This presentation provides an overview of the Brucejack Project and the resource estimation process used for the high-grade Valley of the Kings zone. Key points include:
- The deposit is an intermediate sulfidation epithermal gold-silver system hosted in deformed volcanic rocks.
- Multiple indicator kriging was used to estimate resources given the nuggety, high-grade nature of the gold mineralization. This involved separating the data into low and high-grade populations.
- A 2013 bulk sample program helped confirm the geological model and continuity of mineralization.
- The resource estimate incorporated data from over 79,000 samples and validated the high-grade, coarse gold nature of the mineralization
2. CAUTIONARY STATEMENT
Forward Looking Information
This Presentation contains “forward-looking information” and “forward looking statements” within the meaning of applicable Canadian and United States
securities legislation. Forward-looking information may include, but is not limited to, the preliminary mill results from processing the 426585E cross-cut, the
preliminary mill results from the bulk sample program, the estimated gold to be produced from the bulk sample program, the estimated contained gold in the
426585E cross-cut from the sample tower, the anticipated production and developments in our operations in future periods, information with respect to our
planned exploration and development activities, the adequacy of our financial resources, the estimation of mineral reserves and resources including the 2013
Valley of the Kings Mineral Resource estimate, realization of mineral reserve and resource estimates and timing of development of our Brucejack Project, costs
and timing of future exploration, results of future exploration and drilling, production and processing estimates, capital and operating cost estimates, timelines
and similar statements relating to the economic viability of the Brucejack Project, timing and receipt of approvals, consents and permits under applicable
legislation, our executive compensation approach and practice, the composition of our board of directors and committees and adequacy of financial resources.
Wherever possible, words such as “plans”, “expects”, “projects”, “assumes”, “budget”, “strategy”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “anticipates”,
“believes”, “intends”, “targets” and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be
taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative forms of any of these terms and similar expressions, have been used to identify forward-looking statements and
information. Statements concerning mineral reserve and resource estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward-looking information to the extent that
they involve estimates of the mineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. Any statements that express or involve discussions with
respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not statements of historical fact and
may be forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that
could cause actual events or results to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking information, including, without limitation, those risks
identified in our Annual Information Form dated March 18, 2013 filed on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and in the United States on Form 40-F through EDGAR at
the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Forward-looking information is based on the expectations and opinions of our management on the date the statements are
made. The assumptions used in the preparation of such statements, although considered reasonable at the time of preparation, may prove to be imprecise. We
do not assume any obligation to update forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as
required by applicable law. For the reasons set forth above, prospective investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information.
National Instrument 43-101
Technical and scientific information contained herein relating to the Projects is derived from National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant technical
reports (“Reports”) “Mineral Resources Update Technical Report” dated December 19, 2013 and “Feasibility Study and Technical Report on the Brucejack
Project, Stewart, BC” dated June 21, 2013. We have filed the Reports under our profile at www.sedar.com. Technical and scientific information not contained
within the Reports for the Projects have been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Kenneth C. McNaughton, P.Eng. and Ian Chang, P.Eng., each of whom is
an independent “qualified person” under NI 43-101.
This presentation uses the terms “measured resources”, “indicated resources” (together “M&I”) and “inferred resources”. Although these terms are recognized
and required by Canadian regulations (under NI 43-101), the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Mineral resources
which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental,
permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource will be
converted into mineral reserves.
In addition, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or
any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not
form the basis of feasibility or pre feasibility studies, or economic studies, except for a Preliminary Assessment as defined under NI 43-101. Investors are
cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.
Currency
Unless otherwise indicated, all dollar values herein are in Canadian $.
2
3. TODAY’S PRESENTERS
Ivor Jones
BSc (Hons), Macquarie University;
MSc University of Queensland;
FAusIMM (CP)
Executive Consultant, Snowden Mining Industry Consultants
Mr Jones has more than 25 years experience in the mining industry.
Since graduating in 1984, he has worked in mining (gold, copper,
nickel), exploration and resource evaluation (gold, including coarse
gold, silver, PGEs, copper, iron ore, REEs and nickel and other
commodities).
Companies include BHP Engineering, WMC Resources Ltd and
Anvil Mining Limited (and juniors).
