Highlights:
- The Curipamba feasibility study covers the first 10 years of mine life with an open-pit Mineral Reserve ("Feasibility Study"). An updated preliminary economic assessment on the separate underground mine optionality envisioned in years 10 to 14 is also outlined ("Underground PEA")
US$12M Feasibility Study resulted in an increase in the resource base, improved metallurgy leading to high quality copper and zinc concentrates, grading 28% copper and 56% zinc respectively, and strong project definition with detailed geotechnical and hydrogeological drilling programs completed- Environmental, Social and Impact Assessment ("ESIA") for open-pit mine and mill development shall be submitted to the
Ecuadorian Ministry of Environment inNovember 2021 , which references the highest standards with respect to tailings design, water and waste management, and discharge quality Adventus Mining has initiated a comprehensive review of all strategic development options, including concentrate off-take and project finance packages, as well as potential options for strategic investment or corporate transaction. Advanced discussions are underway for up toUS$240M in non-equity financing- Detailed engineering for Curipamba development is expected to begin in Q1 2022
- The tailings storage facility design has sufficient capacity for significant mineral reserve additions
Adventus Mining will host a 2021 Feasibility Study Webinar onWednesday, October 27, 2021 , at11 am ET . Please register at: https://www.amvestcapital.com/webinar-directory/adventus102721
Open Pit NI 43-101 Feasibility Study
- After-tax Feasibility Study IRR of 32% and NPV8% of
US$259 million for initial open-pit development only - 77% of life-of-mine revenues from payable copper and gold
- Production C1 cash cost of
US$1.14 /lb and AISC ofUS$1.26 /lb copper equivalent - Average annual production of 10,463 tpa copper and 21,390 tpa copper equivalent over the life-of-mine
- Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves of 6.5 M tonnes at 1.93% Cu, 2.49% Zn, 2.52 g/t Au, 45.7 g/t Ag, 0.25% Pb
Underground PEA Update ([1])
- Underground mine plan based on Indicated and Inferred Resources, independent of those resources used in the open pit Feasibility Study
- After-tax NPV8% of
US$49 million , assuming underground production starts after the completion of the open-pit mine plan in year 10, and discounted to the same time zero as the open-pit Feasibility Study (year -2) - Additional Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources of 1.9 million tonnes at 2.72% Cu, 2.38% Zn, 1.37 g/t Au, 31 g/t Ag, 0.14% Pb and 0.8 million tonnes at 2.31% Cu, 2.68% Zn, 1.74 g/t Au, 29 g/t Ag, 0.11% Pb, respectively
- Option to upgrade underground Mineral Resources to reserves by an infill drilling, test-work program and completion of a separate feasibility study estimated to cost approximately
US$8M over 2.5 years
_______________________ |
1 The preliminary economic assessment is preliminary in nature and includes inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. There is no certainty that the preliminary economic assessment will be realized. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. |
President and CEO of Adventus,
"The completion of the Curipamba feasibility study is a major milestone for the
President and CEO of Salazar,
"We want to thank our partner
Updated Mineral Resource Estimate
An update to the Mineral Resource estimate (Table 1a to 1c) for
