Mathematical Geology, Vol. 15, No.

1, 1983

Geostatistics as a Tool to Define Various Categories

o f Resources 1

R. Sabourin 2

Definition of "measured" and "indicated" resources tend to be vague. Yet, the calculation
o f such categories of resources in a mineral deposit calls for specific technical criteria, the
selection o f which depends upon the method of evaluation. This paper discusses how a geo-
statistical methodology provides the technical criteria required to classify reasonably assured
resources by levels of assurance of their existence. A preliminary discussion concludes that
the reasonably assured resources of a mineral deposit shouM be classified locally as in the
traditional approach. However, the size o f local volumes shouM not correspond to the ele-
mentary grid unit of drill holes but if possible to the minimum unit o f selection that can be
supported by the chosen mining method. The "level o f confidence" of the reasonably as-
sured resources can be quantitatively represented and determined by the estimation vari-
ance, one o f the most important tools o f geostatistics.

KEY WORDS: Geostatistics, resource classification, mineral resources, kriging, resource

definitions.

INTRODUCTION
The Mine Evaluation Group (MEG) of Energy, Mines and Resources, Canada
(EMR), has the responsibility of auditing the measured and indicated resources
in Canadian uranium deposits which are mineable under current technological
conditions in given price ranges (Energy, Mines and Resources, 1980). The defi-
nitions (see Appendix) of the above-mentioned resources must be clearly under-
stood by each member of the group to properly accomplish the work. These
definitions are general, and do not relate to any particular method of evaluation,
but express the main concepts associated with resource evaluation. Consequently,
one should not become discouraged by some of the terms used in these defini-
tions. For example, terms such as adequate s a m p l i n g . . . , so closely s p a c e d . . . ,

1Manuscript received 21 December 1981; revised 10 March 1982. Presented at the 10th
Geoehatauqua: Computer Applications in the Earth Sciences, 23-24 October 1981, Ot-
tawa, Canada.
2Mining Research Laboratories, Canada Centre for Mineral and Energy Technology,Energy,
Mines and Resources Canada, Ottawa.
131
0020-5958/83/0200-0131503.00/0 1983 Plenum Publishing Corporation
132 Sabourin

so well defined . . . . well established . . . . reasonable distance . . . . and too widely

or inappropriately spaced are vague indeed for a practical ore reserve evaluation.
To quantitatively define the measured and indicated resources for a particu-
lar uranium deposit, the geologist or geostatistician (in MEG) has to select, on
the basis of professional experience and knowledge, not only a method of evalu-
ation but also technical criteria satisfying the general ideas and concepts behind
these definitions. This is a legitimate approach to resource evaluation, consider-
ing that these definitions tell us what to calculate but do not say how to do it.
The first part of this paper briefly discusses the basic concept of "level of
confidence." This concept can be quantitatively represented and determined by
the estimation variance, one of the most important tools of geostatistics. A dis-
cussion follows about the classification of Reasonably Assured (RA) resources
using the level of confidence of "local" block grade estimates. This discussion
is important because geostatisticians have proposed in the past to classify the
total resources of a mineral deposit according to the relative precision of its
average grade estimate (Carlier, 1964). Finally, a methodology is proposed to
locally classify the RA resources by level of assurance of their existence, on the
basis of geostatistical principles. Geostatistics can provide not only the best
evaluation method, but also the necessary technical criteria to define various
categories of RA resources.

