Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Stillwater Mining Company Second Quarter 2012 Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] And as a reminder, this call is being recorded. I'd now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Frank McAllister. Please go ahead, sir.

Well, thank you, operator. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us today for Stillwater Mining Company's Second Quarter 2012 Results Conference Call. As the operator indicated, I'm Frank McAllister, the Chairman and CEO of Stillwater Mining Company. And with me today are several members of our management team, including John Stark, our Executive Vice President, Chief Commercial Officer; Greg Wing, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Terry Ackerman, Vice President of Corporate Development; Kevin Shiell, Vice President of Mining Operations; and Kris Koss, Vice President of Human Resources. We also have with us Ralph Green, our Vice President of Exploration; and Rhonda Ihde, our Corporate Controller. As always, I'd like to first remind everyone that some statements in this conference call will be forward-looking, and therefore, involve uncertainties or risks that could cause actual results to differ from our projected results. We discuss these risks and uncertainties in more detail in the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including those discussed in our second quarter Form 10-Q, which will be filed later this afternoon. Stillwater had an all-around good second quarter for 2012. Earnings were decent. Safety was excellent. Mine production was good and matched expectations. Costs were in line with forecast. Ore grades were good. Mine development was on plan and recycling business performed well. In addition, we continue to see good progress with all of our development projects. And we completed our transaction with Mitsubishi Corporation wherein they acquired a 25% interest in the Marathon project. That said, PGM prices are experiencing the same market uncertainty and turbulence as are other metals right now. Our total combined average sales realization for the second quarter for mined palladium and platinum was $850 per ounce on a weighted basis compared to $875 per ounce for the first…

[Operator Instructions] And we'll go to the line of David Gagliano with Barclays.

Just a few questions. Given the comments about deferring, delaying the projects, I was wondering if you could prioritize for us like the list of deferrals and potential CapEx impact associated with these deferrals.

David, we're right in the midst of reviewing that. Let me just talk in general. Obviously, we've got the 4 projects that are critical to us: Marathon, Altar, and then we've got the 2 here in Montana, that being the Graham Creek and the Blitz projects. Obviously, the ones that have the most [indiscernible] opportunity for us for production would be the Altar -- excuse me, got that wrong, the Graham Creek and Blitz projects. And they're literally underway at this point in time in terms of moving ahead. So we would be -- have greater reluctance to cut back on them, but we do have the capacity to do that if we were to do so. Obviously, Marathon is going to be somewhat dependent upon the permitting process, and to a certain extent, we'll just have to play that through to determine just exactly what it would be there. One of the issues there is an early-on ordering of equipment to make sure we've got lead times in place. And the question there is, is that the appropriate thing or not. And so those are some of the questions that are there. And at Altar, I just suggest that our spending is coming in just a bit less and our effort going a little bit more than we had expected with our spending. So to a certain extent, there may be just sort of a natural reduction in what we would spend down there even if we were to do the same thing. But we need to sort of finalize our review down there and see what we're doing. So I guess what I'm saying, David, I'm not giving you an answer. How is that for a -- because we don't have that answer yet, but we are looking at it carefully. With respect to operations, there's also, quite frankly, some opportunity to trim some of the spending there. But we would be reluctant to do that because every time you do that, you wind up reducing your developed state. When you reduce your developed state, you wind up getting yourself into a jam with respect to just how -- where you're going to produce. And so I just stated in terms of those priorities but not give you any numbers because we don't know yet.

Okay, understandable. Not that it's a huge issue, but I thought the exploration spending at Altar was supposed to be front-end loaded because of the timing of the drilling season. Yet obviously, the Q2 exploration expense number was very low, and it sounded to me like in the comment that Q3 and Q4 is going to be higher. I'm just curious, what's prompted that change?

Well, actually Q1 is the heavy loading. The $10 million in Q1 was the heavy one. And I guess I'd say, look, we stuck our toe in the water down there. And we were estimating sort of on the aggressive side, understanding that we were still sort of trying to understand just exactly what the program would be. We have designed the program very carefully. The execution of the program was superb. When I went down there in March, I recognized that we were under budget in terms of spending but we were over our drilling target. And I told the guys with some budget that we would have an opportunity of perhaps increasing that drilling, that we should do so if it would help identify where wanted to go for the next season. So we actually increased it by about 10%. Still did it within the season. Still did it within our budget. And so our execution was extraordinary, and the drill results have been the same. So I think perhaps a little bit of a high side, if you will, on the spending side or, if you will, better execution than we had hoped for. But again, it was our first effort down there, and so I don't fault us or blame us for what we did. I think it was probably just we were being careful. The spending in the third and fourth quarter, some of this for metallurgical testing. And then the setup time, we're going to have to get drill rigs and other equipment up the roads in December. Hopefully, the roads will be opened by that time so that we can move them up the roads. If not, it will be sort of like this last year where there was minimal spending in the fourth quarter of 2011. I think it's about $2.5 million in 2011 in December. And we could see a bit more than that this year in December if, in fact, we're able to get up the roads and get on our way, and then obviously, be back in January and March of 2013. So I think the spending is about like we might have expected it, but it's coming in under. Our spending might be at the $20 million rate this year instead of what we have said earlier at $25 million. But we're getting all of the bang for our buck and even more, and we are excited about how it's turned out.