The updated Mineral Resource estimate is supported by information provided from 391 core boreholes, totaling 74,992 metres, completed between 2007 and 2021 and possesses a similar footprint to the previous Mineral Resource estimate (see
Table 1a. Total Mineral Resource for
Resource | Tonnes | Grade | Contained Metal | ||||||||
Cu | Pb | Zn | Au | Ag | Cu (kt) | Pb | Zn (kt) | Au | Ag (koz) | ||
Measured | 3.2 | 2.61 | 0.24 | 2.50 | 3.03 | 45 | 84.9 | 7.7 | 81.1 | 316 | 4,704 |
Indicated | 5.7 | 1.83 | 0.24 | 2.64 | 1.98 | 45 | 104.5 | 13.9 | 150.6 | 364 | 8,265 |
M+I | 9.0 | 2.11 | 0.24 | 2.59 | 2.36 | 45 | 189.4 | 21.6 | 231.7 | 680 | 12,969 |
Inferred | 1.1 | 1.72 | 0.14 | 2.18 | 1.62 | 32 | 18.5 | 1.5 | 23.6 | 57 | 1,118 |
Table 1b. Pit Constrained Mineral Resource for
Resource | Tonnes | Grade | Contained Metal | ||||||||
Cu | Pb | Zn | Au | Ag | Cu (kt) | Pb | Zn (kt) | Au | Ag (koz) | ||
Measured | 3.2 | 2.61 | 0.24 | 2.50 | 3.03 | 45 | 84.9 | 7.7 | 81.1 | 316 | 4,704 |
Indicated | 3.8 | 1.38 | 0.30 | 2.77 | 2.29 | 52 | 52.6 | 11.3 | 105.2 | 280 | 6,370 |
M+I | 7.1 | 1.95 | 0.27 | 2.64 | 2.63 | 49 | 137.5 | 19.0 | 186.3 | 596 | 11,074 |
Inferred | 0.3 | 0.34 | 0.20 | 1.01 | 1.34 | 39 | 1.2 | 0.7 | 3.5 | 15 | 430 |
Table 1c. Underground Mineral Resource for
Resource
| Tonnes (Mt)
| Grade | Contained Metal | ||||||||
Cu | Pb | Zn | Au | Ag | Cu | Pb | Zn | Au | Ag | ||
Indicated | 1.9 | 2.72 | 0.14 | 2.38 | 1.37 | 31 | 51.9 | 2.6 | 45.4 | 84 | 1,895 |
Inferred | 0.8 | 2.31 | 0.11 | 2.68 | 1.74 | 29 | 17.3 | 0.8 | 20.1 | 42 | 688 |
Notes: 1. CIM Definition Standards (2014) definitions were followed for Mineral Resources. 2. Mineral Resources are reported above a cut-off NSR value of 3. The NSR value is based on estimated metallurgical recoveries, assumed metal prices, and smelter terms, which include payable factors treatment charges, penalties, and refining charges. 4. Mineral Resources are estimated using the metal price assumptions: 5. Metallurgical recovery assumptions were based on three mineral types defined by the metal ratio Cu/(Pb+Zn): a. Zinc Mineral (Cu/(Pb+Zn) <0.33): 86% Cu, 90% Pb, 97% Zn, 68% Au and 78% Ag b. Mixed Cu/Zn Mineral (0.33≤ Cu/(Pb+Zn) ≤3.0): 86% Cu, 82% Pb, 95% Zn, 55% Au and 67% Ag c. Copper Mineral (Cu/(Pb+Zn) >3.0): 80% Cu, 37% Pb, 36% Zn, 14% Au and 29% Ag 6. NSR factors were also based on the metal ratio Cu/(Pb+Zn): a. Zinc Mineral (Cu/(Pb+Zn) <0.33): b. Mixed Cu/Zn Mineral (0.33≤ Cu/(Pb+Zn) ≤3.0): c. Copper Mineral (Cu/(Pb+Zn) >3.0): 7. Bulk density interpolated on a block per block basis using assayed value, the correlation between measured density values and iron content, and base metal grade. The bulk densities range between 2.1 t/m3 and 4.6 t/m3 8. Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves. 9. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. 10. The underground portion of the Mineral Resources are reported within underground reporting shapes and include low grade blocks falling within the shapes. 11. QP is not aware of any environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-economic, marketing, political, or other relevant factors that could materially affect the Mineral Resource estimate 12. Numbers may not add due to rounding. |
Feasibility Study Mineral Reserves
The basis of the Curipamba Feasibility Study is on the maiden open-pit Mineral Reserves that were estimated from the updated open-pit Mineral Resources and on the mine design by DRA (Table 2).
