American Mining Jurisdictions in an Election Year

0:07 Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, depending on where you're signing in from today. We've got a pretty global audience. I appreciate everybody for making time to join us today. I really am thrilled to be able to sit down with our panelists to discuss mining and resource extraction in the United States in an election year, which is always exciting. We've got a great panel today. Before I get into my housekeeping and notes, I just want to let everybody introduce themselves.

0:30 So I'll start with Barry and then I'll work our way through. So go for it, Barry. Hi there. Thanks, Romeo. Yeah, my name is Barry O'Shea. I'm the CEO of Highland Copper and Highland has 2 copper projects in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Awesome. I'll throw it to JT.

0:45 Thanks, Romeo. JT Starzycki, Chief Strategy Officer, 5E Advanced Materials, operating a boron mine in the state of California. And finally, through to Sam. Morning, everyone. Sam Asch. I'm the CEO of Bunker Hill Mining Company, and we're restarting the Bunker Hill mine in the Silver Valley in Northern Idaho.

1:04 Awesome. Before we dive right into the discussion, there's a couple of housekeeping items I just really quickly wanted to run through. So today's discussion is interactive. You see in the bottom right of your screen, there's a little chat button. You really are encouraged to ask questions throughout the event. Please do ask at any time. If your question's right on topic, I might sneak it in. Otherwise, we'll try to address them at the end. If for whatever reason we don't get to your question, I'll make sure the relevant executive or executives

1:29 are given the question afterwards so they'll be able to tackle it over email. But we'll try to get to as many as we can. Today's event is also being recorded. The replay should be available by day's end, so keep an eye out for that in your inbox. But enough out of me, I wanted to jump right into today's chat. So what's great is today we've got panelists ranging from the Northern Midwest through to California as already heard. As the election approaches, I'm curious, and Sam, I'll start with you here. What do you consider the primary concerns for mining project stakeholders in your state? And why do you think these projects are important? Well, I think rather than concern, I think it's the opportunity that presents itself coming up through the next election. And I think that that's really one that we're seeing a step back from globalization and resource scarcity and resource security becoming more to the forefront of an issue in the United States. I mean, you see the conversation really beginning to develop and I think what's exciting from Bunker Hill's perspective and from my perspective

2:30 is that the conversation around the need to have onshore critical metal supply is really beginning to come from the forefront where I believe it belongs. I appreciate that. JT, I'll turn to you for your perspective on why mining projects or extraction projects are important in California.

2:51 Yeah, thanks, Romeo. I appreciate that. I would say it kind of falls into a couple of different categories. We happen to be where our project is located in San Bernardino County. We happen to be in a very mining rich jurisdiction. The, where it comes, becomes really interesting for us is that there hasn't been a new mine that's been opened in that particular area in quite some time. So you've got some aging infrastructure, you've got, you know, some aging mines, but you've got a lot of mining-rich skill sets.

3:21 When you look at where people have been and what their journey has been as a career individual in mining, the ability to broaden skill sets, to learn cutting-edge technology, it probably hasn't been as prevalent. Then along comes a company like 5E, where we're doing a different extraction method. We're using in-stitching leaching proven mining techniques, but the ability to then bring in sort of new technologies, use advanced circuitry, being able to provide on the job training, mentoring, internships,

3:59 things like that. It sort of becomes very prevalent in that particular area because we're offering a path forward into some new concepts, mining a new product, right, and allowing sort of that skill set to be utilized but then also grow it in that particular community. And then of course, you know, California being smack dab in the middle of not only the U.S. Energy transition, but the global energy

4:25 transition, we happen to be mining a product that plays right into the heart of it. So I think it's, you know, kind of comes in those 2 areas in that it provides a path forward for skill sets and allows mining skill sets to grow. But then we're also mining a product that, you know, goes right to the heart of California and the US agenda.

4:44 Great. Barry, finally for Michigan. Curious what you think the primary concerns for stakeholders in the state are. Sure, yeah. Well, to begin with, I'd say we're fortunate in that we operate on private land in Michigan, so it's a state-led permitting process. We happen to have our permits in place for our first key project, the Copperwood project. So from that perspective, we don't really anticipate any major changes from a regulatory perspective

5:09 resulting from the federal election. You know, that being said, I think there can be a knock-on impact in terms of sentiment generally in the US, and that can also have an impact in Michigan. One thing that we're certainly keeping an eye on is the prioritization of the energy transition, depending on which government is in place, and access to Department of energy grants, which are critical naturally to copper producers and many other battery metal producers.

