ENGINEERING STUDY REPORT - dgwa.org · 2018-07-16 · Engineering Study Report S106-REP-PR-001 Rev: D Page 2 of 48 1.2 Tailings Reclamation Tailings within the TSF will be reclaimed

Minnovo Pty Ltd | Level 8 256 Adelaide Terrace Perth WA 6000

ENGINEERING STUDY REPORT

Soludo Lambert Mining SAS

Kipushi Tailings Project

Project No.: S106

S106-REP-PR-001

Revision: D

Engineering Study Report

S106-REP-PR-001 Rev D Page i of iv

Revision History

Rev Date Description of Revision Prepared Reviewed Approved Client

Approved

A 8 June 18 Issued for Internal Review JR SP JF

B 8 June 18 Issued for Client Review JR SP JF

C 11 June 18 Client Review Incorporated JR SP

D 5 July 18 Issued for Study

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Tailings Reclamation ...................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Testwork and Process Flowsheet Development ............................................................ 2

1.4 Design Criteria Summary ............................................................................................... 2

1.5 Process Plant .................................................................................................................. 2

1.6 Infrastructure ................................................................................................................... 3

1.7 Project Schedule............................................................................................................. 4

1.8 Financial Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 4

Capital Cost Estimate ........................................................................................... 4

Sustaining Capital ................................................................................................ 4

Operating Cost Estimate ...................................................................................... 5

Financial Analysis ................................................................................................. 5

2.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7

2.1 Project Background ........................................................................................................ 7

2.3 Tenure ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.4 Existing Environment ...................................................................................................... 9

2.5 Scope of Project ............................................................................................................. 9

2.6 Scope of Services ........................................................................................................... 9

2.7 Battery Limits ................................................................................................................ 10

3.1 Mining Fleet .................................................................................................................. 11

3.2 Reclamation of Tailings ................................................................................................ 11

4.0 Testwork and Process Flowsheet Development ............................................................... 12

4.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 12

4.2 Mineralogy .................................................................................................................... 12

4.3 As-Received Particle Size Distribution and Head Assays ............................................ 14

4.4 Leaching ....................................................................................................................... 18

Grind Size Optimisation Leach Tests ................................................................. 18

Acid Strength Optimisation Leach Tests ............................................................ 19

High Total Dissolved Solids Leach Test ............................................................. 20

4.5 Hydroxide Precipitation ................................................................................................. 21


S106-REP-PR-001 Rev D Page ii of iv

4.6 Thickening & Filtration .................................................................................................. 21

4.7 Process Flowsheet Development ................................................................................. 22

5.6 Process Plant Layout .................................................................................................... 27

6.0 Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................... 29

6.1 Plant and Infrastructure Location .................................................................................. 29

6.3 Access Roads ............................................................................................................... 29

6.4 Electrical Power ............................................................................................................ 29

6.5 Water ............................................................................................................................ 29

Raw Water .......................................................................................................... 29

Gland Service Water .......................................................................................... 29

Potable Water ..................................................................................................... 29

Process Water .................................................................................................... 29

6.6 Buildings ....................................................................................................................... 30

6.7 Drainage ....................................................................................................................... 30

6.8 Information Technology and Communications ............................................................. 30

6.9 Security Requirements ................................................................................................. 30

Gatehouse and Security ..................................................................................... 30

Asset Protection ................................................................................................. 30

Site Access Gates .............................................................................................. 30

Fences ................................................................................................................ 30

6.10 Mobile Plant .................................................................................................................. 30

6.11 Accommodation ............................................................................................................ 31

8.0 Financial Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 33

8.1 Capital Cost Estimate ................................................................................................... 33

Process Plant Summary ..................................................................................... 33

Qualifications and Exclusions ............................................................................ 33

Data Sources ...................................................................................................... 34

Currency and Exchange Rates .......................................................................... 34

Project Capital Cost Estimate ............................................................................ 35

Process Plant ..................................................................................................... 36

Sustaining Capital .............................................................................................. 38

8.2 Operating Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 38

Summary ............................................................................................................ 38

Qualifications and Exclusions ............................................................................ 40

Data Sources ...................................................................................................... 40

Operating Strategy ............................................................................................. 40

Labour ................................................................................................................ 40

Power ................................................................................................................. 42

Maintenance Materials ....................................................................................... 42

Reagents and Consumables .............................................................................. 43

Laboratory .......................................................................................................... 43

Mobile Equipment ............................................................................................... 43

8.3 Financial Analysis ......................................................................................................... 44

9.0 Risk Assessment .................................................................................................................. 46


S106-REP-PR-001 Rev D Page iii of iv

Figures

Figure 1-1 Kipushi Project Location ............................................................................................ 1

Figure 2-1 Kipushi Project Location ............................................................................................ 7

Figure 2-2 Project Layout ............................................................................................................ 8

Figure 2-3 Kipushi Climate Data ................................................................................................ 9

Figure 2-4 View over the TSF ................................................................................................... 11

Figure 2-5 Mining Equipment of Allstars ................................................................................... 11

Figure 4-1 Kipushi Tailings Particle Size Distribution ............................................................... 14

Figure 4-2 Copper & Cobalt Assay by Screen Size .................................................................. 17

Figure 4-3 Copper & Cobalt Distribution by Screen Size ......................................................... 17

Figure 4-4 Copper Extraction versus Time ............................................................................... 18

Figure 4-5 Cobalt Extraction versus Time ................................................................................ 19

Figure 4-6 Copper Extraction versus Time ............................................................................... 19

Figure 4-7 Cobalt Extraction versus Time ................................................................................ 20

Figure 4-8 Kipushi Tailings Process Flowsheet ........................................................................ 22

Figure 4-9 Process Plant Layout .............................................................................................. 28

Tables

Table 1-1 Kipushi Tailings Leach Project Design Criteria ......................................................... 2

Table 1-2 Project Capital Cost Estimate Summary ................................................................... 4

Table 1-3 Estimate of Sustaining Capital .................................................................................. 4

Table 1-4 Project Operating Cost Summary .............................................................................. 5

Table 1-5 Results of Financial Analysis. .................................................................................... 6

Table 4-1 Kipushi Tailings Mineralogy ..................................................................................... 13

Table 4-2 Assay Analysis by Screen Size ............................................................................... 15

Table 4-3 Metal Distribution by Screen Size ........................................................................... 16

Table 4-4 Fixed Leach Parameters ......................................................................................... 18

Table 4-5 Synthetic Process Water Composition .................................................................... 20

Table 4-6 Optimum Leach Parameters ................................................................................... 21

Table 4-7 Settling & Filtration Results ..................................................................................... 21

Table 4-8 Kipushi Tailings Leach Project Design Criteria ....................................................... 23

Table 6-1 Mobile Equipment .................................................................................................... 31

Table 8-1 Process Plant Capital Cost Estimate Summary ...................................................... 33

Table 8-2 Basis for Capital Cost Estimate ............................................................................... 34

Table 8-3 Exchange Rates ...................................................................................................... 35

Table 8-4 Project Capital Cost Estimate Summary ................................................................. 35

Table 8-5 Estimate of Sustaining Capital ................................................................................ 38

Table 8-6 Process Plant Operating Cost Summary ................................................................ 38

Table 8-7 Project Operating Cost Summary ............................................................................ 39

Table 8-8 Basis for Site Operating Cost Estimate ................................................................... 40

Table 8-9 Labour Summary ..................................................................................................... 41

Table 8-10 Salary Summary ...................................................................................................... 42

Table 8-11 Power Cost Summary.............................................................................................. 42

Table 8-12 Maintenance Materials ............................................................................................ 43

Table 8-13 Reagents and Consumables Cost Summary .......................................................... 43

Table 8-14 Miscellaneous Cost Summary ................................................................................. 44

Table 8-15 Results of Financial Analysis. .................................................................................. 44


S106-REP-PR-001 Rev D Page iv of iv

Appendices

Process Design Criteria

Block Flow Diagram

Process Flow Diagrams

Mass Balance

Mechanical Equipment List

Preliminary Plant Layout

ALS Testwork Results

Tenova Delkor Testwork Results

Mintek Testwork Results

Capital Cost Estimate

Operating Cost Estimate

Preliminary Schedule


S106-REP-PR-001 Rev: D Page 1 of 48

1.0 Executive Summary

1.1 Introduction

This document presents the findings of the Engineering Study (ES) for the Kipushi Tailings

Project (Project). The study was undertaken by Minnovo Pty Ltd (Minnovo) for Soludo Lambert

Mining SAS (Soludo Lambert).

Soludo Lambert is a 50/50 joint venture arrangement with local entity Paragon Mining SARL

(Paragon) and Australian company Cape Lambert Resources Limited (Cape Lambert).

The Project involves the reprocessing of copper-cobalt tailings contained in the Kipushi

Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) located near the town of Kipushi approximately 25km from

Lubumbashi in the DRC. The tailings were deposited by the Kipushi Concentrator Plant (a

flotation concentrator) between 2002 and 2011 and will be processed through a newly built

1Mtpa acid leach plant designed to produce a mixed hydroxide precipitate (MHP) product.

The leaching plant will produce an MHP product containing approximately 30-35% copper

and 8-14% cobalt (dry basis) at a rate of 7560 tonnes of contained copper and 2900 tonnes

of contained cobalt per year.

The TSF is located on licence PER 12347 approximately 8 km from the process plant and

extends over 1.2 km in length and over 400m in width. The Project location is shown in Figure

1-1

Figure 1-1 Kipushi Project Location

Assaying of samples collected from the TSF returned cobalt grades ranging from 0.35% to

0.46% and copper grades ranging from 0.89% to 1.18% and these compare with metallurgical

accounting figures from when the tailings were produced which gave values ranging from

0.14% to 0.48% cobalt and 0.17% to 1.83% copper. Data retrieved by Soludo Lambert from

the State mining company La Generale Des Carrieres Et Des Mines S.A. (Gecamines)

suggests that the TSF contains approximately 3.4Mt of tailings grading an average of 0.86%

copper and 0.34% Co. Additional drilling is planned to further quantify the resource.

Preliminary mineralogical analysis indicates that the principal copper-bearing minerals are

malachite, pseudomalachite and chrysocolla and the principal cobalt-bearing minerals are

heterogenite and carrollite.



1.2 Tailings Reclamation

Tailings within the TSF will be reclaimed by excavator, loaded on to 40 tonne trucks for

transport to the Kipushi Leaching plant. Due to the intention to return filtered leached tailings

back to the TSF after processing, it will be necessary to reclaim the tailings in such a way that

enables cells of approximately 75m x 75m to be progressively created within the TSF, to be

subsequently lined with HDPE prior to the backfilling with the leached tailings.

1.3 Testwork and Process Flowsheet Development

Prior to commencing the study, a metallurgical testwork programme was developed with the

objective of validating the leaching and precipitation flowsheet prepared during the pre-

scoping study.

Leaching and precipitation testwork was carried out at ALS in Perth on a composite sample

from the Kipushi tailings dam provided by Soludo Lambert.

In addition to the metallurgical testwork, Tenova Delkor carried out settling and filtration tests

on leach residue samples provided by ALS.

Although limited to benchscale tests, the results validated the flowsheet selection of a

combined copper and cobalt leach followed by precipitation of copper and cobalt as a MHP

product and provided adequate data for the process design of the Project. Also, the results

obtained are consistent with published data for tailing leach projects in the DRC in recent

years.

1.4 Design Criteria Summary

Design criteria for the process plant were developed from the testwork and, in the absence of

some specific Kipushi related information, from Minnovo’s experience with similar projects.

The main process design criteria are summarised in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1 Kipushi Tailings Leach Project Design Criteria

Item Units Design Value Comment

Tailings Treatment Rate t/y 1,000,000

Operating time h/y 8000

Nominal Plant Throughput t/h 125

Plant Feed Composition

Cobalt

Copper

%

%

0.40

1

Values for design only

Nominal Circuit Copper Recovery % 90 Inferred from samples

tested

Nominal Circuit Cobalt Recovery % 85 Inferred from samples

tested

1.5 Process Plant

The process plant is a relatively simple design to produce MHP. The process involves:

Slurrification: tailings will be fed to a ROM bin by either direct truck dumping or by FEL

loading from the plant stockpile. An apron feeder will transfer the tailings to a conveyor which

feeds into the trash screen feed box. The vibrating trash screen removes any trash from the

reclaimed tailings. The screen undersize will be collected in a hopper and slurried with water

before being pumped to the leach feed surge tank.



Leaching: the leaching circuit comprises six agitated tanks operating in a series overflow

cascade configuration operating at atmospheric pressure and close to ambient temperature.

Sulphuric acid is added to leach the cobalt and copper from the tailings. Although arranged in

one single leach train, the leach circuit comprises an oxidative copper leach (3 tanks) and a

reductive cobalt leach (3 tanks).

Primary Neutralisation: the leach discharge slurry, with an acid concentration of

approximately 5 g/L, is reacted with hydrated lime slurry to raise the pH of the slurry to

approximately 3, prior to thickening and filtration. This has the benefit of reducing the

consumption of magnesium oxide in the precipitation circuit and removing some of the

dissolved iron to the leach residue.

Solid/Liquid Separation: The leach discharge slurry flows by gravity to the leach discharge

thickener, where the solids are flocculated and thickened. The leach residue thickener

overflow solution, containing most of the copper and cobalt is then transferred to the pregnant

leach solution (PLS) tank via a pinned bed clarifier, which minimises the solids carry over into

MHP. PLS is then pumped to the MHP circuit.

Precipitation: PLS from the clarifier overflow and primary filtrate from the leach discharge

belt filter is treated in a three-stage hydroxide precipitation circuit. Hydrated magnesium oxide

is added to each stage, increasing the pH of the system which facilitates the precipitation of

base metal hydroxides which are insoluble in dilute alkali environments. The discharge of the

third precipitation stage is pumped to the solid/liquid separation circuit.

MHP Handling: MHP discharge slurry is thickened and the thickener underflow slurry is

pumped to the thickener underflow tank, which provides surge capacity between the thickener

and the downstream MHP filter. Slurry is pumped into the MHP filter on a batch basis and the

MHP is dewatered sufficiently for it to be transported in bags. MHP filter discharge drops into

a bunker below the filter and is reclaimed by a FEL and fed to the MHP bagging plant.

Leach Residue Disposal: Leach residue from the Solid/Liquid Separation area will discharge

from the belt filter via a chute onto a conveyor that will convey it to the residue stockpile. A

front end loader will load the residue into trucks which will initially transport the residue to a

lined temporary residue storage facility (RSF) adjacent to the plant. Once a cell has been

created and lined at the TSF, then the trucks transporting the tailings to the plant site will be

backloaded with the leach residue for disposal back in the TSF.

1.6 Infrastructure

The Project is well-served by existing infrastructure and proximity to the towns of Kipushi and

the city of Lubumbashi, which has an international airport.

The proposed site is bounded to the east by a road that is oriented approximately N-S that

links with the Lubumbashi to Kipushi main road.

The main power supply (HV) for the Project is provided by an existing 3 phase, 50 Hz, 66 kV

overhead power line. This feeds into a 66/10kV transformer and 10kV switchboard in a

medium voltage room located east of the existing flotation plant.

As a backup to the mains power supply, a diesel generator power station will be constructed

at the plant site to provide sufficient power to keep the process plant operating should there

be a mains failure.

Raw water will be pumped by the existing bore pumps to the existing water pond adjacent to

the concentrator plant.

Existing buildings on site will be utilised as far as is practicable costs have been allowed for

new buildings where required.

A small 100,000 tonne leach RSF approximately 100m x 100m will be constructed at the plant site for the storage of tailings emanating from the leach process, while space is created in the TSF for the ongoing storage of tailings.



1.7 Project Schedule

The Project is targeting production to commence in Q2 2019.

1.8 Financial Evaluation


The capital cost estimate presented in second quarter 2018 United States dollars (USD) to

an accuracy of ±35%. A summary estimate is shown in Table 1-2 .

Table 1-2 Project Capital Cost Estimate Summary

Description Total (USD)

Direct Costs

Civils 1,570,000

Tailings Reclamation 125,000

Process Plant 17,719,114

Infrastructure 3,725,000

Mobile Fleet 677,500

TOTAL DIRECTS 23,816,614

Indirect Costs

Freight 1,811,189

Spares/First Fills 833,629

Engineering 2,184,162

Commissioning 375,000

Owner Management 1,178,550

Permitting 125,000

Corporate 717,032

Capitalised Operating Cost 1,250,750

TOTAL INDIRECTS 8,475,311

Contingency 3,572,492

TOTAL BUDGET 35,864,418

Sustaining Capital

The sustaining capex for the life of the Project was estimated by Soludo Lambert and is shown

in Table 1-3.

Table 1-3 Estimate of Sustaining Capital


Lining of TSF $3,500,000

Roads $300,000

Equipment (2.5% Directs) $2,381,661

Totals $6,181,661




The operating cost estimate is presented in second quarter 2018 United States dollars (USD)

to an accuracy of ±35 %. The estimate has been divided into the key cost centres,

summarising the average annual operating costs for processing tailings at 1 Mt/y for the

Project. The costs are summarised in Table 1-4.

Table 1-4 Project Operating Cost Summary

Cost Category Total Cost

USD M / y USD / t of Tailings

Mining

Labour 205,200 0.21

Vehicles 9,650 0.01

Tailings Fees 6,840,000 6.84

Contractor 5,250,000 5.25

Total Mining 12,304,850 12.30

Processing

Labour 2,534,640 2.53

Power 1,726,321 1.73

Maintenance Materials 348,181 0.35

Reagents and Consumables 40,873,426 40.87

Miscellaneous 772,324 0.77

Total Processing 46,254,892 46.25

Administration

Labour 2,014,500 2.01

Vehicles 149,700 0.15

Communications 193,000 0.19

Insurances 1,500,000 1.50

Clinic Costs 95,680 0.10

Camp Costs 121,800 0.12

Travel 171,000 0.17

Community Relations 100,000 0.10

Freight 750,000 0.75

Other 500,000 0.50

Corporate Costs 500,000 0.50

Total Administration 6,095,680 6.10

Total Annual Opex 64,655,422 64.66

Financial Analysis

A basic financial model was created by Soludo Lambert to assess the financial viability of the

Project. The basis and results of this financial modelling are shown in Table 1-5.



Table 1-5 Results of Financial Analysis.

Parameter Unit Results

Mine Life years 4

Tailings Reclamation

Tailings Reclaimed Mt 3,250

Reclamation Rate Mtpa 1.0

Processing

Tailings Processed Annually Mtpa 1.0

LoM MHP Produced

Contained Copper t 25,000

Contained Cobalt t 9,400

Sales

Copper Price USD/t $6,000

Cobalt Price USD/t $80,000

Buyers Discount (Minegate Sales) 25%

Capital Costs

Development Capex USD’M 35.8

Sustaining Capital USD’M 6.2

Operating Costs

Tailings Reclamation Cost USD/t Tailings 12.30

Total Processing Cost USD/t Tailings 46.25

Total Administration Cost USD/t Tailings 6.10

Overall Operating Cost USD/t Tailings 64.65

Total Operating Cost USD’M 210,112

Royalties (Cu 3.5% - Co 10%) USD’M 60.3

Corporate Tax (30%) USD’M 136,228

Financial Analysis

Total Revenue USD’M 676.7

Operating Cashflow USD’M 466.6

Net Project Cashflow USD’M 308.7

NPV10% USD’M 216.6

(Note: the impact resulting from the recent changes to the Mining Code has yet to be assessed

in full)



2.0 Introduction

Soludo Lambert Mining SAS, (Soludo Lambert) an entity domiciled in the Democratic Republic

of Congo (DRC), engaged Minnovo Pty Limited (Minnovo) to produce an engineering study

(ES) for the Kipushi Tailings Project (Project).

The Project involves the reprocessing of copper-cobalt tailings contained in the Kipushi

Tailings Dam (TSF) located near the town of Kipushi approximately 25km from Lubumbashi

in the DRC. The tailings were deposited by the Kipushi Concentrator Plant (a flotation

concentrator) between 2002 and 2011 and will be processed through a newly built 1Mtpa acid

leach plant designed to produce a mixed hydroxide precipitate (MHP) product.

Soludo Lambert is a 50/50 joint venture arrangement with local entity Paragon Mining SARL

(Paragon) and Australian company Cape Lambert Resources Limited (Cape Lambert).

The plant will produce a MHP product containing approximately 30-35% copper and 8-14%

cobalt (dry basis) at a rate of 7560 tonnes of contained copper and 2900 tonnes of contained

cobalt per year. The filtered MHP will be bagged and sold to refineries for further purification.

2.1 Project Background

The Project consists of an existing TSF containing copper and cobalt emanating from the

Kipushi Concentrator Plant (a flotation concentrator) located approximately 25km from

Lubumbashi, in the DRC. The Project location is shown in Figure 2-1.

Figure 2-1 Kipushi Project Location

The TSF is located approximately 8 km from the process plant and extends over 1.2 km in

length and over 400m in width. The tailings reportedly have a maximum depth of

approximately 12m in the centre of the tailings dam and 5 m at the boundaries of the tailings

dam, with average depths of approximately 8 m.

Assaying of samples collected from the tailings dam returned cobalt grades ranging from

0.35% to 0.46% and copper grades ranging from 0.89% to 1.18% and these compare with

metallurgical accounting figures from when the tailings were produced which gave values

ranging from 0.14% to 0.48% cobalt and 0.17% to 1.83% copper.



Data retrieved by Soludo Lambert from the State mining company La Generale Des Carrieres

Et Des Mines S.A. (Gecamines) suggests that the TSF contains approximately 3.4Mt of

tailings grading an average of 0.86% copper and 0.34% Co. Additional drilling is planned to

further quantify the resource.

Preliminary mineralogical analysis indicates that the principal copper-bearing minerals are

malachite, pseudomalachite and chrysocolla and the principal cobalt-bearing minerals are

heterogenite and carrollite.

A Project layout is shown in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-2 Project Layout

2.2 Legislative Background

The main legislation governing mining activities was recently updated from the Mining Code

dated July 11, 2002 to the Mining Code dated 9 March 2018 (Mining Code). The applications

of the Mining Code are provided by the Mining Regulations (Mining Regulations). The

legislation incorporates environmental requirements.

Under the Mining Code, mining rights are regulated by exploration permits, exploitation

permits (Permis Exploitation or PEs), small-scale Exploitation Permits and tailings Exploitation

Permits (PE Rejects or PERs).

A PER allows the licence holder to mine and process man-made dumps on the licence area

only down to the original surface. PERs are valid for an initial period of 5 years, and can be

renewed repeatedly for further 5-year periods, as long as the licence holder has operated

according to the requirements laid down.



2.3 Tenure

The TSF is covered by licence PER 12347 held by Gecamines. PER 12347 is valid until 25

January 2021. In 2014, local company Patience SPRL (Patience) executed an agreement

with Gecamines where-in Patience had conditional exclusive rights to purchase the tailings

contained within the TSF.

During 2014, Patience executed a conditional agreement with Paragon, that gave Paragon

the rights to reclaim and process the tailings from the TSF and sell the product mined for a

70% interest in the Project.

In July 2017, Paragon signed a conditional JV agreement with Cape Lambert, whereby Cape

Lambert would provide the technical assistance and funding (part equity part loan) to get the

Project in to production. Pursuant to the JV Agreement, Paragon must increase its interest in

the Project to 80%.

2.4 Existing Environment

The Project is located in the Katanga copperbelt and is approximately 1,350m above mean

sea level. The Katanga region occupies a high plateau covered by forest and savannah. The

topography around Kipushi is gently undulating with some shallow valleys created by small

streams.

The climate is tropical with an average daytime temperature of about 27°C and annual

average rainfall of about 1,200 mm. Seasonal climatic variations are related to the wet

(November to April) and dry seasons, each lasting approximately 6 months.

Figure 2-3 Kipushi Climate Data

2.5 Scope of Project

The Project consists of a processing facility and associated infrastructure to leach flotation

tailings at a rate of 1,000,000 tonnes per year to produce approximately 20,000 tonnes (dry)

of MHP per year.

2.6 Scope of Services

The services provided by Minnovo for the Engineering Study include:

▪ Input to the metallurgical testwork program (testwork by ALS Perth).

▪ Coordination of thickening and filtration testwork (testwork by Tenova Delkor, Perth).

▪ Review of existing data relevant to the Project (previous metallurgical testwork by Mintek,

South Africa, dated July 2017).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Te

mp

éra

ture

C

Pré

cip

ita

tio

n (

mm

)

AveragePrecipitation(mm)Temperature(Min)

Temperature(Max)



▪ Development of the process design of the leach plant, including:

− Process design criteria.

− Mass and water balance.

− Process flowsheets.

− Mechanical equipment list.

− Site Plan.

▪ Sufficient design and engineering works to support the capital and operating cost

estimates.

▪ Development of a capital cost estimate to an accuracy level of ±35%.

▪ Development of an operating cost estimate to an accuracy level of ±35%.

2.7 Battery Limits

The following battery limits applied to Minnovo’s scope of services:

▪ From existing raw water pond.

▪ From existing electrical substation (the existing electrical equipment was assumed to be

adequate for engineering study purposes and will be assessed during the next stage of

the Project).

▪ From receipt of tailings (the plant feed material) at the leach plant stockpile.

▪ To discharge of plant leach residue into the residue storage facility (RSF).

▪ To discharge of scrubbed leach vent gas to atmosphere.

▪ To discharge of filtered MHP into bags for storage on site prior to transport.

▪ To discharge of excess process water.

Elements of the Engineering Study not included in Minnovo’s scope of work were provided by

Soludo Lambert.

3.0 Reclamation of Tailings

A study on the reclamation of the tailings is yet to be commissioned by Soludo Lambert,

however given the tailings are relatively dry and competent, Soludo Lambert expects that the

tailings can be readily excavated and loaded on to trucks for delivery to the Kipushi Leaching

Plant.



Figure 2-4 View over the TSF

3.1 Mining Fleet

Soludo Lambert has a contractual arrangement with local earthmoving and logistics company

Allstars Investment Ltd to undertake its earthmoving and mining requirements, which must be

provided to Soludo Lambert at competitive rates.

Figure 2-5 Mining Equipment of Allstars

3.2 Reclamation of Tailings

Due to the intention to return filtered leached tailings back to the TSF after processing at the

Kipushi Leaching Plant, it will be necessary to reclaim the tailings in such a way that enables

cells of approximately 75m x 75m to be progressively created within the TSF, to be

subsequently lined with HDPE. The lined cells would be topped with a protective cover of

suitable material prior to the placement of tailings, to enable vehicles to move within the cell

without damaging the liner.

Mining of the tailings will commence at the western end of the TSF and progress to the east.

Consideration will also be given to stormwater management within the TSF, and in particular

within the lined cells, to ensure that stormwater quickly drains away from the placed tailings

to minimise any issues with stacking and compacting.



4.0 Testwork and Process Flowsheet Development

4.1 Overview

Prior to commencing the engineering study, a metallurgical testwork programme was

developed with the objective of validating the leaching and precipitation flowsheet prepared

during the pre-scoping study.

Leaching and precipitation testwork was carried out at ALS in Perth on a composite sample

from the TSF provided by Soludo Lambert. The testwork scope of work included:

▪ X-ray diffraction (XRD) and quantitative evaluation of minerals by scanning electron

microscope (QEMSCAN) mineralogical analysis.

▪ Moisture, head assay and particle size distribution (PSD) determination on the as-

received composite.

▪ Size by analysis determination.

▪ Grind size optimisation leach tests.

▪ Acid addition optimisation leach tests.

▪ High total dissolved solids leach test.

▪ Hydroxide precipitation tests using lime and magnesium oxide at various pH levels.

In addition to the metallurgical testwork, Tenova Delkor carried out settling and filtration tests

on leach residue samples provided by ALS.

Testwork results are summarised and discussed in the following sections and the complete

results as received from ALS and Tenova Delkor can be found in Appendix G and Appendix

H respectively.

Although limited to benchscale tests, the results validated the flowsheet selection of a

combined copper and cobalt leach followed by precipitation of copper and cobalt as a MHP

and provided adequate data for the process design of the Project. Also, the results obtained

are consistent with published data for tailing leach projects in the DRC in recent years.

4.2 Mineralogy

XRD and QEMSCAN mineralogical analysis carried out by Mintek, South Africa on a

composite of six samples of Kipushi tailings yielded the results shown in Table 4-1. The

complete results can be found in the Mintek report in Appendix I. Of particular interest are the

relatively high grades of the acid-soluble oxide minerals malachite, chrysocolla, and

heterogenite which suggest that high recoveries of copper and cobalt may be achievable

under optimum leaching conditions.



Table 4-1 Kipushi Tailings Mineralogy

Mineral % Value

Malachite, Cu2(CO3)(OH)2 % 0.63

Pseudomalachite, Cu5(PO4)2(OH)4 % 0.15

Chrysocolla, (Cu,Al)2H2Si2O5(OH)4•n(H2O) % 0.50

Chalcopyrite, CuFeS2 % 0.04

Chalcocite/Diginite, Cu2S/Cu9S5 % 0.03

Pyrite, FeS2 % 0.02

Carrollite, Cu(Co,Ni)2S4 % 0.02

Heterogenite, Co3+O(OH) % 0.53

Wad % 0.21

Quartz, SiO2 % 50.73

Chlorite, (Mg,Fe2+)5Al(Si3Al)O10(OH)8 % 11.47

Muscovite, KAl2(Si3Al)O10(OH,F)2 % 5.70

Talc, Mg3Si4O10(OH)2 % 7.75

Dolomite / Magnesite, CaMg(CO3)2 / MgCO3 % 4.35

Calcite, CaCO3 % 0.17

Orthopyroxene, Mg2Si2O6 % 5.27

Biotite, K(Mg,Fe)3AlSi3O10(OH)2 % 2.68

K-feldspar, KAlSiO8 % 1.29

Diopside, CaMgSi2O6 % 0.29

Apatite, Ca5(PO4)3(F,Cl,OH) % 0.11

Actinolite, Ca2(Mg,Fe)5Si8O22(OH)2 % 0.17

Plagioclase, (Ca,Na)(Si,Al)4O8 % 0.12

Kaolinite, Al2Si2O5(OH)4 % 3.53

Chromite, FeCr2O4 % 0.05

Goethite, FeO(OH) % 3.31

Rutile, TiO2 % 0.40

Ilmenite, Fe2+TiO3 % 0.06

Other silicates % 0.25

Other Oxides % 0.17

Total % 100



4.3 As-Received Particle Size Distribution and Head Assays

Figure 4-1 shows the particle size distribution for the as-received Kipushi tailings sample.

Thee sample has a D80 of approximately 180 microns.

Figure 4-1 Kipushi Tailings Particle Size Distribution

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

10 100 1000

% P

assin

g

Particle Size (µm)

Cumulative Percent Passing vs Particle Size



Table 4-2 and Table 4-3 show the elemental head assays and metal distribution by screen size respectively. Figure 4-1 and Figure 4-3 shows the

same information graphically for copper and cobalt. The average copper grade is 0.9% compared with an assayed head grade of 0.96%. The average

cobalt grade is 0.39% compared with an assayed head grade of 0.31%.

Table 4-2 Assay Analysis by Screen Size

Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si Zn

(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

425 42.5 2.1 97.9 4.31 1.69 0.48 1.04 4.49 5.48 0.07 0.01 0.33 27.70 0.14

300 62.5 3.1 94.8 3.93 1.24 0.49 1.0 1.6 6.6 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.5 0.05

212 164.1 8.1 86.7 3.78 1.28 0.42 0.8 1.4 6.8 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.7 0.04

150 295.5 14.6 72.1 3.71 1.39 0.39 0.8 1.5 6.9 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.5 0.0

106 362.6 17.9 54.2 3.47 1.65 0.38 0.8 1.6 7.3 0.1 0.005 0.0 28.7 0.0

75 254.3 12.6 41.7 3.31 1.79 0.40 0.9 2.0 7.1 0.1 0.005 0.1 28.4 0.0

53 202.9 10.0 31.6 3.33 1.75 0.38 1.0 2.2 6.4 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.1 0.0

38 158.8 7.8 23.8 3.45 1.81 0.32 0.8 2.2 5.9 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.7 0.0

20 153.3 7.6 16.2 3.64 2.13 0.26 0.7 2.1 5.6 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.5 0.0

-20 328.5 16.2 0.0 6.4 1.89 0.45 1.2 2.8 7.2 0.1 0.005 0.1 24.3 0.1

TOTAL 2024.8 100.0 4.01 1.69 0.39 0.90 2.02 6.7 0.07 0.01 0.07 28.33 0.0

ASSAYED HEAD 4.44 1.40 0.31 0.96 2.64 5.4 0.07 0.01 0.10 29.40 0.0

Size Assay Analysis

Screen

Size

(µm)

Mass

Retained

(g)

Retained

(%)

Passing

(%)



Table 4-3 Metal Distribution by Screen Size


(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

425 42.5 2.1 2.26 2.10 2.58 2.43 4.67 1.70 2.15 4.11 9.95 2.05 8.38

300 62.5 3.1 3.03 2.27 3.87 3.50 2.37 3.01 2.71 3.02 5.33 3.21 4.40

212 164.1 8.1 7.65 6.15 8.72 7.49 5.59 8.11 7.12 7.94 8.16 8.50 9.25

150 295.5 14.6 13.51 12.03 14.58 12.51 10.50 14.84 12.82 14.29 10.50 15.20 12.50

106 362.6 17.9 15.51 17.53 17.44 15.56 14.40 19.24 18.36 17.54 10.30 18.14 10.23

75 254.3 12.6 10.37 13.33 12.87 12.59 12.34 13.17 12.87 12.30 9.03 12.59 10.76

53 202.9 10.0 8.33 10.40 9.76 10.82 11.14 9.55 10.27 9.81 11.53 10.29 5.72

38 158.8 7.8 6.75 8.42 6.43 7.25 8.41 6.80 8.04 7.68 10.15 8.22 4.48

20 153.3 7.6 6.88 9.57 5.04 5.99 7.97 6.32 6.65 7.42 8.71 7.88 6.49

-20 328.5 16.2 25.71 18.19 18.71 21.86 22.62 17.26 19.00 15.89 16.33 13.92 27.79

TOTAL 2024.8 100.0 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Screen

Size

(µm)

Mass

Retained

(g)

Retained

(%)

Metal Distribution



Figure 4-2 Copper & Cobalt Assay by Screen Size

Figure 4-3 Copper & Cobalt Distribution by Screen Size

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

425 300 212 150 106 75 53 38 20 -20

Assay:

% C

op

per,

% C

ob

alt

Screen Size

Copper & Cobalt Assay By Screen Size

Copper

Cobalt

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

425 300 212 150 106 75 53 38 20 -20

Dis

trib

uti

on

: %

Co

pp

er,

% C

ob

alt

Screen Size

Copper & Cobalt Distribution By Screen Size

Copper

Cobalt



4.4 Leaching

ALS conducted a number of sulphuric acid leach tests to determine the optimum particle size,

residence time and acid addition parameters for leaching copper and cobalt from Kipushi

tailings. With the exception of the High TDS leach test, all tests were carried out using the

following fixed conditions:

Table 4-4 Fixed Leach Parameters

Test Parameter Value

Temperature Ambient

% Solids 30%

ORP 350 mV (Ag/AgCl)

Duration 6 hours

Water source Perth Tap Water

Grind Size Optimisation Leach Tests

Initially, leach tests were carried out at four P80 sizes of 106, 75, 45 and 30 microns at the

conditions shown in Table 4-4 and with sufficient acid added to attain a value of 10g/L free

acid in the slurry at termination. It is evident from Figure 4-4 and Figure 4-5 that there was

little difference in metal extraction of copper and cobalt after six hours for the four sizes. As

there is a significant capital and operating cost saving in not having to grind the tailings prior

to leaching, it was decided to do a further test using tailings at the higher as-received particle

size. Although there was a slight decrease in extraction of both copper and cobalt at the higher

particle size after six hours, it was decided to proceed with the unground sample to the acid

optimisation tests.

