PreFeas080429 0

PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT

COMPILED BY OUTOTEC, SWEDEN
FOR NORDIC MINES
April 29, 2008
PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
TABLE of CONTENTS
1. SUMMARY
2. SCOPE OF WORK
3. INCOME AND COST CALCULATIONS
4. PROCESS FLOW SHEET
5. DESIGN CRITERIA
6. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
7. EQUIPMENT LIST AND PLANT

DESCRIPTION (Equipment).
8. LAYOUT AND INFRASTRUCTURE
9. MOTOR LISTS
10. POWER SUPPLY AND PROCESS CONTROL
11. WATER SUPPLY
12. TAILINGS HANDLING
13. ORGANIZATION AND PERSONNEL
14. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS

Appendices:
Mining Feasibility Study by CSA/LQS
PRE-FEASIBILITY 800231
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
1 (8)
Anders Nystrm April 29, 2008
PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY OF LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a revised study based on the earlier Initial/Prefeasibility Study dated July 3, 2007.
As a preliminary mining feasibility study now is at hand and the findings in this study are
more accurate than the previous information with respect to quantities and grades, this
study can now be considered as a pre-feasibility study.
The study has been performed and concluded based on information and inputs from
different parties. Please find below a list of participants and the specification of
responsibilities and inputs:
CSA/LQS
Mining Feasibility Study. Mining plan and optimization of ore recovery. Quantities and
grades verification for calculations.
Nordic Mines or their consultants

Water precipitation, maps and gold price
Vattenfall, Finland
Power supply plans
GTK, Finland
Early process study and information.
LVT, Finland
Environmental matters
Outotec (Sweden)AB
Process plant elaboration, investment cost estimations, operation cost estimations.
Flow sheets, water and mass balance, process elaboration (in co-operation with Nordic
Mines and their consultants).
Rough income and cost calculation.
This study was originally ordered and planned to be executed as a Conceptual Study but
has during the performance developed to be a Pre-feasibility Study. It is considered that it
is possible to directly after the finalization of this study, implement a feasibility study.
The Laiva mineralization is located around 15 km south of the town Rahee in Finland. The
mineralization will be suitable for open pit mining and is to be considered as on ore body.
The Laiva mineralization is owned by Nordic Mines, a company with their head office in
Uppsala in Sweden. There is a small office outside of Rahee in the neighborhood of the
mineralization.
DM_OTSK-#185890-v8-1__Laiva__Summary.DOC
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
2 (8)
The calculation has been based on a mine plan optimization, based on a gold price of gold
price of Euro 575/oz equal to 900 USD/oz (exchange rate SEK 6). The amount of
processed ore is 8,5 Mton, and the grade is 1,92 g/ton. This includes a dilution of 10% and
an ore loss of 5%, and a cut at 0,68 g/ton. The calculation is based on the first 4 years of
operation, although there is ore for a longer operation time.
The drilling is continuing to further increase the measured and indicated resources. In the
viability calculation we have however considered 7,2 Mton.
This study shows the possible process solution, location and layout of the crusher plant, the
concentrator, the leaching plant and the other necessary equipment and utilities for the
production of dore. It also includes the tailings and water handling as well as material and
water balance.
The mine and mine operation part is quite brief, but is more specifically presented in the
preliminary mining feasibility study. The revenue has been shown as the quarterly result for
the four first years of operation of the mine with the today known recourses. The information
regarding the mine is verified by CSA/LQS and includes costs for the mine operation as
well.
A brief calculation for investment and operation cost is attached.
The cost calculation is based on budget offers for major equipment and also on our
experience from similar projects.
The environmental aspects are not fully covered in this study but the study will give inputs
for such a study.
Chapter 14 gives however Environmental aspects of the operation and gives a view of the
scenario to come.
The process with environmental approvals has started and up to now no major obstacles
has been noted.
ECOMOMY
The economic situation for the project is presented in Chapter 3, Income and Cost
calculation. The grade and the ore resources give a positive result with the calculated
investment. The base calculations are based on a grade of 1,92 g/ton and an ore resource
of 8,5 Mton. The calculated recovery is 85% and this is based on the tests, but needs
further tests to be finally verified. The futures tests shall also include hot leaching of the
high-grade stream, as there are indications that this will be beneficial for the recovery. The
used calculation price for gold has been set to 945 USD/oz, which is close to price today.
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
3 (8)
Included are costs for an EPCM-contract but no pre-cost engaged up to now, neither the
cost for a Feasibility Study. The costs for drilling or other cost for the direct engagement of
Nordic Mines has not been included.
The investment cost has been based on budget offers, experience from other similar
projects and from other consultants.
The report does not include NPV-calculations.
MINERALIZATION AND LOCATION.
The Laiva mineralization has been known for quite some time but not the full extent of the
quantity and the grade. The mineralization is located some 15 km outside of Rahee in
Finland. The location is not close to any houses, which makes a future mining operation
possible to allocate. There is access to the site from two directions, however the standard
of the roads will not be sufficient for a full-scale operation. A new road will be the best
solution.
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
4 (8)
Mineral resources
The grades and the mineralization resource has now been verified by drilling and is today
containing ore as tabled below:
Information from Nordic Mines verified by CSA
Alternative MTon Au g/t Au Kg Cut of

grade
8.5 1,92 16320 0,68
Main Design basis
Mining of ore: 2 000 000 tons/year
Head grade: 1,92 g/ton
Total mineral resource: 8,5 Mton
Two other important factors for the successful operation of a mine is the quantity of the soil
overburden and the quantity of waste rock.
According to the made calculations is the soil quantity is approximately 1,5 Mm3.
The waste rock is estimated to around 10 Mton/year, totally around 38 Mton for the first four
years of operation.
The waste rock quantity has increased considerably since the previous study and will have
a negative impact on the result.
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
5 (8)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Preparations
The presented study is a pre-feasibility study showing the pros and cons for the project.
This is the base for taking a decision of how to continue with the project. There are a
number of steps that must be considered for the future planning of the project. Inaccurate
planning of the coming work in the project will create an increasing cost and must be
carefully planned.
In the next phase, the feasibility study, there are a number of activities that must continue
from now on. The environmental aspect is one part and another is to conduct proper testing
of steps in the process, pilot tests. The critical steps in the process must be verified and the
proposed equipment and its performance must be ensured that every process step is
optimized and capable of performing what is required and anticipated.
A plan for this must be elaborated and implemented. This plan should be elaborated jointly
by Nordic Mines and suitable consultants for the different activities and steps to be taken.
The project phase, with detail design and purchase of equipment cannot start until the
Feasibility phase is ready.
Coming further in the project, to a start up, this will require a final and total implementation
plan. This must contain things like all approvals and permits from the authorities, soil
excavation, detail design and procurement, preparation of the mine, construction of the
concentrator with all buildings and equipment, other civil work, electrical and water supply,
tailing dams and pumping systems, manning employment and contractor agreements etc.
Mine
The investigation of the mine activities and geology has been supervised by Nordic Mines
and the result is presented in an Appendix to this report. The mine plan has been
preliminary outlined and therefore the intent in the study is to show the result for the total
operation. (with known mineral resources).
The Mine operation must be prepared and the followings steps must be taken:
Preparations for the work-area before the mining operation
Re-enforcement of existing road and construction of site roads
Drainage ditches and clearing ponds
The mine will be operated with leased equipment and 5 days times two shift and 2 days
times 1 shift per week (total 12 shifts).
The yearly mined ore will be 2.000.000 ton and the waste rock 10 Mton/year, some ore will
be stored on stockpile for later processing. There will also be a need to remove totally
around 1,5 Mm3 of overburden.
The drilling, blasting, loading and transport of ore and waste rock can be done with leased
rigs, equipment, loaders and trucks.
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
6 (8)
The mine management will still be in the hands of Nordic Mines.
Process
The process is described in the Process Description. Please refer to Chapter 6.
Please note that the basis of the process is tests performed by GTK in Finland and some
leaching test that have been performed at Boliden Mineral.
The leaching test made in Boliden does indicate that the leaching process for the
concentrate leaching could benefit from being a hot leaching process. There are strong
indications that this increases the output and can be financially viable, however this is not
yet finally verified, but the report includes this activity leaching.
The recovery from hot leaching will need further tests to be performed in a larger scale and
using material from the total ore body. (Tests are being finalized at this very moment.)
Early results from the testing gives the following result:
65% of the gold is separated in the gravity circuit.
The recovery using hot leaching gives 97,8% recovery.
The recovery in the low grade leaching is around 70%.
This gives a total recovery of 85%.
Further test will verify this and changes in the process might increase the recovery.
Concentrator and leaching plant
The ore is trucked to the crusher, crushed and transported to the ore storage and then feed
to the primary mill. The milled material is screened, the fine material goes to the secondary
mill, the coarser material is used for pebbles and some is returned to the primary mill. The
ore is enriched in two Knelson separators to create a high-grade concentrate for separate
leaching and the remaining low-grade goods will be leached in a conventional leach circuit.
A flash flotation cell will separate the arsenic pyrite and this stream will be treated in the
high-grade leaching circuit. The tailing from this circuit will be separate disposed and
covered to limit the affect on the environmental situation.
The plant is described more thoroughly under Plant Description, please refer to Chapter 7.
Water supply
The water supply to the concentrator is essential for the whole operation. Most of the
process water can be recovered and re-circulated back to the process. To enable this and
to compensate for the variations during the season we are proposing to build a water pond
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
7 (8)
that can hold some of the varying flow of reclaim water and also store rain and smelting
snow. The total water balance is positive although the different seasons show a different
balance. The sufficient water balance created by reclaim water from the tailings, rain and
snow smelting will however anyway require an additional clean water supply for process
purposes. This is ensured by a water pipe line from the community and is also included in
the water balance.
The process water will finally partly be tied up in the tailings and the rest will be disposed
through overflow to a dedicated area close to the concentrator. There will be very little
impact of the environment.
Please refer to Chapter 11
Tailings handling
The sand and water handling are described under the Sand and Water handling process,
please refer to Chapter 12.
Electrical supply
The electrical supply system and distribution is described under Power Supply and Process
Control, please refer to Chapter 10
Civil work and logistics
The sizes of the buildings are estimated and the budgeted cost will be fairly accurate.
The roads and plans are marked on the main layout and the surfaces are gravel.
The cost for road and ground material will be low as the mine can produce suitable
material. We propose that a mobile crusher is used from the beginning before the final
crusher can be installed.
The location of the crusher and the concentrator will be around one kilometer from the
mine. Access road will be built from the mine to the concentrator and there will also be
connections to the waste rock area as well to the B-ore storage area.
A new road will be included to connect the plant to the main road. A minor road for
inspection will be built to the water pond and along the tailing pipeline to the tailing pond.
The roads and plans will be covered with crushed waste rock from the mine.
Organization and personnel
As entrepreneurs will handle much of the work in the mine, the requirements of personnel
will be limited. We have elaborated the need of personnel and the organization and
manning are shown under Organization and Manning, please refer to Chapter 13.
STUDY
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
8 (8)
Environmental aspects
The environmental investigations and application is on stream. The work is being performed
by LVT Finland
Please refer to Chapter 14
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The calculations shows a positive cash flow for the stated mineral resources and grade and
our recommendation is to intensify the preparations for the project as well as continue the
drilling to verify the mineral resources and to further increase it.
The studies presented here are based on quite a lot of tests and investigations, however
there are tests that must be done more thoroughly and according to the proposed process
to verify the performance.
As the quite extensive investigation level given the accuracy of this study, the next step is to
implement the necessary tests and verifications and continue with a feasibility study.
STUDY LAIVA GOLD
PROJECT
1 (2)
SCOPE OF WORK
The Scope of Work for the Initial/Pre-feasibility Study is concluded below and is an
extraction from our offer for the study:
Scope of work
- General description
- Description of Infrastructure and Plant
- Preliminary layout drawings of plant and Industrial area
- Preliminary Motor list with power requirement
- Preliminary cost calculation including infrastructure and plant
- Design Criteria from Boliden, including consumption of regencies and operation cost.
The following equipment is included in our study:
- Pump-stations for raw- and reclaim water including cost estimation and location.
- Offices, store, laboratory (exclusive the mine office, truck workshop)
- Industrial area and site roads
- Crusher
- The concentrator inclusive gravity circuit, gold leaching with dor production.
- Cyanide destruction
- Pumping of tailing from concentrator to tailings pond.
The following is excluded from the scope of the study.
- Mine/open pit incl. Explosives handling, waste rock handling etc.
- Tailing pond
- Power supply to the area.
- Clearing pond and main water balance, incl. drainage ditches.
- Environmental matters incl. MKB
Outotec (Sweden) AB
Gymnasievgen 14, P.O. Box 745
SE-931 27 Skellefte, Sweden
Tel. +46 910 876 00, Fax +46 910 890 50
www.outotec.com
Domicile Skellefte, Sweden
DM_OTSK-#188091-v3-2__Laiva__Scope_of_work.DOC Business ID 556104-0006, VAT 556104-000601
STUDY LAIVA GOLD
PROJECT
2 (2)
Conditions and information required
- Design criteria and production level
- Maps
- Indicated layout over the area.
- Process description from Boliden. (Contract between Nordic Mines and Boliden)
DEVIATIONS AND ADDITIONS FROM THE SCOPE
The content in the study will however deviate from the Scope of work to some extent. The
following additional information will be included.
Calculations of cost and income.
More detailed elaborations than a study normally contains.
Water and mass balance
The water and mass balance elaboration has been done based on information from Nordic
Mines and LVT.
Environmental aspects
The environmental impact was initially not included in the task, only inputs for the
development of the issue. However the environmental discussion have certainly been an
important issue and the study has been much impacted by this matter, especially as the
environmental aspects has proved to be more complicated than expected. The
concentration and separation of the arsenic rich part of the tailing has not only impacted the
tailings handling but also had a great impact on the process solution.
DM_OTSK-#188091-v3-2__Laiva__Scope_of_work.DOC
STUDY LAIVA GOLD
PROJECT
1 (2)
INCOME AND COST CALCULATION
CALCULATION BASIS
The Prefeasibility Study for Laiva Gold Project is based on information from process tests in
Finland at GTK and in Sweden at Boliden Mineral, from a joint process development
between Outotec and Nordic Mines as well as from offers from various suppliers.
The base of the costing has been generated from the elaborated Process Flow Sheet and
the chosen equipment.
The cost for the equipment is based on quotations and on prices from known similar
applications.
The calculations are made to visualize the operations for the first years taking the varying
income (and costs) into consideration, as the mining plan now is preliminary elaborated. The
intention with the calculation is showing the viability of the project; with the existing
measured and indicated resources not including any inferred resources.
Cost for buildings, civil work and infrastructure parts are based on key data and on
experience from similar projects.
Closure cost for the 4-year operation time has been estimated, although the economical
lifetime of the plant is far more than 4 years the remaining value of the plant is bigger than
the closure cost.
The income and cost calculation is for four yeas of operation.
Please refer to the summary on the attached page for more details.
There is presented a calculation based on a mining plan optimization:

It is based on an optimization with a gold price of Euro 575/oz equal to USD 900 at an
exchange rate of SEK 6
The following main data have been used in the calculations:
4 years operation time
Total resource 7,2 Mton
Average grade 1,92 g/ton
Cut off grade 0,68 g/ton
Total waste rock 37,8 Mton
Gold price 945 USD/oz
DM_OTSK-#190603-v4-3__Laiva__Income_and_cost_calculation.DOC
STUDY LAIVA GOLD
PROJECT
2 (2)
USD-SEK 5,95
Gold recovery 85%
Operation cost concentrator 45 SEK/ton
Treatment charge 1% of recovered gold
Please note that of the total optimized resource 8,5 Mton (cut 0,68 g/ton) the remaining
1300 kton @1,92 g/ton not is included in the calculation.
We estimate that the accuracy in the calculations is in the range of 15%.
DM_OTSK-#190603-v4-3__Laiva__Income_and_cost_calculation.DOC
Laiva 575/oz - (900U$/oz, 6SEK)
Periods: Quarters
2,00% per quarter discount rate
Mining Capacity 12 000 000 t/annum
Mill Capacity 500 000 t/quarter
Economic Cut-Off 0,68 g/t
Mine to Mill Mine to Mill Mine to Stockpile Stockpile to Mill Stockpile Mill Input Mill Mine Mine
Au 0.8 0.68 Au<0.8 0.68 Au<0.8 0.68 Au<0.8 Cummulative Ore Input Waste Stripping
Period tonne g/t tonne g/t tonne g/t tonne g/t tonne g/t tonnes AU g/t Kg AU tonnes Ratio
1 199 925 1,87 23 725 0,68 - 23 725 0,68 199 925 1,87 373,86 2 775 924 12,41
2 496 927 2,33 3 073 0,68 47 745 0,68 - - 71 470 0,68 500 000 2,32 1 159,93 2 451 458 4,48
3 498 859 2,30 1 141 0,68 51 168 0,68 - - 122 638 0,68 500 000 2,30 1 148,15 2 447 889 4,44
4 496 045 2,28 3 955 0,68 51 982 0,68 - - 174 620 0,68 500 000 2,27 1 133,67 2 447 114 4,43
5 484 505 2,27 15 495 0,68 40 917 0,68 - - 215 537 0,68 500 000 2,22 1 110,36 2 458 241 4,54
6 496 901 2,24 3 099 0,68 55 765 0,68 - - 271 302 0,68 500 000 2,23 1 115,17 2 443 369 4,40
7 478 460 2,22 21 540 0,68 38 025 0,68 - - 309 327 0,68 500 000 2,15 1 076,83 2 461 229 4,57
8 499 725 1,88 275 0,68 73 664 0,68 - - 382 991 0,68 500 000 1,88 939,67 2 425 588 4,23
9 427 616 1,92 66 548 0,68 - - 5 836 0,68 377 155 0,68 500 000 1,74 870,24 2 505 235 5,07
10 361 594 1,98 55 101 0,68 - - 83 305 0,68 293 850 0,68 500 000 1,62 810,07 2 582 565 6,20
11 383 664 1,95 56 752 0,68 - - 59 584 0,68 234 266 0,68 500 000 1,65 827,25 2 558 618 5,81
12 398 584 1,94 58 978 0,68 - - 42 438 0,68 191 828 0,68 500 000 1,68 842,22 2 541 563 5,55
13 349 261 1,98 56 837 0,68 - - 93 902 0,68 97 926 0,68 500 000 1,59 794,04 2 593 207 6,39
14 369 799 1,96 59 478 0,68 - - 70 723 0,68 27 203 0,68 500 000 1,63 813,34 2 569 997 5,99
15 375 472 1,96 58 630 0,68 - - 27 203 0,68 461 305 1,72 794,29 2 565 170 5,91
16 399 463 1,93 57 103 0,68 - - 456 566 1,77 809,79 2 541 477 5,57
17 301 398 1,93 40 685 0,68 - - 342 083 1,78 609,36 2 655 981 7,76
18 72 592 2,28 11 695 0,68 - - 84 287 2,06 173,46 2 915 021 34,58
19 146 481 2,24 23 040 0,68 - - - - 169 521 2,03 343,78 2 829 649 16,69
20 215 615 2,13 35 438 0,68 - - - - - - 251 053 1,93 483,36 2 415 356 9,62
8 464 740 1,92 16 229 51 184 651
Laiva Mine Production Schedule
3 500 000 40,00
3 000 000 35,00
30,00
2 500 000
Tonnes
25,00
2 000 000
20,00
1 500 000
15,00
1 000 000
10,00
500 000 5,00
0 -
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Quarterly Period
Processed Ore Tonnes Waste Tonnes Strip Ratio
DM_OTSK-#210460-v1-Laiva__Mine_plan_E575_Mod
LAIVA
INCOME AND COST CALCULATION
Gold rate 945 US/oz Gold in low grade waste 0,26 g/tonne
US $ rate in SEK 5,95 SEK Highgrade losses % 1,43 %
Euro rate in SEK 9,39 SEK
SEK /tonn Year 0 Year 1 (2010) Year 2 (2011) Year 3 (2012) Year 4 (2013)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Tonnes to crusher 0 199 925 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 500 000 461 305 7 161 230
Tonnes to stockpile 23 725 47 745 51 168 51 982 40 917 55 765 38 025 73 664 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 382 991
Stockpile to crusher 5 836 83 305 59 584 42 438 93 902 70 723 27 203 382 991
ROM grade 1,87 2,32 2,30 2,27 2,22 2,23 2,15 1,88 1,74 1,62 1,65 1,68 1,59 1,63 1,72 1,92
Recovery plant 0,85 0,87 0,87 0,87 0,87 0,87 0,86 0,85 0,84 0,83 0,83 0,83 0,82 0,83 0,83
Waste tonnes (incl inferred resorce) 2 775 924 2 451 458 2 447 889 2 447 114 2 458 241 2 443 369 2 461 229 2 425 588 2 505 235 2 582 565 2 558 618 2 541 563 2 593 207 2 569 997 2 565 170 37 827 167
Rehandling cost 3,00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 508 249 915 178 752 127 314 281 706 212 169 81 609 1 148 973
Mining cost ore /tonne 16,93 16,93 16,93 16,93 16,93 16,93 16,93 17,56 17,56 17,56 17,56 17,56 17,56 18,91 18,91
Mining cost ore total 3 787 501 9 276 033 9 334 001 9 347 786 9 160 401 9 411 851 9 111 425 10 074 083 8 677 988 7 317 559 7 734 122 8 035 222 7 131 466 8 118 396 8 209 646 124 727 480
Mining cost waste /tonne 11,53 11,53 11,53 11,53 11,53 11,53 11,53 12,08 12,08 12,08 12,08 12,08 12,08 13,21 13,21
Mining cost waste total 31 998 172 28 258 041 28 216 901 28 207 967 28 336 229 28 164 799 28 370 672 29 294 997 30 256 933 31 190 884 30 901 665 30 695 683 31 319 413 33 951 610 33 887 842 453 051 807
Processing cost 45 8 996 625 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 22 500 000 20 758 725 322 255 350
Tailing area/Waste rock 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 100 000 1 500 000
OH and other costs 750 000 750 000 750 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 15 000 000
Treatment charge 1% 572 279 1 832 207 1 814 385 1 787 654 1 743 101 1 752 012 1 680 728 1 440 144 1 315 396 1 208 470 1 235 202 1 261 933 1 181 738 1 217 381 1 197 156 21 239 785
Closure costs 1,5 299 888 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 750 000 691 958 10 741 845
Operating cost 750 000 750 000 750 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 46 754 464 63 716 280 63 715 287 63 693 408 63 589 731 63 678 662 63 512 824 65 159 224 64 617 825 64 316 828 64 399 741 64 470 153 64 264 323 67 849 556 65 926 935 949 665 239
Kg Gold produced 316,5 1013,4 1003,6 988,8 964,1 969,1 929,6 796,6 727,6 668,4 683,2 698,0 653,6 673,3 662,2 11 748
Oz produced 10 178 32 586 32 269 31 793 31 001 31 159 29 892 25 613 23 394 21 493 21 968 22 443 21 017 21 651 21 291 377 747
Revenue 57 227 853 183 220 653 181 438 549 178 765 392 174 310 131 175 201 184 168 072 766 144 014 357 131 539 626 120 847 000 123 520 156 126 193 313 118 173 843 121 738 052 119 715 587 2 123 978 463
Productioncost US$/oz 772 329 332 337 345 343 357 428 464 503 493 483 514 527 520
Temporary facilities 1 000 000 1 000 000

