• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Technical Report: PEA Ashram Deposit at the Eldor Project
 

Technical Report: PEA Ashram Deposit at the Eldor Project

on

  • 606 views

On July 5, 2012, Commerce Resources Corp. (TSXv: CCE) filed its National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report entitled, "Preliminary Economic Assessment, Ashram Deposit" on SEDAR [http://www.sedar.com] ...

On July 5, 2012, Commerce Resources Corp. (TSXv: CCE) filed its National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report entitled, "Preliminary Economic Assessment, Ashram Deposit" on SEDAR [http://www.sedar.com] and on their corporate website [http://www.commerceresources.com].
The report was completed by SGS Geostat.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
606
Views on SlideShare
606
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Technical Report: PEA Ashram Deposit at the Eldor Project Technical Report: PEA Ashram Deposit at the Eldor Project Document Transcript

    • NI 43-101 Technical Report Preliminary Economic Assessment Ashram Rare Earth Deposit For Commerce Resources Corp. Respectfully submitted to: Commerce Resources Corp. Effective Date: July 5th 2012 Prepared by: Gaston Gagnon, Eng. SGS Canada Inc. (Geostat) Gilbert Rousseau, Eng. SGS Canada Inc. (Geostat) Yann Camus, Eng. SGS Canada Inc. (Geostat) Jonathan Gagné, Eng. SGS Canada Inc. (Geostat) Geostat 10 boul. de la Seigneurie Est, Suite 203, Blainville, Québec CanadaSGS Canada Inc. t (450) 433 1050 f (450) 433 1048 www.geostat.com www.met.sgs.com Member of SGS Group (SGS SA)
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment ii Table of Contents1 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Property Location and Tenure........................................................................................................ 11 1.3 Royalties Obligations........................................................................................................................ 11 1.4 Mineralization .................................................................................................................................... 11 1.5 Property Geology.............................................................................................................................. 12 1.6 Resource Estimate ............................................................................................................................ 12 1.7 Mining Method ................................................................................................................................. 13 1.8 Mineral Processing, Metallurgical Testing ..................................................................................... 13 1.9 Recovery Methods ............................................................................................................................ 14 1.10 Cracking .......................................................................................................................................... 15 1.11 Infrastructure ................................................................................................................................. 15 1.12 Power .............................................................................................................................................. 16 1.13 Tailings and Water Management ................................................................................................ 16 1.14 Environmental ............................................................................................................................... 16 1.14.1 Provincial Jurisdiction - Environment Quality Act .............................................................. 16 1.14.2 Federal Jurisdiction - Canadian Environment Assessment Act ......................................... 17 1.14.3 Physical Environment .............................................................................................................. 17 1.15 Capital Cost Estimate ................................................................................................................... 17 1.16 Operating Cost Estimate ............................................................................................................. 17 1.17 Economic Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 18 1.18 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 182 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 19 2.1 General ............................................................................................................................................... 19 2.2 Terms of Reference .......................................................................................................................... 19 2.3 Units and Currency........................................................................................................................... 20 2.4 Disclaimer .......................................................................................................................................... 223 Reliance on Other Experts...................................................................................................................... 234 Property Description and Location ....................................................................................................... 24 4.1 Location ............................................................................................................................................. 24 4.2 Property Ownership and Agreements ........................................................................................... 25 4.3 Royalties Obligations........................................................................................................................ 27 4.4 Permits and Environmental Liabilities .......................................................................................... 27 4.5 Mineralization .................................................................................................................................... 275 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography...................................... 29 5.1 Accessibility ....................................................................................................................................... 29 5.2 Climate................................................................................................................................................ 29 5.3 Local Resources and Infrastructures .............................................................................................. 29 5.4 Physiography ..................................................................................................................................... 29 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment iii6 History........................................................................................................................................................ 31 6.1 Regional Government Surveys ....................................................................................................... 31 6.2 Mineral Exploration Work .............................................................................................................. 317 Geological Setting and Mineralization................................................................................................... 34 7.1 Regional Geology.............................................................................................................................. 34 7.2 Property Geology.............................................................................................................................. 36 7.3 Property Mineralization ................................................................................................................... 39 7.4 Ashram Deposit Geology ................................................................................................................ 40 7.5 Ashram Deposit Mineralization...................................................................................................... 438 Deposit Types ........................................................................................................................................... 509 Exploration................................................................................................................................................ 5310 Drilling ................................................................................................................................................... 5611 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security ...................................................................................... 63 11.1 Sampling Method and Approach ................................................................................................ 63 11.2 Sample Preparation and Analyses ............................................................................................... 64 11.3 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Procedure .................................................................. 65 11.3.1 Analytical Certified Reference Materials ................................................................................ 65 11.3.2 Analytical Blanks ....................................................................................................................... 73 11.3.3 Drill Core Duplicates ................................................................................................................ 75 11.3.4 Pulp Duplicates.......................................................................................................................... 77 11.3.5 QA/QC Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 82 11.4 Specific Gravity ............................................................................................................................. 83 11.5 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................... 8412 Data Verification .................................................................................................................................. 8613 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing .................................................................................. 9314 Mineral Resource Estimates................................................................................................................ 96 14.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 96 14.2 Exploratory Data Analysis ........................................................................................................... 96 14.2.1 Analytical Data........................................................................................................................... 97 14.2.2 Composite Data....................................................................................................................... 100 14.2.3 Specific Gravity ....................................................................................................................... 101 14.3 Geological Interpretation ........................................................................................................... 102 14.4 Spatial Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 102 14.5 Resource Block Modeling .......................................................................................................... 105 14.6 Grade Interpolation Methodology ........................................................................................... 105 14.7 Mineral Resource Classification ................................................................................................ 107 14.8 Mineral Resource Estimation .................................................................................................... 107 14.9 Mineral Resource Validation ..................................................................................................... 110 14.10 Comments about the Mineral Resource Estimate ................................................................. 11115 Mineral Reserve Estimates ................................................................................................................ 112 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment iv16 Mining Methods.................................................................................................................................. 113 16.1 Mining Method............................................................................................................................ 113 16.2 Overall Pit Slope Angle .............................................................................................................. 113 16.3 Pit Optimization .......................................................................................................................... 114 16.3.1 Pit Optimization Procedure ................................................................................................... 114 16.3.2 Pit Optimization Parameters ................................................................................................. 115 16.3.3 Pit Optimization Results ........................................................................................................ 116 16.4 Ultimate Pit .................................................................................................................................. 118 16.4.1 Pit Design Parameters ............................................................................................................ 118 16.4.2 Ultimate Pit Design ................................................................................................................. 118 16.4.3 Mineralization Contained Within Pit Design ...................................................................... 119 16.5 Mine Development and Production Schedule........................................................................ 120 16.5.1 Pushback Width ...................................................................................................................... 120 16.5.2 Pit Dewatering ......................................................................................................................... 120 16.5.3 Mine Development ................................................................................................................. 121 16.5.4 Production Schedule ............................................................................................................... 123 16.6 Mine equipment selection .......................................................................................................... 125 16.6.1 Drilling ...................................................................................................................................... 125 16.6.2 Blasting ..................................................................................................................................... 126 16.6.3 Major Equipment Selection ................................................................................................... 12617 Recovery Methods .............................................................................................................................. 128 17.1 Historical Background ................................................................................................................ 128 17.2 Milling ........................................................................................................................................... 128 17.2.1 Processing Description ........................................................................................................... 129 17.2.1.1 Run of Mine Ore ........................................................................................................................................................................ 129 17.2.1.2 Crushing ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 129 17.2.1.3 Grinding and Classification ...................................................................................................................................................... 129 17.2.1.4 Flotation ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 130 17.2.1.5 Thickening – Filtration.............................................................................................................................................................. 130 17.2.2 Milling Operation Costs ......................................................................................................... 130 17.2.2.1 Consumables (wear parts, grinding media, lubricants and chemical reagents) .............................................................. 131 17.2.2.2 Spare Parts ................................................................................................................................................................................... 131 17.2.2.3 Electrical Power .......................................................................................................................................................................... 131 17.2.2.4 Manpower .................................................................................................................................................................................... 132 17.2.2.5 Salaries .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 133 17.2.3 Mill Cost Control and Instrumentation ............................................................................... 133 17.2.4 Mill Services and Other Mill Common Spaces ................................................................... 134 17.2.5 Mill Capital Cost Estimate ..................................................................................................... 134 17.2.6 Construction Schedule............................................................................................................ 134 17.3 Thermal Cracking........................................................................................................................ 135 17.3.1 Process Description ................................................................................................................ 135 17.3.2 Recovery ................................................................................................................................... 136 17.3.3 OPEX and CAPEX ................................................................................................................ 136 17.3.4 Construction schedule ............................................................................................................ 13618 Project Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................... 141 18.1 Mackay’s Island ........................................................................................................................... 141 18.2 Kuujjuaq ....................................................................................................................................... 142 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment v 18.3 All-weather Road (AWR) ........................................................................................................... 143 18.4 Mine Site ....................................................................................................................................... 145 18.5 Quebec Northern Infrastructure & Sustainable Development (Plan Nord) ..................... 15119 Market Studies and Contracts ........................................................................................................... 153 19.1 Oxides Price Forecasts ............................................................................................................... 153 19.2 Oxide Value Discount ................................................................................................................ 15920 Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community Impact ...................................... 161 20.1 Methodology ................................................................................................................................ 163 20.1.1 Physical Environment ............................................................................................................ 163 20.1.2 20.1.2- Biological Environment ............................................................................................ 165 20.1.3 20.1.3- Human Environment ................................................................................................ 167 20.2 Environmental permitting framework ..................................................................................... 169 20.2.1 Provincial Jurisdiction............................................................................................................. 169 20.2.2 Federal Jurisdiction ................................................................................................................. 170 20.3 Potential Issues ............................................................................................................................ 171 20.4 Recommendations for Future Studies ..................................................................................... 172 20.4.1 Physical Environment ............................................................................................................ 172 20.4.2 Biological Environment ......................................................................................................... 173 20.5 Human Environment ................................................................................................................. 17421 Capital and Operating Costs ............................................................................................................. 176 21.1 Capital Cost .................................................................................................................................. 176 21.2 Operating Costs........................................................................................................................... 179 21.2.1 Mining Cost.............................................................................................................................. 180 21.2.2 General and Administration (G&A) Costs.......................................................................... 181 21.2.3 Processing costs ....................................................................................................................... 18322 Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 184 22.1 DCF Method – Base Case Scenario ......................................................................................... 184 22.2 Tax Rate and Royalties ............................................................................................................... 184 22.3 DCF Results for the Base Case Scenario ................................................................................. 185 22.4 Sensitivity Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 18723 Adjacent Properties ............................................................................................................................ 18924 Other Relevant Data and Information ............................................................................................ 19125 Interpretation and Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 19226 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 19527 References............................................................................................................................................ 199 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment vi List of tablesTable 1-1: Metallurgical Testwork Results ................................................................................................... 14Table 1-2: Operating Cost .............................................................................................................................. 18Table 1-3: Ashram Base Case Consolidated Cash Flow Model ................................................................ 18Table 2-1: List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... 20Table 2-2: Element to Oxide and Total Rare Earth Definitions .............................................................. 22Table 4-1: Summary of Mineralization Occurring on the Eldor Property .............................................. 28Table 10-1: Drilling Program Attributes ...................................................................................................... 56Table 10-2: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 1/4 .......................................................................... 58Table 10-3: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 2/4 .......................................................................... 59Table 10-4: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 3/4 .......................................................................... 60Table 10-5: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 4/4 .......................................................................... 61Table 11-1: Expected Values and QA/QC Ranges of SX18-01, SX18-05, and TRM-2 Analytical CRMs for Y and REEs ............................................................................................................................ 66Table 11-2: Statistics of SX18-01, SX18-05, and TRM-2 Analytical CRMs for Y and REEs .............. 67Table 11-3: Comparative Statistics for the Drill Core Duplicates ............................................................ 76Table 11-4: Statistics for the Pulp Duplicates (Actlabs vs. ALS) .............................................................. 77Table 11-5: Specific Gravity Statistics from 2010 Independent Check Sampling Program ................. 83Table 11-6: Specific Gravity Statistics from the 2010 and 2011 Exploration Programs ....................... 84Table 12-1: Statistics for the Independent Check Samples (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) ....................... 86Table 12-2: Sign Test for the Independent Check Samples (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) ...................... 87Table 12-3: Final Drill Hole Database .......................................................................................................... 92Table 13-1: Metallurgical Testwork Results ................................................................................................. 94Table 14-1: Summary Statistics of Analytical Data Used in the Mineral Resource Estimate ............... 97Table 14-2: Summary Statistics for the 3 metres Composites ................................................................. 100Table 14-3: Resource Block Model Parameters......................................................................................... 105Table 14-4: Ashram Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate........................................................................ 108Table 14-5: Ashram Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate with Individual REO Values .................... 109Table 14-6: MHREO Zone Mineral Resource Estimate ......................................................................... 110Table 14-7: MHREO Zone Mineral Resource Estimate with Individual REO Values ...................... 110Table 14-8: Ashram Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate per Zone ...................................................... 110Table 14-9: Comparative Statistics of the Assays, Composites, and Blocks Datasets ......................... 110Table 16-1: Economic Parameters of Pit Optimization........................................................................... 115Table 16-2: Resources Contained Into Base Case Pit Shell ..................................................................... 116Table 16-3: Mineralization Contained Within Pit Design ........................................................................ 119Table 16-4: Tonnage by Phase ..................................................................................................................... 121Table 16-5: Oxides Contained in Mine Concentrate (using 66.5% Mill-Cracking Recovery) ............ 123Table 16-6: Production Schedule Proposed by SGS ................................................................................ 124Table 16-7: Drilling Parameters ................................................................................................................... 125Table 16-8: Blasting Parameters................................................................................................................... 126Table 16-9: Proposed Mining and Service Fleet ........................................................................................ 127Table 18-1: Number of Employees per Department ............................................................................... 146Table 19-1: Selected Oxide Prices ............................................................................................................... 158Table 19-2: Selected Oxides Prices (after 25% discount) ........................................................................ 160Table 21-1: Capital Expenditures (CAPEX) .............................................................................................. 177Table 21-2: Equipment Listing .................................................................................................................... 178 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment viiTable 21-3: Operating Costs ........................................................................................................................ 179Table 21-4: Average Mining Cost Breakdown........................................................................................... 181Table 21-5: Staff and Camp hourly salaries................................................................................................ 182Table 21-6: Estimated G&A Costs ............................................................................................................. 183Table 22-1: DCF Parameters for the Base Case Scenario........................................................................ 184Table 22-2: DCF Results for the Base Case Scenario............................................................................... 185Table 22-3: Discounted Cash Flows (DCF)............................................................................................... 186Table 22-4: Sensitivity Analysis .................................................................................................................... 187Table 26-1: Future Work Cost Summary ................................................................................................... 198 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment viii List of FiguresFigure 4-1: General Location Map ................................................................................................................ 24Figure 4-2: Map of the Mineral Titles, Eldor Property .............................................................................. 26Figure 7-1: Regional Geology Map ............................................................................................................... 35Figure 7-2: Property Geology Map ............................................................................................................... 37Figure 7-3: 2011 Ashram Model View to West ........................................................................................... 41Figure 7-4: 2011 Ashram Model Plan View ................................................................................................. 42Figure 7-5: Western Contact .......................................................................................................................... 45Figure 7-6: Drill Core from Hole EC10-028 Showing the A, B, BD, and Contact Zone .................... 46Figure 8-1: Schematic Representation of St-Honore Carbonatite ............................................................ 51Figure 9-1: Eldor Exploration Areas............................................................................................................. 54Figure 10-1: Ashram Drill Hole Locations .................................................................................................. 57Figure 11-1: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM TRM-2 (Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, and Sm) ...................................................................................................................................................... 68Figure 11-2: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM TRM-2 (Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, and Er) ............................................................................................................................................... 69Figure 11-3: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM TRM-2 (Yb and Lu) ....... 70Figure 11-4: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM SX18-01 (Y, La, Ce, and Nd).............................................................................................................................................................. 71Figure 11-5: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM SX18-05 (Y, La, Ce, and Nd).............................................................................................................................................................. 72Figure 11-6: TREE in the Original ‘Qtz’ Blank .......................................................................................... 74Figure 11-7: TREE in the ‘Qtz-A’ Blank...................................................................................................... 75Figure 11-8: Correlation Plot of the Drill Core Duplicates for TREE and F......................................... 76Figure 11-9: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for TREE, Y, La, and Ce (Actlabs vs. ALS).... 78Figure 11-10: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for Pr, Nd, Sm, and Eu (Actlabs vs. ALS) .... 79Figure 11-11: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for Gd, Tb, Dy, and Ho (Actlabs vs. ALS) ... 80Figure 11-12: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu (Actlabs vs. ALS) .... 81Figure 12-1: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for TREE, Y, La, and Ce (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) ..................................................................................................................................... 88Figure 12-2: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for Pr, Nd, Sm, and Eu (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) ..................................................................................................................................... 89Figure 12-3: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for Gd, Tb, Dy, and Ho (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) ..................................................................................................................................... 90Figure 12-4: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) ..................................................................................................................................... 91Figure 14-1: Histogram of Samples Length from Ashram Database....................................................... 98Figure 14-2: Plan View of the Drill Holes at Ashram ................................................................................ 99Figure 14-3: Longitudinal View of the Drill Holes at Ashram (looking north) ...................................... 99Figure 14-4: Plan View Showing the Spatial Distribution of the Composites ...................................... 101Figure 14-5: Longitudinal View Showing the Distribution of the Composites (looking north) ........ 101Figure 14-6: Modeled 3D Wireframe Envelope in Longitudinal View (looking south)...................... 102Figure 14-7: Variograms of TREO Grade of 3 Metre Composite for Central Zone .......................... 103Figure 14-8: Variograms of TREO Grade of 3 Metre Composite for Inner Zone ............................. 104Figure 14-9: Variograms of TREO Grade of 3 Metre Composite for Outer Zone ............................ 104Figure 14-10: Different Search Ellipsoids Used for the Interpolation Process in Plan View ............ 106 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment ixFigure 14-11: Plan View Showing Block Model Interpolation Results.................................................. 106Figure 14-12: Longitudinal View Showing Block Model Interpolation Results (looking south) ....... 107Figure 14-13: Comparative Histograms of the Assays, Composites, and Blocks Datasets ................ 111Figure 16-1: Cases of Rock Slope With Stable and Failed Conditions Distinguished ......................... 114Figure 16-2: Plan View of the Base Case Pit Shell .................................................................................... 116Figure 16-3: Section View (6,312,175N) of the Base Case Pit Shell ....................................................... 117Figure 16-4: Ramp Width, Single and Double Lanes (annotations in metres) ..................................... 118Figure 16-5: Plan View of Designed Pit and Dimensions ....................................................................... 119Figure 16-6: Minimum Push-back Width ................................................................................................... 120Figure 16-7: Plan View - Pushback’s 1, 2 and 3 (Optimal Pit Design) .................................................. 122Figure 16-8: Pushback’s 1, 2 and 3 (Optimal Pit Design) ........................................................................ 122Figure 16-9: Production Schedule Proposed by SGS ............................................................................... 124Figure 17-1: Mill Plan Drawing.................................................................................................................... 137Figure 17-2: Crushing – Grinding Process Diagram ................................................................................ 138Figure 17-3: Flotation – Thickening – Filtering Process Diagram ......................................................... 139Figure 17-4: Cracking Process Diagram ..................................................................................................... 140Figure 18-1: Docking Location (Mackays Island) .................................................................................... 141Figure 18-2: All-weather Road Elevation Profile ...................................................................................... 143Figure 18-3: Typical Road Section............................................................................................................... 143Figure 18-4: 185 km All-Weather Road ...................................................................................................... 144Figure 18-5: Preliminary Infrastructure Arrangement .............................................................................. 145Figure 18-6: Proposed Accommodation Complex ................................................................................... 146Figure 18-7: Proposed Dewatering Dikes .................................................................................................. 148Figure 18-8: Airport Location vs. Site Infrastructure ........................................................................... ....150Figure 19-1: REEs Demand Forecast ......................................................................................................... 153Figure 19-2: Analyst Consensus Average REE Supply Demand............................................................ 154Figure 19-3: Lanthanum Price History and Forecasts .............................................................................. 155Figure 19-4: Cerium Price History and Forecasts ..................................................................................... 155Figure 19-5: Praseodymium Price History and Forecasts ........................................................................ 155Figure 19-6: Neodymium Price History and Forecasts ............................................................................ 156Figure 19-7: Samarium Price History and Forecasts................................................................................. 156Figure 19-8: Europium Price History and Forecasts ................................................................................ 156Figure 19-9: Gadolinium Price History and Forecasts ............................................................................. 157Figure 19-10: Terbium Price History and Forecasts ................................................................................. 157Figure 19-11: Dysprosium Price History and Forecasts .......................................................................... 157Figure 19-12: Yttrium Price History and Forecasts .................................................................................. 158Figure 19-13: Processing Costs and Recovery Converted into RoM ..................................................... 159Figure 20-1: Study Areas of the Ashram Rare Earth Project .................................................................. 162Figure 20-2: Precipitations and Temperatures Averages.......................................................................... 163Figure 20-3: Environmental Assessment Procedure for Mining Projects North of 55th Parallel ...... 169Figure 21-1: Total Operating Cost Breakdown ......................................................................................... 179Figure 21-2: Mining Cost per Tonne Through Mine Life ....................................................................... 180Figure 22-1: Sensitivity Analysis (Spider Graph)....................................................................................... 188Figure 23-1: Map of Adjacent Properties in the Vicinity of the Eldor Property .................................. 190 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment x List of AppendicesAppendix A: Certificates of Qualified PersonsAppendix B: Eldor Property Mineral Title AttributesAppendix C: Analytical Laboratory Protocols (Actlabs, ALS, SGS Minerals) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 111 Summary 1.1 IntroductionSGS Canada Inc. (Geostat) was commissioned by Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. on behalfof Commerce Resources Corp. (Commerce) to complete a preliminary economic assessment (PEA)of the Ashram Rare Earth Element Project (the ‘Project’). SGS Geostat has prepared this technicalreport in general accordance with the guidelines provided in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) Standards of Disclosure for mineral projects. 1.2 Property Location and TenureThe Eldor Property (the ‘Property’) is located in the Nunavik Region of the Province of Québec,approximately 130 km south of the community of Kuujjuaq (Figure 4-1). The Property is situatedabout longitude 68°24’0” west and latitude 56°56’0” north at its centre and covers portions of NTSmap sheets 24C15, 24C16, and 24F01. The Property is only accessible by float or ski-equippedairplane, helicopter or by snowmobile during winter months.As of June 2012, the Property consists of one block totalling 404 claims covering 19,006.52 ha. TheProperty area extends approximately 17.5 km in an east-west direction and 24 km in a north-southdirection. Figure 4-2 displays the claims that comprise the Property with a detailed listing included inAppendix B.Of the 404 claims comprising the Property, eight claims were acquired in May 2007 by a purchaseagreement with Virginia Mines Inc (Virginia). The other 396 claims were acquired by map stakingbetween May 2007 and October 2010 1.3 Royalties ObligationsThe original eight claims acquired from Virginia are subject to a 1% NSR royalty in favour ofVirginia and a 5% NPI royalty in favour of two individuals. Commerce has the right to buy back the5% NPI royalty in consideration of $500,000. The Ashram Rare Earth Deposit is not situated withinthe Virginia claims, and is not subject to any royalties. 1.4 MineralizationSeveral different types of mineralization, related to the carbonatite intrusive complex, occur at theEldor Property. The main commodities of interest include rare earth elements (REEs) and fluorineas discovered at the Ashram Zone; however they also occur in other areas on the Property.Niobium, tantalum, and phosphate mineralization also occur on the Property; mainly at the StarTrench, Southeast, and Northwest areas. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 12 1.5 Property GeologyThe Property is situated within the central portion of the New Quebec Orogen, also known as theLabrador Trough, straddling two lithotectonic zones that are separated by a major thrust fault. Tothe east is the SC Zone, comprising Proterozoic paraschist, paragneiss, and amphibolites; to the westis the Gerido Zone, comprising the Le Moyne Group, Doublet Group, and the Le Moyne Intrusion,also known as the Eldor CarbonatiteHistoric exploration of the Eldor Carbonatite has shown that it has an elliptical shape withapproximate dimensions of 7.3 km long by 3 km wide (Sherer, 1984). More recently, Clark andWares (2006) suggested a carbonatite extent of almost double, at 15 km long by 4 km wide.Emplacement occurred near the end of the second cycle of the belts formation, approximately 1.88– 1.87 Ga (U - Pb dating). Multiple carbonatite intrusive events are believed to have occurredduring emplacement of the Eldor Complex with calcio-carbonatite, magnesio-carbonatite, and ferro-carbonatite present.The geology of the Eldor Carbonatite is very complex, with several lithological subdivisionsproposed/identified (Wright et al., 1998) and separate eruptive centres postulated (Demers andBlanchet, 2002). Simplistically, the Eldor Complex can be separated into three major divisions:early, mid, and late-stage carbonatite. The mid-stage carbonatite is most closely related to tantalum-niobium mineralization (pyrochlore, columbite) with late-stage carbonatite crosscutting all earlierphases and is the primary host to the REE mineralization observed at the Ashram Deposit.The carbonatite is thought to have undergone minimal weathering, mainly due to the sub-arcticclimate, with glaciation believed to be the major eroding force. Only a thin veil of overburdencovers the complex, with fresh rock being encountered essentially at the soil-rock interface. Thisgeological history prevented the formation of the deep lateritic weathering profile that sometimesproves problematic in rare earth deposits due to rare earth mineral re-crystallization etc. 1.6 Resource EstimateThe base case cut-off grade (CoG) for the reporting of the 2012 mineral resource estimate of theAshram Project was retained from 2011 and a base case CoG of 1.25% total rare earth oxide(TREO) was selected. Using the Ashram basket price of $35.02 per kg, the marginal (mill) CoG wascalculated at 0.51% TREO. Although all the material above 0.51% TREO is economical, a miningCoG of 1.25% TREO was selected in order to maximise the mill feed grade when evaluating theeconomic potential of the Project.The mineral resource estimate utilized in the PEA for the Eldor Property was released on March 6,2012 and includes all drilling completed at the Ashram Deposit to date, totalling 15,691.74 m over45 holes. At a base case CoG of 1.25% TREO the resource totals 29.3 million tonnes averaging1.90% TREO in the measured and indicated categories and 219.8 million tonnes averaging 1.88%TREO in the inferred category. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 13 1.7 Mining MethodTaking into account the proximity of the mineralized zone with the surface topography and thepresence of high grades of REEs at shallow depth, the mining method selected to mine the AshramDeposit is open-pit mining. Conventional mining machinery, such as trucks, loaders, and hydraulicshovels will be used on 5 metre benches.At a rate of 4,000 tonnes of ore per day processed at a CoG of 1.25%, the Ashram Deposit containsenough resource to support an operation for more than 177 years (open pit and undergroundmining). Therefore, the main purpose of the optimization process was to highlight a section of thedeposit providing a sufficient TREO grade (over 1.25% TREO) with a reasonable stripping ratio,rather than determining the optimum pit limit.Gems WhittleTM was used to create a series of nested pit shells based on varying revenue factors(RF). In order to maximise the mined TREO grade, the smallest shell containing sufficient resourcesfor 25 years of production at a mining CoG of 1.25% TREO was selected as the base case.The mining operation will be carried out with a mining fleet of two 100 mm blast hole drills, oneCAT 988H loader, one CAT 385 shovel and four CAT 773 off the road trucks, supplemented bysupport equipment such as tracked dozers, graders, water trucks, and emulsion tankers backed byother minor equipment. 1.8 Mineral Processing, Metallurgical TestingThe rare earth mineralization at Ashram consists primarily of monazite and lesser bastnäsite andxenotime in a matrix of ferro-dolomite, fluorite, and lesser apatite. Particle size of the rare earthminerals is very fine, typically less than 30 m down to <5 m with an average of 15-20 m.Metallurgical testwork on a representative sample of the Ashram Deposit is currently beingcompleted at Hazen Research Inc. in Colorado and UVR-FIA GmbH in Germany. Of the materialreceived, the rare earth head assay for the main light rare earths are as follows:Ce: 0.75%La: 0.41%Nd: 0.27%After initial experimentation with several separation techniques, flotation was identified as the mostpromising and has thus been the chief upgrading process utilized so far. Numerous potentialcollectors for direct rare earth mineral flotation have been tested under a variety of operationalparameters with significant upgrading achieved at reasonable recoveries. No optimization of theprocess has been attempted as the primary focus is currently on determining the best rare earthcollector and carbonate depressant. A listing of the most promising test results is presented in Table1-1. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 14 Table 1-1: Metallurgical Testwork Results TEST # % of Original CONCENTRATE DISTRIBUTION Weight GRADE % % Ce La TREO Ce La TREO (EST) (EST) 3475-102 14.0 4.07 1.98 9.95 68.5 67.3 67.9 3475-125 15.0 4.04 1.96 9.87 63.7 62.5 63.1 3503-28 10.0 4.44 2.36 11.18 68.1 68.9 68.5 3503-29 7.9 4.81 2.54 12.09 55.9 55.9 55.9 3503-34 15.1 4.05 2.25 10.37 74.0 72.7 73.4A mineral concentrate with a grade of 10% TREO and 70% recovery (12.7% of the original feedweight) is used as a base case result of physical upgrading at the mine site via conventional grindingand flotation techniques. The base case selection is considered conservative and constrained by thebest Hazen testwork result thus far as this is standard policy for SGS Geostat.The waste rock and the mine tailings are not considered acid generating due to the high amount ofcarbonates and corresponding low sulphide content. This conclusion is currently being confirmedby Hazen, however, initial testwork is supportive. Moreover, the tailings are not deemed to beradioactive since the amount of the only radioactive element (thorium) in the tailings will be, for allpractical purposes, in the same order of magnitude as in the mill feed. 1.9 Recovery MethodsA 4,000 tpd mill is proposed in this study. The mill process will be conventional with operationrelying on operators’ experience and skill supported by electronic monitoring and instrumentation.It is anticipated that the head grade will be 1.81% TREO, the mineral concentrate grade will be aminimum of 10% TREO, while recovery will be in the 70% range. Rare earth mineral concentratingand cracking is proposed in the PEA to be completed on site with a 99.9% pure mixed rare earthcarbonate (REC) concentrate to be produced for the market.The process plant is designed to produce a rare earth mineral concentrate by froth flotation. It willincorporate the following sections: run-of-mine ore storage, a one-stage crushing plant, crushed orestorage, SAG milling with screen classification followed by a single-stage ball milling with cycloneclassification, flotation of the rare earth minerals, concentrate thickening and filtering, tailingshandling, water and reagents distribution. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 15 1.10 CrackingCracking of the mineral concentrates generated by Hazen is currently underway. Although onlypremliminary results are available, a TREO recovery of 95% is foreseen at the cracking plant basedon applicable and well-known cracking techniques. Because the radioactivity of the mill concentrateis not fully quantified at this time (testwork results pending), for the purpose of this report, it isassumed thermal cracking will be done directly at the mine site with any radioactive materialremaining on site. A trade-off study will be completed in pre-feasibility level evaluation to determineif it is more practical to complete cracking on site or at a location further south (e.g. near Montreal).The major components of the Acid Cracking Section include the following units: roasting, leaching,calcium and fluorine removal, thorium and iron precipitation and removal, REE carbonateprecipitation, centrifuging and drying of the REE carbonate, free of radioactivity. The potential by-product of phosphate, primarily from the cracking of monazite, is not considered in this economicevaluation. Further, the recovery of fluorite as a by-product is also not considered as part of thisstudy.A trade-off study will be completed during pre-feasibility work to evaluate conventional sulphuricacid cracking versus caustic cracking techniques. Both techniques are expected to be applicablebased on the simple and well-known Ashram mineralogy. Such evaluation will assist in determiningif a mixed REO product is more economic/practical than and mixed REC product. 1.11 InfrastructureThe on-site and off-site infrastructure will comprise: primary crushing and associated stockpilingarea, camp and mill complex, waste rock stockpile, tailings storage facility, power plant, mine garagefacility, acid and fuel farms, access roads, airstrip, concentrate storage shed and port facility.Site roads will be located to provide access to all operational areas of the mine. A road will be builtfrom the mine site to Kuujjuaq, mainly for the transportation of fuel, acid, chemicals plus otherspare parts to the mine and for the shipping out of the REE carbonate to the port facility.The camp and mill complex will be designed for a harsh environment and will include the followingbuildings: processing mill and laboratories, cracking plant, office complex, mine dry including shiftchange rooms, general maintenance work shop, mine garage, fuelling station, warehouse facility,staff and employees dormitories, kitchen/cafeteria, sulphuric acid depository, power house,emulsion plant, powder houses, garbage incineration plant and airstrip.In addition, the recent announcement of the Quebec Government northern infrastructure andsustainable development plan (Plan Nord) and its potential impact on the Project is discussed inSection 18.5. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 16 1.12 PowerThe electrical power will be supplied by 5 x 3640 kW diesel generators with an output voltage of4160 V at 60 Hz. Four of the units will operate permanently while the fifth one will be available as astand-by unit. The generators will be located near the mill building as it has the largest loads. Excessheat from the power generators will be used to heat part of the camp buildings. 1.13 Tailings and Water ManagementThe mill and cracking plant tailings will be stored and confined into a dry natural valley ordepression nearby the mining area. This valley or depression will be dammed and strategicallylocated to take into account the environmental constraints. Decant water from the polishing pondwill be reused at the process plant.The mill and cracking plant tailings are not considered acid generating and will contain nodeleterious elements or heavy metals that will necessitate the installation of a lime plant. Moreover,the tailings are not deemed to be radioactive since the amount of the only radioactive element(thorium) in the tailings will be, for all practical purposes, in the same order of magnitude as in themill feed. 1.14 Environmental1.14.1 Provincial Jurisdiction - Environment Quality ActQuebec’s Environment Quality Act (EQA) comprises two chapters. Chapter I set out generalprovisions including protection of living species, protection of the environment, environmentalimpact assessments, depollution attestation, land and water resource protection, residual materialmanagement, etc. The Act says that no one shall alter the quality of the environment (Section 20)and provides a framework for activities likely to alter it, when unavoidable. Chapter II sets outprovisions applicable to the James Bay and Northern Quebec Region.The environmental assessment procedures established for northern projects vary according towhether the project is located south or north of the 55th parallel. Section 168 of the EQA definesthe territory north of the 55th parallel as: “the whole territory located to the north of the 55thparallel, except in Category I and II lands for the Crees of Great Whale River”. The Eldor Propertyis located within the territory described above (north of the 55th parallel and on Category III lands). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 171.14.2 Federal Jurisdiction - Canadian Environment Assessment ActEven though the Project is subject to a joint federal-provincial review panel, some distinct permitsmay be required to satisfy federal bodies such as Fisheries and Oceans Canada. However, it shouldbe noted that the Federal Government has recently announced plans to amend certain aspects of theAct.1.14.3 Physical EnvironmentIn terms of environment, the Project involves three main elements: the mine site, the road linkingthe mine site to Kuujjuaq, and the shipment port.The Project will be subjected to an environment impact assessment potentially from both the federaland provincial governments. The environment impact assessments will measure the potentialeffects of the Project on the natural environment. Also, the Project will be subject to a socio-economic impact assessment, which will assess the potential effects of the Project on the humanmilieu. The water management plan for the mining-milling site will be developed during subsequentProject planning stages. No wastewater investigation has been completed to date but will bescheduled for the pre-feasibility study (PFS) as part of the environment permitting review in order tospecifically identify any issues or parameters of concern and treatment requirements.Given the general nature of the resource being mined, acid rock drainage/metal leaching from thewaste rock or the mill tailings are not a likely concern for this Project as the waste rock consistsmainly of carbonates and sulphur is, for all practical purposes, absent. However, confirmatorytesting is still required. At this time, even if metal leaching does not seem to be an issue, it will betested along with the turbidity of the water discharging from the tailings pond. 1.15 Capital Cost EstimateThe total capital expenditure cost (CAPEX) is estimated at an overall accuracy of ±30%. TheCAPEX were defined by SGS using in-house database and the Mine & Mill Equipment CostsEstimators Guide: Capital & Operating Costs (2010). The costs from the Guide were updated to2012 using an inflation rate of 4% per year. The total required investment is estimated at$763,000,000 and includes a contingency of 25%. The CAPEX assumes that all costs for thetransport road and the port facility are covered entirely by Commerce, with no potential outsideassistance from third parties evaluated (e.g. Plan Nord). 1.16 Operating Cost EstimateThe operating costs (OPEX) are estimated at an overall accuracy of ±30%. The operating costswere defined by SGS using in-house database and the Mine & Mill Equipment Costs EstimatorsGuide: Capital & Operating Costs (2010). The costs from the Guide were updated to 2012 using an SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 18inflation rate of 4% per year. The OPEX assumes that all costs for maintenance of the transportroad and port facility are covered entirely by Commerce, with no potential outside assistance fromthird parties evaluated (e.g. Plan Nord).The total operating cost for the mine and processing over the life of the mine is estimated at$3,331,850,000 which represents $95.20 per tonne of ore treated or $7.91 per kg of rare earth oxide(REO) produced. Table 1-2 summarizes the main costs used to evaluate the Project economics. Table 1-2: Operating Cost Item Cost Unit Mining 5.32** $/t mined (RoM*) G&A 47.70 $/t treated (RoM*) Processing (flotation) 23.87 $/t treated (RoM*) Processing (cracking) 17.40 $/t treated (RoM*) *RoM = Run of mine, ** Equivalent to $6.23 per tonne treated 1.17 Economic AnalysisThe Ashram base case consolidated cash flow model is presented in Table 1-3. The economicanalysis illustrates a base case for a 4,000 tpd operation (350 days per year) producing a 10% TREOmineral concentrate and further processing to a mixed rare earth carbonate (REC) product via acracking stage on-site with an overall final recovery of 66.5% (70% to concentrate + 95% atcracking). Based on an open-pit head grade of 1.81% TREO, a total of approximately 36,000tonnes of 99.9% pure mixed REC is anticipated to be produced annually, representingapproximately 16,850 tonnes of REO. The economics of producing a mixed REO product directlyon-site instead of a mixed REC product will be evaluated in subsequent studies. Table 1-3: Ashram Base Case Consolidated Cash Flow Model Item Unit Value Pre-tax and Pre-finance NPV $ 2,317,600,000 Pre-tax and Pre-finance IRR % 44 Pre-tax and Pre-finance Payback period* year 2.25 1.18 ConclusionSince this Project is certainly one of merit, it is recommended that Commerce continue themetallurgical testing in order to establish the optimal flotation reagents and increase the concentrategrade. These metallurgical tests should be followed by a pre-feasibility study supported by a pilotplant operation on a minimum 300-tonne sample. Pilot testing should include cracking of theflotation concentrate and further, evaluation of the optimal cracking technique and subsequentmarketable product. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 192 Introduction 2.1 GeneralSGS Canada Inc - Geostat (SGS Geostat) was commissioned by Commerce Resources Corp.(Commerce or Company) on May 17, 2011 to prepare a NI 43-101 compliant Preliminary EconomicAssessment (PEA) of the Ashram Rare Earth Project. This technical report was prepared by SGSGeostat for Commerce to support the disclosure of the PEA for the Project.Commerce Resources Corp. is a Canadian exploration and development company with a particularfocus on deposits of rare metals and rare earth elements. The Company is specifically focused on thedevelopment of its Upper Fir Tantalum and Niobium Deposit at the Blue River Project in BritishColumbia, and the exploration of the Eldor Rare Earth Property in northern Quebec, which is thesubject of the present report. Commerce trades on the Toronto Stock Venture Exchange (TSX.V)under the symbol CCE, on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange under the symbol D7H, and on theOTCQX U.S. marketplace under the symbol CMRZF.The Eldor Property is located in northern Quebec approximately 130 km south of the communityof Kuujjuaq and ~85 km north of Adriana Resources Lac Otelnuk Iron Deposit. The property is100% owned by Commerce and encompasses 404 claims totalling approximately 19,006 hectares. In2009, the exploration program by Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. (Dahrouge), on behalf ofCommerce, led to the discovery of a significant new rare earth element deposit known as theAshram Deposit.The purpose of this report is to evaluate the preliminary economic potential of the Ashram Projectbased on the analytical results from diamond drilling during the 2010 and 2011 explorationprograms. The economic scenario takes into account the most recent resource estimation, aprocessing scenario based on tests results, a mining scenario, a list of required infrastructure, andeconomic parameters such as oxide prices from market studies. The report also providesrecommendations for future work. 2.2 Terms of ReferenceThis preliminary economic assessment was prepared by:Gaston Gagnon, Eng. Responsible for all sections except 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 12, 13, 14 and 17Yann Camus, Eng. Responsible for sections 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 12 and 14Gilbert Rousseau, Eng. Responsible for sections 13 and 17Jonathan Gagné, Eng.This technical report was prepared according to the guidelines set under “Form 43-101F1 TechnicalReport” of National Instrument 43-101 Standards and Disclosure for Mineral Projects. Thecertificates of qualification for the Qualified Persons responsible for this technical report can befound in Appendix A. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 20One of the authors, M. Gaston Gagnon, Eng. visited the Property, accompanied by Robert Del’Étoile, Eng. from SGS Geostat, between September 18 and 21, 2011, for a review of explorationmethodology, sampling procedures, and to conduct independent check sampling of selectedmineralized drill core.Information in this report is based on critical review of the documents, information and mapsprovided by personnel of Commerce and Dahrouge, in particular Mr. Darren L. Smith, M.Sc.P.Geol., Project Geologist/Manager, and Mr. Wayne McGuire, Senior GIS Technician. 2.3 Units and CurrencyAll measurements in this report are presented in International System of Units (SI) metric system,unless otherwise stated, with all currency amounts in Canadian Dollars (C$) unless otherwise stated.Abbreviations used in this report are listed in Table 2-1. Table 2-1: List of Abbreviations°C Degree Celcius m MicrometreActlabs Activation LaboratoriesALS ALS GroupBn BillionBTW Core diameter (B-thin wall, 42 mm)C$ Canadian DollarsCA Certificate of AuthorizationCAPEX Capital expendituresCCME Canadian Council of Ministers of the EnvironmentCDD Counter current decantationCEAA Canadian Environment Assessment ActCDPNQ Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec (CDPNQ)cm CentimetreCoG Cut-off-gradeCommerce Commerce Resources CorporationCRMs Certified reference materialsDahrouge Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd., Edmonton, Alberta, CanadaD DiameterDCF Discounted Cash FlowEI Environement Illimité inc.Eldor Eldor Property (site of Ashram Deposit)FS Feasibility StudyEng EngineerEQA Environment Quality ActG&A General and Administrativeg/cc Gram per cubic centimetreg/t Gram per tonneGa Billion yearsGSC Geological Survey of CanadaH Heightha HectaresHazen Hazen Research Inc., Denver, ColoradoHz HertzICP Inductively coupled plasmaICP-MS Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryIRR Internal rate of return SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 21ISE Ion selective electrodeIUGS International Union of Geological Sciencesk Kilokg Kilogramkm KilometrekW KilowattkW-h Kilowatt-hourLFO Light fuel oilLoM Life of mineLREO Light rare earth oxidem MetreM Millionm2 Square metreMa Million yearsMCC Motor Control CentreMDDEP Ministère du Développement Durable, de l’Environnement et des Parcsmg MilligramMHREO Middle and heavy rare earth oxidemin Minutemm MillimetreMMER Metal Mining Effluent RegulationMREO Middle rare earth oxideMRNF Ministère des Ressources Naturelles et de la FauneMW MegawattNAD83 North American datum of 1983NI 43-101 National Instrument 43-101NPI Net profit interestNPV Net present valueNQ Core diameter (47.6 mm)NSR Net smelter returnNTS National Topographic System of CanadaNWPA Navigable Waters Protection ActOK Ordinary Kriging methodologyOPEX Operating expendituresPEA Preliminary economic assessmentPFS Pre-feasibility studyPGE Platinum Group Elements (six elements)pH Potential of hydrogen (acidity scale)PLC Programmable logic controllerppm Part per millionProject Ashram ProjectProperty Eldor PropertyQA/QC Quality assurance/Quality controlQP Qualified PersonQtz QuartzREC Rare earth carbonateREE Rare earth elementREO Rare earth oxideRF Revenue factorsRoM Run of mineRPD Relative percent differenceSAG Semi-Autogenous Grinding MillSECP Southeastern Churchill ProvinceSEDAR System for Electronic Document Analysis and RetrievalSG Specific GravitySGS-Geostat SGS Canada Inc, Geostat’s office in Blainville, QCSI International System of Units metric system SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 22T Metric tonnet/m3 Tonne per cubic metretpd Tonne per daytpy Tonne per yeartpa Tonne per yearTREE Total REE (Sum of the Rare Earth Elements (La through Lu) + Yttrium)TREO Total REO (Sum of the Rare Earth Oxides (La through Lu) + Yttrium)TRM-2 Certified Reference Material for analytical work, from MongoliaUS$ United States dollarsUTM Universal transverse mercatorV VoltVirginia Virginia Mines IncXRF X-ray fluorescenceTable 2-2 presents some factors to convert elements to oxides and also provides total rare earthdefinitions. Table 2-2: Element to Oxide and Total Rare Earth Definitions Name Element Definitions Conversion Factor Oxide Definitions (Element to Oxide) Lanthanum La 1.17276 La2O3 Cerium Ce 1.17127 Ce2O 3 LREOPraseodymium Pr LREE 1.17031 Pr2O3 Neodymium Nd 1.16638 Nd2O 3 Samarium Sm 1.15961 Sm2O3 Europium Eu MREE 1.15793 Eu2O 3 MREO Gadolinium Gd 1.15261 Gd2O 3 Terbium Tb TREE 1.15100 Tb2O 3 TREO Dysprosium Dy 1.14768 Dy2O 3 Holmium Ho 1.14551 Ho2O 3 Erbium Er 1.14348 Er2O3 Thulium Tm HREE 1.14206 Tm2O3 HREO Ytterbium Yb 1.13868 Yb2O 3 Lutetium Lu 1.13716 Lu2O3 Yttrium Y 1.26993 Y2O 3 2.4 DisclaimerIt should be understood that mineral resources, which are not mineral reserves, do not havedemonstrated economic viability. The mineral resources presented in this Technical Report areestimated based on available sample data and on assumptions and parameters available to theauthors. The comments in this Technical Report reflect the authors and SGS Canada Inc. – Geostatbest judgement in light of the information available. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 233 Reliance on Other ExpertsSGS Geostat did not rely on any experts other than Hazen Research Inc, (Hazen), CommerceResources Corp., and Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. during the writing of this report. Allinformation, estimations, opinions and conclusions presented in this report are based on a thoroughreview of the literature and on data, reports and other information supplied by Commerce, and onSGS expertise including in-house database.For the purpose of the report, SGS has relied on Hazen, Commerce, and Dahrouge for informationpertaining to the following sections:4- Property Description and Location5- Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography6- History7- Geological Setting and Mineralization8- Deposit Types9- Exploration10- Drilling13- Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing17- Recovery MethodHowever, these sections were read, revised and approved by SGS experts. SGS is of the opinion thatthe data provided by Hazen, Commerce, and Dahrouge is acceptable compared to standards andthat the work done by Hazen, Commerce, and Dahrouge is professional and trustworthy. SGSexperts are comfortable to use such data in assessing the preliminary economic potential of theAshram Project. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 244 Property Description and Location 4.1 LocationThe Eldor Property is located in the Nunavik Region of the Province of Québec, approximately 130km south of the community of Kuujjuaq (Figure 4-1). The Property is situated about longitude68°24’0” west and latitude 56°56’0” north at its centre and covers portions of NTS map sheets24C15, 24C16, and 24F01. The Property is only accessible by float or ski-equipped plane, helicopterand by snowmobiles during winter months. Figure 4-1: General Location Map SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 25 4.2 Property Ownership and AgreementsAs of June 2012, the Property consists of one block totalling 404 claims covering 19,006.52 ha. TheProperty area extends approximately 17.5 km in an east-west direction and 24 km in a north-southdirection. Figure 4-2 shows the claims that comprise the Property with a detailed listing included inAppendix B.Of the 404 claims comprising the Property, eight claims were acquired in May 2007 by a purchaseagreement with Virginia Mines Inc (Virginia). The other 396 claims were acquired by map stakingbetween May 2007 and October 2010. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 26 Figure 4-2: Map of the Mineral Titles, Eldor Property SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 27 4.3 Royalties ObligationsThe original eight claims acquired from Virginia are subject to a 1% NSR royalty in favour ofVirginia and a 5% NPI royalty in favour of two individuals. Commerce has the right to buy back the5% NPI royalty in consideration of $500,000. The Ashram Rare Earth Deposit is not situated withinthe Virginia claims, and is not subject to any royalties. 4.4 Permits and Environmental LiabilitiesCommerce is conducting exploration work under valid permits and authorisations delivered by theprovincial Ministère des Ressources Naturelles et de la Faune (MRNF) and the Ministère duDéveloppement Durable, de l’Environnement et des Parcs (MDDEP). On March 19, 2011, theCompany confirmed having the following work permits in good standing: • Intervention permit (by the MRNF); • Camp authorisation (by the MDDEP); • Certificate of authorisation (by the MDDEP); • Attestation of exemption (by the MDDEP).There are no known environmental liabilities pertaining to the Property, according to the Company. 4.5 MineralizationSeveral different types of mineralization, related to the carbonatite intrusive complex, occur at theEldor Property. The main commodities of interest include rare earth elements and fluorine asdiscovered at the Ashram Zone; however they also occur in other areas on the Property. Niobium,tantalum, and phosphate mineralization also occur on the Property; mainly at the Star Trench,Southeast, and Northwest areas, Table 4-1 summarises the mineralization currently known on theProperty. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 28 Table 4-1: Summary of Mineralization Occurring on the Eldor Property Location Area Name Commodities Significant Results Sampling Type UTM East UTM North EC10-032: 0.43% Nb2O5 over 155.95 m, incl. 0.71% Nb2O5 over 15.33 m EC10-033: 0.58% Nb2O5, 8.9% P2O5, and 0.47% TREO over 74.25 m, incl. Nb, Ta, F, Drill Core, 538000 6311000 Southeast 12.7% F over 32.42 m; Phosphate Boulders, Soils EC08-015: 0.55% Nb2O5 over 26.1 m, incl.16.1% F over 13.78 m 0.065% Ta2O5 (boulder); 1.21% Nb2O5 (boulder); 19.2% P2O5 (boulder) Nb, Ta, EC08-008: 0.46% Nb2O5 over 46.88 m; Drill Core, 535900 6312700 Northwest Phosphate 28.2% P2O5 (outcrop); 5.74% Nb2O5, 0.46% Ta2O5 (outcrop) Outcrop, Soils Ta, Nb, EC08-025: 0.31% Nb2O5, 0.060% Ta 2O5, and 16.60% P2O5 over 4.37 m; Drill Core, 537300 6310100 Star Trench Phosphate 37.3% P2O5 (outcrop); 4.23% Nb2O5 (boulder); 0.14% Ta2O5 (boulder) Outcrop, Boulders 536300 6312100 Ashram REE, F EC11-048: 2.10% TREO over 586.92 m, incl. 3.00% TREO over 36.99 m Drill Core EC10-037: 1.73% TREO over 7.87 m; Drill Core, 541400 6311700 MC Exposure REE, F 2.03% TREO (outcrop) Outcrop Nb, REE, 537400 6313000 Miranna 2.42% Nb2O5 (boulder); 15.8% P2O5 (boulder); 1.25% TREO (soils) Boulders, Soils Phosphate 535700 6313500 Triple-D REE EC11-055: 1.38% TREO over 10.00 m Drill Core EC11-069: 1.96% TREO over 2.85 m; Drill Core, 535100 6312700 West Rim REE, Nb, Ta 2.27% TREO (boulder); 16.09% Nb2O5, 0.754% Ta 2O5 (boulder); Boulders 21.0% P2O5 (boulder) EC11-081: 1.36% TREO and 2.3% F over 10.45 m; Drill Core, 539100 6312900 Beckling REE, F 4.30% TREO, 20.1% F (outcrop) Outcrop SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 295 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography 5.1 AccessibilityDue to its remoteness, the Property is only accessible by float or ski-equipped plane, helicopter or bysnowmobiles during winter months. 5.2 ClimateThe climate is sub-arctic continental with average temperatures ranging from -25°C in February to+11°C in July for the nearest community of Kuujjuaq. The average annual precipitation for the last10 years in the region is 41 cm of rain and 174 cm of snow (weather base website, 2011). Lakefreeze-up generally begins in early to middle October and ice break-up usually occurs around theend of May-early June. 5.3 Local Resources and InfrastructuresThe regional resources regarding labour force, supplies and equipment are challenging due to theremoteness of the Project. The nearest communities are Kuujjuaq, located 130 km north with apopulation of more than 2,000 citizens, and Schefferville (including the nearby native community)situated approximately 250 km southeast with a population of about 800 citizens (2006 census).Both communities are serviced by a regional airport, float plane base, and helicopter base. Kuujjuaqhas no sea port facilities. Cargo boats must unload at Mackay’s Island (on the Koksoak River)located approximately 35 km northeast of Kuujjuaq, due to shallow waters, and use barges for theremaining river transportation. Schefferville is the northern terminus of the Tshiuetin railway(formerly operated by the Quebec North Shore & Labrador), which connects to Labrador City thenSept-Iles to the south.Exploration work on the Property is completed from a temporary base camp (known as Eldorcamp) located nearby the Ashram REE Deposit. The camp can be open year-round and currentlyhas the capacity to accommodate up to 35 persons. The camp is equipped with core logging,sampling facilities, core photography, and core fluorescence installations. It also hosts the drill corearchive of the Project. No permanent access road has been built on the Property although a networkof temporary access trails connects the camp to the Ashram Deposit and is passable by quad andside-by-side all terrain vehicles 5.4 PhysiographyThe Property is characterised by a rolling hill topography generally created by the underlying glacialdrumlins and eskers. Glacial sediments, mostly till, cover most of the Project area and can be up to SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 30ten metres thick, although is typically less than 1-3 m over the Ashram Deposit. Outcrops are rare,but boulders are abundant. The elevation above sea level ranges from 200 m to 320 m.Drainage in the area, typical of the transitional taiga to tundra regions, is northward toward UngavaBay using small creeks and local poorly drained swampy area connecting to larger lakes and majorrivers. The vegetation is generally forest-covered in the central portion of the Property, populatedmainly by black spruce and tamarack trees, with generally barren areas occurring in the moreelevated southern area. Willow and alder shrubs, often densely populated, also occur in low-lyingareas throughout the Property. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 316 History 6.1 Regional Government SurveysSeveral regional surveys have been conducted in the area of the Property by the Geological Surveyof Canada (GSC) and the MRNF. Between the 1950s and the 1970s, different authors from the GSCand the MRNF conducted regional geological surveys in the New Quebec Orogen at varying scales,from 4 miles per inch (1:253,440) to 1 mile per inch (1:63,360). In 1979, a compilation of the variousgeological surveys conducted in the area was completed (Dressler and Ciesielski, 1979). Since theend of the 1970’s, only a few localised and more detailed geological surveys were completed by theMRNF.The geological syntheses reported by the MRNF for the area since the 1990’s include a 1:250,000scale map of the mineral occurrences of the New Quebec Orogen (Avramtchez et al., 1990), apreliminary lithotectonic and metallogenic synthesis at a 1:500,000 scale (Bandyayera et al., 2002),and more recently a complete lithotectonic and metallogenic synthesis of the New Quebec Orogen(Clark and Wares, 2006).In addition to regional geological surveys, a stream sediment geochemical survey was completed in1974 (Dressler, 1974), followed in 1987 by a regional lake sediment geochemical survey (Baumier,1987). 6.2 Mineral Exploration WorkThe information reported in this section relates mainly to mineral exploration work conducted forthe mineralization related to the carbonatite intrusive complex occurring on the Property. TheEldor Carbonatite Intrusive Complex was first discovered in 1981 by Eldor Resources Ltd. (EldorRes.) following a regional lake-water and sediment sampling program completed in the northern partof the Labrador Trough for uranium exploration.In 1982, after the acquisition of an exploration permit in the area of the Property, Eldor Res.completed a 982 line-km airborne radiometric survey that outlined several radiometric anomalies inthe area.In 1983, Eldor Res. followed up the airborne anomalies with a prospecting program. During theprogram, many of the anomalies were explained, using a scintillometer in hand-dug pits or trenches,or by radioactive carbonatite outcrops or boulders. The samples collected returned anomalousthorium values with some of the samples returning up to 7% Nb, 0.18% Ta, and 4% totallanthanides. A reconnaissance geological mapping survey was also conducted in the area of thenewly discovered carbonatite (Meusy et al., 1984; Lafontaine, 1984).In 1985, Unocal Canada Ltd. carried out a five-day field program consisting of magnetic-radiometricgeophysical and soil geochemical orientation surveys along with prospecting. Samples collected for SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 32geochemical analysis and petrographic study confirmed the historical results by Eldor Res. andadditional Nb-Ta occurrences were outlined in the area (Knox, 1986).The Eldor Carbonatite was staked in April, 2002 by Virginia Gold Mines Ltd. (now Virginia MinesInc.) based on the historical Ta values reported by Eldor Res. Virginia conducted a small programand re-sampled the known Nb-Ta showings, confirming the historical results. No additional workwas performed in the area by Virginia (Demers and Blanchet, 2002).In April, 2007, Commerce concluded a purchase agreement with Virginia on the 8 original claimsand subsequently acquired an additional 396 claims over the next three years, covering thecarbonatite and immediate vicinity. During the summer of 2007, the Company mandated DahrougeGeological Consulting Ltd. (Dahrouge) to conduct an exploration program consisting ofprospecting (56 observation points) and rock sampling (60 samples), soil sampling (901 samples),and ground radiometric (scintillometer) and magnetic surveys. In addition to the field program, an862 line-km airborne magnetic-electromagnetic-radiometric survey was flown over the Property at200 m line spacing (Smith et al., 2008).During 2008, Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, conducted an exploration program on theProperty consisting of prospecting and rock sampling, regional soil sampling, ground geophysics,trenching, and diamond drilling. A total of 5,482.29 metres of drilling was completed over 26 holesin three areas of the Property (Star Trench, Northwest, and Southeast). From these holes, 3,471samples totalling 4,003 metres were collected and analysed during 2008 (2,928 samples) andsubsequent infill sampling programs during 2009 (97 samples) and 2010 (446 samples), not includingduplicates. Some of the best results from the initial drilling and sampling are as follows:Star Trench Area: EC08-025 - 4.37 m grading 597 ppm Ta2O5, 3,058 ppm Nb2O5, 736 ppm U3O8, and 16.6% P2O5Northwest Area: EC08-008 - 46.88 m grading 4,562 ppm Nb2O5Southeast Area: EC08-015 - 26.10 m grading 5,466 ppm Nb2O5Fifteen (15) trenches, with 71 samples collected, were documented on the Property. The groundgeophysics consisted of magnetic and scintillometer surveys. The soil sampling program significantlyextended the 2007 regional grid and returned 685 samples collected at 50 m intervals along 1 km-spaced lines. The prospecting work totalled 270 observation points and returned a total of 93 rocksamples.In 2009, Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, completed a relatively small exploration program withfield work consisting of prospecting and additional sampling of 2008 drill core (97 samples).Additional work was completed in the office and consisted of air-photo interpretation and re-interpretation of the 2007 airborne geophysical survey. The most significant result from the 2009exploration program was the discovery of REE mineralization in outcrop on the Ashram Peninsula,highlighting the exploration potential for rare earth elements on the Property. Of the 70 rock SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 33samples collected in the Ashram area, more than half returned TREO greater than 1%, with the bestsample grading more than 3% TREO (Smith and Peter-Rennich, 2010).After the success of the abbreviated 2009 program, and improvement in the global marketconditions, Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, initiated an aggressive follow-up drilling,prospecting, and soil sampling program during 2010. Five trenches were completed on the Propertywith 30 samples collected. The soil sampling program returned 839 samples collected mostly alongextensions of the regional 2007-8 grid (50 m intervals along 1 km-spaced lines). The prospectingwork totalled 297 observation points and returned nearly 300 rock samples. Prospecting and soilsampling work led to the discovery of the ‘Miranna’ REE target near J Lake as well as the ‘MCExposure’ carbonatite showing located to the east and outside of the main complex as inferred bymagnetics. In addition to the ground work, detailed satellite imagery at 0.5 m resolution was acquiredover the entire property.A total of 5,389.98 metres of drilling was completed over 21 holes in four different areas of theProperty (Star Trench, Southeast, MC Exposure, and Ashram). Some of the best results are asfollows:Star Trench Area: No significant intersections were returned, with the area proving to be enigmatic. Strong mineralization was encountered but only over very narrow widths.Southeast Area: EC10-033 – 74.25 m grading 5,750 ppm Nb2O5, 140 ppm Ta2O5, 0.47% TREO, and 8.9% P2O5MC Exposure: EC10-037 – 7.37 m grading 1.73% TREOAshram Area: EC10-045 – 309.18 m grading 1.99% TREO and 2.6% FThe chief highlight of the 2010 drill program was the confirmation of significant rare earthmineralization extending from surface to considerable depth on the Ashram Peninsula. A total of3,312.67 m over 12 drill holes completed during the summer and fall of 2010 formed the basis foran initial NI 43-101 compliant mineral resource estimate released in March, 2011 by SGS-Geostat ofMontreal (Blainville). The estimate yielded a total inferred resource of 117.4 Mt grading 1.74%TREO at a cut-off grade of 1.25% (Laferrière, 2011). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 347 Geological Setting and Mineralization 7.1 Regional GeologyThe Eldor Property is located in the Paleoproterozoic New Quebec Orogen (also known as the‘Labrador Trough’ or ‘Fosse du Labrador’), which is interpreted to be the western margin of theSoutheastern Churchill Province (SECP). The New Quebec Orogen is bounded to the west by theArchean Superior Province, to the south by the Proterozoic Grenville Province, and extends as faras Ungava Bay to the north. To the east, the New Quebec Orogen is in contact with a compositeterrain of the SECP named the Core Zone, composed of Archean and Paleoproterozoic lithologies(James et al., 2003; Clark and Wares, 2006) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 35 Figure 7-1: Regional Geology Map SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 36The New Quebec Orogen is interpreted to be an early Proterozoic (Aphebian) fold and thrust beltwith an age of 2.17 to 1.87 Ga. The older stratigraphic and structural subdivision of the NewQuebec Orogen outlined three supracrustal belts defined as 1) a western foreland,parauthochthonous to allochthonous “miogeosynclinal” belt composed mainly of platform sedimentrocks; 2) a central foreland, allochthonous “eugeosynclinal” belt composed mainly of greenschistfacies, deeper-water environment, volcano-sedimentary rocks intruded by numerous gabbro sills;and 3) an eastern allochthonous belt marking the beginning of the hinterland and composed ofamphibolitic facies rocks.The recent interpretation defines the New Quebec Orogen as three cycles of sedimentation andvolcanism, which make up the Kaniupiskau Supergroup. The cycles thicken eastwards and areseparated from each other by erosional unconformities. The first two cycles are volcano-sedimentaryin nature with an emplacement age, via U-Pb dating, of between 2.17 and 2.14 Ga and between 1.88and 1.87 Ga respectively. Overlying this sequence is a syn-orogenic suite of meta-sedimentary rocksthat form the third cycle. The belt is subdivided into eleven lithotectonic zones separated by majorthrust faults.The first cycle of the belt was prompted by continental rifting, followed by passive continentalmargin development, then additional rifting, and finally the re-establishment of the platform. Aperiod of approximately 175 Ma, characterized by relatively little tectonic activity, followed the firstcycle of the Orogen. The second cycle is characterized by a transgressive sequence composed ofplatform sediments (sandstones and iron formations) and turbidites (sandstones and mudstones)later intruded in the central part of the belt by several ultramafic sills, tholeiitic in composition,known as the Montagnais Sills. Near the end of the second cycle, the Le Moyne Intrusion (EldorCarbonatite) was emplaced within basaltic to rhyolitic volcanic units. Finally, the third cycle,consisting of molasse-type sedimentation at the margin of the Superior Province, occurred between1.82 and 1.77 Ga.In general, metamorphic grade increases from west to east across the New Quebec Orogen. Theforeland changes from sub-greenschist to upper greenschist facies, and the hinterland goes fromupper greenschist to amphibolite/granulite facies. The Eldor Carbonatite suite of rocks isinterpreted to have undergone greenschist facies metamorphism and was deformed, along with thesurrounding rocks, during the Hudsonian Orogen. 7.2 Property GeologyThe Property is situated within the central portion of the New Quebec Orogen, straddling twolithotectonic zones that are separated by a major thrust fault. To the east is the SC Zone,comprising Proterozoic paraschist, paragneiss, and amphibolites; to the west is the Gerido Zone,comprising the Le Moyne Group, Doublet Group, and the Le Moyne Intrusion, also known as theEldor Carbonatite (Figure 7-2). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 37 Figure 7-2: Property Geology Map SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 38 Figure 7-2B: Geology of the Eldor Carbonatite Map SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 39The older Doublet Group rocks underlay the Le Moyne Group rocks and consist of maficpyroclastics, basalts, dolomites, and gabbros. The Le Moyne Group consists of volcanic andsedimentary rocks of the Douay Formation (rhyolites, rhyodacites, felsic tuffs, dolomites, shales, andpelites), and the sedimentary Aulneau Formation (conglomerate, mudstones, dolomite, and dolomitetuff), which includes mafic pyroclastics coeval with the Le Moyne Intrusion. Finally, a sub-volcaniccarbonatite intrusion (‘Le Moyne Intrusion’ or ‘Eldor Carbonatite’) was emplaced within the LeMoyne Group. Local structure and geology indicate that volcanism was violent and may haveoccurred in a shallow-water environment.The carbonatite complex has been mapped by Clark and Wares (2006) as intrusive (massive andbrecciated ultramafic) with marginal extrusive equivalents interpreted to be a possible volcanicapron. This notion of extrusive carbonatite components is still a matter of debate.Historic exploration of the Eldor Carbonatite has shown it to have an elliptical shape withapproximate dimensions of 7.3 km long by 3 km wide (Sherer, 1984). More recently, Clark andWares (2006) suggested a carbonatite extent of almost double, at 15 km long by 4 km wide.Emplacement occurred near the end of the second cycle of the belts formation, approximately 1.88– 1.87 Ga (U - Pb dating). Multiple carbonatite intrusive events are believed to have occurredduring emplacement of the Eldor Complex with calico-carbonatite, magnesio-carbonatite, and ferro-carbonatite present.The geology of the Eldor Carbonatite is very complex, with several lithological subdivisionsproposed/identified (Wright et al., 1998) and separate eruptive centres postulated (Demers andBlanchet, 2002). Simplistically, the Eldor Complex can be separated into three major divisions:early, mid-, and late-stage carbonatite. The mid-stage carbonatite is most closely related to tantalum-niobium mineralization (pyrochlore, columbite) with late-stage carbonatite crosscutting all earlierphases and is the primary host to the REE mineralization observed at the Ashram Deposit.The carbonatite is thought to have undergone minimal weathering, mainly due to the sub-arcticclimate, with glaciation thought to be the major eroding force. Only a thin veil of overburden coversthe complex, with fresh rock being encountered essentially at the soil-rock interface. This geologicalhistory prevented the formation of the deep lateritic weathering profile that sometimes provesproblematic in rare earth deposits due to rare earth mineral re-crystallization etc. 7.3 Property MineralizationThe primary targeted commodities of exploration on the Eldor Property are niobium-tantalum andrare earth element deposits associated with the carbonatite. Secondary targets include phosphate(apatite) and fluorine (fluorite), which tend to occur with the other primary commodities of interest.Carbonatites have been defined in several ways; a detailed review of the methodologies andarguments is presented in Mitchell (2005). However, for the purposes of this report they aredefined, according to the IUGS system, as igneous rocks containing more than 50% carbonateminerals by volume with less than 20 wt.% SiO2 (Le Maitre, 2002). Geochemical classification(calcio, magnesio, ferro) follows that presented in Woolley and Kempe (1989). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 40Niobium and tantalum mineralized bodies are thought to be formed by primary igneousconcentrations of the minerals pyrochlore, columbite, and others located in geochemically enrichedphases of a carbonatite intrusion. Primary niobium-tantalum deposits tend to run parallel to themineral banding in the host carbonatite. Mineralized bodies are characterized by an increasedconcentration of non-carbonate minerals, as well as increased quantities of actinide elements (U andTh). This results in mineralized zones that tend to be more radioactive than the unmineralized wallrocks. Niobium-tantalum mineralization often occurs in calcio to magnesio phases, in the middlestages of carbonatite emplacement, with earlier-stage carbonatite often barren.Rare earth element deposits tend to be associated with the final phases of intrusion/veining of acarbonatite complex and are often located near the centre of carbonatite/alkaline complexes.Typically, the highly oxidized nature of the late carbonatite phases makes these areas magnetic lows.Geochemically, these deposits tend to occur in the magnesio to ferro phases, with the ferro phasestypically representing the latest stages of emplacement. Rare earth mineralization may occur in awide variety of minerals in this type of geological environment. The rare earth minerals are typicallynon-silicate, and light and middle rare earth enriched, with rare earth phosphate and fluorocarbonateminerals common (e.g., monazite, bastnäsite). It is highly unusual for carbonatites to display heavyrare earth enrichment; however, it has been known to occur under specific conditions (e.g. Ashram). 7.4 Ashram Deposit GeologyThe Ashram Rare Earth Deposit is central to the Eldor Carbonatite Complex, lies within a magneticlow at the apex of a REE-mineralized boulder train, is marked by a gravity anomaly, and appears tobe bordered by an earlier stage calcio-carbonatite and various ‘glimmerite’ related units.Currently, the deposit’s geometry and geology can best be described as a moderate to steeply NEdipping ovoid or sheet, with simple rare earth mineralogy (monazite, bastnäsite, xenotime).Although mineralogically simple, it is texturally complex with multiple later stage episodes ofdolomitic carbonatite emplacement (ferro/magnesio), coupled with deformation and brecciation(cataclasis), and low-temperature hydrothermal overprinting. No major off-setting structures havebeen identified within the main ore body, however, additional drilling and ongoing interpretation isrequired.In general, the body can be divided into a higher grade (typically 1.5–3+% TREO) body comprisingpredominantly the A and B zones, with an outer lower grade halo (typically <1% TREO)predominantly comprising the BD-Zone type lithology. These zones are typically bordered by arelatively unmineralized phlogopite rich unit to the west and a relatively unmineralized calico-carbonatite unit to the east. A near-surface central zone of more intense middle and heavy rareearth oxide (MHREO) enrichment, termed the ‘MHREO Zone’, is also identified within A-Zonematerial (Figure 7-3 and Figure 7-4). The A, B, BD, and MHREO zones, as well as contact units, arefurther defined in Section 7.5. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 41 Figure 7-3: 2011 Ashram Model View to West SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 42 Figure 7-4: 2011 Ashram Model Plan View SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 43The rare earth mineralized footprint at Ashram extends approximately 700 metres along strike, over500 metres across, and reaches depths exceeding 600 metres. Mineralization remains open to thenorth, south, at depth, and is not fully constrained to the west and east. The deposit outcrops atsurface or is covered by only a thin veil of overburden, typically <1 to 3 m thick, hosting well-mineralized boulders.The Ashram Deposit displays a pervasive and well-balanced rare earth distribution that is prevalentthroughout the deposit. The deposit averages over 16% neodymium oxide (% of TREO), and 6%MHREO (% of TREO), including appreciable amounts of the critical rare earths neodymium,europium, terbium, dysprosium, and yttrium. This is unusual in carbonatite deposits and especiallythose of such tonnage and grade. Further, a zone, termed the ‘MHREO Zone’, displays a moreintense enrichment in the middle and heavy rare earth oxides, and is located central to the mainAshram body, extending from surface and to depths exceeding 170 m.The origin of the MHREO enrichment at Ashram remains enigmatic with several theories of note.It may represent the non-eroded upper or central portions of the mineralized system, where theheavy rare earths may preferentially concentrate. In addition, the presence of certain mineralogicalassemblages (including xenotime) suggests a peralkaline rock affinity and possible source for theheavy rare earth enrichment (Mitchell, 2011). Peralkaline and other granitic rocks are typicallyenriched in heavy rare earths, thus residual hydrothermal fluids from such sources may haveinfluenced the system.Macro-examination of core reveals that the main MHREO Zone has sharp, crosscuttingrelationships with the main Ashram Deposit lithologies. It appears to have finer and more massive-like textures and be significantly less deformed. This strongly suggests that the MHREO Zonerepresents a later event than the main Ashram LREO-MREO mineralizing event.MHREO enrichment, if present, is characteristic of the late stages of evolution of a REE-mineralized carbonatite. The MHREO Zone at Ashram could represent this later heavy enrichmentstage, concentrated into a late intrusive event.Additional drilling and thin section analysis is required to adequately determine the correctparagenesis of the Ashram Deposit and further investigate the origins of the pervasive MHREOenrichment throughout, as well as that of the main MHREO Zone. 7.5 Ashram Deposit MineralizationThis section summarizes rare earth mineralization and lithology specific to the Ashram Rare EarthElement Deposit. The primary sources of information include core logs and internal mineralogicalreports by Patrik Schmidt, B.Sc. equivalent from the University of Tübingen (Schmidt, 2011), andDr. Roger H. Mitchell (Mitchell, 2011), in addition to several thin section characterizationscompleted by Mitchell, subsequent to the internal reports. Personal communications and an internalreport on the Ashram Deposit geology by Alex W. Knox, P.Geol, is also utilized (Knox, 2011). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 44The Rare earth element mineralization at Ashram is hosted primarily (essentially 100%) by monazite,rare earth fluorocarbonates (bastnäsite, parisite, and lesser synchysite) and lesser xenotime. Rareearth mineralization at Ashram is consistent throughout the deposit with minimal dilution fromunmineralized fragments and clasts.Monazite typically occurs as intergrowths with fluorite or disseminations in dolomite and lesscommonly as intergrowths with apatite or in association with quartz-rutile assemblages. Bastnäsitetypically occurs as fibrous cavity fillings in dolomite, anhedral grains in veins associated with Y-Nb-Ti minerals, or anhedral grains and aggregates in fluorite.The principal heavy rare earth mineral is xenotime-(Dy) present as anhedral to subhedral crystals inassociation with nioboaeschynite, niobian rutile, ferrocolumbite, monazite, quartz, and mica.Xenotime is present in either pools of quartz, small veins (mm) in fluorite ferro-carbonatites, orscattered throughout the carbonatite as a trace mineral in association with disseminated monaziteand/or bastnäsite.At least two generations of monazite are present: one associated with fluorite and/or disseminatedin dolomite, and a second associated with the xenotime mineral assemblage. The xenotime mineralassemblage represents a distinct (later) mineralization event from that which formed the firstgeneration of monazite.Grain size of the monazite is typically <10 m to 25 m, with bastnäsite slightly coarser at <20 mto 50 m. Aggregates of monazite±bastnäsite in the several-hundred micron range are present butnot common. Xenotime crystals are relatively coarser grained than monazite, although stillcommonly less than 50 m. Parasite-bastnäsite intergrowths, where present (BD-Zone), occur asrelatively large crystals and masses ranging typically from 200 m to 400 m with some aggregatesexceeding a millimetre. Although fine-grained, the rare earth mineralogy of the Ashram Deposit isconsidered simple because it contains three of the four rare earth minerals that dominatecommercially production globally (monazite, bastnäsite, and xenotime). In addition, it has beendemonstrated that all three rare earth bearing minerals (monazite, bastnaesite, and xenotime) liberatetogether and share conventional processing techniques.The Ashram Deposit can be roughly divided into three main mineralized zones termed ‘A-Zone’, ‘B-Zone’, and ‘BD-Zone’. In general the A-Zone is central to the deposit and is rimmed by the B-Zone and BD-Zone respectively. This relationship is more prevalent along the western margin ofthe deposit, where the BD-Zone is in contact with an unmineralized albite amphibole phlogopititeunit, which interfingers with and transitions to a calcio-carbonatite unit. A simplified illustration ofthe typical nature of the western contact is presented in Figure 7-5. Along the eastern margin of thedeposit, the B and BD zone relationship is more variable, with unmineralized calcio-carbonatitepredominantly marking the contact, with the albite amphibole phlogopitite unit noticeably absent. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 45 Figure 7-5: Western Contact SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 46Figure 7-6 displays a representative sample from each of the different mineralized zones as selectedby André Laferrière, Qualified Person for the March, 2011 initial resource estimate (Laferrière 2011),including the non-carbonatite western contact unit (albite amphibole phlogopitite). Other non-mineralized or poorly mineralized zones have been described within the deposit; however, theycomprise only a very minor volume and typically occur on the outer fringes of the system. Figure 7-6: Drill Core from Hole EC10-028 Showing the A, B, BD, and Contact ZoneA-ZoneThe A-Zone lithology is the largest unit by volume and surface footprint, and also the most highlymineralized of the Ashram Deposit (typically 1.5-3+% TREO). The unit is typically very fine-grained, light to dark olive-grey, and composed of clasts of breunnerite (magnesian siderite) plusfluorite, or fluorite plus monazite, set in a complex matrix of several generations of ferrodolomite.Fluorite is typically abundant and pervasive in the zone, occurring as disseminations, blebs, patches,veins, and fracture fillings. Accessory and trace minerals include apatite, pyrite, sphalerite,magnetite, xenotime, quartz, and niobium phases (niobium rutile, nioboaeschynite, ferrocolumbite,and niobium ilmenite). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 47The A-Zone is texturally complex yet mineralogically simple with monazite and lesser bastnäsite asthe dominant rare earth minerals. Monazite is present as disseminations in the ferrodolomite or asfluorite-monazite intergrowths present as clasts and schlieren in a matrix of ferrodolomite. Theserocks are heterogeneous on the local scale, with a highly variable fabric consisting of deformed,‘sheared’, colloform, and brecciated to pseudo-brecciated textures. Several phases of late-stageferro-carbonatite veins (several cms wide) are common, along with occasional later stage,unmineralized fracture-filled fluorite veining (several mms wide). Geochemically, the A-Zone maybe classified as magnesio- to ferro-carbonatite.The A-Zone is commonly in contact with the B-Zone with interfingering characteristics notuncommon. Both units share many similarities and at times appear to grade in and out of eachother. An ‘A/B Transition’ zone has been broadly recognised in several drill holes and is defined asmaterial that does not clearly fit into either A or B, yet shares many similarities to both units. TheA-Zone is also host to the MHREO Zone, which may be considered a subset of A-Zone typematerial, and does not appear to contact B-Zone material.MHREO-ZoneExtending from surface, within A-Zone material and central to the Ashram Deposit, is the MHREOZone displaying an intense enrichment in the middle and heavy rare earth elements (Figure 7-3 andFigure 7-4). The zone displays a marked increase in distribution for neodymium as well as themiddle and heavy rare earths, including the more critical rare earths europium, terbium, dysprosium,and yttrium. MHREO as a percentage of TREO is almost double that of the overall deposit, whilemaintaining significant grade. The zone also contains one of the highest distributions of europiumin the world.This unique zone of mineralization is dominated by large, fluorine-rich ferro-carbonatite dykes orbodies of near massive texture and dark olive-green to brown colour, and appears concentrated at ornear surface. The zone may be difficult to distinguish from surrounding A-Zone material due tosimilar colour, mineralogical and geochemical similarities, and therefore, often leaves grade anddistribution as the main parameters of evaluation.Xenotime-(Dy) is the principal contributor for the heavy rare earths and is present in either pools ofquartz or small veins (mm). Nioboaeschynite is typically present with the xenotime assemblage butis an insignificant contributor to the overall heavy rare earth enrichment. The zone’s rare earthdistributions and abundances may be reflective of a combination of increased xenotime and/or adecrease in fluorite-monazite phases.Very few carbonatites are host to REE deposits that are significantly enriched in the middle andheavy REEs, such as at Ashram, making the MHREO Zone an enigmatic yet highly favourableattribute.B-ZoneThe B-Zone unit typically comprises cataclastic ferrodolomites with coarser grain size and fewerfluorite-monazite clasts than the A-Zone. Visually, the B-Zone has a cream to grey colour with apervasive, yet patchy, yellow-beige hue of mineralization comprising monazite, apatite, andcarbonates. Patches of quartz-phlogopite are present with veins of niobian rutile, ferrocolumbite,and xenotime in association with quartz, phlogopite, and bafertisite also observed. Fluorite is SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 48present occasionally as locally abundant patches or blebs and may lend a bluish hue to the rockwhere present; sulphides are rare. Texturally, the B-Zone appears to be much less deformed andchaotic than the A-Zone with fewer variations in fabric present. The grade of rare earthmineralization in the B-Zone is somewhat variable compared to the A-Zone and typically rangesfrom 1-2+% TREO. Geochemically, the B-Zone may be classified as a magnesio-carbonatite.The B-Zone commonly has a gradational to sharp contact with the BD-Zone and is generally easilyrecognized by decreasing yellow-beige mineralization and the onset of distinct orange-pink rare earthfluorocarbonate minerals that impart a pinkish tone to the BD-Zone unit.BD-ZoneThe BD-Zone unit is typically cream to white in colour with orange-pink to red pervasive shadesfrom rare earth fluorocarbonate mineralization (intergrowths of parisite-bastnäsite with lessersynchysite), and is coarser grained than the A-Zone. The BD-Zone is visually and mineralogicallydistinct from the A and B zones. The unit typically comprises vuggy crystalline dolomite withcommon to abundant rare earth fluorocarbonates (parisite intergrowths with bastnäsite) and trace tominor phlogopite, quartz, calcite, and microcline; fluorite and monazite are absent to rare. The BD-zone may be highly blocky/fractured in some locales, and is more evident along the western marginsof the deposit. Texturally, the BD-Zone is similar to the B-Zone and is much less deformed that theA-Zone, with occasional banding evident. Mineralization of the BD-Zone is less than that of the Aand B zones, typically ranging from 0.6 – 1+% TREO, but with a distribution more enriched in Nd(>20%) as well as the middle and heavy rare earths. Geochemically, the BD-Zone may be classifiedas a magnesio-carbonatite.The BD-Zone is occasionally in gradational contact with a phlogopite carbonatite unit that is verysimilar is mineralogy and easily recognized by a decrease in orange-pink red fluorocarbonates andcorresponding increase in phlogopite. The unit is more typically found at depth and along theeastern edge of the deposit.Along the western margin of the deposit, the BD-Zone unit frequently lies in contact with a poorlyunderstood lithology best described as an albite amphibole phlogopite-rich unit, sometimesinterfingering with dolomite/calcite carbonatite. To the east, the BD-Zone is typically contacted byrelatively unmineralized dolomite carbonatite or calcio-carbonatite.Contact LithologiesThe main unmineralized contact lithologies may be generally grouped as an albite amphibolephlogopitite, ‘glimmerite’ or phlogopite schist, and magnetite amphibole calico-carbonatite.The albite amphibole phlogopitite is the typical outer western contact unit of the BD-Zone and ischaracterized by common brecciation of albite-rich clasts with partially phlogopitized rims, set in amatrix of cream coloured carbonatite. Large (several mm), blue, arfvedsonite crystals as well ascoarse-grained phlogopite are common. The unit is commonly intruded by a cream to white calico-carbonatite unit. The origin of the unit is enigmatic and it is interpreted to be a metasomatisedmega-xenolith or a discrete intrusion genetically related to the Eldor Carbonatite Complex. Thisunit has also been called ‘wallrock’ or ‘country rock’ although this may be a misnomer. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 49A ‘glimmerite’ may be loosely defined as a rock composed of 50% or more biotite. They are presentoccasionally within the deposit and most common in A-Zone type material. They are often foliated,giving a schistose appearance, contain common calcite/dolomite veining, and occasionally containalbite or quartz porphyroblasts. The unit is typically small, ranging from several centimetres toseveral metres in width and may represent fragments of altered country rock caught up in thecarbonatite intrusion.The magnetite amphibole calcio-carbonatite is most common on the peripheral of the system,surrounding most of the deposit. It is commonly interfingered with the albite amphibolephlogopitite to the west and typically borders the BD-Zone to the east. This unit is very commonelsewhere in the complex, with certain variations hosting niobium mineralization. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 508 Deposit TypesThe deposit model at the Eldor Property is the carbonatite-hosted REE-Nb-Ta deposit.Carbonatites are by definition igneous rocks, intrusive and extrusive, that contain more than 50% byvolume carbonate minerals such as calcite, dolomite, ankerite, and less often siderite and magnesite.Intrusive carbonatites occur commonly within alkalic complexes or as isolated intrusions (sills, dikes,breccias, or small plugs) that may not be genetically related to other alkaline intrusions. Carbonatitescan also be volcanic related and occur as flow or pyroclastic rocks like the well-known activeOldoinyo Lengai volcano in Tanzania. Carbonatites are generally related to large-scale, intra-platefractures, grabens, or rifts that correlate with periods of extension, typically Precambrian to recent inage.Carbonatite-hosted deposits occur almost exclusively in intrusive carbonatite and may be subdividedinto magmatic, replacement/veins, and residual sub-type. The Eldor Carbonatite can be classified asa magmatic sub-type, which is the same category as the St-Honore deposit in Quebec, Canada(Niobec niobium mine, Iamgold), the Mountain Pass Deposit in California, U.S.A. (REE), and thePalabora Deposit in South Africa (apatite).The pipe-like carbonatites typically occur as sub-circular or elliptical shapes and can be up to 3-4 kmin diameter. Magmatic mineralization within pipe-like carbonatites is commonly found in crescent-shape, steeply dipping zones. As carbonatite magma is typically volatile rich with low viscosity, itmay ascend rapidly through the mantle, fracturing the crust on impact, causing a characteristicalternating ring (crescent) structure of carbonatite and wall rock to be formed. Metasomaticmineralization occurs as irregular forms, breccias, or veins. Figure 8-1 illustrates the concentric,steeply dipping features of the pipe-like shapes of the St-Honore carbonatite. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 51 Figure 8-1: Schematic Representation of St-Honore Carbonatite1Carbonatites typically consist of multiple phases of intrusion with different mineralogical andtextural characteristics. Early phases tend to consist mainly of calcite with later phases mainlyconsisting of dolomite, ankerite, or siderite. The later phases are typically more enriched in niobiumor tantalum with the latest phases more enriched in rare earth minerals. In general, geochemicalzonation of carbonatite phases will have calcio carbonatite intruding first, followed by magnesiocarbonatite and finally ferro-carbonatite. Fenitization (alkali metasomatism) is common aroundmany carbonatite intrusions.1 Image from IAMGOLD website – March 2011 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 52The major mineral constituents are calcite, dolomite, siderite, ferroan calcite, ankerite as carbonates,and hematite, biotite, titanite, olivine, and quartz. Economic minerals include fluorite (F), apatite(P), pyrochlore (Nb), anatase (Ti), columbite (Nb-Ta), monazite (REE), bastnaesite (REE), parisite(REE), zircon (Zr), and magnesite (Mg), among others. Mineralization within carbonatites istypically syn- to post-intrusion. The mineralization is controlled primarily by fractionalcrystallization within the intrusion, with tectonic and local structures influencing the form ofmetasomatic mineralization (Woolley and Kempe, 1989; Richardson and Birkett, 1996; Birkett andSimandl, 1999).In addition to the carbonatite deposit model mineralized in REE-Nb-Ta, other deposit types withknown mineralized occurrences are located in the vicinity of the Property. The other deposit typesinclude magmatic Cu-Ni (Co-PGE) sulfides in mafic and ultramafic intrusive units, and vein-typeAu-Cu (Ag) mineralization hosted in fractured mafic intrusive.Known occurrences of magmatic Cu-Ni (Co-PGE) mineralization are located approximately 5 kmwest of the Property. The most significant occurrences include: Island deposit (historical resourcesof 1.09 Mt @ 2.02% Cu and 0.45% Ni), Lepage deposit (historical resources of 0.79 Mt @ 2.76%Cu and 0.66% Ni), Redcliff deposit (historical resources of 1.07 Mt @ 2.09% Cu and 0.51% Ni), andthe Marymac II deposit (historical resources of 0.93 Mt @ 1.60% Cu and 0.43% Ni).The known occurrences for the vein-type Au-Cu (Ag) mineralization, located between 10 km and 15km west of the Property, include the Lac Terre Rouge showing (grab sample with 24.75 g/t Au), theLac Daubancourt showing (grab sample with 14.3 g/t Au), and the Lac Deitrich-Sud showing (grabsample with 1.86 g/t Au) (Clark and Wares, 2006). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 539 ExplorationIn 2011 the Company embarked on an aggressive exploration program consisting of prospectingand rock sampling, soil sampling, trenching, ground and airborne geophysics, and diamond drilling.Exploration work focused on delineating the Ashram Rare Earth Deposit as well as outlining newgrassroots rare earth targets. The work was spread over two programs: a winter program (Feb –May 2011) and a summer-fall program (June – Dec 2011).The winter program consisted of diamond drilling and two (2) trenches completed late in the season.A ground gravity and magnetic survey was also completed over the Ashram Deposit at a line spacingof 100 m with stations every 25 m. The ground survey was successful in outlining a gravity anomalycoincident with the Ashram Deposit and supports the model of a moderate to steeply dipping sheet-like body. Bathymetry over Centre Pond was also completed and confirmed the shallow nature ofthe pond, rarely exceeding 2-3 m depth over the deposit.The main focus of the program was to complete step-out drilling over Centre Pond to betterdelineate the Ashram Deposit. In addition, one hole was drilled at a new target to the north ofAshram termed ‘Triple D’. A total of 3,656.42 m of drilling was completed over eight holes,including seven holes (3,367.16 m) at Ashram and one hole (289.26 m) at Triple D. Some of thebest results are as follows:Ashram Area EC11-048 – 586.06 m grading 2.10% TREO and 2.3% FTriple D EC11-055 – 10.00 m grading 1.38% TREO and 2.0% FDetails of the 2011 winter and summer/fall drilling program at the Ashram Rare Earth Deposit arepresented in Section 10: Drilling.The summer program picked up in late June, with a focus on rare earth element targets, andcomprised the bulk of the 2011 exploration work. Prospecting returned several hundredobservation points and rock samples, while focusing mainly on the central portions of the property.Three contiguous soil grids were completed, on 200 m spaced lines with stations spaced every 50 m,as infill to the larger regional soil grid completed in 2008 and 2010. A total of 1701 soils werecollected. In addition, due to the success of the ground gravity survey over the Ashram Deposit, a776 line-km airborne gravity gradiometer survey was completed over the complex at a spacing of200 m. The airborne data is currently being interpreted.The prospecting and soil sampling work was successful in identifying two new rare earth targetstermed ‘West Rim’ and ‘Beckling’, while further outlining previously identified prospects. Locationsof West Rim, Beckling, and other exploration targets/areas are outlined in Figure 9-1. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 54 Figure 9-1: Eldor Exploration Areas SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 55The West Rim Target is located approximately 800 m west of the Ashram Deposit on the margin ofthe complex and is coincident with a radiometric anomaly and regional soil anomaly. Prospectingreturned mineralized boulders and large areas of elevated background radioactivity commonlyassociated with rare earth element mineralization. Three small trenches were completed in the area,although failing to reach bedrock; several samples were collected from boulders within. The bestsamples from the area were of boulders with one assaying 2.27% TREO and another assaying 16.1%Nb2O5 and 0.754% Ta2O5. This second sample is the highest Nb-Ta mineralized sample everreturned from the Property and, based on local glacial trends, is likely sourced further south in thecomplex. Several >10% Nb2O5 boulder samples have been collected on the Property historically,however, the source has yet to be identified.One exploration drill hole (241.71 m) targeted the postulated source of the rare earth mineralizationat West Rim. It returned 1.96% TREO over 2.85 m within a larger ~175 m halo of intermittentlyanomalous mineralization up to 1.67% TREO. The drill hole is interpreted to have been collaredsouth of a larger postulated mineralized body.The Beckling Target is a carbonatite discovered in outcrop during soil sampling and is locatedapproximately 500 m outside the main complex as inferred by magnetics. It has very similarmineralogy to Ashram although displays a dominant schistose texture and more localized intensezones of fluorite. Four trenches were completed in the area with samples collected. The best assayreturned from the area was from an outcrop at 4.30% TREO and 20.1% F.Five short drill holes totalling 681.22 m were completed at Beckling. The best intersection returned1.36% TREO and 2.3% F over 10.45 m. Although prospecting and soil sampling indicated a sizablepotential target, limited rare earth mineralization was intersected at depth. The area is interpreted tobe host to a series of near surface boudinaged lenses of carbonatite, thus, limiting intersectionlengths. In addition, the rare earth distribution of Beckling appears similar to Ashram withenrichment in neodymium and europium. Regional soil geochemical results suggest a sizeable rareearth mineralized carbonatite with an elevated MHREO distribution may exist east of the maincomplex. Beckling may represent a northern boudinaged portion of such a body. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 5610 DrillingSince the Company acquired the Eldor Property in 2007 a total of four diamond drill programs havebeen completed; 2008, 2010, 2011 (winter), and 2011 (summer-fall). No historic drilling wascompleted on the property prior to Commerce’s acquisition of the Property. Table-10-1 belowsummarizes the drilling program attributes. Table 10-1: Drilling Program Attributes Year Area of the Property Number of Holes Total Metres Drilled Northwest 12 2466.12 Southeast 13 2846.17 2008 Star Trench 1 170.00 Total (2008) 26 5482.29 Ashram 12 3312.67 MC Exposure 2 192.00 2010 Southeast 4 1391.65 Star Trench 3 493.66 Total (2010) 21 5389.98 Ashram 33 12379.07 Beckling 5 681.22 2011 Triple D 2 474.32 West Rim 1 241.71 Total (2011) 41 13776.32 Grand-Total 88 24648.59All non-Ashram drill holes are BTW in size and completed with a Super 300 drill rig. All Ashramdrill holes are either BTW in size and completed with a Super 300 or CDI 500 drill rig, or NQ in sizeand completed with a Zinex A5 drill rig. All drill rigs are heli-portable. The Zinex A5 drill, capableof drilling NQ diametre core to depths in excess of 700 m, was mobilized to the property as mostBTW holes at Ashram bottomed in mineralization due to the depth limitations of the Super 300drill.As with most large vertical to near-vertical pipe-like intrusive bodies, the dip of the body becomesless apparent towards the interior, and thus, vertical drilling intersections may be near to truethickness at this locale, as opposed to the edges of the same pipe-like intrusion where a moreapparent thickness may be returned for the same drill hole orientation. This concept is applicable tothe Ashram Deposit. The Ashram Deposit is texturally complex and chaotic with no dominantfabric clearly evident within the central A-Zone that comprises the bulk of the deposit. Althoughthe A-Zone is rimmed by the B and BD zones that show a less chaotic fabric with bandingoccasionally evident, only a minor portion of the deposit is comprised of those units. Therefore,determining the true thickness of most drill holes is not clearly evident and may be highly variableover short distances. In other words, the orientation of mineralization within the deposit is notconsistent with the geometry of the deposit, and thus, true thickness of drill intersections cannot yetbe reasonably determined.Attributes for individual drill holes completed at the Ashram Deposit, including relevant mineralizedintersections, are presented in Table 10-2 to Table 10-5 below. Ashram drill hole locations arepresented in Figure 10-1. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 57 Figure 10-1: Ashram Drill Hole Locations SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 58 Table 10-2: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 1/4 NAD83, Zone 19 Drill Hole Core From Interval MHREO Year Easting Northing Azi (°) Dip (°) EOH (m) To (m) TREO (%) F (%) ID Size (m) (m) (% of TREO) 2010 EC10-027 536391 6312024 230.0 -48.6 BTW 293.71 3.74 219.04 215.30 1.72 7.0 3.5 incl. 105.59 135.07 29.48 2.07 6.2 4.0 2010 EC10-028 536351 6312062 232.6 -47.2 BTW 284.16 2.53 246.37 243.84 1.95 7.1 2.5 incl. 38.25 68.24 29.99 2.40 7.0 3.9 incl. 130.58 158.90 28.32 2.41 6.3 3.5 2010 EC10-029 536341 6311978 238.3 -38.8 BTW 220.37 3.18 132.21 129.03 1.50 7.0 3.3 incl. 3.18 24.64 21.46 1.91 7.3 6.9 incl. 38.16 115.00 76.84 1.61 6.2 4.2 2010 EC10-030 536142 6312085 226.5 -46.2 BTW 102.18 7.10 62.61 55.51 1.97 6.2 4.1 incl. 7.10 50.00 42.90 2.15 6.1 4.9 or 28.00 32.10 4.10 3.03 4.4 7.4 2010 EC10-031 536142 6312085 227.7 -63.3 BTW 117.00 6.83 82.96 76.13 1.89 6.0 3.4 incl. 11.00 65.20 54.20 2.09 5.8 4.0 2010 EC10-039 536761 6312089 229.9 -73.2 BTW 348.96 1.00 348.96 347.96 0.86 8.3 1.4 incl. 251.69 348.96 97.27 1.27 7.5 0.5 2010 EC10-042 536498 6311989 230.2 -43.8 BTW 286.78 9.48 286.78 277.30 1.13 9.3 1.7 incl. 32.64 95.18 62.54 1.60 9.3 3.5 incl. 208.92 215.16 6.24 2.09 5.4 2.5 2010 EC10-043 536502 6311992 50.0 -44.0 BTW 378.51 10.68 378.51 367.83 0.88 11.2 1.4 incl. 55.88 105.12 49.24 1.22 8.7 1.8 2010 EC10-044 536304 6312131 240.2 -43.5 BTW 242.85 3.00 242.66 239.66 1.78 8.8 3.5 incl. 158.54 229.65 71.11 2.19 5.6 3.1 26.81 46.61 19.80 1.38 12.0 3.7 87.27 158.54 71.27 1.62 13.6 3.9 incl. 87.27 104.40 17.13 1.39 18.2 2.9 2010 EC10-045 536304 6312131 197.5 -88.7 BTW 314.48 5.30 314.48 309.18 1.99 7.3 2.6 incl. 121.39 294.28 172.89 2.30 6.2 2.7 or 195.61 249.00 53.39 2.51 5.4 2.9 16.95 82.17 65.22 1.43 11.2 2.7 incl. 63.17 82.17 19.00 1.53 13.2 2.5 2010 EC10-046 536163 6312235 227.7 -89.1 BTW 364.97 0.65 364.97 364.32 1.95 6.5 2.8 incl. 55.15 358.57 303.42 2.02 6.3 2.8 or 350.22 358.57 8.35 3.00 3.0 1.4 2010 EC10-047 536193 6312131 7.1 -89.0 BTW 358.70 2.86 358.70 355.84 1.86 8.4 3.2 incl. 69.70 331.81 262.11 2.04 6.7 3.2 or 245.82 331.81 85.99 2.24 4.6 2.6 2.86 122.17 119.31 1.63 14.6 4.2 incl. 6.00 67.19 61.19 1.41 19.1 4.6 2011 EC11-048 536306 6312238 273.5 -89.2 BTW 593.75 7.69 593.75 586.06 2.10 5.7 2.3 incl. 223.39 361.89 138.50 2.37 5.0 1.0 or 223.39 263.09 39.70 2.45 5.0 1.1 or 312.40 336.75 24.35 2.58 4.7 0.8 incl. 491.37 499.22 7.85 3.00 3.2 4.8 incl. 523.67 560.66 36.99 3.00 3.2 2.3 23.96 27.26 3.30 1.74 12.2 4.3 163.39 170.76 7.37 1.89 11.6 4.3 2011 EC11-049 536460 6312362 32.9 -89.3 BTW 323.09 7.06 323.09 316.03 1.06 7.4 0.8 incl. 7.06 243.00 235.94 0.80 8.6 0.6 incl. 243.00 323.09 80.09 1.85 5.9 1.2 or 308.00 323.09 15.09 2.01 4.2 1.7 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 59 Table 10-3: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 2/4 NAD83, Zone 19 Drill Hole Core From Interval MHREO Year Easting Northing Azi (°) Dip (°) EOH (m) To (m) TREO (%) F (%) ID Size (m) (m) (% of TREO) 2011 EC11-050 536448 6312222 338.0 -89.0 BTW 600.46 15.00 600.46 585.46 1.42 7.7 1.3 incl. 165.54 234.82 69.28 2.04 6.1 3.7 incl. 439.31 478.35 39.04 2.01 4.7 0.8 incl. 590.72 600.46 9.74 2.80 4.8 3.3 238.42 273.11 34.69 1.48 10.7 1.3 292.13 298.00 5.87 1.09 14.0 0.4 305.65 377.78 72.13 1.23 12.5 0.8 incl. 305.65 325.72 20.07 1.57 11.8 0.5 398.56 406.37 7.81 1.23 15.7 0.4 425.09 430.78 5.69 1.04 13.7 0.4 2011 EC11-051 536333 6312373 68.0 -88.8 BTW 563.60 9.14 563.60 554.46 1.86 6.3 2.2 incl. 25.00 479.63 454.63 2.00 5.9 2.5 or 389.00 479.63 90.63 2.37 5.3 1.5 or 425.25 432.50 7.25 3.01 4.2 5.8 133.52 138.75 5.23 1.39 15.2 1.5 224.26 230.96 6.70 1.82 11.7 1.4 290.16 301.44 11.28 0.94 14.9 1.3 500.41 514.94 14.53 0.83 22.7 0.3 2011 EC11-052 536434 6312078 62.3 -87.4 BTW 353.57 6.85 353.57 346.72 1.44 8.1 2.2 incl. 6.85 243.84 236.99 1.67 7.6 3.0 or 126.00 243.84 117.84 2.02 7.0 3.5 or 202.89 227.91 25.02 2.34 6.5 3.4 incl. 243.84 353.57 109.73 0.94 9.7 0.4 109.60 116.05 6.45 1.44 12.3 4.4 2011 EC11-053 536237 6312190 215.3 -89.8 BTW 384.05 6.81 384.05 377.24 2.00 6.8 2.5 incl. 133.24 172.00 38.76 2.35 6.4 3.5 incl. 250.92 273.22 22.30 2.44 5.5 1.1 incl. 361.08 377.47 16.39 2.46 3.9 1.1 or 367.46 372.36 4.90 2.95 3.5 1.5 6.81 39.56 32.75 1.37 12.0 3.2 2011 EC11-054 536330 6312515 243.7 -87.2 BTW 548.64 9.93 548.64 538.71 1.30 5.8 1.3 incl. 9.93 305.10 295.17 0.73 10.0 0.6 incl. 305.10 548.64 243.54 1.99 4.0 1.7 or 468.95 474.62 5.67 2.97 2.6 1.2 or 511.46 548.64 37.18 2.83 3.2 3.6 or 526.37 548.64 22.27 3.00 3.1 4.0 2011 EC11-056 536147 6312142 235.6 -45.0 BTW 274.82 2.14 114.14 112.00 1.89 8.8 3.8 incl. 50.27 78.08 27.81 2.31 5.5 4.3 5.71 50.27 44.56 1.76 13.6 5.0 incl. 5.71 25.05 19.34 1.62 19.2 3.0 or 7.04 19.30 12.26 1.28 25.8 1.9 2011 EC11-057 536148 6312142 164.4 -89.4 BTW 444.93 1.32 344.36 343.04 1.93 6.7 2.5 incl. 1.32 280.54 279.22 2.06 6.6 2.9 or 261.81 280.54 18.73 2.89 3.0 1.6 335.78 344.36 8.58 2.25 3.7 1.4 18.06 25.06 7.00 1.83 13.2 2.5 77.54 116.82 39.28 1.62 11.9 3.8 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 60 Table 10-4: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 3/4 NAD83, Zone 19 Drill Hole Core From Interval MHREO Year Easting Northing Azi (°) Dip (°) EOH (m) To (m) TREO (%) F (%) ID Size (m) (m) (% of TREO) 2011 EC11-058 536105 6312163 229.0 -44.0 BTW 203.30 2.95 60.10 57.15 1.83 6.3 3.6 incl. 14.22 52.50 38.28 2.10 5.5 4.0 2.95 14.22 11.27 1.31 10.2 3.7 2011 EC11-059 536104 6312163 223.0 -89.0 BTW 447.45 0.68 289.29 288.61 2.03 5.4 2.8 incl. 34.14 157.55 123.41 2.47 4.6 4.6 or 119.76 157.55 37.79 2.69 3.8 5.5 0.68 32.20 31.52 1.61 11.2 3.5 2011 EC11-060 536101 6312215 235.1 -45.2 BTW 142.34 4.57 61.03 56.46 2.05 6.6 3.9 incl. 32.00 61.03 29.03 2.24 5.5 3.6 23.79 32.00 8.21 1.49 11.4 3.4 2011 EC11-061 536102 6312215 233.3 -75.8 BTW 351.75 4.03 166.27 162.24 1.48 7.0 1.9 incl. 4.03 72.85 68.82 1.72 8.0 3.0 incl. 149.04 166.27 17.23 2.37 3.7 1.0 2011 EC11-062 536253 6312050 233.7 -45.1 BTW 221.59 4.20 130.53 126.33 1.49 9.4 3.0 incl. 74.14 103.12 28.98 1.88 6.7 3.1 4.20 47.52 43.32 1.40 13.1 3.7 2011 EC11-063 536253 6312051 231.6 -73.2 BTW 411.18 3.89 219.38 215.49 1.78 7.6 3.2 incl. 76.34 158.32 81.98 2.05 6.4 3.0 incl. 201.00 209.75 8.75 3.03 2.7 1.9 3.89 76.34 72.45 1.41 12.7 4.8 2011 EC11-064 536239 6312316 221.8 -88.7 NQ 657.75 2.87 493.92 491.05 2.04 5.8 2.6 incl. 357.86 389.00 31.14 2.66 4.0 0.8 incl. 442.00 454.64 12.64 3.00 3.4 0.8 92.07 96.21 4.14 1.86 12.6 2.4 2011 EC11-065 536238 6312316 321.8 -45.1 NQ 315.76 3.85 114.77 110.92 1.67 6.8 2.9 incl. 3.85 42.41 38.56 1.89 7.0 3.4 incl. 67.72 92.00 24.28 2.15 3.9 3.9 42.41 52.23 9.82 1.09 16.0 1.4 2011 EC11-066 536414 6312581 246.3 -45.5 NQ 512.98 67.97 494.43 426.46 0.61 10.7 1.1 2011 EC11-068 536415 6312581 240.1 -45.2 NQ 619.96 272.13 562.16 290.03 1.95 5.0 1.8 incl. 277.53 496.27 218.74 2.20 4.7 2.2 or 419.15 460.11 40.96 2.54 4.2 4.1 2011 EC11-073 536219 6312089 241.0 -46.5 BTW 224.64 3.41 135.74 132.33 1.75 8.8 3.4 incl. 71.80 108.95 37.15 2.24 6.0 3.2 3.41 55.43 52.02 1.32 14.9 3.4 2011 EC11-074 536192 6312131 245.5 -44.3 BTW 178.92 4.07 140.19 136.12 1.79 7.4 3.9 incl. 7.55 37.89 30.34 2.06 7.5 5.8 incl. 78.94 120.65 41.71 2.23 5.2 3.9 4.07 8.58 4.51 1.42 15.0 4.2 37.89 77.83 39.94 1.47 10.4 3.5 2011 EC11-075 536246 6312124 235.8 -45.3 BTW 212.45 4.85 191.13 186.28 1.77 9.2 3.9 incl. 129.71 186.10 56.39 2.20 5.6 2.7 4.85 109.04 104.19 1.54 12.7 4.4 incl. 7.68 23.20 15.52 1.15 15.4 3.2 incl. 44.40 66.02 21.62 1.36 14.4 3.2 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 61 Table 10-5: Drill Hole Attributes (Ashram Deposit) 4/4 NAD83, Zone 19 Drill Hole Core From Interval MHREO Year Easting Northing Azi (°) Dip (°) EOH (m) To (m) TREO (%) F (%) ID Size (m) (m) (% of TREO) 2011 EC11-076 536219 6312089 - - NQ 70.16 Ended Prematurely, Will be Used for Metallurgy 2011 EC11-076A 536219 6312089 155.2 -89.5 NQ 499.26 2.19 385.22 383.03 1.56 8.9 2.5 incl. 250.00 313.89 63.89 2.08 4.5 1.2 2.19 178.62 176.43 1.56 12.3 3.7 incl. 3.05 51.96 48.91 1.46 14.2 3.6 incl. 53.36 92.07 38.71 2.03 11.7 5.5 2011 EC11-077 536123 6312256 237.5 -45.4 BTW 212.45 3.00 118.23 115.23 1.71 7.4 3.2 incl. 23.74 87.92 64.18 1.96 7.3 4.2 4.71 13.66 8.95 1.06 11.9 1.1 2011 EC11-078 536123 6312256 - - BTW 17.53 Ended Prematurely, Will be Used for Metallurgy 2011 EC11-078A 536123 6312256 235.9 -75.5 BTW 306.93 5.17 259.88 254.71 1.92 5.4 2.3 incl. 30.10 166.58 136.48 2.21 5.2 2.4 or 156.94 166.58 9.64 3.06 3.2 1.4 2011 EC11-079 536245 6312124 63.5 -88.6 NQ 587.65 3.40 482.80 479.40 1.86 6.5 2.6 incl. 3.40 395.80 392.40 2.03 6.5 3.1 or 111.77 249.33 137.56 2.24 6.5 2.9 or 356.08 390.45 34.37 2.34 3.6 2.4 16.77 71.21 54.44 1.77 10.6 4.5 incl. 48.59 64.24 15.65 1.58 13.2 3.4 110.15 115.87 5.72 2.14 12.6 5.4 2011 EC11-082 536139 6312197 88.1 -89.3 NQ 426.11 4.19 325.95 321.76 2.05 6.2 2.7 incl. 282.08 325.02 42.94 2.26 4.0 2.3 325.95 426.11 100.16 1.03 7.7 0.7 2011 EC11-083 536138 6312196 223.0 -45.6 NQ 206.04 2.12 154.93 152.81 1.80 7.1 2.1 incl. 2.12 90.80 88.68 2.14 7.1 2.9 24.59 30.89 6.30 1.82 11.7 3.8 45.88 50.81 4.93 1.88 10.5 0.9 51.55 54.61 3.06 1.83 10.4 2.5 56.40 58.90 2.50 1.97 9.5 3.7 139.26 144.18 4.92 1.15 11.9 0.8 2011 EC11-084 536164 6312166 -7.1 -89.7 NQ 520.53 3.10 400.17 397.07 1.83 6.6 2.8 incl. 3.10 328.41 325.31 1.96 6.6 3.2 or 208.42 260.67 52.25 2.26 4.5 2.2 56.30 84.00 27.70 1.77 9.6 2.9 104.93 110.20 5.27 1.96 11.1 2.9 124.61 130.37 5.76 1.40 11.7 4.3 147.75 157.12 9.37 1.33 10.4 2.6 171.60 181.59 9.99 1.66 10.7 3.7 359.05 364.85 5.80 1.07 10.8 0.8 2011 EC11-085 536163 6312165 227.7 -45.3 NQ 187.70 3.66 148.18 144.52 1.94 7.2 3.2 incl. 28.53 118.91 90.38 2.21 7.1 3.6 13.43 16.87 3.44 1.54 11.5 5.4 37.80 56.62 18.82 2.05 10.7 4.4 143.20 146.42 3.22 1.16 11.2 0.7 2011 EC11-086 536669 6312463 233.9 -45.3 NQ 757.73 368.69 757.73 389.04 1.61 6.1 1.1 incl. 582.17 662.73 80.56 2.14 5.4 1.4 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 62Collared in 2010, drill hole EC10-27 is the ‘discovery hole’ of the Ashram Rare Earth Deposit. Thedrill hole targeted rare earth mineralization in outcrop discovered during prospecting in 2009. Intotal, 12 holes (3,312.67 m) were completed at Ashram during the 2010 program and formed thebasis of the initial resource estimate of 117 MT at 1.74% TREO, in the inferred category, at a 1.25%cut-off grade (Laferrière, 2011). The 2010 program also identified a unique zone of MHREOenrichment centred on drill hole EC10-047 returning 61.19 m of 19.1% MHREO (% of TREO) at1.41% TREO.An additional seven drill holes were completed at Ashram during the winter of 2011. The focus ofthe program was to complete step-out drilling over Centre Pond to better delineate the AshramDeposit. A total of seven holes were completed on Centre Pond, totalling 3,367.16 m. Theprogram was successful in expanding the limits of the Ashram Deposit with EC11-048 returningone of the longest and most consistently mineralized intersections to date; 586.06 m grading 2.10%TREO and 2.3% F.During the summer-fall of 2011, an expanded drilling program was initiated at the deposit with 33drill holes totalling 12,379.07 m completed. The goal of the program was to further define theextent of the mineralized system, as well as infill drill in order to upgrade part of the resource to theindicated category. The program was successful in further expanding the mineralized extent of thedeposit, as well as further delineating the extent of the MHREO Zone. A large portion of the initialinferred resources was also successfully upgraded to indicated status.Most of the drilling competed to date at Ashram has focused along the western flank of the depositas the remainder is covered by a shallow pond and only accessible during the winter. As such, thegeology and geometry of the deposit is less well-constrained outside this area.To date, a total of 45 holes (15,691.74 m) have been completed at Ashram over three drillingprograms. Drilling currently outlines a mineralized surface footprint of approximately 700 metresalong strike, over 500 metres across, and to depths exceeding 600 metres. Mineralization remainsopen to the north, south, at depth, and is not fully constrained to the west and east. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 6311 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security 11.1 Sampling Method and ApproachThis section is based on information supplied by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, andobservations made during the independent verification program conducted at the Project site by theauthor Gaston Gagnon, Eng. accompanied by Robert De l’Étoile, Eng. from SGS Geostat betweenSeptember 18 and 20, 2011.The Company contracted Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. for the management of theexploration work for the Eldor Property. Exploration work at the Property is managed from a fieldcamp which provides the office, core logging, and core storage facilities for the Project.The evaluation of the geological setting and mineralization on the Property includes observationsand sampling from surface (through mapping, grab samples, and trenches) but is principally basedon information and sampling from diamond drilling. The drill core logging and sampling wasconducted at the Property. All samples collected by Dahrouge during the course of the 2010 and2011 exploration programs were sent to Activation Laboratories Ltd (Actlabs) in Ancaster, Ontario,for preparation and analysis. The remaining drill core is currently stored at the storage facilitieslocated at the Eldor main camp.All drill core handling was done on site with logging and sampling processes conducted byemployees and contractors of Commerce or Dahrouge. The observations of lithology, structure,mineralization, sample number, and location were recorded by the geologists and geotechnicians inhard copy then compiled in MS Excel. Copies of the database are stored on external hard drive forsecurity and merged with main Dahrouge office server periodically throughout the program.Drill core of BTW and NQ sizes were placed in wooden core boxes and collected twice a day at thedrill site then transported to the core logging facilities. The drill core was first aligned and measuredby a technician for core recovery and other geotechnical attributes. After a summary review of thecore by the senior geologist, it was logged and sampling intervals were defined by a geologist. Inaddition, a brief description of each individual sample was completed prior to sampling. Also priorto sampling, the core was photographed using a digital camera in natural light and UV light (blacklight) to outline the florescent minerals. The core boxes were identified with Box Number, Hole ID,From, and To using aluminum tags.Sampling intervals were determined by the geologist based on observations of the lithology andmineralization. In addition to naked eye examination, the geologists also use a portable XRFanalyser, a handheld magnetic susceptibility/conductivity probe, a handheld gamma-rayscintillometer, and a handheld spectrometer to help identify the lithologies and define themineralized intervals. The typical sampling length is 1 m but can vary according to lithologicalvariation within the mineralized carbonatite. The drill core samples were cut using a core saw intotwo halves with one half placed in a new plastic bag along with the sample tag; the other half wasleft in the core box for future reference. SGS noted that Dahrouge was not placing systematically aduplicate sample tag in the core box. It was recommended to make the procedure consistent forfuture reference. This practice was adopted immediately following the site visit. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 64The remaining duplicate sample tag was archived with the Project documents. The samples werethen catalogued and placed in sealed pails for shipping. The sample shipment forms were preparedon site with one copy inserted in one of the shipment pails and one copy kept for reference. Thesamples were transported on a regular basis by Commerce or Dahrouge employees or contractorsusing two preferred routes. The first shipping route consisted in sending the samples on charteredfloat plane to Kuujjuaq, using First Air Cargo to Montreal then ground transportation to Actlabs atAncaster, Ontario. The second route was through Schefferville using float plane, by train to Sept-Iles then ground transportation to Ancaster. The remaining core samples kept for reference arestored in cross piles at the main camp.SGS Geostat validated the exploration processes and core sampling procedures used by Dahrouge,on Commerce’s behalf, as part of an independent verification program. SGS Geostat concluded thatthe drill core handling, logging and sampling protocols are at conventional industry or betterstandards and conform to generally accepted best practices. The author considers that the samplesquality is good and that the samples are generally representative. Finally, SGS Geostat is confidentthat the system is appropriate for the collection of data suitable for the estimation of a NI 43-101compliant mineral resource estimate. 11.2 Sample Preparation and AnalysesDrill core samples collected during the 2010 and 2011 exploration programs are transported byCommerce representatives and contracted consultants or companies to Actlabs laboratory facilitiesin Ancaster, Ontario for sample preparation and analysis.All samples received at Actlabs are inventoried and typically weighted. Drying is done to sampleshaving excess humidity. Sample material is crushed in a jaw and/or roll crusher to 70% passing 2mm then split with a rifle splitter to obtain a sub-sample which is then pulverised to 95% passing200 mesh using a single component (flying disk) or a two component (ring and puck) ring mill. Thepulp material is then analysed using lithium metaborate/tetraborate fusion followed by InductivelyCoupled Plasma (ICP) for the major oxides and by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry(ICP-MS) for a series of 57 elements which include the REEs (Actlabs code 8-REE package byfusion ICP and ICP/MS). In 2011, the Nb2O5 was systematically analysed by fusion X-rayfluorescence (XRF). The element F is analysed using fusion ion selective electrode (ISE) (Actlabscode 4-F-ISE). The Actlabs Ancaster facility is an accredited laboratory under ISO/IEC 17025standards.In 2010, the re-analysis of the pulp materials was conducted by ALS Group (ALS) in NorthVancouver, B.C., with the exception of EC10-028 which was completed by InspectorateExploration & Mining Services Ltd. – Analytical Division Facilities (Inspectorate) in Richmond, B.C.In 2011, only ALS Group was used. The pulp samples sent to ALS were analysed by lithiummetaborate fusion followed by ICP-MS using packages ME-MS81h. Fluorine was analyzed bypackage F-ELE81a or F-ELE82 depending on abundance. All ALS samples were first homogenizedusing package ROL-21 prior to analysis. The ALS Vancouver facility is ISO/IEC 17025 and9001:2008 accredited. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 65The independent check samples (40 samples plus 5 QA/QC) were analysed at the SGS Canada Inc.– Minerals Services laboratory located in Toronto, Ontario (SGS Minerals). The samples werecrushed, riffle split, then pulverised to 200 mesh. The pulps are then analysed using lithiummetaborate followed by ICP-MS (SGS Minerals code IMS91B). Also method code ISE07A wasemployed for the determination of the fluorine (F). SGS Minerals is an accredited laboratory underISO/IEC 17025 standards.The analytical protocols for Actlabs, SGS Minerals, and ALS are detailed in Appendix C. 11.3 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ProcedureIn addition to the laboratory quality assurance quality control protocol (QA/QC) routinelyconducted by Actlabs using pulp duplicate analysis, Dahrouge on behalf of Commerce implementedan internal QA/QC protocol consisting of the insertion of certified reference materials as analyticalstandards, quartz blanks, and core duplicates on a systematic basis with samples shipped to Actlabs.The insertion rate of these QA/QC materials is approximately 4.5% of the total samples collected.The Company also sent pulps from each drill hole covering low, medium, and high mineralisedsamples to ALS for re-analysis at a rate of approximately 5%. SGS Geostat did not visit the Actlabsfacilities, or conduct an audit of the laboratories. However, chief geologist and Project manager,Darren L. Smith, did visit the Ancaster facilities during March of 2012.11.3.1 Analytical Certified Reference MaterialsThree certified reference materials (CRMs): TRM-2, SX18-01, and SX18-05 were used for the 2011drill program. The certificates for SX18-01 and SX18-05, from Dillinger Hutte Laboratory inGermany, list analytical results for Y, La, Ce, and Nd that can be used to validate assays for theresource. After a thorough examination of the few existing rare earth CRMs, Commerce determinedthat TRM-2 was the most suitable. Although enriched in the light rare earth elements (La-Nd) TRM-2 reports values for the mid and heavy rare earths similar to that of the deposit as well as having acarbonatite matrix unlike many of the alternative REE CRMs. Material number TRM-2 comes fromCentral Geological Laboratory of Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia; the TRM-2 CRM, new in 2011, hascertified Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Yb and Lu. Only Tm is absent. The CRMsare inserted into the sample series at a rate of one for every 25 samples, or approximately 4.5% ofsamples collected, not including duplicates.On a side note, a four lab round robin survey for the main REE reference material TRM-2 wascompleted by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, during 2011 in order to investigate why theanalytical values for many of the rare earth elements returned by Actlabs were below their certifiedvalues for that CRM. Data from the round robin survey suggests that the certified analytical valuesfor many of the rare earth elements in TRM-2 are too high and that further analytical work shouldbe carried out to confirm and generate industry accepted provisional values for primary use. Similiarresults were found for SX18-01 and SX18-05; however, they are expected to be discontinued as rareearth CRMs as they are primarily recognised as a niobium CRM. Despite the results of the roundrobin survey it is recognized that the certified values take precedence and are therefore used in thisreport. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 66Since the standard deviations, used to outline the warning and failure fields, are not listed on theoriginal analytical certificates for the three CRMs, percentile ranges were used. As suggested by theProjects former QP, Andre Laferrière of SGS Geostat, a ±10% deviation from the certified valuesignified a warning and a ±15% signified a failure. Table 11-1 shows the expected values andQA/QC failure and warning thresholds, and Table 11-2 summarises the reported results for eachanalytical CRM. Figure 11-1 to Figure 11-5 are graphs showing the variation of the reportedanalytical results with time for analytical CRMs TRM-2, SX18-01, and SX18-05. Table 11-1: Expected Values and QA/QC Ranges of SX18-01, SX18-05, and TRM-2 Analytical CRMs for Y and REEs Expected Values and QAQC Ranges Standard Element Failure Warning Expected Warning Failure (-15%) (-10%) Value (+10%) (+15%) Y (ppm) 815 863 959 1055 1103 La (ppm) 16405 17370 19300 21230 22195 Ce (ppm) 24650 26100 29000 31900 33350 Pr (ppm) 2380 2520 2800 3080 3220 Nd (ppm) 7480 7920 8800 9680 10120 Sm (ppm) 765 810 900 990 1035 Eu (ppm) 179 190 211 232 243 TRM-2 Gd (ppm) 470 498 553 608 636 Tb (ppm) 46 49 55 60 63 Dy (ppm) 175 185 206 227 237 Ho (ppm) 31.1 32.9 37 40.3 42.1 Er (ppm) 68 72 80 87 91 Tm (ppm) NA NA NA NA NA Yb (ppm) 46 49 55 60 63 Lu (ppm) 6.5 6.9 8 8.4 8.8 Expected Values and QAQC Ranges Standard Element Failure Warning Expected Warning Failure (-15%) (-10%) Value (+10%) (+15%) Y (ppm) 114 121 134 147 154 La (ppm) 304 322 358 394 412 Ce (ppm) 657 696 773 850 889 SX18-01 Pr (ppm) NA NA NA NA NA Nd (ppm) 371 393 437 481 503 Sm to Lu NA NA NA NA NA Expected Values and QAQC Ranges Standard Element Failure Warning Expected Warning Failure (-15%) (-10%) Value (+10%) (+15%) Y (ppm) 197 209 232 255 267 La (ppm) 426 451 501 551 576 Ce (ppm) 886 938 1042 1146 1198 SX18-05 Pr (ppm) NA NA NA NA NA Nd (ppm) 434 460 511 562 588 Sm to Lu NA NA NA NA NA SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 67 Table 11-2: Statistics of SX18-01, SX18-05, and TRM-2 Analytical CRMs for Y and REEs Period Element Observed Relative Warnings FailuresStandard Count From To (unit) Mean Std dev. Min Max Difference Count Rate Count Rate Y (ppm) 282 913.362 50.6472 242 1055 -5% 7 2% 2 1% La (ppm) 282 17916.5 1150.49 466 19700 -7% 20 7% 2 1% Ce (ppm) 282 28122.6 1880.89 981 31000 -3% 4 1% 1 0% Pr (ppm) 282 2588.26 172.909 110 2970 -8% 46 16% 3 1% Nd (ppm) 282 8041.38 526.034 429 9060 -9% 66 23% 6 2% Sm (ppm) 282 851.477 53.1877 82.5 915 -5% 17 6% 2 1% Eu (ppm) 282 196.049 12.1292 23.9 216 -7% 30 11% 3 1% TRM-2 18-Apr-11 18-Apr-11 Gd (ppm) 282 465.14 40.9606 60.5 692 -16% 104 37% 148 52% Tb (ppm) 282 40.1376 3.17982 8.6 49.4 -26% 5 2% 276 98% Dy (ppm) 282 167.35 9.51722 44.6 185 -19% 28 10% 254 90% Ho (ppm) 282 26.517 1.56439 8.1 29.9 -28% 0 0% 282 100% Er (ppm) 282 65.9599 4.44063 22.3 76.3 -17% 69 24% 197 70% Yb (ppm) 282 49.9929 2.93065 17.6 58.7 -8% 71 25% 6 2% Lu (ppm) 282 7.24816 0.41639 2.4 8.77 -5% 18 6% 2 1% Period Element Observed Relative Warnings FailuresStandard Count From To (unit) Mean Std dev. Min Max Difference Count Rate Count Rate Y (ppm) 49 121.082 5.2434 112 149 -10% 21 43% 2 4% La (ppm) 49 363.571 12.4281 336 398 2% 2 4% 0 0% SX18-01 18-Apr-11 14-Dec-11 Ce (ppm) 49 801.673 24.1285 730 862 4% 1 2% 0 0% Nd (ppm) 49 378.837 11.2442 356 401 -13% 31 63% 13 27% Period Element Observed Relative Warnings FailuresStandard Count From To (unit) Mean Std dev. Min Max Difference Count Rate Count Rate Y (ppm) 189 226.138 5.86571 210 245 -3% 0 0% 0 0% La (ppm) 189 464.392 20.6831 342 522 -7% 45 24% 1 1% SX18-05 18-Apr-11 09-Dec-11 Ce (ppm) 189 985.81 41.9434 721 1110 -5% 14 7% 1 1% Nd (ppm) 189 441.952 18.1996 333 486 -14% 106 56% 57 30% SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 68 Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Y) Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (La) 1220 23000 Failure +15 % 1170 22000 Failure +15 % Warning +10 % 1120 21000 Warning +10 % 1070 20000 Expected Value 1020 La (ppm) 19000 Y (ppm) Expected Value 970 18000 920 17000 Warning -10 % 870 Warning -10 % 16000 Failure -15 % 820 Failure -15 % 770 15000 720 14000 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Ce) Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Pr) 36250 3300 Failure +15 % 3200 34800 Warning +10 % Failure +15 % 3100 33350 3000 Warning +10 % 31900 2900 Expected Value 30450 2800 Ce (ppm) Pr (ppm) Expected Value 2700 29000 2600 27550 2500 Warning -10 % 26100 2400 Warning -10 % Failure -15 % 2300 24650 Failure -15 % 2200 23200 2100 21750 2000 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Nd) Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Sm) 10500 1100 Failure +15 % Failure +15 % 10050 1050 Warning +10 % Warning +10 % 9600 1000 9150 950 Expected Value Expected Value 8700 900 Nd (ppm) Sm (ppm) 8250 850 7800 800 Warning -10 % Warning -10 % 7350 750 Failure -15 % Failure -15 % 6900 700 6450 650 6000 600 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch DateFigure 11-1: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM TRM-2 (Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, and Sm) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 69 Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Eu) Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Gd) 250 800 Failure +15 % 240 Warning +10 % 700 230 Failure +15 % Warning +10 % 220 600 Expected Value Expected Value 210 500Warning -10 % Eu (ppm) Gd (ppm) 200 Failure -15 % 400 190 Warning -10 % 180 300 Failure -15 % 170 200 160 100 150 140 0 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Tb) Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Dy) 68 250 Failure +15 % Failure +15 % 64 Warning +10 % Warning +10 % 230 60 56Expected Value Expected Value 210 52 Tb (ppm) Dy (ppm) 48 Warning -10 % 190 Failure -15 % Warning -10 % 44 170Failure -15 % 40 36 150 32 28 130 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Ho) Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Er) 44 102 Failure +15 % Failure +15 % Warning +10 % 40 94 Warning +10 % Expected Value 86 36 Expected Value 78 Warning -10 % 32 Ho (ppm) Er (ppm) Failure -15 % 70 Warning -10 % 28 Failure -15 % 62 24 54 20 46 16 38 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Figure 11-2: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM TRM-2 (Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, and Er) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 70 Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Yb) Assays of Standard Certified TRM-2 (Lu) 66 9.5 64 Failure +15 % 9 Failure +15 % 62 Warning +10 % Warning +10 % 60 8.5 58 8 56Expected Value Expected Value 54 Yb (ppm) Lu (ppm) 7.5 52 50 7 Warning -10 % 48Warning -10 % 6.5 46 Failure -15 % Failure -15 % 44 6 42 5.5 40 38 5 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Figure 11-3: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM TRM-2 (Yb and Lu) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 71 Assays of Standard Certified SX18-01 (Y) Assays of Standard Certified SX18-01 (La) 160 440 Failure +15 % 155 420 Failure +15 % 150Warning +10 % 145 400Warning +10 % 140 380 Expected Value La (ppm) Y (ppm) 135 Expected Value 360 130 125 340 120Warning -10 % 320 Warning -10 % 115 Failure -15 % 300 Failure -15 % 110 105 280 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Assays of Standard Certified SX18-01 (Ce) Assays of Standard Certified SX18-01 (Nd) 950 600 Failure +15 % 900 560 Warning +10 % 520 Failure +15 % 850 Warning +10 % 480 Nd (ppm) 800 Ce (ppm) Expected Value Expected Value 440 750 400 Warning -10 % 700 Warning -10 % 360 Failure -15 % 650 320 Failure -15 % 600 280 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch DateFigure 11-4: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM SX18-01 (Y, La, Ce, and Nd) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 72 Assays of Standard Certified SX18-05 (Y) Assays of Standard Certified SX18-05 (La) 280 600 Failure +15 % Failure +15 % 270 Warning +10 % 260 550 Warning +10 % 250 Expected Value 500 La (ppm) 240 Y (ppm) Expected Value 230 450 220 Warning -10 % Failure -15 % 210 400 Warning -10 % 200 Failure -15 % 190 350 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch Date Assays of Standard Certified SX18-05 (Ce) Assays of Standard Certified SX18-05 (Nd) 1250 650 Failure +15 % Failure +15 % 1200 600 Warning +10 % Warning +10 % 1150 550 Expected Value 1100 500 Expected Value Nd (ppm) Ce (ppm) 1050 450Warning -10 % 1000 Failure -15 % 400 950 Warning -10 % 350 900 Failure -15 % 850 300 800 250 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sample Batch Date Sample Batch DateFigure 11-5: Variation of Reported Values with Time for Analytical CRM SX18-05 (Y, La, Ce, and Nd)As seen from the relative difference column in the Table 11.2, with the exception of La and Ce forthe CRM SX18-01, all means for observed values are below the certified material grade. Figure 11-1to Figure 11-5 also draw to the same conclusion. Also, statistical tests (sign tests) on every elementfor all 3 CRMs show that the average of the observations is different from the expected certifiedmaterial grade. As all observed values are below the certified values, using the 2011 database willkeep estimates on the conservative side.If we analyse the warnings and failure rates for analytical CRMs: • Y, La, Ce, Pr, Sm, Eu, and Lu for TRM-2, La and Ce for SX18-01 and Y and Ce for SX18-05 find good correspondence with less than 16% Warnings and less than 1% Failures. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 73 • Nd and Yb for TRM-2, Y for SX18-01 and La for SX18-05 find concerning correspondence with between 23% and 43% Warnings and between 1% and 4% Failures. • Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, and Er for TRM-2, Nd for SX18-01 and Nd for SX18-05 find bad correspondence with more than 86% Warning and Failures and up to 100% Failures.Due to this high failure rate, it is very important to verify if any bias would be upward or downward.Fortunately, all concerning biases are on the conservative side and this is further supported by theindependent round robin analytical check of the certified reference materials by the Company.After a review of the QA/QC failures for the CRMs, the differences observed are consideredacceptable based on the conservativeness of the results. Such variability in analytical CRMs is typicalof many rare earth projects and it is an aspect that must be monitored. Data from the round robinsurvey demonstrates such variance; for example, for the Tb of TRM-2, the 3 analyses from each 4laboratories (12 measurements) show a minimum of 38.9 ppm and a maximum of 42.4 ppm. Thecertified value of Tb, as listed on the original analytical certificate, is 54.6 ppm with a 95%confidence interval of 14.2 ppm. If possible, the original assay data used to certify the referencematerial or the standard deviations should be obtained from the analytical CRM providers as ameans of comparison for the data obtained from the round robin survey. Additionally, Commerceshould consider preparing its own analytical standard from materials collected at the Ashram RareEarth Deposit and potentially move to have it certified.11.3.2 Analytical BlanksDuring the 2010 drill program quartz material (termed ‘Qtz’ in the database) was sourced, for use asblank material, from a near-by vein located several kilometres from the deposit. After thecompletion of the 2010 program, when the final assay certificates were issued, it was recognized thatthe ‘Qtz’ blank recurrently assayed several hundred ppm total rare earth elements (TREEs). At thetime, the TREE content in ‘Qtz’ was attributed to its source being in neighboring proximity to theAshram Rare Earth Deposit and thus potentially related to the mineralized system. At the request ofthe Project’s former qualified professional, André Laferrière, another blank material, ‘Qtz-A’, waslocated.For 2011, the blank Qtz was used 91 times (Figure 11-6) and Qtz-A was used 428 times (Figure11-7). Qtz-A is an un-certified crushed quartz (~1-4 cm pieces) prepared by Jim Coleman CrystalMines Inc. in Arkansas, US. Blanks were inserted at a rate of one blank for every 25 samples in thesample series, or approximately 4.5% of samples collected, not including duplicates.Analyses from four labs: SRC Environmental Analytical Laboratories of Saskatoon, ActivationLaboratories Ltd. of Ancaster, Acme Analytical Laboratories Ltd. of Vancouver, and ALS Group ofVancouver validated that REEs existed only as nil to trace impurities in Qtz-A.After verification that Qtz-A contained no significant rare earth content, via the round robin survey,it was exchanged with the previously used ‘Qtz’ blank in the spring of 2011. Despite the substitutionof Qtz-A into QA/QC protocols the elevated REE levels observed in ‘Qtz’ persisted, suggesting anexternal source. The primary lab for the Project, Activation Laboratories Ltd. of Ancaster (Actlabs), SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 74was contacted and notified of the problem. Actlabs suggested that the REEs may have beenintroduced during the pulverization of the blanks and stated that they would ensure all equipmentwas being properly cleaned. Actlabs also commented that the contamination effect could appearslightly amplified due to the fact that the relatively small volume of the blanks would limit itsdilution effect on any high grade residues in the pulveriser bowl or on the rings. Approximately 200g of Qtz-A material was used for each blank.After review and discussion, SGS-Geostat (pers comm., former PEA QP Robert De l’Étoile, Eng.)recommended that the TREE levels in the blanks be tracked to monitor for any emerging trendsand take appropriate actions as necessary. After consideration, during the fall of 2011 a failurethreshold of 500 ppm TREE content in any blank was selected corresponding to approximately3.4% of the initial resource estimate’s average grade (1.74% TREO). If a developing trend isobserved, the lab is to be notified and the insertion site at camp is to be inspected to confirm properprotocols are being maintained. Further, after a review of adjacent CRMs, and if the trend lies aboveor below the threshold, the need for a re-analysis of the entire batch is to be evaluated. Results oftracking to date are presented in the figures below; elevated levels of REE can be correlated to zonesof higher grade mineralization in drill core. Commerce, and Dahrouge, has stated it will ensure thatall future blanks will be continually monitored to ensure internal and external QA/QC. In 2011, atotal of 519 blanks (Qtz + Qtz-A) were inserted in the sample series. A review of the analytical datafor the blanks shows that all the blanks analysed returned a variable but low amount of REEsalthough sometimes orders of magnitude above the detection limit of the analytical method.As part of the laboratory QA/QC protocol, Actlabs is inserting analytical blanks in the samplesseries. A review of the results from the laboratory blanks inserted by Actlabs shows that all blanksreturned values below detection limit suggesting that there is no systematic contamination of thesamples.The author recommends continuing with the QA/QC protocol presently used with the failurethreshold of 500 ppm TREE. Figure 11-6: TREE in the Original ‘Qtz’ Blank SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 75 Figure 11-7: TREE in the ‘Qtz-A’ Blank11.3.3 Drill Core DuplicatesAs part of the Company QA/QC protocol, quarter core duplicates from 522 core samples wereincluded in the Project sample series sent to Actlabs. The drill core duplicates are inserted in thesample series at an average rate of one duplicate for every 25 samples (rate of 4.5%). The relativepercent difference (RPD) between the original and duplicate analytical values averages 6.7% forTREE with a range between 0% and 46%. The RPD average for F is 15.2% with a range between0% and 150%. In general, the drill core duplicate samples show a fair to good correlation with theoriginal samples. Some improvement is noted from the 2010 results. The variability between theoriginal and duplicate samples can be considered acceptable for the REEs with the average RPD forall individual elements bellow or equal to 10%, although some individual elements present a greatervariability than others. The variability is significantly higher for F with the average RPD of 15.2%,but can still be considered in the acceptable range for drill core duplicate. Table 11-3 summarises thecomparatives statistics of the drill core duplicates for the individual REE including TREE and F.Figure 11-8 show correlation plots of the drill core duplicates for TREE and F. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 76 Table 11-3: Comparative Statistics for the Drill Core Duplicates Total Original < Duplicate Original = Duplicates Original > Duplicate Relative Percentage Difference Samples Count % Count % Count % Mean Min Max Y 522 270 52% 17 3% 235 45% 7.7% 0% 56% La 522 264 51% 14 3% 244 47% 7.9% 0% 63% Ce 522 261 50% 3 1% 258 49% 7.0% 0% 52% Pr 522 256 49% 4 1% 262 50% 6.7% 0% 66% Nd 522 255 49% 14 3% 253 48% 6.5% 0% 76% Sm 522 262 50% 14 3% 246 47% 6.4% 0% 59% Eu 522 256 49% 9 2% 257 49% 6.4% 0% 44% Gd 522 257 49% 13 2% 252 48% 6.8% 0% 40% Tb 522 252 48% 26 5% 244 47% 7.8% 0% 48% Dy 522 264 51% 10 2% 248 48% 8.1% 0% 58% Ho 522 258 49% 32 6% 232 44% 9.0% 0% 61% Er 522 277 53% 7 1% 238 46% 10.0% 0% 57% Tm 522 268 51% 11 2% 243 47% 9.7% 0% 68% Yb 522 263 50% 28 5% 231 44% 9.4% 0% 69% Lu 522 268 51% 18 3% 236 45% 9.4% 0% 79% F 522 276 53% 24 5% 222 43% 15.2% 0% 150% TREE 522 253 48% 0 0% 269 52% 6.7% 0% 46% Figure 11-8: Correlation Plot of the Drill Core Duplicates for TREE and F SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 7711.3.4 Pulp DuplicatesDahrouge conducted systematic re-analyses of pulp material of low, moderate, and high mineralizedsamples selected from each 2011 drill hole equating to a sample check rate of approximately 5%.The re-analyses were completed by ALS with samples shipped directly from Actlabs. A total of 644pulps were sent to ALS (in 2011) for a duplicate analysis using a similar analytical protocol withsamples homogenized prior to analysis. Table 11-4 summarises the comparative statistics of the pulpduplicates for the individual REE including TREE. Figure 11-9 to Figure 11-12 shows correlationplots of TREE, Y, and the individual REE. Table 11-4: Statistics for the Pulp Duplicates (Actlabs vs. ALS) Original < Original = Original > Sign Overall Count Duplicate Duplicates Duplicate Conclusion test Difference Count Count Count La 644 315 10 319 Pass 1% Ce 644 233 7 404 Fail -1% ACT<ALS Pr 644 210 4 430 Fail -3% ACT<ALS Nd 644 296 12 336 Pass 0% Sm 644 284 17 343 Fail -0,3% ACT<ALS Eu 644 277 10 357 Fail 0,2% ACT>ALS Gd 644 502 9 133 Fail 11% ACT>ALS Tb 644 446 10 188 Fail 5% ACT>ALS Dy 644 90 12 542 Fail -7% ACT<ALS Ho 644 60 9 575 Fail -11% ACT<ALS Er 644 56 18 570 Fail -10% ACT<ALS Tm 644 134 27 483 Fail -5% ACT<ALS Yb 644 220 33 391 Fail -2% ACT<ALS Lu 644 461 23 160 Fail 6% ACT>ALS Y 644 38 9 597 Fail -10% ACT<ALS TREE 644 254 0 390 Fail -0,4% ACT<ALS SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 78 TREE Yttrium 100000 1600 y= x y= x 1400 80000 1200 y = 0.9168x + 973.96 y = 1.0407x + 8.4612 Yttrium (ppm) - ALS TREE (ppm) - ALS 60000 1000 R² = 0.9674 R² = 0.9822 800 40000 600 400 20000 200 0 0 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 TREE (ppm) - ActLabs Yttrium (ppm) - ActLabs Lanthanum Cerium 25000 50000 y= x y= x 20000 40000 Lanthanum (ppm) - ALS Cerium (ppm) - ALS 15000 30000 y = 0.9196x + 448.15 y = 0.9199x + 207.3 R² = 0.9657 R² = 0.9764 10000 20000 5000 10000 0 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 Lanthanum (ppm) - ActLabs Cerium (ppm) - ActLabs Figure 11-9: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for TREE, Y, La, and Ce (Actlabs vs. ALS) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 79 Praseodymium Neodymium 5000 18000 y= x y= x 16000 4000 14000 y = 0.8907x + 205.27 Praseodymium (ppm) - ALS y = 0.9284x + 59.272 Neodymium (ppm) - ALS 12000 R² = 0.9487 R² = 0.9486 3000 10000 8000 2000 6000 4000 1000 2000 0 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 Praseodymium (ppm) - ActLabs Neodymium (ppm) - ActLabs Samarium Europium 1400 300 y= x y= x 1200 250 1000 y = 0.907x + 23.462 Samarium (ppm) - ALS 200 Europium (ppm) - ALS R² = 0.948 800 150 y = 0.9277x + 5.7227 600 R² = 0.9395 100 400 50 200 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Samarium (ppm) - ActLabs Europium (ppm) - ActLabs Figure 11-10: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for Pr, Nd, Sm, and Eu (Actlabs vs. ALS) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 80 Gadolinium Terbium 500 60 y= x y= x 50 400 Gadolinium (ppm) - ALS 40 Terbium (ppm) - ALS 300 y = 0.8203x + 10.653 30 R² = 0.8828 y = 0.9379x + 0.2706 200 R² = 0.9498 20 100 10 0 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Gadolinium (ppm) - ActLabs Terbium (ppm) - ActLabs Dysprosium Holmium 300 60 y= x y= x 250 50 y = 1.0493x + 2.1396 R² = 0.9774 y = 1.0566x + 0.6137 Dysprosium (ppm) - ALS 200 40 Holmium (ppm) - ALS R² = 0.9779 150 30 100 20 50 10 0 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Dysprosium (ppm) - ActLabs Holmium (ppm) - ActLabs Figure 11-11: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for Gd, Tb, Dy, and Ho (Actlabs vs. ALS) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 81 Erbium Thulium 140 18 y= x y= x 16 120 y = 1.0569x + 1.1286 R² = 0.9769 14 100 12 Thulium (ppm) - ALS Erbium (ppm) - ALS 80 10 y = 1.0202x + 0.1198 R² = 0.975 60 8 6 40 4 20 2 0 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Erbium (ppm) - ActLabs Thulium (ppm) - ActLabs Ytterbium Lutetium 100 12 y= x y= x 90 10 80 y = 0.9518x + 0.0085 R² = 0.973 70 8 Ytterbium (ppm) - ALS Lutetium (ppm) - ALS y = 1.0143x + 0.2083 60 R² = 0.9773 50 6 40 4 30 20 2 10 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Ytterbium (ppm) - ActLabs Lutetium (ppm) - ActLabs Figure 11-12: Correlation Plot of the Pulp Duplicates for Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu (Actlabs vs. ALS)A review of the results for the pulp duplicates analysed by ALS shows a correlation between the twolaboratories but outlined some issues with the pulp duplicates results. A potential analytical bias canbe observed for some elements. The sign test conducted on the Actlabs vs. the ALS analyticaldataset suggests a potential positive bias toward Actlabs for Ce, Gd, and Tb but shows a potentialnegative bias for Pr, Eu, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, and Y. Elements La, Nd and Sm do not showsignificant analytical bias. The variability in the data is significant with average RPD between Actlabsand ALS ranging from 5.8% up to 16.7% for the different REEs. This variation in the analytical datais also observed in the results of the core duplicates and the independent check samples. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 82The results of the pulp duplicates outline potential analytical bias between Actlabs and ALS.Potential analytical biases are also observed in the results of the independent check samples.However, as with the data returned from SGS Minerals and ALS, some elements show contradictoryresults. It is typical of REE analysis to show some elements higher and other elements lower fordifferent laboratories. Based on the pulp duplicates results and the general consistency of thecorrelation plots of the check sampling program, we can conclude that the results are satisfactory.The author recommends continuing systematic re-analysis of pulp materials for mineralized samplesin the internal QA/QC protocol in order to help monitor the quality of the analytical data of theProject.11.3.5 QA/QC ConclusionAs part of the 2011 work program at Ashram, Dahrouge implemented an internal QA/QC protocolconsisting in the insertion of reference materials in the samples series (CRMs and blanks). TheQA/QC program also included analysis of core duplicates on a systematic basis and the re-analysisof selected sample pulp duplicates at a second analytical laboratory for verification.Reported results for the CRMs for the 2011 drill program show a good correlation with expectedmean values, except for some elements where lower average values compared to the expected valuesof the CRM which include some QA/QC failures. After a review of the QA/QC failures, thedifferences in value observed are in the range of variance typically returned for REE analytical dataand are considered acceptable. Further, it is noted that in general Actlab values are typically lowerthan that of the CRM and thus considered conservative.A review of the analytical data for the blanks showed that all the blanks analysed returned a low andvariable amount of mineralization. After reviewing the laboratory blanks Actlabs inserted in thesamples series, the author believes there could be some small amounts of contamination butconsiders this negligible (about 1%) compared to the overall resource.The results for the drill core duplicates show a good correlation with the original analytical valuesand acceptable data variance. The re-analysis of pulp duplicate from selected mineralized samplesoutlined potential analytical bias for some elements. The observed potential biases, which are alsoobserved in the independent check sample results (core duplicates), are positive for some elementsand negative for others. The author suggests that the observed potential analytical biases could bedue principally to the imprecision of the analytical methods.It is the author’s and SGS Geostat’s opinion that Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, is operatingaccording to industry standard QA/QC protocol for the insertion of control certified referencematerials into the stream of samples for the Project. The data is considered of sufficient quality to beused for mineral resource estimation. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 83 11.4 Specific GravityIn 2010, as part of the independent data verification program, SGS Geostat conducted specificgravity (SG) measurements on 40 mineralized core samples collected from drill holes EC10-027 andEC10-028. The measurements were performed using the water displacement method (weight in air /volume of water displaced) on representative half core pieces weighing between 0.57 kg and 1.32 kgwith an average of 0.97 kg. The results from the measurements reported an average SG value of 3.02t/m3 (Table 11-5) Table 11-5: Specific Gravity Statistics from 2010 Independent Check Sampling Program 3 Eldor Project - Ashram Carbonatite S.G. (t/m ) Count 40 Mean 3.02 Std Dev 0.09 Relative Std Dev 3.1% Minimum 2.87 Median 3.00 Maximum 3.25In 2011, a fixed SG was used for the resource estimation based on a total of 449 SG measurements.For the preparation of this report, a total of 432 of the 2010 measurements were retained and 1,840were added, from those collected in 2011, for a total of 2,272. They were separated in the 3 differentmineralized bodies identified for the resource estimates: Central (260), Inner (1339) and Outer (673).The SG measurements were conducted at the Project’s core logging facilities using the weightair/water method (weight in air / (weight in air - weight in water)) on representative core piecesbefore the sampling procedure. Table 11-6 summarises the statistics of the SG measurementscollected by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, at Ashram in 2010 and 2011. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 84 Table 11-6: Specific Gravity Statistics from the 2010 and 2011 Exploration Programs 3 Central Zone - Ashram Carbonatite S.G. (t/m ) Count 260 Mean 3.12 Std Dev 0.15 Relative Std Dev 4.7% Minimum 2.46 Median 3.10 Maximum 3.99 Inner Zone - Ashram Carbonatite S.G. (t/m3) Count 1339 Mean 3.02 Std Dev 0.13 Relative Std Dev 4.3% Minimum 2.06 Median 3.01 Maximum 3.98 Outer Zone - Ashram Carbonatite S.G. (t/m3) Count 934 Mean 2.92 Std Dev 0.11 Relative Std Dev 3.7% Minimum 2.23 Median 2.92 Maximum 3.88The SG values returned by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, from the 2010 and 2011 explorationprogram at Ashram are consistent with the independent SG measurements completed by SGSGeostat as part of the data verification program from 2010. Based on the SG value dataset, a valueof 3.1, 3.0 and 2.9 t/m3 was set as the average SG value for the Ashram carbonatite respectively forthe Central, Inner and Outer mineralized zones. These average SG values are used to estimate themineral resource tonnage from the volumetric estimates of the resource block model. 11.5 ConclusionsSGS Geostat completed a review of the sample preparation and analysis including the QA/QCanalytical protocol implemented by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, for the Project. The authorM. Gaston Gagnon, Eng. visited the Property accompanied by Robert De l’Étoile, Eng. from SGSGeostat between September 18 and 21, 2011 to review the Project sample preparation procedures. Astatistical analysis of the QA/QC data for the Project outlined only minor issues. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 85The author and SGS Geostat are of the opinion that the sample preparation, analysis and QA/QCprotocol used by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, for the Eldor Project follow generally acceptedindustry standards and that the Project data is of quality sufficient to be used for mineral resourceestimation. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 8612 Data VerificationAs part of the data verification program, SGS Geostat completed independent analytical checks ofdrill core duplicate samples taken from Commerce’s 2011 diamond drilling program. SGS Geostatalso completed a verification of the laboratory analytical certificates with validation of the Projectdigital database, supplied by Dahrouge, verified for errors or discrepancies.During a site visit conducted between September 18 and 21, 2011, a total of 40 mineralized drill coreduplicates were collected from holes EC11-048, EC11-053, EC11-056 and EC11-061 by GastonGagnon and Robert de l’Étoile from SGS, and submitted for analysis at the SGS Minerals laboratoryin Toronto. Certified reference materials and blanks were added to the sample series. The coreduplicates were processed using the 31 elements lithium metaborate fusion with ICP-MS finishanalytical protocol. Table 12-1 summarises the comparatives statistics of the independent checksamples for the individual REE. Table 12-2 shows the sign test results. Figure 12-1to Figure 12-4shows correlation plots of the TREE, Y and the individual REE. Table 12-1: Statistics for the Independent Check Samples (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) Relative Percentage Difference Count Mean Min Max Y 40 8% 0% 25% La 40 9% 0% 23% Ce 40 9% 1% 27% Pr 40 7% 0% 22% Nd 40 6% 0% 17% Sm 40 5% 0% 13% Eu 40 6% 0% 20% Gd 40 6% 1% 15% Tb 40 12% 1% 27% Dy 40 8% 0% 22% Ho 40 10% 0% 33% Er 40 9% 0% 29% Tm 40 10% 1% 35% Yb 40 7% 0% 24% Lu 40 7% 0% 21% SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 87 Table 12-2: Sign Test for the Independent Check Samples (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) Original < Original = Original > Sign Average Duplicate Duplicates Duplicate Conclusion test Difference Count Count Count Y 31 0 9 Fail 4% SGS>ACT La 25 0 15 Pass 5% Ce 28 0 12 Fail 5% SGS>ACT Pr 32 1 7 Fail 5% SGS>ACT Nd 20 0 20 Pass 0% Sm 19 0 21 Pass 0% Eu 13 1 26 Pass -3% Gd 23 0 17 Pass 1% Tb 39 0 1 Fail 10% SGS>ACT Dy 34 1 5 Fail 6% SGS>ACT Ho 32 2 6 Fail 5% SGS>ACT Er 19 1 20 Pass -1% Tm 35 0 5 Fail 6% SGS>ACT Yb 25 1 14 Pass 1% Lu 24 1 15 Pass 1% SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 88 Pulp Duplicates (TREE+Y) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Y) - Ashram Project 30000 600 +20% +20% 25000 500 -20% -20% 20000 400 TREE+Y (ppm) - ActLabs Y (ppm) - ActLabs 15000 300 10000 200 5000 100 0 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 TREE+Y (ppm) - SGS Minerals Y (ppm) - SGS Minerals Pulp Duplicates (La) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Ce) - Ashram Project 8000 14000 +20% +20% 7000 12000 6000 -20% 10000 -20% 5000 Ce (ppm) - ActLabs La (ppm) - ActLabs 8000 4000 6000 3000 4000 2000 1000 2000 0 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 La (ppm) - SGS Minerals Ce (ppm) - SGS Minerals Figure 12-1: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for TREE, Y, La, and Ce (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 89 Pulp Duplicates (Pr) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Nd) - Ashram Project 1200 4000 +20% +20% 3500 1000 3000 -20% -20% 800 Nd (ppm) - ActLabs 2500 Pr (ppm) - ActLabs 600 2000 1500 400 1000 200 500 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Pr (ppm) - SGS Minerals Nd (ppm) - SGS Minerals Pulp Duplicates (Sm) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Eu) - Ashram Project 1000 250 +20% +20% 800 200 -20% -20% Eu (ppm) - ActLabs Sm (ppm) - ActLabs 600 150 400 100 200 50 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 50 100 150 200 250 Sm (ppm) - SGS Minerals Eu (ppm) - SGS Minerals Figure 12-2: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for Pr, Nd, Sm, and Eu (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 90 Pulp Duplicates (Gd) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Tb) - Ashram Project 800 100 +20% +20% -20% 80 600 -20% Gd (ppm) - ActLabs Tb (ppm) - ActLabs 60 400 40 200 20 0 0 0 200 400 600 800 0 20 40 60 80 100 Gd (ppm) - SGS Minerals Tb (ppm) - SGS Minerals Pulp Duplicates (Dy) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Ho) - Ashram Project 400 60 +20% +20% 350 50 300 -20% -20% 40 Ho (ppm) - ActLabs Dy (ppm) - ActLabs 250 200 30 150 20 100 10 50 0 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Dy (ppm) - SGS Minerals Ho (ppm) - SGS Minerals Figure 12-3: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for Gd, Tb, Dy, and Ho (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 91 Pulp Duplicates (Er) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Tm) - Ashram Project 120 12 +20% +20% 100 10 -20% -20% 80 8 Tm (ppm) - ActLabs Er (ppm) - ActLabs 60 6 40 4 20 2 0 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Er (ppm) - SGS Minerals Tm (ppm) - SGS Minerals Pulp Duplicates (Yb) - Ashram Project Pulp Duplicates (Lu) - Ashram Project 60 8 +20% +20% 7 50 6 -20% -20% 40 Yb (ppm) - ActLabs 5 Lu (ppm) - ActLabs 30 4 3 20 2 10 1 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Yb (ppm) - SGS Minerals Lu (ppm) - SGS Minerals Figure 12-4: Correlation Plot of the Independent Checks Samples for Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu (Actlabs vs. SGS Minerals)A review of the independent core duplicate check sample results confirmed a correlation betweenActlabs and SGS Minerals data but outlined some issues. In particular, potential analytical bias andsignificant variability in the data was observed. The sign test (presented in Table 12-2) conducted onthe Actlabs vs. the SGS Minerals analytical dataset suggests a potential negative bias toward Actlabsfor Y, Ce, Pr, Tb, Dy, Ho, and Tm. Biases found always show SGS superior to Actlabs so thisresource update is considered conservative in this respect. The most problematic elements are Tb,Dy, and Tm where the average difference is higher than 5%. Comparatively to 2010, theindependent check samples are much improved. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 92The results of the independent check sampling program in 2011 highlight the difficulty of analysingREEs. Results show amelioration compared to 2010. Based on the results of the data verificationprogram, SGS Geostat considers the analytical data to be of sufficient quality to support a mineralresource estimate.The digital drill hole database supplied by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, has been validated forthe following data fields: collar location, azimuth, dip, hole length, survey data, lithology, andanalytical values. The validation of the database did not return any significant issues. As part of thedata verification of the Project, selected analytical data from the database has been validated with thevalues from the laboratories analytical certificates. No errors were noted during the validation.The final database includes the recent drilling data completed in 2011. Table 12-3 lists the datacontained in the final drill hole database. SGS Geostat is in the opinion that the final drill holedatabase is adequate to support mineral resource estimation. Table 12-3: Final Drill Hole Database Number of Number of Number of Number of Metres % Assayed Survey Lithological Assays Holes Drilled Metres Records Records Records 45 15,692 777 430 15,051 98% SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 9313 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical TestingThe rare earth mineralization at Ashram consists primarily of monazite and lesser bastnäsite andxenotime in a matrix of ferro-dolomite, fluorite, and lesser apatite. Particle size of the rare earthminerals is very fine, typically less than 30 m down to <5 m with an average of 15-20 m. Largeraggregates in the several hundred micron range are present but not common.A liberation study completed by SGS Minerals Services indicates that the bastnäsite liberates withthe monazite reflecting their similar grain size and distribution throughout the carbonate matrix.The liberation of xenotime was not evaluated in this study, however, indications from metallurgicaltestwork supports a joint liberation with the monazite and the bastnäsite.In addition, the relatively soft nature of the carbonate matrix coupled with the simple rare earthmineralogy makes the rare earth minerals amenable to conventional separation techniques formineral concentrating prior to cracking (e.g. grinding and flotation).Metallurgical testwork on a representative sample of the Ashram Deposit is currently beingcompleted at Hazen Research Inc. in Colorado and UVR-FIA GmbH in Germany. Due to the lowsulphide content of the ore, coarse analytical reject material could be utilized for all metallurgicaltesting and was sourced from multiple holes within the deposit. Several batches of material havebeen received by Hazen totalling approximately 420 kg. Of the first material received, the rare earthhead assay for the main light rare earths are as follows:Ce: 0.75%La: 0.41%Nd: 0.27%After initial experimentation with several separation techniques, flotation was identified as the mostpromising and has thus been the chief upgrading process utilized so far. In almost all of the tests,direct rare earth mineral flotation has been addressed. However, some reverse flotation tests werealso completed. Numerous potential collectors for the direct flotation have been tested under avariety of operational parameters.Initial bench testwork at Hazen confirm that the rare earth material is amenable to conventionalflotation. No optimization has been attempted thus far as efforts have focused on initial grindingand determination of the best rare earth collectors and carbonate depressants for this particular setof mineralogy. A listing of the most promising test results is presented in Table 13-1. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 94 Table 13-1: Metallurgical Testwork Results TEST # % of Original CONCENTRATE DISTRIBUTION Weight GRADE % % Ce La TREO Ce La TREO (EST)2 (EST) 3475-102 14.0 4.07 1.98 9.95 68.5 67.3 67.9 3475-125 15.0 4.04 1.96 9.87 63.7 62.5 63.1 3503-28 10.0 4.44 2.36 11.18 68.1 68.9 68.5 3503-29 7.9 4.81 2.54 12.09 55.9 55.9 55.9 3503-34 15.1 4.05 2.25 10.37 74.0 72.7 73.4According to Mr. Roland Schmidt, Director of Mineralogical Laboratories and of the Ashramtestwork at Hazen Research Inc., “there is no technical obstacle that would prevent from reaching the currenttarget of 20% TREO at a recovery of 60 to 70%. It is expected that an improvement of this magnitude should bepossible in view of the relatively simple, albeit fine-grained, mineralization and also because the flotation chemistry forseparation of the type of minerals present from a carbonate matrix, is an established and commercially proventechnology”.Current mineral concentrates also display strong upgrading in fluorine (via fluorite) ranging typicallyfrom 10-30% F. No secondary stage of evaluation for the separation of the rare earth minerals fromfluorite has yet been completed. However, this is expected to become the focus of work at UVR-FIA GmbH in the near term as a substantial increase in concentrate TREO grade is expected.Increasing the concentrate TREO grade is a priority as acid consumption and cracking costs may besignificantly reduced. No determination of fluorine as a potential by-product (via acid gradefluorspar) has yet been evaluated.A mineral concentrate with a grade of 10% TREO at 70% recovery (12.7% of the original feedweight) is used as a base case result of physical upgrading at the mine site via conventional grindingand flotation techniques. This concentrate grade and recovery corresponds to the best Hazen testresults so far and complies with the standard policy for SGS Geostat to not extrapolate beyond whathas been demonstrated. Because the radioactivity3 of the mill concentrate is not well quantified(testwork pending) at this time, for the purpose of this report, thermal cracking will be done directlyat the mine site4.Cracking of the mineral concentrates generated by Hazen is currently underway. Only preliminaryresults are available, however, they are positive with the rare earths entering solution readily asanticipated. Given the historically known and proven cracking techniques for monazite, bastnäsite,and xenotime, it is not anticipated to be problematic; thus, a TREO recovery of 95% is foreseen atthe cracking plant. According to Commerce, the process will be tested as the preliminaryconcentrate is refined.2 Concentrate grade estimation for total REO is given by the following formula:1.16*(Ce + La)/.7053 Due to the presence of thorium4 If concentrate radioactivity is low enough, a thermal cracking plant could be built somewhere on the Saint Lawrence Seaway where a marketable rare earth mixed carbonate/oxide concentrate would be produced. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 95In addition, the ore and the mine tailings are not considered acid generating (or metal leaching) dueto the high amount of carbonates and corresponding low sulphide content. This conclusion iscurrently being confirmed by Hazen; however, initial testwork is supportive. Moreover, the tailingsare not deemed to be radioactive since the amount of the only radioactive element (thorium) in thetailings will be, for all practical purposes, in the same order of magnitude as in the mill feed.No metallurgical test work was carried out by SGS, nor was it supervised by the QP responsible forthe Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testwork section of this report. As such, the results werenot independently verified, but are believed to be of sound quality. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 9614 Mineral Resource Estimates 14.1 IntroductionA previous mineral resource estimate was reported in March 2011 for the Eldor Property(Laferrière, 2011). Both mineral resource estimates were completed by SGS Geostat. This currentupdate uses drilling data completed by the Company in 2011. The final database used to produce themineral resource estimate totals 43 diamond drill holes and contains information for collar, survey,lithology and analytical results. Two more holes (EC11-076 and EC11-078) were not sampled andwill be used for advanced metallurgical work. Please refer to Table 12-3 for a summary of therecords in the database used for the mineral resource estimate.The mineral resource has been estimated by the co-author, Yann Camus, Eng., Geological Engineerfor SGS Geostat. Mr. Camus is a professional engineer registered with the Ordre des Ingénieurs duQuébec. He has been involved in mineral resource estimation work on a continuous basis sincejoining Geostat (now a member of SGS Canada Inc.) in 2000, which includes the mineral resourceestimation of the Kipawa Rare Earth Deposit located near the community of Témiscaming, Québec.Mr. Camus is an independent Qualified Person as per section 1.4 of the NI 43-101 Standards ofDisclosure for Mineral Projects.The mineral resource estimates are derived from a computerized resource block model. Theconstruction of the block model starts with the modeling of 3D wireframe envelopes or solids of themineralization using drill hole REE analytical data and lithological information. Once the modelingis complete, the analytical data contained within the wireframe solids is normalised to generate fixedlength composites. The composites are used to interpolate the grade of blocks regularly spaced on adefined grid that fills the 3D wireframe solids. The interpolated blocks located below thebedrock/overburden interface comprise the mineral resource. The blocks are then classified basedon confidence level using the grid size of the composites. The 3D wireframe modeling wasinterpreted by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, and verified by SGS Geostat. The block modeland mineral resource estimates were conducted by SGS Geostat based on information provided byDahrouge, on behalf of Commerce. 14.2 Exploratory Data AnalysisExploratory data analysis for each REE was completed on original analytical data and compositedata contained within the 3D mineralized envelopes. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 9714.2.1 Analytical DataOut of the total 15,051 assays inside the drill hole database, 13,513 fall inside the mineralization.These are the assay intervals from the database that were used for the current mineral resourceestimate. The drill hole intervals defining the mineralized envelopes have been sampledcontinuously. Sample length averages 1.02 m and ranges between 0.18 m and 2.49 m. Table 14-1summarizes the statistics of the analytical data used for the resource estimate. Figure 14-1 shows thehistogram of the samples length. Two holes (EC11-076 and EC11-078) totalling 87.69 m were notsampled and will be used for advanced metallurgical work. Table 14-1: Summary Statistics of Analytical Data Used in the Mineral Resource Estimate Mean Std dev. Min Median Max Y (ppm) 261 168 14 220 2630 La (ppm) 3346 2053 28 3100 21700 Ce (ppm) 6180 2981 56 6190 40400 Pr (ppm) 659 263 6 685 4480 Nd (ppm) 2342 806 26 2460 15600 Sm (ppm) 308 104 5 311 1350 Eu (ppm) 72.4 27.0 1.4 70.9 314 Gd (ppm) 173.8 70.8 4 168 818 Tb (ppm) 17.6 9.3 0.7 15.7 125 Dy (ppm) 71.5 42.8 3.6 61.9 689 Ho (ppm) 10.0 6.5 0.6 8.5 103 Er (ppm) 21.5 13.9 1.4 18.3 213 Tm (ppm) 2.42 1.54 0.17 2.07 20.7 Yb (ppm) 13.2 7.7 1 11.5 94.2 Lu (ppm) 1.76 0.98 0.16 1.56 11.2 F (%) 2.20 2.25 0.01 1.29 26 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 98 Samples Lengths from Ashram Database 3000 2500 2000 Frequency 1500 1000 500 0 0 1 2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Sample Length (m) Figure 14-1: Histogram of Samples Length from Ashram DatabaseThe drill pattern at Ashram is fairly irregular, due to the size and still unknown extent of the body,with 18 holes near vertical, 24 holes oriented between N226° and N245° azimuth and dippingbetween 39° and 76°, one hole oriented N050° azimuth an dipping 44° and one hole orientedN322° azimuth and dipping 45°. Figure 14-2 and Figure 14-3 show a plan view and a longitudinalview looking north of the drill holes at Ashram. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 99 Figure 14-2: Plan View of the Drill Holes at Ashram Figure 14-3: Longitudinal View of the Drill Holes at Ashram (looking north) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 10014.2.2 Composite DataBlock model grade interpolation is conducted on composited analytical data. A composite length of3 m has been selected based on the length of the samples and the thickness of the 10 m by 10 m by10 m block size defined for the resource block model. Composites were filtered from the 3D solids.No capping was applied to the assays before compositing. Table 14-2 shows summary statistics ofthe composites used for the interpolation of the resource block model. Figure 14-4 and Figure 14-5displays the spatial distribution of the composites along drill holes axis in plan and longitudinal viewlooking north respectively. Table 14-2: Summary Statistics for the 3 metres Composites Mean Std dev. Min Median Max Y (ppm) 255 146 0 218 1207 La (ppm) 3269 1843 0 3208 11799 Ce (ppm) 6044 2736 0 6304 16500 Pr (ppm) 646 245 0 689 1850 Nd (ppm) 2298 756 0 2468 6560 Sm (ppm) 303 96 0 309 814 Eu (ppm) 71.2 24.8 0 69.9 216.5 Gd (ppm) 170.7 64.8 0 165.8 543.9 Tb (ppm) 17.2 8.2 0 15.5 74.8 Dy (ppm) 70.0 37.2 0 61.9 312.4 Ho (ppm) 9.8 5.6 0 8.6 45.7 Er (ppm) 21.0 11.9 0 18.3 99.6 Tm (ppm) 2.37 1.31 0 2.08 11.81 Yb (ppm) 12.9 6.6 0 11.7 52.7 Lu (ppm) 1.72 0.84 0 1.59 6.35 F (%) 2.12 1.86 0 1.49 15.96 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 101 Figure 14-4: Plan View Showing the Spatial Distribution of the CompositesFigure 14-5: Longitudinal View Showing the Distribution of the Composites (looking north)14.2.3 Specific GravitySection 11.3 explains the SG determination in detail. Values of 3.1, 3.0 and 2.9 t/m3 were set as thefixed SG value for the Central, Inner and Outer mineralized zones respectively. These SG values areused for the estimation of the tonnages from the volumetric estimates of the resource block model. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 102 14.3 Geological InterpretationDahrouge (on behalf of Commerce), under the supervision of SGS Geostat, completed theinterpretation and modeling of the 3D wireframe envelopes for the mineralization based on drillingdata. The 3D wireframe envelop was defined with respect to the levels of REE mineralization andthe topography was used to constrain the top of the wireframe envelope. Figure 14-6: Modeled 3D Wireframe Envelope in Longitudinal View (looking south) 14.4 Spatial AnalysisThe spatial continuity of the TREO grade of the composites was assessed by variography.Variograms were computed and modeled for the 3 m composite for each mineralized zone.Variograms in a series of directions were analysed in order to identify potential anisotropies in thegrade continuity within the modeled mineralized envelop. Figure 14-7, Figure 14-8 and Figure 14-9show the variograms of TREO for zones Central, Inner, and Outer respectively. The variogrammodels used for the kriging are:Central Zone Variogram Model: • Nugget of 0.1 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 103 • Spherical of 0.4 with ranges of 10m, 8m and 8m at orientations of 50° azimuth, -73° dip and 0° spin • Spherical of 0.5 with ranges of 90m, 50m and 50m at orientations of 50° azimuth, -73° dip and 0° spinInner Zone Variogram Model: • Nugget of 0.1 • Spherical of 0.4 with ranges of 8m, 8m and 8m at orientations of 70° azimuth, -73° dip and 0° spin • Spherical of 0.33 with ranges of 50m, 50m and 50m at orientations of 70° azimuth, -73° dip and 0° spin • Spherical of 0.17 with ranges of 220m, 220m and 220m at orientations of 70° azimuth, -73° dip and 0° spinOuter Zone Variogram Model: • Nugget of 0.1 • Spherical of 0.35 with ranges of 10m, 10m and 10m at orientations of 70° azimuth, 17° dip and 0° spin • Spherical of 0.275 with ranges of 160m, 120m and 120m at orientations of 70° azimuth, 17° dip and 0° spin • Spherical of 0.275 with ranges of 400m, 250m and 120m at orientations of 70° azimuth, 17° dip and 0° spin Figure 14-7: Variograms of TREO Grade of 3 Metre Composite for Central Zone SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 104 Figure 14-8: Variograms of TREO Grade of 3 Metre Composite for Inner Zone Figure 14-9: Variograms of TREO Grade of 3 Metre Composite for Outer ZoneGenerally, the variography does not suggest a strong anisotropy, especially in the isotropic InnerZone. There is continuity at longer distances (up to 200-400 m). In the Central Zone, the bestcontinuity in the analytical data is observed downdip: 70° azimuth at 73° dip. The worse continuityis horizontally at a 160° azimuth direction. In the Outer Zone, the best continuity in the analyticaldata is observed almost flat: 70° azimuth at 17° up dip. The worse continuity is horizontally at a160° azimuth direction. The nugget effect is relatively low (10%). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 105 14.5 Resource Block ModelingA block size of 10 m (E-W) by 10 m (N-S) by 10 m (vertical) was selected for the mineral resourceblock model of the Project based on drill hole spacing, width and general geometry ofmineralization. The 10 m vertical dimension corresponds to an approximation for the bench heightof a potential medium-size open pit mining operation. The resource block model contains 143,036blocks located below the overburden/bedrock surface for a total of 143,036,000 m3. Table 14-3summarizes the parameters of the block model limits. Table 14-3: Resource Block Model Parameters Number of Coordinates (m) Direction Block Size Blocks Minimum Maximum East-West 10 m 91 535 900 mE 536 800 mE North-South 10 m 81 6 311 800 mN 6 312 600 mN Vertical 10 m 71 -400 mZ (a.s.l.) 300 mZ (a.s.l.) (Elevation) 14.6 Grade Interpolation MethodologyThe grade interpolation for the Ashram mineral resource block model was estimated using theOrdinary Kriging (OK) methodology. Anisotropic search ellipsoids were selected for the gradeinterpolation process based on the analysis of the spatial continuity of TREO grade usingvariography and on the general geometry of the modeled mineralized envelop. Limits are set for theminimum and maximum number of composites used per interpolation pass and restriction areapplied on the maximum number of composites used from each hole.The interpolation process was conducted using 3 successive passes with relaxed search conditionsfrom one pass to the next until all blocks are interpolated. The orientation of the search ellipsoids,which is identical for each interpolation pass, is 340° azimuth, -73° dip and 0° spin for Inner andOuter and 320° azimuth, -73° dip and 0° spin for Central.In the first pass, the search ellipsoid distance was 100 m (long axis) by 100 m (intermediate axis) by50 m (short axis). Search conditions were defined with a minimum of 25 composites and amaximum of 25 composites with a maximum of 5 composites selected from each hole. For thesecond pass, the search distance was increased to 200 m (long axis) by 200 m (intermediate axis) by100 m (short axis) and composites selection criteria were kept the same as the first pass. Finally, thesearch distance of the third pass was increased to 400 m (long axis) by 400 m (intermediate axis) by200 m (short axis). Search conditions for the third pass were defined with a minimum of 7composites and a maximum of 25 composites with a maximum of 5 composites selected from eachhole. Figure 14-10 shows the biggest search ellipsoids used for the third interpolation passes. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 106Figure 14-11 and Figure 14-12 present the interpolation results on representative sections and planlevels respectively. Figure 14-10: Different Search Ellipsoids Used for the Interpolation Process in Plan View Figure 14-11: Plan View Showing Block Model Interpolation Results SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 107 Figure 14-12: Longitudinal View Showing Block Model Interpolation Results (looking south) 14.7 Mineral Resource ClassificationThe mineral resources at Ashram have all been categorically classified as measured, indicated, andinferred as defined by NI 43-101 standards. The parameters used to determine the mineral resourceclassification are the composites and drilling density. A drill grid of about 25 m is considered asmeasured and a grid of about 50 m is considered indicated. Some areas contain inferred resourceapproximately 150 m from drill hole data. 14.8 Mineral Resource EstimationThe base case cut-off TREO grade for the reporting of the 2012 mineral resource estimate of theAshram Project was retained from 2011 and a base case 1.25% TREO cut-off grade was selected.The current resource update was disclosed on March 6, 2012 with the full report filed on SEDAR ashort time later. As SGS Geostat was working on a Preliminary Economic Assessment studycoincident with the updated resource estimate, the base case CoG of 1.25% was selected to optimizepit parameters in the resource update. However, a CoG of 0.51% was calculated as the break evenfor the deposit economics.The final mineral resource estimate for the Ashram Deposit at a CoG grade of 1.25% TREO totals29.3 million tonnes averaging 1.90% TREO in the measured and indicated categories and 219.8million tonnes averaging 1.88% TREO in the inferred category. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 108Within the overall defined resource, there exists a zone of more intense Middle and Heavy RareEarth Oxide enrichment that extends from surface (Figure 7-3 and Figure 7-4). This mineralizedzone has been included in the overall mineral resource calculation at a CoG of 1.25% and its detailsare presented in Table 14-7 and Table 14-8 below. The MHREO Zone corresponds to the Centralwireframe shell. The mineral resource scenarios for the Ashram Deposit, including the MHREOZone, are presented in Table 14-4, Table 14-5, Table 14-6, Table 14-7 and Table 14-8 using 0.50%,0.75%, 1.00%, 1.25% (base case) and 1.50% TREO cut-off grades. Table 14-4: Ashram Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate Tonnage Density TREO* LREO* MREO* HREO* MHREO F MH/T* Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) *(%) (%) Ratio Measured 1,980,000 3.04 1.55 1.40 0.079 0.074 0.15 3.18 9.9% Indicated 37,200,000 2.99 1.61 1.49 0.065 0.050 0.11 2.35 7.1% Measured + Indicated 39,180,000 2.99 1.60 1.49 0.065 0.051 0.12 2.39 7.3% Inferred 383,560,000 2.96 1.45 1.35 0.058 0.042 0.10 1.64 6.9% COG 0.50% TREO Tonnage Density TREO* LREO* MREO* HREO* MHREO F MH/T* Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) *(%) (%) Ratio Measured 1,600,000 3.07 1.77 1.60 0.089 0.084 0.17 3.75 9.8% Indicated 30,130,000 3.01 1.83 1.70 0.071 0.054 0.12 2.72 6.8% Measured + Indicated 31,740,000 3.01 1.82 1.70 0.072 0.055 0.13 2.77 7.0% Inferred 336,610,000 2.97 1.56 1.46 0.061 0.043 0.10 1.75 6.6% COG 0.75% TREO Tonnage Density TREO* LREO* MREO* HREO* MHREO F MH/T* Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) *(%) (%) Ratio Measured 1,600,000 3.07 1.77 1.60 0.089 0.084 0.17 3.75 9.8% Indicated 28,680,000 3.01 1.88 1.75 0.072 0.055 0.13 2.81 6.7% Measured + Indicated 30,280,000 3.02 1.87 1.74 0.073 0.056 0.13 2.86 6.9% Inferred 259,400,000 2.99 1.76 1.65 0.065 0.044 0.11 2.02 6.2% COG 1.00% TREO Tonnage Density TREO* LREO* MREO* HREO* MHREO F MH/T* Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) *(%) (%) Ratio Measured 1,590,000 3.07 1.77 1.60 0.089 0.085 0.17 3.76 9.8% Indicated 27,670,000 3.02 1.90 1.77 0.073 0.056 0.13 2.89 6.7% Measured + Indicated 29,270,000 3.02 1.90 1.77 0.073 0.057 0.13 2.94 6.9% Inferred 219,800,000 3.00 1.88 1.77 0.068 0.045 0.11 2.21 6.0% COG 1.25% TREO - BASE CASE Tonnage Density TREO* LREO* MREO* HREO* MHREO F MH/T* Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) *(%) (%) Ratio Measured 1,320,000 3.07 1.85 1.68 0.088 0.084 0.17 3.88 9.3% Indicated 25,420,000 3.01 1.95 1.82 0.072 0.054 0.13 2.88 6.5% Measured + Indicated 26,730,000 3.02 1.94 1.81 0.073 0.056 0.13 2.93 6.6% Inferred 210,590,000 3.00 1.91 1.79 0.069 0.045 0.11 2.22 5.9% COG 1.50% TREO Note: Totals may differ from sum or weighted sum of numbers due to rounding SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 109 Tonnage Density TREO* LREO* MREO* HREO* MHREO F MH/T* Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) *(%) (%) Ratio Measured 820,000 3.05 1.99 1.83 0.083 0.076 0.16 3.77 8.0% Indicated 20,940,000 3.01 2.01 1.89 0.071 0.051 0.12 2.80 6.0% Measured + Indicated 21,750,000 3.01 2.01 1.89 0.071 0.052 0.12 2.83 6.1% Inferred 164,110,000 3.00 1.98 1.86 0.070 0.044 0.11 2.26 5.8% COG 1.75% TREO Note: Totals may differ from sum or weighted sum of numbers due to rounding*LREO (Light Rare Earth Oxides) = La 2O3 + Ce 2O3 + Pr2O 3 + Nd 2O 3*MREO (Middle Rare Earth Oxides) = Sm 2O 3 + Eu2O 3 + Gd2O 3*HREO (Heavy Rare Earth Oxides) = Tb2O 3 + Dy2O3 + Ho2O3 + Er2O3 + Tm 2O 3 + Yb2O 3 + Lu 2O 3 + Y2O3*MHREO (Middle and Heavy Rare Earth Oxides) = MREO + HREO*TREO = LREO + MREO + HREO*MH / T = MHREO / TREO, expressed as a percentCoG = Cut-off GradeEffective March 6th 2012 Table 14-5: Ashram Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate with Individual REO Values Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) MEASURED 1,980,000 3.04 0.3588 0.6888 0.0761 0.2770 0.0422 0.0107 0.0261 0.0029 0.0122 0.0017 0.0036 0.0004 0.0021 0.0003 0.0510 3.18 INDICATED 37,200,000 2.99 0.4059 0.7337 0.0779 0.2734 0.0359 0.0084 0.0203 0.0021 0.0084 0.0012 0.0025 0.0003 0.0015 0.0002 0.0340 2.35 MEAS+IND 39,180,000 2.99 0.4035 0.7314 0.0778 0.2736 0.0362 0.0086 0.0206 0.0021 0.0085 0.0012 0.0026 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.0348 2.39 INFERRED 383,560,000 2.96 0.3565 0.6671 0.0718 0.2559 0.0326 0.0076 0.0178 0.0018 0.0071 0.0010 0.0021 0.0002 0.0013 0.0002 0.0282 1.64 COG 0.50% TREO Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) MEASURED 1,600,000 3.07 0.4148 0.7851 0.0858 0.3099 0.0475 0.0120 0.0296 0.0033 0.0138 0.0020 0.0041 0.0004 0.0024 0.0003 0.0582 3.75 INDICATED 30,130,000 3.01 0.4717 0.8380 0.0877 0.3037 0.0393 0.0092 0.0222 0.0022 0.0090 0.0012 0.0027 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.0364 2.72 MEAS+IND 31,740,000 3.01 0.4688 0.8353 0.0876 0.3040 0.0397 0.0093 0.0226 0.0023 0.0092 0.0013 0.0027 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.0375 2.77 INFERRED 336,610,000 2.97 0.3884 0.7195 0.0767 0.2714 0.0342 0.0079 0.0186 0.0018 0.0073 0.0010 0.0022 0.0002 0.0014 0.0002 0.0289 1.75 COG 0.75% TREO Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) MEASURED 1,600,000 3.07 0.4148 0.7851 0.0858 0.3099 0.0475 0.0120 0.0296 0.0033 0.0138 0.0020 0.0041 0.0004 0.0024 0.0003 0.0582 3.75 INDICATED 28,680,000 3.01 0.4874 0.8622 0.0898 0.3101 0.0399 0.0093 0.0226 0.0023 0.0091 0.0013 0.0027 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.0371 2.81 MEAS+IND 30,280,000 3.02 0.4836 0.8581 0.0896 0.3101 0.0403 0.0095 0.0230 0.0023 0.0094 0.0013 0.0028 0.0003 0.0017 0.0002 0.0382 2.86 INFERRED 259,400,000 2.99 0.4509 0.8183 0.0857 0.2984 0.0369 0.0084 0.0200 0.0019 0.0075 0.0010 0.0022 0.0002 0.0014 0.0002 0.0298 2.02 COG 1.00% TREO Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) MEASURED 1,590,000 3.07 0.4158 0.7865 0.0859 0.3102 0.0475 0.0121 0.0297 0.0033 0.0139 0.0020 0.0041 0.0005 0.0024 0.0003 0.0583 3.76 INDICATED 27,670,000 3.02 0.4960 0.8747 0.0909 0.3131 0.0403 0.0094 0.0229 0.0023 0.0093 0.0013 0.0028 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.0378 2.89 MEAS+IND 29,270,000 3.02 0.4916 0.8699 0.0906 0.3129 0.0407 0.0096 0.0232 0.0024 0.0095 0.0013 0.0028 0.0003 0.0017 0.0002 0.0389 2.94 INFERRED 219,800,000 3.00 0.4895 0.8775 0.0911 0.3137 0.0386 0.0088 0.0209 0.0020 0.0077 0.0010 0.0022 0.0002 0.0013 0.0002 0.0302 2.21 COG 1.25% TREO - BASE CASE Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) MEASURED 1,320,000 3.07 0.4465 0.8287 0.0887 0.3149 0.0469 0.0118 0.0293 0.0032 0.0137 0.0019 0.0041 0.0005 0.0024 0.0003 0.0582 3.88 INDICATED 25,420,000 3.01 0.5131 0.8976 0.0926 0.3168 0.0401 0.0093 0.0226 0.0022 0.0091 0.0013 0.0027 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.0370 2.88 MEAS+IND 26,730,000 3.02 0.5098 0.8942 0.0924 0.3167 0.0405 0.0094 0.0230 0.0023 0.0093 0.0013 0.0028 0.0003 0.0017 0.0002 0.0381 2.93 INFERRED 210,590,000 3.00 0.4965 0.8882 0.0920 0.3164 0.0388 0.0088 0.0210 0.0020 0.0077 0.0010 0.0022 0.0002 0.0013 0.0002 0.0301 2.22 COG 1.50% TREO Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) MEASURED 820,000 3.05 0.5074 0.9072 0.0939 0.3230 0.0450 0.0110 0.0273 0.0029 0.0121 0.0018 0.0038 0.0004 0.0023 0.0003 0.0528 3.77 INDICATED 20,940,000 3.01 0.5419 0.9343 0.0952 0.3219 0.0396 0.0090 0.0219 0.0021 0.0085 0.0012 0.0025 0.0003 0.0015 0.0002 0.0346 2.80 MEAS+IND 21,750,000 3.01 0.5406 0.9333 0.0951 0.3219 0.0398 0.0091 0.0221 0.0021 0.0086 0.0012 0.0026 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.0352 2.83 INFERRED 164,110,000 3.00 0.5211 0.9237 0.0950 0.3246 0.0395 0.0089 0.0214 0.0020 0.0077 0.0010 0.0022 0.0002 0.0013 0.0002 0.0298 2.26 COG 1.75% TREONote: Totals may differ from sum or weighted sum of numbers due to rounding SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 110 Table 14-6: MHREO Zone Mineral Resource Estimate Tonnage Density TREO LREO MREO HREO MHREO F MH/T Classification Zone (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Ratio MEASURED Central 1,140,000 3.10 1.69 1.50 0.098 0.099 0.20 4.18 12% INDICATED Central 5,420,000 3.10 1.62 1.44 0.091 0.091 0.18 3.90 11% MEAS+IND Central 6,550,000 3.10 1.63 1.45 0.093 0.093 0.19 3.95 11% INFERRED Central 2,790,000 3.10 1.57 1.39 0.085 0.088 0.17 3.43 11% COG 1.25 TREO Table 14-7: MHREO Zone Mineral Resource Estimate with Individual REO Values Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F MH/T Classification Zone (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Ratio MEASURED Central 1,140,000 3.10 0.3690 0.7336 0.0831 0.3100 0.0513 0.0134 0.0330 0.0038 0.0163 0.0023 0.0048 0.0005 0.0027 0.0003 0.0685 4.18 12% INDICATED Central 5,420,000 3.10 0.3512 0.7047 0.0804 0.3015 0.0480 0.0125 0.0310 0.0036 0.0153 0.0021 0.0044 0.0005 0.0025 0.0003 0.0624 3.90 11% MEAS+IND Central 6,560,000 3.10 0.3543 0.7098 0.0809 0.3029 0.0486 0.0126 0.0313 0.0037 0.0155 0.0022 0.0045 0.0005 0.0025 0.0003 0.0635 3.95 11% INFERRED Central 2,790,000 3.10 0.3423 0.6823 0.0783 0.2910 0.0448 0.0115 0.0289 0.0034 0.0145 0.0021 0.0043 0.0005 0.0025 0.0003 0.0605 3.43 11% COG 1.25 TREO - BASE CASE Table 14-8: Ashram Deposit Mineral Resource Estimate per Zone Tonnage Density La2O3 Ce2O3 Pr2O3 Nd2O3 Sm2O3 Eu2O3 Gd2O3 Tb2O3 Dy2O3 Ho2O3 Er2O3 Tm2O3 Yb2O3 Lu2O3 Y2O3 F MH/T Classification Zone (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Ratio Measured Central 1,140,000 3.10 0.369 0.734 0.083 0.310 0.051 0.013 0.033 0.0038 0.0163 0.0023 0.0048 0.0005 0.0027 0.0003 0.068 4.18 12% Measured Inner 460,000 3.00 0.533 0.918 0.093 0.311 0.038 0.009 0.021 0.0020 0.0079 0.0011 0.0025 0.0003 0.0015 0.0002 0.033 2.71 6% Indicated Central 5,420,000 3.10 0.351 0.705 0.080 0.301 0.048 0.012 0.031 0.0036 0.0153 0.0021 0.0044 0.0005 0.0025 0.0003 0.062 3.90 11% Indicated Inner 21,960,000 3.00 0.534 0.920 0.094 0.317 0.038 0.009 0.021 0.0020 0.0079 0.0011 0.0024 0.0003 0.0015 0.0002 0.032 2.67 6% Indicated Outer 300,000 2.90 0.314 0.608 0.069 0.252 0.032 0.007 0.015 0.0013 0.0046 0.0006 0.0012 0.0001 0.0009 0.0001 0.017 0.74 6% Inferred Central 2,790,000 3.10 0.342 0.682 0.078 0.291 0.045 0.012 0.029 0.0034 0.0145 0.0021 0.0043 0.0005 0.0025 0.0003 0.060 3.43 11% Inferred Inner 215,770,000 3.00 0.492 0.882 0.091 0.314 0.039 0.009 0.021 0.0019 0.0076 0.0010 0.0022 0.0002 0.0013 0.0002 0.030 2.20 6% Inferred Outer 1,240,000 2.90 0.307 0.598 0.066 0.244 0.030 0.007 0.015 0.0015 0.0059 0.0008 0.0018 0.0002 0.0013 0.0002 0.024 1.10 7% MEASURED All 1,590,000 3.07 0.416 0.787 0.086 0.310 0.048 0.012 0.030 0.0033 0.0139 0.0020 0.0041 0.0005 0.0024 0.0003 0.058 3.76 10% INDICATED All 27,670,000 3.02 0.496 0.875 0.091 0.313 0.040 0.009 0.023 0.0023 0.0093 0.0013 0.0028 0.0003 0.0016 0.0002 0.038 2.89 7% MEAS+IND All 29,270,000 3.02 0.492 0.870 0.091 0.313 0.041 0.010 0.023 0.0024 0.0095 0.0013 0.0028 0.0003 0.0017 0.0002 0.039 2.94 7% INFERRED All 219,800,000 3.00 0.490 0.878 0.091 0.314 0.039 0.009 0.021 0.0020 0.0077 0.0010 0.0022 0.0002 0.0013 0.0002 0.030 2.21 6%Note: Totals of the above three tables may differ from sum or weighted sum of numbers due to rounding 14.9 Mineral Resource ValidationA validation of the mineral resource TREO grade was conducted as part of the verification process.The validation includes: 1) a visual comparison of the color-coded block values versus thecomposites data in the vicinity of the interpolated blocks, and 2) a comparison of the grade averageand standard deviation parameters for the composite data and the block model data. Table 14-9summarizes the comparative statistics of the composite and block model datasets without any cut-off grade. Figure 14-13 shows the verification histograms. Table 14-9: Comparative Statistics of the Assays, Composites, and Blocks Datasets Dataset Count TREE (ppm) Std dev. Assays 13,513 13,481 6120 Composites 4,573 13,186 5650 Blocks 143,036 12,418 4650 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 111 Verification Histograms 45% 40% 35% 30% Assays Frequency 25% Composites 20% Blocks 15% 10% 5% 0% 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000 % TREE Figure 14-13: Comparative Histograms of the Assays, Composites, and Blocks DatasetsIn addition to the grade validation, a verification of the mineral resource tonnage was conducted.The tonnage validation consists of the comparison of the tonnage calculated from the volume of the3D wireframe envelop of the mineralization compared to the tonnage calculated from thevolumetric estimate of the block model using identical average bulk density value. 14.10 Comments about the Mineral Resource EstimateThere are no known factors or issues related to permitting, legal, mineral title, taxation, socio-economic or political relationships that could materially affect the mineral resource estimate.Although there is some significant extrapolation of the analytical data (up to about 150 m), it hasbeen decided to model the Ashram Deposit that way to keep it fairly regular and consistent. Inorder to decrease the uncertainties related to the grade interpolation in the areas located away fromanalytical data, additional in-fill drilling will be necessary to confirm the presence of mineralization. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 11215 Mineral Reserve EstimatesNo mineral reserves have been calculated on the Property. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 11316 Mining Methods 16.1 Mining MethodTaking into account the proximity of the mineralized zone with the surface topography and thepresence of high grades of REEs at shallow depth, the mining method selected to mine the AshramDeposit is open-pit mining. Conventional mining equipment, such as trucks, loaders, and hydraulicshovels will be used on 5 metre benches.This PEA was restricted to the evaluation of the open-pit potential of the Ashram Deposit.Therefore the possibility of underground mining was not considered since SGS Geostat did not seethe advantage of using such a method considering the higher operating costs and the depositparticularities. 16.2 Overall Pit Slope AngleSince the required geotechnical data is not available for determining the pit slope angle, SGS Geostatutilized an overall slope angle of 45°. This value is based on the results of a study performed byHoek and Bray (1974) which has the purpose of reasonably predicting the angle at which a slope isconsidered stable by analysing various mining projects. The next figure shows that for an averagedepth of 200 m and with a factor of safety of 1.3, a slope can be considered stable at 45°. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 114 Figure 16-1: Cases of Rock Slope With Stable and Failed Conditions Distinguished5 16.3 Pit Optimization16.3.1 Pit Optimization ProcedureAt a rate of 4,000 tonnes of ore per day processed, at the 1.25% TREO CoG, the Ashram Depositcontains enough resource to support an operation of more than 177 years6 (open pit andunderground mining). Therefore, the main purpose of the optimization process was to highlight asection of the deposit providing a sufficient TREO grade (over 1.25% TREO) with a reasonablestripping ratio, rather than determining the optimum pit limit.Gems WhittleTM was used to create a series of nested pit shells based on varying revenue factors(RF). In order to maximise the mined TREO grade, the smallest shell containing sufficient resourcesfor 25 years of production at a mining CoG of 1.25% TREO was selected as the base case.Considering that this study is a PEA, no grade optimization scenarios were made in this report.Future studies should analyse several scenarios to quantify the variation of the Project’s NPV whenraising the mining CoG; and thus indirectly raising the stripping ratio and the daily mining rate.5 Steffen, O. K. H., Contreras, L. F., Terbrugge, P. J., Venter, J., A Risk Evaluation Approach for Pit Slope Design, 20086SGS Geostat, Technical Report, Mineral Resource Estimation Update, Eldor Property – Ashram Deposit, Nunavik,Quebec, Commerce Resources Corporation, April 20th 2012, Table 17.1, p.94 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 11516.3.2 Pit Optimization ParametersFor the initial optimization, the required parameters were selected by SGS to evaluate the mosteconomic open-pit profile. Although these parameters are not necessarily final, a reasonable degreeof accuracy is required, since the analysis is an iterative process. The economic and operatingparameters used in the initial optimization are given in Table 16-1: Table 16-1: Economic Parameters of Pit Optimization Exchange rate 1.00 CAN$:US$ Discount rate 10.00 % Oxides Prices Lanthanum 15.00 CAN$/kg Cerium 10.00 CAN$/kg Praseodymium 76.00 CAN$/kg Neodymium 77.00 CAN$/kg Samarium 12.00 CAN$/kg Europium 905.00 CAN$/kg Gadolinium 45.00 CAN$/kg Terbium 980.00 CAN$/kg Dysprosium 800.00 CAN$/kg Yttrium 28.00 CAN$/kg Ashram Basket Price: 35.03 CAN$/kg Slope angle 45 deg Mining cost 5.58 C$/tonne Mining recovery 100 % Mining dilution - % Processing (Concentration) 41.27 C$/t treated G&A 47.70 C$/t treated Total ore based cost 88.97 C$/t treated Mill recovery 70.00 % Cracking recovery 95.00 % Overall mine site recovery (70% x 95%) 66.50 % Oxide Prices Discount * 25.00 % 4,000 tpd Mill throughput 1,400,000 tpy *Account for final hydrometallurgyUsing the Ashram basket price, the marginal (mill) cut-off grade was calculated at 0.51% TREO.Although all material above 0.51% TREO is economical, a mining cut-off grade of 1.25% TREOwas selected in order to maximise the mill feed grade.Note: The economic parameters used at the time of the pit optimization do not necessarily confirm those stated in theeconomic model. The impact is negligible considering the size of the resource and the quality of initial estimates. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 11616.3.3 Pit Optimization ResultsAs described in the pit optimization procedure, from all the nested pit shells, the smallest of themcontaining sufficient resources for 25 years of production at a mining CoG of 1.25% TREO wasthus selected as the base case. The tonnage contained in the selected shell is presented in Table 16-2and shown by Figure 16-2 and Figure 16-3. Table 16-2: Resources Contained Into Base Case Pit Shell Grade Density Tonnage TREO Rocktype % TREO t/m3 t % < 1.25 2.91 1,400,000 0.86 Mineralized ≥1.25 3.03 32,800,000* 1.82 material Total 3.02 34,200,000 1.78 Waste material ALL 2.90 2,900,000 0.00 Total ALL 3.01 37,100,000 Note: Resulting stripping ratio = 0.13* With a reasonable tonnage increase of 5-10% when designing the optimal pit, this tonnage of 32.8 M tonnes willeasily be increased to 35,000,000 tonnes and then support a 25 years mine life operation. TOPO LAKE BASE CASE SHELL Figure 16-2: Plan View of the Base Case Pit Shell SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 117 450m 200m Base case pit shell %TREO OF MINERALIZED MATERIAL 0 to 1.25 1.25 to 1.50 1.50 to 1.75 1.75 to 2.00 2.00 to Ceiling Figure 16-3: Section View (6,312,175N) of the Base Case Pit Shell SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 118 16.4 Ultimate Pit16.4.1 Pit Design ParametersUsing the base case shell as reference, an open-pit including a ramp and safety berms was designedto develop a more realistic mining scenario. The new designed pit will account for the additionalwaste material coming from the addition of a ramp to the base case shell. The design parametersused are defined as: - Overall slope angle: 45° - Face angle: 85° - Bench height: 5m - Double benching: 1 safety berm at each 4 benches - Safety berm: 18 m width - Ramp grade: 10% - Ramp width: 16.3 m (single lane) and 21.7 m (double lane) *See figure below Figure 16-4: Ramp Width, Single and Double Lanes (annotations in metres)16.4.2 Ultimate Pit DesignThe next figure shows a plan view of the pit with his dimensions and the surrounding elements. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 119 Maximum depth = 175m from surface 500 m LAKE BED Figure 16-5: Plan View of Designed Pit and Dimensions16.4.3 Mineralization Contained Within Pit DesignThe ultimate pit design results are presented in Table 16-3. Table 16-3: Mineralization Contained Within Pit Design Grade Density Tonnage TREO Rocktype % TREO t/m3 t % < 1.25 2.91 2,500,000 0.86 Mineralized material ≥1.25 3.02 35,000,000 1.81 Total 3.02 37,400,000 1.74 Waste material ALL 2.90 4,200,000 0.00 Total ALL 3.00 41,600,000 Note: Resulting stripping ratio = 0.19 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 120 16.5 Mine Development and Production ScheduleThe mine development used a number of push-backs, or phases, designed to meet the followingobjectives: - Enable the mining of high grade mineralization as early as possible; - Effectively reduce stripping ratio in the initial mining stage; - Balance the stripping ratio over the period of the mine life; - Maintain a minimum mining width between two working phases.16.5.1 Pushback WidthIn order to have a safe operation, a minimum mining width has to be respected when introducing apushback into an operating pit. An appropriate mining width was determined based on: - a CAT 988H loading a CAT 773 mining truck; - a 23.3 m allowance for loader movement; - a 21.7 m haul road width.The other loading unit, a hydraulic shovel CAT 385C, will require less width due to the backhoe’sconfiguration.Figure 16-6 illustrates the proposed pushback width to be used in the design of the phasedevelopment: Figure 16-6: Minimum Push-back Width16.5.2 Pit DewateringThe progressive deepening of the open pit will result in increasing water infiltration fromprecipitation (rain and snow) and groundwater inflow. The maximum depth of the pit will bereached in year 25 and will be around 170 m under topography. As the pit deepens and increases infootprint, it will be necessary to control water inflow through the construction of an in-pitdewatering systems such as drainage ditches, sumps, water pipes and pumps. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 12116.5.3 Mine DevelopmentThree minable phases are proposed to develop the ultimate pit, as designed and shown in Fig 16-7and Fig 16-8. Each phase or pushback is designed with at least a minimum mining width of about45 m to accommodate the mining equipment that will operate on each working bench.Phase/Pushback #1At the beginning of the Project, the mining activities will be concentrated around phase #1 since theshell defined by this phase gives the higher grade achievable near surface and a low waste-to-orestripping ratio. Prioritizing the mining in this section of the deposit will maximize revenue at thebeginning of the Project, thus maximizing the net present value (NPV).7Phase/Pushback #2Phase #2 generally expands to the Northeast of Phase #1. A constant difference of 10 metres (2benches) has been kept during development of the mining plan (LoM) to limit the number ofbenches mined simultaneously. This constraint has also the effect to limit the variation of strippingratios from years to years.8Phase/Pushback #3 (Optimal Pit Design)Phase #3 includes the mining of the rest of the mineralized material. Table 16-4 presents thetonnage for the 3 phases. Figure 16-7 and Figure 16-8 schematize the 3 phases. Table 16-4: Tonnage by Phase Phase Material Tonnage %TREO Stripping Ore ≥1.25 %TREO 7,850,000 1.75 1 0.11 Waste 840,000 - Ore ≥1.25 %TREO 12,040,000 1.83 2 0.08 Waste 910,000 - Ore ≥1.25 %TREO 15,110,000 1.82 3 0.32 Waste 4,850,000 - Ore ≥1.25 %TREO 35,000,000 1.81 TOTAL 0.19 Waste 6,600,000 -7 Considering that this study is at a PEA level and has for main purpose to evaluate the economic potential of thedeposit, no final pit design was completed for phase #18 Same as above SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 122 Pushback #1 Pushback #2 Pushback #3 OPTIMAL PIT DESIGN Figure 16-7: Plan View - Pushback’s 1, 2 and 3 (Optimal Pit Design) Pushback #3 OPTIMAL PIT DESIGN Pushback #2 Pushback #1 Figure 16-8: Pushback’s 1, 2 and 3 (Optimal Pit Design) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 12316.5.4 Production ScheduleAt a mill throughput of 4,000 tonnes per day, the Ashram Deposit has sufficient mineral resourcesto support an operation of more than 177 years9 (considering the current measured, indicated andinferred resources). SGS and Commerce Resources agreed to limit this PEA to the 25 first years.The evaluation beyond these years is pure speculation considering the impossibility of predicting thedemand for the lanthanides for such a period plus the changes in the overall economy.SGS developed a life-of-mine scenario (LoM) based on a 1,400,000 tonnes mill throughput (4,000tonnes per day over 350 days per year). Stripping will begin during construction phase (year 0) inorder to use waste material to build roads and infrastructure foundations.Table 16-6 and Figure 16-9 show the LoM scenario proposed by SGS. In addition to the LoMscenario, Table 16-5 shows the amount of oxides contained into the final concentrate on a 5 yearbasis and after a 66.5% mill-cracking recovery to a REC end product. Table 16-5: Oxides Contained in Mine Concentrate (using 66.5% Mill-Cracking Recovery) Year 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 Total Mill input tonnes 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 35,000,000 Grade input %TREO 1.72 1.73 1.77 1.86 1.94 1.81 La tonnes 19,200 19,700 20,300 21,400 23,000 103,600 Ce tonnes 36,400 36,800 37,700 39,500 42,530 192,930 Pr tonnes 3,900 3,900 4,000 4,200 4,500 20,500 Nd tonnes 13,900 13,800 14,000 14,500 15,600 71,800 Sm tonnes 1,900 1,900 1,900 2,000 2,180 9,880 Eu tonnes 470 460 460 480 520 2,390 Gd tonnes 1,200 1,100 1,100 1,200 1,300 5,900 Tb tonnes 130 120 120 130 140 640 Dy tonnes 530 500 500 540 590 2,660 Y tonnes 2,200 2,100 2,100 2,200 2,400 11,000 Total tonnes 79,830 80,380 82,180 86,150 92,760 421,300 All tonnages are roundedThe overall 66.5 % processing recovery is explained in Section 17. No tonnages for Holium (Ho),Erbium (Er), Thulium (Th), Ytterbium (Yb), and Lutetium (Lu) are included and have been assignedno value in the economic evaluation of the Project. However, they will be present in the mixedREC end product but account for less than 90 tonnes combined of REO production annually.*Disclaimer: Commerce will not produce these quantities of oxides separately. Commerce is expected to produce a mixed REC product only for the market.9 SGS Geostat, Technical Report, Mineral Resource Estimation Update, Eldor Property – Ashram Deposit, Nunavik,Quebec, Commerce Resources Corporation, April 20th 2012, Table 17.1, p.94 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 124 Table 16-6: Production Schedule Proposed by SGS Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Tonnes ore 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000%TREO 1.77 1.71 1.71 1.71 1.72 1.72 1.73 1.73 1.74 1.74 1.75 1.76Tonnes waste 750,000 865,143 785,673 640,040 632,175 526,288 526,288 370,789 350,654 287,981 244,825 190,199 110,468Stripping ratio 0.62 0.56 0.46 0.45 0.38 0.38 0.26 0.25 0.21 0.17 0.14 0.08Pushback 1 minedPushback 2 minedPushback 3 mined Year 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25Tonnes ore 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000%TREO 1.77 1.79 1.80 1.83 1.84 1.86 1.87 1.88 1.89 1.90 1.92 1.96 2.05Tonnes waste 99,081 64,974 52,981 3,178 4,081 5,625 1,299Stripping ratio 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.00Pushback 1 minedPushback 2 minedPushback 3 mined 2,500,000 2.1 2 2,000,000 1.9 1,500,000 TONNES %TREO 1.8 Waste 1,000,000 1.7 Ore 500,000 1.6 %TREO - 1.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 YEAR Figure 16-9: Production Schedule Proposed by SGS SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 125 16.6 Mine equipment selection16.6.1 DrillingTable 16-7 presents a summary of the drilling parameters selected to mine the Ashram Deposit: Table 16-7: Drilling Parameters Daily tonnage (ore + waste) 5,000 tonnes Burden 4.0 m Spacing 4.0 m Depth (Bench height) 5.0 m Sub-driling 1.0 m Rock density (average) 3.0 t/m3 Tonnes per holes 240.0 t/hole Tonnes per drilled meters 40.0 t/m Tonnes per days 5,000 tpd Required meters per day 125.0 mpd Required holes per day 21 holes Operated hours per day (theo) 12 hpd Efficiency 60% % Average availability 75% % Operated hours per day (real) 5.4 hpd Required production per hour 23.1 mph Drilling unit required 1 unitAlthough only one drill would be sufficient (based on the required production per hour), two unitsare budgeted in order to not compromise the normal production activities in case of a majorbreakdown. Also, this will provide flexibility when pre-shear drilling will be done simultaneouslywith the production drilling.The selected drilling units are defined as: Quantity 2 Supplier Atlas Copco Model FlexiROC D55 Hole diameter 3.625” – 6” Hammer type Down-the-holeA pre-shearing procedure will be implemented adjacent to the outer limits in order to minimizedamage to the final walls. The primary drilling unit will be able to drill those holes due to theflexibility of his boom and the possibility to drill with a smaller diameter. Pre-shearing will consist ofa continuous row, blasted in section along the final wall. Pre-shearing holes are 4” diameter, spacedat 1.2 m and to a depth of 20 m (4 benches together). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 12616.6.2 BlastingTable 16-8 presents a summary of the assumed blasting parameters to mine the Ashram Deposit. Table 16-8: Blasting Parameters Daily tonnage (ore + waste) 5,000 tonnes Tonnes per hole 240.0 tonnes Hole depth 6.0 m Collar 2.00 m Active column 4.00 m Hole diameter 5.0 " Hole diameter 12.7 cm Emulsion density 1.28 g/cc Qty emulsion per hole 65 kg Qty emulsion per day 1,351 kg Powder factor 0.27 kg/tonneGiven the long mine life (more than 25 years), an emulsion plant will be built on the mine site inorder to limit the costs of consumables. Also, emulsion was preferred to ANFO considering itsresistance to water. The emulsion plant should be able to produce 500,000 kg of emulsion per year.A blasting contractor will take care of producing the right mix, to ensure the product quality and todeliver the final product directly to drilled holes. The contractor will provide his own truck and hisown employees for operation. The contractor will be under the direct supervision of the mineoperator (e.g. Commerce Resources).The operator of the Project (e.g. Commerce Resources) will have its own blasting crew who will takecare of the priming, stemming, tie-in and firing the blast patterns.Pre-shear holes will be loaded and blasted by the operator’s blasting crew due to the use of packagesexplosives in this kind of holes.16.6.3 Major Equipment SelectionThe mining equipment, presented in Table 16-9, was selected in order to match the targetedproduction rate and also the mining parameters, such as bench height, shift length, etc. The majormining operations (mucking and hauling) will take place 350 days per year, 24 hours per day, withtwo crews working 12 hours per day.The following parameters were taken in consideration in order to come up with the requiredongoing production fleet (mainly loading units and trucks). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 127 - Specific tonnage mined per year; - Equipment efficiency and availability; - Effective hours worked per day; - Equipment tonnage and filling capacity; - Haulers speed by location; - Haulers cycle time (starting at 6.9 min at year 0 and finishing at 22.3 min at year 25), etc. Table 16-9: Proposed Mining and Service Fleet Purpose Unit Size Model Quantity Drilling Drill 3.625”- 6” AC FlexiROC D55 2 Loader 14 t CAT 988H 1 Mucking Shovel 8t CAT 385 1 Hauling Truck 50 t CAT 773 4 Dozer 305 hp CAT D8R 1 Auxiliary Grader 297 hp CAT 16M 1 Shovel 345 hp CAT 345 1 Water/Fire truck 7 kgal - 1 Loader 270 hp CAT 966H 1 Skid steer 50 hp - 1 Pick-up - - 10 Bus - - 2 Tire truck - - 1 Services & Service truck - - 1 Support & Forklift 10 klbs - 1 Others Flat bed truck - - 1 Tanker truck 2,5 kgal - 1 Crane 75 t - 1 Concentrate truck 35 t - 6 Fuel tanker 45 kL - 2 Tower light - - 5 Truck scale 100 t - 1 Dozer 305 hp CAT D8R 1 Grader 297 hp CAT 16M 2 All Weather Shovel 345 hp CAT 345 1 Road (AWR) Loader 270 hp CAT 966H 1 Tractor - - 1 Low bed trailer 50 t - 1The minimum number of trucks needed is 1 unit for years 1-4 and 2 units for years 5-25. Due to theProject location, the operator (e.g. Commerce Resources) will need backup units in case of majorbreakdown; so a constant number of haulers (4) have to be available during the entire mine life.Those haulers will already be on site due to their use for the all-weather road construction.For the entire Project period, a single loading unit, such as the proposed wheel loader, will besufficient to achieve the mining targets. A back-up loading unit, such as a CAT 385 shovel, willhowever be necessary during major maintenances or breakdown.The estimated life of main units is 70,000 operating hours, i.e. an approximate 10-12 years usage forhighly utilized equipment such as trucks and loading units. Therefore, new equipment will bepurchased around mid-project. A special allocation has been planned and is presented in the sectionon operating costs. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 12817 Recovery Methods 17.1 Historical BackgroundSince Ashram is a new project, there is no historical milling background. 17.2 MillingUpon review of available rare earth market studies, as well as discussion with Commerce, a 4,000 tpdmill is proposed in this study. The mill process will be conventional with operation relying onoperators’ experience and skill supported by electronic monitoring and instrumentation. Mill designcriteria follow those used in several mines in Canada where apart for the run of mine grizzly,hopper, jaw crusher and water tanks, the entire mill services and operations are under the same roof.Whenever possible, mill equipment will be chosen on the basis of the optimization of theconcentrate grade and the overall recovery.This preliminary assessment is based on the following assumptions: • A good mill design will have a good overall TREO grade and recovery • Unless in extremely good working condition, Commerce will buy new milling equipment • The mine will be able to feed the mill at a rate of 4,000 tpd, 7 days per week • No major setbacks will be encountered with the federal and provincial environmental agencies, trade unions and/or indigenous people • 3-Phases diesel power generators delivering about 10MW will be available on site • Approximately 5 hectares of a more or less flat site will have to be prepared for the mill and its ancillary infrastructure • It will be possible to dispose of the tailings without jeopardizing the surrounding environment • It is anticipated that the mineral concentrate grade will be a minimum of 10% TREO, while recovery will be in the 70% range • The ore liberation size is typically less than 30 m, down to <5 m • No provision was made for the recovery of other minerals (fluorite, apatite) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 12917.2.1 Processing DescriptionThe process plant is designed to produce a rare earth mineral concentrate by froth flotation. It willincorporate the following sections: run-of-mine ore storage, a one-stage crushing plant, crushed orestorage, SAG milling with screens classification followed by a single-stage ball milling with cycloneclassification, flotation of the rare earth minerals, concentrate thickening and filtering, tailingshandling and placement, water and reagents distribution.For the ease of reading, only major milling pieces of equipment are enumerated and described.(Refer to the process flowsheets for a more complete listing of mill main machinery).17.2.1.1 Run of Mine OreRun of mine (RoM) ore is delivered from the mine by haul trucks. Whenever possible the ore will bedumped directly in the jaw crusher feed hopper. However, because the mining and the crushingoperations will not always be on the same time schedule, it is assumed that 25% of the time the haultrucks will proceed to the RoM stock pile and the rest of the time the haul trucks will dump directlyonto the grizzly above the crusher feed hopper. The RoM stockpile area is sized to holdapproximately 30,000 tonnes of ore. Secondary handling of the ore will be by a Caterpillar 938 frontend loader that will, among other things, be used to feed the crusher feed hopper with stockpiledRoM ore as necessary.17.2.1.2 CrushingA grizzly (10) having 15” x 20” openings scalps the oversize rock from the run of mine ore. Theoversize will be broken in place with a pneumatic rock breaker (05). Grizzly undersize falls into a100 tonne capacity hopper (15) which in turn feeds a 17’ x 5’ apron feeder (20) discharging on anincline fix bar scalper (25). Bar scalper oversize falls by gravity into the 48” x 60” jaw crusher (30)while the undersize, the crushed ore and the fines from the apron feeder reports to a 60” widesacrificial belt conveyor (35). A sacrificial belt conveyor in turn reports to a 36” wide belt conveyor(40) which discharges on a buffer stockpile (50). The stockpile which is above ground has a live loadof 4,000 tonnes. It feeds through longitudinal slots two apron feeders (55, 60) located in an 8’ x 8’underground concrete tunnel.17.2.1.3 Grinding and ClassificationApron feeders (55, 60) discharging on a second 36” belt conveyor (65) feed a 10’ x 20’, 1200 kWSAG mill (75). The SAG mill discharges on a set of three 60” x 120”, 16 mesh Derrick screens (80).Derrick screen oversize is conveyed back to the SAG mill feed via three, 24” belt conveyors (100,105, and 110) in series while the undersize is pumped (95) to a set of two 20” cyclones (115).Cyclones underflow flow by gravity to a 4-way splitter box feeding four 13.5’ x 13’, 900 kW ball mills SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 130 10in parallel (125, 130, 135 and 140). Cyclone overflow reports to the first conditioner (145) of theflotation circuit.17.2.1.4 FlotationThe larger conditioner (145) with dimensions 3 m in diameter (D) x 4 m in height (H) overflows toa second 2.5 m D x 3 m H conditioner (150) that in turn reports to a bank of Denver DR type 300 x4 cells rougher (155). Rougher tailings are pumped (165) to a third 2 m D x 2 m H conditioner (170),overflowing in a primary Denver DR type 100 x 6 cells scavenger (175). Tailings from the primaryscavenger are pumped (185) to a fourth 2 m D x 2 m H conditioner (190) which overflows into asecond Denver DR type 100 x 6 cells scavenger (195). Tailings from the second scavenger arepumped (205) to a fifth 2 m D x 2 m H conditioner (210) overflowing into a third Denver DR type100 x 6 cells. Tailings from this bank of cell are the final tailings. After being sampled (220) they arepumped (230) to the tailings pond.Rougher (155) concentrate is pumped (235) to a bank of Denver DR type 24 x 4 cells primarycleaner. Concentrate from this cleaner is the final concentrate and is pumped (270) to the millthickener (275)11.17.2.1.5 Thickening – FiltrationConcentrate from the primary cleaner is pumped to a high capacity thickener (275). Thickenerunderflow is pumped via a diaphragm pump (280) to a stock tank (285) having a 2-hour retentiontime. From the stock tank, the thickener underflow concentrate is pumped via a second diaphragmpump (290) to a Larox type pressure filter (295). From the pressure filter the concentrate atapproximately 8% moisture is conveyed (300) to the concentrate shed12 or to the acid cracking plant.17.2.2 Milling Operation CostsThe mill operating costs for the Ashram Project presented in this section are strictly for the mineralprocessing for the production of a 10% TREO mineral concentrate. The limits for the costestimation start at the RoM stockpile and end at the concentrate shed. No cracking and/orhydrometallurgy are included in this section as they are detailed in section 17.3.3. General andadministrative costs (G&A) are included but are limited to the mill operation and do not considerany costs related to either the mine or Commerce Resources Corporation head office.Milling cost is mainly based on salaries, consumption of reagents, supplies and power. The costspresented include the fringe benefits but exclude employee transportation, lodging and contingencyallowances. The mill operation costs are considered to have an accuracy range of +/-30%.10 SAG and ball mills are sized for an ore having an average Work Index of 14.0 kW-h/t11 Conditioner and flotation cells are roughly sized from Hazen’s met tests12 No tests were done to size the filter and the thickener SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 131The breakdown of the mill operation costs per tonne milled is as follows:Consumables: $ 4.00Spare parts: $ 2.00Electric power : $10.00Salaries: $ 5.87G&A 10%: $ 2.00TOTAL $23.8717.2.2.1 Consumables (wear parts, grinding media, lubricants and chemical reagents)Crushing and grinding wear parts as well as grinding media consumption will be limited to the jawcrusher wear plates, the SAG and ball mills liners plus the different size steel balls. Mill reagents andother chemicals consumption will be for all practical purpose limited to a depressant for thecarbonate and the fluorite (sodium lignin sulfonate), a frother (MIBC), a collector (linoleic acid), twomodifiers (sodium carbonate and sodium fluorosilicate), a flocculent for the thickener and somechemicals for the assay office. The cost for the consumables is expected to be around $4.00/tonne.17.2.2.2 Spare PartsSpare parts are all pieces of mechanical or electrical equipment that are subject to the wearing oftime and are normally kept in the warehouse. This cost is evaluated at $2.00/tonne17.2.2.3 Electrical PowerBecause the rare earth mineral liberation size is very fine, in the order of minus -35µm, the powercost will be much higher than it would normally be for a standard base metal mill. SGS Geostat istherefore of the opinion that the mill power cost will be around $ 10.00 per tonne based on thefollowing assumptions:Total mill power demand ≈ 7,000 kWFor 167 t/h → 7,000 kW/167t/h = 41.9 kW-h/tAt $0.24/kW-h → 41.9 kW-h/t x $0.24/kW-h = $10.00/tonne SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 13217.2.2.4 ManpowerAfter the break in period, for an efficient operation of the mill, a work force of 61 employees will berequired. The operation schedule will be 14 days in, 14 days out. As the mill will operate on two 12-hour shifts per day and seven days per week, manpower repartition should be as follow: Mill superintendent 1 Mill metallurgist 1 Metallurgical technician 1+1 Mill general foreman 1 Mill shift technicians (leaders) 2+2 Crusher operators 1+1 Grinding operators 2+2 Flotation operators 2+2 Thickening, filtration, operators 2+2 Maintenance foreman 1+1 Millwrights 4+4 Electricians - electronicians 3+3 Chief analyst 1+1 Samplers 2+2 Assayers 2+2 Mill clerk 1+1 Mill general laborers/helpers 4+4 Janitor 1+1 Total 61The mill metallurgist and general foreman will not work on the same time schedule as the mill superintendent and willreplace him during his days off. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 13317.2.2.5 SalariesBecause of the remote area, the salaries may be as much as 50% higher than what is normally paidfor the same type of work in similar, but less remote Canadian milling operations. The fringebenefits have been set at 35% of the base salary. DESCRIPTION ANNUAL COST per COST TONNE Mill superintendent 202,500 0.14 Mill metallurgist 175,500 0.13 Mill general foreman 162,500 0.12 Mill laboratory technician 298,839 0.21 Mill technician (leader) 589,680 0.42 Crusher operator 221,130 0.16 Grinding operators 442,260 0.32 Flotation operators 442,260 0.32 Thickening, filtration – operators 442,260 0.32 Maintenance foreman 324,270 0.23 Millwrights 972,000 0.69 Electricians – electronicians 753,300 0.54 Chief assayers 324,324 0.23 Samplers 447,201 0.32 Assayers 486,000 0.35 Mill clerk 229,500 0.16 General laborers/helpers 810,000 0.58 Office janitor 135,000 0.10 SUB TOTAL ANNUAL SALARIES 7,458,525 5.34 Overtime, 10% 746,000 0.53 TOTAL ANNUAL SALARIES $ 8,204,525 $ 5.8717.2.3 Mill Cost Control and InstrumentationSGS Geostat is of the opinion that the Ashram mill should rely as much on electronic control andinstrumentation as on the skill and knowhow of the mill operators. At the very minimum a goodand versatile PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) interface should be bought and installed tomonitor most of the mill equipment and operation. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 13417.2.4 Mill Services and Other Mill Common SpacesThe mill service spaces are the assay office, the metallurgical laboratory, the millwright shop, theelectrical shop, the mill stationary, the tool crib, the mill superintendent office, the shift bossesoffice, the MCC room, the computer-PLC room, the maintenance foreman office and the mill clerkoffice. Mill common spaces are the rest rooms and change rooms for men and women, thelunchroom, and the conference room.17.2.5 Mill Capital Cost EstimateToday, the rule of thumb for the construction cost of a new mill including its service area isapproximately $25,000 to $30,000 per tonne of mill feed per day. In the case of Ashram, for a millto be built in such a remote area, the construction cost will probably be more in the $40,000 pertonne per day bracket. This cost is for a conventional mill with new milling equipment.SGS Geostat is therefore of the opinion that the mill construction cost will be in the order $160.0M.The capital cost includes the engineering, the preparation of the land and local site roads around themill, the delivery of all the mill components to the site, the construction of the mill itself, theconstruction of the crusher plant, the purchase and installation of the mill and crusher machinery,the assay office, the mill laboratory, the office furniture, the mill sub-station, the mobile equipment(mill superintendent function vehicle, two service pickup trucks and one front end loader), thestartup, the consumables and spare parts inventory.17.2.6 Construction ScheduleSGS Geostat is of the opinion that it will take up to one year for Commerce Resources to obtain allthe necessary permits before proceeding to the construction of the road from Kuujjuaq to the minesite. In the case the company prefers to wait for all the permits to come and the road constructioncompleted before buying and shipping a first piece of equipment and/or construction material,another period ranging from one to 1.5 year will be required before the mill start up.During this time Commerce will be able to rapidly advance its metallurgical studies and identify theoptimal flotation reagents while resolving any remaining unknowns. This includes pilot plant leveltestwork in order to validate and optimize the presented flowsheet. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 135 17.3 Thermal CrackingSince thermal cracking of the mill concentrate to produce high grade TREO product is ongoing, it isnot possible to give an exact description of the process. However, review of the literature, leads to abroad but reasonable description of the cracking technique for the Ashram rare earth flotationconcentrate due to its simple and well-known rare earth mineralogy (monazite, bastnäsite, andxenotime). Multiple shared and conventional cracking techniques exist for these minerals and aredetailed in Gupta and Krishnamurthy (2004). For the economic evaluation of the PEA, a sulphuricacid cracking technique, resulting in the production of a rare earth carbonate (REC) product, isselected.Whether the acid cracking plant is situated at the mine site or somewhere further south near the StLawrence River, the process will be the same. The cracking plant will be supplied with 98%concentrated sulphuric acid, probably bought from Xstrata. Acid consumption to the crackingsection is based on the “Sulphuric-Cracking” option and is estimated at 178,000 tpa, equal toapproximately 1 tonne of acid per 1 tonne of flotation concentrate as a base case scenario.In order of decreasing abundance, a 10% TREO mineral concentrate will contain fluorite, carbonate(mainly dolomite) / rare earth minerals (monazite, bastnäsite, and xenotime), and minor to traceapatite.17.3.1 Process DescriptionThe major components of the Acid Cracking Section include the following units: roasting, leaching,calcium and fluorine removal, thorium and iron precipitation and removal, REE carbonateprecipitation, centrifuging and drying of the REE carbonate.The chemical upgrading and cracking begins with the mill flotation concentrate being soaked inconcentrated sulphuric acid (98% pure). The acidified concentrate from this curing is roasted at atemperature of ±250ºC in a rotary kiln in order to decompose the rare earth minerals (monazite,bastnäsite, and xenotime) as well as the gangue. The roasted concentrate is water leached, thickenedand filtered. At this time, the rare earth’s and other elements are in solution, with the calcium beingremoved as gypsum (CaSO4) to the residue. The hydrogen fluoride (HF) created is scrubbed anddisposed of. The solid residue (gypsum) is disposed to the mill tailings pond while the rare earthelement enriched solution undergoes clarification. Leached radioactive elements (thorium only asuranium is not present) and other impurities are selectively removed via pH control and by theneutralization with caustic soda of the leach solution, precipitated, and allowed to report to the milltailings. Whence the impurities are removed, the REE enriched solution is precipitated with sodiumcarbonate into an REE carbonate form. The precipitate is then filtered, dried and bagged ready fordispatch13.13 For the purposes of the PEA, the cracking process will end at the production of a REC product. During a PFS,Commerce will evaluate the economics and practicality of producing a 99.9% pure mixed REO product as an alternativeto a REC product SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 13617.3.2 RecoveryIt is anticipated that 95% of the REE will be recovered at the cracking plant resulting in a finalproduct weighing approximately 20% of the concentrate feed weight (i.e. 36,000 tonnes of pureREC)17.3.3 OPEX and CAPEXBecause of the many unknowns regarding the acid cracking plant for the Ashram Project, the OPEXand CAPEX were estimated from available studies realized for ore deposits similar to Ashram. SGScame to the conclusion to use the following parameters:Tonnes of mill feed per year: 1,400,000Tonnes of mineral concentrate per year: 178,000Mineral Concentrate grade: 10.0 % (demonstrated by Hazen)$ per tonne of RoM: $17.40Opex cost per year: $24,360,000Cost of acid cracking plant: $35,000,00017.3.4 Construction scheduleEven if the construction of the cracking plant will be by the same company and in parallel with theconstruction of the mill, it is expected that a period of six months will be added to the one to 1.5year before the mill start up (see paragraph 17.2.6 above). SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 137 Figure 17-1: Mill Plan Drawing SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 138 Figure 17-2: Crushing – Grinding Process Diagram SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 139 Figure 17-3: Flotation – Thickening – Filtering Process Diagram SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 140 Figure 17-4: Cracking Process Diagram SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 14118 Project InfrastructureThe Ashram Project will require the construction of several infrastructure components and facilities.These will be located mainly on the mine site, but some of them will be built around Kuujjuaq andMackays Island. The following section describes the major components of the required constructionby location. 18.1 Mackay’s Island Docking Facilities Sea transportation is open annually for 3 to 4 months depending on weather conditions. The closest accessible site allowing high capacity cargo, around 30-35 ktonnes, is an area known as Mackay’s Island, around 25 kilometres north-east of Kuujjuaq. Maritime transport will depart from a port located around Montreal and will travel to the outskirts of Mackays Island. The transport will anchor in the middle of the watercourse and offload their cargo onto barges which will complete the transfer from the main ship to the shore. SGS propose docking facilities at the harbour location which would allow the barges to unload/load and which would be connected to the all-weather road in order to have a direct access to the mine site. Figure 18-1 presents the proposed scenario: Figure 18-1: Docking Location (Mackays Island) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 142 Warehouse A secure site warehouse is planned at the unloading facilities to stock consumables and products delivered by cargo ships. Fuel Farm All the required fuel has to be delivered by tanker boats during the 3 or 4 navigating months. This means that storage facilities for 9 months have to be provided at the area near Mackay’s Island. The annual fuel consumption at full capacity will be in the range of 21,000,000 litres, so storage has to be 20,000,000 litres (2 x 10 M litres tanks) at the tanker unloading facilities. These tanks will be field-erected steel tanks built to API-650 standards (Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage) and within lined and bermed containment areas. From the shore storage tanks, regular tanker trucks will assume fuel transportation to the mine site. Acid Farm All the required acid has to be delivered by tanker boats during the 3 or 4 navigating months. This means that storage facilities for 9 months have to be provided at the area near Mackay’s Island. The annual acid consumption will be in the range of 88,000,000 litres (1 tonne of acid per tonne of concentrate coming from flotation), so storage has to be 80,000,000 litres (8 x 10 M litres tanks) at the tanker unloading facilities. The acid tanks will be vertical carbon steel tanks14 built in accordance with API-650 standards (Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage). They will be field-erected and within lined and bermed containment areas. From the shore storage tanks, tanker trucks will assume acid transportation to the mine site. Concentrate Dome and Stacker The resulting product coming from the concentrator will be a mixed rare earth carbonate product that will have to be stockpiled in a building during a minimum of 9 months, the time during which the cargo boats cannot dock or anchor at Mackay’s Island. The proposed scenario, based on a 10% mineral concentrate, is to have a heated dome or dome-silo construction of ~40,000 tonnes capacity located next to the docking facilities. To handle all this transit and look after the warehousing, a local office with communications will be built or rented. 18.2 Kuujjuaq Town Office An office will be built in Kuujjuaq to have a foothold in the closest populated community and to maintain a constant link with the Inuit peoples. Ferry In order to connect the all-weather road to Kuujjuaq, a ship/barge will be used as ferry. The ferry, capable of transporting pick-ups trucks, will cross the Koksoak River. Small harbours with communications will be required on both sides of the river.14 http://www.tankteam.com/sulfuric_acid.htm SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 143 18.3 All-weather Road (AWR)A road connecting Mackay’s Island to the mine site, passing by Kuujjuaq will need to be built. Itsmain purposes will be to: - Provide a constant land access to the mine site; - Facilitate the transport of goods for the construction phase; - Allow the transport of goods during the life of the mine; - Allow the shipping of acid cracked concentrate (mixed REC product) to docking facilities;The proposed road location is on the south shore of the Koksoak River to avoid crossing theMélèzes and Caniapiscau Rivers. These rivers are large and would require important and costlybridges. The distance from the Mackay’s Island site to the mine site is estimated to be 185 km. Thereis no major waterway along the proposed road location, except three bridges of 40, 50 and 60 metresto be built (Figure 18-4). The road elevation profile is presented by Figure 18-2.The road will be double lane type of 15 m width. A typical cross-section of the road is presented inFigure 18-3. The rock to be used to build the road will come from quarries near the road path.These quarries will be exploited following conventional mining methods, i.e.: drilling, blasting,crushing and hauling.Safety shelters will be installed every 10 km to provide a refuge in case of stormy weather. Figure 18-2: All-weather Road Elevation Profile Figure 18-3: Typical Road Section SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 144 Figure 18-4: 185 km All-Weather Road1515 Google Earth SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 145 18.4 Mine SiteMany buildings and facilities will be built directly at the mine site. This section lists the principalones and Figure 18-5 presents a preliminary sketch of a proposed arrangement at the mine site: Figure 18-5: Preliminary Infrastructure Arrangement Main CampAn accommodation complex is planned to be built out of pre-fabricated modules. The proposedcomplex has a basic capacity of 147 beds. Tents and/or the actual Eldor camp will be used duringconstruction, allowing an additional ~40 beds. The proposed rooms are single occupancy. Awashroom with a shower is shared between two rooms; all rooms are equipped with a TV set andinternet. The accommodation complex has three dormitory wings and a combination of an office,kitchen, dining room and laundry. These different facilities are all linked together by heatedcorridors. The complex is located approximately 1.0 km from the pit and 0.8 km from the majorinfrastructure in order to reduce noise pollution. The complex also includes a potable watertreatment system and a sewage treatment system that is large enough for 300 persons. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 146 Figure 18-6: Proposed Accommodation Complex16The number of employees who will be working on the Project (on both working rotations) isestimated below: Table 18-1: Number of Employees per Department Department # of employees Mine 36 Garage 20 Staff 78 Camp 18 Processing (Mill + Cracking) 61+18 Total 231From the 231 employees, a constant number of approximately 115 will be on site while the otherhalf will be off-site on their time off. Main Building (Offices and Mechanical Shop)The proposed main building will be located northeast of the open pit and will be a pre-engineeredbuilding with steel cladding and roofing. It will be adjacent to the process building, power house,warehouse, etc. It will be a large structure that will house:16 Provided by Forêt de Demain Cie. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 147 - office for each department (administration, engineering, geology, etc.); - a first aid facility; - a shop; - a secondary warehouse; - a vehicle repair shop for heavy mobile equipment and light vehicles, including a wash-bay and a 20 t overhead crane; - an electrical shop; and - a dryWith the exception of the vehicle repair shop, the other services will be located at one end of thebuilding and constructed over 2 stories. The service complex will have a footprint of 2,000 m2. Power PlantThe site power station will be a diesel generator group of multiple medium speed reciprocatingengines (5 x 3640 kW), located in a powerhouse (1,100 m2), complete with heat recovery and allauxiliary equipment. The power output is rated to meet the process plant, ancillary support loadsand the camp requirements. One of the 5 power generating units will be on standby to allow any oneunit to be on standby or out of service for maintenance or repair. The power station will be locatedadjacent to the largest loads, which are located in the grinding area of the processing plant, tominimize both losses and capital cost. The fuel specified is arctic grade light fuel oil (LFO). The fuelwill be delivered to the powerhouse from the mine site fuel tank farm area via small pipelines. Process FacilitiesDescribed in section 17 Fuel FarmFrom the tanks located at Mackay’s Island, fuel will be transported to mine site fuel tank via 40,000litre tanker trucks. The storage capacity at the mine site will be 2,500,000 litres (one tank). The fueltank will have facilities to fuel the mine and support mobile equipment while facilitating the supplyof fuel to the main power plant. This tank is also a field-erected steel tank within propercontainment. The fuel tank capacity at the mine site has to be sized to hold approximately 40 days offuel requirement during operation, in case of major problems on the all-weather road or major snowstorms. Acid FarmFrom the tanks located at Mackay’s Island, acid will be transported to mine site fuel tank via 40,000litre tanker trucks. The storage capacity at the mine site will be 10,000,000 litres (one tank). The acidtank will have facilities to directly feed the acid cracking plant. This tank is also a field-erected steeltank within proper containment. The acid tank capacity at the mine site has to be sized to holdapproximately 40 days of acid requirement during operation, in case of major problems on the all-weather road or severe snow storms. Emulsion PlantThe emulsion plant building will be designed to house the emulsion mixing equipment provided bythe explosives contractor. In order to meet provincial and federal explosive regulations, the facilitywill be located approximately 3 km away of the plant site. The building is a pre-engineered steel SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 148frame building covered by cladding and roofing panel. The building will be assembled on site. Besidethe emulsion plant building there will be 2 explosives cold storages. Explosives MagazinesNext to the emulsion plant, two explosives magazines will be installed. One of these magazines willhouse priming explosives products such as caps and detonating cord while the second will house allpackages explosives and boosters. The magazines will be bermed and strategically disposed to meetprovincial and federal explosive regulations. WarehouseA 2,000 m2 building will be used as main warehouse. The building will be a pre-engineered steelframe building covered by cladding and roofing panel. The building will be assembled on site. Anoutside area, adjacent to the warehouse building will be reserved to store bigger goods, such as drillrods, rebar, etc. Dewatering DikesSince the Ashram ore deposit is partly submerged by a shallow lake (termed ‘Centre Pond’), twodewatering dykes will be required to allow open-pit mining below the lake. These dikes will be builtwith waste rock material during the construction period. Once constructed, the lake can be pumped,thus the beginning of the stripping operation. The lake itself is relatively shallow ranging in depthfrom ~1 to 4.8 m with an average of ~2.4 m north of Dike #1. Figure 18-7: Proposed Dewatering Dikes1717 Environnement Illimité Inc., Preliminary environmental baseline study, Eldor rare earth project, March 2012 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 149The dikes will be made mostly of quarried rock and crushed stone. Depending on the results offuture testwork, the dikes will be made watertight either by using a geomembrane liner inserted intoa stack of layers of aggregate or by means of a slurry trench excavated through the pervious fill witha grout curtain in the upper rock foundation. The dikes will include a road on the top. Waste DumpMining the Ashram Deposit will result of 3.25 Mm3 of waste rock material (with a %TREO lowerthan 1.25) that need to be disposed over the 20 first years of operation, the last five years beingwithout waste to remove. SGS assumes that 50% of this material will be used to build pads,footings, roads, dikes, airstrip, etc. Therefore, an area capable of containing a waste dump of 1.625Mm3 needs to be planned. The proposed waste dump has an overall height of 20 metres and afootprint of 81,250 m2. AirstripThe airstrip will be located west of the mill site facilities and is aligned roughly parallel to theprevailing wind direction. The proposed airstrip will be 1,300 m long with a 50 m security on eachend; the total length will be 1,400 m. The future airstrip will have a width of 45 m including 37 m ofrunway. The footing will be built using the waste material coming from the mining operation. Thesurface of the airstrip will be covered by 0.45 m of 152 mm-sized rock and 0.15 m of 19 mm-sizedrock compacted at a minimum of 94% of California Bearing Ratio. This airstrip will accommodatepropeller aircraft. The strip will be a visual flight rules operation and a private airfield. The charteroperators will rely on a designated site employee to provide reports on site weather conditions andthe condition of the strip itself. Lighting (together with air beacons) will be provided around thestrip to aid flights in marginal weather or light conditions. Figure 18-8 shows a drawing of theairstrip. Next to the airstrip, a communication tower building and a terminal pad will be built. Theterminal pad will be used for plane loading / unloading. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 150 900m 1400 m Figure 18-8: Airport Location vs. Site Infrastructure SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 151 Tailings DisposalFrom the 1,400,000 tonnes of ore that will be treated per year, 1,364,000 tonnes (97.5%) will bestored and confined into a dry natural valley or depression nearby the mining area. This valley ordepression will be dammed and strategically located to take into account the environmentalconstraints. The tailings area is preliminary designed to store a volume of 15.5 Mm3 of tailings over25 years of operation.The mill and cracking plant tailings are not considered acid generating due to the high amount ofcarbonates and corresponding low sulphides content.Finally the tailings are not deemed to be radioactive since the amount of the only radioactiveelement (thorium) in the tailings will be, for all practical purposes, in the same order of magnitude asin the mill feed. Site roadsApproximately 4.5 km of road will need to be built on site. These roads will be used for materialshandling but also to connect all areas of the mine site. They will be built with waste material comingfrom the mine and will be 1.0 to 1.5 metres thick with various widths. Incinerator buildingAn incinerator building will be built on site. The building will be 200 m2 and will house an industrialincinerator, which will handle all waste from the site that requires incineration. The building is a pre-engineered steel frame building covered by cladding and roofing panel. The building will beassembled on site. 18.5 Quebec Northern Infrastructure & Sustainable Development (Plan Nord)The Quebec Government announced in May of 2011, an ambitious infrastructure and sustainabledevelopment plan for the north called ‘Plan Nord’. The plan involves substantial investment invarious sectors including transportation, lodging, tourism, mining, energy, protection of the territory,etc. north of the 55th parallel in Quebec totalling $80 billion dollars over 25 years. One focus of thisplan is to complete a land link (road or rail) and hydroelectric power line connecting Kuujjuaq to thesouth via the Labrador Trough. A pre-feasibility study has already been completed with additionalfunds committed over the next several years to further assess the project. Such a route, as currentlyproposed, would run within 35 km of the Ashram Deposit. The Quebec Government has stressedthe flexible and dynamic nature of the plan and its need for industry involvement to help financeand develop its final route. As such, Commerce sits in a fortuitous position and intends to workwith the government to integrate its planned shipping route with advancing governmentinfrastructure. Such efforts may help offset the cost of the road construction and associatedmaintenance via integration with the Government’s Plan Nord. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 152The timeframe for construction of such a landlink roughly correlates with the production timelinefor the Ashram Deposit or at least would potentially be completed within the first few years ofproduction. However, as two adjacent routes would not be practical, the completion of anyCommerce road for ore shipment would likely tie into any Plan Nord landlink in the LabradorTrough area.The 185 km road as proposed by Commerce is anticipated to cost approximately $203,500,000 usinga conservative estimate of $1,100,000 per km. For the purposes of this PEA, Commerce is covering100% of the cost for the road project with no financial assistance from the government. However,considering both the stated dynamic nature of the Plan, the government’s willingness to work withmining and exploration companies who would benefit from such a landlink, and the fact that thisroute is very close to that currently proposed in Plan Nord, it is reasonable and practical to assumethat some financial assistance for the construction and maintenance of Commerce’s proposed routewill be provided by the government. This notion is expected to be explored in a pre-feasibility levelstudy. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 15319 Market Studies and Contracts 19.1 Oxides Price ForecastsThe economic potential of the Ashram Project is directly related to present and future values of therare earth oxides. Commerce Resources Corp. commissioned Deloitte to produce a study on thelong-term price of rare earth oxides (Deloitte, 2012). The report produced by Deloitte uses multipleinformation sources, such as technical reports, studies, memo, publically available marketinformation etc. In addition to Deloitte, SGS specifically reviewed a market outlook report releasedby Roskill in November of 2011 (Roskill, 2011), as well as a detailed review of price decks used bycompany peers.Deloitte states: “While price forecasting varies significantly in the marketplace, more current reports from analysts,such as Cormark Securities’ Rare Earth Report in September 2011, appear to show a reasonable trajectory of boththe current short-term high prices and the expectation of long-term prices. These clearly indicate the impact of supplyissues such as Chinese quotas on short-term pricing, while indicating that long-term pricing is expected to decline asmore rare earth projects reach production and address the shortages issue.”18Analysts predict significant differences in forecasted demand levels of REEs (both HREEs andLREEs). However most believe a range of 200,000 to 300,000 tonnes is reasonable by 2020 asillustrated in Figure 19-1. This increased forecast in demand is due to the expectation of growth inthe clean energy sector, which will require rare earth elements in production Figure 19-1: REEs Demand Forecast1918 Deloitte, Rare Earth Elements, Summary of analyst and data and peer review report, March 201219 Deloitte, Rare Earth Elements, Summary of analyst and data and peer review report, March 2012 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 154Supply forecasts also range considerably showing, between 240,000 to 325,000 tonnes of supply by2020. These forecasts share several key assumptions, including projects in the supply pipelineexpected to come online and the continued supply of product out of China. Due to China creating aquota system which restricts export, these supply estimates, which are higher than demand estimatesby 2020, do not automatically result in a softer rare earth sector; rather, projects coming onlineoutside of China are expected to be used by the rest of the world to ensure they have adequatesupply for uninterrupted production growth.The chart below illustrates the analyst consensus average of forecast total REE supply and demandin tonnes, as well as the implied surplus or deficit. The consensus view is that a supply deficit willpersist in all forecast years except for 2017. Figure 19-2: Analyst Consensus Average REE Supply Demand20The following section provides a summary of industry analyst and peer company views on individualREO prices. These prices forecasts are summarized and presented by the following graphs:20 Deloitte, Rare Earth Elements, Summary of analyst and data and peer review report, March 2012 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 155 Figure 19-3: Lanthanum Price History and Forecasts Figure 19-4: Cerium Price History and Forecasts Figure 19-5: Praseodymium Price History and Forecasts SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 156 Figure 19-6: Neodymium Price History and Forecasts Figure 19-7: Samarium Price History and Forecasts Figure 19-8: Europium Price History and Forecasts SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 157 Figure 19-9: Gadolinium Price History and Forecasts Figure 19-10: Terbium Price History and Forecasts Figure 19-11: Dysprosium Price History and Forecasts SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 158 Figure 19-12: Yttrium Price History and ForecastsIt should be noted that much uncertainty remains with respect to the future rare earth pricing andforecasting more than five years ahead must be taken with caution. It is unclear if China willcontinue to reduce exports as it strives to consolidate the industry and conserve the mine lives ofseveral of its operations, moreover its HREE operations, by restricting production. The excessprocessing capacity of many of these rare earth producers is currently set to come from the rest ofthe world as China finds sources to fill its excess REO separation capacity. Further, many forecastsassume proposed rare earth deposits will enter production on their proposed timelines when, inpracticality, many may face significant delays or even not make it to production in the short term ormedium term due to metallurgical and/or permitting issues.The selected oxides values to estimate the economic potential of the Ashram Project are acombination of analyst consensus forecast (green lines on the previous figures) at year 2017 andagreement between SGS and Commerce Resources Corp. The year 2017 was used as reference asthe Ashram Project is anticipated to start production around 2016-17. The determined price deck isconsidered reasonable, practical, and conservative given the supply-demand dynamics of the rareearth industry as it currently stands. The selected oxides price deck is defined as follows: Table 19-1: Selected Oxide Prices Lanthanum $ 15.00 CAN$/kg Cerium $ 10.00 CAN$/kg Praseodymium $ 76.00 CAN$/kg Neodymium $ 77.00 CAN$/kg Samarium $ 12.00 CAN$/kg Europium $ 905.00 CAN$/kg Gadolinium $ 45.00 CAN$/kg Terbium $ 980.00 CAN$/kg Dysprosium $ 800.00 CAN$/kg Yttrium $ 28.00 CAN$/kg Ashram Basket Price: $ 35.03 CAN$/kg SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 159 19.2 Oxide Value DiscountThe product to be sold by Commerce will be a concentrate having undergone flotation followed byan acid attack to produce a mixed rare earth carbonate concentrate. Commerce will not proceed tothe final separation of the oxides by a hydrometallurgical process. Not proceeding to the separatedoxide stage results in the producer not being able to profit from the full market prices of the oxides.To account for the lack of a separation stage, a discount needs to be applied on the oxide valueswhen evaluating the economic potential of the Project.To evaluate an appropriate discount, SGS reviewed some of the most advanced studies of rare earthprojects presenting similar mineralization. Based on the presented values and on SGS experts, ahydrometallurgy cost per tonne of concentrate was selected and applied for the Ashram Project.The calculation of the discount is defined by the following steps: 1. Flotation, acid attack and hydrometallurgical process cost were reduced and converted into run-of-mine cost (RoM) and then combined as one processing cost. See Figure 19-13: Figure 19-13: Processing Costs and Recovery Converted into RoM*Note that the hydromet separation process cost was increased by 30% to account for the processing operator’s profitmargin. 2. Using this simplified approach and a general processing cost of $138.37 per tonne, the Projects net present value (NPV) was calculated. This NPV represents the economical benefit to Commerce Resources if the hydrometallurgical process is sub-contracted and that the final products (separated oxides) are sold by Commerce. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 160 3. To be able to apply an adequate discount to the prices of the oxides, since the hydrometallurgical process will not be done by the operator, SGS first removed $97.09 to the total processing price, which is the RoM hydromet cost. The new and real treatment cost was now $41.27 per tonne (concentration + acid attack). Subsequently, the values of the oxides were decreased until the resulting net present value (NPV) matches the one found in Point #2. 4. Based on NPV’s, two similar economic scenarios were created: one where the cost of hydromet separation (increased to reflect contractor’s profit margin) is included in the project operating cost and a second scenario where the hydromet cost is not taken into consideration, but a 20% discount is applied on the oxides values. 5. Considering that this study is at the PEA level and that the references numbers used into the calculation process are general costs coming from similar studies, the value of the discounting was increased by 5% to account for a certain contingency and to be conservative into the evaluation, resulting in a final discounting of 25%. Table 19-2: Selected Oxides Prices (after 25% discount) Original Discounted Lanthanum $ 15.00 $ 11.25 CAN$/kg Cerium $ 10.00 $ 7.50 CAN$/kg Praseodymium $ 76.00 $ 57.00 CAN$/kg Neodymium $ 77.00 $ 57.75 CAN$/kg Samarium $ 12.00 $ 9.00 CAN$/kg Europium $ 905.00 $ 678.75 CAN$/kg Gadolinium $ 45.00 $ 33.75 CAN$/kg Terbium $ 980.00 $ 735.00 CAN$/kg Dysprosium $ 800.00 $ 600.00 CAN$/kg Yttrium $ 28.00 $ 21.00 CAN$/kg Ashram Basket Price: $ 35.03 $ 26.27 CAN$/kg SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 16120 Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community ImpactThis environmental summary was provided by Dahrouge on behalf of Commerce to SGS Blainvilleto be included in the PEA study that is being completed in 2012 for the Ashram Project.A preliminary environmental baseline study was completed by Environnement Illimité inc. (EI)and its collaborators, Roche Ltd., and G.R.E.B.E. inc., all located in Quebec, Canada, in thesurrounding area of the Eldor Project where the Ashram Rare Earth Deposit is located (Lafrance,2012). The content of this study is an environmental characterization of this sector completed in theperiod of the late summer of 2011: all on-site surveys were conducted from September 2 andSeptember 11. The highlights of this report are summarized below. Area of the StudyThe Eldor Property is located in the Nunavik Territory, in the Province of Quebec, approximately130 km south of Kuujjuaq. Its centre is situated at about 68°240" west longitude by 56°560" northlatitude. The site is only accessible by float or ski plane, or helicopter. A local study area wasdetermined for the field inventory near the deposit and comprises Fox Lake, Centre Pond and JLake.A broader study area was also determined to establish a regional characterization of the componentslikely to be affected by advanced exploration work or the development of the Project. This regionalstudy area extends from Kuujjuaq to the Project site.See Figure 20-1 for the Eldor Project location and study references. Scope of WorkThe overall goal of the environmental study carried out on the Eldor Property is to establish apreliminary baseline for the different environmental components likely to be affected by advancedexploration work (and eventually mining production) and which will require further evaluation as theProject progresses. The specific objectives of this study are the following three components: 1. Physical Environment 2. Biological Environment 3. Human Environment SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 162 Figure 20-1: Study Areas of the Ashram Rare Earth Project SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 163 20.1 MethodologyA review of the available information was conducted and the September on-site survey was preparedtaking this information into consideration.20.1.1 Physical Environment ClimateAll data for temperature and precipitation were obtained from the Environment Canada weatheroffice. Figure 20-2: Precipitations and Temperatures Averages GeologyThe regional, local and Property geology are all described in the Section #7 entitled GeologicalSetting and Mineralization of this report. The mineralization of the Ashram Deposit is also discussedin the same section. The regional geology of the Eldor Property is the Paleoproterozoic NewQuebec Orogen, better known as the ‘Labrador Trough’ or ‘Fosse du Labrador’ in French. TheAshram Rare Earth Deposit is central to the Eldor Carbonatite Complex that has been previouslyexplored for niobium (Nb) and tantalum (Ta) elements. The rare earth elements at the AshramDeposit are hosted primarily in monazite, but also in lesser bastnäsite and xenotime. GeomorphologyA soil quality survey was performed during the September 2011 on-site survey and 18 metals andmetalloids were analyzed to be compared to the average geochemical background values of theLabrador Through as listed by the Ministère du Développement durable, de l’Environnement et desParcs (MDDEP)’s, Soil Protection and Contaminated Sites Rehabilitation Policy, when available.The samples were collected by shovel to a maximum depth of 1 m beneath the topsoil. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 164Information is available for the following items: • Deglaciation history of the regional study area • Glacial and post-glacial geomorphology of the Ungava and the Eldor Property • Till lineation • Ribbed moraines • Rocky outcrops with till veneers • Glaciofluvial and glaciolacustrine sediments • Organic depositsField Survey 2011 – Soil qualityThree soil samples were collected on the Eldor Property. The first two were taken on the westernshore of the northern Centre Pond - where the open-pit is proposed - and the third one taken justeast of J Lake. While the majority of analyzed elements are below the known background values forthe Labrador Trough, there are a few exceptions, especially for samples S2 and S3. Barium,manganese, lead and zinc concentrations are notably higher for sample S3, while chromium,manganese, molybdenum and lead are above the background values for sample S2. Those higherconcentrations are all naturally present in the soils of the study area and are not related to humanactivity. HydrogeologyThe information presented in the report was mainly gathered from the existing literature. Limitedfieldwork was conducted in order to collect preliminary data on the regional and localhydrogeological setting and properties. Groundwater levels were measured in three mineralexploration drill holes and a groundwater sample was collected in EC11-064 drill hole and sent foranalysis of the selected parameters. The sampling was carried out following the MDDEP’s samplingprocedure.The geological formations in the area of the Eldor Property generally display poor hydraulicproperties. Hard rocks, such as metamorphic rocks of igneous and sedimentary origin, usuallypresent low matrix porosity. Water-bearing zones are mainly associated with fracture zones, andlocal joint systems. Therefore, with the exception of much-fractured areas, the rocks have a lowstorage capacity and limited groundwater management will be required. The groundwater sampleshows a very low mineral content. The conductivity of the groundwater was 0.45 ms/cm. None ofthe measured parameters exceeded any applicable criteria. BathymetryDepth profiles of Fox and J lakes were determined by sonar and GPS instruments. No survey wasperformed on the Centre Pond as a bathymetric map was already available.A bathymetric survey was performed in April-May of 2011 by JVX Ltd. over the middle andnorthern parts of Centre Pond, where the open pit operations will start. Augered holes followed by aweighted string measurement method were used for the survey. The northern end, where open-pitoperations will be focused is shallower with depths ranging from 1 to 4.8 m with an average depthof approximately 2.4 m. Depths up to 9 m are found in the middle part (east and west) of CentrePond. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 165 Sediment QualitySediments were collected in Fox Lake, Centre Pond and J Lake. Two to four composite sampleswere collected in each lake and analyzed for total organic carbon, trace metal and granulometricanalysis.Field Survey 2011 – SedimentSediments collected in the different lakes were a mixture of sand (80 µm to 2.5 mm) and silt (<80µm). In Fox Lake, there was more silt (36% to 99%) than sand. In Centre Pond and J Lake, sandwas generally predominant and combined with silt (5% to 78%). Total organic carbon content variedfrom 4% to 18% of the sediment weight, Fox Lake having the lowest content and Centre Pondhaving the highest. Sediment samples exceed sediment quality criteria for rare effect level, thresholdeffect level and occasional effect level on aquatic life for a few metals. Water QualityIn Fox Lake, Centre Pond and J Lake, temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen and conductivity readingswere taken every metre along water columns. Water clarity was also evaluated with a Secchi disk.Samples were collected at one station in each lake and sent to be analyzed to Maxxam Analytics inMontreal.Field Survey 2011 – Surface WaterMost metal and anion concentrations are below or near the detection limit, and below the waterquality criteria for the protection of aquatic life. There are two exceptions: for Centre Pond, copperexceeded both the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) criterion andMDDEP acute effect criterion, and zinc exceeded the CCME criterion only. These values mayrepresent natural elevated levels in the environment.20.1.2 20.1.2- Biological Environment Aquatic FaunaThe fish community study has the objective of characterizing fish species encountered in theselected lakes. Inventories were made in Fox Lake, Centre Pond and J Lake with experimental gillnets (48 m long, 2 m high, equipped with 6 stretched mesh panels measuring 2.5, 3.8, 5.1, 6.4, 7.6,and 10.2 cm). A total of six nets were installed in Fox Lake, six in Center Pond and four in J Lake.Four bait traps were also used in the three lakes. All fishing gear was left for one entire day in thelake. All fish captured were identified and measured. The date, time, effort (fishing time) and GPScoordinates were recorded using a standardized field sheet. Live fish were returned to the lake.Field Survey 2011 – Aquatic FaunaA total of 1,042 fish were caught in the gill nets and bait traps installed in the three lakes. Gill netwas the most efficient fishing engine with a mean capture per 24 hours of 24.6, 98.5 and 61.5 forFox Lake, Centre Pond, and J Lake respectively. Ten species of fish for a total of 182 specimenswere caught in Fox Lake. Lake chub, lake whitefish, white sucker, longnose sucker and threespinestickleback were the predominant species caught in Fox Lake, representing 29%, 15%, 15%, 10%and 10% of the species caught respectively. Brook trout (Speckle trout) was the only species caughtin Centre Pond and J Lake. Specimens from Centre Pond weighed between 15 and 510 g and their SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 166length ranged from 210 to 465 mm. Specimens from J Lake ranged from 15 to 360 g in weight andfrom 110 to 435 mm in length. The absence of prey species, higher proportion of adults andobservation of a male brook trout with fecundated eggs in the belly are signs that cannibalism occursdue to the scarcity of food in Centre Pond and J Lake. Sampled habitats were all lentic with depthsvarying between 2 and 15 m. No aquatic vegetation was observed. The substrate was usually coarse(stones and gravel) near the edge of the lakes. VegetationThe transect method was used to survey the vegetation in the study area. Transects were positionedbased on the presence of potential sensitive areas identified through photo interpretation. All plantswithin 2 m to either side of the transect were identified. Plants not identified and potentially having aspecial status were photographed and/or collected for later identification. Each transect wasassociated with a GPS point. As the study was also aimed at highlighting the presence of speciesdesignated as threatened or vulnerable, or species that are likely to be designated as such in Quebec,a request was made to the Centre de données sur le patrimoine naturel du Québec (CDPNQ) priorto the field survey for information on these species in the regional study area.Field Survey 2011 – VegetationThe sampling conducted was intended as primarily exploratory. The list of 43 plants observed in thelocal study area does not represent the flora of the site but provides a very partial picture of thelocation. A total of eight sampling sites were surveyed in the local study area. In addition to thespecies observed during this survey, matching herbarium specimens to photos has made it possibleto identify species not reported in the field. No species at risk was found on the sites surveyed in thelocal study area. Wild Life and BirdsBased on species distribution, the local study area may be home to amphibians, birds and mammals.No terrestrial reptiles are found north of the 54th parallel (Desroches and Rodrigue, 2004). Theterrestrial fauna survey’s main objective was to make a preliminary list of easily observed vertebratespecies found in the local study area and to try to observe any federally and provincially listedspecies at risk. Since the field work was exploratory and took place in September after thereproduction period of most species, the survey was done following an opportunistic approach.Field Survey 2011 – Wildlife and BirdsSigns or sightings of 10 bird species and three mammal species were recorded during the field work.No amphibians were observed. Areas surrounding Eldor Camp and Centre Pond showed thehighest species richness. These results most likely correlate to the limited extent of survey effort ortime spent in these areas rather than the actual terrestrial fauna richness. Four aquatic bird species(Canada goose, white-winged scoter, common loon and herring gull) and six upland birds (sprucegrouse, raptor sp., gray jay, three-toed woodpecker, yellow-rumped warbler and dark-eyed junco)were seen. Besides the Canada goose and herring gull, none of the most common species in theregional study area were observed. Nonetheless, the results suggest that the birdlife of the local studyarea is more influenced by forest habitats than by open habitats. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 167 Ecotoxicological CharacterizationParameters of interest in surface water and terrestrial environments near a deposit of rare earths areexpected to be similar to those usually found near other rare earth deposits. A review of existingstudies was conducted and parameters were selected for chemical analysis. Two organisms weretargeted: fish, because they are potentially consumed by local residents, and lichens, because of theirability to bioaccumulate metals. Inventories for the ecotoxicological characterization were limited tothe local study area, which is the sector most likely to be affected by advanced exploration. FishThe main predatory fish species, brook trout and Lake Whitefish, were collected in Fox Lake,Centre Pond and J Lake. A total of 15 fish were collected in each lake. The assays were conductedon fish flesh, each sample consisting of a homogenate of five fish of similar size. The samples werepreserved following standard procedures for the analysis of selected elements. A total of ninesamples were collected in the study area.Metal concentration in fish was usually low (near the detection limit) except for mercury where theconcentration was slightly above the level recommended by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency(0.5 mg/kg edible weight). Mercury concentration was higher in lake trout sampled in Fox Lake thanin brook trout sampled in Centre Pond and J Lake. LichenLichen is one of the best terrestrial bio-indicators of potential uptake by radioactive elements and/ortoxic metals. In fact, lichens can accumulate more elements dispersed by air than other plantsbecause of their longevity, the area they cover, and the fact that they obtain more nutrients viaatmospheric deposition than through the soil. Lichens are also an important food source forcaribou, which constitutes a substantial part of the Inuit’s diet. Entire specimens were collected on aplot of about 1.0 m2. The analysis of metals was made from a homogenate of lichens collected inone plot. A total of 10 samples (three sites and three or four homogenates) were collected in the areamost likely to be affected by advanced exploration work (near Centre Pond).Metal concentrations were below or near the detection limit in Cladonia rangiferina specimenscollected around Centre Pond. Arsenic, chromium and zinc were above 2 mg/kg.20.1.3 20.1.3- Human EnvironmentA brief literature review was conducted in the fall 2011 to gather relevant information on land useand other socio-economic components in the study area. Most of the information came fromthe following documents: • Parc national des Monts-Pyramides Project Status Report (KRG, 2011); • Master Plan for Land Use in the Kativik Region (KRG, 1998).Additionally, three local organizations were met in Kuujjuaq during the field campaign of September2011: the Board of Directors of the Nayumivik Landholding Corporation of Kuujjuaq, the Mayorand Secretary-Treasurer of Kuujjuaq, and the Kativik Regional Government. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 168The objective of these meetings was to gather knowledge of traditional and current land andresource use of the regional study area. The main source of information was elder Johnny Gordonfrom the Nayumivik Landholding Corporation Board. During this meeting, a map of the regionalstudy area was presented to the participants, who were invited to indicate information such ashunting, trapping and fishing territory, presence of camp, and location of cult and burial sites.Administration and land regime in NunavikThe Eldor Property is located in Nunavik in the province of Quebec. Nunavik is the territory northof the 55th parallel that is inhabited largely by Inuit. The Kativik region, created pursuant to the JamesBay and Northern Quebec Agreement (JBNQA) in 1975, covers most of the Nunavik Territory, exceptfor the Cree reserved land of Whapmagoostui. Nunavik is part of the Nord-du-Québecadministrative region (No. 10).The territorial organization of Nunavik is established under the JBNQA and the North-eastern QuebecAgreement (NEQA), as well as their attendant laws and agreements. These agreements were signedrespectively in 1975 and 1978 by the Quebec government, the Government of Canada, the Sociétéd’énergie de la Baie James (energy corporation), the Société de développement de la Baie James(development corporation), Hydro-Québec, as well as the Cree and the Inuit (in the case of theJBNQA) and the Naskapi of Kawawachikamach (in the case of the NEQA). The JBNQA andNEQA provide a relative political and administrative autonomy for the concerned Aboriginalcommunities, as well as exclusive hunting, fishing and trapping rights in designated zones andfinancial compensation. In addition to the federal and provincial governments, other organizationsand stakeholders are involved in land management and administration in Nunavik. Of these, themain ones are the: • Makivik Corporation; • Kativik Regional Government (KRG); • 14 northern villages, including Kuujjuaq; • Landholding Corporations.Under the JBNQA, the NEQA and the Act respecting the Land Regime in the James Bay and New QuebecTerritories, a land regime comprising three categories (designated I, II and III) that govern use as wellas management conditions and responsibilities is applicable in Nunavik and the James Bay region.The Eldor Property is located entirely on Category III lands. These are public lands whereAboriginals may exercise their harvesting right; however, this right is not exclusive. The Category IIlands for Kuujjuaq lie, at their closest point, roughly 60 km north from the local study area. About45 km separate the southern boundary of the local study area and the northeast boundary of theCategory II-N lands for Kawawachikamach.Commerce Resources has actively hired from the local community of Kuujjuaq since acquiring theEldor Property in 2007. Further, Commerce representatives have met on several occasions with thevarious local government and Inuit bodies in Kuujjuaq and have a positive relationship with thelocal community. Commerce will continue to engage the local community and has since retainedNATIONAL Public Relations Inc. in order to assist in taking engagement to a more formal level. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 169 20.2 Environmental permitting framework20.2.1 Provincial Jurisdiction Environment Quality ActQuebec’s Environment Quality Act (EQA) comprises two chapters. Chapter I set out generalprovisions including protection of living species, protection of the environment, environmentalimpact assessments, depollution attestation, land and water resource protection, residual materialmanagement, etc. The act says that no one shall alter the quality of the environment (Section 20),and it provides a framework for activities likely to alter it, when unavoidable. Chapter II sets outspecific provisions applicable to the James Bay and Northern Quebec Region.The environmental assessment procedures established for northern projects vary according towhether the project is located south or north of the 55th parallel. Section 168 of the EQA defines theterritory north of the 55th parallel as: “the whole territory located to the north of the 55th parallel,except in Category I and II lands for the Crees of Great Whale River”. The Eldor Property is locatedwithin the territory described above (Category III lands). The procedure described in the EQA andthe Regulation Respecting Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and Review Procedure Applicable to theTerritory of James Bay and Northern Quebec, is presented in the next Figure.Figure 20-3: Environmental Assessment Procedure for Mining Projects North of 55th Parallel SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 17020.2.2 Federal Jurisdiction Canadian Environment Assessment ActEven though the Project is subject to a joint federal-provincial review panel, some distinct permitsmay be required to satisfy federal bodies such as Fisheries and Oceans Canada. In June 2010, theSupreme Court of Canada issued an important decision on this issue concerning a mining project innorthern Quebec: “A mining project within the territory covered by the [James Bay and Northern Quebec] Agreement that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat is not exempted from any independent scrutiny by the federal Fisheries Minister by virtue of the Agreement. While there is no doubt that this project, considered in isolation, falls within provincial jurisdiction, a mining project anywhere in Canada that puts at risk fish habitat cannot proceed without a permit from the federal Fisheries Minister, which he or she cannot issue except after compliance with the CEAA. (...) The relevant Administrator will then make an approval decision. While there is to be only one “impact review” of the mine project under the Agreement, the agreement of the parties to avoid duplication internal to the Agreement does not eliminate the post approval permit requirement contemplated by the Agreement itself if imposed externally by a law of general application, such as the CEAA or the Fisheries Act. (...) Since nothing in the Agreement relieves the proponent from compliance with the ordinary procedures governing the issuance of the necessary authorization or permits referred to, it follows that once the project is approved by the provincial Administrator, the proponent would have to make an application for the s. 35(2) fisheries permit to the federal Minister of Fisheries. As a matter of federal law, a CEAA assessment is obligatory prior to the grant of an s. 35(2) permit. .”The federal environmental review procedures are dealt with in the Act to Establish a FederalEnvironmental Assessment Process (1992, C. 37) and its four main ensuing regulations: • Law List Regulations (SOR/94-636); • Inclusion List Regulations (SOR/94-637); • Comprehensive Study List Regulations (SORS/94-638); • Exclusion List Regulations (SORS/94-639).According to Section 5 of the Act, one of the following conditions is required for the application ofthe federal procedure: • A federal authority is the proponent of the project; • A federal authority has the administration of federal lands and sells, leases, or otherwise disposes of those lands or any interests in those lands, or; • A federal authority provides a financial support, i.e., makes or authorizes payments or provides a guarantee for a loan or any other form of financial assistance to the proponent; SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 171 • A federal authority issues a permit or license, grants approval, or takes any other action for the purpose of enabling the project to be carried out in whole or in part. Fisheries ActThe objectives of the Fisheries Act are the protection of fish habitat and the prevention of pollution.Fish habitat is defined “Spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas on which fishdepend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes.”