Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Corporate Presentation April 2013
2
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT
Forward Looking InformationThis Presentation contains ‘‘forward-looking information’’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking information may include, but is not limited to, information with respect to the anticipated production and developments in our operations in future periods, our planned exploration and development activities, the adequacy of our financial resources, the estimation of mineral resources, realization of mineral resource estimates, costs and timing of development of the projects we currently intend to acquire (the “Projects”), costs and timing of future exploration, results of future exploration and drilling, timing and receipt of approvals, consents and permits under applicable legislation, our executive compensation approach and practice, the composition of our board of directors and committees, and adequacy of financial resources. Wherever possible, words such as ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘expects’’ or ‘‘does not expect’’, ‘‘budget’’, ‘‘scheduled’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘forecasts’’, ‘‘anticipate’’ or ‘‘does not anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘intend’’ and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, have been used to identify forward-looking information. Statements concerning mineral resource estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward-looking information to the extent that they involve estimates of the mineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as ‘‘expects’’, ‘‘anticipates’’, ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘projects’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘assumes’’, ‘‘intends’’, ‘‘strategy’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘potential’’ or variations thereof, or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking information. Many of these risks are listed and described in our final short-form prospectus dated March 19, 2012 (the “Prospectus”), which is available for review on SEDAR at www.sedar.com under our profile. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Forward-looking information involves statements about the future and is inherently uncertain, and our actual achievements or other future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, those referred to in the Prospectus under the heading ‘‘Risk Factors’’. Our forward-looking information is based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date the statements are made, and we do not assume any obligation to update forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable law. For the reasons set forth above, prospective investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information.National Instrument 43-101Technical and scientific information contained herein relating to the Projects is derived from National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant technical reports (“Reports”) “Technical Report and Updated Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project” dated February 20, 2012 “Mineral Resources Update Technical Report” dated April 3, 2012, “Mineral Resources Update Technical Report” dated September 18, 2012 and “Mineral Resources Update Technical Report” dated November 20, 2012. We have filed the Reports under our profile at www.sedar.com. Technical and scientific information not contained within the Reports for the Projects have been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Kenneth C. McNaughton, an independent “qualified person” under NI 43-101.This presentation uses the terms “measured resources”, “indicated resources” (together “M&I”) and “inferred resources”. Although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations (under NI 43-101), the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource will be converted into mineral reserves.In addition, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre feasibility studies, or economic studies, except for a Preliminary Assessment as defined under NI 43-101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable. CurrencyUnless otherwise indicated, all dollar values herein are in Canadian $.
3
Significant high-grade gold resource:
Valley of the Kings
8.5 M oz gold Indicated (16.1 Mt @ 16.4 g/t gold)
2.9 M oz gold Inferred (5.4 Mt @ 17.0 g/t gold)
Located in British Columbia, Canada
Underground feasibility study Q2 2013
Commercial production target early 2016
An investment in Gold
4
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.00.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
F2 Deposit(Rubicon)
Buritica(Continental)
Cerro Negro(Goldcorp)
Eleonore(Goldcorp)
Cerro Moro(Yamana)
Valley of the Kings
Kirkland Lake Mine(Kirkland Lake)
Kensington Mine(Coeur)
Casa Berardi(Aurizon)
El Penon Mine(Yamana)
Red Lake Mine(Goldcorp)
Pogo Mine(Sumitomo)
M&I + Inferred Gold Resources (mm oz)
M&
I +
Infe
rred G
old
Gra
de (
g/t
)HIGH-GRADE GOLD WITH SIZE
November 2012 Valley of the Kings High-Grade Gold Mineral Resource based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne.Data sources: Intierra Ltd., NRH.
Indicated Gold: 8.5 mm oz @ 16.4 g/t Au
Inferred Gold:2.9 mm oz @ 17.0 g/t Au
5
BRUCEJACK PROJECT LOCATION
EXPLORATION AND OWNERSHIP HISTORY
1960-1980
1980-1985
1986-1989
1990
1993
1999-2000
2009
2010
2011-2012
2013
Exploration by various
companies
West Zone discovery and
definition by Newhawk
5.3 km underground
development of West Zone
West Zone Feasibility Study
completed
Acquisition by Silver Standard Resources Inc.