Infrastructure 10 000 000 5 000 000 10 000 000
Electrical supply 5 000 000 5 000 000
Process plant 55 000 100 000 000 100 000 000 100 000 000 100 000 000
Mine 10 000 000 10 000 000
Tailings area 2 000 000 2 000 000 2 000 000 2 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000
EPCM 5% 802 750 5 500 000 5 550 000 5 600 000 5 600 000 0 0 0 100 000 100 000 0 50 000 50 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vehicles 1 000 000 1 000 000 1 000 000
Soil removal Mine 10 SEK/t 2250 kton 12 500 000 6 500 000 3 500 000
Soil removal Dam 10 SEK/to390 kton 3 900 000
Unforseen 5% 1 087 888 6 400 000 5 827 500 6 255 000 5 880 000 175 000 0 0 155 000 105 000 0 52 500 52 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Investments 21 757 750 128 000 000 116 550 000 125 100 000 117 600 000 3 500 000 0 0 3 100 000 2 100 000 0 1 050 000 1 050 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 57 227 853 183 220 653 181 438 549 178 765 392 174 310 131 175 201 184 168 072 766 144 014 357 131 539 626 120 847 000 123 520 156 126 193 313 118 173 843 121 738 052 119 715 587 2 123 978 463
Cash Flow -22 507 750 -128 750 000 -117 300 000 -126 100 000 -118 600 000 6 973 390 119 504 373 117 723 262 111 971 985 108 620 400 111 522 522 103 509 942 77 805 133 66 921 801 56 530 171 59 120 416 61 723 160 53 909 520 53 888 496 53 788 652
Accumulated Cash Flow -22 507 750 -151 257 750 -268 557 750 -394 657 750 -513 257 750 -506 284 360 -386 779 987 -269 056 725 -157 084 740 -48 464 340 63 058 182 166 568 124 244 373 257 311 295 058 367 825 229 426 945 645 488 668 805 542 578 325 596 466 821 650 255 473 650 255 473
STUDY LAIVA GOLD
PROJECT
1 (1)
Lena Boman April 29, 2007
LAIVA GOLD PROJECT
PROCESS FLOW SHEET
Milling section
Leaching section
DM_OTSK-#190757-v2-4__Process_Flow_Sheet.DOC
CSA Consulting International Limited
Nordic Mines Laiva Project
Pre-Feasibility Study Report
REF: LQSINT2008-001-10-06
30 April 2008
CSA Consulting International Limited
Pre-Feasibility Study Mining Engineering
30 April 2008
The Directors
Nordic Mines AB
Kungsngsgatan 5A
S-753 22 Uppsala
REF: LQSINT2008-001-10-06
Dear Sirs,
LQS International Limited has prepared this report for CSA Consulting International limited on the
mining engineering section of the pre-feasibility study for Laiva at the request of Nordic Mines
Limited. The Report has been prepared as the Mining Engineering section of the pre-feasibility study
for Laiva.
The principal authors of this Report were Erhan Karakaya, MSc Mining Engineering and Steve
Lampron, BEng. They were assisted by Julian Bennett, BSc. Mining Engineering; Pierre Fourie, B.Sc.
Mining Engineering, B.Compt., Director; Daniel Tuffin, BEng Mining Engineering, BSc (Surveying) and
Pierre Bredell, BSc. Mining Engineering.
CSA has previously completed feasibility studies (mining engineering) for various companies. The
report is signed on behalf of CSA by Pierre Fourie, Director. Pierre Fourie is also a Qualified Person.
The Report is based on 1) information supplied by Nordic; 2) LQSs extensive knowledge of the
applicable open pit mining, optimisation and planning of these; 3) a site visit and data gathering
visits to the permits held by Nordic. All data held by Nordic was released to LQS for use in the study.
LQS has not reviewed the resource models provided and has relied on the accuracy of data as
provided by Nordic. All requests for information to the employees of Nordic were addressed
immediately where possible and a candid approach to all queries was in evidence throughout the
study.
At no time during the course of preparation of the Report did LQS become aware of either
withholding of information or of the changing of records to influence the conclusion of the LQS
report. LQS has endeavoured to ensure that no error of fact is contained within the report. Any such
error is not intentional and is not a deliberate effort to mislead.
____________________
Yours faithfully,
Pierre Fourie
Director
Preliminary Feasibility Study

A Globally Recognised Mining Consulting Company
Nordic Mines Laiva Project

Preliminary Feasibility Study 30 April 2008
Report Number: LQSINT2008-001-10-06
Erhan Karakaya
M.Sc (Mining Engineering), Dip.PM, MAusIMM
Lower Quartile Solutions Pty Ltd
Steve Lampron
B.Eng
Lower Quartile Solutions Pty Ltd.
LQSINT2008-001-10-06(575) Preliminary Feasibility Study Page i

NORDIC MINES LAIVA PROJECT
Table of Contents
1 RESOURCE MODEL ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Model in Text Format.............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Model Transfer to Datamine................................................................................................... 2
1.3 MIK Model in Datamine .......................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Model Cut by Bedrock Surface................................................................................................ 4
1.5 Adding Waste & Top Soil into Model ...................................................................................... 5
1.6 Mining Model .......................................................................................................................... 6
1.7 Whittle Model ......................................................................................................................... 7
1.8 Whittle Model with Smaller Block Size ................................................................................. 10
1.9 List of Block Models .............................................................................................................. 10
1.10 Resource Summary ............................................................................................................... 11
2 WHITTLE OPTIMISATION .................................................................................................................... 14
2.1 Whittle Optimisation Parameters ............................................................................................... 14
2.1.1 Slope Sets ............................................................................................................................. 14
2.1.2 Study Base Date ................................................................................................................... 15
2.1.3 Initial Capital ........................................................................................................................ 15
2.1.4 Plant Capacity....................................................................................................................... 15
2.1.5 Mining Limit ......................................................................................................................... 15
2.1.6 Processing Recovery ............................................................................................................ 15
2.1.7 Grade Cut-offs ...................................................................................................................... 16
2.1.8 Mining Dilution .................................................................................................................... 16
2.1.9 Mining Recovery .................................................................................................................. 16
2.1.10 Gold Price ........................................................................................................................... 16
2.1.11 Selling Cost ......................................................................................................................... 16
2.1.12 Exchange Rate .................................................................................................................... 17
2.1.13 Discount Rate ..................................................................................................................... 17
2.1.14 Mining Cost ........................................................................................................................ 17
Document: LQSINT2008-001-10-06(575) Preliminary Feasibility Study Page ii

2.1.15 Processing Cost .................................................................................................................. 18

