Richard Adkerson: Let me just add one quick. Hang on, let me just add one quick comment to support what Kathleen is saying. People, and I understand it if you’re doing overall industry analysis, you’re looking for what is the incentive price that triggers new production but Kathleen made the point that each project is different and then each company’s situation is different. One of the strong things about our business is that because of our production levels, our resource base, our ability to add to production with things like leaching but beyond that more with being more efficient with technology working our assets harder and so forth. We don’t face the same pressures from reinvestment risk that some other companies face but also other commodities face because of shorter reserve lives.
And that’s one thing I like so much about our business is that it gives us that flexibility to not have to take risks, not have to press things during uncertain economic times but as I mentioned earlier, to be just more prudent about how we run our business. It’s a great strength of our industry to a certain degree, but of Freeport as a company, because of our strong production base and long-lived [Ph] properties and the ability to maximize production out of our existing properties by doing things smarter and using technology and working assets harder.
Bill Peterson: Thank you, Richard.
Operator: Our next question will come from the line of Alex Terentiew with Stifel. Please go ahead.
Alex Terentiew: Hey, good afternoon or morning, everybody. Just two quick questions for me. First, I just wanted to follow up some of the comments here on Indonesia with the smelter export duty. Any changes, latest changes in the regulations that would change your view on whether you expect the export duty to go to zero once the smelter is built? And then the second question, just circling back on the leach expansion, 800 million pounds over, if you can get there in three to five years, I mean, that’s a pretty impressive number. I just wanted to get some more details from you if I could, just on the cost for that. I mean, the U.S. operations have been running around, call it, 270 a pound or so. Is that a fair cost for us as well? Or, I mean, would the operating cost be higher but much lower capital costs? Just trying to get a sense of what the upside is for that sort of potential.
Kathleen Quirk: Yes. On the duty issue, the duties are paid on concentrate exports. So, once we get the smelter done and ramped up, we will have no more exports of concentrates. We’ll be, we’ll be producing copper cathode and gold, the actual metals. So the export duty only applies to this intermediate, step of concentrates. So, there hasn’t been anything in terms of we’re still working with the government. Right now, the export license is through May. And so, we’ve still got to work with the government to work through this issue beyond May of having a ramp up period. We’ll still be shipping some concentrates, exporting some concentrates during the ramp up. But we’re going to work cooperatively with the government to make sure that those that continuity continues.
With respect to the leach pounds, not every application is the same. But on average, we expect these leach pounds to come in at roughly a dollar per pound. And so, that is, that’s why we’re so excited. Most of this is in our U.S. business. And so, it’ll bring down, if we’re successful, and we’re able to put this into our reserves, it’ll bring down our average cost in the U.S. over time. And I’ll just ask, Corey Stevens on the line, and he and his team are leading this initiative. And just wanted to ask Corey if there’s anything that we didn’t cover on leaching that you want to make points of that hasn’t been discussed so far.
Corey Stevens: Yes, Kathleen. I guess the one thing I would just add or maybe just emphasize is some of the, the momentum that’s been able to build around this effort, really around these executable known technologies has been significant. And so, we’ve been building, quarter-over-quarter. And now we’ve got line of sight to the 200 million. But really, the portfolio gives us sustainability going forward into the future and builds this foundation that, I can see it significantly building from there. And then you’ve got a whole other portfolio of innovation work, whether it’s additives or alternate flow sheets or, really leveraging temperature at that next level that the team is really excited about. So super focused on disciplined execution, that the team is super energized, and looking forward to the future.
Kathleen Quirk: Yes. And so there’s a lot of value in this opportunity. And we see it, we can feel it. And we’re pressing forward. But as we talked about earlier, we’ve got to get that going, at the same time we get our productivity, our key performance indicators improved in the U.S. And that’s a big focus as well. So those two things we believe will generate a lot of value in our U.S. business and it’s not capital intensive. So that’s really our primary focus right now is on getting those two things going at the same time. And we’ve made great progress on the leach front. We’re making progress on the productivity initiative front, but we’ve got more work to do there.
Alex Terentiew: Yes, those are impressive numbers on the production and the cost front. So best of luck to you and your team.
Kathleen Quirk: Thanks Alex.
Operator: Your final question will come from the line of Brian MacArthur with Raymond James. Please go ahead.
Brian MacArthur: Good morning, Richard and Kathleen. My question just goes back to the export duty. The 147 million you incurred this quarter, two things, I assume that going retroactive back to March 29th when it technically was scaled down. So you’re sort of paying two quarters. And the second thing is the text talks about incurring it. Have you actually paid it on a cash basis or is it just a payable as you kind of sign work through all this?
Kathleen Quirk: It was a go forward duty. So it wasn’t based on retroactive. So go forward duty. And 7.5% of the exports values were assessed. Some of it’s been paid, some of it’s not been paid. And there’s a process in Indonesia where just like any other process where you have disputed amounts or amounts that you’re objecting to, you can go through a process and pay it, but you pay it with that advisory that it remains disputed. But for financial accounting purposes, given just the uncertainty of how it would all play out, we have accrued those costs. And so we’ve expensed those as we go. If it gets resolved, that’ll get favorably, it’ll get reversed. But at this point, we’re accruing for these costs pending the ultimate outcome.
