Home » Posts tagged 'ben stoikovich' (Page 2)

Tag Archives: ben stoikovich

Prairie Mining #PDZ – Debiensko concession amendment and application update

In December 2016, following the acquisition of the Debiensko Hard Coking Coal Mine, Prairie Mining Limited applied to the Ministry of Environment (“MoE”) to amend the 50 year Debiensko mining concession.

The purpose of the concession amendment was to extend the time stipulated in the mining concession for first production of coal from 2018 to 2025. Prairie has now received an initial (non-binding) and appealable, first instance decision from the MoE that has denied the Company’s amendment application.

Prairie continues to have valid tenure and ownership of land at Debiensko. Not meeting the production timeframe stipulated in the concession does not infringe on the validity and expiry date of the Debiensko mining concession, which is June 2058. Prairie also holds a valid environmental consent decision enabling mine construction.

Prairie will appeal the MoE’s decision on the basis that its justification for denial is fundamentally flawed for a number of reasons including failure to take into account the requirements of the law and public interest in Poland, and the relevant facts of the Company and its amendment application.

Prairie will strongly defend its position and continue to take relevant actions to pursue its legal rights regarding the Debiensko concession.

Discussions have continued with Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa SA (“JSW”) regarding potential transaction(s) options in respect of Prairie’s tier 1 coking coal projects in Poland.

Debiensko Concession Amendment

Under the terms of the Debiensko mining concession issued in 2008 by the MoE (which is valid for 50 years from grant date), commencement of production was to occur by 1 January 2018. In December 2016, the Company submitted an application to the MoE to amend the Debiensko mining concession to alter the date for commencement of production from 2018 to 2025, and also provided the MoE with additional information requested. Not commencing production by January 2018 does not infringe on the validity and expiry date of the current mining concession, which is June 2058. However, the concession authority has the right to request the concession holder to remove any infringements related to non-conformance with the conditions of a mining concession and determine a reasonable date for removal of the infringements. In accordance with Polish law, the concession authority is required to provide an achievable and reasonable timeframe to remedy any non-compliance taking into account the nature of the non-conformance.

Prairie has now received notification from the MoE in an initial, first instance decision, that the concession amendment request has been denied. Prairie believes that the justification for this denial is flawed and does not take into account the requirements of law and the public interest in Poland, or the facts of the Company and its amendment application, which demonstrates yet further evidence of discriminatory treatment faced by Prairie as a foreign investor in Poland.

The MoE took over 17 months to provide the Company with a decision, whereas under Polish administrative law there is a maximum statutory deadline of two months for the MoE to provide such decision.

Prairie has a right to appeal the first instance decision of the MoE. Prairie’s legal team is in the process of preparing this appeal, which will point out the deficiencies of the MoE’s first instance decision. If Prairie’s appeal is unsuccessful, then this may lead to the commencement of proceedings by the MoE to limit or withdraw the Debiensko concession. Prairie also has the right of further appeal to Poland’s administrative courts.

The Company will consider any other actions necessary to ensure its concession rights are preserved, which may result in the Company taking further action against the MoE including invoking the protection afforded to the Company under any relevant bi-lateral or multi-lateral investment treaties or such other actions as the Company may consider appropriate at the relevant time.

Prairie will continue to update the market in relation to this matter as required.

Prairie has always conducted its business in Poland in accordance with the Polish law and continues to pioneer the application of international standards for development and feasibility work in Poland necessary to ensure the value of its Tier One coking coal projects are maximised for all stakeholders, meet the rigorous requirements for international financing and can ensure the production of high quality coking coal product to regional European steel makers.

Poland is multi-party representative democracy and has been a member of the European Union since 2004. Prairie Mining has been listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange since September 2015 and enjoys a strong and increasing Polish shareholder base. Prairie benefits from strong support of local communities and regional governments, and our activities are in line with Polish national government policy that considers coal at the core of Poland’s raw material security, seeks to renew Polish industry and enhance economic development in Eastern Poland, where the Jan Karski Mine is located.

Australia also holds the status of “Most Favoured Nation” with Poland and the countries signed a Promotion and Protection of Investment Agreement in 1991 (a Bilateral Investment Treaty) which provides reciprocal protections for investments made by residents and entities of both countries, including licences for exploration and mining of natural resources. Prairie reserves the right to make future claims against the Polish state under the Promotion and Protection of Investment Agreement.

For further information, please contact:

Prairie Mining Limited

Tel: +44 207 478 3900

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer

Email: info@pdz.com.au

Sapan Ghai, Head of Corporate Development

ABOUT THE DEBIENSKO MINE

The Debiensko mine  is a hard coking coal project located in the Upper Silesian Coal Basin in the south west of the Republic of Poland. It is approximately 40 km from the city of Katowice and 40 km from the Czech Republic.

Debiensko is bordered by the Knurow-Szczyglowice Mine in the north west and the Budryk Mine in the north east, both owned and operated by JSW, Europe’s leading producer of hard coking coal.

The Debiensko mine was originally opened in 1898 and was operated by various Polish mining companies until 2000 when mining operations were terminated due to a major government led restructuring of the coal sector caused by a downturn in global coal prices. In early 2006 New World Resources Plc (“NWR”) acquired Debiensko and commenced planning for Debiensko to comply with Polish mining standards, with the aim of accessing and mining hard coking coal seams.

In October 2016, Prairie acquired Debiensko with a view that a revised development approach would potentially allow for the early mining of profitable premium hard coking coal seams, whilst minimising upfront capital costs. Prairie has proven expertise in defining commercially robust projects and applying international standards in Poland. The fact that Debiensko is a former operating mine and its proximity to two neighbouring coking coal producers in the same geological setting, reaffirms the significant potential to successfully bring Debiensko back into operation.

Prairie Mining #PDZ – March 2018 quarterly report highlights

MARCH 2018 QUARTERLY REPORT

Highlights from and subsequent to the quarter end:

Possible Co-Operation between Prairie and JSW

  • During the quarter, Prairie noted press articles regarding possible co-operation between the Company and Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa SA to progress the development and exploitation of the Company’s Polish coking coal assets. Prairie confirmed that meetings were held with JSW where preliminary discussions regarding co-operation took place.
  • Prairie and JSW have since entered into a Non-Disclosure Agreement to allow for the exchange of technical and commercial information in order to facilitate substantial and more advanced discussions regarding any potential co-operation or transaction(s) options in respect of Prairie’s projects.
  • Prairie has made available information in relation to both the Debiensko Mine and Jan Karski Project to allow JSW to conduct assessments of their feasibility and economics.
  • The NDA provides for discussions to be conducted for an initial period up to 6 months, which may be extended by mutual agreement of both parties.

Jan Karski Mine

  • As announced on 21 February 2018, Prairie continued to use modern exploration techniques to transform Jan Karski with latest drill results re-affirming the capability of the project to produce high value ultra-low ash semi-soft coking coal, known as Type 34 coal in Poland. Coking coal quality results announced during the quarter are superior to the drill results announced in May 2017, and further confirm that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft coking coal / Type 34 coking coal deposit with the potential to produce a high value ultra-low ash SSCC with an exceptional CSR and a high 75% coking coal product split.
  • However, on 3 April 2018, Prairie announced that it had commenced legal proceedings against Poland’s Ministry of Environment due to its failure to grant Prairie a Mining Usufruct Agreement over the concessions which form the Jan Karski Mine and in order to protect the Company’s security of tenure over the project.
  • Pursuant to the initiated legal proceedings, the Company is pleased to announce that:
    • the Polish Civil Court has ruled in Prairie’s favour by granting an injunction preventing the MoE from granting any prospecting, exploration or mining concession and concluding usufruct agreements with any other party until full court proceedings are concluded;
    • this decision provides security of tenure over the Jan Karski concessions and effectively safeguards Prairie’s rights at the project until full court proceedings have concluded; and
    • the Lublin Regional Director for the Environment has issued an official notification indicating that the process to establish an Environmental Consent decision for Jan Karski will be concluded by 30 June 2018, being the final approval required for Prairie to submit a Mining Concession application.

Corporate

  • Prairie remains in a financially strong position with cash reserves of A$13 million.
  • With CD Capital’s right to invest a further A$68 million as a cornerstone investor, plus with the Strategic Co-operation Agreement between Prairie and China Coal for financing and construction of Jan Karski, Prairie is financially well positioned to progress with its planned development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski.

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer commented: “The latest drilling result continues to demonstrate that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal project. This presents an outstanding economic development opportunity for the Lublin region, and Chelm province in particular, to become a leading European supplier of coking coal to the steel industry. At Jan Karski we are continuing with the Environmental Consent process, which is the final decision we require in order to apply for a Mining Concession. The injunction recently awarded in Prairie’s favor by the civil court in Warsaw against Poland’s Ministry of Environment effectively safeguards Prairie’s security of tenure at Jan Karski until full court proceedings have taken place. Our discussions with JSW are ongoing and we will continue to update the market in line with the relevant reporting requirements”.

For further information, please contact:

Prairie Mining Limited

+44 20 7478 3900

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer

info@pdz.com.au

Sapan Ghai, Head of Corporate Development

 

JAN KARSKI MINE

The Jan Karski Mine is a large scale semi-soft coking coal project located in the Lublin Coal Basin in south east Poland. The Lublin Coal Basin is an established coal producing province which is well serviced by modern and highly efficient infrastructure, offering the potential for low capital intensity mine development. Jan Karski is situated adjacent to the Bogdanka coal mine which has been in commercial production since 1982 and is the lowest cost hard coal producer in Europe.

Prairie Mining Limited’s use of modern exploration techniques continues to transform Jan Karski with latest drill results re-affriming the capability of the the project to produce high value ultra-low ash semi-soft coking coal, known as Type 34 coal in Poland.

The coking coal quality results are superior to the drill results announced in May 2017, and further confirm that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft coking coal (“SSCC”) / Type 34 coking coal deposit with the potential to produce a high value ultra-low ash SSCC with a coking coal product split of up to 75%.

Key benefits for the local community and the Lublin and Chelm regions associated with the development, construction and operation of Jan Karski  have been recognised as the following:

·       creation of 2,000 direct employment positions and 10,000 indirect jobs for the region once operational;

·       increasing skills of the workforce and through the implementation of International Standard training programmes;

·       stimulating the development of education, health services and communications within the region; and

·       building a mine that creates new employment for generations to come and career paths for families to remain in the region.

Polish Civil Court Grants Injunction in Prairie’s Favour against Poland’s Ministry of Environment

On 3 April 2018, Prairie announced that it had commenced legal proceedings against Poland’s Ministry of Environment (“MoE”) due to its failure to grant Prairie a Mining Usufruct Agreement over the concessions which form the Jan Karski Mine and in order to protect the Company’s security of tenure over the project.

Pursuant to the initiated legal proceedings, the Company is pleased to announce that:

·      the Polish Civil Court has ruled in Prairie’s favour by granting an injunction preventing the MoE from granting prospecting, exploration or mining concessions and concluding usufruct agreements with any other party until full court proceedings are concluded;

·      this decision provides security of tenure over the Jan Karski concessions and effectively safeguards Prairie’s rights at the Project until full court proceedings have concluded; and

·      the Lublin Regional Director for the Environment has issued an official notification indicating that the process to establish an Environmental Consent decision for Jan Karski will be concluded by 30 June 2018, being the final approval required for Prairie to submit a Mining Concession application.

The Regional Civil Court in Warsaw has issued a verdict that forms an injunction preventing the MoE from concluding exploration or mining usufruct agreement(s) regarding the Jan Karski Mine area (including the “Lublin” deposit, as well as the former K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and K-9 concession areas) with any party, other than PD Co Sp. z. o.o. (Prairie Mining’s wholly owned Polish subsidiary). The Court has also ordered that the MoE does not grant any concessions (for prospecting, exploration and/or mining) to any party other than PD Co Sp. z. o.o. This highly favourable court ruling was issued in response to Prairie’s application submitted as part of the legal proceedings commenced by Prairie to protect its tenure at Jan Karski.

As a result of the ruling by the Regional Civil Court in Warsaw, security of tenure over the Jan Karski concessions will be safeguarded until full court proceedings have concluded. It is anticipated that full court proceedings could take 12 months or more to complete.

In the justification to the Court’s ruling, the judge stated that: “Based on the evidence one may at this point state that the plaintiff [Prairie Mining] enjoys the right to request conclusion of the requested mining usufruct agreement for the “Lublin” hard coal area (otherwise known as Jan Karski) resulting from Article 15 of the Geological and Mining Law.”

As discussed above, in April 2018, Prairie commenced legal action against the MoE for breaching the Polish Geological and Mining Law (2011) (“GML”) in relation to the award of a Mining Usufruct Agreement to Prairie at Jan Karski.

Prairie has provided the MoE with all documents required by Polish Law to conclude a Mining Usufruct Agreement, including the Geological Documentation approval and an official application for a Mining Usufruct Agreement.

To date the MoE has still not provided Prairie with a Mining Usufruct Agreement for Jan Karski.

Based on professional advice, Prairie considers that the MoE breached the GML and Polish law and is defending its position having commenced legal proceedings against the MoE through the Polish courts to protect its tenure at Jan Karski.

The Company will also consider any other actions necessary to ensure its concession rights are reserved which may result in the Company taking further action against the MoE including invoking the protection afforded to the Company under any relevant bi-lateral or multi-lateral investment treaties or such other actions as the Company may consider appropriate at the relevant time.

Prairie will continue to update the market in relation to this matter as required.

Regional Director for the Environment sets a new deadline for issuing an Environmental Consent Decision

Prairie completed an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and made submissions to the Lublin Regional Director for the Environment (“RDOS”) for an Environmental Consent decision for Jan Karski in October 2017. RDOS has issued a notice indicating that the Environmental Proceedings in order to issue a decision for Environmental Consent will be concluded by 30 June 2018. RDOS also confirmed receipt of all necessary opinions from other government agencies, including the Regional Water Management Board in Lublin.

Subsequent to the commencement of legal proceedings, Prairie’s team has received a request for additional information from RDOS and, together with the appointed environmental consultants, are working to provide this information, which is expected to be completed within the coming weeks.

Latest Drill Results Affirm Jan Karski as a Semi-Soft Coking Coal Project

During the quarter, Prairie announced the results of enhanced coal quality analysis and test work from a recently completed borehole (Kulik 1) at Jan Karski. The coking coal quality results are superior to the drill results announced in May 2017, and further confirm that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft coking coal (“SSCC”) / Type 34 coking coal deposit with the potential to produce a high value ultra-low ash SSCC with an exceptional CSR and a high 75% coking coal product split.

The Kulik 1 borehole was a large diameter borehole enabling sufficient quantities of coal from the 391 seam to be collected to meet the requirements for physical coke testing, specifically confirmation of Coke Strength after Reaction (“CSR”) and extended coal washability test work. Coke testing was conducted at Centralne Laboratorium Pomiarowo-Badawcze Sp. z o.o. (“CLPB”) laboratories in Poland which is controlled by JSW and is internationally accredited as a commercial coal and coke testing laboratory. Washability and other basic coal quality analyses were conducted in the UK.

CSR analysis is considered vital in testing for a coal’s coking properties and is important to steelmakers as it is an indicator of the performance / strength of the coke produced from the coal. The full range of standard coking tests were also conducted as shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Analysis results from Jan Karski Kulik 1 borehole – 391 seam

COKING PROPERTIES

FSI

7.0

Roga Index

82

CSR

%

54.0

CRI

%

36.5

Ash in Coke

%

5.8

Sulphur in Coke

%

0.78

Giesler Plastometer

Initial Softening

°C

404

Max Fluidity temp

°C

440

Resolidification

°C

463

Max Fluidity

ddpm

268

ASTM Dilation

Softening Temperature

°C

380

Max Contraction Temp

°C

420

Max Dilation Temp

°C

450

Max Dilation

% D

64

PROXIMATE ANALYSIS

Inherent moisture

adb%

1.73

Ash

adb%

3.45

Volatile Matter

adb%

35.5

OTHER COAL PROPERTIES

Sulphur

ar%

1.00

Rank (Ro)

0.85

Vitrinite

%

84

Washability analysis from the Kulik 1 borehole and previous boreholes drilled by Prairie across Jan Karski has demonstrated that due to the low inherent ash and excellent washability characteristics of the 391 seam, Jan Karski SSCC is unique with ash product levels of 3.45% or less (air dried) and far superior to typical ash levels for major coking coal brands (both hard and soft) traded internationally and produced domestically in Europe. Further, the exceptionally high CSR (54) of the 391 seam from Kulik 1 borehole at Jan Karski is at the very top end of the range for globally traded SSCC.

The ultra-low ash content increases the coal’s value-in-use to steel and coke makers, making the product highly saleable in both the domestic European and international markets. One of the key outcomes of utilising ultra-low ash coking coal to produce low ash coke ash is the resulting decreased fuel rate. This has a key environmental benefit for steel makers as it reduces CO2 emissions per tonne of hot metal produced.

Prairie’s analysis predicts increasing global demand for ultra-low ash coking coal for blending with hard coking coal (“HCC”), due to a continuing trend of rising average ash levels in globally traded hard coking coals. Premium HCC resources with low ash are becoming increasingly scarce, forcing consumers to make concessions on HCC ash levels. Ultra-low ash coking coals for blending are becoming increasingly sought after by consumers seeking to “blend-down” the ash levels in their coke blends. This is an advantage for European steelmakers where EU regulations focus on reduced CO2 emissions and compliance with other EU emissions directives. The trend of ever more stringent emissions standards for steelmakers imposed by the EU indicates a positive future for marketability of Jan Karski ultralow ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal.