5:36 But broadly speaking, I would agree with Sam. I think the main focus is on critical supply remaining a priority. And I don't think that's really at question, whether it's a Democratic led government or Republican led government. I think the US has really realized it's probably a little behind the curve in terms of domestic supply of critical materials and I think that's going to remain a priority and we'll keep mining at the forefront.

6:00 Awesome. I see some questions coming in. We will get to most of those at the end. So do appreciate them. Please keep them coming. Second thing I wanted to chat about is just kind of zoom out if we all could for a second. It'd be great if each of you could just talk about the attributes of your jurisdiction. So what are the advantages of mining and extracting in your state? What's the permitting process broadly like? And if you get any support from the governor's office. JT, I can start with you there.

6:25 Sure, absolutely. So look, I think one of the benefits that we have based on where our ore body is located is we have significant access to all key infrastructure.

6:39 We have the BNSF railway that runs parallel to our deposit and is literally across the highway. We've got 2 major highway networks that sort of crisscross our deposit. We have high voltage power that goes through. We've got 3 natural gas lines. And you know I think most importantly when you mine in the desert we have access to non-ag use, very brackish water via aquifers that are already designated for non-human consumption. So,

7:10 we have the benefit of having all of that infrastructure in place, which allows us to focus our CapEx dollars on building out the infrastructure needed to extract the mineral, where we don't have to, you know, look at a rail spur and we don't have to look at creating our own network of highways to truck product in and out of what we're doing. So that certainly is a very beneficial component to where we are physically located. As far as the state of California goes, we continue to get a lot of support from Capitol Hill, specifically

7:45 Representative Obernolte, Jay Obernolte, who represents our district, continues to be a big fan not only of our project, but of Boron in general. He's been very instrumental and has put a lot of support in writing to what we're doing

8:03 has continued to push sort of boron in its use and not only solar panels but also in wind. He you know also in chip technology so we continue to have a lot of support for our representatives in Capitol Hill to the point where also other departments too. So a lot of site visits, a lot of people very interested in what we're doing. Awesome. Barry, I'll let you get in there to talk up Michigan for a few seconds. Sure. Yeah, Romeo, I mean, we've had a very good experience in Michigan over the past decade as we've worked through the early phases of the mine cycle. The way I'd characterize the permitting process there is it's stringent, but fair,

8:42 very prescribed timelines, good parameters around public consultation. And generally speaking, I'd say it's not politically driven. You know, broadly, how I characterize it is that they're not there to trip us up. You know provided you demonstrate through project design that you're looking to meet regulation, exceed regulation, of course be a good steward from an environmental and community perspective.

9:04 Their goal is to permit you. So we've had a good experience. As I mentioned, Copperwood is now a fully permitted project. Our second project, which is a joint funder project, the White Pine project, is stepping into that permitting process now. And I think there's a nice read through as we think about how we'll fare there. In terms of the governor, we've had public endorsement from her, very strong support broadly from the state of Michigan. And I think it speaks to the fact that, you know, production of copper is highly aligned to industry in Michigan, broadly aligned to state goals. That makes sense. Just to wrap this one up, Sam, if you wanna talk up the jurisdiction.

9:43 Well, it's interesting, Barry, because what you're described there is really the same experience that we have here in Idaho. So in Idaho, you know, we have a state whose economy is really driven by agriculture, forestry, and mining. So we have a regulatory framework and a regulatory structure that is very experienced

10:05 at dealing with and working with land use and sustainable land use is a priority for the state. That being coupled with the fact that we are on private land and with patented mining claims means very, you know, kind of the same as your situation. We're dealing solely with that state regulatory framework who sets as a priority the sustainable use

10:32 of land resources in the state. So fantastic support from the state, from the governor's office, from the legislature. And then JT, you know, there's some similarities at Bunker Hill that we see as well. The amount of existing in-place infrastructure that supports the mining. We're less than a mile away from a major East-West interstate. And we're also the benefit of capital that has been deployed and infrastructure that has been built back in the 1940s. The Pacific Northwest were the beneficiary

11:07 of very reasonably priced electrical power, sub 5 cents a kilowatt hour. So when you look at that, we think that Idaho is a fantastic jurisdiction to be looking at and building a mining company. And Barry, I have to say, from what you've described, there's a lot of similarities that we have between the projects in that regard.

11:32 Great. And Samuel, I'll stick with you for the next one. I know all of you have, you know, experience working in the US over time, and over multiple elections. And what I'm really interested is what you consider most different now from the beginning of your career from your first American project. Samuel, I'll start right back with you.

