S., Department of Defense, funding, additional funding, especially with the heavy earth plant. Just curious around the, the heavy earth plant, and, have you thought through, around, will you go downstream steps five and six of the value chain? Will you look at metallization and magnets partnerships there? And how do, how should we think about, you know, the government's involvement in underpinning a, you know, a floor price on the, on the heavy, on, on heavy, on the heavy earths?
So in terms of downstream, Paul, it's a really good question because I think that, you know, this vision to be mine to magnet is actually been around. Paul's not joining us today because he's got some visitors on site in WA, but he sometimes says to me, the first time he saw a PowerPoint slide talking about mine to magnet was in, I think, 1999. Yet we have not achieved it outside of China today. And so there are reasons for this.
The competencies at each of the stages are actually quite different, and it's very easy to say, "Well, let's just do X, or let's just do Y." But frankly, what you need to know and be good at, to be good at mining, is different from what you need to know and be good at, to be good at the chemical processing step, which is essentially what we do, we'll be doing in Kalgoorlie and what we do in Malaysia. And then metallization and magnet making bring in a different set of skills, fundamentally from, you know, you from what you've got in your chemical processing area.
So it is absolutely the sort of thing that you can't just wake up one day and say, "I'm going to be doing this." You need to look for good partners, skilled partners, people with the right sort of technical knowledge and expertise in those areas. What we have done in the U.S. is that we have selected a site where we will be able to accommodate both, you know, further downstream activity and recycling activity. You know, if you have a magnet factory, you need to be able to recycle your scrap, and it's unstable, so you can't be shipping it long distances and those sorts of things.
So we see this as a real opportunity, and we are engaging with, you know, sort of relevant potential partners, which may be a partnership which goes anywhere from supplier, customer partnership through to, some sort of a joint venture, and we are actively engaged in that process as we speak. The success of developing an outside China industry is important for all of us. And, you know, so sometimes, I think that the desire to set up, outside China operators as if they're, you know, sort of competing with each other, when in fact, the main game is China, right? That is our competition. For the rest of us, our success is going to be about building this outside China industry. Otherwise, we simply produce material that ends up going into China for finishing and further value adding.
So I think that we do need to work together in this area, and we are certainly very focused on engaging with relevant, potential partners on further developing downstream activities. And I think the ESG-
Yeah, thanks, Amanda, for that response.
Sorry, I was just gonna say-
Sorry.
and I think the ESG truly understands that. It is part of what drives into things like the, you know, sort of, Inflation Reduction Act. It also, you know, sort of feeds into proposed, you know, sort of tax credits on, on materials produced and otherwise. So, the U.S. government is very focused on, reshoring a number of these areas, and, when the U.S. puts its mind to doing something, I think they have a very good track record.
Yeah. Thanks, Amanda. Sorry, just part B to that, around the pricing, because I know Paul, a while back, said that you're seeing, you're getting only sort of 50% payability or around that number versus sort of, if you call it a benchmark within China and term industry, et cetera. How do you think about pricing of those heavies, with respect to, you know, floor pricing or, or how you should price those?
... So I think that in terms of as we think about the production which is coming out of the Texas facility, clearly the DoD will get first call and it will be done at commercial rates, and so therefore we will capture that additional margin that you've just mentioned, Paul. And then our focus is on ensuring and we are working on this in terms of looking at our feedstock profile as well. If you look at an NdFeB magnet, a high-performance NdFeB magnet, you basically need your DyTb at a rate of about 1 to 10 to your NdPr. So we need to increase the amount of DyTb that we have.
What we will look to do is to work with our customers to optimize the pricing on that, because it will be of great value to our customers to secure not just their NdPr, but also their DyTb in the right ratio.
Okay. Thanks, Amanda. Look forward to seeing you at evolve. Cheers.
Thanks, Paul.
One moment for our next question. Our next question will be coming from Al Harvey of JP Morgan. Your line is open, Al.
Good morning, Amanda and team. Just another one on the CapEx at Kalgoorlie. Sorry, was there a feedback there? Just wanted to understand, CapEx guide, still AUD 600 million for 2024, but we have had that increase at Kalgoorlie. So just wondering if, if there's been a shuffling across the other projects, kind of how we think about, yeah, the, the AUD 600 million spend across the, across the, the different projects.
So I think that if you look at this and Gaudenz can come in as well, but we're really talking about often when we're talking about cash, CapEx, it's really sort of what we see in terms of cash. And as I said, with some of those capitalized pre-commissioning and commissioning costs, that cash has already been seen through. And so at 30 June in the accounts, we've got AUD 600 million cash out. So we... Yes, there is. I mean, I think that there's always a little bit of balancing. As it turns out, some of what we're doing in the LAMP's costs us a bit less than we originally thought that it was going to cost us. Some other projects we haven't commenced yet.