Figure 4-4 Copper Extraction versus Time



Figure 4-5 Cobalt Extraction versus Time

Acid Strength Optimisation Leach Tests

Acid tests were carried out at four acid strengths, targeting 10, 5, 3 and 1 g/L free acid in the

leach residue after 6 hours.

Figure 4-6 Copper Extraction versus Time



Figure 4-7 Cobalt Extraction versus Time

From analysis of the results, the 5g/L free acid strength was selected as the optimum acid

tenor for extraction of copper and cobalt.

High Total Dissolved Solids Leach Test

The Metsim model indicated that soluble salts, particularly magnesium sulphate, would build

up in the plant process water. To assess the effect of the dissolved salts on the efficiency of

leaching, ALS carried out an additional leach test using a synthetic solution of process water

of the following composition.

Table 4-5 Synthetic Process Water Composition

Compound Concentration, g/L

H2O 985

MgSO4 105

CaSO4 1

Na2SO4 10

NaCl 0.16

ALS reported no significant change to the leach results compared to the results achieved for

the same test carried out with Perth tap water so the parameters as shown in Table 4-6 were

selected as optimum for the Project.



Table 4-6 Optimum Leach Parameters

Test Parameter Value

Temperature Ambient

% Solids 30%

ORP 350 mV (Ag/AgCl)

Duration 6 hours

Particle size, P80 180 microns (as-received)

Free Acid Strength 5g/L

Water source Plant Process Water

4.5 Hydroxide Precipitation

ALS has carried out a number of tests to precipitate copper and cobalt from the leach solution.

Optimisation tests are continuing but at the time of writing the copper and cobalt content of

the precipitates ranged from 22.8% - 31.9% and 9.77% - 18.4% respectively. The value of

18.4% cobalt is for a precipitate produced after the removal of copper and indicates that a

higher grade cobalt MHP could be produced as an alternative to the mixed copper/cobalt

MHP, if required.

4.6 Thickening & Filtration

Tenova Delkor carried out settling and filtration tests on leach residue supplied by ALS. The

results achieved are shown in Table 4-7. The testwork report can be found in Appendix H.

Table 4-7 Settling & Filtration Results

Parameter Value

Thickener Settling Rate 1t/m2/h

Thickener Rise Rate 3.3m/h

Thickener Underflow Solids 62%

Filtration Flux (no washing) 2t/m2/h

Wash Efficiency (@1litre/kg dry solids) 94%

Filtration Flux (with washing) 1.1t/m2/h



4.7 Process Flowsheet Development

The process flowsheet underwent a number of iterations and refinements during the

Engineering Study and the pictorial summary of the process shown in Figure 4-8 is supported

by the results of metallurgical and equipment vendor testwork and Metsim mass balance

modelling.

Although a mixed copper / cobalt hydroxide containing other base metals and iron as

impurities is not a commonly produced product in the DRC, the simplicity of the flowsheet

resulting from the omission of the typical solution purification and copper and cobalt

separation steps results in a significant reduction in capital cost and project schedule while

still producing a product that can be further refined at in-country or international refineries.

Figure 4-8 Kipushi Tailings Process Flowsheet



5.0 Process Plant Design

Please refer to the process flow diagrams (PFDs) in Appendix C when reading this section.

5.1 Design Criteria Summary

Design criteria for the process plant were developed from a limited suite of test work and, in

the absence of specific Kipushi related information, from Minnovo’s experience with similar

projects.

The main process design criteria are summarised in Table 4-8. A detailed process design

criteria document is provided in Appendix A.

Table 4-8 Kipushi Tailings Leach Project Design Criteria

Item Units Design Value Comment

Tailings Treatment Rate t/y 1,000,000

Operating time h/y 8000

Plant Throughput t/h 125

Plant Feed Composition

Cobalt

Copper

%

%

0.40

1

Values for design only

Nominal Circuit Copper Recovery % 90 Inferred from samples tested

Nominal Circuit Cobalt Recovery % 85 Inferred from samples tested

5.2 Plant Basis of Design

Design Life

The plant design life is ten years, with the initial four years for reprocessing of the Kipushi

tailings resource.

Design Standards

In general, plant and equipment included in the Engineering Study design have been specified

to the standard of design required by the relevant Australian standards. Australian standards

have been adopted as they are generally like the South African standards (SANS), which are

also utilised as the basis for projects in the DRC.

Mechanical and Piping Design Criteria

Minnovo applied typical mechanical and piping design criteria used for this type of facility

when developing the study design.

Civil/Structural Design Criteria

The design basis for the study is that a suitable plant site can be prepared without significant

effort. The study also assumed that geotechnical conditions will allow for reasonable ground

bearing pressures.

Electrical and Instrumentation Design Criteria

All equipment shall be covered by the applicable provisions of the latest editions of relevant

codes, standards and regulations.



Equipment shall be designed for the specific duty and conditions with emphasis on safety,

reliability and maintainability.

Equipment of proven design of similar service, standards and economic considerations shall

be used to ensure an efficient and effective plant of suitable and cost-effective design to fulfil

the Soludo Lambert’s requirements.

5.3 Plant Description

Using the plant design basis and design criteria parameters, the process plant design for the

Project was developed with the primary objective of a reliable and cost-effective design.

The subsequent sections detail the equipment selection and flowsheet for each plant area.

Each section should be read in conjunction with the following appendices:

▪ Process Design Criteria - Appendix A

▪ Overall Block Flow Diagram - Appendix B

▪ Process Flow Diagrams - Appendix C

▪ Process Mass Balance - Appendix D

▪ Mechanical Equipment List - Appendix E

▪ Plant Layout - Appendix F

Leach Feed – Area 330

PFD: S106-000-PFD-PR-001

Tailings is reclaimed by excavator from the TSF and trucked to the process plant area. The

material may be either direct tipped from the truck into the ROM bin or paddock dumped and

then reclaimed by FEL.

Material is discharged from the ROM bin using an apron feeder and transferred to the screen

feed conveyor which feeds into the trash screen feed box. The vibrating screen removes any

trash from the reclaimed tailings and will store it in a trash bunker. The screen undersize will

be collected in a hopper and slurried with water before being pumped to the leach feed surge

tank.

Leaching – Area 340

PFD: S106-000-PFD-PR-002

The leaching circuit comprises six agitated tanks operating in a series overflow cascade

configuration operating at atmospheric pressure and close to ambient temperature. Sulphuric

acid is added to leach the cobalt and copper from the tailings. The total leach residence time

is six hours at design throughput.

Although arranged in one single leach train, the leach circuit comprises an oxidative copper

leach (3 tanks) and a reductive cobalt leach (3 tanks).

Copper (Oxidative) Leach

Copper is present in the Kipushi tailings as oxide, carbonate and silicate minerals that leach

readily in sulphuric acid. Repulped tailings from the leach feed tank are pumped to the head

of the leach train. The tailings are leached in a mixture of dilute sulphuric acid and secondary

filtrate from leach residue belt filter. Leaching dissolves the value metals in the feed solids to

produce a solution rich in copper sulphate. Provision is made for controlled dilute sulphuric

acid addition to each tank in the copper leach train.



Cobalt (Reductive) Leach

A reductive leaching regime is utilised in the cobalt reductive leach to maximise cobalt

dissolution. Slurry from the final copper leach tank, at approximately 30% solids w/w overflows

to the first cobalt leach tank. Dilute sulphuric acid and SMBS solution is added to maintain a

slurry Eh of 350 – 375 mV and a terminal acid concentration of approximately 5 g/L.

The cobalt leaching circuit produces sulphur dioxide gas which will be collected off the cobalt

leach tanks, which are covered and vented and scrubbed in a gas scrubber.

Primary Neutralisation

The leach discharge slurry, with an acid concentration of approximately 5 g/L, is reacted with

hydrated lime slurry to raise the pH of the slurry to approximately 3, prior to thickening and

filtration. This has the benefit of reducing the consumption of magnesium oxide in the

precipitation circuit and removing some of the dissolved iron to the leach residue.

Solid/Liquid Separation – Area 350

PFD: S106-000-PFD-PR-003

The leach discharge slurry flows by gravity to the leach discharge thickener, where the solids

are flocculated and thickened. The leach residue thickener overflow solution, containing most

of the copper and cobalt is then transferred to the pregnant leach solution (PLS) tank via a

pinned bed clarifier, which minimises the solids carry over into mixed hydroxide precipitation.

PLS is pumped to the MHP circuit.

The underflow from the thickener will be pumped to a belt filter for further solid/liquid

separation. Filtrate from the initial dewatering section of the filter will be collected and pumped

to the PLS storage tank. Part way along the filter wash water is added to displace much of the

remaining metals in the filter cake and this secondary filtrate is collected separately, stored in

the belt filter filtrate tank and then is pumped to the leach circuit as dilution liquor.

Leach residue will discharge from the belt filter via a chute onto a conveyor that will convey it

to the residue stockpile. A front end loader will load the residue into trucks which will transport

the residue to a lined RSF adjacent to the plant.

Hydroxide Precipitation – Area 360

PFD: S106-000-PFD-PR-004

PLS from the clarifier overflow and primary filtrate from the leach discharge belt filter is treated

in a three-stage hydroxide precipitation circuit. Hydrated magnesium oxide, as a slurry, is

added to each stage, increasing the pH of the system which facilitates the precipitation of

base metal hydroxides which are insoluble in dilute alkali environments. The discharge of the

third precipitation stage is pumped to the solid/liquid separation circuit.

Hydroxide Precipitate Handling – Area 365

PFD: S106-000-PFD-PR-005

MHP discharge slurry is thickened and the thickener underflow slurry is pumped to the

thickener underflow tank, which provides surge capacity between the thickener and the

downstream MHP filter.

Slurry is pumped into the MHP filter on a batch basis and the mixed hydroxide precipitate is

dewatered sufficiently for it to be transported in bags. MHP filter discharge drops into a bunker

below the filter and is reclaimed by a FEL and fed to the MHP bagging plant.



The MHP bagging plant operates in a semi-automated fashion and loads the MHP into 1 t

capacity bulk bags. The filled bags are then handled by forklift into a storage area to await

loading onto trucks for transport off site. Space has been allocated on the site layout for the

installation of a future MHP dryer should market or operational conditions dictate that it is

required.

The MHP thickener overflow and MHP filter filtrate streams are collected in the MHP thickener

overflow tank and the liquor is pumped to the process water tank.

Reagents – Area 380

PFD: S106-000-PFD-PR-007

Lime

Hydrated lime is supplied to site in 1 t bulk bags. The bags are mixed in batches with raw

water in the agitated lime mixing tank and then pumped to the lime header tank. Lime slurry

is circulated into the plant and back to the header tank via a ringmain.

Magnesium Oxide

Magnesium oxide (MgO) is supplied to site in 1 t bulk bags. The bags of MgO are periodically

loaded into a feed bin from where the MgO powder is metered continuously into a mixing tank

using a screw feeder. The mixed MgO slurry is then pumped to the MHP tanks as required.

Sulphuric Acid

Sulphuric acid is delivered to site in tankers and is transferred by gravity flow into the sulphuric

acid decant tank from where it is pumped to the sulphuric acid storage tank. The acid is

pumped from the storage tank to the leaching circuit at the rate required.

Sodium Metabisulphite (SMBS)

SMBS is supplied to site in 1 t bulk bags. The bags are mixed in batches with raw water in the

SMBS mixing tank and then pumped to the SMBS header tank. SMBS liquor is dosed to the

cobalt leaching circuit as required.

Flocculant

Flocculant make-up and distribution systems are provided on site for the thickeners, clarifier and belt filters.

Flocculant will be delivered to site in 25 kg bags, stored in the reagent store and transferred to the make-up plants by forklift.

Flocculant will be made up to 0.25% w/v and further diluted to 0.025% w/v at the consumption points. After mixing the flocculant is stored in a tank prior to being distributed to the various dosing points throughout the plant.

Services – Area 390

PFD: S106-000-PFD-PR-009/009

Plant services include:

▪ Raw water supplied by an adjacent borefield, or nearby mining pits, which is stored and

distributed as required.

▪ Process water, which is used for slurrying of tailings. Note that there is a net excess of

process water and so a portion must be disposed of to maintain the site water balance.



▪ Gland water, which is distributed from the raw water tank.

▪ Fire water, which is provided by a pump package connected to the raw water tank.

▪ Potable water, which is provided by a treatment plant fed from the raw water supply

▪ Compressed plant and instrument air, which is provided by air compressors and air dryers.

5.4 Process Control Philosophy

The control philosophy envisaged for the Project is typical of those used in similar recent

mineral processing operations by Minnovo.

The plant will be appropriately automated to reduce the need for operator intervention on a

continuous basis, and to suit the expected skill level of the operators. Moderate levels of

process and engineering data collection and equipment monitoring will be provided.

Field instruments will provide inputs to a set of programmable logic controllers (PLCs).

Process control cubicles will be located in the motor control centres (MCCs), and contain

the PLC hardware, power supplies, and input/output (I/O) cards for instrument monitoring

and loop control. Personal computers (PCs) will be networked to the PLCs and operate a

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will provide an interface to

the PLCs for control and monitoring of the plant.

The SCADA system will be configured to provide outputs to alarms, control the function of

process equipment and provide logging and trending facilities to assist in analysis of plant

operations.

5.5 Metallurgical Accounting

Weightometers will be provided on major conveyors (tailings feed and residue discharge) to

measure throughput rates.

Densities (manual measurement) and flowrates will be measured on thickener underflows to

calculate the mass flow at these points in the circuit.

A weigh scale will measure each hydroxide bag weight and bag dip samples will allow

reconciliation of recovered metal compared with predictions from slurry samples.

5.6 Process Plant Layout

The process plant layout is shown in Figure 4-9.



Figure 4-9 Process Plant Layout



6.0 Infrastructure

6.1 Plant and Infrastructure Location

The tailings leaching process plant will be located at the site of an unused flotation plant with

the coordinates of 11°42'54.58"S and 27°17'50.40"E.

The site has been partially cleared to establish the flotation concentrator and is relatively flat.

6.2 Residue Storage Facility

Leach residue will discharge from the belt filter via a chute onto a conveyor that will convey it

to the residue stockpile. A front end loader will load the residue into trucks which will transport

the residue to a lined RSF adjacent to the plant. The RSF, with a capacity of approximately

100,000 tonnes, will be utilised while a permanent facility is prepared at the site of the TSF.

6.3 Access Roads

The proposed site is bounded to the east by a road that is oriented approximately N-S that

links to the Lubumbashi to Kipushi main road.

6.4 Electrical Power

The main power supply (HV) for the Project is provided by the existing 3 phase, 50 Hz, 66 kV

overhead power line. This feeds into a 66/10kV transformer and 10kV switchboard in a

medium voltage room. The study assumes that this existing HV equipment will be suitable

for use to supply the tailings leach plant.

The low voltage process plant equipment will be supplied at 3 phase, 50 Hz, 525 V. Lights

and small power will be supplied at 3 phase, 50 Hz, 380 V.

As a backup to the mains power supply, a small diesel generator power station will be

constructed at the plant site and provide sufficient power to keep the process plant operating

should there be a mains failure.

6.5 Water

Raw Water

For the purposes of the Engineering Study, raw water will be pumped by the existing bore

pumps to the existing water pond adjacent to the concentrator plant.

Gland Service Water

Gland service water will be supplied by dedicated pumps to the glands of the slurry pumps in

the plant.

Potable Water

A potable water treatment plant will supply water to the plant buildings and safety shower /

eye-wash stations.

Process Water

Process water will be pumped to various areas of the plant from the dedicated process water

tank.



6.6 Buildings

Existing buildings on site will be utilised as far as is practicable. Allowance has been made in

the estimate for a new warehouse / workshop, gatehouse, changehouse / cribroom, control

room and MCC room.

6.7 Drainage

All site preparation and earthworks internal to the process plant site including general site

drainage have been included.

6.8 Information Technology and Communications

The communications and information technology requirements for the Project include:

▪ Corporate voice and data.

▪ Internet connectivity and firewall.

▪ Process plant control systems communications networks.

▪ Server infrastructure.

Plant wide communications will be provided on a ringed single mode optical fibre (SMOF)

network between the plant switchroom and administration building. Connections to other

minor buildings and facilities will be provided on a radial network basis using both SMOF and

category 6 copper cabling.

IP voice and data connectivity will be provided to all offices, plant control room and plant

switchroom.

6.9 Security Requirements

Gatehouse and Security

The process plant gatehouse is located adjacent to the main entry to the plant site. The

gatehouse building is 3 m x 3 m in floorplan and will be a transportable style building with door

and furniture for 2 security personnel.

Asset Protection

The asset protection systems include physical security (fencing, gates and signage) and

manual gates.

Site Access Gates

The existing gate control at the process plant gatehouse will be used.

Fences

Fences will be galvanised fence poles concreted into ground nominally 600 mm with

galvanised chain-wire security type mesh 2.1 metres high with 3 off strands of barbed wire at

top of fence.

6.10 Mobile Plant

The mobile equipment owned by Soludo Lambert to support the Project operations is detailed

in the Table 6-1.



Table 6-1 Mobile Equipment

Description Quantity

Motor Vehicles 3

Buses 1

Motor Cycles 3

Front End Loader 1

Bobcats 2

65t Crane 1

6.11 Accommodation

No allowance has been for an accommodation camp. It is assumed that all personnel will be

housed in Kipushi or Lubumbashi.



7.0 Project Schedule

7.1 Key Schedule Drivers

There are many factors that drive the duration of the Project schedule. The key factors include:

▪ Project Approvals - the Project will be subjected to a governmental approvals

process, with renewal of the process plant permit and environmental permitting

being the key approvals; and

▪ Major Equipment Deliveries - delivery periods on major equipment, such as the belt

filters, tend to be long. Actual delivery dates cannot be confirmed until such time as

orders are placed.

The Project is targeting production to commence in Q2 2019.

A preliminary Project Schedule through to commissioning has been attached in Appendix L.

7.2 Qualifications and Assumptions

The following qualifications and assumptions have formed the basis for the preparing the

Project schedule:

▪ No allowance has been made for the following events:

- Scope changes

- Additional geotechnical investigations

- Force majeure events

- Industrial relations disputes/strikes

- Adverse weather events (i.e. abnormal)

- Land acquisition, compensation or relocation and resettlement

▪ No allowance has been made for the time required to complete any additional

metallurgical testwork to further define the works.

▪ Capacity exists within the market-place to execute the works at the times nominated in

the schedule.

▪ A duration of 6 weeks has been assumed for transport and customs clearance of materials

and equipment from vendors works to the Site.

▪ No contingency or growth allowances have been provided for in determining schedule

durations.

▪ The components of the schedule cannot be taken in isolation.

▪ The schedule cannot be considered in isolation to the capital cost estimate.



8.0 Financial Evaluation

8.1 Capital Cost Estimate

Process Plant Summary

The capital cost estimate prepared by Minnovo for the process plant is presented in second

quarter 2018 United States dollars (USD) to an accuracy of ±35%. A summary estimate is

shown in Table 8-1. The detailed process plant capital cost estimate, including a contingency

of 15% on the direct costs, is provided in Appendix J.

Table 8-1 Process Plant Capital Cost Estimate Summary

Description Total USD

Directs

Detail Earthworks & Plant Security Fencing 330,000

Concrete 972,903

Buildings 167,432

Steelwork 550,246

Mechanicals 8,037,172

Piping 899,561

E&I 1,547,856

Contractor Indirect and Temp Works 779,990

Preliminary & General 2,496,523

Contractor Margin 1,578,168

Contractor Overheads, Bonds, Insurance, etc 631,267

Subtotal 17,991,119

Indirects

Transport 1,811,189

Vendor Commissioning 125,000

Spares – 2 yrs Operating 282.871

Spares - Insurance 188,581

Consumables 110,000

Third Party Consultants (Geotech, Survey etc) 250,000

Engineering Design and Procurement Services 1,884,162

Project Insurances 261,065

Subtotal 4,912,869

Contingency (15% of direct costs) 2,698,668

GRAND TOTAL 25,602,656

Qualifications and Exclusions

No allowance has been made for the following items in the capital cost estimate:

▪ Initial geotechnical investigation, hydrology and survey assumed to be completed in

the detailed design phase.



▪ Bulk diesel facility.

▪ Utilities and services outside process plant scope.

▪ Accommodation village.

▪ Engineering services for areas outside the battery limits of this study.

▪ Project escalation and foreign currency fluctuation.

▪ On-going sustaining and or deferred capital costs.

▪ Costs associated with raw water supply.

▪ Value Added Tax (VAT)

▪ Customs excise and import duties

▪ Foreign Exchange Fluctuation

Data Sources

In general terms, the estimate includes all capital expenditure required to build the Project up

from contract award to the point of introducing tailings into the process plant facility. The

estimate has been developed from a number of sources as summarised in Table 8-2.

Table 8-2 Basis for Capital Cost Estimate

Cost Category Source Of Cost Data

Direct Costs

Equipment costs based on budget quotations for major equipment and from recent projects/database pricing for other equipment where similar sized equipment quotes were available.

Earthworks, concrete, structural steel and platework and E&IC costs were factored against mechancial equipment costs estimated from a recent in-country copper project.

Contractor indirects and P&G costs were factored based on detailed estimate for recent in-country copper project.

Infrastructure

Building costs, detailed earthworks, fencing costs costs were factored against mechancial equipment costs derived from similar reference factored to reflect costs estimated from a recent in-country project .

PCS and Comms in the process plant area are included in the E&IC factors for the plant. External communications infrastructure is excluded.

Indirects Factored based on historical Minnovo EPC contracting work.

Owners costs Provided by Soludo Lambert.

Contingency Allowance for Owner’s contingency of 15% of the direct Project costs.

Currency and Exchange Rates

The capital cost estimate is presented in US dollars.

Where pricing information has been quoted in a currency other than US dollars, this was

converted into US dollars using the exchange rates as detailed in Table 8-3. This ensured all

pricing elements were uniformly converted to US dollars and, if required, will facilitate any

global foreign currency reconversion.

The selected estimate exchange rates were current as of 1 June 2018.

No work has been conducted in this study to evaluate potential currency fluctuations in the

future.



Table 8-3 Exchange Rates

Currency USD

United States Dollars (USD) 1.00

Australian Dollar (AUD) 0.75

Project Capital Cost Estimate

A capital cost estimate prepared by Soludo Lambert for the total Project, is shown in Table

8-4.

Table 8-4 Project Capital Cost Estimate Summary

Department Area Description Total (USD)

Direct Costs

10 Civil

110 Plant Earthworks 260,000

120 Kipushi tailings Dam 1,050,000

130 TSF to Plant Road 260,000

Total Civils 1,570,000

20 Tailings Reclamation

210 Kipushi Tailings 125,000

Total Tailings Reclamation 125,000

30 Process Plant

330 Reclaim 2,086,414

340 Leaching 3,554,249

350 Separation 5,602,413

360 Precipitation 1,182,887

365 Precipitate Handling 2,821,232

380 Reagents 638,250

390 Services – Water & Air 1,158,670

395 Piperacks 675,000

Total Process Plant 17,719,114

40 Infrastructure

410 Workshop/Warehouse 475,000

420 Plant Buildings 100,000

430 Power Supply 2,750,000

440 Water Supply 50,000

450 Fuel Supply 100,000

460 Laboratory 250,000

Total Infrastructure 3,725,000

70 Mobile Fleet



Department Area Description Total (USD)

710 Light Vehicles 232,500

720 Heavy Vehicles 445,000

Total Mobile Fleet 677,500

TOTAL DIRECTS 23,816,614

Indirect Costs

90 Indirect Costs

910 Freight 1.811,189

920 Spares/First Fills 833,629

930 Engineering 2,184,162

940 Commissioning 375,000

950 Owner Management 1,178,550

960 Permitting 125,000

980 Corporate 717,032

990 Capitalised Operating Cost 1,250,750

Total Indirects 8,475,311

95 Contingency

Contingency (15% of directs) 3,572,492

TOTAL BUDGET 35,864,418

Process Plant

Earthworks

Site preparation includes bulk earthworks for the site including internal site roads (unsealed)

and drainage. These costs have been estimated by Soludo Lambert. Detailed earthworks

allowance and provision for fencing have been factored from a recent in-country project.

Mechanical Equipment Supply

Proposals were obtained for agitators, thickeners, filters, the sulphur dioxide scrubber and the

(future) flash dryer. The proposals were evaluated based on technical compliance, price, lead

time and previous project delivery experience to select a vendor for the basis of the study

estimate. Preference was given to equipment suppliers with an African presence and a strong

track record of service and support in the DRC.

Pricing for minor equipment and ancillaries were costed from Minnovo’s database from similar

installations or estimates to suit the process plant duty and requirements.

Civil, Structural Steel and Platework

Civil, Concrete, structural steel and platework costs have been factored from a recent in-

country reference project.

Piping

Piping costs have been factored from a recent in-country reference project.



Electrical, Instrumentation and Controls (EIC)

E&IC costs have been factored from a similar in country reference project.

Infrastructure

8.1.6.6.1. Security

An allowance for fencing has been included for around plant perimeter.

8.1.6.6.2. Buildings

Infrastructure building costs have been included for facilities similar to those estimated for

another project in the region. Allowances for fitout have also been included.

8.1.6.6.3. Lubricants

An allowance of USD 100,000 has been made for lubricants.

8.1.6.6.4. Event Pond

An allowance has been made for an event pond to capture and contain overflows from plant

bunds based on a recent in-country project.

8.1.6.6.5. Other Power Infrastructure

Allowance has been made in the capital cost estimate for two 1.5MW diesel powered gensets

and associated equipment.

Indirect Costs

A number of indirect costs have been combined with the process plant direct costs as a result

of factoring:

▪ Contractor indirect labour and supervision costs.

▪ Mobilisation, demobilisation.

▪ Temporary works.

▪ Construction accommodation and messing.

▪ Freight and logistics.

▪ Construction mobile equipment and plant.

The Project indirect costs outlined in Table 8-1 include items such as:

▪ Engineering, drafting and engineering management.

▪ Insurance.

▪ Spares.

▪ Vendor representatives

▪ Contractor’s contingency.

Owner’s Costs

Owner’s costs for the Project are included in Table 8-4. They include first fills for reagents and

consumables, operating spares, insurance spares, travel, and mobile equipment.

8.1.6.8.1. First Fills

Allowance has been made for reagent and consumable first fills.



8.1.6.8.2. Mobile Equipment

Allowance for process plant and infrastructure mobile equipment has been included in the

estimate. Vehicles included are described in Section 6.10.

8.1.6.8.3. Spares

An allowance of 3% has been made for 2 years of operating spares and 2% for insurance

spares based on the total of the following:

▪ Mechanical equipment direct cost ▪ 50% of the E&IC direct costs ▪ 25% of the piping direct costs

Owner’s Contingency

Allowance has been made for Owner’s contingency at a rate of 15% of the direct Project

costs.

Sustaining Capital

The sustaining capex for the life of the Project was estimated by Soludo Lambert and is shown in Table 8-5Table 1-3.

Table 8-5 Estimate of Sustaining Capital


Lining of TSF $3,500,000

Roads $300,000

Equipment (2.5% Directs) $2,381,661

Totals $6,181,661

8.2 Operating Cost Estimate

Summary

This operating cost estimate is presented in second quarter 2018 United States dollars (USD)

to an accuracy of ±35 %. The estimate has been divided into the key cost centres,

summarising the average annual operating costs for processing tailings at 1 Mt/y for the

designed process plant. The full operating cost estimate is provided in Appendix K with the

key cost categories of the process plant summarised in Table 8-6 and for the total Project

including Tailings Reclamation and Administration in Table 8-7.

The same currency and exchange rates as those applied to the capital cost estimate were applied to the operating cost estimate, see Section 8.1.4

Table 8-6 Process Plant Operating Cost Summary



Labour 2,534,640 2.53

Power 1,726,321 1.73


Reagents & Consumables 40,873,426 40.87


Total Operating Cost 46,254,892 46.25



Table 8-7 Project Operating Cost Summary



Mining

Labour 205,200 0.21

Vehicles 9,650 0.01

Tailings Fees 6,840,000 6.84

Contractor 5,250,000 5.25

Total Mining 12,304,850 12.30

Processing

Labour 2,534,640 2.53

Power 1,726,321 1.73


Reagents and Consumables 40,873,426 40.87


Total Processing 46,254,892 46.25

Administration

Labour 2,014,500 2.01

Vehicles 149,700 0.15

Communications 193,000 0.19

Insurances 1,500,000 1.50

Clinic Costs 95,680 0.10

Camp Costs 121,800 0.12

Travel 171,000 0.17

Community Relations 100,000 0.10

Freight 750,000 0.75

Other 500,000 0.50

Corporate Costs 500,000 0.50

Total Administration 6,095,680 6.10

Total Annual Opex 64,655,422 64.66

The accuracy of the operating costs is based on the assumptions listed in this section of the

report. The assumptions should be validated and confirmed during the detailed engineering

phase of the Project.



Qualifications and Exclusions

No allowance has been made for the following items in the operating cost estimate:

▪ Geology, hydrology and hydrogeology.

▪ General site environmental management costs.

▪ Accommodation and messing costs for process plant staff.

▪ MHP refining charges.

▪ Government fees and charges.

▪ Commissioning support (included in capital estimate) and plant start-up expatriate

labour costs.

▪ Start-up and Owner’s costs.

▪ Sustaining capital.

▪ Inflation.

▪ Exchange rate fluctuations.

▪ Import duty and VAT.

▪ Royalties.

▪ Interest and finance charges.

▪ Contingency.

Data Sources

In general terms, the estimate includes all site related operating costs associated with

processing tailings from the ROM pad to produce a filtered and bagged mixed hydroxide

precipitate. The estimate has been developed from a number of sources as detailed in Table

8-8.

Table 8-8 Basis for Site Operating Cost Estimate

Cost Category Source Of Cost Data

Labour Owner operating strategy. Labour rates are for expatriate and local labour based on 12 hour shifts.

Power Consumption from Electrical Load List. Grid power rate advised by Soludo Lambert.

Maintenance Materials Calculated as a percentage of direct capital costs based on benchmarking with operating plants.

Reagents and Consumables

Reagent consumption from testwork and unit prices from regional and international suppliers.

Operating Strategy

The process plant will be managed, operated and maintained by Soludo Lambert personnel.

Labour

Manning levels are related to direct supervision, maintenance and operation of the processing

plant, based on an owner operating strategy. An allowance has been made for process control

samples, prepared by Soludo Lambert laboratory staff, to be assayed at an off-site laboratory

in Lubumbashi.

The process plant manning structure is based on two job levels: Expatriate and other local

labour. Expatriate roles for manager and maintenance staff operate on a 12 hour per day, 6

weeks on / 3 weeks off roster. Local labour assigned to operations and maintenance staff

operate on 12 hour per day or a continuous shift depending on the role.



No allowance has been made in the labour estimate for additional labour requirements during

plant initial operations for additional management support, and to assist in plant

commissioning and ramp-up activities.

The labour cost is based on the manning levels shown in Table 8-9.

Table 8-9 Labour Summary

Area Position Permanent Workforce

Manager Operations Manager and Staff 3

TSF TSF Supervisors 3

TSF Assistants 6

TSF Reclamation Contractor

Process Operations Process Manager and Staff 2

Metallurgy 2

Production Supervisors & Foreman 7

Plant Operators 48

FEL/Truck Drivers 9

Laboratory 10

Maintenance Maintenance Manager and Staff 2

Mechanical 7

Electrical 7

Commercial Finance Manager & Staff 3

Administration & Accounting 24

Supply / Warehouse 13

OHS&E OHS&E Manager 1

Health and Safety 2

Environment 1

Clinic 4

Security Security Manager & Staff 2

Security 33

Community Community Officer 1

Total 190

Base salary rates have been provided by Soludo Lambert from reference projects in a similar

area to the Project using expatriate labour and other roles locally sourced within the DRC.

Total employee costs have been developed by applying on-cost factors to base salaries

determined from a similar project in the same region. The on-costs include allowance for

medical cover, bonuses, pension/superannuation and leave. Flights for expatriate personnel

and transport for all personnel to/from accommodation have been included, as have other

G&A costs such as messing and accommodation costs.

Table 8-10 provides a summary of the total annual labour costs.



Table 8-10 Salary Summary

Labour USD / y USD / t Feed

Administration & Support 2,014,500 2.01

Mining 205,200 0.21

Process Plant 2,534,640 2.53

Total 4,754,340 4.75

Power

Power consumption has been estimated for all equipment drives based on the installed power

with typical service factors. All installed and operating loads are based on the electrical load

list.

Table 8-11 provides the detail of the annual power costs using power from the grid.

Table 8-11 Power Cost Summary

Area Number

Area

Installed Power

Drawn Power

Total Cost

kW kW USD / y USD / t

330 Leach Feed 400 290 463,979 0.46

340 Leaching 243 146 233,589 0.23

350 Solid / Liquid Separation 359 242 387,182 0.39

360 Precipitation 109 67 107,195 0.11

365 MHP Handling 140 95 151,993 0.15

380 Reagents 132 88 140,794 0.14

390 Services 378 151 241,589 0.24

TOTAL 1,761 1,079 1,726,321 1.73

Maintenance Materials

Maintenance materials costs have been estimated as a percentage of the direct installed

capital cost (% factor). The factors have been derived from capital and operating cost data

from similar operations, specific to each plant area based on the major equipment installed

and level of maintenance typically required. The direct installed capital costs have been taken

from the most recent capital cost estimate.

Table 8-12 provides the detail of the annual maintenance costs.



Table 8-12 Maintenance Materials

Area Number

Area Total Directs USD Factor Total Cost

USD / y USD / t

330 Leach Feed 840,025 5.0% 42,001 0.04

340 Leaching 1,431,000 5.0% 71,550 0.07

350 Solid / Liquid Separation

2,255,625 5.0% 112,781 0.11

360 Precipitation 476,250 5.0% 23,813 0.02

365 MHP Handling 1,135,875 5.0% 56,794 0.06

380 Reagents 638,250 5.0% 31,913 0.03

390 Services 466,500 2.0% 9,330 0.01

TOTAL 7,243,525 348,181 0.35

Reagents and Consumables

Reagent consumptions have been derived from the metallurgical testwork programs (Mintek

2017, ALS 2018) and the latest Metsim mass balance. Reagent unit costs have been based

on quotations received from regional and international chemical suppliers.

Allowance has been made for consumables used in the potable water treatment plant,

including quarterly services by the equipment supplier.

Table 8-13 provides the detail of the annual reagents and consumable costs.

Table 8-13 Reagents and Consumables Cost Summary

Description Total Cost

USD / y USD / t

Reagents 40,633,432 40.63

Consumables 239,995 0.24

TOTAL 40,873,426 40.87

Laboratory

An allowance of $1000 per day has been included for off-site analysis of plant control samples.

Mobile Equipment

Vehicles have been allocated depending on role, and have been allocated to supervisors and

managers. Fuels, tyres and maintenance materials used in operating and maintaining the

plant mobile equipment and light vehicles has been included based on similar projects.

Annual fuel consumption has been estimated based on typical service factors; a unit cost for

diesel of 1 USD/L has been used for all vehicles.

