Full Plant Survey MAY 14, 2014 Minera Cerro Bayo: July 9, 2014

FULL PLANT SURVEY
MAY 14, 2014
MINERA CERRO BAYO
KM4202
PHASE 2
July 9, 2014
Work Performed on Behalf Compañía Minera Cerro Bayo Ltd.

1
1.0 Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the contributions made to this program of

metallurgical study by Mandalay Resources and Minera Cerro Bayo personnel.
Firstly, we must thank Mr. Toni Streczynski for the opportunity to travel to site
and conduct the work. We would also like to thank Mr. José Gonzalez, for his
tremendous hospitality during our stay in Chile Chico, and making travel
arrangements to site. Mr. Sebastian Romero, for assisting us with finding
appropriate equipment, completing risk assessments, and operating various
samplers and sample points; as well as the very helpful photographs (a selection
of which are shown in Appendix I). The smooth process of collecting the belt cut
can be attributed to his organization of the task.
Thank you also to Mr. David Tachoires, for assisting with sampling and being
quite amicable despite my clumsiness in pouring slurry on his head, and to JP for
ensuring stable circuit operation, and providing data for the survey period after
the survey. The contribution of the operating and maintenance teams is also noted
in accepting our interference and presence in the concentrator, and providing
support when required. And to all, for putting up with my limited, though now
somewhat improved, Spanglish.
2
2.0 Metallurgical Overview
On May 14, 2014, ALS Metallurgy personnel surveyed the Minera Cerro Bayo
concentrator with the assistance of the on-site metallurgical team. Thirteen
process stream samples were collected, as well as a subsequent belt cut sample.
No testing of the belt cut sample was conducted in this program. A summary of
the sample locations and overall metallurgical balance, created using Bilmat*, is
shown in Figure 1. Further details of sample locations, plant conditions at the
time of the survey, sample pulp densities and assays are provided in Appendix I.
Full size distributions for each stream are located in Appendix II.
The objective of the program was to identify potential areas for improvement in
metallurgical response within the Minera Cerro Bayo flowsheet. The
concentrator already operates very well; the metallurgical balance indicated that at
the time of the survey about 90 percent of the silver and 91 percent of the gold
was recovered into a final concentrate, which graded about 1 percent silver and
108 g/tonne gold.
However, there are some obvious nuances in the circuit that could be capitalized
upon to potentially improve metallurgical performance. Both sets of cyclones are
upgrading gold in the cyclone underflow. Gold, having a high specific gravity,
will tend to report to a cyclone underflow despite measuring a finer sizing than
the majority of the cyclone feed stream.
Based on this observation, the most likely improvement in the circuit would be
realized by including either gravity concentration or flash flotation on a bleed of
the D-15 cyclone underflow.
* Bilmat is a mass balancing program.

3
FIGURE 1
SIMPLIFIED FLOWSHEET AND METALLURGICAL BALANCE
2.4 Scavenger
1.3 Cyclones D- 2.5 Rougher Concentrate
15 O/F Tailing 27µm K80 2.6 Final Tailing
1.1 Cyclones
92µm K80 89µm K80 92µm K80
D-15 Feed
256µm K80
From SAG
Mill 2.3 Rougher
2.2 Cleaner
Concentrate
Tailing
33µm K80 2.7 Regrind
22µm K80
Cyclone Feed
1.2 Cyclones 46µm K80
D-15 U/F 2.1 Cleaner
379µm K80 Feed
23µm K80
2.9 Regrind
Discharge 2.10 Final Con
51µm K80 Column 23µm K80
2.8 Regrind
Cyclone
Underflow
72µm K80
Sample Point
Flotation Circuit Metallurgical Balance Data – 14th of May 2014

Samples Mass Assay - percent or g/t Distribution - percent
No. Description percent Pb Zn Fe S Ag Au Pb Zn Fe S Ag Au
1.1 Cyclones D-15 Feed 293 0.03 0.11 3.3 2.93 283 6.01 317 355 432 495 354 754
1.2 Cyclones D-15 U/F 193.4 0.04 0.12 3.8 3.55 308 7.91 217 255 332 395 254 654
1.3 Cyclones D-15 O/F 100 0.03 0.09 2.2 1.74 235 2.34 100 100 100 100 100 100
2.1 Cleaner Feed 20.5 0.21 0.69 25.4 29.4 1547 17.3 140 156 234 347 135 152
2.2 Cleaner Tailing 18.5 0.11 0.33 23.9 27.1 563 7.72 65 67 199 289 44 61
2.3 Rougher Concentrate 20.5 0.21 0.69 25.4 29.4 1547 17.3 140 156 234 347 135 152
2.4 Scavenger Concentrate 14.4 0.04 0.15 6.6 6.38 194 2.42 17 23 43 53 12 15
2.5 Rougher Tailing 112 0.01 0.03 2.1 1.48 44 0.51 42 34 108 96 21 25
2.6 Final Tailing 98.0 0.01 0.01 1.5 0.76 23 0.23 25 11 65 43 9 10
2.7 Regrind Cyclone Feed 31.6 0.27 0.69 28.3 33.1 1922 60.5 273 239 401 600 259 817
2.8 Regrind Cyclone U/F 11.1 0.38 0.68 33.6 39.8 2616 140 133 83 168 254 124 666
2.9 Regrind Discharge 11.1 0.38 0.68 33.6 39.8 2616 140 133 83 168 254 124 666
2.10 Final Concentrate 2.0 1.20 4.13 39.4 50.7 10876 108 75 89 35 57 91 90
Note: Au and Ag are shown in g/tonne; all other assays are in percent.
4
3.0 D-15 Cyclones
The schematic showing the D-15 cyclones in closed circuit with the ball mill is
again shown in Figure 2, but in this case the potential bleed stream reporting to a
gravity or flash flotation unit is shown in red. Also shown is the metallurgical
balance for the D-15 Cyclones, the mass, gold and silver deportment by size to the
cyclone overflow, as well as the distribution of gold and silver by size in the
cyclone products.
It is clear that gold is upgrading in the cyclone underflow. This stream grades just
under 8 g/tonne gold compared to about 2.3 g/tonne in the mill feed (cyclone
overflow). Of the gold in the cyclone feed, about 87 percent reports to the
cyclone underflow. In comparison, only about 66 percent of the mass in the
cyclone feed reports to the cyclone underflow. This shows how gold has built up
a circulating load of about 650 percent in the ball mill circuit versus a mass
circulating load of about 200 percent.
The deportment chart shows that for the overall stream, the cut size d50 is about
70µm. This is the size at which there is about 50 percent probability of reporting
to the cyclone underflow or overflow. Coarser than this, particles will tend to
report to the underflow and finer particles tend to report to the overflow. For gold
and silver, this sizing was about 30µm, substantially finer than most of the
remaining mass in the stream. Gold or silver particles coarser than 30µm will
most likely return to the ball mill and be ground further, and in this manner the
recirculating load of gold and silver is generated. Removal of a bleed stream, for
gold and silver recovery, would be expected to reduce this effect to some degree.
The distributions of gold and silver by size for the cyclone overflow shows that a
significant component of gold and, to a greater degree, silver, is in the finest size
fraction, less than 12µm. Such fine particles will be more difficult to recover via
flotation. Conversely, the cyclone underflow contained very little silver or gold
finer than 31µm, and may be suitable for either gravity concentration or flash
flotation. Testing would be recommended to evaluate these two options.
5
FIGURE 2
D-15 CYCLONES OPERATION SUMMARY
Flowsheet Summary Metallurgical Balance