Increased European Demand for Semi-Soft / Type 34 Coal

Polish demand for hard coal remained strong during 2017, with Poland being forced to import 13.3 million tonnes of hard coal to meet its own needs – an increase of 60% in hard coal imports year on year. This follows a steady trend in Poland over the last few years with domestic production of hard coal declining and increased reliance on imports.

Concurrently, declining production of Czech and Polish semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal has resulted in steel makers becoming more aware of the importance of security of supply of the raw material. Over the last 12 months, lack of delivery of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal has forced some Central European steel makers to introduce urgent measures including changes in the coking charge mix and increased imports, thus generating additional costs and disturbing normal production.

Comparison of Jan Karski’s latest coking coal quality results to other mines in Poland and the Czech Republic that have historically produced SSCC or Type 34 coking coal show the great potential that Jan Karski has to meet European market demand for Type 34 semi-soft coking coal as production from other Czech and Polish mines continues to diminish over the coming years.

DEBIENSKO MINE

The Debiensko Mine (“Debiensko”) is a fully permitted, hard coking coal project located in the Upper Silesian Coal Basin in the south west of the Republic of Poland. It is approximately 40 km from the city of Katowice and 40 km from the Czech Republic.

Debiensko is bordered by the Knurow-Szczyglowice Mine in the north west and the Budryk Mine in the north east, both owned and operated by Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa SA (“JSW”), Europe’s leading producer of hard coking coal.

The Debiensko mine was originally opened in 1898 and was operated by various Polish mining companies until 2000 when mining operations were terminated due to a major government led restructuring of the coal sector caused by a downturn in global coal prices. In early 2006 New World Resources Plc (“NWR”) acquired Debiensko and commenced planning for Debiensko to comply with Polish mining standards, with the aim of accessing and mining hard coking coal seams. In 2008, the Minister of Environment of Poland (“MoE”) granted a 50-year mine license for Debiensko.

In October 2016, Prairie acquired Debiensko with a view that a revised development approach would potentially allow for the early mining of profitable premium hard coking coal seams, whilst minimising upfront capital costs. Prairie has proven expertise in defining commercially robust projects and applying international standards in Poland. The fact that Debiensko is a former operating mine and its proximity to two neighbouring coking coal producers in the same geological setting, reaffirms the significant potential to successfully bring Debiensko back into operation.

Preparation for the Next Phase of Project Studies

Prairie continued to analyse the drill hole data which will be used for engineering design of foundations of structures associated with the shafts, coal handling and preparation plant (“CHPP”) and other surface facilities. These holes are essential in order to assess the soil conditions, properly design structural foundations and thus provide more accurate pricing in the tenders as required for a feasibility study.

Pre-qualification of contractors for the major components of the next phase of Debiensko studies also continued throughout the quarter.

Prairie’s team have also designed an infill drilling program that when undertaken will upgrade more of the resource base at Debienkso to the Measured and Indicated resource categories and support JORC compliant reserve estimation.

CORPORATE

Possible Co-Operation between Prairie and JSW

Prairie and JSW have entered into a Non-Disclosure Agreement (“NDA”) with respect to potential co-operation regarding Prairie’s two Polish coal projects. The purpose of the NDA is to allow for the exchange of technical and commercial information in order to facilitate substantial and more advanced discussions regarding any potential transaction(s) options in respect of Prairie’s projects.

Prairie will make available information in relation to the hard coking coal project under the Debiensko concession, to allow JSW to conduct an assessment of its feasibility and economics, taking into consideration factors including, but not limited to: its stage of development, conditions of the mining concession, environmental permits, and the mining usufruct contract. JSW will also assess other various risks and opportunities, including JSW’s existing infrastructure at the neighbouring Knurów-Szczygłowice mine.

Prairie will also make available to JSW information in relation to the Jan Karski project in the Lublin Coal Basin, to allow JSW to conduct an assessment of the project’s feasibility and economics regarding coking coal, taking into consideration factors including, but not limited to: its phase of development, the physical and chemical parameters of the coal (in particular its coking parameters), the timeframe and conditions with regards to obligations to obtain a mining concession, as well as other various risks and opportunities.

It is emphasised that discussions are at a preliminary stage and that even if they move onto discussions of specific transactions terms, any potential transaction(s), should they occur, may be subject to a number of conditions including, but not limited to, obtaining positive evaluations and expert opinions, necessary corporate approvals, consents and approvals related to funding, consents from Poland’s Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) if required, and any other requirements that may relate to the strategy, objectives and regulatory regimes applicable to either Prairie Mining or JSW.

There can be no certainty as to whether any transaction(s) will be agreed, or the potential form of such transaction(s).

The NDA provides for discussions to be conducted for an initial period up to 6 months, which may be extended by mutual agreement of both parties. The companies will continue to comply with their respective disclosure obligations to the relevant markets, as required.

 

Financial Position

Prairie has cash reserves of A$13 million. With CD Capital’s right to invest a further A$68 million as a cornerstone investor, plus with the Strategic Co-operation Agreement Prairie has with China Coal for financing and construction of Jan Karski, Prairie is in a strong financial position to progress with its planned development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski.

Forward Looking Statements

This release may include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on Prairie’s expectations and beliefs concerning future events. Forward looking statements are necessarily subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Prairie, which could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. Prairie makes no undertaking to subsequently update or revise the forward-looking statements made in this release, to reflect the circumstances or events after the date of that release.

 

Competent Person Statements

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results was extracted from Prairie’s announcement dated 21 February 2018 entitled “Drill Results Affirm Jan Karski’s Status as a Globally Significant Semi-Soft (Type 34) Coking Coal Project”. The information in the original announcement is based on, and fairly represents information compiled or reviewed by Mr Jonathan O’Dell, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr O’Dell is a part time consultant of the Company. Mr O’Dell has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Prairie confirms that: a) it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original announcements; b) all material assumptions and technical parameters included in the original announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed; and c) the form and context in which the relevant Competent Persons’ findings are presented in this presentation have not been materially modified from the original announcements.

APPENDIX 1 – EXPLORATION TENEMENT INFORMATION

As at 31 March 2018, the Company has an interest in the following tenements:

Location

Tenement

Percentage Interest

Status

Tenement Type

Jan Karski, Poland

Jan Karski Mine Plan Area (K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and K-9)*

100

Granted

Exclusive Right to apply for a mining concession

Jan Karski, Poland

Kulik (K-4-5)

100

Granted

Exploration

Jan Karski, Poland

Syczyn (K-8)

100

Granted

Exploration

Jan Karski, Poland

Kopina (K-9)

100

Granted

Exploration

Debiensko, Poland

Debiensko 1**

100

Granted

Mining

Debiensko, Poland

Kaczyce 1

100

Granted

Mining & Exploration (includes gas rights)

 

*  In July 2015, Prairie announced that it had secured the Exclusive Right to apply for a Mining Concession for Jan Karski as a result of its Geological Documentation for the Jan Karski deposit being approved by Poland’s MoE. The approved Geological Documentation covers areas of all four original Exploration Concessions granted to Prairie (K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and K-9) and includes the full extent of the targeted resources within the mine plan for Jan Karski. As a result of the Exclusive Right, Prairie was the only entity with a legal right to lodge a Mining Concession application over Jan Karski for the period up and until 2 April 2018. Under the Polish GML, a Mining Concession application comprises the submission of a Deposit Development Plan (“DDP”), approval of a spatial development plan (rezoning of land for mining use) and an Environmental Consent decision. Prairie has previously announced that the DDP and spatial development plans for Jan Karski have already been approved. 

However, as of the date of this quarterly, Prairie has not yet received the required Environmental Consent decision, which remains pending. Prairie completed an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and made submissions to RDOS for an Environmental Consent decision in October 2017. Prairie has not been able to apply for a Mining Concession for Jan Karski due to the delay in the issuance of an Environmental Consent decision. However, the Environmental Consent proceedings continue to progress and a decision for Environmental Consent will be concluded by 30 June 2018.

 

The approval of Prairie’s Geological Documentation in 2015 also conferred upon Prairie the legal right to apply for a Mining Usufruct Agreement over Jan Karski for an additional 12-month period beyond April 2018, which precludes any other parties being granted any licence over all or part of the Jan Karski concessions. Under Polish law, the MoE is strictly obligated, within three months of Prairie making an application for a Mining Usufruct Agreement, to grant the agreement. It should be noted that the MoE confirmed Prairie’s priority right in two written statements (i.e. in a final administrative decision dated 11 February 2016 and in a formal letter dated 13 April 2016). Prairie applied to the MoE for a Mining Usufruct Agreement over Jan Karski in late December 2017. As of the date of this quarterly the MoE has not made available to Prairie a Mining Usufruct Agreement for Jan Karski, therefore breaching the three-month obligatory period for the agreement to be concluded. Legal advice provided to Prairie concludes that failure of the MoE to grant Prairie the Mining Usufruct Agreement is a breach of Polish law. Accordingly, the Company commenced legal proceedings against the MoE through the Polish courts in order to protect the Company’s security of tenure over the Jan Karski concessions. Since the MoE has not provided a decision within three months regarding Prairie’s Mining Usufruct application, the Polish civil court has the power to enforce conclusion of a Usufruct Agreement in place of the MoE. In the event that a Mining Usufruct Agreement is not made available to the Company on acceptable terms or the Company does not enter into a Mining Usufruct Agreement for any other reason, other parties may be able to apply for exploration or mining rights for all or part of the Jan Karski concession area. However, given that the Civil Court has approved Prairie’s motion for an injunction against the MoE, as described above, the MoE is now prevented from entering into a Usufruct agreement or concession with any other party besides Prairie until the full court proceedings are concluded.

 

**             Under the terms of the Debiensko Mining Concession issued in 2008 by the MoE (which is valid for 50 years from grant date), commencement of production was to occur by 1 January 2018. Not commencing production by January 2018 does not immediately infringe on the validity and expiry date of the current Mining Concession, which is June 2058. However, the concession authority has the right to request the concession holder to reasonably remove any infringements related to non-conformance with the conditions of a Mining Concession and determine a reasonable date for removal of the infringements (under Polish law, the concession authority is required to provide a reasonable timeframe to remedy any non-compliance taking into account the nature of the non-conformance). Failure to remedy the infringements within any reasonable time frame prescribed by the concession authority may lead to commencement of proceedings to limit or withdraw of a concession. In December 2016, the Company submitted an application to the MoE to amend the Debiensko Mining Concession to alter the date for commencement of production from 2018 to 2025, and has provided the MoE with additional information requested. A decision from the MoE is currently pending following a change in the Polish Prime Minister in December 2017 and the appointment of a new Minister of Environment in January 2018.

 

+Rule 5.5

Appendix 5B

Mining exploration entity and oil and gas exploration entity quarterly report

Introduced 01/07/96  Origin Appendix 8  Amended 01/07/97, 01/07/98, 30/09/01, 01/06/10, 17/12/10, 01/05/13, 01/09/16

Name of entity

PRAIRIE MINING LIMITED

ABN

Quarter ended (“current quarter”)

23 008 677 852

31 March 2018

Consolidated statement of cash flows

Current quarter $A’000

Year to date             (9 months)
$A’000

1.

Cash flows from operating activities

1.1

Receipts from customers

1.2

Payments for

(1,921)

(4,875)

(a)   exploration & evaluation

(b)   development

(c)   production

(d)   staff costs

(489)

(1,572)

(e)   administration and corporate costs

(276)

(716)

1.3

Dividends received (see note 3)

1.4

Interest received

94

297

1.5

Interest and other costs of finance paid

1.6

Income taxes paid

1.7

Research and development refunds

1.8

Other (provide details if material)

(a)  Business development costs

(b)  Property rental and gas sales

(147)

151

(672)

399

1.9

Net cash from / (used in) operating activities

(2,588)

(7,140)

2.

Cash flows from investing activities

(22)

(84)

2.1

Payments to acquire:

(a)   property, plant and equipment

(b)   tenements (see item 10)

(c)   investments

(d)   other non-current assets

2.2

Proceeds from the disposal of:

497

(a)   property, plant and equipment

(b)   tenements (see item 10)

(c)   investments

(d)   other non-current assets

2.3

Cash flows from loans to other entities

2.4

Dividends received (see note 3)

2.5

Other (provide details if material)

2.6

Net cash from / (used in) investing activities

(22)

413

3.

Cash flows from financing activities

3.1

Proceeds from issues of shares

3.2

Proceeds from issue of convertible notes

2,627

3.3

Proceeds from exercise of share options

3.4

Transaction costs related to issues of shares, convertible notes or options

(3)

(182)

3.5

Proceeds from borrowings

3.6

Repayment of borrowings

3.7

Transaction costs related to loans and borrowings

3.8

Dividends paid

3.9

Other (provide details if material)

3.10

Net cash from / (used in) financing activities

(3)

2,445

4.

Net increase / (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents for the period

15,140

16,809

4.1

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

4.2

Net cash from / (used in) operating activities (item 1.9 above)

(2,588)

(7,140)

4.3

Net cash from / (used in) investing activities (item 2.6 above)

(22)

413

4.4

Net cash from / (used in) financing activities (item 3.10 above)

(3)

2,445

4.5

Effect of movement in exchange rates on cash held

2

2

4.6

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

12,529

12,529

5.

Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents
at the end of the quarter (as shown in the consolidated statement of cash flows) to the related items in the accounts

Current quarter
$A’000

Previous quarter
$A’000

5.1

Bank balances

2,029

3,640

5.2

Call deposits

10,500

11,500

5.3

Bank overdrafts

5.4

Other (provide details)

5.5

Cash and cash equivalents at end of quarter (should equal item 4.6 above)

12,529

15,140

6.

Payments to directors of the entity and their associates

Current quarter
$A’000

6.1

Aggregate amount of payments to these parties included in item 1.2

(158)

6.2

Aggregate amount of cash flow from loans to these parties included in item 2.3

Nil

6.3

Include below any explanation necessary to understand the transactions included in items 6.1 and 6.2

Payments include executive remuneration (including bonuses), director fees, superannuation and provision of a fully serviced office.

7.

Payments to related entities of the entity and their associates

Current quarter
$A’000

7.1

Aggregate amount of payments to these parties included in item 1.2

7.2

Aggregate amount of cash flow from loans to these parties included in item 2.3

7.3

Include below any explanation necessary to understand the transactions included in items 7.1 and 7.2

Not applicable

8.

Financing facilities available
Add notes as necessary for an understanding of the position

Total facility amount at quarter end
$A’000

Amount drawn at quarter end
$A’000

8.1

Loan facilities

8.2

Credit standby arrangements

8.3

Other (please specify)

8.4

Include below a description of each facility above, including the lender, interest rate and whether it is secured or unsecured. If any additional facilities have been entered into or are proposed to be entered into after quarter end, include details of those facilities as well.

9.

Estimated cash outflows for next quarter

$A’000

9.1

Exploration and evaluation

(1,000)

9.2

Development

9.3

Production

9.4

Staff costs

(500)

9.5

Administration and corporate costs

(200)

9.6

Other (provide details if material)
(a)        Business development costs

(200)

9.7

Total estimated cash outflows

(1,900)

10.

Changes in tenements
(items 2.1(b) and 2.2(b) above)

Tenement reference and location

Nature of interest

Interest at beginning of quarter

Interest at end of quarter

10.1

Interests in mining tenements and petroleum tenements lapsed, relinquished or reduced

Sawin, Poland

Direct

100

10.2

Interests in mining tenements and petroleum tenements acquired or increased

 

Compliance statement

1        This statement has been prepared in accordance with accounting standards and policies which comply with Listing Rule 19.11A.

2        This statement gives a true and fair view of the matters disclosed.

                        [lodged electronically without signature]

Sign here:         ……………………………………………………                        Date: 30 April 2018

(Director/Company secretary)

Print name:       Dylan Browne

Notes

1.            The quarterly report provides a basis for informing the market how the entity’s activities have been financed for the past quarter and the effect on its cash position. An entity that wishes to disclose additional information is encouraged to do so, in a note or notes included in or attached to this report.

2.            If this quarterly report has been prepared in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards, the definitions in, and provisions of, AASB 6: Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources and AASB 107: Statement of Cash Flows apply to this report. If this quarterly report has been prepared in accordance with other accounting standards agreed by ASX pursuant to Listing Rule 19.11A, the corresponding equivalent standards apply to this report.

3.            Dividends received may be classified either as cash flows from operating activities or cash flows from investing activities, depending on the accounting policy of the entity.

However, on 3 April 2018, Prairie announced that it had commenced legal proceedings against Poland’s Ministry of Environment due to its failure to grant Prairie a Mining Usufruct Agreement over the concessions which form the Jan Karski Mine and in order to protect the Company’s security of tenure over the project.

Prairie Mining #PDZ – Half Year Accounts

Interim Financial Report for the Half-Year Ended
31 December 2017

 

Śródroczny raport finansowy za drugie półrocze zakończone
31 grudnia 2017

ABN 23 008 677 852

CORPORATE DIRECTORY | ZBIÓR DANYCH KORPORACYJNYCH

 

DIRECTORS:
Mr Ian Middlemas                  Chairman
Mr Benjamin Stoikovich        Director and CEO
Ms Carmel Daniele               Non-Executive Director
Mr Thomas Todd                    Non-Executive Director
Mr Mark Pearce                       Non-Executive Director
Mr Todd Hannigan                 Alternate Director

Mr Dylan Browne                    Company Secretary

PRINCIPAL OFFICES:
PD Co sp. z. o.o. (Warsaw):
Ul. Wspolna, 35 lok. 4
00-519 Warsaw

Karbonia S.A. (Czerwionka – Leszczyny):

Ul. 3 Maja 44,
44-230 Czerwionka – Leszczyny

 

London:
Unit 3C, 38 Jermyn Street
London SW1Y 6DN
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 207 487 3900

 

Australia (Registered Office):
Level 9, BGC Centre
28 The Esplanade
Perth   WA   6000
Tel: +61 8 9322 6322
Fax: +61 8 9322 6558

SOLICITORS:
Poland:
DLA Piper Wiater sp.k.