THE CONCEPT OF LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE

According to the definition of EMR, ore is "a natural mineral-bearing sub-
stance that can be recovered by mining and from which one or more commodi-
ties can be extracted economically under conditions specified at the time of the
appraisal" (Energy, Mines and Resources, 1980). The definition of ore is closely
linked with economical and technological conditions of extraction; in fact, ton-
nage and grade reported refer to ore recoverable by mining with due regard for
dilution. We discuss the material in situ, before recoverability considerations
have been applied.
Any in situ mineral-bearing substance will be physically characterized by
its size and shape, tonnage, and by the grade of its contained commodities. The
information needed to calculate these physical characteristics is always limited
and is normally acquired from core samples taken from drill holes or channel
and chip samples taken from workings, trenches, or outcrops. Because of the
scarcity and geographical location of known information, the exact physical
characteristics can only be estimated to be within a limited range for a given
probability of success. It is customary, in statistics, to refer to such a range as
a confidence interval for a given degree of probability.
Geostatistics proposes to express the level of confidence or reliability of
an estimated physical characteristic by the variance of the estimation error
(Z - Z*), that is, the variance of the difference between the true (Z) and the
Geostatistics as a Tool to Define Various Categories of Resources 133

estimated (Z*) value of such a physical characteristic. The larger this estimation
variance, the lower the confidence level or reliability of our estimate. The esti-
mation variance is dependent on the spatial correlation of the estimated variable,
and on the relative position and amount of available information. However, if
one wishes to attach a probability to the error of estimation, it will have to be
defined as a random variable. The distribution law of this random variable is not
known, but by convention the normal (Gaussian) or the lognormal distribution
is usually chosen. If the normal distribution is used we may say that there are
two chances out of three that the true unknown Z value will be wthin a given
interval (Z* - a E, Z* + aE) around the estimated value Z*, oE being the stan-
dard deviation of the error of estimation.
The concept of level of confidence is highly useful in any resource classi-
fication scheme. The EMR resource classification scheme uses terms such as
"measured" and "indicated" to reflect fairly high levels of confidence in the
quantities reported, but there are also further resources that can be estimated
only on the basis of mostly indirect geological evidence. For such resources the
reliability of estimated quantities is not only very low, but can generally not be
calculated.
In contrast, the level of confidence for measured and indicated resources
(identified as reserves if mineable at the market price, as determined at the time
of the assessment) can be calculated using the geostatistical estimation variance.
The square root of this variance represents the standard deviation of the error
(Z - Z*). One can thus predict the unknown Z value to be within a confidence
interval with a calculated probability of success. Therefore, a technical criterion
such as the estimation variance could be used to quantitatively define various
categories of RA resources on the basis of the level of assurance of its existence,
that is, of a confidence level for in situ estimated quantities.
In its annual assessment of uranium resources, the Uranium Resource Ap-
praisal Group (URAG) divides its estimate into five separate categories to reflect
different levels of confidence in the quantities reported. The quantities reported
are the total amount of uranium contained in ore recoverable from "measured,"
"indicated," "inferred," "prognosticated," or "speculative" in situ resources.
Strictly speaking, the level of confidence refers to the existence of local in situ
resources (tonnage and grade), while no uncertainty has been assigned to the re-
coverability and dilution factors.
The estimated local amount of uranium contained in a volume could be
classified if geostatistics is used, into the measured, indicated, or inferred re-
source category if its estimation variance is within certain specified limits. 3 The

30fficially URAG is not proposing any method of evaluation. It is up to the professional

evaluator to technically define what belongs to the measured, indicated or inferred re-
source category. Geostatistics is one of the methods used by the Mine Evaluation Group
to classify RA resources. Other methods used by MEG include zone of influence or poly-
gonal methods.
134 Saboufin

quantities reported for a given category of resource will be the total estimated
amount of uranium contained in all the volumes already classified into that
category. In other words, the level of confidence is applied to local estimated
amounts of uranium contained in small volumes and not to the total amount
of uranium in a category of resource.
To calculate the ore "reserves" of a mineral deposit one must proceed in
two stages. The first is to select that part of the mineral deposit that has been
reasonably well delineated (say, the equivalent of "measured" plus "indicated").
The second stage is to separate further this selected part of the deposit into areas
or volumes of different economical exploitability. The first stage must be done
on the basis of an acceptable level of confidence for the local estimated amount
of metal in given equal size volumes. 4 Any volume could be acceptable for the
purpose of resource classification because we only want to outline and distinguish
the in situ resources as the basis of reserves calculations. However, an economic
evaluation of a mineral deposit usually requires the knowledge of a grade-tonnage
relationship which is dependent upon a specified volume o f selection imposed by
the mining method.

