Technical Report Review of Musselwhite Mine Operations Ontario

4 April 2003

TECHNICAL REPORT REVIEW OF MUSSELWHITE MINE OPERATIONS ONTARIO

PREPARED FOR: KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION BY: STEVEN BLOWER,P.GEO. JOHN KIERNAN,P.ENG.

U961A IMPORTANT NOTICE

This report was prepared exclusively for Kinross Gold Corporation (Kinross) by AMEC E&C Services Limited (AMEC). The quality of information, conclusions and estimates contained herein is consistent with the level of effort involved in AMEC’s services and based on: i) information available at the time of preparation, ii) data supplied by outside sources and iii) the assumptions, conditions and qualifications set forth in this report. This report is intended to be used by Kinross only, subject to the terms and conditions of its contract with AMEC. Any other use of, or reliance on, this report by any third party is at that party’s sole risk. CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR

John Kiernan, P.Eng 111 Dunsmuir Street, Suite 400 Vancouver, BC Tel: (604) 664-4124 Fax: (604) 664-3057 [email protected]

I, John Kiernan, P.Eng., am a Professional Engineer, employed as a Senior Mining Engineer with AMEC E&C Services Limited (AMEC), residing at 738 Broughton Street in Vancouver, British Columbia.

I am a member of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC) and Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO). I graduated from Queen’s University with a Bachelor of Science (Honours) degree in Mining Engineering in 1986 and I have practiced my profession continuously since 1987.

Since 1987 I have been involved in mine operations, engineering design, financial analysis, project development, and consulting for nickel, copper, lead, zinc, gold, PGMs, and industrial minerals in Canada, United States, Greenland, Greece, Russia, China, and Central and South America.

As a result of my experience and qualification, I am a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101.

I am currently a Consulting Engineer and have been so since July 1995.

From 18 March 2003 until 21 March 2003 I visited the Musselwhite Mine in Ontario, Canada for the purposes of reviewing pertinent geological, mining and metallurgical information.

This report was prepared under my direct supervision in consultation with technical specialists, who are Qualified Persons in the fields of geology and metallurgy.

Pierre Lacombe, Eng., a Principal Process Engineer at AMEC and member of OIQ (l’Ordre des ingénieures du Québec), was responsible for the metallurgical review. Mr. Lacombe has a B. Eng. Mining Engineering (Mineral Processing Option) from École Polytechnique, QC, Canada, 1984, and has been practising continuously since 1984.

I am not aware of any material fact or material change with respect to the subject matter of this technical report that is not reflected in this report and that the omission to disclose would make this report misleading.

AMEC E&C Services Limited 111 Dunsmuir Street, Suite 400 Vancouver, B.C. V6B 5W3 Tel +1 604 664 3471 Fax +1 604 664 3041 www.amec.com

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR

Steven J. Blower, P.Geo. 111 Dunsmuir Street, Suite 400 Vancouver, BC Tel: (604) 664-4116 Fax: (604) 664-3057 [email protected]

I, Steven J. Blower, P.Geo., am a Professional Geoscientist, employed as a Senior Geologist with AMEC E&C Services Limited in Vancouver, British Columbia.

I am a member of the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC). I graduated from the University of British Columbia with a Bachelor of Science degree in geology in 1988 and subsequently obtained a Master of Science degree in geology from Queen’s University in 1993.

I have practiced my profession continuously since 1988 and have been involved in: (1) mineral exploration for copper, zinc, gold, and silver in Canada, (2) mine geology (including ore control and resource modelling) for copper and copper/gold deposits in Canada, and (3) geological consulting on mine geology and resource modelling issues for copper, zinc, gold, and silver properties in Canada, United States, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Philippines, Africa, and Brazil.

As a result of my experience and qualifications, I am a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43- 101.

I am currently a Consulting Geologist and have been so since October 2000.

From 18 March 2003 until 21 March 2003 I visited the Musselwhite Mine in Ontario, Canada, as part of a two-person team for the purpose of reviewing pertinent geological and engineering data in sufficient detail to independently support the Mineral Resource and Reserve reported at Musselwhite.