Ultimately, the amount that you're yet to spend in a year can sometimes also be determined by your ability to actually spend. So if you think about AUD 600 million in a year, that's an awful lot of dollars every single week. So we are confident that that is the number that we will be able to spend, both based on the projects and our ability to execute. Bit of reshuffling, but not substantive.
Sure. Thanks, Amanda. Just onto LAMP, just note the High Courts recently ruled to grant judicial proceedings to progress your licensing appeal. Just want to get a sense of what the next timing milestones might be there that we can look out for.
Sure. So we lodged the two judicial review applications the end of last month, and the first hearings in front of judges were last week, and that's where we were given leave to appeal. I think Sarah's on the call, and she can add to this, but... No? Oh, okay. We had some problems getting Sarah connected, so I'll just cover this myself then. So the next step is that there will be a hearing of substantive matters, and I think perhaps in the first week of September, Daniel. Then it will move through from there. I think, as we've said previously, we're very confident about our position. We don't actually have a great appetite to be in the courts. This is something that we would much rather be...
She's just sent me a note, directions hearing on the third of September. So, we don't have a great appetite to be in the courts. We would rather actually deal with this with the regulator and the government on a sensible, evidence-based basis. However, you know, we are compelled in this instance to move through this judicial review process, and we are very confident about the grounds on which we have made the application.
Thanks, Amanda. And just finally on the Mount Weld capacity expansion, I just wanted to get an update on how the progress of the apatite processing circuit's going. If you've got any update there.
It may be better for me to get the team to have a conversation with you separately on that. Yes, we are. There are, because there are a couple of different parts associated with it. We've got one which is pre-leach, which allows us to improve our recoveries post the floating off some of the apatite. And then there's a second piece, which as we go through the ore body in deeper into the ore body, we have more apatite rich ore, and there's a second set of activities associated with that. But I think maybe the best thing would be to get somebody to take you through that in a bit more detail because it is quite complex.
Sure. Thanks, Amanda.
One moment for our next question. The next question will be coming from Reg Spencer of Canaccord. Reg, your line is open.
Good morning, Amanda and team. Thank you very much. I should start. Thank you very much for all the detail around the CapEx. That's very helpful. I was wondering if I could ask a question around OpEx, given inflationary pressures that we are seeing on CapEx. Are you in a position to comment or provide some guidance or how we should think about the operating cost of Kalgoorlie? Or is that something we might have to wait a little bit for?
Okay. I got a little bit of interference on there, but, we have, actually, I did sort of mention this earlier, Reg, that, that, we do have a profile on, on the operating cost of Kalgoorlie. And, it's a lot less than the first draft, which would not surprise you. As I said, we're very focused on ensuring that we keep our cost muscle, even with the addition of the third site. Having said that, this year, when we are, going to be running three plants, and not yet able to confidently put in the additional downstream, there will be some, cost penalties associated with that. We're not going to be able to form a final view on that until we've actually got this plant up and running. It is much larger.
We've got headroom. All of these things sort of help to improve the efficiency of the material moving through the plant. On the other hand, we have some quite significant landside logistics penalties associated with some of the imported reagents, like, you know, MgO and those sorts of things. And so, you know, the team is currently working on what are better solutions than handling the same material three different times, you know, before it actually gets to the plant. And that should allow us to be able to get some further cost optimization in that area. But I don't think that we can give you good guidance on this until we've actually got the plant up and running, and we see how, you know, and we start that optimization process on the costs.
Understood. Thanks very much, Amanda. Another question would be around Malaysia. I know it's difficult for you to give us a timeline on when we might expect an outcome of the judicial review. But if I could put something to you on a best case scenario here, if the review was found in your favor and you were able to continue to crack and leach indefinitely in Malaysia, you would then have what, like 17,000 or 18,000 tons per annum of cracking and leaching capacity. Under a best case scenario, you know, how might we think about that review being found in your favor, or is it just far too early for you to speculate on that?
Under a best case scenario, yes, we have approval to continue to operate in Malaysia. Under a best case scenario, we then would make commitments and decisions related to upsizing the downstream capability. And I think at the last quarterly call, Paul actually talked about, you know, we have an opportunity to consider how to revamp our SX and in particular, but also invest in further product finishing capability in Malaysia, which would allow us to get an uplift in capacity there. Which is why we are confident about making the step to the 9,000 tonnes of Kalgoorlie, because, you know, we will be able to uplift further the downstream capacity at the most appropriate time. The other thing to note is that there are rare earth carbonate.