11:50 Well, I think the major difference, and this is really, you know, just come about in the last probably year, year and a half, is the focus that the mining industry and critical metals has taken in the national conversation. When I started my career, gold price was $250 an ounce, copper was

12:14 80, 90 cents a pound. And quite clearly the United States made the decision that it was going to outsource the supply of the raw materials to run the economy. And I think that the biggest change that I've seen in my career is that that conversation has changed dramatically. And there's a recognition that the secure supply of metals required to grow the economy and run the economy, it needs to be addressed. And it needs to be the focal point of the national conversation.

12:47 I appreciate that. JT, same question. Over the course of your career, what's changed in the U.S.? So when I first started in this industry 17, 18 years ago, the U.S. Was really starting, and I was working on a project in generally in the Midwest. It was in the fertilizer space, but it happened to be in the location where we as a country discovered the Bakken oil, so in North Dakota. And that was really a national priority at that point.

13:19 So the ability to safely frack and extract that oil, turn the US into a net, from a net importer to a net exporter. And it really sort of kind of set the national priorities when it came to oil and gas. And then here we come along looking for a nutrient that is used in agriculture.

13:38 I agree wholeheartedly with what Sam said, which is you see now this evolution where critical minerals and materials are now the national agenda, right? Sufficiency and even the recognition that we are far behind in certain things, certain things that are very vital to not only the energy transition. You know, for us here at 5E, we really focus our efforts from a government perspective on national defense. Because Boron has so many applications in defense related technologies.

14:11 We have the U.S. Government now. You can see this evolution over a 15 year period where it was all about fossil fuels and being independent and not being dependent on other nations to now, we kind of have taken our eye off the ball as a country and we need lithium, we need copper, we need graphite, we need all of these things because of the end use has evolved so much. We are playing catch-up.

14:38 I think, generally speaking, whenever I sit on these panels or I have discussions with other mining professionals, the permitting process has gotten better, but it's still a far cry from what it is in Australia, far cry from even what it is to our neighbors in the north and in Canada.

14:55 And I've even seen improvements in Europe. So we still have some work to do. One of the things that I think has been consistent, not only with sort of this administration, but will be consistent, whatever the next administration is, and we're politically agnostic, is national defense and the need for materials that go into all of our national agenda, energy, defense,

15:21 and anything else, we'll still have a focus on critical minerals and materials. And sort of that's how we view things here at 5E. That makes sense. Defense is historically a bipartisan issue, so that makes sense.

15:36 Egan Defense, yeah. I'll throw it to you for what's changed over your career. Well, yeah, just what's nice to see now is that mining is seen as part of the solution to a green energy transition. So mining looked at positively and that's a wonderful thing, certainly for our industry. And I think it's fair given the battery metals that we're all looking to produce. But the knock on impact of that kind of national conversation that Sam and JT are talking about is the funding that is available. It's something that's quite unprecedented and never really been seen before in the US and arguably in other jurisdictions.

16:08 At the DOE and DOD levels, I mean, specific for us as a copper producer, the DOE is offering tax credits, they're offering grants. More recently, the loan office at the DOE for the first time announced that it would be providing loans into mining companies. At a state level, certainly in our case, the state of Michigan is considering an infrastructure grant to assist us with our initial capital. So as I say, these types of fundings haven't been available in the past. It's certainly a

16:37 reflection of the US priority on domestic supply of critical materials. So you're seeing ideally permitting advance at a faster rate. You're seeing incentives coming into place and taking some down some of the barriers that arguably we would have seen in the past. It's a really positive environment in the US. Awesome. Next I got a question that we just got a number of people over email asking some variation of this question, So I just wanted to pose it to each of you. Barry, I can start back with you. It's just, look, people are looking for you to discuss any legislative or regulatory developments in your jurisdiction that could

17:11 have an impact on the extractive sector and how people are planning to respond to these changes if they exist?

17:19 So, so from our perspective, and again, I'll say we're somewhat fortunate that we're not subject to federal legislation from a permitting perspective. So we don't actually foresee for the moment, again, for us, any regular changes that we need to be considering. I'd also note that the mining regulation in Michigan is relatively current, so it's modern, it's up to date in terms of environmental stewardship. It seems to have been working well in the state of Michigan again, So broadly there's some stability from our perspective in terms of minor regulation in Michigan and certainly we're hoping it remains that way. Great, I'll throw the same question through to JT. Are there any changes on the horizon California investors should be able to look for?