AMEC E&C Services Limited 111 Dunsmuir Street, Suite 400 Vancouver, B.C. V6B 5W3 Tel +1 604 664 3471 Fax +1 604 664 3041 www.amec.com

Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

CONTENTS

1.0 SUMMARY ...... 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTION & TERMS OF REFERENCE...... 2-1 2.1 Terms of Reference ...... 2-1 3.0 DISCLAIMER...... 3-1 4.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ...... 4-1 5.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PHYSIOGRAPHY...... 5-1 5.1 Physiography ...... 5-1 5.2 Climate...... 5-1 5.3 Local Resources ...... 5-1 5.4 Access ...... 5-2 5.5 Project Infrastructure ...... 5-2 6.0 HISTORY...... 6-1 7.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING ...... 7-1 7.1 Regional Geology ...... 7-1 7.2 Property-Scale Lithology and Stratigraphy ...... 7-5 7.3 Mine Scale Lithological and Stratigraphic Relations ...... 7-7 8.0 DEPOSIT TYPES ...... 8-1 9.0 MINERALIZATION ...... 9-1 9.1 Styles of Gold Mineralization ...... 9-1 9.2 Geological Controls on Gold Mineralization ...... 9-2 9.3 Detailed Mineralized Zone Descriptions ...... 9-4 10.0 EXPLORATION ...... 10-1 10.1 Recent Exploration ...... 10-1 10.2 Future Exploration ...... 10-1 11.0 DRILLING ...... 11-1 12.0 SAMPLING METHOD AND APPROACH ...... 12-1 13.0 SAMPLING PREPARATION, ANALYSIS, AND SECURITY ...... 13-1 14.0 DATA VERIFICATION...... 14-1 15.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES ...... 15-1 16.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING ...... 16-1 16.1 Mill Flowsheet ...... 16-1 16.2 Planned Flowsheet Developments ...... 16-1 16.3 Water Treatment...... 16-2 16.4 Tailings Disposal...... 16-3 16.5 Gold Recovery ...... 16-3 16.6 Ore Processing Capital and Operating Cost Estimates ...... 16-4

March 2003 TOC i Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

17.0 MINERAL RESOURCE AND MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES...... 17-1 17.1 Mineral Resource and Reserve Statement...... 17-1 17.2 Mineral Resource Estimation Methods...... 17-2 17.3 Mineral Resource and Reserve Validation ...... 17-6 17.4 Classification...... 17-10 17.5 Reserve Methodology...... 17-11 18.0 OTHER DATA AND INFORMATION ...... 18-1 19.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR TECHNICAL REPORTS ON PRODUCTION PROPERTIES...... 19-1 19.1 Mine Infrastructure...... 19-1 19.2 Mining Methods...... 19-2 19.3 Mobile Equipment ...... 19-3 19.4 Mine Production...... 19-4 19.5 Processing and Recoverability ...... 19-6 19.6 Markets and Contracts...... 19-6 19.7 Environmental Considerations...... 19-6 19.8 Taxes ...... 19-7 19.9 Capital and Operating Costs...... 19-8 19.10 Economic Analysis...... 19-9 19.11 Mine Life ...... 19-9 20.0 INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS...... 20-1 21.0 REFERENCES ...... 21-1

FIGURES

4-1 Musselwhite Mine Location ...... 4-1 5-1 Mine Infrastructure on Satellite Image...... 5-3 7-1 North Caribou Greenstone Belt Assemblages ...... 7-2 7-2 OGS Regional Mapping...... 7-3 7-3 Aeromagnetic Litho-Structural Interpretation...... 7-4 7-4 Regional Stratigraphic Column...... 7-5 7-5 Schematic Section to Illustrate the Stratigraphic Relationship of the Felsic Volcanics...... 7-6 7-6 Schematic Mine Scale Stratigraphic Column ...... 7-8 9-1 Zones of Economic Mineralization ...... 9-1 9-2 Typical Orientation of Longitudinal Fault ...... 9-3 9-3 Schematic Section Showing Relative Positions of S, C, T & WA Zones ...... 9-5 11-1 Distribution of All Drill Hole Collars at Musselwhite...... 11-3 11-2 Surface Drill Hole Collar Locations at Musselwhite...... 11-4 11-3 Underground Drill Hole Collar Locations at Musselwhite ...... 11-5 13-1 2002 Analytical Results for Standard 900 ...... 13-2 13-2 2002 Analytical Results for Standard 999 ...... 13-2 13-3 2002 Blank Sample Analyses...... 13-4 13-4 2002 Reject Duplicate Analyses...... 13-4 13-5 2002 Pulp Duplicate Analyses...... 13-5 17-1 Grade by Easting Validation Plot...... 17-7 17-2 Grade by Northing Validation Plot ...... 17-8

