In this presentation, FMC's Alan Hutchison discusses Preliminary Economic Assessments (PEAs) by going over the recent focus on PEAs, providing important considerations, and going through 4 different scenarios related to PEAs.

1. Preliminary Economic Assessments –
Can You Have Your Cake And Eat it Too?
Presented by: Alan Hutchison
January 22, 2013
1

2. Recent Focus on PEAs
• In an era of cost overruns the market is increasingly focusing
on economic viability rather than resource inventory
• PEA allows for less precision on details of development
scenarios which makes it less expensive than a pre-feasibility
study
• Inclusion of inferred resources in economic analysis only
permitted at a PEA stage, which allows issuers to disclose
economics without having drilled off the deposit
2

3. BCSC Focus on PEAs
• Increase in popularity of PEAs have attracted the attention of
securities regulators
• On August 16, 2012 the regulators published CSA Notice
43-307 setting out the regulators’ position on certain practices
in connection with PEAs
3

4. Context of a PEA vs. PFS/FS
• NI 43-101 defines a PEA as:
“a study, other than a pre-feasibility study, that includes an economic
analysis of the potential viability of mineral resources”
(emphasis added)
• In contrast, a pre-feasibility study is defined as:
“a comprehensive study of a range of options for the technical and
economic viability of a mineral project…”
4

5. Context of a PEA vs. PFS/FS (cont.)
• And a feasibility study is defined as:
“a comprehensive technical and economic study of the selected
development option for a mineral project…”
• Key differences in wording:
– “potential viability” for a PEA vs. “viability” for a PFS (meaning viability
has been established)
– Use of the term “comprehensive” to describe a PFS or FS vs. a PEA
5

6. NI 43-101 Considerations – Inferred Resources
• Issuers are restricted from disclosing results of an economic
analysis that includes or is based on inferred resources except
in limited circumstances (s. 2.3(1)(b))
• A PEA is one of the limited circumstances, provided:
– a cautionary statement with equal prominence is included stating that
inferred resources are considered to speculative geologically to have
economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to
be categorized as mineral reserves, and there is no certainty that the
PEA will be realized
– the basis for the PEA is disclosed along with any qualifications and
assumptions
6

7. NI 43-101 Considerations – Report Triggers
• The disclosure of the results of a PEA that constitutes a
material change in relation to the issuer is a technical report
trigger
• Disclosure of studies that are components of a PEA but do not
include economic analysis (i.e. metallurgical studies, project
infrastructure studies, environmental studies) is not a
technical report trigger
• BUT be careful that the context of the disclosure does not
amount to a PEA, and be careful that multiple component
studies do not in the aggregate amount to a PEA
7

8. PEA Scenarios
A. Over-Built PEA
B. Assumption Based PEA
C. Revised PEA
D. No PEA
8

9. Scenario A – Over-Built PEA
• Many issuers want to ensure that the components of a PEA are
as accurate as possible to withstand scrutiny and avoid
subsequent significant changes
• Components like mine planning, capital and operating costs,
metallurgical work for recoveries typically disclosed with
greater certainty than a PEA requires
• Overall quality of the PEA is emphasized
9

10. Scenario A – Over-Built PEA (cont.)
• Regulatory concern is that issuers try to pass off a PEA (likely
with inferred resources included in the economic analysis) as
the equivalent of a PFS
• The BCSC may treat a PEA as a PFS if:
– no inclusion of required cautionary statements
– the PEA establishes a basis for a FS or production decision
– states or implies economic viability of the resources has been
established
• Be careful not to expect too much out of a PEA
10

11. Scenario B – Assumption Based PEA
• A PEA is intended to represent the first signal to the public that
a project may be economically viable. The level of detail and
certainty is not expected to be the same as a PFS or FS, so
assumptions may be required.
• All assumptions must have a reasonable basis
11

12. Scenario B – Assumption Based PEA (cont.)
• Avoid highly aggressive or overly optimistic assumptions, such
as:
– metal prices
– recovery rates
– by product credits
– capital costs not funded by the issuer (i.e., government funding for
roads, power or other infrastructure)
• The more aggressive the assumptions the greater chance of
subsequent revision along with a greater chance of regulatory
intervention over misleading disclosure
12

13. Scenario C – Revised PEA
• 2011 amendments to NI 43-101 now permit issuers to go
backwards in terms of scope of development if new facts
emerge
• Revised PEAs are possible although keep in mind that the level
of certainty should remain the same
• Where PEAs are completed for new satellite deposits added to
projects that are already at PFS or FS stage, be careful not to
effectively bring inferred resources into a PFS or FS for the
overall project.
13

14. Scenario D – No PEA
• Just because an issuer completes studies that are components
of a PEA doesn’t mean a PEA needs to be completed or
disclosed
• Sometimes an issuer is better off taking more time to get more
certainty on the PEA components before completing a PEA or
PFS
• Remember to be consistent – if an issuer does not proceed to
a PEA, disclosure must not address economics, potential
viability or development scenarios of a project
14

15. QP Considerations
• Definition of a qualified person requires that QPs have
experience relevant to the subject matter of the mineral
project and technical report
• Even at a PEA stage, disclosure of economic analysis and the
assumptions and inputs required requires additional expertise
than a resource stage report
• Keep in mind QP liability for technical reports
15

16. Thank you!
Alan Hutchison
alan.hutchison@fmc-law.com
604-443-7119
The preceding presentation contains examples of the kinds of issues companies
dealing with Preliminary Economic Assessments could face. If you are faced with one
of these issues, please retain professional assistance as each situation is unique.