18:04 Nothing that's going to impact anything, I mean, related to us or anybody within San Bernardino County. Again, San Bernardino County is a bit of an anomaly, just in the sense that there's a lot of mining activity that has already historically been permitted. For us, as a fully permitted operating facility that is also permitted through our expansion phases or parts of our expansion phases, we don't foresee anything on the horizon. We're obviously going to be extreme, extreme stewards of any of our visual impact, our environmental impact.

18:40 You know, because we're in situ leaching, we have a very little surface disturbance. And we like that. We, We partner heavily with the EPA. We've got a fantastic relationship with District 9. We put a lot of effort into ensuring that if there are requests that they have, or if there are items that they want to come and have discussions with, we have a very open door policy.

19:06 It's something that in the last couple of years, we as an organization has focused on, and I think it's obviously been a great strategy for us to do so. We have continued and growing support in Capitol Hill. So we don't foresee anything from a legislative perspective changing whatsoever. And again, we have the benefit of being in San Bernardino County, which is a very mining friendly jurisdiction in the state of California.

19:35 Sure. And Sam, finally for you, changes on the horizon in Idaho or as steady as she goes?

19:41 Well, I think for our project specifically and for the state of Idaho in a larger sense, probably not really. You know, in the state, you know, there's a, you know, there's a well-developed, mature regulatory process with regulators who are experienced and hold a high standard. So I don't see a lot of changes there, particularly with the focus of Idaho's economy being resource-based, whether that be agriculture, forestry, or mining. And for our site specifically, we are on private land with patented mining claims. And so therefore our sole regulatory oversight is through the state of Idaho. So no particular changes. I think for the industry in general,

20:32 in major areas of the Western United States, the topic of mining reform in the United States seems to be picking up a little bit. And certainly there is a focus and an attempt to streamline the NEPA regulatory process. Any advances along those fronts would be very supportive and welcome in the mining industry.

20:57 Great. If you'd all be so kind, I'm going to ask us to gaze into a crystal ball for a quick second for the next question. And as an avid follower of American elections, it's really hard to tell what becomes an election issue or what's a significant point of discussion in American elections. I'm curious if you think the theme of investing in North American supply chains would be a top priority for voters or you think it will become something that's discussed as we get closer and closer to an election? JT, I can start with you there. So I'm not gonna comment, or I should say, I don't have a view on whether the individual voters or voters collectively outside of communities that are either impacted or Reliant upon mining as a as a way of commerce whether they're going to view or how they're going to view that when they make their decision on who to vote for. I do think that regardless of who gets into the White House, whether it's, you know, status quo or if there's a new

21:58 entrant into the White House, I think it remains a high priority. I believe that mining and critical materials, regardless of party,

22:07 and it might have a different flavor, right? So the last 3 plus years, the focus has been on specifically the energy transition, right? More battery manufacturing, reduction of carbon, all of that agenda, which definitely has a place for mining to feed into that. If there were to be a shift, 1 could likely say that the focus on national defense probably comes to the forefront and then the utilization of products for Defense and again, there's a lot of overlap.

22:41 It's not just our product. There's so much overlap between minerals and materials that are used in the energy transition that are also used in defense. I believe that that remains not only a national priority, but will continue to accelerate as a priority. So I think anybody that has a project where you're mining something significant and critical to the US agenda, they continue to be in favor. And I think that we will likely see continued progress that we've seen over the previous few years continue to move forward.

23:19 And outside of the White House, the time I spend at Capitol Hill regardless of party sort of validates that thought process that hey it will still remain a big agenda item for us because independence and the lack of dependence on other nations for processing like Russia and China is a national significance.

23:39 That makes sense. Barry, I'll ask you to look in the crystal ball and see what you can guess about the American election. Yeah, listen, I agree. The domestic supply of critical materials, it's it's it's bipartisan. So I don't foresee it changing in terms of the national conversation or certainly at a political level, be it Republican or Democrat. There's a very keen awareness, I think, in the US of the risk from the supply side. When you look at the global supply demand imbalance, naturally, that's very well documented. When you look at it specific to the US, it's even more pronounced. Historically, that's been dealt with by imports, but through the pandemic, through global unrest, mine closures and disruptions that we've seen recently, and as well, Chinese investment broadly in critical materials, it's very clear that the US needs to act now. I think they have acted, certainly from a funding perspective, very quickly over the past year or so.

