Hallador Energy Company (HNRG) Risk Analysis

None of our employees are represented under collective bargaining agreements. However, all of our workforce may not remain union-free in the future, and legislative, regulatory or other governmental action could make it more difficult to remain union-free. If some or all of our currently union-free operations were to become unionized, it could adversely affect our productivity and increase the risk of work stoppages at our mining complexes. In addition, even if we remain union-free, our operations could still be adversely affected by work stoppages at unionized companies, particularly if union workers were to orchestrate boycotts against our operations.

We believe that commercial insurance coverage is prudent in certain areas of our business for risk management. Insurance costs could increase substantially in the future and could be affected by natural disasters, fear of terrorism, financial irregularities, cybersecurity breaches and other fraud at publicly traded companies, intervention by the government, an increase in the number of claims received by the carriers, and a decrease in the number of insurance carriers. In addition, the carriers with which we hold our policies could go out of business or be otherwise unable to fulfill their contractual obligations or could disagree with our interpretation of the coverage or the amounts owed. In addition, for certain types or levels of risk, such as risks associated with certain natural disasters or terrorist attacks, we may determine that we cannot obtain commercial insurance at acceptable rates, if at all. Therefore, we may choose to forego or limit our purchase of relevant commercial insurance, choosing instead to self-insure one or more types or levels of risks. If we suffer a substantial loss that is not covered by commercial insurance or our self-insurance reserves, the loss and related expenses could harm our business and operating results. Also, exposures exist for which no insurance may be available and for which we have not reserved.  In addition, environmental activists could try to hamper fossil-fuel companies by other means including pressuring insurance and surety companies into restricting access to certain needed coverages.

Our mining operations are influenced by changing conditions or events that can affect production levels and costs at particular mines for varying lengths of time and, as a result, can diminish our profitability. These conditions and events include, among others: - mining and processing equipment failures and unexpected maintenance problems;   - unavailability of required equipment;   - prices for fuel, steel, explosives and other supplies;   - fines and penalties incurred as a result of alleged violations of environmental and safety laws and regulations;   - variations in thickness of the layer, or seam, of coal;   - amounts of overburden, partings, rock and other natural materials;   - weather conditions, such as heavy rains, flooding, ice and other natural events affecting operations, transportation or customers;   - accidental mine water discharges and other geological conditions;   - seismic activities, ground failures, rock bursts or structural cave-ins or slides;   - fires;   - employee injuries or fatalities;   - labor-related interruptions;   - increased reclamation costs;   - inability to acquire, maintain or renew mining rights or permits in a timely manner, if at all;   - fluctuations in transportation costs and the availability or reliability of transportation; and   - unexpected operational interruptions due to other factors. These conditions have the potential to significantly impact our operating results. Prolonged disruption of production at any of our mines would result in a decrease in our revenues and profitability, which could materially adversely impact our quarterly or annual results.

Transportation costs represent a significant portion of the total cost of coal for our customers and, as a result, the cost of transportation is a critical factor in a customer's purchasing decision. Increases in transportation costs could make coal a less competitive source of energy or could make our coal production less competitive than coal produced from other sources. Disruption of transportation services due to weather-related problems, flooding, drought, accidents, mechanical difficulties, strikes, lockouts, bottlenecks or other events could temporarily impair our ability to supply coal to our customers. Our transportation providers could face difficulties in the future that could impair our ability to supply coal to our customers, resulting in decreased revenues. If there are disruptions of the transportation services provided by our primary rail carriers that transport our coal and we are unable to find alternative transportation providers to ship our coal, our business could be adversely affected. Conversely, significant decreases in transportation costs could result in increased competition from coal producers in other parts of the country. For instance, difficulty in coordinating the many eastern coal loading facilities, the large number of small shipments, the steeper average grades of the terrain and a more unionized workforce are all issues that combine to make coal shipments originating in the eastern U.S. inherently more expensive on a per-mile basis than coal shipments originating in the western U.S. Historically, high coal transportation rates from the western coal-producing areas into certain eastern markets limited the use of western coal in those markets. Lower rail rates from the western coal producing areas to markets served by eastern U.S. coal producers have created major competitive challenges for eastern coal producers. In the event of further reductions in transportation costs from western coal-producing areas, the increased competition with certain eastern coal markets could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. States in which our coal is transported by truck may modify or increase enforcement of their laws regarding weight limits or coal trucks on public roads. Such legislation and enforcement efforts could result in shipment delays and increased costs. An increase in transportation costs could have an adverse effect on our ability to increase or to maintain production and could adversely affect revenues. Political or financial instability, currency fluctuations, the outbreak of pandemics or other illnesses (such as the COVID- 19 pandemic), labor unrest, transport capacity and costs, port security, weather conditions, natural disasters, or other events that could alter or suspend our operations, slow or disrupt port activities, or affect foreign trade are beyond our control and could materially disrupt our ability to participate in the export market for coal sales, which could adversely affect our sales and our results of operations.