Exploration resumes. Discovery
of Valley of the Kings Zone
Acquisition by Pretivm
Extensive exploration program, high-grade resource, exploration
road
Mine Development
Certificate issued
Valley of the Kings underground bulk
sample and feasibility study
6
Valley of the Kings
West Zone
BR
UC
EJAC
K F
AU
LT
7
BRUCEJACK GEOLOGY/DRILLING
Meters
500
Valley of the Kings
West Zone
GEOLOGY CROSS SECTION
8
9
MAIN MINERALIZED DOMAINS
West Zone UndergroundDevelopment
Bulk Sample
N
SDomain 17 Domain 11
200 m
Category Tonne
s(mil)
Gold(g/t)
Silver
(g/t)
Contained(3)
Gold(mil oz)
Silver(mil oz)
Indicated 16.1 16.4 14.2 8.5 7.3
Inferred(2
) 5.4 17.0 15.7 2.9 2.7
Valley of the Kings Mineral Resource Estimate – November 2012(1,4,5)
(Based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne)
(1) Mineral Resources which are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, marketing, or other relevant issues. The Mineral Resources in this news release were estimated using the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council.(2) The quantity and grade of reported Inferred resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred Resources as an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource category.(3) Contained metal may differ due to rounding.(4) The Mineral Resource estimate is defined using 5 m by 5 by 5 m blocks in the well drilled portion of West Zone (5 m by 10 m drilling or better) and 10 m by 10 m by 10 m blocks in the remainder of West Zone and in Valley of the Kings.(5) The gold equivalent value is defined as AuEq=Au + Ag/53
VALLEY OF THE KINGS INDICATED RESOURCE
Northing (± 25 m)
Ind.Gold*(Oz.)
6258225 230,900
6258175 484,000
6258125 703,100
6258075 336,600
6258025 1,951,100
6257975 2,365,900
6257925 1,021,000
6257875 513,600
6257825 687,500
6257775 176,400
Total Ounces per 100 m Easting and 50 m Northing strips
Valley of the KingsIndicated Mineral Resource:
8.5 Moz. Au @ 5.0 g/t AuEq.(16.1 Mt @ 16.4 g/t Au)*Nov. 2012 Indicated Mineral
Resource; ≥5.0 g/t AuEq.
10
1,092,100
1,776,900
1,467,600
2,185,800
1,391,000
380,100 192,900 Ind. Au* (Oz.)
MINERAL RESOURCE CONTINUITY
11
Total Ounces* per 10 x 100 m N-S corridor – 6257800 N Long SectionLevel (m) Ind. Gold (Oz)*
1540-1570 116,300
1510-1540 499,700
1480-1510 734,800
1450-1480 510,400
1420-1450 365,450
1390-1420 566,700
1360-1390 631,700
1330-1360 364,800
1300-1330 527,400
1270-1300 992,000
1240-1270 998,200
1210-1240 521,950
1180-1210 213,050
1150-1180 246,800
1120-1150 294,600
1090-1120 393,900
1060-1090 317,600
W E
100 m
4,000-6,000
6,000-7,000
7,000-8,000
>10,000
Key (Oz. Au)
3,000-4,000
1,000-3,000
<1,000
8,000-10,000Total Ounces per level(Valley of Kings Zone)*Nov. 2012 Indicated Mineral Resource; ≥5.0 g/t AuEq.
12
CONTINUITY: HIGH GRADE BLOCKS
Indicated and Inferred blocks greater than 5 g/t AuEq
Valley of the Kings block model – 426550E section view East (50m wide)
13
CONTINUITY: HIGH GRADE BLOCKS
Indicated and Inferred blocks greater than 5 g/t AuEq
Valley of the Kings block model – 426600E section view East (50m wide)
1414
100 m
CONTINUITY: HIGH GRADE BLOCKSValley of the Kings block model plan view - 1300m level (50m thick)
1515
100 m
CONTINUITY: HIGH GRADE BLOCKSValley of the Kings block model plan view - 1250m level (50m thick)
16
10,000-TONNE BULK SAMPLE (Q2/Q3)
N S
0.5-5.0 g/t AuEq
5.0-15.0 g/t AuEq
>15.0 g/t AuEq
KeyWest Zone
UndergroundDevelopment
Valley of the Kings
Bulk Sample
200 m
546 m
100 m 200 m 300 m400 m
500 m
Over 400 meters out of 546 total meters to reach Valley of the Kings have been completed.