So we're not sort of concerned that we will add additional capacity, but we sell that if we're not able to process it ourselves. And of course, finally, the Mixed Rare Earth Carbonate feedstock will be going through to the U.S. facility. So yeah, it will be a very big celebration if we have both of the facilities operating. But if not, we have a variety of different pathways to ensure that we optimize the capacity which is available to us.
... You kind of answered my question there, Amanda. In that, you know, where would you locate further separation finishing capacity? Because that would appear to be the bottleneck relative to your cracking and leaching capacity. So you're suggesting that if it went all your way, that would likely be placed subject to FID and studies and so on and so forth, in Malaysia and not somewhere else?
It could be in Malaysia. The facility in Kalgoorlie certainly has all of the utilities and scope to be able to increase selectively the amount of, you know, the type of activities that we undertake there. It is not something on which we've spent a huge amount of time as we race to meet our current deadline. You know, once we've got this part of the plan up and running, we will review that, and we will compare all of the relevant locations. And then, you know, we are building a factory in Texas, which will do solvent extraction and product finishing, both the heavies and lights.
So we do have options, and I think right back, Reg, to what I was saying at the beginning, it's like a jigsaw puzzle, and sometimes we're sort of moving the pieces around and maybe snipping off an edge here and there to make sure that they fit. But we are confident that we have all of the right elements, and just as each of these different things fall into place, most importantly, the Malaysian license, we will make decisions on the subsequent investment profile.
That's good. Thanks very much, Amanda.
Thanks, Reg.
One moment for our next question. Our next question will come from Regan Burrows of Bell Potter. Your line is open.
Thank you. Good morning, Amanda and team. Thanks for the time this morning. Just a couple of questions from me. I might just start with a broad one, just in terms of production and sales. I think on the quarterly call, you sort of guided to roughly 10%-15% of inventory stockpiling over the next couple of quarters. Just thinking whether your thought on this has changed, and I guess to the full FY 2024, are we sort of to interpret, I guess, production sort of down and sales sort of up a little bit with that inventory volumes? I guess, just how should we sort of look at it?
The first six months of this year has its fair share of challenges, Regan, as we potentially transition across from, you know, to the Kalgoorlie facility being the primary feedstock for Malaysia. You know, I think everybody knows that there is clearly risk as we start up the facility and the speed at which that ramp-up will occur. We believe that the level of experience that we have in operating a cracking and leaching facility will stand us in good stead. But nonetheless, it is a large and complex plant, and I think everyone would know that it would be imprudent of us not to be planning for, you know, as we've described previously, various scenarios.
You know, sort of a best possible and, you know, at the other limit, you know, sort of a slow ramp up. And you know, we have the tools to allow us to make assessments on that. So the inventory build, particularly in the six months, is to ensure that we do two things, you know. We don't unnecessarily sell into a weak market, but B, we also carry inventory just in case there are unforeseen delays as we ramp up the facility. So there is in across this financial year, clearly, as we make the transition, as Reg has, Reg just said, if we get things resolved appropriately in Malaysia, then we've got upside.
If we don't, then, yes, it's likely to be, you know, that we will have some pressures on production, which is once again why we think that it's prudent to build the inventory.
All right, thank you for that. And just potentially changing tact and I guess, tackling it from a different angle, but the capital expenditure at Kalgoorlie, I remember speaking to Gaudenz. There was some sort of tax, I guess, shields that could have been applied to that under the COVID-19, sort of era rules. Just sort of curious whether you were able to sort of capitalize on, on any of those.
Gaudenz, do you want to take that question?
Everybody, so am I online? Yes. Okay, good. So I think that's actually specific to tax and tax consideration. I think there was kind of this setup in place for Australia, kind of COVID related, that you could take an advantage on, kind of, on the when, when to recognize the tax depreciation of the assets, kind of, in one go, if you could, if they were put in place before the end of June. And I think we have a couple of assets, obviously, which qualify.
I think it's a little bit different between accounting approach and tax approach, so we are working that through. And we will know. We need to finalize this before we obviously hand in our tax declaration before the end of this calendar year. But I think here, it's not P&L impact. It's really more a cash impact on when you pay the taxes. So if you can kind of pull forward the tax shield at this point in time, or if you spread it over the life of the assets. So that's the only impact. It's purely a timing impact.
All right, thanks for that answer. Potentially just one more, if I could squeeze in. Just in terms of the 9,000-ton capacity increase, just confirming that's 9,000 tons of separated NdPr. So I guess from an MREC product perspective, we should think of that as roughly 15,000 tons capacity?
We can confirm that at some other stage, Regan, but yes, we think about the capacity in terms of finished product.