An allowance has been made for vehicles and mobile equipment required for contract

maintenance. Crane hire has been estimated based on the requirements for a similar sized

reference facility.

Table 8-14 provides detail of the annual miscellaneous costs.



Table 8-14 Miscellaneous Cost Summary

Description Total Cost

USD / y USD / t

Off-site Laboratory Analysis 365,000 0.37

Vehicles 211,096 0.21

Diesel 196,228 0.19

TOTAL 772,324 0.77

8.3 Financial Analysis

A basic financial model was created by Soludo Lambert to assess the financial viability of the

Project. The basis and results of this financial modelling are shown in Table 8-15.

Table 8-15 Results of Financial Analysis.


Mine Life years 4

Tailings Reclamation

Tailings Reclaimed Mt 3,250

Reclamation Rate Mtpa 1.0

Processing

Tailings Processed Annually Mtpa 1.0

LoM MHP Produced

Contained Copper t 25,000

Contained Cobalt t 9,400

Sales

Copper Price USD/t 6,000

Cobalt Price USD/t 80,000

Buyers Discount (Minegate Sales) 25%

Capital Costs

Development Capex USD’M 35.8

Sustaining Capital USD’M 6.2

Operating Costs

Tailings Reclamation Cost USD/t Tailings 12.30

Total Processing Cost USD/t Tailings 46.25

Total Administration Cost USD/t Tailings 6.10

Overall Operating Cost USD/t Tailings 64.65

Total Operating Cost USD’M 210,112

Royalties (Cu 3.5% - Co 10%) USD’M $60.3

Corporate Tax (30%) USD’M 136,228

Financial Analysis




Total Revenue USD’M 676.7

Operating Cashflow USD’M 466.6

Net Project Cashflow USD’M 308.7

NPV10% USD’M 216.6

(Note: the impact resulting from the recent changes to the Mining Code has yet to be assessed

in full)



9.0 Risk Assessment

No risk assessment was carried out during the engineering study. However, risks to the

Project identified during the study are:

▪ The procurement of an adequate supply of sulphuric acid at reasonable cost in the

region.

▪ The confirmation of the condition and adequacy of the existing power supply.

▪ The identification of a market for the MHP.

▪ The discount that Buyers will want applied to the LME price for the MHP product.

It is recommended that an assessment be carried out during the next phase of the Project’s

development to identify and address additional risks.


S106-REP-PR-001 Rev: D

Process Design Criteria

Client: SOLUDO LAMBERT MININGProject Number: S106

Document Number: S106-DCR-PR-001Revision: B

Revision By ApprovedA JRB JR

KIPUSHI TAILINGS LEACHEngineering Study

PROCESS DESIGN CRITERIAAND MASS BALANCE

Date Description of Revision27-March-2018 Preliminary08-June-2018 Mineralogy updated, site water analysis added

PREAMBLE

1.0 DISCLAIMER

2.0 DESIGN DEFINITIONS

The design criteria value provides the instantaneous process criterion value. This takes account of: - variability in process parameters - variability in operating conditions - flow conditions that are not continuous

The design criteria value: - is an individual rate used for sizing equipment. - is intended as an attainable rate at the stated operating condition. - does not include any additional design allowance(s), by engineer or vendor, to ensure attainment.

The combination of design values neither relate to the annual productions defined nor integrate to represent ametallurgical balance.

Where it is intended that the particular equipment will have an additional catch-up capacity or include additionalallowances for sizing where these factors materially affect the equipment size, these are noted in the calculations.

Flowsheet balance values represent steady-state average rate during utilisation time per operating period.For the purposes of this design, they are based on maximum head grades. A more detailed assessment at variousgrades and ore types will be required in the next phase.All flowsheet balance flow rates, together with the respective utilisation factors, should be consistent with a singlemass balance in which all ouputs are equivalent to all inputs.The average flow includes the utilisation factor which allows for planned stoppage, such as maintenance, and unplannedon-line disturbances.

Run TimeRun time reflects the combined effect of availability (allows for downtime) utilisation of an area of plant.

Any grade, recovery or similar data presented herein are used for the purpose of process design and can represent maximum valueand are not statements of predicted average plant performance.

These terms are used according to the definitions following:

Design Criteria Value:

Flowsheet balance:

Client: SOLUDO LAMBERT MINING Blue = InputProject: KIPUSHI TAILINGS LEACH Black = CalculatedDoc. No: S106-DCR-PR-001 Yellow = Assumed\TBCRev. B Pink = Referenced from another source

Gray = Previous PDC figures

1.0 GENERAL SITE, PLANT AND OPERATING DATA

1.1 Site InformationProject LocationCountry Democratic Republic of Congo Client A

Province Katanga Client A

Closest regional centre Lubumbashi Client A

Distance from site to closest centre 25 km Client A

Plant site above sea level m 1329 Assumed Elevation at Kipushi A

Pressure kPa 87 Assumed A

ClimateWet season Oct - Apr Assumed A

Annual rainfall - Average mm/y 1287 Assumed http://www.lubumbashi.climatemps.com/precipitation.php A

Annual rainfall - Maximum mm/y 1746 Assumed A

Evaporation - Average mm/y 2405 Assumed A

Evaporation - Maximum mm/y 2930 Assumed A

Annual temperature - Average °C 22.3 Assumed http://www.lubumbashi.climatemps.com/temperatures.php A

Monthly temperature - Average minimum °C 9.4 (July) Assumed A

Monthly temperature - Average maximum °C 31.6 (October) Assumed A

Annual humidity - Average % 67 Assumed A

Monthly humidity - Average minimum % 45 Assumed A

Monthly humidity - Average maximum % 82 Assumed A

Prevailing winds (March-October) Direction Easterly Assumed A

Prevailing winds (November-March) Direction Westerly Assumed https://www.meteoblue.com/en/weather/forecast/modelclimate/lubumbashi_dr-congo_922704

A

Wind Speed - Maximum km/h 30 Assumed

http://www.myweather2.com/City-Town/Democratic-Republic-Of-Congo/Lubumbashi/climate-profile.aspx

https://www.worldweatheronline.com/lubumbashi-weather-averages/katanga/cd.aspx

A

1.2 Operating BasisGeneral PlantDesign life years 10 Client 4 years of Kipushi tailings followed by oxide ore A

Annual tailings treatment rate tonnes/year 1,000,000 Client A

Nominal circuit copper recovery % 90 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Nominal circuit cobalt recovery % 85 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Operating schedule days/year 365 Engineer A

Operating schedule shift/day 2 Engineer A

Operating schedule hours/shift 12 Engineer A

Operating schedule - running time hours/year 8000 Engineer A

Operating schedule - availability % 91.3 Calculation A

1.3 Metal Dissolution in Leach

Al % 0.85 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Ca % 11.7 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Co % 85.0 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Cu % 90.0 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Fe % 7.89 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Mg % 12.6 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Mn % 70.9 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Si % 0.18 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

Zn % 75.9 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

2.0 PLANT FEED CHARACTERISTICS (FLOTATION TAILINGS)

2.1 Feed CompositionAl % 3.93 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Ca % 1.66 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Co % 0.40 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Cu % 0.91 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Fe % 2.18 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Mg % 6.51 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Mn % 0.07 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Ni % 0.01 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

S % 0.10 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Si % 28.6 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

Zn % 0.04 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

COMMENT REVNo. Item Units Design SOURCE

2.2 Mineralogical CompositionMineralMalachite, Cu2(CO3)(OH)2 % 0.63 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Pseudomalachite, Cu5(PO4)2(OH)4 % 0.15 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Chrysocolla, (Cu,Al)2H2Si2O5(OH)4•n(H2O) % 0.50 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Chalcopyrite, CuFeS2 % 0.04 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Bornite, Cu5FeS4 % Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Chalcocite/Diginite, Cu2S/Cu9S5 % 0.03 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Covellite, CuS % Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Pyrite, FeS2 % 0.02 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Carrollite, Cu(Co,Ni)2S4 % 0.02 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Heterogenite, Co3+O(OH) % 0.53 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Wad % 0.21 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Quartz, SiO2 % 50.7 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Chlorite, (Mg,Fe2+)5Al(Si3Al)O10(OH)8 % 11.5 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Muscovite, KAl2(Si3Al)O10(OH,F)2 % 5.70 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Talc, Mg3Si4O10(OH)2 % 7.75 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Dolomite / Magnesite, CaMg(CO3)2 / MgCO3 % 4.35 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Calcite, CaCO3 % 0.17 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Orthopyroxene, Mg2Si2O6 % 5.27 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Biotite, K(Mg,Fe)3AlSi3O10(OH)2 % 2.68 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

K-feldspar, KAlSiO8 % 1.29 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Diopside, CaMgSi2O6 % 0.29 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Apatite, Ca5(PO4)3(F,Cl,OH) % 0.11 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Actinolite, Ca2(Mg,Fe)5Si8O22(OH)2 % 0.17 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Plagioclase, (Ca,Na)(Si,Al)4O8 % 0.12 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Periclase, MgO % Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Kaolinite, Al2Si2O5(OH)4 % 3.53 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Chromite, FeCr2O4 % 0.05 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Goethite, FeO(OH) % 3.31 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Rutile, TiO2 % 0.4 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Ilmenite, Fe2+TiO3 % 0.06 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Other silicates % 0.25 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Other BMS % Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

Other Oxides % 0.17 Test Work Mintek Report, 26 July 2017 A

2.3 Feed PropertiesTailings (Plant Feed) Specific Gravity - design 2.75 Assumed A

Tailings (Plant Feed) Specific Gravity - range 2.6 - 2.9 Assumed A

Moisture - design % 12 Assumed A

Moisture - range % 5-15 Engineer A

Tailings (Plant Feed) Bulk Density t/m3 1.80 Assumed A

Tailings (Plant Feed) SizingSize, microns Cumulative, % Passing425 97.9 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A

300 94.8 Test Work ALS Report A18714 A








P80 microns 183 Test Work ALS Report A18741,Test ID HY6040, 3 April 2108 - 5gpl H2SO4 in leach discharge A

3.0 PLANT FEED ROM BIN

3.1 ROM BinTruck Model Feeding Bin Howo Sinotruck, 50 t Client Advise from proposed mining contractor Allstars Investment 24 May 2018 A

Front End Loader Model Feeding Bin SDLG LG958L, 4.2 m3 bucket Client Advise from proposed mining contractor Allstars Investment 24 May 2018 A

Size t 100 Engineer Based on capacity for two mining trucks direct tipping A

Grizzly type Static Engineer A

Grizzly opening 300 x 300 Engineer A

3.2 Trash ScreenScreen type Vibrating, inclined Engineer A

Number of Screens # 1 Engineer A

Screen Feed Rate - nominal t/h 125 Calculation A

Screen Feed Rate - design t/h 250 Engineer A

Feed Solids Content - design % solids w/w 88 Calculation A

Screen Feed Rate - design m3 /h 125 Calculation A

Specific Screen Duty m³/m²/h 60 Engineer A

Area Required m2 2.08 Assumed A

Area Selected m2 TBC Pending vendor selection

Screen Size m TBCDeck Polyurethane Engineer A

Aperture - design mm 1 x 8.8 mm slotted Engineer TBC with vendor A

Spray Water m3/h 2 Assumed

Screen Oversize (Trash) Rate % of feed <1 Assumed A

Screen Oversize Moisture % 10-20 Assumed A

4.0 LEACH FEED REPULP AND SLURRY STORAGE

4.1 Repulp TankRepulp Density - design % solids w/w 60 Engineer A

Number of Tanks # 1 Engineer A

Sizing Basis Residence time Engineer A

Vessel Type Open agitated tank Engineer A

Target Total Retention Time mins 20 Engineer A

Tank Feed Rate m3/h 129 Calculation A

Required Live Volume / Tank m3 43 Calculation A

Agitation Type − High shear repulping duty Engineer A

Repulp liquor Raw water Engineer A

4.2 Leach Feed Slurry Storage TankNumber of Tanks # 1 Engineer A

Vessel Type Open, agitated tank Engineer A

Sizing Basis Retention Time Engineer A

Design Total Retention Time h 6 Engineer A

Nominal Feedrate m3/h 129 Calculation A

Required Live Volume / Tank @ nominal feedrate m3 773 Calculation A

Free Board m 0.5 Engineer A

Agitation Type − Suspension duty Engineer A

Heating Medium − None Engineer A

5.0 COPPER AND COBALT LEACH

5.1 Leach Conditions

Leach Feed Dilution Liquor HBF secondary filtrate / ProcessWater

Engineer A

Sulphuric acid concentration % w/w 98.5 Assumed A

Addition Concentration - range % H2SO4 w/w 4-10 Test Work A

Addition Concentration - design % H2SO4 w/w 10 Test Work A

Addition Rate - kg conc. H2SO4/t solids 56 Test Work Mintek 26 July 2017 Report (No Mintek report number on cover page) A

Addition Rate - kg conc. H2SO4/h - predicted from test work kg/h 7000 Calculation A

Addition Rate - kg conc. H2SO4/h - nominal kg/h 10,230 Calculation Mass balance based on mineralogy, reaction extents and target free acid A

Discharge Slurry Free Acid g/L H2SO4 5 Test Work A

Discharge Slurry pH 0.99 Calculation A

Leaching % Solids % w/w 30 Engineer A

Leach Discharge Solids - range % w/w 25-35 Engineer Should we add desanding pumps to each tank? A

Leach Discharge Solids - design % w/w 35 Engineer A

Temperature °C ~35 (Ambient) Engineer A

% Mass Loss Across Leach % TBCSMBS Addition (Cobalt Leach)SMBS concentration g/L 200 Test Work A

Addition Rate - kg SMBS/t solids - predicted from test work kg/t 10.7 Test Work Mintek 26 July 2017 Report (No Mintek report number on cover page) A

Addition Rate - kg SMBS/h - predicted from test work kg/h 1334 Calculation A

Addition Rate - kg SMBS/h - nominal kg/h 1122 Calculation Mass balance based on mineralogy, reaction extents and target free acid A

SMBS utilisation % 99 Assumed A

Eh Setpoint in Secondary Leach mV Ag/AgCl 375 Test Work A

5.2 Copper Leach TanksNumber of Tanks # 3 Engineer Arranged in cascade formation with ability to by-pass A

Inter-tank transfer Open Launder Engineer A

Material of Construction 316L/SAF2205/LDX2101 Engineer Material selection subject to material availability and economics for locality A

Vessel Type Open, agitated tanks Engineer A

Sizing Basis Residence time/common size Engineer A

Design Total Retention Time (3 tanks) h 3 Test Work A

Nominal Feedrate m3/h 302 Calculation Mass balance S106-CAL-PR-00x, Copper Leach Tank 1 Discharge A

Required Live Volume / Tank @ nominal feedrate m3 302 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


Agitation Type − Suspension and mass transfer duty Engineer Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary agitator power A

Agitator material of construction Carbon steel / nitrile rubber-lined Engineer A


5.3 Cobalt Leach TanksNumber of Tanks # 3 Engineer Arranged in cascade formation with ability to by-pass A

Inter-tank transfer Open Launder Engineer A

Material of Construction 316L/SAF2205/LDX2101 Engineer Material selection subject to material availability and economics for locality A

Vessel Type Closed, agitated tanks Engineer A

Sizing Basis Residence time/common size Engineer A

Design Total Retention Time h 3 Test Work A

Nominal Feedrate m3/h 316 Calculation Mass balance S106-CAL-PR-00x, Cobalt Leach Tank 1 Discharge A

Required Live Volume / Tank @ nominal feedrate m3 316 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


Agitation Type − Suspension and mass transfer duty Engineer Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary agitator power A

Agitator material of construction Carbon steel / nitrile rubber-lined Engineer A


5.4 Leach Vent flowrate (total for all tanks)Design Am3/h 20,200 Calculation Mass balance stream 103 - combined diluted vent gas flow A

SO2 concentration in vent % w/w 2 Calculation Mass balance stream 103 - combined diluted vent gas flow A

6.0 LEACH RESIDUE PRIMARY NEUTRALISATION

6.1 Neutralisation ConditionsPrecipitants Lime Engineer A

Lime Addition Points Tank 1 Engineer A

Lime Stoichiometric Excess % 0 Engineer A

Operating Temperature °C 25-35 Engineer A

Residue Discharge pH 3 Engineer This is a partial neutralisation step to minimise MgO consumption in the hydroxide precipcircuit.

A

6.2 Reactor TanksNumber of Tanks 1 Engineer A

Vessel Type Open, agitated Engineer A

Inter-tank Transfer Open launders Engineer Tank is positioned between the final leach tank leach thickener feed box. A

Sizing Basis Residence time Engineer Size to be same as leach tanks. A


Total Flow to Residue Neutralisation Tank - nominal m3/h 307 Calculation Mass balance - primary neutralisation tank feed A

Nominal Live Volume / Tank m³ 307 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


Agitation Type Solids suspension Engineer Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary agitator power A

Heating Medium Nil Engineer A

7.0 LEACH THICKENER

7.1 Thickener Type High rate with auto-dilution Engineer A

Settling Flux - range t/m2.h 0.7- 1.25 Test Work Tenova Delkor report AUDLW0030 May 2018 A

Settling Flux - design t/m2.h 0.7 Engineer Selected lower value to account for potential site water impacts compared with tap waterused for testing

A

Thickener FeedThickener Feed Rate - nominal (undiluted) t/h solids 123 Calculation Mass balance - leach product to thickener A

Thickener Feed Rate - design (undiluted) t/h solids 150 Engineer A

Thickener Overflow m3/h solution 131 Calculation Mass balance - leach thickener overflow A

Thickener Overflow Clarity ppm <200 Engineer A

7.2 Overflow TankOverflow Tank Residence Time min 60 Engineer Allowance for normal feed during clarifier backwash B

Overflow Tank Volume m³ 131 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions B

Material of Construction Carbon steel, rubber-lined Engineer A

Thickener DesignMaterial of Construction Carbon steel, rubber-lined Engineer A

Foam Control Thickener to be fitted with foamring

Engineer A

Sizing Basis Settling rate Engineer A

Minimum Diameter m 15.0 Calculation A

Minimum Area m2 176 Calculation A

Design Factor % 20 A

Area - Design (Minimum + 20%) m2 211 Calculation A

Diameter - Design m 16.4 Calculation A

Selected Thickener Diameter m 16.5 Engineer A

Thickener UnderflowUnderflow Slurry Solids Concentration - range % solids w/w 55 - 65 Test Work Tenova Delkor report AUDLW0030 May 2018 A

Underflow Slurry Solids Concentration - design % solids w/w 60 Engineer A

Flocculant AdditionType Magnafloc 333 or equivalent Test Work Tenova Delkor report AUDLW0030 May 2018 A

Dosage - nominalg/t thickener

solids feed40 Test Work Tenova Delkor report AUDLW0030 May 2018 A

Dosage - designg/t thickener

solids feed100 Engineer A

Flocculant Dilution Solution HBF secondary filtrate Engineer A

8.0 LEACH THICKENER OVERFLOW CLARIFIER

8.1 Clarifier Type Pinned Bed or Similar Engineer A

Rise rate - range m/h 8-10 Assumed A

Rise Rate - design m/h 8 Engineer A

Clarifier FeedClarifier Feed Rate - nominal m3/h 131 Calculation Mass balance - leach thickener overflow A

Clarifier Feed Rate - design m3/h 158 Calculation A

Clarifier Feed Rate - nominal t/h solids 0.03 Calculation A

Clarifier Feed Rate - design t/h solids 0.66 Calculation A

Suspended Solids - nominal mg/L 200 Engineer A

Suspended Solids - design mg/L 5000 Engineer A

Clarifier Overflow Clarity ppm <50 Engineer A

Overflow Flowrate - Design m3/h 158 Calculation A

Clarifier DesignMaterial of Construction Carbon steel, rubber-lined Engineer A

Sizing Basis Rise Rate Engineer A


Minimum Area m2 16.4 Calculation A

Design Factor % 20 Test Work A

Area - Design (Minimum+ 20%) m2 19.7 Calculation A


Selected Clarifier Area m2 19.7 Engineer A

Selected Clarifier Diameter m 5.0 Engineer A

Clarifier UnderflowUnderflow Slurry Solids Concentration - range % solids w/w 20-30 Assumed A

Underflow Slurry Solids Concentration - design % solids w/w 20 Engineer A

Flocculant AdditionType Magnafloc 333 or equivalent Test Work Tenova Delkor report AUDLW0030 May 2018 A

Dosage - nominal g/m3 feed 2 Assumed A

Dosage - design g/m3 feed 5 Assumed A


8.2 Pregnant Leach Solution TankTank Residence Time h 1 Engineer A

Tank Volume m³ 281 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


9.0 LEACH RESIDUE FILTRATION

9.1 Filter FeedTotal volumetric flowrate m3/h 220 Calculation A

Total solids flowrate - nominal t/h 122 Calculation Mass balance - leach filter feed A

Design factor % 20 Engineer A

Total solids flowrate - design t/h 146 Calculation A

Solids concentration % w/w 60.0 Assumed As per thickener underflow solids concentration B

9.2 Leach Discharge Filter Feed TankTank Residence Time h 1 Engineer A

Tank Volume m³ 220 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


9.3 Filtration ConditionsFlocculant dosage g/t 40 Assumed A

Type of flocculant Magnafloc 333 or equivalent Assumed A

Filtration EquipmentAvailability % 90 Assumed A

Filtration flux t/m2.h 0.86 Test Work Tenova Delkor report AUDLW0030 May 2018 and follow-up recommendation for washinglength requirements. Test work results pending to confirm selection.

B

Filtration area required m2 170 Calculation B

Number of filters # 1 Engineer

Filter area per unit m2 170 Calculation B

Cake thickness mm TBC Awaiting vendor input

Cake moisture % 20 Test Work Tenova Delkor report AUDLW0030 May 2018 A

Cake washCake wash solution Process waterWash water Temperature °C Ambient Assumed A

Wash water quantity m3/t of solids 1.2 Assumed A

Wash water quantity m3/h 146 Calculation

Wash efficiency % 85 Assumed Based on test work and vendor advice from Tenova 29 May 2018 A

Cloth/belt wash water required m3/h TBC Requires vendor confirmation

Cloth/belt wash water source Raw water Engineer

Vacuum pump cooling water requirement m3/h TBC Requires vendor confirmation A

Primary filtrateTotal volumetric flowrate m3/h 150 Calculation Mass balance - leach filter filtrate A

Solids content in exit stream g/L 1 Assumed A

9.4 Belt Filter Filtrate TankSecondary (wash) filtrate 146 Calculation A

Filtrate surge capacity h 1 Engineer A

Total live volume m³ 146 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


9.5 Cloth/belt wash water dischargeTotal volumetric flowrate m3/h TBC Requires vendor confirmation

Total solids flowrate t/h TBC Requires vendor confirmation

Solids content in exit stream g/l 20 Assumed A

9.6 Belt Filter Discharge ConveyorDesign Solids Throughput wet t/h 183 Calculation A

Residue Stockpile Capacity h 12 Engineer Allowance for D/S only trucking between process plant and Kipushi for residue return B

Residue Stockpile Capacity t 1826 Calculation B

10.0 LEACH DUMP POND AND CATCHALL TANK

10.1 PondPond Type HDPE double-lined earthen pond Client A

Total volume m³ 1000 Assumed Allowance for approximately 3 hours leach flow. Final dimensions to be dictated by layout. A

10.2 TankTank type Open Engineer A

Material of Construction Carbon steel, painted Engineer

Agitation Duty None Engineer A

Total volume m³ 150 Assumed Allowance for short term spillage management A

11.0 MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION

11.1 Precipitation FeedFeed Temperature - Range °C 20 - 30 Assumed A

Feed Temperature - Design °C 25 Engineer A

Circuit Temperature ºC 25 Assumed A

Solution Heating Method Nil Engineer A

Feed flowrate - nominal m3/h 275 Calculation Mass balance - PLS tank discharge A

Seed Recycle % 200 Engineer A

Seed Recycle Flowrate - nominal m3/h 9.52 Calculation Mass balance - seed recycle stream A

Total Flowrate to Hydroxide Precipitation - nominal m3/h 292 Calculation Mass balance - MHP tank 1 discharge A

Precipitation Reagent Magnesia Test Work A

MgO Content % > 92 Test Work A

Magnesia type Emag 45 or equivalent Engineer A

pH Profile pH 6.9 - 7.1 Engineer A

Tank 1 pH 7.3 - 7.5 Engineer A

Tank 2 pH 8.1 - 8.3 Engineer A

DischargeReaction Extent % 85 - 95 Assumed A

Stoichiometric Excess % 10 Engineer A

MgO Addition Rate - nominal t/h 1.60 Calculation Mass balance - combined MgO additional to three tanks A

MgO Addition Rate - design t/h 2.40 Engineer Allow for 50% design factor A

Cobalt Precipitation TanksNumber of Tanks # 3 Engineer A

Arrangement In series with bypass Engineer A


Intertank connectionsInclined pipe launders between

tanks with an upcomer for solutionexiting the tank

Engineer A

Sizing Basis Required residence time Engineer A

Design Total Retention Time h 4 Assumed A

Nominal Live Volume / Tank m³ 367 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


Agitation Type − High shear Engineer Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary agitator power A

12.0 MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATE THICKENING

12.1 Thickener Type High rate with auto-dilution Engineer A

Settling Flux - range t/m2.h 0.12 Assumed A

Settling Flux - design t/m2.h 0.12 Assumed A

Rise Rate - design m/h kle Assumed A

Thickener FeedThickener Feed Rate - nominal (undiluted) t/h solids 8.33 Calculation Mass balance -total MHP discharge, including recycle B

Design Factor % 0 Engineer Use of 200% seed recycle already adds a significant factor B

Thickener Feed Rate - design (undiluted) t/h solids 8.33 Calculation A

Thickener Overflow Clarity ppm <200 A

Thickener Overflow Flowrate m3/h 285 Calculation Mass balance - MHP thickener overflow A


Foam Control Thickener to be fitted with foamring

Engineer A

Sizing Basis Rise rate assuming no externaldilution

Engineer A


Minimum Area m2 68.3 Calculation A

Area - Design (Minimum+ 20%) m2 68.3 Calculation A


Selected Thickener Diameter m 10.0 Engineer B

Thickener UnderflowUnderflow Slurry Solids Concentration - range % solids w/w 10-15 Assumed Based on similar projects. Value is low and should be confirmed by test work. A

Underflow Slurry Solids Concentration - design % solids w/w 13 Assumed A

Flocculant AdditionType Magnafloc 333 or equivalent Assumed Same as leach residue thickener to limit the number of flocculant mixing plants A

Dosage - nominalg/t thickener

solids feed50 Assumed A

Dosage - designg/t thickener

solids feed100 Assumed A


13.0 MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATE FILTRATION

13.1 Filter Feed TankNumber of Tanks # 1 Engineer A


Sizing Basis Retention time at maximum feedrate

Engineer A


Nominal Tank Feed Rate m3/h 4.76 Calculation Mass balance - MHP thickener underflow stream A

Nominal Live Volume / Tank m3 57.1 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A

Free board m 0.5 Engineer A

Agitation Duty − Solids suspension Engineer Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary agitator power A


13.2 FilterType of Filter − Plate and frame pressure filter Engineer Chosen for maximum moisture removal A

Filtration Flux Rate (@600kPa(g)) kg/m2.h 50 Assumed Test work on specific hydroxide material recommended A

Filter FeedFilter Feed Rate - nominall m3/h slurry TBC Depends on batch or continuous filter selection A

Filter Feed Rate - nominal t/h solids 8.33 Calculation Mass balance - total precipitate formed A

Design Factor % 50 Engineer Allow for uncertainty in equipment selection and potential variability in filtrationcharacteristics and mixed hydroxide production rate

A

Filter Feed Rate - design t/h solids 12.50 Calculation A

Filter DesignNumber of filters 1 Engineer A

Sizing Basis Solids throughput Engineer A

Moisture Content Ex-Filter % w/w 15-50 Assumed Pending vendor input A

Cake Thickness mm TBC Pending vendor input A

Filter Availability % 90 Assumed A

Required Filtration Area m2 249.9 Calculation A

Selected Filtration Area (each) m2 TBC Pending vendor input

Wash Efficiency % 95 A

Filter CycleTotal Cycle Time - No wash min TBC Pending vendor input A

Design min TBC Pending vendor input

Mass per Cycle t TBC Pending vendor input

Fill Time min TBC Pending vendor input

Pressing Time min TBC Pending vendor input

Wash time min 0 Assumed Assumed no washing of MHP product is required. A

Squeeze Time min TBC Pending vendor input

Drying min TBC Pending vendor input

Technical Time min TBC Pending vendor input

Discharge period s TBC Pending vendor input

Wash Tank None Assumed Assumed no washing of MHP product is required. A

13.3 Filter DischargeType Filter discharge fully automated Engineer A

Bunker capacity Minimum of 2 full discharge cycles Engineer A

13.4 MHP Thickener Overflow Tank

Tank Feed MHP thickener overflow and MHPfilter filtrate

Engineer A

Number of Tanks # 1 Engineer A

Vessel Type Open Engineer A

Sizing Basis MHP overflow residence time Engineer A

Design Total Retention Time mins 10 Engineer A

Design Live Volume / Tank m³ 47 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A


Agitation Type − None Engineer A


14.0 MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATE BAGGING

14.1 Mixed Hydroxide Dryer Not required. Future layoutallowance only.

Client A

14.2 MHP Bagging FacilityFeed Rate (nominal) wet t/h 3.83 Calculation Mass balance - MHP filter discharge A

Temperature ºC Ambient Assumed A

Bagging Facility DesignBulk Density t/m3 1.1 Assumed A

Sizing Basis t/bag 1 Assumed A

Bagging Plant Capacity (nominal) h/d 24 Assumed A

Hours of Operation h/week 168 Assumed A

Utilisation Factor % 0.75 Engineer A

Bags per Hour (minimum) # 5.2 Calculation A

Mass per Day for Bagging t solids/d 91.9 Calculation A

Storage t/h 4 Calculation A

Mass Storeddays

production7 Engineer A

Mass Stored t 672 Calculation A

15.0 REAGENTS & CONSUMABLES

15.1 Sodium Metabisulphite - SMBSPackaging Type Bag Assumed A

Packaging Capacity kg 1,000 Assumed A

Mix Strength g/L 200 Engineer A

Dose Rate kg/t solids 10.7 Test Work A

Flow Rate kg/h 1,334 Calculation A

Flow Rate m3/h 6.67 Calculation A

Usage t/y 10,670 Calculation A

Mix TankNumber of bags per mix 4 Engineer A

Mix batch volume, design m³ 20.0 Calculation A

Mixing tank selected - Live m³ 20.0 Engineer Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A

Time between mixes h 3.0 Calculation A

Header TankHeader tank working capacity, selected m³ 6.7 Calculation Actual volume to be the same as other header tanks A

Header tank residence time hour 1.0 Engineer Allow sufficient time for draw down whilst new mix is being done A

Solid StorageDays 7 Engineer A

Number of bulk bags 225 Calculation A

15.2 Hydrated LimePackaging Type Bag Assumed A


Mix Strength g/L 250 Engineer Need to minimise raw water input for this flowsheet B

Lime to Primary Neutralisation - nominal consumption t/h 1.02 Calculation Mass balance A

Lime to Sulfur Dioxide Scrubbing - nominal consumption t/h 0.69 Calculation Mass balance A

Total lime demand - nominal t/h 1.71 Calculation A

Design Factor % 50 Engineer A

Total lime demand - design t/h 2.57 Calculation A

Flow Rate - nominal m3/h 6.8 Calculation A

Flow Rate - design m3/h 10.3 Calculation A

Usage - at nominal consumption t/y 13,680 Calculation A

Mix TankNumber of bags per mix 4 Engineer A

Mix batch volume, design m³ 16.0 Calculation A

Mixing tank selected - Live m³ 20.0 Engineer Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A

Time between mixes h 1.6 Calculation A

Header TankHeader tank working capacity, selected m³ 6.8 Calculation A

Header tank residence time h 1 Engineer Allow sufficient time for draw down whilst new mix is being done A



15.3 Magnesium OxidePackaging Type Bag Assumed A


Magnesia Purity %MgO >92 Test Work A

Magnesia SG t/m3 3.56 Assumed A

Magnesia Bulk Density t/m3 1.25 Assumed A

Mix Strength g/L 250 Engineer Need to minimise raw water input for this flowsheet B

MgO to Precipitation - nominal consumption t/h 1.60 Calculation Mass balance A

MgO to Precipitation - design consumption t/h 2.40 Calculation Mass balance A

Flow Rate - nominal m3/h 6.4 Calculation A

Flow Rate - design m3/h 9.6 Calculation A

Usage - at nominal consumption t/y 12,800 Calculation A

MgO Feed BinNumber of bags 4 Engineer A

Bin volume, design m³ 3.2 Calculation A

Bin capacity h 2.5 Calculation A

Mix TankMix tank working capacity, selected m³ 3.2 Calculation Refer to calculation P054-CAL-ME-003 for preliminary tank dimensions A

Mix tank residence time min 30 Engineer Allow for rapid turnover of magnesia A



15.4 Flocculant A

Packaging Type Bag Assumed A

Packaging Capacity kg 25 Assumed A

Mixing Tank Volume L 10,000 Assumed Vendor to confirm A

Storage Tank Volume L 13,438 Calculation Based on 6 h residence time and volume greater than mix tank. Vendor to confirm. A

Mix Strength g/L 2.5 Engineer A

Mixes per day 5.40 Calculation A

Flocculant to Leach Thickener - nominal kg/h 4.92 Calculation A

Flocculant to Leach Thickener Overflow Clarifier - nominal kg/h 0.26 Calculation A

Flocculant to Leach Residue Filter - nominal kg/h TBC Requirement TBC

Flocculant to MHP Thickener - nominal kg/h 0.42 Calculation A

Flocculant to Residue Neutralisation Thickener - nominal kg/h TBC Requirement TBC

Flocculant to Residue Neutralisation Filter - nominal kg/h TBC Requirement TBC

Total Consumption g/h 5,599 Calculation A

L/h 2,240 Calculation A

bag/day 5.4 Calculation A

t/y 45 Calculation A


Number of bags 38 Calculation A

15.5 Sulphuric AcidUsage A

Delivery Packaging Type B-double tanker Assumed A

Delivery Mass t 44 Assumed A

Packaging Capacity m3 23.9 Calculation A

Sulphuric Acid SG 1.84 Assumed A

Concentration % w/w 98.5 Assumed A

Sulphuric acid to Leach - nominal kg/h 7,000 Calculation A

Flow Rate m3/h 3.80 Calculation A

Usage t/y 56,000 Calculation A

Storage Tank m³ 1,278 Calculation A

d 14 ClientTank was originally sized for 30 day capacity but chnaged to 14 days during initial capex /fast track discussions with SLM on 24 April 2018. If required, isotainers will be used foradditional storage.