1.1 Cyclones D-15 Feed
256µm K80 Mass Assay-g/tonne Distribution-percent
From SAG 1.3 Cyclones D-15 Cyclones percent Ag Au Ag Au
Mill D-15 O/F
Overflow 34.1 235 2.34 28.3 13.3
92µm K80
Underflow 65.9 308 7.91 71.7 86.7
Sample 1.2 Cyclones Cyclone Feed 100 283 6.01 100 100
Point D-15 U/F
379µm K80 Note: A detailed metallurgical balance, head assays and size fraction
assays are provided in Appendix I.
Potential
Circuit Gravity
Addition or Flash
Cyclone Deportment to Overflow

100
90 Ag
Mass / Gold / Silver Deportment to
80 Au
Mass
70
Overflow - percent
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
Nominal Particle Size - µm
Gold and Silver Distribution by Size

Cyclone Overflow Cyclone Underflow
50 50
Ag/Au Distribution by Size - percent
45 45 Silver
Silver
40 40 Gold
Gold
35 35
30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
6
4.0 Roughers / Scavengers
A summary of the flowsheet, metallurgical balances and key performance data by

particle size for the roughers and scavengers is summarized in Figure 3. The feed
to the roughers includes not only the D-15 cyclone overflow, but also the cleaner
tailing and scavenger concentrate. Of the gold and silver in this combined
rougher feed stream, about 86 percent was recovered to the rougher concentrate.
A further 8 percent (over half that remaining in the rougher tailing) was recovered
to the scavenger concentrate.
The recovery of gold and silver by size curve for the roughers is very typical of
that observed for most operating rougher circuits, in our experience. High
recoveries of particles in what would be considered intermediate size fractions
were recorded; however, recovery of fine and coarse particles was lower. This is
generally due to the coarser particles not being liberated, and the finer particles
having slow flotation kinetics.
Performance of the scavengers was comparatively poorer, as would be expected

given that the more hydrophobic particles have already been recovered by the
rougher circuit. Most of the gold and silver in the scavenger concentrate, about
two thirds, was sized finer than 13µm. As such, these particles would be expected
to exhibit slower flotation kinetics.
As observed in the previous assessment conducted on Minera Cerro Bayo

samples*, most of the losses, about two-thirds of both the gold and silver, were in
the finest size fraction less than 12µm. There are a number of options to reduce
these losses. Longer residence times in flotation and perhaps higher collector
dosages may assist. Alternatively, limiting overgrinding may reduce these losses.
When the rougher feed is compared to the D-15 cyclones overflow, it is clear that
the silver was already finely sized from the ball mill circuit. However, increase in
fine gold particles in the rougher feed is observed as a result of recycling the
scavenger concentrate and cleaner tailing into the rougher feed.
* KM3113 “A Mineralogical Assessment of Plant Performance – August 11, 2011”, December 2, 2011 .
7
FIGURE 3
ROUGHER / SCAVENGER OPERATION SUMMARY
2.2 Cleaner Mass Assay-g/tonne Distribution-percent
Tailing
22µm K80 Circuit/Product percent Ag Au Ag Au
2.4 Scavenger
Concentrate Roughers
27µm K80 Rougher Conc. 15.4 1547 17.3 86.4 86.0
Rougher Tailing 84.6 44 0.51 13.6 14.0
Rougher Feed 100.0 276 3.10 100 100
2.5 Rougher 2.6 Final
1.3 Cyclones D- Tailing Scavengers
15 O/F Tailing
92µm K80
89µm K80 92µm K80 Scavenger Conc. 12.8 194 2.42 55.8 60.6
2.3 Rougher Final Tailing 87.2 23 0.23 44.2 39.4
Concentrate
Rougher Tailing 100.0 44 0.51 100 100
33µm K80
Recovery by Size
Roughers Scavengers
100 100
Mass/Gold/Silver Recovery - percent
Mass/Gold/Silver Recovery - percent

90 90 Ag
80 Au
80
Mass
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 Ag 40
30 Au
30
Mass
20 20
10 10
0 0
1 10 100 1000 1 10 100 1000
Nominal Particle Size - µm Nominal Particle Size - µm

Rougher Feed (Recalculated) Final Tailing
70 70
Silver
Silver
60 60
Gold Gold
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
Note: A detailed metallurgical balance, head assays and size fraction assays are provided in Appendix I.
8
5.0 Regrinding
Regrinding at Minera Cerro Bayo appears to be a double-edged sword. On the

one hand, mineralogical assessments conducted in KM3113 showed interlocking
between silver and gold and other minerals in the concentrate suggesting that
regrinding is necessary to produce high grade concentrates. On the other hand, it
is clear from this assessment that this is resulting in the generation of ultrafine
gold and silver particles that respond poorly to flotation. Figure 4 summarizes the
regrind flowsheet, along with presentations of key data relating to the regrind
circuit.
The circulating load of gold around the regrinding circuit measured about 440
percent. Conversely, the circulating load for mass measured only 54 percent. As
for the D-15 cyclones, gold is preferentially being concentrated in the cyclone
underflow because of the high specific gravity of gold compared to other
minerals. The cyclone underflow graded about 140 g/tonne gold, higher than that
measured for the final concentrate. However, if this stream was directed to final
concentrate, the circulating load would be broken and gold would return to the
grade of the rougher concentrate measuring about 17 g/tonne. The same
phenomenon was not as apparent for silver.
It may be possible, as similarly discussed for the D-15 cyclones, to concentrate

the gold and silver in the cyclone underflow by either gravity concentration or by
flash flotation processes. Gold in the cyclone underflow was predominantly sized
between 22 and 106µm and may be coarse enough to be recovered via such
processes. Testing would be required for confirmation.
Testing may also be worthwhile to evaluate the impact of regrind size on

concentrate grade and recovery. Coarser regrind sizings would be expected to
impede concentrate grade, but may improve gold and silver recoveries.
9
FIGURE 4
REGRIND OPERATION SUMMARY

Mass Assay-g/tonne Distribution-percent
2.3 Rougher
2.7 Regrind Stream percent Ag Au Ag Au
Concentrate
33µm K80 Cyclone Feed Rougher Concentrate 100 1547 17.3 100 100
46µm K80 2.1 Cleaner Regrind Discharge 54.1 2616 140 92 439
Feed Cyclone Feed 154 1922 60.5 192 539
23µm K80
Underflow 54.1 2616 140 92 439
Overflow (Clnr Feed) 100.0 1547 17.3 100 100
2.9 Regrind
Discharge Note: A detailed metallurgical balance, head assays and size fraction assays
2.8 Regrind are provided in Appendix I.
51µm K80 Cyclone
Underflow
72µm K80
Gold and Silver Deportment in the

