P6MUNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS INC0000082020--12-312021FYfalse0000P0Y0000082020srt:MaximumMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020uslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020srt:MinimumMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:OtherNonoperatingIncomeExpenseMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:OtherNonoperatingIncomeExpenseMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:OtherNonoperatingIncomeExpenseMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:CommonStockMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:CommonStockMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:CommonStockMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember2020-12-310000082020us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember2020-12-310000082020us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember2020-12-310000082020us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember2019-12-310000082020us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember2019-12-310000082020us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember2019-12-310000082020us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember2019-12-310000082020us-gaap:TreasuryStockCommonMember2018-12-310000082020us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember2018-12-310000082020us-gaap:AdditionalPaidInCapitalMember2018-12-310000082020us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember2018-12-310000082020us-gaap:CommonStockMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:CommonStockMember2020-12-310000082020us-gaap:CommonStockMember2019-12-310000082020us-gaap:CommonStockMember2018-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2020-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2021-12-310000082020srt:WeightedAverageMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:WeightedAverageMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020srt:WeightedAverageMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberuslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:RestrictedStockMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:RestrictedStockMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:RestrictedStockMember2020-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberus-gaap:RestrictedStockMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberus-gaap:RestrictedStockMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020uslm:OtherProductsAndServiceMemberus-gaap:AllOtherSegmentsMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:MineralMemberuslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020uslm:OtherProductsAndServiceMemberus-gaap:AllOtherSegmentsMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:MineralMemberuslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020uslm:OtherProductsAndServiceMemberus-gaap:AllOtherSegmentsMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:MineralMemberuslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberus-gaap:MachineryAndEquipmentMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberus-gaap:FurnitureAndFixturesMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberus-gaap:EquipmentMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberus-gaap:BuildingAndBuildingImprovementsMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberus-gaap:MachineryAndEquipmentMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberus-gaap:FurnitureAndFixturesMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberus-gaap:EquipmentMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMemberus-gaap:BuildingAndBuildingImprovementsMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020uslm:MillCreekDolomiteLlcMemberus-gaap:SubsequentEventMember2022-02-092022-02-090000082020us-gaap:DomesticCountryMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:CapitalAdditionsMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:LetterOfCreditMember2016-10-270000082020uslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMember2015-05-070000082020srt:MinimumMemberuslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020srt:MaximumMemberuslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020us-gaap:RevolvingCreditFacilityMember2021-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMember2021-12-310000082020srt:MaximumMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:RestrictedStockMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:RestrictedStockMember2021-12-310000082020srt:MinimumMemberuslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMemberus-gaap:PrimeRateMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020srt:MinimumMemberuslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMemberus-gaap:LondonInterbankOfferedRateLIBORMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020srt:MaximumMemberuslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMemberus-gaap:PrimeRateMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020srt:MaximumMemberuslm:NewRevolvingCreditFacilityMemberus-gaap:LondonInterbankOfferedRateLIBORMember2015-05-072015-05-070000082020uslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:AllOtherSegmentsMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020uslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:AllOtherSegmentsMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020uslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:AllOtherSegmentsMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:RetainedEarningsMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:AccumulatedOtherComprehensiveIncomeMember2019-01-012019-12-3100000820202021-04-300000082020us-gaap:SubsequentEventMember2022-01-312022-01-3100000820202018-12-310000082020uslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2021-12-310000082020us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember2021-12-310000082020uslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2020-12-310000082020us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember2020-12-310000082020uslm:LimeAndLimestoneOperationsSegmentMember2019-12-310000082020us-gaap:CorporateNonSegmentMember2019-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020uslm:EmployeeAndNonemployeeStockOptionMember2019-01-012019-12-3100000820202019-12-310000082020us-gaap:SellingGeneralAndAdministrativeExpensesMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:CostOfSalesMember2021-01-012021-12-310000082020us-gaap:SellingGeneralAndAdministrativeExpensesMember2020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:CostOfSalesMember2020-01-012020-12-3100000820202020-01-012020-12-310000082020us-gaap:SellingGeneralAndAdministrativeExpensesMember2019-01-012019-12-310000082020us-gaap:CostOfSalesMember2019-01-012019-12-3100000820202019-01-012019-12-3100000820202021-12-3100000820202020-12-3100000820202021-06-3000000820202022-03-0900000820202021-01-012021-12-31xbrli:sharesiso4217:USDiso4217:USDxbrli:sharesxbrli:pureuslm:segment

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021

OR

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Commission File Number 000-04197

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Texas
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)

75-0789226
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)

5429 LBJ Freeway, Suite 230, Dallas, Texas
(Address of principal executive offices)

75240
(Zip code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (972991-8400

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:

Title of each class

Trading Symbol(s)

Name of each exchange on which registered

Common stock, $0.10 par value

USLM

The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT: None

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes  No 

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes  No 

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes  No 

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes  No 

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company

Emerging growth company

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the Registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.  

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes  No 

The aggregate market value of Common Stock held by non-affiliates computed as of the last business day of the Registrant’s quarter ended June 30, 2021: $289,358,791.

Number of shares of Common Stock outstanding as of March 9, 2022: 5,668,165.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Part III incorporates information by reference from the Registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement to be filed for its 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Part IV incorporates certain exhibits by reference from the Registrant’s previous filings.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Part I

ITEM 1.

BUSINESS

1

ITEM 1A.

RISK FACTORS

13

ITEM 1B.

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

17

ITEM 2.

PROPERTIES

17

ITEM 3.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

17

ITEM 4.

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

17

Part II

ITEM 5.

MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

18

ITEM 6.

[RESERVED]

19

ITEM 7.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

20

ITEM 7A.

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

29

ITEM 8.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

29

ITEM 9.

CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

50

ITEM 9A.

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

50

ITEM 9B.

OTHER INFORMATION

50

ITEM 9C.

DISCLOSURE REGARDING FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS THAT PREVENT INSPECTIONS

50

Part III

ITEM 10.

DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

51

ITEM 11.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

51

ITEM 12.

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

51

ITEM 13.

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

51

ITEM 14.

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

51

Part IV

ITEM 15.

EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

52

ITEM 16.

FORM 10-K SUMMARY

54

SIGNATURES

55

ii

Table of Contents

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS.

General.

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (the “Company,” the “Registrant,” “We” or “Our”), which was incorporated in 1950, conducts its business primarily through its Lime and Limestone Operations segment. The Company’s Other operations relate to its natural gas interests.

The Company’s principal corporate office is located at 5429 LBJ Freeway, Suite 230, Dallas, Texas 75240. The Company’s telephone number is (972) 991-8400 and its internet address is www.uslm.com. The Company’s annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as well as the Company’s definitive proxy statement filed pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, are available free of charge on the Company’s website as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).

Lime and Limestone Operations.

Business and Products. The Company, through its Lime and Limestone Operations, is a manufacturer of lime and limestone products, supplying primarily the construction (including highway, road and building contractors), industrial (including paper and glass manufacturers), metals (including steel producers), environmental (including municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities and flue gas treatment processes), roof shingle manufacturers, agriculture (including poultry and cattle feed producers), and oil and gas services industries. The Company is headquartered in Dallas, Texas and operates lime and limestone plants and distribution facilities in Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas through its wholly owned subsidiaries, Arkansas Lime Company, ART Quarry TRS LLC (DBA Carthage Crushed Limestone), Colorado Lime Company, Mill Creek Dolomite, LLC, Texas Lime Company, U.S. Lime Company, U.S. Lime Company—Shreveport, U.S. Lime Company—St. Clair and U.S. Lime Company—Transportation.

The Company extracts high-quality limestone from its open-pit quarries and underground mines and then processes it for sale as pulverized limestone, aggregate, quicklime, hydrated lime and lime slurry. Pulverized limestone (also referred to as ground calcium carbonate) (“PLS”) is produced by applying heat to dry the limestone, which is then ground to granular and finer sizes. Quicklime (calcium oxide) is produced by heating limestone to very high temperatures in kilns in a process called calcination. Hydrated lime (calcium hydroxide) is produced by reacting quicklime with water in a controlled process. Lime slurry (milk of lime) is a suspended solution of calcium hydroxide produced by mixing quicklime with water in a lime slaker.

PLS is used in the production of construction materials such as roof shingles and asphalt paving, as an additive to agriculture feeds, in the production of glass, as a soil enhancement, in flue gas treatment for utilities and other industries requiring scrubbing of emissions for environmental purposes and for mine safety dust in coal mining operations. Quicklime is used primarily in metal processing, in flue gas treatment, in soil stabilization for highway, road and building construction, as well as for oilfield roads and drill sites, in the manufacturing of paper products and in municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities. Hydrated lime is used primarily in municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities, in soil stabilization for highway, road and building construction, in flue gas treatment, in asphalt as an anti-stripping agent, as a conditioning agent for oil and gas drilling mud and in the production of chemicals. Lime slurry is used primarily in soil stabilization for highway, road and building construction.

Product Sales. In 2021, the Company sold almost all of its lime and limestone products in the states of Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas. Sales were made primarily by the Company’s ten sales employees who call on current and potential customers and solicit orders, which are generally made on a purchase-order basis. The Company also receives orders in response to bids that it prepares and submits to current and potential customers.

1

Table of Contents

Principal customers for the Company’s lime and limestone products are construction customers (including highway, road and building contractors), industrial customers (including paper manufacturers and glass manufacturers), metals producers (including steel producers), environmental customers (including municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities and flue gas treatment processes), roof shingle manufacturers, poultry and cattle feed producers, and oil and gas services companies.

Approximately 650 customers accounted for the Company’s sales of lime and limestone products during 2021. No single customer accounted for more than 10% of such sales. The Company is generally not subject to significant customer demand and credit risks as its customers are considerably diversified within our geographic region and by industry concentration. However, given the nature of the lime and limestone industry, the Company’s profits are very sensitive to changes in sales volumes, prices, and costs.

Lime and limestone products are transported by truck and rail to customers generally within a radius of 400 miles of each of the Company’s plants. All of the Company’s 2021 sales were made within the United States.

Seasonality. The Company’s sales have typically reflected seasonal trends, with the largest percentage of total annual shipments and revenues normally being realized in the second and third quarters. Lower seasonal demand normally results in reduced shipments and revenues in the first and fourth quarters. Inclement weather conditions generally have a negative impact on the demand for lime and limestone products supplied to construction-related customers, as well as on the Company’s open-pit quarrying operations.

Limestone Mineral Resources and Reserves. The Company’s limestone mineral resources and reserves contain at least 96% calcium carbonate (CaCO3). The Company has three subsidiaries that extract limestone from open-pit quarries: Texas Lime Company (“Texas Lime”), which is located near Cleburne, Texas; Arkansas Lime Company (“Arkansas Lime”), which is located near Batesville, Arkansas; and Mill Creek Dolomite, LLC (“Mill Creek”), which the Company acquired on February 9, 2022, located near Mill Creek, Oklahoma. U.S. Lime Company—St. Clair (“St. Clair”) extracts limestone from an underground mine located near Marble City, Oklahoma. Carthage Crushed Limestone (“Carthage”) extracts limestone from an underground mine located in Carthage, Missouri. Colorado Lime Company (“Colorado Lime”) owns property containing limestone deposits at Monarch Pass, Colorado. Existing crushed stone stockpiles on the property are being used to provide feedstock to the Company’s plant in Delta, Colorado. Access to all properties is provided by paved roads and, in the case of Arkansas Lime, St. Clair, Carthage, and Mill Creek, also by rail. During each of the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, the Company mined approximately 3 million tons of limestone from its quarries and mines.

The Company engaged SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”) to serve as the Qualified Person (“QP”) to prepare estimates of the limestone mineral resources and reserves, as of December 31, 2021, at all of its properties except for Carthage and Colorado Lime. The QP was not retained to prepare estimates at Carthage and Colorado Lime because the Company has not completed a drilling program sufficient to enable the QP to prepare estimates of the limestone mineral resources and reserves at those properties.

Summaries of the Company’s total limestone mineral resources and reserves for all properties other than Carthage and Colorado Lime as of December 31, 2021 are shown below. The terms “Mineral Resource”, “Measured Resources”, “Indicated Resources”, “Mineral Reserves”, “Proven Reserves” and “Probable Reserves” are defined in accordance with SEC Regulation S-K subpart 229.1300 governing disclosures by registrants engaged in mining operations. Limestone mineral reserves are included in limestone mineral resources, net of any mining loss factors.

Summary of Total Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.051


Measured
Resources (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Indicated
Resources (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Measured + Indicated
Resources (tons)

Cutoff Grade

284,992,994

Above 96.0% (CaCO3)

137,986,334

Above 96.0% (CaCO3)

422,979,328

Above 96.0% (CaCO3)

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

2

Table of Contents

Summary of Total Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.051

Proven Reserves
(tons)

Cutoff Grade

Probable Reserves
(tons)

Cutoff Grade

Total Mineral Reserves
(tons)

Cutoff Grade

164,145,961

Above 96.0% (CaCO3)

72,037,300

Above 96.0% (CaCO3)

236,183,261

Above 96.0% (CaCO3)

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

Set forth below is a description of each of the Company’s mining properties. The Company considers the four mining properties associated with Texas Lime, Arkansas Lime (2 properties) and St. Clair to be material for purposes of application of SEC Regulation S-K subpart 229.1300. Included in the description of each of these four material mining properties are disclosures with respect to such property’s limestone mineral resources and reserves. For additional information with respect to these four properties, see the Technical Report Summaries prepared by SYB, as of December 31, 2021, in Exhibits 96.1-96.4 to this Report on Form 10-K.

Texas Lime owns a quarry and has PLS, lime, and hydrated lime production facilities, located on approximately 5,200 acres of land in Johnson County, Texas that contains known high-quality limestone resources in a bed averaging 25 to 35 feet in thickness (the “Texas Lime Quarry”). As of December 31, 2021, Texas Lime had 117 million tons of measured limestone mineral resources, which included 63 million tons of proven reserves plus 48 million tons of probable reserves. Assuming the current level of production and recovery rate is maintained, the Company estimates that these reserves are sufficient to sustain operations for approximately 75 years. The tables below summarize the limestone mineral resources and reserves at the Texas Lime Quarry as of December 31, 2021.

Texas Lime Quarry - Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Resources (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Processing Recovery

Measured Mineral Resources

116,532,906

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

-

-

N/A

Total Measured + Indicated

116,532,906

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

Texas Lime Quarry - Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Reserves (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Mining Recovery

Proven Reserves

63,173,961

96.0(CaCO3)

95%

Probable Reserves

47,532,300

96.0(CaCO3)

95%

Total Mineral Reserves

110,706,261

96.0(CaCO3)

95%

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

Arkansas Lime owns a quarry, and has PLS, lime, and hydrated lime production facilities, located on approximately 1,260 acres of land located in Independence County, Arkansas that contains known high-quality limestone resources in a bed averaging 60 feet in thickness (the “Batesville Quarry”). As of December 31, 2021, the Batesville Quarry had 8 million tons of indicated limestone mineral resources and 16 million tons of measured limestone mineral resources, which included 9 million tons of proven reserves and 3 million tons of probable reserves. Based on forecasted production levels and recovery rates, the Company estimates that these reserves are sufficient to sustain operations for approximately 25 years. The tables below summarize the limestone mineral resources and reserves at the Batesville Quarry as of December 31, 2021.

3

Table of Contents

Batesville Quarry - Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Resources (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Processing Recovery

Measured Mineral Resources

16,010,088

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

8,239,334

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Total Measured + Indicated

24,249,422

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

1 Price source from from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

Batesville Quarry - Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Reserves (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Mining Recovery2

Proven Reserves

9,085,000

96.0(CaCO3)

82%/75%

Probable Reserves

3,458,000

96.0(CaCO3)

82%/75%

Total Mineral Reserves

12,543,000

96.0(CaCO3)

82%/75%

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

2Mining recovery is listed as open pit/underground recovery

In 2005, the Company acquired an additional quarry associated with Arkansas Lime, located on approximately 2,500 acres of land in Izard County, Arkansas (the “Love Hollow Quarry”). The Company is improving the transportation infrastructure between the Love Hollow Quarry and Arkansas Lime’s production facilities and incurring other development costs to prepare the Love Hollow Quarry for mining, in anticipation of sourcing a portion of the Arkansas Lime plant’s limestone requirements from the Love Hollow Quarry during 2022. As of December 31, 2021, the Love Hollow Quarry had 116 million tons of measured limestone mineral resources, which included 69 million tons of proven reserves and 21 million tons of probable reserves. Based on forecasted production levels and recovery rates, the Company estimates that these reserves are sufficient to sustain operations for approximately 80 years. The tables below summarize the limestone mineral resources and reserves at the Love Hollow Quarry as of December 31, 2021.

Love Hollow Quarry - Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Resources (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Processing Recovery

Measured Mineral Resources

115,802,000

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

-

-

N/A

Total Measured + Indicated

115,802,000

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

Love Hollow Quarry - Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Reserves (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Mining Recovery2

Proven Reserves

68,500,000

96.0(CaCO3)

95%/75%

Probable Reserves

21,047,000

96.0(CaCO3)

95%/75%

Total Mineral Reserves

89,547,000

96.0(CaCO3)

95%/75%

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

2 Mining recovery is listed as open pit/underground recovery

St. Clair operates an underground mine and has PLS, lime, and hydrated lime production facilities located on approximately 1,400 acres that it owns in Sequoyah County, Oklahoma containing high-quality limestone resources and also has long-term mineral leases that provide the right to mine high-quality limestone resources contained in approximately 1,340 adjacent acres (the “St. Clair Mine”). As of December 31, 2021, the St. Clair Mine had 148 million tons of indicated limestone mineral resources and 36 million tons of measured limestone mineral resources, including 23 million tons of proven reserves. Assuming the current level of production and recovery rate is maintained, the Company estimates that these reserves are sufficient to sustain operations for approximately 55 years. The tables below summarize the limestone mineral resources and reserves at the St. Clair Mine as of December 31, 2021.

4

Table of Contents

St. Clair Mine - Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Resources (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Processing Recovery

Measured Mineral Resources

36,648,000

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

129,747,000

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Total Measured + Indicated

166,395,000

96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

St. Clair Mine - Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves

as of December 31, 2021 Based on $11.05 Crushed Stone 1

Resource Category

Reserves (tons)

Cutoff Grade

Mining Recovery

Proven Reserves

23,387,000

96.0(CaCO3)

81%

Probable Reserves

-

96.0(CaCO3)

81%

Total Mineral Reserves

23,387,000

96.0(CaCO3)

81%

1 Price source from U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021, based on short tons

Carthage operates an underground mine and has limestone production facilities located on approximately 800 acres that it owns containing high-quality limestone. In addition, Carthage has the right to mine the high-quality limestone contained in approximately 760 adjacent acres pursuant to long-term mineral leases.

Mill Creek, which the Company acquired on February 9, 2022, operates an open pit quarry and production facilities located on approximately 570 acres that it owns where it mines and processes industrial grade crushed dolomite.

Colorado Lime acquired the Monarch Pass Quarry in November 1995 and has not carried out any mining on the property. The Monarch Pass Quarry, which had been operated for many years until the early 1990s, contains a mixture of limestone types, including high-quality calcium limestone and dolomite.

Internal Controls Over Limestone Mineral Resources and Reserves Estimates. Internal control procedures followed by the Company’s Quality Control/Quality Assurance Laboratories (“QC/QA Lab”) and its contract geologists when assessing properties for limestone mineral resources and reserves estimates are clearly defined. Core drilling is conducted under the direct supervision of the geologists, and all core data is logged using a standard protocol. The geologists are responsible for examining the core and compiling an interval list for X-Ray Florescence (“XRF”) analysis. Splits of cores are bagged and labeled with the depth interval to be analyzed, with the remaining split boxed and stored for reference. Bagged intervals are submitted to the Company’s certified QC/QA Lab for XRF analysis, with any samples not destroyed by the testing process retained at the Company’s core storage facility.

When classifying limestone mineral resources and reserves, the Company’s contract geologists apply a fixed cutoff grade and set parameters of geologic confidence to classify the respective resources and reserves. Company management reviews the geologists’ assessments for reasonableness.

Quarrying and Mining. The Company extracts limestone by the open-pit method at its Texas and Batesville Quarries and will do so initially at the Love Hollow Quarry, beginning in 2022. The Monarch Pass Quarry is also an open-pit quarry but is not being mined at this time. The open-pit method consists of removing any overburden comprising soil and other substances, including inferior limestone, and then extracting the exposed high-quality limestone. The Company removes such overburden by utilizing both its own employees and equipment and those of outside contractors. Open-pit mining is generally less expensive than underground mining. The principal disadvantage of the open-pit method is that operations are subject to inclement weather and overburden removal. The limestone is extracted by drilling and blasting, utilizing standard mining equipment. At its St. Clair and Carthage underground mines, the Company mines limestone using room and pillar mining. We have no knowledge of any recent changes in the physical quarrying or mining conditions on any of our properties that have materially affected quarrying or mining operations.

5

Table of Contents

Plants and Facilities. After extraction, limestone is crushed and screened and, in the case of PLS, ground and dried, or, in the case of quicklime, processed in kilns. Quicklime may then be further processed in hydrators and slakers to produce hydrated lime and lime slurry. The Company processes and distributes lime and/or limestone products at four plants, six lime slurry facilities and three terminal facilities. All of its plants and facilities are accessible by paved roads, and, in the case of the Arkansas Lime, St. Clair and Carthage plants and the terminal facilities, also by rail.

The Texas Lime plant has an annual capacity of approximately 470 thousand tons of quicklime from two preheater rotary kilns. The plant also has PLS equipment, which, depending on the product mix, has the capacity to produce approximately 800 thousand tons of PLS annually.

The Arkansas Lime plant is situated at the Batesville Quarry. Utilizing three preheater rotary kilns, this plant has an annual capacity of approximately 630 thousand tons of quicklime. The Arkansas Lime plant is approximately 21 miles from the Love Hollow Quarry, to which it is connected by railroad. Arkansas Lime’s PLS and hydrating facilities are situated on a tract of 290 acres located approximately two miles from the Batesville Quarry, to which it is connected by a Company-owned railroad. The PLS equipment, depending on the product mix, has the capacity to produce approximately 300 thousand tons of PLS annually.

The St. Clair plant has an annual capacity of approximately 250 thousand tons of quicklime from one vertical kiln and one preheater rotary kiln. The plant also has PLS equipment, which has the capacity to produce approximately 150 thousand tons of PLS annually.

The Carthage plant has facilities located next to the mine that produce both aggregates and PLS. The equipment has the capacity to produce approximately 900 thousand tons annually.

The Mill Creek plant has facilities located next to the mine that produces dolomitic PLS products. The equipment has the capacity to produce approximately 200 thousand tons annually.

The Company also maintains lime hydrating and bagging equipment at the Texas, Arkansas and St. Clair plants. Storage facilities for lime and limestone products at each plant consist primarily of cylindrical tanks, which are considered by the Company to be adequate to protect its lime and limestone products and to provide an available supply for customers’ needs at the expected volumes of shipments. Equipment is maintained at each plant to load trucks and, at the Arkansas Lime, St. Clair, and Mill Creek plants, to load railroad cars.

Colorado Lime operates a limestone grinding and bagging facility with an annual capacity of approximately 125 thousand tons, located on approximately three and one-half acres of land in Delta, Colorado.

During 2021, the Company’s utilization rate was approximately 63% of its aggregate annual production capacity for the plants in its Lime and Limestone Operations.

U.S. Lime Company (“US Lime”) uses quicklime to produce lime slurry and has four Houston area facilities, including two distribution terminals connected to railroads, to serve the Greater Houston area construction market and four facilities to serve the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex. The Company established U.S. Lime Company—Transportation (“Transportation”) to deliver some of the Company’s products to its customers and facilities primarily in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex.

U.S. Lime Company — Shreveport operates a distribution terminal in Shreveport, Louisiana, which is connected to a railroad, to provide lime storage, hydrating, slurrying and distribution capacity to service markets in Louisiana and East Texas.

The Company believes that its plants and facilities are adequately maintained and insured.

Human Capital Resources. The Company is committed to attracting and retaining the best and brightest talent to meet the current and future needs of its business. Attracting, retaining, motivating, and investing in the development of human capital resources is a critical part of the Company’s commitment to environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) and sustainability issues.

6

Table of Contents

At December 31, 2021, the Company employed 308 persons, 109 of whom were represented by unions. The Company is a party to three collective bargaining agreements. The collective bargaining agreement for the Texas facilities expires in November 2023. The collective bargaining agreement for the Arkansas facilities expires in January 2023. The collective bargaining agreement for the Carthage facilities expires in May 2022. Overall, the Company believes that its employee relations are generally good.

Employee Retention and Incentivization. The Company has entered into an employment agreement with Timothy W. Byrne, its President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Byrne’s employment agreement became effective as of January 1, 2020 for a five-year term and will continue for successive one-year periods unless the Company or Mr. Byrne gives at least one-year’s prior written notice of intent not to renew. Under the employment agreement, in addition to the possibility of a discretionary cash bonus, Mr. Byrne is entitled each year to an EBITDA cash bonus opportunity under the United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. Amended and Restated 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), and he is also entitled to grants of equity awards under the Plan.

Mr. Byrne’s employment agreement provides that Mr. Byrne is subject to certain forfeiture/clawback and share ownership provisions designed to align Mr. Byrne’s financial interests with those of the Company’s long-term shareholders, and to ensure that he is incentivized not to take actions that may benefit the Company and its shareholders in the short-term at the expense of long-term corporate value creation and sustainability. In particular, in entering into the employment agreement with Mr. Byrne, the Company’s Board of Directors and Compensation Committee were sensitive to how Mr. Byrne’s leadership and actions could further the Company’s various objectives, including human capital resources development and executive succession planning.

With respect to the Company’s broader employee base, certain employees are eligible to receive annual cash bonuses based on discretionary determinations. Except in the case of Mr. Byrne, the Company has not adopted a formal or informal annual bonus arrangement with pre-set performance goals. Rather, the determination to pay a cash bonus, if any, is made in December each year based on the past performance of the individual and the Company or on the attainment of non-quantified performance goals during the year. In either such case, the discretionary bonus may be based on the specific accomplishments of the individual and/or on the overall performance of the Company. The amounts of the discretionary bonuses for 2021 were based on each employee’s individual performance and accomplishments, as well as those of the Company, including productivity, sales, controlling costs, and contributions made to special projects.

In addition to cash bonuses, the Company makes equity awards to certain individuals under the Plan. The Company uses equity awards granted under the Plan as a means to attract, retain, and motivate the Company’s directors, officers, employees, and consultants. The Company views the use of equity awards under the Plan as an important means of aligning the interests of its employees with those of its shareholders.

Employee Health and Safety. The Company believes that it is responsible to its employees to provide a safe and healthy workplace environment. The Company seeks to accomplish this by: training employees in safe work practices; openly communicating with employees; following safety standards and establishing and improving safe work practices; involving employees in safety processes; and recording, reporting and investigating accidents, incidents and losses to avoid reoccurrence. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Company is continuing to focus on the health and safety of its employees and other individuals at its facilities that produce lime and limestone products to the essential businesses and communities that it serves.

Employee Development and Training. The Company encourages and supports the growth and development of its employees. It advances continual learning and career development through ongoing performance and development conversations or evaluations with employees and internally and externally developed training programs. The Company also provides reimbursement for certain educational programs relating to the Company’s business.

Employee Diversity and Inclusion. The Company is committed to fostering a work environment that values and promotes diversity and inclusion. This commitment includes providing equal access to, and participation in, equal employment opportunities, programs, and services, without regard to a person’s gender, nationality, race, and ethnicity. The Company is focused on the development and fair treatment of its employees, including equal employment hiring

7

Table of Contents

practices and policies, anti-harassment, and anti-retaliation policies. The Company is continuing to invest in and take actions in an effort to create a more diverse and inclusive workforce and workplace environment.

Competition. The lime industry is highly regionalized and competitive, with price, quality, ability to meet customer demands and specifications, proximity to customers, personal relationships and timeliness of deliveries being the prime competitive factors. The Company’s competitors are predominantly private companies.

The lime industry is characterized by high barriers to entry, including: the scarcity of high-quality limestone deposits on which the required zoning and permitting for extraction can be obtained; the need for lime plants and facilities to be located close to markets, paved roads and railroad networks to enable cost-effective production and distribution; clean air and anti-pollution regulations, including those related to greenhouse gas emissions, which make it more difficult to obtain permitting for new sources of emissions, such as lime kilns; and the high capital cost of the plants and facilities. These considerations reinforce the premium value of operations having permitted, long-term, high-quality limestone resources and good locations and transportation relative to markets.

Lime producers tend to be concentrated on known high-quality limestone formations where competition takes place principally on a regional basis. While the steel industry and environmental-related users are the largest market sectors, the lime industry also counts chemical users and other industrial users, including paper manufacturers, oil and gas services and highway, road and building contractors, among its major customers.

In recent years, the lime industry has experienced reduced demand from certain industries as they experience cyclical or secular downturns. For example, demand from the Company’s steel and oil and gas services customers tends to vary with the demand for their products and services, which has continued to be cyclical. In addition, utility plants are continuing to use more natural gas and renewable sources for power generation instead of coal, which reduces their demand for lime and limestone for flue gas treatment processes. These reductions in demand have resulted in increased competitive pressures, including pricing and competition for certain customer accounts, in the industry.

Consolidation in the lime industry has left the three largest companies accounting for more than two-thirds of North American production capacity. In addition to the consolidations, and often in conjunction with them, many lime producers have undergone modernization and expansion and development projects to upgrade their processing equipment in an effort to improve operating efficiency. We believe that our modernization and expansion projects in Texas, Arkansas, and Oklahoma and our recent acquisitions, along with our lime slurry operations in Texas, should allow us to continue to remain competitive, protect our markets and position ourselves for the future. In addition, we will continue to evaluate internal and external opportunities for expansion, growth and increased profitability, as conditions warrant, or opportunities arise. We may have to revise our strategy or otherwise consider ways to enhance the value of the Company, including by entering into strategic partnerships, mergers or other transactions.

Compliance with Government Regulations. The Company is subject to various federal, state, and local laws and regulations that may materially impact the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position. These include laws and regulations relating to the environment, mine permitting and operations, mine safety, and reclamation and remediation.

Environmental Laws. The Company owns or controls large areas of land on which it operates limestone quarries, two underground mines, lime plants and other facilities with inherent environmental responsibilities, compliance costs and liabilities. These include maintenance and operating costs for pollution control equipment, the cost of ongoing monitoring and reporting programs, the cost of reclamation efforts and other similar environmental costs and liabilities.

The Company’s operations are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the environment, health and safety and other regulatory matters, including the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and analogous state and local laws (“Environmental Laws”). These Environmental Laws grant the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) and state governmental agencies the authority to promulgate and enforce regulations that could result in substantial expenditures on pollution control, waste management, permitting compliance activities, and mining reclamation. Many Environmental Laws also authorize private citizens and interest groups to file

8

Table of Contents

lawsuits in court to enforce alleged violations. Changes in policy or political leadership may affect how Environmental Laws are interpreted or enforced by the EPA and state governmental agencies. The failure to comply with Environmental Laws may result in administrative and civil penalties, injunctive relief and criminal prosecution. The Company has not been named as a potentially responsible party in any federal superfund cleanup site or state-led cleanup site.

The rate of change of Environmental Laws continues to be rapid, and compliance can require significant expenditures. For example, the Clean Air Act required the Company’s lime plants to obtain Title V operating permits that have significant ongoing compliance costs. In addition to the Title V permits, other environmental operating permits are required for the Company’s operations, and such permits are subject to modification during the permit renewal process and, in rare instances, could be revoked. Over time, the EPA has increased the stringency of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”), which are used to establish air emission permitting limits under the Clean Air Act.

The EPA has lowered ozone standards and reclassified areas where State Implementation Plans (the “SIPs”) exist. In October 2015, the EPA issued a final rule lowering the ground-level ozone NAAQS to 70 parts per billion. In December 2018, the EPA issued a final rule affecting SIP requirements for attainment demonstrations, planning and implementation deadlines for reasonably available control technology, emissions inventories and emissions standards, and the timing of required SIP revisions. State environmental agencies in the states in which we operate are currently in the process of revising their SIPs to comply. For example, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality adopted a rule package in June 2020 to incorporate the 2015 ozone NAAQS into the emission inventory provisions of the Texas SIP. This and similar rulemakings could increase the cost of future plant modifications or expansions, increase compliance costs and have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

EPA regulations require large emitters of greenhouse gases, including the Company’s plants, to collect and report greenhouse gas emissions data. The EPA has previously indicated that it will use the data collected through the greenhouse gas reporting rules to decide whether to promulgate future greenhouse gas emission limits. The EPA and delegated states also regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the New Source Review permitting and Federal Operating Permit programs for facilities that are otherwise subject to permitting based on their emissions of conventional, non-greenhouse gas pollutants. Thus, any new facilities or major modifications to existing facilities that exceed the federal New Source Review emission thresholds for conventional pollutants may be required to use “best available control technology” and energy efficiency measures to minimize greenhouse gas emissions.

Although the timing and impact of climate change legislation and of regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions are uncertain, the consequences of such legislation and regulation are potentially significant for the Company because the production of CO2 is inherent in the manufacture of lime through the calcination of limestone and combustion of fossil fuels. In February 2021, the current Administration rejoined the Paris Agreement. The Agreement commits the United States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. Future regulation related to the Paris Agreement or other greenhouse gas rulemakings could affect New Source Review permitting or other permitting programs and, thereby, increase the time and costs of plant upgrades and expansions. The passage of climate change legislation, and other regulatory initiatives by the Congress, the states or the EPA that restrict or tax emissions of greenhouse gases, could also adversely affect the Company. There is no assurance that changes in the law or regulations will not be adopted, such as the imposition of greenhouse gas emission limits, a carbon tax, a cap-and-trade program requiring the Company to purchase carbon credits or other measures that would require reductions in emissions or changes to raw materials, fuel use or production rates. Such changes, if adopted, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

In addition to regulation, several court cases have been filed and decisions issued that may increase the risk of claims being filed by third parties against companies for their greenhouse gas emissions. Such cases may seek to challenge air permits, to force reductions in greenhouse gas emissions or to recover damages for alleged climate change impacts to the environment, people, and property.

In July 2020, the EPA adopted a final revision to a federal regulation that establishes national standards to meet the maximum achievable control technology (“MACT”) within the lime industry.  Also known as the “Lime MACT,”

9

Table of Contents

this rulemaking is the second revision to the initial Lime MACT promulgated in 2004.  The revision included changes to the startup, shutdown and malfunction provisions contained in the prior Lime MACT rule, but otherwise did not impose more stringent standards.

In September 2020, a non-governmental organization filed a petition for reconsideration asking the EPA to reconsider the Lime MACT and arguing the EPA’s decision to not set limits for hazardous air pollutants was unlawful. The non-governmental organization also initiated litigation, Sierra Club v. EPA, No. 20-1381 (D.C. Cir. September 22, 2020), before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, challenging the Lime MACT. That case is currently held in abeyance due to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ holding in a separate litigation, Louisiana Environmental Action Network v. EPA, 955 F.3d 1088 (D.C. Cir. 2020) (“Lean”), which involved a challenge to emissions standards for pulp mill combustion sources. In LEAN, the D.C Circuit Court of Appeals held that the EPA had failed to set necessary limits for hazardous air pollutants for pulp mill combustion sources. Based on the holding of LEAN, the EPA determined that, in finalizing the Lime MACT, it did not set all necessary limits for hazardous air pollutant emissions. In April 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia extended the deadline for the EPA to take final action on the Lime MACT to February 23, 2023. This new rulemaking will establish new limits for hazardous air pollution emissions as required by the court. The Company is working with the National Lime Association and the EPA to ensure that the rulemaking is science based, accurate, and attainable.

It is uncertain what limits the EPA will ultimately impose on the lime industry and what emission controls may be required. It is probable that it will incorporate more stringent standards which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

The Company also holds permits for process water and storm water discharges and must comply with the Clean Water Act and analogous state laws and regulations. Any failure to comply with these permits could result in fines or other penalties. Material changes to the terms of these permits or changes to regulations affecting water discharges in the future could also increase compliance costs.

The manufacturing of lime and hydrated lime requires significant volumes of water. The Company operates multiple groundwater wells to provide water to its plants. Groundwater pumping is subject to increased regulation, and in some areas the Company is required to obtain permits from groundwater conservation districts to pump groundwater. Any failure to comply with these permits could result in fines or other penalties and future changes that restrict the quantities of groundwater that may be pumped may increase compliance costs.

The Company incurred capital expenditures related to environmental matters of $0.5 million, $0.7 million, and $1.2 million in 2021, 2020, and 2019, respectively. The Company’s recurring costs associated with managing environmental permitting and waste recycling and disposal (e.g., used oil and lubricants) and maintaining pollution control equipment amounted to $0.7 million, $0.5 million and $0.6 million in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

Mine Safety. The Company’s mining operations are also subject to regulation under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the “Mine Act”). The Mine Act has been construed as authorizing the Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) to issue citations and orders pursuant to the legal doctrine of strict liability, or liability without fault. If, in the opinion of an MSHA inspector, a condition that violates the Mine Act or regulations promulgated pursuant to it exists, then a citation or order will be issued regardless of whether the operator had any knowledge of, or fault in, the existence of that condition. Many of the Mine Act standards include one or more subjective elements, so that issuance of a citation or order often depends on the opinions or experience of the MSHA inspector involved and the frequency and severity of citations and orders will vary from inspector to inspector.

Whenever MSHA believes that a violation of the Mine Act, any health or safety standard, or any regulation has occurred, it may issue a citation or order which describes the violation and fixes a time within which the operator must abate the violation. In some situations, such as when MSHA believes that conditions pose a hazard to miners, MSHA may issue an order requiring cessation of operations, or removal of miners from the area of the mine, affected by the condition until the hazards are corrected. Whenever MSHA issues a citation or order, it has authority to propose a civil penalty or fine, as a result of the violation, that the operator is ordered to pay.

10

Table of Contents

Citations and orders can be contested before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (the “Commission”), and as part of that process, are often reduced in severity and amount, and are sometimes vacated. The Commission is an independent adjudicative agency that provides administrative trial and appellate review of legal disputes arising under the Mine Act. These cases may involve, among other questions, challenges by operators to citations, orders and penalties they have received from MSHA, or complaints of discrimination by miners under section 105 of the Mine Act.

For further information, see Exhibit 95.1 to this Report on Form 10-K.

Reclamation and Remediation. The Company recognizes legal reclamation and remediation obligations associated with the retirement of long-lived assets at their fair value at the time the obligations are incurred (“Asset Retirement Obligations” or “AROs”). Some of the states the Company operates in have reclamation regulations to properly reclaim the surface mines. These regulations require permitting with the respective state to ensure reclamation obligations are met. Over time, the liability for AROs is recorded at its present value each period through accretion expense, and the capitalized cost is amortized over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, the Company either settles the ARO for its recorded amount or recognizes a gain or loss. AROs are estimated based on studies and the Company’s process knowledge and estimates and are discounted using an appropriate interest rate. The AROs are adjusted when further information warrants an adjustment. The Company believes its accrual of $1.6 million for AROs at December 31, 2021 is reasonable.

11

Table of Contents

Map of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. Lime and Limestone Operations.

Graphic

Other.

The Company’s Other operations, consisting of its natural gas interests, are conducted through its wholly owned subsidiary, U.S. Lime Company – O&G, LLC (“U.S. Lime – O&G”) and consist principally of a lease with respect to oil and gas rights on the Cleburne, Texas property, located in the Barnett Shale Formation. Pursuant to the lease, U.S. Lime – O&G has royalty interests ranging from 15.4% to 20% in oil and gas produced from any successful wells drilled on the leased property and an option to participate in any well drilled on the leased property as a 20% non-operated working interest owner. At December 31, 2021, the overall average interest under the oil and gas rights lease was 34.7% on 33 producing wells.

U.S. Lime – O&G has also entered into a drillsite agreement with an operator that has an oil and gas lease covering approximately 538 acres of land contiguous to our Johnson County, Texas property. Pursuant to the drillsite agreement, U.S. Lime – O&G has a 3% royalty interest and a 12.5% non-operated working interest. At December 31, 2021, U.S. Lime – O&G had a combined 12.4% royalty and non-operated working interest on 6 active wells drilled on a padsite located on the Johnson County, Texas property.

12

Table of Contents

No new wells have been completed since 2011, and there are no plans to drill additional wells under either the oil and gas lease or the drillsite agreement. The carrying values of the long-lived assets related to the Company’s natural gas interests were $1.5 million as of December 31, 2021.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.

COVID-19 Risks

Our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and competitive position could be materially adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.  The extent to which COVID-19, and measures taken in response thereto, could materially adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the scope and duration of the pandemic, including current and future variants of the COVID-19 virus, and actions taken by governmental authorities, including the effectiveness and administration of vaccine mandates, to contain the business, financial and economic impact of the pandemic. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic may result in delays and disruptions to our supply chain, or those of our customers, negatively impact our mine and plant operations, our modernization, expansion and development plans or our ability to integrate recent or future acquisitions, adversely impact demand and prices for our lime and limestone products, and increase our costs.

 

While we are continuing to execute our business continuity plans in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, there remains the potential for increased disruptions to our lime and limestone business and operations from the pandemic.  Surges of COVID-19 cases and variants of the COVID-19 virus that emerged during 2021 impacted the economic recovery and has ongoing social and economic ramifications. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to affect our business, results of operation and financial condition is difficult to predict and depends on numerous evolving factors including: the duration and scope of the pandemic; government, social, business and other actions that have been and will be taken in response to the pandemic; and the effect of the pandemic on short- and long-term general economic conditions. In recent months, we have experienced, and continue to experience, rising costs and supply chain delays and disruptions, which may be amplified by new variants of the COVID-19 virus and governmental responses to any outbreaks of infections. In addition, a related economic slowdown may put downward pressure on the prices that we are able to realize for our lime and limestone products.

The continued impact of COVID-19 may limit our ability to produce, sell and deliver our lime and limestone products to our customers; cause key management and plant-level employees not to be available to us; result in mine and plant shutdowns due to contagion, in which case we may not be able to shift production to our other mines and plants; cause delays and disruptions to our supply chain as it relates to our suppliers, as well as delay and disrupt the supply chains of our customers; impede our ability to maintain and repair our plants and equipment; negatively impact our modernization, expansion, and development plans; negatively impact our ability to integrate acquisitions; as well as adversely impact demand and prices for our lime and limestone products and increase our costs.  Although we cannot predict future developments, which are highly uncertain, including the scope and duration of the pandemic, and actions taken by governmental authorities, including mandated vaccination programs, the COVID-19 pandemic could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

Industry Risks

Our Lime and Limestone Operations are affected by general economic conditions in the United States and specific economic conditions in particular industries.

General and industry specific economic conditions in the United States could lead to reduced demand for our lime and limestone products. Specifically, demand from our utility customers has decreased due to the continuing trend in the United States to retire coal-fired utility plants. Our steel and oil and gas services customers reduce their purchase volumes, at times, due to cyclical economic conditions in their industries. The overall reduction in demand for lime and limestone products has also resulted in increased competitive pressures, including pricing pressure and competition for certain customer accounts, from other lime producers.

For us to maintain or increase our profitability, we must maintain or increase our revenues and improve cash flows, manage our capital expenditures and control our operational and selling, general and administrative expenses. If

13

Table of Contents

we are unable to maintain our revenues and control our costs in these uncertain economic and regulatory times, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position could be materially adversely affected.

Our mining and other operations are subject to operating risks that are beyond our control, which could result in materially increased operating expenses and decreased production and shipment levels that could materially adversely affect our Lime and Limestone Operations and their profitability.

We mine limestone in open pit and underground mining operations and process and distribute that limestone through our plants and other facilities. Certain factors beyond our control could disrupt our operations, adversely affect production and shipments and increase our operating costs, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. These include geological formation problems that may cause poor mining conditions, variability of chemical or physical properties of our limestone, an accident or other major incident at a site that may cause all or part of our operations to cease for some period of time and increase our expenses, mining, processing and plant equipment failures and unexpected maintenance problems that may cause disruptions and added expenses, strikes, job actions or other work stoppages that may disrupt our operations or those of our suppliers, contractors or customers and increase our expenses, and adverse weather conditions and natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, heavy rains, flooding, ice storms, freezing weather, such as the February 2021 winter storms in the southern United States, drought and other natural events, that may affect operations, transportation or customers.

If any of these conditions or events occurs, our operations may be disrupted, we could experience a delay or halt of production or shipments, our operating costs could increase significantly, and we could be exposed to fines, penalties, assessments and other liabilities. If our insurance coverage is limited or excludes a given condition or event, we may not be able to recover in full the losses that we may incur as a result of such conditions or events, some of which may be substantial.

The lime and limestone industry is highly regionalized and competitive.

Our competitors are predominately large private companies. The primary competitive factors in the lime industry are price, quality, ability to meet customer demands and specifications, proximity to customers, personal relationships and timeliness of deliveries, with varying emphasis on these factors depending upon the specific product application. To the extent that one or more of our competitors becomes more successful with respect to any key competitive factor, we may find it difficult to increase or maintain our prices or to retain certain customer accounts, and our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position could be materially adversely affected.

Business and Financial Risks

In the normal course of our Lime and Limestone Operations, we face various business and financial risks, including inflationary pressures, that could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position. Not all risks are foreseeable or within our ability to control.

These risks arise from various factors, including, but not limited to, fluctuating demand and prices for our lime and limestone products, including as a result of downturns in the economy and in the construction, industrial, steel and oil and gas services industries, and reduced demand from coal-fired utility plants, increased competitive pressures from other lime producers, changes in legislation and regulations, including Environmental Laws, health and safety regulations and requirements to renew or obtain operating permits, our ability to produce and store quantities of lime and limestone products sufficient in amount and quality to meet customer demands and specifications, the success of our modernization, expansion and development and acquisition strategies, the uncertainty of our ability to sell our increased production capacity at acceptable prices, our ability to execute our strategies and complete projects on time and within budget, our ability to integrate, refurbish and/or improve acquired facilities, our access to capital, volatile costs, especially energy costs, inclement weather and the effects of seasonal trends.

We receive most of our coal and petroleum coke by rail, so the availability of sufficient solid fuels to run our plants could be diminished significantly in the event of major rail disruptions. Domestic coal and petroleum coke may also be exported, which can increase competition and prices for the domestic supply. In addition, our freight costs to deliver our lime and limestone products are high relative to the value of our products, and they have generally increased

14

Table of Contents

in recent years. Our costs for delivery of solid fuels, as well as our products, also increase as demand for rail and trucking by other industries increases, and changes to Department of Transportation rules and regulations can reduce the availability of trucks, truck drivers and rail cars to deliver solid fuels to our plants and deliver our products to our customers. Recent inflationary pressures have increased our energy costs by more than the general inflationary indices, and recent events such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the sanctions and other actions resulting therefrom, could further increase our energy costs. If we are unable to continue to pass along our variable coal, petroleum coke, diesel, natural gas, electricity, transportation, and freight costs to our customers through higher prices or surcharges, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position could be materially adversely affected.

We quote our lime and limestone products on a delivered price basis to certain customers, which requires us to estimate future delivery costs. Our actual delivery costs may exceed these estimates, which would reduce our profitability.

Delivery costs are impacted by the price of diesel. When diesel prices increase, we incur additional fuel surcharges from freight companies that cannot be passed on to our customers that have been quoted a delivered price. Material increases in the price of diesel could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s profitability.

To maintain our competitive position in the lime and limestone industry, we may need to continue to increase the efficiency of our operations and expand production capacity, obtain financing for any such projects and acquisitions at reasonable interest rates and acceptable terms and sell any resulting increased production at acceptable prices.

We have in the past, and may in the future, undertake additional modernization and expansion and development projects and acquisitions. Such projects and acquisitions may require that we incur substantial debt, which may not be available to us at all or at reasonable interest rates or on acceptable terms. Given current and projected demand for lime and limestone products, we cannot guarantee that any such project or acquisition would be successful, that we would be able to sell any resulting increased production at acceptable prices or that any such sales would be profitable.

Although prices for our lime and limestone products have been relatively firm in past years, pricing competition has increased in recent years. We are unable to predict future demand and prices, given the current economic and regulatory uncertainties in the United States economy as a whole and in particular industries, and cannot provide any assurance that current levels of demand and prices will continue or that any future increases in demand or prices can be maintained.

We may be limited in our ability to insure against certain risk of our operations.

Mining limestone and producing lime and limestone products involves risks which could result in damage to our facilities, personal injury, and environmental damage. Although we maintain insurance in an amount that we consider adequate, liabilities might exceed policy limits, in which event we could incur significant costs that could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position. Additionally, the risks inherent in mining limestone and the production of lime and limestone products may significantly increase the cost of obtaining adequate insurance coverage, or make some coverage unavailable.

We may be adversely affected by any disruption in, or failure of, our information technology systems, including due to cyber-security risks and incidents.

We rely upon the capacity, reliability and security of our information technology (“IT”) systems for our mining, manufacturing, sales, financial and administrative functions. We also face the challenge of supporting our IT systems and implementing upgrades when necessary, including the prompt detection and remediation of any cyber-security breaches.

Our IT systems security measures are focused on the prevention, detection and remediation of damage from computer viruses, natural disasters, unauthorized access, cyber-attack and other similar disruptions. However, our IT systems protection measures may not be successful in preventing unauthorized access, intrusion and damage. Threats to our systems can derive from human error, fraud or malice on the part of employees or third parties, ransomware, or technological failure. Any failure, accident or security breach involving our IT systems could result in disruption to our

15

Table of Contents

operations. A material breach in the security of our IT systems could negatively impact our mining and manufacturing operations, sales or financial and administrative functions or result in the compromise of personal information of our employees, customers or suppliers. To the extent any such failure, accident or security breach results in disruption to our operations or sales or loss or disclosure of, or damage to, our data or confidential information, our costs could increase, and our reputation, business, results of operations, competitive position, and financial condition could be materially adversely affected. Additionally, should we experience a cyber-security event, we may incur substantial costs, including remediation costs, such as liability for stolen assets or information, repairs of system damage, legal costs and costs associated with regulatory actions.

Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Risks

Our Lime and Limestone Operations are subject to general and industry specific regulations. Changes to the regulatory environment could increase our cost of compliance and adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

We are in a period of regulatory uncertainty, which has been heightened by the 2021 change in the United States federal government Administration and Congress. The Administration and Congress may initiate actions to increase regulation of certain industries, including the lime industry, and may take other steps to restrict oil and gas drilling, reduce the use of coal or regulate domestic manufacturing. There can be no assurance that any of these actions, if adopted, will not increase the costs for our customers or increase the Company’s cost of compliance with Environmental Laws. In addition, a variety of factors, including uncertainty with respect to governmental fiscal and budgetary constraints, including the timing and amount of construction and infrastructure spending, changes to tax laws, legislative impasses, extended government shutdowns, pandemics, trade wars, tariffs, social unrest, international incidents, and increased inflationary pressures and interest rates, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

We incur environmental compliance costs and liabilities in our Lime and Limestone Operations, including capital, maintenance and operating costs, with respect to pollution control equipment, the cost of ongoing monitoring programs, the cost of reclamation and remediation efforts and other similar costs and liabilities relating to our compliance with Environmental Laws. We expect these costs and liabilities to continue or increase, such as possible new costs, taxes and limitations on operations, including regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. Similar environmental costs and liabilities may also be faced by some of our customers.

The rate of change of Environmental Laws has been rapid over the last decade, and we may face possible new uncertainties, costs and liabilities, taxes and limitations on operations, including those related to climate change initiatives. Changes in policy or political leadership may affect how Environmental Laws are interpreted or enforced by the EPA and state governmental agencies. The current Administration has signaled its intent to increase regulation under Environmental Laws and has issued multiple executive orders reversing prior deregulation. We expect our expenditure requirements for future environmental compliance, including complying with nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, ozone and particulate matter emission limitations under the NAAQS and regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, to continue or increase. Discovery of currently unknown conditions and unforeseen costs and liabilities could require additional expenditures.

The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions remains an issue for the Company and some of its customers. In February 2021, the current Administration rejoined the Paris Agreement, under which the United States committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There is no assurance that changes in the law or regulations will not be adopted, such as the imposition of a carbon tax, a cap-and-trade program requiring companies to purchase carbon credits, the imposition of greenhouse gas emission limits or other measures that would require reductions in emissions or changes to raw materials, fuel use or production rates. These changes, if adopted, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

More stringent regulation of greenhouse gas emissions could also adversely affect the competitiveness of some of the Company’s customers, including coal-fired power plants, and indirectly the demand for our lime and limestone products. For example, our utility customers are continuing to switch from coal to natural gas or renewable sources for power generation for environmental and regulatory as well as cost reasons, thus reducing demand for our lime and

16

Table of Contents

limestone products for flue gas treatment processes.

We intend to comply with all Environmental Laws and believe our accrual for environmental costs and liabilities at December 31, 2021 is reasonable. Because many of the requirements are subjective and therefore not quantifiable or presently determinable, or may be affected by additional legislation and rulemaking, including those related to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, there is no assurance that we will be able to successfully secure new permits in connection with our future modernization and expansion and development projects, and it is not possible to accurately predict the aggregate future costs and liabilities relating to environmental compliance and their effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

Our lime and limestone operations are subject to various regulatory risks, including those relating to mine safety, and reclamation and remediation obligations.

Our mining operations are subject to mine safety regulation under the Mine Act. The Mine Act has been construed as authorizing MSHA to issue citations and orders pursuant to the legal doctrine of strict liability, or liability without fault. Citations and orders can be contested before the Commission, and as part of that process, are often reduced in severity and amount, and are sometimes vacated.

We also have legal reclamation and remediation obligations associated with the retirement of AROs. Over time, the liability for AROs is recorded at its present value each period through accretion expense, and the capitalized cost is amortized over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, we either settle the ARO for its recorded amount or recognize a gain or loss. We believe our accrual for AROs is reasonable, but there can be no assurance that any amounts accrued will be sufficient to meet our reclamation and remediation obligations at any point in time.

We intend to comply with all mining regulations and all of our reclamation and remediation obligations. If we fail to comply with such regulations and obligations, such noncompliance may adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.