United Kingdom:
DLA Piper UK LLP

Australia:
DLA Piper Australia

AUDITOR:
Poland: 
Ernst & Young Audyt Polska sp. z. o.o.

Australia:
Ernst & Young – Perth

 

BANKERS:
Poland:
Bank Zachodni WBK S.A. – Santander Group

Australia:
Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd

 

SHARE REGISTRIES:
Poland:
Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF)
Plac Powstańców Warszawy 1, skr. poczt. 419
00-950 Warszawa
Tel: +48 22 262 50 00

United Kingdom:
Computershare Investor Services PLC
The Pavilions, Bridgewater Road
Bristol BS99 6ZZ
Tel: +44 370 702 0000

Australia:
Computershare Investor Services Pty Ltd
Level 11, 172 St Georges Terrace
Perth WA 6000
Tel: +61 8 9323 2000

 

STOCK EXCHANGE LISTINGS:

Poland:
Warsaw Stock Exchange – GPW Code: PDZ

United Kingdom:
London Stock Exchange (Main Board) – LSE Code: PDZ

Australia:
Australian Securities Exchange – ASX Code: PDZ

 

 

CONTENTS | ZAWARTOŚĆ

Directors’ Report

Directors’ Declaration

Consolidated Statement of Profit or Loss and other Comprehensive Income

Consolidated Statement of Financial Position

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows

The following sections are available in the full version of the Interim Financial Report on our website at www.pdz.com.au  

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

Auditor’s Independence Declaration

Independent Auditor’s Review Report

The Directors of Prairie Mining Limited present their report on the Consolidated Entity consisting of Prairie Mining Limited (“Company” or “Prairie”) and the entities it controlled during the half-year ended 31 December 2017 (“Consolidated Entity” or “Group”).

DIRECTORS

The names and details of the Company’s Directors in office at any time during the half-year and until the date of this report are:

Directors:

Mr Ian Middlemas                               Chairman
Mr Benjamin Stoikovich                     Director and CEO

Ms Carmel Daniele                            Non-Executive Director

Mr Thomas Todd                                Non-Executive Director 
Mr Mark Pearce                                   Non-Executive Director
Mr Todd Hannigan                              Alternate Director


Unless otherwise shown, all Directors were in office from the beginning of the half-year until the date of this report.

OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW

Operations 

Highlights during, and subsequent to, the end of the half-year include:

Debiensko Mine (Premium Hard Coking Coal)

·      The newly appointed Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, officially presented the Ministry of Development’s “Program for Silesia” which included a strategy for the re-start of a major coking coal mine in the Upper Silesian region, where the Debiensko Mine (“Debiensko”) is located, and highlighted the positive social and economic impacts that mine development would have on the region.

·      Mine site redevelopment planning continued at the Debiensko to advance with completion of initial demolition works, pre-qualification of study contractors, and preparation for an infill drill program to increase JORC Measured and Indicated Resources.

·      Prairie continued discussions with regional steel makers and coke producers for future coking coal sales and offtake.

·      Hard coking coal prices continued to trade at price levels above US$225/t FOB Australia.

·      Market analysts forecast underinvestment in new coking coal mine development has potential to result in sustained high coking coal prices.

·      European Commission continues to designate coking coal as a Critical Raw Material in its 2017 review.

Jan Karski Mine (Semi-Soft Coking Coal)

·      Prairie’s use of modern exploration techniques continues to transform the Jan Karski Mine (“Jan Karski”) with latest drilling results re-affirming the capability of the project to produce high value ultra-low ash semi-soft coking coal.

·      Environmental permitting for Jan Karski advanced following successful submission of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (“ESIA”) to the Lublin Regional Environment Directorate for Environmental Consent.

·      Spatial development plan approved at Jan Karski meaning the rezoning of 56 hectares of agricultural land for industrial use is complete allowing for construction of a mine site, shafts and associated surface infrastructure.

·      Preparation of the Mining Concession application is underway and anticipated to be lodged in the coming weeks, subject to the Company being issued with Environmental Consent.

·      China Coal’s technical studies for the construction of Jan Karski have significantly advanced and Prairie is currently reviewing study documents provided by China Coal. The studies will be revised to incorporate the latest coal quality results from drilling at Jan Karski as well as any conditions stipulated in the Environmental Consent and the Mining Concession to be granted for Jan Karski.

Corporate

·      In July 2017, Prairie and CD Capital completed an additional investment of US$2.0 million ($2.6 million) in the form of a non-redeemable, non-interest-bearing convertible loan note (“Loan Note 2”).

·      Cash on hand of $15.1 million and CD Capital’s right to invest a further $68 million as a cornerstone investor, plus with the Strategic Co-operation Agreement between Prairie and China Coal for financing and construction of Jan Karski, Prairie is well positioned to progress with its planned development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski.

Debiensko Mine

Debiensko is a hard coking coal project located in the Upper Silesian Coal Basin in the south west of the Republic of Poland. It is approximately 40 km from the city of Katowice and 40 km from the Czech Republic.

Debiensko is bordered by the Knurow-Szczyglowice Mine in the north west and the Budryk Mine in the north east, both owned and operated by Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa SA (“JSW”), Europe’s leading producer of hard coking coal.

The Debiensko mine was originally opened in 1898 and was operated by various Polish mining companies until 2000 when mining operations were terminated due to a major government led restructuring of the coal sector caused by a downturn in global coal prices. In early 2006 New World Resources Plc (“NWR”) acquired Debiensko and commenced planning for Debiensko to comply with Polish mining standards, with the aim of accessing and mining hard coking coal seams. In 2008, the Minister of Environment of Poland (“MoE”) granted a 50-year mine license for Debiensko.

Premium Quality Hard Coking Coal

Preliminary analysis indicates that a range of premium hard coking coals that will be in high demand from European steelmakers can be produced from Debiensko. This analysis is based on historical data, neighbouring operational coking coal mines and the results of a suite of modern coking tests performed on selected seams from a fully cored borehole drilled by the previous owners in 2015/16. Two premium hard coking coal specifications have been delineated from select seams at Debiensko, namely Medium volatile matter hard coking coal (“Mid-vol HCC”) and Low volatile matter hard coking coal (“Low-vol HCC”). Future study phases will determine the precise Debiensko premium hard coking coal quality specification on a year by year basis depending on the final adopted mine plan, mining schedule and extent of coal blending.

Both Debiensko’s Mid-vol and Low-vol HCC lie within the range of premium hard coking coals produced globally. Indications are that the Mid-vol HCC at Debiensko is present between 850 m to 1,000 m from surface and the Low-vol HCC is present 1,000 m to 1,300 m below surface i.e. at depths similar to adjacent operating mines owned by JSW – the largest coking coal producer in Europe

 

Re-start of a Coking Coal mine included in “Program for Silesia” and new political appointments in Poland

Prairie notes that during the half-year, the Polish Government appointed a new Prime Minister, Mr Mateusz Morawiecki, who immediately prior to his current role, was Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance in Poland. Prairie also notes that in January 2018, a new Minister of Environment, Mr Henryk Kowalczyk, was appointed as part of a cabinet reshuffle under the new Prime Minister. In Poland, responsibility for exploration and Mining Concessions is the responsibility of the MoE.

 

Following his appointment, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, presented the Polish Ministry of Development’s “Program for Silesia” (“Program”) – a strategic document which anticipated the re-construction of a coking coal mine in the region of Upper Silesia, where Debiensko is located. The Program details the creation of 1,500 direct jobs in the region and indicates the social and economic benefits of re-construction of a coking coal mine, to potentially be funded by foreign and Polish capital.

 

Preparation for the Next Phase of Project Studies

Following completion of a 28 shallow geo-technical drill program during the period, Prairie continued to analyse the drill hole data which will be used for engineering design of foundations of structures associated with the shafts, coal handling and preparation plant (“CHPP”) and other surface facilities. These holes are essential in order to assess the soil conditions, properly design structural foundations and thus provide more accurate pricing in the tenders as required for a feasibility study.

 

Pre-qualification of contractors for the major components of the next phase of Debiensko studies also continued throughout the period including contractors for the:

 

·        In-fill drilling program (to update measured and indicated resources);

·        CHPP;

·        Shafts and bulk coal winder;

·        Desalination plant; and

·        Surface facilities.

 

Demolition works continued throughout the period specifically targeting old structures including walkways and old administrative buildings. To date, Prairie has completed demolition works on a number of old surface structures of the former Debiensko mine including the bathhouse, switchgear building and locomotive garage.

Jan Karski Mine

Latest Drill Results Affirm Jan Karski as a Semi-Soft Coking Coal Project

Prairie’s use of modern exploration techniques continues to transform Jan Karski with latest drill results re-affriming the capability of the the project to produce high value ultra-low ash semi-soft coking coal, known as Type 34 coal in Poland.

The coking coal quality results are superior to the drill results announced in May 2017, and further confirm that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft coking coal (“SSCC”) / Type 34 coking coal deposit with the potential to produce a high value ultra-low ash SSCC with an exceptional CSR and a high 75% coking coal product split.

Submission of ESIA & Initiation of Public Consultation

An application for issuing the environmental decision together with the ESIA was submitted to the Regional Director for Environmental Protection (“RDOS”) in Lublin in October 2017. Taking into account the RDOS’s additional comments the motion and ESIA were supplemented in late November 2017. The Environmental Consent process has now officially been initiated by RDOS.

Prairie is now waiting for approval of the ESIA in the form of an Environmental Consent decision, which is the last component to meet all formal requirements to apply for the Mining Concession for construction for Jan Karski.

As part of the environmental permitting process, Prairie initiated public consultations in three municipalities, including Wierzbica, Siedliszcze and Cyców. Presentations on Jan Karski’s development plans were given by Mr Miroslaw Taras (Prairie’s Group Executive), Witold Wołoszyn (Prairie’s Environmental and Planning Manager) and specialists from the international environmental consulting group, Multiconsult Polska who prepared the ESIA. Key advantages for the local community related to employment opportunities and social benefits associated with the development, construction and operation of Jan Karski including:

 

·        creation of 2,000 direct employment positions and 10,000 indirect jobs for the region once operational;

·        increasing skills of the workforce and through the implementation of International Standard training programmes;

·        stimulating the development of education, health services and communications within the region; and

·        building a mine that creates new employment for generations to come and career paths for families to remain in the region.

China Coal Progress and Financing Discussions

In November 2017, the Company hosted a delegation in Poland including China Coal No.5 Construction Company Ltd (“China Coal”) and the Chinese Government’s officially authorised coal mine design institute Jinan Mine Design Institute, during which locally provided content for construction of Jan Karski was finalised alongside domestic Polish specialists, subcontractors and partners who will provide relevant Polish content.

China Coal’s non-JORC technical studies for the construction and funding of the Jan Karski Mine have significantly advanced and Prairie is currently reviewing study documents (“Studies”) received from China Coal subsequent to the half-year end. In accordance with the Strategic Co-operation Agreement between Prairie and China Coal, the Studies will form the basis for provision of debt financing out of China for the construction and development of Jan Karski. The Studies are being undertaken in accordance with Chinese official mine design and banking standards for coal mine projects, and to comply with domestic Polish engineering standards and standards for mechanical and electrical equipment. The terms of the Environmental Consent and Mining Concession for Jan Karski will be incorporated into the final engineering design, as well as results from the latest coal quality and hydrogeological drilling works being conducted by the Company.

Prairie and China Coal continue to advance discussions with Chinese banks to provide debt facilities to fund construction of the Project and enter into a complete Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (“EPC”) contract under which China Coal would construct the Jan Karski Mine.

Results of Operations

The net loss of the Consolidated Entity for the half-year ended 31 December 2017 was $5,297,797 (31 December 2016: $5,337,988). Significant items contributing to the current half-year loss and the substantial differences from the previous half-year include to the following:

 

(i)         Exploration and evaluation expenses of $4,047,621 (31 December 2016: $2,565,889), which is attributable to the Group’s accounting policy of expensing exploration and evaluation expenditure incurred by the Group subsequent to the acquisition of rights to explore and up to the commencement of a bankable feasibility study for each separate area of interest. As a direct result of exploration and evaluation activities conducted during the half-year, the Group achieved key milestones including (i) completed drilling at Jan Karski which re-affirmed the capability of the project to produce SSCC; (ii) permitting activities continued at Jan Karski including submission of an ESIA and approval of spatial development plans which will form the basis of a Mining Concession application; (iii) substantial advancement of China Coal’s technical studies for construction of the Jan Karski Mine; and (iv) mine site redevelopment planning continued at Debiensko including advancement of demolition works pre-qualification of study contractors and preparation for an infill drill program to increase JORC Measured and Indicated Resources;

 

(ii)        Business development expenses of $512,267 (31 December 2016: $484,478) which includes expenses relating to the Group’s investor relations activities during the six months to 31 December 2017 including brokerage fees, public relations, digital marketing, travel costs, attendances at conferences and business development consultant costs;

 

(iii)       Other expenses of nil (31 December 2016: $500,236) which relates to legal, accounting and other consultant costs in relation to the extensive due diligence and legal process conducted by the Company to effectively execute the acquisition of Karbonia in 2016;

 

(iv)       Non-cash share-based payment expenses of $200,422 (31 December 2016: $167,060) due to incentive securities issued to key management personnel and other key employees and consultants of the Group as part of the long-term incentive plan to reward key management personnel and other key employees and consultants for the long-term performance of the Group. The expense results from the Group’s accounting policy of expensing the fair value (determined using an appropriate pricing model) of incentive securities granted on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the options and rights. At 31 December 2017 1.2 million unvested performance rights were forfeited;

 

(v)        Non-cash fair value loss of $212,687 (31 December 2016: $1,847,018) which is attributable to the non-cash fair value movements on the conversion right of the first CD Capital convertible loan note (“Loan Note 1”) accounted as a financial liability at fair value through profit and loss. This financial liability increases in size as the share price of the Company increases. With the share price increasing by some 8% during the half-year, the size of the loss attributable to the financial liability has increased. When Loan Note 1 converts into shares and the CD Options are issued, the financial liability will be reclassified from a liability to equity and will require no cash settlement by the Company; and

 

(vi)       Revenue of $441,023 (31 December 2016: $403,179) consisting of interest revenue of $189,164 (31 December 2016: $208,330) and the receipt of $251,859 (31 December 2016: $194,849) of gas and property lease income derived at Debiensko.

Financial Position

At 31 December 2017, the Group had cash reserves of $15,146,766 (30 June 2017: $16,826,854) and with CD Capital’s right to invest a further $68 million in the Company as a strategic partner, this places the Group in a strong financial position to continue with its planned development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski.

At 31 December 2017, the Company had net assets of $10,634,740 (30 June 2017: $13,095,130) a decrease of approximately 19% compared with 30 June 2017. This is largely attributable to the decrease in cash, the increase in other financial liabilities coupled with the loss for the six months to 31 December 2017.

Business Strategies and Prospects for Future Financial Years

Prairie’s strategy is to create long-term shareholder value by creating synergies and developing both Debiensko and Jan Karski in Poland.

To date, the Group has not commenced production of any minerals. To achieve its objective, the Group currently has the following business strategies and prospects:

·           Commence a focused in-fill drill program to increase JORC measured and indicated resources to support future feasibility studies for Debiensko;

·           Deliver a re-engineered mine plan to produce a feasibility study to international standards with a focus on near term production at Debiensko;

·           Continue to advance discussions with regional steel makers and coke producers for future coking coal sales and offtake at Debiensko;

·           Formally lodge a Mining Concession application for Jan Karski in the coming weeks, subject to the Company being issued with Environmental Consent;

·           Furthering discussions with a select group of Chinese financing institutions as China Coal nears completion of its Studies; and

·           Based on the results of the Studies, enter into a complete EPC contract under which China Coal will construct the Jan Karski Mine.

All of these activities are inherently risky and the Board is unable to provide certainty of the expected results of these activities, or that any or all of these likely activities will be achieved. The material business risks faced by the Group that could have an effect on the Group’s future prospects, and how the Group manages these risks, include the following:

 

·           The Company’s activities will require further capital in future years – As at 31 December 2017, the Company has cash in excess of $15 million which places it in an excellent position to conduct its current planned exploration and development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski. However, the ability of the Company to finance capital investment in future years for the construction and future operation of the Company’s projects is dependent, among other things, on the Company’s ability to raise additional future funding either through equity or debt financing. Any failure to obtain sufficient financing in the future may result in delaying or indefinite postponement of any future construction of the projects or even a loss of property interest (in the future). The key items which the Company would require further funding in future years would be for the construction of the mines at each project.

             In this regard, and pursuant to the CD Capital investment agreement, CD Capital has a first right to invest a further $55 million in any future fund raise conducted by the Company, plus CD Capital will have the ability to inject a further $13 million through the exercise of $0.60 options (“CD Options”) to be held in the Company. There is however no guarantee that CD Capital would take up this right in the future (or exercise the CD Options). There is also a risk that the Company’s obligation to offer CD Capital a first right of refusal on any future fund raising could prejudice the Company’s ability to raise funds from investors other than CD Capital. However, the Company considers that it would not be necessary to undertake such development actions until it has secured financing to do so and the timing for commencement of such actions would accordingly depend on the date that such financing is secured. If, in the unlikely event that future financing cannot be secured, the Group has the flexibility and ability to significantly reduce its ongoing expenditure.

             The Company has also signed a Strategic Co-operation Agreement with China Coal for the financing and construction of Jan Karski. Subsequent to the end of the half-year, China Coal and Prairie continue to advance towards completion the Studies, which will provide the basis for an EPC contract and finalising a term sheet with Chinese financing institutions for a construction funding package for Jan Karski.