Yeah.
So you see, if you want to-
I'll leave that.
Okay. Yeah.
Yeah. I'll, I'll leave it there. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
One moment for our next question. Our next question will be coming from Daniel Morgan of Barrenjoey. Your line's open.
Thank you, Amanda and team. In the releases, you talk about scope of 9,000 tons per annum of NdPr at Kalgoorlie. But this compares to back in 2019, when you announced Lynas 2025, that you were targeting 10,500 tons per annum of NdPr. Is the gap between... Is that proposed to be the U.S. plant? Is there gonna be a cracking and leaching circuit there, or, you know, what is the difference between those numbers? Thank you.
No. Sorry, the 9,000 is what we will now be able to crack at Kalgoorlie. So it is higher-
And so the 10.5?
Sorry, where are we getting-
I was referring to...
Sorry. I'm sorry.
Apologies, I keep interrupting. In 2019, Lynas 2025, I think you announced that you would build system capacity of 10,500 tons per annum of NdPr.
Yes, and all the way back then, there was no at that stage, we did not face any constraints on continuing to operate cracking in Malaysia. So the first change to the license in Malaysia, which saw us not, you know, which was foreshadowed in August 2019, and that Lynas 2025 was, I think, May 2019. But the license didn't actually change until March 2020. So right back when we said that 10.5, we were working on a different set of assumptions in terms of what we had. And in fact, all the way back then, I think we were thinking about, you know, sort of nameplate capacity at Kalgoorlie in the first instance of maybe about 3.5-4,000 tons.
So then we got the change to the license, and that's when, you know, Grant and team had to go back and really rethink, what were we doing at Kalgoorlie, how were we sizing it, and how were we going to be able to ensure that it met our requirements in the medium and long term? And that's when we then changed, sort of, the first goal there was to, at a minimum, be able to replace Malaysia, bearing in mind that, you know, by now, we were on a 2.5-year sort of ticking timeline. But as we've moved through, and as indicated in previous disclosures, we've made the additional investments to give us confidence in being able to get this 9,000 tons.
Now, you're right, and a number of you have highlighted that that's still not at the 10.5 and not at the 12 that we're actually putting in place in Mount Weld. But we still have, you know, some way to go in terms of our discussions in Malaysia. Cracking will not be a bottleneck if we can get this resolved appropriately in Malaysia. But, you know, I mean, there's been a number of things have moved through this sort of 4-year period, and what we've been trying to do is to ensure that as we make our investments, we give ourselves optionality, so that still by 2025, we have at least 10.5, and hopefully more, 12,000 tons of NdPr capacity.
Okay, thank you. I'm going to leave it there in the interest of time. Thanks, Amanda.
Thanks, Dan.
One moment for our next question. Okay. Our last question will come from Paul Young of Goldman Sachs. Your line is open, Paul.
Hi again, Amanda. Just a few follow-ups on the U.S. refinery, please. First, just on the heavy rare earths refinery, when do you expect to award EPCM contracts and actually start construction?
So, we have already identified an EPCM partner with whom we've been working for some time. In fact, in the next, they've been to Kuantan on at least one occasion and are there again in the next couple of weeks for a 2-week period, because we have a number of our Malaysian engineers who will also engage in on this project. And so that's the, you know, sort of the first point. Yes, we've identified an EPCM partner and also a construction firm. The second piece is that we have started with the NEPA approval process, and that's going to determine when we're able to commence construction.
Okay. Thanks, Amanda. And then just the second one on the light rare earth refinery. What is the latest—what is the last capital estimate for the 5,000? And, are you, do you expect to update that estimate?
We are finalizing. It's interesting with always when you deal with dealing with government. So there is one contracting body for the heavies and a second contracting body for the lights. We are finalizing contract discussions with the entities, that is, the contracting entity for the lights, and we would expect to be updating what we would say that once those negotiations are complete.
Okay. And that, that would be in FY 2024?
Ah, yes.
Okay, great. Okay. Thank you, Amanda. Appreciate it.
Thanks, Paul. Thanks.
I would now like to hand the conference back to Amanda for closing remarks.
Okay. So once again, thank you, all. It's, as I said, we live in interesting times, and we at Lynas are very pleased that we've been able to meet many of our challenges. I look forward to being able to take you all on either an in-person or a virtual tour of our fabulous new facility at Kalgoorlie, because it really is very impressive. We face the future with enthusiasm and optimism, but those of you who know me would know that I face everything with enthusiasm and optimism. But I think that we remain in the best place to really be match fit to take full advantage of the growth in this market. So thanks, and I'll look forward to seeing many of you over the next few days.
This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.