17
BULK SAMPLE: SECTION 426625
SN
HIGH-GRADE CORRIDORS
18
Valley of the Kings Drill Hole Trace Bar Graphs – 426615E Section View
Bulk sample
N S
Domain 17/20
19
BULK SAMPLE LOCATION
Vertical viewing window ±40 m
1345 m Level
Acces
s Ram
pN
5-10
10-20
20-60
>60
Key (g/t AuEq)
2.5-5
1-2.5
0.3-1
30 m
20
BULK SAMPLE LOCATION
5-10
10-20
20-60
>60
Key (g/t AuEq)
2.5-5
1-2.5
0.3-1
1345 m Level
Vertical viewing window ±8.5 m
N
Siltstone, litharenite, pebble conglomerate
Polylithic Conglomerate
60°
Fragmental Volcanic Rocks
Intensely Silicified
Conglomerate
Hbl-phyric Latite Flow 30 m
Acces
s Ram
p
21
BULK SAMPLE LOCATION
5-10
10-20
20-60
>60
Key (g/t AuEq)
Only Indicated blocks greater than 5 g/t AuEq shown
1345 m Level
Vertical viewing window ±8.5 m
NSiltstone, litharenite, pebble conglomerate
Polylithic Conglomerate
Fragmental Volcanic Rocks
Intensely Silicified
Conglomerate
Hbl-phyric Latite Flow 30 m
60° Acces
s Ram
p
22
BULK SAMPLE PROCESS(1)
Typical sample tower flowsheetSource: Strathcona Mineral Services Limited, Meladine Project
Process flowsheet summary:
Crosscut rounds of 100 tonnes transported to surface
Crushing to ¾ inch, then to ½ inch Run through on-site sample tower 120 kilograms in 4 samples are sent for
testing Remainder (99.8 tonnes) shipped for
processing to produce gold
Representivity testing:
Representative of drillhole density that informs the Indicated Mineral Resource
Representative of average grade of Indicated Resource and the global resource for Valley of the Kings
Representative of style of mineralization for the rest of Valley of the Kings
(1) Strathcona Mineral Services Ltd is independent QP for Valley of the Kings bulk sample
23
UNDERGROUND DRILLING
30 m
NSN
Typical Section – Fan Drilling
Detailed underground drilling at <15 meter centers to outline 700,000 ounces of gold.
VISIBLE GOLD STRINGERS IN STOCKWORK
24
VALLEY OF THE KINGS GOLD GRADE
25
Valley of the Kings – Indicated Resource grade consistency
Resource Estimate
(Snowden)
Cumulative Drilling(m)
Indicated Gold Resource Ounces
(mil)
Indicated Gold Grade (g/t)
April 2012 59,100 4.9 17.3
September 2012 114,949 5.1 16.2
November 2012 174,182 8.5 16.4
Valley of the Kings – Drilling results and gold grade
Year
Hole number by
series
Over 1 kilogram per tonne
500 - 1,000
g/t
100 – 500 g/t
30 – 100 g/t
15 – 30 g/t
5 – 15 g/t Annual total
2009 1 - 37 2 3 14 17 107 143
2010 38 - 110 6 2 12 26 26 129 201
2011 111 - 288 21 11 48 63 74 304 521
2012 289 - 585 49 26 125 151 134 491 976
2009-2012 Total: 78 39 188 254 251 1,031 1,841
2626
Corridors of high-grade visible gold seams within lower grade (5g/t to 20g/t) gold quartz stockwork
Steeply dipping ore body
Competent ground conditions
Stope widths (15m wide X 30m high) appropriate both for transverse and longitudinal layouts
Cost effective
First 50 meters of Valley of the Kings ramp
Long hole stoping mining method:
MINING METHOD FOR STOCKWORK
27
PROPOSED MINE DEVELOPMENT
Oblique View of Mining Stopes, Valley of the Kings
S
N
100 m
West-Zone (late mine
life) Valley of the Kings
MINE AND MILL SITE LAYOUT
28
Crushing
Grinding
Gravity Concentrate Circuit
Doré (50%-60% of gold production)
Flotation Concentrate Circuit
Off-take (40%-50% of gold production)
Flowsheet Summary:
Dore bars produced on site, shipped to gold refinery
Flotation concentrate (~300 tpd) shipped to Stewart then sea transport
West Zone
Valley of the Kings
29
BRUCEJACK PROJECT ECONOMICS
(1) Source: Technical Report and Updated Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project, effective date February 20, 2012
(2) Base case metals prices of US$1,100 /oz gold and US$21/oz silver
PEA is based on Mineral Resource estimates for the Valley of the Kings and West Zone effective November 28, 2011 which are now out-of-date.