Cyclone Deportment to Overflow
Rougher Concentrate
100 70

Mass / Gold / Silver Deportment to
90 Silver
60
80 Gold
70 50
Overflow- percent
60 40
50
30
40
30 20
Ag
20 Au 10
10 Mass
0 0
1 10 100 1000

Overflow (Cleaner Feed) Underflow
70 70
Silver 60 Silver
60
Gold Gold
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
10
6.0 Cleaners
The performance of the cleaner block was poorer than might be expected. It is
somewhat difficult to evaluate due to the circulating load from the cleaner tailing
into the roughers and back into the cleaners. As compared to the mill feed, the
cleaner tailing contained about 61 percent of the gold and 44 percent of the silver,
the majority of which is then recovered by the roughers and returned to the
cleaner block.
A summary of the cleaner block performance, on the basis of the feed to the
cleaners, is provided as Figure 5. The following comments relate to those results:
- Within the cleaner block, coarser particles tended to be recovered better

than the finely sized particles. With this sample set it is not possible to
discern if this is related to the column cell or mechanical cells.
- As a result, the silver and gold losses to the cleaner tailing were, like the
scavenger concentrate, predominantly contained in the fine size fractions.
It is unlikely such particles require further regrinding, and it is unclear
why these particles should be returned to the rougher circuit. However,
the flowsheet appears to be relatively effective (despite high circulating
loads) and the roughers and scavenger may simply be serving as increased
flotation residence time and a source of additional collector to allow
recovery of these finer particles back into the cleaner block.
11
FIGURE 5
CLEANER CIRCUIT OPERATION SUMMARY

2.2 Cleaner Tailing Mass Assay-g/tonne Distribution-percent
22µm K80
Stream percent Ag Au Ag Au
To
2.1 Cleaner Roughers Final Con 9.5 10876 108 67.1 59.6
Feed Cleaner Tail 90.5 563 7.72 32.9 40.4
23µm K80 Cleaner Feed 100.0 1547 17.3 100 100
Column Note: A detailed metallurgical balance, head assays and size

fraction assays are provided in Appendix I.
2.10 Final Con

23µm K80
Recovery by Size
100
Mass / Gold / Silver Recovery - percent
90
80
70
60
50
40
30 Ag
20 Au
10 Mass
0
1 10 100 1000

Final Concentrate Cleaner Tailing
60 60
Silver Silver
50 50
Gold Gold
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
12
7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
On the 14th of May, 2014, a full plant survey of the Minera Cerro Bayo
concentrator was conducted. With the support of Mandalay personnel, ALS
Metallurgy collected 13 samples for size by assay analysis to identify potential
opportunities for improvement. A belt cut was also obtained for further testing as
required; no testing has been conducted so far on that sample.
Results of the analyses show that gold, and to a lesser degree silver, are
concentrating in the cyclone underflow of both the D-15 cyclones and the regrind
cyclones. This indicates that there may be opportunity for gold recovery by flash
or gravity concentration on a bleed of the cyclone underflow(s). Testing would be
required to evaluate these two options.
This should first be tested in the D-15 cyclone circuit as it may recover the gold
and silver particles that are concentrating in the regrind cyclones. The addition of
such a process may have two effects. It may recover the coarser binary particles
that are not being recovered by the flotation process. It may also limit the
circulating load around the milling stages, which is currently extensive. In the D-
15 cyclones, the circulating load is about 650 percent for gold. This compares to
the mass recirculating load of about 200 percent. This recirculation could be
resulting in the excessive generation of fine particles, less than 12µm, that are the
predominant form of gold and silver losses to the final tailing.
Rougher performance was relatively typical of that observed for flotation circuits.
Gold and silver in the scavenger concentrate and cleaner tailings both were
generally contained in the finer size fractions. The benefit of recirculating these
streams to the rougher may be related to the application of additional collector, or
available residence time in the rougher circuit. However, additional regrinding is
unlikely to further benefit these streams.
13
The cleaner circuit exhibited comparatively poor recoveries of fine particles. It

may be of benefit to sample the exit streams from the mechanical cells and the
column to evaluate if one of the two components is driving the relatively poor
recovery of fine particles.
APPENDIX I – KM4202
PHASE 2
SAMPLE ORIGIN
1
1.0 Sample Origin
On the 14th of May, 2014 from 10:55 to 11:50 am, the Minera Cerro Bayo plant
was surveyed by ALS personnel. During the survey period, thirteen samples were
obtained via two rounds of sampling. The list of samples collected is provided as
Table I-1. Photos of selected sample locations, as well as a picture of the
samplers, are provided as Figures I-1A to I-1F. The photos were provided by
Mandalay personnel.
TABLE I-1
LIST OF SAMPLE LOCATIONS
Samples
Location
No. Description
1.1 Cyclones D-15 Feed Ball Valve on D-15 Distributor
1.2 Cyclones D-15 U/F Discharge of D-15 Cyc U/F Pipe
1.3 Cyclones D-15 O/F Flotation Feed Sampler
2.1 Cleaner Feed Discharge of Regrind Overflow Pipe
2.2 Cleaner Tail Cleaner tailings pipe discharge
2.3 Rougher Concentrate Rougher Concentrate Pipe Discharge(s)
2.4 Scavenger Concentrate Scavenger Concentrate Pipe Discharge
2.5 Rougher Tail Dip Sample from bottom of Rougher Cell 4
2.6 Final Tail Final Tailing Sampler
2.7 Regrind Cyclone Feed Regrind Cyclone Feed E-DART Sampler
2.8 Regrind Cyclone U/F Manual sampling of cyclone underflows
2.9 Regrind Discharge Regrind Discharge pipe
2.10 Final Concentrate Final Concentrate Sampler
During the survey, the plant was understood to be processing relatively ‘typical’
ore and operations appeared to be stable. The average throughput at the time of
the survey was 68 tonnes per hour, wet. Key chemical conditions and reagent
dosages at the time of the surveys are provided in Tables I-2 and I-3.
2
TABLE I-2
PH AND EH FOR EACH SAMPLE ROUND
Parameter Round 1 Round 2

Date 5/14/2014 5/14/2014
Time 10:55 - 11:23 11:25 - 11:50
Measure pH Eh pH Eh
Rougher 1 9.24 59 8.27 81
Scavenger 4 8.22 127 8.19 70
Cleaner 1 8.12 127 8.12 85
Cleaner 2 8.14 129 8.09 112
Cleaner 3 9.24 131 8.20 101
Note: pH and Eh were measured by ALS personnel.
TABLE I-3
CHEMICAL DOSAGES
Location / Reagent
Concentration PAX 3477 MIBC
Concentration - percent 5 5 100
Dosage - mL/min
Primary Cyclones 600 500 30
Rougher Feed 300 300 10
Rougher 4 100 100 -
Dosage - g/tonne
Primary Cyclones 26.5 22.1 21.4
Rougher Feed 13.2 13.2 7.1
Rougher 4 4.4 4.4 -
Note: Dosages in g/tonne are based on the belt throughput, unadjusted for moisture content.
After completion of the survey, at around 2 pm the same day, a belt cut ahead of
the Minera Cerro Bayo SAG mill was conducted.
The thirteen samples were filtered and shipped as wet filter cake to ALS
Metallurgy Santiago. Upon receipt, ALS Metallurgy Santiago dried and prepared
the thirteen samples. Standard bulk preparation was conducted for the Belt Cut.
The prepared samples were shipped to ALS Metallurgy Kamloops. In addition,
about 4.1 kilograms was shipped to ALS Metallurgy Balcatta for diagnostic leach
tests. Each of the thirteen samples was assayed for a series of elements of interest.
Head assays, masses and densities for the thirteen samples are summarized in
Table I-4.
3
TABLE I-4
HEAD ASSAYS
Samples Total Dry Mass Slurry Density Assay - percent or g/tonne