That's helpful. And then very last question, not a huge one. And again, just filling in some of the blanks. I'm curious, what are you spending $10 million on at the recycling facility this year? And is that an ongoing CapEx? Or is that a onetime in 2012?

Well, there are 2 or 3 things we're doing there. John, I'm going to let you speak to that, and maybe you can provide better information. It's not a continuing spending, no, David. But I'll let John explain exactly what we're doing.

Yes. We're reconditioning and changing our #1 furnace, which has not been in production for the last few years and making it into a slight cleaning furnace. So that's a good share of what the capital costs are this year, which will not be provided -- usually, we probably on a sustaining basis, our expenses down there would be $3 million to $4 million a year. The other projects, we're constructing and building. And we're also doing a little bit of work in base metal refinery, improving some of the tanks. So I guess that would be the main thrust.

And we'll go to the line of John Bridges with JPMorgan. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Well, David, I've got my best questions. I'll see what else I can come up with. And so I noticed the grade of Stillwater was up significantly this quarter. Is that sustainable level? Or what's going on?

I'm not going to get back into my McAllister ballroom in this, John, of 10 years ago, but I'm going to let Kevin to speak to the grade.

Well, if you remember in Q1, it was also down. So when you look at things in aggregate, it's really tracking above what we would expect. And as we move through this, it's going to mask the model at the end of the year rather more online with what our reserve has been. So we're sticking with our 500,000-ounce guidance, and there's a reason for that. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay. In your text, you spoke about some unusual things going on at the mine during the quarter. What was that all about?

John, say again? I'm missing you a little bit. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: In your report, you spoke about some unusual things going on at the mine during the quarter, fluctuations in mining conditions.

Yes, there are 2 or 3 things. Let me speak in general. I'm going to have Kevin speak to it specifically. First of all, we started off on a rather aggressive program with respect to the industry initiative on core safety that I referred briefly to in the opening remarks. This is a very intensive, very important initiative that we're taking extraordinarily seriously, and I'd have to say the reception by all of our team, when I say team, I mean, right down to all the miners, has been great. But nevertheless, that doesn't mean that you see the film and everybody is onboard. You have to work on this for a protracted period of time, and it has to be a sustained program. So that's one of the things that's going on. I guess the other thing, Kevin, would be simply the efforts going on over at the Blitz, which are taking some of the time and effort of the people. Aside from that, are -- any other things that...

There's just been an enhanced focus on training overall, communicating what it is we're trying to achieve with the core safety objectives. We've added some people. There's about a half-dozen people there specifically focused on that objective and evaluating what's been going on in the past, looking at our existing systems, what works for us today, what needs to be looked at again and maybe modified and then communicating these things and getting everyone to understand what we're trying to achieve, why, how it fits and actually how it benefits them. So it's a massive communication process that's going on. And it's a large crew, so it's no small undertaking.

John, I think borrowing partly what Kevin just said, there's a couple of things here that sort of have driven our cost up significantly on plan, and one of them is when you get to a point where you sort of used up the labor that might be available in the marketplace and you now have to worry about having sufficient miners going forward, not just for our existing mine but for the new projects that we have underway, then you've got to build those miners. And that's part of what's going on. But the second thing is, is you have to have additional staff in order to staff up those projects as well. So there's 2 efforts going on here, both of which are critical. And they sort of overlap themselves, and I think that's probably where we're talking about some of the things going on at the mine. A lot of effort, a lot activity going on at the mine. Our team up there is performing absolutely superbly. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay. How many guys have you got who came over from Lucky Friday?

We had about 8, actually. And unfortunately, the majority of those have gone home now since they're Lucky Friday is not recalling their people. We have one last, to my knowledge. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay. So impact has come through already. On my PDF of Altar, it doesn't -- you can't identify where the individual drill holes are on the plan view. Is that a fault of my copy? Or is that not available?