24:39 I don't see this changing irrespective of government. I appreciate that. And Sam, I'll throw it to you for your view on critical minerals. And then I'm going to corner you a bit on precious metals as well. But we'll start in perspective on trends and critical minerals. Yeah, well, in relation to the election, I don't suspect that critical middle minerals is going to be a substantial issue just because of what Barry and JT have said is that it's broadly recognized across political lines that critical metals is a very important issue that's at the forefront. They're not likely to see, I don't know, debate questions about critical minerals just because there's not a lot of space in between the viewpoints there.

25:26 That makes sense. But on precious metals, I'm Curious for your view into the future here, where we've seen in the last couple of years, particularly of gold, which I know you guys are so developer, but majority of gold purchasing seemingly being done by China. What do you think might be the impact on silver prices as geopolitics evolve and there's a potentially deteriorating relationship between the United States and China. Well, silver is kind of a difficult metal to predict in terms, and I don't think you can look at it purely in terms of its performance as a precious metal or a commodity. I think what I would say is that when you look at silver and you look at the fundamentals that underpin price, I see that there is strength in the price, both from the industrial metals perspective and its utility in the low carbon or an energy transition.

26:27 And there's utility from a precious side in a world that appears to be stepping back from globalization and we appear to be entering a period of increased global geopolitical tension. So I think either way that you look at silver, I think it's supportive of price. But I think actually the real story on silver, as it is on most critical metals, is the supply side. I think I was reading an article the other day. I think that 2024 will be the fifth straight year that silver was in a deficit, in a supply deficit. And I think that the supply side is really the story. Got it. As one thing, I mean, while we're talking about kind of the macro and I'll let everybody speak to this, because you all represent different commodities and minerals on this panel, which I think is great. I'm curious, what are some signs and this is for the best writings in the room. What are some signs people should be on lookout for that your commodity could heat up as you get closer to the end of the year, whether that's domestic politics in the US or global politics?

27:32 Barry, I'll start with you on copper, if you don't mind. Sure. Yeah, listen, copper is just driven heavily by fundamentals, supply, demand. Naturally, it'll be interesting to see how electrification plays out. Obviously, there's been a big focus on that worldwide. It'll be interesting to see if that remains the case, or if that cools off somewhat. Certainly, the other things that I'm looking for are interest rates, and that's on a global perspective. Obviously, if interest rates begin to subside and reduce, that generally drives the investment, it drives construction, so on and so forth, and naturally drives an ongoing need for copper. The other thing that I keep an eye on, of course, is the strength of the Chinese economy. China obviously still drives the predominant usage of copper globally, So that is a very significant piece. And as mentioned as well, just an ongoing view on the supply chain side. There's been, I'd argue that the most recent rally from a copper perspective has precipitated from mine disruptions, a view around supply on the mine side, lowering grades at challenges and bringing mines to construction. So keeping an eye on that as well. So all of those are the pieces that will drive, drive copper in the coming period.

28:42 Great. Jay, I know boron is a bit of an education story sometimes for investors. So let us know what investors should be on the lookout for that might affect prices towards the end of the year. So we've seen we've seen prices remain strong and actually increase this year. We had a bit of a level off last year, but Boron, you know, historically has, has been, you know, relatively in that 6 to $750 a ton range. But over the last 5 years, we've seen that, that level sort of the Mendoza line shift to well north of a thousand a ton. We've seen a lot of growth in prices again this year and we expect that to continue for the simple fact of supply and demand. There's just not enough supply for the increasing demand. I mean the market itself or boron is essentially an oligopoly. It's controlled by 2 major producers, one of which is in Turkey.

29:38 They are a price setter. They sit on a large reserve. Rio Tinto is kind of in the opposite situation in their borax mine in California. The mine itself has been operating for 100 years. They're at the edge of the deposit. They're getting less pure ore, yet prices continue to go up. So customers, at least the customers sitting in our portfolio as we're growing that portfolio, continue to say a couple of different things. Number 1, they can't find enough product, which actually is going to impact a lot of different things all the way down through consumer electronics, right? So boric acid is an input into screens, phones, tablets, you name it. So, and there's only 6 total prospective Boron deposits even known in the geological space. And of those 6, there's only one that's fully permitted. So even with the product that is coming out, right, we're not able to even fulfill that product that is coming out, much less meet the growing demand that, you know, 2 and a half years ago was a theoretical supply-demand gap. But that supply-demand gap is very real in the second half of 2024 and beyond. And when you look at the US's mandate to add more wind and solar, the math doesn't math. There's just not enough boron being mined and even potential boron to be mined to meet that growing demand. So like anything, right, less supply, more demand, higher