A

16.0 WATER SERVICES

16.1 Raw WaterSource Plant Bores Client Existing A

Raw water assayCu mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Co mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Fe mg/l <0.06 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Al mg/l <0.07 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Cr mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Mn mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Ni mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Pb mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Zn mg/l 0.59 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

As mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Cd mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Ca mg/l 9.86 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Mg mg/l 3.56 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

S mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Na mg/l 2.04 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

K mg/l 0.06 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

U mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

V mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Hg mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Se mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Pb mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

B mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Mo mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Sb mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Ba mg/l <0.01 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

pH # 6.3 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

TDS mg/l 47 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Conductivity µS/cmK 95 Test Work Robinson International Afrique Sarl Report. 2 April 2018. (Lot 2 Borehole Usine) A

Required Borefield Supply (nominal) m³/h 65.8 Calculation Mass balance - total raw water demand A

Destination Bore Water TankRaw Water Tank

Client A

Raw Water Tank Capacity h 6 Engineer Allowance for downtime on the borefield A

Raw Water Tank Capacity m³ 395 Calculation A

Fire Water Reserve Volume m³ TBC

16.2 Potable WaterTreatment Plant Type Chlorination & UV sterilisation Assumed A

Consumption L/person/day 180 Engineer Typical industry value A

Persons in Plant 80 Assumed Based on labour from operating cost estimate A

Water Supply - Plant Use m³/day 14.4 Calculation A

Potable Water Storage capacity m³ 28.8 Calculation Allow for 2 days storage A

16.3 Process Water

Feed sourcesBore Water

MHP Thickener OverflowMHP Filter Filtrate

Engineer A

Process Water Tank Capacity m³ 780 Calculation A

h 2 Engineer A

Nominal Flowrate m³/h 390 Calculation Mass balance - sum of process water demands A

Maximum Design flowrate m³/h TBC A

Excess Water Bleed t/h 57.9 Calculation Mass balance - calculated excess process water A

17.0 AIR SERVICES

17.1 High Pressure AirCompressors No 1 duty Assumed Air requirements and design TBC A

Capacity - each m³/min TBC B

Pressure kPa(g) 1,000 Engineer A

Duty Plant Air Engineer A

18.0 SAMPLING

18.1 Tailings (plant feed) sampling

Method Pressure pipe sampler on reslurrypump discharge

Engineer B

18.2 MHP sampling

MethodPressure pipe sampler on mixed

hydroxide precipitation slurry pumpdischarge

Engineer B

Method Grab or spear sampling from MHPbags

Engineer B

18.3 Residue sampling

Method Cross belt sampler on belt filterdischarge conveyor

Engineer B



Block Flow Diagram

TECHAPP BREV:DWG

No:

SOLUDO LAMBERT MININGTITLE:

KIPUSHI TAILINGS LEACHPROJECT

:

A3

MINNOVO Pty Ltd632 Newcastle St, Leederville, Western Australia 6007

Tel: (08) 6163 5980 Email: [email protected]

JR

JR

DRN

SK

JR

REFERENCES REVISION

DOCUMENT CREATED

NEUTRALISATION CIRCUIT REMOVED

DATE

27/03/18

31/5/18

REV

A

C

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT

APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNE

D

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY 27/03/18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

SKGENERAL UPDATE TO MATCH LATEST PFDS17/5/18B

J.RIORDAN

BLOCK FLOW DIAGRAM

S106-PFD-ER-000

TRASHSCREEN

RESLURRY / STORAGE

COPPER LEACH

COBALT LEACH

THICKENING, FILTRATION AND CLARIFICATION

TAILINGSRECLAIM

TRASHTO BUNKER

WATER

TO RESIDUESTORAGE

SMBS

ACID

ACID

FLOCCULANT

PLS

U/F

MIXEDHYDROXIDE

PRECIPITATION

THICKENING AND FILTRATION

BAGGING & STORAGE

MIXEDHYDROXIDETO MARKET

MAGNESIUMOXIDE

FLOCCULANT

O/F AND FILTRATE



Process Flow Diagrams

TECHAPP BREV:DWG

No:

SOLUDO LAMBERT MININGTITLE:

KIPUSHI TAILINGS LEACHPROJECT

:

A3

MINNOVO Pty Ltd632 Newcastle St, Leederville, Western Australia 6007

Tel: (08) 6163 5980 Email: [email protected]

JR

JR

DRN

SK

JR

REFERENCES REVISION

DOCUMENT CREATED

NEUTRALISATION CIRCUIT REMOVED

DATE

27/03/18

31/5/18

REV

A

C

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT

APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNE

D

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY 27/03/18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

SKGENERAL UPDATE TO MATCH LATEST PFDS17/5/18B

J.RIORDAN

OVERALL FLOWSHEET 1

S106-PFD-ER-001

TO MARKET

REDUCTIVE COBALT LEACH

OXIDATIVE COPPER LEACH

TRASH

H2SO4

H2SO4

SMBS

TOATMOSPHERE

SO2 SCRUBBING

``````

LEACH RESIDUESTORAGE

PRIMARY NEUTRALISATION

THICKENING

TAILINGS RECLAIM

FLOCCULANT

PLS STORAGE

MgO

MgO

MgO

``````

FLOCCULANT

FILTRATIONBULK BASE METAL HYDROXIDEPRECIPITATION

MIXED HYDROXIDEBAGGING AND STORAGE

(Seed Recycle)

WASH WATER

FLOCCULANT

FILTRATION

THICKENING

LIME

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:

KIPUSHI TAILINGS LEACH PROJECT:

A3

MINNOVO Pty LtdLevel 11, 256 Adel aide Tce, Perth, Western Aust ralia 600 0

Tel: (08) 6163 5900 Emai l: info@ minnovo.com.au

CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION

NEUTRALISATION REMOVED

ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW


ISSUED FOR PREFEASIBILITY STUDY

RENUMBERED EQUIPMENT AS PER CLIENT’S WBS

14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

PRELIMINARY

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 330LEACH FEED

S106-000-PR-002S106-000-PR-002

ROM BIN330-BN-001

ROM BIN330-BN-001

SCREEN FEEDCONVEYOR330-CV-001

SCREEN FEEDCONVEYOR330-CV-001

LEACH FEED SLURRYTO COPPER LEACH

S106-000-PR-001

DISTRIBUTIONDISTRIBUTIONPROCESS WATERFROM DISTRIBUTION

RESLURRY TANK330-TK-001

RESLURRY TANK330-TK-001

RESLURRY PUMP330-PP-001

RESLURRY PUMP330-PP-001

TRASH SCREEN330-SC-001

TRASH SCREEN330-SC-001

LEACH FEEDPUMP

330-PP-002

LEACH FEEDPUMP

330-PP-002

LEACH FEEDSURGE TANK330-TK-002

LEACH FEEDSURGE TANK330-TK-002

LEACH FEEDSURGE AGITATOR

330-AG-002

LEACH FEEDSURGE AGITATOR

330-AG-002

LEACH FEED AREASUMP PUMP330-PP-003

LEACH FEED AREASUMP PUMP330-PP-003

OTHERS MVO

BL

OTHERS MVO

BLSTATIC GRIZZLY

330-GZ-001STATIC GRIZZLY

330-GZ-001

WEIGHTOMETER330-WT-001

WEIGHTOMETER330-WT-001

RESLURRY TANKAGITATOR

330-AG-001

RESLURRY TANKAGITATOR

330-AG-001

LEACH FEEDSAMPLER

330-SA-001

LEACH FEEDSAMPLER

330-SA-001

TRASH BUNKER330-BK-001

TRASH BUNKER330-BK-001

APRON FEEDER330-FE-001

APRON FEEDER330-FE-001

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:


A3



CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION






14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN


PRELIMINARY

S106-000-PR-001S106-000-PR-001

S106-000-PR-003S106-000-PR-003

S106-000-PR-007S106-000-PR-007

DISTRIBUTIONDISTRIBUTIONPROCESS WATER

LEACH FEED SLURRYFROM LEACH FEED PUMP

S106-000-PR-002

LEACHED SLURRYTO THICKENING

SMBSFROM DOSING PUMP

IN LINE MIXER340-XM-001

IN LINE MIXER340-XM-001

S106-000-PR-007S106-000-PR-007SULPHURIC ACIDFROM ACID DOSI NG PUMP

COPPER LEACHTANK 1

340-TK-001

COPPER LEACHTANK 1

340-TK-001

COPPER LEACHTANK 2

340-TK-002

COPPER LEACHTANK 2

340-TK-002

COPPER LEACHTANK 3

340-TK-003

COPPER LEACHTANK 3

340-TK-003

COBALT LEACHTANK 1

340-TK-004

COBALT LEACHTANK 1

340-TK-004

COBALT LEACHTANK 2

340-TK-005

COBALT LEACHTANK 2

340-TK-005

COBALT LEACHTANK 3

340-TK-006

COBALT LEACHTANK 3

340-TK-006

S106-000-PR-003S106-000-PR-003FILTRATEFROM BELT FILTER FILTRATE PUMP

ATMOSPHERE

SULPHUR DI OXIDESCRUBBER PACKAGE

340-PK-001

SULPHUR DI OXIDESCRUBBER PACKAGE

340-PK-001

LEACH AREASUMP PUMP340-PP-003

LEACH AREASUMP PUMP340-PP-003

COPPER LEACHTANK 1 AGITATOR

340-AG-001


340-AG-001


340-AG-002


340-AG-002


340-AG-003


340-AG-003

COBALT LEACHTANK 1 AGITATOR

340-AG-004


340-AG-004


340-AG-005


340-AG-005


340-AG-006


340-AG-006

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 340LEACHING

SCRUBBERBLOWDOWN PUMP

340-PP-002

SCRUBBERBLOWDOWN PUMP

340-PP-002

S106-000-PR-007S106-000-PR-007 LIME SLURRYFROM RING MAIN

S106-000-PR-007S106-000-PR-007LIME SLURRY

TO RINGMAIN

PRIMARYNEUTRALISATION TANK

340-TK-007

PRIMARYNEUTRALISATION TANK

340-TK-007

PRIMARY NEUTRALISATIONTANK AGITATOR

340-AG-007

PRIMARY NEUTRALISATIONTANK AGITATOR

340-AG-007

(GRAVITY)

LEACHOFF G AS FAN340-FA-001

LEACHOFF G AS FAN340-FA-001

VENDOR PACKAGE

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:


A3



CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION






14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN


PRELIMINARY

S106-000-PR-004S106-000-PR-004PREGNANT LIQUORTO PRECIPITATION

S106-000-PR-003

DISTRIBUTIONDISTRIBUTIONPROCESS WATERFROM DISTRIBUTION

PREGNANT LEACHSOLUTION TANK

350-TK-002

PREGNANT LEACHSOLUTION TANK

350-TK-002

PREGNANT LEACHSOLUTION PUMP

350-PP-002

PREGNANT LEACHSOLUTION PUMP

350-PP-002

S106-000-PR-007S106-000-PR-007FLOCCULANTFROM DOSING PUMP

LEACH DISCHARGETHICKENER350-TH-001

LEACH DISCHARGETHICKENER350-TH-001

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENERUNDERFLOW PUMP

350-PP-001

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENERUNDERFLOW PUMP

350-PP-001

LEACH DISCHARGETHICKENER FEED BOX

350-DI-001

LEACH DISCHARGETHICKENER FEED BOX

350-DI-001

LEACH DISCHARGEFILTER PACKAGE

350-PK-001

LEACH DISCHARGEFILTER PACKAGE

350-PK-001

BELT FILTERFILTRATE PUMP

350-PP-003

BELT FILTERFILTRATE PUMP

350-PP-003

S106-000-PR-002S106-000-PR-002FILTRATE

TO COPPER LEACH

BELT FILTERDISCHARGE CONVEYOR

350-CV-001

BELT FILTERDISCHARGE CONVEYOR

350-CV-001

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENERSUMP PUMP350-PP-005

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENERSUMP PUMP350-PP-005

S106-000-PR-005S106-000-PR-005SUMP SLURRYFROM CONCENTRATE HANDLING

S106-000-PR-004S106-000-PR-004SUMP SLURRYFROM PRECIPITATION

S106-000-PR-002S106-000-PR-002LEACH SLURRYFROM LEACHING

S106-000-PR-001S106-000-PR-001SUMP SLURRYFROM RECLAMATION

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 350SOLID/LIQUID SEPARATION

BELT FILTERFILTRATE TANK

350-TK-003

BELT FILTERFILTRATE TANK

350-TK-003

PREGNANT LEACHSOLUTION SAMPLER

350-SA-002

PREGNANT LEACHSOLUTION SAMPLER

350-SA-002

LEACH DISCHARGESAMPLER

350-SA-001

LEACH DISCHARGESAMPLER

350-SA-001


LEACH DISCHARGEFILTER FEED PUMP

350-PP-007

LEACH DISCHARGEFILTER FEED PUMP

350-PP-007

LEACH DISCHARGEFILTER FEED TANK

350-TK-004

LEACH DISCHARGEFILTER FEED TANK

350-TK-004

LEACH DISCHARGE FILTERFEED TANK AGITATOR

350-AG-004

LEACH DISCHARGE FILTERFEED TANK AGITATOR

350-AG-004

VENDOR PACKAGE

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENER OVERFLOW PUMP

350-PP-006

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENER OVERFLOW PUMP

350-PP-006

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENER OVERFLOW TANK

350-TK-001

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENER OVERFLOW TANK

350-TK-001

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENER OVERFLOW TANK AGITATOR

350-AG-001

LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENER OVERFLOW TANK AGITATOR

350-AG-001

LEACH DISCHARGE CLARIFIER UNDERFLOW PUMP

350-PP-004

LEACH DISCHARGE CLARIFIER UNDERFLOW PUMP

350-PP-004

LEACH DISCHARGECLARIFIER

350-CL-001

LEACH DISCHARGECLARIFIER

350-CL-001

MVO OTHERS

BL

MVO OTHERS

BL

RESIDUE STORAGE AREARESIDUE STORAGE AREALEACH RESIDUE

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:


A3



CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION






14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN


PRELIMINARY

S106-000-PR-005S106-000-PR-005

S106-000-PR-007S106-000-PR-007


S106-000-PR-004

MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SLURRYTO MHP THICKENER

MAG NESIUM OXIDEFROM REAGENT DOSING

S106-000-PR-003S106-000-PR-003PREGNANT LEACH SOLUTIONFROM SOLID/LIQUID SEPARATION

MIXED HYDROXIDEPRECIPITATION TANK 1

360-TK-001


360-TK-001


360-TK-002


360-TK-002


360-TK-003


360-TK-003

MIXED HYDROXIDEPRECIPITATION SLURRY PUMP

360-PP-001

MIXED HYDROXIDEPRECIPITATION SLURRY PUMP

360-PP-001

PRECIPITATIONSUMP PUMP360-PP-002

PRECIPITATIONSUMP PUMP360-PP-002

S106-000-PR-003S106-000-PR-003SUMP SLURRY

TO LEACH DISCHARGE THICKENER

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 360PRECIPITATION

S106-000-PR-005S106-000-PR-005

SEED RECYCLEFROM MHP THICKENER UNDERFLOW PUMP

MHP SAMPLER360-SA-001

MHP SAMPLER360-SA-001

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:


A3



CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION






14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN


PRELIMINARY

S106-000-PR-005

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 365MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATE HANDLING

S106-000-PR-006S106-000-PR-006


THICKENER OVERFLOW AND FILTRATE

TO NEUTRALISATION

S106-000-PR-004S106-000-PR-004MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SLURRYFROM PRECIPITATION

MHP THICKENER AND FILTERSUMP PUMP365-PP-004


MHP THICKENER365-TH-001


MHP THICKENERUNDERFLOW PUMP

365-PP-001


365-PP-001

MHP THICKENERFEED BOX

365-DI-001


365-DI-001


MHP THICKENEROVERFLOW TANK

365-TK-002


365-TK-002

MHP THICKENEROVERFLOW PUMP

365-PP-003


365-PP-003

MHP THICKENEROVERFLOW TANK AGITATOR

365-AG-002


365-AG-002



MHP FILTER365-PK-001 MHP FILTER365-PK-001

OFFSITE

S106-000-PR-004S106-000-PR-004SEED RECYCLE

TO PRECIPITATION

MHP FILTERDRIP TRAY

MHP FILTERCAKE BUNKER

365-BK-001


365-BK-001

S106-000-PR-00XS106-000-PR-00XDIESELFROM DISTRIBUTION PUMP

S106-000-PR-010S106-000-PR-010PLANT AIRFROM SERVICES

MHP THICKENERUNDERFLOW TANK

365-TK-001


365-TK-001

MHP FILTERFEED PUMP365-PP-002


MHP THICKENERUNDERFLOW TANK AGITATOR

365-AG-001


365-AG-001

VENDOR PACKAGE

MANUALBAGGING

MHP BAGGING365-XM-001


MHP DRYER365-PK-002MHP DRYER365-PK-002

MHP DRYERFEEDER

MHP DRYERSURGE BIN

MVO OTHERS

BL

MVO OTHERS

BL

ATMOSPHERE

FLASHDRYER

GAS/SOLIDSEPARATOR

DRYER FEEDCONVEYOR365-CV-001


FUTURE VENDOR PACKAGE

BURNER

PRODUCTDUST COLLECTOR

365-DC-001


365-DC-001

PRODUCT DUSTCOLLECTOR EXHAUST FAN

365-FA-001


365-FA-001

ATMOSPHERE

MHP STORAGE

MANUALBAGGING


MHP DRYER365-PK-002

MHP DRYERFEEDER

MHP DRYERSURGE BIN

MVO OTHERS

BL

ATMOSPHERE

FLASHDRYER

GAS/SOLIDSEPARATOR



BURNER


365-DC-001


365-FA-001

ATMOSPHERE

MHP STORAGE

S106-000-PR-006

DISTRIBUTIONPROCESS WATER

THICKENER OVERFLOW AND FILTRATE

TO NEUTRALISATION

S106-000-PR-004MIXED HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SLURRYFROM PRECIPITATION




365-PP-001


365-DI-001

S106-000-PR-007FLOCCULANTFROM DOSING PUMP


365-TK-002


365-PP-003


365-AG-002

S106-000-PR-003SUMP SLURRY


MHP FILTER365-PK-001

OFFSITE

S106-000-PR-004SEED RECYCLE

TO PRECIPITATION

MHP FILTERDRIP TRAY


365-BK-001

S106-000-PR-00XDIESELFROM DISTRIBUTION PUMP

S106-000-PR-010PLANT AIRFROM SERVICES


365-TK-001



365-AG-001

VENDOR PACKAGE

MANUALBAGGING


MHP DRYER365-PK-002

MHP DRYERFEEDER

MHP DRYERSURGE BIN

MVO OTHERS

BL

ATMOSPHERE

FLASHDRYER

GAS/SOLIDSEPARATOR



BURNER


365-DC-001


365-FA-001

ATMOSPHERE

MHP STORAGE

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:


A3



CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION






14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN


PRELIMINARY

S106-000-PR-007

FLOCCULANT BAGS

DISTRIBUTIONDISTRIBUTIONRAW WATER

FLOCCULANTMIXING PACKAGE

380-PK-001

FLOCCULANTMIXING PACKAGE

380-PK-001

S106-000-PR-003S106-000-PR-003FLOCCULANT


FLOCCULANT MIXING

FLOCCULANT

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 380REAGENTS

S106-000-PR-002S106-000-PR-002SMBS

TO COBALT LEACH

SMBSDOSING PUMP

380-PP-004

SMBSDOSING PUMP

380-PP-004

MAG NESIUM OXIDEMIXING TANK

380-TK-005

MAG NESIUM OXIDEMIXING TANK

380-TK-005

MAG NESIUM OXIDEMIXING TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-005

MAG NESIUM OXIDEMIXING TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-005

MAG NESIUM OXIDEBAG SPLITTER

380-BS-002

MAG NESIUM OXIDEBAG SPLITTER

380-BS-002

MAG NESIUM OXIDEDOSING PUMP 1

380-PP-005

MAG NESIUM OXIDEDOSING PUMP 1

380-PP-005

S106-000-PR-004S106-000-PR-004MAG NESIUM OXIDE

TO PRECIPITATION

SMBSMIXING TANK

380-TK-003

SMBSMIXING TANK

380-TK-003

SMBSMIXING TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-003

SMBSMIXING TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-003

SMBSHEADER TANK

380-TK-004

SMBSHEADER TANK

380-TK-004

SMBSHEADER TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-004

SMBSHEADER TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-004

SMBSTRANSFER PUMP

380-PP-003

SMBSTRANSFER PUMP

380-PP-003

RINGMAINRINGMAINLIME

TO RINGMAIN

LIME RING MAINPUMP 1

380-PP-014

LIME RING MAINPUMP 1

380-PP-014

LIMEMIXING TANK

380-TK-006

LIMEMIXING TANK

380-TK-006

LIMEMIXING TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-006

LIMEMIXING TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-006

LIMEHEADER TANK

380-TK-007

LIMEHEADER TANK

380-TK-007

LIMEHEADER TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-007

LIMEHEADER TANK AGITATOR

380-AG-007

LIMETRANSFER PUMP

380-PP-013

LIMETRANSFER PUMP

380-PP-013




RINGMAINRINGMAINLIME RETURNFROM RING MAIN

S106-000-PR-002S106-000-PR-002SULPHURIC ACID

TO LEACHING

SULPHURIC ACIDDOSING PUMP

380-PP-002

SULPHURIC ACIDDOSING PUMP

380-PP-002

SULPHURIC ACID

MAGNESIUM OXIDESMBS

LIME RINGMAIN

SULPHURIC ACIDTRANSFER PUMP

380-PP-001

SULPHURIC ACIDTRANSFER PUMP

380-PP-001

FLOCCULANTDOSING PUMP 1

380-PP-008


380-PP-008


380-PP-009


380-PP-009


380-PP-010


380-PP-010


TO LEACH DISCHARGE FILTER


TO MHP THICKENER

REAGENTS AREASUMP PUMP380-PP-016

REAGENTS AREASUMP PUMP380-PP-016

SULPHURIC ACIDSTORAGE TANK

380-TK-002

SULPHURIC ACIDSTORAGE TANK

380-TK-002

MAG NESIUM OXIDEFEED BIN

380-BN-002

MAG NESIUM OXIDEFEED BIN

380-BN-002

MAG NESIUM OXIDEFEEDER

380-FE-002

MAG NESIUM OXIDEFEEDER

380-FE-002

REAGENTS HOIST380-HT-001

REAGENTS HOIST380-HT-001

LIMEBAG SPLITTER

380-BS-003

LIMEBAG SPLITTER

380-BS-003

SULPHURIC ACIDDECANT TANK

380-TK-001

SULPHURIC ACIDDECANT TANK

380-TK-001

SMBSBAG SPLITTER

380-BS-001

SMBSBAG SPLITTER

380-BS-001


TO SOLID/LIQUID SEPARATION

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:


A3



CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION






14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN


PRELIMINARY

S106-000-PR-008

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 390WATER SERVICES

BOREFIELDBOREFIELD

RAW WATERTANK

390-TK-002

RAW WATERTANK

390-TK-002

RAW WATERDISTRIBUTION PUMP 2

390-PP-003


390-PP-003


390-PP-002


390-PP-002

DISTRIBUTIONDISTRIBUTION


GLAND WATERDISTRIBUTION PUMP 1

390-PP-004


390-PP-004


390-PP-005


390-PP-005

BORE WATER

BORE WATERTANK (EXISTING)

390-TK-001

BORE WATERTANK (EXISTING)

390-TK-001

POTABLE WATERTANK

390-TK-003

POTABLE WATERTANK

390-TK-003

POTABLE WATERDISTRIBUTION PUMP 2

390-PP-008


390-PP-008


390-PP-007


390-PP-007


RAW WATERTRANSFER PUMP

390-PP-001

RAW WATERTRANSFER PUMP

390-PP-001

PROCESS WATERDISTRIBUTION PUMP 2

390-PP-010


390-PP-010


390-PP-009


390-PP-009

FIRE WATERPUMP PACKAGE

390-PK-002

FIRE WATERPUMP PACKAGE

390-PK-002


RAW WATERTO DISTRIBUTION

GLAND WATERTO DISTRIBUTION

PROCESS WATERTO DISTRIBUTION

FIRE WATER

POTABLEWATER PLANT

POTABLE WATER PLANT FEED PUMP

390-PP-006

POTABLE WATER PLANT FEED PUMP

390-PP-006

POTABLE WATERTO DISTRIBUTION

BRINETO TBC

POTABLE WATERPLANT

390-PK-001

POTABLE WATERPLANT

390-PK-001

OTHERS MVO

BL

OTHERS MVO

BL

EXCESS WATEREXCESS WATER

OTHERS MVO

BL

OTHERS MVO

BL

PROCESS WATER TANK390-PP-009

PROCESS WATER TANK390-PP-009

VENDOR PACKAGE

P054-000-PR-005P054-000-PR-005

THICKENER OVERFLOW AND FILTRATEFROM CONCENTRATE HANDLING

VENDOR PACKAGE

TECHAPP GREV:DWG

No:

TITLE:


A3



CHK

SK

JR

JR

JR

JR

JR

DRN

JR

SK

SK

SK

SK

SK

REFERENCES

MINOR UPDATES

REVISION






14.05.18

DATE

30.05.18

06.04.18

13.04.18

20.04.18

04.05.18

F

REV

G

B

C

D

E

DWG No.SCALE:

NTSCLIENT APP

PROJ APP

TECH APP

DESIGNED

CHECKED

DRAWN S.KAY

29.03.18

25.05.18

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

PROJAPP

J.RIORDAN


PRELIMINARY

S106-000-PR-009

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMAREA 390AIR SERVICES

S106-000-PR-005S106-000-PR-005PLANT AIR RECEIVER

390-AR-001PLANT AIR RECEIVER

390-AR-001

MHP FILTERAIR RECEIVER390-AR-002

MHP FILTERAIR RECEIVER390-AR-002

PLANT AIR COMPRESSOR 1

390-CP-001


390-CP-001


390-CP-002


390-CP-002

PLANT AIRTO DISTRIBUTION

PLANT AIRTO MHP FILTER

AIR DRYER 1390-DR-001AIR DRYER 1390-DR-001

AIR DRYER 2390-DR-002AIR DRYER 2390-DR-002



Mass Balance

Soludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings Leach ProjectS106-CAL-PR-001Revision: A

MASS AND WATER BALANCE

Revision History S106-CAL-PR-001

Rev Date Prepared Reviewed Approved Client

A 8/06/2018 SK NB JR

Description of Revision

Issued for Client Review

Soludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings Leach ProjectS106-CAL-PR-001A

Solids Aqueous Slurry Solids Aqueous Slurry Solids Aqueous Slurry % SolidsSTREAM DESCRIPTION t/h t/h t/h SG SG SG m³/h m³/h m³/h w/w Nm³/h Factor m³/h ValueLEACH FEED

001 ROM Feed 125.0 17.0 142.0 2.8 1.0 2.3 45.4 17.1 62.5 88.0 50 tonne dumps

002 101 Apron Feeder Feed 125.0 17.0 142.0 2.8 1.0 2.3 45.4 17.1 62.5 88.0 2.0 284.1 Peak flow shown in wet t/h

103 Dust Suppression Spray PW 2.2 2.2 1.1 1.1 2.0 2.0 0.0 5.0102 Apron Feeder Dribble 8.8 1.3 10.1 2.8 1.0 2.2 3.2 1.3 4.5 86.7 15.0 7.0 Peak flow shown in wet t/h

104 Apron Feeder Discharge 116.3 17.9 134.1 2.8 1.0 2.2 42.2 17.7 59.9 86.7

Screen Feed Conveyor Ore Feed 125.0 19.2 144.2 2.8 1.0 2.2 45.4 19.1 64.4 86.7 2.0 288.5 Peak flow shown in wet t/h

105 Screen Feed Conveyor Dust Suppression Spray PW 2.2 2.2 1.1 1.1 2.0 2.0 0.0 5.0

003 106 Trash Screen Feed 125.0 21.4 146.4 2.8 1.0 2.2 45.4 21.0 66.4 85.4 2.0 292.9 Peak flow shown in wet t/h

005 107 Water to Trash Screen PW 2.0 2.0 1.1 1.1 1.8 1.8 0.0 5.0 Peak flow shown in wet t/h

Trash Screen Total Feed 125.0 23.4 148.4 2.8 1.0 2.2 45.4 22.9 68.2 84.2108 Trash Screen Oversize 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 85.4 0.0

004 109 Trash Screen Undersize 125.0 23.4 148.4 2.8 1.0 2.2 45.4 22.9 68.2 84.2 297.9 Peak flow shown in wet t/h

006 110 Water to Reslurry Tank PW 59.9 59.9 1.1 1.1 54.5 54.5 0.0 2.0 109.1008 111 Reslurry Tank Discharge 125.0 83.3 208.3 2.8 1.1 1.7 45.4 77.3 122.7 60.0 246.5

112 Water to Leach Feed Tank PW 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0113 Leach Feed Area Sump Pump 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 70.0

009 114 Leach Feed Surge Tank Discharge 125.0 83.3 208.3 2.8 1.1 1.7 45.4 77.3 122.7 60.0 1.2 147.2

LEACHING

010 201 Water to In-Line Mixer PW 11.2 11.2 1.1 1.1 10.2 10.2 0.0 70.0011 Filtrate Recycle to In-Line Mixer 175.8 175.8 1.1 1.1 160.2 160.2 0.0 192.2012 702 Sulphuric Acid to In-Line Mixer (copper + cobalt) H2SO4 10.2 10.2 1.9 1.9 5.4 5.4 0.0 8.1

In-Line Mixer Discharge to Distibution Box 197.2 197.2 1.1 1.1 173.2 173.2 0.0 200.3

013 202 Diluted H2SO4 to Copper Leach Distribution Box 187.8 187.8 1.1 1.1 164.8 164.8 0.0 1.2 197.8 95.2009 114 Leach Feed Slurry Feed to Distribution Box 125.0 83.3 208.3 2.8 1.1 1.7 45.4 77.3 122.7 60.0 1.2 147.2

405 Sump Slurry from Precipitation to Distribution Box 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0 Intermittent flow

752 Acidic Sump Slurry from Reagents to Distribution Box 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0 Intermittent flow

220 Leach Area Sump Slurry 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0 Intermittent flow

Leach Area Catchall Tank Discharge 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0203 Copper Leach Distribution Box Discharge 125.0 271.1 396.1 2.8 1.1 1.4 45.4 242.0 287.4 31.6 345.1

204 Copper Leach Tank 1 Discharge 125.0 271.1 396.1 2.8 1.1 1.4 45.4 242.0 287.4 31.6 345.1205 Diluted H2SO4 to Copper Leach 2 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 197.8 0.0 Sized for 100% flow during tank bypass

206 Copper Leach Tank 2 Discharge 125.0 271.1 396.1 2.8 1.1 1.4 45.4 242.0 287.4 31.6 345.1207 Diluted H2SO4 to Copper Leach 3 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 197.8 0.0 Sized for 100% flow during tank bypass

015 208 Copper Leach Tank 3 Discharge 122.3 273.8 396.1 2.7 1.1 1.4 45.4 242.0 287.4 30.9 345.1 This assumes that the entire reaction to take place in the final leach stage

018 713 SMBS to Cobalt Leach Tank 1 SMBS 6.7 6.7 1.1 1.1 6.4 6.4 0.0 9.6209 Diluted H2SO4 to Cobalt Leach 1 9.5 9.5 1.1 1.1 8.3 8.3 0.0 0.0 4.8210 Cobalt Leach Tank 1 Discharge 122.3 290.0 412.3 2.7 1.1 1.4 45.4 256.7 302.0 29.7 354.6211 Diluted H2SO4 to Cobalt Leach 2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sized for 100% flow during tank bypass

212 Cobalt Leach Tank 2 Discharge 122.3 290.0 412.3 2.7 1.1 1.4 45.4 256.7 302.0 29.7 354.6213 Diluted H2SO4 to Cobalt Leach 3 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sized for 100% flow during tank bypass

020 214 Cobalt Leach Discharge 121.7 290.6 412.3 2.7 1.1 1.4 45.4 256.7 302.0 29.5 354.6 This assumes that the entire reaction to take place in the final leach stage

218 Scrubber Blowdown to Primary Neutralisation Tank 0.7 2.1 2.8 2.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 1.9 2.3 25.0 2.7099 216 Lime Addition to Primary Neutralisation Tank Feed Lime 0.8 2.3 3.1 2.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 2.2 2.5 25.0 3.3

219 Primary Neutralisation Tank Discharge 123.2 295.0 418.2 2.7 1.1 1.4 46.0 260.8 306.8 29.5 360.7

SULPHUR DIOXIDE SCRUBBING JR

221 Cobalt Leach Tank 1 Vent Gas 4713.0 14140.0 70.0 Nominal vent gas distribution



103 Combined Cobalt Leach Tank Vent Gas 6732.8 20200.0 Peak flow shown as Am3/h

078 215 Lime to Sulphur Dioxide Scrubber Lime 0.7 2.1 2.8 2.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 1.9 2.3 25.0 3.1

217 Blowdown Recycle 1.9 5.6 7.5 2.3 1.1 1.2 0.8 5.2 6.1 25.0 1.2 7.3 270.0 TBC by vendor

064 218 Blowdown to Primary Neutralisation Tank 0.7 2.1 2.8 2.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 1.9 2.3 25.0 1.2 2.7Total Blowdown Discharge 2.6 7.7 10.3 2.3 1.1 1.2 1.1 7.2 8.3 25.0 10.0

079 224 Scrubber Vent Discharge Gas 6830.3 20200.0 Peak flow shown as Am3/h

SOLID / LIQUID SEPARATION

020 219 Leach Discharge to Thickener 123.2 295.0 418.2 2.7 1.1 1.4 46.0 260.8 306.8 29.5 360.7Secondary Filtrate Recycle 2.0 2.0 1.1 1.1 1.9 1.9 0.0 20.0

732 Flocculant to Thickener Feed Box Floc 1.9 1.9 1.0 1.0 1.9 1.9 0.0 2.9751 Sump Slurry from Reagents Area 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0 Intermittent flow

315 Sump Slurry from Leach Thickener Sump 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0 Intermittent flow

Sump Slurry from Leach Residue Sump 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0 Intermittent flow

027 302 Leach Thickener Feed Box Discharge 123.2 298.9 422.1 2.7 1.1 1.4 46.0 264.6 310.6 29.2 1.2 372.7030 306 Leach Thickener Underflow 123.2 82.1 205.3 2.7 1.1 1.7 46.0 72.7 118.7 60.0 1.2 142.4032 303 Leach Thickener Overflow 0.0 216.8 216.8 2.7 1.1 1.1 0.0 191.9 191.9 0.02 1.2 230.3

735 Flocculant to Clarifier Floc 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.5305 Clarifier Underflow 0.0 0.1 0.1 2.7 1.1 1.3 0.0 0.1 0.1 20.0 5.0 100.0304 Clarifier Overflow 0.0 217.7 217.7 2.7 1.1 1.1 0.0 192.7 192.7 1.2 231.2 Assume negligible solids in the clarifier overflow

307 Process Water to Filter Feed Tank PW 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0308 Leach Discharge Filter Feed Tank Discharge 123.2 82.2 205.4 2.7 1.1 1.7 46.0 72.8 118.8 60.0 1.2 142.5

733 Flocculant to Belt Filter Floc 7.5 7.5 1.0 1.0 7.5 7.5 0.0 11.2 Vendor testwork

031 310 Leach Discharge Filter PLS 59.5 59.5 1.1 1.1 54.3 54.3 0.0 1.2 65.1028 309 Process Water to Filter Wash PW 156.4 156.4 1.1 1.1 142.4 142.4 0.0 184.8 1.2 1.2 m3/t nominal wash ratio. 1.5 m3/t max

021 Secondary Filtrate Discharge 156.4 156.4 1.1 1.1 142.5 142.5 0.0 1.2 171.0034 313 Leach Discharge Filter Cake 123.2 30.2 153.3 2.7 1.1 2.1 46.0 27.5 73.5 80.3 1.2 88.2

033 311 Pregnant Leach Solution Tank Discharge 277.2 277.2 1.1 1.1 252.7 252.7 0.0 1.2 303.2

320 Raw Water to Vacuum Pump Seal RW 18.0 18.0 1.0 1.0 18.0 18.0 0.0 1.5 27.0 Advised by Vendor (05/06/18)

321 Raw Water to Belt Filter Seal Strips RW 5.3 5.3 1.0 1.0 5.3 5.3 0.0 1.5 8.0 Advised by Vendor (05/06/18)

322 Process Water to Cloth and Belt Wash PW 19.1 19.1 1.1 0.9 21.0 21.0 0.0 1.5 31.5 Advised by Vendor (05/06/18)

Vacuum Seal Water Reclaim Hopper Discharge 18.0 18.0 1.0 1.0 18.0 18.0 27.0

317 Sump Slurry from Leach Discharge Belt Filter Sump 24.4 24.4 1.1 1.1 26.3 26.3 39.5312 Belt Filter Secondary Filtrate Tank Discharge 180.8 180.8 1.1 1.1 164.8 164.8 1.2 197.7

011 318 Belt Filter Secondary Filtrate to Copper Leach 175.8 175.8 1.1 1.1 160.2 160.2 1.2 192.2045 319 Belt Filter Secondary Filtrate to MHP Handling 3.0 3.0 1.1 1.1 2.8 2.8 1.2 3.3025 314 Belt Filter Secondary Filtrate to Leach Thickener 2.0 2.0 1.1 1.1 1.9 1.9 1.2 2.2

Belt Filter Discharge Conveyor to Residue Stockpile 123.2 30.2 153.3 2.7 1.1 2.1 46.0 27.5 73.5 80.3 1.2 184.0 Peak flow shown in wet t/h

316 Sump Slurry from Residue Stockpile 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0

COMMENT / REFERENCEPeak Flow

MetsimStream

MVOStream

TYPE Nominal

ClientProjectDoc.Rev.