No. Description kilograms weight percent Ag Au Pb Zn Fe S
1.1 Cyclones D-15 Feed 4.06 57 290 6.01 0.03 0.10 3.15 2.71
1.2 Cyclones D-15 U/F 4.18 70 303 7.91 0.04 0.13 3.94 3.85
1.3 Cyclones D-15 O/F 3.08 43 227 2.52 0.03 0.09 2.44 2.00
2.1 Cleaner Feed 1.20 28 1554 16.6 0.22 0.69 25.9 30.1
2.2 Cleaner Tail 0.97 16 558 7.83 0.11 0.33 23.5 26.1
2.3 Rougher Concentrate 1.31 31 1548 17.5 0.21 0.68 24.9 29.8
2.4 Scavenger Concentrate 1.10 17 198 2.41 0.04 0.14 6.70 6.51
2.5 Rougher Tail 1.23 26 43 0.52 0.01 0.03 2.06 1.43
2.6 Final Tail 4.58 29 23 0.23 0.01 <0.01 1.45 0.74
2.7 Regrind Cyclone Feed 5.26 33 2005 58.9 0.28 0.68 29.2 33.9
2.8 Regrind Cyclone U/F 5.34 74 2612 150 0.38 0.67 33.4 39.5
2.9 Regrind Discharge 3.11 64 2572 136 0.37 0.69 33.4 39.7
2.10 Final Concentrate 1.30 10 10960 104 1.29 4.33 38.4 47.9
Notes: a) Au and Ag are in g/tonne, all other assays are in percent.

b) Silver assays for samples above 1,000 g/tonne silver were mostly conducted via fire assay. Silver assays for
samples below this value were conducted using an aqua regia digestion.
b) The dry mass for the final tailing includes the mass received by ALS Metallurgy Balcatta.
A metallurgical balance was constructed using Bilmat, a mass balancing program.

The resulting balance is provided as Table I-5.
TABLE I-5
METALLURGICAL BALANCE
Samples Mass Assay - percent or g/tonne Distribution - percent

No. Description percent Pb Zn Fe S Ag Au Pb Zn Fe S Ag Au
1.1 Cyclones D-15 Feed 293 0.03 0.11 3.3 2.93 283 6.01 317 355 432 495 354 754
1.2 Cyclones D-15 U/F 193.4 0.04 0.12 3.8 3.55 308 7.91 217 255 332 395 254 654
1.3 Cyclones D-15 O/F 100 0.03 0.09 2.2 1.74 235 2.34 100 100 100 100 100 100
2.1 Cleaner Feed 20.5 0.21 0.69 25.4 29.4 1547 17.3 140 156 234 347 135 152
2.2 Cleaner Tail 18.5 0.11 0.33 23.9 27.1 563 7.72 65 67 199 289 44 61
2.3 Rougher Concentrate 20.5 0.21 0.69 25.4 29.4 1547 17.3 140 156 234 347 135 152
2.4 Scavenger Concentrate 14.4 0.04 0.15 6.6 6.38 194 2.42 17 23 43 53 12 15
2.5 Rougher Tail 112 0.01 0.03 2.1 1.48 44 0.51 42 34 108 96 21 25
2.6 Final Tail 98.0 0.01 0.01 1.5 0.76 23 0.23 25 11 65 43 9 10
2.7 Regrind Cyclone Feed 31.6 0.27 0.69 28.3 33.1 1922 60.5 273 239 401 600 259 817
2.8 Regrind Cyclone U/F 11.1 0.38 0.68 33.6 39.8 2616 140 133 83 168 254 124 666
2.9 Regrind Discharge 11.1 0.38 0.68 33.6 39.8 2616 140 133 83 168 254 124 666
2.10 Final Concentrate 2.0 1.20 4.13 39.4 50.7 10876 108 75 89 35 57 91 90
Note: Au and Ag are in g/tonne; all other assays are in percent.

4
An additional sub-cut of each of the samples was also cyclosized into appropriate
size fractions for gold and silver assays. These assays are summarized in Tables
I-6A to I-6M. Tables I-7A to I-7F summarize recoveries by size fraction for each
block of the circuit.
The 282 kilogram belt cut sample was placed into storage at ALS Metallurgy
Kamloops.
5
TABLE I-6A TABLE I-6B TABLE I-6C

SIZE FRACTION ASSAYS SIZE FRACTION ASSAYS SIZE FRACTION ASSAYS
1.1 Cyclones D-15 Feed 1.2 Cyclones D-15 U/F 1.3 Cyclones D-15 O/F
Size Weight Metal Assays Size Weight Metal Assays Size Weight Metal Assays
Fraction percent Ag Au Fraction percent Ag Au Fraction percent Ag Au
>300µm 16.1 174 2.70 >300µm 25.1 140 2.71 >300µm 0.0 0 0.00
<300>150µm 21.3 202 4.82 <300>150µm 29.2 132 3.60 <300>150µm 5.0 46 0.41
<150>106µm 12.2 266 14.1 <150>106µm 12.9 278 15.0 <150>106µm 10.3 63 0.84
<106>53µm 16.1 344 9.15 <106>53µm 12.7 654 16.4 <106>53µm 22.5 103 2.53
<53µm>C2 5.9 882 15.0 <53µm>C2 3.8 1242 19.6 <53µm>C2 9.6 346 9.64
<C2>C3 5.2 246 2.42 <C2>C3 2.8 208 2.35 <C2>C3 10.2 170 2.26
<C3>C5 7.1 256 2.16 <C3>C5 3.7 196 1.76 <C3>C5 13.9 236 1.92
<C5 16.0 314 1.16 <C5 9.7 292 1.22 <C5 28.5 270 1.08
Calc Head 100.0 293 6.01 Calc Head 100.0 282 6.74 Calc Head 100.0 192 2.41
TABLE I-6D TABLE I-6E TABLE I-6F

2.1 Cleaner Feed 2.2 Cleaner Tailing 2.3 Rougher Concentrate
>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 >300µm 0.0 0 0.00 >300µm 0.0 0 0.00
<300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 <300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 <300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00
<150>106µm 0.0 0 0.00 <150>106µm 0.0 0 0.00 <150>106µm 4.6 793 14.8
<106>53µm 4.1 630 8.73 <106>53µm 4.1 384 3.86 <106>53µm 8.9 1345 31.0
<53µm>C2 8.6 1677 39.1 <53µm>C2 6.3 506 7.75 <53µm>C2 11.6 2175 35.8
<C2>C3 16.7 1356 19.5 <C2>C3 14.7 466 7.34 <C2>C3 14.3 1193 14.4
<C3>C5 29.0 1241 14.4 <C3>C5 28.5 452 7.96 <C3>C5 26.5 1107 12.3
<C5 41.5 2027 13.5 <C5 46.4 770 7.33 <C5 34.1 1950 11.0
6
TABLE I-6G TABLE I-6H TABLE I-6I