I'm going to let [indiscernible] speak to that.

One of the problems was trying to put all that information on that very small map. It was very illegible and hard to read. And those can be made available, and we can put that out there.

We'll get them on the website, John, so you can see it and make a better definition of it. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Yes, I'd just like to get some idea as to the scale. Have you just calculated the tonnage you identified so far of mineralized material?

We have not. That's yet to come. And -- but the important thing is the scope of this thing is quite large. And if you were unable, based upon what we put out there, to identify the scope of this, then we will put out some additional material so that everybody can understand the scope. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: I'd just like to be able to pull out where the richer holes are and just contour it a little bit.

Understood. And we want you to do that.

And we'll go to the line of Richard Garchitorena with Crédit Suisse. Richard Garchitorena - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: So yes, just a couple of follow-up questions here. One, in terms of the guidance for the year, is that really -- second half is really just a reflection of, as you mentioned, lower ore grades in the third and fourth quarter, and that's going to basically be the reason for the unchanged guidance to the cash cost? Or is there anything else that we should be thinking about?

Let me have Kevin speak to that.

Really, the risk opportunities are very similar when you compare the first half to the second half. The thing that's really different is we are making a shift manpower-wise once these projects start, which will be kicking off probably mid-September, that point in time. We'll have to reallocate some miners. And we have a plan in place to manage all that, but the plan on paper is exactly a plan on paper. It's not that good. So you actually get the execution. So there is some risk there, and that's one of the reasons we're sticking with the guidance of 500,000. Richard Garchitorena - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Okay, great. And then just touching on the CapEx potential changes going forward. Is there anything we should think about it terms of Mitsubishi? Are they just -- you're still the primary, obviously, the primary owner of Marathon. But in terms of major CapEx decisions going forward, is there something that may come into play?

No, there's nothing there. It's just simply -- I think there are 2 things to focus on. One is obviously the permitting and how long the permitting might take place. And then the second thing would be when we, as a partnership, can make the decisions as to the longer lead time items. And both those things are, I guess, at this point in time, a little bit nebulous. I have to comment that we do have underway right now is the final engineering study that will be put in place. We would expect that to be finalized by the end of this year, early next year and obviously, that's going to provide us with greater guidance and greater direction as to both the permit process that we have to have that in place before we can actually begin to file the permits. So the EIS is underway, but we don't have that yet until the study is finalized and the recommendation is made to the government. And then obviously, we would move into the permits. So the engineering is important to that. And at that point in time, obviously, we'll have a better definition for shareholders to understand. Terry, anything else to add there?

I think that's fair. I think right now, our focus has been on standing up any additional information that the panel and the regulatory groups need so that we can move that toward because the timeline doesn't start until they complete that initial testing. Richard Garchitorena - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Okay, great. And my final question on Altar, you mentioned that you'll be providing an update on resources. Should we expect that by the end of this year? Or year-end 2012 is probably a better estimate?

Well, at this point in time, we're not certain whether an updated inventory update or resource is going to be of any use to everybody. What we're doing is providing as much of the drill hole result data and assays as possible. We'll be looking at a resource, but whether or not we actually make that public, it's just -- we're not certain if that's going to make a lot of sense right now.

[Operator Instructions] We'll go to the line of Sam Crittenden with RBC Capital Markets.

Most of my questions have been answered, but a couple of follow-ups. On the Altar drilling, you did, did anything surprise you compared to the geological model that Peregrine had put in place and anything sort of stand out there?

I'm going to turn that over to Ralph Green, and I'm going to see what he says. I've been following this very, very carefully, but Ralph is the master on this.

Thanks for the question. I think the short answer would be that we recognized some common characteristics with what's considered the classic Andean porphyry copper models. And -- but we also recognized that Altar is a multiple intrusive complex and that there was likely more than one center or central mineralizing event within that complex. Our modifications or fine-tuning of the model that was being employed previously was the reason for our objectives or principal objectives this year. And as we mentioned in our release, I think we've taken a great deal of risks out of our exploration models. We're more convinced that we're dealing with something quite extraordinary at Altar. And we're anxious to continue to de-risk it and move it forward.

Okay, great. And then a question on Stillwater. I'm just curious if you're seeing any change in your trends in sort of turnover or applications coming into the mine. Has anything changed over the last couple of months?

As to geology or as to people?

People.

I'm going to let Kevin speak to that.