             Furthermore, the Company’s Board of Directors has a successful track record of fundraising for natural resources projects, including large scale coal projects, and has completed successful financing transactions with strategic partners, large institutional fund managers, off-take partners and traders and project finance lenders.

             There is however no guarantee that the then prevailing market conditions will allow for a future fundraising or that new investors will be prepared to subscribe for ordinary shares or at the price at which they are willing to do so in the future. Failure to obtain sufficient future financing may result in delaying or indefinite postponement of appraisal and any development of the Company’s projects in the future, a loss of the Company’s personnel and ultimately a loss of its interest in the projects. There can be no assurance that additional future capital or other types of financing will be available, if needed, or that, if available, the terms of such future financing will be favourable to the Company.

             If the Company obtains debt financing in the future, it will be exposed to the risk of leverage and its activities could become subject to restrictive loan and lease covenants and undertakings. If the Company obtains future equity financing other than on a pro rata basis to existing Shareholders, the future percentage ownership of the existing Shareholders may be reduced, Shareholders may then experience subsequent dilution and/or such securities may have preferred rights, options and pre-emption rights senior to the Ordinary Shares. There can be no assurance that the Company would be successful in overcoming these risks in the future or any other problems encountered in connection with such financings.

·           Risk of maintaining project concessions – The Company’s mining exploration and development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski are dependent upon the alteration of, or as the case may be, the maintenance of appropriate licences, concessions, leases, claims, permits and regulatory consents which may be withdrawn or made subject to limitations. The maintaining of concessions, obtaining renewals, or attaining concessions alterations, often depends on the Company being successful in obtaining required statutory approvals for its proposed activities and that the licences, concessions, leases, claims, permits or consents it holds will be renewed and altered as and when required. In this regard the Company has made an application to the Polish MoE, in December 2016, to amend the Debiensko Mining Concession (which is valid until 2058) to alter the commencement of production from 1 January 2018 to 2025. Not commencing production by January 2018 does not immediately infringe on the validity and expiry date of the current Mining Concession, however, the concession authority has the right to request the concession holder to reasonably remove any infringements related to non-conformance with the conditions of a Mining Concession and determine a reasonable date for removal of the infringements (under Polish law, the concession authority is required to provide a reasonable timeframe to remedy any non-compliance taking into account the nature of the non-conformance). Failure to remedy the infringements within any reasonable time frame prescribed by the concession authority may lead to commencement of proceedings to limit or withdraw a concession. A decision from the MoE on the Company’s amendment application is currently pending following a change of the Polish Prime Minister in December 2017 and the appointment of a new Minister of Environment in January 2018. Under Poland’s Geological and Mining Law, the MoE is required to view any application to modify a concession in the same manner as any initial application for a concession, in that the award of the concession is not in detriment to public interest (building a mine is considered to be in the best interest of the public), does not particularly breach any environmental laws (Karbonia was awarded with Environmental Consent prior to being granted a Mining Concession) and is not in breach of the spatial development plan (Karbonia was granted with spatial approval prior to the award of the Debiensko Mining Concession).

On 1 July 2015, the Company announced that it had secured the Exclusive Right to apply for a Mining Concession for Jan Karski. As a result of its geological documentation for the Jan Karski deposit being approved, Prairie is currently the only entity that can lodge a Mining Concession application over Jan Karski within a three (3) year period up and until 2 April 2018. The approved geological documentation covers an area comprising of all four of the original Exploration Concessions granted to Prairie (K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and K-9) and includes the full extent of the targeted resources within the mine plan for Jan Karski. In this regard, no beneficial title interest was surrendered by the Company when the K-6-7 Exploration Concession expired in 2017. Under Polish mining law, and owing to the Exclusive Right the Company has secured, Prairie is currently the only entity that may apply for and be granted a Mining Concession with respect to the K-6-7 area (the Exclusive Right also applies to the K-4-5, K-8 and K-9 areas of Jan Karski). There is no requirement for the Company to hold an Exploration Concession in order exercise the Exclusive Right and apply for a Mining Concession. In addition, Prairie has the right to apply for and be granted, within 3 months of making an application, a mining usufruct agreement for an additional 12 month period that precludes any other parties being granted a licence over all or part of the Jan Karski concessions. Prairie applied for a mining usufruct agreement in December 2017 with the decision from the Polish MoE still pending. In the event that a mining usufruct agreement is not made available to the Company on acceptable terms or the Company does not enter in to a mining usufruct agreement for any other reason, other parties may be able to apply for a Mining Concession for all or part of the Jan Karski license area.

If, however, in a scenario where the MoE does not grant the Company with a mining usufruct in the required timeframe, legal advice sought by Company outlines that the Group will be in a position to file a civil law claim against the Polish authorities which could overturn the authority’s decision not to grant Prairie a mining usufruct. In any event, The Company intends to submit a Mining Concession application over the mine plan area at Jan Karski (which includes K-6-7), which is subject to the approval of the MoE, within the coming weeks subject to the Company being issued with Environmental Consent. There is no assurance that the Company will be issued Environmental Consent, however the Company believes that the Environmental Consent application, as submitted in October 2017 and supplemented in November 2017, was complete and complied with formal requirements of the relevant Polish environmental regulations.

There is also no assurance that such applications (or renewals or alterations) of the concessions will be granted or that such applications, renewals, alterations, rights and title interests will not be revoked or significantly altered. If such applications, renewals or alterations of concessions applied for are not granted or are in fact revoked in the future, there is a risk that this may have a material adverse effect on the financial performance and operations at Jan Karski, Debiensko, the Company and on the value of the Company’s securities.

·           Risk of further challenges by Bogdanka – Since April 2015, Lubelski Wegiel Bogdanka (“Bogdanka”) has made a number of applications and appeals to the Polish MoE seeking a Mining Concession application over the Company’s K-6-7 Exploration Concession and priority right (only one Exploration Concession which comprises of the Jan Karski Mine). All applications and appeals previously made by Bogdanka have been outright rejected. However, Bogdanka has made a further appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court (with no court hearing being scheduled to date). The Supreme Administrative Court has no authority to grant Bogdanka a Mining Concession but it may however cancel the MoE’s previous rejection decision. If the Supreme Administrative Court does cancel the MoE decision, the MoE will be required to re-assess Bogdanka’s Mining Concession application. These proceedings do not relate to the Prairie’s valid and existing priority right to apply for a Mining Concession over the K-6-7 area. As discussed above Bogdanka has in the past raised several appeals challenging the Company’s title to the Exploration Concessions comprising the Jan Karski Mine. There is therefore no guarantee that Bogdanka will not seek to file further appeals to future decisions taken by government departments in the course of the Jan Karski Mine development timeline.

·           Operations conducted in an emerging market – The Company’s operations are located in Poland and will be exposed to related risks and uncertainties associated with this jurisdiction. Changes in mining or investment policies, laws or regulations (or the application thereof) or shifts in political attitude in Poland, in particular to mining, use of coal, and foreign ownership of coal projects may adversely affect the operation or profitability of the Company. The Company continues to consult with the various levels of Government but there can be no assurances that current or future political developments in Poland will not directly impact the Company’s operations or its ability to attract funding for its operations. The Company also competes with many other companies in Poland, including companies with established mining operations. Some of these companies have greater financial resources and political influence than the Company and, as a result, may be in a better position to compete with or impede the Company’s current or future activities.

·           The Company may be adversely affected by fluctuations in coal prices and/or foreign exchange – The price of coal fluctuates widely and is affected by numerous factors beyond the control of the Company. Coal prices are currently high compared to previous levels but there is no guarantee that prices will remain at this level in the future. Future production, if any, from the Company’s mineral properties and its profitability will be dependent upon the price of coal being adequate to make these properties economic. Current and planned development activities are predominantly denominated in Euros and the Company’s ability to fund these activates may be adversely affected if the Australian dollar continues to fall against the Euro. The Company currently does not engage in any hedging or derivative transactions to manage commodity price or foreign exchange risk. As the Company’s operations change, this policy will be reviewed periodically going forward.

SIGNIFICANT EVENTS AFTER THE REPORTING PERIOD

 

(i)         On 9 February 2018, the Company issued an announcement, following recent press articles, regarding possible co-operation between the Company and JSW to progress the development and exploitation of the Company’s Polish coal projects. Prairie confirms that a meeting was held with JSW where preliminary discussions regarding co-operation took place. Discussions are at a very early stage and there can be no certainty as to whether any co-operation will be agreed in the future; and

 

(ii)        On 21 February 2018, the Company released drill results at Jan Karski which re-affirmed the capability of the project to produce high value ultra-low ash semi-soft coking coal.

Other than the above, there were no significant events occurring after balance date requiring disclosure.

 

AUDITOR’S INDEPENDENCE DECLARATION

Section 307C of the Corporations Act 2001 requires our auditors, Ernst and Young, to provide the Directors of Prairie Mining Limited with an Independence Declaration in relation to the review of the half-year financial report. This Independence Declaration is on page 22 and forms part of this Directors’ Report in the full version of the Interim Financial Report.

 

Signed in accordance with a resolution of the Directors.

BEN STOIKOVICH

Director

 

 

9 March 2018

Forward Looking Statements

This report may include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on Prairie’s expectations and beliefs concerning future events. Forward looking statements are necessarily subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Prairie, which could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. Prairie makes no undertaking to subsequently update or revise the forward-looking statements made in this release, to reflect the circumstances or events after the date of that release.

DIRECTORS’ DECLARATION

 

In accordance with a resolution of the Directors of Prairie Mining Limited, I state that:

In the reasonable opinion of the Directors and to the best of their knowledge:

(a)        the attached financial statements and notes thereto for the period ended 31 December 2017 are in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001, including:

(i)         complying with Accounting Standard AASB 134 Interim Financial Reporting and the Corporations Regulations 2001; and

(ii)        giving a true and fair view of the financial position of the Group as at 31 December 2017 and of its performance for the half-year ended on that date; and

(b)        The Directors Report, which includes the Operating and Financial Review, includes a fair review of the information required by:

(i)      DTR4.2.7R of the Disclosure and Transparency Rules in the United Kingdom, being an indication of important events during the first six months of the current financial year and their impact on the half-year financial statements, and a description of the principal risks and uncertainties for the remaining six months of the year; and

(ii)     DTR4.2.8R of the Disclosure and Transparency Rules in the United Kingdom, being related party transactions that have taken place in the first six months of the current financial year and that have materially affected the financial position or performance of the Group during that period, and any changes in the related party transactions described in the last annual report that could have such a material effect; and

(c)        there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Company will be able to pay its debts as and when they become due and payable.

 

 

On behalf of the Board

 

 

BEN STOIKOVICH

Director

 

9 March 2018

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF PROFIT OR LOSS AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

FOR THE HALF-YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2017

 

 

Half-Year Ended
31 December 2017
$

Half-Year Ended
31 December 2016
$

Revenue

441,023

403,179

Other income

325,000

Exploration and evaluation expenses

(4,047,621)

(2,565,889)

Employment expenses

(66,680)

(68,774)

Administration and corporate expenses

(487,870)

(238,129)

Occupancy expenses

(211,273)

(194,583)

Share-based payment expenses

(200,422)

(167,060)

Business development expenses

(512,267)

(484,478)

Other expenses

(500,236)

Fair value movements

(212,687)

(1,847,018)

Loss before income tax

(5,297,797)

(5,337,988)

Income tax expense

Net loss for the period

(5,297,797)

(5,337,988)

Net loss attributable to members of Prairie Mining Limited

(5,297,797)

(5,337,988)

Other comprehensive income

Items that may be reclassified subsequently to profit or loss:

Exchange differences on translation of foreign operations

42,842

(150,679)

Total other comprehensive income/(loss) for the period

42,842

(150,679)

Total comprehensive loss for the period

(5,254,955)

(5,488,667)

Total comprehensive loss attributable to members of Prairie Mining Limited

(5,254,955)

(5,488,667)

Basic and diluted loss per share (cents per share)

(3.16)

(3.52)

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION

AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2017

 

31 December 2017
$

30 June
2017

$

ASSETS

Current Assets

Cash and cash equivalents

15,146,766

16,826,854

Trade and other receivables

991,479

1,094,997

Total Current Assets

16,138,245

17,921,851

Non-Current Assets

Property, plant and equipment

2,444,548  

2,779,526

Exploration and evaluation assets

2,699,523

2,603,172

Total Non-Current Assets

5,144,071

5,382,698

TOTAL ASSETS

21,282,316

23,304,549

LIABILITIES

Current Liabilities

Trade and other payables

2,011,403

2,109,127

Provisions

616,795

580,129

Other financial liabilities

1,841,338

1,783,283

Non-cash other financial liabilities

4,813,433

4,600,746

Total Current Liabilities

9,282,969

9,073,285

Non-Current Liabilities

Provisions

1,364,607

1,136,134

Total Non-Current Liabilities

1,364,607

1,136,134

TOTAL LIABILITIES

10,647,576

10,209,419

NET ASSETS

10,634,740  

13,095,130

EQUITY

Contributed equity

61,071,856

58,477,713

Reserves

2,501,603 

2,258,339

Accumulated losses

(52,938,719)

(47,640,922)

TOTAL EQUITY

10,634,740  

13,095,130

 

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN EQUITY

FOR THE HALF-YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2017

 

Contributed Equity

Share-based Payments Reserve

Foreign Currency Translation Reserve

Accumulated Losses

Total
Equity

$

$

$

$

$

Balance at 1 July 2017

58,477,713

1,529,894

728,445

(47,640,922)

13,095,130

Net loss for the period

(5,297,797)

(5,297,797)

Other comprehensive income for the half-year

Exchange differences on translation of foreign operations

42,842

42,842

Total comprehensive income/(loss) for the period

42,842

(5,297,797)

(5,254,955)

Transactions with owners recorded directly in equity

Issue of convertible notes (Loan Note 2) (Note 12)

2,627,430

2,627,430

Convertible note issue costs

(27,418)

(27,418)

Share issue costs

(5,869)

(5,869)

Forfeiture of performance rights

(1,134,010)

(1,134,010)

Recognition of share-based payments

1,334,432

1,334,432

Balance at 31 December 2017

61,071,856

1,730,316

771,287

(52,938,719)

10,634,740  

Balance at 1 July 2016

51,298,932

3,010,300

33,193

(36,526,665)

17,815,760

Net loss for the period

(5,337,988)

(5,337,988)

Other comprehensive income for the half-year

Exchange differences on translation of foreign operations

(150,679)

(150,679)

Total comprehensive income/(loss) for the period

(150,679)

(5,337,988)

(5,488,667)

Transactions with owners recorded directly in equity

Issue of ordinary shares

50,000

50,000

Share issue costs

(1,918)

(1,918)

Forfeiture of performance rights

(396,001)

(396,001)

Recognition of share-based payments

513,061

513,061

Balance at 31 December 2016

51,347,014

3,127,360

(117,486)

(41,864,653)

12,492,235

 

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE HALF-YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2017

 

Half-Year Ended
31 December 2017
$

Half-Year Ended
31 December 2016
$

Cash flows from operating activities

Payments to suppliers and employees

(5,078,182)

(4,890,288)

Proceeds from property and gas sales

248,859

94,849

Interest revenue from third parties        

202,758

231,437

Net cash outflow from operating activities

(4,626,565)

(4,564,002)

Cash flows from investing activities

Purchase of plant and equipment

(60,008)

Proceeds from sale of property

495,008

Purchase of controlled entity

(742,367)

Proceeds from sale of base metals project

325,000

Net cash inflow/(outflow) from investing activities

435,000

(417,367)

Cash flows from financing activities

Proceeds from issue of convertible note

2,627,430

Payments for issue of convertible note

(54,611)

Payments for share issue costs

(61,342)

Net cash inflow from financing activities

2,511,477

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents

(1,680,088)

(4,981,369)

Net foreign exchange differences

(4,980)

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period

16,826,854

18,063,119

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period

15,146,766

 13,076,770

The following sections in the full version of the Interim Financial Report, along with all figures and illustrations, are available on our website at www.pdz.com.au  

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

Auditor’s Independence Declaration

Independent Auditor’s Review Report

Paweł Różyński of RZECZ o BIZNESIE Polish business TV channel interviews Benjamin Stoikovich, CEO of Prairie Mining #PDZ

Paweł Różyński of RZECZ o BIZNESIE Polish business TV channel interviews Benjamin Stoikovich, CEO of Prairie Mining #PDZ

Prairie Mining #PDZ – Drilling Results Affirm Jan Karski as Semi-Soft Coking Coal

PRAIRIE MINING #PDZ – DRILL RESULTS AFFIRM JAN KARSKI’S STATUS AS A GLOBALLY SIGNIFICANT SEMI-SOFT (TYPE 34) COKING COAL PROJECT 

HIGHLIGHTS

  • Prairie’s use of modern exploration techniques continues to transform the Jan Karski Mine with latest drill results re-affirming the capability of the Project to produce high value ultra-low ash semi-soft coking coal, known as Type 34 coal in Poland
  • Outstanding results from coke oven testing demonstrate superior coal quality specification compared to typical parameters of internationally traded semi-soft coking coals and domestic Type 34 coals, including an exceptionally high Coke Strength after Reaction which is a parameter highly prized by steelmakers
  • Historically Poland’s Lublin Coal Basin has been associated with thermal coal production, however Prairie’s exploration program conducted according to international standards has demonstrated beyond doubt that the 391 coal seam at Jan Karski hosts a globally significant deposit of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal
  • Washplant flow sheet design conducted as part of the China Coal technical studies anticipates mine production will be up to 75% ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, with outstanding overall saleable coal yield of 82%
  • Czech and Polish supply of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal to the European steel industry has dramatically decreased over the last two years due to mine closures and declining production, with regional coke and steelmakers forced to replace the supply deficit with imports
  • Benchmarking analysis of Jan Karski’s ultra-low ash product against semi-soft coking coal produced in the Czech Republic and from recently closed Polish mines demonstrates the potential of the Jan Karski Type 34 coal to replace these coals in the regional market
  • The Company can now advance discussions with regional steelmakers and coke producers for future coking coal sales and offtake on the basis of selling ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coals from Jan Karski
  • Drill results will be incorporated in China Coal’s technical studies for the Jan Karski Mine

 

Prairie Mining Limited is pleased to announce the results of enhanced coal quality analysis and test work from a recently completed borehole (Kulik 1) at its 100% owned Jan Karski Mine. The coking coal quality results are superior to the drill results announced in May 2017, and further confirm that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft coking coal (“SSCC”) / Type 34 coking coal deposit with the potential to produce a high value ultra-low ash SSCC with an exceptional CSR and a high 75% coking coal product split.