2.2 Whittle Optimisation Results ...................................................................................................... 19
2.2.2 Sensitivities .......................................................................................................................... 19
2.2.3 Economic Cut-off.................................................................................................................. 22
3 PIT DESIGN AND PIT INVENTORY ....................................................................................................... 23
3.1 Whittle Pit Shells for Pit Design Stages ....................................................................................... 23
3.2 Pit Design Parameters ................................................................................................................. 24
3.3 Pit Designs ................................................................................................................................... 24
3.4 Pit Inventory and Whittle Shell ................................................................................................... 31
3.5 Production Schedule ................................................................................................................... 31
4 COST ESTIMATES ................................................................................................................................ 34
4.1 General Assumptions .................................................................................................................. 34
4.2 Operating Costs........................................................................................................................... 34
4.3 Mining Personnel ........................................................................................................................ 38
4.4 Capital Costs ................................................................................................................................ 39
5 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................... 41
List of Tables
Table 1: MIK Resource Model (Nordic Mines Laiva.xls) .......................................................................... 1

Table 2: Block Model Coordinates Transfer ............................................................................................ 2
Table 3: Fields Added to Block Model..................................................................................................... 2
Table 4: Adding Ore Proportion Attributes for MIK Model .................................................................... 3
Table 5: Model Extents (laiva_mik_25.dm) ........................................................................................... 6
Table 6: Densities and Classifications in Mining Model (laiva_mine_25.dm)......................................... 7
Table 7: Attributes of the Whittle Model (laiva_whitt_25.dm) .............................................................. 7
Table 8: List of Models .......................................................................................................................... 10
Table 9: Measured Resource Summary at Laiva ................................................................................... 11
Table 10: Indicated Resource Summary at Laiva .................................................................................. 11
Table 11: Inferred Resource Summary at Laiva .................................................................................... 12
Table 12: Total Mineral Resources (Measured, Indicated & Inferred) at Laiva .................................... 12
Table 13: Gold Price and Sell Cost Applied in Optimisation ................................................................. 17
Table 14: MCAFs Applied to Laiva Optimisation .................................................................................. 18
Table 15: PCAFs Applied to Laiva Optimisation ................................................................................... 18
Document: LQSINT2008-001-10-06(575) Preliminary Feasibility Study Page iii

Table 16: Whittle Optimisation Result for Sensitivities (Measured & Indicated Material Type) ......... 19
Table 17: Laiva Whittle Optimisation Results, Base Case 575/oz ....................................................... 20
Table 18: Whittle Economic Cut-off for Different Prices ...................................................................... 22
Table 19: Pit Design Parameters ........................................................................................................... 24
Table 20: Whittle Shell and Ultimate Pit Design Comparison............................................................... 31
Table 21: Laiva Mine Quarterly Production Schedule .......................................................................... 32
Table 23: Mining Cost for Laiva............................................................................................................. 35
Table 24: Processing Costs for Laiva ..................................................................................................... 36
Table 25: Total Operating Costs for Laiva (costs modified for Whittle) ............................................... 37
Table 26: Mining Personnel .................................................................................................................. 38
Table 27: Mining Equipment List .......................................................................................................... 39
Table 28: Mining Capital ....................................................................................................................... 40
List of Figures
Figure 1: Bedrock Surface (bs_tr/pt) & Block Model (laiva_p) ............................................................... 4
Figure 2: Bedrock Surface Extended (bsm tr/pt) & Block Model (laiva_p) ............................................. 5
Figure 3: NS Section View @28350E (Colored by Classification of the Material Type) .......................... 8
Figure 4: NS Section View @28350E (Colored by AU Grade) ................................................................. 8
Figure 5: View of MIK Model through the Surface ................................................................................. 9
Figure 6: View of MIK Model below the Surface .................................................................................... 9
Figure 7: Grade/Tonnage Curve (All material types) ............................................................................ 13
Figure 8: Laiva Optimisations Whittle Pit by Pit Graph, Base Case 575/oz ........................................ 21
Figure 9: Whittle Shells Used for Pit Design Stages (Number 14 and 34)_Plan View........................... 23
Figure 10: Laiva Stage 1 Pit Design (960_stg1_final.str) ....................................................................... 25
Figure 11: Stage 1 with Surface Topography ........................................................................................ 26
Figure 13: Stage 2 with Surface Topography ........................................................................................ 28
Figure 14: Laiva Final Stage Pit Design (960_stg3_final.str) ................................................................. 29
Figure 15: Final Stage Pit Design with Surface Topography.................................................................. 30
Figure 16: Laiva mine Quarterly Production Schedule ......................................................................... 33
Document: LQSINT2008-001-10-06(575) Preliminary Feasibility Study Page iv

1 RESOURCE MODEL
1.1 Model in Text Format
The MIK resource model (Nordic Mines Laiva.xls) was provided to Lower Quartile Solutions Pty Ltd
(LQS) by Mr. Peter Kuiper of Nordic Mines AB (Nordic) in text format. The original resource block
model contents are summarised as follows:
Table 1: MIK Resource Model (Nordic Mines Laiva.xls)
Field Names Minimum Value Maximum Value Definition

Idnr 1 17719 Block ID number
Xkoord 2527712.5 2528842.5 X Coordinate of a block
Ykoord 7159863 7160695 Y Coordinate of a block
Zkoord -135 45 Z Coordinate of a block
ObjNr 1 3 Classification, measured, indicated or inferred
Ton 0 9694 14500 Total ore tonnes at cut-off 0.0 g/t
Au 0 0.03 14.97 Au cut-off grade 0.0 g/t
Kg Au 0 0.3 217.8 Au metal content at cut-off 0.0 g/t
Ton 0,5 80 14500 Total ore tonnes at cut-off 0.5 g/t
Au 0,5 1.49 14.97 Au cut-off grade 0.5 g/t
Kg Au 0,5 0.19 217.08 Au metal content at cut-off 0.5 g/t
Document: LQSINT2008-001-10-06(575) Preliminary Feasibility Study Page 1

1.2 Model Transfer to Datamine
The original resource model (Nordic Mines Laiva.xls) was saved in CSV format (Nordic Mines
laiva.csv). The X and Y coordinates of the model have been modified in order to be able to work in a
single precision environment in Datamine. The following changes were made to the X and Y
coordinates and hence to Model Origins:
Table 2: Block Model Coordinates Transfer
Coordinates Subtact Min Value Max Value

XC 2 500 000 27 712.5 28 842.5
YC 7 100 000 59 863.0 60 695.0
ZC NA 135.0 45.0
A Datamine script was then created to:
Import the CSV file (Nordic Mines Laiva.csv) to Datamine in a table file format (lavia_t.dm)
Add new fields to create a proper block model in Datamine (laiva_m.dm). The new fields are
shown in Table 3
Generate new IJK for each block and sort the block model using IJK in Datamine (laiva_i &
laiva_s).
Table 3: Fields Added to Block Model
Name Type Stored Default

XINC Numeric yes 25
YINC Numeric yes 10
ZINC Numeric yes 20
XMORIG Numeric no 27700
YMORIG Numeric no 59858
ZMORIG Numeric no -145
NX Numeric no 47
NY Numeric no 84
NZ Numeric no 10

1.3 MIK Model in Datamine
The Laiva model is a MIK-type resource model and MIK models state a proportion of cell above a cut-
off grade and the associated grade.
The model provided had associated total metal content and total ore tonnes for each cut-off, but it
did not have any field that stated the ore proportion of each block for each cut-off.
The following table shows how the ore proportion was calculated for each cut-off to get a correct
MIK model (laiva_p) that could be applied within Whittle by using a Datamine script:
Table 4: Adding Ore Proportion Attributes for MIK Model
Field Names Type Stored Calculated Definition

P00 Numeric yes Ton_0.0/14 500 Ore proportion @ cut-off 0.0g/t

1.4 Model Cut by Bedrock Surface
Bedrock surface data was provided in text format (New bedrock surface.xls) which was created from
drillhole data to identify bedrock topography. This data was transferred into Datamine as a surface
triangulation file and named as bs_tr/pt as shown in the following figure:
Figure 1: Bedrock Surface (bs_tr/pt) & Block Model (laiva_p)
Although this triangulation area was enough to cover all ore blocks in the model, it would not be
enough to cover all blocks once waste is added to the block model. Therefore, the bedrock surface
data was extended into all directions and new triangulation was formed as bsm_tr/pt shown in the
following figure over the page:

Figure 2: Bedrock Surface Extended (bsm tr/pt) & Block Model (laiva_p)
A Datamine script was then used to cut the block model by the extended bedrock surface and the
resultant block model was named as laiva_c.dm.
1.5 Adding Waste & Top Soil into Model
The block model extents and origins were changed in order to add enough waste blocks and topsoil
material into the block model for the Whittle optimisation. Then waste (CLASS=99) and topsoil
(CLASS=100) material were added into the block model by using a Datamine script and the resultant
block model was named as laiva_mik_25.dm. The extents of this model are shown in the following
table over the page:

Table 5: Model Extents (laiva_mik_25.dm)
Name Type Stored Default

XMORIG Numeric no 27430
YMORIG Numeric no 59680
ZMORIG Numeric no -145
XINC Numeric yes 25
YINC Numeric yes 10
ZINC Numeric yes 20
NX Numeric no 65
NY Numeric no 120
NZ Numeric no 14
1.6 Mining Model
The Laiva MIK block model (laiva_mik_25.dm) has been split vertically into the various grade
intervals so that Whittle looks at each of these proportions within the overall block cell to decide if it
is economic or not.
Grade and proportion splits are physically arranged within the block and that gives flexibility to
assess various cut-off grades in Whittle without importing a new block model for every cut-off.
This process provides a mining model (laiva_mine_25.dm) and in order to generate this model a
Datamine script is used to:
Split each block vertically into various grade intervals

Resolve any absent geological or physical values
Remove unnecessary geological flags or attributes
Create rock types; ore was defined by (Au>0) and waste (Au=0), (Rock 1 and Rock 15
respectively).
Create a density for each block
The following table shows material classification and also provides information for the density values
used in the mining model for different material types:

Table 6: Densities and Classifications in Mining Model (laiva_mine_25.dm)
MATERIAL TYPE CLASS DENSITY