INPUT

This mass balance is a design document used to define stream peak flows. It is not acompletely live document, but more so a dump of the mass balance performed in Metsim. Assuch, some figures may not add up perfectly. Refer to "Stream Tables" tab for the raw Metsimresults.

Input from MetSim MB

InputCalculated

Input from PDC

Adjusted from MetSim MB

Page 3 of 5

PRECIPITATION

107 505 Seed Recycle 5.5 37.1 42.6 3.4 1.1 1.2 1.6 33.9 35.5 13.0 53.2723 Magnesium Oxide to MHP Tank 1 MgO 1.0 3.0 4.0 3.6 1.0 1.2 0.3 3.0 3.3 25.0 1.5 4.9 80.0311 Pregnant Leach Solution Feed 277.2 277.2 1.1 1.1 252.7 252.7 0.0 1.2 303.2401 Process Water Addition PW 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0402 MHP Tank 1 Discharge 6.5 317.3 323.8 3.4 1.1 1.1 1.9 289.5 291.4 2.0 1.2 349.7

Magnesium Oxide to MHP Tank 2 MgO 0.1 0.4 0.5 3.6 1.0 1.2 0.0 0.4 0.4 25.0 4.9 10.0 Sized for 100% of the maximum flow to tank 1

403 MHP Tank 2 Discharge 6.7 317.6 324.3 3.5 1.1 1.1 1.9 289.9 291.8 2.1 1.2 350.2

Magnesium Oxide to MHP Tank 3 MgO 0.1 0.4 0.5 3.6 1.0 1.2 0.0 0.4 0.4 25.0 4.9 10.0 Sized for 100% of the maximum flow to tank 1

043 404 MHP Tank 3 Discharge 8.3 318.0 326.3 3.4 1.1 1.1 2.4 290.3 292.7 2.5 1.2 351.2 This assumes that the entire reaction to take place in the final stage

MHP HANDLING

044 501 Secondary Filtrate to MHP Thickener Feed Box 3.0 3.0 1.1 1.1 2.8 2.8 0.0 3.3047 734 Flocculant to MHP Thickener Floc 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.5

513 MHP Thickener And Filter Sump Slurry 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.0046 MHP Thickener Feed Box Discharge 8.3 322.0 330.3 3.4 1.1 1.1 2.4 294.0 296.4 2.5 1.2 355.7

050 503 MHP Thickener Overflow 0.0 266.4 266.4 3.4 1.1 1.1 0.0 243.2 243.2 0.0 1.2 291.9 Assume negligible solids in the thickener overflow

051 504 MHP Thickener Underflow 8.3 55.6 63.9 3.4 1.1 1.2 2.4 50.8 53.2 13.0 1.2 63.8 100.0

505 Seed Recycle 5.5 37.1 42.6 3.4 1.1 1.2 1.6 33.9 35.5 13.0 1.5 53.2 200.0 200% Recirculating load to Seed Recycle

506 MHP Thickener Underflow Tank Discharge 2.8 18.5 21.3 3.4 1.1 1.2 0.8 16.9 17.7 13.0 1.2 21.3

MHP Filter Feed 2.8 18.5 21.3 3.4 1.1 1.2 0.8 16.9 17.7 13.0 21.3507 MHP Filter Cake 2.8 0.5 3.3 3.4 1.1 2.6 0.8 0.4 1.3 85.0508 MHP Filter Filtrate 18.0 18.0 1.1 1.1 16.5 16.5 0.0 1.2 19.8

509 MHP Filter Cake Drip 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0

510 MHP Thickener Overflow Tank Discharge 284.4 284.4 1.1 1.1 259.1 259.1 0.0 1.2 310.9

511 MHP Bagging Feed 2.8 0.5 3.3 3.4 1.1 2.6 0.8 0.4 1.3 85.0

REAGENTS

701 Sulphuric Acid Decant Tank Discharge 10.2 10.2 1.9 1.9 5.4 5.4 70.0702 Sulphuric Acid Storage Tank Discharge 10.2 10.2 1.9 1.9 5.4 5.4 1.5 8.1

092 SMBS Powder 1.1 1.1 1.5 0.8 0.8 1.0 Peak flow shown in t/h

711 Raw Water to SMBS Mixing Tank RW 5.6 5.6 1.0 1.0 5.6 5.6 10.0 200.0 200 grams per litre mix strength

713 SMBS Mixing Dosing to Leach 6.7 6.7 1.1 1.1 6.4 6.4 1.5 9.6

722 Magnesuim Oxide Feeder Discharge 1.2 0.0 1.2 3.6 1.0 3.6 0.3 0.0 0.3 100.0 1.5 0.5721 Raw Water to Magnesium Oxide Mixing Tank RW 3.7 3.7 1.0 1.0 3.7 3.7 0.0 1.5 5.6723 Magnesium Oxide Dosing to MHP Tank 1 1.0 3.0 4.0 3.6 1.0 1.2 0.3 3.0 3.3 25.0 1.5 4.9 80.0 Nominal MgO mass distribution

723 Magnesium Oxide Dosing to MHP Tank 2 0.1 0.4 0.5 3.6 1.0 1.2 0.0 0.4 0.4 25.0 4.9 10.0 Nominal MgO mass distribution

723 Magnesium Oxide Dosing to MHP Tank 3 0.1 0.4 0.5 3.6 1.0 1.2 0.0 0.4 0.4 25.0 4.9 10.0 Nominal MgO mass distribution

731 Raw Water to Flocculant Mixing Plant RW 11.4 11.4 1.0 1.0 11.4 11.4 17.1732 Flocculant Dosing to Leach Discharge Thickener 1.94 1.9 1.0 1.0 1.9 1.9 1.5 2.9 66.6735 Flocculant Dosing to Leach Discharge Clarifier 0.97 7.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 33.4733 Flocculant Dosing to Leach Discharge Filter 7.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 7.5 7.5 1.5 11.2734 Flocculant Dosing to MHP Thickener 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5

Lime Powder 1.5 1.5 2.3 0.7 0.7 100.0 1.5 1.0741 Raw Water to Lime Mixing Tank RW 4.4 4.4 1.0 1.0 4.4 4.4 0.0 1.5 6.6742 Lime Mixing Tank Discharge 1.5 4.4 5.9 2.3 1.0 1.2 0.7 4.4 5.1 25.0 1.5 7.6745 Lime Slurry Ringmain Return 1.5 4.4 5.9 2.3 1.0 1.2 0.7 4.4 5.1 25.0 1.2 6.1 100.0215 Lime to Sulphur Dioxide Scrubbing 0.7 2.1 2.8 2.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 1.9 2.3 25.0 3.1216 Lime to Primary Neutralisation Tank 0.8 2.3 3.1 2.3 1.1 1.2 0.3 2.2 2.5 25.0 3.3744 Lime Slurry Header Tank Discharge 2.9 8.8 11.8 2.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 8.3 9.6 25.0 40.0 200.0 200% of the requirement charged to the ringmain

WATER

Potable WaterSafety Shower / Eye Wash Requirement (Instantaneous) 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.6 10.0 14.4 m3/day defined by PDC

809 Raw Water Feed to RO Plant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 16.7 60.0 Assume 60% RO efficiency

810 RO Brine PW 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.4 0.4 6.7

Raw Water320 Raw Water to Belt Filter Vacuum Pump Seal 18.0 18.0 1.0 1.0 18.0 18.0 27.0711 Raw Water to SMBS Mixing 5.6 5.6 1.0 1.0 5.6 5.6 10.0721 Raw Water to Magnesium Oxide Mixing 3.7 3.7 1.0 1.0 3.7 3.7 5.6731 Raw Water to Flocculant Mixing 11.4 11.4 1.0 1.0 11.4 11.4 17.1741 Raw Water to Lime Mixing 4.4 4.4 1.0 1.0 4.4 4.4 6.6321 Raw Water to Belt Filter Seal Strips 5.3 5.3 1.0 1.0 5.3 5.3 8.0809 Raw Water to RO Feed RW 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 16.7

Gland Water RW 24.3 24.3 1.0 1.0 24.3 24.3 2.0 48.6 Allowance for 30 L/m/pump for 27 centrifugal pumps. Nominal of 15 L/min/pump

320 Raw Water Addition from Vacuum Seal Collection -18.0 -18.0 1.0 1.0 -18.0 -18.0 -27.0803 Raw Water to Process Water Make up RW 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 99.3801 Total Raw Water Requirement 55.7 55.7 1.0 1.0 55.8 55.8 211.8

Process Water103 Dust Suppression Spray 2.2 2.2 1.1 1.1 2.0 2.0 5.0105 Screen Feed Conveyor Dust Suppression Spray 2.2 2.2 1.1 1.1 2.0 2.0 5.0

005 107 Water to Trash Screen 2.0 2.0 1.1 1.1 1.8 1.8 5.0006 110 Water to Reslurry Tank 59.9 59.9 1.1 1.1 54.5 54.5 109.1

112 Water to Leach Feed Tank 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 20.0010 201 Water to In-Line Mixer 11.2 11.2 1.1 1.1 10.2 10.2 70.0

307 Process Water to Filter Feed Tank 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 10.0028 309 Process Water to Filter Wash 156.4 156.4 1.1 1.1 142.4 142.4 184.8

322 Process Water to Cloth and Belt Wash 19.1 19.1 1.1 1.1 21.0 21.0 31.5401 Process Water Addition 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 25.0

Total Process Water Requirement 253.0 253.0 234.0 234.0 465.4

Process Water Tank - IN510 MHP Thickener Overflow Tank Discharge 284.4 284.4 1.1 1.1 259.1 259.1 310.9810 RO Brine 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.4 0.4 6.7

Tailings Reclaim 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0Gland Water Reclamation 24.3 24.3 1.0 1.0 24.3 24.3 48.6

Total 309.1 309.1 1.1 1.1 283.8 283.8 366.1Process Water Bleed -56.1 -56.1 1.0 1.0 -49.8 -49.8 99.3

Page 4 of 5

ClientProjectDoc.Rev.

WATER REQUIREMENTS (Nominal) COMMENTS

LegendLiquid (t/h)

Liquid (m3/h)

Rom Ore 17.017.1

Leach 30.2RW Requirement 31.43 Residue 27.5

31.49

Gland Water 24.324.3 PW Requirement Overflow Settled tails

253.0 284.8 30.2Borefields 234.0 259.5 27.5

55.68 Decant 0.0%

55.79

Top Up 0.0 Decant 0.00.0 0.0

Excess Water Bleed56.149.8

A Input from Mass Balance

Soludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings Leach Project InputS106-CAL-PR-001 Calculated

Process Water Tank

Plant

Raw Water Tank Tailings Dam

Page 5 of 5



Mechanical Equipment List

Total, kW 1,744 1,058

Eq

uip

Ta

g

Are

a N

o.

Eq

uip

. T

yp

e I

de

nti

fie

r

Se

qu

en

tia

l Id

en

tifi

er

HO

LD

S

De

lete

d

Name Description Model Duty

Fabricated /

Vendor Supply /

Novated

VendorDatasheet/Drawing

Number

Starter

Type

Installed

Power

kW

Load

%

Drawn Power

kW

Duty /

StandbyRev Comment

330-AG-001 330 AG 001 Reslurry Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-001 DOL 15 0.75 11.3 Duty A

330-AG-002 330 AG 002 Leach Feed Surge Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-001 DOL 185 0.75 138.8 Duty A

330-BK-001 330 BK 001 Trash Bunker N/A N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-BN-001 330 BN 001 ROM Bin Live capacity 100 t, mild steel stiffened, painted externally N/A N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-CH-001 330 CH 001 Screen Feed Conveyor Head Chute MS constructed and Lined N/A N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-CH-002 330 CH 002 Trash Screen Oversize Chute MS constructed, unlined N/A N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-CH-003 330 CH 003 Trash Screen Undersize Chute MS constructed and Lined N/A N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-CV-001 330 CV 001 Screen Feed Conveyor 250 wt/h, 60m, 600mm, 11o, 12m elevation N/A Vendor / Fabricated Various S106-000-PR-001 VSD 11 0.85 9.4 Duty A

330-FE-001 330 FE 001 Apron Feeder 250 wt/h capacity Vendor S106-000-PR-001 VSD 75 0.75 56.3 Duty A

330-GZ-001 330 GZ 001 ROM Bin GrizzlyRemovable static grizzly, 300 mm x 300 mm apertures, Material TBC,

removable panels N/A N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-PP-001 330 PP 001 Reslurry Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-001 VSD 55 0.7 38.5 Duty A

330-PP-002 330 PP 002 Leach Feed Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-001 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Duty A

330-PP-003 330 PP 003 Leach Feed Area Sump Pump Vertical spindle slurry pump Sump Vendor S106-000-PR-001 DOL 5.5 0.2 1.1 Duty A

330-SA-001 330 SA 001 Leach Feed SamplerPressure pipe sampler, Includes pinch valve and manual flush, Sample flow

XXm3/hVendor S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-SC-001 330 SC 001 Trash Screen Single Deck Vibrating Screen with spray bars, 250 wt/h, 1 x 8.8 mm aperture Vendor S106-000-PR-001 DOL 15 0.55 8.3 Duty A

330-SH-001 330 SH 001 Reclaim Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash Station Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-TK-001 330 TK 001 Reslurry Tank CSRL. Live volume = 43 m3, 3.6 m (Dia) x 4.5 m (H), open N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-TK-002 330 TK 002 Leach Feed Surge Tank CSRL. Live volume = 860 m3, 9.9 m (Dia) x 11.6 m (H), open N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-001 N/A N/A N/A A

330-WT-001 330 WT 001 Screen Feed Conveyor WeightometerSingle belt scale system, galvanised, c/w integral calibration set & weigh idlers.

Range 0 to 300 t/h.N/A N/A Vendor S106-000-PR-001 FDR 0.75 0.7 0.5 Duty A

330 Total

340-AG-001 340 AG 001 Copper Leach Tank 1 Agitator Single impeller. Carbon steel nitrile rubber lined shaft and impeller blades N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-002 DOL 30 0.6 18.0 Duty A



340-AG-004 340 AG 004 Cobalt Leach Tank 1 Agitator Single impeller. Carbon steel nitrile rubber lined shaft and impeller blades N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-002 DOL 30 0.6 18.0 Duty A



340-AG-007 340 AG 007 Primary Neutralisation Tank Agitator Single impeller. Carbon steel nitrile rubber lined shaft and impeller blades N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-002 DOL 30 0.6 18.0 Duty A

340-FA-001 340 FA 001 Leach Off Gas Fan Part of Sulphur Dioxide Scrubber Vendor Package N/A Vendor S106-000-PR-002 VSD 15 0.7 10.5 Duty B

340-LA-001 340 LA 001 Copper Leach Tank 1 Slurry Overflow Launder 316L/SAF2205/LDX2101 Fabricated S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A



340-LA-004 340 LA 004 Cobalt Leach Tank 1 Slurry Overflow Launder 316L/SAF2205/LDX2101 Fabricated S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A

340-LA-005 340 LA 005 Cobalt Leach Tank 2 Slurry Overflow Launder 316L/SAF2205/LDX2101 Fabricated S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A

340-PD-001 340 PD 001 Leach Area Dump Pond HDPE double-lined earthen pond, Volume TBC S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A

340-PK-001 340 PK 001 Sulphur Dioxide Scrubber Package 20,200 Am3/h flow N/A Vendor S106-000-PR-002 N/A 11 0.7 7.7 N/A B

340-PP-002 340 PP 002 Scrubber Blowdown PumpEnd suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal. Part of Sulphur Dioxide

Scrubber Vendor PackageVendor S106-000-PR-002 VSD 1.1 0.7 0.8 Duty A

340-PP-003 340 PP 003 Leach Area Sump Pump Vertical spindle slurry pump Sump Vendor S106-000-PR-002 DOL 5.5 0.2 1.1 Duty A

340-SH-001 340 SH 001 Leaching Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash Station 1 Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A

340-SH-002 340 SH 002 Leaching Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash Station 2 Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A

340-TK-001 340 TK 001 Copper Leach Tank 1LDX2101. Live volume = 335 m³. 7.5 m (Dia) x 8.0 m (H), open. Bottom feed

via downcomer, top discharge, with bafflesN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A





340-TK-004 340 TK 004 Cobalt Leach Tank 1LDX2101. Live volume = 335 m³. 7.5 m (Dia) x 8.0 m (H), Sealed and vented.

Bottom feed via downcomer, top discharge, with bafflesN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A





340-TK-007 340 TK 007 Primary Neutralisation TankLDX2101. Live volume = 335 m³. 7.5 m (Dia) x 8.0 m (H), Sealed and vented.

Bottom feed via downcomer, top discharge, with bafflesN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A B

DOCUMENT S106-LST-ME-001

REVISION C

MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT LISTCLIENT Soludo Lambert Mining

PROJECT Kipushi Tailings Leach Project

PROJECT

S106-LST-ME-001_C 08062018 Equipment List Rev C Page 1 of 15

Total, kW 1,744 1,058

Eq

uip

Ta

g

Are

a N

o.

Eq

uip

. T

yp

e I

de

nti

fie

r

Se

qu

en

tia

l Id

en

tifi

er

HO

LD

S

De

lete

d


Fabricated /

Vendor Supply /

Novated


Number

Starter

Type

Installed

Power

kW

Load

%

Drawn Power

kW

Duty /

StandbyRev Comment


REVISION C



PROJECT

340-TK-008 340 TK 008 X Leach Area Catchall Tank N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A CNote: Replaced by 80m x 40m HDPE-lined event

pond on layout

340-XM-001 340 XM 001 In-line Mixer Vendor S106-000-PR-002 N/A N/A N/A A

340 Total

350-AG-001 350 AG 001 Leach Discharge Thickener Overflow Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-003 DOL 7.5 0.6 4.5 Duty A

350-AG-004 350 AG 004 Leach Discharge Filter Feed Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-003 DOL 22 0.6 13.2 Duty A

350-CH-001 350 CH 001 Belt Filter Discharge Conveyor Head Chute MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A 0.85 N/A A

350-CH-00X 350 CH 00X Belt Filter Discharge Chutes MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A 0.7 N/A A

350-CL-001 350 CL 001 Leach Discharge Clarifier 5 m diameter, pinned bed or similar, CSRL Vendor S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A N/A A

350-CV-001 350 CV 001 Belt Filter Discharge Conveyor 183 wet t/h, 50m, 600mm, 11o, 10m elevation N/A Vendor / Fabricated Various S106-000-PR-003 VSD 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

350-DI-001 350 DI 001 Leach Discharge Thickener Feed Box Distribution box with launder discharge N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A 0.7 N/A A

350-PK-001 350 PK 001 Leach Discharge Belt Filter PackageBelt filter package including vacuum pump, filtrate recievers, cloth wash

system and spraysVendor S106-000-PR-003 DOL 90 0.7 63.0 Duty A

350-LA-001 350 LA 001 Leach Discharge Thickener Overflow Launder MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A 0.2 N/A A

350-LA-002 350 LA 002 Leach Discharge Clarifier Overflow Launder MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A 0.7 N/A A

350-PP-001 350 PP 001 Leach Discharge Thickener Underflow Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-003 VSD 22 0.7 15.4 Duty A

350-PP-002 350 PP 002 Pregnant Leach Solution Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-003 VSD 55 0.7 38.5 Duty A

350-PP-003 350 PP 003 Belt Filter Filtrate Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-003 VSD 55 0.7 38.5 Duty A

350-PP-004 350 PP 004 Leach Discharge Clarifier Underflow Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-003 VSD 5.5 0.2 1.1 Duty A

350-PP-005 350 PP 005 Leach Discharge Thickener Area Sump Pump Vertical spindle slurry pump Sump Vendor S106-000-PR-003 DOL 5.5 0.2 1.1 Duty A

350-PP-006 350 PP 006 Leach Discharge Thickener Overflow Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-003 VSD 22 0.7 15.4 Duty A

350-PP-007 350 PP 007 Leach Discharge Filter Feed Pumps End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-003 VSD 55 0.7 38.5 Duty A

350-SA-001 350 SA 001 Leach Discharge Sampler Cross belt sampler Vendor S106-000-PR-003 DOL 0.75 0.2 0.2 Duty A

350-SA-002 350 SA 002 Pregnant Leach Solution SamplerPressure pipe sampler, Includes pinch valve and manual flush, Sample flow


350-SH-001 350 SH 001 Leach Discharge Thickener Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash Station Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A N/A A

350-TH-001 350 TH 001 Leach Discharge Thickener 16.5 m diameter, high rate thickener, CSRL Vendor S106-000-PR-003 DOL 7.5 0.6 4.5 Duty A

350-TK-001 350 TK 001 Leach Discharge Thickener Overflow TankCSRL. Live volume = 25 m³. 3.0 m (Dia) x 3.6 m (H), open. Top feed , bottom

discharge, with bafflesN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A N/A A

350-TK-002 350 TK 002 Pregnant Leach Solution TankCSRL, Live volume = 320 m³. 7.1 m (Dia) x 8.2 m (H), open. Top feed , bottom



Total, kW 1,744 1,058

Eq

uip

Ta

g

Are

a N

o.

Eq

uip

. T

yp

e I

de

nti

fie

r

Se

qu

en

tia

l Id

en

tifi

er

HO

LD

S

De

lete

d


Fabricated /

Vendor Supply /

Novated


Number

Starter

Type

Installed

Power

kW

Load

%

Drawn Power

kW

Duty /

StandbyRev Comment


REVISION C



PROJECT

350-TK-003 350 TK 003 Belt Filter Filtrate TankCSRL, Live volume = 180 m³. 6.0 m (Dia) x 6.5 m (H), open. Top feed , bottom

dischargeN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-003 N/A N/A N/A A

350-TK-004 350 TK 004 Leach Discharge Filter Feed TankCSRL, Live volume = 220 m³. 6.6 m (Dia) x 8.0 m (H), open. Top feed , bottom


350 Total

360-AG-001 360 AG 001 Mixed Hydroxide Precipitation Tank 1 Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-004 DOL 22 0.6 13.2 Duty A



360-PP-001 360 PP 001 Mixed Hydroxide Precipitation Slurry Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-004 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Duty A

360-PP-002 360 PP 002 Precipitation Area Sump Pump Vertical spindle slurry pump Sump Vendor S106-000-PR-004 DOL 5.5 0.2 1.1 Duty A

360-LA-001 360 LA 001Mixed Hydroxide Precipitation Tank 1 Discharge

LaunderMS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-004 N/A N/A N/A A

360-LA-002 360 LA 002Mixed Hydroxide Precipitation Tank 2 Discharge

LaunderMS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-004 N/A N/A N/A A

360-SA-001 360 SA 001 MHP SamplerPressure pipe sampler, Includes pinch valve and manual flush, Sample flow


360-SH-001 360 SH 001Precipitation Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash Station

1Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-004 N/A N/A N/A A

360-SH-002 360 SH 002Precipitation Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash Station

2Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-004 N/A N/A N/A A

360-TK-001 360 TK 001 Mixed Hydroxide Precipitation Tank 1CSRL, Live volume = 367 m³. 7.8 m (Dia) x 9.0 m (H), open. Top feed , bottom






360 Total

365-AG-001 365 AG 001 MHP Thickener Underflow Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-005 DOL 7.5 0.7 5.3 Duty A

365-BK-001 365 BK 001 MHP Filter Cake Bunker Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-005 N/A N/A N/A A

365-CH-001 365 CH 001 MHP Filter Cake Chute MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-005 N/A N/A N/A A

365-DI-001 365 DI 001 MHP Thickener Feed Box Distribution box with launder discharge N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-005 N/A N/A N/A A

365-PK-001 365 PK 001 MHP FilterVertical plate filter package. Recess filter press including drip tray, core blow

tank and ancillary equipmentVendor S106-000-PR-005

DOL

Reversing7.5 0.7 5.3 Duty A

365-LA-001 365 LA 001 MHP Thickener Overflow Launder MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-005 N/A N/A N/A A

365-LA-002 365 LA 002 MHP Filter Drip Trap Launder MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-005 N/A N/A N/A A


Total, kW 1,744 1,058

Eq

uip

Ta

g

Are

a N

o.

Eq

uip

. T

yp

e I

de

nti

fie

r

Se

qu

en

tia

l Id

en

tifi

er

HO

LD

S

De

lete

d


Fabricated /

Vendor Supply /

Novated


Number

Starter

Type

Installed

Power

kW

Load

%

Drawn Power

kW

Duty /

StandbyRev Comment


REVISION C



PROJECT

365-PP-001 365 PP 001 MHP Thickener Underflow Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-005 VSD 22 0.7 15.4 Duty A

365-PP-002 365 PP 002 MHP Filter Feed Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-005 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Duty A

365-PP-003 365 PP 003 MHP Thickener Overflow Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-005 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Duty A

365-PP-004 365 PP 004 MHP Thickener and Filter Area Sump Pump Vertical spindle slurry pump Sump Vendor S106-000-PR-005 DOL 5.5 0.2 1.1 Duty A

365-SH-001 365 SH 001MHP Thickener Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash

Station 1Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-005 N/A N/A N/A A

365-TH-001 365 TH 001 MHP Thickener 6 m diameter, high rate thickener, CSRL Vendor S106-000-PR-005 DOL 22 0.7 15.4 Duty A

365-TK-001 365 TK 001 MHP Thickener Underflow TankCSRL, Live volume = 57 m³. 4.2 m (Dia) x 5.0 m (H), open. Top feed , bottom


365-TK-002 365 TK 002 MHP Thickener Overflow TankCSRL, Live volume = 57 m³. 4.2 m (Dia) x 5.0 m (H), open. Top feed , bottom

discharge, no bafflesN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-005 N/A N/A N/A A

365-XM-001 365 XM 001 MHP Bagging Plant Vendor S106-000-PR-005 1.1 0.7 0.8 A

365 Total

A

380-AG-003 380 AG 003 SMBS Mixing Tank Agitator Single impeller, 316SS unlined construction, gearbox N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-007 DOL 3 0.6 1.8 Duty A

380-AG-004 380 AG 004 SMBS Header Tank Agitator Single impeller, 316SS unlined construction, gearbox N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-007 DOL 5.5 0.6 3.3 Duty A

380-AG-005 380 AG 005 Magnesium Oxide Mixing Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-007 DOL 3 0.6 1.8 Duty A

380-AG-006 380 AG 006 Lime Mixing Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-007 DOL 5.5 0.6 3.3 Duty A

380-AG-007 380 AG 007 Lime Header Tank Agitator Single impeller, CSRL shaft and impeller blades. N/A Vendor Mixtec S106-000-PR-007 DOL 3 0.6 1.8 Duty A

380-BN-002 380 BN 002 Magnesium Oxide Feed Bin 4 bags (3.2 m3) live volume Fabricated S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-BS-001 380 BS 001 SMBS Bag Splitter Suitable for 1000 kg bulk bags Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-BS-002 380 BS 002 Magnesium Oxide Bag Splitter Suitable for 1000 kg bulk bags Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-BS-003 380 BS 003 Lime Bag Splitter Suitable for 1000 kg bulk bags Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-CH-001 380 CH 001 Magnesium Oxide Feeder Discharge Chute MS Constructed N/A Fabricated S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-FE-002 380 FE 002 Magnesium Oxide Feeder 2.4 t/h capacity. Mixing tank screw feeder Continuous Vendor S106-000-PR-007 VSD 1.1 0.6 0.7 Duty A

380-HT-001 380 HT 001 Reagents Hoist 2t monorail hoist, Xm travel, Xm lift, chain type Vendor S106-000-PR-007 FDR Duty A

380-PK-001 380 PK 001 Flocculant Mixing Package7.5 kg/h capacity, 10 m

3 mix tank, 12.7 m

3 storage tank. Vendor to confirm

detailsN/A Vendor S106-000-PR-007 DOL 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

380-PP-001 380 PP 001 Sulphuric Acid Transfer Pump End suction centrifugal pump. Acid resistant MOC Vendor S106-000-PR-007 DOL 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

380-PP-002 380 PP 002 Sulphuric Acid Dosing Pump Metering Diaphragm Pump Vendor S106-000-PR-007 DOL 22 0.7 15.4 Duty A

380-PP-003 380 PP 003 SMBS Transfer Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump. Vendor S106-000-PR-007 VSD 5.5 0.7 3.9 Duty A

380-PP-004 380 PP 004 SMBS Dosing Pump Metering Diaphragm Pump Vendor S106-000-PR-007 VSD 1.1 0.7 0.8 Duty A

380-PP-005 380 PP 005 Magnesium Oxide Dosing Pump 1 Metering Diaphragm Pump Vendor S106-000-PR-007 VSD 1.1 0.7 0.8 Duty A

380-PP-008 380 PP 008 Flocculant Dosing Pump 1 Metering Diaphragm Pump Vendor S106-000-PR-007 VSD 1.1 0.7 0.8 Duty A





380-PP-013 380 PP 013 Lime Transfer Pump End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-007 VSD 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

380-PP-014 380 PP 014 Lime Ringmain Pump 1 End suction centrifugal slurry pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-007 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Duty A

380-PP-016 380 PP 016 Reagents Area Sump Pump Vertical spindle slurry pump Sump Vendor S106-000-PR-007 DOL 5.5 0.2 1.1 Duty A

380-SH-001 380 SH 001 Reagents Area Safety Shower/Eye Wash Station Vendor N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-TK-001 380 TK 001 Sulphuric Acid Decant TankCarbon steel acid resist. Live volume = 30 m³. 3.2 m (Dia) x 3.7 m (H). Sealed

and vented. Top feed, bottom dischargeN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A B

380-TK-002 380 TK 002 Sulphuric Acid Storage TankCarbon steel acid resist, Live volume = 1278 m³. 11.8 m (Dia) x 13.6 m (H).

Sealed and vented. top feed, bottom dischargeN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A B

380-TK-003 380 TK 003 SMBS Mixing TankLive volume = 20 m³, 3.0 m (Dia) x 3.5 m (H), sealed and vented, agitated,

shop fabricated, 316SS, unpaintedN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-TK-004 380 TK 004 SMBS Header TankLive volume = 8.6 m³, 2.2 m (Dia) x 2.8 m (H), sealed and vented, agitated,


380-TK-005 380 TK 005 Magnesium Oxide Mixing TankLive volume = 4.4 m³, 1.8 m (Dia) x 2.2 m (H), sealed and vented, agitated,


380-TK-006 380 TK 006 Lime Mixing TankCS, Live volume = 20 m³. 3.0 m (Dia) x 3.5 m (H), sealed and vented,

agitated. Top feed, bottom discharge, with bafflesN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380-TK-007 380 TK 007 Lime Header TankCS, Live volume = 8.6 m³. 2.2 m (Dia) x 2.8 m (H),open, agitated. Top feed,

bottom discharge, with bafflesN/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-007 N/A N/A N/A A

380 Total


Total, kW 1,744 1,058

Eq

uip

Ta

g

Are

a N

o.

Eq

uip

. T

yp

e I

de

nti

fie

r

Se

qu

en

tia

l Id

en

tifi

er

HO

LD

S

De

lete

d


Fabricated /

Vendor Supply /

Novated


Number

Starter

Type

Installed

Power

kW

Load

%

Drawn Power

kW

Duty /

StandbyRev Comment


REVISION C



PROJECT

390-DR-001 390 DR 001 Air Dryer 1 Vendor S106-000-PR-009 N/A 5 0.7 3.5 Duty A

390-DR-002 390 DR 002 Air Dryer 2 Vendor S106-000-PR-009 N/A 5 0.7 3.5 Duty A

390-AR-001 390 AR 001 Plant Air Receiver Vendor S106-000-PR-009 N/A N/A N/A A

390-AR-002 390 AR 002 MHP Filter Air Receiver Vendor S106-000-PR-009 N/A N/A N/A A

390-CP-001 390 CP 001 Plant Air Compressor 1 Vendor S106-000-PR-009 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Duty A

390-CP-002 390 CP 002 Plant Air Compressor 2 Vendor S106-000-PR-009 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Standby A

390-FL-001 390 FL 001 Plant Air Filter 1 In-Line Coalescing Filter (included in compressor package) Vendor S106-000-PR-009 N/A N/A Duty A

390-FL-002 390 FL 002 Plant Air Filter 2 In-Line Coalescing Filter (included in compressor package) Vendor S106-000-PR-009 N/A N/A Standby A

390-PK-001 390 PK 001 Potable Water Plant 20 m3/day capacity Vendor S106-000-PR-008 DOL 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

390-PP-001 390 PP 001 Raw Water Transfer Pump End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

390-PP-002 390 PP 002 Raw Water Distribution Pump 1 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 22 0.7 15.4 Duty A

390-PP-003 390 PP 003 Raw Water Distribution Pump 2 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 22 0.7 15.4 Standby A

390-PP-004 390 PP 004 Gland Water Distribution Pump 1 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 55 0.7 38.5 Duty A

390-PP-005 390 PP 005 Gland Water Distribution Pump 2 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 55 0.7 38.5 Standby A

390-PP-006 390 PP 006 Potable Water Plant Feed Pump End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

390-PP-007 390 PP 007 Potable Water Distribution Pump 1 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

390-PP-008 390 PP 008 Potable Water Distribution Pump 2 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 11 0.7 7.7 Standby A

390-PP-009 390 PP 009 Process Water Distribution Pump 1 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Duty A

390-PP-010 390 PP 010 Process Water Distribution Pump 2 End suction centrifugal pump, gland seal Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 37 0.7 25.9 Standby A

390-PK-002 390 PK 002 Fire Water Pump Package Electric jockey pump and diesel back-up pump included Vendor S106-000-PR-008 VSD 11 0.7 7.7 Duty A

390-TK-001 390 TK 001 Bore Water Tank Existing tank. Volume TBC. Existing N/A S106-000-PR-008 N/A N/A N/A A

390-TK-002 390 TK 002 Raw Water TankCS painted. Live volume = 395 m

3.. 8.0 m (Dia) x 9.1 m (H),sealed and vented.