Table 2: Open-Pit Mineral Reserves Statement
Classification | Grade | Contained Metal | |||||||||
Tonnage | Cu | Pb | Zn | Au | Ag | Cu | Pb | Zn | Au | Ag | |
Proven Reserves | 3,136 | 2.50 | 0.2 | 2.30 | 2.83 | 41 | 78.4 | 6.7 | 72.0 | 285 | 4175 |
Probable Reserves | 3,343 | 1.39 | 0.3 | 2.67 | 2.23 | 50 | 46.4 | 9.4 | 89.4 | 240 | 5342 |
Proven + Probable | 6,478 | 1.93 | 0.2 | 2.49 | 2.52 | 46 | 124.9 | 16.2 | 161.4 | 525 | 9517 |
Notes: 1. Waste: Ore Strip Ratio 6.02 : 1 not including pre-strip waste and 8.59 : 1 including pre-strip waste 2. The effective date of the Mineral Reserve Estimate is 3. Mineral Reserves are reported in accordance with CIM Definition Standards (2014) and best practice guidelines (2019). 4. An NSR cut-off grade of 5. Mineral reserves were estimated at a gold price of 6. Figures have been rounded to an appropriate level of precision for the reporting of Mineral Reserves. 7. Due to rounding, some columns or rows may not compute exactly as shown. 8. The Mineral Reserves are stated as dry tonnes processed at the crusher. 9. Tonnages are presented in metric tonnes |
Open-Pit Feasibility Study
The Feasibility Study is based only on open-pit Mineral Reserves, whereas the 2019 preliminary economic assessment included both the open pit and potential underground Mineral Resources ("2019 PEA"). Table 3 and Figure 1 provide a summary of the key Feasibility Study results and cash flows respectively, with sensitivity scenarios for higher and lower metal prices also shown.
Table 3: Open Pit Feasibility Study Results
Open Pit Feasibility Study Results | Feasibility Study | -15% Price Deck | Spot Prices as of |
After-Tax NPV (US$ million, 8% discount rate) (1) | |||
After-Tax IRR (%) (2) | 32% | 23% | 44% |
Cumulative First 6 Years of After-Tax Cashflow (US$ million undiscounted) | |||
Initial Capital Cost (US$ M, incl. refundable VAT) (3) | |||
Total Life of Mine Capital Cost including Closure (US$ M) (4) | |||
AISC (US$/lb CuEq Basis) (5) | |||
Payback Period (years) | 2.6 | 3.2 | 2.1 |
Nominal processing capacity (tpd) | 1,850 | ||
Average annual payable production (Years 1 - 9) (6) | Cu = 11 kt | ||
Au = 26 koz | |||
Zn = 12 kt | |||
Ag = 488 koz | |||
Pb = 0.5 kt | |||
CuEq= 23 kt | CuEq= 22 kt | CuEq= 21 kt | |
Metal prices assumed | |||
Notes: 1) Unless otherwise noted in this news release, all currencies are reported in US dollars on a 100% project basis 2) Assumes an 18-month construction period as the basis for the internal rate of return ("IRR") and net present value ("NPV") calculations 3) Capital cost estimates are to AACE class 3, are based primarily on contractor quotes and vendor equipment pricing, and includes 12% VAT ( 4) Includes credit for 5) All-in sustaining cost per pound copper, cash cost per pound and cash cost per pound are not measures recognized under IFRS and are referred to as non-GAAP measures. These measures have no standardized meaning under IFRS and may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. Refer to the "Non-GAAP Financial Measures" section of the Management's Discussion and Analysis for the three and twelve months ended Copper Equivalent Calculation:(Payable Metals NSR Ag,Zn,Pb,Au, Ag)/(Payable Metals NSR Cu)* (Payable Copper t) 6) Year 10 excluded from the average as it is a partial year of production. |
Major changes in the 2021 Feasibility Study vs. the 2019 PEA
- Open-pit only – Due to the underground resource having significant inferred material, and insufficient geotechnical drilling, the Partners decided to base the Feasibility Study on the open-pit only, and completed a separate updated PEA on the underground resources, whereas the 2019 PEA was on a combined open-pit and underground scenario
- Infill drilling – 44-hole infill and step-out drill program was completed and allowed for significant conversion to Measured category of Mineral Resource, bringing the total number of core boreholes drilled to 391
- Process optimization – Addition of a lead concentrate circuit provides a third saleable product and allows for the production of higher value copper and zinc concentrates with minimal lead penalties. Process optimization work introduced new chemical reagents, a 125-micron primary grind size, and allowed improvement on concentrate grades and recoveries