Since first joining Snowden in April 2001, Mr Jones has consulted in
mineral resource projects globally, and has specialist skills in
project management, evaluation and review, geostatistics, resource
evaluation, extensional exploration, grade control and
reconciliation studies.
3
4. TODAY’S PRESENTERS
Warwick Board, Ph.D., P.Geo, MAusIMM, Pr.Sci.Nat.
Chief Geologist
Dr. Board has over 17 years of global experience as a professional geologist. He was most recently Senior
Resource Geologist at Silver Standard Resources Inc., where he was involved with the structural assessment and
initial non-linear resource modeling of the high grade gold mineralization at the Brucejack Deposit. Prior to
Silver Standard, he was Principal Consultant at Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Inc. Dr. Board holds
Bachelor of Science (Honours), Master of Science, and Doctor of Philosophy degrees in geology from the
University of Cape Town, South Africa, as well as a Citation in Applied Geostatistics from the University of
Alberta. Dr. Board is a registered professional geoscientist with the Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of British Columbia, a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, and a
registered professional with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions.
Kevin Torpy
Director, Mine Engineering
Mr. Torpy has over 17 years of experience developing underground mines in remotes areas. Mr. Torpy
manages both the mining portion of the Brucejack Feasibility Study and the Operations group at
Brucejack. Mr. Torpy was previously Project Mine Engineer with Silver Standard Resources where he
managed the mining portion of various studies for projects in Mexico and South America. As Chief Mine
Engineer Coeur d’ Alene Mines’ Kensington Project Mr. Torpy managed the detailed engineering and site
operations for the underground development program during construction of the mine. As Operations
Engineer at Teckcominco’s Pogo Mine, he helped to manage the operation of a remote camp and underground
development program and work on the feasibility study. He has also been Project Engineer for JS Redpath
during a shaft excavation project in Wyoming. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Montana Tech.
4
5. Agenda
Brucejack’s geology as it relates to resource estimation (Board)
Resource estimation and nuggety gold deposits (Jones)
Multiple Indicator Kriging (MIK) (Jones)
Valley of the Kings resource estimation (Jones)
2013 Bulk Sample Outcomes (Board)
December 2013 Resource estimate (Jones)
Mining the Valley of the Kings (Torpy)
Next steps, Q&A
5
6. BRUCEJACK GEOLOGY – OVERVIEW
Intermediate sulfidation epithermal gold-silver deposit
― Stockwork vein-hosted system
― Active island arc
― Alkaline porphyry associated
Key age dates
― 198-180 Myr ago – Host rock sequence formation
― 191-184 Myr ago – Mineralization
― ~110 Myr ago - Deformation
Myr = Million Years
6
7. BRUCEJACK GEOLOGY - STRUCTURE
S
N
Valley of the
Kings
West Zone
Fragmental
Volcanic Rocks
Plag.-Kfs.-Phyric
Latite Flow
Polylithic
Conglomerate
200 m
Intensely Silicified
Conglomerate
Siltstone, litharenite,
pebble conglomerate
Mineralized
Corridors
Hbl-phyric
Latite Flow
7
8. CONFIRMATION OF GEOLOGICAL MODEL
Modelled lithologies and contacts
Corridors of stockwork mineralization
Folded stratigraphy
East Raise –
615 Lateral
426555E
Round 7W
Multiple overprinting vein generations
East-West
part of
system
East-West
part of
system
Visible electrum
― Stockwork association
― Alteration association
― Spatial distribution – resource blocks
Continuity
― Along strike
― Across strike
― Vertical
Post-mineral deformation
Cleo
North Raise
426660E
West Wall
East-West
part of
system
North-South
part of system
― Folds, thrust faults, wrench faults
― Late veins
8
9. BULK SAMPLE AREA - GEOLOGY
Cleopatra is considered part
of the stockwork system
9
12. Snowden Mining Industry Consultants
A leading service provider founded in 1987
Offices in Perth, Brisbane, Johannesburg, Vancouver, Calgary,
London, Belo Horizonte
Services focused on mining related activities:
–
Resource evaluation
–
Mining engineering
–
Geotechnical engineering
–
Corporate services
–
Mining /geology related software
12
13. Common estimation methods
Linear techniques
― Inverse Distance methods (Power 0, 1, 2, 3)
― Ordinary Kriging (OK)
Other techniques
― Indicator Kriging (including MIK and Med IK) - a nonparametric method
― Uniform Conditioning (mathematical manipulation of OK
estimates)
13
14. Selecting an estimation technique
based on grade data population
no skew
positive skew
negative skew
mixed
Ordinary kriging
Indicator kriging
Indicator kriging
Indicator kriging
Indicator kriging if
spatially integrated
14
15. Indicator Kriging
Indicator Kriging is a common technique
— Originated out of Stanford University (Journel, 1983)
— Non-parametric
— Not a linear technique
— Suitable for skewed and mixed statistical datasets
As in all resource estimation methods, it can be applied
poorly – care is required
The definition of geological domains is still important
15
16. Where has MIK been used for operating
mines?