Requirement to reserve volume for fire water TBC.N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-008 N/A N/A N/A A

390-TK-003 390 TK 003 Potable Water Tank HDPE or galvanised CS. Live volume 30 m3. N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-008 N/A N/A N/A A

390-TK-004 390 TK 004 Process Water Tank CS painted. Live volume = 780 m3.. 10.0 m (Dia) x 11.3 m (H), open N/A Fabricated N/A S106-000-PR-008 N/A N/A N/A A

390 Total

Gran

d

Total




Preliminary Plant Layout



ALS Testwork Results

Generate CompositeKipushi Tailings Composite 1 (~75kg)

Check samples against sample list

Combine as required

Crush to P100:3.35mm (Break up Lumps)Break up and Blend wet sample & conduct moisture content determinationSplit into 20x 1kg Dry Weight Equivalent Charges (Reserve to stores in 10kg DWE Charges)

1kg 3x1kg 2kg Dry Weight Equivalent 3 x 1kg DWE 3 x 1kg DWE 2 x 1kg DWE 2 x 1kg DWE 1 x 15kg DWE ReserveFigure 3

Moisture Determination Grind Establishment Size by size analysis Grind Size Optimisation Acid Addition Optimisation ORP Optimisation TBA Optimisation BulkHead Assay: Target Sizes: Atmospheric Leach Atmospheric Leach Atmospheric Leach Atmospheric Leach Atmospheric Leach

Cu, Co, Al, Ca, 1. P80:75µm Size Fractions: Variations as RequiredFe, Mg, Mn, Ni, 2. P80:45µm 425 um Grind To: 1. P80:75µm Grind To: Optimised Grind To: Optimised Grind To: Optimised

Si, S, Zn 3. P80:30µm 300 um 2. P80:45µm Grind To: OptimisedCu Speciation 212 um 3. P80:30µm

150 um Test Conditions: Test Conditions: Test Conditions:106 um Water: Perth Tap Water: Perth Tap Test Conditions: Water: Perth Tap

75 um Test Conditions: % Solids: 30% (w/w) % Solids: 30% (w/w) Water: Perth Tap % Solids: 30% (w/w)53 um Water: Perth Tap Temperature: Ambient Temperature: Ambient % Solids: 30% (w/w) Temperature: Ambient38 um % Solids: 30% (w/w) Acid Addition: 1. 5 g/L H2SO4 Acid Addition: Optimised Temperature: Ambient Acid Addition: Optimised20 um Temperature: Ambient 2. 10 g/L H2SO4 ORP: 1. Acid Addition: Optimised ORP: Optimised

-20 um Acid Addition: 10 g/L H2SO4 3. 20 g/L H2SO4 2. ORP: Optimised Duration: 6hrsORP: 350 mV (Ag/AgCl) ORP: 350 mV (Ag/AgCl) Duration: 6hrs Duration: 6hrs Sampling: Liquor only at

Assay Size fractions for: Duration: 6hrs Duration: 6hrs Sampling: Liquor only at Sampling: Liquor only at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6hrCu, Co, S, Si Sampling: Liquor only at Sampling: Liquor only at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6hr 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6hr Final residue:

Fe, Mn, Al, Ca, Mg, Ni, Zn 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6hr 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6hr Final residue: Final residue: Wash with: Acidified DI WaterFinal residue: Final residue: Wash with: Acidified DI Water Wash with: Acidified DI Water Wash twice

Split out Sub-Sample for Wash with: Acidified DI Water Wash with: Acidified DI Water Wash twice Wash twice Dry and weighMineralogical Analysis Wash twice Wash twice Dry and weigh Dry and weigh Assays: Liquor:

Dry and weigh Dry and weigh Assays: Liquor: Assays: Liquor: Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg,Liquor: Assays: Liquor: Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si

Assays: Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si Residue:Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si Residue: Residue: Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg,Residue: Residue: Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, SiCu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Cu, Co, Al, Ca, Mg, Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, SiMn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, S, Si

Slurry to Figure 2Metal Recovery Testwork

METALLURGIST JS FIGURE 1

TESTWORK FLOWSHEET - CHARACTERISATION & ACID LEACH TESTWORK

PROJECT Kipushi Cu/Co JOB # A18714CLIENT Cape Lambert Resources DATE 20/02/2018

HAZARD IDSample Contains no

Known Hazardous MaterialCaution with fine dust

SAMPLES ARE TO REMAINUNDER QUARANTINE CONTROL

Value is under detection limit


(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

425 42.5 2.1 97.9 4.31 1.69 0.48 1.04 4.49 5.48 0.07 0.01 0.33 27.70 0.14

300 62.5 3.1 94.8 3.93 1.24 0.49 1.0 1.6 6.6 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.5 0.05

212 164.1 8.1 86.7 3.78 1.28 0.42 0.8 1.4 6.8 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.7 0.04

150 295.5 14.6 72.1 3.71 1.39 0.39 0.8 1.5 6.9 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.5 0.0

106 362.6 17.9 54.2 3.47 1.65 0.38 0.8 1.6 7.3 0.1 0.005 0.0 28.7 0.0

75 254.3 12.6 41.7 3.31 1.79 0.40 0.9 2.0 7.1 0.1 0.005 0.1 28.4 0.0

53 202.9 10.0 31.6 3.33 1.75 0.38 1.0 2.2 6.4 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.1 0.0

38 158.8 7.8 23.8 3.45 1.81 0.32 0.8 2.2 5.9 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.7 0.0

20 153.3 7.6 16.2 3.64 2.13 0.26 0.7 2.1 5.6 0.1 0.005 0.1 29.5 0.0

-20 328.5 16.2 0.0 6.4 1.89 0.45 1.2 2.8 7.2 0.1 0.005 0.1 24.3 0.1

TOTAL 2024.8 100.0 4.01 1.69 0.39 0.90 2.02 6.7 0.07 0.01 0.07 28.33 0.0

ASSAYED HEAD 4.44 1.40 0.31 0.96 2.64 5.4 0.07 0.01 0.10 29.40 0.0


(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

425 42.5 2.1 2.26 2.10 2.58 2.43 4.67 1.70 2.15 4.11 9.95 2.05 8.38

300 62.5 3.1 3.03 2.27 3.87 3.50 2.37 3.01 2.71 3.02 5.33 3.21 4.40

212 164.1 8.1 7.65 6.15 8.72 7.49 5.59 8.11 7.12 7.94 8.16 8.50 9.25

150 295.5 14.6 13.51 12.03 14.58 12.51 10.50 14.84 12.82 14.29 10.50 15.20 12.50

106 362.6 17.9 15.51 17.53 17.44 15.56 14.40 19.24 18.36 17.54 10.30 18.14 10.23

75 254.3 12.6 10.37 13.33 12.87 12.59 12.34 13.17 12.87 12.30 9.03 12.59 10.76

53 202.9 10.0 8.33 10.40 9.76 10.82 11.14 9.55 10.27 9.81 11.53 10.29 5.72

38 158.8 7.8 6.75 8.42 6.43 7.25 8.41 6.80 8.04 7.68 10.15 8.22 4.48

20 153.3 7.6 6.88 9.57 5.04 5.99 7.97 6.32 6.65 7.42 8.71 7.88 6.49

-20 328.5 16.2 25.71 18.19 18.71 21.86 22.62 17.26 19.00 15.89 16.33 13.92 27.79

TOTAL 2024.8 100.0 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

PROJECT Kipushi tailings Cu/Co

JOB # A18714

CLIENT Cape Lambert Resources

SAMPLE Kipushi Composite

ScreenSize(µm)

MassRetained

(g)Retained

(%)

Size Assay AnalysisScreen

Size(µm)

MassRetained

(g)Retained

(%)Passing

(%)

Metal Distribution

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

10 100 1000

% P

assi

ng

Particle Size (µm)

Cumulative Percent Passing vs Particle Size

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

425 300 212 150 106 75 53 38 20 -20

% C

oppe

r, %

Cob

alt

Screen Size

Copper & Cobalt Distribution By Screen Size

Copper

Cobalt

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

425 300 212 150 106 75 53 38 20 -20

% C

oppe

r, %

Cob

alt

Screen Size

Copper & Cobalt Assay By Screen Size

Copper

Cobalt

Test ID : HY5996Test Description : ACID LEACH

Sample : Kipushi Tailings Date : 22/03/2018Grind Size (P80) : As received (~183µm)

Temperature : ambient °C Initial Solids : 1000 gTarget ORP : <350mV (Ag/AgCl) Initial water mass : 2333 g Value is under detection limit

Target H2SO4 : 10g/L Leach % Solids : 30 % Outstanding analysis

Bulk 98% 200g/L Slurry Solids SolutionTime Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. H2SO4 SMBS pH ORP pH ORP Soln Mass Mass Mass Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnHours mL mL mV °C g g mV mV s.g. g g g mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LNatural 2333 0 7.70 272 Ambient

0 2348 0 1.34 647 23.30 2.28 1.00005 mins 2360 0 1.77 403 0 14.5510 mins 2373 0 1.32 417 10.15 7.57 1.33 41615 mins 2403 0 1.17 403 14.31 25.70 1.16 40620 mins 2480 0 1.19 359 12.16 80.4625 mins 2483 0 1.10 358 5.90 1.10 358

0.5 2522 26 1.07 356 8.34 39.37 1.04 354 1.24 255 1.0350 26.65 72 535 1053 2931 254 906 136 6.00 114800 114 1061 2539 29 1.06 348 11.38 11.44 1.25 258 1.0389 29.89 80 530 1142 3081 340 1340 143 6.50 63370 130 1082 2661 33 1.08 350 36.28 117.55 0.99 350 1.18 262 1.0478 35.08 92 610 1225 2991 476 2006 157 7.50 73950 151 1093 2738 33 1.08 358 13.82 78.59 1.01 350 1.19 263 1.0521 34.86 92 565 1196 2913 526 2236 156 7.50 83680 155 1064 2743 31 1.09 347 9.45 0.99 348 1.16 317 1.0534 32.65 102 560 1227 2999 580 2516 161 8.00 17590 166 1075 2872 33 1.04 370 15.56 137.79 1.01 351 1.18 248 1.0596 35.12 96 530 1173 2810 592 2602 155 7.50 132900 156 1016 2872 33 1.07 335 1.23 298 1.0583 34.72 100 535 1195 2816 636 2676 159 7.50 18510 164 103

Final 1.20 320 1.0577Total 160.65 515.30

kg/tonne 160.7 515.3Final Slurry 3558.10 gFinal Dry Solids 967.64 gFinal % Solids 27.2 % Time Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si Zn

Hours ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppmFeed 40400 17100 4040 8900 20000 67700 700 50 900 282000 200

6 41300 12600 710 900 18100 63200 300 25 7300 300000 50

Time Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnHours (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.5 0.46 9.95 62.06 78.73 3.38 3.39 44.93 32.71 0.10 74.391.0 0.51 9.82 67.00 82.41 4.49 4.96 47.05 35.27 0.11 75.502.0 0.62 11.98 76.19 84.90 6.65 7.86 54.74 43.11 0.14 80.833.0 0.65 11.56 77.42 86.06 7.63 9.09 56.59 44.85 0.15 81.814.0 0.72 11.61 80.37 89.64 8.49 10.33 59.09 48.35 0.16 83.615.0 0.72 11.64 81.34 89.00 9.16 11.28 60.21 48.03 0.16 83.606.0 0.76 11.87 83.68 90.14 9.91 11.71 62.35 48.55 0.17 86.08

Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si Zn% % % % % % % % % % %

100 81 108 108 97 102 111 95 103 184

A18741 : KIPUSHI TAILINGS CO/CU PROJECTATMOSPHERIC ACID LEACH - ACID STRENGTH OPTIMISATION - TEST 1

Volume Slurry Addition Adjusted Slurry Solution Sampling

10g/L H2SO4

Metal Accountability

Residue Assays

Metal ExtractionBased on Metal in Solution vs Calc. Head

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Met

al E

xtra

ctio

n (%

)

Duration (hours)

Metal Extraction vs Time

Al

Co

Ca

Cu

Fe

Mg

Ni

Si

Zn

Mn



Temperature : ambient °C Initial Solids : 1000 gTarget ORP : <350mV (Ag/AgCl) Initial water mass : 2333 g

Target H2SO4 : 5g/L Value is under detection limitTarget pH : 1.3 Leach % Solids : 30 % Outstanding analysis

Bulk 98% 200g/L Slurry Solids SolutionTime Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. H2SO4 SMBS pH ORP pH ORP Soln Mass Mass Mass Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnHours mL mL mV °C g g mV mV s.g. g g g mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LNatural 2333 0 7.70 382 Ambient 7.12 331

0 2341 0 7.12 331 11.67 1.55 2.08 737 1.00005 mins 2395 0 2.08 737 20.73 48.89 1.56 34410 mins 2456 0 1.56 344 22.12 56.54 1.31 33015 mins 2458 0 1.31 330 2.54 1.32 32620 mins 2460 0 1.34 324 4.85 1.30 32225 mins 2460 0 1.33 326

0.5 2464 28 1.40 321 6.83 1.29 326 0.94 251 1.0315 29.04 80 560 1146 3081 269 900 135 6.05 31206 122 1131 2473 28 1.40 331 11.69 3.20 1.29 349 0.95 286 1.0344 29.23 95 683 1242 3146 344 1421 148 6.75 10783 146 1152 2515 30 1.54 361 17.11 36.83 1.30 349 0.94 254 1.0397 30.74 100 582 1297 3128 426 1930 157 7.10 29652 156 1143 2531 30 1.37 357 11.39 11.67 1.30 350 0.92 280 1.0428 31.80 110 562 1360 3168 516 2518 164 7.50 15781 171 1134 2549 30 1.31 350 8.05 15.38 1.29 350 0.92 312 1.0453 31.08 114 541 1349 3205 563 2870 167 7.60 14301 177 1115 2566 29 1.33 351 6.00 15.96 1.30 350 0.93 357 1.0473 30.84 117 532 1370 3142 607 3009 169 7.55 14626 181 1086 2566.49 30 1.37 362 0.99 383 1.0475 31.35 123 519 1371 3189 639 3224 173 7.90 14374 190 111

Final 1.04 383 1.0481 0.0051 0.0217 0.0573 0.1333 0.0267 0.1348 0.0072 0.0003 0.6009 0.0079 0.0046Total 122.98 190.02 0.03857 0.1627469 0.42992 1 0.20038 1.01098 0.05425 0.00248 4.50737 0.05958 0.03481



6 40000 11200 650 900 20700 61900 200 25 7100 299000 100


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.5 0.50 11.23 64.55 79.04 3.04 3.23 50.01 32.59 0.10 69.371.0 0.61 13.87 70.95 81.90 3.94 5.16 55.59 36.86 0.13 71.652.0 0.66 12.20 76.11 83.74 5.00 7.17 60.56 39.83 0.14 73.043.0 0.73 12.00 81.13 86.30 6.14 9.47 64.32 42.76 0.15 73.724.0 0.77 11.78 81.96 88.84 6.80 10.95 66.63 44.09 0.16 73.785.0 0.80 11.80 84.61 88.69 7.43 11.66 68.56 44.58 0.17 73.146.0 0.85 11.66 85.60 90.92 7.89 12.59 70.86 47.03 0.18 75.85


98 73 110 109 110 103 96 93 104 203

Residue Assays

Metal Extraction


5g/L H2SO4


Based on Metal in Solution vs Calc. Head


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Met

al E

xtra

ctio

n (%

)

Duration (hours)


Al

Co

Ca

Cu

Fe

Mg

Ni

Si

Zn

Mn




Target H2SO4 : 3g/L Value is under detection limitTarget pH : 1.5 Leach % Solids : 30 % Outstanding analysis

Bulk 98% 200g/L Slurry Solids SolutionTime Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. H2SO4 SMBS pH ORP pH ORP Soln Mass Mass Mass Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnHours mL mL mV °C g g mV mV s.g. g g g mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LNatural 2333 0 8.00 329 24.8

0 2337 0 2.08 663 7.00 1.00005 mins 2370 0 1.71 364 12.77 29.64 1.71 36410 mins 2396 0 1.84 364 7.79 25.37 1.58 34115 mins 2400 0 1.83 310 6.17 1.47 34420 mins 2404 0 1.55 355 2.00 4.17 1.51 34325 mins 2406 0 1.63 334 2.93 1.50 344

0.5 2425 28 1.64 336 10.07 15.25 1.46 344 1.76 284 1.0247 28.68 68 485 872 2990 169 586 129 5.00 8150 88 1201 2440 28 1.51 338 29.2 6.60 13.41 1.47 341 1.67 264 1.0255 28.81 76 595 997 3133 210 874 137 6.00 6470 102 1222 2473 29 2.01 307 29.2 16.14 27.61 1.44 336 2.13 303 1.0274 30.14 86 500 1111 3196 260 1326 150 6.00 6540 120 1223 2518 28 1.30 347 29.7 12.55 43.06 1.39 327 1.80 322 1.0324 28.82 92 490 1160 3219 328 1812 159 7.00 8190 130 1284 2520 28 1.48 315 29.9 5.10 1.43 319 1.79 283 1.0371 29.00 100 490 1196 3219 383 2238 166 8.00 9760 142 1265 2535 28 1.47 347 29.8 5.34 13.47 1.43 334 1.76 333 1.0380 29.43 104 490 1217 3207 418 2434 171 8.00 10200 150 1266 2535.17 29 1.49 352 29.7 1.74 348 1.0405 30.06 110 485 1237 3287 447 2774 175 8.00 11160 162 130

Final 1.86 253 1.0405Total 94.46 171.98



6 44800 20000 960 1100 20100 60600 200 60 13400 282000 50


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.5 0.38 5.76 49.91 73.13 2.01 2.18 47.37 15.40 0.08 73.091.0 0.43 7.17 57.99 77.95 2.54 3.29 51.17 18.77 0.09 75.612.0 0.50 6.20 66.10 81.47 3.21 5.09 57.32 19.24 0.11 77.503.0 0.55 6.25 70.89 84.36 4.14 7.11 62.38 22.98 0.12 83.494.0 0.61 6.33 73.86 85.35 4.86 8.84 65.78 26.45 0.14 83.205.0 0.64 6.43 76.32 86.42 5.38 9.75 68.77 26.88 0.15 84.546.0 0.68 6.43 78.34 89.39 5.80 11.18 71.05 27.17 0.16 87.99


108 121 106 113 103 97 95 159 97 201

Residue Assays

Metal Extraction


3g/L H2SO4




0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Met

al E

xtra

ctio

n (%

)

Duration (hours)


Al

Co

Ca

Cu

Fe

Mg

Ni

Si

Zn

Mn




Target H2SO4 : 1g/L Value is under detection limitTarget pH : 2 Leach % Solids : 30 % Outstanding analysis

Bulk 98% 200g/L Slurry Solids SolutionTime Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. H2SO4 SMBS pH ORP pH ORP Soln Mass Mass Mass Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnHours mL mL mV °C g g mV mV s.g. g g g mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LNatural 2333 0 7.81 369 Ambient

0 2341 0 4.08 510 2.33 7.66 2.15 336 1.00005 mins 2347 0 3.18 256 3.96 4.04 1.97 34010 mins 2349 0 2.93 252 3.81 0.38 1.92 33615 mins 2351 0 2.63 274 3.30 1.90 32720 mins 2352 0 2.44 302 2.84 1.96 34825 mins 2358 0 2.30 329 3.27 4.00 1.87 345

0.5 2359 28 2.13 321 1.78 1.93 336 1.63 394 1.0171 28.84 57 532 627 2540 90 539 106 4.05 3517 73 1051 2367 31 2.31 342 8.81 4.22 1.92 346 1.62 382 1.0203 31.62 65 592 748 2899 108 890 117 4.65 4455 86 1102 2372 29 2.90 356 8.03 1.08 1.97 347 1.71 381 1.0216 29.87 66 526 819 3049 119 1233 129 5.10 4955 96 1113 2386 30 2.31 327 12.42 8.29 1.88 348 1.61 375 1.0224 31.12 80 533 921 3154 171 1788 143 5.65 6169 108 1144 2397 30 2.23 334 8.21 7.02 1.89 349 1.58 371 1.0231 30.39 85 516 974 3173 199 2238 153 6.00 7071 116 1155 2406 29 2.16 326 5.33 6.78 1.96 340 1.65 362 1.0307 29.45 89 509 1044 3206 241 2487 156 6.25 7681 121 1156 2406 30 2.77 280 2.46 306 1.0308 31.35 79 485 1061 3240 188 2736 163 6.25 7609 118 115

Final 2.70 297 1.0307Total 64.09 43.47



6 39700 12200 1805 1400 21400 63800 300 35 5700 297000 400


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.5 0.35 9.57 33.18 61.85 1.00 1.85 35.35 19.12 0.06 36.161.0 0.40 10.82 40.16 71.66 1.22 3.09 39.62 22.28 0.07 38.492.0 0.41 9.78 44.52 76.36 1.36 4.31 44.22 24.74 0.08 39.393.0 0.50 10.08 50.79 80.33 1.96 6.32 49.75 27.82 0.09 41.154.0 0.55 9.93 54.47 82.09 2.31 7.99 53.94 29.95 0.10 42.165.0 0.58 9.95 59.05 84.13 2.82 8.98 55.76 31.60 0.11 42.786.0 0.53 9.62 60.67 85.97 2.26 9.96 58.81 31.97 0.10 43.28


97 78 112 110 108 103 102 101 104 347



Residue Assays

Metal Extraction


1g/L H2SO4


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Met

al E

xtra

ctio

n (%

)

Duration (hours)


Al

Co

Ca

Cu

Fe

Mg

Ni

Si

Zn

Mn

Test ID : HY6366 Notes:Test Description : Lime Precipitation Test 1. Total Ca(OH)2 Addition 3.55 kg/m3 solution

Sample : HY6094 Final Solution Date :Grind Size (P80) : 183 µm Value is under detection limit

Temperature : 40 °C Initial Solution : 1500 g Indicative valueTarget pH: 3

Bulk Solution Solids 25% Ca(OH)2Time Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. pH ORP Soln Mass Mass slurry Ca(OH)2 DI Water Adjusted Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si Zn

Minutes g g mV °C mV s.g. g g g g g pH mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LNatural 1500 0 1.68 413.0 40 - - - - 154 500 1506 3491 813 4384 211 11 13720 181 130.0

0 1511 0 2.05 388.0 40 14.17 3.54 10.63 2.0415 1515 0 2.04 385.0 41 6.10 1.53 4.58 2.5430 1516 0 2.61 341.0 39 0.60 0.15 0.45 2.7645 1516 0 2.87 317.0 42 0.61 0.15 0.46 3.01

Bulk Solution Solids 25% MgO

Time Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. pH ORP Soln Mass Mass slurry MgO DI Water Adjusted Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnMinutes g g mV °C mV s.g. g g g g g pH mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L

0 1516 0 3.01 310.0 42 - - - -15 1516 0 3.37 277.0 39 - - - -30 1516 0 3.55 264.0 42 - - - -45 1516 0 3.70 258.0 40 - - - -60 1516 0 3.76 257.0 41 - - - -75 1516 0 3.82 255.0 41 - - - -90 1516 0 3.88 254.0 40 - - - -105 1516 0 3.89 255.0 41 - - - -

Final 1469 0 3.89 244.0 41 4.20 265.0 1.0457 120 490 1483 3457 414 4606 216 10.5 13570 142.00 136

Final Slurry Mass 1476.95 g

Final Solids Mass 8.20 gFinal % Solids 0.6 %

Time Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnMinutes (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

FeedFinal 0.73 19.40 0.01 0.73 6.59 0.07 0.00 0.00 13.20 1.18 0.02

Time Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnMinutes % % % % % % % % % % %

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Final 23.70 4.04 3.58 3.04 50.14 0.16 <0.10 2.08 3.15 23.18 <0.10

Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si Zn% % % % % %

102 63 96 98 94 177 100 98 102 112 103


Residue Assays

Metal PrecipitationBased on Metal in Solution vs Metal in Feed Solution

Liquor Assays

Volume Slurry Solution Sampling Addition Liquor Assays

Volume Slurry Solution Sampling Addition

A18714: KIPUSHI TAILINGS PROJECTLIME PRECIPITATION TESTWORK

21/06/2018

25 % (w/w) Ca(OH)2 addition to pH 3.0

Test ID : HY6367 Notes:Test Description : Magnesia Precipitation Test 1. Total Lime Addition 0.82 kg/m3 solution

2. Total NaOH Addition 2.19 kg/m3 solution

Sample : HY6366 Final Solution Date :Grind Size (P80) : 183 µm Value is under detection limit

Temperature : 40 °C Initial Solution : 1308 g Indicative valueTarget pH: 5/8

Bulk Solution Solids 25% MgOTime Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. pH ORP Soln Mass Mass slurry MgO DI Water Adjusted Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si Zn

Minutes g g mV °C mV s.g. g g g g g pH mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/LNatural 1308 0 3.51 301.0 43 - - - - 120 490 1483 3457 414 4606 216 11 13570 142 136.0

0 1308 0 4.83 159.0 43 4.28 1.07 3.21 5.0015 1311 0 5.00 195.0 40 24.98 - - - - 4 550 1547 2344 11 5268 226 11 13890 80 13230 1286 0 4.90 246.0 41 27.92 - - - - 4 545 1516 1647 1 5702 221 11 12040 72 13145 1258 0 4.94 256.0 40 - - - -60 1258 0 5.02 246.0 41 26.13 - - - - 4 570 1574 759 1 5842 230 11 11810 70 13275 1232 0 5.18 234.0 39 - - - -90 1232 0 5.28 226.0 42 - - - -105 1232 0 5.55 212.0 39 - - - -120 1232 0 5.81 205.0 42 27.27 - - - - 1 580 1506 39 1 6172 227 11 12010 51 113

Bulk Solution Solids 50 g/L NaOH

Time Solution Sample pH ORP Temp. pH ORP Soln Mass Mass slurry NaOH DI Water Adjusted Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnMinutes g g mV °C mV s.g. g g g g g pH mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L

120 1205 0 5.81 205.0 42 60.21 2.86 57.35 8.42135 1262 0 8.42 102.0 45 25.26 - - - - 1 545 22 2 1 5778 43 0 11550 3 0150 1237 0 8.42 107.0 44 - - - -180 1237 0 8.37 124.0 42 - - - -

Final 1148 0 8.37 124.0 42 7.10 320.0 1.0409 1 530 25 1.8 0.5 5868 24 0.25 11860 5.00 0.1

Final Slurry Mass 1165.40 g

Final Solids Mass 17.59 gFinal % Solids 1.5 %

Time Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnMinutes (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

FeedFinal 0.87 0.45 9.77 22.80 2.94 5.58 1.31 0.11 7.20 1.24 0.90

Time Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si ZnMinutes % % % % % % % % % % %

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Final 99.27 5.08 98.52 99.95 99.89 11.13 90.25 97.91 23.30 96.91 99.94

Al Ca Co Cu Fe Mg Mn Ni S Si Zn% % % % % %98 107 90 89 96 84 91 143 84 121 89


Residue Assays

Metal PrecipitationBased on Metal in Solution vs Metal in Feed Solution

Liquor Assays

50 g/L NaOH addition to pH 8

Volume Slurry Solution Sampling Addition Liquor Assays

Volume Slurry Solution Sampling Addition

A18714: KIPUSHI TAILINGS PROJECTMAGNESIA/HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION TESTWORK

22/06/2018

25 % (w/w) MgO addition to pH 5.0

AMMTEC ANALYTICAL REPORT

Client Name ALS AmmtecPOrder Number 0Job Ref B97021Client Ref A18714Date Submitted 4/07/18

Sample_Description Al(%) Ca(%) Co(%) Cu(%) Fe(%)HY6412 Final RESI 0.20 20.4 0.007 0.05 6.69HY6413 Final pH 7.5 RESI 1.31 0.44 4.11 27.9 3.92HY6413 Final pH 8.5 RESI 0.11 12.2 16.0 <0.01 0.14HY6414 Final pH 6.0 RESI 1.50 0.34 1.19 31.9 4.55HY6414 Final pH 8.3 RESI 0.06 0.65 18.4 0.18 0.09

Sample_Description Mg(%) Mn(%) Ni(%) S(%) Si(%)HY6412 Final RESI 0.10 <0.01 0.01 16.2 1.66HY6413 Final pH 7.5 RESI 9.41 0.21 0.05 4.43 1.83HY6413 Final pH 8.5 RESI 2.68 2.50 0.12 10.9 1.32HY6414 Final pH 6.0 RESI 7.96 0.08 0.04 4.82 1.76HY6414 Final pH 8.3 RESI 22.6 1.37 0.17 5.27 1.08

Sample_Description Zn(%)HY6412 Final RESI 0.03HY6413 Final pH 7.5 RESI 1.06HY6413 Final pH 8.5 RESI 0.08HY6414 Final pH 6.0 RESI 0.50HY6414 Final pH 8.3 RESI 1.15

Data Page 1 of 1 6/07/2018 B97021 Final Report



Tenova Delkor Testwork Results

Date : 4 July 2018 Test Report

Lead By: Mark White

Test No: AUDLW0030 Minnovo – Kipushi Residue Thickener & HBF Tests

1 | P a g e

Customer Minnovo Pty Ltd

Contact Details John Riordan

Place L1, 632 Newcastle St Leederville WA 6007

Category Mining

Application Tailings retreatment residue

Project No. or Name Kipushi

Test Unit Thickening HBF

Test Location Fremantle Metallurgy 12A Bowen St O’Connor

Test work Date 7-14 May & 8 June 2018

Test Engineers Mark White, Joshua Widjaja


Lead By: Mark White


2 | P a g e

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 4

2. OBJECTIVE & SCOPE OF TEST WORK ..................................................................................... 5

Section 1 – Thickener Tests

3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - THICKENER ....................................................................................... 5

a. High Rate Thickener Selection ..................................................................................................... 5

4. CLIENT PROCESS DATA & REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................... 6

5. STATIC THICKENING TESTS ........................................................................................................ 7

a. Sample Preparation ....................................................................................................................... 7

b. Initial Flocculant Screening ......................................................................................................... 7

c. Dilution Response ........................................................................................................................ 8

d. Settling Rate & Dose Response Tests .......................................................................................... 9

6. DYNAMIC THICKENING TESTS .................................................................................................. 12

a. Dynamic Thickener Model ......................................................................................................... 12

b. Dynamic Thickener Tests ........................................................................................................... 12

c. Solids Loading and Rise Rate Selection ..................................................................................... 13

d. Rheology.................................................................................................................................... 14

7. DATA ANALYSIS – HIGH RATE THICKENING ......................................................................... 16

a. Flocculant Selection ................................................................................................................... 16

b. Flocculant Dose ......................................................................................................................... 16

c. Coagulant Dose ......................................................................................................................... 16

d. Feed Dilution ............................................................................................................................. 16

e. Rise Rate and Thickener Loading .............................................................................................. 16

f. Thickener Underflow ................................................................................................................. 16

g. Design Yield Stress..................................................................................................................... 16

8. CONCLUSIONS & EQUIPMENT SIZING – HIGH RATE THICKENER ................................. 17


Lead By: Mark White


3 | P a g e

Section 2 – HBF Tests

9. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY – HORIZONTAL BELT FILTER ........................................................ 18

a. Aims ........................................................................................................................................... 18

b. Summary of Results ................................................................................................................... 18

10. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF TESTWORK ............................................................................... 18

11. VACUUM FILTRATION TEST PROCEDURE ............................................................................ 19

a. General Method ........................................................................................................................ 19

b. Wash Test Method .................................................................................................................... 20

c. Wash Analysis Method .............................................................................................................. 21

12. RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................... 21

a. General Note ............................................................................................................................. 21

b. Sample Preparation................................................................................................................... 21

c. Flocculant Tests ......................................................................................................................... 21

d. Cloth Selection Tests ................................................................................................................. 21

e. Cake Thickness & Filtration Rate ............................................................................................... 23

f. Wash Efficiency Curve ............................................................................................................... 24

13. CONCLUSIONS & EQUIPMENT SIZING - HBF ........................................................................ 26

14. TESTWORK REPORT DISCLAIMER .......................................................................................... 29

15. APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................. 30


Lead By: Mark White


4 | P a g e

1. INTRODUCTION Soludo-Lambert Mining SAS (Soludo-Lambert) have engaged Minnovo Pty Ltd (Minnovo) to assist

with the Kipushi Tailings Project. Soludo-Lambert and Minnovo wish to look at a number of process

variables in relation to a thickener and Horizontal Belt Filter (HBF) to handle the Kipushi residue. This

includes for the thickener:

Flocculant selection

Flocculant consumption

Settling flux rate

Underflow density

Overflow clarity

And for the HBF:

Cloth selection

Filtration rate

Cake moisture

Washing efficiency.

The testwork was conducted on an ore sample supplied to us by the client. It aims to show what

values are achievable and what size Thickener and HBF are required for the Project.


Lead By: Mark White


5 | P a g e

Section 1 – Thickener Tests

2. OBJECTIVE & SCOPE OF TEST WORK The objective of the test work is to determine the thickener operating parameters to produce

thickened tailings for the Kipushi project. The scope of the test programme includes flocculant

selection, settling tests, flocculant dose tests, dynamic tests, rheology, rise rate and thickener

loading selection.

3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - THICKENER The testwork gave the following results:

Rise Rate 3.3 m/hr

Solids Loading 1.0 t/m2/h

Coagulant Selection n/a

Coagulant Dosage n/a

Flocculant Selection BASF 333

Flocculant Dosage 38 g/t

Underflow Density 62% w/w Solids

Yield Stress 52Pa

Overflow Clarity >40 clarity wedge

Selected thickener size 14m

Table 1: Summary of Results

In order to meet all three major criteria (clarity, flocculant consumption and density) it was found

necessary to add coagulant. It may be possible to run the thickener at the same rate without coagulant

and achieve good underflow density but overflow ppm solids is likely to be very high.

a. High Rate Thickener Selection Based on the above results we selected 1 x 30m High Rate Thickener with 3m tank wall and a floor

slope of 9 degrees. The drive model selected was the SR130-4 with a maximum operating torque of

400kNm that is designed to operate to a yield stress of up to 80 Pa.

Higher underflow density can be achieved. However the yield stress rises rapidly and is likely to

cause problems related to torque, operator issues and pumping.


Lead By: Mark White


6 | P a g e

4. CLIENT PROCESS DATA & REQUIREMENTS

Description Tailings

Process Data Solid SG 2.7

Liquid SG 1.00

Slurry pH As received

Slurry Temperature ambient

Particle size – DV80 Not specified

Thickener Process Solid Flow (TPH) 150

Slurry Flow (m3/h) 656

Slurry SG 1.19

Slurry % Solids 25%

Overflow Not specified

Underflow >40%

Filter Process Feed density 60% w/w (achieved in thickener test)

Filter discharge moisture <20% w/w

Wash water consumption <1.2 litres/kg dry solids

Wash efficiency >90%

Table 2: Process Data

The above figures are from the email from Chris Larder on 7 May 2018 and as advised by John

Riordan.

The feed slurry was received as filter cake and repulped and diluted as required. All dilutions were

done with Perth tap water. John Riordan advised this was an acceptable substitute for site water in

his email of 7 May 2018.


Lead By: Mark White


7 | P a g e

5. STATIC THICKENING TESTS

a. Sample Preparation The sample was received as slurry. The sample was then diluted with Perth tap water to produce a

stock slurry at 20% w/w. This was then further diluted as required for testing purposes.

All dilutions were done with Perth tap water as advised by John Riordan (Minnovo). We note that

site water may be different and could affect the settling and filtration rates achieved.

