Pulacayo Project Feasibility Study - Apogee Silver

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Pulacayo 1 000 t/d Phase I Feasibility Study - NI 43-101 Technical Report 090644-3-0000-20-IFI-100 14.3.4.11 Resource Category Parameters Used in Current Estimate Mineral resources presented in the current updated estimate have been assigned to Inferred and Indicated resource categories that reflect increasing levels of confidence with respect to spatial configuration of resources and corresponding grade assignment within the deposit. Several factors were considered in defining resource category assignments, including drill hole spacing, geological interpretations, and number and range of informing composites. Apogee has significantly improved the quality of the underground workings model since the previous resource estimate by Mercator that incorporated an Inferred category buffer zone around the digital workings model. A similar Inferred category envelope was not included in the current estimate Additional specific definition parameters for each resource category applied in the current estimate are set out below and Figure 14.15 through Figure 14.18 illustrate spatial distribution of these categories and the underground workings within the block model. Measured Resource: There are no interpolated resource blocks with the certainty of definition suitable for classification in this category present in the current estimate. Indicated Resources: All interpolated blocks that occur within the peripheral deposit constraint with one or more of the interpolated metals qualifying to have at least 7 contributing assay composites with a maximum average distance of 70 m to a block centroid and the nearest contributing composite at 60 m or less from a block centroid are categorized as Indicated mineral resources. Inferred Resources: All interpolated blocks that occur within the peripheral deposit constraint that do not meet Indicated resource category requirements, or for which grades were interpolated through drill intervals without sampling are categorized as Inferred mineral resources. Figure 14.15: Isometric View of the Mineral Resource Categories – View to NW TWP Sudamérica S.A. Av. Encalada 1257 Of. 801, Santiago de Surco Lima 33, Perú (51-1) 4377473 Page 133
Pulacayo 1 000 t/d Phase I Feasibility Study - NI 43-101 Technical Report 090644-3-0000-20-IFI-100 Figure 14.16: Isometric View of the Indicated Mineral Resource – View to NW Figure 14.17: Isometric View of the Inferred Mineral Resource – View to NW 14.3.4.12 Pit Optimization and Cut-off Values Oxide and sulphide zone resources potentially amenable to economic development by means of an open pit were modeled by P & E Mining Consultants Inc. (P&E) by applying Net Smelter Return (NSR)/ton cut-off values to the block model and reporting the resulting tonnage and grade of silver, lead and zinc for potentially mineable areas within a Whittle optimized pit shell to El 4159 ASL. Resources potentially amenable to economic development by means of underground extraction were estimated below EL4159ASL using an NSR cut-off per ton value as described below. The NSR cut-off grade calculations for resource reporting of open pit and underground potentially economic portions of the mineralization were founded on operating costs provided by Apogee. P&E has reviewed these costs and consider them to be reasonable given P&E's recent resource/reserve estimating experience in Peru, Guyana, Ecuador and Argentina. TWP Sudamérica S.A. Av. Encalada 1257 Of. 801, Santiago de Surco Lima 33, Perú (51-1) 4377473 Page 134
Page 1 and 2:
NI 43 — 101 TECHNICAL REPORT PULA
Page 3 and 4:
Pulacayo 1 000 t/d Phase I Feasibil
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96: Pulacayo 1 000 t/d Phase I Feasibil
Page 145: Pulacayo 1 000 t/d Phase I Feasibil
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
show all

Pulacayo Project Feasibility Study - Apogee Silver

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?