Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by and welcome to the Whitehaven Coal June Quarter Production Report conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. There'll be a presentation followed by a question-and-answer session, at which time, if you wish to ask a question, you'll need to press star one on your telephone. I must advise you that this conference is being recorded today, and I'd now like to hand the conference over to your host, Paul Flynn, MD and CEO of Whitehaven Coal. Thank you. Please go ahead, Paul.
Good morning. Thank you very much, everybody, for taking the time to participate in the June 2021 Quarter Production Report for Whitehaven. I hope you're all safe and well from your various locations and some of you outside the state, I'm sure, being able to travel a little bit more freely than those of us who are here in New South Wales. Look, I'm thinking that this quarterly report won't be particularly long in the sense that, given the amount of time we've been discussing the progress of operations with you over the last six months, these numbers are probably not too far from your expectations already. So I'll just go through the highlights as usual, then we'll get onto the individual lines and get to the Q&A.
In terms of the highlights for the quarter, the June quarter managed ROM production at 5.4 million tonnes is certainly a solid result. We'll get into the details of that. The June quarter managed saleable coal production at 3.8. Our quarter total managed sales at 5.4. Our managed owned sales at 4. And then the equity cut of that at 3.7 and 3.2, respectively. The managed ROM in total for the group was 20.6 million tonnes for the year. Maules Creek had a very good year and finished the year in fine form at 12.7. The managed tonnes for sales at 19.8, including the 2 million tonnes of purchased coal, with our equity tonnes being at 14.4. Healthy stocks at the end of the year at 3.3 million tonnes.
From a COVID perspective, we haven't had any cases since the start of COVID, which is great to be able to report to you, but given the circumstances, we are continuing to operate under the distancing and hygiene requirements that we've seen in recent times and have in fact reinitiated a further suite of measures, which we probably haven't seen for six months now, but have been reinstalled, and then, of course, guidance and so on will give you in a month's time when we come to the full year results. From a safety perspective, our TRIFR for the year at 5.86 is actually a little worse than what it was last year, which is unfortunate. We had a bunch of sites there on zero TRIFR as well, which have had a number of small incidents, which affects these numbers to some degree.
That's not great, but we certainly are seeing good numbers at CHPP and Rocglen rehabilitation operations doing 3,000 days without incidents. So that's fantastic news, but again, further effort required in this regard. The managed totals and equity totals are set out across the page for you. Again, as I say, the managed ROM at 5.4, obviously somewhat higher at a 3.7 from the previous corresponding period of FY22. The year-on-year totals, you can see, are quite consistent with where we've been in the previous year. So the balance for the year almost lines up well. Managed saleable coal production at 3.8 versus 6.2. Again, this is a function of the difference in the June quarter of the last year. The totals themselves are 7% down, 16.9 versus 18.1. Purchased coal, I'm sorry, managed sales for produced coal, 4 million tonnes, versus 5.2, similarly affected in the same way.
But again, the totals, 2% difference, 17.77 versus 17.5. Purchased coal during the period in total, 2 million tonnes, versus 2.4, 16% down. And total managed coal sales at 4.5 versus 5.7 for the quarter, and 19.8 versus 19.9, 1% difference for the full year. Moving over to, I won't go through the equity coal production for you, but moving over to a table which I know everyone loves to look at, quarter-on-quarter analysis of our realized pricing and the indices for the period. When we look at our total coal sales, equity coal sales, sorry, 3.7 versus 4 for the last quarter, we can say 2 million tonnes has been relatively consistently spread over the course of the whole financial year. Our high CV tonnes, in terms of proportions, is 61%, up from 53% over the last quarter. The other thermal sales are about lineball at 27%.
And then, of course, the difference being spread between a lower contribution from the metallurgical coal sales during this quarter. Pricing at 109% has obviously stepped up from the 89% that we saw in the previous corresponding quarter. Semi-soft is flat, basically, on a quarterly basis, but the spot price has improved, and we suspect this lagging index will show benefit in the next quarter. Overall, from our achieved tonnes, we've got 94% for the thermal coal versus 76% on our previous quarter, met coal at 103% versus 92%. So in terms of realizations, the thermal for that total of all our thermal coal across the board being our premium quality products and also the mid-CV, there's a 14% discount versus the 15% that we reported in the previous corresponding period.