None.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.

Reference is made to Item 1 of this Report for a description of the properties of the Company, and such description is hereby incorporated by reference in answer to this Item 2. As disclosed in Note 3 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, the Company’s plants and facilities and resources are subject to encumbrances to secure any Company loans under its credit agreement.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.

Information regarding any legal proceedings is set forth in Note 8 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and is hereby incorporated by reference in answer to this Item 3.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.

Under Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Item 104 of Regulation S-K, each operator of a coal or other mine is required to include disclosures regarding certain mine safety results in its periodic reports filed with the SEC. The operation of the Company’s quarries, underground mine and plants is subject to regulation by MSHA. The required information regarding certain mining safety and health matters, broken down by mining complex, for the year ended December 31, 2021 is presented in Exhibit 95.1 to this Report on Form 10-K.

17

Table of Contents

As discussed in Item 1 above, the Company believes it is responsible to employees to provide a safe and healthy workplace environment. The Company seeks to accomplish this by: training employees in safe work practices; openly communicating with employees; following safety standards and establishing and improving safe work practices; involving employees in safety processes; and recording, reporting and investigating accidents, incidents and losses to avoid reoccurrence.

Following passage of the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006, MSHA significantly increased the enforcement of mining safety and health standards on all aspects of mining operations. There has also been an increase in the dollar penalties assessed for citations and orders issued in recent years.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

On April 30, 2021, the Company’s shareholders approved an increase in the Company’s number of authorized shares of common stock from 15,000,000 to 30,000,000. As of March 9, 2022, the Company had 30,000,000 shares of common stock authorized and 5,668,185 shares outstanding.

The Company’s common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market® under the symbol “USLM.” As of March 9, 2022, the Company had approximately 350 shareholders of record.

As of March 9, 2022, the Company had 500,000 shares of $5.00 par value preferred stock authorized; however, none has been issued.

18

Table of Contents

PERFORMANCE GRAPH

The graph below compares the cumulative 5-year total shareholders’ return on the Company’s common stock with the cumulative total return on the NASDAQ Composite Index and a peer group index consisting of Eagle Materials, Inc., Mineral Technologies, Inc., and Summit Materials Inc. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in the Company’s common stock and each index was $100 on December 31, 2016, and that all cash dividends, including the special cash dividend paid in the fourth quarter 2019, have been reinvested.

Graphic

    

2016

    

2017

    

2018

    

2019

    

2020

    

2021

 

U.S. LIME & MINERALS, INC.

 

100.00

 

102.52

 

95.11

 

135.56

 

172.39

 

196.00

NASDAQ COMPOSITE INDEX

 

100.00

 

129.64

 

125.96

 

172.17

 

249.51

 

304.85

PEER GROUP

100.00

113.04

60.96

90.56

92.52

150.66

The Company’s Amended and Restated 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan allows employees and directors to pay the exercise price upon the exercise of stock options and the tax withholding liability upon exercise of stock options or the lapse of restrictions on restricted stock by payment in cash and/or withholding or delivery of shares of the Company’s common stock to the Company. Pursuant to these provisions, the Company repurchased 4,918 shares at a price of $129.02 per share, the fair market value of one share on the date they were tendered to the Company, in the fourth quarter 2021 for payment of tax withholding liability upon the lapse of restrictions on restricted stock.

ITEM 6. [RESERVED]

19

Table of Contents

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS.

Any statements contained in this Report that are not statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements in this Report, including without limitation statements relating to the Company’s plans, strategies, objectives, expectations, intentions, and adequacy of resources, are identified by such words as “will,” “could,” “should,” “would,” “believe,” “possible,” “potential,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “schedule,” “estimate,” “anticipate” and “project.” The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. The Company cautions that forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations, including without limitation the following: (i) the Company’s plans, strategies, objectives, expectations, and intentions are subject to change at any time at the Company’s discretion; (ii) the Company’s plans and results of operations will be affected by its ability to maintain and increase its revenues and manage its growth; (iii) the Company’s ability to meet short-term and long-term liquidity demands, including meeting the Company’s operating and capital needs, including possible acquisitions and paying dividends, and conditions in the credit and equity markets, including the ability of the Company’s customers to meet their obligations; (iv) interruptions to operations and increased expenses at the Company’s facilities resulting from changes in mining methods or conditions, variability of chemical or physical properties of the Company’s limestone and its impact on process equipment and product quality, inclement weather conditions, including more severe and frequent weather events resulting from climate change, natural disasters, accidents, IT systems failures or disruptions, including due to cyber-security incidents or ransomware attacks, utility disruptions, supply chain delays and disruptions, labor shortages and disruptions, or regulatory requirements; (v) volatile coal, petroleum coke, diesel, natural gas, electricity, transportation and freight costs and the consistent availability of trucks, truck drivers and rail cars to deliver the Company’s products to its customers and solid fuels to its plants on a timely basis at competitive prices; (vi) unanticipated delays or cost overruns in completing modernization and expansion and development projects; (vii) the Company’s ability to expand its lime and limestone operations through projects and acquisitions of businesses with related or similar operations and the Company’s ability to obtain any required financing for such projects and acquisitions, to integrate the projects and acquisitions into the Company’s overall operations, and to sell any resulting increased production at acceptable prices; (viii) inadequate demand and/or prices for the Company’s lime and limestone products due to increased competition from competitors, increasing competition for certain customer accounts, conditions in the U.S. economy, recessionary pressures in, and the impact of government policies on, particular industries, including oil and gas services, utility plants, steel, construction, and industrial, effects of governmental fiscal and budgetary constraints, including the level of highway construction and infrastructure funding, changes to tax laws, legislative impasses, extended governmental shutdowns, trade wars, tariffs, international incidents, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine, sanctions, economic and regulatory uncertainties under state governments and the United States Administration and Congress, Federal Reserve responses to inflationary concerns, including increased interest rates, and inability to continue to maintain or increase prices for the Company’s products, including passing through the increased costs and availability of transportation, energy, supplies, labor, and services; (ix) ongoing and possible new regulations, investigations, enforcement actions and costs, legal expenses, penalties, fines, assessments, litigation, judgments and settlements, taxes and disruptions and limitations of operations, including those related to climate change, health and safety, human capital, diversity, and other ESG and sustainability considerations, and those that could impact the Company’s ability to continue or renew its operating permits or successfully secure new permits in connection with its modernization and expansion and development projects; (x) estimates of reserves and remaining lives of reserves; (xi) the ongoing impact of the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) pandemic and current or future variants of the COVID-19 virus and governmental responses thereto, including decreased demand, lower prices, tightened labor and other markets, and increased costs, and the risk of non-compliance with health and safety protocols, social distancing and mask guidelines, and vaccination mandates, on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and competitive position; (xii) the impact of social or political unrest; (xiii) risks relating to mine safety and reclamation and remediation; and (xiv) other risks and uncertainties set forth in this Report or indicated from time to time in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), including the Company’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q.

20

Table of Contents

OVERVIEW.

Set forth below is certain selected financial data for the five years ended December 31, 2021:

Years Ended December 31,

 

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

    

2018

    

2017

 

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

 

Operating results

Lime and limestone revenues

$

187,365

 

159,707

 

156,981

 

141,922

 

142,612

Other revenues

 

1,890

 

997

 

1,296

 

2,513

 

2,232

Total revenues

$

189,255

 

160,704

 

158,277

 

144,435

 

144,844

Gross profit

$

59,260

 

47,587

 

41,676

 

30,486

 

34,380

Operating profit (1)

$

46,417

 

33,869

 

29,246

 

20,002

 

24,227

Income before income tax expense (benefit)

$

46,518

 

34,072

 

30,900

 

21,568

 

24,943

Income tax expense (benefit) (2)

$

9,473

5,849

4,844

1,883

(2,205)

Net income

$

37,045

 

28,223

 

26,056

 

19,685

 

27,148

Net income per share of common stock:

Basic

$

6.55

 

5.01

 

4.64

 

3.52

 

4.87

Diluted

$

6.54

5.00

4.64

3.51

4.86

Dividends per share of common stock (3)

$

0.64

 

0.64

 

5.89

 

0.54

 

0.54

(1)Operating profit for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 was adversely impacted by impairment charges of $1,550 and $930 to adjust the carrying value of the long-lived assets related to the Company’s natural gas interests.
(2)Income tax expense (benefit) for the year ended December 31, 2017 included the one-time effect of a $7,447 income tax benefit resulting from reduced federal income tax rates under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.
(3)Dividends per share of common stock for 2019 included a special dividend of $5.35 per share.

As of December 31,

 

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

    

2018

    

2017

 

Total assets

$

316,196

 

279,098

 

247,037

 

244,671

 

228,446

Stockholders’ equity per outstanding common share

$

49.10

 

43.06

 

38.62

 

39.76

 

36.73

Employees

 

308

 

317

 

282

 

287

 

318

General.

We have identified one reportable business segment based on the distinctness of our activities and products: Lime and Limestone Operations. All operations are in the United States. Operating profit from our Lime and Limestone Operations includes all of our selling, general and administrative costs. We do not allocate interest expense and interest and other income to our Lime and Limestone Operations.

On July 1, 2020, we acquired Carthage, a limestone mining and production company located in Carthage, Missouri, for $8.4 million cash. On February 9, 2022, we acquired Mill Creek, a dolomite mining and production company located in Mill Creek, Oklahoma, for $5.9 million cash, subject to adjustment. We believe that these acquisitions will complement our existing geographic footprint.

Our Other operations relate to our natural gas interests, consisting of royalty and non-operated working interests under an oil and gas lease and a drillsite agreement with two separate operators related to our Johnson County, Texas property, located in the Barnett Shale Formation, on which Texas Lime conducts its lime and limestone operations. In the fourth quarters 2020 and 2019, we recognized impairment charges of $1.6 million ($1.2 million, net of tax) and $0.9 million ($0.7 million, net of tax), respectively, related to our natural gas interests. The carrying values of the long-lived assets related to our natural gas interests were $1.5 million as of December 31, 2021. Based on current production and pricing estimates, we believe that the carrying value of these assets will be recoverable in future periods.  

21

Table of Contents

Our revenues increased 17.8% in 2021 compared to 2020. Revenues from our Lime and Limestone Operations increased 17.3% in 2021, compared to 2020, primarily due to increased demand from our construction, steel, environmental, industrial, roofing, and agriculture customers. Revenues in 2021 were also favorably impacted by an increase in average selling prices for our lime and limestone products of 0.9%.

Our gross profit increased 24.5% in 2021 compared to 2020. Gross profit from our Lime and Limestone Operations in 2021 increased 22.2%, compared to 2020, primarily due to the increased revenues discussed above and increased operating efficiencies, partially offset by higher energy costs.

Our net income increased $8.8 million, or 31.3%, in 2021, compared to 2020. Net income per fully diluted share increased to $6.54 in 2021, compared to $5.00 in 2020.

Cash flows from operations enabled us to make $29.9 million of capital investments in 2021. It also enabled us to pay $3.6 million in dividends in 2021 and increase our cash balances to $105.4 million as of December 31, 2021, compared to $83.6 million as of December 31, 2020. As of December 31, 2021, we had no debt outstanding.

On January 31, 2022, we announced that our Board of Directors had declared an increased regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.20 per share. The dividend is payable on March 18, 2022 to shareholders of record on February 25, 2022.

Absent a significant acquisition opportunity arising during 2022, we anticipate funding our operating and capital needs, our quarterly cash dividend, and the Mill Creek acquisition from our cash balances on hand and cash flows from operations.

Lime and Limestone Operations.

In our Lime and Limestone Operations, we produce and sell PLS, aggregate, quicklime, hydrated lime and lime slurry. The principal factors affecting our success are the level of demand and prices for our products and whether we are able to maintain sufficient production levels and product quality while controlling costs.

Inclement weather conditions, such as winter ice and snow storms, cold weather, hurricanes, tornadoes and excessive rainfalls generally reduce the demand for lime and limestone products supplied to construction-related customers that account for a significant amount of our revenues. Inclement weather also interferes with our open-pit mining operations and can disrupt our plant production. In addition to weather, various maintenance, environmental, accident and other operational and construction issues can also disrupt our operations and increase our operating expenses.

Demand for our lime and limestone products in our market areas is also affected by general economic conditions, the pace of construction, the demand for steel, the level of oil and gas drilling in our markets, the level of governmental and private funding for highway construction and infrastructure, and utility plant usage of coal for power generation. Demand for our lime and limestone products from our construction, steel, environmental, industrial, roofing, and agriculture customers increased in 2021.

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and related restrictions on business activities resulted in a general economic slowdown, which disproportionately impacted certain industries that purchase our products. We continue to monitor and assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the emergence of new variants of the virus, implementation of new or enhanced pandemic-related restrictions, and the possibility of additional wide-spread or localized outbreaks of infections, any of which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.

Additionally, we are experiencing rising costs, especially energy and supplies costs, and supply chain delays and disruptions. If these issues persist, they could adversely affect our profitability in 2022. We are increasing the prices of our lime and limestone products in an effort to mitigate the impact of our increasing costs.

In 2014 and 2015, Texas approved two constitutional amendments authorizing a portion of oil and gas tax revenues to be deposited into the State Highway Fund, for certain other sales and use tax revenues to be directed to the State Highway Fund and, beginning in Texas’ fiscal 2020, for certain state motor vehicle sales and rental tax revenues to

22

Table of Contents

be directed to the State Highway Fund. In its fiscal 2021, Texas transferred approximately $3.8 billion of such tax revenues to the State Highway Fund from these two amendments, with over $18 billion transferred since 2015. In 2021, the United States Congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which is estimated to apportion approximately $26.9 billion to Texas for federal-aid highway programs. With these funding sources, we would expect to see strong continued demand from our construction customers, but the timing and amount of any increase in demand is uncertain and subject to weather, political, and other factors.

Our modernization and expansion and development projects and acquisitions in Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Missouri and our Texas slurry operations have positioned us to meet the demand for high-quality lime and limestone products in our markets. Our modernization and expansion and development projects have also equipped us with up-to-date, fuel-efficient plant facilities, which have resulted in lower production costs and greater operating efficiencies, thus enhancing our competitive position. All of our rotary kilns are now fuel-efficient preheater kilns. The addition of the vertical kiln at St. Clair in 2019 further increased the fuel efficiency of our fleet of kilns.

For our plants to operate at peak efficiency, we must meet operational challenges that arise from time to time, including bringing new facilities on-line and refurbishing and/or improving acquired facilities, including the facilities acquired as a result of our recent acquisitions of Carthage and Mill Creek, as well as operating existing facilities efficiently. We also incur ongoing costs for maintenance and to remain in compliance with rapidly changing Environmental Laws and health and safety and other regulations.

Our primary variable cost is energy. Prices for coal, petroleum coke, diesel, natural gas, electricity, transportation and freight are volatile, and our energy costs have increased substantially in recent months. In addition, our freight costs, including diesel prices, to deliver our products can be high relative to the value of our products.

Historically, we have been able to mitigate to some degree the impact of volatile energy costs by varying the mixes of fuel used in our kilns, and by passing on some of any increase in costs to our customers, where possible, through higher prices and/or surcharges on certain products. In addition, as noted above, we put a more fuel-efficient kiln in service at St. Clair, and we continually look for other ways to better manage our energy costs at our plants. Finally, we have not engaged in any significant hedging activity in an effort to control our energy costs but may do so in the future.

We have financed our modernization and expansion and development projects and acquisitions through a combination of debt financing, which has now been repaid, and cash flows from operations. We must generate sufficient cash flows to cover ongoing capital requirements, including current and possible future modernization and expansion and development projects and acquisitions, or borrow sufficient funds to finance any shortfall in our liquidity needs.

For us to maintain or increase our profitability in our Lime and Limestone Operations in the face of reduced demand from some of our customers, competitive pressures and increased costs, we must maintain or increase our customer base, improve our revenues and control our operational and selling, general and administrative expenses. To maintain or improve our gross profit margins, we are focusing on increasing our lime and limestone prices to offset our increased costs, which is a challenging task with increased competition from other lime and limestone producers. In addition, we will continue to explore ways to increase the operating efficiency of our mines, plants, and other facilities and expand our production capacity through acquisitions as conditions warrant or opportunities arise.

We continue to believe the enhanced efficiency and production capacity resulting from our modernization and expansion and development projects in Texas, Arkansas, and Oklahoma, our expanded slurry operations, our acquisitions, including the recent acquisitions of Carthage and Mill Creek, and the operational strategies we have implemented have allowed us to increase our efficiency, grow production capacity, improve product quality, better serve existing customers, attract new customers and control costs. To date, however, demand and prices for our lime and limestone products have not been sufficient to fully utilize our additional production capacity. In addition, there can be no assurance that our efficiency and production will not be adversely affected by weather, maintenance, environmental, accident, cyber-security and other operational and construction issues; that we can successfully invest in improvements to our existing facilities and acquisitions; that our results will not be adversely affected by increases in fuel, natural gas, electricity, transportation and freight costs, taxes or new environmental, health and safety or other regulatory

23

Table of Contents

requirements; or that, with increasing competition with other lime and limestone producers, our revenues, gross profit, net income and cash flows can be maintained or improved.

Other.

Revenues in 2021 included $1.9 million from our natural gas interests, compared to $1.0 million in 2020. Gross profit (loss) in 2021 included $0.6 million from our natural gas interests, compared to a loss of $(0.4) million in 2020. 

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES.

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US GAAP”). The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities, at the date of our financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates and judgments under different assumptions or conditions and historical trends.

Critical accounting policies are defined as those that are reflective of significant management judgments and uncertainties and potentially result in materially different results under different assumptions and conditions. We believe the following critical accounting policies require the most significant management estimates and judgments used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

Contingencies. We are party to proceedings, lawsuits and claims arising in the normal course of business relating to regulatory, labor, product and other matters. We are required to estimate the likelihood of any adverse judgments or outcomes with respect to these matters, as well as potential ranges of possible losses. A determination of the amount of reserves required, if any, for these contingencies is made after careful analysis of each individual matter, including coverage under our insurance policies. This determination may change in the future because of new information or developments.

Income taxes. We utilize the asset and liability approach in reporting our income taxes. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are computed for differences between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities that will result in taxable or deductible amounts in the future based on enacted tax laws and rates applicable to the periods in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. We establish valuation allowances when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount more likely than not to be realized. Income tax related interest and penalties are included in income tax expense. We also assess individual tax positions to determine if they meet the criteria for some or all of the benefits of that position to be recognized in our financial statements and only recognize tax positions that meet the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold.

Environmental costs and liabilities. We record environmental accruals, including accrued reclamation costs, in other liabilities, based on studies and estimates, when it is probable we have incurred a reasonably estimable cost or liability. The accruals are adjusted when further information warrants an adjustment. Environmental expenditures that extend the life, increase the capacity or improve the safety or efficiency of Company-owned assets or are incurred to mitigate or prevent future possible environmental issues are capitalized. Other environmental costs are expensed when incurred.

24

Table of Contents

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

The following table sets forth certain financial information expressed as a percentage of revenues for the three years ended December 31, 2021:

Year Ended December 31,

 

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

 

Lime and limestone revenues

 

99.0

%  

99.4

%  

99.2

%

Other revenues

 

1.0

0.6

0.8

Total revenues

 

100.0

100.0

100.0

Cost of revenues

Labor and other operating expenses

 

(57.8)

(58.3)

(62.6)

Depreciation, depletion and amortization

 

(10.9)

(12.1)

(11.0)

Gross profit

 

31.3

29.6

26.4

Selling, general and administrative expenses

 

(6.8)

(7.6)

(7.3)

Impairment of long-lived assets

 

(1.0)

(0.6)

Operating profit

 

24.5

21.1

18.5

Other (expense) income:

Interest expense

 

(0.1)

(0.2)

(0.1)

Interest and other income, net

 

0.2

0.3

1.2

Income tax expense

 

(5.0)

(3.6)

(3.1)

Net income

 

19.6

17.6

16.5

%

2021 vs. 2020

Our revenues for 2021 increased to $189.3 million from $160.7 million in 2020, an increase of $28.6 million, or 17.8%. Revenues from our Lime and Limestone Operations in 2021 increased $27.7 million, or 17.3%, to $187.4 million from $159.7 million in 2020. The increase in revenues from our Lime and Limestone Operations was primarily due to a 16.4% increase in sales volumes of our lime and limestone products principally to our construction, steel, environmental, industrial, roofing, and agriculture customers. In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions on business activities resulted in a general economic slowdown, which disproportionately impacted certain industries that purchase our lime and limestone products. In addition, we realized a 0.9% average increase in prices for our lime and limestone products in 2021, compared to 2020. Other revenues included $1.9 million and $1.0 million in 2021 and 2020, respectively, from our natural gas interests.

Our gross profit increased to $59.3 million for 2021 from $47.6 million for 2020, an increase of $11.7 million, or 24.5%. Gross profit from our Lime and Limestone Operations for 2021 was $58.7 million, compared to $48.0 million in 2020, an increase of $10.7 million, or 22.2%. The increase in gross profit in 2021, compared to 2020, resulted primarily from the increased revenues discussed above and increased operating efficiencies, partially offset by higher energy costs. Gross profit also included a $0.6 million profit in 2021 and a $(0.4) million loss in 2020 from our natural gas interests.

Selling, general and administrative expenses (“SG&A”) increased to $12.8 million for 2021, an increase of $0.7 million, or 5.5%, compared to $12.2 million for 2020. As a percentage of revenues, SG&A was 6.8% in 2021, compared to 7.6% in 2020. The increase in SG&A was primarily due to increased personnel expenses in 2021, compared to 2020.

In the fourth quarter 2020, we recognized an impairment charge of $1.6 million ($1.2 million, net of tax) to adjust the carrying values of the long-lived assets related to our natural gas interests.  At December 31, 2021, the long-lived assets related to our natural gas interests had a carrying value of $1.5 million.

Interest expense was $0.3 million in 2021, compared to $0.2 million in 2020. We had no outstanding debt during either 2021 or 2020.

25

Table of Contents

Interest and other income, net was $0.4 million in 2021, compared to $0.5 million in 2020.

Income tax expense was $9.5 million in 2021, for an effective rate of 20.4%, compared to $5.8 million in 2020, for an effective rate of 17.2%, an increase of $3.6 million, primarily due to the increase in income before taxes in 2021, compared to 2020. Our effective income tax rates for 2021 and 2020 were reduced from the statutory rate primarily due to statutory depletion in excess of cost depletion.

Net income increased to $37.0 million ($6.54 per share diluted) in 2021, compared to $28.2 million ($5.00 per share diluted) in 2020, an increase of $8.8 million, or 31.3%.

2020 vs. 2019

Our revenues for 2020 increased to $160.7 million from $158.3 million in 2019, an increase of $2.4 million, or 1.5%. Revenues from our Lime and Limestone Operations in 2020 increased $2.7 million, or 1.7%, to $159.7 million from $157.0 million in 2019. The increase in revenues from our Lime and Limestone Operations was primarily due to the addition of limestone sales by Carthage to agriculture and roofing customers and increased sales volumes of our lime and limestone products, principally to our construction customers, offset by decreased sales volumes to our oil and gas services, environmental and steel customers, resulting in an overall decrease in sales volumes of 1.9%. We realized a 3.6% average increase in prices for our lime and limestone products in 2020, compared to 2019. Other revenues included $1.0 million and $1.3 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively, from our natural gas interests.

Our gross profit increased to $47.6 million for 2020 from $41.7 million for 2019, an increase of $5.9 million, or 14.2%. Gross profit from our Lime and Limestone Operations for 2020 was $48.0 million, compared to $42.0 million in 2019, an increase of $5.9 million, or 14.1%. The increase in gross profit in 2020, compared to 2019, resulted primarily from increases in the average selling prices for the Company’s lime and limestone products, lower fuel costs and increased operating efficiencies associated, in part, with the kiln at the Company’s St. Clair facility, which began producing commercially saleable quicklime in the second quarter 2019, partially offset by increased costs incurred in the 2020 periods associated with responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Gross profit also included the impact of a $(0.4) loss in each of 2020 and 2019 from our natural gas interests.

SG&A increased to $12.2 million for 2020, an increase of $0.7 million, or 5.8%, compared to $11.5 million for 2019. As a percentage of revenues, SG&A was 7.6% for 2020, compared to 7.3% in 2019. The increase in SG&A was primarily due to increased personnel expenses, including stock-based compensation which was principally due to higher prices for the Company’s common stock, and increased legal expenses and COVID-19 pandemic costs in the second quarter 2020.

In the fourth quarters 2020 and 2019, we recognized an impairment charge of $1.6 million ($1.2 million, net of tax) and $0.9 million ($0.7 million, net of tax), respectively. Low prices for natural gas and natural gas liquids had reduced the estimates for future economically feasible production, which impaired the recoverability of the assets as they approached the end of their useful lives.

Interest expense was $0.2 million in each of 2020 and 2019. We had no outstanding debt during either 2020 or 2019.

Interest and other income, net was $0.5 million in 2020, compared to $1.9 million in 2019. The decrease in interest and other income, net in 2020, compared to 2019, was primarily due to decreased interest rates received on cash and cash equivalents balances in 2020.

Income tax expense was $5.8 million in 2020, for an effective rate of 17.2%, compared to $4.8 million in 2019, for an effective rate of 15.7%, an increase of $1.0 million, primarily due to the increase in income before taxes in 2020, compared to 2019. Our effective income tax rates for 2020 and 2019 were reduced from the statutory rate primarily due to statutory depletion in excess of cost depletion. In addition, for 2019, our effective tax rate was reduced as a result of research and development tax credits.

Net income increased to $28.2 million ($5.00 per share diluted) in 2020, compared to $26.1 million ($4.64 per share diluted) in 2019, an increase of $2.2 million, or 8.3%.

26

Table of Contents

Summary of Quarterly Financial Data

(dollars in thousands except per share amounts)

2021

 

March 31,

June 30,

September 30,

December 31,

 

Revenues

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

Lime and limestone operations

$

41,356

$

48,742

$

51,749

$

45,518

Other

 

318

 

420

 

562

 

590

$

41,674

$

49,162

$

52,311

$

46,108

Gross profit

Lime and limestone operations

$

11,804

$

16,682

$

17,128

$

13,017

Other

 

1

 

113

 

213

 

302

$

11,805

$

16,795

$

17,341

$

13,319

Net income

$

7,031

$

11,093

$

11,308

$

7,613

Basic income per common share

$

1.24

$

1.96

$

2.00

$

1.35

Diluted income per common share

$

1.24

$

1.96

$

1.99

$

1.34

2020

 

March 31,

June 30,

September 30,

December 31,

 

Revenues

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

Lime and limestone operations

$

38,214

$

37,362

$

43,473

$

40,658

Other

 

226

 

185

 

254

 

332

$

38,440

$

37,547

$

43,727

$

40,990

Gross profit

Lime and limestone operations

$

10,039

$

10,507

$

14,256

$

13,181

Other

 

(162)

 

(150)

 

(74)

 

(10)

$

9,877

$

10,357

$

14,182

$

13,171

Net income

$

5,544

$

6,101

$

9,324

$

7,254

Basic income per common share

$

0.99

$

1.08

$

1.66

$

1.29

Diluted income per common share

$

0.98

$

1.08

$

1.65

$

1.28

FINANCIAL CONDITION.

Capital Requirements. We require capital primarily for normal recurring capital and re-equipping projects, modernization and expansion and development projects and acquisitions. Our capital needs are expected to be met principally from cash on hand, cash flows from operations and our $75.0 million revolving credit facility.

We expect to spend approximately $14.0 million per year over the next several years in our Lime and Limestone Operations for normal recurring capital and re-equipping projects at our plants and facilities to maintain or improve efficiency, ensure compliance with Environmental Laws, meet customer needs and reduce costs. As of December 31, 2021, we had $2.2 million in open orders for equipment and construction contracts for our Lime and Limestone Operations.

Liquidity and Capital Resources. Net cash provided by operating activities was $55.7 million in 2021, compared to $58.6 million in 2020, a decrease of $2.9 million, or 4.9%. Our net cash provided by operating activities is composed of net income, depreciation, depletion and amortization (“DD&A”), other non-cash items included in net income and changes in working capital. In 2021, net cash provided by operating activities was principally composed of $37.0 million net income, $20.9 million DD&A, $1.5 million increase in deferred income taxes, $2.2 million stock-based compensation, partially offset by a $6.0 million decrease from changes in working capital. In 2021, the changes in working capital were principally composed of a $3.7 million increase in trade receivables, net, primarily as a result of increased sales in the fourth quarter 2021, compared to the fourth quarter 2020, a $1.4 million decrease in accounts payable, accrued expense and other liabilities, and a $1.0 million increase in prepaid expenses and other assets. In 2020,

27

Table of Contents

net cash provided by operating activities was principally composed of $28.2 million net income, $19.6 million DD&A, $4.3 million increase in deferred income taxes, $1.6 million impairment of long-lived assets, $1.9 million stock-based compensation, and a $2.5 million increase from changes in working capital. In 2020, the changes in working capital were principally composed of a $2.9 million increase in accounts payable, accrued expense and other liabilities, and a $1.1 million decrease in trade receivables, net, partially offset by a $1.4 million increase in inventories.

Net cash used in investing activities was $29.6 million for 2021, compared to $25.2 million for 2020. Net cash used in investing activities for 2021 included $14.0 million for development of the Love Hollow Quarry and its connection to the Batesville plant and $2.3 million for other real property purchases. Net cash used in investing activities in 2020 included $8.4 million for the acquisition of Carthage and $17.1 million for the purchase of property, plant and equipment, including $2.7 million for the Carthage facility and $2.1 million for specialized equipment at the Batesville Quarry. The balance of net cash used in investing activities in 2021 and 2020 was primarily for normal recurring capital and re-equipping projects at our plants and facilities.

Net cash used in financing activities primarily consisted of $3.6 million for dividend payments and $0.7 million to repurchase shares of our common stock in 2021, compared to $3.6 million for dividend payments and $0.6 million to repurchase shares of our common stock in 2020.

Our cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2021 increased to $105.4 million from $83.6 million at December 31, 2020.

Banking Facilities and Debt. Our credit agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (the “Lender”), as amended as of May 2, 2019 and November 21, 2019, provides for a $75 million revolving credit facility (the “Revolving Facility”) and an incremental four-year accordion feature to borrow up to an additional $50 million on the same terms, subject to approval by the Lender or another lender selected by us. The credit agreement also provides for a $10 million letter of credit sublimit under the Revolving Facility. The Revolving Facility and any incremental loans mature on May 2, 2024.

Interest rates on the Revolving Facility are, at our option, LIBOR plus a margin of 1.000% to 2.000%, or the Lender’s Prime Rate plus a margin of 0.000% to 1.000%; and a commitment fee range of 0.200% to 0.350% on the undrawn portion of the Revolving Facility. The Revolving Facility interest rate margins and commitment fee are determined quarterly in accordance with a pricing grid based upon our Cash Flow Leverage Ratio, defined as the ratio of the Company’s total funded senior indebtedness to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, depletion, amortization and stock-based compensation expense (“EBITDA”) for the 12 months ended on the last day of the most recent calendar quarter, plus pro forma EBITDA from any businesses acquired during the period. Pursuant to a security agreement, dated August 25, 2004, the Revolving Facility is secured by the Company’s existing and hereafter acquired tangible assets, intangible assets and real property. The maturity of the Revolving Facility and any incremental loans can be accelerated if any event of default, as defined under the credit agreement, occurs. Our maximum Cash Flow Leverage Ratio is 3.50 to 1.

We may pay dividends so long as we remain in compliance with the provisions of our credit agreement, and may purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire shares of our common stock so long as our pro forma Cash Flow Leverage Ratio is less than 3.00 to 1.00 and no default or event of default exists or would exist after giving effect to such stock repurchase.

We had no debt outstanding as of December 31, 2021 or 2020. We had $0.3 million of letters of credit issued under the Revolving Facility as of December 31, 2021, which count as draws against the available commitment under the Revolving Facility.

Common Stock Buybacks. We spent $0.7 million, $0.6 million and $0.4 million in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively, to repurchase treasury shares tendered for payment of the exercise price for stock options and the tax withholding liability upon the lapse of restrictions on restricted stock.

28

Table of Contents

Contractual Obligations. The following table sets forth our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2021 (in thousands):

Payments Due by Period

 

    

    

    

    

    

More Than

 

Contractual Obligations

Total

1 Year

2 - 3 Years

4 - 5 Years

5 Years

 

Debt

$

 

 

 

 

Operating leases(1)

$

3,354

 

971

 

1,140

 

709

 

534

Limestone mineral leases

$

2,337

 

91

 

183

 

291

 

1,772

Purchase obligations(2)(3)

$

6,374

 

4,680

 

1,694

 

 

Other liabilities

$

1,553

 

120

 

248

 

245

 

940

Total

$

13,618

 

5,862

 

3,265

 

1,245

 

3,246

(1)Represents operating leases for railcars, corporate office space and some equipment that are either non-cancelable or subject to significant penalty upon cancellation.
(2)Of these obligations, $1,369 were recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2021.
(3)Purchase obligations includes enforceable agreements to purchase goods or services that specify all significant terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased, generally pertaining to fuel contracts, fixed-price provisions, and the approximate timing of the transaction, and are either non-cancelable or subject to significant penalty upon cancellation.

Absent a significant acquisition, we believe that cash on hand and cash flows from operations will be sufficient to meet our operating needs, ongoing capital needs, including our current and possible future modernization and expansion and development projects, and liquidity needs and allow us to pay our regular cash dividends for the near future.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements. We do not utilize off-balance sheet financing arrangements.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.

INTEREST RATE RISK.

We could be exposed to changes in interest rates, primarily as a result of floating interest rates on the Revolving Facility. There was no outstanding balance on the Revolving Facility subject to interest rate risk at December 31, 2021. Any future borrowings under the Revolving Facility would be subject to interest rate risk.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (PCAOB ID Number 248)

30

Consolidated Financial Statements:

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2021 and 2020

34

Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

35

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

36

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

37

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

38

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

39

29

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Board of Directors and Shareholders
United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Opinion on the financial statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (a Texas corporation) and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2021, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2021, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2021, based on criteria established in the 2013 Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”), and our report dated March 10, 2022 expressed an unqualified opinion.

Basis for opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

30

Table of Contents

Critical audit matters

The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. We determined that there are no critical audit matters.

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2005.

Dallas, Texas

March 10, 2022

31

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Board of Directors and Shareholders
United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Opinion on internal control over financial reporting

We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (a Texas corporation) and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2021, based on criteria established in the 2013 Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2021, based on criteria established in the 2013 Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by COSO.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of and for the year ended December 31, 2021, and our report dated March 10, 2022 expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.

Basis for opinion

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

32

Table of Contents

Definition and limitations of internal control over financial reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

Dallas, Texas

March 10, 2022

33

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Consolidated Balance Sheets

(dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

December 31,

December 31,

 

    

2021

    

2020

 

ASSETS

Current assets

Cash and cash equivalents

$

105,355

$

83,562

Trade receivables, net

 

26,715

 

22,979

Inventories, net

 

15,116

 

15,210

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

 

3,244

 

2,245

Total current assets

 

150,430

 

123,996

Property, plant and equipment

 

Mineral reserves and land

 

40,534

 

40,065

Proved natural gas properties, successful-efforts method

 

15,934

 

15,934

Buildings and building and leasehold improvements

 

7,856

 

7,808

Machinery and equipment

 

342,120

 

318,503

Furniture and fixtures

 

1,173

 

1,088

Automotive equipment

 

5,944

 

4,802

Property, plant and equipment

 

413,561

 

388,200

Less accumulated depreciation and depletion

 

(251,389)

 

(235,739)

Property, plant and equipment, net

 

162,172

 

152,461

Operating lease right-of-use assets

3,144

2,226

Other assets, net

 

450

 

415

Total assets

$

316,196

$

279,098

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Current liabilities

Accounts payable

$

5,433

$

4,592

Current portion of operating lease liabilities

899

1,187

Accrued expenses

 

4,856

 

5,809

Total current liabilities

 

11,188

 

11,588

Deferred tax liabilities, net

 

23,055

 

21,531

Operating lease liabilities, excluding current portion

2,311

1,030

Other liabilities

 

1,436

 

1,757

Total liabilities

 

37,990

 

35,906

Stockholders’ equity

Preferred stock, $5.00 par value; authorized 500,000 shares; none issued or outstanding

 

 

Common stock, $0.10 par value; 30,000,000 shares authorized and 6,681,469 issued at December 31, 2021; 15,000,000 authorized and 6,657,880 issued at December 31, 2020

 

669

 

666

Additional paid-in capital

 

31,774

 

29,457

Accumulated other comprehensive income

 

 

Retained earnings

 

301,611

 

268,186

Less treasury stock, 1,015,457 and 1,009,796 shares at December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, at cost

 

(55,848)

 

(55,117)

Total stockholders’ equity

 

278,206

 

243,192

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

$

316,196

$

279,098

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

34

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Income

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31,

 

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

 

Revenues

$

189,255

$

160,704

$

158,277

Cost of revenues

Labor and other operating expenses

 

109,365

93,738

99,207

Depreciation, depletion and amortization

 

20,630

 

19,379

 

17,394

 

129,995

 

113,117

 

116,601

Gross profit

 

59,260

 

47,587

 

41,676

Selling, general and administrative expenses

 

12,843

 

12,168

 

11,500

Impairment of long-lived assets

1,550

930

Operating profit

 

46,417

 

33,869

 

29,246

Other expense (income)

Interest expense

 

250

 

248

 

244

Interest and other income, net

 

(351)

 

(451)

 

(1,898)

 

(101)

 

(203)

 

(1,654)

Income before income tax expense

 

46,518

 

34,072

 

30,900

Income tax expense

 

9,473

 

5,849

 

4,844

Net income

$

37,045

$

28,223

$

26,056

Net income per share of common stock

Basic

$

6.55

$

5.01

$

4.64

Diluted

$

6.54

$

5.00

$

4.64

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

35

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income

(dollars in thousands)

Years Ended December 31,

 

2021

2020

2019

 

Net income

    

$

37,045

    

$

28,223

    

$

26,056

Other comprehensive income

Mark to market of foreign exchange hedges, net of tax expense of $0 and $4 for 2020 and 2019, respectively

1

12

Total other comprehensive income

 

 

1

 

12

Comprehensive income

$

37,045

$

28,224

$

26,068

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

36

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity

(dollars in thousands)

Accumulated

 

Common Stock

Additional

Other

 

    

Shares

    

    

Paid-In

    

Comprehensive

    

Retained

    

Treasury

    

 

Outstanding

Amount

Capital

(Loss) Income

Earnings

Stock

Total

 

Balances at December 31, 2018

 

5,607,401

$

661

$

25,867

$

(13)

$

250,568

$

(54,116)

$

222,967

Stock options exercised

 

2,000

 

 

75

 

 

 

 

75

Stock-based compensation

 

18,900

 

2

 

1,522

 

 

 

 

1,524

Treasury shares purchased

 

(5,475)

 

 

 

 

 

(444)

 

(444)

Cash dividends paid

 

 

 

 

(33,058)

 

 

(33,058)

Net income

 

26,056

26,056

Mark to market of foreign exchange hedges, net of $4 tax expense

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

 

12

Comprehensive income

 

 

 

 

12

 

26,056

 

 

26,068

Balances at December 31, 2019

 

5,622,826

663

27,464

(1)

243,566

(54,560)

217,132

Stock options exercised

 

12,271

 

1

 

80

 

 

 

 

81

Stock-based compensation

 

18,609

 

2

 

1,913

 

 

 

 

1,915

Treasury shares purchased

 

(5,622)

 

 

 

 

 

(557)

 

(557)

Cash dividends paid

 

 

 

 

 

(3,603)

 

 

(3,603)

Net income

 

28,223

28,223

Mark to market for foreign exchange hedges, net of $0 tax expense

 

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

1

Comprehensive income

 

 

 

 

1

 

28,223

 

 

28,224

Balances at December 31, 2020

 

5,648,084

666

29,457

268,186

(55,117)

243,192

Stock options exercised

 

5,310

 

1

 

83

 

 

 

 

84

Stock-based compensation

 

18,279

 

2

 

2,234

 

 

 

 

2,236

Treasury shares purchased

 

(5,661)

 

 

 

 

 

(731)

 

(731)

Cash dividends paid

 

 

 

 

 

(3,620)

 

 

(3,620)

Net income

37,045

37,045

Comprehensive income

 

 

 

 

 

37,045

 

 

37,045

Balances at December 31, 2021

 

5,666,012

$

669

$

31,774

$

$

301,611

$

(55,848)

$

278,206

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

37

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(dollars in thousands)

2021

2020

2019

 

OPERATING ACTIVITIES:

    

    

    

 

Net income

$

37,045

$

28,223

$

26,056

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

Depreciation, depletion and amortization

 

20,898

 

19,611

 

17,617

Impairment of long-lived assets

1,550

930

Amortization of deferred financing costs

 

6

 

5

 

9

Deferred income taxes

 

1,524

 

4,313

 

4,848

Loss on disposition of property, plant and equipment

 

10

 

462

 

439

Stock-based compensation

 

2,236

 

1,915

 

1,524

Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

Trade receivables, net

 

(3,736)

 

1,109

 

(3,346)

Inventories, net

 

94

 

(1,390)

 

(542)

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

 

(999)

 

(106)

 

(447)

Other assets

 

(41)

 

3

 

117

Accounts payable and accrued expenses

 

(1,101)

 

2,579

 

(165)

Other liabilities

 

(247)

 

301

 

(29)

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

55,689

 

58,575

 

47,011

INVESTING ACTIVITIES:

Purchase of property, plant and equipment

 

(29,914)

 

(17,133)

 

(27,100)

Acquisition of a business

(8,392)

Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment

 

285

 

331

 

558

Net cash used in investing activities

 

(29,629)

 

(25,194)

 

(26,542)

FINANCING ACTIVITIES:

Cash dividends paid

(3,620)

(3,603)

(33,058)

Proceeds from exercise of stock options

 

84

 

81

 

75

Purchase of treasury shares

 

(731)

 

(557)

 

(444)

Net cash used in financing activities

 

(4,267)

 

(4,079)

 

(33,427)

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

 

21,793

 

29,302

 

(12,958)

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

 

83,562

 

54,260

 

67,218

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

105,355

$

83,562

$

54,260

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

38

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

(a)         Organization and Presentation

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (the “Company”) is a manufacturer of lime and limestone products, supplying primarily the construction (including highway, road and building contractors), industrial (including paper and glass manufacturers), environmental (including municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities and flue gas treatment processes), metals (including steel producers), oil and gas services, roof shingle manufacturers and agriculture (including poultry and cattle feed producers) industries. The Company is headquartered in Dallas, Texas and operates lime and limestone plants and distribution facilities in Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas through its wholly owned subsidiaries, Arkansas Lime Company, Colorado Lime Company, Texas Lime Company, U.S. Lime Company, U.S. Lime Company – Shreveport, U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair, ART Quarry TRS LLC (DBA Carthage Crushed Limestone) (“Carthage”) and U.S. Lime Company – Transportation. In addition, the Company, through its wholly owned subsidiary, U.S. Lime Company – O & G, LLC, has royalty and non-operated working interests in natural gas wells located in Johnson County, Texas, in the Barnett Shale Formation.

(b)         Principles of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its subsidiaries. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.

(c)         Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates and judgments.

(d)         Statements of Cash Flows

For purposes of reporting cash flows, the Company considers all bank deposits and highly liquid debt instruments, such as United States Treasury bills and notes, with maturities, at the time of purchase, of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are carried at cost plus accrued interest, which approximates fair market value. Supplemental cash flow information is presented below:

Years Ended December 31,

 

2021

2020

2019

 

Cash paid during the year for:

    

    

    

    

    

    

Interest

$

151

$

152

$

150

Income taxes

$

9,483

$

975

$

445

(e)         Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue for its Lime and Limestone Operations when (i) a contract with the customer exists and the performance obligations are identified; (ii) the price has been established; and (iii) the performance obligations have been satisfied, which is generally upon shipment. Revenues include external freight billed to customers with related costs accounted for as fulfillment costs and included in cost of revenues. The Company’s returns and allowances are minimal. External freight billed to customers included in revenues

39

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

was $34,307, $28,373 and $28,397 for 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively, which approximates the amount of external freight included in cost of revenues. Sales taxes billed to customers are not included in revenues. For its natural gas interests, the Company recognizes revenue in the month of production and delivery.

The Company operates its Lime and Limestone Operations within a single geographic region and derives all revenues from that segment from the sale of lime and limestone products. See Note 9 for disaggregation of revenues by the Lime and Limestone Operations segment and Other, which the Company believes best depicts how the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows are affected by economic factors.

(f)         Concentration of Credit Risk and Trade Receivables

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to a concentration of credit risk consist principally of cash and cash equivalents, trade receivables and derivative financial instruments. The Company places its cash and cash equivalents with high-credit quality financial institutions and in highly rated commercial paper or United States Treasury bills and notes with maturities, at the time of purchase, of three months or less. The Company places its derivative financial instruments with financial institutions and other firms that management believes have high credit ratings. The Company’s cash and cash equivalents at commercial banking institutions normally exceed federally insured limits.

The majority of the Company’s trade receivables are unsecured. Payment terms for all trade receivables are based on the underlying purchase orders, contracts or purchase agreements. The Company estimates credit losses relating to trade receivables based on an assessment of the current and forecasted probability of collection, historical trends, economic conditions and other significant events that may impact the collectability of accounts receivables. Due to the relatively homogenous nature of its trade receivables, the Company does not believe there is any meaningful asset-specific differences within its accounts receivable portfolio that would require the portfolio to be grouped below the consolidated level for review of credit losses. Credit losses relating to trade receivables have generally been within management expectations and historical trends. Uncollected trade receivables are charged-off when identified by management to be unrecoverable. Trade receivables are presented net of the related allowance for doubtful accounts, which totaled $450 and $398 at December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Additions, adjustments for expected credit loss factors, and write-offs to the Company’s allowance for doubtful accounts during the years ended December 31 are as follows:

    

2021

    

2020

 

Beginning balance

$

398

$

361

Additions

 

66

 

60

Adjustments for expected credit loss factors

(14)

Write-offs

 

 

(23)

Ending balance

$

450

$

398

40

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

(g)         Inventories, Net

Inventories are valued principally at the lower of cost, determined using the average cost method, or net realizable value. Costs for raw materials and finished goods include materials, labor and production overhead. A summary of inventories is as follows:

December 31,

2021

2020

 

Lime and limestone inventories:

    

    

    

    

Raw materials

$

3,232

$

4,279

Finished goods

 

2,677

 

2,866

5,909

7,145

Service parts inventories

 

9,207

 

8,065

$

15,116

$

15,210

(h)         Property, Plant and Equipment

For major constructed assets, the capitalized cost includes the price paid by the Company for labor and materials plus interest and internal and external project management costs that are directly related to the constructed assets. Machinery and equipment at December 31, 2021 and 2020 included $12,556 and $6,308, respectively, of construction in progress for various capital projects. No interest costs were capitalized for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020. At December 31, 2021 and 2020, accounts payable and accrued expenses included $1,369 and $380, respectively, of capitalized costs. Depreciation of property, plant and equipment is being provided for by the straight-line method over estimated useful lives as follows:

Buildings and building and leasehold improvements

    

3

-

25

years

Machinery and equipment

 

2

-

30

years

Furniture and fixtures

 

3

-

10

years

Automotive equipment

 

3

-

10

years

Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred; renewals and betterments are capitalized. When units of property are retired or otherwise disposed of, their cost and related accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts, and any resulting gain or loss is credited or charged to income.

The Company expenses all exploration costs as incurred as well as costs incurred at an operating quarry or mine, other than capital expenditures and inventory. Costs to acquire mineral reserves are capitalized upon acquisition. Development costs incurred to develop new mineral reserves, to expand the capacity of a quarry or mine, or to develop quarry or mine areas substantially in advance of current production are capitalized once proven and probable reserves exist and can be economically produced. For each quarry or mine, capitalized costs to acquire and develop mineral reserves are depleted using the units-of-production method based on the proven and probable reserves for such quarry or mine.

The Company reviews its long-lived assets for impairment and, when events or circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable, the Company determines if impairment of value exists. If the estimated undiscounted future net cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, an impairment exists, and an impairment loss must be calculated and recorded. If an impairment exists, the impairment loss is calculated based on the excess of the carrying amount of the asset over the asset’s fair value. Any impairment loss is treated as a permanent reduction in the carrying value of the asset.

41

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

During 2020 and 2019, the Company recognized impairment charges of $1,550 and $930 to adjust the carrying value of certain long-lived assets related to its natural gas interests. Continuing low prices for natural gas and natural gas liquids have reduced the estimates for future economically feasible production from the Company’s drilled wells, resulting in the Company’s determination that the estimated fair value of its natural gas assets was less than their carrying value in each year. Fair value was determined as the present value of the estimated future cash flows of the natural gas interests.

(i)         Asset Retirement Obligations

The Company recognizes legal obligations for reclamation and remediation associated with the retirement of long-lived assets at their fair value at the time the obligations are incurred (“AROs”). Over time, the liability for AROs is recorded at its present value each period through accretion expense, and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, the Company either settles the AROs for the recorded amount or recognizes a gain or loss. The Company’s AROs of $1,553 and $1,520 as of December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, are included in Other liabilities and Accrued expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of December 31, 2021, assets, net of accumulated depreciation, associated with the Company’s AROs totaled $720. During 2021 and 2020, the Company spent $58 and $52, respectively, on its AROs, and recognized accretion expense of $92, $90 and $86 in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively, on its AROs.

The AROs were estimated based on studies and the Company’s process knowledge and estimates and are discounted using a credit adjusted risk-free interest rate. The AROs are adjusted when further information warrants an adjustment. The Company estimates annual expenditures of approximately $100 to $200 per year in years 2022 through 2026 relating to its AROs.

(j)          Accrued Expenses

Accrued expenses consist of the following:

December 31,

 

    

2021

    

2020

 

Personnel related expenses

$

2,344

$

2,340

Income taxes

990

Other taxes

1,374

985

Other

 

1,138

 

1,494

$

4,856

$

5,809

(k)         Environmental Expenditures

Environmental expenditures that relate to current operations are expensed or capitalized as appropriate. Expenditures that relate to an existing condition caused by past operations, and which do not contribute to current or future revenue generation, are expensed. Liabilities are recorded at their present value when environmental assessments and/or remedial efforts are probable, and the costs can be reasonably estimated. Generally, the timing of these accruals will coincide with completion of a feasibility study or the Company’s commitment to a formal plan of action.

The Company incurred capital expenditures related to environmental matters of $665 in 2021, $730 in 2020 and $1,156 in 2019.

42

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

(l)         Income and Dividends Per Share of Common Stock

On April 30, 2021, the shareholders approved an increase in the Company’s number of authorized shares of common stock from 15,000,000 to 30,000,000.

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted income per common share:

Years Ended December 31,

 

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

 

Net income for basic and diluted income per common share

$

37,045

$

28,223

$

26,056

Weighted-average shares for basic income per common share

 

5,656,367

 

5,629,425

 

5,612,048

Effect of dilutive securities:

Employee and director stock options(1)

 

11,992

 

10,438

 

9,090

Adjusted weighted-average shares and assumed exercises for diluted income per common share

 

5,668,359

 

5,639,863

 

5,621,138

Basic net income per common share

$

6.55

$

5.01

$

4.64

Diluted net income per common share

$

6.54

$

5.00

$

4.64

(1)Excludes 600, 5,550 and 8,700 stock options in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively, as antidilutive because the exercise price exceeded the average per share market price for the periods presented.

The Company paid $0.64, $0.64 and $5.89 of cash dividends per share of common stock in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. The cash dividends for 2019 included a special dividend of $5.35 per share paid in 2019.

(m)         Stock-Based Compensation

The Company expenses all stock-based payments to employees and directors, including grants of stock options and restricted stock, in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Income based on their fair values. Compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period.

(n)         Income Taxes

The Company utilizes the asset and liability approach in its reporting for income taxes. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are computed for differences between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities that will result in taxable or deductible amounts in the future based on enacted tax laws and rates applicable to the periods in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances are established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount more likely than not to be realized. Income tax related interest and penalties are included in income tax expense.

The Company also assesses individual tax positions to determine if they meet the criteria for some or all of the benefits of that position to be recognized in the Company’s financial statements. The Company only recognizes tax positions that meet the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold.

(o)         Comprehensive Income

Accounting principles generally require that recognized revenue, expenses, gains and losses be included in net income. Certain changes in assets and liabilities, such as mark-to-market gains or losses of interest rate and foreign exchange hedges, are reported as a separate component of the stockholders’ equity section of the

43

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

balance sheet. Such items, along with net income, are components of comprehensive income.

(2) Banking Facilities and Debt

The Company’s credit agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (the “Lender”), as amended as of May 2, 2019 and November 21, 2019, provides for a $75,000 revolving credit facility (the “Revolving Facility”) and an incremental four-year accordion feature to borrow up to an additional $50,000 on the same terms, subject to approval by the Lender or another lender selected by the Company. The credit agreement also provides for a $10,000 letter of credit sublimit under the Revolving Facility. The Revolving Facility and any incremental loans mature on May 2, 2024.

Interest rates on the Revolving Facility are, at the Company’s option, LIBOR plus a margin of 1.000% to 2.000%, or the Lender’s Prime Rate plus a margin of 0.000% to 1.000%; and a commitment fee range of 0.200% to 0.350% on the undrawn portion of the Revolving Facility. The Revolving Facility interest rate margins and commitment fee are determined quarterly in accordance with a pricing grid based upon the Company’s Cash Flow Leverage Ratio, defined as the ratio of the Company’s total funded senior indebtedness to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, depletion, amortization and stock-based compensation expense (“EBITDA”) for the 12 months ended on the last day of the most recent calendar quarter, plus pro forma EBITDA from any businesses acquired during the period. Pursuant to a security agreement, dated August 25, 2004, the Revolving Facility is secured by the Company’s existing and hereafter acquired tangible assets, intangible assets and real property. The maturity of the Revolving Facility and any incremental loans can be accelerated if any event of default, as defined under the credit agreement, occurs. The Company’s maximum Cash Flow Leverage Ratio is 3.50 to 1.