CRITERIA TO OUTLINE THE REASONABLY ASSURED RESOURCES

The question still to be answered is: What specific limiting values of the es-
timation variance should be used to outline the RA resources of a mineral
deposit?
Certainly the arbitrary selection of estimation variance limits for each cate-
gory of RA resources would be equivalent to arbitrarily defining zones of influ-
ence around sample values. Consequently, such a geostatistical approach would
be as subjective as the traditional approach for the classification of RA resources.
Predetermined relative precision limits for block grade estimates could pro-
vide an answer to our question. The relative precision of a block grade estimate
is equal to the standard deviation of the estimation error divided by the value of
the block grade estimate. The measured and indicated RA resources as well as
the estimated additional inferred resources could be outlined, respectively, by
relative precision limits (at 68% probability) such as 0.2, 0.3, and 0.5 (i.e., 20,
30, and 50%) for the average grade of equal size blocks (volumes). These possible

4In practice, the two stages can be interchanged depending on the situation. Indeed, one
can also say that the first stage of ore "reserves" calculation is to delineate the ore with
economical and mining criteria (cutoff grade, minimum mining thickness, minimum dis-
tance between parallel stopes, etc.). The second stage would be in this case to divide fur-
ther the ore into areas or volumes with different levels of confidence (such as "measured,"
"indicated," and "inferred") in the quantities reported. However, this last stage must still
be done on the basis of an acceptable level of confidence for local amount of metal in
given volumes.
Geostatisfics as a Tool to Def'meVarious Categories of Resources 135

limits can be chosen arbitrarily as long as they are applied uniformly to every
mineral deposit.
Although the question seems answered, the utilization of relative precisions
for resource classification purposes has two major drawbacks. First, a greater
number of volumes could be classified into the better known, measured, or indi-
cated resources simply by increasing the size of these volumes, that is, the esti-
mation variances and consequently the relative precisions of block grade esti-
mates will be smaller when the size of the volumes gets larger. Second, as defined
above and assuming stationarity of grades, a relative precision depends on the
value of the estimate. Indeed two volumes of equal size having the same estima-
tion variance for grade estimates can be classified differently using relative pre-
cisions if the grade estimates are different.
The following proposed criteria to outline the RA resources will avoid the
above-mentioned drawbacks. However, the author's investigations and experi-
mentations of the methodology are still being carried out. It is thus possible that
the proposed methodology could also inherently have drawbacks which would
prevent its generalization. The methodology is nevertheless proposed, subject to
further experimental verifications, as a possible answer to the question asked at
the beginning of this section.
The attention of the reader is oriented toward a relationship between the
average kriging variance of estimated block grade values of small equal size vol-
umes within a deposit s and the variance of the true block grade values of these
volumes. We know that the theoretical statistical distribution (histogram) of true
block grade values is more scattered than the experimental distribution of krig-
ing block grade estimates (David, 1972). The formula revealing the phenomenon
is derived from the kriging variance itself. By proper manipulation of the kriging
variance and kriging system of equations, one can arrive at

D2(Z) = D2(Z *) + a~ - B, where (1)

D2(Z) = is the variance of true grade (Z) values of equal-size mining blocks
within the deposit
D2(Z *) = is the experimental variance of estimated grade (Z*) values of the same
blocks
o~ = is the average kriging variance of the estimate grade values for these
blocks
B = is a function of the estimation variance of the average grade of the
total resources and not on the number of evaluated mining blocks; B