Deposit
Company
Country
Date(1)
Mine Type
Porgera deposit
Barrick Gold Corp.
Papua N.G.
December 2011
Underground to
Open Pit
Cadia Hill
Newcrest Mining Ltd.
Australia
February 2013
Open Pit
Telfer – Main Dome
Newcrest Mining Ltd.
Australia
February 2013
Open Pit
Telfer – West Dome
Newcrest Mining Ltd.
Australia
February 2013
Open Pit
Telfer – VSC
Newcrest Mining Ltd.
Australia
February 2013
Underground
Bonikro
Newcrest Mining Ltd.
Ivory Coast
February 2013
Open Pit
Wafi
Newcrest Mining Ltd.
Papua N.G.
February 2013
Open Pit
Peak Gold Mines
New Gold Inc.
Australia
January 2009
Underground
Tiriganiaq (Meliadine)
Comaplex Minerals Corp.
Canada
February 2010
Underground
McKinnons Gold Deposit
Burdekin Resources Ltd.
Australia
1995
Open Pit
Agbaou Gold Project
Endeavour Mining Corp.
Ivory Coast
May 2012
Open Pit
Blagodatnoye Gold Deposit
ZAO Polyus
Russian Fed.
November 2008
Open Pit
Ban Houayxai
PanAust Ltd.
Laos
December 2012
Open Pit
Note: non-inclusive list
(1) Effective date of Mineral Resource as of most recent technical report
16
24. Valley of the Kings data
Summary statistics of 1.5m composited data for mineralized domains – VOK
Statistic
Samples
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Standard deviation
CV
Variance
Gold g/t
Silver g/t
79,699
79,699
0.00
0.25
16,552
9,383
2.57
8.59
69.54
41.94
27.03
4.88
4,836
1,759
24
25. Estimation methodology – Valley
of the Kings
Steps:
1. Define low grade / high grade definition limit
2. Separate the lower grade ‘background’ population from the higher grade population
3. Estimate grade of lower grade component using ordinary kriging
4. Estimate grade of higher grade component using multiple indicator kriging (MIK)
5. Estimate proportion of high grade component using indicator kriging
6. Recombine low grade and high grade estimates using estimated proportions
7. Grade estimate validation and classification
8. Grade tabulation
25
26. Steps 1,2: Summary statistics –
VOK
High grade
population
Low grade
population
26
31. Step 6: Final grade estimate
Low grade population estimate * Probability of block being low grade
+
High grade population estimate * Probability of block being high grade
31
33. Step 7: Model validation – visual
review
December 2013 Mineral Resource - oblique view
33
34. Step 7: Model validation - statistical
December 2013 Mineral Resource estimate – data validation
Mineralized domain
Gold (g/t)
Number of samples
Composite mean
Estimated mean
Silver (g/t)
79,699
79,699
2.57
8.59
2.36
8.23
34
36. IMPACT OF DRILLING DIRECTION
25 m
Au (g/t)
<0.5
0.5-1.0
1.0-5.0
5.0-20.0
>20.0
N
36
37. MILL VS. TOWER – 426585E EXAMPLE
Figure 9.7 from Mineral Resources Update Technical Report 19 December 2013
14.00
Min
Max
12.00
Calculated mill feed grade
Gold grade (g/t)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Round number
Tonnes
Mill
Sample tower
*Based on dry tonnage from mill
2,167*
Au (g/t)
Oz. Au
4.03
281
2.08
145
37
38. MILL VS. TOWER – 426585E EXAMPLE
14.00
Min
Max
10.00
Calculated mill feed grade
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Round number
426585 E
Gold grade (g/t)
12.00
38
39. BULK SAMPLE – MILL & MODEL RESULTS
Table 14.10 December 2013 Mineral Resource versus November 2012 Mineral Resource and Mill results
by bulk sample crosscut(1)
November 2012
Mineral Resource
Mill
Drive
December 2013
Mineral Resource
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
426555E
1,416
4.41
201
1,491
4.89
234
1,481
3.97
189
426645E
1,875
2.28
137
1,959
5.64
355
1,987
3.26
208
426585E