The Company may pay dividends so long as it remains in compliance with the provisions of the Company’s credit agreement, and may purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire shares of its common stock so long as its pro forma Cash Flow Leverage Ratio is less than 3.00 to 1.00 and no default or event of default exists or would exist after giving effect to such stock repurchase.

The Company had no debt outstanding at December 31, 2021 or 2020. The Company had $347 of letters of credit issued at December 31, 2021, which count as draws against the available commitment under the Revolving Facility.

(3) Leases

The Company has operating leases for the use of equipment, corporate office space, and some of its terminal and distribution facilities. The leases have remaining lease terms of 0 to 7 years, with a weighted-average remaining lease term of 4 years at December 31, 2021. Some operating leases include options to extend the leases for up to 5 years. The Company’s lease calculations include the impact of options to extend when it is reasonably certain the Company will exercise the option. The Company used a weighted-average discount rate of 1.1% and 1.2% for leases entered into during 2021 and 2020, respectively. The components of net operating lease costs for 2021, 2020 and 2019 were as follows (in thousands):

Year Ended December 31,

    

Classification

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

Operating lease costs(1)

Cost of revenues

$

1,706

$

1,552

$

1,974

Operating lease costs(1)

Selling, general and administrative expenses

 

259

 

243

 

230

Rental revenues

Interest and other income, net

 

(98)

 

(89)

 

(71)

Net operating lease costs

$

1,867

$

1,706

$

2,133

(1)

Includes the costs of leases with a term of one year or less.

44

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

As of December 31, 2021, future minimum payments under operating leases that were either non-cancelable or subject to significant penalty upon cancellation, including future minimum payments under renewal options that the Company is reasonably certain to exercise, were as follows (in thousands):

2022

$

956

2023

597

2024

558

2025

355

2026

354

Thereafter

534

Total future minimum lease payments

3,354

Less imputed interest

(144)

Present value of lease liabilities

$

3,210

Supplemental cash flow information pertaining to the Company’s leasing activity for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019 was as follows (in thousands):

Year Ended December 31,

2021

2020

2019

Cash payments for operating lease liabilities

$

1,420

$

1,486

$

1,664

Right-of-use assets obtained in exchange for operating lease obligations

$

2,377

$

314

$

857

(4) Income Taxes

Income tax expense (benefit) for the years ended December 31 is as follows:

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

 

Current income tax expense (benefit)

$

7,949

$

1,537

$

(4)

Deferred income tax expense

 

1,524

 

4,312

 

4,848

Income tax expense

$

9,473

$

5,849

$

4,844

A reconciliation of income taxes computed at the federal statutory rate to income tax expense (benefit) for the years ended December 31 is as follows:

2021

2020

2019

 

Percent of

Percent of

Percent of

 

Pretax

Pretax

Pretax

 

    

Amount

    

Income

    

Amount

    

Income

    

Amount

    

Income

 

Income taxes computed at the federal statutory rate

    

$

9,769

    

21.0

%  

$

7,155

    

21.0

%  

$

6,489

    

21.0

%

(Reduction) increase in taxes resulting from:

Statutory depletion in excess of cost depletion

 

(1,389)

 

(3.0)

 

(1,266)

 

(3.7)

 

(1,200)

 

(3.9)

Research and development tax credits

(1,155)

(3.7)

State income taxes, net of federal income tax benefit

 

462

 

1.0

 

(262)

 

(0.8)

 

155

 

0.5

Disallowed executive compensation

456

1.0

Other

 

175

 

0.4

 

222

 

0.7

 

555

 

1.8

Income tax expense

$

9,473

 

20.4

%  

$

5,849

 

17.2

%  

$

4,844

 

15.7

%

45

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

The research and development tax credits in 2019 were primarily associated with the construction of the kiln at St. Clair.

Components of the Company’s deferred tax liabilities and assets are as follows:

    

December 31,

    

December 31,

 

2021

2020

 

Deferred tax liabilities

Lime and limestone property, plant and equipment

$

22,992

$

21,297

Operating lease right-of-use assets

724

513

Natural gas interests drilling costs and equipment

 

387

 

519

 

24,103

 

22,329

Deferred tax assets

Operating lease liabilities

740

511

Other

 

308

 

287

 

1,048

 

798

Deferred tax liabilities, net

$

23,055

$

21,531

Current income taxes are classified on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as follows:

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

    

$

543

    

$

Accrued expenses

$

$

990

The Company had no federal net operating loss carry forwards at December 31, 2021. The Company reduces deferred tax assets by a valuation allowance if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is “more likely than not” that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Deferred tax assets are considered fully recognizable because of the Company’s recent income history and expectations of income in the future. The Company’s federal income tax returns for the year ended December 31, 2018 and subsequent years remain subject to examination. The Company’s income tax returns in certain state income tax jurisdictions remain subject to examination for various periods for the year ended December 31, 2017 and subsequent years. The Company treats interest and penalties on income tax liabilities as income tax expense.

(5) Employee Retirement Plans

The Company has a contributory retirement (401(k)) savings plans for non-union employees and for union employees of Arkansas Lime Company, Carthage, and Texas Lime Company. Company contributions to these plans were $322, $282 and $259 in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

(6) Stock-Based Compensation

The Company has a long-term incentive plan, the Amended and Restated 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2001 Plan”). The 2001 Plan provides for stock options, restricted stock and dollar-denominated cash awards, including performance-based awards. In addition to stock options, restricted stock and cash awards, the 2001 Plan provides for the grant of stock appreciation rights, deferred stock and other stock-based awards to directors, officers, employees and consultants.

The number of shares of common stock that may be subject to outstanding awards granted under the 2001 Plan (determined immediately after the grant of any award) may not exceed 874,589 from the inception of the 2001 Plan. In

46

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

addition, no individual may receive awards in any one calendar year of more than 100,000 shares of common stock. Stock options granted under the 2001 Plan expire ten years from the date of grant and generally become exercisable, or vest, immediately. Restricted stock generally vests over periods of one-half to three years. Upon the exercise of stock options, the Company issues common stock from its non-issued authorized or treasury shares that have been reserved for issuance pursuant to the 2001 Plan. At December 31, 2021, the number of shares of common stock remaining available for future grants of stock options, restricted stock or other forms of stock-based compensation under the 2001 Plan was 92,377.

The Company recorded $2,236, $1,915 and $1,524 for stock-based compensation expense related to stock options and shares of restricted stock for 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. The amounts included in cost of revenues were $197, $312 and $170 and in selling, general and administrative expense were $2,039, $1,603 and $1,354, for 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

A summary of the Company’s stock option and restricted stock activity and related information for the year ended December 31, 2021 and certain other information for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019 are as follows:

    

    

Weighted-

    

    

    

Weighted-

 

Average

Aggregate

Average

 

Stock

Exercise

Intrinsic

Restricted

Grant-Date

 

    

Options

    

Price

    

Value

    

Stock

    

Fair Value

 

Outstanding (stock options); non-vested (restricted stock) at December 31, 2020

 

46,100

$

77.98

$

1,661

 

18,521

$

103.10

Granted

 

9,900

 

131.24

 

 

18,400

 

130.48

Exercised (stock options); vested (restricted stock)

 

(9,500)

 

69.58

 

647

 

(18,639)

 

112.47

Forfeited

 

 

 

 

(136)

 

99.80

Outstanding (stock options); non-vested (restricted stock) at December 31, 2021

 

46,500

$

91.04

$

1,788

 

18,146

$

121.26

Exercisable at December 31, 2021

 

46,500

$

91.04

$

1,788

 

n/a

 

n/a

    

2021

    

2020

    

2019

 

Weighted-average fair value of stock options granted during the year

$

42.10

$

31.30

$

20.47

Weighted-average remaining contractual life for stock options in years

 

6.85

 

6.74

 

6.64

Total fair value of stock options vested during the year

$

321

$

310

$

203

Total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during the year

$

647

$

1,128

$

57

Total fair value of restricted stock vested during the year

$

2,096

$

1,612

$

1,303

There were 10,000 non-vested stock options at December 31, 2021, and the weighted-average remaining contractual life of the outstanding and exercisable stock options at such date was 6.85 years. The total compensation cost not yet recognized for restricted stock at December 31, 2021 was $1,951, which will be recognized over the weighted average of 1.07 years.

The fair value for the stock options was estimated at the date of grant using a lattice-based option valuation model, with the following weighted-average assumptions for the 2021, 2020 and 2019 grants: risk-free interest rates of 0.86% to 1.26% (weighted average 1.19%) in 2021, 0.37% to 0.53% (weighted average 0.42%) in 2020 and 1.69% to 2.33% (weighted average 1.89%) in 2019; a dividend yield of 0.46% to 0.50% (weighted average 0.49%) in 2021, 0.56%

47

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

to 0.80% (weighted average 0.64%) in 2020 and 0.60% to 0.67% (weighted average 0.62%) in 2019; and a volatility factor of .366 to .373 (weighted average .371) in 2021, .346 to .356 (weighted average .354) in 2020 and .244 to .247 (weighted average .245) in 2019, based on the daily per-share closing prices for five years preceding the date of issuance. In addition, the fair value of these options was estimated based on an expected life of five years. The fair value of restricted stock is based on the closing per-share price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant.

(7) Share Repurchases

During 2021, pursuant to provisions in the 2001 Plan that allow employees and directors to pay the tax withholding liability upon the lapse of restrictions on restricted stock in either cash and/or delivery of shares of the Company’s common stock, the Company repurchased 5,661 shares at a weighted-average price of $129.13 per share.

(8) Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is party to lawsuits and claims arising in the normal course of business, none of which, in the opinion of management, is expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or competitive position.

The Company is not contractually committed to any planned capital expenditures until actual orders are placed for equipment or services. At December 31, 2021, the Company had $2,247 for open equipment and construction contracts.

(9) Reportable Segment

The Company has identified one reportable segment based on the distinctness of the Company’s activities and products: lime and limestone operations. All operations are in the United States. In evaluating the operating results of the Company, management primarily reviews revenues, gross profit and operating profit from the lime and limestone operations. Operating profit from its lime and limestone operations includes all of the Company’s selling, general and administrative costs. The Company does not allocate interest income and expense and other expense to its lime and limestone operations. Other identifiable assets includes assets related to the Company’s natural gas interests, unallocated corporate assets, and cash items.

48

Table of Contents

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Continued)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019

Operating results and certain other financial data for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019 for the Company’s Lime and Limestone Operations segment and Other are as follows:

Revenues

2021

2020

2019

Lime and limestone operations

$

187,365

$

159,707

$

156,981

Other

 

1,890

 

997

 

1,296

Total revenues

$

189,255

$

160,704

$

158,277

Depreciation, depletion and amortization

Lime and limestone operations

$

20,052

$

18,664

$

16,432

Other

 

578

 

715

 

962

Total depreciation, depletion and amortization

$

20,630

$

19,379

$

17,394

Gross profit (loss)

Lime and limestone operations

$

58,651

$

47,983

$

42,043

Other

 

609

 

(396)

 

(367)

Total gross profit

$

59,260

$

47,587

$

41,676

Operating profit (loss)

Lime and limestone operations

$

45,835

$

35,815

$

30,543

Other (1)

582

(1,946)

(1,297)

Total operating profit

$

46,417

$

33,869

$

29,246

Identifiable assets, at period end

Lime and limestone operations

$

204,815

$

190,946

$

185,657

Other

 

111,381

 

88,152

 

61,380

Total identifiable assets

$

316,196

$

279,098

$

247,037

Capital expenditures

Lime and limestone operations

$

29,914

$

17,133

$

27,100

Other

Total capital expenditures

$

29,914

$

17,133

$

27,100

(1)Other Operating profit for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 were adversely impacted by impairment charges of $1,550 and $930, respectively, to adjust the carrying value of long-lived assets related to the Company’s natural gas interests.

(10) Subsequent Events

On January 31, 2022, the Company declared an increased regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.20 per share on the Company’s common stock. This dividend is payable on March 18, 2022 to shareholders of record at the close of business on February 25, 2022.

On February 9, 2022, the Company acquired Mill Creek Dolomite, LLC, a dolomite mining and production company located in Mill Creek, Oklahoma, for $5.9 million cash, subject to adjustment.

49

Table of Contents

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.

None.

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.

Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures. The Company’s management, with the participation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this Report. Based on that evaluation, the CEO and CFO concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this Report were effective.

MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

The management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed under the supervision of the Company’s CEO and CFO to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of the Company’s financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Additionally, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

As of December 31, 2021, management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on the criteria for effective internal control over financial reporting established in the 2013 “Internal Control—Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the “COSO criteria”). Based on the assessment, management determined that the Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2021, based on the COSO criteria.

Grant Thornton LLP, the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an audit report on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, which appears elsewhere in this Report on Form 10-K.

Changes in internal control over financial reporting. No change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting occurred during the Company’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION.

None.

ITEM 9C. DISCLOSURE REGARDING FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS THAT PREVENT INSPECTIONS.

Not applicable.

50

Table of Contents

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE.

The information appearing under “Election of Directors,” “Information About Our Nominees for Director,” “Information About Our Executive Officers Who Are Not Directors,” and “Corporate Governance” in the definitive Proxy Statement for the Company’s 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “2022 Proxy Statement”) is hereby incorporated by reference in answer to this Item 10. The Company anticipates that it will file the 2022 Proxy Statement with the SEC on or before May 2, 2022.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.

The information appearing under “Executive Compensation” and “Compensation of Directors” in the 2022 Proxy Statement is hereby incorporated by reference in answer to this Item 11.

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.

The information appearing under “Voting Securities and Principal Shareholder,” “Shareholdings of Company Directors and Executive Officers” and “Executive Compensation” in the 2022 Proxy Statement is hereby incorporated by reference in answer to this Item 12.

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.

The information appearing under “Voting Securities and Principal Shareholder” and “Corporate Governance” in the 2022 Proxy Statement is hereby incorporated by reference in answer to this Item 13.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES.

The information appearing under “Independent Auditors” in the 2022 Proxy Statement is hereby incorporated by reference in answer to this Item 14.

51

Table of Contents

PART IV

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES.

(a)

1.    The following financial statements are included in Item 8:

Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Consolidated Financial Statements:

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2021 and 2020;

Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019;

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019;

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019;

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019; and

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

2.

All financial statement schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or are immaterial or the required information is presented in the consolidated financial statements or the related notes.

(b)Exhibits

The Exhibit Index set forth below is incorporated by reference in response to this Item.

EXHIBIT INDEX

3.1

    

Articles of Amendment to the Restated Articles of Incorporation, as Amended, of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., dated as of May 4, 2021 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed May 4, 2021, File Number 000-04197).

3.2

Restated Articles of Incorporation, as Amended, of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2021, File Number 000-04197).

3.3

Amended and Restated Bylaws of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. as of March 8, 2018 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 12, 2018, File Number 000-04197).

4.1

Description of Securities Registered Under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended.

10.1.1

Form of stock option grant agreement under the United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as Amended and Restated (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2.1 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, File Number 000-04197).

10.1.2

Form of restricted stock grant agreement under the United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as Amended and Restated (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2.2 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, File Number 000-04197).

52

Table of Contents

10.1.3

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as Amended and Restated (incorporated by reference to Exhibit A to the Company’s definitive Proxy Statement for its Annual Meeting of Shareholders held on May 3, 2019, File Number 000-04197).

10.2.1

Employment Agreement effective as of January 1, 2015 between United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. and Timothy W. Byrne, including Cash Performance Bonus Award Agreement dated as of January 1, 2015 between United States Lime and Minerals, Inc. and Timothy W. Byrne, set forth as Exhibit A thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2014, File Number 000-04197).

10.2.2

Employment Agreement effective as of January 1, 2020 between United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. and Timothy W. Byrne, including Cash Performance Bonus Award Agreement dated as of January 1, 2020 between United States Lime and Minerals, Inc. and Timothy W. Byrne, set forth as Exhibit A thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2020, File Number 000-04197).

10.3

Credit Agreement dated as of August 25, 2004 among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each Lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Swing Line Lender and L/C Issuer (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 31, 2004, File Number 000-04197).

10.4

Security Agreement dated as of August 25, 2004 among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., Arkansas Lime Company, Colorado Lime Company, Texas Lime Company and U. S. Lime CompanyHouston, in favor of Wells Fargo Bank, N. A., as Administrative Agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 31, 2004, File Number 000-4197).

10.5

Second Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of October 19, 2005 among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each Lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 20, 2005, File Number 000-04197).

10.6

Third Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of March 30, 2007 among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each Lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 30, 2007, File Number 000-04197).

10.7

Fourth Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of June 1, 2010 among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each Lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 1, 2010, File Number 000-04197).

10.8

Fifth Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of May 7, 2015 among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2015, File Number 000-04197).

10.9

Sixth Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of October 27, 2016 among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, File Number 000-04197).

10.10

Seventh Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of May 2, 2019, among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2019, File Number 000-04197).

53

Table of Contents

10.11

Eight Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of May 2, 2019, among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2019, File Number 000-04197).

10.12

Ninth Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of November 21, 2019, among United States Lime & Minerals, Inc., each lender from time to time a party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, File Number 000-4197).

21.1

Subsidiaries of the Company.

23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.

23.2

Consent of Qualified Person.

31.1

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification by Chief Executive Officer.

31.2

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification by Chief Financial Officer.

32.1

Section 1350 Certification by Chief Executive Officer.

32.2

Section 1350 Certification by Chief Financial Officer.

95.1

Mine Safety Disclosures.

96.1

Technical Report Summary on Texas Lime Company Limestone Operation, Johnson County, Texas, USA.

96.2

Technical Report Summary on Arkansas Lime Company Limestone Operation, Independence County, Arkansas, USA.

96.3

Technical Report Summary on ACT Holdings Company Limestone Operation, Izzard County, Arkansas, USA.

96.4

Technical Report Summary on U.S. Lime Company—St. Clair – Marble Mountain Limestone Operation, Sequoyah County, Oklahoma, USA.

101

Interactive Data Files (formatted as Inline XBRL).

104

Cover Page Interactive Data File (formatted as Inline XBRL and contained in Exhibit 101).

Exhibits 10.1.1 through 10.2.2 are management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements required to be filed as exhibits.

ITEM 16. FORM 10-K SUMMARY.

Not Applicable.

54

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS, INC.

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Timothy W. Byrne

Timothy W. Byrne,

President and Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Timothy W. Byrne

Timothy W. Byrne,

President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director (Principal Executive Officer)

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Michael L. Wiedemer

Michael L. Wiedemer,

Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Antoine M. Doumet

Antoine M. Doumet,

Director and Chairman of the Board

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Richard W. Cardin

Richard W. Cardin,

Director

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Ray M. Harlin

Ray M. Harlin

Director

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Billy R. Hughes

Billy R. Hughes,

Director

Date: March 10, 2022

By:

/s/ Edward A. Odishaw

Edward A. Odishaw,

Director and Vice Chairman of the Board

55

Exhibit 4.1

DESCRIPTION OF UNITED STATES LIME & MINERALS, INC.’S

SECURITIES REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

General

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (the “Company,” “we,” or “our”) is incorporated in the State of Texas. The rights of our shareholders are generally covered by Texas law and our articles of incorporation and bylaws (each as amended and restated and in effect on the date hereof). The terms of our common stock are therefore subject to Texas law, including the Texas Business Organizations Code (the “TBOC”), and the common and constitutional law of Texas.

This exhibit describes the general terms of our common stock. This description is a summary and does not purport to be complete. Our articles of incorporation and bylaws are incorporated by reference as exhibits to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of which this exhibit is a part, and amendments or restatements of each will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) in future periodic or current reports in accordance with the rules of the SEC. You are encouraged to read these documents.

For more detailed information about the rights of holders of our common stock, you should refer to our articles of incorporation and bylaws and the applicable provisions of Texas law, including the TBOC.

Authorized Capital Stock

We are authorized to issue 30,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.10 par value, and 500,000 shares of preferred stock, $5.00 par value.

Common Stock

Voting Rights

Holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote per share in the election of directors and on all other matters submitted to a vote of shareholders. No shareholder has the right of cumulative voting.

With respect to any matter other than the election of directors or a matter for which the affirmative vote of the holders of a specified portion of the shares of our common stock entitled to vote is required by Texas law or our articles of incorporation, the act of the shareholders shall be the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares entitled to vote on, and voted for or against, the matter at a meeting of shareholders at which a quorum is present. Directors shall be elected by a plurality of the votes cast by the holders of shares entitled to vote in the election of directors at a meeting of shareholders at which a quorum is present. We do not have a classified board of directors. Our directors are elected for one-year terms.

Dividend Rights

Holders of our common stock are entitled to dividends when, as and if declared by our Board of Directors out of funds legally available therefor.

Liquidation Rights

If we liquidate, a holder of common stock will be entitled to share ratably with the other shareholders in the distribution of all assets that we have left after we pay all of our liabilities and make any necessary distributions to holders of our preferred stock.


Other

Our common stock has no preemptive or conversion rights and is not entitled to the benefits of any redemption or sinking fund provision. The outstanding shares of our common stock are fully paid and non-assessable.

Preferred Stock

The Company may issue shares of preferred stock from time to time upon the approval of our Board of Directors in one or more series without further stockholder approval. The Board of Directors may designate the number of shares to be issued in such series and the rights, preferences, privileges and restrictions granted to, or imposed on, the holders of such shares. If issued, such shares of preferred stock could have dividends and liquidation preferences over our shares of common stock, and may otherwise affect the rights of the holders of the common stock. The rights of the holders of our common stock will, therefore, generally be subject to the rights of the holders of any existing outstanding shares of preferred stock with respect to dividends, liquidation preferences and other matters. As of the date hereof, we have no outstanding shares of preferred stock.

Certain Business Combination Restrictions in Texas Law

Section 21.606 of the TBOC restricts certain business combinations between us and an affiliated shareholder (beneficial ownership of 20% or more of the voting power of our stock entitled to vote for directors) for three years after the shareholder becomes an affiliated shareholder. The restrictions do not apply if our Board of Directors approved the transaction that caused the shareholder to become an affiliated shareholder, or if the business combination is approved by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of our voting stock that is not beneficially owned by the affiliated shareholder at a meeting of shareholders called for that purpose within six months after the affiliated shareholder’s acquiring the shares. Although we may elect to exclude ourselves from the restrictions imposed by Section 21.606, our articles of incorporation does not do so.

Certain Provisions of Our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws

Some provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws could make the acquisition of control of the Company and/or the removal of our existing management more difficult, including those that provide as follows:

·

cumulative voting in the election of our Board of Directors, which would otherwise allow holders of less than a majority of our shares to elect director candidates, is prohibited under our articles of incorporation;

·

our Board of Directors may amend or repeal our bylaws, or adopt new bylaws without shareholder approval;

·

our Board of Directors can increase or decrease the size of the Board without shareholder approval by amending the bylaws;

·

shareholder action that is not taken at a regular or special meeting of our shareholders may only be taken by the unanimous written consent of our shareholders; and

·

our Board of Directors is authorized to issue shares of our preferred stock without shareholder approval.

These provisions may be expected to discourage coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids. They may also encourage persons seeking to acquire control of the Company to first negotiate with our Board of Directors. We believe that the benefits of our increased protection give us the potential ability to negotiate with the proponent of an unfriendly or unsolicited proposal to acquire or restructure us, and that these benefits outweigh the disadvantages of discouraging the proposals. Negotiating with the proponent could result in an improvement of the terms of the proposal.


Stock Exchange Listing

Our common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market under the symbol “USLM.”

Transfer Agent and Registrar

Our transfer agent and registrar is Computershare Investor Services, P.O. Box 30170, College Station, TX 77842.


Exhibit 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

Arkansas Lime Company, an Arkansas Corporation

ACT Holdings, Inc., a Texas Corporation

ART Quarry TRS LLC (DBA Carthage Crushed Limestone), a Delaware LLC

Colorado Lime Company, a Colorado Corporation

Mill Creek Dolomite, LLC, an Oklahoma Corporation

Texas Lime Company, a Texas Corporation

U.S. Lime Company, a Texas Corporation

U.S. Lime Company—Shreveport, a Louisiana Corporation

U.S. Lime Company—St. Clair, a Delaware Corporation

U.S. Lime Company—Transportation, a Texas Corporation

U.S. Lime Company—O & G, LLC, a Texas LLC


Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our reports dated March 10, 2022 with respect to the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.  We consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-236817 and File No. 333-196697).

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP 

Dallas, Texas

March 10, 2022


Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON

SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”) in connection with the filing of the United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Form 10-K”), consent to:

·

The filing and use of the Technical Report Summary titled Technical Report Summary on Texas Lime Company Limestone Operation, Johnson County, Texas, USA, with an effective date of December 31, 2021, as Exhibit 96.1 to and referenced in the Form 10-K;

·

The filing and use of the Technical Report Summary titled Technical Report Summary on Arkansas Lime Company Limestone Operation, Independence County, Arkansas, USA, with an effective date of December 31, 2021, as Exhibit 96.2 to and referenced in the Form 10-K;

The filing and use of the Technical Report Summary titled “Technical Report Summary on ACT Holdings Company Limestone Operation, Izzard County, Arkansas, USA”, with an effective date of December 31, 2021, as Exhibit 96.3 to and referenced in the Form 10-K;
The filing and use of the Technical Report Summary titled “Technical Report Summary on U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair - Marble Mountain Limestone Operation, Sequoyah County, Oklahoma, USA”, with an effective date of December 31, 2021, as Exhibit 96.4 to and referenced in the Form 10-K;

·

The use of and references to our name, including our status as an expert or qualified person (as defined in Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K as promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission), in connection with the Form 10-K and any such Technical Report Summary;

·

The information derived, summarized, quoted, or referenced from any of the Technical Report Summaries, or portions thereof, that were prepared by SYB, that SYB supervised the preparation of and/or that was reviewed and approved by SYB, that is included or incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K; and

The incorporation by reference of the foregoing in the Registration Statements of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-236817 and File No. 333-196697).

SYB is responsible for authoring, and this consent pertains to, the Technical Report Summaries. SYB certifies that it has read the Form 10-K and that it fairly represents the information in the sections of the Technical Report Summaries for which SYB is responsible.

SYB Group, LLC

/s/ Keith Vickers

President

March 10, 2022


EXHIBIT 31.1

RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Timothy W. Byrne, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and

b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Dated: March 10, 2022

/s/ Timothy W. Byrne

Timothy W. Byrne

President and Chief Executive Officer


EXHIBIT 31.2

RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael L. Wiedemer, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and

b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

4

Dated: March 10, 2022

/s/ MICHAEL L. WIEDEMER

Michael L. Wiedemer

Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


EXHIBIT 32.1

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Timothy W. Byrne, Chief Executive Officer of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify that, to my knowledge:

(1)The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 (the “Form 10-K”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: March 10, 2022

/s/ TIMOTHY W. BYRNE

Timothy W. Byrne

President and Chief Executive Officer


EXHIBIT 32.2

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael L. Wiedemer, Chief Financial Officer of United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify that to my knowledge:

(1)

The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 (the “Form 10-K”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)

The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

4

Dated: March 10, 2022

/s/ Michael Wiedemer

Michael Wiedemer

Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


EXHIBIT 95.1

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

The following disclosures are provided pursuant to Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and Item 104 of SEC Regulation S-K, which requires certain disclosures by companies required to file periodic reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that operate mines regulated under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the “Mine Act”).

The Mine Act has been construed as authorizing MSHA to issue citations and orders pursuant to the legal doctrine of strict liability, or liability without fault. If, in the opinion of an MSHA inspector, a condition that violates the Mine Act or regulations promulgated pursuant to it exists, then a citation or order will be issued regardless of whether the operator had any knowledge of, or fault in, the existence of that condition. Many of the Mine Act standards include one or more subjective elements, so that issuance of a citation or order often depends on the opinions or experience of the MSHA inspector involved, and the frequency and severity of citations and orders will vary from inspector to inspector.

Whenever MSHA believes that a violation of the Mine Act, any health or safety standard, or any regulation has occurred, it may issue a citation or order which describes the violation and fixes a time within which the operator must abate the violation. In some situations, such as when MSHA believes that conditions pose a hazard to miners, MSHA may issue an order requiring cessation of operations, or removal of miners from the area of the mine, affected by the condition until the hazards are corrected. Whenever MSHA issues a citation or order, it has authority to propose a civil penalty or fine, as a result of the violation, that the operator is ordered to pay.

The table that follows reflects citations, orders, violations and proposed assessments issued to the Company by MSHA during the year ended December 31, 2021 and any pending legal actions as of December 31, 2021. Due to timing and other factors, the data may not agree with the mine data retrieval system maintained by MSHA. The proposed assessments for the year ended December 31, 2021 were taken from the MSHA system as of March 9, 2022.

Additional information follows about MSHA references used in the table:

Section 104(a) Citations: The total number of citations received from MSHA under section 104(a) of the Mine Act for alleged violations of health or safety standards that could significantly and substantially contribute to a serious injury if left unabated.
Section 104(b) Orders: The total number of orders issued by MSHA under section 104(b) of the Mine Act, which represents a failure to abate a citation under section 104(a) within the period of time prescribed by MSHA. This results in an order of immediate withdrawal from the area of the mine affected by the condition until MSHA determines that the violation has been abated.
Section 104(d) Citations and Orders: The total number of citations and orders issued by MSHA under section 104(d) of the Mine Act for unwarrantable failure to comply with mandatory health or safety standards.
Section 110(b)(2) Violations: The total number of flagrant violations issued by MSHA under section 110(b)(2) of the Mine Act.
Section 107(a) Orders: The total number of orders issued by MSHA under section 107(a) of the Mine Act for situations in which MSHA determined an imminent danger existed.

Citations and orders can be contested before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (the “Commission”), and as part of that process, are often reduced in severity and amount, and are sometimes dismissed. The Commission is an independent adjudicative agency that provides administrative trial and appellate review of legal disputes arising under the Mine Act. These cases may involve, among other questions, challenges by operators to citations, orders and penalties they have received from MSHA, or complaints of discrimination by miners under section 105 of the Mine Act.

1


Year ended December 31, 2021

    

    

    

Section

    

    

    

    

    

 

104(d)

Proposed

 

Section

Section

Citations

Section

Section

MSHA

Pending

 

104 S & S

104(b)

and

110(b)(2)

107(a)

Assessments(2)

Legal

 

Mine(1)

Citations

Orders

Orders

Violations

Orders

($ in thousands)

Fatalities

Actions(3)

 

Texas Lime Company

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.6

 

 

Arkansas Lime Company

Plant

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.6

 

 

Limedale Quarry

 

5

 

 

 

 

 

4.2

 

 

U.S. Lime Company—St. Clair

 

4

 

 

 

 

 

2.7

 

 

Carthage Crushed Limestone

10

20.2

Colorado Lime Company

Monarch Quarry

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Delta Plant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


(1)The definition of a mine under section 3 of the Mine Act includes the mine, as well as other items used in, or to be used in, or resulting from, the work of extracting and processing limestone, such as roads, land, structures, facilities, equipment, machines, tools, kilns, and other property. These other items associated with a single mine have been aggregated in the totals for that mine.
(2)The proposed MSHA assessments issued during the reporting period do not necessarily relate to the citations or orders issued by MSHA during the reporting period or to any pending contests reported above.
(3)Includes any pending legal action before the Commission involving such mine as of December 31, 2021. Any pending legal actions were initiated by the Company and may include multiple citations or orders. The pending legal actions may relate to the citations or orders issued by MSHA during the reporting period or to citations or orders issued in prior periods. There was one legal actions instituted and resolved during the reporting period.

Pattern or Potential Pattern of Violations. During the year ended December 31, 2021, none of the mines operated by the Company received written notice from MSHA of either (a) a pattern of violations of mandatory health or safety standards that are of such nature as could have significantly and substantially contributed to mine health or safety hazards under section 104(e) of the Mine Act or (b) the potential to have such a pattern.

2


Exhibit 96.1

Technical Report Summary on

Texas Lime Company Limestone Operation

Johnson County, Texas, USA

Prepared for:

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

Graphic

SK-1300 Report

Effective Date December 31, 2021

Report Date: March 2, 2022

Page 1 of 50


DISCLAIMERS AND QUALIFICATIONS

SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”) was retained by United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) to prepare this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) related to Texas Lime Company (“TLC”) limestone reserves and resources. This TRS provides a statement of TLC’s limestone reserves and resources at its mine located in Johnson County, Texas and has been prepared in accordance with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Regulation S-K 1300 for Mining Property Disclosure (S-K 1300) and 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229.601(b)(96)(iii)(B) reporting requirements. This report was prepared for the sole use by USLM and its affiliates and is effective December 31, 2021.

This TRS was prepared by SYB Group’s President who meets the SEC’s definition of a Qualified Person and has sufficient experience in the relevant type of mineralization and deposit under consideration in this TRS.

In preparing this TRS, SYB relied upon data, written reports and statements provided by TLC and USLM. SYB has taken all appropriate steps, in its professional opinion, to ensure information provided by TLC and USLM is reasonable and reliable for use in this report.

The Economic Analysis and resulting net present value estimate in this TRS were made for the purposes of confirming the economic viability of the reported limestone reserves and not for the purposes of valuing TLC or its assets. Internal Rate of Return and project payback were not calculated, as there was no initial investment considered in the financial model. Certain information set forth in this report contains “forward-looking information,” including production, productivity, operating costs, capital costs, sales prices, and other assumptions. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and undue reliance should not be placed on them. The ability to recover the reported reserves depends on numerous factors beyond the control of SYB Group that cannot be anticipated. Some of these factors include, but are not limited to, future limestone prices, mining and geologic conditions, obtaining permits and regulatory approvals in a timely manner, the decisions and abilities of management and employees, and unanticipated changes in environmental or other regulations that could impact performance. The opinions and estimates included in this report apply exclusively to the TLC mine as of the effective date of this report.

All data used as source material plus the text, tables, figures, and attachments of this document have been reviewed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geologic practices.

SYB hereby consents to the use of TLC’s limestone reserve and resource estimates as of December 31, 2021 in USLM’s SEC filings and to the filing of this TRS as an exhibit to USLM’s SEC filings.

Qualified Person: /s/ Keith V. Vickers

Keith V. Vickers, TXPG #3938

President, SYB Group, LLC

1216 W. Cleburne Rd

Crowley, TX 76036

Page 2 of 50


Table of Contents

List of Figures

4

List of Tables

5

1

Executive Summary

6

2

Introduction

7

3

Property Description

10

4

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

11

5

History

12

6

Geological Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

12

7

Exploration

18

8

Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

23

9

Data Verification

24

10

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

24

11

Mineral Resource Estimates

25

12

Mineral Reserve Estimates

28

13

Mining Methods

29

14

Processing and Recovery Methods

31

15

Infrastructure

31

16

Market Studies

32

17

Environmental Studies, Permitting and Plans, Negotiations or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

32

18

Capital and Operating Costs

33

19

Economic Analysis

33

20

Adjacent Properties

36

21

Other Relevant Data and Information

37

22

Interpretation and Conclusions

37

23

Recommendations

37

24

References

37

25

Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

38

Appendix A: List of Data Included in the Geologic Model

39

Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

40

Page 3 of 50


List of Figures

1.

Fig. 3.1

Texas Lime Company Plant and Mine Location

2.

Fig. 6.1-1

Geologic Map of Texas, Surface Geology and Stratigraphy (TBEG, 1997)

3.

Fig. 6.1-2

Paleomap of the Cretaceous Western Interior Seaway

5.

Fig. 6.4-1

Detailed Fredericksburg Group stratigraphic column

6.

Fig. 6.4-2

Topography, N-S Cross Section and Hole Profile with Stratigraphy and CaCO, %

7.

Fig. 7.1-1

TLC Core and Test Holes utilized in Geologic Model

8.

Fig. 7.1-2

Example of TLC Hole Log, Core Hole TLC 16-12

9.

Fig. 7.2-1

TLC Property Outcrop Geology

10.

Fig. 11.3

TLC Ore Top Structure Map

11.

Fig. 13.4

Final TLC Pit Boundaries

12.

Fig. 15.1

TLC Mine Infrastructure Map

Page 4 of 50


List of Tables

1.

Table 1.1

Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

2.

Table 1.2

Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

3.

Table 1.3

Capital Costs

4.

Table 1.4

Operating Costs

5.

Table 2.3

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

6.

Table 2.4

Visits Made by QP to TLC

7.

Table 5.2

Historical Exploration and Development Drilling

8.

Table 6.4

TLC Property Stratigraphy

9.

Table 7.1-1

All TLC Drilling Projects

10.

Table 7.1-2

Summary of 1955 and 1958 TLC Mine Site Drilling

11.

Table 7.1-3

Summary of 2016 Development Drilling

12.

Table 7.1-4

Summary of 2018 Exploration Drilling

13.

Table 7.2

Summary of Measured Section Sampling

14.

Table 11.2.4

Resource Parameter Assumptions

15.

Table 11.3

Summary of Drill Hole Database for the Model

16.

Table 11.4.1

Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

17.

Table 12.4

Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

18.

Table 17.1

Mining and Environmental Permits

19.

Table 18.1

Capital Costs

20.

Table 18.2

Operating Costs

21.

Table 19.3-1

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

22.

Table 19.3-2

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Mining Cost

23.

Table 19.3-3

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying TLC East Area Mining Cost

24.

Table 19.3-4

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Stripping Cost

25.

Table 19.3-5

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying All Mining and Contract Mining and Stripping Costs

26.

Table 19.3-6

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Price

Page 5 of 50


1Executive Summary

The Texas Lime Company (“TLC”) mine is a production stage, open pit mine that produces high-grade limestone with calcium carbonate (“CaCO3”) quality above 96.0% from the Edwards formation that is delivered to TLC’s primary crusher. The TLC plant processes the limestone into various products that are sold to a variety of customers. The TLC mine is located in Johnson County, Texas on approximately 5,200 acres owned by TLC that contains known high-grade limestone reserves in a bed that typically ranges from 25 ft. to 35 ft. Operations began at the TLC mine in the 1940’s.

Mining at the TLC mine consists of pushing aside the topsoil and overburden using conventional earthmoving equipment and methods. The topsoil and overburden are used as backfill for nearby previously mined pits. The limestone ore body is then drilled and blasted, followed by loading and haulage utilizing conventional limestone mining equipment. The shot limestone is hauled to TLC’s primary crusher.

The TLC mine has procured, and is operating in compliance with, the required air and storm water permits that are required by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. TLC will be required to renew the permits when they expire in January 2026.

The TLC mine currently averages an annual production rate of approximately 1,400,000 tons of limestone per year. The expected mine life at that rate of production is in excess of 75 years.

Over the last 65+ years, drilling reports from drilling programs performed and historical production records have established that the Edwards formation limestone has consistent high-grade limestone (CaCO3 quality above 96.0%) in the TLC mine property. They have also confirmed the 25 to 35 ft. thickness of the Edwards limestone ore interval as well as the relatively shallow overburden that is favorable for open pit mining. The drilling data, along with information from mining faces and examination of widely spread Edwards outcrops, allow a high degree of geological confidence to be assigned to the quality and lateral continuity of the limestone on the property.

As noted in section 2.1, Keith Vickers of SYB Group (“SYB”), a consultant for United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) for over 20 years, served as the Qualified Person (“QP”) and prepared the estimates of limestone mineral resources and reserves for the TLC mine. Summaries of the TLC mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves are shown below in Tables 1.1 and 1.2, respectively. Sections 11 and 12 sets forth the definitions of mineral resources and reserves as well as the methods and assumptions used by the QP in determining the estimates and classifications of the TLC mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves.

Table 1.1 Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Resource Category

    

In Place
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Processing Recovery
 (%)
3

Measured Mineral Resources

116,533,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

0

0

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

116,533,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place.

Table 1.2 Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade

(% X)

    

Mining Recovery
 (%)

Probable Reserves

47,532,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0

Proven Reserves

63,174,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0

Total Probable and Proven

110,706,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

The modeling and analysis of the TLC mine’s resources and reserves has been developed by TLC and USLM personnel and reviewed by management of the companies, as well as the QP. The development of such resources and reserves estimates, including related assumptions, was a collaborative effort between the QP and personnel of the companies.

The TLC mine has been a stable producer of limestone using the current equipment fleet and operating parameters for many years. This operating history and its 2022 budget were used to estimate the unit costs for limestone mining, overburden stripping, and annual sustaining capital expenditures. As the mine plan proceeds further from the existing crushing facility, haulage distance increases. This will require an increase in the haul truck fleet size in some years. Capital and operating costs were adjusted for this increased haulage requirement as shown in Appendix B. The fleet size is three trucks until 2027. From 2027 to 2036, from 2045 to 2052, and from 2100 to

Page 6 of 50


2102 the fleet size is four trucks. From 2037 to 2044 and from 2053 to 2064 the fleet size is five trucks. From 2065 to 2067 the fleet size is six trucks. Tables 1.3 and 1.4 set forth the estimated capital costs and operating costs, respectively, used to estimate future operations for the TLC mine.

Table 1.3 Capital Costs

Capital Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Annual Maintenance of Operations

$850,000

Haul Truck Cost

$650,000

Table 1.4 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Limestone Mining Cost Per Ton

$2.86

Contractor Limestone Mining Cost per Ton

$3.10

Overburden Stripping Cost Per Ton

$2.03

It is the QP’s overall conclusions that:

1.

Geologically, the TLC mine limestone deposit has been proven by regional and detailed local drilling and sampling to have quality and thickness that is very consistent. Because of the simple geology, the mining method for the mine is straightforward and consists of uncomplicated open pit mining.

2.

The data detailed in this report that was used to estimate the resources was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

3.

TLC has successfully mined this resource for many years using the same methods that are projected into the future. Significant increases in the cost of mining coupled with large decreases in the selling price of limestone would be required to make mining uneconomic. Historically, TLC has been able to increase sales prices in line with cost increases.

4.

There are no significant factors onsite that will impact the extraction of this ore body. TLC has been in operation for many decades during varying economic and market conditions. The mining operation has been modernized over the last twenty-five years, which has allowed it to optimize mining of the limestone deposit.

5.

Absent unforeseen changes in economic or other factors, including additional federal or state environmental regulations, the economic analysis and the amount of Proven and Probable Reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 80 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

2Introduction

2.1Issuer of the Report

Mr. Keith Vickers of SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”), a consultant for USLM for over 20 years, prepared this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) on TLC’s mining operations located in Johnson County, Texas. Mr. Vickers is a Qualified Person (“QP”). USLM is a publicly-traded company on the NASDAQ Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol USLM and TLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of USLM.

2.2Terms of Reference and Purpose

The purpose of this TRS is to support the disclosure of mineral resource and reserve estimates for TLC’s existing mining operations located in Johnson County, Texas, as of December 31, 2021. This TRS is to fulfill 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229, “Standard Instructions for Filing Forms Under Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 – Regulation S-K,” subsection 1300, “Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations.” The mineral resource and reserve estimates presented herein are classified according to 17 CFR § 229.1300 Definitions.

The QP prepared this TRS with information from various sources with detailed data about the historical and current mining operations, including individuals who are experts in an appropriate technical field. TLC has not previously filed a TRS.

The quality of information, conclusions, and estimates contained herein are based on: i) information available at the time of preparation; and ii) the assumptions, conditions, and qualifications outlined in this TRS.

Unless stated otherwise, all volumes and grades are in U.S. customary units and currencies are expressed in 2021 U.S. dollars. Distances are described in U.S. standard units.

Page 7 of 50


2.3Sources of Information

This TRS is based upon engineering data, financial and technical information developed and maintained by TLC or USLM personnel, work undertaken by third-party contractors and consultants on behalf of the mine, public data sourced from the United States Geological Survey, Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, internal TLC technical reports, previous technical studies, maps, TLC letters and memoranda, and public information as cited throughout this TRS and listed in Section 24. Table 2.3 is a list of the terms used in this TRS.

This TRS was prepared by Keith V. Vickers, BSGeol, MSGeol, TXPG #3938, CPetG #6152. Detailed discussions with the following were held during the preparation of the TRS:

Mr. Timothy W. Byrne, President, CEO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Michael L. Wiedemer, Vice President, CFO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Russell R. Riggs, Vice President, Production, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. M. Michael Owens, Corporate Treasurer, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Jason Nutzman, Director of Legal and Compliance, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Wendell Smith, Director Environmental, USLM Dallas, Texas

Mr. Julius J. Harris, Vice President and Plant Manager, TLC, Cleburne, Texas

Mr. Peter McKenzie, Mine Manager, TLC, Cleburne, Texas

Mr. Tom Quinlan, Quality Control Laboratory Manager, TLC, Cleburne, Texas

Mr. Keith Vickers, SYB Group, USLM Consulting Geologist, Crowley, Texas

Table 2.3 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

Term

    

Definition

AAPG

American Association of Professional Geologists

AASHTO

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

ASTM

American Society for Testing and Materials

CaCO3

Calcium Carbonate

CEO

Chief Executive Officer

CFO

Chief Financial Officer

CFR

Code of Federal Regulations

DFW

Dallas Fort Worth

DTM

Digital Terrain Model

E

East

F.

Fahrenheit

Fig.

Figure

ft.

Feet

GLONASS

Global Navigation Satellite System

GPS

Global Positioning System

LIBOR

London Inter-Bank Offered Rate

LIDAR

Light Detection and Ranging

LST

Limestone

N

North

NAD

North American Datum

NPV

Net Present Value

P.E.

Professional Engineer

PG

Professional Geologist

QP

Qualified Person

QC/QA

Quality Control/Quality Assurance

S

South

TRS

Technical Report Summary

TLC

Texas Lime Company

U.S.

United States

USGS

United States Geological Survey

USLM

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

WAAS

Wide Area Augmentation System

W

West

XRF

X-Ray Fluorescence

Page 8 of 50


2.4Personal Inspection

The QP, who has been a consulting geologist for USLM for over 20 years, is familiar with TLC’s mine geology and operations. In addition, the QP conducted onsite visits to review data, confirm protocols, and gather specific information required for the TRS not previously available to him.

On September 3, 2021, the QP met TLC personnel in the TLC mine office to review the drill hole and surface sample database and discuss what data was available and needed for the TRS. The QP inspected the mine and reviewed the core storage methods. Core logging and sampling procedures were verified. The QP discussed quality control and quality assurance with the TLC QC/QA lab manager. A review of the core sawing methods and sample preparation for analytical tests also occurred.

On November 29, 2021, the QP visited the site to update and review a report checklist with TLC management and personnel. Also attending this visit was Mr. Peter Christensen (consultant) to provide clarity and insight into the new SK-1300 regulatory requirements. A review of the resource areas, grade controls, and production hole sampling and surveying procedures occurred at the plant office. The QP also inspected several mined locations in the mine to examine the consistency and thickness of the limestone interval. The mining faces were also compared to the existing geologic model and the QP met with the QC/QA lab manager to obtain lab and X-Ray Fluorescence (“XRF”) standard certifications and instrument service/care contracts. Table 2.4 is a partial list of dates the QP has visited the mine.

Table 2.4 Visits Made by QP to TLC

Date

    

Reason

1997

Performed Resource Estimate Based on Available Data

2008

Geologic Modeling from Test and Production Holes

2011

Supervise Percussion Drilling Project

2014

Oriented New Mine Manager, Assisted in Updating Stripping Program  

2015

Updated Mine Model from Recent Production Data

2016

Supervised Core Drilling Project

2017

Geologic Support Adjacent Property Acquisition

2018

Geologist for Exploration Drilling, Adjacent Property

3Property Description

3.1Property Description and Location

TLC’s operations (32°15’28.65”N, -97°33’46.41”W, Fig. 3.1, GoogleEarth, 2021) are located in Johnson County, southwest of Cleburne, Texas, 12 miles by a state highway.

Page 9 of 50


Map

Description automatically generated

3.2Mineral Rights

TLC wholly owns in fee (surface and mineral) approximately 5,200 acres with the exception of 333 +/- acres in Tract 1, Abstract 200, in which it owns the entire mineral estate only (no surface) (AcreValue website, 2021) (USLM internal report). Title includes a clause for negotiating the purchase of the surface. Information was furnished by TLC.

3.3

Significant Encumbrances or Risks to Performing Work on the Property

There are no significant issues or risks to work on the properties outside of those generally related to mining operations.

3.4Lease Agreements and Royalties

TLC does not receive any royalties as it is not the lessor for any mineral rights on its properties.

4

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

4.1Topography, Vegetation, and Physiography

The area’s topography comprises broad valleys associated with the Brazos River drainage and abundant small branch valleys extending on either side of the river. TLC’s operations are on one of the ridge and plateau areas. The elevation ranges from 990 ft. to 660 ft. There is little soil covering the rock outcrops along the sides and ends of the ridges; slightly more occurs on top.

The tree types are consistent with the vegetation typically found in this region. The flat valley floors are primarily agricultural land with hay pastures the dominant agri-businesses.

Page 10 of 50


The operation is in the physiographic province known as the Grand Prairie (Texas Almanac website, 2019). Rocky soils on limestone units and clay-rich soil developed on shale and clay and marl units characterize this province. Much of the province has thin to no soil thickness that results in a treeless terrain for the most part.

4.2Accessibility and Local Resources

Primary access to the operation is by State Highway 67 and then by State Park Road 21 or county road 1434. Cleburne has a population of approximately 30,000 and is served by a municipal airport. Commercial airline travel is through DFW International Airport, 65 miles away. Roads are well paved with broad shoulders and load weight designed for multi-axle trucks. The majority of the operation’s workers live in Johnson County and some live in the surrounding counties.

4.3Climate and Operating Season

The average rainfall for Johnson County is 38 inches of rain per year. The County averages one inch of snow per year. On average, there are 231 sunny days per year in Johnson County. The County averages 75 precipitation days per year. Precipitation is rain, snow, sleet, or hail that falls to the ground. The average temperature ranges from a high in July of 95 degrees F. to a low of 33 degrees F. in January (https://www.bestplaces.net, 2021). There are infrequent winter storms that may make operations pause for a day or so but nothing long-term. The above conditions make year-round mine operation possible with little weather-related lost time.

4.4Infrastructure

4.4.1Water

There are no issues with the water supply.

4.4.2Energy Supply

Fuel supply for TLC’s mining operations is from distributors in Johnson County.

4.4.3Personnel

The DFW Metroplex has a population of 7.6 million and the nearby town of Cleburne has 30,000 people that the mine can draw from for new or replacement employees (U.S. Census website, 2020).

4.4.4Supplies

The mine’s supply needs are not an issue since all the major manufacturers have representatives in the DFW Metroplex area. All the major airlines and air freight carriers serve DFW International Airport and the airport is considered a prime hub. Several trucking companies provide service to the operation from Johnson County and the DFW area.

5History

5.1Prior Company Ownership

The TLC mine began operations in the 1940’s. USLM (formerly known as Rangaire Corporation) purchased TLC in the 1960s, which owned 458 acres in Johnson County, Texas, at the time. In the years that followed, TLC acquired additional acres of land resulting in the current ownership of approximately 5,200 acres of land in Johnson County, and built three rotary kilns, two of which have preheaters and are still in operation, as well as other operational and office facilities. Information was provided by TLC.

5.2Exploration and Development History

Table 5.2 Historical Exploration and Development Drilling

Year

Company

Purpose

Summary

of Work

Comment

1955

TLC

Exploration

159 Core Holes

Hill & Johnson Co.

1955

TLC

Development

33 Core Holes

A.D. Holland Reserves

1958

TLC

Development

37 Core Holes

McClung Reserves

1997-Present

TLC

Production Drilling

Percussion Holes

Mine Bench QC

2009-2021

TLC

Development

Test Holes

Local Data Points

Note: A detailed discussion of all drilling and results is in Section 7.1.

Page 11 of 50


6Geologic Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

The TLC mining operation has, and is, mining the upper part of the Cretaceous age Edwards Limestone. The associated lime plant requires unique chemical properties found in the Edwards. The mining operation has been mining continuously for the past seven decades. The longevity of this mine is due to the availability of resources, low chemical variability, and reasonably consistent thickness of the limestone ore mined.

6.1Regional Geology

Shallow seas covered Texas during the early Paleozoic (Cambrian-Ordovician), the late Paleozoic (Permian) and the late Mesozoic (Cretaceous). These environments produced the extensive carbonate strata that form the limestone surface belt known as the Edwards Plateau.

The regional geology consists of northeast to southwest trends of outcropping and subcropping bands of rock groups ranging from the Permian age (oldest) to Eocene age toward the Gulf Coast. The Cretaceous age trend stretches from the border with Oklahoma down through the San Antonio area along with other outcrop trends (Fig. 6.1-1).

Page 12 of 50


Map

Description automatically generated

The Fredericksburg Group is part of this series and includes the Edwards Limestone formation. Fredericksburg Group sediments were deposited on an extensive reef bank. This environment covered nearly all of the Midwest of the United States. It was part of a seaway (broad trough) that extended northwest into western Canada (Fig. 6.1-2) (www.cretaceousatlas.org/geology/, 2021).

Page 13 of 50


Map

Description automatically generated

6.2Local and TLC Property Geology

Locally, Johnson County surface geology consists of almost flat-lying strata with the geologic age range of Cretaceous (oldest) and Quaternary (youngest). The units dip east-southeast gently toward the East Texas Basin further to the east. These units are unaffected by the significant faults that bound that basin (Collins and Baumgardner, 2011).

The structural fabric across the TLC property is straightforward, consisting of a dip with minimal range from two to four degrees to the east-southeast. In the past seven decades, no faulting has been observed on the surface or encountered by drilling or mining. The thickness of the Edwards ore interval ranges from 25 to 35 ft. and covers the entire property except were eroded. Photogeology and surface mapping have determined the outcrop is almost continuous in the area of the TLC property limits. The outcrop pattern reflects the almost flat dip with no subsurface structural relief.

Page 14 of 50


In 1955, Albert A. Lewis drilled 159 holes on the property and locally. Data from recent holes on the site, contiguous parcels, and measured sections further confirm the same limestone bed is present across the entire TLC property. The Edwards is an almost linear north-south outcrop across the property. This data, along with information from mining faces and examination of nearby Edwards outcrops, provide a high degree of geological confidence of the quality and lateral continuity of the limestone on the property.

The TLC mine geology is a mirror image of the regional and local geology. The Edwards forms low relief cliffs that are bleached by the sun to bright white. In 1997 TerraCon, Inc. mapped the local area Edwards outcrop using photogeology methods (Bowers and Vickers, 1997). In some cases, the outcrop is hidden by weathering in the Kiamichi shale just above the formation.