Our results of operations are primarily dependent upon the prices we receive for our coal in our coal operations, or the price we pay for our coal in the case of our electric operations, as well as our ability to improve productivity and control costs. These prices depend upon factors beyond our control, including: -   the supply of and demand for domestic and foreign coal;   -   weather conditions and patterns that affect demand for or our ability to produce coal;   -   the proximity to and capacity of transportation facilities;   -   supply chain and cost of raw materials for coal operations;   -   competition from other coal suppliers;   -   domestic and foreign governmental regulations and taxes;   -   the price and availability of alternative fuels;   -   the effect of worldwide energy consumption, including the impact of technological advances on energy consumption;   -   overall domestic and global economic conditions;   - the adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic due to the reduction in demand;   -   international developments impacting supply of coal; and   -   the impact of domestic and foreign governmental laws and regulations, including environmental and climate change regulations and regulations affecting the coal mining industry and coal-fired power plants, and delays in the receipt of, failure to receive, failure to maintain or revocation of necessary governmental permits. Any adverse change in these factors could result in weaker demand and lower prices for our products. With respect to our coal operations, a substantial or extended decline in coal prices could materially and adversely affect us by decreasing our revenues to the extent we are not protected by the terms of existing coal supply agreements (although the adverse impact of a decline in coal prices may in some cases be offset by lower coal prices we pay in our electric operations).

Our operations currently use hazardous materials and generate limited quantities of hazardous wastes from time to time. Drainage flowing from or caused by mining activities can be acidic with elevated levels of dissolved metals, a condition referred to as "acid mine drainage." We could become subject to claims for toxic torts, natural resource damages and other damages, as well as for the investigation and clean-up of soil, surface water, groundwater and other media. Such claims may arise, for example, out of conditions at sites that we currently own or operate, as well as at sites that we previously owned or operated, or may acquire. Our liability for such claims may be joint and several, so that we may be held responsible for more than our share of the contamination or other damages, or for the entire share. In addition, government inspectors, under certain circumstances, may have the ability to order our operations to be shut down based on a perceived or actual violation of regulations concerning hazardous substances and other matters related to environmental protection. These and other similar unforeseen impacts that our operations may have on the environment, as well as exposures to hazardous substances or wastes associated with our operations, could result in costs and liabilities that could adversely affect us.

The U.S., European Union and other large economies have recently experienced inflation at a rate significantly higher than recent years. Current and future inflationary effects may be driven by, among other things, governmental stimulus and monetary policies, supply chain disruptions and geopolitical instability, including the ongoing military conflict between Ukraine and Russia. This recent inflation has resulted in rising prices, including increases in freight rates, prices for energy and other costs, and has adversely impacted us and may further impact us negatively in the future. Sustained inflation could result in higher costs for transportation, energy, materials, supplies and labor. Our efforts to recover inflation-based cost increases from our customers may be hampered as a result of the structure of our contracts and competitive pressures.  Accordingly, substantial inflation may have an adverse impact on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Inflation has also resulted in higher interest rates in the U.S., which could increase our cost of debt borrowing in the future.

Any future inflationary or deflationary pressures could adversely affect the results of our operations. For example, at times our results have been significantly impacted by price increases affecting many of the components of our operating expenses such as fuel, steel, maintenance expense and labor. In addition to potential cost increases, inflation could cause a decline in global or regional economic conditions that reduce demand for our coal or electric power and could adversely affect our results of operations.