2,169
4.02
280
2,231
12.12
869
2,269
2.35
171
426615E
2,878
39.35
3,642
3,089
18.88
1,876
3,127
15.74
1,582
615L
1,964
25.52
1,611
1,535
38.78
1,914
1,574
38.42
1,945
10,305
15.84
5,248
10,438
12.20
4,096
Final
clean out
Total
52.0
10,302
17.88
5,923
Direct comparisons at crosscut level are only guidelines:
– Mineral Resource block size is 10 mE x 10 mN x 10 mRL (approximately 2,700 t
per block)
– Round size is 4 mE x 2.7 mN x 3.5 mRL (approximately 100 t per round)
– Cannot assume grade homogeneity throughout block
(1)From Mineral Resources Update Technical Report 19 December 2013
39
40. BULK SAMPLE – OK, ID VERSUS MILL(1)
Table 14.12 Ordinary kriging and inverse distance weighted estimated versus Mill results by bulk
sample drive – total gold ounces
Model
Mill
ID1
ID2
ID3
OK
December 2013
Mineral Resource
5,923
5,923
5,923
5,923
No top cut
8,313
8,541
8,351
6,932
2000
4,626
4,716
4,640
3,925
Top cut (Au g/t)
1500
3,931
4,007
3,963
3,440
700
2,755
2,807
2,811
2,582
85
837
826
810
790
4,096
Table 14.13 Ordinary kriging and inverse distance weighted estimated versus Mill results by
bulk sample drive – grade details
Model
Mill
ID1
ID2
ID3
OK
December 2013
Mineral Resource
16.08
16.08
16.08
16.08
No top cut
28.78
29.57
28.91
24.00
2000
15.99
16.31
16.05
13.58
Top cut (Au g/t)
1500
13.59
13.85
13.70
11.90
700
9.51
9.69
9.71
8.92
85
2.86
2.82
2.77
2.71
12.20
(1)From Mineral Resources Update Technical Report 19 December 2013
40
41. KEY POINTS – BULK SAMPLE OUTCOMES
Confirmed the geological model
The results of mapping in the bulk sample area were
consistent with the November 2012 Mineral Resource
estimate
Facilitated parameter optimization for December 2013
Mineral Resource estimate
Increased confidence in the Valley of the Kings Mineral
Resources
41
42. Changes between 2012 & 2013 –
Fine tuning the estimation parameters
Use of bulk sample results to fine tune estimation parameters
Testwork to look at different techniques and constraints
Refinement of search parameters for estimates
Reduction in smoothing (reblocking)
Additional drilling and bulk sample (including reconciliation)
42
43. December 2013 Mineral Resource
classification
Section showing December 2013 Mineral Resource blocks colour-coded by Classification
S
N
Inferred
Measured
(see next slide)
Indicated
43
44. December 2013 Mineral Resource
classification - Measured
S
N
Indicated
Measured
~10m
Detail of section
showing
December 2013
Mineral Resource
blocks colourcoded
by Classification
44
45. December 2013
Mineral Resource(1,4,5,6)
Valley of the Kings - Mineral Resource >5g/t AuEq
(1) Mineral Resources which are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially
affected by environmental, permitting, legal, marketing, or other relevant issues. The Mineral Resources were reported using the Canadian Institute of Mining,
Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee
on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council.
(2) The quantity and grade of reported Inferred resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these
Inferred Resources as an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an Indicated or
Measured Mineral Resource category.
(3) Contained metal and tonnes figures in totals may differ due to rounding.
(4) The Mineral Resource estimate stated in Table 14.25 and Table 14.26 is defined using 5 m by 5 by 5 m blocks in the well drilled portion of West Zone
(5 m by 10 m drilling or better) and 10 m by 10 m by 10 m blocks in the remainder of West Zone and in VOK.