6.3Mineralization

Unlike other industrial minerals or metal deposits, high calcium limestones are the product of unique depositional environments only, not by subsurface alteration or enhancement. The CaCO3 content is the product of reef organisms that build their exoskeletons out of CaCO3 derived from the marine environment. The reef area has very limited or no exposure to non-carbonate materials such as clay, silica, and iron that reduce the CaCO3 content. No subsurface mineralization has occurred to create or enhance the CaCO3content in this deposit.

6.4Stratigraphy and Mineralogy

The following is a detailed discussion of the mine site stratigraphy. The Fredericksburg Group lithologies reflect changes in shoreline movement. The back-and-forth movement of the shoreline results from sea-level changes. Fig. 6.4-1 is the stratigraphic column for Western Johnson County (Brand, 1953).

Thin alternating shale and shaley limestone comprise the Walnut formation, deposited in near-shore shallow water such as a marsh or shallow tidal bay. The Comanche formation represents deeper water deposition with limestone beds alternating with widely separated shale layers, such as present in a lagoon or back reef bay environment. The Edwards formation is limestone with no land-derived shale or sand layers. The depositional conditions were clean seawater with moderate depth (sun light), resulting in massive carbonate reefs (Lozo et al., 1959).

Next, during deposition of the Kiamichi formation, the water depth deepened significantly, stopping nearly all reef production. This water depth change resulted in thick shale beds with very thin limestones and thin sandstones that typically represent deeper offshore areas and are associated with fine grain sediment input. The group’s top and bottom are marked by a depositional hiatus, or erosional surface called an unconformity. These surfaces sometimes represent aerial exposure (dry land) and sediment removal. Fig. 6.4-1 contains the Fredericksburg Group stratigraphic sequence, thickness range, and lithology (Brand, 1953). Table 6.4 shows a stratigraphic order and thickness of the mined strata on the site. A cross-section index map with a north-south cross-section from the TLC mine is shown in Fig. 6.4-2.

Page 15 of 50


Diagram

Description automatically generated

Table 6.4 TLC Property Stratigraphy

Stratigraphic

Unit

    

Thickness Approximate

Range

    

Primary Lithology

Duck Creek

20 ft. to 35 ft.

Shale, Minor Limestone, Sandstone

Kiamichi Shale

35 ft. to 50 ft.

Shale, Very Thin Limestone, Sandstone

Edwards LST

25 ft. to 35 ft.

Clean Limestone, Abundant Reef Fossils

Comanche LST

30 ft. to 40 ft.

Clayey, Sandy Limestone

Page 16 of 50


Timeline

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Page 17 of 50


7Exploration

The sample database used for the TLC geologic model is composed of multiple sources of data types. These sources include core and percussion drilling, measured sections with outcrop or highwall sampling, and photogeology mapping the Edwards limestone outcrop beyond the operation. Because of the TLC’s significant land position, little exploration drilling has been necessary for the last 60 years. A considerable amount of the recent drilling has been near the mine and on TLC property.

7.1Drilling Programs

A summary of all drilling projects in the local vicinity and on TLC property is in Table 7.1-1. These projects include exploration, development, and production drilling by diamond and percussion bit methods.

Table 7.1-1 All TLC Drilling Projects

Year

    

Company

    

Purpose

    

Summary of Work

    

Comment

1955

TLC

Exploration

189 Core Holes

Regional Area

1955

TLC

Exploration

7 Core Holes

Resource Purchase

1958

TLC

Development

123 Core Holes

Resource Purchase

1997-Present

TLC

Production Drilling

Percussion Holes

Mine Bench QC

2009-2021

TLC

Development

Test Holes

Near Pit Data Points

2016

3D Drilling Inc.

Development

12 Core Holes

Overburden and Ore Data

2018

Rubicon Drilling

Acquisition

12 Core Holes

Exploration

Fig 7.1-1 is a map of all core hole drilling programs utilized in the geologic model with labeled resource areas. A list of the hole database containing the hole name, XY coordinates, can be found in Appendix A.

Map

Description automatically generated

Before 1955, TLC leased a mining property in Johnson County. To secure ownership of mining properties and extend resources, TLC sponsored an extensive exploration and development drilling program conducted by Albert A. Lewis P.E./Geologist in 1955 and 1958. These programs core drilled in southwestern Johnson County. The exploration area centered around the current mining area (Wilbanks Tract, Lewis, 1955). The program consisted of 189 core holes and provided detailed information when the Edwards was present. The program results led to the purchase of the first mining properties at the TLC’s present-day location.

The average CaCO3 percentage for entire 189-hole project was 97.9%. Table 7.1-2 lists the drilling results for properties located at the current mine site. The consistent CaCO3 quality and thickness results from this detailed drilling was evidence that drill hole spacing was not a limiting factor in confirming continuity and consistency of the Edwards limestone. Summary tables for each parcel are in the internal reports. After review and verification, it was evident that the quality limit resulted in CaCO3 percentages above 96.0% for the majority of the properties drilled.

Page 18 of 50


Table 7.1-2 Summary of 1955 and 1958 TLC Mine Site Drilling*

Property

Number of Holes

Average LST

Thickness (Ft.)

Average CaCO3

Percentage (%)

1

12

26

98.2

2

13

19

96.9

3

3

22

97.9

4

36

27

98.8

5

7

30

97.6

6

6

29

98.7

7

5

27

98.6

8

6

28

97.1

9

4

27

98.4

10

33

28

97.6

11

5

23

97.2

Total

130

26

97.9

Note: *From Lewis, 1955 and 1958 internal drilling reports.

The core sampling and logging methods employed in the 1955 and 1958 drilling are comparable to modern-day techniques. Lewis reported the county surveyor surveyed the hole locations that produced maps for the reports’ resource calculations. The reports do not contain the hole location coordinates. The reports have hole location maps for the leased and acquired tracts and provided property location maps for all the drilled properties.

During drilling, cuttings and core were collected. In the locations where the overburden was absent, cuttings were collected until enough hole was drilled to set up the core barrel assembly. An air compressor was used to clean the holes and retrieve the cuttings while drilling. A cone rock bit was used to drill the cuttings which produced coarse (-0.5 inch) cuttings. Samples were collected in the box from a pipe that ran to the collar flange over the hole. A sample was taken and bagged and the hole was blown clean every two ft. After five ft., the composited sample in a bag was labeled internally and externally. The collection box was then cleaned and the hole blown clean before the next composite. Hole locations with nearly ten ft. or more of overburden core drilling were started as soon as solid bedrock was drilled. The cuttings and core were logged at the hole site. The data logged were core recovered, stratigraphy, lithology, and stratigraphic top and bottom.

The reports provided detailed drill logs and laboratory result sheets. Holes, where mapped locations are provided, are material to developing the geologic model. The chemical analysis results are very comparable to analysis from holes recently drilled. These drilling reports establish that the Edwards limestone has consistent CaCO3 quality above 96.0% around the current TLC operation site.

In 2016, additional development core drilling was done to support the mine advancement (Fig. 7.1-1). A twelve-hole program was approved and followed the core logging and sampling USLM protocols. The holes were located by GPS unit and logged at the location. The TLC QC/QA lab conducted the XRF analysis. The results of this drilling and analysis are very comparable to the results from the other core projects. A summary of these results is presented in Table 7.1-3.

Table 7.1-3 Summary of 2016 Development Drilling

A

Property

    

Number of Holes

    

Average LST

Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3

Percentage (%)

TLC North and West

12

27

Above 96.0

Note: From 2016 SYB Group Drilling Report.

The chemical results were consistent with the core analyzed in the 1955 drilling programs.

The most recent exploration project occurred on land now owned by TLC. The land adjoins the mine property east of State Park Road 21. The drilling program consisted of eight core holes on the sale tract and four were drilled on adjacent TLC property to the west. The Edwards Limestone quality and minable thickness were confirmed on both parcels and the sale tract was purchased. Table 7.1-4 contains a summary of the drilling results. The holes were surveyed by a GPS unit and logged at the location according to the core logging protocols USLM had established. The TLC QC/QA lab conducted the XRF analysis.

Page 19 of 50


Table 7.1-4 Summary of 2018 Exploration Drilling

Property

    

Number of Holes

    

Average LST

Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3

Percentage (%)

TLC East

12

24

Above 96.0

Note: From 2018 SYB Group Drilling Report.

The CaCO3 percentage results were consistent with the drilling results in the active mine areas. Depths of the east drilling Edwards tops and bottoms compare well with the 2016 TLC drilling tops and bottoms, confirming a nearly flat-lying formation with a low dip range from two to four degrees to the east-southeast. The protocols for the project are presented below in this section.

TLC has for many years conducted development drilling and sampling on the properties being actively mined. This drilling has consisted of percussion (test holes) and coring to provide geology/lithology, quality control, and data to confirm or update the mine geologic model.

The current protocols for drilling, logging, and sampling cores have been developed over several years as equipment and analyses have changed. Contract geologists selected all core drilling locations with the approval of sites and drilling budget by USLM/TLC management. Core drilling was conducted directly under the supervision of contract geologists. All core was logged by SYB Group or an approved USLM contract geologist using a protocol modified from the Shell Sample Examination Manual (Swanson, R.G, 1981) that was modified by SYB Group and approved by USLM.

Immediately upon retrieval, the core was placed on a V-shaped trough. All core pieces were fitted together and labeled with a permanent marker in one-foot intervals. Next, characteristics related to the suitability of the limestone for the TLC plant processing and geology are recorded. These items are stratigraphy, key marker lenses/layers, lithology characteristics, visual identification of ore top and bottom, and structural disturbance. The core from each drill hole was placed into cardboard boxes in two-foot intervals totaling 10 ft. at the drill site. The boxes were labeled with a box number, company information, hole number, core runs, and depths marked on each box. The boxes were then delivered to the TLC core storage warehouse. The contract geologists were responsible for examining the core and compiling a detailed interval list for XRF analysis. This list was later entered into Excel to build an analysis database. The intervals were two ft. long and included intervals six to ten ft. above and below the lithologically identified ore zone. This excess is so the top and bottom of the ore could be chemically defined.

Once the cores were at the core storage area, the core intervals were diamond sawed into two-thirds to one-third splits. The interval’s one-third split was then bagged in a plastic bag and labeled with the depth interval to be analyzed. The bagged intervals are kept in plastic labeled buckets or boxes in separate groups by the hole and then submitted to the TLC QC/QA lab for XRF analysis. Any portions of samples not destroyed during the testing process are stored at TLC’s core storage facility.

The percussion development or test hole drilling is ongoing. A hole is drilled as soon as new land is cleared, stripped, or new access to an area right above the top of the Edwards is available. Locations are selected to provide data points providing closer spacing to the core locations. Mine drilling crews performed test hole logging primarily but contract geologists logged the holes when needed. This program is utilized to confirm (pit specific) the mine geologic model and verify the CaCO3 content between core holes. These holes were sampled by catching drill cuttings in a container next to the hole or from the cyclone dust collector, depending on the drill utilized while drilling the desired interval of five or two ft. The hole is then swept by cycling the drill string up and down while blowing the hole clean. The upper interval above is drilled and sampled if the hole location is not directly on top of the ore zone. This non-ore interval thickness is minimized so that contamination from above is not a concern. A 20-mesh steel screen is used to separate dust and fine particles to obtain the largest chip sizes for visual examination and XRF analysis.

Production holes are selected from the blast hole patterns and are part of a weekly quality control program that existed for most of the mine’s life. These holes provide detailed bench-specific chemical quality and ore zone thickness data. The production hole results were not included in the TRS resource estimate because of the missing location information and high spatial density of data (model biases).

Holes were surveyed using GPS (WAAS and GLONASS capable) units. After surveying by drone (Firmatek Inc.), some locations are checked to be verified. When adjustment was needed in the horizontal plane, it was usually under 10 ft.

The lithology, chemical analysis, and ore interval for all database holes were plotted as logs. A recent core log is shown below in Fig. 7.1-2. These logs were used to correlate stratigraphy, lithology, and ore zone intercepts. Also, they form a visual catalog for the hole data. Sources for this section were TLC personnel and historical reports.

Page 20 of 50


Graphic

Page 21 of 50


7.2Surface Mapping and Sampling

Outcrop section sampling and measuring had occurred when access for a drill was problematic or offsite. These sampling programs were conducted at TLC in 1998, 2015, 2017, and 2020 to locate and describe sample outcrops and extend the geologic database. A representative section was measured at each location, samples were collected, and the lithology was described. These sampling sites were used to provide chemical quality and surface mapping of the limestone units in and beyond the boundary of the active mining operation. The outcrop or highwall sampled section was surveyed by GPS and marked on aerial photos. Representative hand samples were obtained from each section, where access would allow, by a hammer. The piece was prepped, so only fresh material was present. The sample and a plastic zip bag were labeled with a permanent marker with the sample number. Samples were submitted to TLC QC/QA lab for prep and XRF analysis. A profile was made for each section using USGS LIDAR scanned topography, and outcrop samples were plotted with CaCO3 percent results on the profile.

The N. West section was measured to confirm the presence of the Edwards and validate three holes drilled there because specific locations could not be established. Table 7.2 summarizes outcrop measured sections and the average CaCO3 percentage for the section. Fig. 7.2-1 is an example of a measured section profile (N. West) with outcrop sample locations marked.

Table 7.2 Summary of Measured Section Sampling

Property

    

Number of

samples

    

Estimated LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

TLC East

4

23

96.6

West

3

30

97.3

N. West

3

30*

98.3

North

4

30

98.4

Note: * Drilling was stopped in the ore interval.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

The drilling, surface sampling, and mapping results have provided the following conclusions. Locally, the Edwards outcrop is almost continuously visible across the TLC area. Recent sampling confirmed the mapping by photogeology by TerraCon, Inc. in 1997. This mapping confirmed, and drilling has substantiated, the presence of the limestone throughout the TLC property. Sources for this section were consultants and TLC.

Page 22 of 50


7.3Hydrogeology Information

No hydrogeological studies have been conducted at the TLC property and the State of Texas does not require TLC to do so. Because the floor of the TLC mine is above the groundwater table.

7.4Geotechnical Information

The state of Texas does not require geotechnical studies to be performed at mines.

8Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

8.1Sample Preparation and XRF Analysis

The TLC plant produces many products which are under strict quality parameters for chemical and physical quality. The TLC QC/QA lab was established many years ago and has been upgraded as required to meet the increasing demands of the customer base. In addition, customer quality control labs test TLC product shipments frequently.

XRF is one of the primary methods for determining the chemical content of limestone. The TLC QC/QA lab has been responsible for conducting XRF analysis on plant products and all limestone samples from stockpiles, belt feed samples, drilling, to hand samples collected for outcrop conformation. The five significant oxides are analyzed. CaO is most important because of the plant’s raw limestone requirement above 96.0% CaCO3.

XRF sample preparation, whether core or cuttings, is crushed the entire sample to -10 mesh. The sample is then separated and reduced by a ruffle to 250 grams, drying and pulverizing a representative split to -150 mesh. The samples are analyzed for these oxides CaO, MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2, following USLM’s XRF analytical method for limestone analysis. The technique involves pressing the powder into a pellet using a wax binder to hold the shape. The sample trays are loaded into the instrument with samples, a copper standard, and a certified control standard. The analytical procedure and protocol information was provided by TLC QC/QA personnel and other information for this section was provided by TLC personnel.

8.2 Quality Control/Quality Assurance

The unknown samples are analyzed twice in a run to provide data to confirm repeatability. All sample preparation equipment is cleaned after preparing each sample and before the subsequent preparation. The instrument is cleaned and calibrated each year by the manufacturer and is under a service contract. Whenever the device becomes dirty and registers out of calibration or out of specification for the standards, the manufacturer comes out to clean, recalibrate, and repair if necessary. The oxide results of each sample are totaled to determine if the data is within an acceptable error range around 100%. The sample analysis is rerun if the total oxide percentage exceeds acceptable error limits. Sample preparation and a newly prepped sample correct the problem in many cases. The lab has a set of certified limestone standards to cover the content range of the major oxides that can occur in limestones. The appropriate standard is run concurrently with the unknown samples. The standard results are compared run to run to ensure the instrument operates correctly.

USLM has a total of four QC/QA labs among its wholly-owned subsidiaries. These labs can perform many of the same analyses, specifically XRF. At any time one lab goes down or needs verification of analytical (XRF) results, samples can be sent to another lab for continuing analysis of the sample or cross verification.

The TLC QC/QA lab is certified by:

·

Highway Departments in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, and Colorado;

·

The Food and Drug Administration;

·

Underwriters Laboratory; and

·

Member of Sedex Global.

The lab follows procedures and protocols set forth by:

·

ASTM Methods: C-25, 50. 51, 110, 977;

·

AASHTO Methods: M216-05, 219; and

·

USLM protocols for testing whole-rock samples.

Page 23 of 50


The lab utilizes certified limestone samples to verify the accuracy and calibration of its instrumentation. These are:

·

Euronorm MRC 701-1;

·

China National Analysis Center:

-NC DC 60107a;
-NCS DC 14147a;
-NCS DC 70307; and
-NCS DC 70304.

The security for limestone geological samples is not required as compared to the procedures needed for precious metals (gold, silver, etc.). Core or other samples are, immediately after drilling, taken to the core storage area by the contract geologist, member of the drill crew, or the collector of limestone samples. They are logged in and then processed by TLC QC/QA lab personnel. The change of possession is limited to two or three people that can be identified and held accountable for the whereabouts of the samples before delivery to the lab. This information was provided by TLC QC/QA lab personnel.

8.3 Opinion of the Qualified Person on Adequacy of Sample Preparation

The QP noted the adherence to preparation and analytical procedure protocols by the TLC QC/QA lab personnel. The analysis of geologic samples is conducted with the same care as the TLC QC/QA testing for the products produced by the plant. The opinion is that the analytical program and lab provide reasonably accurate data for determining resource estimates.

9 Data Verification

9.1 Source Material

The QP worked with onsite TLC personnel to obtain databases and raw data. There was an ongoing interface with TLC personnel while reviewing and verifying the data needed to model the resources. For this TRS, the hard copy data was compared with the digital database for correctness and thoroughness. The data from the old drilling programs were validated as reasonably as possible by comparing lithology and depths from nearby recent holes. Recent hole ore intercepts were cross-checked with the appropriate mine surveys to verify and confirm surveyed collar data.

The 1955 hole maps with the plotted surveyed locations were georeferenced using Global MapperTM and then digitally overlain on age appropriate USGS Quad Geotiff raster maps to verify location and, when possible, topography (USGS MapView, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer).

When possible, the original hole analyses were re-composited using a cutoff above 96.0% CaCO3 cutoff. Then CaCO3 averages were compared to recent holes. The selected core from the recent drilling was compared to drill site core logs to confirm logging was suitable for the intercept data needs. The QP met with the QC/QA lab manager to validate that the QC/QA protocol was followed for the geologic samples and the instrument’s status records. The sources for this data are the TLC QC/QA lab, contract geologists, and Firmatek Surveying.

A truck LIDAR or drone photogrammetry elevation survey provides spatial control for TLC mining. These surveys are conducted quarterly and year-end. They are accurate to within one foot when coupled to a Trimble ground station. (Firmatek, 2020). All surface mapping and sample locations were surveyed by hand-held GPS and adjusted where necessary when compared with federal government or private LIDAR data sources. Locations for select accessible sites were survey-checked with GPS for validation.

9.2 Opinion of Qualified Persons on Data Adequacy

After contacting TLC personnel and subcontractors, reviewing the material, and performing verification processes, the QP is satisfied the drill hole database and chemical analysis data are reasonably valid. The QP’s opinion is that the data has been analyzed and collected appropriately and reasonably and that the data was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

10Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

The limestone mined at the TLC property is sedimentary without alteration due to metamorphic or igneous geologic processes. The uniqueness and suitability of the raw stone for making the plant’s products are based on the percent of CaCO3 content in the limestone. There is no metal content in the ore and no need to perform metallurgical testing. Shot limestone from the mine has been supplied to the plant’s primary crusher for many years. The mine does not operate crushing and screening processes, so testing is unnecessary. TLC personnel furnished the preceding information.

Page 24 of 50


11Mineral Resource Estimates

11.1Definitions

A mineral resource is an estimate of mineralization, considering relevant factors such as cutoff grade, likely mining dimensions, location, or continuity, that, with the assumed and justifiable technical and economic conditions, is likely to, in whole or in part, become economically extractable. Mineral resources are categorized based on the level of confidence in the geologic evidence. According to 17 CFR § 229.1301 (2021), the following definitions of mineral resource categories are included for reference.

An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. An inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for the evaluation of economic viability. An inferred mineral resource, therefore, may not be converted to a mineral reserve.

An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. An indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource and may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve. As used in this subpart, the term adequate geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to establish geological and grade or quality continuity with reasonable certainty.

A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. As used in this subpart, the term conclusive geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to test and confirm geological and grade or quality continuity.

11.2Key Assumptions, Parameters, and Methods

11.2.1Resource Classification Criteria

Geologic and analytical data from regional and local drilling along with surface sampling/mapping have proven that the Edwards limestone has a consistent CaCO3 content above 96.0% and a small range of thickness (25 ft. to 35 ft.) across many square miles of outcrop area in Johnson County. These analytical results cover from 1955 to 2021 and are sufficient to establish reasonable certainty of geological presence, grade, and quality continuity on the property.

Practically any outcrop of the Edwards limestone on the TLC property will supply limestone with a CaCO3 above 96.0%. The many years that the TLC mine has operated historically proves the extraction of the deposit is economical. The geologic confidence is high with the abundance of verified sampling, classifying these resources in the measured category is appropriate.

11.2.2Market Price

A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the USGS each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.” Their database is comprised of sources from the entire United States. The study considers such material issues as regional price differences, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. For 2020, USGS reported an average value price crushed limestone per metric ton of $12.19, which converts to $11.05 per short ton for crushed limestone. TLC mine’s only product is shot limestone and is the sole supplier to the TLC plant.

11.2.3Fixed CutOff Grade

The TLC mine supplies shot limestone to the plant’s primary crusher and is further processed by the Texas Lime Company plant for products to sell to end-user markets. The plant must be provided with a limestone source above an average CaCO3 threshold for customer needs. No matter the product, the raw limestone must exceed a minimum average content above 96.0% CaCO3. This percentage is considered a fixed cutoff grade because the percentage does not vary for the current plant products. The average percent of CaCO3 can be higher but not lower to meet the quality requirement of the plant. Mining stone with a significantly higher average CaCO3 percentage results in the deposit being high-graded which shortens the mine’s life. Lowering the grade is unacceptable for the plant.

A primary XRF analysis quality control check is to total all the oxide percentages to determine how close the analysis total is to 100%. CaO is the primary oxide of the sample analyzed and the remainder is comprised of MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2 (refer to Section 8).

Since the mine operates on a fixed cutoff grade, there are no specific economic criteria for changing the cutoff grade. Any cost factors that increase the mining cost of limestone at this cutoff grade would be offset by appropriate downstream price increases in the TLC plant’s products. The fixed cutoff grade determines the ore body thickness, an economic limit because of high stripping ratios.

Page 25 of 50


11.2.4Summary of Parameters

Modifying factors are the fixed cutoff grade, the final pit shell area, and property line offset. Key assumptions and parameters applied to estimate mineral resources are in Table 11.2.4

Table 11.2.4 Resource Parameter Assumptions

Modifying Factor

    

Parameter

Fixed Grade Cutoff

Above 96.0% CaCO3

Estimated Final Pit Shell

Pit Shell Outline

Property Offset

20 ft.

Mineability

Reasonably Expected to be Feasible to Mine

11.3Resource Model

The beginning of the database came from the exploration programs in 1955 and 1958 and continued with the development test completed by TLC to continue to define the resource. This same database was updated in 2016 when development drilling occurred west of the mine. The QP reviewed the existing database, added new sample data, and verified to prepare for the TRS resource estimates. Table 11.3 lists the number of holes in the database and the data type.

Once the database had been updated a final data entry check was performed. Any sample data without a verifiable location was deleted or excluded. All production hole data was excluded because a significant number of the holes had no location data. Based on the QP’s professional judgment, holes in that category were removed rather than selectively including some holes.

The mine is surveyed by Firmatek drone photogrammetry quarterly. The survey is accurate to one foot when coupled with a Trimble R8 GPS base station (Firmatek, 2020). The new survey is edited into the old topography using Global MapperTM software. The current scan dated October 9, 2021, was used for the TRS resource estimate. The existing coordinate system was State Plane NAD 83 ft. and was not changed.

The ore body consists of a single limestone bed defined by top and bottom surfaces. The top and the bottom ore intercepts were created from total hole ore composites. The average CaCO3 percentage is composited above 96.0% in each hole. If any hole’s composite were below 96.0%, that area would be excluded from the resource estimate. This situation did not occur. Next, the hole intercepts and data points from the surface sections were utilized to produce top and bottom three-dimensional structural surfaces or contour maps based on the fixed cutoff grade composites.

The method chosen to model the deposit structure was gridding using SURFERTM software and Kriging was selected from twelve other algorithms. The selection process involved four steps:

·

Rough hand contour data for trend and structure estimate;

·

Run gridding script with basic inputs to compare gridding methods and produce a rough map;

·

Select grid method/s then refine with specific inputs; and

·

Run a residual test to see which grid method closely matches the hole intercepts.

These two surfaces were then truncated against the new topography to account for erosional effects. This truncation is done because the ore bed position does not occupy the floor of the valleys. There are several ft. of non-ore below the bottom of the ore. Fig 11.3 is a map of ore thickness (isopach). Some of the older mined areas where backfilled are noted.

Next, ore isopach, overburden isopach, and overburden stripping ratio maps were constructed. These maps were compared to a block model created in Surpac TM using the two ore boundary surfaces. The surfaces were also used to determine conformity and validate the block model. The block model was then utilized to design pits for mine planning and determine mine resource and reserve estimates. Those pit designs furnished the pit shell for defining the outer boundary for resource estimation. The methods employed using Surpac are discussed below.

The resources were estimated using Geovia Surpac software. Contours of the top and bottom of the ore were imported into Surpac in AutoCAD format exported from SURFER. Surpac DTM surfaces were created using these contours. The same drone survey performed on October 9, 2021 was imported into Surpac. Block models were developed for the resource areas on the property (refer to Fig. 11-3). The blocks were 20 ft. northing by 20 ft. easting and 2 ft. thick. The blocks were coded above or below the topography, above the ore bottom surface, and below the top ore surface. The blocks were coded within the resource boundaries for each area. Mine pits were designed using a 70-degree slope in limestone and a 45-degree slope in the overburden. The crests of the pits were offset 20 ft. from any external property boundaries.

Page 26 of 50


Graphic

Table 11.3 Summary of Drill Hole Database for the Model

Data Type

    

Number of Records

Total Holes

142

Collar

139

Lithology

142

Chemical Analyses

142

Hole Composites

142

Holes Not on TLC Property

3*

*Note: Replaced by measured section, chemistry valid.

11.4Mineral Resources

11.4.1Estimate of Mineral Resources

The estimate of measured and indicated mineral in-place limestone resources for the TLC operation effective December 31, 2021, estimated from applying the resource parameters to the geologic model are in Table 11.4.1. There are no indicated nor inferred mineral resources.

Page 27 of 50


Table 11.4.1 Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

3

Resource Category

    

In Place

(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade

(% X)

    

Processing

Recovery

(%)3

Measured Mineral Resources

116,533,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

0

0

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

116,533,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place

11.4.2Geologic Confidence and Uncertainty

The most uncertainty in the geologic data was associated with production hole locations. As discussed in Section 11.3, excluding that data removed the issue. The older chemical analysis consistently reports higher CaCO3 results than recent data (Lewis, 1955). The older holes were composited at a higher cutoff than the current holes. The company mined through the older areas with no reported quality problems. The Edwards is a tabular, massively bedded limestone. For many decades, the TLC mining operation has produced crushed limestone meeting or surpassing the quality limits required by the plant. The continuity and quality consistency has been documented by abundant widespread local sampling and drilling results on the property. Because of those results, there is high confidence in the definition of the ore zone limits and that the quality is constantly above the CaCO3 cutoff.

11.5 Opinion of the Qualified Person

There are no significant factors onsite that will impact the extraction of this ore body. Most directly involve the TLC plant and not the mine. After reviewing the resource model, the QP is confident that sampling the property at any Edwards outcrop in the area would provide a minable section provided erosion has not removed significant limestone thickness. TLC will continue to economically extract limestone above the quality cutoff for the foreseeable future.

The QP’s opinion is that the following technical and economic factors could influence the economic extraction of the resource but the TLC plant insulates most of them from the mine. If lime production becomes economically unfeasible, the TLC plant would no longer require limestone from the TLC mine for the production of lime.

·

Regional supply and demand – Due to the shipping cost of lime, sales are limited to a regional footprint at the plant. The plant is insulated from global import and export market changes as sales are domestic and regional.

·

Fuel cost – mining equipment are major diesel consumers at the TLC mine. As diesel prices rise, the price per ton of production also rises and will need to be offset by increases in the plant’s product prices.

·

Skilled labor – This site is located near the DFW Metroplex, which should provide a sufficient source of skilled labor.

·Environmental Matters:

Federal or State regulations/legislation regarding greenhouse gas emission
Air and water quality standards

12

Mineral Reserve Estimates

Mineral resources were converted to reserves using a 95% recovery factor. The ore that was not recovered was added to the non-carbonate material volume. The property boundary offsets and pit slopes were included in the resource estimate. The limestone is mined on a bench and breaks cleanly from the overburden. The limestone below the targeted pit floor has slightly lower quality and when encountered is blended with higher portions of the ore body without having a significant impact on quality. Dilution volume is minimal and was not estimated.

As discussed in Section 11.2.3, the average stripping ratio for the reserves is 1.0 tons of stripping per ton of limestone. The highest annual stripping ratio in the life of mine plan is 1.8:1.

12.1Definitions

Mineral reserve is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted (Dorsey, 2019).

Page 28 of 50


Probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.  For a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person’s confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions (Dorsey, 2019).

Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource.  For a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person has a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality. Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource and can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource (Dorsey, 2019).

12.2Price

A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the United States Geological Survey each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021”. Their database comprises sources from the entire United States and considers such material issues as regional price difference, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. As stated in Section 11.2.2, USGS reports average value price for crushed limestone of $12.19 per metric ton, which converts to $11.05 per short ton. The TLC mine is the sole supplier of crushed limestone to the TLC plant.

12.3Costs

Annual maintenance of operations capital costs were estimated using prior-year capital expenditures and TLC’s 2022 capital budget. Limestone mining costs for TLC were estimated using historical data and its 2022 budget. Contract limestone mining costs for the TLC East area were calculated using a vendor quote. Stripping costs were estimated using an existing stripping contract cost.

12.4 Reserve Estimates

The estimate of proven and probable limestone reserves for the TLC operation effective December 31, 2021, estimated from applying the reserve parameters to the geologic model are in Table 12.4.

Table 12.4 Texas Lime Company – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable

(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade

(% X)

    

Mining Recovery

(%)

Probable Reserves

47,532,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0

Proven Reserves

63,174,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0

Total Probable and Proven

110,706,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021

2 Shot limestone delivered to primary crusher.

12.5 Opinion of the Qualified Person

TLC has successfully mined this resource for many years using the same methods that are projected into the future. Significant increases in the cost of mining coupled with large decreases in the selling price of limestone would be required to make mining uneconomic. Historically, TLC has been able to increase sales prices in line with cost increases. The limestone and the overburden are consistent across the reserves and allow for stable operating requirements from year to year.

13Mining Methods

13.1Geotechnical and Hydrologic Considerations

The State of Texas currently does not require geotechnical or hydrology modeling in mining operations. Since the operation is a open pit mine, no geotechnical or hydrological studies or models were needed.

The only geotechnical aspect of the mining investigated is modifying the blasting procedure to control the sizing of the shot limestone. The only investigation into hydrologic conditions in the mine was to confirm drainage patterns and formation dip in the floor so that rainwater could be controlled at the mining face. The floor of the mine is above the water table of the area.

Page 29 of 50


13.2Mine Operating Parameters

The TLC mine currently averages an annual production rate of approximately 1,400,000 tons per year. The current expected mine life at the average rate stated is in excess of 75 years.

Topsoil and vegetation are pushed aside utilizing conventional mining equipment. Some overburden is drilled using a five inch bit. The spacing is determined by using best mining practices. The mining contractor removes the shot overburden using conventional mining equipment. The overburden is backfilled into a nearby pit after the limestone has been extracted. The average stripping ratio for the life of mine is 1.0, with the highest stripping ratio of 1.8 and the lowest of zero. The standard deviation of the annual stripping ratio over the life of the mine is 0.5. This low standard deviation shows that the stripping requirements are relatively uniform from year to year.

The lowest strata of overburden is a shale layer that breaks away cleanly from the limestone ore body. The limestone ore body is drilled with a five-inch bit. The burden and spacing for the drill hole pattern are determined by using best mining practices. The limestone ore body mining thickness typically ranges from 25 ft. to 35 ft. Blastholes are sampled as required to confirm CaCO3 content and the desired mining thickness. The limestone is mined with conventional mining equipment. The mining recovery is estimated to be 95%.

13.3Mining Plan

Mining operations at the TLC property are straightforward and relatively simple. The overburden material is removed by contract stripping annually. This removal is not generally considered a capitalized activity and is expensed as incurred. It is simply the most efficient and economical way to handle the overburden. Mining operations are a repeated cycle of drilling and blasting the limestone benches followed by loading and haulage. TLC performs the drilling and a contractor carries out the blasting operations. The mine completes the load and haul operations using conventional mining equipment with a small ancillary equipment fleet, including a water truck, grader, and tracked dozer. Limestone is hauled to the primary crusher.  

13.4Mine Plant, Equipment, and Personnel

The mining equipment fleet consists of three haul trucks, two loaders and a drill. Ancillary mobile equipment includes a water truck, a grader, an excavator, a dozer, and light vehicles. Contractors have additional equipment for blasting and overburden removal operations. Equipment necessary for mining operations includes three water pumps. The TLC mine operates 5 to 6 days per week depending on demand from the plant and maintenance requirements. Operating personnel, excluding contract operations, consist of nine operators and two maintenance personnel, with a mine manager supervising the operations. The TLC plant personnel and equipment are not discussed because the mining operations end at the plant’s primary crusher. Fig.13.4 shows the TLC estimated final pit boundaries.

Page 30 of 50


Graphic

14Processing and Recovery Methods

14.1Process Plant and Description

This section does not apply to the report because the TLC mine delivers shot limestone to the TLC primary crusher, where the plant processes the limestone into various products. Crusher Flow Sheet was not included in this TRS because it only covers mined limestone delivered to the TLC plant’s primary crusher.

14.2Plant Throughput and Design

This section does not apply to the report because the TLC mine is the sole limestone supplier to the TLC plant’s primary crusher.

14.3 Plant Operational Requirements

This section does not apply to the report because the TLC mine is the sole limestone supplier to the TLC plant’s primary crusher.

14.4Application of Novel or Unproven Technology

Mining operations at the site follow standard open pit methods. There has not been any application of novel or unproven technologies or techniques.

Page 31 of 50


15Infrastructure

The TLC property is accessible by a paved state highway and the TLC mine operation by gravel roads and haul roads is maintained by the mine personnel. The mine site is a land-locked location with no rail or port facilities access. The mine has an office and maintenance shop near the primary crusher. Three-phase electric power is provided to the site via above-ground utility lines. Water is available, including dust control water for the mine, from a TLC-owned well on the property and potable water from the county system. Shot limestone haul truck load-out to the primary crusher is on the mine property. Crushed limestone stockpiles are within the plant area. Shot limestone stockpiles and overburden piles are located in appropriate locations in the mine area. A natural gas system pipeline crosses the property along the western side of the active mining area (Fig.15.1). Several natural gas well pads and production lines, not owned by TLC, are on the property. These locations were preapproved by USLM management and situated to minimize hindrance to the mining process (in valleys or mined-out areas). The associated wells and surface equipment are readily identified and fenced according to the regulations established by the Railroad Commission of Texas. Fig. 15.1 shows an aerial photo of the mine area and significant infrastructure features.

Map

Description automatically generated

16Market Studies

16.1 Market Outlook and Forecast

Demand for limestone produced at the TLC mine is exclusively for TLC’s lime and limestone production facilities next to the mine which has been in existence for over 70 years and primarily serves the DFW market area.

Demand for limestone for the TLC operations has averaged approximately 1,400,000 tons per year over the previous five years. Primary demand for lime and limestone products from TLC’s operations is from stable markets including the construction industry, paper and glass manufacturers, municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities, roof shingle manufacturers, poultry and cattle feed producers, and oil and gas services industries. Current market conditions for these customers should result in continued steady demand for lime and limestone products in TLC’s market areas for the foreseeable future.

16.2 Material Contracts

The TLC mine is the sole provider of limestone to TLC’s lime and limestone production facilities. There are no material contracts with outside purchasers.

Page 32 of 50


17

Environmental Studies, Permitting and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

17.1 Environmental Studies and Permitting Requirements

The State of Texas has abundant laws and regulations pertaining to surface mining and reclamation for petroleum and coal resources; however, there are little to no regulations relating to other mineral resources, including limestone. Nearly all lands in Texas are privately owned and rarely state or federally owned. A private landowner is free to develop and use non-petroleum resources on his land. Other than environmental regulations, the State of Texas does not require a mining/reclamation permit to operate a limestone mine on private land. USLM furnished the environmental permit information provided in Table 17.1 consisting of the permits associated with the mine.

Table 17.1 Mining and Environmental Permits

Permit Number

Issue Date

    

Issuer

    

Purpose

    

Expiration Date

    

Status

20519 January 11, 2016

TCEQ

Air Quality

January 11, 2026

In Place, Active

TX05M322 January 11, 2016

TCEQ

Storm Water

January 11, 2026

In Place, Active

The above-referenced air permit covers the mine’s shot limestone load-out area at the plant’s primary crusher and the rest of the non-mining operational areas. The stormwater permit covers weather-related discharge throughout the operations, including the mine areas.

17.2 Overburden, Site Monitoring, and Water Management

Non-Production mine material consists of overburden with a minor amount of unusable limestone from the blasting process. Considerable natural erosion has occurred in areas at the mine site. Large areas exist where there is little to no overburden over the ore zone. When mining progresses into areas with overburden, it is utilized to backfill the active pits to the extent the material is available.

The only water used in the mining operation is for dust control. Stormwater is allowed to run off by way of pre-existing natural erosion pathways. In some areas, stormwater must be pumped to a natural drainage from a mine sump used to control standing water at the mining face. The TLC mine area is situated above the natural water table. There are no natural artesian springs or flowing water outlet points associated with mining areas. Therefore, there is no requirement or need for groundwater monitoring. There are no existing environmental site monitors related to the mine.

17.3 Post-Mining Land Use and Reclamation

The State of Texas has no standard reclamation regulations for mine closure at this time. Currently, the mining operations use the stripped overburden to backfill the active pit as the volume allows. The estimated life of the mine is in excess of 75 years.

17.4 Local or Community Engagement and Agreements

The operation has developed relationships over the years with various neighboring communities, including the adjacent Cleburne State Park.

17.5 Opinion of the Qualified Person

Texas is a heavily regulated State of environmental laws and regulations and has numerous permits that require ongoing compliance and oversight from the State agency. TLC and USLM personnel are well trained and stay up to date on all environmental regulations. All permits require constant reporting and oversight from the State environmental agency. In the QP’s opinion, there are no current or outstanding issues in environmental governance.

18Capital and Operating Costs

The TLC mine has been a stable producer of limestone using the current equipment fleet and operating parameters for many years. This operating history and its 2022 budget were used to estimate the unit costs for limestone mining, overburden stripping, and annual sustaining capital expenditures. As the mine plan proceeds further from the existing crushing facility, haulage distance increases. This will require an increase in the haul truck fleet size in some years. Capital and operating costs were adjusted for this increased haulage requirement as shown in Appendix B. The fleet size is three trucks until 2027. From 2027 to 2036, from 2045 to 2052, and from 2100 to 2102 the fleet size is four trucks. From 2037 to 2044 and from 2053 to 2064 the fleet size is five trucks. From 2065 to 2067 the fleet size is six trucks. Tables 18.1 and 18.2 set for estimated capital costs and operating costs, respectively, used to estimate future operations for the TLC mine.

Page 33 of 50


18.1Capital Costs

Table 18.1 Capital Costs

Capital Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Annual Maintenance of Operations

$850,000

Haul Truck Cost

$650,000

18.2Operating Costs

Table 18.2 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Limestone Mining Cost Per Ton

$2.86

Contractor Limestone Mining Cost per Ton

$3.10

Overburden Stripping Cost Per Ton

$2.03

19Economic Analysis

The block model was used to estimate overburden and limestone ore volumes for each reserve area. Overburden mining is contracted out on a cost per bank cubic yard basis. Limestone volumes were converted to tons for cost and revenue estimation using a density factor of 155 pounds per cubic foot.

The overburden thickness is generally uniform in each area. Northwest and East areas will have mining start where the limestone outcrops and the overburden is the thinnest or not present. This start method will allow TLC to develop the new areas at low initial stripping ratios. Thus the stripping ratio can be averaged annually across each reserve area. As mining develops mining equipment will be added.

19.1Key Parameters and Assumptions

The discount rate used in the economic analysis is 1.09%. This rate is TLC’s incremental borrowing cost. Per the current debt agreement and TLC’s current leverage ratio, TLC’s borrowing rate is 1.09% (calculated from the November 2021 LIBOR of 0.09%).

The tax was estimated using TLC’s current effective income tax rate calculated on September 30, 2021. In reviewing the September 30, 2021 tax provision, the effective tax rate contained no material non-recurring permanent items that would influence the rate, so it is considered not applicable to future periods. Demand for limestone is projected to be approximately 1,400,000 tons per year for the life of the mine. The sales price per ton is estimated using the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021. Depreciation was estimated using existing assets and the approved items in the 2022 budget. The later years’ depreciations are calculated using the capital budget forecast and the asset life with a mid-year convention.

19.2Economic Viability

TLC has positive cash flow and the current mine plan does not require a significant capital expenditure until 2038; therefore, payback and return on investment calculations are irrelevant. NPV of the life of mine plan is $257.1 million. The annual cash flows are in Appendix B.

19.3Sensitivity Analysis

Sensitivity analysis was performed on the discount rate, contractor mining costs for stripping, contractor costs for limestone mining in the TLC East area, TLC mining costs, and all mining costs changing simultaneously.

Table 19.3-1 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

Discount Rate

    

NPV (thousands)

0%

$586,922

1%

$402,762

2%

$290,715

5%

$140,415

10%

$69,165

15%

$45,171

20%

$33,484

Page 34 of 50


Graphic

Table 19.3-2 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Mining Cost

Limestone Mining Costs Per Ton

    

NPV (thousands)

$2.86

$390,331

$3.86

$350,614

$4.86

$310,897

$5.86

$271,180

$6.86

$231,463

Graphic

Table 19.3-3 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying TLC East Area Mining Cost

Contractor TLC East Cost

    

NPV (thousands)

$3.10

$390,331

$4.10

$372,384

$5.10

$354,438

$6.10

$336,491

$7.10

$318,545

Page 35 of 50


Graphic

Table 19.3-4 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Stripping Cost

Contractor Stripping Cost

    

NPV (thousands)

$2.03

$390,331

$3.03

$363,963

$4.03

$337,596

$5.03

$311,229

$6.03

$284,862

Graphic

Page 36 of 50


Table 19.3-5 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying All Mining and Contract Mining and Stripping Costs

All Mining Costs % Increase

    

NPV (thousands)

0

$390,331

5

$379,193

10

$368,056

15

$356,918

20

$345,781

Graphic

Table 19.3-5 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Price

Limestone Price Change

    

NPV (thousands)

-20%

$260,013

-10%

$325,172

0%

$390,331

10%

$455,489

20%

$520,648

Graphic

Page 37 of 50


20Adjacent Properties

Adjacent to the TLC property, there are many aggregate operations with quarries in the Edwards limestone. Some of these smaller privately owned operations have allowed the sampling or, in one instance, drilling on their property in exchange for the geologic data. The data the QP considered material to the geologic model was utilized for the resource estimate. The adjacent property data used was identified in Section 7.2 of this report.

21Other Relevant Data and Information

All data relevant to the supporting studies and estimates of mineral resources and reserves have been included in the sections of this TRS. No additional information or explanation is necessary to make this TRS understandable and not misleading.

22Interpretation and Conclusions

22.1 Interpretations and Conclusions

Geologically, the deposit is a simple tabular, single bed limestone deposit with no structure and a shallow dip angle. The formation has been proven by regional, detailed local sampling, and drilling that the quality and thickness are very consistent. Because of this simple geology, the mining method is straightforward and consists of uncomplicated open pit mining.

TLC has been in operation for many decades during varying economic and market conditions and the TLC plant has maintained a steady market share. The mining operation has been modernized over the last 25 years which has allowed it to optimize mining so that high grading is minimized. The economic analysis and amount of Proven and Probable Reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 80 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

22.2 Risks and Uncertainties

Internal to the mining operation, risks and uncertainties are minimal because of the uncomplicated geology and the employment of a standard mining method. Governmental, legal and regulatory risks, such as greenhouse gases, could adversely affect the market the TLC operation supplies.

23Recommendations

Recommended mining projects include: determining if there is an economic benefit to mining lower stripping ratio reserves sooner than projected and evaluating economic benefits versus the cost of reducing haulage time by moving the primary crusher and conveyor closer to the active mining areas.

Development core drilling could be done in the northwest undeveloped area of the mine to prepare for mining in the future.

24References

Brand JP. 1953. Cretaceous of Llano Estacado of Texas. BEG. TUTA. RI#20. 67 pgs.

Bureau of Economic Geology. 1992. Geology of Texas. SM 2. TUTA. 1 pg.

Bowers R, Vickers K, TerraCon. 1997. Resource Estimate. USLM Internal Report. 15 pgs.

Butler Dr. DR. 2021. Physical Regions of Texas. Texas Almanac Website. [Accessed 2021]. https://www.texasalmanac.com/articles/physical-regions

Cass C. 2021. Personal Communication. Firmatek LLC.

Collins EW. Baungardner Jr. RW. Geologic Map of the East Part of Cleburne Texas, 30 x 30 minute Quadrangle: South of Fort Worth-Interstate 35W Corridor. 2011. STATEMAP. NCGMP. BEG. TUTA. 1pg.

Digital Atlas of Ancient Life. Geology of the Western Interior Seaway. NSF DBI 1645520 [Accessed 2021]. https://www.cretaceousatlas.org/geology.

Dorsey. 2019. How will the new rules affect the definitions of mineral reserves, probable mineral reserves and proven mineral reserves? Understanding the SEC’s New Mining Disclosure Rules. [Accessed 2021]. https://www.dorsey.com/newsresources/publications/client-alerts/2019/02/new-mining-disclosure-rules-2019#:~:text=A%20proven%20mineral%20reserve%20is,tonnage%20and%20grade%20or%20quality.

Kyle, JR. 2018. Industrial Minerals of Texas (map). TEBG. 1 pg.

Page 38 of 50


Kyle J R, Elliot B H. 2019. Past, Present, and Future of Texas Industrial Minerals. M, M & E. 36:475–486.

Lewis, A A.1955. Investigation of limestone properties in Johnson and Hill Counties, Texas: Texas Lime Company Internal Report, 62 pgs.

Lewis, AA. 1958. Drill Hole Data Map Clyde McClung Property, Area No. 1: Texas Lime Company Internal map, scale 1 inch = 200 feet.

Lozo FE. et al. 1959. Symposium on Edwards Limestone in Central Texas. BEG. TUTA. P#5905. 40-42

Roberson DS. 1972. The Distribution and Significance of Circular Bioherms in the Edwards Limestone of Central Texas. BGS. BU. 40 pgs.

Swanson RG. 1981. Shell Sample Examination Manual. MIES1. AAPG. 102 pgs.

Texas Railroad Commission Website.2021. Chapter 3, Oil & Gas Division. [Accessed 2021]. ttps://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=4&ti=16&pt=1&ch=3&rl=Y.

US Census.2020. Bureau of Quick Facts. USFG. [Accessed 2021]. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts.

USGS. 2021. MapView Website. [Accessed 2021]. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/mapview/?center=-97,39.6&zoom=4.

US Geological Survey. 2021. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021. Stone (Crushed). pg. 154. USGS. 200 pgs.

25Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

The QP has relied upon information and data from TLC and USLM personnel and historical records in completing this TRS. This material included written reports and statements of other individuals and companies with whom it does business. The material also includes permits, licenses, historical exploration data, production records, equipment lists, geologic and ore body resource and reserve information, mine modeling data, financial data and summaries, mine equipment specifications and summaries, records, and equipment lists. The QP believes that the assumptions were factual and accurate and that the interpretations were reasonable. This material has been relied upon in the mine planning, capital and cost planning, and reviewed. The TLC mine engineer assisted the QP in reviewing these materials and performed the final reserve modeling and economic analysis under the direction of the QP. There is no reason to believe that any material facts have been withheld or misstated. In his professional judgment, the QP has taken all appropriate steps to ensure that the information or advice from TLC and USLM personnel and records and outside entities are accurate. The QP does not disclaim any responsibility for this Technical Report Summary.

Page 39 of 50


Appendix A: List of Data included in the Geologic Model

A close-up of a document Description automatically generated with low confidence

Page 40 of 50


Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

Discount Factor 1.09%

NPV $390,331

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,470

$

5,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(6,346)

$

(6,113)

$

(6,113)

$

(6,114)

$

(6,135)

$

(6,350)

$

(6,350)

$

(6,350)

-Depreciation

$

(805)

$

(701)

$

(598)

$

(638)

$

(738)

$

(922)

$

(1,001)

$

(980)

Taxable Income

$

8,319

$

8,656

$

8,759

$

8,718

$

8,596

$

8,197

$

8,118

$

8,140

-Tax

$

(1,672)

$

(1,740)

$

(1,761)

$

(1,752)

$

(1,728)

$

(1,648)

$

(1,632)

$

(1,636)

+Depreciation

$

805

$

701

$

598

$

638

$

738

$

922

$

1,001

$

980

-Capital Expenses

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(1,500)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

Free Cash Flow

$

6,601

$

6,767

$

6,096

$

6,754

$

6,757

$

6,622

$

6,638

$

6,634

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

2035

2036

2037

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(6,350)

$

(6,350)

$

(6,169)

$

(5,354)

$

(5,354)

$

(5,354)

$

(5,354)

$

(5,264)

-Depreciation

$

(980)

$

(980)

$

(915)

$

(850)

$

(915)

$

(980)

$

(980)

$

(1,045)

Taxable Income

$

8,140

$

8,140

$

8,386

$

9,266

$

9,201

$

9,136

$

9,136

$

9,161

-Tax

$

(1,636)

$

(1,636)

$

(1,686)

$

(1,863)

$

(1,849)

$

(1,836)

$

(1,836)

$

(1,841)

+Depreciation

$

980

$

980

$

915

$

850

$

915

$

980

$

980

$

1,045

-Capital Expenses

$

(850)

$

(1,500)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(1,500)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

Free Cash Flow

$

6,634

$

5,984

$

6,766

$

7,404

$

6,767

$

7,430

$

7,430

$

7,514

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2038

2039

2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

2045

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(4,938)

$

(4,938)

$

(4,938)

$

(4,938)

$

(4,340)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,429)

-Depreciation

$

(1,110)

$

(1,045)

$

(980)

$

(1,045)

$

(1,045)

$

(1,045)

$

(1,110)

$

(1,110)

Taxable Income

$

9,422

$

9,487

$

9,552

$

9,487

$

10,085

$

9,566

$

9,501

$

9,931

-Tax

$

(1,894)

$

(1,907)

$

(1,920)

$

(1,907)

$

(2,027)

$

(1,923)

$

(1,910)

$

(1,996)

+Depreciation

$

1,110

$

1,045

$

980

$

1,045

$

1,045

$

1,045

$

1,110

$

1,110

-Capital Expenses

$

(1,500)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(1,500)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

Free Cash Flow

$

7,139

$

7,775

$

7,762

$

7,125

$

8,253

$

7,838

$

7,851

$

8,195

Page 41 of 50


Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2046

2047

2048

2049

2050

2051

2052

2053

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(4,644)

$

(4,644)

$

(4,644)

$

(4,644)

$

(4,644)

$

(4,644)

$

(4,644)

$

(4,859)

-Depreciation

$

(1,045)

$

(980)

$

(915)

$

(850)

$

(980)

$

(1,110)

$

(1,110)

$

(1,240)

Taxable Income

$

9,781

$

9,846

$

9,911

$

9,976

$

9,846

$

9,716

$

9,716

$

9,371

-Tax

$

(1,966)

$

(1,979)

$

(1,992)

$

(2,005)

$

(1,979)

$

(1,953)

$

(1,953)

$

(1,884)

+Depreciation

$

1,045

$

980

$

915

$

850

$

980

$

1,110

$

1,110

$

1,240

-Capital Expenses

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(2,150)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

Free Cash Flow

$

8,010

$

7,997

$

7,984

$

7,971

$

6,697

$

8,023

$

8,023

$

7,878

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2054

2055

2056

2057

2058

2059

2060

2061

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

-Depreciation

$

(1,370)

$

(1,240)

$

(1,110)

$

(1,110)

$

(980)

$

(850)

$

(980)

$

(1,110)

Taxable Income

$

9,241

$

9,371

$

9,501

$

9,501

$

9,631

$

9,761

$

9,631

$

9,501

-Tax

$

(1,857)

$

(1,884)

$

(1,910)

$

(1,910)

$

(1,936)

$

(1,962)

$

(1,936)

$

(1,910)

+Depreciation

$

1,370

$

1,240

$

1,110

$

1,110

$

980

$

850

$

980

$

1,110

-Capital Expenses

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(2,150)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

Free Cash Flow

$

7,904

$

7,878

$

7,851

$

6,551

$

7,825

$

7,799

$

7,825

$

7,851

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

   

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2062

2063

2064

2065

2066

2067

2068

2069

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(4,859)

$

(5,074)

$

(6,162)

$

(5,529)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

-Depreciation

$

(1,110)

$

(1,110)

$

(1,110)

$

(1,045)

$

(980)

$

(980)

$

(895)

$

(725)

Taxable Income

$

9,501

$

9,501

$

9,501

$

9,351

$

8,328

$

8,961

$

8,730

$

8,900

-Tax

$

(1,910)

$

(1,910)

$

(1,910)

$

(1,880)

$

(1,674)

$

(1,801)

$

(1,755)

$

(1,789)

+Depreciation

$

1,110

$

1,110

$

1,110

$

1,045

$

980

$

980

$

895

$

725

-Capital Expenses

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

-

$

-

Free Cash Flow

$

7,851

$

7,851

$

7,851

$

7,667

$

6,784

$

7,290

$

7,870

$

7,836

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

   

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2070

2071

2072

2073

2074

2075

2076

2077

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

-Depreciation

$

(490)

$

(255)

$

(85)

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Taxable Income

$

9,135

$

9,370

$

9,540

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

-Tax

$

(1,836)

$

(1,883)

$

(1,917)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

+Depreciation

$

490

$

255

$

85

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

-Capital Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Free Cash Flow

$

7,789

$

7,741

$

7,707

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

Page 42 of 50


Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2078

2079

2080

2081

2082

2083

2084

2085

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

-Depreciation

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Taxable Income

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

-Tax

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

+Depreciation

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

-Capital Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Free Cash Flow

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2086

2087

2088

2089

2090

2091

2092

2093

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

-Operating Costs

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

-Depreciation

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Taxable Income

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

-Tax

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

+Depreciation

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

-Capital Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Free Cash Flow

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

Texas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2094

2095

2096

2097

2098

2099

2100

Tons Limestone Sold

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,178

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

15,470

$

13,021

-Operating Costs

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(5,845)

$

(4,454)

$

(6,691)

$

(6,419)

-Depreciation

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

(85)

$

(515)

$

(945)

$

(1,115)

Taxable Income

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,625

$

9,540

$

10,501

$

7,834

$

5,487

-Tax

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,935)

$

(1,917)

$

(2,111)

$

(1,575)

$

(1,103)

+Depreciation

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

85

$

515

$

945

$

1,115

-Capital Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

(3,450)

$

(850)

$

(850)

$

(850)

Free Cash Flow

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

7,690

$

4,257

$

8,056

$

6,355

$

4,649

Page 43 of 50


Exhibit 96.2

Technical Report Summary on

Arkansas Lime Company – Limestone Operation

Independence County, Arkansas, USA

Prepared for:

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

Graphic

SK-1300 Report

Effective Date: December 31, 2021

Report Date: March 2, 2022

Page 1 of 37


DISCLAIMERS AND QUALIFICATIONS

SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”) was retained by United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) to prepare this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) related to Arkansas Lime Company (“ALC”) limestone reserves and resources. This TRS provides a statement of ALC’s limestone reserves and resources at its mine located in Independence County, Arkansas and has been prepared in accordance with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Regulation S-K 1300 for Mining Property Disclosure (S-K 1300) and 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229.601(b)(96)(iii)(B) reporting requirements. This report was prepared for the sole use by USLM and its affiliates and is effective December 31, 2021.