February 2012 Preliminary Economic Assessment Results(1,2) :
Processing rate 1,500 tpd
Mine life 24 years
Total gold production
6.9 million oz
Average annual gold production (Yrs 1-12)
325,000 ounces
Capex US$436.3 million
Total operating costs
C$170.90/t milled
Internal Rate of Return
29.8%
Net Present Value (5% discount)
US$2.262 billion
Processing rate increased 2,700 tonnes per day
Mill facilities streamlined Flotation concentrate to be sold
to 3rd parties rather than refined on site
Capex and Opex savings, reduced project footprint
Metallurgy continues to be positive Feasibility metallurgical studies
confirm gold recoveries 98%, silver recoveries 92%
Feasibility Study Refinements to PEA:
30
2013 BRUCEJACK PROJECT PLANS
H1 2013
Access ramp to Valley of the Kings is underway, with over 300 meters completed out of 546 meters in total
Channel sample the ramp to Valley of the Kings
Underground sampling/drilling Valley of the Kings
Commence 10,000-tonne underground bulk sample from Valley of the Kings
Feasibility study completed
H2 2013
Complete bulk sample report
Process bulk sample
File Environmental Assessment Certificate Application
Resource update
Valley of the Kings drilling
31
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Pretivm’s management team has been cooperatively engaging with First Nations and local community leaders in the Stewart, BC region for over 10 years
We work to ensure that our communication about the progress of the Brucejack Project is open and continuous
Commercial relationships with local First Nations developed during the exploration phase at Brucejack have been mutually successful
We will continue to extend both commercial contract and employment opportunities to locals whenever possible
Stewart warehouse constructed by development corporation of Skii km Lax Ha First Nation
32
BRUCEJACK PERMITTING
1986
1989
1993
1998
1999
2006
2011-2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Reclamation Permit
Mine Development
Certificate issued April 15, 1993
Project Assessment Certificate
Permitted for exploration and exploration road
Project Assessment Certificate allowed to
expire
Approval in principle for
development of a mine at West Zone
Reclamation Completion
Project Description under review for
underground mine at Brucejack’s
Valley of the Kings
Brucejack Lake is not fish habitat
Waste rock from 1980’s/1990’s underground development was deposited in Brucejack Lake as part of 1999 reclamation
More than 50% of tailings (targeting 60%) to be used for paste backfill and deposited underground, with remainder of tailings to be deposited in bottom 30 meters of Brucejack Lake
Anticipate Environmental
Assessment Certificate
Construction, commissioning
Commercial production target
33
PRETIVM MANAGEMENT
Robert Quartermain, B.Sc., M.Sc., P.Geo, D.Sc. President & Chief Executive Officer, Director
Peter de Visser, CAChief Financial Officer
Joseph Ovsenek, B.A. Sc., P.Eng., LLBVice President & Chief Development Officer, Director
Ken McNaughton, M.A. Sc., P.Eng.Vice President & Chief Exploration Officer
Ian I Chang, M.A. Sc., P.Eng.Vice President, Project Development
Michelle Romero, B.A., M.L.S.Director, Corporate Relations
Kevin Torpy, B.Sc.Director, Mine Engineering
Warwick Board, Ph.D., P.Geo. Chief Geologist
Max Holtby, B.Sc., P. Geo.Director, Permitting
Andrew Saltis, I.Eng.Site Project Manager, Mine Manager
SHAREHOLDING & ANALYST COVERAGE
34
Institutions, 50%
Retail, 23%
Management, 5%
Silver Standard,
20%
Capital Structure(1)