SThe deposit taken here has total in situ resources for which the outline can be defined
using, for example, a low cutoff grade. This low cutoff grade could correspond to the
minimum grade a mill can process or to a regional background grade. The outline of the
deposit can also be defined by geologicalboundaries such as faults, basement highs, etc.
136 Saboufin

is usually very small for the total resources of a deposit and can be
neglected from the equation
The above equation tells us that the experimental distribution of block
grade estimates will be close to the distribution of true block grade values as
long as the average kriging variance of local block grade estimates is small. The
relative difference between the two variances D2(Z) and D2(Z*) expresses our
lack of knowledge about true block grades of the evaluated deposit and is com-
puted by the following equation
[D2(Z) - D2(Z*)I/D2(Z) =a~/D2(Z) (2)
It is proposed that the reasonably assured resources be outlined according
to predetermined relative differences between the experimental variance of
estimated block grade values D2(Z *) and the variance of true block grade values
D2(Z). For example, a 10% relative difference between these variances could
be used as the upper limit for the measured resources. In such a case, any group
of blocks for which the average kriging variance of estimated grades is lower or
equal to 10% X D2(Z) would be classified into the measured resources. Similarly,
if a 20% relative difference is used by convention as the upper limit for the indi-
cated resources, than any group of blocks for which the average kriging variance
of the estimated grade is between 10% X D2(Z) and 20% X D2(Z) would be clas-
sified into the indicated resources.
Although, the proposed relative differences must be chosen by convention,
they can be applied uniformily to any mineral deposit as possible technical cri-
teria to outline the reasonably assured resources as well as the inferred resources.
The procedure outlining the total RA resources (measured plus indicated)
would be defined by the following steps

1. Evaluate the grade of equal-size mining blocks with kriging grade estimates
2. Calculate their kriging grade variances
3. Sort in increasing order all of the kriging grade variances
4. Select the blocks with the smallest kriging variance giving an average kriging
variance less than or equal to 20% X D2(Z)
5. D2(Z), the variance of true block grade values of equal size volumes within
the deposit, has previously been theoretically calculated using the variogram,
or if the deposit has been delineated completely, D2(Z) can be equated to
D2(Z *) + a~
To simplify the methodology, we could also by convention choose upper
limits for each of the measured, indicated, and inferred resource categories equal
to some predetermined percentage of the variance D2(Z) of true block grade
values within the deposit. The sorting of blocks would be eliminated and we
could immediately classify each block into its proper category.
Geostatisrics as a Tool to Define Various Categories of Resources 137

GENERAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROPOSED

TECHNICAL CRITERION
The proposed methodology will now be confronted with considerations
from exploration and mining practitioners, from geostatiscians, and from those
who favor a more traditional classification approach. The reliability of the pro-
posed methodology will be experimentally tested and verified in a future report.
However, the future experimental investigations will be guided by the above
mentioned considerations. It is not expected that such technical criteria could
be applied to all situations, but if it can satisfactorily be used in several of them,
it would already be an improvement toward a more objective approach in the
classification of RA resources.

Geological Exploration and Mining Considerations

Let us first consider a mineral deposit which has been drilled exhaustively
using a uniform grid pattern (i.e., the outline of the mineral deposit is known
either because of property or geological limits). The uniform grid pattern indi-
cates to us that each block grade will have approximately the same kriging vari-
ance. The extension of the deposit at its peripheryis limited to half the distance
between barren and mineralized drill hole intersections, to property or to geo-
logical limits. According to the proposed methology, such a deposit is classified
as RA resources if the average kriging variance for the grade of equal size vol-
umes is lower than 20% X D2(Z). In such a case, only two choices are possible:
either the total deposit is considered as RA resources or not. Indeed, no portion
of such a deposit can be studied separately because each evaluated block grade
will have approximately the same kriging variance or level of confidence for the
estimated grade.
One could argue against the proposed methology that we are really only
interested in the total reserve tonnage of the mineral deposit and its average
grade with their respective reliability. For example, if the relative precisions of
either the total reserve tonnage or its average grade estimate are lower than 20%
(as proposed by the USBM, USGS definitions of measured resource (Geological
Survey Bulletin, 1450-A, 1976), then a deposit could be considered as measured
resources.
The problem in such a statement is that the relative precision of the total
estimated quantities increases with the volume of a deposit and consequently
with the amount of information on the deposit. Two deposits, different in size,
having been explored with the same drilling pattern, can be classified differently
with this approach. This can be shown by the following equation
138 Sabourin