2.4 Scavenger Concentrate 2.5 Rougher Tailing 2.6 Final Tailing
>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 >300µm 0.0 0 0.00 >300µm 0.0 0 0.00
<300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 <300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 <300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00
<150>106µm 3.1 224 1.94 <150>106µm 14.3 24 0.17 <150>106µm 15.3 17 0.15
<106>53µm 7.3 189 1.75 <106>53µm 20.6 20 0.16 <106>53µm 22.4 12 0.09
<53µm>C2 4.9 200 3.03 <53µm>C2 8.5 26 0.19 <53µm>C2 8.7 14 0.09
<C2>C3 8.8 148 1.69 <C2>C3 9.7 23 0.24 <C2>C3 9.8 9 0.03
<C3>C5 18.5 150 2.67 <C3>C5 14.7 32 0.52 <C3>C5 14.2 12 0.14
<C5 57.4 263 2.69 <C5 32.1 93 1.13 <C5 29.5 45 0.53
TABLE I-6J TABLE I-6K

SIZE FRACTION ASSAYS SIZE FRACTION ASSAYS
2.7 Regrind Cyclone Feed 2.8 Regrind Cyclone Underflow
Size Weight Metal Assays Size Weight Metal Assays

Fraction percent Ag Au Fraction percent Ag Au
>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 >300µm 0.0 0 0.00
<300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 <300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00
<150>106µm 3.7 930 61.2 <150>106µm 8.8 857 42.2
<106>53µm 12.4 1678 106 <106>53µm 24.2 1846 134
<53µm>C2 23.0 2798 159 <53µm>C2 38.0 3236 242
<C2>C3 15.1 1743 31.4 <C2>C3 17.6 2561 68.6
<C3>C5 19.1 1387 15.3 <C3>C5 5.3 1883 22.3
<C5 26.7 2209 13.7 <C5 6.1 1883 22.3
Calc Head 100.0 2005 63.4 Calc Head 100.0 2417 143
TABLE I-6L TABLE I-6M

SIZE FRACTION ASSAYS SIZE FRACTION ASSAYS
Regrind Discharge 2.9 2.10 Final Concentrate
Size Weight Metal Assays Size Weight Metal Assays

Fraction percent Ag Au Fraction percent Ag Au
>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 >300µm 0.0 0 0.00
<300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 <300>150µm 0.0 0 0.00
<150>106µm 2.9 1260 125 <150>106µm 0.0 0 0.00
<106>53µm 14.5 1775 158 <106>53µm 0.0 0 0.00
<53µm>C2 41.5 2739 207 <53µm>C2 22.3 6397 165
<C2>C3 13.9 2162 49.6 <C2>C3 25.5 7019 88.1
<C3>C5 11.3 2038 32.3 <C3>C5 30.5 8834 75.6
<C5 15.9 3691 105 <C5 21.7 27919 97.0
Calc Head 100.0 2549 140 Calc Head 100.0 11963 103
7
TABLE I-7A
SIZE BY ASSAY AND SIZE BY RECOVERY FOR THE D-15 CYCLONES - 15th of MAY 2014
KM4202
1.3 Cyclones D-15 O/F
Size Mass Recovery Metal Assays - g/tonne Recovery - percent

Fraction % Ag Au Ag Au
>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 8.1 56 0.40 3.3 0.8
<150>106µm 29.2 77 0.82 9.4 1.9
<106>53µm 47.8 126 2.46 13.8 10.5
<53µm>C2 56.6 422 9.4 28.9 34.8
<C2>C3 65.3 207 2.19 63.2 60.0
<C3>C5 65.9 288 1.86 72.2 63.5
<C5 60.2 329 1.05 60.9 52.6
Total 34.1 235 2.34 28.3 13.3
1.2 Cyclones D-15 U/F

>300µm 100.0 153 3.18 100.0 100.0

<150>150µm 91.9 144 4.22 96.7 99.2
<150>106µm 70.8 304 17.6 90.6 98.1
<106>53µm 52.2 716 19.2 86.2 89.5
<53µm>C2 43.4 1359 22.9 71.1 65.2
<C2>C3 34.7 228 2.76 36.8 40.0
<C3>C5 34.1 214 2.06 27.8 36.5
<C5 39.8 319 1.43 39.1 47.4
Total 66 308 7.91 71.7 86.7
Recalculated Cyclones D-15 Feed

>300µm 100 153 3.18 100 100

<150>150µm 100 137 3.91 100 100
<150>106µm 100 238 12.7 100 100
<106>53µm 100 434 11.20 100 100
<53µm>C2 100 828 15.3 100 100
<C2>C3 100 214 2.39 100 100
<C3>C5 100 263 1.93 100 100
<C5 100 325 1.20 100 100
Total 100 283 6.01 100 100
Measured 1.1 Cyclones D-15 Feed
Size Mass Metal Assays - g/tonne Distribution by Size - percent

>300µm 16.1 174 2.70 9.6 7.3

<150>150µm 21.3 202 4.82 14.7 17.1
<150>106µm 12.2 266 14.1 11.1 28.6
<106>53µm 16.1 344 9.15 18.9 24.5
<53µm>C2 5.9 882 15.0 17.9 14.8
<C2>C3 5.2 246 2.42 4.4 2.1
<C3>C5 7.1 256 2.16 6.2 2.6
<C5 16.0 314 1.16 17.2 3.1
Total 100 293 6.01 100 100

8
TABLE I-7B
SIZE BY ASSAY AND SIZE BY RECOVERY FOR THE ROUGHERS - 15th of MAY 2014
KM4202
2.3 Rougher Concentrate

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 5.5 797 15.3 67.0 84.6
<106>53µm 7.3 1353 32.1 84.8 94.3
<53µm>C2 19.8 2188 37.1 95.6 98.1
<C2>C3 21.2 1200 15.0 93.6 94.6
<C3>C5 24.7 1114 12.7 92.3 89.4
<C5 16.2 1962 11.4 81.0 67.2
Total 15.4 1547 17.3 86.4 86.0
2.5 Rougher Tailing

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 94.5 23 0.16 33.0 15.4
<106>53µm 92.7 19 0.15 15.2 5.7
<53µm>C2 80.2 25 0.18 4.4 1.9
<C2>C3 78.8 22 0.23 6.4 5.4
<C3>C5 75.3 31 0.50 7.7 10.6
<C5 83.8 89 1.08 19.0 32.8
Total 85 44 0.51 13.6 14.0
Recalculated Rougher Feed

>300µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>150µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>106µm 100 66 1.00 100 100
<106>53µm 100 117 2.49 100 100
<53µm>C2 100 454 7.51 100 100
<C2>C3 100 271 3.34 100 100
<C3>C5 100 298 3.52 100 100
<C5 100 393 2.76 100 100
Total 100 276 3.10 100 100