March 2003 TOC ii Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

17-3 Grade by Level Validation Plot ...... 17-8

TABLES

4-1 List of Mineral Leases and Claims Checked by AMEC...... 4-2 11-1 Drilling Summary by Year...... 11-1 17-1 Summary of Mineral Resource* by Classification Category...... 17-1 17-2 Summary of Mineral Reserve by Classification Category ...... 17-2 17-3 2002 Capping Levels...... 17-4 17-4 Summary of Statistical Properties of Assay Composites ...... 17-4 17-5 2002 S Zone Variogram Model Parameters...... 17-5 17-6 Global Mean Grade Comparison...... 17-10 17-7 Cutoff Grades and Mining Parameters by Zone...... 17-12 17-8 Cutoff Grade Parameters ...... 17-12 18-1 Annual Reconciliation Data for 2001 and 2002...... 18-1 19-1 Mobile Equipment List ...... 19-4 19-2 LOM Production Plan ...... 19-5 19-3 Distribution of Gold Production...... 19-6 19-4 Average Unit Operating Costs – 1998 to 2003 ($/t) ...... 19-8

APPENDICES

A Claims List and Claims Map B Diamond Drill hole Location Plan C Process Plant Flowsheet D Histograms and Cumulative Distribution Plots E Variogram Models F Block Model Cross-Sections G Longitudinal Reserve Sections H 2002 Reconciliation Results

March 2003 TOC iii Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

1.0 SUMMARY

Kinross Gold Corporation (Kinross) has asked AMEC Mining and Metals (AMEC) to provide an independent Qualified Person’s review and technical report of the Musselwhite Mine operation in Ontario, Canada. John Kiernan, P.Eng., an employee of AMEC, served as the Qualified Person responsible for preparing the technical report as defined in National Instrument 43-101, Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Properties, and in compliance with Form 43-101F1 (the “Technical Reports”). John Kiernan, in addition to supervising the preparation of this report, conducted a review of issues related to mining. Steve Blower, P.Geo., and Pierre Lacombe, Eng., both employees of AMEC and Qualified Persons, conducted the geological and metallurgical reviews, respectively. John Kiernan and Steve Blower visited the Musselwhite Mine on 18 to 23 March 2003.

The Musselwhite property is located in the Patricia Mining District in Northwestern Ontario, approximately 430 km northwest of Thunder Bay. The mine is predominantly an underground operation adjacent to, and beneath, Opapimiskan Lake. Musselwhite is operated as an unincorporated joint venture between Placer Dome (CLA) Limited (68.07%) and the newly formed Kinross Gold Corporation (31.93%).

The mine has an impact benefit agreement with local First Nations groups. The agreement was recently renewed removing previous restrictions on daily mill throughput, and including revenue-sharing provisions to help direct some of the mine’s economic benefits directly into local communities. The mine operator, Placer Dome, has a sustainability policy that commits the Musselwhite Mine to a high standard of environmental stewardship. This involves protecting human health, reducing the impact of mining on the ecosystem, and returning the site to a state compatible with a healthy environment.

Musselwhite is an Archean-aged Iron Formation hosted gold deposit located near the northeast margin of the North Caribou Greenstone Belt. Most of the mineralization is hosted by a highly tectonized iron formation unit known as 4ea that is continuous across most of the property but is only well mineralized where the permeability of the unit has been increased by structural complications such as fault intersections or fold hinge zones. Consequently mineralization within the 4ea unit is believed to be epigenetic and is associated with intense quartz flooding and the presence of pyrrhotite.