This TRS was prepared by SYB Group’s President who meets the SEC’s definition of a Qualified Person and has sufficient experience in the relevant type of mineralization and deposit under consideration in this TRS.

In preparing this TRS, SYB relied upon data, written reports and statements provided by ALC and USLM. SYB has taken all appropriate steps, in its professional opinion, to ensure information provided by ALC and USLM is reasonable and reliable for use in this report.

The Economic Analysis and resulting net present value estimate in this TRS were made for the purposes of confirming the economic viability of the reported limestone reserves and not for the purposes of valuing ALC or its assets. Internal Rate of Return and project payback were not calculated, as there was no initial investment considered in the financial model. Certain information set forth in this report contains “forward-looking information,” including production, productivity, operating costs, capital costs, sales prices, and other assumptions. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and undue reliance should not be placed on them. The ability to recover the reported reserves depends on numerous factors beyond the control of SYB Group that cannot be anticipated. Some of these factors include, but are not limited to, future limestone prices, mining and geologic conditions, obtaining permits and regulatory approvals in a timely manner, the decisions and abilities of management and employees, and unanticipated changes in environmental or other regulations that could impact performance. The opinions and estimates included in this report apply exclusively to the ALC mine as of the effective date of this report.

All data used as source material plus the text, tables, figures, and attachments of this document have been reviewed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geologic practices.

SYB hereby consents to the use of ALC’s limestone reserve and resource estimates as of December 31, 2021 in USLM’s SEC filings and to the filing of this TRS as an exhibit to USLM’s SEC filings.

Qualified Person:  /s/ Keith V. Vickers

Keith V. Vickers, TXPG #3938

President, SYB Group, LLC

1216 W. Cleburne Rd

Crowley, TX 76036

Page 2 of 37


Table of Contents

List of Figures

4

List of Tables

5

1

Executive Summary

6

2

Introduction

7

3

Property Description

10

4

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

11

5

History

12

6

Geological Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

12

7

Exploration

16

8

Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

21

9

Data Verification

22

10

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

22

11

Mineral Resource Estimates

22

12

Mineral Reserve Estimates

26

13

Mining Methods

27

14

Processing and Recovery Methods

29

15

Infrastructure

29

16

Market Studies

29

17

Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

30

18

Capital and Operating Costs

31

19

Economic Analysis

31

20

Adjacent Properties

33

21

Other Relevant Data and Information

33

22

Interpretation and Conclusions

33

23

Recommendations

33

24

References

34

25

Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

34

Appendix A: List of Data Included in the Geologic Model

35

Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

36

Page 3 of 37


List of Figures

1.

Fig. 3.1

Location and Property Map for ALC Operation

2.

Fig. 6.1-1

Arkansas Geological Provinces

3.

Fig. 6.1-2

Regional Geologic Map, Eastern Ozark Plateau

4.

Fig. 6.4-1

ALC Local Area Stratigraphic Column and Description

5.

Fig. 6.4-2

Boone LST Ore Interval NW to SE Cross Section

6.

Fig. 7.1-1

All ALC Drill Hole Locations

7.

Fig. 7.1-2

ALC Core Hole Log

8.

Fig. 11.3

ALC, Top of the Ore in Each Reserve Area

9.

Fig. 13.2

Current Estimated Final Mine Limits

10.

Fig. 15.1

ALC Operation Infrastructure Map

Page 4 of 37


List of Tables

1.

Table 1.1

ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

2.

Table 1.2

ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

3.

Table 1.3

Capital Costs

4.

Table 1.4

Operating Costs

5.

Table 2.3

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

6.

Table 2.4

Visits Made by QP to ALC

7.

Table 5.2

ALC Historical Drilling Projects

8.

Table 6.4

ALC Property Stratigraphy

9.

Table 7.1-1

All ALC Drilling Projects

10.

Table 7.1-2

Summary of 1959 Development Drilling

11.

Table 7.1-3

Summary of 1989 Development Drilling

12.

Table 7.1-4

Summary of 1992 Development Drilling

13.

Table 7.1-5

Summary of 1996-97 Development Drilling

14.

Table 7.1-6

Summary of 1998 Development Drilling

15.

Table 7.1-7

Summary of 2005 Exploration Drilling

16.

Table 7.1-8

Summary of 2007 Exploration Drilling

17.

Table 7.1-9

Summary of 2008 Development Drilling

18.

Table 7.1-10

Summary of 2016 Development Drilling

19.

Table 11.2.4

Resource Parameter Assumptions

20.

Table 11.3

Summary of Drill Hole Database for the Model

21.

Table 11.4.1

ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

22.

Table 12.4

ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

23.

Table 17.1

Mining and Environmental Permits

24.

Table 18.1

Capital Costs

25.

Table 18.2

Operating Costs

26.

Table 19.3-1

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

27.

Table 19.3-2

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Mining Costs

28.

Table 19.3-3

Sensitivity Analysis: Selling Price Change

Page 5 of 37


1Executive Summary

The Arkansas Lime Company (“ALC”) mine is a production stage, open pit mine that produces high-grade limestone with above 96.0% calcium carbonate (“CaCO3”) from the Boone formation that is delivered to ALC’s primary crusher. The ALC plant processes the limestone into various products that are sold to a variety of customers. The ALC mine is located in Independence County, Arkansas on approximately 1,260 acres owned by ALC. Mining operations began at the ALC mine in the 1920’s.

Geologic and analytical data from regional and local drilling have proven that the Boone limestone has a consistently high CaCO3 content (above 96.0%) and a consistent mining thickness varying from 35 ft. to 75 ft. across the entire ALC property. These analytical results cover from 1959 to 2016 and are sufficient to establish reasonable certainty of geological presence, grade and quality continuity on the operation’s property.

Mining at the ALC mine consists of pushing aside the topsoil and overburden using conventional earthmoving equipment and methods. The topsoil and overburden are used as backfill for nearby previously mined pits. The limestone ore body is then drilled and blasted, followed by loading and haulage utilizing conventional limestone mining equipment. The shot limestone is hauled to ALC’s primary crusher.

The ALC mine has procured, and is operating in compliance with, the required Authorization to Quarry (“ATQ”) and air and storm water permits that were issued the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (“ADEQ”). ALC will be required to refile the ATQ in 2022 and renew the air and storm water permits in 2026 and 2024, respectively.

The ALC mine average production over the last 5 years was approximately 1,000,000 of limestone. In this TRS, due to the fact that the ALC plant intends to begin sourcing approximately 500,000 tons of limestone from a different source during 2022 and thereafter, the annual production for the ALC mine is estimated to be 500,000 tons of limestone. Assuming annual production of 500,000 tons of limestone per year, the expected mine life is approximately 25 years.

As noted in section 2.1, Keith Vickers of SYB Group (“SYB”), a consultant for United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) for over 20 years served as the Qualified Person (“QP”) and prepared the estimates of limestone mineral resources and reserves for the ALC mine. Summaries of the ALC mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves are shown below in Tables 1.1 and 1.2, respectively. Sections 11 and 12 set forth the definitions of mineral resources and reserves as well as the methods and assumptions used by the QP in determining the estimates and classifications of the ALC mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves.

Table 1.1 ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021 Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Resource Category

    

In Place
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Processing Recovery
 (%)3

Measured Mineral Resources

16,010,088

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

8,239,334

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

24,249,422

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place.

Table 1.2 ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Mining Recovery
 (%)3

Probable Reserves

3,458,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

82.0/75.0

Proven Reserves

9,085,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

82.0/75.0

Total Probable and Proven

12,543,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

82.0/75.0

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 Mining recovery is listed as open pit/UG recovery.

The modeling and analysis of the ALC mine’s resources and reserves has been developed by ALC and USLM personnel and reviewed by management of the companies, as well as the QP. The development of such resources and reserves estimates, including related assumptions, was a collaborative effort between the QP and personnel of the companies.

Page 6 of 37


The ALC mine has been a stable producer of limestone using the current equipment fleet and operating parameters for many years. This operating history and its 2022 budget were used to estimate the unit costs for open pit mining and annual sustaining capital expenditures. In 2035, limestone production is forecast to transition to underground mining which will require the purchase of a fleet of underground mining equipment. For purposes of this TRS, the estimated underground mining cost per ton is based on contract mining costs for other mines. Tables 1.3 and 1.4 set forth the estimated capital costs and operating costs, respectively, used to estimate future operations for the ALC mine.

Table 1.3 Capital Costs

Capital Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Annual Maintenance of Operations

$450,000

Underground Mining Equipment Fleet

$3,000,000

Table 1.4 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Open Pit Mining Cost Per Ton

$4.60

Underground Mining Cost Per Ton

$6.00

It is the QP’s overall conclusions that:

1.

Geologically, the ALC mine limestone deposit has been proven by detailed production and drilling results to have quality and thickness that is very consistent. Because of the simple geology, the mining method for the mine is straightforward and consists of uncomplicated open pit and underground mining.

2.

The data detailed in this report that was used to estimate the resources was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

3.

ALC has successfully mined this resource for many years using the same methods that are projected into the future. Significant increases in the cost of mining coupled with large decreases in the selling price of limestone would be required to make mining uneconomic. Historically, ALC has been able to increase sales prices in line with cost increases.

4.

There are no significant factors onsite that will impact the extraction of this ore body. ALC has been in operation for many decades during varying economic and market conditions.

5.

Absent unforeseen changes in economic or other factors, including additional federal or state environmental regulations, the economic analysis and the amount of Proven Reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 25 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

2Introduction

2.1Issuer of Report

Mr. Keith Vickers of SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”), a consultant for USLM for over 20 years, prepared this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) on ALC’s mining operations located in Independence County, Arkansas. Mr. Vickers is a Qualified Person (“QP”). USLM is a publicly-traded company on the NASDAQ Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol USLM and ALC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of USLM.

2.2Terms of Reference and Purpose

The purpose of this TRS is to support the disclosure of mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates for ALC’s existing mining operations located in Independence County, Arkansas, as of December 31, 2021. This report is to fulfill 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229, “Standard Instructions for Filing Forms Under Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 – Regulation S-K,” subsection 1300, “Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations.” The mineral resource and reserve estimates presented herein are classified according to 17 CFR § 229.1300 Definitions.

The QP prepared this TRS with information from various sources with detailed data about the historical and current mining operations, including individuals who are experts in an appropriate technical field. ALC has not previously filed a TRS.

The quality of information, conclusions, and estimates contained herein are based on: 1) information available at the time of preparation; and 2) the assumptions, conditions, and qualifications outlined in this TRS.

Page 7 of 37


Unless stated otherwise, all volumes and grades are in U.S. customary units, and currencies are expressed in 2021 U.S. dollars. Distances are described in U.S. standard units.

2.3Sources of Information

This TRS is based upon engineering data, financial and technical information developed and maintained by ALC or USLM personnel, work undertaken by third-party contractors and consultants on behalf of the mine, public data sourced from the United States Geological Survey, Arkansas Geological Survey, internal ALC technical reports, previous technical studies, maps, ALC letters and memoranda, and public information as cited throughout this TRS and listed in Section 24. Table 2.3 is the list of terms used in this TRS.

This TRS was prepared by Keith V. Vickers, BSGeol, MSGeol, TXPG #3938, CPetG # 6152. Detailed discussions with the following were held during the preparation of the TRS:

Mr. Timothy W. Byrne, President, CEO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Michael L. Wiedemer, Vice President, CFO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Russell R. Riggs, Vice President, Production, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. M. Michael Owens, Corporate Treasurer, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Jason Nutzman, Director of Legal and Compliance, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Wendell Smith, Director Environmental, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Nate O’Neill, Vice President and Plant Manager, ALC, Batesville, Arkansas

Mr. Tim Zuroweste, Mining and Projects Manager, ALC, Batesville, Arkansas

Mr. David Cox, Quality Control Laboratory Manager/Safety and Environmental Manager, ALC, Batesville, Arkansas

Mr. Marty Fulbright, Accounting Manager, ALC, Batesville, Arkansas

Mr. Keith Vickers, SYB Group, USLM Consulting Geologist, Crowley, Texas

Page 8 of 37


Table 2.3 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

Term

    

Definition

AAPG

American Association of Professional Geologists

AASHTO

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

ADEQ

Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality

AGS

Arkansas Geological Survey

ALC

Arkansas Lime Company

ASTM

American Society for Testing and Materials

ATQ

Authorization to Quarry

CaCO3

Calcium Carbonate

CEO

Chief Executive Officer

CFO

Chief Financial Officer

CFR

Code of Federal Regulations

CMC

Construction Materials Consultants

DTM

Digital Terrain Model

E

East

F.

Fahrenheit

Fig.

Figure

ft.

Feet

GLONASS

Global Navigation Satellite System

GPS

Global Positioning System

LIBOR

London Inter-Bank Offered Rate

LIDAR

Light Detection and Ranging

LST

Limestone

N

North

NAD

North American Datum

NPV

Net Present Value

P.E.

Professional Engineer

PG

Professional Geologist

QP

Qualified Person

QC/QA

Quality Control/Quality Assurance

S

South

TRS

Technical Report Summary

TLC

Texas Lime Company

UG

Underground

U.S.

United States

USGS

United States Geological Survey

USLM

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

WAAS

Wide Area Augmentation System

W

West

XRF

X-Ray Fluorescence

2.4Personal Inspection

The QP, who has been a consulting geologist for USLM for over 20 years, is familiar with ALC’s mine geology and operations. Over the years, the QP has visited the operation to supervise drilling, log cores and investigate geologic issues associated with specific areas in the mine. Table 2.4 is a partial list of dates the QP has visited the mine. Data, protocols, and specific information required for the TRS were gathered during onsite visits. The ALC plant manager and the mine manager provided any detailed information the QP required for the resource estimation and mining operation sections of this report.

Page 9 of 37


Table 2.4 Visits Made by QP to ALC

Date

    

Reason

1998*

Initial Visit and Data Audit

1998-99*

Supervise Core Drilling Project

1999

Performed Resource Assessment

2005*

Supervise Core Drilling Project

2007*

Supervisor Core Drilling Project

2008*

Supervise Core Drilling Project and Mine Plan

2016*

Supervise Core Drilling Project and Results Meeting

2021

Meeting to Review and Obtain Detailed Information for TRS

Note: * Multiple Trips Made to Mine.

On October 18, 2021, the QP met in the ALC operations office to discuss the information requirements for this TRS report. He reviewed the production QC drill hole database. The QP inspected the mine, visited faces to examine the consistency and thickness, and discussed current status of core storage buildings. The equipment suite, blasting and mining methods, and costs were reviewed. The QP discussed QC/QA at the operations office with the plant Quality Control Laboratory Manager. The Quality Control Laboratory Manager provided lab and XRF standard certifications and instrument service/care contracts. A review of the core and sample preparation for analytical tests occurred and copies of their documentation were provided.

The QP reviewed a report checklist with ALC management and the mining engineer to ensure all materials needed for the TRS were available. The resource areas, fixed grade control, and production hole sampling procedures were reviewed and QP was made current on any changes. The mining faces were compared to the existing geologic model, and a comparison of the core to production sample chemistry was discussed. The QP had a meeting with the accounting manager to obtain the financials for the mine economic analysis.

3Property Description

3.1Property Description and Location

ALC operations (35°47’13.08”N, -91°45’10.03”W, Fig. 3.1, GoogleEarth, 2021) are located in Independence County, Arkansas. ALC operates an open pit mine at the location. The mine is five miles west of Batesville, Arkansas on State Highway 106.

Graphic

3.2Mineral Rights

ALC owns approximately 1,260 acres in fee (AcreValue website, 2021) (USLM internal report). ALC holds all surface and mineral rights on the fee property.

Page 10 of 37


3.3Significant Encumbrances or Risks to Perform Work on the Property

There are no significant issues or risks to work on the properties outside of those generally related to mining operations.

3.4Lease Agreements or Income from Royalties

ALC does not receive any royalties as it is not the lessor for any mineral rights on its properties.

4Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

4.1Topography, Vegetation, and Physiography

The area’s topography is characterized by broad valleys with rounded hills of variable elevation connecting to several main river drainages. The White River is the largest drainage system in the local area. Occasionally the hills are more plateau-like with greater relief to them. ALC’s operations are located in one of the valleys. The elevation ranges from 1144 ft. to 242 ft. The valleys are covered with thick alluvial sediments and the ridges have moderate soil cover on top and sufficient depth on the sides for abundant tree growth (Albin et al, 1967).

The tree types are dominated by oak, maples, hickories, and hawthorns (Mitchell, 2016). The flat valley floors are primarily agricultural land cover in typical grasses common to the area.

The operation is in the physiographic province known as the Ozark Plateaus (Chandler, 2014). The area has been eroded into high ridges approximately the same height separated by board and steep valleys that merge into larger open flat areas occupied by the main river drainages.

4.2Accessibility and Local Resources

Primary access to the operation is by Punch Lane County Road to State Highway 106 from the city of Batesville. Batesville is served by a regional airport and commercial airline travel is through Little Rock Arkansas (95 miles). County roads are paved. (GoogleMaps website, 2021). ALC has a private rail spur that connects to the Missouri and Northern Arkansas railroad line.

4.3Climate and Operating Season

The average rainfall for Independence County, Arkansas, is 49 inches of rain per year. The County averages four inches of snow per year. On average, there are 219 sunny days per year in Independence County. The County averages 99 days of precipitation per year. Precipitation is rain, snow, sleet, or hail that falls to the ground. Average temperature ranges from a high in July of 91 degrees F. to a low of 26 degrees F. in January. There are infrequent winter storms that may make operations pause for a short period but nothing long-term. The above conditions make year-round mine operation possible with little weather-related lost time (www.bestplaces.net/climate, 2021).

4.4Infrastructure

4.4.1Water

There are no issues with the water supply. The operation water requirements are served by spring and surface water from the mine.

4.4.2Energy Supply

The mine fuel supply is from distributors in Batesville, Arkansas. A state power grid supply supplies electrical power to the operation.

4.4.3Personnel

The Batesville Metropolitan area population is estimated at 11,000 and several rural communities nearby that the mine can draw from for new or replacement employees (www.populationreview.com, 2022).

Page 11 of 37


4.4.4Supplies

The most common supplies needed by the mine are obtained from Batesville, Arkansas. Heavy equipment parts and other similar supplies come from Little Rock, Arkansas. Several trucking companies provide service to the operation from the above supply centers.

5History

5.1Prior Company Ownership

The ALC mine has been in operation for more than 60 years. USLM (formerly known as Rangaire Corporation) purchased ALC (then named Batesville White Lime Company) in the 1960’s, which owned the Batesville Quarry in Independence County, Arkansas, at the time. In the years that followed, ALC acquired additional acres of land resulting in the current ownership of approximately 1,050 acres of land in Independence County. In the past 25 years, ALC has built three preheater rotary kilns as well as other operational and office facilities. Information was provided by ALC.

5.2Exploration and Development History

Presently, ALC operates two open pits, one north of Highway 106 and another just south of the highway. Many of the early programs drilled only the north property. From 2005 drilling was done on both sides of the highway.

Table 5.2 ALC Historical Drilling Projects

Year

Company

Purpose

Summary of Work

Comment

1959

Albert Lewis

Development

21 Core Holes

First Resource Assessment

1989

Don Williams

Exploration

2 Plug Holes

Explore Areas Near Mine

1992

CMC

Development

7 Core Holes

Expand Mine

1996-97

Charles Mallete

Development

17 Core Holes

Resource Assessment

1998

ALC/TerraCon, Inc.

Development

38 Core Holes

Drill North and South Highway 106

2005

ALC

Development

19 Core Holes

West Side Stewart

2007

ALC

Development

19 Core Holes

North/South Stewart

2008

ALC

Development

9 Core Holes

East Side North Mine

2016

ALC

Development

34 Core Holes

Westside Both Mines

Note:

A detailed discussion of all drilling and results is in Section 7.1.

6Geologic Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

The ALC mining operation started in the 1920’s when excavation of the Mississippian age Boone limestone was begun.

6.1Regional Geology

The state of Arkansas is divided into five geologic provinces (Fig. 6.1-1). These provinces were designated according to unique geology and topography. ALC is located in the Ozark Plateaus province. The following is excerpted from McFarland, 1998.

The Ozark Plateaus region of Arkansas is made up of typically flat-lying Paleozoic strata separated into three plateau surfaces based on their unique topography and geology. The northern-most plateau is the Salem Plateau and is generally underlain by dolostones, sandstones, and limestones of Ordovician age and low elevations. The Springfield Plateau stands above the Salem a few hundred feet and is ordinarily capped by lower Mississippian age cherty limestones and limestones. The Boston Mountains are southernmost plateau area and has the highest relief of the Ozarks. It is dominated by Pennsylvanian age shales, siltstones, and sandstones. The entire Ozark Plateaus province is deeply cut by numerous streams throughout the area. The faulting is generally normal; most faults displaying a displacement down on the southern side in the province. Gentle folds are mapped but are generally of very low amplitude. The depositional environment of the rocks found in the Arkansas Ozarks is one of a relatively shallow continental shelf, sloping toward deeper water generally toward the south. Sea level lowering caused the shelf emerged many times during the Paleozoic resulting in numerous erosional unconformities throughout the province’s geologic history.

Page 12 of 37


Graphic

Described below is the regional geologic history. Refer to Fig. 6.1-2 for the stratigraphic period and formation order/age. The Ozark Plateaus province began to form in the early Ordovician age when the first uplift of the region occurred. These uplift events occurred throughout geologic time until the Tertiary age. This last event and significant erosion left the current structural feature seen today. Between the Cambrian age and the present day there were repetitive erosional events. There are an estimated total of 17 events. They were caused by either uplift with erosion or erosion because of receding seas and resulted in depositional hiatuses or erosional unconformities. They are important because they produce a high degree of variability in thickness of strata. The Lower Ordovician age is characterized by deposition of dolomites until the Middle Ordovician age with the deposition of the Joachim formation. From the Upper Plattin formation until the Chattanooga shale at the end of the Devonian age limestone deposition was the dominate rock type. The rock types of this period represent deposition in a shallow marine environment existed for a long period of time until deep water marine environment conditions produced shale deposition (McFarland, 1998).

The Chattanooga shale was a period of deep water fine grained deposition that separated the long period of limestone deposition during the Ordovician to the end of the Devonian. After the Chattanooga shale deposition concluded the Mississippian deposition was dominated by limestone deposition especially of interest is the Boone limestone. Next the upper Mississippian interval to the Pennsylvanian interval was dominated by alternating limestone, shale, and sandstone deposition.

Fig. 6.1-2 is the geologic map of the eastern part of the Ozark Plateaus province with the ALC ore limestone highlighted.

Page 13 of 37


Graphic

6.2Local and ALC Property Geology

Locally, the structural setting is simple. In over 80 decades of mining only one fault was encountered (10 ft. throw, normal). The Boone limestone is moderately jointed. As with all surface exposed limestones in northern Arkansas and the southeastern part of the United States there are localized karst features present. The presence of erosional unconformities have the greatest impact on the local geology. Each unconformity has a different degree of erosion associated with it. These erosional episodes resulted in loss of stratigraphic section or thinning of rock units in a random pattern.

ALC is located in an east-west Boone limestone outcrop belt. Locally, Mississippian age limestones were not the result of reef formation but transported carbonate sand deposited further off shore from a massive reef bank located to the north and northwest of the northern Arkansas. The almost chemically pure carbonate sand was deposited on a shallow offshore shelf by sea currents and storms. This isolated environment produced areas of high purity limestone. Later in the formation’s geologic history subsurface conditions caused some replacement of the limestone by chert. This resulted in separating the areas of high calcium limestone.

Local drilling has defined the ore deposit as being an elongate northeast to southwest bowl or trough. The floor of the trough is where a distinctive lithology and chemical quality change occurs. The formation that comprises the floor is believed to be the Lafferty limestone. The shape of the trough is interpreted to be the result of an erosional unconformity or a submarine channel the Boone limestone was deposited in.

6.3Mineralization

High calcium limestones are the product of unique depositional environments only, not by subsurface alteration or enhancement. No subsurface mineralization has occurred to create or enhance the calcium carbonate content in this deposit. The CaCO3 content is the product of reef organisms that build their exoskeletons out of calcium carbonate derived from the marine environment. The reef area has very limited or no exposure to sources of non-carbonate materials such as clay, silica, and iron that reduce the CaCO3 content.

Page 14 of 37


6.4Stratigraphy and Mineralogy

Graphic

Page 15 of 37


Graphic

Table 6.4 ALC Property Stratigraphy

Stratigraphic Unit

Thickness
Approximate Range

Primary Lithology

Moorefield Shale

0 to 30 ft.*

Black very fine grain, thin LST lenses

Boone LST

150 to 200 ft.*

Gray coarse to fine crystalline, mostly recrystallized, very clean

Chattanooga Shale

0 to 4 ft.*

Black, fissile, rarely present

Lafferty LST

5 to 20 ft.*

Gray to dark gray, sandy, fine crystalline,

Note: *From multiple sources.

7Exploration

The database used for the ALC geologic model is consists of lithology and chemical analysis data from core drilling. Limited exploration drilling has been necessary for the past 30 years because of ALC’s significant land position. A considerable amount of recent drilling has been near the mine and on ALC property.

7.1Drilling Programs

A summary of drilling projects to date on ALC property is in Table 7.1-1. These projects include exploration, and development, by diamond bit and percussion drilling methods. Fig. 7.1-1 shows all the ALC Drill Holes.

Page 16 of 37


Table 7.1-1 All ALC Drilling Projects

Year

Company

Purpose

Summary of Work

Comment

1959

Albert Lewis

Development

21 Core Holes

First Resource Assessment

1989

Don Williams

Exploration

2 Plug Holes

Explore Areas Near Mine

1992

CMC

Development

7 Core Holes

Expand Mine

1996-97

Charles Mallete

Development

17 Core Holes

Resource Assessment

1998

ALC/TerraCon, Inc.

Development

38 Core Holes

Drill North and South Highway 106

2005

ALC

Development

19 Core Holes

West Side Stewart

2007

ALC

Development

19 Core Holes

North/South Stewart

2008

ALC

Development

9 Core Holes

East Side North Mine

2016

ALC

Development

34 Core Holes

Westside Both Mines

The mining operation started in the early 1920’s. In 1929 the company saw the need to expand the mining operation. It drilled a few plug holes around the exiting mine to prove the Boone was present. Results from this project are not available. In 1959 Albert Lewis was contracted to confirm more ore near the active mine site and drilled 21 core holes. The cores were analyzed on 10 ft. intervals by an outside lab. Lewis conducted the first resource determination for the northern mine. The cores were preserved and TerraCon, Inc. reexamined and had them reanalyzed in 1998. The summary of the hole analysis are presented in Table 7.1-2 below.

Graphic

Table 7.1-2 Summary of 1959 Development Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC N. Property

21

78

98.1

The holes were drilled along the Boone outcrop ridge and south of it. Two holes resulted in coring limestone below the ore interval and the ore thickness was variable because of the feather edge of the outcrop.

Page 17 of 37


If any drilling was conducted between 1959 and 1989 there are no records available. Don Williams drilled 12 plug holes directly around the active north mine for expansion purposes in 1989. Records for two holes were available for review. The summary results of the drilling are listed in table 7.1-3 below.

Table 7.1-3 Summary of 1989 Development Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC N. Property

2

53

97.1

In 1992 CMC was contracted to drill seven core holes in areas that would be mined in the near future. From the drilling results the mine could expand into the areas drilled. Some of the holes had over 75 ft. of CaCO3 above 96.0%. A summary of the results is presented in Table 7.1-4 below.

Table 7.1-4 Summary of 1992 Development Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC N. Property

7

75

97.2

In 1996-97, Charles Mallete drilled 17 core holes across the property to perform a resource assessment. It appears he placed his holes to fill the gaps in the previous programs. Eight cores out of the 17 were located for the TerraCon, Inc. reexamination project. The summary of the core results is below in Table 7.1-5.

Table 7.1-5 Summary of 1996-97 Development Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC North and South Properties

17

64

97.6

In 1998, TerraCon, Inc. was contracted to perform a resource assessment on the north mine. TerraCon, Inc. reviewed all previous drilling and resource studies. A 38-hole drilling project occurred that covered both the north mine and south unmined areas. The results of the study provided validation there were sufficient resources for several years in the future. Unlike the previous core projects, the sampling interval of 5 ft. or 10 ft. in this project was sampled on 2 ft. intervals to better define the top and the bottom of the ore. A summary table listing the results of the project is below in Table 7.1-6.

Table 7.1-6 Summary of 1998 Development Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC North and South Properties

38

65*

97.3

Note: *Some holes drilled in existing mine floor.

TerraCon, Inc. followed the drill site protocols recently established by USLM. These protocols for drilling, logging, and sampling cores had been developed as equipment and analyses had changed. The project procedures were:

·

Contract geologists selected core drilling locations with the approval of sites and drilling budget by USLM management.

·

Core drilling was conducted directly under the supervision of contract geologists. All core was logged by SYB or an approved USLM contract geologist using a protocol modified from the Shell Sample Examination Manual (Swanson, 1981) that was modified by SYB and approved by USLM.

·

After final selection, hole locations were surveyed by hand GPS (WAAS and GLONASS capable).

·

Immediately upon retrieval, the core was placed on a V-shaped trough. All core pieces were fitted together and labeled with a permanent marker in one-ft. intervals.

·

Characteristics related to the suitability of the limestone for the ALC plant processing and geology were recorded. These items are stratigraphy, key marker lenses/layers, lithology characteristics, visual identification of ore top and bottom, and structural disturbance.

·

The core from each drill hole was placed into cardboard boxes in two ft. intervals totaling 10 ft. at the drill site. The boxes were labeled with a box number, company information, hole number, core runs, and depths marked on each box. The boxes were then delivered to the ALC core processing area. Then they were prepped for transport to the ALC core storage center.

Page 18 of 37


·

The contract geologists were responsible for examining the core and compiling a detailed interval list for XRF analysis. This list was later entered into Excel to build an analysis database. The analysis intervals were chosen on two ft. lengths and intervals of six ft. to ten ft. above and below the lithologically identified ore zone were chosen. This excess was so the top and bottom of the ore could be chemically defined.

·

Once the cores were at the ALC core storage area, the core intervals were diamond sawed into two-thirds to one-third splits. The interval’s one-third split was then bagged in a plastic bag and labeled with the depth interval to be analyzed. The two-thirds split was placed back in the box for reference.

·

The bagged intervals are kept in plastic labeled buckets or boxes in separate groups by the hole and then submitted to the ALC QC/QA lab for XRF analysis. Any portions of samples not destroyed during the testing process are still stored at the ALC core storage facility.

The ALC QC/QA lab performed the XRF analysis on these cores using the USLM lab protocols (discussed in Section 8).

The drilling project conducted in 2005 was to expand the southern mine to the west. The project followed the USLM drill site and lab protocols.

Table 7.1-7 Summary of 2005 Exploration Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC South Mine

19

51

97.1

The 2007 drilling project was conducted with the goal of defining more west resources in the north mine and providing geotechnical support for gaining access to the proposed southern mine area in 2008. Nine holes were analyzed for mine development and ten holes were drilled for geotechnical measurements. The ten cores provided lithological data and were not analyzed for chemical content. The results of this drilling project are presented in Table 7.1-8. The standard USLM protocols for drilling and analysis were followed.

Table 7.1-8 Summary of 2007 Exploration Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC 2007 Drilling

9*

60

97.8

Note: *19 holes drilled but only nine holes were analyzed for chemistry (see above).

In 2008, drilling was conducted on the northeast side of the north mine. This was a mine development project. Limited previous drilling in this area had indicated the possibility of a thicker ore section under shallow stripping. The results of this project proved the results of earlier drilling and the mine planning was adjusted according. The results of this drilling project are presented in Table 7.1-9. Protocols developed by USLM were followed during this drilling.

Table 7.1-9 Summary of 2008 Development Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC 2008 Drilling

9

97

97.9

In 2016, development drilling was conducted to update the existing mine model. The majority of the holes were drilled along the western side of both mines and in the southern area of the south mine. The project provided data for expanding both mines to the west. As with all USLM drilling projects the protocols discussed in the 2008 drilling results were followed. Table 7.1-10 summarizes the results from the 2016 project.

Table 7.1-10 Summary of 2016 Development Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

ALC 2016 Drilling

34

68

97.0

A list of the holes used in the model with the hole name and XY coordinates can be found in Appendix A. All holes’ lithology, chemical analysis, and ore interval were plotted as logs. These logs were used to correlate stratigraphy, lithology, and ore zone intercepts. Also, they form a visual catalog of all the hole data. A core log is shown below in Fig. 7.1-2.

Page 19 of 37


Graphic

7.2Surface Mapping and Sampling

There was no surface sampling or measured section work associated with this operation.

7.3Hydrogeology Information

The State of Arkansas does not require hydrogeological studies.

7.4Geotechnical Information

The State of Arkansas does not require geotechnical studies to be performed at mines. The ALC mines are open pit mines and the company had no need to perform geotechnical studies.

Page 20 of 37


8Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

8.1Sample Preparation and XRF Analysis

The ALC plant produces many products which are under strict parameters for chemical and physical quality. The ALC QC/QA lab was established many years ago and was upgraded several times to meet the increasing demands of the customer base. In addition, customer quality control labs test ALC product shipments frequently.

XRF is one of the primary methods for determining the chemical content of limestone. The ALC QC/QA lab has been responsible for conducting XRF analysis on plant products and all limestone samples from stockpiles, belt feed samples, drilling, to hand samples collected for outcrop identification. The five significant oxides are analyzed. CaO is most important because of the plant’s raw limestone requirement above 96.0% CaCO3.

XRF sample preparation, whether hand sample, core, or cuttings, is crushed the entire sample to -10 mesh. The sample is then separated and reduced by a ruffle to 250 grams, drying and pulverizing a representative split to -150 mesh. The samples are analyzed for these oxides CaO, MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2, following USLM’s XRF analytical method for limestone analysis. The technique involves pressing the powder into a pellet using a wax binder to hold the shape. The analytical procedure and protocol information was provided by ALC QC/QA personnel and other information for this section was provided by ALC personnel.

8.2Quality Control/Quality Assurance

The limestone samples are analyzed twice in a run to confirm repeatability. All sample preparation equipment is cleaned after preparing each sample and before the subsequent preparation. The instrument is cleaned and calibrated each year by the manufacturer and is under a service contract. Whenever the device becomes dirty and registers out of calibration or out of specification for the standards, a manufacturer service call is made to clean, recalibrate, and repair if necessary. The oxide results of each sample are totaled to determine if the data is within an acceptable error range around 100%. The sample analysis is rerun if the total oxide percentage exceeds acceptable error limits. The rerun is to correct or help define the error issue. Sample preparation and a newly prepped sample usually correct the problem in many cases. The lab has a set of certified limestone standards to cover the content range of the major oxides that can occur in limestones. The appropriate standard is run concurrently with the unknown samples. The standard results are compared run to run to ensure the instrument operates correctly.

USLM has four QC/QA labs among its wholly-owned subsidiaries. These labs can perform many of the same analyses, specifically XRF. At any time one lab goes down or needs verification of analytical (XRF) results, samples can be sent to another lab for continuing analysis of the samples or cross verification.

The ALC QC/QA lab is certified by:

·

The Food and Drug Administration

·

Underwriters Laboratory

The lab follows procedures and protocols set forth by:

·

ASTM Methods: C-25, 50. 51, 110, 977

·

AASHTO Methods: M216-05, 219

·

USLM protocols for testing whole-rock samples.

The lab utilizes certified limestone samples to verify the accuracy and calibration of its instrumentation. These are:

·

Euronorm MRC 701-1

·

China National Analysis Center:

-NC DC 60107a
-NCS DC 14147a
-NCS DC 70307
-NCS DC 70304

The security for geological samples is not required compared to the procedures needed for precious metals (gold, silver, etc.). Core or other samples are immediately after drilling or at the end of the current shift taken to the core storage area by the contract geologist, member of the drill crew, or limestone sample collector. They are logged in and processed by ALC QC/QA lab personnel. The change of possession is limited to two or three people that can be identified and held accountable for the locations of the samples before delivery to the lab. This information was provided by ALC QC/QA lab personnel.

Page 21 of 37


8.3Opinion of the Qualified Person on Adequacy of Sample Preparation

The analysis of geologic samples is conducted with the same care as the ALC QC/QA testing for the plant’s products. The QP reviewed the preparation and analytical procedure protocols by the QC/QA lab personnel for proper adherence. The QP’s opinion is that the analytical program and lab provide reasonably accurate chemical data necessary for determining resource estimates.

9Data Verification

9.1Source Material

The QP obtained the analysis results and raw data from the ALC lab personnel. For this TRS, the hard copy data was compared with the digital database for correctness and thoroughness. The geologic data from the old drilling programs were validated as reasonably as possible by comparing lithology and depths from nearby recent holes and production data. Chemical results from the older work were compared to recent chemical results from the nearest production data or hole. This comparison was necessary to verify using the older data in the model. Recent hole ore intercepts were cross-checked with the appropriate mine data to verify and confirm surveyed collar data and check the ore zone.

The older hole maps with the plotted surveyed locations were georeferenced using Global MapperTM and then digitally overlaid on age appropriate USGS Quadrangle Geotiff raster maps to verify location, convert to State Plane System, and verify collar elevation.

The core logs from the various drilling projects were reviewed to confirm logging was suitable for the intercept data determination. The older hole analyses were composited above 96.0% CaCO3 cutoff when possible. If recompositing was not possible, the analytical results had to average above 96.0% cutoff. ALC has conducted a production QC program for many years. Data from this program was used to check on the chemical quality between core holes.

The QP met with the QC/QA lab manager to validate that the QC/QA protocol was followed for the geologic samples and reviewed the instrument’s status records. The sources for this data are the ALC QC/QA lab, old resource studies, mine manager and contract geologists.

Any hole data where the location could not be verified were excluded. Also, any hole where chemical data appeared to be a partial analysis or incomplete was excluded.

9.2Opinion of the Qualified Person on Data Accuracy

After reviewing the material, the QP is satisfied the drill hole database and chemical analysis data are reasonably valid. The QP’s opinion is that the data utilized has been analyzed and collected appropriately, reasonably, and the data was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

10Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

The Boone limestone mined at the ALC property is sedimentary without alteration due to metamorphic or igneous geologic processes. The uniqueness and suitability of the raw limestone for making the plant’s products are based on the percent of CaCO3 content in the limestone. There is no metal content in the ore and no need to perform metallurgical testing. Limestone from the mine has been supplied to the plant’s primary crusher for decades. The mine does not operate crushing and screening processes, so testing is unnecessary.

11Mineral Resource Estimates

11.1Definitions

A mineral resource is an estimate of mineralization by considering relevant factors such as cutoff grade, likely mining dimensions, location, or continuity that, with the assumed and justifiable technical and economic conditions, is likely to, in whole or in part become economically extractable. Mineral resources are categorized based on the level of confidence in the geologic evidence. According to 17 CFR § 229.1301 (2021), the following definitions of mineral resource categories are included for reference:

An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. An inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for the evaluation of economic viability. An inferred mineral resource, therefore, may not be converted to a mineral reserve.

Page 22 of 37


An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. An indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource and may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve. As used in this subpart, the term adequate geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to establish geological and grade or quality continuity with reasonable certainty.

A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. As used in this subpart, the term conclusive geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to test and confirm geological and grade or quality continuity.

11.2Key Assumptions, Parameters, and Methods

11.2.1Resource Classification Criteria

Geologic and analytical data from local drilling have proven that the Boone limestone has a consistently high CaCO3 content (above 96.0%) and a consistent mining thickness of 30 plus ft. across the entire ALC property.

For many years the ALC mine has provided limestone of a consistent quality to the plant. Geologic confidence was established by the verified consistent analytical results from drilling. Classifying these resources in the indicated and measured categories is appropriate. The indicated category was applied to areas that some drilling was available but more was needed to increase the geologic confidence. The measured category was applied to tracts adjacent to the existing mines because: 1) there are sufficient drill holes in the area with analyses; and 2) the proximity (high walls) to the mines that have operated for decades extracting the same limestone with the same quality as seen in the holes. These two factors provide high geologic confidence in the resource model for this acreage.

11.2.2Market Price

A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the USGS each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.” Their database is comprised of sources from the entire United States. The study considers such material issues as regional price differences, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. For 2020, USGS reported an average value price per metric ton of $12.19, which converts to $11.05 per short ton for crushed limestone. ALC mine’s only product is crushed limestone and is an exclusive supplier to the ALC plant.

11.2.3Fixed Cutoff Grade

The ALC mine supplies shot limestone to the plant’s primary crusher that is further processed by the ALC plant for products to sell to end-user markets. The plant must be provided with a limestone source above an average CaCO3 threshold for customer needs. No matter the product, the raw limestone must exceed a minimum average content above 96.0% CaCO3. This percentage is considered a fixed cutoff grade because the percentage does not vary for the current plant products. The average percent of CaCO3 can be higher but not lower to meet the quality requirement of the plant. Mining limestone with a significantly higher average CaCO3 percentage results in the deposit being high-graded which shortens the mine’s life. Lowering the grade is unacceptable for the plant.

A primary XRF analysis quality control check is to total all the oxide percentages to determine how close the analysis total is to 100%. CaO is the primary oxide of the sample analyzed and the remainder is comprised of MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2 (refer to Section 8).

The fixed cutoff grade determines the mining thickness. Hole analyses are conducted on intervals of typically two to 10 ft. This thickness is determined by compositing the individual intervals in a hole until the average CaCO3 is just above the fixed cutoff. Since the mine operates on a fixed cutoff grade, there are no specific economic criteria for changing the cutoff grade. Any cost factors that increase the mining cost of limestone at this fixed grade would be offset by appropriate downstream price increases in the ALC plant’s products.

11.2.4Summary of Parameters

Primary modifying factors are fixed cutoff grade, the final underground mine layout, and property line offset. Key assumptions and parameters applied to estimate mineral resources are in Table 11.2.4.

Page 23 of 37


Table 11.2.4 Resource Parameter Assumptions

Modifying Factor

    

Parameter

 

Fixed Grade Cutoff

Above 96.0% CaCO3

Property Offset

50 ft.

Mineability

Reasonably Expected to be Feasible to Mine

11.3Resource Model

Once the all the verified data was in the database, a final data entry check was performed. Any sample data without a verifiable location or complete analyses were excluded. Table 11.3 lists the number of drill holes used in the model database.

The mines are surveyed every year to document the mining face advance during the year. The existing mine map is updated with the newly surveyed mined areas and oriented to the mine grid. The current surface survey dated December 21, 2021, was used to determine the resource areas for the TRS resource estimate. The new surface survey and most recent USGS LIDAR topography were edited using Global MapperTM software to reduce file size and crop to the resource area. The existing mining grid coordinate system was State Plane NAD 83 feet and was not changed.

The ore body consists of a horizontal single limestone bed defined by top and bottom surfaces. The top and the bottom ore intercepts were from total ore interval composites. The average CaCO3 content above the 96.0% cutoff or higher was used to determine the ore interval in each hole. If any hole’s composite were below 96.0% CaCO3, that area would be excluded from the resource estimate. This situation did not occur within the defined ore body. Next, the hole intercepts were utilized to produce top and bottom three-dimensional structural surfaces.

The method chosen to model the ore structures was gridding using SURFERTM software and gridded by Kriging was selected from eleven other algorithms. The selection process involved four steps:

·

Rough hand contour data for trend and structure preview for comparison;

·

Run gridding script with basic inputs to compare 12 gridding methods rough maps with hand contoured map;

·

Select appropriate grid methods after comparison, then refine with specific inputs to further the selection process; and

·

Run a residual test to select which grid method specifically honors the ore intercepts and approximates the hand contouring.

These structural surfaces were then truncated against the current topography to account for erosional effects and mined out areas. The outline of the ALC property was then used to define the gross boundary of the resource areas.

Next, ore isochore (thickness) and overburden isochore maps were constructed. These maps were used determine model limits, thickness of overburden, ore and overburden to ore ratio. Fig. 11.3 is a map of the reserve areas and the top of the ore in each area.

Page 24 of 37


Graphic

The resource volume and tonnage were estimated using Surfer software. The volumes were determined by direct measurement of the thickness between the top and bottom of the ore surfaces as defined by gridding of the ore intercepts in each hole. The density factor for the ore was 167 pounds per cubic ft. from previous outside lab density measurements.

Table 11.3 Summary of Drill Hole Database for the Model

Data Type

    

Number of Records

 

Total Holes

166

Lithology

166

Chemical Analyses (Includes Mine Faces)

156*

Hole Composites

156*

Note: *10 holes were for lithology only.

11.4Mineral Resources

11.4.1Estimate of Mineral Resources

Resources for this deposit were estimated as in-place volumes and tonnages. The estimate of measured, indicated, and inferred mineral in-place limestone resources for the ALC operation effective December 31, 2021, as determined from applying the resource parameters to the geologic model, are in Table 11.4-1.

Page 25 of 37


Table 11.4.1 ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone1,2

Resource Category

    

In Place
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Processing Recovery
 (%)3

Measured Mineral Resources

16,010,088

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

8,239,334

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

24,249,422

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place.

11.4.2Geologic Confidence and Uncertainty

The core chemical analysis data in the database have been verified and there is a high degree of confidence in those results. The confidence was from the fact the composited CaCO3 results were constantly above the 96.0% cutoff. At the ALC mine site the Boone formation is a tabular, medium bedded limestone with very little dip and no complicated structural features. For many decades, the ALC mining operation has produced crushed limestone meeting or surpassing the quality limits required by the plant during its entire operational history.

The analytical results cover from 1959 to 2021 and are sufficient to establish reasonable certainty of geological presence, grade, and quality continuity on the operation’s property. 156 hole’s chemical analyses were examined for this model and the average CaCO3 % was constantly above 96.0%. 79 acres (per 2021 mine survey) have been excavated since the mine went into operation in the 1920’s.

The continuity and quality consistency has been documented by drilling results on the property. The chemical quality for cores from unmined areas is consistent with past limestone production. This was verified by comparison of data from holes in mined out areas and QC/QA data.

Because of those results and the fact that the quality control drilling and production quality is constantly above the calcium carbonate cutoff for the deposit, there is high confidence in the definition of the ore zone limits,

11.5Opinion of the Qualified Person

There are no significant factors onsite that will impact the mining of this ore body. After reviewing the resource model, the QP is confident that the limestone has consistent quality, lateral continuity and minable thickness within the drilled areas on the ALC property. The QP is also confident that ALC will continue to extract limestone above the quality cutoff for the foreseeable future.

The QP’s opinion is that the following technical and economic factors could influence the economic extraction of the resource, but the ALC plant insulates most of them from the mine. Although, if lime production becomes unfeasible the ALC plant would no longer require limestone from the ALC mine to produce lime.

·

Regional supply and demand Due to the shipping cost of lime, sales are limited to a regional footprint at the plant. The plant is insulated from global import and export market changes, as sales are domestic and regional.

·

Fuel cost mining equipment are major diesel consumers at the ALC mine. As diesel prices rise, the price per ton of production also rises and will need to be offset by increases in the plants product prices.

·

Skilled labor This site is located near communities with an available labor source.

·

Environmental Matters:

Federal or State regulations/legislation regarding greenhouse gas emission
Air and water quality standards

12Mineral Reserve Estimates

Mineral resources were converted to reserves using the estimated percentage recovery factor for the mining method proposed. For open pit mining it is estimated to be an 82% recovery factor. For underground mining the recovery factor is estimated to be 75%. The overall recovery factor for all mining is estimated to be 78%.

12.1Definitions

Mineral reserve is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable

Page 26 of 37


part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted (Dorsey, 2019).

Probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.  For a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person’s confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions (Dorsey, 2019).

Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource.  For a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person has a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality. Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource and can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource (Dorsey, 2019).

12.2Price

The ALC mine exclusively supplies crushed limestone to the ALC plant. A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the USGS each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.” Their database comprises sources from the entire U.S. and considers such material issues as regional price difference, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. As stated in Section 11.2.2, USGS reports average crushed limestone value price of $12.19 per metric ton, which converts to $11.05 per short ton.

12.3Costs

Annual sustaining capital costs were estimated using prior-year capital expenditures and ALC’s 2022 capital budget. Capital costs estimates were reduced from prior years costs due to decreased requirements for limestone ore quantities. Limestone mining costs for ALC were estimated using historical data and its 2022 budget. Operating costs estimates were reduced from prior years costs due to decreased requirements for limestone ore quantities. The estimate UG mining cost per ton is based on estimated mining costs.

12.4Reserve Estimates

Table 12.4 ALC – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Mining Recovery
 (%)3

Probable Reserves

3,458,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

82.0/75.0

Proven Reserves

9,085,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

82.0/75.0

Total Probable and Proven

12,543,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

82.0/75.0

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 Mining recovery is listed as open pit/UG recovery.

12.5Opinion of the Qualified Person

ALC has successfully mined this resource for many years using the same methods that are projected into the future. Significant increases in the cost of mining coupled with large decreases in the selling price of limestone would make mining uneconomic. Historically, ALC has increased sales prices in line with cost increases. The limestone is consistent across the reserves and allows for stable operating requirements from year to year.

13Mining Methods

13.1Geotechnical and Hydrologic Considerations

Currently, the State of Arkansas does not require geotechnical or hydrology modeling in mining operations.

13.2Mine Operating Parameters

The ALC mine plans to produce 500,000 tons per year. The expected life of the mine is approximately 25 years.

Overburden is removed by drilling and blasting. A vertical bench drill is used to drill the prescribed holes on designed spacings. Blasting is completed by a qualified contractor. The overburden is moved using excavators, bulldozers and haul trucks to designated overburden piles on the site.

Page 27 of 37


Mining has been exclusively open pit mining. Ore is excavated by drilling and blasting. A vertical bench drill is used the prescribed holes on a designed spacing. Blasting is completed by a qualified contractor. The ore is loaded using wheel loaders and haul trucks. Fig. 13.2 reflects a current estimate of the final mine limits.

Graphic

13.3Mining Plan

ALC mining will include both open pit and underground mining methods. Open pit mining extraction will utilize typical mining techniques of vertical drill and blast overburden removal and typical mine haulage equipment such as bulldozers, excavators, wheel-loaders and haul trucks. Overburden will be generally targeted at a 2:1 stripping ratio with the non-ore materials being placed within the property. Limestone ore will be recovered with vertical drill and blast, single pass bench mining and typical mining diesel-powered mine haulage equipment such as wheel loaders, excavators and haul trucks.

Designated UG areas will be extracted by the room and pillar mining method. Pillars will be designed as required by strata and depth constraints with estimated extraction ratios of 70-80%. Mining will be by horizontal drilling and blasting. Ground control will be maintained with mine scaling machines. Haulage will be via conventional underground mine haulage equipment.

13.4Mine Plant, Equipment, and Personnel

ALC has a skilled labor force of qualified miners, mechanics, supervision and management. ALC operates 3 to 6 days per week depending on demand from the plant and maintenance requirements. The mining equipment fleet consists of wheel-loaders and haul trucks. Ancillary equipment includes a bench drill, excavators, water truck, motor grader, light vehicles and dewatering pumps.