9
TABLE I-7C
SIZE BY ASSAY AND SIZE BY RECOVERY FOR THE SCAVENGERS - 15th of MAY 2014
KM4202
2.4 Scavenger Concentrate

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 2.9 195 1.9 25.5 27.1
<106>53µm 4.6 165 1.7 39.6 47.2
<53µm>C2 7.6 174 2.9 50.3 72.5
<C2>C3 11.6 129 1.6 65.2 87.7
<C3>C5 16.0 131 2.6 67.4 77.7
<C5 22.2 229 2.6 59.1 58.1
Total 12.8 194 2.4 55.8 60.6
2.6 Final Tailing

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 97.1 17 0.15 74.5 72.9
<106>53µm 95.4 12 0.09 60.4 52.8
<53µm>C2 92.4 14 0.09 49.7 27.5
<C2>C3 88.4 9 0.03 34.8 12.3
<C3>C5 84.0 12 0.14 32.6 22.3
<C5 77.8 45 0.53 40.9 41.9
Total 87 23 0.23 44.2 39.4
Recalculated Rougher Tail

>300µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>150µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>106µm 100 22 0.20 100 100
<106>53µm 100 19 0.16 100 100
<53µm>C2 100 26 0.30 100 100
<C2>C3 100 23 0.22 100 100
<C3>C5 100 31 0.53 100 100
<C5 100 86 0.99 100 100
Total 100 44 0.51 100 100
2.5 Rougher Tailing

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 14.3 24 0.17 7.4 4.5
<106>53µm 20.6 20 0.16 8.8 6.2
<53µm>C2 8.5 26 0.19 4.8 3.0
<C2>C3 9.7 23 0.24 4.8 4.4
<C3>C5 14.7 32 0.52 10.1 14.3
<C5 32.1 93 1.13 64.1 67.6
Total 100 47 0.54 100 100

10
TABLE I-7D
SIZE BY ASSAY AND SIZE BY RECOVERY FOR THE REGRIND CYCLONE FEED - 15th of MAY 2014
KM4202

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 74.3 797 15.3 64.1 26.1
<106>53µm 53.3 1353 32.1 45.9 18.8
<53µm>C2 34.0 2188 37.1 28.7 8.4
<C2>C3 65.6 1200 15.0 50.8 36.5
<C3>C5 81.3 1114 12.7 69.8 63.0
<C5 79.8 1962 11.4 67.2 29.9
Total 64.9 1547 17.3 52.2 18.5
2.9 Regrind Discharge

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 25.7 1293 126 35.9 73.9
<106>53µm 46.7 1822 158 54.1 81.2
<53µm>C2 66.0 2811 208 71.3 91.6
<C2>C3 34.4 2218 49.8 49.2 63.5
<C3>C5 18.7 2092 32.4 30.2 37.0
<C5 20.2 3788 106 32.8 70.1
Total 35 2616 140 47.8 81.5
2.7 Regrind Cyclone Feed

>300µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>150µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>106µm 100 925 43.6 100 100
<106>53µm 100 1572 91 100 100
<53µm>C2 100 2599 150 100 100
<C2>C3 100 1550 26.9 100 100
<C3>C5 100 1297 16.4 100 100
<C5 100 2331 30.5 100 100
Total 100 1922 60.5 100 100

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 3.7 930 61.2 1.7 3.5
<106>53µm 12.4 1678 106 10.4 20.7
<53µm>C2 23.0 2798 159 32.1 57.8
<C2>C3 15.1 1743 31.4 13.2 7.5
<C3>C5 19.1 1387 15.3 13.2 4.6
<C5 26.7 2209 13.7 29.5 5.8
Total 100 2005 63.4 100 100

11
TABLE I-7E
SIZE BY ASSAY AND SIZE BY RECOVERY FOR THE REGRIND CYCLONES - 15th of MAY 2014
KM4202
2.1 Cleaner Feed

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
<106>53µm 24.0 609 9.00 8.8 2.1
<53µm>C2 29.5 1622 40.3 16.2 6.6
<C2>C3 63.7 1311 20.1 45.4 34.4
<C3>C5 91.1 1200 14.9 85.7 87.4
<C5 92.6 1961 13.9 92.3 88.8
Total 64.9 1547 17.3 52.2 18.5
2.8 Regrind Cyclone Underflow

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 100.0 927 41.5 100.0 100.0
<106>53µm 76.0 1998 132 91.2 97.9
<53µm>C2 70.5 3502 238 83.8 93.4
<C2>C3 36.3 2771 67.5 54.6 65.6
<C3>C5 8.9 2038 21.9 14.3 12.6
<C5 7.4 2038 21.9 7.7 11.2
Total 35 2616 140 47.8 81.5

>300µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>150µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>106µm 100 927 41.5 100 100
<106>53µm 100 1665 102 100 100
<53µm>C2 100 2948 180 100 100
<C2>C3 100 1841 37.3 100 100
<C3>C5 100 1275 15.5 100 100
<C5 100 1967 14.5 100 100
Total 100 1922 60.5 100 100

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 3.7 930 61.2 1.7 3.5
<106>53µm 12.4 1678 106 10.4 20.7
<53µm>C2 23.0 2798 159 32.1 57.8
<C2>C3 15.1 1743 31.4 13.2 7.5
<C3>C5 19.1 1387 15.3 13.2 4.6
<C5 26.7 2209 13.7 29.5 5.8
Total 100 2005 63.4 100 100

12
TABLE I-7F
SIZE BY ASSAY AND SIZE BY RECOVERY FOR THE CLEANERS - 15th of MAY 2014
KM4202
2.10 Final Concentrate

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<106>53µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<53µm>C2 27.3 5816 172 82.2 88.9
<C2>C3 15.4 6381 92 72.8 68.7
<C3>C5 10.1 8031 79.0 68.2 51.8
<C5 4.7 25382 101 63.5 39.5
Total 9.5 10876 108 67.1 59.6
2.2 Cleaner Tailing

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<106>53µm 100.0 359 4.03 100.0 100.0
<53µm>C2 72.7 473 8.09 17.8 11.1
<C2>C3 84.6 436 7.66 27.2 31.3
<C3>C5 89.9 422 8.31 31.8 48.2
<C5 95.3 720 7.65 36.5 60.5
Total 90 563 7.72 32.9 40.4
Measured 2.1 Cleaner Feed

>300µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>150µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<150>106µm 0 0 0.00 0 0
<106>53µm 100 359 4.03 100 100
<53µm>C2 100 1932 52.9 100 100
<C2>C3 100 1352 20.7 100 100
<C3>C5 100 1194 15.5 100 100
<C5 100 1877 12.1 100 100
Total 100 1547 17.3 100 100
Measured 2.1 Cleaner Feed

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

<150>150µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<150>106µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0
<106>53µm 4.1 630 8.73 1.6 2.2
<53µm>C2 8.6 1677 39.1 9.0 20.0
<C2>C3 16.7 1356 19.5 14.2 19.5
<C3>C5 29.0 1241 14.4 22.5 24.9
<C5 41.5 2027 13.5 52.7 33.4
Total 100 1599 16.8 100 100