Increasing attention to climate change risk has also resulted in a recent trend of governmental investigations and private litigation by state and local governmental agencies as well as private plaintiffs in an effort to hold energy companies accountable for the alleged effects of climate change. Other public nuisance lawsuits have been brought in the past against power, coal, and oil & gas companies alleging that their operations are contributing to climate change. The plaintiffs in these suits sought various remedies, including punitive and compensatory damages and injunctive relief. While the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal common law provided no basis for public nuisance claims against the defendants in those cases, tort-type liabilities remain a possibility and a source of concern. Government entities in other states (including California and New York) have brought similar claims seeking to hold a wide variety of companies that produce fossil fuels liable for the alleged impacts of the GHG emissions attributable to those fuels. Those lawsuits allege damages as a result of climate change and the plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and abatement under various tort theories. Separately, litigation has been brought against certain fossil-fuel companies alleging that they have been aware of the adverse effects of climate change for some time but failed to adequately disclose such impacts to their investors or consumers. We have not been made a party to these other suits, but it is possible that we could be included in similar future lawsuits initiated by state and local governments as well as private claimants.

Combustion of fossil fuels, such as the coal we produce, results in the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Concerns about the environmental impacts of such emissions have resulted in a series of regulatory, political, litigation, and financial risks for our business. Global climate issues continue to attract public and scientific attention. Most scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs in the Earth's atmosphere could produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts and floods, and other climatic events. Increasing government attention is being paid to global climate issues and to emissions of GHGs, including emissions due to fossil fuels. In the U.S., no comprehensive climate change legislation has been implemented at the federal level. However, following the U.S. Supreme Court finding that GHG emissions constitute a pollutant under the CAA, the EPA has adopted regulations that, among other things, establish construction and operating permit reviews for GHG emissions from certain large stationary sources, require the monitoring and annual reporting of GHG emissions from certain sources in the U.S., or constrain the emissions of power plants (though such emissions restraints have been subject to challenge.) Separately, various states and groups of states have adopted or are considering adopting legislation, regulations, or other regulatory initiatives that are focused on such areas as GHG cap-and-trade programs, carbon taxes, reporting and tracking programs, and restriction of emissions. Internationally, the Paris Agreement requires member states to submit non-binding, individually-determined emissions reduction targets. These commitments could further reduce demand and prices for fossil fuels. Although the U.S. had withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, following President Biden's executive order in January 2021, the U.S. rejoined the Agreement and, in April 2021, established a goal of reducing economy-wide net GHG emissions 50-52% below levels by 2030. Additionally, at COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021, the U.S. and the European Union jointly announced the launch of a Global Methane Pledge committing to a collective goal of reducing global methane emissions by at least 30% from 2020 levels by 2030, including "all feasible reductions" in the energy sector. At COP27 in Sharm El-Sheik in November 2022, countries reiterated the agreements from COP26 and were called upon to accelerate efforts toward the phase out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies. The U.S. also announced, in conjunction with the European Union and other partner countries, that it would develop standards for monitoring and reporting methane emissions to help create a market for low methane-intensity natural gas. Although no firm commitment or timeline to phase out or phase down all fossil fuels was made at COP27, there can be no guarantees that countries will not seek to implement such a phase out in the future. The full impact of these actions is uncertain at this time and it is unclear what additional initiatives may be adopted or implemented that may have adverse effects upon us and our operators' operations. Governmental, scientific, and public concern over climate change has also resulted in increased political risks, including certain climate-related pledges made by certain candidates now in political office. In January 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that commits to substantial action on climate change, calling for, among other things, the increased use of zero-emissions vehicles by the federal government, the elimination of subsidies provided to the fossil-fuel industry, a doubling of electricity generated by offshore wind by 2030, and increased emphasis on climate-related risks across governmental agencies and economic sectors. Other actions that may be pursued include restrictive requirements on new pipeline infrastructure or fossil-fuel export facilities or the promulgation of a carbon tax or cap and trade program. Further, although