Comparison of the latest coking coal quality results to other mines in Poland and the Czech Republic that have historically produced SSCC or Type 34 coking coal show the great potential Jan Karski has to meet European market demand for Type 34 semi-soft coking coal as production from other Czech and Polish mines continues to diminish over the coming years.

Table 1: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish Type 34 coals

Parameter

Jan Karski (Kulik 1)

Typical SSCC Coal (Upper Silesia – Poland)

Darkov

(Czech Republic)

Karvina CSA

(Czech Republic)

Rank (Ro)

0.85

0.82

1.15

1.00

VM %

35-37

38

27

28

Ash %

3.5

8.4

8.0

8.0

FSI

7.0

6.5

4.5

5

Roga Index

82

70

Vitrinite %

84

43

42

Dilatation

64

59

25

25

Fluidity

268

380

300

500

CSR

54

45-48

45-50

Type

34.2

34.2

These latest results will be incorporated into the non-JORC technical studies currently underway by Prairie’s strategic partner, China Coal.

Prairie’s CEO Ben Stoikovich commented: Prairie’s modern exploration program has demonstrated that Jan Karski is a globally significant semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal project, whereas historically the Lublin Coal Basin has been associated with thermal coal production only. This presents an outstanding economic development opportunity for the Lublin region, and Chelm province in particular, to become a leading European supplier of coking coal to the steel industry. Our latest studies anticipate that up to 75% of saleable production will be semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, which is a high value product with the current benchmark FOB Australia price at ~USD135/t. With such a high proportion of saleable product from Jan Karski anticipated to be high value semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, project economics are likely to be significantly enhanced compared to the 2016 Pre-Feasibility Study results. Coal tested from the Kulik 1 borehole demonstrated exceptional coking parameters, including CSR of 54, swelling index of 7.0 and fluidity of 268. With the ongoing closure of coal mines in the Czech Republic and Poland that produce semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, there is a growing regional market opportunity for Jan Karski ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coals. Independent analysis has indicated that due to the superior coal quality of Jan Karski semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal, we have the potential to achieve market pricing of some 10% above the standard international SSCC benchmarks.

For further information, please contact:

Prairie Mining Limited

Tel: +44 207 478 3900

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer

Email: info@pdz.com.au

Sapan Ghai, Head of Corporate Development

RESULTS FROM RECENT DRILLING AND EXPANDED COAL QUALITY ANALYSIS

Prairie has now completed drilling the Kulik 1 borehole at Jan Karski which was a large diameter borehole enabling sufficient quantities of coal from the 391 seam to be collected to meet the requirements for physical coke testing, specifically confirmation of Coke Strength after Reaction (“CSR”) and extended coal washability test work. Coke testing was conducted at Centralne Laboratorium Pomiarowo-Badawcze Sp. z o.o. (“CLPB”)laboratories in Poland which is controlled by Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa (“JSW”) and is internationally accredited as a commercial coal and coke testing laboratory. Washability and other basic coal quality analyses were conducted in the UK. CSR analysis is considered vital in testing for a coal’s coking properties and is important to steelmakers as it is an indicator of the performance / strength of the coke produced from the coal. The full range of standard coking tests were also conducted as shown in Table 2 below:

Table 2: Analysis results from Jan Karski Kulik 1 borehole – 391 seam

COKING PROPERTIES

FSI

7.0

Roga Index

82

CSR

%

54.0

CRI

%

36.5

Ash in Coke

%

5.8

Sulphur in Coke

%

0.78

Giesler Plastometer

Initial Softening

°C

404

Max Fluidity temp

°C

440

Resolidification

°C

463

Max Fluidity

ddpm

268

ASTM Dilation

Softening Temperature

°C

380

Max Contraction Temp

°C

420

Max Dilation Temp

°C

450

Max Dilation

% D

64

PROXIMATE ANALYSIS

Inherent moisture

adb%

1.73

Ash

adb%

3.45

Volatile Matter

adb%

35.5

OTHER COAL PROPERTIES

Sulphur

ar%

1.00

Rank (Ro)

0.85

Vitrinite

%

84

 

JAN KARSKI COKING COAL KEY QUALITY ADVANTAGES

Ultra-low Ash

Washability analysis from the Kulik 1 borehole and previous boreholes drilled by Prairie across Jan Karski has demonstrated that due to the low inherent ash and excellent washability characteristics of the 391 seam, Jan Karski SSCC is unique with ash product levels of 3.45% or less (air dried) and far superior to typical ash levels for major coking coal brands (both hard and soft) traded internationally and produced domestically in Europe. Figure 1 (refer to www.pdz.com.au for figure 1) shows there is a range of ash specifications for semi-soft coking coals. Coal from the Kulik 1 borehole had ash of 3.45% at a float RD of 1.4, again demonstrating that Jan Karski SSCC is an ultra-low ash product compared to other SSCCs. Low ash provides a number of technical benefits including improved coke strength and caking properties, and reduced fuel rate in the blast furnace.

The ultra-low ash content increases the coal’s value-in-use to steel and coke makers, making the product highly saleable in both the domestic European and international markets. One of the key outcomes of utilising ultra-low ash coking coal to produce low ash coke ash is the resulting decreased fuel rate. This has a key environmental benefit for steel makers as it reduces CO2 emissions per tonne of hot metal produced.

Prairie’s analysis predicts increasing global demand for ultra-low ash coking coal for blending with hard coking coal (“HCC”), due to a continuing trend of rising average ash levels in globally traded hard coking coals. Premium HCC resources with low ash are becoming increasingly scarce, forcing consumers to make concessions on HCC ash levels. Ultra-low ash coking coals for blending are becoming increasingly sought after by consumers seeking to “blend-down” the ash levels in their coke blends. This is a particular advantage for European steelmakers where EU regulations focus on reduced CO2 emissions and compliance with other EU emissions directives. The trend of ever more stringent emissions standards for steelmakers imposed by the EU indicates a positive future for marketability of Jan Karski ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal.

Exceptionally High CSR

The measured CSR (54) of the 391 seam from Kulik 1 borehole at Jan Karski is at the very top end of the range for globally traded SSCC. A CSR figure of 54 shows the coal has the ability to form a coherent coke mass, a sought after quality by steelmakers.

Other Positive Attributes

Other Jan Karski ultra-low ash SSCC quality positives are its high vitrinite content, high-range FSI (7.0), and fluidity of 268. The volatile matter is in the range typical for Australian traded SSCCs.

COMPARISON TO SEMI-SOFT COKING COALS PRODUCED IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND POLAND

SSCC is produced in the Czech Republic by mining company OKD, formerly New World Resources. Two SSCC brands are produced by OKD, Karvina CSA and Darkov. According to Prairie’s estimates, OKD currently produces approximately 1.8Mtpa of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal. Indications are that these mines will cease production by 2022. Furthermore, during 2017 mine closures and production changes in Poland that have resulted in a reduction of availability of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal in the domestic market of almost 2Mtpa.

Jan Karski ultra-low ash semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal quality parameters compare favourably with the coals currently and historically produced in the Czech Republic and Poland, with a summary comparison of coal qualities indicated in Table 3. These types of coals find wide acceptance in European coke ovens and particularly in stamp charging coke batteries which are widely used in Poland and across Central Europe.

Table 3: SSCC / Type 34 Coking Coal Quality – Jan Karski (Kulik 1) compared to other Czech and Polish mines

Parameter

Jan Karski (Kulik 1)

Typical SSCC Coal (Upper Silesia – Poland)

Darkov

(Czech Republic)

Karvina CSA

(Czech Republic)

Rank (Ro)

0.85

0.82

1.15

1.00

VM %

35-37

38

27

28

Ash %

3.45

8.4

8.0

8.0

FSI

7.0

6.5

4.5

5

Roga Index

82

70

Vitrinite %

84

43

42

Dilatation

64

59

25

25

Fluidity

268

380

300

500

CSR

54

45-48

45-50

Type

34.2

34.2

Increasing Polish Dependence on Hard Coal Imports

According to prominent Polish financial newspaper Parkiet Gazeta Gieldy, 2017 data from the EU’s statistical office Eurostat suggests Poland produced 65.8 million tonnes of hard coal in 2017, approximately 6 million tonnes less than in 2016. The decrease is attributed to the continued closure and restructuring of Polish coal mines. Conversely, Polish demand for hard coal remained strong during 2017, with Poland being forced to import 13.3 million tonnes of hard coal to meet its own needs – an increase of 60% in hard coal imports year on year. This follows a steady trend in Poland over the last few years with domestic production of hard coal declining and increased reliance on imports.

Increased European Demand for Type 34 Coal

Declining production of Czech and Polish semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal has resulted in steel makers becoming more aware of the importance of security of supply of the raw material. Over the last 12 months, lack of delivery of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal has forced some Central European steel makers to introduce urgent measures including changes in the coking charge mix and increased imports, thus generating additional costs and disturbing normal production.

According to an article by Dziennik Gazeta Prawna, in February 2018 Lakshmi Mittal (Chairman and CEO of ArcelorMittal S.A. (“ArcelorMittal”)) met with Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki during the World Economic Forum in Davos and informed the Prime Minister of the company’s concerns regarding the low availability of regionally produced semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal.  ArcelorMittal is reportedly considering further investment into steelmaking capacity in Poland following on from the completion of important modernisation investment projects at its Krakow unit in May 2017 totalling PLN 500 million including relining of the blast furnace for a new plant life of 20 years. However, security of supply of semi-soft / Type 34 coking coal remains an important consideration.

International and Polish Steel Sector Update

Global steel markets continued to strengthen in 2017 with groups such as Europe’s ArcelorMittal, Nucor Corporation of the US and South Korea’s POSCO all recently reporting higher profits. The recent rebound in the steel prices and increased demand have provided an ideal situation for steel makers. At the same time, North American and European steel makers have benefited from trade actions against dumping from China, which is responsible for half of global output, and continue to close underutilised and old-technology steel mills.

In December 2017, the President of the Board of Polish Steel Association estimated 2017 Polish steel product consumption to be approximately 13.5 million tonnes, up from 13.1 million tonnes in 2016 and forecast consumption rates to grow by over 11% over the next three years to reach 15 million tonnes. The increase was attributed to developments in the automobiles industry and household appliances sector, noting that Poland is Europe’s largest producer of such household appliances.

In 2016, Poland also imported 7.2 million tonnes of steel – an increase of 12% year on year and mainly from Ukraine, Russia and China – and exported 5.2 million tonnes of steel – a 6% increase year on year especially driven by exports to countries outside of the EU which increased by 16% from 2015 to 2016. This high level of demand for Polish steel from countries outside of the EU and particularly Ukraine, Russia and Turkey resulted in a negative trade balance of 4.5 million tonnes as Poland was unable to meet the demand.

PRICE BENCHMARKING

In 2017 independent coal market specialists CRL Energy Ltd (“CRL”) were appointed by Prairie to analyse the potential value of Jan Karski ultra-low ash SSCC in the market based on the results of the Cycow 9 borehole. CRL took two approaches to price benchmarking. The first approach applied the method used by the S&P Global Platts (“Platts”) publication of international benchmark coal prices. The second was a proprietary approach adopted by CRL based on value in use assessment incorporating assumptions regarding a typical Western European coking coal blend used by steel makers and proportions of Jan Karski ultra-low ash SSCC included in the blend.

The Platts coal market publication shows a number of penalty/premium factors that can be used to calculate relative values of coking coals against a stated benchmark. The limit of this method is that it assumes all markets would derive the same value from a particular coal; this is not strictly applicable in all cases, since value is also a function of the other coals in the blend, coke versus PCI rate and plant configuration. The “benchmark” coal used in this evaluation is the Rio Tinto Hunter Valley semi-soft, hence this coal is calibrated at 100% of the benchmark. The Platts benchmarking shows the Jan Karski coal specification is valued at 112.7% of the Rio Tinto semi-soft specification. The only comparable coal is the Blackwater coking coal (which is more of a semi-hard type specification) and the NZ SSCC (a low ash SSCC product).

Both Platts benchmarking and value in use modelling show Jan Karski is a high value SSCC, driven substantially by the ultra-low ash. The Platts specification benchmarking suggests Jan Karski should be priced at a 10% premium above the benchmark Rio Tinto Hunter Valley SSCC. 

COAL PROCESSING UPDATE AND COKING COAL YIELD

Dargo Associates, specialist coal handling and preparation consultants were appointed to re-evaluate the potential yields of ultra-low ash coking coal from Jan Karski and to develop a washplant flow sheet as part of the Chinese technical studies currently underway. To evaluate the yield of ultra-low ash coal, the washability tests were extended to give more information on separation in the lower density ranges.  Separating at low density increases the quantities of near density material and the extended washability test work was used to identify the most efficient wash plant process. The washability results from the recently drilled Kulik 1 borehole were consistent with the results from washability analysis conducted for all of the nine boreholes Prairie has drilled across Jan Karski, demonstrating exceptionally high yields of ultra-low ash (<3.5%) product coal at RD1.40 float.

Preliminary analysis has shown that the production of ultra-low ash SSCC (2.5 – 3.5%) results in an overall yield of saleable coal of 82%, which is similar overall yield as indicated in the original Jan Karski Pre-Feasibility Study (“PFS”) published in March 2016. Overall mine yields are hardly impacted by the ultra-low ash beneficiation as any coal lost due to the lowering of ash on the ultra-low ash SSCC product reports to the thermal product.

The predicted ratio of ultra-low ash SSCC to thermal coal is 75% coking coal to 25% thermal coal. The thermal coal product is anticipated to have 13% ash and will be in line with typical API2 specification export quality thermal coal. Should Prairie decide to sell a typically higher ash Polish domestic thermal coal of up to 25% ash, the overall yield will increase further.

BACKGROUND ON JAN KARSKI

In March 2016, Prairie announced the results of a PFS for Jan Karski confirming the technical viability and robust economics of the Project and highlighting its potential to become one of the lowest cost, large scale strategic coal suppliers to be developed in Europe.

The Study utilised an updated Coal Resource Estimate (“CRE”) for the Project which comprises a Global CRE of 728Mt including an Indicated Resource of 181Mt from two coal seams, the 391 and 389 seams. The PFS incorporated a mine plan based on an initial Marketable Ore Reserve Estimate generated from the indicated resources within the 391 and 389 seams.

Table 4: Jan Karski Mine Resource JORC Coal Resource and Reserve Estimate – 389 & 391 Seams

Coal Seam

Indicated Coal Resource

In-Situ (Mt)

389

17

391

164

Total

181

Probable Recoverable Coal Reserves (Mt)

170

Probable Marketable Coal Product (Mt)

139

To view all illustrations and figures, please refer to this announcement on the Company’s website at www.pdz.com.au 

Forward Looking Statements

This release may include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on Prairie’s expectations and beliefs concerning future events. Forward looking statements are necessarily subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Prairie, which could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. Prairie makes no undertaking to subsequently update or revise the forward-looking statements made in this release, to reflect the circumstances or events after the date of that release.

Competent Person Statements

The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents information compiled or reviewed by Mr Jonathan O’Dell, a Competent Person who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr O’Dell is a part time consultant of the Company. Mr O’Dell has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’. Mr O’Dell consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

The information in this announcement that relates to the Coal Resources and Coal Reserves was extracted from Prairie’s announcement dated 8 March 2016 entitled “Pre-feasibility Study Confirms LCP As One of The Lowest Cost Global Coal Suppliers Into Europe” which is available to view on the Company’s website at www.pdz.com.au.

The information in the original announcement that relates to Coal Resources is based on, and fairly represents, information compiled or reviewed by, Mr Samuel Moorhouse, a Competent Person who is a Chartered Geologist and is employed by independent consultants Royal HaskoningDHV UK Limited. Mr Moorhouse has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’.

The information in the original announcement that relates to Coal Reserves is based on, and fairly represents, information compiled or reviewed by Mr Maarten Velzeboer, a Competent Person, Member of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (MIMMM). Mr Velzeboer has worked in deep coal mines in New South Wales and Queensland in Australia and the Karaganda Coalfield in Kazakhstan. Mr Velzeboer has been engaged in a senior capacity in the design and development of proposed mines in Queensland, Australia, Botswana and Venezuela. Mr Velzeboer is employed by independent consultants Royal HaskoningDHV. Mr Velzeboer has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’.

Prairie confirms that: a) it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original announcements; b) all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Coal Resource and Coal Reserve included in the original announcements continue to apply and have not materially changed; and c) the form and context in which the relevant Competent Persons’ findings are presented in this presentation have not been materially modified from the original announcements.

 

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Sampling techniques

·     Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.

·     Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.

·     Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.

 

·     Coal cores were taken from continuous cores in the Carboniferous sections of the boreholes.

·     Assessment of coal quality and type is based on the results of laboratory tests of the coal samples taken from the borehole cores.