Measured Ore 1 2.85
Indicated Ore 2 2.85
Inferred Ore 3 2.85
Waste 99 2.90
Till 100 2.10
1.7 Whittle Model
The mining model (laiva_mine_25.dm) was used to generate a Whittle model which was used in the
Whittle optimisation and named as laiva_whitt_25.dm. A Datamine script was used to:
Create bulk tons for each block

Create ore tons for each block (where applicable)
Create metal content for each block (where applicable)
The following table and figures provide information for the attributes of the Whittle model:
Table 7: Attributes of the Whittle Model (laiva_whitt_25.dm)
NAME TYPE STORED DEFAULT DEFINITION

IJK Numeric yes 0 Block no in Datamine
XC Numeric yes 0 X Coordinate of a block
YC Numeric yes 0 Y Coordinate of a block
ZC Numeric yes 0 Z Coordinate of a block
XINC Numeric yes 25 Block size in X direction
YINC Numeric yes 10 Block size in Y direction
ZINC Numeric yes 20 Block size in Z direction
CLASS Numeric yes 0 Material classification
IDNR Numeric yes - ID no from resource model
ROCK Numeric yes - Defines ore and waste
AU Numeric yes - Gold grade in each block
DENSITY Numeric yes - Density of each block
BTONS Numeric yes - Block total tonnes
AUMET Numeric yes - Metal content in each block
OTON Numeric yes - Ore tonnes in each block
XMORIG Numeric no 27430 X origin of the model
YMORIG Numeric no 59680 Y origin of the model
ZMORIG Numeric no -145 Z origin of the model
NX Numeric no 65 Number of blocks in X direction
NY Numeric no 120 Number of blocks in Y direction
NZ Numeric no 14 Number of blocks in Z direction

Figure 3: NS Section View @28350E (Colored by Classification of the Material Type)
Figure 4: NS Section View @28350E (Colored by AU Grade)

Figure 5: View of MIK Model through the Surface
Figure 6: View of MIK Model below the Surface

1.8 Whittle Model with Smaller Block Size
Although it is feasible to optimize the block model with the original block size (25x10x20) in Whittle,
it helps to obtain more feasible results if the block model cell size is reduced to standard mining unit
(SMU) size of 5x5x5.
It was considered that the 5x5x5 parent cell-sizing would be sufficient to represent a typical 90t fleet
SMU block size.
A Datamine script was used to convert the whittle model (laiva_mik_25.dm) to the new SMU cell
size. This provided a MIK model (laiva_mik_5.dm). This model was then converted to a mining model
(laiva_mine_5.dm) and whittle model (laiva_whitt_5.dm).
1.9 List of Block Models
The following table describes the list of models generated up to this part of the study:
Table 8: List of Models
Model Name Definition

laiva_t Table file generated from supplied model in text format
laiva_m Block model with new attributes
laiva_i IJK values generated for each block
laiva_s Model sorted based on IJK values
laiva_p MIK model with ore proportion
laiva_c MIK model cut by bedrock surface
laiva_mik_25 MIK model with all material types ore, waste etc.
laiva_mine_25 Vertically split model with various grade intervals
laiva_whitt_25 Whittle model for optimisation
laiva_mik_5 MIK model with smaller SMU (5x5x5)
laiva_mine_5 Vertically split model with smaller SMU (5x5x5)
laiva_whitt_5 Whittle model for smaller SMU (5x5x5)

1.10 Resource Summary
The Mineral Resources estimated for the Nordic Laiva Resource model were classified as Measured,
Indicated and Inferred.
The following tables list the Measured, Indicated and Inferred Resources at various cut-off grades for
Au within the Laiva deposit. Also, total Mineral Resources (Measured, Indicated & Inferred) is listed
in the last table inclusive of the Mineral Reserve.
Table 9: Measured Resource Summary at Laiva
Cut-off Ore Tonnes Metal Ave Grade Contained Gold

Au (g/t) (t) (g) (g/t) Oz
0.0 16 126 000 8 604 009 0.53 276 625
0.5 4 278 089 7 000 674 1.64 225 077
0.6 3 707 589 6 686 984 1.80 214 992
0.7 3 252 549 6 391 977 1.97 205 507
0.8 2 879 289 6 112 470 2.12 196 520
0.9 2 550 135 5 832 769 2.29 187 528
1.0 2 283 504 5 579 267 2.44 179 378
1.1 2 082 918 5 369 213 2.58 172 624
Table 10: Indicated Resource Summary at Laiva

0.0 62 702 000 24 295 000 0.39 781 102
0.5 10 804 000 19 146 000 1.77 615 558
0.6 9 294 519 18 317 000 1.97 588 905
0.7 8 117 095 17 553 000 2.16 564 342
0.8 7 177 252 16 848 000 2.35 541 676
0.9 6 368 176 16 160 000 2.54 519 556
1.0 5 731 822 15 556 000 2.71 500 137
1.1 5 230 655 15 031 000 2.87 483 258

Table 11: Inferred Resource Summary at Laiva

0.0 25 880 000 10 241 000 0.40 329 256
0.5 4 365 325 8 404 855 1.93 270 222
0.6 3 823 350 8 106 818 2.12 260 640
0.7 3 411 367 7 839 147 2.30 252 034
0.8 3 073 906 7 585 577 2.47 243 882
0.9 2 778 731 7 334 973 2.64 235 825
1.0 2 540 670 7 108 748 2.80 228 552
1.1 2 357 453 6 916 947 2.93 222 385
Table 12: Total Mineral Resources (Measured, Indicated & Inferred) at Laiva

0.0 104 708 000 43 140 009 0.41 1 386 983
0.5 19 447 413 34 551 529 1.78 1 110 857
0.6 16 825 457 33 110 802 1.97 1 064 537
0.7 14 781 010 31 784 124 2.15 1 021 883
0.8 13 130 447 30 546 047 2.33 982 078
0.9 11 697 041 29 327 741 2.51 942 909
1.0 10 555 996 28 244 015 2.68 908 066
1.1 9 671 025 27 317 160 2.82 878 267

A combined grade tonnage calculation was also performed. A grade tonnage curve for the total
Mineral Resources (Measured, Indicated & Inferred) inclusive of the Mineral Reserve is shown in the
following graph diagram:
Grade Tonnage Curve - Summary
Tonnes Grade Au (g/t)
120,000,000 3.00
100,000,000 2.50
80,000,000 2.00
Tonnes
60,000,000 1.50
40,000,000 1.00
20,000,000 0.50
0 0.00
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2
Cut-Off Au (g/t)
Figure 7: Grade/Tonnage Curve (All material types)

2 WHITTLE OPTIMISATION
LQS used Whittle optimisation parameters for Laiva as provided by the client or those that resulted
due to applied changes made to site specific cost and physical parameters in the cost spreadsheet
supplied by Julian Bennett. All parameters were investigated and updated for the Whittle
optimisations and pit designs.
Unless otherwise stated all costs and revenues are in Euros.
The initial supplied spreadsheet was called mine cost model.xls, and all updated costs and
parameters evolve from a derivation of this original sheet. The final cost model spreadsheet was
named as Laiva Cost Model.xls.
Only a 575/oz gold price was used for this optimisation. The parameters used for this study are
outlined over the following pages.
Whittle runs were done based on 2 models as follows:
laiva_whitt_25 (with original block size 25x10x20)

laiva_whitt_5 (SMU block size 5x5x5)
The comparison of optimum pit shells from these optimisations will help confirm if reducing block
size provides more accurate results.
2.1 Whittle Optimisation Parameters
The following parameters were used for the Whittle optimisation.
2.1.1 Slope Sets
A slope angle of 45 degrees was applied to the weathered zone above the bedrock surface.
Thereafter, an overall slope angle of 55 degrees was applied. This slope was suggested in the
geotechnical report (Laivakangas Stability Report) supplied by the client. In this report, it is stated
that pit slope of 55 degrees is stable based on both empirical study and geotechnical simulations
with FEM rock mechanical simulation software.

2.1.2 Study Base Date
This Preliminary Feasibility Study was carried out in March 2008 and all supplied costs and revenues
used and output resulting from this study must be referred to this date.
2.1.3 Initial Capital
No initial CAPEX costs are used in the pit Whittle runs, and as such do not influence the selection of
the optimal pit in each case, but were used to obtain overall project profitability values.
2.1.4 Plant Capacity
The plant capacity was set at 2,000,000 tonnes per annum, and this constraint was used in the
Whittle optimisations.
2.1.5 Mining Limit
The mining limit capacity was set at 12,000,000 tonnes per annum to the optimisation to reflect the
total average production capacity of the selected fleet per annum.
2.1.6 Processing Recovery
The following metallurgical recovery formula was supplied from the client: (ROM grade-(0,26 "gold
grade in tail" + ROM grade x 1,43% "highgrade losses" / 100)) / ROM grade. This formula was then
applied in the processing recovery for the Whittle optimisation.

2.1.7 Grade Cut-offs
No cut-off grades were forced within the optimisation. Whittle determined the final economic cut-
offs depending upon sale price and overall costs applied to each run.
2.1.8 Mining Dilution
A 10% mining dilution factor was applied to the project within Whittle to account for dilution that
would be expected to occur during the course of mining due to mixing of ore and waste material
during blasting and excavation processes.
2.1.9 Mining Recovery
A 95% mining recovery factor was applied to the project within Whittle to account for the amount of
ore that is lost due to spillage and/or re-handling. The mining recovery also allows for ore lost
(hauled to waste dump) during the selective ore mining process.
2.1.10 Gold Price
The base case commodity sell price supplied to LQS to use was 575/oz. Only this sell price was used
in this optimisation.
2.1.11 Selling Cost
The selling costs were calculated by applying royalty and refining cost. The following table displays
the combined selling price and costs.