DESCRIPTION COMMENTS

Sample Slurry Prepared to 10% w/w

Process Liquid Perth Tap Water

Temperature / pH 20-25 / 7-7.5

Flocculants polyacrylamide

SG Solids / SG Liquid 2.7 / 1.0

Particle size – DV80 Not specified

Table 3: Settling & Thickening Tests Parameters

b. Initial Flocculant Screening For the flocculant screening five (5) different flocculants were selected based on recommendations

from BASF as being most likely to give good results with the ore type:

Magnafloc 333

Magnafloc 336

Magnafloc 338

Magnafloc 919

Magnafloc 5250

Table 4: Flocculant Selection

Dry flocculant powder was mixed with Perth tap water to produce a 0.25% stock solution of

flocculant. This solution was left for 4 hours to activate before it was further diluted with tap water

to produce a 0.025% solution that was used for the screening process.

Samples were prepared at 10% solids in 250mL cylinders. Smaller cylinders were used for initial tests

as they consume less sample and are valid for comparison purposes. Initial flocculant dose rate for

comparison was determined by means of sighter tests, full data not recorded.

Flocculants were added via syringe at the dosage rates indicated below. Sample pulps were mixed

using a plunger and the settling rates recorded.


Lead By: Mark White


8 | P a g e

Test 1 2 3 4 5

% Solids 10

Floc Type 333 336 338 919 5250

Floc Rate 40g/t

Settling time 200-

150ml

5.6 No effect 7.4 No effect 9.7

Clarity Wedge

>40 >40 >40

Settled bed @ 30 min

38 38 40

Table 5: Initial Flocculant Screening Tests Data

Based on the above results 333 had the best settling rate, clarity and underflow density (within

measurement limits). It was therefore chosen for all tests from then on.

It should be noted that these tests are not exhaustive and there may be an opportunity for further

optimisation of flocculants in the same family as that selected.

c. Dilution Response Samples were prepared at a range of dilutions to determine the optimum dilution within the

thickener feedwell. This dilution rate is then used for all further testing. The information is also used

to determine if the required dilution is within the capability of a conventional auto-dilution feedwell

or if forced (pumped) dilution is required. As with the initial flocculant screening tests the dilution

tests were done in 250ml cylinders to conserve sample.

Based on the results of these tests it was determined that the optimum dilution was 10%. This is

within the range of a conventional auto-dilution feedwell and forced dilution is not required.

% Solids Time 200-150ml Settling rate m/h %Solids * Rate

5 2.9 27.58621 137.931

7.5 4.4 18.18182 136.3636

10 5.6 14.28571 142.8571

12.5 8.3 9.638554 120.4819

15 12.1 6.61157 99.17355

Table 6: Dilution response results


Lead By: Mark White


9 | P a g e

Fig. 1: Dilution response curve

d. Settling Rate & Dose Response Tests Tests were then moved to 1 litre cylinders for improved accuracy and for comparison with previous

testwork results. Settling rate was measured and the results graphed.

The first test was conducted at a flocculant dose rate of 38g/t (similar to all preceeding tests) then a

second test at 28g/t to determine if a lower flocculant rate could be supported. While the settling

rates were still good at the lower flocculant rate it was noted that the supernatant was noticeably

less clear and the settled bed interface was also less clear. This indicates that we are approaching

the lower limit for flocculant addition. Furthermore, it is known that clarity in continuous tests is less

than in static settling tests. The decision was therefore made to proceed with dynamic testing at a

dose rate of 38g/t.

The slope of the settling rate curve was then measured to determine the maximum settling rate.

This information is used to determine the settling rate and rise rate for dynamic testing (see below).

The graphs generated in these tests are presented below.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Co

mp

arit

ive

Thro

ugh

pu

t

% solids

Dilution Response

%solids * rate

Poly. (%solids * rate)


Lead By: Mark White


10 | P a g e

Fig. 2: Settling rate curve, 1 litre cylinder, 38g/t

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00

Sett

led

Dis

tan

ce (

mm

)

Time (mins)

38g/t Flocculant, 10% Solids

Interface Level [m]


Lead By: Mark White


11 | P a g e

Fig. 3: Settling rate curve, 1 litre cylinder, 28g/t

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00

Sett

led

Dis

tan

ce (

mm

)

Time (mins)

28g/t Flocculant, 10% Solids

Interface Level [m]


Lead By: Mark White


12 | P a g e

6. DYNAMIC THICKENING TESTS

a. Dynamic Thickener Model The starting parameters for dynamic testwork were selected based on the results of the static

settling testwork. A feed stream was prepared at the required density to simulate the optimum

feedwell dilution. The solid settling rates and liquor rise rates for the dynamic test were selected and

calculated from these data and the feed pump was set to provide the required flow. Feed slurry was

drawn from an agitated container using a peristaltic pump and fed into the feedwell of the test unit.

The flocculant was injected into the feed line in two separate locations prior to its delivery into the

test unit to provide some opportunity for mixing.

A bed of solids was allowed to build until it reaches the bottom of the feedwell; an overflow sample

was collected before it reached this limit. At the completion of this test, the feed slurry was turned

off, and then the flocculant pump. The solids bed was allowed to compress under raked conditions

for a predetermined amount of time before starting the underflow pump. A representative sample

from the underflow discharge was taken for analysis.

In the case of the dynamic thickener tests sufficient overflow and underflow is available to allow

accurate calculation of ppm solids in the overflow and the density and rheology of the underflow.

Fig. 4: Dynamic Thickener Pilot Rig Flow Diagram

b. Dynamic Thickener Tests The feed slurry was fed to the dynamic unit at initially 10% solids with flocculant Magnafloc 333

injected into the feed line. Overflow sample was taken after approximately 5 minutes operation, just

before the bed of solids reached the bottom of the feedwell the feed flow was stopped. Continuous


Lead By: Mark White


13 | P a g e

raking was allowed for 30 minutes before taking a sample from the underflow discharge. The test

was repeated under a different settling rate to investigate different settling conditions.

Fig. 5: Dynamic thickening test unit in operation (T1)

c. Solids Loading and Rise Rate Selection The estimates from the static settling tests showed that settling rate was extremely fast and thus

was not the limiting case and that the limitation was likely to be the retention time in the bed to

allow for compaction. Based on a tentative thickener selection for the required plant throughput it

was determined that a settling rate of 1.0t/m2/h would provide the necessary retention time.

The results of the first dynamic test (T1) were recorded and compared to the parameters above,

these results are detailed in Table 7 below.


Lead By: Mark White


14 | P a g e

Dynamic test T2 used a higher settling rate of 1.2t/m2/h to investigate the maximum settling rate

that could be supported. The retention time was reduced in line with that offered by a full size

thickener at the nominal throughput . The flocculant addition rate was kept at 38g/t in line with the

previous test. This test displayed poor interface to the settled bed, low underflow density and poor

overflow clarity. This test shows clearly that it is not practical to operate at this settling rate and that

the previous test rate of 1.0t/m2/h is close to the maximum achievable.

d. Rheology Yield Stress determination was performed using a HAAKE Viscotester 550 fitted with a FL-100 vane.

The material tested was the underflow sample withdrawn from the dynamic testwork unit. This

material can be considered unsheared as it has had minimal mechanical agitation to cause it to have

any form of shear thinning. It is therefore the closest approximation we have to the rheology

experienced within the thickener.

Thickener rakes operate at very low shear rates (<1/s). At these shear rates the shear stress is 52 Pa

and it is recommended that this figure be used for thickener rake design purposes. This shear stress

is within the range suitable for treatment in a high rate thickener. Based on these results we do not

foresee any problems in the design of thickener rakes.

Shear stress typically reduces to 30-50% of the unsheared value following shearing in an underflow

pump or similar. We do not foresee any problems in operation at these levels but depending on

pipeline length further rheology testing may be recommended.

Fig. 6: Haake Viscotester


Lead By: Mark White


15 | P a g e

Test Number Unit T1 T2

FEED

Target solids loading t/m2/h 1.00 1.20

Solids in Feed (%) 10.0% 10.0%

Feed Slurry S.G. SG 1.067 1.067

Feed Flow ml/min 1202 1450

FLOCCULANT

Coagulant Type n/a n/a

Coagulant g/t

Flocculant Type M333 M333

Flocculant Dosage g/t 38.0 38.0

UNDERFLOW

Time to feed stop min 6m 30s 3m 30s

Bed height mm @ feedwell discharge @ feedwell discharge

Time to underflow sample min 30 25

Underflow ml/min Batch Batch

Underflow Density % Solids 62.0% 49.5%

Underflow shear stress Pa unsheared/sheared 52 16

OVERFLOW

Overflow ml/min

Overflow Clarity wedge 40 35

Overflow Clarity ppm

Comments

Small flocs, fast settling, clean

interface. Bed low, poorly

consolidated

Table 7: Dynamic thickening tests data


Lead By: Mark White


16 | P a g e

7. DATA ANALYSIS – HIGH RATE THICKENING

The data from Sections 5 & 6 are summarised and discussed below:

a. Flocculant Selection Non-ionic flocculants responded well in the flocculant screening tests. We selected M333 based on

its performance in producing the highest settling rate as well as excellent visual overflow clarity.

There may be opportunities for further optimisation of flocculant using M333 as the starting point.

All dilutions were done using Perth tap water as advised by Minnovo as it is thought this is a

reasonable analogue for the site process water. However the difference in water could have an

effect and should be noted as a risk.

b. Flocculant Dose A flocculant dose rate of 38g/t was found to be optimal. There appears to be little value in increasing

the flocculant above this level. Decreasing below this level quickly led to poor clarity indicating that

this is close to the lower limit. This dose rate is consistent with similar applications.

c. Coagulant Dose There was no apparent need for coagulant as overflow clarity was excellent, therefore this was not

explored.

d. Feed Dilution Tests conducted from 5-15% solids in feed showed that the optimum dilution is 10%. Settling rates

are higher at lower densities however, this is offset by the lower settling flux rate. 10% dilution is

achievable with conventional auto-dilution and forced dilution is not required.

e. Rise Rate and Thickener Loading Due to the high settling rates the application is not rise rate limited. A settling rate of 1.0t/m2/h is

recommended. This corresponds to a 14m thickener for the specified 150t/h throughput rate. This is

the minimum size thickener we would recommend for this application. Selection of a larger

thickener will provide greater operating margin and the capacity to handle abnormal events. It

should be noted that a change of plant throughput may resut in a thickener with the same settling

flux rate but different bed retention time, requiring a different settling flux rate to be selected.

f. Thickener Underflow An underflow density of 62% was achieved after 30 minutes retention time in the underflow. All

underflow densities obtained were significantly better than the 40% specified. We expect that a full

size unit with a deeper compression bed would get 1% to 2% higher value than this.

g. Design Yield Stress The underflow yield stress of 52Pa at 62%w/w is within the normal range and is not expected to

cause any issues in thickener design.


Lead By: Mark White


17 | P a g e

8. CONCLUSIONS & EQUIPMENT SIZING – HIGH RATE

THICKENER Below are the details of the process parameters for high rate thickening and our equipment

selection.

PROCESS PARAMETERS DETAILS

Feed Solids / % Solids in Feed 150t/h @ 25%

SG Solids / Liquid 2.7 / 1.0

pH / Temperature OC 7 to 8 / ambient

Particle size DV80 Not specified

Feed Dilution 10%

Coagulant n/a

Coagulant Dose

Flocculant BASF M333

Flocculant Dose 38g/t

Thickener Overflow >40 clarity wedge

Rise Rate 3.3m/h

Solids Loading 1.0t/h/m2

Retention Time 30 minutes

Thickener Underflow 62% Solids

Critical Yield Stress 52Pa

HIGH RATE THICKENER DESIGN

Thickener Diameter 14m

No. of Units 1

Tank Wall / Slope 2.4m / 9 degrees

Thickener Drive SR130-4

Table 8: Equipment Selection


Lead By: Mark White


18 | P a g e

Section 2 – HBF Tests

9. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY – HORIZONTAL BELT FILTER

a. Aims

To filter the underflow obtained from the Kipushi Residue thickener (refer testwork Section

1 above)

Obtain the best cake dryness consistent with reasonable throughput rates (target 80%)

Determine the best filter cloth

Determine optimum cake thickness for filter operation

Determine design throughput rates

Establish a wash efficiency curve (target 90% wash efficiency, wash ratio 1.2 litres/kg dry

solids)

b. Summary of Results

A total of 29 tests were conducted over 3 days (not consecutive)

The best filter cloth for this application was determined to be Solaft PET-MM024B

The best cake thickness was found to be 13mm

The target residual moisture levels of 20% can be readily achieved at a design throughput of

1.7t/m2/h for drying only (no washing)

Washing efficiency of 95% can be achieved at a single stage wash ratio of 1 litre/kg dry solids

The filter required to achieve this is 135m2. Basic operating data for this filter are attached

below.

10. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF TESTWORK Key objectives are:

Determine filter cloth selection. Criteria for selection include:

o Filtration rate

o Cake release

o Filtrate clarity

Assess the need for flocculant addition

Determine optimum filtration parameters for the Tailings Composite. Criteria for selection

include:

o Flocculant rate

o Cake thickness


Lead By: Mark White


19 | P a g e

o Drying time

Conduct wash tests to establish a wash efficiency curve and filtration area required.

11. VACUUM FILTRATION TEST PROCEDURE Vacuum filtration testwork was conducted using Tenova Delkor 100mm dia, two piece Buchner

funnel connected to vacuum flask and vacuum pump. The system includes a control valve to allow

immediate start & stop to filtration and a pressure gauge and flow meter to provide additional

information useful in confirming the size of the vacuum pumps.

Fig. 7: Vacuum filtration test equipment in operation on the Kipushi residue samples

Vacuum filtration testing on representative samples was conducted using standard dewatering

(without cake wash) procedures as detailed below:

a. General Method


Lead By: Mark White


20 | P a g e

Start vacuum pump, close valve between funnel & filtrate flask

Record vacuum level before start to confirm correct operation

Obtain a representative slurry sample of known volume

Agitate representative sample with spatula to assure homogeneity

Pour the slurry onto the filter cloth including all residual solids in beaker

Open valve to filtrate flask and start stopwatch

Record vacuum level (-kPag) and flowrate (l/min) during cake formation

Record form time (sec)

Record time when filtrate flow into flask effectively ceases

Allow cake to dry under vacuum

Record vacuum level (kPag) and flowrate (m3/hr) while drying

Turn off the valve to filtrate flask

Switch off vacuum pump

Lightly tap Buchner funnel side wall perimeter to release cake

Remove filter cake

Record cake thickness (mm)

Record cake “smoothness” (clays? slimes? cracking? rat holes?)

Transfer the filter cake to a tared sample bowl

Record quality of “cloth release” and “cloth blinding”

Record “wet cake moisture” weight

Dry sample in oven for 105°C for 5hrs minimum

Carefully remove sample bowl and weigh

Determine final cake moisture

Record quality of filtrate clarity.

b. Wash Test Method Wash testing was conducted using the following procedures in addition to the general method

described above:

Filter until “Form” (ie no free surface water on the cake)

Turn off valve and pause stopwatch

Obtain sample of mother filtrate for analysis

Empty Buchner flask

Pour a measured amount of wash water onto the cake using a spoon or similar to prevent

water impact from disrupting the cake

Turn on valve and restart stopwatch

Record form time for wash water

Continue drying for a time equal to the drying time only from previous tests for consistency

then stop test

Obtain samples of wash filtrate and cake for analysis.


Lead By: Mark White


21 | P a g e

c. Wash Analysis Method

The client was provided with a copy of the Tenova Delkor standard procedure for analysis of washing

efficiency. This procedure is provided solely for use in conjunction with this testwork and report for

the Kipushi project. The procedure is confidential and must not be used for any other purpose or

released to third parties without Tenova Delkor approval.

12. RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS

a. General Note All of the data collected during the testing is presented but please read in conjunction with the

observations below.

Initial sighter tests were analysed using a moisture balance however for later tests drying the whole

of the filter cake is preferred as it provides better accuracy plus additional information on total dry

cake mass. It takes time (generally overnight) for samples to dry before residual moisture can be

calculated. This produces a delay so that in some cases some tests may have been unnecessary and

that some additional or different tests may have been beneficial. These were conducted later.

b. Sample Preparation Based on the thickener testwork above it was decided to run the filtration tests at a feed density of

60% as this should be easily and reliably obtained in operation. The samples were prepared as

follows:

The remaining filter cake (as supplied) was combined with the small quantities of slurry left over

from the thickener testwork and repulped

Mass of solids was calculated and M333 flocculant added at 38g/t. The sample was manually

agitated

The sample was allowed to settle and supernatant water decanted to obtain the required density

c. Flocculant Tests It was noted that the flocculant was still highly active in the prepared feed sample therefore no

additional flocculant was added. Some small quantities of underflow from the thickener testing were

observed to have no apparent floc activity after a few days. Depending on the shear and time delay

that the residue undergoes this may occur in the actual plant. However, addition of a very small

amount of additional flocculant (eg 5g/t) was found to be sufficient to fully activate the flocculant in

these samples.

d. Cloth Selection Tests Three different cloth types were selected based on experience with similar applications:


Lead By: Mark White


22 | P a g e

Solaft PET-MM-024 – The most commonly used cloth on a wide range of medium to coarse

grind filtration applications

Solaft PET-MM024B – Found to be the optimum selection on flotation tailings backfill

filtration at Tritton (NSW)

Clearedge PX140 – Found to be the optimum selection on flotation tailings backfill filtration

at Didipio (Philippines)

The tests were run at a nominal cycle time of 120 seconds, consistent with both Tritton and Didipio.

Key comparative data from these tests #1-3 are presented below:

Test No. 1 2 3

Cloth type PX140 24B 24

Time to form (s) 11 11 10

Cycle time TOTAL 120 120 120

% moisture in cake 17.0% 16.0% 17.1%

% solids in filtrate 0.48% 0.10% 1.84%

Cake release Good Good Good Table 9: Cloth selection test results

Fig. 8: Cloth selection filtrate filter papers showing solids in filtrate


Lead By: Mark White


23 | P a g e

Fig. 9: Filter cloth showing release

Based on it showing the best cake moisture and solids in the filtrate PET-MM024B was selected for

all further testing. Detailed analysis of the data shows some minor anomalies but 024B is preferred

on lower solids in the filtrate alone (and thus less wear as it passes through the cloth).

e. Cake Thickness & Filtration Rate The bulk of testing the occurred using these parameters established earlier. Refer to tests #6-20 in

the attached data.

The results obtained are presented in graphical form below:


Lead By: Mark White


24 | P a g e

Fig. 10: Residual moisture vs filtration rate for different cake thicknesses

A number of conclusions can be drawn from this:

1. The data is very linear due to consistent experimental techniques and can thus be

considered highly reliable

2. The optimum cake thickness for drying is clearly 13mm. Both thicker and thinner cakes

produced significantly worse results.

3. At this cake thickness the target moisture level of 20% was obtained at a filtration rate of

2t/m2/h. This is significantly higher than is achieved on other similar applications possibly

due to the coarser grind

4. Based on the above we would recommend a design filtration rate for drying only of

1.7t/m2/h which includes a standard safety factor of 15%.

f. Wash Efficiency Curve Wash efficiency tests were conducted using the procedures described above. The filter cake samples

were bagged and sent for analysis (by others). Based on the chemical analysis a graph of wash ratio

vs wash efficiency was developed. Additionally, time to form for the wash water was also graphed,

this data is required for filter sizing.

The analysis received analysed the filter cake samples for 11 different elements in the remnant

liquor. The majority of these were found to be not useful for our analysis as they were in some cases

all 100% (probably due to limits of detection eg Co, Cu) or meaningless due to solution equilibrium

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%

20.00%

22.00%

24.00%

26.00%

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Re

sid

ual

Mo

istu

re

Filtration Rate kg/m2/h

Kipushi Tails

13 cake

25 cake

19 cake

6 cake

Linear (13 cake)

Linear (25 cake)

Linear (19 cake)


Lead By: Mark White


25 | P a g e

(eg Ca). Following discussion with Mr John Riordan it was decided to use Mg results as the indicator

of wash efficiency.

The following graph results:

Fig. 11: Wash Ratio vs Wash Efficiency

This data indicates that a wash ratio of 1litre/kg dry solids will provide a wash efficiency of better

than 94%. This is consistent with previous applications and reasonably conservative.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

92.5% 93.0% 93.5% 94.0% 94.5% 95.0% 95.5% 96.0% 96.5% 97.0%

Was

h r

atio

l/kg

% wash efficiency

Wash ratio vs wash efficiency


Lead By: Mark White


26 | P a g e

Wash ratio was then graphed against time to form (dry surface) for the wash water:

Fig. 12: Wash ratio vs Time to Form

This time must be added to the filter cycle time to allow sufficient filtration area for washing. Wash

water is applied immediately after the initial form time and must form again before drying time

commences.

13. CONCLUSIONS & EQUIPMENT SIZING - HBF A total of 22 filtration tests were conducted over two non-consecutive days. Following analysis of

these results the following conclusions can be reached:

The best filter cloth for this application was determined to be Solaft PET-MM024B. It

achieved high filtration rates and good filtrate clarity. Cake release was good with any

residual material easily rinsing off the cloth. This cloth also gave the driest filter cake

however this is within the error range for the methods used so is not conclusive. Other

cloths tested had high solids in filtrate with no clear advantage in any other area.

The residual flocculant from the thickening process was found to be sufficient to provide

good filtration results. Later tests in the series can be seen to have longer form times. This is

consistent with a loss of flocculant activity due to extended mixing times as the tests

progressed. However, it does not appear to have any significant effect on the final cake

moisture.

Initial wash tests (data not used) showed significantly longer form times also thought to be

due to reducing flocculant activity. Later wash tests were conducted as a separate campaign

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Was

h r

atio

Time to form

Wash ratio vs time to form timefor the wash water


Lead By: Mark White


27 | P a g e

and the slurry flocked freshly for these tests. Form times in these tests are consistent with

the early drying tests.

The best results for filtering the residue were achieved under the following conditions:

o Flocculant – M333 residual only (38g/t original floc rate)

o Cake thickness – 13mm

o Form time – 13-16 seconds

o Total cycle time – 30 seconds

o Filtration rate (drying only) 2t/m2/h

o Final cake moisture - <20%

Wash tests were conducted and samples sent for analysis (by others). Wash curves were

established indicating that a wash ratio of 1litre/kg dry solids will produce a wash efficiency

of 94%

Wash water form times were also developed. These were found to be consistent with initial

form times for the volumes of liquid involved. For a wash ration of 1litre/kg a form time of

24 seconds was required.


Lead By: Mark White


28 | P a g e

The HBF required to achieve these results is 135m2 with the following basic operating data:

Horizontal Belt Filter

Model 42B/11-30V Belt width 4.2 m

Vacuum box length 33.0 m

Effective area 135.0 m2

Cycle time 79.2 s

Filtration rate 1110.9 kg/m2/hr

Power

Main belt drive 75.0 kW

Drive cooling fan 0.1 kW

Belt support fan 15.0 kW

Water

Seal strip water 8.3 m3/h

Belt slide water N/A m3/h

Cloth & belt wash 21.0 m3/h

to 26.3 m3/h (optional extra spray bar)

Water pressure 300 kPa

Vacuum pump

Model 2BE4 600 Drive power 400 kW

Seal water 25.4 m3/h - Note water quality requirements - potable water or similar

Filtrate Receiver

Diameter 2400 mm

Height 3000 mm

Filtrate Pump

Drive Power 75 kW

Instrument Air

Flow rate 1 m3/h

Air pressure 500 kPa


Lead By: Mark White


29 | P a g e

14. TESTWORK REPORT DISCLAIMER

This testwork report was prepared by Tenova Delkor for the exclusive benefit of Minnovo Pty

Ltd and Soludo Lambert Mining SAS and exclusively in relation to Thickener and Vacuum

Filtration (HBF) Testwork on Kipushi residue samples for the purpose of determining, in

relation to Tenova Delkor equipment, the required filtration area, the equipment sizing and the

parameters of a process guarantee, all subject to the samples used in the testwork being

representative of the material to be produced on site.

In undertaking the testwork, Tenova Delkor has been provided by or on behalf of Soludo

Lambert Mining SAS with ore samples and records, documents and other data for which

Tenova Delkor bears no responsibility.

Save as expressly stated in the report, Tenova Delkor has assumed and did not attempt to

verify the accuracy of the Oceana Gold Information or the representativeness of the samples.

Neither Tenova Delkor nor its affiliates, principals, sub-contractors, officers, directors or

employees accept any liability whatsoever in respect of Soludo Lambert Mining SAS

information used in this report.

This report is integral, must be read in its entirety and may not be relied upon by others.

Soludo Lambert Mining SAS indemnifies Tenova Delkor against any claim made by a third

part arising out of this report.


Lead By: Mark White


30 | P a g e

15. APPENDICES Vacuum filtration – raw data attached as native file:

180702 Kipushi Vacuum Filtration Testwork Data.xlsx



Mintek Testwork Results




Soludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings LeachS106-EST-PR-001Revision: D

Revision History S106-EST-PR-001

Rev Date Prepared Reviewed Approved Client Review

D 8/06/2018 ML/JH JR JR JH

CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE


Issued for Study Report

CLIENTPROJECT NAMEPROJECTREVISION

Department Area Description Total (US$)Direct Costs

10 Civil110 Plant Earthworks 260,000$120 Kipushi Tailings Dam 1,050,000$130 TSF to Plant Road 260,000$

Total Civils 1,570,000$20 210 Kipush Tailings 125,000$

220 Kasombo -$Total Mining 125,000$

30 Process Plant330 Reclaim 2,086,414$340 Leaching 3,554,249$350 Separation 5,602,413$360 Preciptation 1,182,887$365 Precipitate Handling 2,821,232$370 Neutralisation -$380 Reagents 638,250$390 Services - Water & Air 1,158,670$395 Piperacks 675,000$

Total Process Plant 17,719,114$40 Infrastructure

410 Workshop/Warehouse 475,000$420 Plant Buildings 100,000$430 Power Supply 2,750,000$440 Water Supply 50,000$450 Fuel Supply 100,000$460 Laboratory 250,000$

Total Infrastructure 3,725,000$70 Mobile Fleet

710 Light Vehicles 232,500$720 Heavy Vehicles 445,000$

Mobile Fleet 677,500$

Total Directs 23,816,614$

90 Indirect Costs910 Freight 1,811,189$920 Spares/First Fills 833,629$930 Engineering 2,184,162$940 Commissioning 375,000$950 Owner Management 1,178,550$960 Permitting 125,000$980 Corporate 692,249$990 Capitalised Operating Costs 1,250,750$

Total Indirects 8,450,528$95 Contingency

Contingency (15% of directs) 3,572,492$

Total Budget 35,839,635$

S106-EST-PR-001D

CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE SUMMARYSoludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings Leach

Indirect Costs

Item Description

Area

110 Plant EarthworksOverall Site Clear & Grub 1 lot $10,000 $10,000Earthworks - Bulk Earthworks for site & Infrastructure 1 lot $50,000 $50,000Site & Roads Drainage 1 lot $50,000 $50,000Access & Plant Roads - Unsealed 1 lot $100,000 $100,000Sediment Ponds 1 lot $50,000 $50,000

Subtotal $260,000

120 Kipushi Tailings DamDivert Creek 1 lot $200,000 $200,000Repair Access to Dam 1 lot $100,000 $100,000TSF at Plantsite 1 lot $750,000 $750,000

Subtotal $1,050,000

130 TSF to Plant RoadTSF to Main Road 3.0 km $40,000 $120,000Main Road to Plant Site 3.5 km $40,000 $140,000

$0

Subtotal $260,000

Total Civils $1,570,000

PROJECT NUMBER S106DOCUMENT NO S106-EST-PR-001REVISION D

AREA 10 - CIVILSCLIENT Soludo Lambert MiningPROJECT NAME Kipushi Tailings Leach

UnitQty. Rate Total Comments

Area Item Description

210 Kipushi TailingsContractor Mob/Demob 1 lot $25,000 $25,000Establishment at TSF 1 lot $50,000 $50,000 Toilets/office etcExcavate & Haul 10kt to Plant 1 lot $50,000 $50,000

Subtotal $125,000

220 Kasombo1 lot $0 $01 lot $0 $0

$0

Subtotal $0

Total Civils $125,000

S106S106-EST-PR-001D

PROJECT NUMBERDOCUMENT NOREVISION

CLIENTPROJECT NAME

AREA 20 - MININGSoludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings Leach

Qty. Unit Rate Total Comment

Rate Total Comments

330 Reclaim $2,086,41410 Concrete 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.11 Steel 10% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.12 Platework 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab13 Mechanical Equipment 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab14 Electrical & Instrumentation 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.15 Piping, Valves & Fittings 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.16 Electrical Contractor 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.17 SMP Contractor 15% lot $0 % of Mech + Plate

Subtotal $2,086,414

340 Leaching $3,554,24910 Concrete 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.11 Steel 25% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.12 Platework 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab13 Mechanical Equipment 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab14 Electrical & Instrumentation 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.15 Piping, Valves & Fittings 25% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.16 Electrical Contractor 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.17 SMP Contractor 15% lot $0 % of Mech + Plate

$3,554,249

350 Separation $5,602,41310 Concrete 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.11 Steel 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.12 Platework 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab13 Mechanical Equipment 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab14 Electrical & Instrumentation 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.15 Piping, Valves & Fittings 25% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.16 Electrical Contractor 25% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.17 SMP Contractor 15% lot $0 % of Mech + Plate

$5,602,413

360 Preciptation $1,182,88710 Concrete 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.11 Steel 10% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.12 Platework 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab13 Mechanical Equipment 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab14 Electrical & Instrumentation 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.15 Piping, Valves & Fittings 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.16 Electrical Contractor 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.17 SMP Contractor 15% lot $0 % of Mech + Plate

$1,182,887

365 Precipitate Handling $2,821,23210 Concrete 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.11 Steel 15% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.12 Platework 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab13 Mechanical Equipment 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab14 Electrical & Instrumentation 10% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.15 Piping, Valves & Fittings 5% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.16 Electrical Contractor 10% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.17 SMP Contractor 15% lot $0 % of Mech + Plate

$2,821,232

380 Reagents $638,25010 Concrete 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.11 Steel 40% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.12 Platework 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab13 Mechanical Equipment 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab14 Electrical & Instrumentation 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.15 Piping, Valves & Fittings 25% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.16 Electrical Contractor 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.17 SMP Contractor 15% lot $0 % of Mech + Plate

$638,250

390 Services - Water & Air $1,158,67010 Concrete 30% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.11 Steel 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.12 Platework 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab13 Mechanical Equipment 1 lot $0 refer Equipment List tab14 Electrical & Instrumentation 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.15 Piping, Valves & Fittings 25% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.16 Electrical Contractor 20% lot $0 % of Mechanical Equip.17 SMP Contractor 15% lot $0 % of Mech + Plate

$1,158,670

395 Piperacks10 Concrete 1 lot $75,00011 Steel 1 lot $300,000 $300,00014 Electrical & Instrumentation 1 lot $150,000 $150,00015 Piping, Valves & Fittings 1 lot $150,000 $150,000

$675,000

Total $17,719,114


AREA 30 - PROCESSINGCLIENT Soludo Lambert MiningPROJECT NAME Kipushi Tailings Leach

Area Qty UnitItem Description

E&IPROJECTSERVICES,

DESCRIPTION Factor CIVILS CONCRETE BUILDINGS SUPPLY ERECT SUPPLY ERECT (S+I) TRANSPORTEPCM &

CONSULTANTSCONSUMABLES

AND SPARESPROJECT INDIRECT

COST TOTAL

Detail Earthworks & Plant Security Fencing 330,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 330,000$Concrete -$ 972,903$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 972,903$Buildings -$ -$ 167,432$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 167,432$Steelwork -$ -$ -$ 450,906$ 99,340$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 550,246$Mechanicals -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7,243,525$ 793,647$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 8,037,172$Piping -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 899,561$ -$ -$ -$ 899,561$E&I -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,547,856$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,547,856$Contractor Indirects and Temp Works -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 779,990$ 779,990$Preliminary & General 3,676$ 554,555$ 95,436$ -$ 363,162$ -$ 523,807$ 362,176$ 593,711$ -$ -$ -$ 2,496,523$Contractor Margin 10% 33,368$ 152,746$ 26,287$ 45,091$ 46,250$ 724,353$ 131,745$ 191,003$ 149,327$ -$ -$ 77,999$ 1,578,168$Contractor Overheads, Bonds, Insurance, Etc 4% 13,347$ 61,098$ 10,515$ 18,036$ 18,500$ 289,741$ 52,698$ 76,401$ 59,731$ -$ -$ 31,200$ 631,267$

Sub-Total 380,391$ 1,741,302$ 299,670$ 514,033$ 527,253$ 8,257,619$ 1,501,897$ 2,177,437$ 1,702,330$ -$ -$ -$ 889,189$ 17,991,119$

INDIRECTSTransport 1,811,189$Vendor Commissioning 125,000$ 125,000$Spares - 2 yrs Operating 3% 217,305.75$ -$ 28,650.48$ 11,199.54$ 25,716$ 282,871$Spares - Insurance 2% 144,870.50$ -$ 19,100.32$ 7,466.36$ 17,144$ 188,581$Consumables 10,000$ 100,000$ 110,000$Third Party Consultants (Geotech, survey, etc.) 250,000$ 250,000$Engineering Design & Procurement Services 1,884,162$ -$ 1,884,162$Project Insurances 1.5% 5,506$ 22,912$ 3,943$ 6,764$ 6,938$ 108,653$ 19,762$ 28,650$ 22,399$ 23,840$ -$ -$ 11,700$ 261,065$

Sub-Total 5,506$ 22,912$ 3,943$ 6,764$ 6,938$ 470,829$ 19,762$ 76,401$ 41,065$ 76,699$ 1,884,162$ 100,000$ 386,700$ 4,912,869$

Contingency 15% 57,059$ 261,195$ 44,950$ 77,105$ 79,088$ 1,238,643$ 225,285$ 326,616$ 255,350$ -$ -$ -$ 133,378$ 2,698,668$

Grand Total 442,955$ 2,025,409$ 348,563$ 597,901$ 613,278$ 9,967,090$ 1,746,944$ 2,580,453$ 1,998,745$ 76,699$ 1,884,162$ 100,000$ 1,409,267$ 25,602,656$

Notes: Equip CostExcludes Taxes, VAT, Customs excise and import duties 330 Reclaim 840,025$Excludes Owners Costs, Sunk Costs, Sustaining Caoex 340 Leaching 1,431,000$2Qtr 2018 Cost Base 350 Separation 2,255,625$Excludes Escalation 360 Preciptation 476,250$Excludes Capital Costs Outside Plant Boundary Fence (Tails, Water, Roads, Power, Comms etc.) 365 Precipitate Handling 1,135,875$Accuracy of Capex is +/-25 to 35% 370 Neutralisation -$Estimate is factored Estimate based on budget priced mechanical equipment list 380 Reagents 638,250$All Costs Quoted in USD 390 Services - Water & Air 466,500$Excludes Bulk Earthworks 395 Piperacks -$Excludes Gensets, Power Station and Bulk Fuel Storage 7,243,525$

D

AREA 30 - PROCESSING (As per study scope)Soludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings LeachS106

STRUCTURAL MECHANICALSPIPING &

VALVES (S+I)