·     All seams equal to or thicker than 0.60 m were analysed.

·     Dirt (rock) partings in-seam less than 0.05 m were included in the coal sample and analysed with the coal.

·     Dirt partings equal to, or thicker than 0.05 m were analysed separately.

·     Average core yield was 100%. Core yield for the target seam 391 was 100%, confirmed by core measurement and geophysics.

Drilling techniques

·     Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).

·     The borehole was drilled open hole to 16 m below the base of the Jurassic, approximately 707 m, and cased. Continuous coring was used in the in the coal measure strata below. Core diameter was 85 mm (PQ).

Drill sample recovery

·     Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.

·     Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.

·     Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.

·     During the drilling of the borehole, coal samples were collected from the drill core using methods that were standard for the coal industry in Poland (according to GWP and international standard ISO 14180:1998(E) – Solid mineral fuels – Guidance on the sampling of coal seams)

·     Core recovery was determined for the coal samples by measuring the lengths of recovered core and weighing broken/fragmentary core and calculating length to provide an overall recovery length and percentage as compared to the drilling depths. Final checks are provided by comparison with thicknesses determined from the suite of geophysical logs.

·     Core recoveries were recorded for each core run and for individual seams.

·     There is no known relationship between recovery and quality. 

·     All cores were photographed.

Logging

·     Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.

·     Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.

·     The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.

·     The cores have been logged and analysed in sufficient detail to support this announcement. Cores were analysed by Centralne Laboratorium Pomiarowo- – Badawcze Sp. z o.o. laboratories certified to Polish national standards and at Infrastructure and Energy, Socotec House Bretby who are certified to international standards. The results are considered fit for purpose.

·     Detailed borehole records are presented in the “Borehole Documentation” which contains the written description, graphic log (borehole card) and details of analyses and interpretations, including the final accepted seam thicknesses.

·     The Carboniferous section was fully cored and logged throughout.

Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation

·     If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.

·     If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.

·     For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.

·     Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples.

·     Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.

·     Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.

·     Cores were not split but sampled as whole core as is standard practice with coal core. Detailed core recovery measurements were made allowing assessment of the representative nature of the core analysed. Cores were wrapped in plastic to prevent moisture loss prior to analysis. The target seam was sampled as soon as practicable, double packed in plastic bags which were purged with nitrogen gas and kept refrigerated during transport and prior to analysis. (In accordance with Australian best practice for the sampling of coking coals)

Quality of assay data and laboratory tests

·     The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.

·     For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.

·     Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.

·     Laboratory procedures were to the standard industry practices.

·     Geophysical logs used in the boreholes include natural gamma, density (gamma gamma), acoustic scanner, dual laterolog and caliper logs.  These are of sufficient quality to be used for quantitative (i.e. seam thickness) determinations.

·     The laboratories used are accredited to national and international standards and have adequate quality control practices including analysis of standards and participation in “round robin” exercises.

Verification of sampling and assaying

·     The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.

·     The use of twinned holes.

·     Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.

·     Discuss any adjustment to assay data.

·      Geological supervision over all drilling works was performed by geological staff contracted to PDCo, the Company’s 100% owned Polish subsidiary, who are qualified and licensed according to Polish Geological and Mining Law

·     These geological staff also performed detailed core logging.

·     Twinned boreholes were not used.

·     Primary data is held as hard copy (laboratory certificates etc.) and this has been transferred to electronic spreadsheets.

·     No adjustments have been made to assay data.

Location of data points

·     Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.

·     Specification of the grid system used.

·     Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

·     The borehole location has been accurately determined and surveyed in the Poland CS2000, zone 8 grid system.

·     Detailed topographic maps are available.

Data spacing and distribution

·     Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.

·     Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.

·     Whether sample compositing has been applied.

·     This announcement of exploration results relates to a single borehole, Kulik 1.

·     Sample compositing has not been used.

Orientation of data in relation to geological structure

·     Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.

·     If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.

·     The borehole was nominally vertical and the coal seams have low to moderate dip and relatively simple structure and so there is no structural or orientation bias to the sampling.

·     The borehole has been surveyed for verticality with maximum deviation of approximately 29 m at a depth of 1037.50 m.

Sample security

·     The measures taken to ensure sample security.

·     All core samples were handled by staff contracted to PDCo under supervision of a licenced geologist. Core samples were marked for way up orientation placed in plastic in fully labelled wooden core boxes. These staff also undertook core sampling and in the case of the target seams this was supervised by consultants contracted to Prairie Mining.

Audits or reviews

·     The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.

·     The data and techniques have been reviewed by the Competent Person and are considered adequate and appropriate.

SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria

JORC Code explanation

Commentary

Mineral tenement and land tenure status

·     Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.

·     The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.

·     Prairie has held the exploration licences to five exploration concession areas that constitute the Jan Karski Mine: Cycow (K-6-7), Syczyn (K-8), Kulik (K-4-5), Kopina (K-9) and Sawin-Zachód.

·     On 1 July 2015, Prairie announced that it had secured the Exclusive Right to apply for, and consequently be granted, a mining concession for the Jan Karski Mine.

·     As a result of its geological documentation for the Jan Karski Mine deposit being approved, Prairie is now the only entity that can lodge a mining concession application over the Jan Karski Mine within a three (3) year period up and until April 2018. In addition, Prairie has the right to apply for and be granted a mining usufruct agreement for an additional 12 month period that precludes any other parties being granted a licence over all or part of the Jan Karski concessions. Prairie applied for a mining usufruct agreement in December 2017.

·     The approved geological documentation covers an area comprising all four of the original exploration concessions granted to Prairie (K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and K-9) and includes the full extent of the targeted resources within the mine plan for the Jan Karski Mine. In this regard, no beneficial title interest has been surrendered by the Company when the K-6-7 exploration concession expired last year. The Company intends to submit a mining concession application, over the mine plan area at Jan Karski (which includes K-6-7) prior to April 2018. Under Polish mining law, and owing to the Exclusive Right the Company has secured, Prairie is currently the only entity that may apply for and be granted a mining concession with respect to the K-6-7 area (the Exclusive Right also applies to the K-4-5, K-8 and K-9 areas of Jan Karski). There is no requirement for the Company to hold an exploration concession in order exercise the Exclusive Right and apply for a mining concession.

·     Prairie’s approved geological documentation did not include the Sawin-Zachód concession.

Exploration done by other parties

·     Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.

·     Not applicable.

Geology

·     Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.

·     The deposit is a Carboniferous hard coal consisting of coal seams separated by units of mudstone and sandstone.

Drill hole Information

·     A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes:

o  easting and northing of the drill hole collar

o  elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar

o  dip and azimuth of the hole

o  down hole length and interception depth

o  hole length.

·     If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.

·     X: 5678988 Y: 8444070 (Polish CS2000 zone 8)

·     H: 187.8 m a.s.l

·     Nominally vertical, deviation approximately 29 m at 113o at base of hole.

·     Hole length/depth – 1,037.50 m (drilling)

Data aggregation methods

·     In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.

·     Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.

·     The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.

·     Coal seams have normally been sampled as one continuous sample. Dirt partings of 5 cm in thickness or less have been sampled with the coal.

Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths

·     These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.

·     If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.

·     If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).

·     The boreholes are nominally vertical and the coal seams form part of a stratiform deposit dipping at approximately 0 – 5 degrees.

·     Intercept lengths used in the model are drill intercept lengths which will be modelled in 3D removing the need to calculate the true thickness. Because of the very low dip the difference between intercept thickness and true thickness is not significant.

Diagrams

·     Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.

·     Not applicable

Balanced reporting

·     Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.

·     Not applicable.

Other substantive exploration data

·     Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.

·     Not applicable.

Further work

·     The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).

·     Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

·     Prairie Mining may drill further boreholes if deemed appropriate.

 

Prairie Mining #PDZ – Appendix 3B – Issue of Performance Rights

Prairie Mining Limited (Company) announces that 1,500,000 unlisted Performance Rights have been issued today to key employees and consultants of the Company pursuant to the Company’s long-term incentive Performance Rights Plan.

No new Ordinary Shares are being issued.

The below figure of 167,498,969 Ordinary Shares can be continued to be used by shareholders as the denominator for the calculations by which they will determine if they are required to notify their interest in, or a change to their interest in, the share capital of the Company, under the FCA’s Disclosure and Transparency Rules.

For further information, please contact:

Prairie Mining Limited

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer

Tel: +44 207 478 3900

Sapan Ghai, Head of Corporate Development

Email: info@pdz.com.au

 

Rule 2.7, 3.10.3, 3.10.4, 3.10.5

Appendix 3B

New issue announcement, application for quotation of additional securities and agreement

Information or documents not available now must be given to ASX as soon as available.  Information and documents given to ASX become ASX’s property and may be made public.

Introduced 01/07/96  Origin: Appendix 5  Amended 01/07/98, 01/09/99, 01/07/00, 30/09/01, 11/03/02, 01/01/03, 24/10/05, 01/08/12, 04/03/13

Name of entity

   PRAIRIE MINING LIMITED

ABN

   23 008 677 852

We (the entity) give ASX the following information.

Part 1 ‑ All issues

You must complete the relevant sections (attach sheets if there is not enough space).

1

+Class of +securities issued or to be issued

Performance share rights

2

Number of +securities issued or to be issued (if known) or maximum number which may be issued

1,500,000

3

Principal terms of the +securities (e.g. if options, exercise price and expiry date; if partly paid +securities, the amount outstanding and due dates for payment; if +convertible securities, the conversion price and dates for conversion)

Performance share rights which do not have an exercise price but are subject to various performance conditions (including: Jan Karski Construction; Debiensko Feasibility Study; and Debiensko Construction Milestones) to be satisfied prior to the relevant expiry dates between 31 December 2018 and 31 December 2020

4

Do the +securities rank equally in all respects from the +issue date with an existing +class of quoted +securities?

If the additional +securities do not rank equally, please state:

·    the date from which they do

·    the extent to which they participate for the next dividend, (in the case of a trust, distribution) or interest payment

·    the extent to which they do not rank equally, other than in relation to the next dividend, distribution or interest payment

No – not listed

 

5

Issue price or consideration

Nil – see below

 

6

Purpose of the issue

(If issued as consideration for the acquisition of assets, clearly identify those assets)

Issue of performance share rights to key employees and consultants of the Company

6a

Is the entity an +eligible entity that has obtained security holder approval under rule 7.1A?

If Yes, complete sections 6b – 6h in relation to the+securities the subject of this Appendix 3B, and comply with section 6i

No

6b

The date the security holder resolution under rule 7.1A was passed

Not applicable

 

6c

Number of +securities issued without security holder approval under rule 7.1

Not applicable

6d

Number of +securities issued with security holder approval under rule 7.1A

Not applicable

 

6e

Number of +securities issued with security holder approval under rule 7.3, or another specific security holder approval (specify date of meeting)

Not applicable

6f

Number of +securities issued under an exception in rule 7.2

Not applicable

6g

If +securities issued under rule 7.1A, was issue price at least 75% of 15 day VWAP as calculated under rule 7.1A.3?  Include the +issue date and both values.  Include the source of the VWAP calculation.

Not applicable

6h

If +securities were issued under rule 7.1A for non-cash consideration, state date on which valuation of consideration was released to ASX Market Announcements

Not applicable

6i

Calculate the entity’s remaining issue capacity under rule 7.1 and rule 7.1A – complete Annexure 1 and release to ASX Market Announcements

Rule 7.1 – 24,486,845

Rule 7.1A – Not applicable

7

+Issue dates

Note: The issue date may be prescribed by ASX (refer to the definition of issue date in rule 19.12).  For example, the issue date for a pro rata entitlement issue must comply with the applicable timetable in Appendix 7A.

Cross reference: item 33 of Appendix 3B.

7 February 2018

Number

+Class

8

Number and +class of all +securities quoted on ASX (including the +securities in section 2 if applicable)

167,498,969

Ordinary Shares

Number

+Class

9

Number and +class of all +securities not quoted on ASX (including the +securities in section 2 if applicable)

1,400,000

 

 

200,000

 

 

 

900,000

 

 

 

700,000

 

 

 

10,925,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

44,776,120

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

22,388,060

 

 

 

5,711,805

Options exercisable at $0.45 each on or before 30 June 2018

 

Options exercisable at $0.50 each on or before 31 March 2020

 

Options exercisable at $0.60 each on or before 31 March 2020

 

Options exercisable at $0.80 each on or before 31 March 2020

 

Performance share rights subject to various performance conditions to be satisfied prior to relevant milestones or expiry dates between 31 December 2018 and 31 December 2020

 

Convertible loan note with a principal amount of $15,000,000, exchangeable into 44,776,120 ordinary shares at a conversion price of $0.335 per share with no expiry date (“Loan Note 1”).

 

Agreement to issue unlisted options exercisable at $0.60 each expiring 3 years after conversion of Loan Note 1.

 

Convertible loan note with a principal amount of $2,627,430, convertible into 5,711,805 ordinary shares at a conversion price of $0.46 per share with no expiry date (“Loan Note 2”)

10

Dividend policy (in the case of a trust, distribution policy) on the increased capital (interests)

Not applicable

Part 2 ‑ Pro rata issue

11

Is security holder approval required?

Not applicable

12

Is the issue renounceable or non-renounceable?

Not applicable

13

Ratio in which the +securities will be offered

Not applicable

14

+Class of +securities to which the offer relates

Not applicable

15

+Record date to determine entitlements

Not applicable

16

Will holdings on different registers (or subregisters) be aggregated for calculating entitlements?

Not applicable

17

Policy for deciding entitlements in relation to fractions

Not applicable

18

Names of countries in which the entity has security holders who will not be sent new offer documents

Note: Security holders must be told how their entitlements are to be dealt with.

Cross reference: rule 7.7.

Not applicable

19

Closing date for receipt of acceptances or renunciations

Not applicable

 

 

 

 

 

 

20

Names of any underwriters

Not applicable

21

Amount of any underwriting fee or commission

Not applicable

22

Names of any brokers to the issue

Not applicable

23

Fee or commission payable to the broker to the issue

Not applicable

24

Amount of any handling fee payable to brokers who lodge acceptances or renunciations on behalf of security holders

Not applicable

25

If the issue is contingent on security holders’ approval, the date of the meeting

Not applicable

26

Date entitlement and acceptance form and offer documents will be sent to persons entitled

Not applicable

27

If the entity has issued options, and the terms entitle option holders to participate on exercise, the date on which notices will be sent to option holders

Not applicable

28

Date rights trading will begin (if applicable)

Not applicable

29

Date rights trading will end (if applicable)

Not applicable

30

How do security holders sell their entitlements in fullthrough a broker?

Not applicable

31

How do security holders sell part of their entitlements through a broker and accept for the balance?

Not applicable

32

How do security holders dispose of their entitlements (except by sale through a broker)?

Not applicable

33

+Issue date

Not applicable

Part 3 ‑ Quotation of securities

You need only complete this section if you are applying for quotation of securities

34

Type of +securities

(tick one)

(a)

+Securities described in Part 1

(b)

All other +securities

Example: restricted securities at the end of the escrowed period, partly paid securities that become fully paid, employee incentive share securities when restriction ends, securities issued on expiry or conversion of convertible securities

Entities that have ticked box 34(a) 

Additional securities forming a new class of securities

Tick to indicate you are providing the information or documents

35

If the +securities are +equity securities, the names of the 20 largest holders of the additional +securities, and the number and percentage of additional +securities held by those holders

36

If the +securities are +equity securities, a distribution schedule of the additional +securities setting out the number of holders in the categories

1 – 1,000

1,001 – 5,000

5,001 – 10,000

10,001 – 100,000

100,001 and over

37

A copy of any trust deed for the additional +securities

 

Entities that have ticked box 34(b)

 

38

Number of +securities for which +quotation is sought

Not applicable

39

+Class of +securities for which quotation is sought

Not applicable

40

Do the +securities rank equally in all respects from the +issue date with an existing +class of quoted +securities?

If the additional +securities do not rank equally, please state:

·    the date from which they do

·    the extent to which they participate for the next dividend, (in the case of a trust, distribution) or interest payment

·    the extent to which they do not rank equally, other than in relation to the next dividend, distribution or interest payment

Not applicable

41

Reason for request for quotation now

Example: In the case of restricted securities, end of restriction period

(if issued upon conversion of another +security, clearly identify that other +security)

Not applicable

Number

+Class

42

Number and +class of all +securities quoted on ASX (including the +securities in clause 38)

Not applicable

 

Not applicable

 

Quotation agreement

 

1          +Quotation of our additional +securities is in ASX’s absolute discretion.  ASX may quote the +securities on any conditions it decides. 

 

2          We warrant the following to ASX.

 

·           The issue of the +securities to be quoted complies with the law and is not for an illegal purpose.

 

·           There is no reason why those +securities should not be granted +quotation.

 

·           An offer of the +securities for sale within 12 months after their issue will not require disclosure under section 707(3) or section 1012C(6) of the Corporations Act.

Note: An entity may need to obtain appropriate warranties from subscribers for the securities in order to be able to give this warranty

 

·           Section 724 or section 1016E of the Corporations Act does not apply to any applications received by us in relation to any +securities to be quoted and that no-one has any right to return any +securities to be quoted under sections 737, 738 or 1016F of the Corporations Act at the time that we request that the +securities be quoted.

·           If we are a trust, we warrant that no person has the right to return the +securities to be quoted under section 1019B of the Corporations Act at the time that we request that the +securities be quoted.

 

3          We will indemnify ASX to the fullest extent permitted by law in respect of any claim, action or expense arising from or connected with any breach of the warranties in this agreement.

 

4          We give ASX the information and documents required by this form. If any information or document is not available now, we will give it to ASX before +quotation of the +securities begins.  We acknowledge that ASX is relying on the information and documents.  We warrant that they are (will be) true and complete.