if the density is constant, and the estimators are statistically independent, or

a~ = a~i/N, if all V/are the same, with
a~ = The relative estimation variance for the total tonnage (%)2
a}i = The relative estimation variance for the mining blocks i (%)2
Note that similar equations exist for the relative estimation variance of
the total metal tonnage and average grade.
So the relative precision for the total tonnage with, say, 95% probability
would be equal to (2or/N1~2). Two deposits, having, respectively, N (deposit A)
and a N (deposit B) mining blocks of equal dimensions, would differ in rela-
tive precision by a 1/2. This could mean, for example, that if the relative pre-
cision in tonnage (for deposit A) is 25% a t t h e 95% probability level and that
deposit B is twice as big (a = 2) in volume, the relative precision of deposit B
would be only 0.25/21/2 = 0.1768 or 17.68%. Deposit B would be classified as
measured resource and deposit A as indicated resource. However, each deposit
would have the same density of information. It would also be possible using the
criteria proposed in this paper that each deposit would not be classified as RA
resources after all if the average kriging variance of local block grade were larger
than 20% X D2(Z).
Relative precisions are important for investment decisions. Investors are
interested to know the risk to mine a deposit having an average grade below a
limiting grade. As the relative precision, this risk is dependent both on the value
of the average grade estimate and on the size of the deposit. Although relative
precisions are useful for investment decisions, they cannot satisfy actual defini-
tions of RA resources.
What happens, if because of geological conditions or economical considera-
tions, the deposit is partially outlined? If the deposit is partially explored, it
could be geologically inferred that an extension of the deposit exists. A few scat-
tered drill holes outside the well-explored area usually aids the geologist in de-
termining whether a possible extension of the mineralization really exists. If a
boundary is arbitrarily defined to identify the RA resources, by so doing, we
immediately classify this known resource by assurance of existence and no other
criterion is needed for its classification. However, this boundary can be objec-
tively defined using estimation variances as proposed in the previous section of
this report.
Geostatistieal Considerations
What happens if kriging estimates are not used? Earlier in this article the
variance of block grade estimates D2(Z *) was expressed as a function of the
average kriging variance of these local grade estimates and of the variance D2(Z)
of true (Z) block grade values [i.e., D2(Z *) =DZ(Z)- o~]. In the proposed
methodology, the absolute value of the difference IDa(Z)- D2(Z*)[ determines
the technical criteria to classify RA resources.
Geostatistics as a Tool to Define Various Categories of Resources 139