A total of 3,261 diamond drill holes have been drilled from both surface and underground at Musselwhite. To verify the accuracy of the database, AMEC compared the assay and survey data from seventeen drill holes to source data records. No errors were found.

March 2003 Page 1-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Gold assays have been completed with industry standard fire assay techniques supported by Musselwhite’s QA/QC program. The program consists of the regular insertion of standard reference materials, blanks, and both pulp and reject duplicate samples into the core sample stream.

A large number of specific gravity determinations have been completed on diamond drill core samples with a weight-in-air/weight-in-water technique. The average, 3.29, has been used in Mineral Resource and Reserve estimates.

On 31 December 2002, the total Measured and Indicated Resource (excluding Mineral Reserves) was estimated to be 5.688 M tonnes with a grade of 6.31 g/t Au. This Resource is reported above a cutoff grade of 3.00 g/t Au, reflecting a gold price of US$325/oz. An additional Resource of 3.517 M tonnes with a grade of 7.35 g/t Au (also reported at a cutoff grade of 3.00 g/t Au) has been classified as Inferred. Approximately 68% of the total Measured and Indicated Resource is within the T-Antiform zone. The remaining 32% is divided among nine other zones on the property.

As of 31 December 2002, the Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve was estimated to be 11.914 Mt with a grade of 5.44 g/t Au. This Reserve is reported above a cutoff grade of 3.25 g/t Au, reflecting a gold price of US$300/oz.

Mineral Resources and Reserves at Musselwhite are based on geologically constrained grade block models that are constructed by interpolating composited assay values with ordinary kriging or inverse distance techniques. AMEC has checked the validity of the T-Antiform portion of the models with a number of methods, including a review of reconciliation data, and is satisfied that the Reserve model provides an acceptable estimate of tonnage and grade for mine production forecasts.

Gold milling in the treatment plant includes a conventional crushing/rod milling/ball milling circuit for size reduction, with a gravity recovery step included in the ball mill circuit. The grinding slurry is thickened before entering a cyanidation circuit, followed by a dissolved gold recovery circuit with carbon-in-pulp (CIP). The carbon handling circuit is conventional, using the heated and pressurized strip method before sludging the gold in four electrowinning cells. Doré bars are poured from both the electrowinning sludge and from gold recovered by gravity. Recovery in the mill averages 95% or slightly higher; ongoing improvements are being implemented to raise this figure.

The majority of ore production is from underground sources, with open pits providing some feed at the beginning and end of mine life. The mine currently plans to produce approximately 232,000 ounces of gold per year.

The 2003 Musselwhite Mine budget and the 2003 Strategic Business Plan call for a sustained production rate of 4,000 tpd for the mine life. The entire operation is currently being modified to optimize throughput capacity.

March 2003 Page 1-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

The mine operating and capital cost budgets and the business plan financial analysis have been reviewed and are consistent with industry standard operating practices. These documents are not publicly available and have therefore not been included with this report. Should there be a requirement to review these documents, access can be granted by requesting and signing a confidentiality agreement approved by both joint- venture partners at the mine.

The 31 December 2002 Musselwhite Mine Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve statement is supported by this independent review.

March 2003 Page 1-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

2.0 INTRODUCTION & TERMS OF REFERENCE

The mine is operated as an unincorporated joint venture between Placer Dome (CLA) Limited (68.07%) and Kinross (31.93%). Information and data for the report were obtained from a site visit by AMEC on 18 to 23 March 2003, as well as from issuers’ reports on SEDAR and directly from Musselwhite Mine personnel and Kinross. The pertinent geological, mining, and metallurgical information was reviewed in sufficient detail to prepare this report. John Kiernan, in addition to supervising the preparation of this report, conducted a review of issues related to mining. Steve Blower, P.Geo., and Pierre Lacombe, Eng., both employees of AMEC and Qualified Persons, conducted the geological and metallurgical reviews, respectively.