13
FIGURE I-1A
SAMPLE POINTS
1.1 Cyclones D-15

Feed
Note: A 2 meter hose was attached to this valve.
Note: A sample cutter, shown at the bottom of Figure I-1F was used to collect this sample.
14
FIGURE I-1B
SAMPLE POINTS
2.1 Cleaner Feed (Regrind Cyclone Overflow)
2.2 Cleaner Tailing
15
FIGURE I-1C
SAMPLE POINTS
Notes: a) This is an example of one of the four rougher discharge pipes that was sampled.
b) The same number of cuts was samples from each discharge pipe, with the same cutting speed.
c) A sample cutter, shown at the bottom of Figure I-1F was used to collect this sample.
2.4 Scavenger Concentrate
16
FIGURE I-1D
SAMPLE POINTS
2.6 Final Tailing

17
FIGURE I-1E
SAMPLE POINTS
2.8 Regrind Cyclone Underflow
Notes: a) The same number of cuts was taken from each operating cyclone and combined into a single sample.
b) A sample cutter, shown at the bottom of Figure I-1F was used to collect this sample.
2.9 Regrind Discharge
18
FIGURE I-1F
SAMPLE POINTS
2.10 Final Concentrate
Note: The same number of cuts was taken from each operating cyclone and combined into a
single sample.
Samplers
Note: From left to right, there is a sample cutter, dip sampler, and a second sample cutter.
APPENDIX II – KM4202
PHASE 2
PARTICLE SIZING DATA

INDEX
TABLE m K80 PAGE
II-1 KM4202 Cyclones D-15 Feed 1.1 ................................................... 256 .............1

II-2 KM4202 Cyclones D-15 Underflow 1.2.......................................... 379 .............2
II-3 KM4202 Cyclones D-15 Overflow 1.3.............................................. 92 .............3
II-4 KM4202 Cleaner Feed 2.1................................................................. 23 .............4
II-5 KM4202 Cleaner Tailing 2.2 ............................................................. 22 .............5
II-6 KM4202 Rougher Concentrate 2.3 .................................................... 33 .............6
II-7 KM4202 Scavenger Concentrate 2.4 ................................................. 27 .............7
II-8 KM4202 Rougher Tailing 2.5............................................................ 89 .............8
II-9 KM4202 Final Tailing 2.6 ................................................................. 92 .............9
II-10 KM4202 Regrind Cyclone Feed 2.7 .................................................. 46 ...........10
II-11 KM4202 Regrind Cyclone Underflow 2.8......................................... 72 ...........11
II-12 KM4202 Regrind Discharge 2.9 ........................................................ 51 ...........12
II-13 KM4202 Final Concentrate 2.10........................................................ 23 ...........13
1
TABLE II-1
CYCLOSIZING ANALYSIS
KM4202 Cyclones D-15 Feed 1.1
Size (µm) Weight Cumulative

Product
Limiting Effective % Retained % Passing
28 Mesh 600 600 0.00 100.0

35 Mesh 425 425 10.67 89.3
48 Mesh 300 300 5.47 83.9
65 Mesh 212 212 8.27 75.6
100 Mesh 150 150 13.07 62.5
150 Mesh 106 106 12.20 50.3
200 Mesh 75 75 8.93 41.4
270 Mesh 53 53 7.13 34.3
Cyclone 1 45 45 1.47 32.8
Cyclone 2 31 32 4.47 28.3
Cyclone 3 22 22 5.20 23.1
Cyclone 4 15 15 3.73 19.4
Cyclone 5 12 12 3.40 16.0
Total 89.33 **
Operating Conditions Measured Factor

Temperature (°C) 16.30 1.043
Specific Gravity 2.67 1.007
Flow Rate (mm) 180 1.012
Elutriation Time (min) 20 0.955
Overall Factor 1.015
K80 Size (microns) 256
Particle Size Distribution Plot
100
90
Cumulative Percent Passing
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
Particle Size (microns)
2
TABLE II-2
KM4202 Cyclones D-15 Underflow 1.2

Product
20 Mesh 850 850 0.00 100.0

28 Mesh 600 600 11.07 88.9
35 Mesh 425 425 6.33 82.6
48 Mesh 300 300 7.73 74.9
65 Mesh 212 212 13.80 61.1
100 Mesh 150 150 15.40 45.7
150 Mesh 106 106 12.87 32.8
200 Mesh 75 75 7.67 25.1
270 Mesh 53 53 5.07 20.1
Cyclone 1 45 45 1.47 18.6
Cyclone 2 31 32 2.33 16.3
Cyclone 3 22 22 2.80 13.5
Cyclone 4 15 15 2.27 11.2
Cyclone 5 12 12 1.47 9.7
Total 82.60 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
3
TABLE II-3
KM4202 Cyclones D-15 Overflow 1.3

Product
35 Mesh 425 425 0.00 100.0

48 Mesh 300 300 0.07 99.9
65 Mesh 212 212 0.53 99.4
100 Mesh 150 150 4.40 95.0
150 Mesh 106 106 10.27 84.7
200 Mesh 75 75 11.33 73.4
270 Mesh 53 53 11.20 62.2
Cyclone 1 45 45 1.60 60.6
Cyclone 2 31 32 8.00 52.6
Cyclone 3 22 22 10.20 42.4
Cyclone 4 15 15 7.40 35.0
Cyclone 5 12 12 6.53 28.5
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
4
TABLE II-4
KM4202 Cleaner Feed 2.1

Product
100 Mesh 150 150 0.00 100.0

150 Mesh 106 106 0.07 99.9
200 Mesh 75 75 1.40 98.5
270 Mesh 53 53 2.67 95.9
Cyclone 1 50 41 1.80 94.1
Cyclone 2 33 27 6.80 87.3
Cyclone 3 23 18 16.73 70.5
Cyclone 4 16 13 16.20 54.3
Cyclone 5 13 10 12.80 41.5
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
5
TABLE II-5
KM4202 Cleaner Tailing 2.2

Product
100 Mesh 150 150 0.00 100.0

150 Mesh 106 106 0.33 99.7
200 Mesh 75 75 1.27 98.4
270 Mesh 53 53 2.47 95.9
Cyclone 1 50 42 1.00 94.9
Cyclone 2 33 28 5.27 89.7
Cyclone 3 23 19 14.73 74.9
Cyclone 4 16 13 15.60 59.3
Cyclone 5 13 11 12.93 46.4
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
6
TABLE II-6
KM4202 Rougher Concentrate 2.3

Product
48 Mesh 300 300 0.00 100.0

65 Mesh 212 212 0.13 99.9
100 Mesh 150 150 1.13 98.7
150 Mesh 106 106 3.33 95.4
200 Mesh 75 75 4.13 91.3
270 Mesh 53 53 4.80 86.5
Cyclone 1 45 37 3.93 82.5
Cyclone 2 31 26 7.67 74.9
Cyclone 3 22 18 14.33 60.5
Cyclone 4 15 12 13.40 47.1
Cyclone 5 12 10 13.07 34.1
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
7
TABLE II-7
KM4202 Scavenger Concentrate 2.4