Kriging will always ensure, by definition, the minimum estimation variance,

for a given amount of information, compared to any other method of evalua-
tion. This means that no matter what evaluation method (polygons, triangular,
weighted average, inverse square distances, etc.) is used, the absolute value of the
difference ID2(Z) - D2(Z*)] between the variance of true and estimated local
block grade values will always be equal or greater as compared to a kriging evalu-
ation. Kriging will also ensure unbiased estimates, which means for example that
the average estimated block grade values will not systematically overevaluate the
average true block grade values. This feature is of great importance when calcu-
lating reserves. We can thus say that the user of a method of evaluation other
than kriging will be twice penalized.
Which variables (grade, tonnage, or metal quantities) should be used in
the proposed methodology? Normally, when the tonnage factor or rock den-
sity is assumed to be constant, only the grade should be used in the proposed
methodology.
The problem is different when the rock density varies significantly from
block to block or when a two-dimensional approach is used to evaluate the RA
resources. In both situations, block grades are not elementary or independent
variables and must be estimated from both the estimated metal and tonnage
content. The variance D2(Z) of the true block grade values within the deposit
has no significance anymore since each block has a different tonnage.
One solution to this problem is to evaluate the amount of metal per unit
of volume instead of block grades, that is, to calculate the kriging variance of
the metal content per unit of volume.
How important is the size of the blocks? The size of the blocks is very im-
portant when the reserves are calculated. Indeed, better grades are normally re-
covered for highly selective mining methods. However, in the present methodol-
ogy our first objective is to outline the RA resources. The proposed technical
criteria use the ratio between the average kriging variance and the variance of
true block grades of equal size volumes within the deposit. This ratio should not
vary too much since both the kriging and the dispersion variance vary propor-
tionally with the size of the volumes. Large blocks would produce small kriging
and also small dispersion variances. However, the block size must not be chosen
so large that the total RA resources would only be within a few blocks. If pos-
sible, the block size should be the same as the volume of selection permitted by
the mining method.

Traditional Classification Considerations

This paper is dealing with the classification of reasonably assured resources

which are subdivided into the measured and indicated categories. The proposed
methodology can objectively outline each category of RA resources. However,
RA resources do not generally constitute the total known resources. What is not
reasonably assured is, nevertheless, known with a lower degree of assurance and
140 Saboufin

must also be reported, since it is likely to become the future reserves of the de-
posit. The inferred resources can also be objectively delineated with the pro-
posed methodology.
The proposed methodology and the traditional approach are'both classify-
ing locally the known resources. However, the traditional approach uses dis-
tances of influence as a tool to classify known resources. These distances or pro-
jections are subjectively determined for each deposit. It is clear that, if confirmed
by experimental results, the proposed methodology would be a positive step
toward improvement of the traditional approach, because both the kriging vari-
ance and the variance of the true blocks grade values are objectively determined
by one or more of the following factors
(1) The spatial correlation of the grades in the mineral deposit; variograms quan-
titatively express the continuity of the variable
(2) The amount of information
(3) The relative geometric positions of information
(4) The size of the estimated blocks

CONCLUSIONS
From the preceding discussions, it can be said that
(1) There are enough arguments in favor of the geostatistical methodology pre-
sented in this report to propose it as a possible tool to classify known re-
sources and specifically the RA resources.
(2) The classification of known resources should be done locally as the tradi-
tional approach is always presupposed.
(3) The dimension of the local volumes should preferably correspond to the
unit of ore selection or be small enough to outline the RA resources.
(4) According to the proposed classification methodology RA resources should
include only those volumes for which the ratio between the average kriging
variance and the variance of the true block grade values within the deposit
is less than or equal to a conventional value (0.2 is suggested in this paper
and is to be confirmed with further experimental results).
(5) Inferred resources can also be delineated with the proposed methodology.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. F. Agterberg and Dr. J. Zwarten-

dyk of the Geological Survey and the Mineral Policy Sector of Energy, Mines
and Resources, Canada for reviewing this report. I would also like to thank all
those who have directly or indirectly helped me express my ideas on the subject.
Geostatistics as a Tool to Define Various Categories of Resources 141