Metallurgical coal sales relative to the JFY quarter is about 10% up, but relative to the spot price is about 5% down, which is about where it normally is. I'm moving over to the commentary here just on page three. For everybody, again, the sales numbers I won't go through again because everyone has seen that. Clearly, the market is signified by a pretty strong underlying demand at $109 at the GC NEWC average for the period, up 23% on March, so about the $89 there that we quoted. So very good underlying demand. We can certainly see that our customers are definitely pressuring the market for more supply. There have been some disruptions, as you know, at various individual mines and then also from an infrastructure perspective through Newcastle as well. Although we hope to see that normalize in relatively short term.
Significant rises, obviously, over the period in coal prices, but our average of, in terms of our realizations for the June quarter at $94 versus an indexed average of 109% is reflective of a couple of different things. Certainly, we'll try to break it out for you here in explaining what the differences are. About 50% of our thermal coal book is priced on prior periods, so this is a lagging. In fact, these are long-term contracts generally, so you'll see the benefit of that lag come through in the subsequent quarter. So it really is just a timing element in that sense. We do have 20% of our thermal coal sales are priced sub-GC Newcastle. this is affected by the full spectrum coal that we've been talking about at Maules Creek to some degree, and we would certainly want to see that normalize over the coming quarters.
Metallurgical coal sales at 12% is pretty modest, and I think we're well accustomed to the idea that the semi market isn't looking particularly exciting for us. It hasn't been for some time, and it's far preferable for us to use our high-quality thermal and gain the freedom to sell units of the thermal market itself. Again, all this, the summary of this is probably not news to you, given that we've all been watching the market dynamics and enjoying the benefits of a tight market. Onto the sites themselves. Maules Creek has rounded out the year in good form. So 3.7 versus 4.1 for the ROM coal production for the quarter. The saleable tonne is about the same, about 4%, 2.6 versus 2.7 for the quarter. Sales of our saleable coal is about 2.6 versus 2.3, 12% up.
Healthy stocks there at the end of the period were 2.3, which bodes well in this good price environment to turn that into cash in the coming quarters. Overall, a pretty solid result from Maules Creek hitting its straps, demonstrating the capacity of this mine to deliver very closely this year to its approved limit, which is very good to see. The mine's definitely running in good form, and we continue to see positive opportunities for improvement there as we go through the year. The sales volumes for the quarter are 2.6 for Maules itself, and for FY21, 9.96 in total. Significant jumps above our previous corresponding period at 22%, better than the previous corresponding period. Overall, very good result, and keen to see that continue to run.
As I mentioned, the coal stocks are at good levels, and unwinding that into this new year, we'll certainly see good cash in relation at good prices. And then just to note, obviously, ROM at Werris Creek hit 1.1 million tonnes during June, so which is very good for us to be able to demonstrate the capacity of the line to achieve the sorts of volumes that we'd like to send down there from Werris Creek in particular. Onto Narrabri. The tonnes in Narrabri, as everybody understands, are understandably modest, at 350,000 tonnes, period on period. Obviously, a big change at 2.6 versus in the previous period, but I think this is not new news from anyone's perspective in terms of how Narrabri's performance has been going.
But a lot of the repairs have been done during the course of the latter last few months of production at Narrabri, and it's nice to say that we're on the back end of the difficult areas now and moving into more normalized production as we speak. Very positively, we did drill out the back end of 109, and there was no further structure identified there, which would be the cause of any concern for us now. So our focus really now is just completing this panel over this quarter and moving on to our change-out in early in the second quarter.
In terms of the sales, just to go through the metrics of that, saleable coal production at 300,000 tonnes, obviously significantly below where we've been in the past, and the managed sales volumes for the quarter at 600,000 tonnes again at low, and the full year at 4.5 reflects the saleable coal production profile, and obviously offset partially by the drawdown of stocks in the period. Next, longwall change-out, as I said, early Q2, FY22, which we're keen to obviously move into that when the opportunity for full overhauls will be done during the course of that seven-week period and move into 110 under a more normalised operating scenario. From the Gunnedah open-cuts perspective, the numbers are there. I'll go straight into Tarawonga.