(5) The gold equivalent value is defined as AuEq = Au + Ag/53.
(6) Mineral Resource Update Technical Report 19 December 2013.
45
46. December 2013
Mineral Resource(1,4,5,6)
West Zone Mineral Resource >5g/t AuEq
(3)
Category
Tonnes
(millions)
Gold
(g/t)
Silver
(g/t)
Measured
2.4
5.85
Indicated
2.5
M+I
Inferred(2)
Contained
Gold
(Moz)
Silver
(Moz)
347
0.5
26.8
5.86
190
0.5
15.1
4.9
5.85
267
0.9
41.9
4.0
6.44
82
0.8
10.6
(1) Mineral Resources which are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially
affected by environmental, permitting, legal, marketing, or other relevant issues. The Mineral Resources were reported using the Canadian Institute of Mining,
Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee
on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council.
(2) The quantity and grade of reported Inferred resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these
Inferred Resources as an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an Indicated or
Measured Mineral Resource category.
(3) Contained metal and tonnes figures in totals may differ due to rounding.
(4) The Mineral Resource estimate stated in Table 14.25 and Table 14.26 is defined using 5 m by 5 by 5 m blocks in the well drilled portion of West Zone
(5 m by 10 m drilling or better) and 10 m by 10 m by 10 m blocks in the remainder of West Zone and in VOK.
(5) The gold equivalent value is defined as AuEq = Au + Ag/53.
(6) Mineral Resource Estimate Update Technical Report 19 December 2013.
46
47. Comparison of November 2012
and December 2013 Mineral
Resource estimates – VOK(1)
Tonnes
(millions)
Nov-12
Grade
Gold
Silver
(g/t)
(g/t)
Contained metal
Gold
Silver
(Moz)
(Moz)
16.4
14.1
8.5
7.3
5.4
17
15.7
2.9
2.7
Measured
2
19.3
14.4
1.2
0.9
Indicated
13.4
17.4
14.3
7.5
6.1
M+I
15.3
17.6
14.3
8.7
7.0
Inferred
(1) See notes slide 47
16.1
Inferred
Dec-13
Indicated
5.9
25.6
20.6
4.9
3.9
47
48. Key Points – December 2013
Mineral Resource estimate
Confirms global robustness of November 2012 estimate – little changed
― M&I contained metal effectively the same
― More selective estimate (slightly higher grade for slightly less tonnes)
Conservative
― Drilling orientation under-sampling N-S structures
― Revised estimation parameters calibrated to production
Increased Confidence
― Reconciliation to production data
― Definition of Measured Mineral Resource
― Increased understanding of mineralization
― Confirmation of geological model
48
49. WHY LONGHOLE STOPING AT BRUCEJACK?
Longhole Open Stoping (LHOS) selected at
Brucejack because:
Vein stockwork conducive to bulk mining
Steeply dipping orebody
Extensive orebody
Probable reserves over:
― >550 m of vertical extent in VOK
― >450 m of strike length
― Inferred resource beyond those limits
49
50. PLAN VIEW: 2013 UG DRILLING
N
Polylithic
Conglomerate
Fragmental
Volcanic Rocks
Key (g/t Au)
Assay intervals
2.5-5.0
5.0-20.0
>20
Silicified
Conglomerate
Legend
Completed Underground
Development
Volcanic
Sediment
Volcanic Flows
Completed Bulk Sample
50 m
51. OTHER REASONS LHOS IS SUITABLE
Stable rock in ore, hangingwall, and footwall
Adaptable to a variety of stope widths
Allows for scheduling flexibility due to multiple stopes
on multiple horizons being available
Conventional mining method and equipment
High production rate provides lower operating costs
Backfill placement helps to maximize recovery of the
reserve and reduce surface impacts
51
52. EXAMPLES OF LHOS MINES WORLD WIDE (1)