 

                                      [signed electronically without signature]

Sign here:              ……………………………………………………           Date: 7 February 2018

                             (Director/Company secretary)

Print name:            Dylan Browne

== == == == ==

Appendix 3B – Annexure 1

Calculation of placement capacity under rule 7.1 and rule 7.1A for eligible entities

Introduced 01/08/12  Amended 04/03/13

Part 1

Rule 7.1 – Issues exceeding 15% of capital

Step 1: Calculate “A”, the base figure from which the placement capacity is calculated

Insert number of fully paid +ordinary securities on issue 12 months before the +issue date or date of agreement to issue

151,858,969

Add the following:

•    Number of fully paid +ordinary securities issued in that 12 month period under an exception in rule 7.2

•    Number of fully paid +ordinary securities issued in that 12 month period with shareholder approval

•    Number of partly paid +ordinary securities that became fully paid in that 12 month period

Note:

•    Include only ordinary securities here – other classes of equity securities cannot be added

•    Include here (if applicable) the securities the subject of the Appendix 3B to which this form is annexed

•    It may be useful to set out issues of securities on different dates as separate line items

 

11,500,000 Ordinary shares (3 April 2017)

570,000 ordinary shares (9 June 2017)

2,110,000 ordinary shares (16 June 2017)

1,340,000 ordinary shares (6 July 2017)

Subtract the number of fully paid +ordinary securities cancelled during that 12 month period

Nil

“A”

167,378,969

Step 2: Calculate 15% of “A”

“B”

0.15

[Note: this value cannot be changed]

Multiply “A” by 0.15

25,106,845

Step 3: Calculate “C”, the amount of placement capacity under rule 7.1 that has already been used

Insert number of +equity securities issued or agreed to be issued in that 12 month period not counting those issued:

•    Under an exception in rule 7.2

•    Under rule 7.1A

•    With security holder approval under rule 7.1 or rule 7.4

Note:

•    This applies to equity securities, unless specifically excluded – not just ordinary securities

•    Include here (if applicable) the securities the subject of the Appendix 3B to which this form is annexed

•    It may be useful to set out issues of securities on different dates as separate line items

 

 

120,000 Ordinary shares (17 Mar 2017)

500,000 Incentive options (15 Sep 2017)

 

“C”

620,000

Step 4: Subtract “C” from [“A” x “B”] to calculate remaining placement capacity under rule 7.1

“A” x 0.15

Note: number must be same as shown in Step 2

25,106,845

Subtract “C”

Note: number must be same as shown in Step 3

620,000

Total [“A” x 0.15] – “C”

24,486,845

[Note: this is the remaining placement capacity under rule 7.1]

Part 2

Rule 7.1A – Additional placement capacity for eligible entities

Step 1: Calculate “A”, the base figure from which the placement capacity is calculated

“A”

Note: number must be same as shown in Step 1 of Part 1

Not applicable

Step 2: Calculate 10% of “A”

“D”

0.10

Note: this value cannot be changed

Multiply “A” by 0.10

Not applicable

Step 3: Calculate “E”, the amount of placement capacity under rule 7.1A that has already been used

Insert number of +equity securities issued or agreed to be issued in that 12 month period under rule 7.1A

Notes:

•    This applies to equity securities – not just ordinary securities

•    Include here – if applicable – the securities the subject of the Appendix 3B to which this form is annexed

•    Do not include equity securities issued under rule 7.1 (they must be dealt with in Part 1), or for which specific security holder approval has been obtained

•    It may be useful to set out issues of securities on different dates as separate line items

Not applicable

“E”

Not applicable

Step 4: Subtract “E” from [“A” x “D”] to calculate remaining placement capacity under rule 7.1A

“A” x 0.10

Note: number must be same as shown in Step 2

Not applicable

Subtract “E”

Note: number must be same as shown in Step 3

Not applicable

Total [“A” x 0.10] – “E”

Not applicable

Note: this is the remaining placement capacity under rule 7.1A

Prairie Mining #PDZ – December 2017 Quarterly Report

DECEMBER 2017 QUARTERLY REPORT

HIGHLIGHTS FROM AND SUBSEQUENT TO THE QUARTER END:

Debiensko Mine (Premium Hard Coking Coal)

  • During the quarter Poland’s newly appointed Prime Minister, Mr Mateusz Morawiecki, officially presented the Ministry of Development’s “Program for Silesia” in December 2017 which included a strategy for the re-start of a major coking coal mine in the Upper Silesian region, where Prairie’s Debiensko project is located, and highlighted the positive social and economic impacts that mine development would have on the region
  • Mine site redevelopment planning continued to advance with completion of initial demolition works, pre-qualification of study contractors, and preparation for an infill drill program to increase JORC Measured and Indicated Resources
  • Prairie continued discussions with steel makers and coke producers throughout the quarter for future coking coal sales and offtake

Jan Karski Mine (Semi-Soft Coking Coal)

  • Environmental permitting for Jan Karski advanced following successful submission of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment to the Lublin Regional Environment Directorate for Environmental Consent
  • Preparation of the Mining Concession application is underway and anticipated to be lodged during the first quarter of 2018
  • Prairie initiated public consultations in local municipalities for the development of the Jan Karski Mine, demonstrating that a new mine would bring significant employment opportunities and economic development
  • China Coal’s technical studies for the construction of the Jan Karski Mine have significantly advanced and Prairie is currently reviewing study documents provided by China Coal. The studies will be revised to incorporate the latest coal quality results from drilling at Jan Karski as well as any conditions stipulated in the Environmental Consent and the Mining Concession to be granted for Jan Karski
  • During the quarter, Prairie hosted a delegation in Poland including China Coal and Jinan Mine Design Institute during which offers for project works involving Polish subcontractors were finalised

Robust Coking Coal Fundamentals

  • Hard coking coal prices continued to trade at price levels above US$225/t FOB Australia
  • Market analysts forecast underinvestment in new coking coal mine development has potential to result in sustained high coking coal prices
  • European Commission continues to designate coking coal as a Critical Raw Material in its 2017 review
  • The Polish Government strongly supports development of new, modernised coal mines, as announced in the “Program for Silesia” produced by Poland’s Ministry for Development

Corporate

  • Prairie remains in a financially strong position with cash reserves of A$15.1 million
  • With CD Capital’s right to invest a further A$68 million as a cornerstone investor, plus with the Strategic Co-operation Agreement between Prairie and China Coal for financing and construction of Jan Karski, Prairie is well positioned to progress with its planned development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer commented Following the submission of the ESIA and initiation of public consultations, Prairie continues towards applying for a Mining Concession to commence construction of the Jan Karski Mine together with our strategic partner China Coal. China Coal’s Technical and Economic Studies have progressed positively, and our team is in the process of preparing a full Mining Concession application for Jan Karski. At Debiensko, we continue to plan our mine site redevelopment program in a positive market environment with increased coking coal demand from Europe’s steel producers coupled with reducing European supply. We welcome the news that the Polish government have officially included the re-start of a coking coal mine in the “Program for Silesia”, the region where our Debiensko project is located.

For further information, please contact:

Prairie Mining Limited

+44 20 7478 3900

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer

info@pdz.com.au

Sapan Ghai, Head of Corporate Development

DEBIENSKO MINE

The Debiensko Mine (“Debiensko”) is a fully permitted, hard coking coal project located in the Upper Silesian Coal Basin in the south west of the Republic of Poland. It is approximately 40 km from the city of Katowice and 40 km from the Czech Republic.

Debiensko is bordered by the Knurow-Szczyglowice Mine in the north west and the Budryk Mine in the north east, both owned and operated by Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa SA (“JSW”), Europe’s leading producer of hard coking coal.

The Debiensko mine was originally opened in 1898 and was operated by various Polish mining companies until 2000 when mining operations were terminated due to a major government led restructuring of the coal sector caused by a downturn in global coal prices. In early 2006 New World Resources Plc (“NWR”) acquired Debiensko and commenced planning for Debiensko to comply with Polish mining standards, with the aim of accessing and mining hard coking coal seams. In 2008, the Minister of Environment of Poland (“MoE”) granted a 50-year mine license for Debiensko.

In October 2016, Prairie (“Prairie” or “Company”) acquired Debiensko with a view that a revised development approach would potentially allow for the early mining of profitable premium hard coking coal seams, whilst minimising upfront capital costs. Prairie has proven expertise in defining commercially robust projects and applying international standards in Poland. The fact that Debiensko is a former operating mine and its proximity to two neighbouring coking coal producers in the same geological setting, reaffirms the significant potential to successfully bring Debiensko back into operation.

Re-start of a Coking Coal mine included in “Program for Silesia” and new political appointments in Poland

Prairie notes that on 11 December 2017, the Polish government appointed a new Prime Minister, Mr Mateusz Morawiecki, who immediately prior to his current role, was Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Development and Finance in Poland. Prairie also notes that on the 9 January 2018, a new Minister of Environment, Mr Henryk Kowalczyk, was appointed as part of a cabinet reshuffle under the new Prime Minister. In Poland, responsibility for exploration and mining concessions is the responsibility of the Ministry of Environment.

Following his appointment, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, presented the Polish Ministry of Development’s “Program for Silesia” (“Program”) – a strategic document which anticipated the re-construction of a coking coal mine in the region of Upper Silesia, where Debiensko is located. The Program details the creation of 1,500 direct jobs in the region and indicates the social and economic benefits of re-construction of a coking coal mine, and to potentially be funded by foreign and Polish capital.

Preparation for the Next Phase of Project Studies

Following completion of a 28 shallow geo-technical drill program in the previous quarter, Prairie continued to analyse the drill hole data which will be used for engineering design of foundations of structures associated with the shafts, coal handling and preparation plant (“CHPP”) and other surface facilities. These holes are essential in order to assess the soil conditions, properly design structural foundations and thus provide more accurate pricing in the tenders as required for a feasibility study.

Pre-qualification of contractors for the major components of the next phase of Debiensko studies also continued throughout the quarter including contractors for the:

·              In-fill drilling program (to update measured and indicated resources);

·              CHPP;

·              Shafts and bulk coal winder;

·              Desalination plant; and

·              Surface facilities.

Demolition works continued throughout the quarter specifically targeting old structures including walkways and old administrative buildings. To date, Prairie has completed demolition works on a number of old surface structures of the former Debiensko mine including the bathhouse, switchgear building and locomotive garage.

Sale of Non-Core Land

Through the acquisition of Debiensko in 2016, Prairie obtained land tenements within the village of Kaczyce which were considered non-core to the construction, restart and operations of the Debiensko Mine. During the quarter, the Company agreed the sale of the non-core land for consideration of PLN1.4 million (~A$500,000). Prairie has received the consideration and ownership of the land is expected to be transferred by the end of the next quarter.

JAN KARSKI MINE

Submission of ESIA & Initiation of Public Consultation

An application for issuing the environmental decision together with the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (“ESIA”) was submitted to the Regional Director for Environmental Protection (“RDOS”) in Lublin in October 2017. Taking into account the RDOS’s additional comments the motion and ESIA were supplemented in late November 2017. The Environmental Consent process has now officially been initiated by RDOS.

Prairie is now waiting for approval of the ESIA in the form of an Environmental Consent decision, which is the last component to meet all formal requirements to apply for the Mining Concession for construction for the Jan Karski Mine (“Jan Karski”).

As part of the environmental permitting process, Prairie initiated public consultations in three municipalities, including Wierzbica, Siedliszcze and Cyców. Presentations on Jan Karski’s development plans were given by Mr Miroslaw Taras (Prairie’s Group Executive), Witold Wołoszyn (Prairie’s Environmental and Planning Manager) and specialists from the international environmental consulting group, Multiconsult Polska who prepared the ESIA. Key advantages for the local community related to employment opportunities and social benefits associated with the development, construction and operation of Jan Karski including:

·              creation of 2,000 direct employment positions and 10,000 indirect jobs for the region once operational;

·              increasing skills of the workforce and through the implementation of International Standard training programmes;

·              stimulating the development of education, health services and communications within the region; and

·              building a mine that creates new employment for generations to come and career paths for families to remain in the region.

China Coal Progress and Financing Discussions

In November 2017, the Company hosted a delegation in Poland including China Coal No.5 Construction Company Ltd (“China Coal”) and the Chinese Government’s officially authorised coal mine design institute Jinan Mine Design Institute, during which locally provided content for construction of Jan Karski was finalised alongside domestic Polish specialists, subcontractors and partners who will provide relevant Polish content.

China Coal’s technical studies for the construction and funding of the Jan Karski Mine have significantly advanced and Prairie is currently reviewing study documents (“Studies”) received from China Coal subsequent to the quarter end. In accordance with the Strategic Co-operation Agreement between Prairie and China Coal, the Studies will form the basis for provision of debt financing out of China for the construction and development of Jan Karski. The Studies are being undertaken in accordance with Chinese official mine design and banking standards for coal mine projects, and to comply with domestic Polish engineering standards and standards for mechanical and electrical equipment. The terms of the Environmental Consent and Mining Concession for Jan Karski will be incorporated into the final engineering design, as well as results from the latest coal quality and hydrogeological drilling works being conducted by the Company.

Prairie and China Coal continue to advance discussions with Chinese banks to provide debt facilities to fund construction of the Project and enter into a complete Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (“EPC”) contract under which China Coal would construct the Jan Karski Mine.

CORPORATE

Financial Position

Prairie has cash reserves of A$15.1 million. With CD Capital’s right to invest a further A$68 million as a cornerstone investor, plus with the Strategic Co-operation Agreement Prairie has with China Coal for financing and construction of Jan Karski, Prairie is in a strong financial position to progress with its planned development activities at Debiensko and Jan Karski.

Forward Looking Statements

This release may include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on Prairie’s expectations and beliefs concerning future events. Forward looking statements are necessarily subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Prairie, which could cause actual results to differ materially from such statements. Prairie makes no undertaking to subsequently update or revise the forward-looking statements made in this release, to reflect the circumstances or events after the date of that release.

APPENDIX 1 – EXPLORATION TENEMENT INFORMATION

As at 31 December 2017, the Company has an interest in the following tenements:

Location

Tenement

Percentage Interest

Status

Tenement Type

Jan Karski, Poland

Jan Karski Mine Plan Area (K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and K-9)*

100

Granted

Exclusive Right to apply for a mining concession

Jan Karski, Poland

Kulik (K-4-5)

100

Granted

Exploration

Jan Karski, Poland

Syczyn (K-8)

100

Granted

Exploration

Jan Karski, Poland

Kopina (K-9)

100

Granted

Exploration

Jan Karski, Poland

Sawin-Zachód

100

Granted

Exploration

Debiensko, Poland

Debiensko 1**

100

Granted

Mining

Debiensko, Poland

Kaczyce 1

100

Mining & Exploration (includes gas rights)

*  On 1 July 2015, the Company announced that it had secured the Exclusive Right to apply for a mining concession for Jan Karski. As a result of its geological documentation for the Jan Karski deposit being approved, Prairie is currently the only entity that can lodge a Mining Concession application over Jan Karski within a three (3) year period up and until April 2018. In addition, Prairie has the right to apply for and be granted a mining usufruct agreement for an additional 12 month period that precludes any other parties being granted a licence over all or part of the Jan Karski concessions. Prairie applied for a mining usufruct agreement in December 2017.

The approved geological documentation covers an area comprising of all four of the original exploration concessions granted to Prairie (K-4-5, K-6-7, K-8 and K-9) and includes the full extent of the targeted resources within the mine plan for Jan Karski. In this regard, no beneficial title interest has been surrendered by the Company when the K-6-7 exploration concession expired during the quarter. The Company intends to submit a mining concession application, over the mine plan area at Jan Karski (which includes K-6-7) within the next 12 months. Under Polish mining law, and owing to the Exclusive Right the Company has secured, Prairie is currently the only entity that may apply for and be granted a mining concession with respect to the K-6-7 area (the Exclusive Right also applies to the K-4-5, K-8 and K-9 areas of Jan Karski). There is no requirement for the Company to hold an exploration concession in order exercise the Exclusive Right and apply for a mining concession.

 

**             Under the terms of the Debiensko Mining Concession issued in 2008 by the MoE (which is valid for 50 years from grant date), commencement of production was to occur by 1 January 2018. Not commencing production by January 2018 does not immediately infringe on the validity and expiry date of the current Mining Concession, which is June 2058. However, the concession authority has the right to request the concession holder to reasonably remove any infringements related to non-conformance with the conditions of a Mining Concession and determine a reasonable date for removal of the infringements (under Polish law, the concession authority is required to provide a reasonable timeframe to remedy any non-compliance taking into account the nature of the non-conformance). Failure to remedy the infringements within any reasonable time frame prescribed by the concession authority may lead to commencement of proceedings to limit or withdraw of a concession. In December 2016, the Company submitted an application to the MoE to amend the Debiensko Mining Concession to alter the date for commencement of production from 2018 to 2025, and has provided the MoE with additional information requested. A decision from the MoE is currently pending following a change in the Polish Prime Minister in December 2017 and the appointment of a new Minister of Environment in January 2018.

+Rule 5.5

Appendix 5B

Mining exploration entity and oil and gas exploration entity quarterly report

Introduced 01/07/96  Origin Appendix 8  Amended 01/07/97, 01/07/98, 30/09/01, 01/06/10, 17/12/10, 01/05/13, 01/09/16

Name of entity

PRAIRIE MINING LIMITED

ABN

Quarter ended (“current quarter”)

23 008 677 852

31 December 2017

Consolidated statement of cash flows

Current quarter $A’000

Year to date             (6 months)
$A’000

1.