Table 13: Gold Price and Sell Cost Applied in Optimisation
Gold Price /oz Gold Price AU$/oz Sell Price /g Sell Costs /g
575 960 18.52 0.53
2.1.12 Exchange Rate
An exchange rate of 0.6 for every AU$ was used where applicable during this optimisation.
2.1.13 Discount Rate
A discount rate of 8% was used for the optimisation; implicit time costs were applied.
2.1.14 Mining Cost
The costs associated with mining the deposit are largely dependent upon the fleet type. A default
reference cost of AU$1/t was used and a calculated bench-by-bench MCAF was applied to this value
dependent upon a range of variables, some of which include fleet specifications, pit depth, rock
density, water inflows, blasting costs, etc.
The MCAFs applied within Whittle are displayed over the following page:

Table 14: MCAFs Applied to Laiva Optimisation
Whittle MCAF Expression (Abbreviated to approximate depth)
SEL(IZ,2.724,2.724,2.621,2.621,2.621,2.517,2.517,2.517,2.411,2.411,2.307,2.307,2.307,2.2,2.2,2.09
7,2.097,2.097,1.993,1.993,1.993)
2.1.15 Processing Cost
The costs associated with processing the deposit are largely determined prior to applying the fleet
type. However, a PCAF must also be applied to the final processing cost dependent upon the fleet
type used.
The PCAFs applied within Whittle are displayed in the table below:
Table 15: PCAFs Applied to Laiva Optimisation
Reference Processing Whittle PCAF Expression (Abbreviated to approximate depth)

Cost (/t)
SEL(IZ,1.019,1.019,1.017,1.017,1.017,1.015,1.015,1.015,1.013,1.013,1.011
6.46 ,1.011,1.011,1.009,1.009,1.019,1.007,1.007,1.005,1.005,1)

2.2 Whittle Optimisation Results
The tables and graphs displayed over the following pages show the full results from the Whittle pit
optimisations. The DCF peak of the scheduled case is used to compare the various case results. Initial
CAPEX costs were not applied at this stage as it does not affect the ultimate pit size.
2.2.2 Sensitivities
Only Measured and Indicated material was used for the sensitivity analyses in the whittle
optimisation.
A Datamine script was used to convert the Whittle model (laiva_whitt_5.dm) that contains all
material types (Measured, Indicated and Inferred) to a new Whittle model (laiva_whitt_5_ni.dm)
that contains only Measured and Indicated material types. All Inferred material was assumed to be
waste in the Whittle optimisations for sensitivities.
Table 16: Whittle Optimisation Result for Sensitivities (Measured & Indicated Material Type)
STUDY TYPE OPTIMAL PIT RESULTS

CAT 777 Fleet Pit Size Ore Au Grade Strip Scheduled DCF
55Overall Slope tonnes tonnes g/t Ratio disc
575/oz 63,429,624 9,666,266 1.90 5.56 111,291,917
The table and graph displayed over the following pages show the full results from the Whittle pit
optimisations for the commodity sell price of 575/oz. Whittle pit shells number 8, 17 and 27 were
used to get a result for the scheduled case. The peak of the DCF curve was used as the indicator to
select the optimal pit for the scheduled case.

Table 17: Laiva Whittle Optimisation Results, Base Case 575/oz
Pit by Pit Table - Laiva

777 Fleet - 575/oz 55 Degrees
NPV - No CAPEX or TAX applied
Open pit Open pit Open pit Mine Units Units Revenue Cut-off
Final cashflow cashflow cashflow Ore tonnes Ave Grade Waste tonnes Strip Ratio Final bench life output output factor MILL
Pit best specified worst input to mill input to mill mined best (whit blk) years Au/g Au/oz for pit shell AU
Shell $ disc $ disc $ disc best best best best best best
1 33,470,526 33,470,526 33,470,526 737,962 3.41 878,243 1.19 33 0.37 2,286,611 73,516 0.30 0.680
2 35,473,649 35,473,649 35,473,649 862,502 3.17 984,652 1.14 32 0.43 2,470,975 79,444 0.32 0.680
3 41,008,263 41,008,263 41,008,263 1,254,449 2.71 1,398,197 1.11 29 0.63 3,019,075 97,066 0.34 0.680
4 44,282,222 44,282,222 44,282,222 1,508,019 2.53 1,737,243 1.15 27 0.75 3,365,820 108,214 0.36 0.680
5 48,022,813 48,022,813 48,022,813 1,818,817 2.38 2,278,444 1.25 25 0.91 3,788,419 121,800 0.38 0.680
6 50,331,309 50,331,308 50,331,308 2,017,357 2.31 2,721,963 1.35 24 1.01 4,061,003 130,564 0.40 0.680
7 55,929,901 55,909,909 55,909,909 2,453,836 2.19 3,903,940 1.59 20 1.23 4,667,551 150,065 0.42 0.680
8 59,488,259 59,386,209 59,386,209 2,742,379 2.14 4,833,181 1.76 19 1.37 5,075,882 163,193 0.44 0.680
9 74,600,125 73,878,803 73,878,803 4,049,004 2.01 9,746,562 2.41 17 2.02 6,967,379 224,006 0.46 0.680
10 78,728,311 77,889,184 77,889,198 4,419,284 1.99 11,278,089 2.55 17 2.21 7,499,478 241,114 0.48 0.680
11 82,178,362 81,257,489 81,257,347 4,743,770 1.97 12,776,177 2.69 14 2.37 7,971,490 256,289 0.50 0.680
12 86,348,173 85,286,542 85,285,019 5,158,498 1.95 14,958,419 2.90 14 2.58 8,584,724 276,005 0.52 0.680
13 91,042,660 89,846,861 89,841,505 5,649,083 1.94 17,761,091 3.14 13 2.82 9,321,044 299,679 0.54 0.680
14 95,060,071 93,730,047 93,720,187 6,092,655 1.93 20,536,814 3.37 9 3.09 9,994,995 321,347 0.56 0.680
15 101,644,718 100,156,388 100,118,912 6,840,649 1.92 25,529,710 3.73 9 3.56 11,135,876 358,027 0.58 0.680
16 103,415,002 101,910,445 101,862,007 7,060,678 1.91 27,119,002 3.84 7 3.71 11,475,136 368,934 0.60 0.680
17 105,212,422 103,519,379 103,459,771 7,303,307 1.91 28,947,016 3.96 4 3.88 11,849,100 380,957 0.62 0.680
18 107,877,722 106,731,539 105,322,277 7,677,621 1.91 32,053,455 4.17 3 4.17 12,431,402 399,679 0.64 0.680
19 109,777,502 108,461,758 106,874,180 7,950,132 1.91 34,474,863 4.34 2 4.39 12,863,541 413,572 0.66 0.680
20 111,002,285 109,660,396 107,828,675 8,143,967 1.90 36,294,830 4.46 2 4.56 13,170,505 423,442 0.68 0.680
21 112,071,826 111,011,225 108,639,400 8,327,478 1.90 38,116,696 4.58 1 4.73 13,463,594 432,865 0.70 0.680
22 113,718,892 112,608,741 109,676,444 8,643,722 1.90 41,265,164 4.77 1 5.02 13,956,131 448,700 0.72 0.680
23 114,702,386 113,439,737 110,291,192 8,831,964 1.90 43,309,918 4.90 1 5.20 14,257,588 458,392 0.74 0.680
24 115,660,670 114,188,872 110,760,584 9,033,308 1.90 45,678,668 5.06 1 5.42 14,586,552 468,969 0.76 0.680
25 117,136,091 115,054,003 110,984,088 9,384,591 1.90 50,142,453 5.34 1 5.82 15,169,017 487,695 0.78 0.680
26 117,834,050 115,632,971 111,236,240 9,571,398 1.90 52,544,341 5.49 1 6.04 15,476,413 497,578 0.80 0.680
27 118,158,524 115,823,079 111,291,917 9,666,266 1.90 53,763,358 5.56 1 6.14 15,628,926 502,482 0.82 0.680
28 118,494,466 115,954,640 111,164,891 9,780,256 1.90 55,223,703 5.65 1 6.28 15,807,398 508,220 0.84 0.680
29 118,833,169 116,059,548 110,853,431 9,908,025 1.90 57,040,725 5.76 1 6.44 16,017,214 514,965 0.86 0.680
30 119,075,114 116,089,360 110,573,231 10,015,672 1.90 58,623,800 5.85 1 6.58 16,195,681 520,703 0.88 0.680
31 119,222,137 116,049,801 110,255,249 10,100,158 1.90 59,859,767 5.93 1 6.69 16,330,352 525,033 0.90 0.680
32 119,283,693 115,986,997 110,072,036 10,143,328 1.90 60,542,540 5.97 1 6.75 16,401,935 527,334 0.92 0.680
33 119,326,234 115,933,207 109,933,147 10,180,875 1.90 61,154,242 6.01 1 6.80 16,465,681 529,384 0.94 0.680
34 119,669,206 114,735,942 106,762,255 10,691,911 1.91 69,752,714 6.52 1 7.56 17,316,952 556,753 0.96 0.680
35 119,695,818 114,354,557 105,950,684 10,805,631 1.91 71,787,001 6.64 1 7.74 17,508,553 562,913 0.98 0.680
36 119,692,751 114,201,566 105,648,667 10,851,586 1.91 72,596,000 6.69 1 7.81 17,584,726 565,362 1.00 0.680
37 119,681,716 114,121,469 105,495,782 10,877,657 1.91 73,049,867 6.72 1 7.85 17,628,370 566,765 1.02 0.680
38 119,651,370 113,963,200 105,183,187 10,919,343 1.91 73,837,663 6.76 1 7.92 17,698,107 569,007 1.04 0.680
39 119,598,768 113,901,551 104,803,770 10,965,897 1.91 74,726,330 6.81 1 8.00 17,775,021 571,480 1.06 0.680
40 119,556,232 113,720,893 104,467,207 11,002,058 1.91 75,445,092 6.86 1 8.06 17,835,396 573,421 1.08 0.680
41 119,508,677 113,623,480 104,177,400 11,032,861 1.91 76,064,893 6.89 1 8.12 17,886,984 575,080 1.10 0.680
42 119,473,871 114,060,553 104,017,715 11,051,776 1.91 76,450,160 6.92 1 8.15 17,918,710 576,100 1.12 0.680
43 119,426,795 113,946,854 103,803,386 11,072,324 1.91 76,903,668 6.95 1 8.19 17,954,478 577,250 1.14 0.680
44 119,347,927 113,767,415 103,478,698 11,102,896 1.91 77,569,167 6.99 1 8.25 18,006,311 578,916 1.16 0.680
45 119,251,675 113,540,597 103,058,308 11,139,414 1.91 78,336,482 7.03 1 8.32 18,065,132 580,807 1.18 0.680
46 119,218,100 113,477,015 102,953,928 11,149,407 1.91 78,570,893 7.05 1 8.34 18,083,018 581,383 1.20 0.680
47 119,170,649 113,388,641 102,803,388 11,162,647 1.91 78,897,959 7.07 1 8.36 18,106,384 582,134 1.22 0.680
48 119,103,636 113,250,171 102,557,129 11,179,531 1.91 79,328,382 7.10 1 8.40 18,136,163 583,091 1.24 0.680
49 118,999,363 112,534,407 102,161,007 11,204,130 1.91 79,963,717 7.14 1 8.46 18,179,047 584,470 1.26 0.680
50 118,924,157 112,526,717 101,915,167 11,221,525 1.91 80,390,911 7.16 1 8.49 18,208,046 585,402 1.28 0.680