Page 28 of 37


14Processing and Recovery Methods

14.1Process Plant and Description

This section does not apply to the report because the mine delivers shot limestone to the ALC primary crusher, where the plant processes the limestone into various products. Crusher Flow Sheet was not included in the report because we only consider mined limestone delivered to the plant’s primary crusher.

14.2Plant Throughput and Design

This section does not apply to the report because the mine is an exclusive limestone supplier to the plant’s primary crusher.

14.3Plant Operational Requirements

This section does not apply to the report because the mine is an exclusive limestone supplier to the plant’s primary crusher.

14.4Application of Novel or Unproven Technology

Mining operations at the site follow standard underground methods. There has not been any application of novel or unproven technologies or techniques.

15Infrastructure

The ALC property is accessible by a paved state highway and rail. The mine operation is accessed by a gravel haul road maintained by the mine personnel. The mine site is a land-locked location with no port facilities access. A rail spur is located on plant property connected to the Missouri and Northern Arkansas Railway. The mine has an onsite office and maintenance shop. Three-phase electric power is provided to the site via above-ground utility lines. A water source is available but not utilized by the mine. A water supply is available from the county system but bottled water is supplied for drinking. Load-out to the primary crusher is on mine property. Fig. 15.1 shows a topographic map of the mine area and significant infrastructure features.

Graphic

16Market Studies

16.1Market Outlook and Forecast

Demand for limestone produced at the ALC mine is exclusively for ALC’s lime and limestone production facilities next to the mine which have been in existence for over 60 years. ALC lime and limestone products are delivered to customers by either truck or rail. Demand for limestone for the ALC operations has averaged approximately 1,000,000 tons per year over the previous

Page 29 of 37


five years. However, beginning in 2022, ALC plans to source 50% of its limestone demand from another party. Thus, over the remaining estimated 25 year life of the ALC mine, it is expected to produce 500,000 tons of limestone annually for delivery to the primary crusher.

Primary demand for lime and limestone products from ALC’s lime and limestone facilities is from stable markets including the steel industry, the construction industry, paper and glass manufacturers, municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities, roof shingle manufacturers, and poultry and cattle feed producers. Current market conditions for these customers should result in continued steady demand for lime and limestone products in ALC’s market areas for the foreseeable future.

16.2Material Contracts

The ALC mine is an exclusive provider of limestone to ALC’s lime and limestone production facilities. There are no material contracts with outside purchasers.

17Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations for Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

17.1Environmental Studies and Permitting Requirements

The State of Arkansas regulates industrial activities and its potential impacts on the environment under the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Open pit mining and reclamation are regulated in both the Coal and Non-Coal Programs, including soil, clay, shale, gravel, stone, limestone, sand, gypsum, bauxite, and novaculite under Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission Regulation 15, Act 827 of 1991, and Act 1166 of 1997.

In addition to open pit mining and reclamation, the ADEQ is also a delegated authority under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, established by the Environmental Protection Agency, to protect the ambient air quality and water quality within the State of Arkansas. ALC has furnished the environmental permit information provided in Table 17.1 below associated with its mine:

Table 17.1 Mining and Environmental Permits

Permit Number

    

Issuer

    

Purpose

    

Expiration Date

    

Status

 

0053-MQ-A2

November 2, 2017

ADEQ

Authorization to Quarry

November 1, 2022

In Place, Active

0045-AOP-R9

November 29, 2021

ADEQ

Air Quality

November 28, 2026

In Place, Active

ARR00A109

July 1, 2019

ADEQ

Storm Water

July 30, 2024

In Place, Active

Note: The above-referenced permits cover the ALC mining operations.

17.2Overburden, Site Monitoring, and Water Management

ALC produces and manages non-production material, which consists of overburden and a trace amount of unusable rock from the blasting process at the open pit mines. When mining operations progress into areas with overburden, the overburden is utilized to backfill active pits to the extent where the material is available.

Water management is conducted at the open pit mines to use for dust control and to manage stormwater run-off by way of pre-existing natural erosion pathways. In some areas of the mine, stormwater must be pumped to a natural drainage from a sump used to control standing water.

17.3Post-Mining Land Use and Reclamation

A Financial Plan for Reclamation was developed as part of the Five-Year Plan submitted to The State of Arkansas. The Financial Plan outlines the non-ore materials to be stockpiled within the mine, topsoil management as part of the stripping process as well as the final reclamation process. A surety bond and an estimated acreage of land affected over the life of the mine is submitted as part of the Five-Year Plan.

17.4Local or Community Engagements and Agreements

The operation has developed relationships over the years with various neighboring communities, including the small communities of Bethesda, Melbourne, and Batesville.

Page 30 of 37


17.5Opinion of the Qualified Person

Arkansas is a heavily regulated State of environmental laws and regulations and has numerous permits that require ongoing compliance and oversight from the State agencies. All permits require constant reporting and oversight from the State mining and environmental agencies. ALC and USLM personnel are well trained and stay up-to-date on all mining and environmental regulations. In the QP’s opinion, there are no current or outstanding issues in environmental governance.

18Capital and Operating Costs

The ALC mine has been a stable producer of limestone using the current equipment fleet and operating parameters for many years. This operating history and its 2022 budget were used to estimate the unit costs for limestone mining and annual sustaining capital expenditures.

18.1Capital Costs

Table 18.1 Capital Costs

Capital Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Annual Maintenance of Operations

$450,000

Underground Mining Equipment Fleet

$3,000,000

18.2Operating Costs

Table 18.2 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Open Pit Mining Cost Per Ton

$4.60

Underground Mining Cost Per Ton

$6.00

19Economic Analysis

The gridded model estimated limestone ore volumes for each reserve area. Limestone volumes are converted to tons for cost and revenue estimation using a density factor of 167 pounds per cubic foot.

The ore thickness is generally uniform in each area. The mining methods and equipment are suitable for all reserve areas.

19.1Key Parameters and Assumptions

The discount rate used in the economic analysis is 1.09%. This rate is ALC’s incremental borrowing cost. Per the current debt agreement and ALC’s current leverage ratio, our borrowing rate is 1.09% (calculated from the November 2021 LIBOR of 0.09%).

The tax was estimated using ALC’s current effective income tax rate calculated on September 30, 2021. In reviewing the September 30, 2021 tax provision, the effective tax contained no material non-recurring permanent items that would influence the rate, so it is considered not applicable to future periods. Demand for limestone is projected to be 1,000,000 tons per year for the life of the mine. The sales price per ton is estimated using the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021. Depreciation was estimated using existing assets and the approved items in the 2022 budget. The later years’ depreciations are calculated using the capital budget forecast and the asset life with a mid-year convention.

19.2Economic Viability

Sensitivity analysis was performed on the discount rate, mining costs, ALC mining costs, and limestone price.

Table 19.3-1 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

Discount Rate

    

NPV (thousands)

 

0%

$46,486

1%

$41,367

2%

$37,046

5%

$27,551

10%

$18,541

15%

$13,661

20%

$10,716

Page 31 of 37


Graphic

Table 19.3-2 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Mining Costs

Graphic

Limestone Mining Cost % Change

    

NPV (thousands)

 

-10%

$49,943

-5%

$45,348

0%

$40,754

5%

$36,159

10%

$31,564

Graphic

Table 19.3-3 Sensitivity Analysis: Selling Price Change

Selling Price % Change

    

NPV (thousands)

 

-20%

$31,748

-10%

$36,348

0%

$40,948

10%

$45,548

20%

$50,149

Page 32 of 37


Graphic

20Adjacent Properties

Geologic information from adjacent properties was limited to that performed by the AGS and some regional drilling performed by ALC. The AGS material consisted of measured sections and sampled surface locations. The AGS information is public domain. This information was utilized primarily as evidence of lateral continuity and quality if chemical analysis was available. None of the AGS information was part of the geologic model database.

21Other Relevant Data and Information

All data relevant to the supporting studies and estimates of mineral resources and reserves have been included in the sections of this TRS. No additional information or explanation is necessary to make this TRS understandable and not misleading.

22Interpretation and Conclusions

22.1Interpretation and Conclusions

Geology of the Boone limestone on the ALC property is simple. The deposit consists of a tabular, single limestone strata with no structure in the reserve areas and a shallow dip angle. The formation has been proven by drilling and production in and around the mines that the quality and thickness are very consistent. Because of this simple geology, the mining method is straightforward and consists of uncomplicated underground and open pit mining.

ALC has been in operation for many decades during varying economic and market conditions, and the ALC plant has maintained a steady market share. The quality control practices have helped to optimize the thickness and quality of the ore zone over the period of operation. The economic analysis and amount of Mineral Resources and Proven Reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 25 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

22.2Risks and Uncertainties

Internal to the mining operation, risks and uncertainties are minimal because of the uncomplicated geology and the employment of a standard mining methods. Governmental, legal, and regulatory risks, such as greenhouse gases, could adversely affect the markets the ALC operation supplies.

23Recommendations

The QP recommends a drilling project along the western side at the property line west of the south pit. This project would define and extent the resource potential out to the western property limits. The project could allow expansion of the mining operation in that direction.

Page 33 of 37


24References

Albin DR. et al. 1967. Water resources of Jackson and Independence, Arkansas. GSW-SP 1839-G. USGS. 37 pgs.

AcreValue.com. 2021. [Accessed 2021]. https://www.acrevalue.com/map/?lat=40.628229&lng=-90.5&zoom=4

Bestplaces.net/climate.2021. [Accessed 2022]. https://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/arkansas/batesville

Chandler A.2014. Physiographic Provinces of Arkansas. AGSPS. AGS. 1 pg.

Dorsey. 2019. How will the new rules affect the definitions of mineral reserves, probable mineral reserves, and proven mineral reserves? [Accessed 2020].

Earth.google.com. 2022. [Accessed 2022]. https://earth.google.com/web/

Google.com/maps. 2021. [Accessed 2022] https://www.google.com/maps/place/Batesville,+AR+72501/@35.7931201,-91.7481323,6611m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x87d16190f05e8a23:0x4c72fbe63c4e63d1!8m2!3d35.769799!4d-91.6409721

Haley BR et.al. 1993. Geological Map of Arkansas. USGS. 1 pg.

McFarland JD. 1998. Stratigraphic Summary of Arkansas. IC-36. AGS. 44 pgs.

Mitchell K. 2016. [Accessed 2022]. onlyinark.com/homegrown/Arkansas-trees/

Rains DS and Hutto RS. 2012. Geologic map of the Sylamore Quadrangle. Izard and Stone Counties, Arkansas. DGM AR-00844. AGS. 1 pg.

Swanson RG. 1981. Shell Sample Examination Manual. MIES1. AAPG. 102 pgs.

USLM. 2021 Property Records, Executive Summary. Company Internal Report. Pgs. 123

US Geological Survey. 2021. MapView Website. [Accessed 2021]. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/mapview/?center=-97,39.6&zoom=4.

US Geological Survey. 2021. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021. Stone (Crushed). pg. 154. USGS. 200 pgs.

World populationreview.com. 202. [Accessed 2022]. https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/batesville-ar-population

25Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

The QP has relied upon information and data from ALC and USLM personnel and historical records in completing this TRS. This material included written reports and statements of other individuals and companies with whom it does business. The material also includes permits, licenses, historical exploration data, production records, equipment lists, geologic and ore body resource and reserve information, mine modeling data, financial data and summaries, mine equipment specifications and summaries, records, equipment lists. This material has been relied upon in the mine planning, capital and cost planning, and audited. The ALC mine engineer assisted the QP in reviewing these materials and performed the final reserve modeling and economic analysis under the direction of the QP. The QP believes that the basic assumptions were factual and accurate and that the interpretations were reasonable. There is no apparent reason to believe that any material facts have been withheld or misstated. In his professional judgment, the QP has taken all appropriate steps to ensure that the information or advice from ALC and USLM personnel and records and outside entities are accurate. The QP does not disclaim any responsibility for this Technical Report Summary.

Page 34 of 37


Appendix A: List of Data included in the Geologic Model

Table Description automatically generated

Page 35 of 37


Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

Arkansas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

 

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

Discount Factor 1.09%

NPV $40,948

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Tons Limestone Sold

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

-Operating Costs

$

(2,299)

$

(2,299)

$

(2,299)

$

(2,299)

$

(2,299)

$

(2,299)

$

(2,299)

$

(2,299)

-Depreciation

$

(1,021)

$

(876)

$

(704)

$

(603)

$

(490)

$

(464)

$

(450)

$

(450)

Taxable Income

$

2,205

$

2,350

$

2,522

$

2,623

$

2,736

$

2,762

$

2,776

$

2,776

-Tax

$

(441)

$

(470)

$

(504)

$

(525)

$

(547)

$

(552)

$

(555)

$

(555)

+Depreciation

$

1,021

$

876

$

704

$

603

$

490

$

464

$

450

$

450

-Capital Expenses

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

Free Cash Flow

$

2,335

$

2,306

$

2,272

$

2,251

$

2,229

$

2,224

$

2,221

$

2,221

Arkansas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

 

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

2035

2036

2037

Tons Limestone Sold

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

-Operating Costs

$

(2,299)

$

(2,362)

$

(2,522)

$

(2,650)

$

(2,650)

$

(2,708)

$

(3,000)

$

(3,000)

-Depreciation

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(960)

$

(960)

$

(960)

Taxable Income

$

2,776

$

2,713

$

2,553

$

2,426

$

2,426

$

1,857

$

1,565

$

1,565

-Tax

$

(555)

$

(543)

$

(511)

$

(485)

$

(485)

$

(371)

$

(313)

$

(313)

+Depreciation

$

450

$

450

$

450

$

450

$

450

$

960

$

960

$

960

-Capital Expenses

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(3,000)

$

(450)

$

(450)

Free Cash Flow

$

2,221

$

2,170

$

2,042

$

1,940

$

1,940

$

(555)

$

1,762

$

1,762

Arkansas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

 

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

2038

2039

2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

2045

Tons Limestone Sold

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

-Operating Costs

$

3,000)

$

(3,000)

$

(3,000)

$

(3,000)

$

(3,000)

$

(3,000)

$

(3,000)

$

(3,000)

-Depreciation

$

(960)

$

(960)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

Taxable Income

$

1,565

$

1,565

$

2,075

$

2,075

$

2,075

$

2,075

$

2,075

$

2,075

-Tax

$

(313)

$

(313)

$

(415)

$

(415)

$

(415)

$

(415)

$

(415)

$

(415)

+Depreciation

$

960

$

960

$

450

$

450

$

450

$

450

$

450

$

450

-Capital Expenses

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

$

(450)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,762

$

1,762

$

1,660

$

1,660

$

1,660

$

1,660

$

1,660

$

1,660

Page 36 of 37


Arkansas Lime - Discounted Cash Flow

 

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

2046

Tons Limestone Sold

500

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

-Operating Costs

$

(3,000)

-Depreciation

$

(450)

Taxable Income

$

2,075

-Tax

$

(415)

+Depreciation

$

450

-Capital Expenses

$

(450)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,660

Page 37 of 37


Exhibit 96.3

Technical Report Summary on

ACT Holdings Company Limestone Operation

Izard County, Arkansas, USA

Prepared for:

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

Graphic

SK-1300 Report

Effective Date December 31, 2021

Report Date: March 2, 2022

Page 1 of 40


DISCLAIMERS AND QUALIFICATIONS

SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”) was retained by United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) to prepare this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) related to ACT Holdings, Inc. (“ACT”) limestone reserves and resources. This TRS provides a statement of ACT’s limestone reserves and resources at its mine located in Izard County, Arkansas and has been prepared in accordance with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Regulation S-K 1300 for Mining Property Disclosure (S-K 1300) and 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229.601(b)(96)(iii)(B) reporting requirements. This report was prepared for the sole use by USLM and its affiliates and is effective December 31, 2021.

This TRS was prepared by SYB Group’s President who meets the SEC’s definition of a Qualified Person and has sufficient experience in the relevant type of mineralization and deposit under consideration in this TRS.

In preparing this TRS, SYB relied upon data, written reports and statements provided by ACT, Arkansas Lime Company, also a wholly-owned subsidiary of USLM, (“ALC”) and USLM. SYB has taken all appropriate steps, in its professional opinion, to ensure information provided by ACT, ALC and USLM is reasonable and reliable for use in this report.

The Economic Analysis and resulting net present value estimate in this TRS were made for the purposes of confirming the economic viability of the reported limestone reserves and not for the purposes of valuing ACT or its assets. Internal Rate of Return and project payback were not calculated, as there was no initial investment considered in the financial model. Certain information set forth in this report contains “forward-looking information,” including production, productivity, operating costs, capital costs, sales prices, and other assumptions. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and undue reliance should not be placed on them. The ability to recover the reported reserves depends on numerous factors beyond the control of SYB Group that cannot be anticipated. Some of these factors include, but are not limited to, future limestone prices, mining and geologic conditions, obtaining permits and regulatory approvals in a timely manner, the decisions and abilities of management and employees, and unanticipated changes in environmental or other regulations that could impact performance. The opinions and estimates included in this report apply exclusively to the ACT mine as of the effective date of this report.

All data used as source material plus the text, tables, figures, and attachments of this document have been reviewed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geologic practices.

SYB hereby consents to the use of ACT’s limestone reserve and resource estimates as of December 31, 2021 in USLM’s SEC filings and to the filing of this TRS as an exhibit to USLM’s SEC filings.

Qualified Person: /s/ Keith V. Vickers

Keith V. Vickers, TXPG #3938

President, SYB Group, LLC

1216 W. Cleburne Rd

Crowley, TX 76036

Page 2 of 40


Table of Contents

List of Figures

4

List of Tables

5

1

Executive Summary

6

2

Introduction

7

3

Property Description and Location

10

4

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

11

5

History

11

6

Geological Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

12

7

Exploration

17

8

Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

20

9

Data Verification

22

10

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

22

11

Mineral Resource Estimates

22

12

Mineral Reserve Estimates

25

13

Mining Methods

27

14

Processing and Recovery Methods

28

15

Infrastructure

28

16

Market Studies

29

17

Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

29

18

Capital and Operating Costs

31

19

Economic Analysis

31

20

Adjacent Properties

34

21

Other Relevant Data and Information

34

22

Interpretation and Conclusions

34

23

Recommendations

34

24

References

35

25

Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

35

Appendix A: List of Data Included in the Geologic Model

36

Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

37

Page 3 of 40


List of Figures

1.

Fig. 3.1

Location and Property Map for ACT Operation

2.

Fig. 6.1-1

Arkansas Geological Provinces

3.

Fig. 6.1-2

Regional Geologic Map, Eastern Ozark Plateau

4.

Fig. 6.4-1

ACT, Local Area Stratigraphic Column

5.

Fig. 6.4-2

ACT West to East Cross-Section

6.

Fig. 7.1-1

ACT, Drill Hole Locations

7.

Fig. 7.1-2

ACT Core Hole Log

8.

Fig. 11.3

ACT, Top of the Plattin Limestone

9.

Fig. 13.2

ACT, Estimated Final Mine Limits

10.

Fig. 15.1

ACT, Operations Infrastructure

Page 4 of 40


List of Tables

1.

Table 1.1

ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

2.

Table 1.2

ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

3.

Table 1.3

Operating Costs

4.

Table 2.3

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

5.

Table 2.4

Visits Made by QP to ACT

6.

Table 5.2

Historical Exploration and Development Drilling

7.

Table 6.4

ACT Property Stratigraphy

8.

Table 7.1-1

All ACT Drilling Projects

9.

Table 7.1-2

Summary of 2005 Exploration Drilling

10.

Table 7.1-3

Summary of 2006 Exploration Drilling

11.

Table 7.1-4

Summary of 2019 Development Drilling

12.

Table 7.1-5

Summary of All ACT Drilling

13.

Table 11.2.4

Resource Parameter Assumptions

14.

Table 11.3

Summary of the Drill Hole Database for the Model

15.

Table 11.4.1

ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

16.

Table 12.4

ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based on $11.05 Crushed Limestone

17.

Table 17.1

Mining and Environmental Permits

18.

Table 18.2

Operating Costs

19.

Table 19.3-1

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

20.

Table 19.3-2

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Open Pit Mining Costs

21.

Table 19.3-3

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Overburden Mining Costs

22.

Table 19.3-4

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Underground Mining Costs

23.

Table 19.3-5

Sensitivity Analysis: Limestone Selling Price Change

Page 5 of 40


1Executive Summary

The ACT Holdings, Inc. (“ACT”) mine is scheduled to begin production during 2022. The ACT mine will be mined by a contract miner using two methods: conventional open pit mining and room and pillar underground mining. It will produce high-grade limestone with calcium carbonate (“CaCO3”) quality above 96.0% from the Plattin formation that is delivered to the contract miner’s primary crusher. The crushed limestone will be transported to a rail spur on the mine property that is owned and operated by Arkansas Lime Company (“ALC”). ALC will transport the limestone by rail to the ALC plant where it will be processed into various products that are sold to a variety of customers. The ACT mine is located in Izard County, Arkansas on approximately 2,500 acres owned by ACT that contains known high-grade limestone reserves in a bed that typically ranges from 25 ft. to 30 ft. The mine was previously operated from approximately the 1950’s to the late 1970’s by former owners.

The ACT mine has procured, and will operate in compliance with, the required Authorization to Quarry (“ATQ”) and air and storm water permits that were issued the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (“ADEQ”). ACT will be required to refile the ATQ in 2023 and renew the air and storm water permits in 2022 and 2024, respectively.

The average annual production rate for the ACT mine is expected to be approximately 500,000 to 1,000,000 tons of limestone per year. The expected mine life at that rate of production is approximately 80 years.

Geologic and analytical data from local drilling have proven that the Plattin limestone has a consistent CaCO3 content above 96.0% and a small range of thickness (30 ft. to 25 ft.) across the entire ACT property. These analytical results from more than 70 drill holes are sufficient to establish reasonable certainty of geological presence and grade or quality continuity on the property. The geologic confidence is high and verified with the abundance of drilling results.

As noted in section 2.1, Keith Vickers of SYB Group (“SYB”), a consultant for United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) for over 20 years served as the Qualified Person (“QP”) and prepared the estimates of limestone mineral resources and reserves for the ACT mine. Summaries of the ACT mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves are shown below in Tables 1.1 and 1.2, respectively. Sections 11 and 12 set forth the definitions of mineral resources and reserves as well as the methods and assumptions used by the QP in determining the estimates and classifications of the ACT mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves.

Table 1.1 ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Resource Category

    

In Place
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Processing Recovery
 (%)3

Measured Mineral Resources

115,802,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

0

0

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

115,802,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place.

Table 1.2 ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade

(% X)

    

Mining Recovery
 (%)3

Probable Reserves

21,047,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0/75.0

Proven Reserves

68,500,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0/75.0

Total Probable and Proven

89,547,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0/75.0

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 Mining recovery is listed as open pit/UG recovery.

Page 6 of 40


The modeling and analysis of the ACT mine’s resources and reserves has been developed by ACT, ALC, and USLM personnel and reviewed by management of the companies, as well as the QP. The development of such resources and reserves estimates, including related assumptions, was a collaborative effort between the QP and personnel of the companies.

Since all mining and overburden removal is performed by a contractor there are no capital costs. Limestone mining costs for ACT were estimated using its contract with its contractor. Contract mining costs are $3.50 per ton of limestone ore and $2.17 per ton for overburden. Underground contract limestone mining costs are $6.50 per ton.

Table 1.3 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Contractor Open Pit Mining Cost Per Ton

$3.50

Contractor Overburden Mining Cost Per Stripping Ton

$2.17

Contractor Underground Mining Cost Per Ton

$6.50

It is the QP’s overall conclusions that:

1.

The ACT mine limestone deposit has been proven by geologic and analytical data from local drilling to have quality and thickness that is very consistent. Because of the simple geology, the mining methods for the mine are straightforward and consist of conventional open pit mining and conventional room and pillar mining for the underground portion of the mine.

2.

The data detailed in this report that was used to estimate the resources was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

3.

The mining operations will be performed by contract miners and there are no significant factors onsite that will impact the extraction of the ore body.

4.

Absent unforeseen changes in economic or other factors, including additional federal or state environmental regulations, the economic analysis and the amount of Proven and Probable Reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 80 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

2Introduction

2.1Issuer of Report

Mr. Keith Vickers of SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”), a consultant for USLM for over 20 years, prepared this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) on ACT’s mining operations located in Izard County, Arkansas. Mr. Vickers is a Qualified Person (“QP”). USLM is a publicly-traded company on the NASDAQ Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol USLM and ACT is a wholly-owned subsidiary of USLM.

2.2Terms of Reference and Purpose

The purpose of this TRS is to support the disclosure of mineral resource and reserve estimates for ACT’s mining operations located in Izard County, Arkansas as of December 31, 2021. This TRS is to fulfill 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229, “Standard Instructions for Filing Forms Under Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 – Regulation S-K,” subsection 1300, “Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations.” The mineral resource and reserve estimates presented herein are classified according to 17 CFR § 229.1300 Definitions.

The QP prepared this TRS with information from various sources with detailed data about the historical and current mining operations, including individuals who are experts in an appropriate technical field. ACT has not previously filed a TRS.

The quality of information, conclusions, and estimates contained herein are based on: i) information available at the time of preparation; and ii) the assumptions, conditions, and qualifications outlined in this TRS.

Unless stated otherwise, all volumes and grades are in U.S. customary units and currencies are expressed in 2021 U.S. dollars. Distances are described in U.S. standard units.

2.3Sources of Information

This TRS is based upon engineering data, financial and technical information developed and maintained by ACT or USLM personnel, work undertaken by third-party contractors and consultants on behalf of the mine, public data sourced from the United

Page 7 of 40


States Geological Survey, Arkansas Geological Survey, internal ACT technical reports, previous technical studies, maps, ACT letters and memoranda, and public information as cited throughout this TRS and listed in Section 24. Table 2.3 is list of the terms used in this TRS.

This TRS was prepared by Keith V. Vickers, BSGeol, MSGeol, TXPG #3938, CPetG #6152. Detailed discussions with the following were held during the preparation of the TRS:

Mr. Timothy W. Byrne, President, CEO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Michael L. Wiedemer, Vice President, CFO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Russell R. Riggs, Vice President, Production, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. M. Michael Owens, Corporate Treasurer, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Jason Nutzman, Director of Legal and Compliance, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Wendell Smith, Director Environmental, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Nate O'Neill, Vice President and Plant Manager, ACT Holdings, Inc./ALC, Batesville, Arkansas

Mr. Tim Zuroweste, Mining and Projects Manager, ALC, Batesville, Arkansas

Mr. David Cox, Safety and Quality Control Manager, ALC, Batesville, Arkansas

Mr. Peter McKenzie, Mine Manager, TLC, Cleburne, Texas

Mr. Keith Vickers, SYB Group, USLM Consulting Geologist, Crowley, Texas

Page 8 of 40


Table 2.3 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

Term

    

Definition

AAPG

American Association of Professional Geologists

AASHTO

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

ACT

ACT Holdings Company, Inc.

ADEQ

Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality

AGS

Arkansas Geological Survey

ALC

Arkansas Lime Company

ASTM

American Society for Testing and Materials

CaCO3

Calcium Carbonate

CEO

Chief Executive Officer

CFO

Chief Financial Officer

CFR

Code of Federal Regulations

DTM

Digital Terrain Model

E

East

F.

Fahrenheit

Fig.

Figure

ft.

Feet

GLONASS

Global Navigation Satellite System

GPS

Global Positioning System

LIBOR

London Inter-Bank Offered Rate

LIDAR

Light Detection and Ranging

LST

Limestone

N

North

NAD

North American Datum

NPV

Net Present Value

P.E.

Professional Engineer

PG

Professional Geologist

QP

Qualified Person

QC/QA

Quality Control/Quality Assurance

S

South

SST

Sandstone

TRS

Technical Report Summary

TLC

Texas Lime Company

UG

Underground

U.S.

United States

USGS

United States Geological Survey

USLM

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

WAAS

Wide Area Augmentation System

W

West

XRF

X-Ray Fluorescence

2.4Personal Inspection

The QP, who has been a consulting geologist for USLM for over 20 years, is familiar with ACT’s mine geology and operations. In addition, the QP conducted onsite visits to review data, confirm protocols, and gather specific information required for the TRS not previously available to him.

On October 3, 2021, the QP met in the ACT office to review the drill hole and surface sample database and discuss what data were available and needed for the TRS. The QP inspected the mine and discussed the core storage methods. Core logging and sampling procedures were verified. The QP discussed quality control and quality assurance with the ALC QC/QA lab manager. A review of the core sawing methods and sample preparation for analytical tests occurred also.

The QP was updated on current mine status and reviewed a report checklist with ACT management and personnel. Topics covered in the update were the resource areas, grade controls, and production hole sampling and surveying procedures. The QP also inspected several locations in the mine area. The existing geologic model and mine design were reviewed. The QP met with the QC/QA lab manager to obtain lab and XRF standard certifications and instrument service/care contracts. Table 2.4 is a partial list of dates the QP has visited the mine.

Page 9 of 40


Table 2.4 Visits Made by QP to ACT

Date

    

Reason

2005

Supervised Exploration Drilling

2006

Supervised Exploration Drilling

2015

Geologic Mapping for Permitting

2017

Assisted in Mine Planning for Permitting

2019

Supervised and Served as Hole Site Geologist for Development Drilling

3Property Description

3.1Property Description and Location

ACT’s operations (35053’27.13”N, -91052’30.96”W, Fig. 3.1 GoogleEarth 2021) are located in Izard County, Arkansas, 5 miles east of Guion, Arkansas and 15 miles from Batesville, Arkansas.

Graphic

3.2Mineral Rights

The ACT Company owns approximately 2,500 acres in fee with all surface and subsurface mineral rights. Information furnished by ACT. (AcreValue website, 2021) (USLM Internal Report, 2005).

3.3Significant Encumbrances or Risks to Performing Work on the Property

There are no significant issues or risks to work on the properties outside of those generally related to mining operations.

3.4Lease Agreements and Royalties

ACT does not receive any royalties as it is not the lessor for any mineral rights on its properties.

Page 10 of 40


4Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

4.1Topography, Vegetation, and Physiography

The ACT area is located in the Ozark Plateaus physiographic province which is part of the Interior Highlands Physiographic region. Fig. 6.1-1 shows the regions and provinces with the ACT approximate location.

This province’s topography is comprised of narrow valleys with steep sided ridges. These valleys generally connect to major river drainages. The elevations range from 750 ft. to 290 ft. The valleys are covered with thick alluvial sediments and the ridges have moderate soil cover on top but little to no soil on the sides.

The tree types consist predominately of upland forest consisting of oak and hickory trees (Foti, 1979). The limited area of the flat valley floor is agricultural land or small real estate tracts.

4.2Accessibility and Local Resources

Primary access to the operation is by County Road 2 to County Road 5 then to Collietown Road into the town of Cushman, Arkansas. From Cushman, State Highway 69 runs through the city of Batesville, Arkansas. The nearest community, Guion, Arkansas, does not have an airport. Batesville is served by a regional airport and commercial airline travel is through Little Rock, Arkansas (95 miles). County roads are gravel and paved.

4.3Climate and Operating Season

The average rainfall for Izard County, Arkansas, is 48 inches of rain per year. The County averages six inches of snow per year. On average, there are 220 sunny days per year in Izard County. The County averages 98 days of precipitation per year. Precipitation is rain, snow, sleet, or hail that falls to the ground. Average temperature ranges from a high in July of 90 degrees F. to a low of 25 degrees F. in January. There are infrequent winter storms that may make operations pause for a short period but nothing long-term. The above conditions make year-round mine operation possible with little weather-related lost time (www.bestplaces.net/climate, 2021).

4.4Infrastructure

4.4.1Water

There are no issues with the water supply. Mine is located next to the White River.

4.4.2Energy Supply

ACT’s mining operations are conducted by a contract miner who is responsible for their own fuel. Electricity is available at the property.

4.4.3Personnel

The contractor mining ACT is responsible for providing their personnel.

4.4.4Supplies

All supplies needed are furnished by the contactor as stipulated in the mining contract.

5History

5.1Prior Company Ownership

ACT purchased two adjoining properties formerly known as the ALCOA property and Reynolds property in 2005, which together consisted of approximately 2,500 acres in Izard County, Arkansas. Both properties produced high quality limestone for about 30 years before ceasing operations in the 1980’s. Information was provided by USLM.

Page 11 of 40


5.2Exploration and Development History

Table 5.2 Historical Exploration and Development Drilling

Year

Company

Purpose

Summary
of Work

Comment

2005

ACT/Longyear Drilling

Exploration

5 Hole Project

Confirm Platting Present and Quality

2006

ACT/Longyear Drilling

Exploration

48 Hole Project

Confirm Extent Across Property

2019

ACT/3D Drilling

Development

Drilling in Old Surface Mines 24 Hole Project

Quality and Mining Thickness Plattin

Note:

A detailed discussion of all drilling and results is in Section 7.1.

6Geologic Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

6.1Regional Geology

The state of Arkansas is divided into five geologic provinces (Fig. 6.1-1). These provinces were designated according to unique geology and topography. ACT is located in the Ozark Plateaus province. The target ore formation at the ACT mine is the Plattin limestone of the Middle Ordovician age. Described below is the regional geologic history with emphasis on this age and formation. Please refer to Fig. 6.1-2 for the stratigraphic period and formation order. The Ozark Plateaus province began to form in the early Ordovician when the first uplift of the region occurred. These uplift events occurred throughout geologic time until the Tertiary age. This last event and significant erosion left the current structural feature seen today. Between the Cambrian age and the present day there were repetitive erosional events. There were a total of 17 events caused by either uplift with erosion or erosion because of receding seas. These are depositional hiatuses or erosional unconformities. They are important because they produce a high degree of variability in thickness. The Lower Ordovician age is characterized by deposition of dolomites until the Middle Ordovician age with the deposition of the Joachim formation. From the Plattin formation until the Chattanooga shale at the end of the Devonian age, limestone deposition was the dominate rock type. The rock types of this period represent deposition in a shallow marine environment which existed for a long period of time until deep water marine environment conditions produced shale deposition (McFarland, 1998.)

Structurally, the region is one of flat lying strata (low dip angle) and faulting is generally the normal type with the downthrown part on the south side. There are gentle folds present and they are very low amplitude (height). Fig. 6.1-2 is the geologic map of the eastern part of the Ozark Plateaus province.

Page 12 of 40


Graphic

Page 13 of 40


Graphic

6.2Local and ACT Property Geology

The local and ACT mine site geology are microcosms of the regional geologic events. The age range for the formations outcropping in the ACT area is Middle Ordovician to Mississippian age. Fig. 6.4-1 is a stratigraphic column with complete descriptions of the formations present in the ACT area. At the ACT mine site drilling revealed a transitional interval between the Kimmswick formation above and the Upper Plattin formation below. The interval consists of a very fine crystalline limestone and dolomitic limestone with very fine quartz sand. This interval’s thickness is highly variable with a range from 0 ft. to 35 ft. Drilling and surface mapping have not found any faults in the area but mapping in other nearby areas has encountered normal faults with displacements of 20 ft. or less. Similar to the regional structural fabric there are a few gentle low angle folds.

There are erosional surfaces present at every formational contact which has produced variation in formation thicknesses. These are hiatuses in the depositional record called unconformities. This partial rock record poses some challenges in mapping and correlation because these events varied in length and magnitude. Table 6.4 contains typical ranges for formation thicknesses in the local area.

Karsting or limestone dissolution by meteoric water occurs all over northern Arkansas as the result of the large amount of rainfall the region receives. Typically, the more porous the rock the greater the dissolution effect. Formations like the Fernvale or Kimmswick (coarse crystalline) are more affected than less porous formations such as the Upper Plattin formation (very fine crystalline).

6.3Mineralization

Unlike other industrial minerals or metal deposits, high calcium limestones are the product of unique depositional environments only, not by subsurface alteration or enhancement. The CaCO3 content is the product of reef organisms that build their exoskeletons out of CaCO3 derived from the marine environment. The reef area has very limited or no exposure to sources of non-carbonate materials such as clay, silica, iron, that reduce the CaCO3 content. No subsurface mineralization has occurred to create or enhance the CaCO3 content in this deposit.

6.4Stratigraphy and Mineralogy

Fig. 6.4-1 is stratigraphic column with detailed descriptions covering the local area around the ACT mine site. Fig. 6.4-2 is a cross-section through the center of the property. The section displays the variable nature if the interburden interval between the Kimmswick formation and the Upper Plattin formation. Table 6.4 is a listing of the mine site stratigraphy and the range of formation thicknesses that occur locally. (Rains and Hutto, 2012)

The Upper Plattin formation is a very fine crystalline limestone that is composed of almost pure CaCO3 mud. This type of lithology is deposited in clear water in a shallow sheltered bay or lagoon which has limited source to open water mostly at high tide.

Page 14 of 40


Graphic

Page 15 of 40


Graphic

Page 16 of 40


Table 6.4 ACT Property Stratigraphy

Stratigraphic
Unit

    

Thickness Approximate
Range

    

Primary Lithology

Alluvium

Variable

Recent Soils and Gravels (Chert)

Boone Formation

0 ft. to 200 ft.*

Cherty, Coarse to Fine Crystalline LST

St Joe Formation

0 ft. to 100 ft.*

Coarse Crystalline, Bioclastic LST

Sylamore Formation

0 ft. to 20 ft.*

Well Rounded, Medium Grained, SST

Lafferty Formation

5 ft. to 20 ft.*

Very Fine to Fine Crystalline, Clayey, LST

St Clair Formation

0 ft. to 100 ft.*

Very Coarse Crystalline, Fossiliferous LST

Cason Formation

0 ft. to 10 ft.*

Sandy, Calcareous, Shale Containing SST in areas

Fernvale Formation

60 ft. to 120 ft.*

Coarse Crystalline, Fossiliferous, LST

Kimmswick Formation

12 ft. to 55 ft.*

Coarse to Fine Crystalline, Surgery Texture, LST

Plattin Top Marker Bed

0 ft. to 35 ft.

Very Fine Crystalline, “Lime Green” Dolomitic LST

Plattin Formation

105 ft. to 240 ft.*

Upper Very Fine Crystalline, Clear Calcite Grains, LST

Joachim Formation

20 ft. to 150 ft.*

Very Fine Granular, Calcite Grains and Veins, Dolomite

St Peter Formation

120 ft. to 200 ft.*

Well Sorted and Rounded Grains, White, Friable, SST

Everton Formation

0 ft. to 600 ft.*

Thin Bedded, Interbedded SST and Dolomite

Note:

*Multiple Sources AGS.

7Exploration

The ACT sample consists of 76 core holes. Previous owners conducted drilling programs and mined the Fernvale formation and Kimmswick formation (open pit and underground mine). Their drilling information was not available.

7.1Drilling Programs

A summary of all drilling projects in the on ACT property is in Table 7.1-1. These projects include exploration and development drilling by diamond rotary bit method. Fig. 7.1-1 is a location map of all core holes utilized in the geologic model with the resource area outlined. A list of the holes in the model database containing the hole name and XY coordinates can be found in Appendix A.

These drilling projects followed USLM protocols for drilling and analysis of the cores. The procedures for the projects were:

·

Contract geologists selected core drilling locations with the approval of sites and drilling budget by USLM management.

Graphic

Page 17 of 40


·

Core drilling was conducted directly under the supervision of contract geologists. All core was logged by SYB or an approved USLM contract geologist using a protocol modified from the Shell Sample Examination Manual (Swanson, 1981) that was modified by SYB and approved by USLM.

·

After final selection, hole locations were surveyed by hand GPS (WAAS and GLONASS capable).

·

Immediately upon retrieval, the core was placed on a V-shaped trough. All core pieces were fitted together and labeled with a permanent marker in one-ft. intervals.

·

Characteristics related to the suitability of the limestone for the ALC plant processing and geology were recorded. These items are stratigraphy, key marker lenses/layers, lithology characteristics, visual identification of ore top and bottom, and structural disturbance.

·

The core from each drill hole was placed into cardboard boxes in two ft. intervals totaling 10 ft. at the drill site. The boxes were labeled with a box number, company information, hole number, core runs, and depths marked on each box. The boxes were then delivered to the ALC core processing area. Then they were prepped for transport to the ALC core storage center.

·

The contract geologists were responsible for examining the core and compiling a detailed interval list for XRF analysis. This list was later entered into Excel to build an analysis database. The analysis intervals were chosen on two ft. lengths and intervals of six ft. to ten ft. above and below the lithologically identified ore zone were chosen. This excess was so the top and bottom of the ore could be chemically defined.

·

Once the cores were at the ALC core storage area, the core intervals were diamond sawed into two-thirds to one-third splits. The interval’s one-third split was then bagged in a plastic bag and labeled with the depth interval to be analyzed. The two-thirds split was placed back in the box for reference.

·

The bagged intervals are kept in plastic labeled buckets or boxes in separate groups by the hole and then submitted to the ALC QC/QA lab for XRF analysis. Any portions of samples not destroyed during the testing process are still stored at the ALC core storage facility.

The ALC QC/QA lab performed the XRF analysis on these cores using the USLM lab protocols (discussed in Section 8).

Table 7.1-1 All ACT Drilling Projects

Year

Company

Purpose

Summary
of Work

Comment

2005

ACT/Longyear Drilling

Exploration

5 Hole Project

Confirm Platting Present and Quality

2006

ACT/Longyear Drilling

Exploration

48 Hole Project

Confirm Extent Across Property

2019

ACT/3D Drilling

Development

Drilling in Old Surface Mines 24 Hole Project

Quality and Mining Thickness Plattin

ACT purchased the properties located at Izard County, Arkansas in 2005 and as part of the due diligence five exploratory core holes were drilled across the properties. These holes were wide spaced and drilled to a depth below the Upper Plattin formation limestone target to preliminarily evaluate the area’s stratigraphy and the Upper Plattin formation’s quality. The exploration data indicated that the formation was present across the property with the quality and continuity needed to justify more development drilling. The results from this project are in Table 7.1-2 below.

Table 7.1-2 Summary of 2005 Exploration Drilling

Number of Holes

    

Average LST
Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3
Percentage (%)

5

29

97.1

Note:

From 2005 SYB Group Drilling Report.

Based on the previous project, a 48-core hole exploration project was undertaken to prove with reasonable certainty the continuity and quality of the Upper Plattin formation was present across the property. During drilling, at some locations, karsting was

Page 18 of 40


encountered in the limestone formations above and a few in the Upper Plattin formation. This issue at times presented a risk of losing the drill string so that location was abandoned and drilling was done at an alternate location. The results of the project are listed below.

Table 7.1-3 Summary of 2006 Exploration Drilling

Number of Holes

    

Average LST
Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3
Percentage (%)

48

31

97.1

Note:

From 2006 SYB Group Drilling Report.

The average CaCO3 percentage results in 2006 were consistent with the drilling results from the 2005 drilling project. Both projects data confirm a nearly flat-lying formation with a low dip range from two to five degrees to the southwest.

In 2019, a development project was approved for drilling around the two open pit mines. The goal was to provide detailed information for mine planning. The project followed the protocols utilized in the previous two drilling projects. The results from this project are provided in Table 7.1-4 below.

Table 7.1-4 Summary of 2019 Development Drilling

Number of Holes

    

Average LST
Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3
Percentage (%)

24

38

97.5

Note:

From 2019 SYB Group Drilling Report.

The drilling results prove the Upper Plattin formation ore interval has a reasonable continuous thickness across the entire property. The CaCO3 quality surpasses the minimum needed by the ALC plant for production. The zone has a mineable average thickness across the property both for open pit mining and for UG mining. Table 7.1-5 lists average thickness and CaCO3 percentage of all the holes.

Table 7.1-5 Summary of All ACT Drilling

Number of Holes

    

Average LST
Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3
Percentage (%)

77

32

97.2

Fig. 7.1-2 is an example of the core logs produced from core description log and chemical analysis. These composite logs are used for correlation, determining ore intercepts, and a visual record of the core data.

Page 19 of 40


Graphic

7.2Surface Mapping and Sampling

The AGS had measured several stratigraphic sections (Halbrook, 1950) locally and on ACT property in the past. The QP has examined a representative number of the sections in the field.

7.3Hydrogeology Information

No hydrogeological studies have been conducted at the ACT property and the State of Arkansas does not require ACT to do so.

7.4Geotechnical Information

The State of Arkansas does not require geotechnical studies be performed.

8Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

8.1Sample Preparation and XRF Analysis

The ALC plant produces many products which are under strict quality parameters for chemical and physical quality. The ALC QC/QA lab was established many years ago and has been upgraded as required to meet the increasing demands of the customer base. In addition, customer quality control labs test ALC product shipments frequently.

XRF is one of the primary methods for determining the chemical content of limestone. The ALC QC/QA lab has been responsible for conducting XRF analysis on plant products and all rock samples from stockpiles, belt feed samples, drilling, and hand

Page 20 of 40


samples collected for outcrop conformation. The five significant oxides are analyzed. CaO is most important because of the plant’s raw limestone requirement above 96.0% CaCO3.

XRF sample preparation, whether core or cuttings, is crushed the entire sample to -10 mesh. The sample is separated and reduced by a ruffle to 250 grams then drying and pulverizing a representative split to -150 mesh. The samples are analyzed for oxides CaO, MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2, following USLM’s XRF analytical method for limestone analysis. The technique involves pressing the powder into a pellet using a wax binder to hold the shape. The sample trays are loaded into the instrument with samples, a copper standard, and a certified control standard. The analytical procedure and protocol information was provided by ALC QC/QA personnel.

8.2Quality Control/Quality Assurance

The unknown samples are analyzed twice in a run to provide data to confirm repeatability. All sample preparation equipment is cleaned after preparing each sample and before the subsequent preparation. The instrument is cleaned and calibrated each year by the manufacturer and is under a service contract. Whenever the device becomes dirty and registers out of calibration or out of specification for the standards, the manufacturer comes out to clean, recalibrate, and repair if necessary. The oxide results of each sample are totaled to determine if the data is within an acceptable error range around 100%. The sample analysis is rerun if the total oxide percentage exceeds the acceptable error limits. Sample preparation and a newly prepped sample correct the problem in many cases. The lab has a set of certified limestone standards to cover the content range of the major oxides that can occur in limestones. The appropriate standard is run concurrently with the unknown samples. The standard results are compared from run to run to ensure the instrument operates correctly.

USLM has a total of four QC/QA labs among its wholly-owned subsidiaries. These labs can perform many of the same analyses, specifically XRF. At any time one lab goes down or needs verification of XRF results, samples can be sent to another lab for continuing analysis of the sample or cross verification.

The ALC QC/QA lab is certified by

·

The Food and Drug Administration; and

·

Underwriters Laboratory.

The lab follows procedures and protocols set forth by:

·

ASTM Methods: C-25, 50. 51, 110, 977;

·

AASHTO Methods: M216-05, 219; and

·

USLM protocols for testing whole-rock samples.

The lab utilizes certified limestone samples to verify the accuracy and calibration of its instrumentation. These are:

·

Euronorm MRC 701-1;

·

China National Analysis Center;

-NC DC 60107a;
-NCS DC 14147a;
-NCS DC 70307; and
-NCS DC 70304.

The security for limestone geological samples is not required as compared to the procedures needed for precious metals (gold, silver, etc.). Core or other samples are, immediately after drilling, taken to the core storage area by the contract geologist, member of the drill crew, or the collector of limestone samples. They are logged in and then processed by ALC QC/QA lab personnel. The change of possession is limited to two or three people that can be identified and held accountable for the locations of the samples before delivery to the lab. This information was provided by ALC QC/QA lab personnel.

8.3Opinion of the Qualified Person on Adequacy of Sample Preparation

The QP examined the adherence to preparation and analytical procedure protocols by the ALC QC/QA lab personnel. The analysis of geologic samples is conducted with attention to detail given as the ALC QC/QA testing for the products produced by the plant. The opinion is that the analytical program and lab provide reasonably accurate data for determining resource estimates.

Page 21 of 40


9Data Verification

9.1Source Material

The QP worked with ALC personnel to obtain databases and raw data. There was an ongoing interface with ALC personnel while reviewing and verifying the data needed to model the deposit. For this TRS, the hard copy data was compared with the digital database for correctness and thoroughness. The data from the drilling programs were validated as reasonably as possible by comparing lithology and depths from each hole. Hole ore intercepts were cross-checked with the USGS LiDAR survey and GPS data to verify and confirm hole collar data. The logging of the core followed drill-site protocol and all data was collected and written on a formatted log sheet.

The QP met with the QC/QA lab manager to validate that the QC/QA protocol was followed for the geologic samples and the instrument’s status records. The sources for this data are the ALC QC/QA lab and contract geologists.

The topography used in the model was obtained from the most recent LIDAR scans, either federal government or private LIDAR data sources. The scans were reviewed for recent disturbance to make sure that was not an issue.

9.2Opinion of the Qualified Person on Data Adequacy

After contacting ACT personnel and subcontractors and reviewing the material for verification, the QP is satisfied the drill hole database and chemical analysis data are reasonably valid. The QP’s opinion is the data has been analyzed and collected appropriately, reasonably, and the data was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

10Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

The limestone mined at ACT is sedimentary without alteration due to metamorphic or igneous geologic processes. The uniqueness and suitability of the raw limestone for making the ALC plant’s products are based on the percent of CaCO3 content in the limestone. There is no metal content in the ore and no need to perform metallurgical testing. The mine does not operate crushing and screening processes so testing is not needed.

11Mineral Resource Estimates

11.1Definitions

A mineral resource is an estimate of mineralization by considering relevant factors such as cutoff grade, likely mining dimensions, location, or continuity that, with the assumed and justifiable technical and economic conditions, is likely to, in whole or in part become economically extractable. Mineral resources are categorized based on the level of confidence in the geologic evidence. According to 17 CFR § 229.1301 (2021), the following definitions of mineral resource categories are included for reference:

An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. An inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for the evaluation of economic viability. An inferred mineral resource, therefore, may not be converted to a mineral reserve.

An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. An indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource and may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve. As used in this subpart, the term adequate geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to establish geological and grade or quality continuity with reasonable certainty.

A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. As used in this subpart, the term conclusive geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to test and confirm geological and grade or quality continuity.

11.2Key Assumptions, Parameters, and Methods

11.2.1Resource Classification Criteria

Geologic and analytical data from local drilling have proven that the Upper Plattin formation limestone has a consistently high percentage of CaCO3 content (above 96.0%) and a small range of thickness (30 ft. to 25 ft.) across the entire ACT property. These analytical results from more than 70 drill holes are sufficient to establish reasonable certainty of geological presence and grade

Page 22 of 40


or quality continuity on the property. The geologic confidence is high because of the abundance of verified drilling results. Classifying these resources in the measured category is appropriate.

11.2.2Market Price

A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the USGS each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.” Their database is comprised of sources from the entire U.S. The study considers such material issues as regional price differences, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. For 2020, USGS reported an average value price per metric ton of $12.19, which converts to $11.05 per short ton for crushed limestone.

11.2.3Fixed Cutoff Grade

The limestone from the ACT mine is supplied to the mining contractor’s primary crusher and is transported to the ALC plant to process and to sell to end-user markets. The ALC plant must be provided with a limestone source that consistently exceeds an average CaCO3 threshold for customer needs. No matter the product, the raw limestone must exceed a minimum average content above 96.0% CaCO3. The percentage of CaCO3 can be higher but not lower to meet the quality requirement of the plant. Mining the limestone at a significantly higher average CaCO3 percentage results in the deposit being high-graded which shortens the mine’s life. Lowering the grade is unacceptable for the plant.

A primary XRF analysis quality control check is to total all the oxides to determine how close the total is to 100%. CaO is the primary oxide of the sample analyzed and the remainder is comprised of MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2 (refer to section 8).

Since the mine operates on a fixed cutoff grade, there are no specific economic criteria for changing the cutoff grade. Any cost factors that increase the mining cost of limestone at this fixed grade would be offset by appropriate downstream price increases in the ALC plant’s products.

11.2.4Summary of Parameters

Modifying factors are the fixed cutoff grade, the final pit shell area, and property line offset. Key assumptions and parameters applied to estimate mineral resources are in Table 11.2.4.

Table 11.2.4 Resource Parameter Assumptions

Modifying Factor

    

Parameter

Fixed Grade Cutoff

Above 96.0% CaCO3

Estimated Final Pit Shell

Pit Shell Outline

Property Offset

100 ft.

Karsting

100 ft. Set Back from Top of Plattin Outcrop

Slope of High Wall

70 Degrees

Mineability

Reasonably Expected to be Feasible to Mine

11.3Resource Model

The resource model database consists of all drill holes listed in Appendix A. The QP confirmed and verified the database contained appropriate data for the TRS resource estimates. Table 11.3 lists the number holes in the database and the data type. A final review was conducted to ensure no data entry errors existed.

The most current USGS LIDAR topography was downloaded (USGS Mapview, 2021). The topography was edited using Global MapperTM software to select only the local area around the ACT property. The coordinate system for the maps in this report is State Plane NAD 83 feet.

The ore body consists of a single limestone bed defined by top and bottom surfaces. The top and the bottom ore intercepts were created from total hole composites. The average CaCO3 percentage is composited at 96.0% or higher in each hole. If any hole’s composite were significantly below 96.0%, that area would be excluded from the resource estimate. This situation did not occur. Next, the hole ore intercepts were utilized to produce top and bottom three-dimensional structural surfaces or contour maps based on the fixed cutoff grade composites.

The method chosen to model the deposit structure was gridding using SURFERTM software and Kriging was selected from twelve other algorithms. The selection process involved four steps:

Page 23 of 40


·

Rough hand contour data for trend and structure estimate;

·

Run gridding script with basic inputs to compare gridding methods and produce a rough structure map;

·

Select grid method(s) then refine with specific inputs; and

·

Run a residual test to see which grid method closely matches the hole intercepts data value.

These two surfaces were then truncated against the new topography to account for erosional effects. This truncation is done because the ore bed position is not below the floor of the valleys. There are several ft. of non-ore below the bottom of the ore interval. Fig. 11.3 is a map of the top ore structure with the resource area outlined.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Next, ore, overburden thickness, and overburden stripping ratio maps were constructed. These maps were compared to a block model created in Surpac TM using the two ore structure surfaces. These surfaces were used to determine, to validate and confirm the conformity of the block model. The block model was then utilized to determine mine limits for resource and reserve estimates. The methods employed using Surpac are discussed below.