31:10 prices. Yeah, and people talk about upcoming supply gaps when it actually is there. We are in a very real midst of not enough product for the demand. Sure. Sam, I know silver bugs have had a wild ride this year. So throw it to you for your view on what could impact silver prices for the rest of the year and where you think it might end up. Well, I think that when you're looking at silver prices specifically, I think that one should recognize that most silver, the majority of silver production, comes as a byproduct. So to a certain extent, you have to look primarily in the lead space. And I think when you're looking at both zinc, lead, silver, to a certain extent copper, the downstream smelting and the relationship between concentrate cells and smelting becomes important. And I think that we saw a huge reversion in TCRCs this year in the global benchmark, which indicates a shortage of concentrate supply on the global market. So, kind of as a leading indicator, 1 might look towards the spot TCRCs and the discount that smelting facilities are having

32:40 to pay to get concentrate to continue to have the smelting operations run. So I always kind of think of that as a bit of a leading indicator towards price. How hard is it for smelting operations and refiners to get access to to raw concentrate and concentrate inputs. Great. Now just before I get to some precise questions just targeted to each one of you, there's 1 in this, it's represented in the chat, it's also been represented in email. And I know we've already a bit gone over it, but I'd love if just each of you went through in as plain language as possible to outline what you think might change in your jurisdiction with any given election results, whether that be federally or in state this November.

33:25 Might as well start back with you, Sam, if you don't mind. Look, we're in a state where the political outcome of the election from an Idaho perspective is really not in question. And we have a regulatory framework around mining that is robust, mature, and operates at a very high standard. So really, not just copying out of the answer, but the reality on the ground in Idaho is that the results of this national election are not going to really have a significant impact on Bunker Hill as a mining project. Now, a wider field in the state of Idaho, there is quite a lot of federal land. So I think that Looking at the outcome of the election in terms of the, you know, the pace and the scope and the direction of federal mining regulation is important, but for Bunker Hill specifically, the impact is really will be pretty new.

34:33 No, Appreciate that. JT, same question. I know we've already sort of gone over it, but just for the sound bites, what could change your jurisdiction with election results? So I'll answer it from a perspective of what we anticipate to change, which is we don't anticipate changes. And I think for a couple of reasons. 1, we've got large scale mining operations that are happening in our area and have been operating some as old as a century, right? Let's also not forget that outside of US Borax, we've got another mine that's adjacent to us. And still in that arena is Mountain Pass, right? So Mountain Pass is not that far from us. The US is very reliant upon those particular mines. So remember, the only domestic, large-scale domestic borate producer is Rio Tinto.

35:29 Big company, big lobbying efforts, right? Big employer. Mountain Pass, only domestic producer of rare earths today have now launched into battery manufacturing. That's jobs, right? That's part of the economy. And because we don't have any permitting risk, because all of our stuff is permitted and we are operating, there isn't anything that we are looking at going, maybe that could be impactful. It would have to be something out of the blue that nobody anticipated, and then you would have the battle of established operating minds that we as a country are very dependent upon for our materials to then also have to get through that. So we're not just a small facility that started in the middle of nowhere and we're at risk as an organization, there's strength in numbers specifically in where we are. So the outcome of the election, we don't anticipate anything from a political perspective to impact what we're doing.

36:32 Great. And finally, Barry, just in plain language, is there any election result that could change things for Highland Copper? I mean, certainly what we're keeping an eye on is whether the election has any impact on the prioritization of the green energy transition. I think a potential consequence, one way or the other, would be around the federal funding from the DOE in particular. So we're keeping an eye that that remains available. As I say, from a critical minerals perspective, I think it truly will. So we don't particularly see any major changes from that perspective. A little more relevant to us is more on the state side. There are governor and Senate elections in 2026. So certainly something we're keeping an eye on down the road. Again, from a Michigan perspective, there's a real focus on electrification and broadly industry. So again, one way or the other, I think, you know, things stay quite stable in Michigan.

37:22 Great. So now I've got his questions for each of you. And then there's also a question in the chat, coincidentally, for each of you. So I'll try and wrap them all in while we talk. Sam, I'll start with you. One question from the chat, this is from Dale, early in the presentation. Dale, thanks for sticking around. He's curious if you could explain the structure of the silver bond that Bunker Ale is currently going through. Well, we are just going through that process and you're referring to the press release that we came out and look as we move forward, Dale, what I would ask you to do, rather than to go into kind of a deep dive discussion of the financing structure on this call. Keep an eye out because as we move forward and as we complete that transaction, we will be discussing that with all of our shareholders in quite some detail in the relatively near future.