140,000,000 100,000,000
90,000,000
120,000,000
80,000,000
100,000,000
70,000,000
Pit Size (Tonnes)

60,000,000
Pit Value (A$)
80,000,000
50,000,000
60,000,000
40,000,000
30,000,000
40,000,000
20,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
- 0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49
Waste Ore Best Specified Worst

Pit Shells - 575/oz
Figure 8: Laiva Optimisations Whittle Pit by Pit Graph, Base Case 575/oz

2.2.3 Economic Cut-off
The table below summarises the economic cut-off grades calculated in the Whittle optimisation run
considering the commodity selling price of 575/oz:
Table 18: Whittle Economic Cut-off for Different Prices
Gold Price /oz Gold Price AU$/oz Economic Cut off t/g
575 960 0.68

3 PIT DESIGN AND PIT INVENTORY
This section of the study covers the pit design, pit inventory and LOM scheduling. For the purpose of pit
design and the subsequent pit inventory, LQS has used the optimisation results for Measured and
Indicated material types to produce a shell on which a design can be based.
3.1 Whittle Pit Shells for Pit Design Stages
Pit shell 27 was selected to be used for the ultimate pit design. Pit shell 8 and 17 are to be used as
cutback stages for the commodity sell price of 575/oz. The following figures shows the pit shells used
for the pit designs.
Figure 9: Whittle Shells Used for Pit Design Stages (Number 14 and 34)_Plan View

3.2 Pit Design Parameters
The pits were designed to the pre-assumed geotechnical guidelines as outlined in the supplied
geotechnical report.
Table 19: Pit Design Parameters
Pit Design Parameters

Fleet Type RH75+Cat 777
Bottom of pit design -140 mRL
Top of pit design 68 mRL
Minimum mining width 20 m
Overall slope angle 55
Batter angle 75
Ramp grade 1 in 10
Ramp width 26 m & 16 m (double and single lane)
Bench height 20 m
Berm width 5m
Whittle Shells Pit 8, Pit 17, Pit 27
3.3 Pit Designs
Due to the shape of the ore deposit and that of the optimum pit shell, it was difficult to apply a design
that could get within 5% by volume. Pit designs will be improved during the Bankable Feasibility Study,
using more aggressive parameters when available, along with options to look at creating a smoother ore
delivery to the mill.
Further drilling results will also likely change the current Whittle shell output, increasing the size and
depth, and thus the final designs will differ from those contained herein.
The following figures show the first and second pit stages (cutback design) and the ultimate pit design:

Figure 10: Laiva Stage 1 Pit Design (960_stg1_final.str)

Figure 11: Stage 1 with Surface Topography

Figure 12: Laiva Stage 2 Pit Design (960_stg2_final_.str)

Figure 13: Stage 2 with Surface Topography

Figure 14: Laiva Final Stage Pit Design (960_stg3_final.str)

Figure 15: Final Stage Pit Design with Surface Topography

3.4 Pit Inventory and Whittle Shell
The pit inventory has been calculated using the Mineral Resource Model (laiva_whitt_5_ni.dm) including
only Measured and Indicated material type.
The modifying factors that have been used to discount the ore into pit inventory are as follows:
Dilution factor of 10%

Mining recovery of 95%
Metallurgical recovery =(ROM grade-(0,26+ROM grade*1,43%/ 100))/ROM grade
Gold price of 575/oz
Economic cut-off grade of 0.68 g/t
The following table summarises the comparison of whittle shell 31 and ultimate pit design inventory:
Table 20: Whittle Shell and Ultimate Pit Design Comparison
Grade
Type Ore t Waste t
g/t
Whittle Shell 27 9,666,266 1.90 53,763,358
Ultimate Pit Design 960_stg_3_final.str 8,464,733 1.92 51,202,479
Difference -14.32% +1.04% -4.08%
3.5 Production Schedule
The block model representing the project area was exported into Whittle. And the designed mining
phase and final pit were also exported to Whittle as pit list files.
The Whittle Milawa NPV Algorithm, which specifies to the system to find a schedule with improved NPV
and the order in which the benches of pushbacks are mined is determined by the Milawa algorithm as it
seeks to maximise NPV, was used to determine the optimum extraction sequence using a 575/oz gold
price, mill limited to 2,000,000tpa and mining limited to 12,000,000tpa.
Ore which has grade more than 0.8g/t was milled while the ore which has grade between 0.68-0.8g/t
has been stockpiled as much as possible through the LOM. This schedule is represented in the table
below:

Table 21: Laiva Mine Quarterly Production Schedule
Mine to Mill Mine to Mill Mine to Stockpile Stockpile to Mill Stockpile Mill Input Mill Mine Mine
Au0.8 0.68Au<0.8 0.68Au<0.8 0.68Au<0.8 Cummulative Ore Input Waste Stripping
Period tonne g/t tonne g/t tonne g/t tonne g/t tonne g/t tonnes AU g/t Kg AU tonnes Ratio
1 199,925 1.87 23,725 0.68 - 23,725 0.68 199,925 1.87 373.86 2,775,924 12.41
2 496,927 2.33 3,073 0.68 47,745 0.68 - - 71,470 0.68 500,000 2.32 1,159.93 2,451,458 4.48
3 498,859 2.30 1,141 0.68 51,168 0.68 - - 122,638 0.68 500,000 2.30 1,148.15 2,447,889 4.44
4 496,045 2.28 3,955 0.68 51,982 0.68 - - 174,620 0.68 500,000 2.27 1,133.67 2,447,114 4.43
5 484,505 2.27 15,495 0.68 40,917 0.68 - - 215,537 0.68 500,000 2.22 1,110.36 2,458,241 4.54
6 496,901 2.24 3,099 0.68 55,765 0.68 - - 271,302 0.68 500,000 2.23 1,115.17 2,443,369 4.40
7 478,460 2.22 21,540 0.68 38,025 0.68 - - 309,327 0.68 500,000 2.15 1,076.83 2,461,229 4.57
8 499,725 1.88 275 0.68 73,664 0.68 - - 382,991 0.68 500,000 1.88 939.67 2,425,588 4.23
9 427,616 1.92 66,548 0.68 - - 5,836 0.68 377,155 0.68 500,000 1.74 870.24 2,505,235 5.07
10 361,594 1.98 55,101 0.68 - - 83,305 0.68 293,850 0.68 500,000 1.62 810.07 2,582,565 6.20
11 383,664 1.95 56,752 0.68 - - 59,584 0.68 234,266 0.68 500,000 1.65 827.25 2,558,618 5.81
12 398,584 1.94 58,978 0.68 - - 42,438 0.68 191,828 0.68 500,000 1.68 842.22 2,541,563 5.55
13 349,261 1.98 56,837 0.68 - - 93,902 0.68 97,926 0.68 500,000 1.59 794.04 2,593,207 6.39
14 369,799 1.96 59,478 0.68 - - 70,723 0.68 27,203 0.68 500,000 1.63 813.34 2,569,997 5.99
15 375,472 1.96 58,630 0.68 - - 27,203 0.68 461,305 1.72 794.29 2,565,170 5.91
16 399,463 1.93 57,103 0.68 - - 456,566 1.77 809.79 2,541,477 5.57
17 301,398 1.93 40,685 0.68 - - 342,083 1.78 609.36 2,655,981 7.76
18 72,592 2.28 11,695 0.68 - - 84,287 2.06 173.46 2,915,021 34.58
19 146,481 2.24 23,040 0.68 - - - - 169,521 2.03 343.78 2,829,649 16.69
20 215,615 2.13 35,438 0.68 - - - - - - 251,053 1.93 483.36 2,415,356 9.62

Laiva Mine Production Schedule
3,500,000 40.00
3,000,000 35.00
30.00
2,500,000
25.00
Tonnes
2,000,000
20.00
1,500,000
15.00
1,000,000
10.00
500,000 5.00
0 -
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Quarterly Period
Processed Ore Tonnes Waste Tonnes Strip Ratio
Figure 16: Laiva mine Quarterly Production Schedule

4 COST ESTIMATES
Operating and capital cost estimates for mining and processing were calculated based on the initial
supplied spreadsheet which was called mine cost model.xls by Julian Bennett. All updated costs
and parameters evolve from a derivation of this original spread sheet and the final cost model
spreadsheet was named as Laiva Cost Model.xls.
4.1 General Assumptions
The following general assumptions were used to do the cost estimates:
Table 22: General Cost Assumptions
Public Holidays days 14.0

Shifts Worked per annum 550.0
Hours per shift 9.0
Hours per annum 4 950.0
Ore Production t/annum 2 000 000
Waste Production (inc low grade) t/annum 10 000 000
Total Production t/annum 12 000 000
Diesel Cost /l 0.6
Typical mechanical availability of 85% and utilization of 80% was used to determine actual hours
worked. Some operations achieve availabilities of 90% and utilization of 80% on some equipment
types.
4.2 Operating Costs
LQS used the basic production schedule to determine the required equipment and operating cost.
Indicative capital and operating costs were obtained from the supplied spreadsheet prepared by
Julian Bennett. Where unable to do so, the costs were obtained from similar projects. A full
maintenance lease was assumed for the whole project.
More knowledge of the operating environment and specific rock qualities must be obtained during
the bankable feasibility study to refine these estimates. In the following tables over the page, the
operating cost estimates are shown:

Table 23: Mining Cost for Laiva
Ore Waste
Level (mRL) Mining Cost (/m)
SG SG
Total Total
Ore Waste Drill & Mine Grade Ground Dewaterin
From To t/m t/m Rehab Ore Waste
LHD LHD Blast Fixed Control Support g
Cost Cost
60 50 2.10 2.90 1.40 1.65 1.17 0.37 1.16 0.11 0.14 0.02 4.37 3.47
50 40 2.85 2.90 1.76 1.65 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 4.99 3.47
40 30 2.85 2.90 1.76 1.65 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 4.99 3.47
30 20 2.85 2.90 1.97 1.83 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.21 3.65
20 10 2.85 2.90 1.97 1.83 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.21 3.65
10 0 2.85 2.90 2.20 1.83 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.43 3.65
0 -10 2.85 2.90 2.20 2.01 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.43 3.83
-10 -20 2.85 2.90 2.20 2.01 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.43 3.83
-20 -30 2.85 2.90 2.41 2.20 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.65 4.01
-30 -40 2.85 2.90 2.41 2.20 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.65 4.01
-40 -50 2.85 2.90 2.41 2.20 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.65 4.01
-50 -60 2.85 2.90 2.63 2.38 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.87 4.19
-60 -70 2.85 2.90 2.63 2.38 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 5.87 4.19
-70 -80 2.85 2.90 2.85 2.56 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.09 4.38
-80 -90 2.85 2.90 2.85 2.56 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.09 4.38
-90 -100 2.85 2.90 2.85 2.56 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.09 4.38
-100 -110 2.85 2.90 3.07 2.74 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.31 4.56
-110 -120 2.85 2.90 3.07 2.74 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.31 4.56
-120 -130 2.85 2.90 3.07 2.74 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.31 4.56
-130 -140 2.85 2.90 3.29 2.92 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.52 4.74
-140 -150 2.85 2.90 3.29 2.92 1.17 0.37 1.42 0.11 0.14 0.02 6.52 4.74

Table 24: Processing Costs for Laiva
Ore Waste
Level (mRL) Processing Cost (/t)
SG SG
Ore ROM Tails Disposal Total Process

From To t/m t/m Processing Admin
Haulage Handling & Rehab Cost
60 50 2.10 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96

50 40 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
40 30 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
30 20 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
20 10 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
10 0 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
0 -10 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-10 -20 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-20 -30 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-30 -40 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-40 -50 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-50 -60 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-60 -70 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-70 -80 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-80 -90 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-90 -100 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-100 -110 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-110 -120 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-120 -130 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-130 -140 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96
-140 -150 2.85 2.90 0.08 0.30 4.50 0.48 0.60 5.96

Table 25: Total Operating Costs for Laiva (costs modified for Whittle)
Ore Waste CostProcessing

Level (mRL)
SG SG CostMining (Including
(Waste) incremental Ore MCAF PCAF
From To t/m t/m /t mining cost)
/t
60 50 2.10 2.90 1.20 6.46 1.993 1.000
50 40 2.85 2.90 1.20 6.49 1.993 1.005
40 30 2.85 2.90 1.20 6.49 1.993 1.005
30 20 2.85 2.90 1.26 6.50 2.097 1.007
20 10 2.85 2.90 1.26 6.50 2.097 1.007
10 0 2.85 2.90 1.26 6.58 2.097 1.009
0 -10 2.85 2.90 1.32 6.52 2.200 1.009
-10 -20 2.85 2.90 1.32 6.52 2.200 1.009
-20 -30 2.85 2.90 1.38 6.53 2.307 1.011
-30 -40 2.85 2.90 1.38 6.53 2.307 1.011
-40 -50 2.85 2.90 1.38 6.53 2.307 1.011
-50 -60 2.85 2.90 1.45 6.54 2.411 1.013
-60 -70 2.85 2.90 1.45 6.54 2.411 1.013
-70 -80 2.85 2.90 1.51 6.55 2.517 1.015
-80 -90 2.85 2.90 1.51 6.55 2.517 1.015
-90 -100 2.85 2.90 1.51 6.55 2.517 1.015
-100 -110 2.85 2.90 1.57 6.57 2.621 1.017
-110 -120 2.85 2.90 1.57 6.57 2.621 1.017
-120 -130 2.85 2.90 1.57 6.57 2.621 1.017
-130 -140 2.85 2.90 1.63 6.58 2.724 1.019
-140 -150 2.85 2.90 1.63 6.58 2.724 1.019

4.3 Mining Personnel
Mining personnel costs were provided by Mr. Peter Kuiper from Nordic. The table below shows a list
of expected personnel requirements by department:
Table 26: Mining Personnel
Salary On Cost Total

Personnel Number
/month /month /annum
Mine Manager 1 6 500 9 750 117 000
Mine Engineer 1 5 000 7 500 90 000
Mine Geologist 1 5 000 7 500 90 000
Surveyor 1 4 000 6 000 72 000
Survey Assisstants/Geology Asisstants 3 2 500 3 750 135 000
Grade Control 1 3 300 4 950 59 400
Truck Driver/Machine Operators 30 2 460 3 690 1 328 400
Blasting Crew 3 2 460 3 690 132 840
General Crew 3 2 460 3 690 132 840
Artisans 4 3 000 4 500 216 000
Supervision 4 4 000 6 000 288 000
Helpers 2 2 460 3 690 88 560
Ancillary 4 2 500 3 750 180 000
Total 58 45 640 68 460 2 930 040

4.4 Capital Costs
Although initial CAPEX costs are not included in the pit Whittle runs, LQS has estimated the initial
mining capital. The capital costs should be further investigated during the full Bankable Feasibility
Study (BFS), and applied during the financials stage of the BFS. The capital costs do not influence the
selection of the optimal pit.
Equipment efficiencies were used to determine the numbers of equipment required at peak
production. Phasing of the project could result in the phasing of capital mining equipment. The table
below shows an estimate of the mining capital required if the mine had to buy its own mining fleet.
A contingency of 10% was added onto the total.
Table 27: Mining Equipment List
Unit
Total Cost
Equipment Type Number Cost

Excavator RH75 1 1 140 000 1 140 000
Excavator 330B 1 90 000 90 000
Dump Truck CAT777 12 480 000 5 760 000
Dozer D10N 2 390 000 780 000
Grader 16H 1 270 000 270 000
Drill Rig Atlas Copco 1 620 000 620 000
Water Cart 769WB 1 120 000 120 000
Wheel Loader 966F 1 108 000 108 000
Lighting Plants Any 3 20 000 60 000
General Other 1 100 000 100 000
Total 9 048 000

Table 28: Mining Capital
Unit Cost Total Cost

Item Number

Mining Equipments 1 9 048 000 9 048 000
Dewatering Wells 10 5 000 50 000
Workshops 1 300 000 300 000
Offices 1 250 000 250 000
Fuel Facility 1 50 000 50 000
Electrical 1 100 000 100 000
Reticulation/Lighting 1 40 000 40 000
Explosive Magazine 1 75 000 75 000
Mobile Radios 50 1 000 50 000
Survey Equipment 1 50 000 50 000
Computers/Software 1 150 000 150 000
Site Clearance 1 200 000 200 000
ROM Pad 1 100 000 100 000
Site Roads 1 100 000 100 000
Pre-Stripping (t) 2 700 000 1.20 3 240 000
Contingency 10% 15 183 300

5 CONCLUSIONS
The following results were obtained from the Preliminary Feasibility Study:
An updated Laiva Resource Model which contains fields differentiating between Measured,
Indicated and Inferred fields has given more reliability and accuracy of the results.
A further drilling program may increase total reserves of the site by converting Inferred
material to Measured or Indicated material types.
A detailed feasibility study is advised for the site after completing an updated resource
model.

PreFeas080429 0

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

PreFeas080429 0

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY

LAIVA GOLD PROJECT

3. INCOME AND COST CALCULATIONS

4. PROCESS FLOW SHEET

7. EQUIPMENT LIST AND PLANT

8. LAYOUT AND INFRASTRUCTURE

10. POWER SUPPLY AND PROCESS CONTROL

11. WATER SUPPLY

12. TAILINGS HANDLING

13. ORGANIZATION AND PERSONNEL

14. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS

PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY OF LAIVA GOLD PROJECT

Nordic Mines or their consultants

A brief calculation for investment and operation cost is attached.

The report does not include NPV-calculations.

MINERALIZATION AND LOCATION.

Information from Nordic Mines verified by CSA

Alternative MTon Au g/t Au Kg Cut of

8.5 1,92 16320 0,68

Main Design basis

Mining of ore: 2 000 000 tons/year

Head grade: 1,92 g/ton

Total mineral resource: 8,5 Mton

Preparations for the work-area before the mining operation

Re-enforcement of existing road and construction of site roads

Drainage ditches and clearing ponds

The mine management will still be in the hands of Nordic Mines.

The process is described in the Process Description. Please refer to Chapter 6.

Early results from the testing gives the following result:

65% of the gold is separated in the gravity circuit.

The recovery using hot leaching gives 97,8% recovery.

The recovery in the low grade leaching is around 70%.

This gives a total recovery of 85%.

Concentrator and leaching plant

Please refer to Chapter 11

Civil work and logistics

Organization and personnel

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

- Description of Infrastructure and Plant

- Preliminary layout drawings of plant and Industrial area

- Preliminary Motor list with power requirement

- Preliminary cost calculation including infrastructure and plant

The following equipment is included in our study:

- Offices, store, laboratory (exclusive the mine office, truck workshop)

- Industrial area and site roads

- Pumping of tailing from concentrator to tailings pond.

The following is excluded from the scope of the study.

- Mine/open pit incl. Explosives handling, waste rock handling etc.

- Power supply to the area.

- Clearing pond and main water balance, incl. drainage ditches.

- Environmental matters incl. MKB

Conditions and information required

- Design criteria and production level

- Indicated layout over the area.

DEVIATIONS AND ADDITIONS FROM THE SCOPE

Calculations of cost and income.

More detailed elaborations than a study normally contains.

Water and mass balance

INCOME AND COST CALCULATION

There is presented a calculation based on a mining plan optimization:

The following main data have been used in the calculations:

4 years operation time

Total resource 7,2 Mton