2.1 Terms of Reference

Unless otherwise specified, all units of measurement in this report are metric and all costs are expressed in Canadian dollars. The payable metals, gold and silver, are priced in United States dollars (US$) per ounce.

The statement of Reserves and Resources as of 31 December 2002 is based on a gold price of US$300/oz and a conversion rate of 1.0 to 1.5 (CDN$ to US$). As discussed in Section 17, there are two small deposits to be mined at the end of the mine life, the Reserves for which are estimated based on information contained in feasibility studies completed in 1997 and 1998.

March 2003 Page 2-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

3.0 DISCLAIMER

AMEC’s review of the Musselwhite Mine operation was completed based on information provided by the mine staff. In particular, Resource information was based on work carried out by Qualified Person Andrew Cheatle, Chief Geologist, and Reserve information was based on the work of Qualified Person Rob Usher, Mining Manager.

March 2003 Page 3-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

4.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

The Musselwhite property is located in the Patricia Mining District in Northwestern Ontario; NTS 53 B/9, latitude 52°36'50" N and longitude 90°21'43" W. The mine lies in the Opapimiskan Lake area, approximately 76 km southeast of the First Nations community of Round Lake (Weagamow), 130 km north of the town of Pickle Lake, and 430 km northwest of Thunder Bay (Figure 4-1)

Figure 4-1: Musselwhite Mine Location

The majority of mining to date has been performed underground on the T-Antiform deposit. Mining will continue on this deposit, supplemented by ore from six additional underground deposits and one open pit deposit near the end of the current mine plan.

March 2003 Page 4-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

The property consists of a total of 617 claims. There is a core holding of 338 leased mining claims; except for 96 claims, for which only mining rights are held, mining and surface rights are held for all of these. Surrounding this core holding are 279 contiguous unpatented mining claims. The core holding and unpatented claims together span approximately 5,444 and 12,104 hectares, respectively, for a total of 17,548 hectares.

The claims have expiration dates ranging from 28 January 2004 to 12 June 2012. AMEC did not complete a detailed title search on the mineral and property holdings at Musselwhite; however, in a random check, ten mining leases and ten unpatented claims were confirmed by the Ontario Provincial Recording office to be in good standing (see Table 4-1 for a list of leases and claims that were checked). A complete list of claims and a claim map are included in Appendix A.

Table 4-1: List of Mineral Leases and Claims Checked by AMEC

Mineral Leases Unpatented Mineral Claims

PA 529495 PA 529410 PA 529496 PA 529429 PA 529497 PA 529470 PA 529487 PA 529518 PA 529826 PA 529548 PA 529827 PA 529566 PA 529828 PA 529640 PA 529829 PA 529807 PA 508457 PA 851196 PA 508458 PA 1173215

The mine has recently renewed an impact benefit agreement with local First Nations groups. In the new agreement, restrictions on daily mill throughput have been removed, and revenue-sharing provisions have been incorporated to help direct some of the mine’s economic benefits directly into local communities. The following is an outline of the agreement (source: Placer Dome website):

The Musselwhite Agreement “With the original Musselwhite Agreement having expired in February 2001, a new Agreement was negotiated between the Joint Venture Parties, Placer Dome and TVX/Normandy Americas Inc., Cat Lake First Nation, North Caribou Lake First Nation, Kingfisher Lake First Nation, Wunnumin Lake First Nation, Shibogama First Nations Council, Windigo First Nations Council. In addition, the Joint Venture Parties have maintained the General Compensation Agreement with the above First Nations and a specific North Caribou Lake First Nations Trappers Compensation Agreement.

March 2003 Page 4-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

In addition to the opting out of the Federal and Provincial Governments, the new Musselwhite Agreement differs in structure while maintaining the mutual benefits of the old agreement. Salient points are a “Life of Mine” agreement providing for an unfettered business with no tonnage cap on the mill or mill expansion. There will be an increased employment target of 30% for signatory and affiliate First Nations employees. Moreover, the signatory First Nations have agreed to a Revenue Sharing agreement whereby monies will flow directly to the communities based on the monthly ounce production of the mine. The revenue is broken down to three main categories: Revenue Sharing, Implementation and Environmental dollars. The breakdown was derived by a formula agreed to by First Nations Elders that met to discuss the matter.