38:19 Great, thanks. And my question for you, it's about balancing. So what's Bunker Hill's strategy for balancing your need for regulatory compliance in the pursuit of your construction? So at the stage you're at now, what is your strategy for keeping those 2 goals in mind? Yeah, absolutely. So from a regulatory perspective, I like to think about Ronald Reagan. So when they were, and he had the famous line, trust but verify. So our relationship with the regulatory authority in the state of Idaho, but also more generally, including the EPA, because we are operating on an EPA Superfund site, is expecting the regulatory agency to verify, and they absolutely do that. But it's incumbent on us as an organization, the way we operate and the way we approach business is to build that trust.

39:18 And so that's really the focus for us is we, and our job is to develop that level of trust. And it's the regulatory's authority to verify that we're performing at a high standard. And we actually do that in a couple of ways. One of the ways we do it is that we have a weekly call with the IDEQ, the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, and the EPA. And we do that because they operate a water treatment facility that we pay for the use of for the historic acid mine drainage that comes out of the mine. So there's a real very real operational synergy and discussion that takes place on a weekly basis. And that's happened for the last 4 years since we've been at some site.

40:07 So the way that I would say in terms of balance is that, you know, that regulatory compliance and that environmental performance is first. That's the first priority, because that's what enables us and gives us, you know, the license to operate and the ability to construct and operate a mining operation. So there's no, it's not, There's no really question about balance, Romeo. The environmental compliance, performance and regulatory compliance is absolutely number 1 because without that, we don't have the ability to construct, build or operate. I appreciate that context. One question, actually, I'm going to shoot to everybody. This is from Tom Theriot in the chat. And I don't often hear this question asked about American jurisdictions.

40:57 But he asks, in terms of protecting the investor, is there any risk of the United States government nationalizing your operations or any operations in the U.S.? Barry, I can start with you there on your perceived risk. I mean, personally, I would say that is highly unlikely. That certainly is a risk in other jurisdictions in the world, But to be quite honest, I don't think that's on the cards in the US. Great. JT, Sam, either of you have any opinion on whether that's likely in the United States? I don't see it being at all something that we would have to concern ourselves with. Fundamentally, it would deviate pretty extensively from what we stand for here in the country around capitalism and the ability for free markets. So I wouldn't see that ever happening.

41:45 Sam, got a contrarian take on this? Unfortunately, no, I don't have a contrarian take on this, but in fact, not only do I think mineral tenure is secure in the United States, in our case, we're on patented mining claims, which means that the Bunker Hill Mining Company owns the entire metal value in the ground on all of our claims. So we're not even in a situation where we're leasing it. The Bunker Hill Mine has clear title to all mineral value in all of our mining claims. We happen to have the exact same thing. So we own all of our project from start to finish. Yeah. There you go. Tom, if you have any additional questions, let me know. Make sure the team gets them.

42:31 One question for Barry. I know that Planet Copperwood, Planet Manhattan Copper General is produced copper for Michigan from Michigan. I'm curious and just really kind of share if you could for the audience what the copper needs are in the state. I know you mentioned industry. I was curious how the project plan to or intend to contribute to those needs. Yeah, supply has become a very hot issue in Michigan. Recently, there was a report, an international energy reform report co-authored by a University of Michigan researcher that reflects delivering the energy transition, delivering the electrification that the state has in mind will require unprecedented rates of mining production. GM has committed to all electric sales by 2035, Ford has committed to half by 2030.

43:20 And additionally, there's a real focus in Michigan on alternative energy sources again, which have dramatic need from a copper perspective. So the broad conclusion, and this is for the US, but very specific to Michigan, is that new mines are needed to support industry. They're lacking, they've been slow to have been developed over the past decade or 2. I won't say that Copperwood and our White Pine project will solve the problem in their entirety, but each mine will play a part in this. And I think we all stand a good chance to move forward as a result. Great, thank you. One other question from you, and Obviously feel free to answer as much or as little as you'd like. Jay Redberg asked from the chat, he said a Michigan up peninsula company returned $200 million to Michigan strategic fund.

44:10 He's curious if Highland Copper is going after that money that needs to be reallocated. We're not going after anything else that's to be reallocated. We're in our own process for a $50 million grant from the state of Michigan. We're incredibly pleased to be under consideration for it and looking for a positive outcome there. Great. Thank you. 2 questions for you, JT. They sort of lead into one another, so I'll ask them in that order. From Adrian Palmer in the chat, he asks if you can speak a bit more, just for those who might not be as familiar with the 5E story, talk about your efforts to secure DOD funding and how the upcoming election might factor in? Sure. Let me go back, and I'll try and be as brief as possible. But I want to encapsulate the last 18 months.