Tarawonga, obviously, a lot of coal came out, 800,000 tonnes, lined up pretty much with what it did last year for a total of 2.25 versus 2.35 for the full year. Saleable coal production at 470,000 tonnes versus 600,000 in the previous corresponding period, 1.9 versus 2 million for the previous corresponding period. Stocks about the same as where we were last year, 400,000 versus 429,000. Overall, Tarawonga's had a reasonable year. It has been weather-affected to the extent both Werris Creek and Tarawonga have certainly experienced well higher than average rainfall during the course of both the March and the June quarters, but despite that, have turned in a solid performance for the year. Werris Creek numbers, 600,000 versus 694,000, 574,000 versus 692,000, so 6.7 million, 17% difference there. Saleable coal production at 415,000 tonnes versus 472,000 for the quarter, rounding out the year at 1.7 versus 1.4 million, 22% up.
Coal stocks there at just under 400,000 tonnes versus about 550,000 for the previous corresponding period. Again, operations here have been pretty solid during the course of the year as the open-cut mines have been able to run well during this period. But again, we have been weather-affected in the last two quarters, which slowed things down a little bit. But despite that, I think the operations of our open-cut mines have been doing nicely as we've been obviously resolving the challenges of Maules Creek in the background. From the logistics perspective, I think everybody understands there have been some constraints, obviously, through the system this year, which is not the most ideal. Repair work on SL2 is proceeding ahead of plan, and we are actually anticipating that we would see this operational early in the September quarter, or in September, I should say. So that's looking very good.
Early in the quarter is maybe a little bit. I know the testing is going on currently, but let's see how that goes, so either which way, we're going to have definitely adaptive capacity back in the system in September. Weather, again, has played a bit of a role here just on the logistics front as well. That wet weather that we've experienced at site certainly has manifested itself in some high seas which, as you've already noticed, shuts the port down periodically. Annoyingly, that did happen quite a bit in the last couple of months of the year, in fact, as everyone's trying to get their tonnes through the port infrastructure, which was not what we wanted at the time, but it is what it is.
Overall, the guidance and the actual outcomes there for you, you're only missing pieces of that puzzle, as you can see there, is obviously cost, and our cost guides remain AUD 74, as we mentioned in our previous discussions. I'll just go to development projects. Vickery is moving forward in its assessment process. There's nothing particularly noteworthy that we should draw to your attention there. There is, of course, a process now by which the whole of government report is produced prior to any entry into the IPC system. We think that we will be going to the IPC, although we haven't been formally notified of that by the government, but all our responses and submissions have gone in, and we look forward to receiving the whole of government report in due course.
Vickery project has had an interesting development during the course of the last quarter with the injunction against the minister having been defeated, but with the court acknowledging the existence of a duty of care that the minister owes to the applicants in this case. So what that means is that the minister can approve the project, and our expectations are that still that will be the case. But in doing so, the minister will need to evidence the consideration of the duty that the court has acknowledged. At the same time, the minister also has registered their intent to appeal this decision, so we look forward to seeing the basis of that appeal tabled and pursued through the court.
Of course, this is not just about Vickery, but any project that has a greenhouse gas footprint is obviously going to be impacted by this, so the government's definitely minded to want to solve this one. From a Winchester South perspective, nothing particularly noteworthy during the course of the quarter, other than to say that we've pretty much finished our part in terms of the adequacy assessment that the Queensland Government has performed. And so we are waiting now. We expect within next month to actually enter the period of public exhibition for the project, which would be very welcome. Now, I just want to part, which I'm sure is going to be the subject of some Q&A in terms of how the market is going.
The market continues to be very strong, and we've seen, I suppose, energy in all forms: coal, obviously, gas, and oil, all improving during the course of the last six months in particular. And the market certainly feels very strong and tight. High-quality coal, very hard to get your hands on. The 5,500 market for the API 5 certainly has improved significantly during the period, and those numbers are looking much better, which is a challenge to reinforce the notion that, obviously, the whole coal complex is tight. But that's what happens when you have no new supply and demand lifts, so that's for certainly the benefit of that. And months ago, we were about $142, I think, on the thermal coal price, which is going to translate nicely, certainly, into cash generation for this quarter.