Public Float 77.5Silver Standard Shares 19.0 Total Issued & Outstanding Shares
96.5
Incentive Options 8.5 Total Fully Diluted Shares 105.0
Market CapitalizationC$735 millionWorking Capital (at Dec. 31,
2012)C$30.1 million
Share Offering gross proceeds (at February 15, 2013)(3)
C$21.0 million
(1)As of March 27, 2013; ownership calculated on an undiluted basis.(2)As of March 27, 2013. Source: IPREO, SEDI(3)See news release dated February 15, 2013
(shares in millions)
Top Shareholders(2) (shares in millions)
Silver Standard Resources
18.986
Royce & Associates 10.689Passport Capital 5.386 Fidelity Management 3.720Robert Quartermain 2.853 Connor, Clark & Lunn 2.602TD Asset Management 2.153Carmignac Gestion 1.898Sprott Asset Management
1.718
Analyst Coverage
BMO John HayesCIBC Jeff KilleenCitibank Alex Hacking Cormark Securities Richard GrayDahlman Rose Adam Graf Global Hunter Securities Jeff WrightGMP Securities TBDRBC Dan RollinsSalman Partners Ash GuglaniScotiabank Ovais HabibUBS TBDVery Independent Research
John Tumazos
35
HIGH-GRADE GOLD PRODUCTION
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 180
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
295
158
237.5216.666666666667
Casa Berardi Mine (Aurizon Mines)
127
356
180
492.5
257.230769230769
95
290
100.3
142
90.032154340836
550 Valley of the Kings (Pretium )
657
Average gold production vs. grade for various North American producing mines with >2Moz Au
Grade (g/t)
Annual G
old
Pro
duct
ion (
Koz/
year)
Data sources: Companies, NRH.
Production target:400k-500k oz/year@ 14g/t -15g/t head grade
CONTACTPhone: 604-558-1784Fax: 604-558-4784Toll-free: [email protected]
HEAD OFFICEPretium Resources Inc.570 Granville St.Suite 1600Vancouver, BCCanada V6C 3P1
COMMON SHARES TSX/NYSE:PVGIssued: 96.5 millionFully diluted: 105.0 million52-week hi/low: $16.74/$6.48Market cap: $735 million
Advancing a major high-grade gold resource in Canada
37
APPENDIX: DECLINING GRADES AND DISCOVERIES
Decade Yield/Spend-Ratio
1950’s 42
1960’s 106
1970’s 83
1980’s 57
1990’s 23
2000’s 11
Ratio of Discovered US$ in the Ground Per US$ Exploration Expenditure
Source: Open Geology Journal, 2010 Volume 4(*) Added for comparison
Arithmetic mean of gold grade in ores mined in South Africa, Australia, Canada, Brazil and the US,
1830-2004
PVG’s Valley of the Kings(*)
Four-sub-cycle Model of Gold Production 1850-2008*
*Global gold production with exponential fit of +1.96 p.a. (R2 = 0.9222 ) and four sub-cyclesSource: Open Geology Journal, 2010 Volume 4
APPENDIX: GOLD EQUITIES VERSUS GOLD
38Gold price (%) XAU Index (%)
Gold Price ($US) (%)
10-Year Performance of Gold, and Gold’s Relative Performance to XAU Index:
January 1, 2003 to March 31, 2013 (monthly,%)
Gold price ($US)
APPENDIX: GOLD EQUITIES IN GOLD TERMS
39
Source: RBC Capital Markets
APPENDIX: GOLD EQUITIES: TRADING AT 2008 LEVEL
40
Senior/Mid-Tier Gold Producer Average
APPENDIX: RISING COSTS – FOCUS ON GRADE
41
Rising costs erode margins, even in high gold price environment
Source: Scotiabank
APPENDIX: RISING COSTS – FOCUS ON GRADE
42
Rising costs erode margins, even in high gold price environment
Source: Randgold
43
APPENDIX: COMPARATIVE GEOCHRONOLOGY
44
GEOLOGICAL EVOLUTION
~192-188 Ma
Active island arcPorphyry-related hydrothermal systemInitial mineralization
Telescoping porphyrySyn-deposition volcanic pile deformationMain mineralization continuum
Magmatic Brine
Vapour
~196-192 Ma
Heated Seawater
Ocean
Mineralizing fluids
Volcano-sedimentary
sub-basin
45
GEOLOGICAL EVOLUTION