44:57 We, as an organization, pivoted our strategy about 18 months ago and differing from probably my 2 fellow panelists, we are not really chasing DOE funding, right? So our product itself, the majority of its use and derivative products go into defense. And so we wanted to really kind of focus our efforts on that. A couple of things that we've been able to do that has put Boron sort of at a higher level. So Boron is already listed as a critical material in the eyes of the Department of Defense. We were able to get boron language written into the National Defense Appropriations Act, which means every year that Congress goes for their defense budget to be divvied out to all of their respective jurisdiction, they actually have to talk about what is the boron supply chain and what are the single points of failure look like. Because all of the boron carbide is produced in China globally and a lot of the boron nitride is produced in Russia, those are single points of failure.

46:01 And so what we've tried to do, and I think we've been very successful, and this process is now starting to really catch a lot of momentum, is we're trying to parlay that into dollars. And so we've got 2 different requests, 1 that sits essentially under the Appropriations Act as a direct ask, and then 1 that sits under the DPA Title III program that will help us do a couple of different things. 1, scale our operations. 2, look for assistance in funding the large CapEx number that we need to expand into large scale commercial production. And then also really just to continue to gain support for us to have boron added as a, under the USGS critical minerals list.

46:50 We're sort of, we're kind of just around the fringes. You know, if you look at it from a mathematical equation, we miss it by about 1 point. And Now that we've sort of looked at and done a deep dive and started to educate people in the Department of Defense, just how much of the derivative products were dependent outside of the US. We really like where we're at. And we do, I will say to our, anybody that is listening to this webcast and that follows 5E, stay tuned because there is some information and some catalysts that are coming and they're coming in the relatively near future. So look, we've done a direct ask in multiple ways. We've continued to raise the profile.

47:35 We've got Boron written into the appropriations language. And that's a lot. It doesn't maybe seem like a lot, but it's a lot of yards in a relatively short period of time in the eyes of the US government. Appreciate it. That actually tackled the other question I had for you as well. So perfect. One thing just before we jet, I wanted everybody to have an opportunity with the investors in the room, just to pitch the security, tell us why it's a good time to take a look. Sam, I'll start with you. Just tell the investors in the audience why look at Bunker Hill. Absolutely. I mean, it comes down to pretty simple, really, is that we're going to be coming into production in the first quarter of 2025. We're fully financed for restart, and we're one of the few new mining projects that's going to be coming online in the United States. We're going to be producing critical metal, lead, zinc, silver.

48:28 Its final smelting location is in Trail, British Columbia. So it's a US metal, critical metals producer with a US supply chain. And we're coming into production in the near term, early 2025. Great, Barry, I'll give it to you next. Sure, thanks. I think there are 3 key things to know about Highland Copper. Number 1, we have one of very few fully permitted copper projects in the US, you know, at the right time, certainly. Pure leading leveraged changes in copper price, some real elasticity, and possibility to do well from both a leverage perspective and also stepping through to production. And lastly, we operate in Michigan. I think it's really going to emerge as a fantastic mining state that's both actively permitting and looking at incentivizing projects.

49:18 Great. JT, wrap it up for us with a pitch for 5E. Sure. So our investment thesis is I think is pretty straightforward. It's a high barrier at high barrier to entry market. Right. So I mentioned earlier that really 85% of the world's boron production is controlled by 2 entities, 1 in which kind of has a really direct and deep relationship with China. So there is some risk geopolitically speaking. We are fully permitted. We did start production up in April of this year. So we are producing boric acid at our site. If I was an investor looking at our opportunity, I would say, you know, if you get your head around the thematics of Boron and the fact that we're already at a supply-demand imbalance.

50:05 We are already at a point where prices are increasing month over month. You've got an opportunity to invest in the upside of Boron through 5E. You can't invest in Turkey and you can't directly invest in U.S. Borax, you've got to invest in Rio. So if you believe that where we're headed as a country and our need for more national defense, 5E is the way to recognize that upside. Fully permitted, producing, permitted through expansion, and boric acid now flowing out of the facility. Great. Well, gentlemen, thank you so much. I know talking about politics inspires fear in the hearts of speakers, so appreciate you all for joining me today to talk about this issue. I think it was a great discussion. And for everybody who joined us, particularly those who asked questions, but for everybody who made time, thank you