Our goals for 2002 and beyond include building on the relationships already developed with the signatory First Nations, and expanding our relationships in the north with the affiliated First Nations Communities. We will continue to monitor the progress of the new Musselwhite Agreement through the working of the Musselwhite Working Committee, the Environmental Working Committee and the Implementation Review Committee. Musselwhite Mine will continue to use goods and services from the First Nations as well as looking for other business opportunities from the First Nations that can be offered to the mine.”

March 2003 Page 4-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

5.0 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

5.1 Physiography

The topography of the project area is relatively flat, with granite intrusions associated with regional highlands. Local relief, which ranges from 5 m to a maximum of 45 m, can be attributed to glacial deposits in the form of moraines, eskers, and drumlins. Extensive, low-lying swampy areas surround streams, ponds, and lakes on the property. The elevation of Opapimiskan Lake is reported to be 300.5 m and 296.0 m by the East Bay Mine grid and the Surveying and Mapping Branch of the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, respectively. Regional drainage trends northeast towards Hudson Bay, with an average gradient of 3 m/km.

The Opapimiskan Lake area lies within the northern coniferous section of the boreal forest. Predominant species include black spruce, tamarack, and cedar, with local stands of white birch, jackpine, and poplar on better-drained areas such as eskers and moraines. A forest fire destroyed most of the area south of Opapimiskan Lake in 1979. Vegetation is slowly returning but currently has no economic value.

5.2 Climate

The nearest permanent weather monitoring station is located in Pickle Lake. Weather statistics for the period 1951-1980 indicate a mean daily temperature of -0.9°C. Temperatures range between 40°C and a minimum of -51°C. The mean annual rainfall is recorded at 509 mm and the mean annual snowfall is 266 cm. On average, precipitation is recorded on 168 days during the course of a year. The average wind speed is 16.4 km/h, originating from the northwest 23% of the time. Winds from the west, southwest, south, and north are roughly equally divided in frequency.

5.3 Local Resources

Opapimiskan Lake, once commercially fished, now receives limited fly-in fishing from a tourist resort operator. Fish species include pickerel, pike, perch, and whitefish. Animal species occupying the regenerating forest include moose, black bear, wolves, beaver, fox, and rabbit. Portions of two registered traplines cross the property, and seven others cross the winter access road.

Five First Nations and two non-First Nations communities—a total of approximately 3,000 inhabitants—live within the vicinity of the Musselwhite project:

March 2003 Page 5-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

• Kingfisher Lake lies 58 km to the northeast. • North Caribou Lake (aka Round Lake and Weagamow Lake) is 76 km to the northwest. • Wunnumin Lake is 84 km to the east-northeast. • Cat Lake is 140 km to the southwest. • Mishkeegogamang (aka Osnaburgh) is 128 km to the south. • Pickle Lake and Central Patricia are 24 km north of Mishkeegogamang.

Wunnumin Lake and Kingfisher Lake are affiliated with the Shibogama First Nations Council. Cat Lake and Caribou Lake are affiliated with the Windigo First Nations Council. Mishkeegogamang was previously affiliated with Windigo, but is now independent.

5.4 Access

The property is accessed by chartered air service from Thunder Bay. A 1,500 m gravel strip suitable for STOL-type (short take-off and landing) aircraft is maintained year- round on site. During summer, docking facilities for floatplanes are available on Opapimiskan Lake. A 45 km all-weather road connects the property with the North Road (formerly Ontario Provincial Highway 808) that extends north from the town of Pickle Lake.

The communities of Mishkeegogamang and Pickle Lake have year-round road access. Communities north of Pickle Lake have winter road access from the North Road to Windigo Lake. For the remainder of the year, access to these northern communities is by aircraft.

The community of Pickle Lake serves as a distribution centre for many of the northern communities because it has both air and ground freight services. It is also a transfer point for air traffic connecting to Thunder Bay and Sioux Lookout. Industries operating north of Pickle Lake are based on the natural resource sector and include forestry and fishing. Tourist and craft activities also create limited levels of employment opportunities.