Actually, we have had an increase in applicants recently. So that's a positive trend. Our attrition has been relatively consistent throughout the year. It's roughly 15%, which is a bit above what we had last year. But we're pretty much in a change situation right now. Whenever you're trying to change things and driving change throughout an organization, it tends to unsettle some people, and that's a little bit of what's been driving that, I think. But it's beginning to stabilize a little bit better, and hopefully, by year end, that will settle out somewhat below that mark.

To add to that, the change that's been made is good, and those who are finally recognizing that change is good are settled down and liked it.

Maybe we'd even have a couple of comebacks.

And we'll go to Andy Shopek [ph], private investor.

Frank, based on what you've achieved to date and the current guidance that you have for your total cash cost of $500 per mined-outs for the full year of 2012, it implies that you'll see cash cost rising to perhaps 550, 600 over the next 6 months. I'm wondering if you can, at this time, give us any guidance on where you expect your current cash cost to peak and whether you have any indication in 2013, whether they'll continue to rise or whether they'll flatten or maybe even come down again based on current plans.

Great questions. First of all, you're right if you do the arithmetic, you'd suspect our cash costs for the last half of the year are going to be well over $500, just average out to get the 500. We are working very hard to make sure that we keep our cash costs in line, and I wouldn't disagree with you that they may be above $500 in the last half in order for that $500 guidance to be right. On the other hand, we got a remarkable -- you've opened up the opportunity for me to talk about costs and talk about relative costs in the industry. There's a chart that had been put out by JPMorgan, which is just dynamite, if you will, and it's out in the last 4, 5 weeks, in a report that was put together by their South African team. And the report shows all the mines down in South Africa on a platinum-equivalent basis. So what they've done is they've taken all palladium and copper and nickel and chrome or whatever else by-products they might have and converted those into platinum-equivalent ounces. And then they divide the total ounces of actual platinum plus the equivalent ounces of platinum in their cost and come up with the cost. And that average cost down there at this point in time is $1,654. $1,654. The current price of palladium today -- of platinum today is $1,403. Our cost in that calculation is $1,295. So the $500 I'm talking about obviously gets converted into a platinum-equivalent cost where we've eliminated the palladium and converted that into platinum-equivalent ounces. We do that with the copper and gold and the silver and nickel as well, and we come up with $1,295. So we're down in the lower quartile of costs…

Well, Frank, I do appreciate the discussion. And clearly, I think most of us are familiar with the many challenges that the mining industry is facing in South Africa. And certainly, that only argues more for jurisdiction such as yours and the value that perhaps is going to be created. But my concern is whether or not the current trends of rising costs of production, whether they will continue to rise over the course of the following calendar year or whether you would expect them to begin to level out or whether there are any initiatives that might even bring them down over the course of the next calendar year.

That's a fair question. And Andy, let me give you a better answer to that. And the answer is we added significant employees during the year 2012. That brought our costs up quite dramatically from what they were in 2011. We wouldn't expect that to continue for the year 2013. So the increase -- the rate of increase is going to diminish. Sorry for not getting that clarity to you to start with.

And our final question is from John Bridges with JPMorgan. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: I thought I heard somebody talk about the Altar being quite extraordinary. And I just wondered if you could sort of pin down a little bit as to what you think you've got down there.

Let me turn that back to Ralph.

Yes, John, well, in our evaluations of the concepts and our pretty ambitious drilling program this year, as we try to further define what was going on in the Altar system, one thing that we suspected early on and have confirmed by the drilling is that there's -- with the various mineralizing centers that are the components of the large Altar porphyry complex, that we have seen a pretty interesting and beneficial gold endowment to certain of those mineralizing porphyries that were not previously defined in the resource. I think as you review the results from drilling in the East porphyry, for example, you'll see a significantly different gold endowment, positive gold endowment, with that mineralizing center as compared to the Central Altar system that constituted the majority of the previous resource. And we're continuing to get interesting geologic insight as we continue with our program, including some pleasant surprises that we anticipate following up on in this coming season.

John, one of the things that's kind of exciting is that they've got these drills down there. They're down 1 kilometer, and we're still in the mineralization. I know that's deep, but nevertheless, it sort of signifies the size of this thing that it could be. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Well, the depth, but you're in a bit of a valley there, so that's going to give you quite a big strip, I would think.

It could be, except on the East side. The East side is actually up on the East side, and it's a different configuration than being down in the valley. John D. Bridges - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay. I look forward to seeing those drill holes not on a map.

We have no further questions.

I just -- in closing, not to hold everybody on the call, but we appreciate everybody being on the call today. And operator, we'll turn it back to you.