APPENDIX: DEFINITIONS OF RESOURCES

(Excerpts from "Uranium in Canada 1979 Assessment of Supply

and Requirements" Report EP 80-3, Sept. 1980)
In its annual assessment of uranium resources, URAG (Uranium Resource
Appraisal Group) divides its estimates into five separate categories reflecting
different levels of confidence in the quantities reported. These categories are
further separated into two levels of exploitability related to the current price
of uranium.
The following terms and definitions used by URAG are in harmony with
those used by EMR for mineral and coal resource assessment
Ore is a natural mineral-bearing substance that can be recovered by mining and
from which one or more commodities can be extracted economically under
conditions specified at the time of the appraisal.
Measured ore refers to ore for which tonnage is computed from dimensions
revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings, or drillholes, and for which the
grade is computed from adequate sampling. The sites for inspection, sam-
pling, and measurement are so closely spaced and the geological character
so well defined that the size, shape, and mineral content are well estab-
lished. The tonnage and grade should refer to ore recoverable by mining
with due regard for dilution.
Indicated ore refers to ore for which tonnage and grade are computed partly
from specific measurements, samples, or production data and partly from
projection for a reasonable distance on geological evidence. The openings
or exposures available for inspection, measurement, and sampling are too
widely or inappropriately spaced to outline the ore completely or to estab-
lish its grade throughout.
Inferred ore refers to ore for which quantitative estimates are based largely on
a broad knowledge of the geological character of the deposit and for which
there are few, if any, samples or measurements. Estimates are based on as-
sumed continuity or repetition for which there is geological evidence; this
evidence may include comparison with deposits of similar types. Bodies
that are completely concealed but for which there is some geological evi-
dence may be included. Estimates of inferred ore should include a state-
ment of the specific limits within which the inferred material may lie.
These limits vary depending upon the characteristics and knowledge of the
orebodies.
Reserve refers only to those measured and indicated resources that could be
mined at the uranium market price as determined at the time of the assess-
ment (equivalent to block 1A of Figure A1) unless another price is specified.
142 Sabourin

3 i I
I I
z I I
0
0
lC I 2c I 3C
I- I I
o
0
j
uJ
n- o I I
o. I I
x ~_
I I

0
>. (J
~ uJ ~
Iz) 1B 2B 5B
0

u z 0 -(~ 1A 2A 5A
_z 8~ o
l.d II:

CANADIAN
TERMINOLOGY
~--

MEASURED INDICATED INFERRED

r PROGNOS-
TICATED SPECULATIVE

NEA/AEA REASONABLY ESTIMATED

SPECULATIVE
EQUIVALENT ASSURED ADDITIONAL

19

INCREASING CONFIDENCE IN QUANTITIES REPORTED

Fig. A1. Classification scheme for recoverable uranium resources (Energy, Mines
and Resources Canada).

For national and international purposes, Canadian resource estimates are

often quoted in terms of the international uranium resource definitions em-
ployed by the joint NEA/IAEA 6 working party on uranium resources. The terms
Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) and Estimated Additional Resources
(EAR) and their definitions were first developed in 1964 and have been retained,
with minor modification, in periodic NEA/IAEA world uranium supply assess-
ments. It is pertinent to note that, in 1975, the NEA/IAEA changed its resource
definitions to refer to cost instead of price, while Canada has retained the price
classification. 6
Reasonably Assured Resources refers to uranium that occurs in known mineral
deposits of such size, grade, and configuration that it could be recovered
within the given production cost ranges, with currently proven mining and

6NEA Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency.
Geostatisties as a Tool to Det'me Various Categories of Resources 143

processing technology. Estimates of tonnage and grade are based on specific

sample data and measurements of the deposits and on knowledge of deposit
characteristics. Reasonably Assured Resources have a high assurance of ex-
istence and in the cost category below $80/KgU (block 1A of Figure A-l)
are considered as reserves for the purpose of this report.

REFERENCES

Carlier, A., 1964, Contribution aux m&hodes d'estimation des gisements d'uranium: Com-
missariat ~ l'~nergie atomique, Rapport R-2332.
David, M., 1972, Grade-tonnage curve; use and misuse in ore reserve estimation: Trans. Inst.
Min. Metall., sect. A, p. 129-132.
Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, 1980, Uranium in Canada, 1979 assessment of supply
and requirements: Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, Report EP 80-3.
Geological Survey Bulletin; 1450-A, 1976, Principles of the mineral resource classification
system of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and U.S. Geological Survey.