5.5 Project Infrastructure

The major infrastructure consists of the airstrip, some ATCO-type bunkhouses, a recreation/kitchen facility, ATCO-type offices, the mill buildings, a tailings pond, a portal and conveyor adits, an old exploration shaft, a fresh air ventilation raise, and various pump stations and drill access roads (see Figure 5-1).

March 2003 Page 5-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 5-1: Mine Infrastructure on Satellite Image

EskerEsker ZoneZone DrillDrill RoadRoad PrimaryPrimary SurfaceSurface CrusherCrusher PumphousePumphouse AdiAdit? t? LabLab TrailerTrailer Water Containment Berm AirsAi rs trip tri p DitchDitch OpenOpen PitPit DitchDitch West Anticline Road

LandfillLandfill 11 TailingsTailings PondPond -- UndisturbedUndisturbed

TailingsTailings PondPond BorrowBorrow PitPit

BorrowBorrow PitPit TailTail PondPond SeepageSeepage DitchDitch BorrowBorrow PitPit TailingsTailings PondPond Berm/RoadBerm/Road

AggregateAggregate QuarryQuarry BurrowBurrow Pit?Pit?

MainMain RoadRoad

Grid North

BaileyBailey BridgeBridge -- oldold

2km

BorrowBorrow PitPit

March 2003 Page 5-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

6.0 HISTORY

1960 Harold and Alan Musselwhite prospect the region.

1973 The Musselwhite Prospecting Grubstake is initiated 1973 to 1984 Several exploration campaigns are carried out. 1983 The Musselwhite Joint Venture is formed. 1985 to 1986 Surface drilling confirms a discovery with economic potential has been made. 1986 to 1987 A prefeasibility study is completed. 1988 to 1989 An underground exploration program is completed. The three remaining partners, Placer Dome (43%), Inco Gold (32%) and Corona (25%), initiate a full feasibility study. The economics do not justify developing the mine. 1992 to 1993 A drilling program focuses on the OP and PQ mineralized zones. 1993 Placer Dome purchases the 25% share of Musselwhite acquired by Homestake Mining Co. through the latter's merger with Corona. 1994 An underground program begins on the T-Antiform structure. The PQ zone is explored by surface diamond drilling. 1994 – 1995 Sinking of exploration shaft commences. 1995 All-weather road connection to north road is completed. Portal excavation commences. 1996 The Musselwhite Joint Venture partners decide to put the property into production, and construction begins immediately following completion of a feasibility study. Underground development of the T-Antiform deposit, and open pit mining of the OP zone, begin. 1997 The first gold bar is poured on 10 March 1997, and the mine enters commercial production on 1 April 1997. Production from the open pit is suspended in August 1997 (but resumes later in mine life on the Snoppy open pit). 2001 One million ounces are produced as of 7 November 2001. 2002 Underground crusher and conveyor are commissioned. 2002 to 2003 A merger of Kinross, TVX, and Echo Bay is proposed and completed. The new Kinross Gold Corporation acquires approximately 32% of the Musselwhite Mine.

The Weagamow-North Caribou Lake belt was first mapped by Satterly (1941) at a scale of 1” to 1 mile. Emslie (1962), Thurston (1979) and Andrews et al. (1981) subsequently mapped the area at a reconnaissance scale. In 1960, the Ontario Department of Mines (ODM), now the Ontario Geological Survey (OGS), completed an airborne magnetic survey over the belt at a scale of 1" to 1 mile.

From 1984 to 1986, an integrated geosciences survey of the belt was undertaken by the OGS. This work included bedrock and surface mapping, mineral deposit and aggregate assessment studies, and reconnaissance till prospecting for gold. Results of this work are reported by Breaks et al. (1984, 1985, and 1986) and Piroshco and Shields (1985). The area was also covered by an airborne electromagnetic and magnetic survey in 1985 (OGS 1985).