Congress has not passed such legislation, almost half of the states have begun to address GHG emissions, primarily through the planned development of emissions inventories, regional GHG cap and trade programs, or the establishment of renewable energy requirements for utilities. Depending on the particular program, we or our customers could be required to control GHG emissions or to purchase and surrender allowances for GHG emissions resulting from our operations. Litigation risks are also increasing. Additionally, on March 6, 2024, the SEC adopted new rules relating to the disclosure of a range of climate-related data risks and opportunities, including financial impacts, physical and transition risks, related governance and strategy and GHG emissions, for certain public companies. We are currently assessing this rule but at this time we cannot predict the ultimate impact of the rule on our business or those of our customers. As a result of these final rules, we or our customers could incur increased costs related to the assessment and disclosure of climate-related risks and certain emissions metrics. In addition, enhanced climate disclosure requirements could accelerate the trend of certain stakeholders and lenders restricting or seeking more stringent conditions with respect to their investments in certain carbon intensive sectors. Apart from governmental regulation, there are also increasing financial risks for fossil-fuel producers as stakeholders of fossil-fuel energy companies may elect in the future to shift some or all of their support into non-energy related sectors. Institutional lenders who provide financing to fossil-fuel energy companies also have become more attentive to sustainable lending practices and some of them may elect not to provide funding for fossil-fuel energy companies. For example, at COP26, the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero ("GFANZ") announced that commitments from over 450 firms across 45 countries had resulted in over $130 trillion in capital committed to net zero goals. The various sub-alliances of GFANZ generally require participants to set short-term, sector-specific targets to transition their financing, investing, and/or underwriting activities to net zero emissions by 2050. There is also a risk that financial institutions will be required to adopt policies that have the effect of reducing the funding provided to the fossil-fuel sector. In late 2020, the Federal Reserve announced it had joined the Network for Greening the Financial System ("NGFS"), a consortium of financial regulators focused on addressing climate-related risks in the financial sector, and, in September 2022, announced that six of the U.S.' largest banks will participate in a pilot climate scenario analysis to enhance the ability of firms and supervisors to measure and manage climate-related financial risk. The Federal Reserve released its pilot exercise in January 2023 which is designed to analyze the impact of both physical and transition risks related to climate change on specific assets of the banks' portfolio. Although we cannot predict the effects of these actions, such limitation of investments in and financing, bonding, and insurance coverages for fossil-fuel energy companies could adversely affect our coal mining operations. The adoption and implementation of new or more stringent international, federal, or state legislation, regulations, or other regulatory initiatives that impose more stringent standards for GHG emissions from fossil-fuel companies could result in increased costs of compliance or costs of consuming, and thereby reduce demand for coal, which could reduce the profitability of our interests. Additionally, political, litigation, and financial risks could result in either us restricting or canceling mining activities, incurring liability for infrastructure damages as a result of climatic changes, or having an impaired ability to continue to operate in an economic manner. One or more of these developments, as well as concerted conservation and efficiency efforts that result in reduced electricity consumption, and consumer and corporate preferences for non-fossil-fuel sources, including alternative energy sources, could cause prices and sales of our coal to materially decline and could cause our costs to increase and adversely affect our revenues and results of operations. Climate change may also result in various physical risks, such as the increased frequency or intensity of extreme weather events or changes in meteorological and hydrological patterns that could adversely impact our operations. Such physical risks may result in damage to our facilities or otherwise adversely impact operations which could decrease our production. We may not have insurance to cover these risks and the consequences for our operations could have a negative impact on the costs and revenues from operations.

In 2023, a significant portion of our coal, capacity and energy sales were under contracts having a term greater than one year, which we refer to as long-term contracts. These contracts have historically provided a relatively secure market for the amount of production committed under the terms of the contracts. From time to time industry conditions could make it more difficult for us to enter into long-term contracts with our electric utility customers, and if supply exceeds demand in the coal and power industries, our customers may become less willing to lock in price or quantity commitments for an extended period of time. Accordingly, we may not be able to continue to obtain long-term sales contracts with reliable customers as existing contracts expire, which could subject a portion of our revenue stream to the increased volatility of the spot market.