- Mine optimization and mill throughput – Nameplate mill throughput was increased from 1,750 to 1,850 tpd, supported by an optimized mine plan that minimizes stockpiling. Significantly more rock waste was moved forward into preproduction from later in the mine life to provide sufficient materials to start the tailings storage facility construction ("TSF")
- Site investigations – A LIDAR survey as well as geotechnical and hydrogeological drilling programs were completed which provide more accurate definition of surface and subsurface conditions, which were considered in the Feasibility Study designs
- Commodity prices – Notably much higher at present than they were in 2019, which provides a positive economic benefit to the project financials, but using the same long-term consensus price methodology
- Water usage – The project is now completely self-sufficient with respect to water requirements through the collection and use of rainfall/surface water on site. Water pumping from external river sources is no longer required
Open-Pit Mining
The open-pit will be mined using a traditional truck and shovel operation with a contractor mining fleet consisting of drills, shovels, front end loaders, and 40-ton haul trucks. The open-pit will be developed in four phases and operate for approximately 10 years of production, with total material movement of 61.8 Mt (6.5 Mt ore and 55.3 Mt waste) at a strip ratio of 8.6 (including pre-stripping) and 6.02 without pre-stripping included. The open-pit mine design consists of a single pit with a mining sequence to maximize grade, but also provides suitable construction material for the project infrastructure and waste management facilities during construction. Mining of ore is expected to begin within 18 months of the start of pre-production waste movement.
Open-Pit Processing
Previously conducted metallurgical test-work programs in 2014 and 2019 were supplemented with further comminution, flotation, locked cycle, solid/liquid separation test-work programs and associated minerology and assays during 2020 and 2021. Samples consisted of remaining material from the 2019 test-work campaign and new composite samples taken from representative drill cores in 2020 and 2021. Results corresponded well with previously completed test-work with improvements in recoveries and grades incorporated in the Feasibility Study.
Net recoveries to copper, zinc, and lead concentrates total 87.5% for copper, 84.7% for zinc, 51.8% for gold, 63.6% for silver, and 30.3% for lead. The net recoveries only include metals that are payable in their respective concentrates.
The process plant is expected to ramp-up production over a three-month period following completion of construction to a steady state throughput rate of 666,000 tonnes/year (1,850 tpd). The processing plant design includes a comminution circuit consisting of a two-stage crushing circuit followed by ball milling, and sequential flotation circuits producing copper, zinc, and lead concentrates.
Site Infrastructure
The major infrastructure items considered and costed in the Feasibility Study support a mining and milling operation that is expected to operate 24-hours per day, seven-days per week. The design of project infrastructure has prioritized environmental protection, workforce safety, and operating efficiency while minimizing community impacts. The project site will consist of the open-pit mine and mining related workshops, a processing plant, waste rock and conventional tailings facility, and support service infrastructure such as warehousing, offices and workshops.
The project site is water positive for which water capture, treatment and discharge infrastructure has been allowed for and designed. The project will draw water from within the property and contain chemical process water and tailings within the TSF. Water management and treatment has been allowed for to treat both open-pit dewatering and surface facilities run-off to required environmental discharge standards.