The resources were estimated using Geovia SurpacTM software. Contours of the top and bottom of the ore were imported into Surpac in AutoCAD format exported from SURFER. Surpac DTM surfaces were created using these contours. The USGS National Map service LIDAR database was imported into Surpac. Block models were developed for the entire resource area. The block dimensions were 20 ft. northing by 20 ft. easting and 2 ft. thick. The blocks were coded above or below the topography, above the ore bottom surface, and below the top ore surface to ensure that only blocks containing ore were included in the resource estimate. Blocks were also coded as being inside of a karsted and weathered zone to prevent these volumes from being included in the resource. Open pit and UG mining are appropriate for different parts of the resource area. The resource estimate employed both designs where necessary. Mine pits were designed using a 70 degree slope angle. The crests of the pits were offset 100 ft. from any external property boundaries.

Table 11.3 Summary of the Drill Hole Database for the Model

Data Type

    

Number of Records

Total Holes

76

Lithology

76

Chemical Analyses

76

Hole Composites

76

Page 24 of 40


11.4Mineral Resources

11.4.1Estimate of Mineral Resources

The estimate of measured and indicated in-place limestone resources for ACT effective December 31, 2021, were estimated from applying the resource parameters to the geologic model and are set forth in Table 11.4. There are no indicated nor inferred mineral resources.

Table 11.4.1 ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Resource Category

    

In Place
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Processing Recovery
 (%)3

Measured Mineral Resources

115,802,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

0

0

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

115,802,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place.

11.4.2Geologic Confidence and Uncertainty

Any geologic uncertainty associated with the limestone deposits is tied to the variability of the quality, continuity, and thickness of the bed or interval. Drilling was conducted on separate ridges which were thousands of ft. apart and encountered limestone with the aforementioned properties being very similar. The conclusion can be made that, over a large area, drilling results have shown the Upper Plattin formation to have, with reasonable certainty, consistent, quality and thickness of limestone. Based on the drilling results, there is high confidence in the definition of the ore zone limits and the quality is constantly above the CaCO3 cutoff.

11.5Opinion of the Qualified Person

There are no factors onsite that will impact the extraction of this ore body. After reviewing the resource model and supporting data, the QP is confident the Upper Plattin formation outcrops over the entire ACT property with consistent quality and a minable section. It appears ACT will economically extract stone through different mining methods above the quality cutoff for the foreseeable future.

The QP’s opinion is that the following technical and economic factors could influence the economic extraction of the resource but the ALC plant insulates most of them from the mine. If lime production becomes economically unfeasible, the plant would no longer require limestone from the mine for the production of lime.

·

Regional supply and demand – Due to the shipping cost of lime, sales are limited to a regional footprint at the plant. The plant is insulated from global import and export market changes, as sales are domestic and regional.

·

Fuel cost – Mining equipment are major diesel consumers at the ACT mine. As diesel prices rise, the price per ton of production also rises and will need to be offset by increases in the plant’s product prices.

·

Skilled labor – This site is located near communities with an available labor source.

·

Environmental Matters:

Federal or State regulations/legislation regarding greenhouse gas emission
Air and water quality standards

12Mineral Reserve Estimates

Mineral resources were converted to reserves using a 75% recovery factor for underground mining and a 95% recovery factor for open pit mining. The property boundary offsets, karsted and weathered areas, and pit slopes were included in the resource estimate. For underground mining 17% of the ore is lost to pillars and 8% is lost to the roof, the floor, spillage, and dust. For open pit mining 5% of the ore is not recovered due to ore being left in the pit floor or walls, dust and spillage. Dilution volume is minimal and was not estimated.

As discussed in Section 13.2, the average waste to ore ratio for the reserves is two tons of stripping per ton of limestone for open pit mining. The ore body outcrops on ridges which makes the stripping ratio and ore to waste ratio increase as mining progresses into the ridges. The open pit mining generally targeted a stripping ratio of less than 2:1. When combined with the back slope of the pits, the recovery factor, and the karsted and weathered limestone where the ore body outcrops the open pit mining waste to ore ratio

Page 25 of 40


averaged 2:1. Underground mining becomes increasingly more economic towards the interior of the ridge despite the lower ore recovery and higher costs.

12.1Definitions

Mineral reserve is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted (Dorsey, 2019).

Probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.  For a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person’s confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions (Dorsey, 2019).

Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource.  For a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person has a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality. Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource and can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource (Dorsey, 2019).

12.2Price

A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the USGS each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.” The database comprises sources from the entire U.S. and considers such material issues as regional price difference, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. As stated in Section 11.2.2, USGS reports average value crushed limestone price of $12.19 per metric ton, which converts to $11.05 per short ton.

12.3Costs

Limestone mining costs for ACT were estimated from the contract with its contractor. Contract mining costs are estimated at $3.50 per ton of limestone ore and $2.17 per ton for overburden. Underground contract limestone mining costs are estimated $6.50 per ton. Since all mining is to be performed by a contractor there are no capital costs.

12.4Reserve Estimates

Table 12.4 ACT Holding Company, Inc. – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Mining Recovery
 (%)3

Probable Reserves

21,047,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0/75.0

Proven Reserves

68,500,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0/75.0

Total Probable and Proven

89,547,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

95.0/75.0

Notes:

1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 Mining recovery is listed as open pit/UG recovery.

12.5Opinion of the Qualified Person

USLM has mined similar deposits for many years using the same methods that are projected into the future for this deposit. Given the similarity of the geology and ore chemical qualities to other properties operated by USLM, the proposed mining methods should perform according to plans. Significant increases in the cost of mining coupled with large decreases in the selling price of limestone would be required to make mining uneconomic. Historically, USLM has been able to increase sales prices in line with cost increases. The limestone and the overburden are consistent across the reserves and allow for stable operating requirements from year to year.

Page 26 of 40


13Mining Methods

13.1Geotechnical and Hydrologic Considerations

The State of Arkansas does not require geotechnical or hydrology modeling in mining operations and no geotechnical or hydrological studies have been completed.

13.2Mine Operating Parameters

The ACT mine plans to produce 500,000 to 1,000,000 tons per year. The expected life of mine is approximately 80 years. Mining will be conducted by a mining contractor.

Site development is completed by mining contractors using diesel powered earth moving equipment as they deem necessary.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

The deposit will be mined using two methods – conventional open pit mining and room and pillar UG mining. The average waste to ore ratio for open pit mine portion of the mine is two tons of stripping per ton of limestone. As the amount of waste that is required to be moved to expose ore increases underground mining becomes more economically attractive. For these reasons areas with lower overburden thicknesses were targeted for open pit mining. The mining recovery is estimated to be 95% for open pit mining and 75 % for underground mining. Fig. 13.2 shows the estimated final mine limits.

Page 27 of 40


13.3Mining Plan

ACT’s mine plan will include both open pit and underground mining methods. Open pit mining extraction will utilize typical quarrying techniques of vertical drill and blast overburden removal and typical diesel-powered mine haulage equipment such as bulldozers, excavators, wheel-loaders and haul trucks. Overburden will be generally targeted at a 2:1 stripping ratio with the non-ore materials being placed within the property. Limestone ore will be recovered with vertical drill and blast, single pass bench mining and typical mining diesel-powered mine haulage equipment such as wheel loaders, excavators and haul trucks.

UG deposits will be extracted by the room and pillar mining method. Pillars are planned to be 35 ft. by 35 ft. on 85 ft. centers yielding an extraction ratio of 75%. Mining will be by horizontal drilling and blasting. Ground control will be maintained with mine scaling machines. Haulage will be via conventional UG mine haulage equipment.

13.4Mine Plant, Equipment, and Personnel

The mining contractor provides the personnel and equipment they deem necessary to meet required production demands.

14Processing and Recovery Methods

14.1Process Plant and Description

This section does not apply to the report because the ACT mine will deliver limestone to the contractor’s primary crusher. The crushed limestone will then be transferred to ALC for processing into various products. Crusher Flow Sheet was not included in this TRS because the report only covers mined limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

14.2Plant Throughputs and Design

This section does not apply to the report because the ACT mine will be an exclusive limestone supplier to ALC.

14.3Plant Operational Requirements

The ACT mine is an exclusive limestone supplier to the ALC so this section does not apply to the mine.

14.4Application of Novel or Unproven Technology

Mining operations at the site will follow standard open pit mining or UG mining methods. There has not been any application of novel or unproven technologies or techniques in the mining processes.

15Infrastructure

The ACT property is accessible by rail, county roads, and the mine operation by gravel roads and haul roads maintained by the contract mine personnel. The mine site is land-locked with no port facilities. The rail is served by Missouri and North Arkansas rail line. Three-phase electric power is provided to the site via above-ground utility lines. Water for dust control at the mine is obtained from the nearby White River which flows year round. All mine facilities are located on mine property. Maintenance facilities and the primary crusher are portable and furnished by the contract mining company. Fig. 15.1 shows the topography of the mine area and significant infrastructure features.

Page 28 of 40


Graphic

16Market Studies

16.1Market Outlook and Forecast

Demand for limestone produced at the ACT mine is exclusively for ALC’s lime and limestone production facilities located in Independence County, Arkansas. The ALC facilities have been in existence for over 60 years. Its products are delivered to customers by either freight or rail. Demand for limestone for the ALC operations has averaged approximately 1,000,000 tons per year over the previous five years which has been previously sourced exclusively from a mine owned by ALC. However, beginning in 2022, ALC plans to source 50% of its limestone demand (500,000 tons) from the ACT mine for the next 25 years (the period of time the mine owned by ALC is expected to remain in production). Afterwards, the ACT mine is expected to be ALC’s exclusive limestone supplier and will produce approximately 1,000,000 tons of limestones annually for delivery to the primary crusher.

Primary demand for lime and limestone products from ALC’s lime and limestone production facilities is from stable markets including the steel industry, the construction industry, paper and glass manufacturers, municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities, roof shingle manufacturers, and poultry and cattle feed producers. Current market conditions for these customers should result in continued steady demand for lime and limestone products in ALC’s market areas for the foreseeable future.

16.2Material Contracts

The ACT mine exclusively provides limestone to ALC’s lime and limestone production facilities. There are no material contracts with outside purchasers.

17Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

17.1Environmental Studies and Permitting Requirements

The ADEQ regulates industrial activities and its potential impacts on the environment. Open pit mining and reclamation are regulated in both the Coal and Non-Coal Programs, including soil, clay, shale, gravel, stone, limestone, sand, gypsum, bauxite, and novaculite under the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission Regulation 15, Act 827 of 1991 and Act 1166 of 1997.

In addition to open pit mining and reclamation, the ADEQ is also a delegated authority under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, established by the Environmental Protection Agency, to protect the ambient air quality and water quality within the State of Arkansas. ACT has furnished the environmental permit information provided in Table 17.1 below. This information was provided by USLM.

Page 29 of 40


Table 17.1 Mining and Environmental Permits

Permit Number
Issue Date

    

Issuer

    

Purpose

    

Expiration Date

    

Status

0129-MQ
January 9, 2018

ADEQ

Authorization to Quarry

January 8, 2023

In Place, Active

1916-AGP-149
August 12, 2021

ADEQ

General Air Permit for Rock Crusher Plant

N/A

In Place, Active

ARR000000
(Final Permit No. TBD)
July 1, 2019

ADEQ

Storm Water

July 30, 2024

Notice of Intent Submitted to ADEQ

ACT is authorized under Permit No. 0129-MQ to mine high-quality limestone. As required by ADEQ, a Five-Year Plan was developed for ACT’s operations and includes estimations for the removal of topsoil, overburden, and production of limestone. Upon expiration of the permit, ACT will calculate area and volume estimations based on future limestone production. Actual volumes may vary depending on market and geological conditions.

ACT has contracted a third-party portable rock crushing operation to extract high-grade limestone from the ACT mine. The portable rock crushing operations are authorized under the General Air Permit for Rock Crusher Plants Permit No. 1916-AGP-149.

Industrial Storm Water Permit No. ARR000000 (Final Permit No. TBD) is a general permit authorizing the discharge of storm water that has commingled with the mining activities off property to a nearby receiving water body. This information was provided by USLM.

17.2Overburden, Site Monitoring, and Water Management

ACT produces and manages non-production material, which consists of overburden and a trace amount of unusable rock from the blasting process at the ACT open pit mine. When open pit mine operations remove overburden, the material is utilized to backfill active pits to the extent where the material is available.

Water management at the open pit mine consists of use for dust control and managing stormwater run-off by way of pre-existing natural erosion pathways. Because the ACT open pit mine is situated above the natural water table, there is no requirement or need for groundwater monitoring. This information was provided by USLM.

17.3Post-Mining Land Use and Reclamation

A Financial Plan for Reclamation was developed as part of the Five-Year Plan submitted to the State of Arkansas. The Financial Plan outlines the non-ore materials to be stockpiled within the mine, topsoil management as part of the stripping process, and the final reclamation process. A surety bond and an estimated acreage of land affected over the life of the mine is submitted as part of the Five-Year Plan.

The projected estimated life of the mine is 80 years. The operation is considered a tangible, long-lived asset. As with all long-lived assets, ACT has reasonably projected reclamation and remediation costs as an asset retirement obligation which is reported annually in the USLM’s annual report on Form 10K (USLM’s 2021 Form 10K to which this TRS is attached as an exhibit). This information was provided by USLM.

17.4Local or Community Engagement and Agreements

The operation is relatively new and at this time there are no engagements or agreements. This information was provided by USLM.

17.5Opinion of the Qualified Person

Arkansas is a heavily regulated state of environmental laws and regulations and has numerous permits that require ongoing compliance and oversight from the ADEQ. ACT and USLM personnel are well trained and stay up-to-date on all environmental regulations. In the QP’s opinion there are no current or outstanding issues in environmental governance.

Page 30 of 40


18Capital and Operating Costs

The ACT mine has a contract in place for producing limestone with a local company that has the equipment and skilled personnel for performing this work.

18.1Capital Costs

Since all mining and overburden removal is performed by a contractor there are no capital costs.

18.2Operating Costs

Table 18.2 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Contractor Open Pit Mining Cost Per Ton

$3.50

Contractor Overburden Mining Cost Per Stripping Ton

$2.17

Contractor Underground Mining Cost Per Ton

$6.50

19Economic Analysis

The block model was used to estimate overburden and limestone ore volumes for open pit and UG mining. All mining is performed by a contractor.

19.1Key Parameters and Assumptions

The discount rate used in the economic analysis is 1.09%. This rate is ACT’s incremental borrowing cost. Per the current debt agreement and our current leverage ratio, ACT’s borrowing rate is 1.09% (calculated from the November 2021 LIBOR of 0.09%).

The tax was estimated using ACT’s current effective income tax rate calculated on September 30, 2021. In reviewing the September 30, 2021 tax provision, the effective tax rate contained no material non-recurring permanent items that would influence the rate, so it is considered not applicable to future periods. Demand for limestone is projected to be 500,000 to 1,000,000 tons per year for the life of the mine. The sales price per ton is estimated using the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

19.2Economic Viability

ACT has positive cash flow and the current mine plan does not require capital expenditure therefore, payback and Return On Investment calculations are irrelevant. The NPV of the life of mine plan is $130.1 million. The annual cash flows are in Appendix B.

19.3Sensitivity Analysis

Sensitivity analysis was performed on the discount rate, contractor open pit mining costs, contractor open pit overburden mining costs, contractor underground mining costs, and limestone selling price.

Table 19.3-1 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

Discount Rate

    

NPV (thousands)

0%

$235,019

1%

$150,433

2%

$101,469

5%

$41,648

10%

$18,382

15%

$11,900

20%

$8,963

Page 31 of 40


Graphic

Table 19.3-2 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Open Pit Mining Costs

Contractor Open Pit Mining Costs Per Ton

    

NPV (thousands)

$3.00

$149,583

$4.00

$140,187

$5.00

$130,791

$6.00

$121,395

$7.00

$111,999

Graphic

Page 32 of 40


Table 19.3-3 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Overburden Mining Costs

Contractor Overburden Mining Cost Per Ton

    

NPV (thousands)

$2.00

$147,927

$3.00

$130,031

$4.00

$112,135

$5.00

$94,240

$6.00

$76,344

Graphic

Table 19.3-4 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Contractor Underground Mining Costs

Contractor UG Mining Cost Per Ton

    

NPV (thousands)

$6.00

$157,278

$7.00

$132,491

$8.00

$107,705

$9.00

$82,918

$10.00

$58,132

Graphic

Page 33 of 40


Table 19.3-5 Sensitivity Analysis: Limestone Selling Price Change

Selling Price Change (%)

    

NPV (thousands)

-20%

$69,341

-10%

$107,113

0%

$144,885

10%

$182,656

20%

$220,428

Graphic

20Adjacent Properties

The QP utilized published academic, professional, or government publications about the local area in creating this report. The QP has no material knowledge pertaining to the adjacent properties.

21Other Relevant Data and Information

All data relevant to the supporting studies and estimates of mineral resources and reserves have been included in the sections of this TRS. No additional information or explanation is necessary to make this TRS understandable and not misleading.

22Interpretation and Conclusions

22.1Interpretations and Conclusions

This limestone deposit is reasonably flat lying and continuous across the ACT property. The quality is very consistent and exceeds the fixed ore grade needed to supply the ALC plant. Because of the simple geology, the application of mining methods are straightforward and consists of uncomplicated open pit or UG mining. The selection of the mining method will be determined by economics and/or the terrain and geology. The economic analysis and amount of reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 80 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

22.2Risks and Uncertainties

Internal to the mining operation, risks and uncertainties are minimal because of the uncomplicated geology and the employment of a standard mining methods. Governmental, legal, and regulatory risks, such as greenhouse gases, could adversely affect the ALC plant’s market for which the ACT mine is the limestone supplier.

23Recommendations

The operation has more than enough resources to last beyond the foreseeable future. The QP’s opinion is with the application of a sound mine design(s) and the appropriate equipment suite the mine will operate well within the cost estimates projected in the economic analysis. Further analysis of the mine designs for open pit versus UG mining methods should be performed to ensure the optimum economic choice is made when transitioning from open pit to UG methods. Because the operation is in such an early stage more recommendations are not needed at this time.

Page 34 of 40


24References

AcreValue.com. 2021. [Accessed 2021] .https://www.acrevalue.com/map/?lat=40.628229&lng=-90.5&zoom=4

Bestplaces.com. 2021. Marble City, Oklahoma Weather. [Accessed 2021]. www.bestplaces.net/climate

Dorsey. 2019. How will the new rules affect the definitions of mineral reserves, probable mineral reserves, and proven mineral reserves? [Accessed 2020]

Foti TL. 1978. The Natural Divisions of Arkansas. ANHC. 76 pgs.

Halbrook DF. 1950. Investigation of High-Calcium Limestone Deposits Along White River. Izard County, Arkansas.AGS.16 pgs.

McFarland JD. 1998. Stratigraphic Summary of Arkansas. IC-36. AGS. 44 pgs.

Rains D and Hutto RS. 2012, Geology Map of the Sylamore Quadrangle, Izard and Stone Counties, Arkansas.DGM-AR-00844 AGS. 1 pg.

Swanson RG. 1981. Shell Sample Examination Manual. MIES1. AAPG. 102 pgs.

USLM. 2005 Property Records, Executive Summary. Company Internal Report. 23 pgs.

US Geological Survey. 2021. MapView Website. [Accessed 2021]. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/mapview/?center=-97,39.6&zoom=4.

US Geological Survey. 2021. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021. Stone (Crushed). pg. 154. USGS. 200 pgs.

25Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

The QP has relied upon information and data from ACT, ALC, and USLM personnel and records in completing this TRS. This material included written reports and statements of other individuals and companies with whom it does business. The material also includes permits, licenses, historical exploration data, production records, equipment lists, geologic and ore body resource and reserve information, mine modeling data, financial data and summaries, mine equipment specifications and summaries, records, equipment lists. The QP believes that the basic assumptions were factual and accurate and that the interpretations were reasonable. This material has been relied upon in the mine planning, capital and cost planning, and audited. The ALC mining engineer assisted the QP in reviewing these materials and performed the final reserve block modeling and economic analysis under the direction of the QP. There is no apparent reason to believe that any material facts have been withheld or misstated. In his professional judgment, the QP has taken all appropriate steps to ensure that the information or advice from ACT, ALC, and USLM personnel and records and outside entities is accurate. The QP does not disclaim any responsibility for this TRS.

Page 35 of 40


Appendix A: List of Data Included in the Geologic Model

Graphic

Page 36 of 40


Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

Discount Factor 1.09%

NPV $144,884

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Tons Limestone Sold

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

-Operating Costs

$

(3,052)

$

(3,052)

$

(3,052)

$

(2,976)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

2,473

$

2,473

$

2,473

$

2,549

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

-Tax

$

(495)

$

(495)

$

(495)

$

(510)

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

1,978

$

1,978

$

1,978

$

2,039

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

2035

2036

2037

Tons Limestone Sold

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

-Operating Costs

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

$

(3,595)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

$

1,931

-Tax

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

$

(386)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

$

1,544

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2038

2039

2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

2045

Tons Limestone Sold

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

$

5,525

-Operating Costs

$

(3,595)

$

(2,640)

$

(3,844)

$

(3,844)

$

(3,844)

$

(3,844)

$

(3,844)

$

(3,844)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

1,931

$

2,885

$

1,682

$

1,682

$

1,682

$

1,682

$

1,682

$

1,682

-Tax

$

(386)

$

(577)

$

(336)

$

(336)

$

(336)

$

(336)

$

(336)

$

(336)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

1,544

$

2,308

$

1,345

$

1,345

$

1,345

$

1,345

$

1,345

$

1,345

Page 37 of 40


ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2046

2047

2048

2049

2050

2051

2052

2053

Tons Limestone Sold

500

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

5,525

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(3,844)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

1,682

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

-Tax

$

(336)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

1,345

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2054

2055

2056

2057

2058

2059

2060

2061

Tons Limestone Sold

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

-Tax

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

   

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2062

2063

2064

2065

2066

2067

2068

2069

Tons Limestone Sold

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(7,094)

$

(6,564)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

3,957

$

4,486

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

-Tax

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(791)

$

(897)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,165

$

3,589

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

Page 38 of 40


ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

   

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2070

2071

2072

2073

2074

2075

2076

2077

Tons Limestone Sold

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

-Tax

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2078

2079

2080

2081

2082

2083

2084

2085

Tons Limestone Sold

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

-Tax

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2086

2087

2088

2089

2090

2091

2092

2093

Tons Limestone Sold

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

-Tax

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

Page 39 of 40


ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2094

2095

2096

2097

2098

2099

2100

2101

Tons Limestone Sold

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

$

(6,500)

-Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Taxable Income

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

$

4,550

-Tax

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

$

(910)

+Depreciation

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

$

3,640

ACT – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

 

In Thousands

2102

Tons Limestone Sold

1,000

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

Revenue

$

11,050

-Operating Costs

$

(6,500)

-Depreciation

$

0

Taxable Income

$

4,550

-Tax

$

(910)

+Depreciation

$

0

-Capital Expenses

$

0

Free Cash Flow

$

3,640

Page 40 of 40


Exhibit 96.4

Technical Report Summary on

U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Marble Mountain Limestone Operation

Sequoyah County, Oklahoma, USA

Prepared for:

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

Graphic

SK-1300 Report

Effective Date December 31, 2021

Report Date: March 2, 2022

Page 1 of 56


DISCLAIMERS AND QUALIFICATIONS

SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”) was retained by United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) to prepare this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) related to U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair (“St. Clair”) limestone reserves and resources. This TRS provides a statement of St. Clair’s limestone reserves and resources at its mine located in Sequoyah County, Oklahoma and has been prepared in accordance with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Regulation S-K 1300 for Mining Property Disclosure (S-K 1300) and 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229.601(b)(96)(iii)(B) reporting requirements. This report was prepared for the sole use by USLM and its affiliates and is effective December 31, 2021.

This TRS was prepared by SYB Group’s President who meets the SEC’s definition of a Qualified Person and has sufficient experience in the relevant type of mineralization and deposit under consideration in this TRS.

In preparing this TRS, SYB relied upon data, written reports and statements provided by St. Clair and USLM. SYB has taken all appropriate steps, in its professional opinion, to ensure information provided by St. Clair and USLM is reasonable and reliable for use in this report.

The Economic Analysis and resulting net present value estimate in this TRS were made for the purposes of confirming the economic viability of the reported limestone reserves and not for the purposes of valuing St. Clair or its assets. Internal Rate of Return and project payback were not calculated, as there was no initial investment considered in the financial model. Certain information set forth in this report contains “forward-looking information,” including production, productivity, operating costs, capital costs, sales prices, and other assumptions. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and undue reliance should not be placed on them. The ability to recover the reported reserves depends on numerous factors beyond the control of SYB Group that cannot be anticipated. Some of these factors include, but are not limited to, future limestone prices, mining and geologic conditions, obtaining permits and regulatory approvals in a timely manner, the decisions and abilities of management and employees, and unanticipated changes in environmental or other regulations that could impact performance. The opinions and estimates included in this report apply exclusively to the St. Clair mine as of the effective date of this report.

All data used as source material plus the text, tables, figures, and attachments of this document have been reviewed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geologic practices.

SYB hereby consents to the use of St. Clair’s limestone reserve and resource estimates as of December 31, 2021 in USLM’s SEC filings and to the filing of this TRS as an exhibit to USLM’s SEC filings.

Qualified Person: /s/ Keith V. Vickers

Keith V. Vickers, TXPG #3938

President, SYB Group, LLC

1216 W. Cleburne Rd

Crowley, TX 76036

Page 2 of 56


Table of Contents

List of Figures

4

List of Tables

5

1

Executive Summary

6

2

Introduction

7

3

Property Description

10

4

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

11

5

History

12

6

Geological Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

13

7

Exploration

18

8

Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

26

9

Data Verification

27

10

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

28

11

Mineral Resource Estimates

28

12

Mineral Reserve Estimates

32

13

Mining Methods

33

14

Processing and Recovery Methods

35

15

Infrastructure

35

16

Market Studies

36

17

Environmental Studies, Permitting and Plans, Negotiations or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

36

18

Capital and Operating Costs

37

19

Economic Analysis

37

20

Adjacent Properties

39

21

Other Relevant Data and Information

39

22

Interpretation and Conclusions

40

23

Recommendations

40

24

References

40

25

Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

41

Appendix A: List of Data Included in the Geologic Model

42

Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

43

Page 3 of 56


List of Figures

1.

Fig. 3.1

Location Map for St Clair Lime Company

2.

Fig. 6.1

Geologic Map of Oklahoma

3.

Fig. 6.4-1

Stratigraphic Columns for the St Clair Area

4.

Fig. 6.4-2

Marble City Member Cross Section South to North

5.

Fig. 7.1-1

All St. Clair Drill Locations

6.

Fig. 7.1-2

St Clair Core Hole Log

7.

Fig. 11.3

St. Clair, Top of Marble City Member Map

8.

Fig. 13.2

Current Estimate of Final Mine Limits

9.

Fig. 15.1

Infrastructure For St Clair Operations

Page 4 of 56


List of Tables

1.

Table 1.1

U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone

2.

Table 1.2

U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone

3.

Table 1.3

Capital Costs

4.

Table 1.4

Operating Costs

5.

Table 2.3

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

6.

Table 2.4

Visits Made by QP to St. Clair Mine

7.

Table 5.1

Company Ownership History

8.

Table 5.2

St. Clair Historical Drilling Projects

9.

Table 6.4

St. Clair Property Stratigraphy

10.

Table 7.1-1

All St. Clair Drilling Projects

11.

Table 7.1-2

Drilling Summary of OGS 1965 Study

12.

Table 7.1-3

Summary of 2000 Exploration Drilling

13.

Table 7.1-4

Summary of 2005 Exploration Drilling

14.

Table 7.1-5

Summary of 2017 Exploration Drilling

15.

Table 7.2

Surface Location Summary of OGS 1965 Study

16.

Table 11.2.4

Resource Parameter Assumptions

17.

Table 11.3

Summary of Drill Hole Database for the Model

18.

Table 11.4.1

U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021, Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone

19.

Table 12.4

U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021, Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone

20.

Table 17.1

Mining and Environmental Permits

21.

Table 18.1

Capital Costs

22.

Table 18.2

Operating Costs

23.

Table 19.3-1

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

24.

Table 19.3-2

Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Mining Costs

25.

Table 19.3-3

Sensitivity Analysis: Selling Price Change

Page 5 of 56


1

Executive Summary

The U.S. Lime Company-St. Clair (“St. Clair”) mine is a production stage, underground mine that produces high-grade limestone with above 96.0% calcium carbonate (“CaCO3”) from the upper Marble City member formation that is delivered to St. Clair’s primary crusher. The St. Clair plant processes the limestone into various products that are sold to a variety of customers. The St. Clair mine is located in Sequoyah County, Oklahoma on approximately 1,400 acres owned by St. Clair and an additional 1,340 acres covered by long-term mineral leases. Underground operations began at the St. Clair mine in the 1950’s.

Geologic and analytical data from regional and local drilling, subsurface, and surface sampling/mapping have proven that the Marble City member has a consistently high CaCO3 content above 96.0% and a consistent mining thickness of 30 plus ft. across the entire St. Clair property. These analytical results cover from 1962 to 2021 and are sufficient to establish reasonable certainty of geological presence and grade or quality continuity on the operation’s property.

Mining at the St. Clair mine is performed using a room and pillar method. The pillars are 30 ft. by 30 ft. and the room is 50 ft. wide. Conventional limestone mining equipment is used to transport the limestone from the mine to the primary crusher. Any non-ore material encountered is moved a short distance to an area that is not in use.

The St. Clair mine has procured, and is operating in compliance with, the required air and storm water permits that were last issued by the Oklahoma Department of Mines and the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality. St. Clair will be required to renew the permits when they expire in 2045 and 2025, respectively.

The St. Clair mine currently averages an annual production rate of approximately 425,000 tons of limestone per year. The expected mine life at that rate of production is approximately 55 years.

As noted in section 2.1, Keith Vickers of SYB Group (“SYB”), a consultant for United States Lime & Minerals, Inc. (“USLM”) for over 20 years served as the Qualified Person (“QP”) and prepared the estimates of limestone mineral resources and reserves for the St. Clair mine. Summaries of the St. Clair mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves are shown below in Tables 1.1 and 1.2, respectively. Sections 11 and 12 set forth the definitions of mineral resources and reserves as well as the methods and assumptions used by the QP in determining the estimates and classifications of the St. Clair mine’s limestone mineral resources and reserves.

Table 1.1. U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Resource Category

    

In Place
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Processing Recovery
 (%)
3

Measured Mineral Resources

36,648,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

129,747,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

166,395,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place.

Table 1.2. U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade

(% X)

    

Mining Recovery
 (%)

Probable Reserves

0

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

81.0

Proven Reserves

23,387,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

81.0

Total Probable and Proven

23,387,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

81.0

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

The modeling and analysis of the St. Clair mine’s resources and reserves has been developed by St. Clair and USLM personnel and reviewed by management of the companies, as well as the QP. The development of such resources and reserves estimates, including related assumptions, was a collaborative effort between the QP and personnel of the companies.

Annual sustaining capital costs were estimated using prior-year capital expenditures and St. Clair’s 2022 capital budget. Capital expenditures for major mobile equipment replacements were estimated using information from vendors. Limestone mining costs for St. Clair were estimated using historical data and its 2022 budget.

Page 6 of 56


Table 1.3 Capital Costs

Capital Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Annual Maintenance of Operations

$500,000

Table 1.4 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

 

Limestone Mining Cost Per Ton

$4.79

It is the QP’s overall conclusions that:

1.

Geologically, the St. Clair mine limestone deposit has been proven by abundant widespread local sampling production and drilling results to have quality and thickness that are very consistent. Because of this consistency, the mining method for the mine is straightforward and consists of standard room and pillar underground mining.

2.

The data detailed in this report that was used to estimate the resources was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

3.

St. Clair has successfully mined this resource for many years using the same methods that are projected into the future. Significant increases in the cost of mining coupled with large decreases in the selling price of limestone would be required to make mining uneconomic. Historically, St. Clair has been able to increase sales prices in line with cost increases.

4.

There are no significant factors onsite that will impact the extraction of this ore body. St. Clair has been in operation for many decades during varying economic and market conditions.

5.

Absent unforeseen changes in economic or other factors, including additional federal or state environmental regulations, the economic analysis and the amount of Proven Reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 55 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

The QP recommends that ground water could be better controlled at the mine face with an improved configuration of the floor.

2Introduction

2.1Issuer of the Report

Mr. Keith Vickers of SYB Group, LLC (“SYB”), a consultant for USLM for over 20 years, prepared this Technical Report Summary (“TRS”) on ALC’s mining operations located in Independence County, Arkansas. Mr. Vickers is a Qualified Person (“QP”). USLM is a publicly-traded company on the NASDAQ Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol USLM and ALC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of USLM.

2.2Terms of Reference and Purpose

The purpose of this TRS is to support the disclosure of mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates for St. Clair’s existing mining operations located in Sequoyah County, Oklahoma, as of December 31, 2021. This report is to fulfill 17 Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) § 229, “Standard Instructions for Filing Forms Under Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 – Regulation S-K,” subsection 1300, “Disclosure by Registrants Engaged in Mining Operations.” The mineral resource and reserve estimates presented herein are classified according to 17 CFR § 229.1300 Definitions.

The QP prepared this TRS with information from various sources with detailed data about the historical and current mining operations, including individuals who are experts in an appropriate technical field. St. Clair has not previously filed a TRS.

The quality of information, conclusions, and estimates contained herein are based on: 1) information available at the time of preparation; and 2) the assumptions, conditions, and qualifications outlined in this TRS.

Unless stated otherwise, all volumes and grades are in U.S. customary units and currencies are expressed in 2021 U.S. dollars. Distances are described in U.S. standard units.

Page 7 of 56


2.3Sources of Information

This TRS is based upon engineering data, financial and technical information developed and maintained by St. Clair or USLM personnel, work undertaken by third-party contractors and consultants on behalf of the mine, public data sourced from the United States Geological Survey, the Oklahoma Geological Survey, internal St. Clair technical reports, previous technical studies, maps, St. Clair letters and memoranda, and public information as cited throughout this TRS and listed in Section 24. Table 2.3 is a list of the terms used in this TRS.

This TRS was prepared by Keith V. Vickers, BSGeol, MSGeol, TXPG #3938, CPetG #6152. Detailed discussions with the following were held during the preparation of the TRS:

Mr. Timothy W. Byrne, President, CEO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Michael L. Wiedemer, Vice President, CFO USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Russell R. Riggs, Vice President, Production, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. M. Michael Owens, Corporate Treasurer, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Jason Nutzman, Director of Legal and Compliance, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Wendell Smith, Director Environmental, USLM, Dallas, Texas

Mr. Ron Terrell, Mine Manager, St. Clair, Marble City, Oklahoma

Mr. Branden Crowder, Production Manager, St. Clair, Marble City, Oklahoma

Mr. Zach Carter, Accounting Manager, St. Clair, Marble City, Oklahoma

Mr. Keith Vickers, SYB Group, USLM Consulting Geologist, Crowley, Texas

Page 8 of 56


Table 2.3 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

Term

    

Definition

AAPG

American Association of Professional Geologists

AASHTO

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

ALC

Arkansas Lime Company

AMR

Advanced Minimum Royalty

ASTM

American Society for Testing and Materials

AWWA

American Water Works Association

BLM

Bureau of Land Management

CaCO3

Calcium Carbonate

CEO

Chief Executive Officer

CFO

Chief Financial Officer

CFR

Code of Federal Regulations

DXF

Drawing Exchange File

E

East

F.

Fahrenheit

Fig.

Figure

ft.

Feet

GLONASS

Global Navigation Satellite System

GPS

Global Positioning System

LIBOR

London Inter-Bank Offered Rate

LST

Limestone

N

North

NAD

North American Datum

NPV

Net Present Value

ODEQ

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality

ODOM

Oklahoma Department of Mines

OGS

Oklahoma Geological Survey

PG

Professional Geologist

PLSS

Public Land Survey System

QP

Qualified Person

QC/QA

Quality Control/Quality Assurance

S

South

TRS

Technical Report Summary

UG

Underground

U.S.

United States

USGS

United States Geological Survey

USLM

United States Lime and Minerals, Inc.

WAAS

Wide Area Augmentation System

W

West

XRF

X-Ray Fluorescence

2.4Personal Inspection

The QP, who has been a consulting geologist for USLM for over 20 years is familiar with St. Clair’s mine geology and operation. Over the years, the QP has visited the operation to supervise drilling, log cores and investigate geologic issues associated with specific areas in the mine. Table 2.4 is a partial list of dates the QP has visited the mine. Data, protocols, and specific information required for the TRS were gathered during onsite visits. The St. Clair plant manager and the mine manager provided any detailed information the QP required for the reserve operation and mine plan sections of this report.

Page 9 of 56


Table 2.4 Visits Made by QP to St. Clair Mine

Date

    

Reason

2005

Due Diligence for Acquisition & Core Drilling

2006

Supervise Core Drilling Project

2018

Supervise Core Drilling Project

2018

Inspection Sampling Locations for Physical Testing

2021

Meeting to Review and Obtain detailed Information for TRS

On January 27, 2022, the QP met in the St. Clair mine office to review the drill hole and surface sample database and discuss the data needed for the TRS. The QP inspected the mine, visited faces to examine the consistency and thickness, and discussed core storage in the mine. The equipment suite, blasting and mining methods, and costs were reviewed and verified. QP discussed quality control and quality assurance at the mine office with the plant QC/QA lab personnel. The QC/QA lab personnel provided lab XRF standard certifications and instrument service/care contracts. A review of the core and sample preparation for analytical tests occurred and their documentation was provided.

The QP reviewed a report checklist with St. Clair management and the mine manager to ensure all materials needed for the TRS were available. The resource areas, fixed grade control, and production hole sampling procedures were reviewed and clarified. The mining faces were compared to the existing geologic model, and a comparison of the core to production sample chemistry was discussed. The QP had a meeting with the Accounting Manager to obtain the financials for the mine economic analysis.

3Property Description

3.1Property Description and Location

St. Clair operations (35°35’52.80”N, -94°49’57.35”W, Fig. 3.1 GoogleEarth 2021) are located in Sequoyah County, north of Sallisaw, Oklahoma, 9.5 miles by county road to Marble City and then another 1.5 miles north.

Graphic

Page 10 of 56


3.2Mineral Rights

St. Clair owns approximately 1,400 acres in fee and has mineral leases covering approximately 1,340 acres (AcreValue website, 2021) (USLM internal report). St. Clair holds all surface and mineral rights on the fee property. The mineral leases convey the right to explore, build infrastructure, extract, and process limestone. A detailed mineral lease discussion follows in Section 3.4.

3.3

Significant Encumbrances or Risks to Perform work on Property

There are no significant issues or risks to work on the properties outside of those generally related to mining operations.

3.4Lease Agreements or Income from Royalties

Currently, St. Clair is not mining on any leased property and anticipates continuing to mine on the company’s fee land until resources there are depleted.

There are eleven leases that were signed between 1985 and 1986. They were assigned to St. Clair by O-N Minerals in 2005 with the property owners (referred to herein, collectively, as the “Lessors”), providing the authority for St. Clair to explore, build infrastructure, extract, and process limestone and dolomite. The following summarizes the leases in which St. Clair is the Lessee, as stated in the 2005 Executive Property Summary prepared for due diligence (USLM Internal Report by staff, 2005). Lease ownership history is listed:

·

Pluess-Staufer Industries – Originator

·

Global Stone Assignment from Pluess-Staufer

·

O-N Minerals Assignment from Global Stone

·

St. Clair (USLM) Assignment from O-N Minerals

The state of Oklahoma’s property system is organized under the PLSS of the United States government. The mineral leases are with private owners. Material terms are predominately standard with AMR being the same except for one lease and production royalty rates being the same for each lease. There is generally a stated initial term of each lease, with automatic extensions for so long as the lease terms are met, or mining operations are conducted in a described area. The leases’ current term ranges from 25 to 75 years. The description of the leased area has remained the same over the years and is described in terms as defined by the BLM Manual of Surveying Instructions (Abbey, 2009). Examples are 1/4NE 1/4NE 1/4SW, N2 NW1/4, NE1/4 of T5N R13E S 11 or Township 5 North, Range 13 East, Section11.

Initially, the Lessee paid an AMR per lease, either $50 or $300 per month, and payments are recoupable against earned royalties due under the leases. The production royalty is $0.25 per ton when production is established. Both AMR and Production Royalty are indexed to the Producer Price Index for Non-metallic Mineral Products (Code 13) every five years. Under the existing mineral leases, the Lessor is responsible for ad valorem taxes. The Lessee is responsible for any taxes on infrastructure and equipment they own. Any taxes directly related to production from an operating mine are the responsibility of the Lessee.

St. Clair currently has no royalty interest in any fee or leased lands in the operational area.

4

Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure, and Physiography

4.1Topography, Vegetation, and Physiography

The area’s topography is characterized by narrow valleys with steep-sided ridges connecting to several main river drainages. St. Clair’s operations are located at the base of Quarry Mountain ridge. The elevation ranges from 1,450 ft. to 550 ft. The valleys are covered with thick alluvial sediments and the ridges have moderate soil cover on top but little to no soil on the sides.

The tree types are dominated by oak, hickory, pine, and cedar glades (Rafferty, 1988). The flat valley floors are primarily agricultural land cover in typical grasses common to the area.

The operation is in the physiographic region known as the Ozark Plateau (Digitalprairie website, 2021). Three distinct plateau regions characterize the province connected one time in the past, but erosion has separated them. The areas have been eroded into high ridges approximately the same height separated by steep-walled valleys that merge into larger open flat areas occupied by the main river drainages.

Page 11 of 56


4.2Accessibility and Local Resources

Primary access to the operation is by county highway N4610 from Marble City and S4620 from the city of Sallisaw, located on Interstate 40. Marble City is a small community that does not have an airport. A municipal airport serves Sallisaw and commercial airline travel is through Ft. Smith, Arkansas (25 miles) or Tulsa, Oklahoma (95 miles). Roads are paved and are traveled daily by multi-axial vehicles. The Kansas City Southern Railway runs near the plant and there is a spur into the operation. Most of the operation’s workers live in the rural area near the mine or Sallisaw (GoogleMaps website, 2021).

4.3Climate and Operating Season

The average rainfall for Sequoyah County, Oklahoma, is 38 inches of rain per year. The County averages four inches of snow per year. On average, there are 218 sunny days per year. The County averages 87 precipitation days per year. Precipitation is rain, snow, sleet, or hail that falls to the ground. Temperature ranges from a high in July of 92 degrees F. to a low of 27 degrees F. in January. The underground mine is not affected by the weather conditions and the operating season can be year-round. (www.bestplaces.net/climate, 2021)

4.4Infrastructure

4.4.1Water

There are no issues with the water supply. The operation water requirements are served by spring and surface water from the mine.

4.4.2Energy Supply

The mine fuel supply is from distributors in Ft. Smith, Arkansas. A state power grid supply supplies electrical power to the operation.

4.4.3Personnel

Ft. Smith has a population of over 87,000, and the nearby town of Sallisaw has 8,500 people that the mine can draw from for new or replacement employees (www.population.com, 2021).

4.4.4Supplies

The supply chain is a low priority issue for the mine as its proximity to Sallisaw and Ft. Smith provide the most common needs. Tulsa and Oklahoma City are alternate sources if needed. Tulsa and Oklahoma City are large suppliers to the state’s oilfield and other mining operations. Several trucking companies provide service to the operation from the above supply centers.

5History

5.1Prior Company Ownership

In 1937, the OGS convinced the owners of a lime company at Oklahoma City to move to the current location of the St. Clair mine (Ham et al., 1943). The OGS made the recommendation because of the detailed field and analytical work that OGS had done on the Quarry Mountain formation.

Page 12 of 56


Table 5.1 Company Ownership History

Year

    

Company

    

Operations/Activity

1938

Homer & Hilmer Dunlap, dba St. Clair Lime Company

Company Startup, Surface Mine

1938

St. Clair Lime Company

Built 2 Shaft kilns in Sallisaw, OK (plant)

1953

St. Clair Lime Company

First Portal to Underground Mine, East Side

1955

St. Clair Lime Company

Second Portal, Underground, South Side

1964

St. Clair Lime Company

Built 1st Rotary Kiln (KVS)

1971

St. Clair Lime Company

Built 2nd Rotary Kiln (Fuller)

1995

Global Stone Corporation

Purchased St. Clair Lime Company

1998

Oglebay Norton Company

Purchased Global Stone Corporation and later renamed it O-N Minerals – St. Clair

2005

United States Lime & Minerals, Inc.

Purchased O-N Minerals – St. Clair and renamed it U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair

Source: St. Clair and USLM personnel.

5.2Exploration and Development History

Table 5.2 St. Clair Historical Drilling Projects

Year

    

Company

    

Purpose

    

Summary of Work

    

Comment

1962

St. Clair Lime

Development

Limited Surface & Production Drilling

4 cores utilized by OGS in the 1965 regional study

1965

OGS

Research, Geologic Study

3 holes drilled regionally, measured sections

OGS Bulletin 105 was published

2000

Wallace Mitchell PG

Resource Extent

Examined ore coverage on entire Property

Drilled 2 holes north end of the leased area and utilized UG face, outcrops, and offset property holes

2004 to Present

O-N Minerals – St. Clair

Development

Mining face QC/QA production drilling sampling

Daily sampling of mine faces to confirm the quality

2005-06

USLM

Acquisition Exploration

Established ore present on the total property (fee and leased)

Drilled 8 holes on north leases and 1 hole on fee to complement the previous data points.

2017

St. Clair

Development and explore full potential of ore thickness

Proved economic ore thickness in the south in front of mine

Drilled 16 holes on fee land southwest of UG mine.

Note: A detailed discussion of all drilling and results is in Section 7.1.

6Geologic Setting, Mineralization, and Deposit

The first mining operations in the area were for dimension stone, commonly called “Marble” because of the limestone’s hardness and suitability for construction. This “Marble” would later be identified as the Quarry Mountain Limestone (Silurian Age). Marble City, the upper member of the Marble Mountain formation, had the appearance of marble and was one of the few outcrops in the state that met that demand. In 1938 the St. Clair Lime Company was formed, producing lime from two shaft kilns. The mining operation started as an open pit mine and transitioned to an underground mine in 1958. The mine has supplied limestone to the plant continuously since 1938 (more than 80 years).

6.1Regional Geology

The following is an excerpted summary of the sedimentary history of the Ozark region from Huffman, 1958 (OGS Bulletin 77, 1958):

The advance of the Upper Cambrian age seas deposited thick sequences of dolomite. The sea advance was followed by a period of erosion and then advancing seas in the Upper Ordovician started a long period of limestone development. During this time, limestone was deposited in thick beds with periodic shale deposition because of deeper seas. A period of receding seas resulted in extreme erosion removing strata to the bottom of the Late Ordovician age Sylvain shale.

Page 13 of 56


The Quarry Mountain limestone (Hi-calcium) was deposited when the seas advanced in the Silurian age. Next, from the Silurian until the middle of the Devonian, a series of fluctuating sea levels deposited limestones and sandstones. Then significant erosion would occur when the sea receded. This erosion would partially or entirely erode the pervious strata in areas leaving scattered remnants of formations. Then a period of tilting produced more erosion in front of the advancing Late Devonian sea that covered the Ozark Uplift with deep water and deposited the thick Chattanooga shale.

Alternating cherty limestones and shales characterize the period from the Mississippian to the Pennsylvanian age as the sea level, tilting, and uplift events continued to repeat, with erosion occurring when the seas had a significant retreat.

In Early Pennsylvanian time, emergence and uplift to the north of the region provided land-derived clay and sand input, so limestone deposition contained significant amounts of the material.

These lithologies continued until the Middle Pennsylvanian time when alternating shales and sandstone dominated the area and limestone deposition was subordinate.

Next, the Ozark Uplift was significantly elevated, which is believed to be caused by the tensional stresses resulting from the Arkoma Basin development and filling. The uplifting resulted in large-scale regional Northeast trending normal faults.

Since the end of the Pennsylvanian, recent geologic history has been marked by erosion of the Uplift producing extensive valleys and the deposition of sand and gravels. Fig. 6.1 shows the regional geology of northeastern Oklahoma with a stratigraphic column.

Page 14 of 56


Graphic

Page 15 of 56


6.2Local and St. Clair Property Geology

Locally, Sequoyah County surface geology consists of parallel gentle anticlines and synclines with numerous parallel faults between them. Oil well data has shown that the Marble City formation is 3,000 ft. below the mine elevation across the entire southeastern part of Sequoyah County, including the Sallisaw area. The St. Clair area is located at the far south end of the Ozark Uplift, approximately 24 miles north of the subsurface edge of the Arkoma Basin.

The rocks in the St. Clair area range in geologic age from the Quaternary to the Ordovician. The strata from above the lower Pennsylvanian (Atoka Formation) to the Quaternary has been eroded or missing because of non-deposition.

The Ordovician lithologies represent high sea levels and clear water. The lower part was dominantly marine rocks with the deposition of limestone and dolomite. The inter-layered clean sandstones in the upper part were deposited offshore and reworked by the advancing sea (Snider, 1915). The age ended with a complete withdrawal of the sea and a period of substantial erosion occurred. The Silurian age lithologies represent another high sea-level stand reversing the conditions at the end of the Ordovician. These conditions were perfect for reef growth which produced sediments high in CaCO3 material. The Marble Mountain limestone is the only Silurian age formation present locally. The outcrop near the mine is one of the few in the state. The end of the Silurian and the beginning of the Devonian was a period of falling sea level. This period of exposure and erosion was long-term and removed several formations by producing erosional valleys and plains. At the same time, there was a structural down warping to the south, which tilted the existing lower rocks to the south. The Frisco limestone and Sallisaw sandstone are transitional lithologies from low to high sea levels. The Chattanooga shale (Devonian and Mississippian ages) exemplifies fine-grain deep water sediments. This shale deposition is widespread across Eastern Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, Tennessee, and Ohio.

The remainder of the Mississippian age was dominated by recurring deep water sediments followed by shallow water carbonates with the occasional period of exposure and erosion. There are six sea level cycles in the geologic record. In the middle of the Pennsylvanian, the depositional environment changed to sediments from a land origin. This change is evidenced by the rocks of the Atoka formation consisting of river and deltaic sediments, producing rocks dominated by high clay and silica content.

The St. Clair area structure presents nothing different from the regional structural fabric. The units dip east-southwest gently (4 to 5 degrees) toward the Arkoma Basin unless they are very near a structural feature where the dip can reach a magnitude of 40 degrees. In the immediate area south of the operation, the Marble City and the Lyon faults form a southeast truncation for any exposures of the Marble Mountain formation. Both faults trend northeast to southwest. The displacement across the faults is estimated greater than 500 ft. since the Atoka formation is at the surface in the valley on the southeast side of the fault and top of Quarry Mountain (1,300 ft.) on the northwest side of the fault.

No faults have been encountered in the history of mining at St. Clair. The Quarry Mountain ridge is characterized as a low-angle anticline. This anticline trends the same as the regional structures. The mine area is located on the eastern limb. (Ham and Teal, 1943)

6.3Mineralization

High calcium limestones are the product of unique depositional environments only, not by subsurface alteration or enhancement. No subsurface mineralization has occurred to create or enhance the CaCO3 content in this deposit. The CaCO3 content is the product of reef organisms that build their exoskeletons out of CaCO3 derived from the marine environment. The reef area has very limited or no exposure to sources of noncarbonate materials such as clay, silica, iron that would reduce the CaCO3 content.

6.4Stratigraphy and Mineralogy

The Quarry Mountain formation is subdivided into two members. The Upper Marble City member is a clean high purity calcium limestone with a CaCO3 composite consistently above 96.0%. This limestone has been extracted throughout the mine’s history at St. Clair. The Lower Barber member ranges from a dolomitic limestone to dolomite. The OGS marks the division between the two members where the MgCO3 content exceeds ten percent. This use of MgCO3 content is a somewhat arbitrary division. The dolomite content was used for dividing the members because no clear division was defined by lithology and fossil content.

Infrequently in the Marble City member, there are dolomitic lenses and there are lenses of non-magnesium limestone in the Barber. The lenses have a limited lateral extent and St. Clair utilizes appropriate mining practices when these are encountered.

Fig. 6.4-1 are stratigraphic columns for the local area and the St. Clair mine. Fig. 6.4-2 shows a cross-section and index map south of the mine. The section is oriented north and south to the south edge of the mined area. The cross-section only highlights the topography and top and bottom structures of the ore interval.

Page 16 of 56


Table

Description automatically generated

Page 17 of 56


Diagram

Description automatically generated

Table 6.4 St. Clair Property Stratigraphy

Stratigraphic Unit

Thickness Approximate Range

Primary Lithology

Frisco LST

0 ft. to 8 ft.

Coarse Crystalline Limestone Devonian Age

Marble City Member LST

0 ft. to 160 ft.

Upper Part of Quarry Mountain, pure Bioclastic LST, Silurian Age

Barber Member LST/Dolomite

0 ft. to 80 ft.

Lower Part of Quarry Mountain, Dolomite/LST to Dolomite, Little Insolubles.

Tenkiller LST

0 ft. to 27 ft.

Limestone, Bioclastic, Moderate Insolubles

7Exploration

The database used for the St. Clair geologic model is composed of multiple sources of data types. These sources include core and drill cuttings, measured sections (from OGS), and underground mine production sampling. Minor exploration drilling has been necessary for the past 30 years because of St. Clair’s significant land position. A considerable amount of recent drilling has been near the mine and on St. Clair property.

Page 18 of 56


7.1Drilling Programs

A summary of drilling projects to date in the local vicinity and on St. Clair property is in Table 7.1-1. These projects include research, exploration, development, and production drilling by diamond and percussion bit methods. Fig. 7.1-1 shows all the St. Clair Drill Holes.

Table 7.1-1 All St. Clair Drilling Projects

Year

Company

Purpose

Summary of Work

Comment

1962

St. Clair Lime

Development

Limited Surface & Production Drilling

4 cores utilized by OGS in the 1965 regional study

1965

OGS

Research, Geologic Study

3 holes drilled regionally, measured sections

OGS Bulletin 105 was published

2000

Wallace Mitchell PG

Resource Extent

Examined ore coverage on entire Property

Drilled 2 holes north end of the leased area and utilized UG face, outcrops, and offset property holes

2004 to Present

O-N Minerals – St. Clair

Development

Mining face QC/QA production drilling sampling

Daily sampling of mine faces to confirm the quality

2005-06

USLM

Acquisition Exploration

Established ore present on the total property (fee and leased)

Drilled 8 holes on north leases and 1 hole on fee to complement the previous data points.