Goldex, Agnico Eagle, Quebec
LaRonde, Agnico Eagle, Quebec
Red Lake, Goldcorp, Ontario
Musselwhite, Goldcorp, Ontario
Casa Berardi, Hecla, Quebec
Kensington Mine, Coeur d’Alene Mines
Greens Creek Mine, Hecla, Alaska
Chukar Mine, Newmont, Nevada
Miekle, Barrick, Nevada
Cortez Hills, Barrick, Nevada
Tanami, Newmont, Northern Territory, Australia
(1) Long hole stoping may not necessarily be the only method employed at these operations
52
53. LIFE OF MINE PLAN
Valley of the Kings
Infrastructure Area
West Zone
Portals
Oblique view facing west
53
54. VALLEY OF THE KINGS LONG SECTION
View Facing South
Stope Blocks
Footwall Level Drives
Ramp
54
55. LONG HOLE STOPING TERMINOLOGY
Primary stopes bounded
by rock on both sides
Secondary stopes
bounded by backfill on
one or both sides
30 m level spacing
Maximum of 45 m stope
lengths
15 m widths
55
56. TOP CUT CENTER DRIVE
The mucking level was
previously established
during the excavation of
the previous stope
A drift is driven across
the center of the drift
using a jumbo drill
Two Boom Jumbo
56
57. CENTER DRIVE CABLE BOLTING
The center of the stope is
supported using cable
bolts in ordered to
provide a stable span
after the stope is fully
excavated
Cable Bolter
57
58. SLASHING COMPLETE
Full width slashing
allows for parallel
drilling rather than ring
drilling
Parallel drilling
provides cleaner walls
which helps to control
dilution and improve
recovery
58
59. SLOT RAISE DRILLING
Because the stope is
confined by rock on all
sides, an opening must be
excavated to allow rock
movement and volume
swell during the blasts
Accomplished by excavating
a slot raise, then a full width
slot
Several methods of
accomplishing this
Now viewing from the hanging wall
59
60. SLOT DRILLING
Once the slot raise is
complete, the slot is
drilled off
The drilling is
completed using a long
hole drill
Long Hole Drills
60
61. PRODUCTION BLASTING
Once completed, the
more efficient
production blasting can
begin
The production blasts
are shot into the void
created by the slot
Again, the ore is
mucked from the lower
level using remote
control LHD’s
61
62. FILL BARRICADE CONSTRUCTED
Once the stope is fully
mucked out, a fill barricaded
is constructed
The barricade prevents
backfill from running into
the level before it has cured
Viewing from the footwall
62
64. MINING THE VALLEY OF THE KINGS(1)
Primarily Transverse Longhole Open Stoping
with cemented paste backfill
Longitudinal Longhole Open Stoping in some
areas
Dilution Factors
– Primary Stopes: 7%
– Secondary Stopes: 15%
Mining Recovery Factors
– Primary Stopes: 97.5%
– Secondary Stopes: 92.5%
Avg. 12 stopes in the mining & backfill cycle at
any time
(1)See Feasibility Study and Technical Report on the Brucejack Project, Stewart, BC dated June 21, 2013
64
65. MINING: MINERAL RESERVES SUMMARY(1)
Ore
Tonnes
(Mt)
Valley
Proven
of the
Probable
15.1
Kings
Subtotal
15.1
Proven
2.0
West Zone Probable
1.8
Subtotal
3.8
Proven
2.0
Total
Probable
17.0
Total
19.0
Grade
Au
g/t
13.6
13.6
5.7
5.8
5.8
5.7
12.8
12.0
Ag
g/t
11.0
11.0
309.0
172.0
243.0
309.0
28.0
58.0
Contained Metal
Au
Ag
Mil oz
Mil oz
g/t
g/t
6.6
5.3
6.6
5.3
0.4
19.9
0.3
10.1
0.7
30.0
0.4
19.9
7.0
15.4
7.3
35.3
Mineral Reserve at $180/t NSR Cutoff Grade
(1)See Feasibility Study and Technical Report on the Brucejack Project, Stewart, BC dated June 21, 2013. The June 2013
Feasibility Study will be amended using the December 2013 Valley of the Kings Mineral Resource estimate.