We'll note that the coal sales, importantly, have certainly improved, and you've seen a big change there in higher pricing from approximately $110 for quite some time through $200 now in the June quarter, so we are looking to see a backward-looking index for the JFY or JSM semi-soft price when next settled, reflecting a better position than the $93, which it currently is at.
Obviously, at that level, everybody will understand that we're not particularly motivated to sell too much coal at $93 when we can get $140 plus for selling that high-quality thermal, so with that, obviously, guidance for 2022 will come out in a month's time when we discuss the full year financials with you, but with the information that we've given you today, those numbers, as I say, the physicals should be well understood. And I'd like to hand back now to the operator to open up the Q&A session.
Thank you, Paul. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question and answer session. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you need to cancel your request, please press the pound or hash key. Our first question comes from the line of Rahul Anand at Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Hi, Paul and Team. Thanks for the opportunity. Can I please ask two questions? The first one is around washing. Just wanted to understand, you've obviously had some delays in the saleable coal side driven by more tons being washed this time. Would we see the washing levels come off or become lesser in the future as the coal quality in Narrabri improves? That's the first question. Or are we at normalized levels of washing as we stand? And then the second question is around the longwall move at Narrabri. Seems to be a quarter later than before from 1Q to 2Q now. Just if you could provide an update on that mine and how things are going and what's led to that delay. Thanks.
Thanks, Rahul. Can I just qualify the first thing with that question? So the washing percentage, is that a Maules Creek-related question that you were asking, or is that washing more generally across the business?
More generally across the business because my thinking was perhaps you're washing a bit more to offset some of the poor quality at Maules Creek, and whether that changes once the quality improves there.
Yep. Thanks, Rahul. Yep, I think that's certainly good to know two pieces of that question. And just a reminder, everyone, that I have the rest of the team here. Fiona's on the phone, Kevin's on the phone, and Sarah Withey is here as well. So I'll move that around as required. In terms of washing across the business overall, you're absolutely right. We are washing more. We're actually washing more as a business, as you know, particularly at Maules Creek, where we've put in place a three-product strategy. And when you have a big wash plant and you've been paid good premiums for a washed thermal product, then you should use that capacity. And so that's what we're definitely doing that. So there's a little bit of that in that sense.
But as you can see, even though, as I mentioned, the 5,500 market has improved quite considerably off the lows that it was a year ago, and we're certainly back to September now. And so everyone is motivated to put as much coal as they can into the high end of the market and therefore washing more. But that bottom end of the market actually is quite healthy now. So I think you may see people start to wash a little bit less. In our instance, that's not the case, though. We'll definitely continue to wash a little bit more. So there is a small yield impact that goes along with that proportionately across the business. But it does lock in those better prices.
Even though the 5,500 coal sort of is around about the mid-$80s at the moment, which is pretty good, $140 sounds a whole lot better if you can wash it compared to something at the higher end of the market. So we will continue to do that. And as you point out, as a group, as Maules Creek has produced quite a bit of fault-affected coal in the area, we are using, obviously, our blending stock across our business to move that out of the lower end of the market into the mid or up, if it's possible, into the mid to the market as required. In terms of longwall move, yes, it has moved. It has moved. In line with the revisions to the guidance, obviously, that implies a slower production rate through that faulted area.
So definitely by Ginter, that, of course, the longwall moves out to the right. And so that definitely has happened, but that was already implied in the guidance that we've given you on this, and these numbers have just really confirmed that. So yeah, that's not obviously what we would have liked, but that is what it is. And we are cutting in a much more orderly fashion now outside of both the faulted area and the known area, the dyke area that was there as well. And the equipment is performing better, although obviously we're looking forward to getting to Ginter, the panel, given that this one has been wrestling with us a little bit. I don't know, Ian, if there's anything else that you wanted to add from that in terms of how Narrabri is currently operating.
Yeah, thanks, Paul. I might go back to the first point about washing and just add a little bit more context to what we experienced at Maules Creek. We were in the lower seams, which is new to us, getting to the bottom of the pit to accelerating pit dumping. We found that the lower seams, there was a positive upside there. They were slightly thicker than we anticipated, but the interburdens between the seams didn't present as we had expected.