Cash flows from operating activities

1.1

Receipts from customers

1.2

Payments for

(1,339)

(2,954)

(a)   exploration & evaluation

(b)   development

(c)   production

(d)   staff costs

(478)

(1,083)

(e)   administration and corporate costs

(200)

(440)

1.3

Dividends received (see note 3)

1.4

Interest received

83

203

1.5

Interest and other costs of finance paid

1.6

Income taxes paid

1.7

Research and development refunds

1.8

Other (provide details if material)

(a)  Business development costs

(b)  Property rental and gas sales

(208)

107

(526)

248

1.9

Net cash from / (used in) operating activities

(2,035)

(4,552)

2.

Cash flows from investing activities

(40)

(62)

2.1

Payments to acquire:

(a)   property, plant and equipment

(b)   tenements (see item 10)

(c)   investments

(d)   other non-current assets

2.2

Proceeds from the disposal of:

272

497

(a)   property, plant and equipment

(b)   tenements (see item 10)

(c)   investments

(d)   other non-current assets

2.3

Cash flows from loans to other entities

2.4

Dividends received (see note 3)

2.5

Other (provide details if material)

2.6

Net cash from / (used in) investing activities

232

435

3.

Cash flows from financing activities

3.1

Proceeds from issues of shares

3.2

Proceeds from issue of convertible notes

2,627

3.3

Proceeds from exercise of share options

3.4

Transaction costs related to issues of shares, convertible notes or options

(179)

3.5

Proceeds from borrowings

3.6

Repayment of borrowings

3.7

Transaction costs related to loans and borrowings

3.8

Dividends paid

3.9

Other (provide details if material)

3.10

Net cash from / (used in) financing activities

2,448

4.

Net increase / (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents for the period

16,943

16,809

4.1

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

4.2

Net cash from / (used in) operating activities (item 1.9 above)

(2,035)

(4,552)

4.3

Net cash from / (used in) investing activities (item 2.6 above)

232

435

4.4

Net cash from / (used in) financing activities (item 3.10 above)

2,448

4.5

Effect of movement in exchange rates on cash held

4.6

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

15,140

15,140

5.

Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents
at the end of the quarter (as shown in the consolidated statement of cash flows) to the related items in the accounts

Current quarter
$A’000

Previous quarter
$A’000

5.1

Bank balances

3,640

5,443

5.2

Call deposits

11,500

11,500

5.3

Bank overdrafts

5.4

Other (provide details)

5.5

Cash and cash equivalents at end of quarter (should equal item 4.6 above)

15,140

16,943

6.

Payments to directors of the entity and their associates

Current quarter
$A’000

6.1

Aggregate amount of payments to these parties included in item 1.2

(169)

6.2

Aggregate amount of cash flow from loans to these parties included in item 2.3

Nil

6.3

Include below any explanation necessary to understand the transactions included in items 6.1 and 6.2

Payments include executive remuneration (including bonuses), director fees, superannuation and provision of a fully serviced office.

7.

Payments to related entities of the entity and their associates

Current quarter
$A’000

7.1

Aggregate amount of payments to these parties included in item 1.2

7.2

Aggregate amount of cash flow from loans to these parties included in item 2.3

7.3

Include below any explanation necessary to understand the transactions included in items 7.1 and 7.2

Not applicable

8.

Financing facilities available
Add notes as necessary for an understanding of the position

Total facility amount at quarter end
$A’000

Amount drawn at quarter end
$A’000

8.1

Loan facilities

8.2

Credit standby arrangements

8.3

Other (please specify)

8.4

Include below a description of each facility above, including the lender, interest rate and whether it is secured or unsecured. If any additional facilities have been entered into or are proposed to be entered into after quarter end, include details of those facilities as well.

9.

Estimated cash outflows for next quarter

$A’000

9.1

Exploration and evaluation

(1,500)

9.2

Development

9.3

Production

9.4

Staff costs

(500)

9.5

Administration and corporate costs

(200)

9.6

Other (provide details if material)
(a)        Business development costs


(200)

9.7

Total estimated cash outflows

(2,400)

10.

Changes in tenements
(items 2.1(b) and 2.2(b) above)

Tenement reference and location

Nature of interest

Interest at beginning of quarter

Interest at end of quarter

10.1

Interests in mining tenements and petroleum tenements lapsed, relinquished or reduced

10.2

Interests in mining tenements and petroleum tenements acquired or increased

 

Compliance statement

1        This statement has been prepared in accordance with accounting standards and policies which comply with Listing Rule 19.11A.

2        This statement gives a true and fair view of the matters disclosed.

                        [lodged electronically without signature]

Sign here:         ……………………………………………………                        Date: 31 January 2018

(Director/Company secretary)

Print name:       Dylan Browne

Notes

1.            The quarterly report provides a basis for informing the market how the entity’s activities have been financed for the past quarter and the effect on its cash position. An entity that wishes to disclose additional information is encouraged to do so, in a note or notes included in or attached to this report.

2.            If this quarterly report has been prepared in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards, the definitions in, and provisions of, AASB 6: Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources and AASB 107: Statement of Cash Flows apply to this report. If this quarterly report has been prepared in accordance with other accounting standards agreed by ASX pursuant to Listing Rule 19.11A, the corresponding equivalent standards apply to this report.

3.            Dividends received may be classified either as cash flows from operating activities or cash flows from investing activities, depending on the accounting policy of the entity.

Prairie Mining #PDZ CEO Ben Stoikovich discusses the company and developments with Jeremy Naylor at IG TV

IG TV’s Jeremy Naylor is joined by Ben Stoikovich, Prairie Mining #PDZ, to discuss its production of coking coal in Poland. It says that it has the economic dynamic that will enable it to undercut almost all other coking coal suppliers.

Prairie Mining #PDZ – Change of Director’s Interest Notice

Change of Director’s Interest Notice

Information or documents not available now must be given to ASX as soon as available.  Information and documents given to ASX become ASX’s property and may be made public.

Introduced 30/09/01  Amended 01/01/11

Name of entity    Prairie Mining Limited

ABN                     23 008 677 852

 

We (the entity) give ASX the following information under listing rule 3.19A.2 and as agent for the director for the purposes of section 205G of the Corporations Act. 

 

Name of Director

Benjamin Stoikovich

Date of last notice

25 August 2017

 

Part 1 – Change of director’s relevant interests in securities

In the case of a trust, this includes interests in the trust made available by the responsible entity of the trust.

Note: In the case of a company, interests which come within paragraph (i) of the definition of “notifiable interest of a director” should be disclosed in this part.

Direct or indirect interest

Direct and Indirect

Nature of indirect interest

(including registered holder)

Note: Provide details of the circumstances giving rise to the relevant interest.

Windellama Capital Limited (Beneficial Interest)

Date of change

31 December 2017

No. of securities held prior to change

A.       1,500,000 (Direct)

B.       1,000,000 (Indirect)

C.       500,000 (Indirect)

D.       640,000 (Indirect)

E.       960,000 (Indirect)

Class

A.       Ordinary Fully Paid Shares

B.       Performance Rights – expiry 31 December 2017

C.       Performance Rights – expiry 31 December 2018

D.       Performance Rights – expiry 31 December 2019

E.       Performance Rights – expiry 31 December 2020

Number acquired

Nil

Number disposed

A.       Nil

B.       (1,000,000)

C.       Nil

D.       Nil

E.       Nil

Value/Consideration

Note: If consideration is non-cash, provide details and estimated valuation

Nil – see below

No. of securities held after change

A.       1,500,000

B.       Nil

C.       500,000

D.       640,000

E.       960,000

Nature of change

Example: on-market trade, off-market trade, exercise of options, issue of securities under dividend reinvestment plan, participation in buy-back

Expiry of Performance Rights

 

Part 2 – Change of director’s interests in contracts

 

Note: In the case of a company, interests which come within paragraph (ii) of the definition of “notifiable interest of a director” should be disclosed in this part.

Detail of contract

Not applicable

Nature of interest

Not applicable

Name of registered holder

(if issued securities)

Not applicable

Date of change

Not applicable

No. and class of securities to which interest related prior to change

Note: Details are only required for a contract in relation to which the interest has changed

Not applicable

Interest acquired

Not applicable

Interest disposed

Not applicable

Value/Consideration

Note: If consideration is non-cash, provide details and an estimated valuation

Not applicable

Interest after change

Not applicable

 

Part 3 – +Closed period

 

Were the interests in the securities or contracts detailed above traded during a +closed period where prior written clearance was required?

Not applicable

If so, was prior written clearance provided to allow the trade to proceed during this period?

Under Prairie Mining’s Securities Trading Policy a director cannot deal in Prairie Mining securities without prior approval. This requirement applies to all dealings, including those outside a Closed Period.

If prior written clearance was provided, on what date was this provided?

Not applicable

Initial notification/Amendment

Initial

LEI

213800EHCGNYSCN9T108

Place of transaction

Australian Securities Exchange (ASX)

Prairie Mining #PDZ – EU Confirms Coking Coal as a Critical Raw Material while Market Fundamentals Continue to Improve

EU Confirms Coking Coal as a Critical Raw Material while Market Fundamentals Continue to Improve 

 

  • European Commission continues to designate coking coal as a Critical Raw Material in its 2017 review
  • Coking coal continues to enjoy a strong market and spot price environment with hard coking coal prices above US$200/t FOB Australia
  • Market analysts forecast underinvestment in new coking coal mine development has potential to result in sustained high coking coal prices
  • European coking coal supply and demand fundamentals continue to improve with recovery of the steel making sector and increased reliance on imported coking coal as European production declines
  • Polish Government strongly supports development of new, modernised coal mines in order to meet future demand
  • Increasing demand for electric vehicles is expected to drive growth in steel supply to the European automobile industry
  • Large infrastructure development programs across Europe including High Speed 2 Rail in the UK, Poland’s transportation redevelopment plan, and China’s Belt and Road Initiative to contribute to European steel consumption

Prairie Mining Limited notes market fundamentals continue to improve for Prairie’s two large-scale Tier One coking coal projects as the European Commission reaffirms coking coal as a “Critical Raw Material” for Europe.

Prairie remains ideally positioned to supply coking coal to meet Europe’s steel demand in the future.

Prairie’s Chief Executive Officer Ben Stoikovich commented The outlook for increased coking coal demand from Europe’s steel producers coupled with reducing European supply is creating a ‘perfect storm’ for Prairie to become the go-to supplier of the critical raw material. Europe’s steel producers which supply the vast automobile industry are now noting the potential increase in demand for steel due to the move towards vehicle electrification over the coming decades. We are well positioned to supply the required coking coal to produce the steel from the heart of Europe’s steel making industry.”

COKING COAL REMAINS A CRITICAL RAW MATERIAL FOR EUROPE

The European Commission has confirmed coking coal’s status as a Critical Raw Material in its 2017 list, which features 27 raw materials and updates the 2014 list. The primary purpose of the list is to identify the raw materials with a high supply-risk and a high economic importance to which reliable and unhindered access is a concern for European industry and value chains.

Following an objective methodology, the list provides a factual tool for trade, innovation and industrial policy measures to strengthen the competitiveness of European industry in line with the renewed industrial strategy for Europe, for instance by:

  • identifying investment needs which can help alleviate Europe’s reliance on imports of raw materials;
  • guiding support to innovation on raw materials supply under the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme; and
  • drawing attention to the importance of critical raw materials for the transition to a low-carbon, resource-efficient and more circular economy.

Importantly for both of Prairie’s projects, it is expected that the list will incentivise the European production of critical raw materials through facilitating the launching of new mining activities.

Table 1: 2017 Critical Raw Materials

Antimony

Baryte

Beryllium

Bismuth

Borate

Cobalt

Coking Coal

Fluorspar

Gallium

Germanium

Hafnium

Helium

HREEs

Iridium

LREEs

Magnesium

Natural graphite

Natural rubber

Niobium

PGMs

Phosphate rock

Phosphorus

Scandium

Silicon metal

Tantalum

Tungsten

Vanadium

European steel makers – including the newly-formed ThyssenKrupp Tata Steel Joint Venture – are now looking ahead to supply a changing automobile industry with the introduction of electric vehicles and concurrently supply numerous major European infrastructure programs.

  • Increasing demand for ultra-low emission vehicles is expected to drive growth in steel supply to the European automobile industry. Almost 0.5 tonnes of coking coal are required to produce the structural, electrical and plated steel for each electric car. Specifically, steel is an important component of the electric vehicle structure and will be in the powertrain, enhancing the electric motor’s efficiency, range and power. Further, lithium-ion batteries commonly used in electric vehicles will require steel while infrastructure including the production of machinery, charging units and “refuelling hubs” for electric vehicles will also require steel.
  • According to BHP Billiton, China’s Belt and Road Initiative to advance globalisation and trading – which includes several European countries including Poland – could result in up to 150 million tonnes of incremental steel demand.
  • UK infrastructure projects including the High Speed 2 Rail Line and the construction of the Hinkley Point C Nuclear Power Station are expected to use over 3 million tonnes of steel – equivalent to 375 London Olympic Stadiums.

STRONG COKING COAL ENVIRONMENT CONTINUES

Hard coking coal prices have returned to levels above US$200/t FOB Australia mainly attributable to proactive buying in the seaborne market by steel producers concerned about future potential supply disruptions from Australia due to weather.

Longer term, market analysts have suggested recent and sustained underinvestment in new mine development has the potential to result in a lack of new supply in coming years which may sustain higher coking coal prices even in a lower demand scenario. According to industry analysts there is an expected decrease in supply of 0.5% per annum until 2020.

POLISH ECONOMISTS AND INDUSTRY EXPERTS ACKNOWLEDGE PRAIRIE AS CLEAR FUTURE SUPPLIER

A key independent adviser to the Polish Government, the Polish Academy of Sciences1, recently published a report confirming Prairie’s Jan Karski and Debiensko Mines as obvious sources of future coking coal supply for the European steel industry. The Polish Academy of Sciences is a statutory institution which provides expert advice to the Polish Government and is one the most prestigious and reputable academic institutes in Poland. The report suggested:

 “Both domestic and European demand for coking coal is also expected to increase. However, the supply of this raw material is low – 85% of coking coal used in the EU in 2016 was imported. Therefore, Polish authorities are interested in promoting both the material and domestic steel industry, in order to secure a bigger share of European market to Poland – especially in Central Europe.

It is necessary to open new seams at existing mines, or building new mines, to guarantee the energy security of the country and to ensure sufficient supply of material for the steel industry (in Poland and in European Union).” 

Importantly, the report concluded that private mining businesses such as Prairie would indeed complement, rather than compete, with state-controlled mining companies.

“The Polish mining sector faces a great opportunity, as foreign private companies shall bring in the best innovative technologies and international practices in undertaking and implementing modern mining projects, thus leading to the natural transfer of innovative technologies to Polish industry.”

The findings of the report are in line with the Polish Commercial and Industrial Chamber of the Metallurgical Sector which in a recent paper acknowledged:

“One of the most important cost components, decisive for the economic standing of the steel sector, is the price of coking coal, and resulting prices of coke. It is worth remembering that undisturbed and attractively priced supplies of such materials from Polish mining and coking plants shall continue to be the base for development and competitive advantage of Polish steel industry and operation of directly and indirectly connected sectors.

Polish coking coal is attractive to the steel sector due to its price, resulting from high quality and geographic rent. In the event of insufficient supply of domestic coal, necessary imports (from countries like Australia and the USA) could have significant impact on both prices and flexibility of production in the sector2“.

POLISH GOVERNMENT HIGHLIGHTS THE NEED FOR NEW COAL MINES SUCH AS PRAIRIE’S PROJECTS

In December 2017, Vice Minister of Energy Mr. Grzegorz Tobiszowski publicly discussed the requirement of investment into the Polish coal mining industry which included the construction of new coal mines:

“To be effective we should invest in new technologies, using modern equipment, but also consider building new shafts and new mines – and then we will be able to mine coal effectively”

During a speech in the same month, Minister of Energy, Mr. Krzystof Tchorzewski discussed the need for at least two new coal mines in Poland. The Minister stated:

“…today we face this challenge. There is a requirement for investment…into new longwalls, but also the necessity to build new mines is looming”

Prairie will pioneer the introduction of international best practice in mine design, production organisation and technology to deliver substantial operational and product quality improvements in the development of its Jan Karski Semi-Soft Coking Coal Mine in the Lublin Basin and its Debiensko Hard Coking Coal Mine in Upper Silesia.

Coal mining technology in Poland has not kept pace with international best practices, thereby negatively impacting efficiency of existing mines. Prairie will start with a “clean slate”, drawing on modern international experience in all areas of development including:

  • Modern exploration techniques – provide more accurate and reliable estimation of resources and improved mine planning
  • Optimized targeting of coal seams – focuses on maximizing net present value by targeting highest quality coal seams first
  • Modern mine design – reduces operating costs, improves coal yields and optimizes logistics
  • New technologies – focuses on increased automation, improved productivity and safety
  • Improved Labour Organisation – flexible shift structures, bonuses based on production targets aimed at increasing productivity, reducing costs and aligning staff interests with corporate goals

To view this announcement in full including all illustrations and figures, please refer to www.pdz.com.au

For further information, please contact:

Prairie Mining Limited

Tel: +44 207 478 3900

Ben Stoikovich, Chief Executive Officer

Email: info@pdz.com.au

Sapan Ghai, Head of Corporate Development

________________

1 The Mineral and Energy Economy Research Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences: “Raw material security in the context of limited domestic capacity of hard coal production – key issues”, 2017.
2 Commercial and Industrial Chamber of Metallurgic Sector: “POLISH STEEL SECTOR”; 2017.

I would like to receive Brand Communications updates and news...
Free Stock Updates & News
I agree to have my personal information transfered to MailChimp ( more information )
Join over 3.000 visitors who are receiving our newsletter and learn how to optimize your blog for search engines, find free traffic, and monetize your website.
We hate spam. Your email address will not be sold or shared with anyone else.