65
66. MILESTONES TO PRODUCTION
2013
Completed Feasibility Study (June)
Updated Resource Estimate (December)
H1 2014
File Environmental Assessment
Certificate Application
Amend Feasibility Study
H2 2014/ 2015
Anticipate Environmental Assessment
Certificate
Mine construction
2016
Commission, ramp-up, commercial
production at Brucejack Gold Mine
66
67. PERMITTING PROCESS
BC Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) manages it
Federal review coordinated by Federal Environmental
Assessment Agency (CEAA) for relevant areas
Provincial and Federal reviews are coordinated
Project
Description
Filed
January 2013
Scope and
Process for
Review
determined
1st Public
Comment
Period
Application
Submitted
Five Open
Houses in
November
2013
Target
submitting by
March 31,
2014
Application
evaluated for
completeness
Application
review, 2nd
Public
Comment
Period
(30 days)
Assessment
Report
Referral to
Ministers
(Review stage 180 days)
Project
Decision by
Ministers
(Decision 45 days)
For more information on assessment process: www.eao.gov.bc.ca/ea_process.html
67
68. THE NEXT SIX MONTHS:
Q1 2014
File 43-101 Technical Report for
December 2013 Mineral Resource
estimate update
Processing 1,000 tonnes of high-grade
ore from 2013 exploration program
Plan for excavation of additional 1,000
tonnes of high-grade ore
File Environmental Assessment
Certificate application
Q2 2014
Amend Feasibility Study
Plan underground exploration program
Potential production of additional 1,000
tonnes of high-grade ore
68
72. APPENDIX: 2013 BULK SAMPLE
N
S
100 m
200 m
300 m
400 m
500 m
Valley of the Kings
Bulk Sample
546 m
200 m
West Zone
Underground
Development
Key
0.5-5.0 g/t AuEq
5.0-15.0 g/t AuEq
>15.0 g/t AuEq
10,000 tonne bulk sample from Valley of the Kings
Selection based on representative geology, mineralisation, drill spacing
density, run of mine material and grade distribution of the November 2012
Indicated mineral resource
Successfully confirmed geological interpretation of the deposit to date
72
76. APPENDIX: CLEOPATRA STRUCTURE
The Cleopatra structure is considered as being part of the broader
stockwork mineralization system:
― No obvious cross-cutting relationships
― Dominant E-W and subordinate N-S structures appear to merge
― No differences in style of mineralization, gangue mineralogy, and associated
alteration between the E-W and N-S components of the stockwork system
― Similar abundance of dendritic electrum in both E-W and N-S structures
― Both E-W and N-S structures appear to have formed coevally – imprinted on
rocks of Lower Jurassic age, cut by post-mineral dykes of Lower Jurassic age
― Both E-W and N-S structures display similar styles and degrees of deformation
The presence of N-S structures in the stockwork is not unexpected:
― Both the dominant E-W and subordinate N-S structures are present throughout
the bulk sample area, as well as in surface outcrop
The Cleopatra structure is interpreted as one of probably a whole
series of variably oriented higher fluid flow conduits in the overall
stockwork system
76
77. APPENDIX: BRUCEJACK ECONOMICS
June 2013 Feasibility Study Highlights(1,2,4) :
Processing rate
2,700 tonnes per day
Mine life
22 years
Total gold production
7.1 million oz
Average annual gold production
425,700 ounces (years 1-10)
321,500 ounces (life of mine)
Average gold grade
14.2 g/t (years 1-10)
12.0 g/t (life of mine)
All-in sustaining cash cost per oz(3)
$508/oz
Capex (including contingencies)
US$663.5 million
Total operating costs
C$156.46/t milled
Internal Rate of Return
42.9% (pre-tax)
35.7% (post-tax)
Net Present Value
(5% discount)
US$2.69 billion (pre-tax)
US$1.76 billion (post-tax)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Source: Feasibility Study and Technical Report on the Brucejack Project, (Tetra Tech) dated June 21, 2013
Base case metals prices of US$1,350 /oz gold and US$20/oz silver
Includes by-product cash costs, sustaining capital, exploration expense and reclamation cost accretion
The June 2013 feasibility study is based on the November 2012 Mineral Resource estimate for the Brucejack Project and will
be amended in 2014.
77
78. Advancing a major high-grade gold project in Canada
CONTACT
HEAD OFFICE
Phone: 604-558-1784
Fax: 604-558-4784
Toll-free: 1-877-558-1784
invest@pretivm.com
www.pretivm.com
Pretium Resources Inc.
570 Granville St.
Suite 1600
Vancouver, BC
Canada V6C 3P1
COMMON SHARES
TSX/NYSE:PVG
Issued: 105 million
Fully diluted: 114.8 million
52-week hi/low: $11.17/$2.83
Market cap: $656 million
(at February 6, 2014)