We opted to take, I guess, the bottom three seams effectively as one, and that required some more washing to remove that parting out of there. Building on the Narrabri question, so yes, we are out of the fault that we talked about and the dyke-affected zone. We've undertaken all of the major maintenance known to us, and now we anticipate completing the rest of this block under normal conditions.
Just one follow-up there from me, Ian, if I can. In terms of the interburden that you just talked about at Maules, is that something that's expected to continue, or do you expect the interburden to become smaller as you progress through that seam or through the bottom end of the mine?
We think it's probably more localized in the southwest corner of the pit that we've seen and working on. We are doing further drilling to better understand the bottom seams, but I think that that, I guess, upside and the thinning of the interburdens there is probably more local in those seams in that southwest corner.
Okay, perfect. That's very helpful. Thank you, Team. I'll pass it on.
Our next question comes from Paul Young at Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.
Thanks. Morning, Paul, Kevin, and Ian. First of all, I've got a few questions on inventory and cash flow. Paul, you've ended the quarter with a similar sort of inventory level that you did this time last year. And last year, we didn't have any infrastructure constraints that I can remember, and you managed to unwind your inventory by a couple of million tons over the September quarter. Now, the Ship Loader 2 doesn't start up, I think you said, fully until beginning of September. So I just want to ask that question again around how quickly you think you can draw down your inventory by that couple of million tons and unwind that working cap.
Yeah, thanks, Paul. Look, it's definitely a healthy stock, so we want to process as much as we can. I think with the second ship loader up and running, I think we'll definitely see us being able to accelerate the drawdown of our stocks. We can, obviously, do as much as we can of that in cash, but we're also producing at solid levels as well. Now, in the short term, of course, in this quarter, we will start the wind down for the change-out period. So even though the change-out falls now into early Q2, we do wind down, as you know, with a bolt-up process towards the end of this panel.
So, as production through there, there will be an opportunity to swing the trains into Maules Creek, say, for instance, and pick up that healthy run rate that we've had in shipping that you saw when I quoted there in the June month itself. So we want to pull that back down as soon as we can. But the stock levels really are, as I say, a function of a lot of coal coming out in that last quarter. You can see just the smaller mines have done the same. Maules Creek has had a very healthy period as well, although not only not large like it did in the previous corresponding year in terms of production through the quarter, particularly in that last month.
So I won't put the exact time on it in terms of the full drawdown. We want to pull that down and convert into cash as quickly as we can while we've got a healthy price.
Okay. All right. Then moving on to pricing, Paul, I know you called out Taipower has been aggressive in the market on cargoes. I'm curious about just the, I guess, the terms that you can sell to Taiwan on. What's the pricing lag on selling high-quality coal to Taiwan? And then also Korea. I mean, the Koreans were aggressive in the market at the lows in September quarter of last year, locking in six-month, 12-month contracts. Can you now go out to the Koreans and what comes around goes around and lock in high prices for six months with the Koreans at the moment?
Yeah, Paul, look, we only pulled out one, but I have to say that that sort of behavior is pretty consistent across the market. Everybody's looking for more coal, so it's not just Taipower and Taiwan. It's definitely the Koreans are doing it, so there's healthy tendering. I can only imagine, or I can only say to you that they thought that this would moderate six to nine months ago, and so the activity was lower during the COVID period, you can imagine, and then that seems to have turned quite dramatically. We're also getting requests to bring cargoes forward from our Japanese customers as well, so that's certainly indicating that everybody's a little short and that more coal is required, but I think that's consistent with general activity dipping at the same time, so prices are healthy.
As I mentioned, the API 5 number, you can all see that number. That's certainly looking a lot healthier than what it was. The Korean market's in between that and obviously the GCU. So yeah, we're keen to lock that in as soon as we can. The Korean market, generally, unless they're individual discrete cargoes, they're generally a year in tenure, those sales. So it won't be six months, as you mentioned, to the extent that we've got some tons in there. Unless they're discrete cargoes, which some of the tenders are at the moment, where they've got short-term issues, they're generally a year in duration.
Yeah. Thanks, Paul. Last question from me, just a high-level one. How's the discussion going leading into the August results with respect to the balance sheet metrics versus capital returns into the future and also growth CapEx? I'm just really curious about, is a discussion being had around announcing new balance sheet metrics, more conservative balance sheet metrics with the August results?