Product
35 Mesh 425 425 0.00 100.0

48 Mesh 300 300 0.07 99.9
65 Mesh 212 212 0.07 99.9
100 Mesh 150 150 0.73 99.1
150 Mesh 106 106 2.27 96.9
200 Mesh 75 75 3.00 93.9
270 Mesh 53 53 4.33 89.5
Cyclone 1 50 49 0.67 88.9
Cyclone 2 33 32 4.20 84.7
Cyclone 3 23 22 8.80 75.9
Cyclone 4 16 16 9.87 66.0
Cyclone 5 13 12 8.60 57.4
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
8
TABLE II-8
KM4202 Rougher Tailing 2.5

Product
35 Mesh 425 425 0.00 100.0

48 Mesh 300 300 0.07 99.9
65 Mesh 212 212 0.60 99.3
100 Mesh 150 150 3.93 95.4
150 Mesh 106 106 9.73 85.7
200 Mesh 75 75 10.73 74.9
270 Mesh 53 53 9.87 65.1
Cyclone 1 45 45 1.07 64.0
Cyclone 2 31 32 7.47 56.5
Cyclone 3 22 22 9.73 46.8
Cyclone 4 15 15 7.47 39.3
Cyclone 5 12 12 7.27 32.1
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
9
TABLE II-9
KM4202 Final Tailing 2.6

Product
35 Mesh 425 425 0.00 100.0

48 Mesh 300 300 0.13 99.9
65 Mesh 212 212 0.87 99.0
100 Mesh 150 150 4.13 94.9
150 Mesh 106 106 10.20 84.7
200 Mesh 75 75 11.20 73.5
270 Mesh 53 53 11.20 62.3
Cyclone 1 45 46 1.13 61.1
Cyclone 2 31 32 7.60 53.5
Cyclone 3 22 22 9.80 43.7
Cyclone 4 15 15 7.33 36.4
Cyclone 5 12 12 6.87 29.5
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
10
TABLE II-10
KM4202 Regrind Cyclone Feed 2.7

Product
48 Mesh 300 300 0.00 100.0

65 Mesh 212 212 0.13 99.9
100 Mesh 150 150 0.73 99.1
150 Mesh 106 106 2.80 96.3
200 Mesh 75 75 4.67 91.7
270 Mesh 53 53 7.73 83.9
Cyclone 1 50 40 8.13 75.8
Cyclone 2 33 26 14.87 60.9
Cyclone 3 23 18 15.13 45.8
Cyclone 4 16 13 11.60 34.2
Cyclone 5 13 10 7.47 26.7
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
11
TABLE II-11
KM4202 Regrind Cyclone Underflow 2.8

Product
48 Mesh 300 300 0.00 100.0

65 Mesh 212 212 0.27 99.7
100 Mesh 150 150 2.13 97.6
150 Mesh 106 106 6.40 91.2
200 Mesh 75 75 9.47 81.7
270 Mesh 53 53 14.73 67.0
Cyclone 1 45 34 12.87 54.1
Cyclone 2 31 24 25.13 29.0
Cyclone 3 22 16 17.60 11.4
Cyclone 4 15 11 3.27 8.1
Cyclone 5 12 9 2.00 6.1
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
12
TABLE II-12
KM4202 Regrind Discharge 2.9

Product
65 Mesh 212 212 0.00 100.0

100 Mesh 150 150 0.33 99.7
150 Mesh 106 106 2.60 97.1
200 Mesh 75 75 5.60 91.5
270 Mesh 53 53 8.87 82.6
Cyclone 1 50 37 18.60 64.0
Cyclone 2 33 24 22.93 41.1
Cyclone 3 23 17 13.87 27.2
Cyclone 4 16 12 6.67 20.5
Cyclone 5 13 9 4.60 15.9
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
13
TABLE II-13
KM4202 Final Concentrate 2.10

Product
200 Mesh 75 75 0.00 100.0

270 Mesh 53 53 0.40 99.6
Cyclone 1 50 33 7.07 92.5
Cyclone 2 33 22 14.87 77.7
Cyclone 3 23 15 25.47 52.2
Cyclone 4 16 11 20.60 31.6
Cyclone 5 13 8 9.93 21.7
Total 100.00 **

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000

Full Plant Survey MAY 14, 2014 Minera Cerro Bayo: July 9, 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Full Plant Survey MAY 14, 2014 Minera Cerro Bayo: July 9, 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Plant Survey MAY 14, 2014 Minera Cerro Bayo: July 9, 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FULL PLANT SURVEY

MAY 14, 2014

MINERA CERRO BAYO

Work Performed on Behalf Compañía Minera Cerro Bayo Ltd.

We would like to acknowledge the contributions made to this program of

2.0 Metallurgical Overview

* Bilmat is a mass balancing program.

Flotation Circuit Metallurgical Balance Data – 14th of May 2014

3.0 D-15 Cyclones

Flowsheet Summary Metallurgical Balance

Cyclone Deportment to Overflow

Gold and Silver Distribution by Size

Ag/Au Distribution by Size - percent

4.0 Roughers / Scavengers

A summary of the flowsheet, metallurgical balances and key performance data by

Performance of the scavengers was comparatively poorer, as would be expected

As observed in the previous assessment conducted on Minera Cerro Bayo

Mass/Gold/Silver Recovery - percent

Gold and Silver Distribution by Size

Regrinding at Minera Cerro Bayo appears to be a double-edged sword. On the

It may be possible, as similarly discussed for the D-15 cyclones, to concentrate

Testing may also be worthwhile to evaluate the impact of regrind size on

Flowsheet Summary Metallurgical Balance

Gold and Silver Deportment in the

Ag/Au Distribution by Size - percent

Gold and Silver Distribution by Size

- Within the cleaner block, coarser particles tended to be recovered better

Flowsheet Summary Metallurgical Balance

Column Note: A detailed metallurgical balance, head assays and size

2.10 Final Con

Gold and Silver Distribution by Size

7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

The cleaner circuit exhibited comparatively poor recoveries of fine particles. It

1.0 Sample Origin

Parameter Round 1 Round 2

Note: pH and Eh were measured by ALS personnel.

Samples Total Dry Mass Slurry Density Assay - percent or g/tonne

Notes: a) Au and Ag are in g/tonne, all other assays are in percent.

A metallurgical balance was constructed using Bilmat, a mass balancing program.

Samples Mass Assay - percent or g/tonne Distribution - percent

Note: Au and Ag are in g/tonne; all other assays are in percent.

TABLE I-6A TABLE I-6B TABLE I-6C

TABLE I-6D TABLE I-6E TABLE I-6F

TABLE I-6G TABLE I-6H TABLE I-6I

TABLE I-6J TABLE I-6K

Size Weight Metal Assays Size Weight Metal Assays

TABLE I-6L TABLE I-6M

Size Weight Metal Assays Size Weight Metal Assays

1.3 Cyclones D-15 O/F

Size Mass Recovery Metal Assays - g/tonne Recovery - percent

>300µm 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0

Total 34.1 235 2.34 28.3 13.3

1.2 Cyclones D-15 U/F

Size Mass Recovery Metal Assays - g/tonne Recovery - percent

>300µm 100.0 153 3.18 100.0 100.0

Total 66 308 7.91 71.7 86.7

Recalculated Cyclones D-15 Feed