The site will be supported by electrical grid power which requires the construction of a 7.1 km 69kV power line. The power grid of
The proposed tailings storage is of conventional design containing both tailings and process water. Waste rock and over burden will be split by type and placed in suitably designed facilities that will ensure stability and containment and run-off treatment of any potentially acid generating waste rock. All facilities are located near the open-pit mine to maximize efficiencies and minimize impact. The TSF is suitably designed to international standards for earthquake events, storms and floods.
Initial Capital Costs and Sustaining Costs
The initial capital expenditures for the project as estimated by DRA are summarized in Table 4. Capital expenditures to be incurred after the start-up of operations are assigned to sustaining capital and are projected to be covered by operating cash flows. Project contingencies have been added where applicable, excluding capitalized operating costs, which results in an overall contingency of
The Curipamba project will benefit from established infrastructure in
DRA estimates the life-of-mine sustaining capital for Curipamba to be
Open Pit Operating Costs
The estimated operating costs for the Curipamba open-pit mine is
Table 5: On Site Operating Cost for the Open-Pit
Metric | Unit | 2021 Feasibility | 2019 PEA |
Open pit mining cost (excl. pre-prod) | US$/t mined | 3.35 | 3.15 |
Processing cost | US$/t milled | 22.74 | 21.80 |
G&A | US$/t milled | 8.95 | 4.74 |
Projected Treatment Charges ("TCs") and transport charges for the copper, zinc and lead concentrates were developed by a global major off-taker based on their extensive mining projects experience in
Table 6: Off Site Costs – Copper, Zinc and Lead concentrates
Item | Copper Concentrate | Zinc Concentrate | Lead Concentrate |
Treatment Charge | |||
Refining Charge | |||
Primary Metal | - | - | |
Gold | - | ||
Silver | - | ||
Payability | |||
Copper | 96.5% | - | - |
Zinc | - | 85% | - |
Gold | 95% | 75% | 95% |
Silver | 90% | 75% | 95% |
Lead | - | - | 95% |
Moisture % | 10% | ||
Transportation |
The concentrates are of good quality, with strong precious metals credits. A minor penalty for the combined zinc and lead grade in the copper concentrate was applied, at a rate of
Taxes and Royalties
Taxes and royalties that are presented in the Feasibility Study were based on Ecuadorian legislated tax rates and reviewed by an independent tax consultant. Improvements may be possible based on final terms agreed upon with the Ecuadorian government within the exploitation agreement. Based on long-term prices assumed in the Feasibility Study, life-of-mine royalties to the government are estimated to be
Environmental and Community Matters
Environmental and social baseline studies for the Curipamba project have been ongoing since
Underground Mine PEA
The updated PEA for the underground mine expansion assumes the same metallurgy, treatment charges, refining charges, penalty assumptions, transport charges, tax structure, royalties, and surface infrastructure as the open-pit Feasibility Study. In particular, the process plant will be used for the underground operation, and the tailings storage facility has sufficient excess capacity to support the underground operation. As a result, this section will only summarize the underground PEA highlights, including the updated Mineral Resources amenable to underground mining, capital and operating costs estimates, and financial metrics.
The underground mine plan consists of 2.0 million tonnes at 2.48% Cu, 2.18% Zn, 1.25 g/t Au, 28.1 g/t Ag, 0.13% Pb of diluted Indicated Resources, and 0.8 million tonnes at 2.13% Cu, 2.46% Zn, 1.60 g/t Au, 26.4 g/t Ag, 0.09% Pb, of diluted Inferred Resources.
For consistency, the years of operation for the Underground PEA use the same starting point as the open-pit Feasibility Study, however the underground PEA is considered a separate mine plan on mineral resources exclusive of those used in the open-pit mine plan and will not potentially commence until the open-pit reserves are exhausted in year 10. Development capital for the Underground PEA is anticipated to be spent starting in year 9, to allow for the start of underground operations in year 10. NPV and IRR calculations for the Underground PEA have been significantly discounted back to year -2.