2017

St. Clair

Development and explore full potential of ore thickness

Proved economic ore thickness in the south in front of mine

Drilled 16 holes on fee land southwest of UG mine.

Page 19 of 56


Graphic

In 1965, the OGS conducted a detailed study on the limestone stratigraphy and lithology at St. Clair which at the time was designated as the St. Clair formation (Amsden TW and Rowland TL, 1965). The study utilized four cores donated from St. Clair Lime Company, three cores from a previous OGS drilling program, cuttings from 17 rotary/cable tool rigs (oilfield), measured sections of surface exposures, and mining faces in the St. Clair mine. The lab work consisted of chemical analysis, insoluble residue, and thin sections of the surface samples and the available cores. Because the limestone at St. Clair had very few outcrops, existing oilfield down-hole logs and drill cuttings were examined in areas where the formation was below the subsurface to confirm regional continuity (not chemical content). The results provided evidence the limestone at the mine was mistakenly identified as the St. Clair formation. It was renamed as the Quarry Mountain formation and divided into two members: the Upper Marble City member and the Lower Barber member. The division was based on the chemical content of the members. The average CaCO3 percent from the Marble City member chemical analysis was 97.6% Two of these cores are beyond the St. Clair area. The oil well cuttings examination revealed the Marble City member is present 40 miles to the west and 30 miles to the south at depths between 1,000 ft. and 2000 ft. This project proved the Marble City member existed over the St. Clair property with reasonable thickness and chemical qualities.

Procedures for the study were as follows:

·

Measured sections followed standard field practices for determining lithology and thickness. Individual samples from beds and channel sampling for chemical analysis were taken from the sections.

·

Cores were sawed lengthwise and a large section was saved and stored. The smaller section was used for examination and analysis. Core recovery was 100%, with a few exceptions.

·

Oil well cuttings were collected and logged at the rig and any well with mislabeled, missing samples, or caving in the crucial interval was omitted. Marble City presence was determined from cuttings and thin sections by comparison to

Page 20 of 56


cores and surface exposures. Down-hole logs supplemented these determinations. Dolomite content by visual assessment of formic acid reaction. Insoluble residue by visual determination after digestion with HCl acid. The OGS author cautions that the results from the cutting analysis represent a lower order of precision than other sample methods.

·

The OGS lab conducted chemical analyses under their standardized procedures. The smaller section of the sawed core was visually examined for lithology and carbonate content (Lemburg staining) determination. Then lithostratigraphic units were subdivided into smaller intervals for chemical analysis. These smaller lots were crushed with a jaw-crusher (1/4 in. size) and split, employing a riffle splitter to a split size of approximately 2 pounds. The split was then ground to -60 mesh. This procedure was utilized so the chemical analysis would represent a continuous channel sample of rocks cored.

·

Two analyses were performed on the prepared core samples: 1) Acid digestion of a sample, then analyzed the soluble part by titration to determine the total calcium and magnesium carbonate content, and the insolubles were reported as a percentage. OGS lab reports the precision of this technique is on the order of 0.1% or better; and 2) complete analysis on composites of smaller lots, weighted samples composed of one gram from each ft., analyzed for LOI, CaCO3, and MgCO3 as above, SiO2, R2O3, Fe2O3, Al2O3, P2O5, K2O, S, trace element analysis by emission spectrochemical analysis using artificial external standards. Analytic reproducibility is accurate (at the time of the study) to be within +/- 10%.

Note: This TRS is focused on the Marble City member of the formation and those results will be presented herein.

The measured sections and surface sampling results from this project are presented in Section 7.3 below.

Page 21 of 56


Table 7.1-2 Drilling Summary of OGS 1965 Study from the Amsden TW and Rowland TL, 1965

Core/Cuttings

    

LST Thickness (ft.)

    

Top Depth (ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

OGS 1 Core

34

0

98.0

OGS-2 Core (Barber)

37*

0

22.9*

OGS-3 Core

70

0

97.2

STCL-1 Core

63

22

97.4

STCL-2 Core (Barber)

59*

Above collar

19.3*

STCL-29Z Core

61

26

98.6

STCL-34Y Core

32

42

97.1

Well A-Mabee Cuttings

160

910

No Chemistry

Well B-Burke Cuttings

110

580

No Chemistry

Well C-Ready Cuttings

61

20

No Chemistry

Well D-Cook Cuttings

160 (upper mixed)^

755

No Chemistry

Well E-Cheek Cuttings

135

3,020

No Chemistry

Well F-Snow Cuttings

155

1,030

No Chemistry

Well G-Blake Cuttings

171 (mixed)^

2,209

No Chemistry

Well H-Padgett Cuttings

55# (log top)

905#

No Chemistry

Well I-Dunagan Cuttings

133

2,327

No Chemistry

Well Williamson. Cuttings

50

2,210

No Chemistry

Well K-Walker Cuttings

0

None

No Chemistry

Well L-Bennett. Cuttings

0

None

No Chemistry

Well M-Graham Cuttings

100

4,655

No Chemistry

Well N-Grant Cuttings

0

None

No Chemistry

Well O-Brandon Cuttings

0

None

No Chemistry

Well P-Lackey Cuttings

0

None

No Chemistry

Well Q-Haggard Cuttings

0

None

No Chemistry

Note: * No Marble City present, Barber Analyzed

^ Mixed Samples from 2 units, unclear

# Log top used

In 2000, the mine owner drilled two exploration core holes at the far north end of the St. Clair property (Fig. 7.1). The purpose was to confirm the continuity, thickness, and chemical quality of the Marble City member at the northern end property. The project’s procedure was:

·

A GPS unit surveyed hole locations. Both locations were chosen where the Marble City was close to the surface to limit drilling time.

·

The geologist supervising the project visited nearby hollows and valleys) and confirmed the presence of Marble city outcrops that the 1965 study had examined. Some data were available from holes drilled by a previous owner to the geologist (data not available or lost now).

·

Core size was drilled using a rig with a wireline retrievable core barrel setup. A Cone rock bit was used to drill through overburden until bedrock was encountered.

·

The core was logged at the hole site using routine logging methods; MgCO3 and SiO2 were listed on the log after analysis was completed.

·

The cores were split and then analyzed for CaO, MgO, Al2O3, SiO2. The lab performing the work was not listed. Analysis samples were composited based on lithology.

The results of the hole analysis are presented in Table 7.1-3 below.

Table 7.1-3 Summary of 2000 Exploration Drilling

Property

    

Number of
Holes

    

Average LST Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3 Percentage (%)

St. Clair N. Property

2

60

98.1

Note: W. Mitchell Report, 2000 drilling.

Page 22 of 56


W. Mitchell reported the data from 5 holes about three miles north of the St. Clair mine. The data was incomplete, some holes had logs, and others did not. They all had analysis and four out of the five confirmed continuity and chemical quality of the limestone ore zone. These holes were not part of the drillhole database. This project provided data confirming the lateral continuity and chemical quality of the Marble City member at the far northern extent of the St. Clair property.

In 2005, USLM purchased all the outstanding stock of O-N Minerals (St. Clair) Company from O-N Minerals (Lime) Company, a subsidiary of Oglebay Norton Company. Part of the due diligence was to drill the property to confirm the existence of the ore between the active mine and the northern two 2000 project holes. Because the terrain is very rugged with steep-sided ridges, it was decided to drill a widespread pattern of locations with existing reasonable access. Historical quality and thickness from the mine were used in designing the drilling criteria and pattern. In 2005, the mine had an 8,500 ft. long face forming a 180-degree continuous ore zone exposure. The mine face was used as a continuous drill hole for correlation purposes. The mining had operated continuously for approximately 60 years providing the plant with shot limestone for processing into products with consistent quality. The drilling program consisted of nine core holes; five were drilled on St. Clair property north of the mine and four were drilled nearby the mine. USLM approved the methods and procedures. These protocols for drilling, logging, and sampling cores had been developed over several years as equipment and analyses had changed. The project procedures were:

·

Contract geologists selected core drilling locations with the approval of sites and drilling budget by USLM management.

·

Core drilling was conducted directly under the supervision of contract geologists. All core was logged by SYB Group or an approved USLM contract geologist using a protocol modified from the Shell Sample Examination Manual (Swanson, 1981) that was modified by SYB and approved by USLM.

·

After final selection, hole locations were surveyed by hand GPS (WAAS and GLONASS capable).

·

Immediately upon retrieval, the core was placed on a V-shaped trough. All core pieces were fitted together and labeled with a permanent marker in one-foot intervals.

·

Characteristics related to the suitability of the limestone for the St. Clair plant processing and geology were recorded. These items are stratigraphy, key marker lenses/layers, lithology characteristics, visual identification of ore top and bottom, and structural disturbance.

·

The core from each drill hole was placed into cardboard boxes in two-foot intervals totaling 10 ft. at the drill site. The boxes were labeled with a box number, company information, hole number, core runs, and depths marked on each box. The boxes were then delivered to the St. Clair core processing area. Then they were prepped for transport to the ALC core storage center.

·

The contract geologists were responsible for examining the core and compiling a detailed interval list for XRF analysis. This list was later entered into Excel to build an analysis database. The analysis intervals were chosen on two ft. lengths and intervals of six to ten ft. above and below the lithologically identified ore zone were chosen. This excess was so the top and bottom of the ore could be chemically defined.

·

Once the cores were at the ALC core storage area, the core intervals were diamond sawed into two-thirds to one-third splits. The interval’s one-third split was then bagged in a plastic bag and labeled with the depth interval to be analyzed. The two-thirds split was carefully placed back in the box for reference.

·

The bagged intervals are kept in plastic labeled buckets or boxes in separate groups by the hole and then submitted to the ALC QC/QA lab for XRF analysis. Any portions of samples not destroyed during the testing process are still stored at the ALC core storage facility.

The ALC QC/QA lab performed the XRF analysis on these cores using the USLM lab protocols (discussed in Section 8).

This drilling further substantiated the lateral continuity, consistent vertical thickness, and average CaCO3 quality above 96.0% for the Marble City member ore interval. Holes drilled on the northern properties confirmed the results from the Marble City member’s 2000 hole chemistry and thickness. The four holes drilled nearby the mine agreed with the production chemistry and mining thickness observed in the mine. The chemistry and thickness from drilling and historical data from the mining operation would be used in future mine planning. The results from this project are listed in Table 7.1-4 below:

Page 23 of 56


Table 7.1-4 Summary of 2005 Exploration Drilling

Property

    

Number of Holes

    

Average LST
Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3
Percentage (%)

 

St. Clair N Leased Prop.

5

51

97.7

St. Clair Fee Prop

4

45

98.01

Total

9

48

97.8

Note: From 2006 SYB Group Drilling Report.

Recent acquisitions (2017) by St. Clair southwest of the mine required drilling for resource assessment. Mining face chemistry and thickness again was considered as drill hole data. The project's design and criteria considered the results from two existing holes nearby. The area consisted of a set of elongate north-south trending ridges. The ridges had outcrops on three sides. The hole pattern consisted of 16 holes in a grid pattern of variable spacing to accommodate the topography. Primary objectives for the drilling were: 1) to confirm the ore body presence, extent, consistency; and 2) drill to the bottom of the Quarry Mountain formation since little deep drilling had been done in the past. This project’s protocols and procedures are the same as the 2005 drilling project listed above.

The bottom of the Quarry Mountain formation was drilled in each hole and the vertical extent of the existing ore zone was defined. The Marble City member was present in every hole, but one, and the thickness was consistent with the mining height. The ore thickness was thicker than the mining face height in three holes. The occurrence of small dolomitic limestone pods or lenses in two holes will require production monitoring methods currently being utilized in the mine.

The results of this drilling project are presented in Table 7.1-5.

Table 7.1-5 Summary of 2017 Exploration Drilling

Project

    

Number of Holes

    

Average LST
Thickness (Ft.)

    

Average CaCO3
Percentage (%)

 

St. Clair 2017 Drilling

17

34

97.6

Note: From 2017 SYB Group Drilling Report.

The mine had a production QC/QA program before USLM purchased the operation and was continued with modification to the present day. Complete records for the analytical program have existed since 2004. Records from prior years are incomplete or unlocatable.

This database provides a comprehensive insight into the ore zone’s composition, thickness, and variability over a considerable time span. The program consists of compositing cuttings for one row from the top, middle, and bottom of the face blast hole pattern. Every mining face to be blasted is sampled using this method. This sampling amounts to 40% of the hole pattern. It is estimated that the average number of samples analyzed for production QC per year over the past five years is 490.

St. Clair Procedure for Collecting Drill Cuttings:

·

Drill operator identifies face location. Row (Numerical), Column (Alphabetical), Cardinal Direction (N, E, S, W) (Example 1 A North).

·

Labels collection bags with location and hole location (Top, Middle, Bottom).

·

Driller starts drilling the face.

·

Driller collects floor cuttings across the face from left to right and puts them into a bag labeled bottom (Example 1 A North Bottom).

·

Driller collects middle cuttings across the face from left to right and puts them into a bag labeled middle (Example 1 A North Middle).

·

Driller collects roof cuttings across the face from left to right and puts them into a bag labeled top (Example 1 A North Top).

·

Driller drops off drill cuttings at the lab at the end of shift.

·

The cuttings are then logged in and processed by the lab personnel using USLM protocols (discussed below in section 8.0).

This production data has been used to map chemical trends in the ore deposit to estimate quality ahead of the mining faces and floor. This QC data’s average mine production quality has been above 96.0% CaCO3.

A list of the holes used in the model with the hole name and XY coordinates can be found in Appendix A.

Page 24 of 56


All holes’ lithology, chemical analysis, and ore interval were plotted as logs. These logs were used to correlate stratigraphy, lithology, and ore zone intercepts. Also, they form a visual catalog of all the hole data. A recent core log is shown below in Fig. 7.1-2.

Chart

Description automatically generated

7.2Surface Mapping and Sampling

In 1943, OGS (Ham et al., 1943) performed a study to define the extent and chemical content of the Marble City member (named St. Clair then) in more detail than previous work. The OGS sampled outcrops and mine faces in and around the St. Clair Lime Company mine. The work identified three chemical zones that matched the three differing lithologies of the member. The results for zone two represent the ore zone in the St. Clair mine. The zone two thickness ranged from 55 to 70 ft. and chemistry was consistently above 96.0 % CaCO3. Some small random lenses of dolomitic stone were sampled, which slightly lowered the CaCO3 content. In all areas sampled, CaCO3 and MgCO3 content were 99 % of zone two limestone. St. Clair zone two CaCO3 content averaged above 96.0%, and Independent Gravel Company quarry (an adjacent operation) CaCO3 averaged above 96.0%. The results of this study documented in detail the high purity of the Marble City member 70 years ago.

The procedures for the study are as follows:

·

Surface samples were taken every inch along a perpendicular line to the dip of the beds. Samples were composited every five ft. or when there was a change in lithology.

·

The OGS lab analyzed samples under the direction of the Survey Chemist.

The 1965 OGS comprehensive study (Amsden and Rowland, 1965) utilized surface examination, fossil collection, and measured sections as part of the project. There is not an entire section exposed at any one of the sites. The authors relied on quarries and mines to supplement the outcrops. The correlation of these partial sections also benefited from the subsurface cores and wells nearby used in the study.

Page 25 of 56


The surface sampling was limited to fossil collection. This part of the study was directed toward obtaining lithological and stratigraphic information. It is essential because the sampling locations provided evidence on the lateral extent of the Marble City member ore interval. Table 7.2 lists the surface locations where the Marble City member was present and the measured thickness. The distribution of these locations supports the recent drilling proving the Marble City member is consistently present across the entire St. Clair property. The QP has visited some of the nearby locations mentioned in this report to confirm the report findings and observe the ore zone in the outcrop.

Table 7.2 Surface Location Summary of OGS 1965 Study

Location

    

LST Thickness (Ft.)

 

Ch1, SE Cherokee Co.

Top Marble City exposed only

Ch2 SE Shore Tenkiller Lake

Upper Barber exposed

Ch3 SE Town of Barber

No exposure

Ch4 W Town of Qualls

No exposure

Ch5 W town of Qualls

No exposure

Ch6 W Town of Qualls

No exposure

Ch7 NW Town of Qualls

No exposure

S15 Walkingstick Hollow

Top 25 ft. Marble City

S16 Walkingstick Hollow

Top 25 ft. Marble City

S17 N St. Clair Quarry

Top 20 ft. Marble City

S18 St. Clair Quarry Floor

Upper Barber Member

S19 W Payne Hollow

Top 30 ft. Marble City

S20 Indpen. Gravel Quarry

Top 55 ft. Marble City

S21 W Lake Tenkiller Dam

Top 8 ft. Marble City

Ad1 Malloy Hollow

Top 22 ft. Marble City

7.3Hydrogeology Information

The State of Oklahoma does not require hydrogeological studies.

7.4Geotechnical Information

The State of Oklahoma does not require geotechnical studies to be performed. As part of due diligence prior to acquisition, USLM performed a pillar analysis to ensure the pillar dimensions were safe and adequate for the existing mine design.

8Sample Preparation, Analyses, and Security

8.1Sample Preparation and XRF Analysis

The St. Clair plant produces many products which are under strict parameters for chemical and physical quality. The St. Clair lab was established many years ago and was upgraded several times to meet the increasing demands of the customer base. The most significant upgrade was in 2017 when the original O-N Minerals XRF was replaced with a higher quality instrument. In addition, customer quality control labs test St. Clair product shipments frequently.

XRF is one of the primary methods for determining the chemical content of limestone. The St. Clair QC/QA labo has been responsible for conducting XRF analysis on plant products and all limestone samples from stockpiles, belt feed samples, drilling, to hand samples collected for outcrop identification. The five significant oxides are analyzed. CaO is most important because of the plant’s raw limestone requirement above 96.0% CaCO3.

XRF sample preparation, whether hand sample, core, or cuttings, is crushed the entire sample to -10 mesh. The sample is then separated and reduced by a ruffle to 250 grams, drying and pulverizing a representative split to -150 mesh. The samples are analyzed for these oxides CaO, MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2, following USLM’s XRF analytical method for limestone analysis. The technique involves pressing the powder into a pellet using a wax binder to hold the shape. The analytical procedure and protocol information was provided by St. Clair QC/QA personnel and other information for this section was provided by St. Clair personnel.

8.2 Quality Control/Quality Assurance

The limestone samples are analyzed twice in a run to confirm repeatability. All sample preparation equipment is cleaned after preparing each sample and before the subsequent preparation. The instrument is cleaned and calibrated each year by the manufacturer and is under a service contract. Whenever the device becomes dirty and registers out of calibration or out of specification for the

Page 26 of 56


standards, a manufacturer service call is made to clean, recalibrate, and repair if necessary. The oxide results of each sample are totaled to determine if the data is within an acceptable error range around 100%. The sample analysis is rerun if the total oxide percentage exceeds acceptable error limits. The rerun is to correct or help define the error issue. Sample preparation and a newly prepped sample usually correct the problem in many cases. The lab has a set of certified limestone standards to cover the content range of the major oxides that can occur in limestones. The appropriate standard is run concurrently with the unknown samples. The standard results are compared run to run to ensure the instrument operates correctly.

USLM has four QC/QA labs among its wholly-owned subsidiaries. These labs can perform many of the same analyses, specifically XRF. At any time one lab goes down or needs verification of analytical (XRF) results, samples can be sent to another lab for continuing analysis of the samples or cross verification.

The St. Clair QC/QA lab is certified by:

·

Highway Departments in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas;

·

The Food and Drug Administration;

·

Underwriters Laboratory; and

·

FAA.

The lab follows procedures and protocols set forth by:

·

ASTM Methods: C-25, 50. 51, 110, 602, 706, 977, 1271;

·

AASHTO Methods: M216-05;

·

AWWA B-202-02;

·

pH 4500 Standard; and

·

USLM Company protocols for testing limestone samples.

The lab utilizes certified limestone samples to verify the accuracy and calibration of its instrumentation. These are:

·

JLS-1;

·

NIST 1D; and

·

China National Analysis Center:

·

NCS DC 70301;

·

NCS DC 70302;

·

NCS DC 70307;

·

NCS DC 70308; and

·

NCS DC 73375.

The security for geological samples is not required compared to the procedures needed for precious metals (gold, silver, etc.). Core or other samples are immediately after drilling or at the end of the current shift taken to the core storage area by the contract geologist, member of the drill crew, or limestone sample collector. They are logged in and processed by St. Clair QC/QA lab personnel. The change of possession is limited to two or three people that can be identified and held accountable for the location of the samples before delivery to the lab. This information was provided by St. Clair QC/QA lab personnel.

8.3Opinion of the Qualified Person on Adequacy of Sample Preparation

The analysis of geologic samples is conducted with the same care as the St. Clair QC/QA testing for the plant’s products. The QP reviewed the preparation and analytical procedure protocols by QC/QA lab personnel and shift workers for proper adherence. The QP’s opinion is that the analytical program and lab provide reasonably accurate data for determining resource estimates.

9Data Verification

9.1Source Material

The QP worked with onsite St. Clair personnel to obtain databases and raw data. There was an ongoing interface with St. Clair personnel while reviewing and verifying the data needed for input into the geologic resource model. For this TRS, the hard copy data was compared with the digital database for correctness and thoroughness. The geologic data from the old drilling programs were validated as reasonably as possible by comparing lithology and depths from nearby recent holes and production data. Chemical results from the older work were compared to recent chemical results from the nearest production data or hole. This comparison was

Page 27 of 56


necessary to verify using the older data in the model. Recent hole ore intercepts were cross-checked with the appropriate mine data to verify and confirm surveyed collar data and check the ore zone.

The 1965 OGS hole maps with the plotted surveyed locations were georeferenced using Global MapperTM and then digitally overlaid on age-appropriate USGS Quad Geotiff raster maps to verify location, convert to State Plane System, and verify collar elevation.

The core logs from the various drilling projects were reviewed to confirm logging was suitable for the intercept data determination. The original 1965 hole analyses were composited above 96.0% CaCO3 cutoff when possible. If recompositing was not possible, the analytical results had to average above 96.0% cutoff. A local surveyor performed surface surveying of tracts, and each year an underground survey is performed.

The QP met with QC/QA lab personnel to validate that the QC/QA protocol was followed for the geologic samples and reviewed the instrument’s status records. The sources for this data are the St. Clair QC/QA lab, Satterfield Surveyors (surface) and Osburn Surveyors (underground), and contract geologists.

9.2 Opinion of the Qualified Person on Data Adequacy

After contacting St. Clair personnel and subcontractors, reviewing the material, and performing verification processes, the QP is satisfied the drill hole database and chemical analysis data are reasonably valid. The QP’s opinion is that the data utilized has been analyzed and collected appropriately and reasonably and that the data was adequate for the resource interpretation and estimation.

10Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

The Marble City member mined at the St. Clair property is sedimentary without alteration due to metamorphic or igneous geologic processes. The uniqueness and suitability of the raw limestone for making the plant’s products are based on the percent of CaCO3 content in the limestone. There is no metal content in the ore and no need to perform metallurgical testing. Shot limestone from the mine has been supplied to the plant’s primary crusher for decades. The mine does not operate crushing and screening processes, so testing is unnecessary. St. Clair personnel furnished the preceding information.

11Mineral Resource Estimates

11.1Definitions

A mineral resource is an estimate of mineralization by considering relevant factors such as cutoff grade, likely mining dimensions, location, or continuity that, with the assumed and justifiable technical and economic conditions, is likely to, in whole or in part become economically extractable. Mineral resources are categorized based on the level of confidence in the geologic evidence. According to 17 CFR § 229.1301 (2021), the following definitions of mineral resource categories are included for reference:

An inferred mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. An inferred mineral resource has the lowest level of geological confidence of all mineral resources, which prevents the application of the modifying factors in a manner useful for the evaluation of economic viability. An inferred mineral resource, therefore, may not be converted to a mineral reserve.

An indicated mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of adequate geological evidence and sampling. An indicated mineral resource has a lower level of confidence than the level of confidence of a measured mineral resource and may only be converted to a probable mineral reserve. As used in this subpart, the term adequate geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to establish geological and grade or quality continuity with reasonable certainty.

A measured mineral resource is that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of conclusive geological evidence and sampling. As used in this subpart, the term conclusive geological evidence means evidence that is sufficient to test and confirm geological and grade or quality continuity.

Page 28 of 56


11.2Key Assumptions, Parameters, and Methods

11.2.1Resource Classification Criteria

Geologic and analytical data from regional and local drilling, subsurface, and surface sampling have proven that the Marble City member has a consistently high CaCO3 content (above 96.0%) and a consistent mining thickness of 30 plus ft. across the entire St. Clair property. These analytical results cover from 1962 to 2021 and are sufficient to establish reasonable certainty of geological presence and grade or quality continuity on the operation’s property. 300 acres (per 2021 UG survey) have been mined since the operation went underground in 1953.

The many years the St. Clair mine has operated in a wide range of economic conditions historically proves the extraction of the deposit to be economical. Geologic confidence is high based on the verified consistent analysis from sampling. Classifying these resources in the indicated and measured categories is appropriate. The indicated category for the northern tracts is appropriate because the chemical data is consistent, the total acreage is large, and drill spacing is widespread. The measured category for the tracts adjacent to the mine is appropriate because the mine’s operations for 65 plus years extracting limestone from hundreds of acres coupled with the existing core hole results provide high confidence in the resource model for this acreage.

11.2.2Market Price

A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the USGS each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.” Their database is comprised of sources from the entire United States. The study considers such material issues as regional price differences, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. For 2020, USGS reported an average value price per metric ton of $12.19, which converts to $11.05 per short ton for crushed limestone. St. Clair mine’s only product is crushed limestone and is the sole supplier to the St. Clair plant.

11.2.3Fixed Cutoff Grade

The St. Clair mine supplies shot limestone to the plant’s primary crusher that is further processed by the St. Clair plant for products to sell to end-user markets. The plant must be provided with a limestone source above an average CaCO3 threshold for customer needs. No matter the product, the raw limestone must exceed a minimum average content above 96.0% CaCO3. This percentage is considered a fixed cutoff grade because the percentage does not vary for the current plant products. The average percent of CaCO3 can be higher but not lower to meet the quality requirement of the plant. Mining limestone with a significantly higher average CaCO3 percentage results in the deposit being high-graded which shortens the mine’s life. Lowering the grade is unacceptable for the plant.

A primary XRF analysis quality control check is to total all the oxide percentages to determine how close the analysis total is to 100%. CaO is the primary oxide of the sample analyzed and the remainder is comprised of MgO, Fe2O3, Al2O3, and SiO2 (refer to Section 8).

Since the mine operates on a fixed cutoff grade, there are no specific economic criteria for changing the cutoff grade. The fixed cutoff grade determines the mining thickness. In underground mines, this can be an issue for various reasons. Any cost factors that increase the mining cost of limestone at this fixed grade would be offset by appropriate downstream price increases in the St. Clair plant’s products.

11.2.4Summary of Parameters

Primary modifying factors are fixed cutoff grade, the final underground mine layout, and property line offset. Key assumptions and parameters applied to estimate mineral resources are in Table 11.2.4.

Table 11.2.4 Resource Parameter Assumptions

Modifying Factor

    

Parameter

 

Fixed Grade Cutoff

Above 96.0% CaCO3

Estimated Final UG Mine Layout

Final Underground Mine Outline

Mining Thickness

Height Suitable for Mining and Use of Equipment

Property Offset

800 ft. contour with 20 ft. property offset

Mineability

Reasonably Expected to be Feasible to Mine

Page 29 of 56


11.3Resource Model

Once the database had been updated, a final data entry check was performed. Table 11.3 lists the drill holes and the samples used in the model data base.

The mine is surveyed every year to document the mining face advance during the year. Surveyed elevation points are advanced in the mine as needed. The existing mine map is updated with the newly surveyed mining face and oriented to the mapping grid. The current underground survey dated January 7, 2022, was used for the underground mine limits for the TRS resource estimate. The new underground survey and most recent USGS Light Detection and Ranging topography were edited using Global MapperTM software to reduce file size and crop to the resource area. The existing coordinate system was State Plane NAD 83 ft. and was not changed.

The ore body consists of a horizontal single limestone bed defined by top and bottom surfaces. The top and the bottom ore intercepts were from total ore interval composites. The average CaCO3 content above the 96.0% cutoff or higher was used to determine the ore interval in each hole. If any hole’s composite were below 96.0% CaCO3, that area would be excluded from the resource estimate. This situation did not occur. In many holes, the thickness of ore grade limestone was thicker than the current mining interval. The larger thickness was noted but the current mining thickness was used to pick ore intercepts in the hole regardless of the total ore grade thickness. Next, the hole intercepts were utilized to produce top and bottom three-dimensional structural surfaces.

The method chosen to model the ore structures was gridding using SURFERTM software and gridded by Kriging was selected from eleven other algorithms. The selection process involved four steps:

·

Rough hand contour data for trend and structure preview for comparison;

·

Run gridding script with basic inputs to compare 12 gridding methods rough maps with hand contoured map;

·

Select appropriate grid methods after comparison, then refine with specific inputs to further the selection process; and

·

Run a residual test to select which grid method specifically honors the ore intercepts and approximates the hand contouring.

Contour structure maps of the ore top and bottom were created and utilized in Geovia SurpacTM as vertical boundary surfaces to develop an ore block model. These structural surfaces were then truncated against the current topography to account for erosional effects. This truncation was necessary because the ore bed position was not located in the valley subsurface. The outline of the St. Clair property was then used to define the gross boundary of the resource areas. The 800 ft. elevation as the mining limit for the resource was chosen.

Next, ore isochore (thickness) and overburden isochore maps were constructed. These maps were compared to the Surpac block model to determine conformity and validate the block model limits. Fig 11.3 is a map of the resource area ore thickness.

The block model was then utilized to update the mine design and aid mine planning. The revised mine design determined the limits for defining the outer boundary for resource estimation.

The resource volume and tonnage were estimated using Surpac software. After surfaces of the ore top and bottom were imported into Surpac (DXF files), Digital Terrain Model surfaces were created using the imported surface files. The same topography and underground survey were imported into Surpac. Blocks were coded above the ore bottom surface and below the top ore surface. The blocks were 20 ft. northing by 20 ft. easting and 2 ft. thick. The blocks were coded within the resource boundaries for each area. Future mine areas were designed using a pillar design of 30 ft. by 30 ft. with 50 ft. rooms. The boundary limits of mining were developed with a combination of property lines inside the 800 ft. contour and the 800 ft. contour when the boundary was inside the property line. A property offset of 20 ft. was applied when the property lines were used.

Page 30 of 56


Diagram

Description automatically generated

Table 11.3 Summary of Drill Hole Database for the Model

Data Type

    

Number of Records

 

Total Holes

35

Lithology

35

Chemical Analyses(Includes Mine Faces)

48

Hole Composites

35

Holes Not on St. Clair Property

4

11.4Mineral Resources

11.4.1Estimate of Mineral Resources

Resources for this deposit were estimated as in-place volumes and tonnages. The estimate of measured, indicated, and inferred mineral in-place limestone resources for the St. Clair operation effective December 31, 2021, as estimated from applying the resource parameters to the geologic model, are in Table 11.4-1.

Page 31 of 56


Table 11.4.1. U.S. Lime Company – St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Resources as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Resource Category

    

In Place
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Processing Recovery
(%)
3

 

Measured Mineral Resources

36,648,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Indicated Mineral Resources

129,747,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Total Measured and Indicated

166,395,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

N/A

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

3 N/A: Not Applicable because estimated resources are in place.

11.4.2Geologic Confidence and Uncertainty

The samples in the database have been verified and there is a high degree of geologic confidence in the database. Theore composite analysis results were constantly above the 96.0% CaCO3 cutoff. The Marble City member is a tabular, medium bedded limestone. For many decades, the St. Clair mining operation has produced crushed limestone meeting or surpassing the quality limits required by the plant during its entire operational history.

The continuity and quality consistency has been documented by widespread local production and drilling results on the property. Because of those results and the fact that the production quality is constantly above the CaCO3 cutoff for the deposit, there is high confidence in the definition of the ore zone limits.

11.5Opinion of the Qualified Person

There are no significant factors onsite that will impact the extraction of this ore body. Most directly involve the St. Clair plant and not the mine. After reviewing the resource model, the QP is confident that drilling the property above the Marble City outcrop would yield ore quality limestone. The QP is also confident that St. Clair will continue to economically extract limestone above the quality cutoff for the foreseeable future.

The QP’s opinion is that the following technical and economic factors could influence the economic extraction of the resource, but the St. Clair plant insulates most of them from the mine. Although, if lime production becomes unfeasible, the St. Clair plant would no longer require limestone from the St. Clair mine to produce lime.

·

Regional supply and demand Due to the shipping cost of lime, sales are limited to a regional footprint at the plant. The plant is insulated from global import and export market changes, as sales are domestic and regional.

·

Fuel cost mining equipment are major diesel consumers at the St. Clair mine. As diesel prices rise, the price per ton of production also rises and will need to be offset by increases in the plants product prices.

·

Skilled labor This site is located near three metropolitan areas (Sallisaw, Oklahoma, Ft. Smith, Arkansas, Tulsa, Oklahoma).

·

Environmental Matters:

·

Federal or State regulations/legislation regarding greenhouse gas emission

·

Air and water quality standards

12Mineral Reserve Estimates

Mineral resources were converted to reserves using a 81% recovery factor. The limits of underground mining were assumed to be the 800 ft. elevation contour around the mine. The limestone is mined using the room and pillar method. An average of 14% of the limestone is left in the mine as pillars. An estimated 5% of the remaining ore after the pillars is lost to the roof, floor, and to dust and spillage. The limestone below the targeted mine floor in places is slightly lower quality. It is blended with higher-grade ore to meet the fixed cutoff when encountered. Dilution volume is minimal and not estimated.

12.1Definitions

Mineral reserve is an estimate of tonnage and grade or quality of indicated and measured mineral resources that, in the opinion of the qualified person, can be the basis of an economically viable project. More specifically, it is the economically mineable part of a measured or indicated mineral resource, which includes diluting materials and allowances for losses that may occur when the material is mined or extracted (Dorsey, 2019).

Page 32 of 56


Probable mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of an indicated and, in some cases, a measured mineral resource.  For a probable mineral reserve, the qualified person’s confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality is lower than what is sufficient for a classification as a proven mineral reserve, but is still sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of reporting, extraction of the mineral reserve is economically viable under reasonable investment and market assumptions (Dorsey, 2019).

Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource.  For a proven mineral reserve, the qualified person has a high degree of confidence in the results obtained from the application of the modifying factors and in the estimates of tonnage and grade or quality. Proven mineral reserve is the economically mineable part of a measured mineral resource and can only result from conversion of a measured mineral resource (Dorsey, 2019).

12.2Price

The St. Clair mine is the sole supplier of crushed limestone to the St. Clair plant. A reasonable market survey for industrial mineral prices is conducted by the USGS each year. The publication is titled “USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.” Their database comprises sources from the entire United States and considers such material issues as regional price difference, weather effects, production issues, and decreased demand from downstream users. As stated in Section 11.2.2, USGS reports average crushed limestone value price of $12.19 per metric ton, which converts to $11.05 per short ton.

12.3Costs

Annual sustaining capital costs were estimated using prior-year capital expenditures and St. Clair’s 2022 capital budget. Capital expenditures for major mobile equipment replacements were estimated using information from vendors. Limestone mining costs for St. Clair were estimated using historical data and its 2022 budget.

12.4 Reserve Estimates

Table 12.4 U.S. Lime Company –St. Clair – Summary of Limestone Mineral Reserves as of December 31, 2021,

Based On $11.05 Crushed Limestone 1, 2

Reserve Category

    

Extractable
(tons)

    

Cutoff Grade
(% X)

    

Mining Recovery
(%)

 

Probable Reserves

0

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

81.0

Proven Reserves

23,387,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

81.0

Total Probable and Proven

23,387,000

Above 96.0 (CaCO3)

81.0

Notes: 1 Price Source from USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021.

2 Shot limestone delivered to the primary crusher.

12.5 Opinion of the Qualified Person

St. Clair has successfully mined this resource for many years using the same methods that are projected into the future. Significant increases in the cost of mining coupled with large decreases in the selling price of limestone would make mining uneconomic. Historically, St. Clair has increased sales prices in line with cost increases. The limestone is consistent across the reserve area and allows for stable operating requirements from year to year.

13Mining Methods

13.1Geotechnical and Hydrologic Considerations

Currently, the State of Oklahoma does not require geotechnical or hydrology modeling in mining operations. The only geotechnical aspect considered was determining if the room and pillar design was appropriate for the mining height (St. Clair Internal Report, 2006).

The only investigation into hydrologic conditions was to determine the water table height so that a suitable plan was put into action to pump water from the mine.

13.2Mine Operating Parameters

The mine currently averages an annual production rate of approximately 425,000 tons per year. The current expected mine life at the average rate stated is approximately 55 years.

Page 33 of 56


The St. Clair mine has a natural draft throughout. The natural draft is adequate for the equipment fleet. Air quality testing is performed using a multi-gas detector and a sampling pump used for diesel particulate content analyzed by an outside lab. Typical air quality readings in the mine meet regulatory standards. Testing is done daily by St. Clair mine personnel and a minimum of twice a year by external entities during their regular yearly inspections.

Figure 13.2 reflects a current estimate of the final mine limits.

Diagram Description automatically generated

13.3Mining Plan

The mining method used at the St. Clair mine is room and pillar. The pillars are 30 ft. by 30 ft. The room is 50 ft. wide. A horizontal drill performs drilling with typical holes that are 18 ft. long and 2.5 inches in diameter. The typical blast pattern is 60 holes in a V-cut. A front-end loader and three haul trucks transport the limestone out of the mine. Any unusable limestone encountered is moved a short distance to an area outside the mine.

Mining operations at the St. Clair Property are straightforward and relatively simple. Limestone is mined with pillars left in place to stabilize the mine workings. Limestone is hauled to the primary crusher near the mine portal. Mining operations are a repeated cycle of drilling, blasting, scaling, followed by loading and haulage of the limestone. St. Clair performs the drilling and blasting. The mine completes the load and haul operations using front-end loaders and haul trucks with a small ancillary equipment fleet, including a scaler and a grader.

13.4Mine Plant, Equipment, and Personnel

The mining equipment fleet consists of three haul trucks and a loader. A horizontal drill does the drilling with 18 ft. holes. Ancillary mobile equipment includes an Anfo truck, a grader, a scaler, a maintenance truck, and light vehicles. Equipment necessary for mining operations includes water pumps. The mine operates 3 to 6 days per week depending on demand from the plant and maintenance requirements. Operating personnel consist of skilled operators and a mine manager supervising the operations. The St. Clair plant personnel and equipment are not discussed because the mining operations end at the plant’s primary crusher for this TRS.

Page 34 of 56


14Processing and Recovery Methods

14.1Process Plant and Description

This section does not apply to the report because the mine delivers shot limestone to the St. Clair primary crusher, where the plant processes the limestone into various products. Crusher Flow Sheet was not included in the report because we only consider mined limestone delivered to the plant’s primary crusher.

14.2Plant Throughput and Design

This section does not apply to the report because the mine is the sole limestone supplier to the plant’s primary crusher.

14.3 Plant Operational Requirements

This section does not apply to the report because the mine is the sole limestone supplier to the plant’s primary crusher.

14.4Application of Novel or Unproven Technology

Mining operations at the site follow standard underground methods. There has not been any application of novel or unproven technologies or techniques.

15Infrastructure

The St. Clair property is accessible by a paved state highway and rail. The mine operation is accessed by a gravel haul road maintained by the mine personnel. The mine site is a land-locked location with no port facilities access. A rail spur is located on plant property connected to the Kansas City Southern Railway. The mine shares an office and maintenance shop with the plant. The mine has its mobile equipment maintenance shop located in the underground mine. Three-phase electric power is provided to the site via above-ground utility lines. A water source is available but not utilized by the mine. A water supply is from the county system but bottled water is supplied for drinking. The plant pumps water from the mine for water needs. Load-out to the primary crusher is on the plant property. The shot limestone stockpiles are on the plant property. Fig. 15.1 shows an aerial photo of the mine area and significant infrastructure features.

Map

Description automatically generated

Page 35 of 56


16Market Studies

16.1 Market Outlook and Forecast

Demand for limestone produced at the St. Clair mine is solely for St. Clair’s lime and limestone production facilities next to the mine which has been in existence for over 80 years. Lime kilns have been in existence at the current St. Clair lime and limestone production facilities since 1964. Its lime and limestone products are delivered to its geographic market areas by either truck or rail.

Demand for limestone for the St. Clair lime and limestone production facilities has averaged approximately 425,000 tons per year over the previous five years. Primary demand for lime and limestone products from St. Clair’s operations is from stable markets including the construction industry, steel manufacturers, paper and glass manufacturers, municipal sanitation and water treatment facilities, roof shingle manufacturers, and poultry and cattle feed. Current market conditions for these customers should result in continued steady demand for lime and limestone products in St. Clair’s market areas for the foreseeable future.

16.2 Material Contracts

The St. Clair mine is the sole provider of limestone to St. Clair’s lime and limestone production facilities. There are no material contracts with outside purchasers.

17Environmental Studies, Permitting, and Plans, Negotiations, or Agreements with Local Individuals or Groups

17.1 Environmental Studies and Permitting Requirements

The State of Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (“ODEQ”) has environmental laws that regulate air and water resources. The ODEQ regulates the surface and mine water in the mine and around the proposed reclamation area. The Oklahoma Department of Mines (“ODOM”) regulates the mining and reclamation of mines. The environmental and mining permit information is provided in Table 17.1.

Table 17.1 Mining and Environmental Permits

Permit Number

    

Issuer

    

Purpose

    

Expiration Date

    

Status

 

L.E. – 1451-B

ODOM

Permit to Mine and Reclamation

11-30-2045

Active

OK0034401

ODEQ

Permit ponds and stormwater runoff

7-21-2025

Active

The permit for ponds and stormwater runoff covers weather-related discharge throughout St. Clair’s operations, including the mine areas.

17.2 Overburden, Site Monitoring, and Water Management

At St. Clair, the mine is underground and no overburden is disturbed in the mining process. As a result, there are no overburden piles or need to manage stripped materials.

Stormwater and springwater percolates into the mine and management is predominantly without discharging. However, during years of excessive precipitation, the increase in mine water is allowed to be discharged via the ODEQ permit listed above.

There are no automated onsite monitors in or around the mine property. The only air quality monitoring is in accordance with regulatory agencies to determine the quality of air in the mine. All mine water discharge is sampled by the mine personnel and tested in the plant lab. The monitoring and reporting are conducted under regulations promulgated by the agencies.

17.3 Post-Mining Land Use and Reclamation

The State of Oklahoma has laws and regulations pertaining to reclamation for mineral resources, including limestone. The State requires a mining permit which includes a reclamation plan to operate limestone mines. The ODOM has regular oversight of the mine and reclamation and requires bonding for future reclamation. The ODOM permit information associated with the mine is listed in Table 17.1.

Page 36 of 56


The current reclamation plan for the underground mine, required by the state, covers the entire operation with sections specific to each area. The following is a summary of the state requirements pertaining to the mine property only.

·

Land over the mine is utilized for forest and agriculture and this usage is expected to be retained after mine closure. Therefore, openings and entrances will be permanently sealed.

·

Haul roads to the primary crusher will be graded, disked, and prepared for seeding.

·

Topsoil initially removed will be distributed over the mined area. The highwall slopes will be addressed and berms put in place to prevent accidental entry if any open pit mining occurs. Any areas where benching remains will have appropriate access restrictions.

·

Final soil distribution and revegetation are to be conducted according to the procedure outlined in the permit plan.

The projected estimated life of the mine is 55 years. The operation is considered a tangible, long-lived asset. St. Clair has reasonably projected reclamation and remediation costs as asset retirement obligations reported annually in the USLM’s annual report on Form 10K (USLM’s 2021 Form 10K to which this TRS is attached as an exhibit).

17.4 Local or Community Engagement and Agreements

The operation has developed relationships over the years with various neighboring communities, including the small community of Marble City.

17.5 Opinion of the Qualified Person

Oklahoma is a heavily regulated State of environmental laws and regulations and has numerous permits that require ongoing compliance and oversight from the State agencies. All permits require constant reporting and oversight from the State mining and environmental agencies. St. Clair and USLM personnel are well trained and stay up-to-date on all mining and environmental regulations. In the QP’s opinion, there are no current or outstanding issues in environmental governance.

18Capital and Operating Costs

St. Clair mine has been a stable producer of limestone using the current equipment fleet and operating parameters for many years. This operating history and its 2022 budget were used to estimate the unit costs for limestone mining and annual sustaining capital expenditures.

18.1Capital Costs

Table 18.1 Capital Costs

Capital Cost Estimate

    

Cost

Annual Maintenance of Operations

$500,000

18.2Operating Costs

Table 18.2 Operating Costs

Operating Cost Estimate

    

Cost

 

Limestone Mining Cost Per Ton

$4.79

19Economic Analysis

The block model estimated limestone ore volumes for each reserve area. Limestone volumes are converted to tons for cost and revenue estimation using a density factor of 168 pounds per cubic foot.

The ore thickness is generally uniform in each area. The current mining method and equipment are suitable for all reserve areas.

19.1Key Parameters and Assumptions

The discount rate used in the economic analysis is 1.09%. This rate is St. Clair’s incremental borrowing cost. Per the current debt agreement and St. Clair’s current leverage ratio, our borrowing rate is 1.09% (calculated from the November 2021 LIBOR of 0.09%).

Page 37 of 56


The tax was estimated using St. Clair’s current effective income tax rate calculated on September 30, 2021. In reviewing the September 30, 2021 tax provision, the effective tax contained no material non-recurring permanent items that would influence the rate, so it is considered not applicable to future periods. Demand for limestone is projected to be approximately 425,000 tons per year for the life of the mine. The sales price per ton is estimated using the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021. Depreciation was estimated using existing assets and the approved items in the 2022 budget. The later years’ depreciations are calculated using the capital budget forecast and the asset life with a mid-year convention.

19.2Economic Viability

St. Clair has positive cash flow, and the current mine plan does not require a significant capital expenditure; therefore, payback and return on investment calculations are irrelevant. NPV of the life of mine plan is $68.1 million. The annual cash flows are in Appendix B.

19.3Sensitivity Analysis

Sensitivity analysis was performed on the discount rate, mining costs, St. Clair mining costs, and limestone price.

Table 19.3-1 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Discount Rate

Discount Rate

    

NPV
(thousands)

 

0.0%

$94,588

1%

$72,544

2%

$57,137

5%

$32,124

10%

$17,149

15%

$11,482

20%

$8,611

Graphic

Table 19.3-2 Sensitivity Analysis: Varying Limestone Mining Costs

Limestone Mining Costs Per Ton

    

NPV
(thousands)

 

$4.79

$71,111

$5.79

$57,455

$6.79

$43,799

$7.79

$30,142

$8.79

$16,486

Page 38 of 56


Graphic

Table 19.3-3 Sensitivity Analysis: Selling Price Change

Selling Price Change (%)

    

NPV
(thousands)

 

-20%

$40,188

-10%

$55,650

0%

$71,111

10%

$86,572

20%

$102,033

Graphic

20Adjacent Properties

Geologic information from adjacent properties was limited to that performed by the OGS. This material consisted of core holes, sampled surface locations, and oil wells drilled nearby. The information is public domain. It was utilized primarily as evidence of lateral continuity and extent and quality if the chemical analysis was available. The core holes in the OGS study were used in the geologic model.

21Other Relevant Data and Information

All data relevant to the supporting studies and estimates of mineral resources and reserves have been included in the sections of this TRS. No additional information or explanation is necessary to make this TRS understandable and not misleading.

Page 39 of 56


22Interpretation and Conclusions

22.1 Interpretations and Conclusions

Geologically, the deposit is a simple tabular, single bed limestone deposit with minor structure in the proven reserve areas and a shallow dip angle. The formation has been proven by local, detailed sampling, and drilling in and around the mine that the quality and thickness are very consistent. Because of this simple geology, the mining method is straightforward and consists of uncomplicated underground mining.

The mine operation has been modernized since USLM acquired St. Clair in 2005, which has allowed it to optimize mining. St. Clair has been in operation for many decades during varying economic and market conditions, and the St. Clair plant has maintained a steady market share. The economic analysis and amount of Mineral Resources and Proven Reserves indicate the operation reasonably has approximately 55 years of estimated mine life at current production levels.

22.2 Risks and Uncertainties

Internal to the mining operation, risks and uncertainties are minimal because of the uncomplicated geology and the employment of a standard mining method. Governmental, legal, and regulatory risks, such as greenhouse gases, could adversely affect the markets the St. Clair operation supplies.

23Recommendations

The mine has operated for many years under the current mining practices. The quality control practices have helped to optimize the thickness and quality of the ore zone over the period of operation. The QP recommends that ground water could be better controlled at the mine face with an improved configuration of the floor.

24References

AcreValue.com. 2021. {Accessed 2021}.https://www.acrevalue.com/map/?lat=40.628229&lng=-90.5&zoom=4 Abbey R. 2009. Manual of Surveying Instructions for the Survey of the Public Lands of the United States. BLM. 515 pgs.

Amsden TW and Rowland TL. 1965. Silurian Stratigraphy of Northeastern Oklahoma, OGS Bull. 105. Pgs. 195 Bestplaces.com. 2021. Marble City, Oklahoma Weather. [Accessed 2021]. www.bestplaces.net/climate

Digitalprairie.com. 2021. Oklahoma Geography: Physiographic Regions. QKA. Pg. 996.[accessed 2021] https://digitalprairie.ok.gov/digital/api/collection/almanacs/id/47773/download

Dorsey. 2019. How will the new rules affect the definitions of mineral reserves, probable mineral reserves, and proven mineral reserves? [Accessed 2020]

GoogleMaps.com. 2021. Sequoyah Oklahoma Road Map. [Accessed 2021] https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sequoyah+County,+OK/@35.464973,-94.9216917,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x87ca14b25955be37:0xbf93173495ff0ef0!8m2!3d35.5155322!4d-94.7691586

Ham et al. 1943. Geology and Mineral Composition of St. Clair Limestone near Marble City, Oklahoma. OGS MR #16. Pgs. 17

Huffman GG, 1958. Geology of the Flanks of the Ozark Uplift, Northeastern Oklahoma. OGS Bull. 77. Pgs. 292

Population.com. 2021. Sequoyah County, Oklahoma, City Populations. [Accessed 2021]. www.population.com

Rafferty M. 1988. Ozarks as a Region: A geographer’s description. OW. V1. #4.

Snider LC. 1915. Geology of a Portion of Northeastern Oklahoma. OGS Bull. 24. Pgs.71.

St. Clair Staff. 2006 Pillar Study Internal Report. St. Clair. Pgs. 10

Swanson RG. 1981. Shell Sample Examination Manual. MIES1. AAPG. 102 pgs.

USLM. 2005 Property Records, Executive Summary. Company Internal Report. Pgs. 23

US Geological Survey. 2021. MapView Website. [Accessed 2021]. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/mapview/?center=-97,39.6&zoom=4.

Page 40 of 56


US Geological Survey. 2021. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021. Stone (Crushed). pg. 154. USGS. 200 pgs.

US Geological Survey. 2021. MapView Website. [Accessed 2021]. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/mapview/?center=-97,39.6&zoom=4.

25Reliance on Information Provided by the Registrant

The QP has relied upon information and data from St. Clair and USLM personnel and historical records in completing this TRS. This material included written reports and statements of other individuals and companies with whom it does business. The material also includes permits, licenses, historical exploration data, production records, equipment lists, geologic and ore body resource and reserve information, mine modeling data, financial data and summaries, mine equipment specifications and summaries, records, and equipment lists. This material has been relied upon in the mine planning, capital and cost planning, and audited. The St. Clair mine engineer assisted the QP in reviewing these materials and performed the final reserve modeling and economic analysis under the direction of the QP. The QP believes that the assumptions were factual and accurate and that the interpretations were reasonable. There is no reason to believe that any material facts have been withheld or misstated. In his professional judgment, the QP has taken all appropriate steps to ensure that the information or advice from St. Clair and USLM personnel and records and outside entities are accurate. The QP does not disclaim any responsibility for this Technical Report Summary.

Page 41 of 56


Appendix A: List of Data included in the Geologic Model

Graphic

Page 42 of 56


Appendix B: Annual Cash Flow Analysis

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

Discount Factor 1.09%

NPV $71,111

  

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(443)

$

(461)

$

(459)

$

(492)

$

(456)

$

(472)

Taxable Income

$

2,217

$

2,200

$

2,201

$

2,169

$

2,204

$

2,188

-Tax

$

(446)

$

(442)

$

(442)

$

(436)

$

(443)

$

(440)

+Depreciation

$

443

$

461

$

459

$

492

$

456

$

472

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,715

$

1,718

$

1,718

$

1,725

$

1,717

$

1,721

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(544)

$

(544)

$

(544)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,117

$

2,117

$

2,117

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(425)

$

(425)

$

(425)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

544

$

544

$

544

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,735

$

1,735

$

1,735

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2034

2035

2036

2037

2038

2039

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

Page 43 of 56


St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

2045

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

2046

2047

2048

2049

2050

2051

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

2052

2053

2054

2055

2056

2057

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

In Thousands

2058

2059

2060

2061

2062

2063

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

Page 44 of 56


St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2064

2065

2066

2067

2068

2069

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2070

2071

2072

2073

2074

2075

Tons Limestone Sold

425

425

425

425

425

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

$

1,726

St. Clair – Discounted Cash Flow

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

 

In Thousands

2076

Tons Limestone Sold

425

Sales Price/Ton

$

11.05

Revenue

$

4,696

-Operating Costs

$

(2,036)

-Depreciation

$

(500)

Taxable Income

$

2,160

-Tax

$

(434)

+Depreciation

$

500

-Capital Expenses

$

(500)

Free Cash Flow

$

1,726

Page 45 of 56