(Fisheries Act, sec. 34(l)).The Act stipulates that: “No person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration,disruption or destruction of fish habitat”. However, this interdiction does not apply to a person “causing thealteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat by any means or under any conditions authorized by the Minister orunder regulations made by the Governor in Council under this Act”. Metal Mining Effluent RegulationThe Metal Mining Effluent Regulation (MMER) under the Fisheries Act applies to metal mines. TheRegulation specifies the maximum concentration of various parameters at the discharging point.MMRE also requires the execution of Environmental Effect Monitoring (EEM) studies. Prior tooperation and during operation, an impact assessment is required if effluents likely to damage a fishhabitat are present. Navigable Waters Protection ActThe Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA) provides a legislative mechanism for the protection ofthe public right of marine navigation on all navigable waterways in Canada. This is accomplishedthrough permitting of the construction of works built or placed in, over, through or across navigablewaterways and through a legal framework to deal with obstacles and obstructions to navigation. TheNWPA is administered by the Navigable Waters Protection Program (NWPP) of Transport Canada(TC). A navigable waterway is defined as being any body of water capable of being navigated byfloating vessels of any description for the purpose of transportation, commerce or recreation. Thisincludes both inland and coastal waters. The authority to determine the navigability of a waterwayrests with the Minister of Transport or his/her designated representative. 20.3 Potential Issues Physical EnvironmentPotential issues associated with mining activities in the physical environment are mainly restricted tothe local study area. Potential issues include: • Concentration processes to extract rare earths may generate radioactive and metal enriched wastes (mine waste rock and tailings) that will need to be confined adequately. However, at this time the radioactivity (thorium) is not anticipated to be significantly elevated enough to prevent practical handling and storage in the waste and tailings areas. Biological EnvironmentPotential issues associated with mining activities in the biological environment are mainly restrictedto the local study area. Potential issues include: SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 172 • Construction of mining facilities, mining operations and effluents may affect aquatic, terrestrial and wetland habitats. Those ecosystems need to be properly inventoried and preserved as much as possible. Possible effects may include: o Loss of wildlife and vegetation biodiversity; o Bioaccumulation of metals in fish. Human EnvironmentMining activities south of Kuujjuaq would result in a growing need for mining-related services andpersonnel in the Kuujjuaq area (regional study area). Potential issues associated with a growingpopulation are: • Access to jobs, even though the aboriginal (Inuit/Naskapi) labour pool is limited and not all individuals show interest; • Access to business opportunities; • Protection of the traditional Inuit/Naskapi way of life; • Housing issues in Kuujjuaq.In the local study area, mining facilities may have more direct potential for impacts on theenvironment, wildlife and humans, such as: • Loss of land (sense of loss); • Changes in caribou migration patterns, making hunters travel farther to reach harvesting areas, a situation that involves higher costs and greater risk due to the greater distances to be travelled; • Preservation of quality fish stocks associated with possible mine tailings; • Changes to water quality in the lakes affected by possible mine waste and tailings, which could affect wildlife and availability of drinking water during field trips; • Population health effects resulting from the two previous points. 20.4 Recommendations for Future Studies20.4.1 Physical Environment Soil qualityGiven the intrinsic variability of the matrix typically observed over large areas, it would berecommended to increase the number of samples collected to obtain a more representativemeasurement of the geochemical background at the Eldor Property. It is also recommended tocollect duplicate samples to verify that soil analysis results fall within the expected laboratoryperformance intervals. In addition, given that some metals tend to be associated with fine particlesand organic matter, it would be relevant in the future to measure the grain-size distribution of thesoil samples as well as organic content. Organic depositsPeat bogs are protected under Quebec’s regulations because of their high ecological value.Therefore, at the stage of designing mining project infrastructures and their footprint on the SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 173environment, it is imperative to avoid as much as possible disturbance to those sensitive areas,including the conservation of the natural drainage systems that run in and out of wetlands. HydrogeologyDespite the possibly limited need for groundwater management in a permafrost environment, someissues must be addressed early in the Project, notably the nature and extent of the permafrost, whichwill affect groundwater flow. For this purpose, fieldwork will be required in the coming stages of theProject. It may consist of: • Drilling additional boreholes, and monitoring well installation in bedrock and overburden; • Measurements of water level in open exploration boreholes, and of the topographic elevation of the numerous lakes and streams in the areas, which are considered to be hydraulically connected to the groundwater system; • Collecting a larger number of groundwater samples in order to calculate the geochemical background of groundwater; • Packer testing to determine the hydraulic conductivity of the rock mass; • Borehole resistivity/temperature logging and borehole video imaging; • Borehole flow metre testing to measure water flow rates along a borehole; • Grain size analyses of overburden samples (nature of surface deposits and hydraulic properties); • Eventually, pumping tests in the proposed mining pit area in order to evaluate the potential and influence of dewatering; and • Lastly, groundwater modeling using the data collected during the field investigation in order to predict future groundwater conditions. Surface Water QualityAs for the groundwater, a monitoring network should be established for the surface water tocomplete the environmental baseline study to ensure that there is sufficient information to identifyseasonal trends and to assess potential impacts of mining on the surface water resources of the localstudy area.20.4.2 Biological Environment Vegetation • Wetlands in the study area are quite varied and hence often sensitive, species-rich sites; these sites may sometimes cover small areas (e.g., snow beds), while at other times they may cover several hectares (e.g., seepage slopes). A thorough sampling of all such habitats and their corresponding species, including site visits to riparian habitats (lake and river shorelines) is crucial since they may represent rare microhabitats. • Little knowledge is available about the distribution of species that may be designated threatened or vulnerable in the boreal forest. However, the two vascular species at risk are more likely to colonize higher land and well-drained sites, thus, sampling drier environments apparently poorer in species must not be neglected. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 174 • As northern environments are slow to regenerate, it would be desirable that any proposed mining activities use, to the extent feasible, less sensitive areas (e.g., barrens or areas with poor biodiversity). • A more detailed vegetation survey is imperative to obtain a complete baseline due to the diversity of habitats, especially those considered wet. A greater sampling effort with visits to some very specific habitats sensitive to human disturbance, such as wetlands, will help identify and highlight the environmental constraints associated with the project. Wildlife • Additional fish surveys would be required to obtain a complete baseline for the impact assessment. The spawning period of the main fish species should be targeted in order to identify spawning ground in the different watercourse of the study area; • Detailed aquatic habitat mapping and characterization would need to be conducted in order to obtain a complete baseline for the impact assessment. This information could then be used to assess the availability of the aquatic environments according to the main biological functions of the species present in the study area, in terms of needs for reproduction, foraging and growth of juvenile fish; • Monitoring of the nesting sites located in 2011 and a survey of cliff-nesting raptors conducted during the breeding season would provide data to confirm species identification and to assess how many pairs are nesting and hunting in the area of the projected mine and its proposed infrastructure including access ways. This would help to determine impacts and whether special mitigation measures are needed, especially if species at risk (e.g., the golden eagle and peregrine falcon) are involved; • The current state of knowledge with respect to mammals in the local study area is poor. This brings uncertainty to the eventual impact assessment process and to the development of proper mitigation measures. Furthermore, as the MRNF requests more and more that surveys be conducted on small- and medium-size mammals to document species distribution and abundance in northern Quebec, surveys aimed at finding dens should also be performed to assess the use of the local study area by large mammals such as wolves and bears; and • A bird survey conducted during the breeding season would give a much better idea of the composition of the avifauna of the local study area. 20.5 Human EnvironmentA significant amount of information is already available on the human environment of the EldorProject area. In order to move forward, additional information on the following topics must becollected as soon as possible: SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 175 • Traditional harvesting (hunting, fishing, trapping, berry picking, etc.) activities by the Naskapi of Kawawachikamach; • Outfitter activities in the local and regional study areas (e.g., outfitting areas, main and satellite camp locations); and • The specifications with respect to development of a (road or railway) land link to Kuujjuaq.An information forum or another communication channel should also be developed to keep thepopulation informed about the project’s development and possible job opportunities for the longerterm. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 17621 Capital and Operating Costs 21.1 Capital CostThe total capital expenditures cost (CAPEX) is estimated at an overall accuracy of ±30%, which isthe standard for a preliminary economic assessment. The CAPEX were defined by SGS using in-house database and the Mine & Mill Equipment Costs Estimators Guide: Capital & OperatingCosts (2010). The costs from the Guide were updated to 2012 using an inflation rate of 4% per year.The total required investment is estimated at 763 M$ and includes a contingency of 25%.*Refer to Table 21-1 for the CAPEX breakdownSGS made the assumption that Quebec Government will not participate in the investment for theroad construction. However, it is possible that an allowance will be allocated to this constructioncost, based on Quebec’s Plan Nord in the upcoming years. See Section 18.5 for a brief discussion onPlan Nord and its potential relevance to the project.The capital costs do not include: - Costs to obtain permits (excepted for airstrip); - Costs for pre-feasibility and feasibility studies; - Any provision for changes in exchange rates; - GST/QST; - Project financing and interest charges; - Price/cost escalation during construction; - Import duties and custom fees; - Pilot plant and other testwork; - Sunk cost; - Exploration activities; - Severance cost for employees at the cessation of operations; - Royalties and taxes; and - Any additional costs (but can partly be absorbed in contingency allowance).The total equipment capital cost for the project is estimated to be 21.35 M$ in initial start-up. Dueto the low tonnage mined per day (average of 4,500 tonnes of ore and waste over the entire minelife) and the decreasing stripping ratio, no major equipment acquisitions will be needed during themine life to increase the mining fleet. Therefore, a sustaining capital cost is included into the G&Aas 1.4 M$ per year ($1.00 per tonne treated) in order to account for major equipment maintenancefees or a replacement program. The equipment capital cost breakdown is outlined in Table 21-2. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 177 Table 21-1: Capital Expenditures (CAPEX) Item Cost % of total CommentsKuujjuaq - MacKays Island Town office $ 250,000 0.03% Located in Kuujjuaq Warehouse $ 250,000 0.03% Located at Mackays Island Docking facilities $ 1,250,000 0.16% Located at Mackays Island Kuujjuaq - MacKays Island ferry $ 250,000 0.03% Ferry boat and installation Barges $ 1,000,000 0.13% 2 units required Fuel tanks $ 7,000,000 0.92% 2 x 10 ML fuel tank located near MacKays Island docking Acid tanks $ 28,000,000 3.67% 8 x 10 ML acid tank located near MacKays Island docking Concentrate dome and stacker $ 1,000,000 0.13% Sized to contain 15,000 tonnes of concentrate Transport and Lodging personnel $ 3,000,000 0.39% Transport and lodging in Kuujjuaq during project constructionRoad (Kuujjuaq - Mine site) Road construction $ 203,500,000 26.69% 185 km estimated at a construction cost of 1,1 M$/km Quebec contribution $ - Estimated contribution ....... % Shelters $ 400,000 0.05% 1 shelter at each 10 kmInfrastructures Site prep $ 2,000,000 0.26% Cutting trees, ground levelling, drainage, fencing, etc Main camp $ 8,500,000 1.11% Designed to accomodate 140 persons Water treatment plant $ 200,000 0.03% Offices builing + truck shop $ 8,750,000 1.15% Purchasing, construction, and transport to mine site Processing plant $ 160,000,000 20.98% Throughput of 4,000 tpd. Include laboratory & tailings facilities Acid cracking plant $ 35,000,000 4.59% 180,000 tonnes per year acid cracking plant Tailings (site prep., dike, dewatering) $ 7,500,000 0.98% Site roads $ 2,000,000 0.26% Service roads to all facilities Powerhouse + Genset $ 20,000,000 2.62% Includes building, 5 - CAT 3612, 3640 ekW + installation Warehouse $ 2,000,000 0.26% Mine site fuel tank $ 750,000 0.10% 1 x 2.5 ML tank Mine site acid tank $ 3,500,000 0.46% 1 x 10 ML tank Emulsion factory $ 1,500,000 0.20% Explosives magazines $ 100,000 0.01% 1 magazine for detorators and 1 for powder Airstrip + Auxiliary $ 15,000,000 1.97% Construction, Control & Communication, Terminal & Permits Computers and Softwares $ 500,000 0.07% Computers, network system, printers, Softwares licenses, etc. Rehabilitation and decommissioning $ 20,000,000 2.62%Equipment Drilling $ 1,470,000 0.19% Mucking $ 2,050,000 0.27% Hauling $ 4,000,000 0.52% Auxiliary / Road maintenance $ 2,290,000 0.30% Service $ 4,760,000 0.62% All weather road (AWR) $ 3,700,000 0.49% Others $ 300,000 0.04% SCP $ 2,785,500 0.37% Shipping, Commissioning and Parts inventory for 6 months (15%) Subtotal (1) $ 554,555,500 72.73% EPCM - 10% $ 55,455,550 7.27% Engineering, procurement and construction management Subtotal (2) $ 610,011,050 80.00% Contingency (25%) $ 152,502,763 20.00% Total * $ 762,513,813 100.00%Total rounded $ 763,000,000* Salvage value is estimated nil due to the long life of the mine, and the transport/shipping are included in the present prices. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 178 Table 21-2: Equipment Listing Unit Price Total Cost Purpose Unit Size Model Quantity $/unit $ Drilling Drill 3.625”- 6” AC FlexiROC D55 2 $ 735,000 $ 1,470,000 Loader 14 t CAT 988H 1 $ 950,000 $ 950,000 Mucking Shovel 8t CAT 385 1 $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Hauling Truck 50 t CAT 773 4 $ 1,000,000 $ 4,000,000 Dozer 305 hp CAT D8R 1 $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Auxiliary Grader 297 hp CAT 16M 1 $ 740,000 $ 740,000 Shovel 345 hp CAT 345 1 $ 800,000 $ 800,000 Water/Fire truck 7 kgal - 1 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Loader 270 hp CAT 966H 1 $ 470,000 $ 470,000 Loader 180 hp CAT 938 1 $ 210,000 $ 210,000 Skid steer 50 hp - 1 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Pick-up - - 12 $ 50,000 $ 600,000 Bus - - 2 $ 75,000 $ 150,000 Tire truck - - 1 $ 160,000 $ 160,000 Services & Service truck - - 1 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Support & Forklift 10 klbs - 1 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Others Flat bed truck - - 1 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Tanker truck 2,5 kgal - 1 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Crane 75 t - 1 $ 650,000 $ 650,000 Concentrate truck 35 t - 2 $ 250,000 $ 500,000 Fuel tanker 45 kL - 2 $ 200,000 $ 400,000 Acid tanker 45 kL - 4 $ 200,000 $ 800,000 Tower light - - 5 $ 12,000 $ 60,000 Truck scale 100 t - 1 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Dozer 305 hp CAT D8R 1 $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Grader 297 hp CAT 16M 2 $ 740,000 $ 1,480,000All Weather Shovel 345 hp CAT 345 1 $ 800,000 $ 800,000 Road Loader 270 hp CAT 966H 1 $ 470,000 $ 470,000 (AWR) Tractor - - 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 Low bed trailer 50 t - 1 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Others (Drilling accessories, Pumps, Lines, etc.) lot $ 300,000Sub-Total Mining Fleet cost $ 18,570,000Shipping, Commissioning and 6 months parts inventory (15%) $ 2,785,500Total Mining Fleet cost $ 21,355,500 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 179 21.2 Operating CostsThe operating costs (OPEX) are estimated at an overall accuracy of ±30%, which is the standard fora preliminary economic assessment. The operating costs were defined by SGS using in-housedatabase and the Mine & Mill Equipment Costs Estimators Guide: Capital & Operating Costs(2010). The costs from the Guide were updated to 2012 using an inflation rate of 4% per year.The operating costs do not include: - Any provision for inflation; - Any provision for changes in exchange rates; - GST/QST; - Corporate administration and head offices costs; and - Exploration activities;The total operating cost for mining and processing over the life of the mine is estimated at $3,332 Mwhich represents $95.20 per tonne of ore treated. Table 21-3: Operating Costs Cost type $/tonne treated Total cost ($) Mining 6.23 217,900,000 G&A 47.70 1,669,500,000 Processing 41.27 1,444,450,000 Total 95.20 3,331,850,000 Mining 7% Processing 43% G&A 50% Figure 21-1: Total Operating Cost Breakdown SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 18021.2.1 Mining CostThe total mine operating cost is estimated at $217.9 M which equates to $6.23 per tonne treated orto an average of $5.32 per tonne mined ($4.57 per tonne mined at year 1 and $5.83 per tonne minedat year 25).To calculate the mining cost, SGS took into consideration the following parameters: • Quantity of tonnes needed to be mined per year; • Equipment mechanical availability; • Overall efficiency; • Percentage of daily use per equipment; • Equipment tonnage capacity (loading units and haulers); • Various distances (in-pit, ramp, on site); • Maximum achievable speeds based on hauler status (loaded or empty); • Total cycle time; • Fuel cost of (1.30 $/litre); • Operators and mechanics hourly wages (plus benefits); • Equipment maintenance costs; and • All other relevant parameters.The overall operating costs are higher than those of a similar size operating further south. Thiscomes from a lower mechanical availability due to the cold weather and a higher cost of fuel per litrecoming from shipping cost. The overall mining cost will vary through the life of the mine in respectof the variation of stripping ratio and also to the increasing total cycle time attributable to thedeepening of the pit. The estimated cost is presented by the next figure: Mining cost per tonne through mine life $6.00 $5.75 $5.50 $5.25 $/t $5.00 $4.75 $4.50 $4.25 $4.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Year Figure 21-2: Mining Cost per Tonne Through Mine Life SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 181The breakdown of the average mining cost per tonne is defined as: Table 21-4: Average Mining Cost Breakdown Average ITEM $/t Drilling $ 0.40 Blasting $ 0.68 Mucking $ 0.71 Hauling $ 1.19 Auxiliary $ 1.86 Sub-Total $ 4.84 Contingency (10%) $ 0.48 Total Mining cost per tonne** $ 5.32 *Based on 5,000 tonnes mined per day **Include the salary of operators and mechanics21.2.2 General and Administration (G&A) CostsThe total G&A cost is estimated at $1,669 M which equates to $47.70 per tonne treated through thelife of the mine. The G&A costs include all costs that are not directly related to the mining operationand they are composed of several items such as staff salaries (see Table 21-5), maintenance costs ofthe camp, transportation costs of personnel, fuel, concentrate, goods, etc.. A full list of these costs ispresented in Table 21-6. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 182 Table 21-5: Staff and Camp hourly salaries Staff Salaries Qty. Salary Costs & Total Cost per - 35 % - tonne $/pers./year $/pers./year $/year $/tonne Open-pit Operation Mine superintendant 1 $ 130,000 $ 45,500 $ 175,500 $ 0.13 General foreman 1 $ 120,000 $ 42,000 $ 162,000 $ 0.12 Shiftboss 4 $ 100,000 $ 35,000 $ 540,000 $ 0.39 Clerk 2 $ 50,000 $ 17,500 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 Mine Maintenance Maintenance superintendant 1 $ 130,000 $ 45,500 $ 175,500 $ 0.13 Maintenance superintendant assistant 1 $ 110,000 $ 38,500 $ 148,500 $ 0.11 Maintenance planner 2 $ 75,000 $ 26,250 $ 202,500 $ 0.14 Shiftboss 2 $ 90,000 $ 31,500 $ 243,000 $ 0.17 Clerk 2 $ 50,000 $ 17,500 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 Mine Engineering Engineering superintendant 1 $ 150,000 $ 52,500 $ 202,500 $ 0.14 Senior mine engineer 1 $ 130,000 $ 45,500 $ 175,500 $ 0.13 Mine engineer 2 $ 110,000 $ 38,500 $ 297,000 $ 0.21 Environmental engineer 1 $ 95,000 $ 33,250 $ 128,250 $ 0.09 Environmental technician 1 $ 80,000 $ 28,000 $ 108,000 $ 0.08 Surveyor 2 $ 80,000 $ 28,000 $ 216,000 $ 0.15 Surveyor assistant 2 $ 50,000 $ 17,500 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 Clerk 2 $ 50,000 $ 17,500 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 Geology Geology superintendant 1 $ 130,000 $ 45,500 $ 175,500 $ 0.13 Senior geologist 1 $ 115,000 $ 40,250 $ 155,250 $ 0.11 Grade control geologist 2 $ 100,000 $ 35,000 $ 270,000 $ 0.19 Administration Mine manager 1 $ 160,000 $ 56,000 $ 216,000 $ 0.15 Managing secretary 1 $ 60,000 $ 21,000 $ 81,000 $ 0.06 General services superintendant 1 $ 130,000 $ 45,500 $ 175,500 $ 0.13 General services superintendant assistant 1 $ 100,000 $ 35,000 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 HR superintendant 1 $ 120,000 $ 42,000 $ 162,000 $ 0.12 HR superintendant assistant 1 $ 100,000 $ 35,000 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 HR agent 2 $ 75,000 $ 26,250 $ 202,500 $ 0.14 Health and safety superintendant 1 $ 110,000 $ 38,500 $ 148,500 $ 0.11 Health and safety superintendant assistant 1 $ 100,000 $ 35,000 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 Formation coordinator 2 $ 85,000 $ 29,750 $ 229,500 $ 0.16 Accountant clerk 2 $ 65,000 $ 22,750 $ 175,500 $ 0.13 Logistic superintendant 1 $ 120,000 $ 42,000 $ 162,000 $ 0.12 Logistic superintendant assistant 1 $ 100,000 $ 35,000 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 Warehouse employee 6 $ 75,000 $ 26,250 $ 607,500 $ 0.43 Nurse 2 $ 80,000 $ 28,000 $ 216,000 $ 0.15 I.T. 4 $ 75,000 $ 26,250 $ 405,000 $ 0.29 Concentrator *Included in processing cost Camp Camp superintendant 1 $ 110,000 $ 38,500 $ 148,500 $ 0.11 Camp manager 1 $ 90,000 $ 31,500 $ 121,500 $ 0.09 Camp supervisor 2 $ 80,000 $ 28,000 $ 216,000 $ 0.15 Protocol agent 2 $ 80,000 $ 28,000 $ 216,000 $ 0.15 Chief janitor 2 $ 60,000 $ 21,000 $ 162,000 $ 0.12 Janitor 10 $ 50,000 $ 17,500 $ 675,000 $ 0.48 Chief cook 2 $ 80,000 $ 28,000 $ 216,000 $ 0.15 Cook 6 $ 60,000 $ 21,000 $ 486,000 $ 0.35 Cook helper 2 $ 50,000 $ 17,500 $ 135,000 $ 0.10 Plane controler 2 $ 75,000 $ 26,250 $ 202,500 $ 0.14 Camp mechanic 2 $ 75,000 $ 26,250 $ 202,500 $ 0.14 92 $ 4,310,000 $ 1,508,500 $ 10,017,000 $ 7.16 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 183 Table 21-6: Estimated G&A Costs G&A $/t treated* Comments Staff Salaries - Open-pit Operation $ 0.72 Staff Salaries - Mine Maintenance $ 0.65 Staff Salaries - Engineering $ 1.00 Staff Salaries - Geology $ 0.43 Staff Salaries - Administration $ 2.37 Staff Salaries - Concentrator $ - Included in processing costs Staff + Hourly Salaries - Camp $ 1.99 Flights - Employees transportation $ 2.36 60 flights per year Flights - Cargo $ 3.06 78 flights per year Power consumption $ 0.51 Excluding mill consumption Camp $ 0.98 Food, supply and yearly investments Local office fees $ 0.07 Investment in local community $ 0.14 Material transportation $ 1.43 Mackays Island to mine site Concentrate storage and loading $ 0.25 Road maintenance $ 1.32 Offices $ 0.11 Softwares, hardware, supply, etc. Fuel transportation $ 2.72 21 Mlitres transported to mine site per year Acid transportation $ 14.19 40 Mlitres transported to mine site per year Concentrate transportation $ 2.85 21,000 tonnes shipped to China per year Operating capital $ 0.29 Ongoing studies Sustaining capital $ 0.71 Capital replacement program Sub-total $ 38.16 Contingency (25%) $ 9.54 Total $ 47.70 *Based on 1,400,000 tonne per year mill thoughput (350 days x 4,000 tonnes per day)21.2.3 Processing costsThe total processing cost is estimated at $1,593 M which equates to an average of $41.27 per tonnetreated through the life of the mine ($23.87 per tonne for flotation and $17.40 per tonne for acidcracking).Refer to Section 17 for cost breakdown. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 18422 Economic Analysis 22.1 DCF Method – Base Case ScenarioThe discounted cash flow valuation method (DCF) was used to evaluate the economic potential ofthe Ashram Deposit. The DCF method estimates the attractiveness of an investment opportunitysuch as capital expenditure for a mining project. Discounted cash flow analysis uses future cash flowprojections and discounts them at a fixed discount rate to arrive at a value, which is used to evaluatethe potential for investment.The cash flow projections have been generated from the life of mine scenario presented in Section16. Capital expenditures, operating costs and oxides values (with their associated discount) were allused to produce the economic analysis. The base case scenario implies a 25 year open-pit operationand a processing plant (flotation and acid attack) located directly at the mine site to produce a rareearth carbonate concentrate. The economic analysis is based on the following parameters:Table 22-1: DCF Parameters for the Base Case Scenario Parameters Unit ValueYearly mill throughput* tonnes 1,400,000Life of Mine years 25Metal recovery (Flotation + Acid) % 66.5Oxides prices $/kg See Table 19-1Oxides values discount** % 25.0Mining cost $/t mined 5.32G&A cost $/t treated 47.70Processing cost $/t treated 41.27Total investment $ 763,000,000Discount rate % 10.0Tax rate and Royalties % 0.0Exchange rate Cdn$:US$ 1:1* 350 days per year, 4000 tonnes of ore treated per day.**Account for selling a rare earth carbonate concentrate that will need hydrometallurgy process to liberate and separatethe oxides. 22.2 Tax Rate and RoyaltiesThe economical profitability of mining the Ashram Deposit has been evaluated without anyconsideration of taxes and royalties. This is mainly due to the complexity and the numbers of taxcredits and allowances (such as; New Mine Allowance, Investment Allowance, Allowance for a MineLocated in Northern Quebec, etc.) that a company can benefit during the development stage and inthe production period. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 185 Tax RateThe Quebec mining tax flat rate is 16% on the annual profits from a mine (2012). For the purposeof the Quebec’s Mining Tax Act, annual profit is determined by subtracting from gross revenues theoperating expenses and allowances directly related to the mine. Federal tax flat rate is 16.5%(2012)21. Commerce can expect to be subjected to a combined tax rate around 32.5% when theproject will begin commercial production. RoyaltiesAs presented in Section 4.3, the original 8 claims acquired from Virginia are subject to a 1% NSRroyalty in favour of Virginia and a 5% NPI royalty in favour of two individuals. Commerce has theright to buy back the 5% NPI royalty in consideration of $500,000. However, the Ashram projectedopen-pit is not located within the Virginia claims, and is not subject to any royalties. 22.3 DCF Results for the Base Case ScenarioThe Ashram consolidated cash flow model is presented in Table 22-2. The valuation results fromthe base case scenario are defined as: Table 22-2: DCF Results for the Base Case Scenario Item Unit Value Pre-tax and Pre-finance NPV $ 2,318,000,000 Pre-tax and Pre-finance IRR % 44 Pre-tax and Pre-finance Payback period* year 2.25 *from start of productionThe potential by-product of phosphate, primarily from the cracking of monazite, is not consideredin this economic evaluation. Further, the recovery of fluorite as a by-product is also not consideredas part of this study. All economics are based only on the rare earth oxide content of the AshramDeposit.21 KPMG, A guide to Canadian Mining Taxation, September 2011 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 186 Table 22-3: Discounted Cash Flows (DCF) Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Ore treated tonnes 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000TREO % 1.77% 1.71% 1.71% 1.71% 1.72% 1.72% 1.73% 1.73% 1.74% 1.74%Avg. $ / t. treated $/tonne $ 687.00 $ 681.90 $ 665.20 $ 665.10 $ 663.40 $ 663.40 $ 662.80 $ 662.70 $ 665.70 $ 667.70Metal recovery 66.5% 67% 67% 67% 67% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5%Discount 25.00% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%Revenues $ $ 479,697,750 $ 476,136,675 $ 464,475,900 $ 464,406,075 $ 463,219,050 $ 463,219,050 $ 462,800,100 $ 462,730,275 $ 464,825,025 $ 466,221,525Ore mined tonnes 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000Waste mined tonnes 750,000 865,143 785,673 640,040 632,175 526,288 526,288 370,789 350,654 287,981 244,825Stripping ratio t. waste / t. ore 0.62 0.56 0.46 0.45 0.38 0.38 0.26 0.25 0.21 0.17Mining $/t mined $ 4.57 $ 4.57 $ 4.61 $ 4.66 $ 4.69 $ 5.01 $ 5.03 $ 5.11 $ 5.15 $ 5.20 $ 5.25Mining $ $ 3,429,268 $ 10,357,044 $ 10,075,995 $ 9,504,907 $ 9,527,511 $ 9,642,782 $ 9,698,815 $ 9,049,900 $ 9,014,227 $ 8,778,741 $ 8,635,215G&A $/t treated $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70G&A $ $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813Processing $/t treated $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27Processing $ $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000Investment $ $ 763,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -Pre-tax benefits $ -$ 766,429,268 $ 344,780,894 $ 341,500,867 $ 330,411,181 $ 330,318,751 $ 329,016,456 $ 328,960,422 $ 329,190,388 $ 329,156,236 $ 331,486,472 $ 333,026,497 Year 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21Ore treated tonnes 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000TREO % 1.75% 1.76% 1.77% 1.79% 1.80% 1.83% 1.84% 1.86% 1.87% 1.88% 1.89%Avg. $ / t. treated $/tonne $ 668.10 $ 668.70 $ 670.80 $ 677.20 $ 680.20 $ 692.70 $ 696.90 $ 704.10 $ 709.80 $ 714.80 $ 721.50Metal recovery 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5%Discount 25.00% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%Revenues $ $ 466,500,825 $ 466,919,775 $ 468,386,100 $ 472,854,900 $ 474,949,650 $ 483,677,775 $ 486,610,425 $ 491,637,825 $ 495,617,850 $ 499,109,100 $ 503,787,375Ore mined tonnes 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000Waste mined tonnes 190,199 110,468 99,081 64,974 52,981 3,178 4,081 5,625 1,299 - -Stripping ratio t. waste / t. ore 0.14 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.00Mining $/t mined $ 5.30 $ 5.37 $ 5.40 $ 5.44 $ 5.48 $ 5.54 $ 5.57 $ 5.60 $ 5.63 $ 5.67 $ 5.70Mining $ $ 8,429,643 $ 8,108,065 $ 8,094,485 $ 7,976,068 $ 7,964,599 $ 7,775,078 $ 7,813,722 $ 7,876,915 $ 7,896,076 $ 7,932,695 $ 7,978,792G&A $/t treated $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70G&A $ $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813Processing $/t treated $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27Processing $ $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000Investment $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -Pre-tax benefits $ $ 333,511,370 $ 334,251,897 $ 335,731,803 $ 340,319,020 $ 342,425,238 $ 351,342,884 $ 354,236,890 $ 359,201,097 $ 363,161,962 $ 366,616,592 $ 371,248,770 Year 22 23 24 25 TotalOre treated tonnes 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 35,000,000TREO % 1.90% 1.92% 1.96% 2.05% 1.81%Avg. $ / t. treated $/tonne $ 727.50 $ 738.00 $ 748.90 $ 766.50 $ 692.80Metal recovery 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5% 66.5%Discount 25.00% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25%Revenues $ $ 507,976,875 $ 515,308,500 $ 522,919,425 $ 535,208,625 $ 12,059,196,450Ore mined tonnes 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 35,000,000Waste mined tonnes - - - - 6,511,742Stripping ratio t. waste / t. ore 0.19Mining $/t mined $ 5.72 $ 5.75 $ 5.79 $ 5.83Mining $ $ 8,003,121 $ 8,054,586 $ 8,110,168 $ 8,158,308 $ 217,886,726G&A $/t treated $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70 $ 47.70G&A $ $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 66,781,813 $ 1,669,545,313Processing $/t treated $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27 $ 41.27Processing $ $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 57,778,000 $ 1,444,450,000Investment $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 763,000,000Pre-tax benefits $ $ 375,413,942 $ 382,694,102 $ 390,249,444 $ 402,490,505 $ 7,964,314,412 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 187 22.4 Sensitivity AnalysisSensitivity analysis was performed on the base case scenario on major variables that have thegreatest impact on the overall economics of the project. These variables are oxide values discount,basket price (or overall revenues), CAPEX, OPEX and processing recovery. Table 22-4 presents theresults of this analysis. Table 22-4: Sensitivity Analysis Variation Discount NPV (M$) IRR -30% 18% 2,719 50% -20% 20% 2,604 48% Oxide Value -10% 23% 2,432 46% Discount 0 25% 2,318 44% +10% 28% 2,145 42% +20% 30% 2,031 40% +30% 33% 1,859 37% Variation* Basket Price ($/kg) NPV (M$) IRR -30% 24.52 1,028 25% -20% 28.02 1,458 32% Basket Price -10% 31.53 1,888 38% ($/kg of oxide) 0 35.03 2,318 44% +10% 38.53 2,747 50% +20% 42.04 3,177 56% +30% 45.54 3,607 63% Variation OPEX (M$) NPV (M$) IRR -30% 2,332 2,683 49% -20% 2,666 2,561 48% -10% 2,999 2,439 46% OPEX 0 3,332 2,318 44% +10% 3,665 2,196 42% +20% 3,998 2,074 40% +30% 4,332 1,953 39% Variation CAPEX (M$) NPV (M$) IRR -30% 534 2,546 63% -20% 610 2,470 55% -10% 687 2,394 49% CAPEX 0 763 2,318 44% +10% 839 2,241 40% +20% 916 2,165 37% +30% 992 2,089 34% Variation Recovery NPV (M$) IRR -30% 47% 1,029 25% -20% 53% 1,458 32% -10% 60% 1,888 38% Recovery 0 67% 2,318 44% +10% 73% 2,747 50% +20% 80% 3,177 56% +30% 86% 3,607 63% *While oxides values discount remains at 25% SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 188 Sensitivity analysis 4 000 3 500 3 000 NPV (M$) 2 500 2 000 1 500 1 000 500 -30% -20% -10% 0 +10% +20% +30% Oxide Value Discount 2 719 2 604 2 432 2 318 2 145 2 031 1 859 Basket Price 1 028 1 458 1 888 2 318 2 747 3 177 3 607 CAPEX 2 546 2 470 2 394 2 318 2 241 2 165 2 089 OPEX 2 683 2 561 2 439 2 318 2 196 2 074 1 953 Recovery 1 029 1 458 1 888 2 318 2 747 3 177 3 607 Figure 22-1: Sensitivity Analysis (Spider Graph)As is typically the case, the Project is more sensitive to the metal pricing and the variations areidentical to the one obtained from varying the processing recovery. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 18923 Adjacent PropertiesOther companies or individuals own mineral titles in the vicinity of the Eldor Property. Other thanrare earths, the area is explored for a variety of commodities including precious metals, base metals,iron-ore and uranium. Figure 23-1 shows a map of the mineral titles in the vicinity of the EldorProperty. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 190 Figure 23-1: Map of Adjacent Properties in the Vicinity of the Eldor Property SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 19124 Other Relevant Data and InformationIn the opinion of SGS, no additional information or explanation is necessary to make this TechnicalReport understandable and not misleading. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 19225 Interpretation and ConclusionsThe preliminary economics for the Ashram Deposit are highly favourable using the parametersdetailed herein. Mining will be completed by conventional open-pit methods as minimal overburdenis present. The final product from the mine site will be a mixed rare earth carbonate concentrateready to be delivered to a hydrometallurgical plant. Geology and Mineral ResourcesSGS Geostat has validated the exploration processes and drill core sampling procedures used byDahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, as part of an independent verification program. SGS Geostatconcluded that the drill core handling, logging and sampling protocols are at conventional industrystandard or better and conform to generally accepted best practices.The author, Gaston Gagnon, completed a review of the sample preparation and analysis includingthe QA/QC analytical protocol implemented by Dahrouge, on behalf of Commerce, for the Project.The author, accompanied by Robert de l’Étoile, visited the Eldor Property between September 18and 21, 2011 to review the sample preparation procedures. SGS Geostat considers that the samplesare of sound quality and that the samples are generally representative. Finally, the author is confidentthat the system is appropriate for the collection of data suitable for the estimation of a NI 43-101compliant mineral resource.As part of the data verification program, SGS Geostat completed independent analytical checks ofdrill core duplicate samples taken from the summer 2011 diamond drilling program. The author alsoconducted verification of selected laboratory analytical certificates and validation of the Project’sdigital database, supplied by Dahrouge on behalf of Commerce, for errors or discrepancies. Thebulk density of the carbonatite material was estimated by SG measurements on mineralized drill coresample and is consistent with expected values from the rock type. SGS Geostat is of the opinionthat the final drill hole database is of sufficient quality to support a mineral resource estimate.Geological interpretation and modeling of the mineralized carbonatite at Ashram was completed byDahrouge. The resource model, prepared by SGS Geostat, contains blocks of 10 m (east-west) by 10m (north-south) by 10 m (elevation) in size, located below the bedrock/overburden interface. Theblock grade was estimated using analytical values from 3 m long drill hole composites. Interpolationwas performed using ordinary kriging. Three mineralized zones are estimated separately: Central,Inner and Outer.Finally, a mineral resource was estimated based on the results of the block model interpolation. Thefinal mineral resource estimates are presented in the following Tables 25.1 and 25.2 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 193 Table 25.1: Final Mineral Resources for the Ashram Deposit (all Zones) Tonnage Density TREO* LREO* MREO* HREO* MHREO* F MH/T Classification (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Ratio Measured 1,590,000 3.07 1.77 1.60 0.089 0.085 0.17 3.76 9.8% Indicated 27,670,000 3.02 1.90 1.77 0.073 0.056 0.13 2.89 6.7% Measured + Indicated 29,270,000 3.02 1.90 1.77 0.073 0.057 0.13 2.94 6.9% Inferred 219,800,000 3.00 1.88 1.77 0.068 0.045 0.11 2.21 6.0% COG 1.25% TREO - BASE CASE Table 25.2: Final Mineral Resources for the MHREO Zone Tonnage Density TREO LREO MREO HREO MHREO F MH/T Classification Zone (t) (t/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Ratio Measured Central 1,140,000 3.10 1.69 1.50 0.098 0.099 0.20 4.18 11.6% Indicated Central 5,420,000 3.10 1.62 1.44 0.091 0.091 0.18 3.9 11.3% Measured + Indicated Central 6,550,000 3.10 1.63 1.45 0.093 0.093 0.19 3.95 11.3% Inferred Central 2,790,000 3.10 1.57 1.39 0.085 0.088 0.17 3.43 11.1% COG 1.25% TREO - BASE CASE Note: Totals may differ from sum or weighted sum of numbers due to rounding*LREO (Light Rare Earth Oxides) = La 2O3 + Ce 2O3 + Pr2O 3 + Nd 2O 3*MREO (Middle Rare Earth Oxides) = Sm 2O 3 + Eu2O 3 + Gd2O 3*HREO (Heavy Rare Earth Oxides) = Tb2O 3 + Dy2O3 + Ho2O3 + Er2O3 + Tm 2O 3 + Yb2O 3 + Lu 2O 3 + Y2O3*MHREO (Middle and Heavy Rare Earth Oxides) = MREO + HREO*TREO = LREO + MREO + HREO*MH / T = MHREO / TREOSGS Geostat is of the opinion that the Company successfully confirmed the mineral resourcepotential of the Ashram Deposit located on the Eldor Property based on recent explorationprograms. The author considers the Project to be sufficiently robust to warrant additional drilling toaugment the confidence level of the current mineral resource. The tonnage quantity in the AshramDeposit is more than enough for a practical mining operation. Only better grades or distributionwould change the target for a mining operation. Exploration has revealed multiple other rare metaland rare earth targets on the Property with much potential still remaining.The majority of the resource used to prepare this report is in the inferred category, however is basedon sound geological evidence and limited sampling. There is enough information to reasonablyassume, yet not verify, that those resources display geological and grade continuity. Although there issignificant tonnage in the measured and indicated categories, additional drilling information willbetter define the extent, grade, and REE distribution of the mineralization. Although some of thesefactors may affect the economics of the Project, no major effects are anticipated. This is supportedby long intersections of very continuous and consistent mineralization suggesting significant lateralextent of similar style as estimated for the determination of the inferred resources.In addition the QA/QC program shows that grades of samples used for resources estimates are veryclose to the true grades. Moreover, grades are on the conservative side and for this reason, theassociated risks are considered minimal. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 194 MiningMining the Ashram Deposit will be by straightforward open-pit methods with the deposit notrepresenting any unusual challenges. The tonnage to be extracted is low and the pit shape makes iteasy to mine. Possible variations in the mining cost per tonne will not strongly affect the economicsof the Project since the mining cost is only 7% of total operating costs (see Figure 21-1). A risk toconsider is possible water infiltration into the pit. Major infiltration may require an expensivepumping system. Variation of pit slope angles will not strongly affect the Project economicsconsidering the low stripping ratio. ProcessingA mineral concentrate with a grade of 10% TREO at 70% recovery (12.7% of the original feedweight) is selected as the PEA base case as a result of physical upgrading at the mine site by way ofconventional grinding and flotation techniques. The process plant is designed to produce a rareearth mineral concentrate by conventional froth flotation.Cracking of the mineral concentrate will be completed at the mine site using standard techniquescommon to the rare earth minerals monazite, bastnaesite, and xenotime. Acid cracking, withconcentrated sulphuric acid, will remove the impurities (e.g. Ca, F, P, Th, and Fe) and precipitate therare earth elements as carbonates which will be sold at market. The process and economics forproducing a mixed REO end-product, as a potential alternative to an REC product, will be evaluatedin a pre-feasibility study. Cracking Plant LocationIn this report, SGS has made the assumption that the acid plant will be located directly at the minesite since the radioactivity analysis of the thorium had not yet been completed. Treating the flotationconcentrate with acid will require a large volume of acid to be sent by ship and eventually by bargeto Mackays Island and then be transported by land to the mine site. An environmental hazardwould therefore be associated with these operations. In the next section, a recommendation will bemade to eliminate this risk. Oxide PricesEven with analysis from various experts to estimate the future price of the oxides, it is impossible topredict their exact value. For this reason, the values used in this report are considered conservative.The Ashram Project, even while being sensitive to the values of the oxides on the market, canabsorb a significant decline in the value used in this report and still remain profitable. The sameapproach can be applied to the oxide price discount. GeneralIn general, the Ashram Project presents a robust NPV, a good rate of return and a short paybackperiod. The preliminary economic potential is ultimately positive. ConclusionBased on the results of this PEA, SGS Geostat recommends that Commerce proceeds with the nextphase of the Project in order to identify opportunities and further assess the viability of the wholeventure. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 19526 RecommendationsGeologyBecause of the extensive geological work completed, SGS Geostat is confident that the density ofinformation is presently sufficient to move the Project to the pre-feasibility level.SGS Geostat considers that the resource potential of the Ashram Deposit is sufficient at this time,and that future work should aim at upgrading the resource categories for an open-pit miningoperation. The expected LoM of the current resources at a geological CoG of 1.25% TREO, is~177 years based on an estimated daily mining rate of 4,000 tpd. At the economic CoG of 0.51%TREO, a mining operation could potentially be sustained for 300 years (open-pit + underground).SGS Geostat also recommends continuing with the QA/QC protocol presently used with the failurethreshold of 500 ppm TREE for the blanks. The protocol should include the systematic verificationof the REE analytical values using more than one certified laboratory in order to monitor the qualityof the analysis completed for the Project.A large infill drilling program should be planned for the forthcoming field programs to upgrade allin-pit resources to indicated status in anticipation of a pre-feasibility study.MiningMining itself is, for all practical purposes, straightforward. However, since the open-pit will occupypart of Center Pond, SGS Geostat recommends a geotechnical and a comprehensive hydrologicalstudy to better define the stability and impermeability of the bedrock and ultimately the pit slopes.Detailed topographic data with 1 m contours is available from Commerce and a detailed study of theopen-pit and waste stockpiling areas is recommended.The acid generating and metal leaching potential of the waste rock will need to be further assessed.Preliminary testwork suggests the acid generation potential is negligible. However, measures tomitigate any potential problems should be defined.Always, within the framework of a pre-feasibility study, it is recommended that a detailedoptimization schedule be conducted for the mining operation. There are a number of softwareprograms on the market that can be used for this implementation.Mineral Processing and Metallurgical TestingOngoing metallurgical testworks on a representative sample of the Ashram Deposit is currentlybeing completed at Hazen Research Inc. in Colorado and UVR-FIA GmbH in Germany. Presently,the best result obtained in the laboratory is a mineral concentrate grade of approximately 10.37%TREO at 73.4% recovery and another of 11.18% TREO at a 68.5% recovery using conventionalflotation techniques with no attempt at optimization. The short term objective is to obtain a 20%TREO mineral concentrate grade with 60 to 70% TREO recovery. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 196Whatever the final concentrate grade and recovery obtained at the bench scale level, the process willhave to be confirmed at the pilot plant level. A 300-tonne pilot plant is recommended at this stageto assure enough concentrate material to undergo cracking.A trade-off study is recommended to assess the practicality and economics of transporting andcracking a mineral concentrate in the south versus cracking the mineral concentrate on site.Radioactivity of the flotation concentrate, the residue from the bulk acid bake, and leached flotationconcentrate (cracking) will need to be addressed. If the radioactivity is low enough, the crackingplant could be built somewhere along the St. Lawrence River where services are abundant, thusminimizing freight costs and issues related to the transportation of the acid and other chemicals.Initial testwork suggests the radioactivity is significantly lower compared to the amount of thoriumin the resource, which is already relatively low (~315 ppm). However, additional testwork is requiredto quantify it and is currently underway. Uranium is not present.A separated REO product would generate higher revenue than a bulk acid and leached flotationconcentrate (mixed carbonate/oxide product). As such, further laboratory and pilot plant testingmay be needed to determine the means of separation necessary to establish the added costs versusrevenue. A trade-off study should be considered to assess the economics of Commerce producinga separated rare earth oxide product via its own facility.Permanent Access RoadThe access road will need a detailed topographic survey and soil study to finalize the optimal route.This study will also make an inventory of the quality and quantity of on-site construction material:till, eskers, sand, gravel, and future quarries. Drainage is also an important issue of this road to bestudied.Wharfs and DockingTo facilitate the supply boat and barge loading and unloading operations, a bathymetric study of theKoksoak River will have to be done to properly locate the two docking areas: Kuujjuaq andMackay’s Island.Tailings, Waste and Water ManagementTailings ManagementA complete survey of the Ashram Deposit area will have to be undertaken to locate an area foremplacement of the tailings and polishing ponds. This area will have to be chosen in such a way asto minimize disturbance to the local environment. Physical and chemical characteristics of thetailings will have to be addressed, including rheology, specific gravity, acid base accounting/metalleaching, flocculation, sedimentation, precipitation of heavy metals, turbidity of supernatant water,rain falls, snow melting, etc.Because of the high amount of carbonate within the mineralisation and the recirculation of thetailings pond overflow back to the mill, the effluent from the tailings impoundment is notconsidered to be a potential environment problem with respect to acid generation. However,further tailings wastewater testing (from the pilot plant) should be scheduled as part of theenvironmental assessment for permitting in order to identify any parameters of concern and identify SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 197mitigation requirements. Finally, at the pre-feasibility stage, dam stability will be addressed for staticand post-earthquake conditions.WasteMining the Ashram Deposit will result in 3.25 Mm3 of waste rock material (with a TREO contentlower than 1.25%) that needs to be disposed over the 20 first years of operation, the last five yearsbeing without waste to remove. SGS assumes that 50% of this material will be used to build pads,footings, roads, dikes, airstrip, etc. Therefore, an area capable of containing a waste dump of 1.625Mm3 needs to be planned. The proposed waste dump has an overall height of 20 metres and afootprint of 285 m x 285 m (81,250 m2). The waste rock (and the mine tailings) is not consideredacid generating due to the high amount of carbonates and corresponding low sulphides content.This conclusion is currently being confirmed by Hazen, however, initial testwork is supportive.Water ManagementA preliminary environmental baseline study was completed by Environnement Illimité Inc. (EI) andits collaborators, Roche Ltd., and G.R.E.B.E. inc., in the surrounding area of the Eldor Propertywhere the Ashram Rare Earth Deposit is located. As for surface water, most metal and anionconcentrations are below or near the detection limit, and below the water quality criteria for theprotection of aquatic life. There are two exceptions: for Centre Pond, copper exceeded both theCanadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) criterion and MDDEP acute effectcriterion, and zinc exceeded the CCME criterion only. However, these values may represent naturalelevated levels in the environment.From the beginning of the operation at least some 630 m3/hr of water will be pumped from CentrePond to the mill and ultimately report to the tailings pond, some mitigation for these two metals willhave to be addressed.A complete water balance will be worked out between, precipitation, evaporation, seepage, millrequirement, pit dewatering, tailings discharge, potable water, fresh water, septic tank and leachingbed, ground water inflow, Centre Pond in and outflows, etc.Human EnvironmentThe Eldor Property is located in Nunavik, in the province of Quebec, Canada. Nunavik is theterritory north of the 55th parallel that is inhabited largely by Inuit. The Kativik region, createdpursuant to the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (JBNQA) in 1975, covers most of theNunavik Territory, except for the Cree reserved land of Whapmagoostui. Nunavik is also part of theNorth-Eastern Quebec Agreement (NEQA) and determines Naskapi Lands.Due to the above and also because it is a practice of good social responsibility, meetings withAboriginal Communities must be held in order to explain the whole Project. Commerce has alreadyheld several of these meetings, including a formal presentation to the community, and will continueto do so.Commerce will take every measure to minimise the environmental impact on the AboriginalCommunities. Commerce has already begun formal community engagement and has recentlyretained NATIONAL Public Relations Inc. in order to take discussions to a more formal level. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 198Because obtaining a Certificate of Authorisation (CA) from the Ministère du DéveloppementDurable de l’Environnement et des Parcs (MDDEP) of the Province of Quebec is required,communication with the Quebec government should begin as soon as possible.Future WorkThe recommended future work will apply to the next two phases of this study, Pre-feasibility (PFS)and Feasibility (FS) Studies. The recommended future work summarized below is a budgetaryestimation of the workings necessary to be realized for the completion of the PFS phase. Theestimated cost of the PFS study is also included in the budget to get a complete estimation of theexpenditures related to the PFS study completion. Table 26-1: Future Work Cost Summary Item Description BudgetGeology Diamond drilling campaign (all inclusive): 12,000 m at $200/m $ 2,400,000 Mineralogy and petrography study $ 100,000 Eldor camp operation and personnel salaries $ 1,500,000Mining Geotechnical study $ 400,000 Hydrological study for mining area, $ 1,500,000 dewatering parameters and permeability of pillarsInfrastructures Permanent access road location and specifications $ 750,000 Bathymetric and water transportation study $ 300,000Processing Complete actual laboratory bench scale testings $ 100,000 Pilot plant testing: 300 t sample for concentration, cracking $ 3,000,000 and REO separation testing (hydrometallurgy) Assess radioactivity impact $ 10,000 Tailings management study $ 500,000Environmental Soil quality sampling $ 150,000 Hydrological study of surface & groundwater c/w monitoring network $ 1,500,000 Special survey and sampling of wetlands $ 500,000 Wildlife detailled surveys of fish and bird $ 250,000 Human environment: traditional harvesting & outfitter activities $ 250,000 Complete Study of Environmental and Social Impacts Assessment $ 500,000 and Review Procedures of a mining project north of the 55th parallel for permits and certificates of authorization, including federal requirementsPre-feasibility PFS technical report in compliance with NI43-101 $ 3,000,000 Sub total $ 16,710,000 Contingencies (25%) $ 4,177,500 TOTAL $ 20,887,500 SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 19927 ReferencesAn Independent Technical Report on the Results of a Preliminary Economic Assessment ofFrontier Rare Earths Limited, a Zandkopsdrift Rare Earths Project, Located in The Northern CapeProvince of South Africa – Venmyn Rand (Pty) Ltd.Avalon Rare Metals NI 43-101 August 25, 2011 and Press Release February 2012.Avramtchev et al., (1990) Carte des Gites Mineraux du Quebec: Region de la Fosse du Labrador,DV 84-01, Publication du M.E.R., 42 pages with maps.Bandyayera et al., (2002) Cartes Préliminaires en Couleur des Travaux de Cartographie et des Études2002-2003, DV 2002‐11, Publication de M.E.R., 28 maps.Beaumier, M. (1987) Geochimie des Sediments de Lac: Region du Lac Otelnuk, DP 87‐14,Publication du M.E.R., 35 maps.Birkett, T.C. and Simandl, G.J. (1999) Carbonatite Associated Deposits: Magmatic, Replacement andResidual; in Selected British Columbia Mineral Deposit Profiles, Volume 3, Industrial Minerals, G.J.Simandl, Z.D. Hora and D.V. Lefebure, Editors, British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines.China’s Role in a Changing Global Rare earth elements Market, Dr Chen Zanheng June 3-4, 2011.Clark, T. and Wares, R. (2006) Lithotectonic and Metallogenic Synthesis of the New QuebecOrogen (Labrador Trough), MM 2005‐01, Publication du M.E.R., 175 pages with map.Clarus Securities – Analyst Report December 6, 2011.Cormark’s Rare Earth Metals Report (09-13-11) – Cormark Securities September 13, 2011.Critical Rare earth elements: Global supply & demand projections and the leading contenders fornew sources of supply – Technology Metals Research, LLC – August 2011.Demers, M. and Blanchet, C. (2001) Propriete Lac Erlandson‐Ta Reconnaissance GeologiqueAout 2001, for Mines d’Or Virginia, 101 pages with maps.Deloitte, Rare Earth Elements, Summary of analyst and data and peer review report, March 2012.Dressler, B. (1974) Geochimie des Sediments de Ruisseau: Region du Lac Nachikapau (NouveauQuebec), DP 422, Publication du M.E.R., 15 pages with maps.Dressler, B. and Ciesielski, A. (1979) Region de la Fosse du Labrador, rapport geologique RG‐195,MRN Quebec, 130 pages with maps.Environment Illimité Inc. – Preliminary Environmental Baseline Study – Eldor Rare Earth Project,March 2012. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 200Forêt de Demain Cie, Outland Camp, Amos QC, 2012.Hazen Reaserch Inc. - Development of a Beneficiation Process for Rare earth Minerals from theAshram Deposit (Eldor Carbonatite), Nunavik, Quebec, Progress Report.Hoek and Bray: Rock Slope Engineering, 1974.Hudson Resources Preliminary Assessment on the Sarfartoq Rare Earth Element Project,Greenland, October 2011.IMCOA Meeting the Challenges of Supply this Decade – Dudley Kingsnorth March 2011.IMCOA Rare earth elements Price Forecast – Dudley Kingsnorth August 24, 2010.Jacob Securities Inc: Rare Earth Elements – Industry Primer January 21, 2011.JBNQA: James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement in 1975.James et al., (2003) The Southeastern Churchill Province Revisited: U-Pb Geochronology, RegionalCorrelations, and Enigmatic Orma Domain, Current Research, Newfoundland Department ofMines and Energy Geological Survey, Report 03-1, p.35-45.John Kaiser Bottom Fish: 2011 Critical Materials Investment Report November 2011.Knox, A.W. (1986) 1985 Field Examination Eldor Carbonatite, Quebec, for Unocal Canada Ltd, 75pages with maps.Knox, A.W. (2011) Some Notes and Observations on the Geology of the Ashram Zone, EldorCarbonatite, New Quebec. Internal Report for Commerce Resources Corp. 5 pages.KPMG, A guide to Canadian Mining Taxation, September 2011.Laferrière, A (2011) Technical Report: Mineral Resource Estimation, Eldor Property – AshramDeposit, Nunavik, Quebec. For Commerce Resources Corp., 99 pages with maps and figures.Lafontaine, M. (1984) Permis 669 Prospection et Cartographie, for Eldor Resources Ltd, GM40910, 19pages with maps.Le Maitre, R.W. (2002) Igneous Rocks: A Classification and Glossary of Terms. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, U.K.Master Plan for Land Use in the Kativik Region (KRG, 1998).Matamec Exploration Inc. – NI 43-101 Report – Preliminary Economic Assessment Study forKipawa Project.Metal Pages – Rare Earth Conference September 2011. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 201Meusy et al., (1984) The Carbonatite Complex of Permit 669, New Quebec, for Eldor Resources Ltd.,10 pages with map.Mine & Mill Equipment Costs Estimators Guide: Capital & Operating Costs (2010).Mitchell, R.H. (2005) Carbonatites and Carbonatites and Carbonatites. The Canadian Mineralogist, Vol.43, pp. 2049-2068.Mitchell, R.H. (2011) Mineralogy of the Ashram Rare Earth Element Occurrence. Internal Report forCommerce Resources Corp. 24 pages plus plates.Navigating the Rare Earth Metals landscape: Gareth Hatch – Streetwise Reports November 8, 2011.New Rare Earth Metals Deposits in 2012: Jon Hykawy – Streetwise Reports January 03, 2012.Parc national des Monts-Pyramides Project Status Report (KRG, 2011).Picking the front runners in the Rare Earth Horse Race – Mackie Research Capital July 22, 2011.Plan Nord - Economic development strategy by the Quebec government.Quebec’s Mining Tax Act, 2012.Quest Rare Minerals Limited Preliminary Assessment on the Strange Lake B Zone September 2010.Rare earth elements & Yttrium: Market Outlook to 2015 – Roskill Information Services November2011.Rare Earth Elements Fall Q3 takes a breather – Macquatch Express September 30, 2011.Rare Earth Metals Bears and Bulls: Anthony Alfidi – Streetwise Reports December 20, 2011.Rare Earth Metals demand is unstoppable : Jeb Handwerger – Streetwise Reports February 14, 2012.Rare Earth Metals: Not your father’s mining biz: Byron King – Streetwise Reports January 31, 2012.Richardson, D.G., and Birkett, T.C., (1996) Carbonatite Associated Deposits, in Geology ofCanadian Mineral Deposit Types, (ed.) O.R. Eckstrand, W.D. Sinclair, and R.I. Thorpe; GeologicalSurvey of Canada, Geology of Canada, no. 8, p.541-558 (also Geological society of America, The Geologyof North America, v.P-1).Roskill: Rare Earths & Yttrium Market Outlook to 2015, 2011.Sherer, R.L. (1984) Evaluation of Selected Samples from Eldor Resources Ltd., Permit 669Carbonatite, Quebec. Union Molycorp Rept., 62 pages. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment 202Schmidt, P. (2011) Ashram Zone (Preliminary Report). Internal Report for Commerce Resources Corp. 30pages with plates.Smith, DL., D’Souza R., and Knox A.W. (2008) 2007 Exploration of the Eldor Property, NorthernQuebec. Assessment Report, 21 pages plus figures and appendices.Smith, D.L. and Peter‐Rennich, A. (2010) 2008 and 2009 Exploration of the Eldor Property,Northern Quebec. Assessment Report, 48 pages plus figures and appendices.Steffen, O. K. H., Contreras, L. F., Terbrugge, P. J., Venter, J., A Risk Evaluation Approach for PitSlope Design, 2008.Technology Metals Summit 2012: Extracts of IMCOA demand forecasts from Dudley Kingsnorthkey, note speech Feb 2012.The Age of Rare Earth Metals: Luisa Moreno - Streetwise Reports December 6, 2011.UVR-FIA GmbH: Beneficiation plant in Germany.Woolley, A.R. and Kempe, D.R.C. (1989) Carbonatites: Nomenclature, Average ChemicalCompositions, and Element Distribution. In Carbonatites, Genesis and Evolution, Keith Bell (ed.),London, Unwin Hyman Ltd., pp. 1-14.Wright, W.R., Mariano, A.N. and Hagni, R.G. (1998) Pyrochlore, mineralization, and glimmeriteformation in the Eldor (Lake LeMoyne) carbonatite complex, Labrador Trough, Quebec, Canada.In: Proceedings of the 33rd Forum on the Geology of Industrial Minerals. Canadian Institute of Mining,Metallurgy and Petroleum; Special Vol. 50, pages 205-213.Yuanta Research: China Rare Earth Industry: An industry at a turning point January 6, 2011. SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment APPENDIX A______________________________________________________________________________ CERTIFICATES OF QUALIFIED PERSONS SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Certificate of Qualified PersonGASTON GAGNON350 rue du Galet, Saint-Eustache QcJ7P 5R9 CanadaGaston.Gagnon@sgs.com• I am Senior Mining Engineer with SGS Canada Inc. - Geostat with an office at 10 Boul. de la Seigneurie Est, Suite 203, Blainville, Quebec, Canada, J7C 3V5.• This certificate applies to the technical report entitled Preliminary Economic Assessment on the Ashram Rare Earth Deposit, Nunavik in Quebec Province dated July 5th 2012 (the “Technical Report)• I am a graduate of the University of Laval in Quebec City (B.Sc. Mining Engineering, 1964). I am a member of good standing (#15918) of the l’Ordre des Ingénieurs du Québec (Order of Engineers of Quebec). My relevant experience includes over 40 years of experience in mining minerals in underground and surface producers, processing mainly gold, silver, copper, zinc, aggregates and niobium. Experience also includes 5 years of consulting for several mining projects under development. EPCM experience covers scoping (now PEA) studies and prefeasibility studies, detailed economic estimation and construction management in Canada, Africa, Mexico, South America and Saudi Arabia. I am a “Qualified Person” for purposes of National Instrument 43-101 (the “Instrument”).• I have visited the property site between September 18th to September 21th, 2011.• I am responsible for all Sections except 11.3, 11.4,11.5, 12,13,14 and 17 of the Technical Report.• I am independent of Commerce Resources Corporation as defined by Section 1.5 of the Instrument.• I have no prior involvement with the property that is the subject of the Technical Report.• I have read the Instrument and the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for has been prepared in compliance with the Instrument.• As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the sections of the Technical Report for which I am responsible contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the the Technical Report not misleading.Signed and dated this 5th day of July 2012 at Blainville, Quebec.“Original document signed and sealed by Gaston Gagnon, Eng”Gaston Gagnon. EngSenior Mining EngineerSGS Canada Inc. – Geostat SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Certificate of Qualified PersonYANN CAMUSyann.camus@sgs.comI, Yann Camus, Eng., of Blainville, Quebec, do hereby certify:• I am project Engineer with SGS Canada Inc.- Geostat with an office at 10 Boul. de la Seigneurie Est, Suite 203, Blainville, Quebec, Canada, J7C 3V5.• This certificate applies to the technical report entitled Preliminary Economic Assessment on the Ashram Rare Earth Deposit, Nunavik in Quebec Province dated July 05th 2012 (the “Technical Report)• I am a graduate from École Polytechnique de Montréal (B.Sc. Geological Engineering, 2000). I am a member of good standing (#125443) of the l’Ordre des Ingénieurs du Québec (Order of Engineers of Quebec). My relevant experience includes continuous geological engineering since my graduation from University. I am a “Qualified Person” for purposes of National Instrument 43-101 (the “Instrument”).• I did not visit the property.• I am responsible for Sections 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 12 and 14 of the Technical Report.• I am independent of Commerce Resources Corporation as defined by Section 1.5 of the Instrument.• I have no prior involvement with the property that is the subject of the Technical Report.• I have read the Instrument and the sections of the Technical Report that I am responsible for have been prepared in compliance with the Instrument.• As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the sections of the Technical Report for which I am responsible contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the the Technical Report not misleading.Signed and dated this 05th day of July 2012 at Blainville, Quebec.“Original document signed and sealed by Yann Camus, Eng”Yann Camus. Eng.Geological EngineerSGS Canada Inc. – Geostat SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Certificate of Qualified PersonGILBERT ROUSSEAUgilbert.rousseau@sgs.comI, Gilbert Rousseau B Sc.A, Eng., of Ville de Saguenay, Province of Quebec, do hereby certify :• I am a Senior Mining-Metallurgical Engineer with SGS Canada Inc., with a business address at 10 Boul. de la Seigneurie, Blainvile, Quebec, J7C 3V5.• This certificate applies to the Preliminary Economic Assessment report entitled : Ashram Rare Earth Deposit, Nunavik, province of Quebec dated July 05th, 2012 (the “Technical Report”).• I graduated from The Ecole Polytechnique of the University of Montreal (B.Sc.A, Mining Engineer in 1969). I am a member in good standing of the “l’Ordre des Ingénieurs du Québec” #20288). My relevant experience includes more than 40 years of experience in the mining and milling of minerals including iron, copper, lead, zinc, silver, gold, asbestos, graphite, nickel, silica, etc. I am a “Qualified Person” for the purposes of National Instrument 43-101 (the “Instrument”).• I did not visit the property.• I am responsible for Sections 13 and 17 of the Technical Report.• I am independent of Commerce Resources Corporation as defined by Section 1.5 of the Instrument.• I have read the Instrument and the sections of the report that I am responsible. These sections have been prepared in compliance with the Instrument.• As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the sections of the report for which I am responsible contain all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the Technical Report not misleading.Signed and dated this 05th day of July 2012 at Blainville, Quebec.“Original document signed and sealed by Gilbert Rousseau, Eng”Gilbert Rousseau, Eng.SGS Canada Inc. – Geostat SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment APPENDIX B______________________________________________________________________________ LIST OF MINERALS TITLES SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Type of Date of Number of NTS sheet Title No Status Expiry date Area (Ha) Titleholder(s) (Name, Number and Percentage) title registration renewalsSNRC 24C16 CDC 1007657 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 1007658 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 1007659 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 1007660 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 1007661 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 1007883 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 1007889 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 1007890 Active 11/04/2001 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 6 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087740 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087741 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087742 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087743 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087744 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087745 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087746 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087747 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087748 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087749 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087750 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087751 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087752 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087753 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087754 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087755 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087756 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087757 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087758 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087759 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087760 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087761 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087762 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087763 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087764 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087765 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087766 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087767 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087768 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087769 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087770 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087771 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087772 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087773 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087774 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087775 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087776 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087777 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087778 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087779 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087780 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087781 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087782 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087783 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087784 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087785 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087786 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087787 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087788 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087789 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087790 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087791 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087792 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087793 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087794 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087795 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087796 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087797 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087798 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087799 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Type of Date of Number of NTS sheet Title No Status Expiry date Area (Ha) Titleholder(s) (Name, Number and Percentage) title registration renewalsSNRC 24C16 CDC 2087800 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087801 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087802 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087803 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087804 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087805 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087806 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087807 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087808 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087809 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087810 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087811 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087812 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087813 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087814 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087815 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087816 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087817 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087818 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087819 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087820 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087821 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087822 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2087823 Active 30/05/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 3 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111141 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111142 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111143 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111144 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111145 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111146 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111147 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111148 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111149 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111150 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111151 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111152 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111153 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111154 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111155 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111156 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111157 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111158 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111159 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111160 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111161 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111162 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111163 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111164 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111165 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2111166 Active 25/07/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118751 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118752 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118753 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118754 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118755 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118756 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118757 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118758 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118759 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118760 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118761 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118762 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118763 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118764 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118765 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118766 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118767 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118768 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Type of Date of Number of NTS sheet Title No Status Expiry date Area (Ha) Titleholder(s) (Name, Number and Percentage) title registration renewalsSNRC 24C16 CDC 2118769 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118770 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118771 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118772 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118773 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118774 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118775 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118776 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118777 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118778 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118779 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118780 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118781 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118782 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118783 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118784 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118785 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118786 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2118787 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118788 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118789 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118790 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118791 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118792 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118793 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118794 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118795 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2118796 Active 22/08/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123090 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123091 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123092 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123093 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123094 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123095 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123096 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123097 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123098 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123099 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123100 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123101 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2123102 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2123103 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2123104 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2123105 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2123106 Active 21/09/2007 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C15 CDC 2142199 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C15 CDC 2142200 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142201 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142202 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142203 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.04 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142204 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142205 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.03 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142206 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142207 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142208 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142209 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.02 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142210 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142211 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142212 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.01 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142213 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142214 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142215 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142216 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142217 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142218 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142219 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142220 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142221 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Type of Date of Number of NTS sheet Title No Status Expiry date Area (Ha) Titleholder(s) (Name, Number and Percentage) title registration renewalsSNRC 24C16 CDC 2142222 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142223 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142224 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.99 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142225 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142226 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142227 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142228 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142229 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142230 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142231 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142232 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142233 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142234 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142235 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142236 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.98 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142237 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142238 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142239 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142240 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142241 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142242 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142243 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142244 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142245 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2142246 Active 25/01/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.97 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145593 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145594 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145595 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145596 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145597 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145598 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145599 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145600 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145601 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145602 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145603 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145604 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145605 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145606 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.14 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145607 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145608 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145609 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145610 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145611 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145612 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145613 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145614 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145615 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145616 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145617 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145618 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145619 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145620 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145621 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.13 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145622 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145623 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145624 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145625 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145626 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145627 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145628 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145629 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145630 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145631 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145632 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145633 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145634 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145635 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.12 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Type of Date of Number of NTS sheet Title No Status Expiry date Area (Ha) Titleholder(s) (Name, Number and Percentage) title registration renewalsSNRC 24C16 CDC 2145636 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145637 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145638 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145639 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145640 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145641 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145642 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145643 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145644 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145645 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145646 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145647 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145648 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.11 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145649 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145650 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145651 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145652 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145653 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145654 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145655 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145656 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145657 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145658 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145659 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145660 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145661 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.1 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145662 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145663 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145664 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145665 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145666 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145667 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145668 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145669 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145670 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145671 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145672 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145673 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145674 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145675 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145676 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145677 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145678 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145679 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145680 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145681 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145682 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145683 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145684 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145685 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145686 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145687 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145688 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145689 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145690 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145691 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145692 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2145693 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145694 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145695 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145696 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145697 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145698 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145699 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145700 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.96 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145701 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.94 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145702 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145703 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Type of Date of Number of NTS sheet Title No Status Expiry date Area (Ha) Titleholder(s) (Name, Number and Percentage) title registration renewalsSNRC 24F01 CDC 2145704 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145705 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145706 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145707 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145708 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.95 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145709 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145710 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145711 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145712 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145713 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145714 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145715 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145716 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145717 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145718 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.93 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145719 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145720 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145721 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145722 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145723 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145724 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145725 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145726 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145727 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24F01 CDC 2145728 Active 28/03/2008 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 46.92 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2179343 Active 12/02/2009 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 2 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204143 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.09 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204144 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204145 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204146 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204147 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.08 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204148 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204149 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204150 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204151 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204152 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.07 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204153 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204154 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204155 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204156 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204157 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204158 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.06 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204159 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204160 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204161 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2204162 Active 02/02/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.05 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254846 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.18 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254847 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.18 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254848 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.18 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254849 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.18 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254850 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.18 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254851 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.16 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254852 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.16 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254853 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.16 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254854 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.16 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254855 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.16 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254856 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.17 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254857 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.15 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254858 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.15 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254859 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.15 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254860 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.15 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254861 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.15 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254862 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.15 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable)SNRC 24C16 CDC 2254863 Active 20/10/2010 0:00 13/05/2014 23:59 1 47.15 Commerce Resources Corporation (18766) 100 % (responsable) SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment APPENDIX C ANALYTICAL PROTOCOLS SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment Inspectorate Analytical MethodologySample Preparation Parameters:- Up to 2kg of sample is dried for up to 24hrs, crushed and riffle split to ~250g sample weight. The splitsample is then pulverized to >85% passing -200 mesh. Please keep in mind that for this particular job wewere the check laboratory and did not prep core or rock from this client.Whole Rock:- Lithium Metaborate Fusion, followed by nitric acid leach and ICP-MS scan. LOI was included.Detection limits for each element were:Al2O3, BaO, CaO, Cr2O3, MgO, Na2O, P2O5, Fe2O3, K2O, SiO2, TiO2 - 0.01 - 100%Ce, Dy, Er, Eu, Ho, La, Lu, Nd, Pr, Sm, Tb, Tm, Yb - 0.1 - 10,000 ppmGd, Hf - 0.1 - 1,000 ppm SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment SGS Geostat
    • Commerce Resources Corp. – Ashram Project – Preliminary Economic Assessment SGS Geostat