CLIENTPROJECT NAMEPROJECT NUMBERDOCUMENT NOREVISION

S106-EST-PR-001

Item Description

Area

410 Workshop/WarehouseGeneral Consumables 1 lot $25,000 $25,000Small Tools 1 lot $50,000 $50,000Worskhop - Equipments 1 lot $150,000 $150,000Building 1 lot $250,000 $250,000

Subtotal $475,000

420 Plant BuildingsCommunications 1 lot $25,000 $25,000Clinic 1 lot $25,000 $25,000Admin Building Fitout 1 lot $50,000 $50,000

Subtotal $100,000

430 Power SupplyUnderground Services 1.0 lot $100,000 $100,000Generators (1.5MW) 2.0 ea $750,000 $1,500,000Switchgear/Electricals 1 lot $1,000,000 $1,000,000Foundations 1 lot $50,000 $50,000Building 1 lot $100,000 $100,000

Subtotal $2,750,000

440 Water SupplyAllowance $50,000

$50,000

450 Fuel SupplyAllowance $100,000

$100,000

460 LaboratoryFitout $250,000

$250,000

Total Infrastructure $3,725,000

S106S106-EST-PR-001D

PROJECT NUMBERDOCUMENT NOREVISION

CLIENTPROJECT NAME

AREA 40 - INFRASTRUCTURESoludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings Leach

Qty. Unit Rate Total Comments

Area Item Description

710 Light VehiclesMotor Vehicles 3 ea $50,000 $150,000Buses 1 ea $75,000 $75,000Motor Cycles 3 ea $2,500 $7,500

Subtotal $232,500

720 Heavy VehiclesFront End Loader 1 ea $175,000 $175,000Bobcats 2 lot $35,000 $70,00065t Crane 1 ea $200,000 $200,000

Subtotal $445,000

Total Civils $677,500


AREA 70 - MOBILE FLEETCLIENT Soludo Lambert MiningPROJECT NAME Kipushi Tailings Leach

Qty. Unit Rate Total Comment

Rate Total Comments

910 FreightFreight - OverlandFreight - SeaFreight - AirContainersCustoms Clearance 1 lot $1,811,189 $1,811,189

Subtotal $1,811,189

920 Spares/First Fills10 General Spares 1 lot $282,871 $282,87111 Insurance Spares 1 lot $188,581 $188,58112 First Fills 5% lot $7,243,525 $362,176

$833,629

930 EngineeringProcess Plant 1 lot $1,884,162 $1,884,162 Minnovo quoteMetallurgical Testwork 1 lot $100,000 $100,000Drill TSF 1 lot $75,000 $75,000Geotech 1 lot $50,000 $50,000TSF 1 lot $75,000 $75,000

$2,184,162

940 Commissioning10 Commissioning Consultants 1 lot $175,000 $175,00011 Equipment Reps 1 lot $150,000 $150,00012 Commissioning Supplies 1 lot $50,000 $50,000

$375,000

950 Owner ManagementExpat Salaries 1 lot $782,500 $782,500 Refer Indirects TabLocal Salaries 1 lot $126,000 $126,000 Refer Indirects TabMedical Costs 1 lot $6,000 $6,000 Refer Indirects TabRecruitment Costs 1 lot $17,000 $17,000 Refer Indirects TabRostered Travel 1 lot $36,000 $36,000 Refer Indirects TabVisa & Work Permit Costs 1 lot $18,000 $18,000 Refer Indirects TabMobile Phone Charges 1 lot $14,500 $14,500 Refer Indirects TabPrinting & Stationary 1 lot $14,500 $14,500 Refer Indirects TabFreight - Couriers 1 lot $5,000 $5,000 Refer Indirects TabEntertainment 1 lot $6,500 $6,500 Refer Indirects TabBusiness Travel & Accomodations 1 lot $5,000 $5,000 Refer Indirects TabTravel Other - Taxi, etc 1 lot $3,000 $3,000 Refer Indirects TabDiesel Fuel 1 lot $5,800 $5,800 Refer Indirects TabSafety Equipment 1 lot $9,000 $9,000 Refer Indirects TabGeneral Consumables 1 lot $9,000 $9,000 Refer Indirects TabOffice Consumables 1 lot $9,000 $9,000 Refer Indirects TabSurvey Consumables 1 lot $4,500 $4,500 Refer Indirects TabMinor Capital 1 lot $10,500 $10,500 Refer Indirects TabRepairs & Maintenance 1 lot $9,000 $9,000 Refer Indirects TabSundry Equipment Hire 1 lot $9,000 $9,000 Refer Indirects TabVehicle Hire 1 lot $5,000 $5,000 Refer Indirects TabAccomodation Operating Costs 1 lot $22,500 $22,500 Refer Indirects TabRent - Guest House 1 lot $25,000 $25,000 Refer Indirects TabInsurances 1 lot $26,250 $26,250 Refer Indirects Tab

$1,178,550

960 PermittingProcess Plant 1 lot $100,000 $100,000Importation 1 lot $25,000 $25,000

$0$125,000

980 CorporateProject Insurance 1.5% Directs $23,816,614 $357,249Board 1 lot $335,000 $335,000

$692,249

990 Capitalised Operating CostsExpat Salaries 1 lot $572,000 $572,000 Refer Indirects TabLocal Salaries 1 lot $316,000 $316,000 Refer Indirects Tab

Security 1 lot $66,000 $66,000 Refer Indirects TabMedical Costs 1 lot $11,000 $11,000 Refer Indirects Tab

Rostered Travel 1 lot $32,000 $32,000 Refer Indirects TabVisa & Work Permit Costs 1 lot $5,500 $5,500 Refer Indirects Tab

Mobile Phone Charges 1 lot $11,000 $11,000 Refer Indirects TabPrinting & Stationary 1 lot $5,500 $5,500 Refer Indirects Tab

Freight - Couriers 1 lot $2,750 $2,750 Refer Indirects TabEntertainment 1 lot $5,500 $5,500 Refer Indirects Tab

Business Travel & Accomodations 1 lot $5,000 $5,000 Refer Indirects TabTravel Other - Taxi, etc 1 lot $5,500 $5,500 Refer Indirects Tab

Diesel Fuel 1 lot $5,500 $5,500 Refer Indirects TabSafety Equipment 1 lot $16,500 $16,500 Refer Indirects Tab

General Consumables 1 lot $27,500 $27,500 Refer Indirects TabOffice Consumables 1 lot $11,000 $11,000 Refer Indirects Tab

Minor Capital 1 lot $23,000 $23,000 Refer Indirects TabRepairs & Maintenance 1 lot $11,000 $11,000 Refer Indirects TabSundry Equipment Hire 1 lot $11,000 $11,000 Refer Indirects Tab

Vehicle Hire 1 lot $5,500 $5,500 Refer Indirects TabAccomodation Operating Costs 1 lot $38,500 $38,500 Refer Indirects Tab

Rent - Guest House 1 lot $36,000 $36,000 Refer Indirects TabExpat Insurance 1 lot $27,500 $27,500 Refer Indirects Tab

$1,250,750

Total $8,450,528


AREA 90 - INDIRECTSCLIENT Soludo Lambert MiningPROJECT NAME Kipushi Tailings Leach

Area Item Description Qty Unit




Soludo Lambert MiningKipushi Tailings LeachS106-EST-PR-002Revision: C

Revision History S106-EST-PR-002

Rev Date Prepared Reviewed Approved Client Review

A 16/05/2018 SK SP JR

B 18/05/2018 SK SP JR JH

C 8/06/2018 SK SP JR

OPERATING COST ESTIMATE


Issued for Internal Review

Issued for Client review

Issued for Study Report

Client: Soludo Lambert Mining

Project: Kipushi Tailings Leach

Doc: Operating Cost Estimate

Doc No: S106-EST-PR-002

Revision: C

Disclaimer

This operating cost estimate is for information only and cannot be relied upon in determining project economics.

Several items in the estimate require further refinement and clarification, including, but not limited to the following:1 Final reagent consumptions2 Confirmed cost of sulphuric acid, power, diesel

Client: Soludo Lambert Mining

Project: Kipushi Tailings Leach

Doc: Operating Cost Estimate


Revision: C

Operating ConditionsAnnual Throughput 1,000,000 dt/y

Utilisation 8,000 h/y

Feed rate 125 dt/h

Item US$/y US$/t Feed

MiningLabour $205,200 $0.21

Vehicles $9,650 $0.01

Tailings Fees $6,840,000 $6.84

Contractor $5,250,000 $5.25

Total Mining $12,304,850 $12.30

ProcessingLabour $2,534,640 $2.53

Power $1,726,321 $1.73

Maintenance Materials $348,181 $0.35

Reagents and Consumables $40,873,426 $40.87

Miscellaneous $772,324 $0.77

Total Processing $46,254,892 $46.25

AdministrationLabour $2,014,500 $2.01

Vehicles $149,700 $0.15

Communications $193,000 $0.19

Insurances $1,500,000 $1.50

Clinic Costs $95,680 $0.10

Tenement Fees $0 $0.00

Camp Costs $121,800 $0.12

Travel $171,000 $0.17

Community Relations $100,000 $0.10

Freight $750,000 $0.75

Other $500,000 $0.50

Corporate Costs $500,000 $0.50

Total Administration $6,095,680 $6.10

Total Annual Opex 64,655,422 $64.66

OPERATING COST SUMMARY

Description Calculation Operating Costs Unit Cost, $/t Feed

LabourTSF Staff Refer "Labour" tab $117,000

Security Refer "Labour" tab $88,200Total $205,200 $0.21

VehiclesLight Vehicle Fuel 1 x $10 /day $3,650

Light Vehicle Maintenance 1 x $500 /month $6,000Total $9,650 $0.01

Tailings FeesGecamines Payments 1,000,000 x $6.84 /t of tailings $6,840,000

$6,840,000 $6.84

ContractorExcavate and Load Tailings 1,000,000 x $3.20 /t Tailings $3,200,000

Haul Tailings to Plant 1,000,000 x $1.80 /t Tailings $1,800,000Road Maintenance Allowance/yr $250,000

Total $5,250,000 $5.25

TOTAL $12,304,850 $12.30

Mining Operating Costs - 1.0Mtpa

Description Calculation Operating Costs Unit Cost, $/t Feed

LabourManager + Commercial + Admin Refer "Labour" tab $1,555,800

OHSE Refer "Labour" tab $113,100Security Refer "Labour" tab $255,900

Clinic Refer "Labour" tab $89,700Total $2,014,500 $2.01

VehiclesLight Vehicle Fuel 8 x $10 /day $29,200

Light Vehicle Maintenance 8 x $500 /month $48,000Bus Fuel 2 x $50 /day $36,500

Bus Maintenance 2 x $1,500 /month $36,000Total $149,700 $0.15

CommunicationsSatellite 1 x $10,000 /month $120,000

Calls 1 x $200 /day $73,000Total $193,000 $0.19

InsurancesAllowance $1,500,000

Total $1,500,000 $1.50

Clinic Costs184 $10 /person/week $95,680

Total $95,680 $0.10

Tenement FeesML Annual Charge $0

Total $0 $0.00

Camp CostsHouse rental 2 x $24,000 /house/yr $48,000

House Running Costs 2 x $1,500 /house/mth $36,000Employees Meals 5 x $25 /people/day x 264 days $33,000

Visitor Meals 10 x $25 /people/month x 12 months $3,000Casual Meals 10 x $15 /people/month x 12 months $1,800

Total $121,800 $0.12

TravelExpats - Mgt 5 x $6,000 /trip x 5.7 trips $171,000

Expats - Staff 0 x $2,500 /trip x 5.7 trips $0African Expats 0 x $1,500 /trip x 5.7 trips $0

Total $171,000 $0.17

Community RelationsAllowance $100,000

Total $100,000 $0.10

FreightAllowance $750,000

Total $750,000 $0.75

OtherAllowance $500,000

Total $500,000 $0.50

Corporate CostsAllowance $500,000

Total $500,000 $0.50

TOTAL $6,095,680 $1.22

Total ex SalariesNotes:Roster = 6 weeks on 3 week off

Administration Operating Costs - 1.0Mtpa

Client: Soludo Lambert MiningProject: Kipushi Tailings LeachDoc: Operating Cost EstimateDoc No: S106-EST-PR-002Revision: C

Operating ConditionsAnnual Throughput 1,000,000 dt/yUtilisation 8,000 h/yFeed rate 125 dt/h

Item US$/y US$/t FeedLabour 2,534,640 2.53Power 1,726,321 1.73Maintenance Materials 348,181 0.35Reagents and Consumables 40,873,426 40.87Miscellaneous 772,324 0.77Total 46,254,892 46.25

Labour US$/y US$/t FeedProcessing 1,717,920 1.72Maintenance 816,720 0.82Subtotal 2,534,640 2.53

Power US$/y US$/t Feed330 - Leach Feed 463,979 0.46340 - Leaching 233,589 0.23350 - Solid / Liquid Separation 387,182 0.39360 - Precipitation 107,195 0.11365 - MHP Handling 151,993 0.15380 - Reagents 140,794 0.14390 - Services 241,589 0.24 - Miscellaneous 0 0.00

Subtotal 1,726,321 1.73

Maintenance Materials and Contract Labour US$/y US$/t Feed330 - Leach Feed 42,001 0.04340 - Leaching 71,550 0.07350 - Solid / Liquid Separation 112,781 0.11360 - Precipitation 23,813 0.02365 - MHP Handling 56,794 0.06380 - Reagents 31,913 0.03390 - Services 9,330 0.01

Subtotal 348,181 0.35

Reagents and Consumables US$/y US$/t FeedReagents 40,633,432 40.63Consumables 239,994 0.24

Subtotal 40,873,426 40.87

Miscellaneous US$/y US$/t FeedLaboratory 365,000 0.37Vehicles 211,096 0.21Diesel 196,228 0.20Subtotal 772,324 0.77

All costs shown in US Dollars (USD, US$)All G&A, insurances etc are excluded from operating cost estimatesExcludes import duty, dangerous goods licencing etc

OPERATING COST SUMMARY - PLANT

DETAILED SUMMARY

Page 6 of 12


Operational Expense Type Base estimate $/ annum Minimum range Maximum range Median $/annum

Personnel - Operating 1,717,920$ -10% 20% 1,803,816$Personnel - Maintenance 816,720$ -10% 20% 857,556$Reagents 40,633,432$ -15% 30% 43,680,939$Consumables 239,994$ -25% 30% 245,994$Maintenance 348,181$ -10% 25% 374,295$Power 1,726,321$ -10% 15% 1,769,479$Laboratory (Off-site sample analysis) 365,000$ -20% 30% 383,250$Overheads (Shared personnel, services, corporate) -20% 30% -$Fuel & Vehicle 407,324$ -10% 15% 417,507$Total Operating Cost 46,254,892$ 39,525,232$ 59,540,440$ 49,532,836$

% OPEXPersonnel - Operating 3.7%Personnel - Maintenance 1.8%Reagents 87.8%Consumables 0.5%Maintenance 0.8%Power 3.7%Laboratory (Off-site sample analysis) 0.8%Overheads (Shared personnel, services, corporate) 0.0%Fuel & Vehicle 0.9%

100.0%

OPEX SUMMARY

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

OPE

X %

OPEX Summary

3%

2%

88%

0% 1%

4%

1%0%1%

OPEX Summary

Personnel - Operating

Personnel - Maintenance

Reagents

Consumables

Maintenance

Power

Laboratory

Overheads (Shared personnel,services, corporate)

Fuel & Vehicle


Number of Positions

Description Expat National Number ofExpats Vehicles No/Crew Crews Total Monthly

Salary, US$Annual Salary,

US$Estimated Overheads

(%)Overheads

(US$/a)Total Cost

(US$/a) Comments

ADMINISTRATION &SUPPORTManagement

General Manager E 1 1 1 1 1 20,800$ 249,600$ 100% 249,600$ 499,200$Secretary N 1 1 1 750$ 9,000$ 30% 2,700$ 11,700$

Driver N 1 1 1 500$ 6,000$ 30% 1,800$ 7,800$

CommercialFinance and Administration Manager E 1 1 1 1 1 12,500$ 150,000$ 100% 150,000$ 300,000$

Secretary N 1 1 1 750$ 9,000$ 30% 2,700$ 11,700$Driver N 1 1 1 500$ 6,000$ 30% 1,800$ 7,800$

AdministrationAdmin Manager N 1 1 1 1 5,000$ 60,000$ 30% 18,000$ 78,000$

Admin Staff Level 1 N 6 1 6 750$ 54,000$ 30% 16,200$ 70,200$Admin Staff Level 2 N 8 1 8 500$ 48,000$ 30% 14,400$ 62,400$

IT Officer N 1 1 1 1,000$ 12,000$ 30% 3,600$ 15,600$Drivers N 1 1 1 500$ 6,000$ 30% 1,800$ 7,800$

AccountingAccounting Supervisor N 1 1 1 7,500$ 90,000$ 30% 27,000$ 117,000$

Accounting Staff Level 1 N 2 1 2 1,000$ 24,000$ 30% 7,200$ 31,200$Accounting Staff Level 2 N 4 1 4 500$ 24,000$ 30% 7,200$ 31,200$

Supply/WarehousePurchasing/Warehouse Manager N 1 1 1 1 5,000$ 60,000$ 30% 18,000$ 78,000$

Warehouse Supervisor N 1 1 1 1 3,500$ 42,000$ 30% 12,600$ 54,600$Logistics Supervisor N 1 1 1 1 3,500$ 42,000$ 30% 12,600$ 54,600$

Warehouse Clerks N 2 2 4 750$ 36,000$ 30% 10,800$ 46,800$Warehouse Storeman N 3 2 6 750$ 54,000$ 30% 16,200$ 70,200$

Driver N

OHSEOHSE Manager N 1 1 1 1 5,000$ 60,000$ 30% 18,000$ 78,000$Safety Officers N 2 1 2 750$ 18,000$ 30% 5,400$ 23,400$

Environment Officers N 1 1 1 750$ 9,000$ 30% 2,700$ 11,700$

ClinicParamedic N 1 1 1 3,500$ 42,000$ 30% 12,600$ 54,600$

Nurse N 1 3 3 750$ 27,000$ 30% 8,100$ 35,100$

SecuritySecurity Manager N 1 1 1 1 3,500$ 42,000$ 30% 12,600$ 54,600$Head of Security N 1 1 1 2,000$ 24,000$ 30% 7,200$ 31,200$

Community Officer N 1 1 1 750$ 9,000$ 30% 2,700$ 11,700$TSF Guards N 3 3 9 500$ 54,000$ 30% 16,200$ 70,200$

Process Plant Guards N 3 3 9 500$ 54,000$ 30% 16,200$ 70,200$Police N 1 3 3 500$ 18,000$ -$ 18,000$

Total Labour - Administration 2 8 75 675,900$ 2,014,500$

MININGTSF Supervisors N 1 1 3 3 1,500$ 54,000$ 30% 16,200$ 70,200$

TSF Assistants N 2 3 6 500$ 36,000$ 30% 10,800$ 46,800$TSF Guards N 3 3 9 500$ 54,000$ 30% 16,200$ 70,200$

Police N 1 3 3 500$ 18,000$ -$ 18,000$

Total Labour - Mining 1 21 43,200$ 205,200$

PROCESS PLANT PRODUCTIONManagementPlant Manager E 1 1 1 1 1 17,500$ 210,000$ 100% 210,000$ 420,000$Plant Superintendent N 1 1 1 7,500$ 90,000$ 30% 27,000$ 117,000$Senior Metallurgist N 1 1 1 7,500$ 90,000$ 30% 27,000$ 117,000$Junior Metallurgist N 1 1 1 5,500$ 66,000$ 30% 19,800$ 85,800$General Foreman N 1 3 3 2,000$ 72,000$ 30% 21,600$ 93,600$OperatorsProduction Supervisior N 1 4 4 1,100$ 52,800$ 30% 15,840$ 68,640$Control Room Operator N 0 -$ 30% -$ -$Plant Operators N 12 4 48 700$ 403,200$ 30% 120,960$ 524,160$Plant Operators (Day Shift) N 0 -$ 30% -$ -$Utilities/Reagent Mixing / Relief N 0 -$ 30% -$ -$FEL / Truck Driver N 3 3 9 800$ 86,400$ 30% 25,920$ 112,320$

Sub Total 1 1 68 468,120$ 1,538,520$

PROCESS PLANT LABORATORYManagementLab Manager / Senior Chemist N 0 7,500$ -$ 30% -$ -$Laboratory Personnel -$ 30% -$ -$Chemist N 1 1 1 2,000$ 24,000$ 30% 7,200$ 31,200$Metallurgical Technician 0 -$ 30% -$ -$Production Foreman 0 -$ 30% -$ -$Lab Assistant 0 -$ 30% -$ -$Lab Clerk N 1 1 1 500$ 6,000$ 30% 1,800$ 7,800$Assayers N 1 4 4 1,500$ 72,000$ 30% 21,600$ 93,600$Assayers Assistants N 1 4 4 750$ 36,000$ 30% 10,800$ 46,800$Assay Clerk 0 -$ 30% -$ -$

Sub Total 0 0 10 41,400$ 179,400$

PROCESS PLANT MAINTENANCEMaintenance Manager E 1 1 1 1 1 12,500$ 150,000$ 100% 150,000$ 300,000$Maintenance Supervisor E 1 1 1 1 1 11,000$ 132,000$ 100% 132,000$ 264,000$Electrical / Instrument Engineer N 1 1 1 1 5,000$ 60,000$ 30% 18,000$ 78,000$Mechanical Foreman N 1 1 1 2,000$ 24,000$ 30% 7,200$ 31,200$E&I Foreman Foreman N 1 1 1 1 2,000$ 24,000$ 30% 7,200$ 31,200$Boilermaker/Welder N 2 1 2 800$ 19,200$ 30% 5,760$ 24,960$Fitter N 2 1 2 800$ 19,200$ 30% 5,760$ 24,960$Electrician N 2 1 2 800$ 19,200$ 30% 5,760$ 24,960$Instrumentation Technician N 2 1 2 800$ 19,200$ 30% 5,760$ 24,960$Trades Assistants N 4 1 4 200$ 9,600$ 30% 2,880$ 12,480$

Sub Total 2 4 16 340,320$ 816,720$

Total Processing Labour 3 5 94 849,840$ 2,534,640$

Shift type1 12 h per day, day shift only 9/5 Roster2 12 h per day, continuous shift 14/7 Roster3 12 h per day, day shift only and 14/7 Roster

Description

SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

Client: Soludo Lambert MiningProject: Kipushi Tailings LeachDoc: Operating Cost Estimate


Revision: CPower

Installed Ave. Running Consumption/y Consumption/t Total Cost CommentArea kW kW kWh kWh US$/y US$/t

330 Leach Feed 400 290 2,319,893 2.3 463,979 0.46340 Leaching 243 146 1,167,946 1.2 233,589 0.23350 Solid / Liquid Separation 359 242 1,935,911 1.9 387,182 0.39360 Precipitation 109 67 535,975 0.5 107,195 0.11365 MHP Handling 140 95 759,965 0.8 151,993 0.15380 Reagents 132 88 703,968 0.7 140,794 0.14390 Services 378 151 1,207,944 1.2 241,589 0.24

Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.00

Grand Total 1,761 1,079 8,631,603 8.63 1,726,321 1.73

Power Cost 0.200 US$/kWh

Page 9 of 12


Doc No: S106-EST-PR-002Revision: CMaintenance Materials & Contract Labour

Direct Costs Factor Other Costs Cost CommentAUD AUD/y AUD/y AUD/t

330 Leach Feed 1,120,033 5.0% 56,002 0.06340 Leaching 1,908,000 5.0% 95,400 0.10350 Solid / Liquid Separation 3,007,500 5.0% 150,375 0.15360 Precipitation 635,000 5.0% 31,750 0.03365 MHP Handling 1,514,500 5.0% 75,725 0.08380 Reagents 851,000 5.0% 42,550 0.04390 Services 622,000 2.0% 12,440 0.01

Grand Total, AUD 9,658,033 464,242 0.46Grand Total, USD 348,181 0.35

Page 10 of 12


Annual TailingsTreatment Rate 1,000,000 t/yOperating Hours 8,000 h/yHourly Throughput (Nominal) 125 t/h

Reagent Supplier CommercialName Product delivery form Quantity Unit Quantity, t/y Quantity, kg/y Cost (US$/t) Cost (US$/y) Cost (US$/t

Feed) Delivery Method

Flocculant TBA Solid 30 kg/h 240 240,000 5,000 1,200,000 1.20$98% H2SO4 TBA Liquid 7,000 kg/h 56,000 56,000,000 330 18,480,000 18.48$ TankerSMBS Protea Chemicals Solid 1,359 kg/h 10,870 10,870,000 691 7,511,170 7.51$ 1350kg Bulk BagsSlaked Lime Neelkanth Lime Solid 1,373 kg/h 10,983 10,983,495 320 3,514,718 3.51$ 1000kg Bulk BagsMgO ex Turkey Solid 1,241 kg/h 9,928 9,927,543 1,000 9,927,543 9.93$ 1000kg Bulk BagsWater N/A N/A Liquid m3/h 0 0 0.2 0 -$ Borefield

Total 40,633,431.63$

Consumables Supplier CommercialName Product delivery form Quantity Unit Quantity/Year Unit Cost (US$/unit) Cost (US$/y) Cost (US$/t

Feed) Delivery Method

US$/bag $/yBulk Bags 2.50 bags/h 19,999 Bags 6 119,994 0.12$Belt Filter Cloths 4 units/belt 8 Cloths 7,000 56,000 0.06$Filter Press Cloths 50 cloths/press 300 Cloths 80 24,000 0.02$Potable Water Plant Chemicals & Servicing 1.00 #/quarter 4.0 Service 10,000 40,000 0.04$

Total 239,994.48$

Flocculant 1,200,000$98% H2SO4 18,480,000$SMBS 7,511,170$Slaked Lime 3,514,718$MgO 9,927,543$Water -$Consumables 239,994$

40,873,426$

REAGENT CONSUMPTION

$-

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

$16,000,000

$18,000,000

$20,000,000

Flocculant 98% H2SO4 SMBS Slaked Lime MgO Water Consumables

OPE

X %

Reagents & Consumables



Revision: CMiscellaneous

Number of units Unit costUS$ US$/y US$/t Comment

Laboratory (including mine)Contract Laboratory costs 365 1,000.00$ 365,000 0.37Building and equipment fee 0.00

Research & DevelopmentConsultants 0 0.00Vehicles & Mobile EquipmentLight vehicles 10 16,000 0.02 CalculatedMedium vehicles 9 43,200 0.04 CalculatedHeavy vehicles 1 14,000 0.01 CalculatedCrane hire including operators 137,896 0.14 CalculatedDieselVehicles 196,228 0.20 CalculatedGrand Total 772,324 0.77

Page 12 of 12



Preliminary Schedule

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish

1 Major Project Milestones 241 days Fri 3/08/18 Mon 1/04/192 Process Plant Renewal 0 days Wed 12/09/18 Wed 12/09/18

3 RSF Approval 0 days Mon 5/11/18 Mon 5/11/18

4 Import Exoneration 0 days Wed 10/10/18 Wed 10/10/18

5 Commnce Procurement of Long Lead Items 0 days Fri 3/08/18 Fri 3/08/18

6 Commence Construction 0 days Mon 11/03/19 Mon 11/03/19

7 Commence Commissioning 0 days Sat 16/03/19 Sat 16/03/19

8 Commence Production 0 days Mon 1/04/19 Mon 1/04/19

9

10 Permitting 321 days? Wed 16/05/18 Mon 1/04/1911 Process Plant Renewal 120 days Wed 16/05/18 Wed 12/09/1812 Engage Permiting Consultant - Geo Science 0 days Mon 18/06/18 Mon 18/06/18

13 Finalise SS Report and Drawings - Minnovo 30 days Wed 16/05/18 Thu 14/06/18

14 Prepare Documentation - Geo Science 60 days Fri 15/06/18 Mon 13/08/18

15 Lodge Permiting Documentation 0 days Mon 13/08/18 Mon 13/08/18

16 Review Process 30 days Tue 14/08/18 Wed 12/09/18

17 Process Plant Permit Approved 0 days Wed 12/09/18 Wed 12/09/18

18

19 RSF Approval 90 days Tue 7/08/18 Mon 5/11/1820 Finalse RSF design 0 days Tue 7/08/18 Tue 7/08/18

21 Prepare & Lodge Permitting Documentation 30 days Wed 8/08/18 Thu 6/09/18

22 Review Process 60 days Fri 7/09/18 Mon 5/11/18

23 RSF Permit Approval 0 days Mon 5/11/18 Mon 5/11/18

24

25 Customs Duty Exoneration 122 days Mon 11/06/18 Wed 10/10/1826 Finalise Equipment List 7 days Mon 11/06/18 Sun 17/06/18

27 Prepare and Lodge Exoneration Paperwork 14 days Thu 13/09/18 Wed 26/09/18

28 Review Process 14 days Thu 27/09/18 Wed 10/10/18

29 Exoneration Approved 0 days Wed 10/10/18 Wed 10/10/18

30

12/095/11

10/103/08

11/0316/03

1/04

18/06

13/08

12/09

7/0820

215/11

34

10/10

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19 2Q19

Task

Split

Progress

Milestone

Summary

Project Summary

External Tasks

External Milestone

Deadline

Page 1

Project: Kipushi Tailings ProjecDate: Fri 8/06/18


31 Design Works 175 days? Wed 16/05/18 Tue 6/11/1832 Leaching Plant 175 days? Wed 16/05/18 Tue 6/11/1833 Appoint Consultant 0 days Wed 16/05/18 Wed 16/05/18

34 Finalise Process Design 40 days Wed 16/05/18 Sun 24/06/18

35 Finalise PFD's 50 days Wed 16/05/18 Wed 4/07/18

36 Major Equipment Selection & Sizing 120 days Wed 16/05/18 Wed 12/09/18

37 Plant Layouts 40 days Wed 16/05/18 Sun 24/06/18

38 Engineering 145 days Fri 15/06/18 Tue 6/11/1839 Civil / Structural Engineering 120 days Mon 25/06/18 Mon 22/10/18

40 Mechanical / Piping Engineering 130 days Fri 15/06/18 Mon 22/10/18

41 Electrical / Instrumentation Engineering 130 days Sat 30/06/18 Tue 6/11/18

42 Project Infrastructure 54 days? Wed 16/05/18 Sun 8/07/1843 Water Supply 14 days Mon 25/06/18 Sun 8/07/1844 Finalise Site Water Balance 14 days Mon 25/06/18 Sun 8/07/18

45 Power Station 1 day? Wed 16/05/18 Wed 16/05/1846 Finalise Power Demand 1 day? Wed 16/05/18 Wed 16/05/18

47

48 Residue Storage Facility 84 days Wed 16/05/18 Tue 7/08/1849 Send Sample for Geotech Testing 7 days Sat 19/05/18 Fri 25/05/18

50 Tailings Geotech Testwork 14 days Sat 26/05/18 Fri 8/06/18

51 Finalise RSF Design 84 days Wed 16/05/18 Tue 7/08/18

52

53 Procurement 225 days Sat 30/06/18 Sat 9/02/1954 Filters 215 days Tue 10/07/18 Sat 9/02/1955 Tender and Award 35 days Tue 10/07/18 Mon 13/08/18

56 Manufacture & Deliver 180 days Tue 14/08/18 Sat 9/02/19

57 Agitators 185 days Sat 30/06/18 Mon 31/12/1858 Tender and Award 35 days Sat 30/06/18 Fri 3/08/18

59 Manufacture & Deliver 150 days Sat 4/08/18 Mon 31/12/18

60 Thickeners 215 days Tue 10/07/18 Sat 9/02/19

16/05


Task

Split

Progress

Milestone

Summary

Project Summary

External Tasks

External Milestone

Deadline

Page 2



61 Tender and Award 35 days Tue 10/07/18 Mon 13/08/18

62 Manufacture & Deliver 180 days Tue 14/08/18 Sat 9/02/19

63 Apron Feeder 215 days Sat 30/06/18 Wed 30/01/1964 Tender and Award 35 days Sat 30/06/18 Fri 3/08/18

65 Manufacture & Deliver 180 days Sat 4/08/18 Wed 30/01/19

66 Scrubber 185 days Tue 10/07/18 Thu 10/01/1967 Tender and Award 35 days Tue 10/07/18 Mon 13/08/18

68 Manufacture & Deliver 150 days Tue 14/08/18 Thu 10/01/19

69 Steelwork & Platework 195 days Wed 25/07/18 Mon 4/02/1970 Tender and Award Packages 35 days Wed 25/07/18 Tue 28/08/18

71 Manufacture & Deliver 160 days Wed 29/08/18 Mon 4/02/19

72

73 Construction 260 days Tue 10/07/18 Tue 26/03/1974 Concrete Works 175 days Tue 10/07/18 Mon 31/12/1875 Tender & Award 35 days Tue 10/07/18 Mon 13/08/18

76 Mobilise & Establish 20 days Tue 14/08/18 Sun 2/09/18

77 Concrete Works 120 days Mon 3/09/18 Mon 31/12/18

78 SMP Works 185 days Sat 8/09/18 Mon 11/03/1979 Tender & Award 35 days Sat 8/09/18 Fri 12/10/18

80 Mobilise & Establish 30 days Sat 13/10/18 Sun 11/11/18

81 SMP Works 120 days Mon 12/11/18 Mon 11/03/19

82 E&I Works 185 days Sun 23/09/18 Tue 26/03/1983 Tender & Award 35 days Sun 23/09/18 Sat 27/10/18

84 Mobilise & Establish 30 days Sun 28/10/18 Mon 26/11/18

85 E&I Works 120 days Tue 27/11/18 Tue 26/03/19

86 Roadworks 90 days Mon 12/11/18 Sat 9/02/1987 Tender Works 30 days Mon 12/11/18 Tue 11/12/18

88 Upgrade Roads 60 days Wed 12/12/18 Sat 9/02/19

89 Residue Storage Facility 140 days Tue 23/10/18 Mon 11/03/1990 Tender and Award 35 days Tue 23/10/18 Mon 26/11/18


Task

Split

Progress

Milestone

Summary

Project Summary

External Tasks

External Milestone

Deadline

Page 3



91 Mobilise 30 days Tue 27/11/18 Wed 26/12/18

92 Earthworks 30 days Thu 27/12/18 Fri 25/01/19

93 HDPE Liner 45 days Sat 26/01/19 Mon 11/03/19

94

95 Tailings Reclamation 237 days Wed 8/08/18 Mon 1/04/1996 Develop Recalamation Plan 90 days Wed 8/08/18 Mon 5/11/18

97 Tender Reclamation Work 30 days Tue 6/11/18 Wed 5/12/18

98 Mobilise & Establish 21 days Thu 31/01/19 Thu 21/02/19

99 Pre-production 40 days Thu 21/02/19 Mon 1/04/19

100

101 Commissioning 36 days Mon 25/02/19 Mon 1/04/19102 Dry Commissioning 20 days Mon 25/02/19 Sat 16/03/19

103 Water Commissioning 15 days Mon 4/03/19 Mon 18/03/19

104 Tailings Commissioning 22 days Mon 11/03/19 Mon 1/04/19

105 Commence Production 0 days Mon 1/04/19 Mon 1/04/19 1/04


Task

Split

Progress

Milestone

Summary

Project Summary

External Tasks

External Milestone

Deadline

Page 4


Documents

ENGINEERING STUDY REPORT - dgwa.org · 2018-07-16 · Engineering Study Report S106-REP-PR-001 Rev: D Page 2 of 48 1.2 Tailings Reclamation Tailings within the TSF will be reclaimed