Yeah, thanks, Paul. I mean, that discussion is live, as you can imagine, that being the case. Obviously, the outlook is pretty good in terms of cash generation for the business. I think we've reported consistently throughout the course of the last 18 months, in fact. Our balance sheet has been largely static during this whole COVID period. And certainly going through the calendar 2020, we anticipated being able to deliver significantly during that period, and we certainly weren't able to do that. And then, of course, the occurrence of the challenges at Maules Creek also curtailed our ability to deliver for a period. Having said that, you're quite right to point out that conversation must be quite active now, given that Maules Creek production has returned to normal and that we've got a healthy market here in which to sell our coal into.
So I won't really front-run the discussion that management is having with the board, but I agree with you. Conservative is good. We're looking to put ourselves in a position where, as I say, we would have otherwise delivered significantly during this last period, even on reasonable coal prices, but COVID put paid to that. We want to make sure that we get back on that trajectory and get the debt down.
That's great. Thanks, Paul.
Ladies and gentlemen, just a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone. Our next question comes from Paul McTaggart at Citigroup. Please go ahead.
Morning, Paul. So look, I just wanted to circle back to that issue around the washing at Maules. So in the quarter, obviously, the interburden was washing yields to be low. I think the yield loss was about 35%. Over the course of the year, it was 25%. So how should we think, on the presumption it's only localized, should we be getting back to 25% for the year ahead? I mean, historically, yield loss was lower than that. How should we think about yield loss for Maules going forward?
Yeah, thanks, Paul. You should be using that 25%, that would be fine to revert back to that. As Ian predicted, you think there's a localized impact in that southwestern corner of the lease, and that obviously is adjacent to what was the outcrop in that area. So it seems these things are coming together and pushing against the feature there on that side of the pit. So 25% should be fine, I think, overall from a Maules Creek perspective.
Is that assuming, at my recollection from the old days, was that the expectation was yield losses would be lower than that, that 25%? Is that assuming a decent portion of net semi-soft?
Yeah, not so much that, Paul. So I did make the comment earlier about the three-product strategy at Maules Creek. That was the canvas for washing more. When the market, after we tested the market strongly with Maules Creek coal and the convergence of the semi-soft prices being relatively flattering for the last couple of years, we flipped over into a period where we said, "Look, we have washing capacity. Let's use more of that washing capacity to lock in the premiums on the thermal side in particular." So at that time, when you would have saw broadly about 20%, it actually was, they stepped up to 25% in order to utilize more of that capacity in an effort to lock those premiums into the thermal product rather than selling a variety of products which had different yield outcomes.
Okay. Thanks, Paul.
Our next question comes from the line of Peter O'Connor from Shaw and Partners. Please go ahead.
Hey, Paul, Kevin, Ian. A couple of questions. Firstly, with regards to the last question on stocking, can you remind us, Paul or Kevin, how much surplus capacity you have in the rail and the port system? Firstly. Secondly, Vickery, can the minister approve Vickery whilst they're appealing last week's update? And thirdly, Narrabri, why seven weeks for the changeover? I think I know the answer, but I just wanted to articulate why. How many weeks did you actually produce coal, or were you down, if that's a better way to put it, during the quarter? And when will we get results for Geosensing inbye longwall and outbye longwall?
I think that's four questions.
About six, actually, but I've got more to come as well.
Okay. Yep. I generally need three questions in one Zoom meeting, but okay, let's go. Port capacity. It's actually port capacity is okay. Once we get back up with the SL2, we're definitely going back and forth there. The commentary I made there before was really railing in terms of the railing that we quoted there in June. Someone must be tapping away on their computer, I think, in the background, and so we think that there's no constraints in order to be able to draw down the stock the way we look at it, so if you're annualizing that, that's about a Mt. So that was essentially going to be 12.8 Mt. That's no problem at all, given that we've actually run tonnes at 12.7 for the year.
Obviously, the sale of the piece of which your rail, obviously, is after the yield adjustment has been made, as we just talked about, so we're not worried about that in that regard, Kevin, so we'll be able to push that through, absent any other nuances. The ag sector is obviously, in our area, the line is the major draw on the line other than us, and that seems quite manageable at the moment, so that's not giving us headaches. The appeal, what to do during the period of appeal, we think it's very positive that the government signaled their intent here to move ahead with the appeal. They think this is a pretty untidy outcome from their perspective.