The preliminary economic assessment is preliminary in nature and includes inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. There is no certainty that the preliminary economic assessment will be realized. Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
Table 7: Curipamba Underground Mine PEA Results
Underground PEA Base Case | -15% Price Deck | Spot Prices as at | |
After-Tax NPV ($M, 8% discount rate) (1)(2) | |||
Total development capital for underground ($M) (3) | |||
Nominal processing capacity (tpd) | 1,850 | ||
Average annual payable production (Years 11 - 14) | Cu = 14 kt | ||
CuEq = 20 kt | CuEq = 20 kt | CuEq = 20 kt | |
Metal prices assumed | |||
Notes: 1) Unless otherwise noted in this news release, all currencies are reported in US dollars on a 100% project basis. Metals prices used are the same as the Feasibility Study 2) Underground PEA net present value ("NPV") calculations are discounted back to 3) Capital cost estimate is based on DRA in-house estimates and benchmarking, inclusive of 12% VAT ( 4) CuEq is calculated as follows: (Payable Metals NSR Ag,Zn,Pb,Au, Ag)/(Payable Metals NSR Cu)* (Payable Copper t) |
DRA has selected a drift and fill mining method for the Underground PEA to maximize mine recovery. The 2019 PEA assumed a room and pillar operation which had a lower overall mine recovery due to resource material left behind in the pillars despite having a similar development and operating cost.
The El Domo underground deposit is amenable to a drift and fill operation and can supply the mill with 1,850 tpd throughput. A 20-metre pillar composed primarily of waste rock will separate the exhausted open-pit from the underground mine. Development cost is estimated at
Underground Mine Operating Costs
The estimated operating cost for the Curipamba underground mine is
Table 8: On-Site Operating Cost Estimate for the
Metric | Unit | 2021 PEA | 2019 PEA |
Underground mining cost | US$/t mined | 70 | 71.50 |
Cemented rock fill | US$/t mined | 5 | - |
Stockpile rehandling | US$/t of stockpile | 0.33 | - |
Mine dewatering | US$/t mined | 0.25 | - |
Processing cost | US$/t milled | 22.74 | 21.80 |
G&A | US$/t milled | 8.95 | 4.74 |
Next Steps for Curipamba
A comprehensive Adventus board and management review of all strategic development options is underway, including concentrate off-take and project finance packages, as well as potential options for strategic investment or a corporate transaction. Commercial discussions are at an advanced stage for up to
Following the completion of the Feasibility Study, Adventus will progress the following workstreams prior to construction decision approval and ramp-up to full scale construction:
- Complete detailed engineering
- Additional geotechnical drilling and test work to support the detailed design
- Additional geochemistry test work
- Upgrade existing and construct a new access road to the project site
- Power line detailed engineering, permitting and preparatory work
- Commence site preparatory infrastructure work (fencing, on-site roads, clear & grub, etc.)
- Install the previously purchased construction camp (see
July 14, 2021 news release) - Purchase engineering / vendor data for long lead equipment to support the detailed design (ball mill, flotation cells etc.)
- Prepare request-for-proposal documentation and tender the major construction contracts (mining, earthworks, concrete, steel, mechanical/piping, electrical and instrumentation), in preparation for award
- Complete final land acquisition
- Receive ESIA approval, and sign-off on investment and likely exploitation agreement
These activities are expected to cost approximately
The estimated cost to further advance the underground mine to a Feasibility Study design is approximately
All currency units presented in this news release are in
Technical Information and Quality Control & Quality Assurance ("QAQC")
The Curipamba project resource-related work program is being managed and reviewed by Vice President Exploration,
All assay data have undergone internal validation of QAQC; noting there is an established sampling control program with blind insertion of assay blanks, certified industry standards and sample duplicates for the Curipamba project. A QAQC program is also in place at BV and includes insertion of blanks, standards, and duplicate reanalysis of selected samples. BV's quality system complies with the requirements for the International Standards ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 17025: 1999. At BV, gold is analyzed by classical fire assay techniques with an ICP-AES finish, and both silver and base metals are analyzed by a 44-element aqua regia ICP-AES technique. Overlimit protocols are in place for gold, silver, copper, lead, and zinc.