Cretaceous deformation at ~110 MaUplift and erosion
Valley of the Kings
Waning of porphyry systemArc-related deformationMafic dyke intrusion
West Zone
SN
~184 Ma
APPENDIX: BRUCEJACK AREA GEOLOGY
46>0.3 g/t gold
500mExisting 5km underground workings
1980-1994 – Newhawk908 DDH/120,000m
2009-2010 – Silver Standard110 DDH/50,946m
2011-2012 – Pretivm426 DDH/155,144m
West Zone
Valley of the Kings Zone
North – South
Valley of the Kings Zone
Valley of the Kings Zone
500m
West Zone
West Zone
(Teuton)
0.65 g/t Au 0 - 1047 m
(Seabridge)
47
APPENDIX: VALLEY OF THE KINGS – GOLD GRADE
Gold grade distribution inside mineralized corridors – Valley of the Kings
All 1.5 m composites
Au > 5.0 g/t only
5 g/t Au
Au (g/t) Au (g/t)
Cum
ula
tive P
robabili
ty (
%)
Cum
ula
tive P
robabili
ty (
%)
48
APPENDIX: BRUCEJACK BULK TONNAGE
Category Tonnes
(millions)
Gold(g/t)
Silver
( g/t)
Contained(3)
Gold(million
oz)
Silver(million
oz)
Measured 7.4 2.77 152 0.66 36.3
Indicated 139.0 2.14 12.9 9.6 57.8
M+I 146.0 2.17 19.9 10.3 94.1Inferred(
2) 857.0 0.86 8.49 23.7 234.0
Category Tonnes
(millions)
Gold(g/t)
Silver
(g/t)
Contained(3)
Gold(million
oz)
Silver(million
oz)
Measured 7.4 2.78 153 0.66 36.3
Indicated 100.0 2.87 16.4 9.2 52.5
M+I 107.0 2.86 25.8 9.9 88.8Inferred(
2) 600.0 1.09 10.2 21.0 197.0
Brucejack Grade-tonnage estimate (Open Cut sensitivity) September 2012 (1)(4)(5)
(Based on a cut-off grade of 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne)
Brucejack Grade-tonnage estimate (Open cut sensitivity) September 2012 (1)(4)(5)
(Based on a cut-off grade of 0.50 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne)
(1) Mineral Resources which are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, marketing, or other relevant issues. The Mineral Resources in this news release were estimated using the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council.(2) The quantity and grade of reported Inferred resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred Resources as an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource category.(3) Contained metal may differ due to rounding.(4) The Mineral Resource estimate is defined using 5 m by 5 by 5 m blocks in the well drilled portion of West Zone (5 m by 10 m drilling or better) and 10 m by 10 m by 10 m blocks in the remainder of West Zone ,Valley of the Kings, Galena Hill and parts of the Shore Zone, and by 20m by 20m by 20m in the poorer informed Bridge Zone, Gossan Hill and parts of Shore Zone(5) The gold equivalent value is defined as AuEq=Au + Ag/53
49
APPENDIX: SNOWFIELD PROJECT
Snowfield Open Pit(September 2010 PA)
Mitchell Zone(SEA)
Sulphurets Zone(SEA)
Iron Cap Zone(SEA)
Grade Contained Metal
Tonnes Au Ag Cu Mo Re Au Ag Cu
(mt) (g/t) (g/t) (%)(ppm
)(ppm
)(mm oz)
(mm oz)
(bil lbs)
Measured 189.80.82
1.69
0.09%
97.4 0.57 4.98 10.3 0.38
Indicated1,180.
30.55
1.73
0.10%
83.6 0.5020.9
365.4 2.60
Measured & Indicated
1,370.1
0.59
1.72
0.10%
85.5 0.51 25.9
2 75.8 2.98
Inferred 833.2 0.34
1.90
0.06%
69.5 0.43 9.0350.9 1.10
Snowfield Mineral Resource Summary – Feb. 2011(1,2)
(Based on a cut-off grade of 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne
(1) Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Snowfield Property, February 18, 2011(2) See notes 1,2 and 3 on slide 41
Inferred ResourcesMeasured + Indicated Resources
Pebble KSM Donlin Gold
Snowfield0
20
40
60
80
100
120
4014.5
4 9
67
45
38 26
Go
ld R
eso
urc
es
(mm
oz.
)
Large –Scale North American Gold Projects
(PVG)(NG/ABX)
(SEA)
(NDM)