I've said before, I think it's a strange outcome, this judgment, in the sense that the notion that every previous EPBC decision prior to this judge enlightening us as to the existence of this duty was made without due regard to the impacts of any proponent's project on future generations. I think that's not a suggestion which really, I think, has any merit. So the government seems minded to deal with this. They can approve the project in the meantime because that appeal process will take some time to unfold. And of course, the appeal is for something between the government and the applicants to deal with. We're just a joint party in the previous discussion. So we think that, when the minister says, they can deal with it in the meantime. So that's what we're looking forward to do.
The seven-week changer, I don't think that's particularly different from what we've done in the past. Did you have a particular dimension to that question you wanted to expand on, Peter?
I figured it was just to do with doing more major maintenance or taking gear out to the surface to do major maintenance ahead of what could be another challenging block. And seven did seem a little bit longer than normal. And given the maintenance you've done underground, which is never perfect, I just thought you doubling up and just being 100% sure that you get through longwall 10, okay? And if it's not particularly longer, it's fine.
Yeah. No, it's not particularly long. There's nothing particularly noteworthy. The maintenance that we did during the longwall panel, which was annoying, most of which doesn't have a particular benefit for the next panel, we will make sure that we do a complete overhaul of everything in those seven weeks that we enter the panel with a fully restored and back to operating capability longwall. We don't want to just assume that whatever we've done is going to see us through the next panel. We will be taking the time to do that overhaul completely. The Geosensing drilling that you've mentioned, Ian, I'll turn it over to you on that.
Okay. Thanks for that, Peter. Hang on there. Yeah. So I envisage we're currently in drilling 110A now, and we'd anticipate that we would have those results and a handle on that block early September. We have scheduled to go in and do 110B after that. I would imagine there'd probably be two months of work there to drill that out and do the necessary interpretation.
Ian, if you did the lessons learned from the drilling you've done for longwall 9, does it give you the confidence, longwall 10, this geosensing that you'll go full gas when you get in there?
I mean, we are doing more drilling. We are drilling from the installation phase all the way up to the takeoff phase. There'll be at least seven holes with whatever extra holes we need to do there. Between that and the other work we've done from analysis of our gas drilling holes, etc., we have a strong degree of confidence that we will know what structures exist in that block.
Okay. Thanks, Ian.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, just a final call before we wrap up. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone. We have further questions from the line of Peter O'Connor from Shaw and Partners. Please go ahead.
So Ian, Paul, imagine the 13 million tonne limit at Maules Creek. How do you deal with that ahead of an approval change? Clearly, you're close. How do you dial that back and keep the troops fully engaged?
Thanks, Peter. Look, I think we've mentioned this more than once or twice, that this is a particular challenge for us. It's a high-quality problem to have, of course, with the mine now performing at a level where we can start knocking on the door of the upper limit. To remind you, I know you know, Peter, that for everybody's benefit, that obviously 13 million tonne limit is set on a calendar basis, not the financial. So there is a little bit of juggling to deal with that if you've had a bigger half versus the second. Hence our desire to want to move on and ask for more tons. Now, as we talked about before, that's related to AHS in terms of how much we ask for over and above the 13. But we do think one way or the other, you need to have a little bit more capacity here.
For exactly as you mentioned, Peter, that there are times when you don't want to be in a position where you're winding back. And so as the mine continues to perform, we want to make sure we've got some headroom available to us to be able to manage that better. But it's not, as I say, a problem that we're staring at right now, but it is something that we want to deal with going forward. We want to wrap that up with our view of the AHS.
Okay. Thanks, Paul.
Thank you. We have no further questions, so I'll hand back to Paul for closing comments. Thank you.
Thanks, everybody, again, for your attention here for the quarterly report. If there's any further questions that any of you have or that you wanted to direct to us, you know where to find us all, but look forward to contacting you and speaking to you over the coming weeks, and of course, we've got our full results coming out in a month's time, which we'll be speaking to you formally again. Thanks all for your time this morning.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude the call today. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.