The engineering and technical content of the Feasibility Study and Underground PEA has been reviewed and approved by Mr.
Qualified Persons
Volodymyr Liskovych, PhD,
Each of the individuals above are IQPs for the purposes of NI 43-101. All scientific and technical information in this press release in respect of
The Mineral Resource estimate and Mineral Reserves statement in this news release has been classified in accordance with CIM Definition Standards – For Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (
About Adventus
About Salazar
Neither the
About DRA
DRA Global Limited (ASX: DRA | JSE: DRA) is a diversified global engineering, project delivery and operations management group. Founded in 1984, its impressive track record spans over three decades. With expertise in the areas of project development, mining, mineral processing, plant optimisation, operations & maintenance and related water, energy, and infrastructure requirements, the company successfully delivers comprehensive solutions to the resources sector. DRA has detailed design and construction at its core but also supports major innovations to drive cost savings at the Preliminary Economic Assessment and Feasibility Study level while focused on guiding these projects through to construction. DRA has offices in Africa, Australia, Canada, Peru, China, and the
This press release contains "forward -looking information" within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. Forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs, expectations, and opinions of the management of the Partners as of the date the statement is published, and the Partners assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement, except as required by law. In certain cases, forward–looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as "plans", "expects", "outlook", "guidance", "budget", "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates" or "believes", or variations of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might", "will be taken", "occur" or "be achieved" or the negative of these terms or comparable terminology.
Forward-looking statements relate to future events or future performance and reflect management's expectations or beliefs regarding future events including, but not limited to, statements and information related to the results of the Feasibility Study and updated Mineral Reserves for
Forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon estimates and assumptions, which are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond the Partners' control and many of which, regarding future business decisions, are subject to change. Assumptions underlying the Partners' expectations regarding forward-looking statements or information contained in this press release include, but are not limited to, the Partners will be able to accomplish its plans and objectives with respect to the Feasibility Study, PEA, ESIA and the Curipamba project on the expected timeline; market fundamentals will accord with the estimates and assumptions contained in the Feasibility Study and PEA; the receipt of any necessary approvals and consents in connection with the development of the Curipamba project in a timely manner; that the cost estimates presented in the Feasibility Study and PEA are representative of the actual costs associated with the development, operation and closure of the Curipamba project; sustained commodity prices such that the Project remains economically viable; and that the geology of the Curipamba project accords with the expectations and projections presented in the Feasibility Study and PEA and that the Partners will be able to mine at the Curipamba project in accordance with the specifications set out in the Feasibility Study and PEA.
By their very nature, forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Partners to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, risks related to the ability of the Partners to accomplish its plans and objectives with respect to the Feasibility Study, PEA and the Project within the expected timing or at all, including the ability of the Partners to improve the economics and finance-ability and de-risk the Curipamba project; the timing and receipt of certain approvals and the risk that certain necessary approvals may never be received; changes in commodity and power prices; changes in interest and currency exchange rates; that the cost estimates presented in the Feasibility Study and PEA may not be representatives of the actual development, construction, operational and closure costs associated with the Curipamba project; risks inherent in exploration estimates and results; the timing and success of the development of the Curipamba project is not guaranteed and the Partners may not construct and operate the Curipamba project on the timelines or in the manner presented in the Feasibility Study or PEA, or at all; that the Partners may be unable to conclude the
Although the Partners has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. The Partners provides no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events may differ from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.
SOURCE
© Canada Newswire, source