March 2003 Page 6-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Kenpat Mines Ltd first discovered gold mineralization in the Opapimiskan Lake area, in 1962. Exploration efforts were restricted to a gold-bearing quartz-carbonate vein on the north shore of Opapimiskan Lake, and to an occurrence named the IF Showing on the south shore. Late in 1963, Kenpat conducted geophysical and geological mapping surveys, performed extensive trenching, and completed 20 diamond drill holes totalling 1,171 m prior to abandoning the property.

The Musselwhite Prospecting Grubstake was initiated in 1973 to explore the Opapimiskan Lake area for gold mineralization. Three surface gold showings, the No.1, No.2, and Everyway showings, were discovered by Harold and Allan Musselwhite by panning regolith material covering iron formation outcroppings on the south shore of Opapimiskan Lake.

During the period 1973 through 1983, considerable exploration in the form of prospecting, geological mapping, soil and rock sampling, trenching, geophysical surveying, and extensive surface diamond drilling was completed. In addition, a cut and chained picket grid, with lines at 400-foot centres, was established and used as control over the entire property. This grid has not been maintained and, although it can still be seen in selected areas, is of little value to present exploration.

The Musselwhite Joint Venture was formed in 1983. In the fall of that year, construction of the winter access road was initiated to facilitate an underground exploration and bulk sampling program on the West Anticline area. A 605 m ramp was driven to access mineralization on the 215 m level. During the program, a 5,180 t bulk sample was mined and 1,756 m of underground drilling was completed. In November 1984, the project was completed and the excavations were allowed to flood. The results of this work, documented in the "Report on the 1984 Underground Exploration and Bulk Sampling Program, West Anticline Area, 215 Level, Riggs et al. " failed to substantiate the grade and continuity of mineralization indicated from surface drilling. As a consequence, exploration ceased in this portion of the property.

In 1985, a limited surface diamond-drilling program was conducted to test other favourable iron formation targets on the property and to maintain the remaining mining claims in good standing. Two significant drill intersections were reported from targets in the East Bay Area. Following an office compilation program, surface drilling in 1986 confirmed that a discovery with economic potential had been made.

Through 1986 up to September 1987, four separate gold zones were identified and delineated. In the fall of 1987, a prefeasibility report addressing the economic viability of mining the T-Antiform deposit was completed. Based on the results of this study, an underground exploration program was initiated in January 1988 to test this mineralized zone. In conjunction with this underground program, surface diamond drilling continued during the winter months in 1988 and 1989, with the objective of delineating the plunge extent of the T-Antiform Deposit. A 240 m vertical shaft was excavated with drifts and

March 2003 Page 6-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

cross-cuts developed on the 100 m, 150 m, and 200 m levels. A 5,500 t bulk sample and 178 underground diamond drill holes were completed in order to evaluate the potential of the T-Antiform. Once again, the project was deemed to be uneconomic and the workings were allowed to flood.

A small surface drill program was conducted in early 1992, with the objective of locating a high-grade gold zone in order to revive the project. In the fall of 1992, it was determined that the property had the potential to support a 2,500 t/d operation and provide an attractive cash flow. Late in 1992, Placer Dome acquired Homestake's 25% interest in the property. In January 1993, accelerated exploration began, with the principal objectives of defining the extent, grade and continuity of the T-Antiform deposit between l0000N and 10500N, and evaluating the open pit potential of the OP Zone. During 1994, diamond drilling continued on the north extension of the T-Antiform and on near-surface targets with open pit potential. In addition, a major underground program to dewater and refurbish the old 1989 workings was instituted to facilitate the collection of a 30,000 tonne bulk sample and to conduct approximately 28,000 m of underground diamond drilling from 10000N to 10500N.

After re-examination of all available data in February 1996, a decision was made by Placer Dome and TVX Gold to proceed with construction of a 3,300 t/d mine with Placer Dome as the operator. Construction began shortly thereafter.

The extraction of the OP zone in the open pit workings began in August 1996, and full production was initiated from the underground workings in early April of 1997.

The mine has recently undergone a major capital expansion that included the installation of underground crushing and conveying facilities, and upgrading of mill facilities in an attempt to expand production to 4,000 t/d this year.

To date (March 2003) the operation has milled approximately 7.2 Mt of ore at a head grade of about 5.79 g/t Au, for a total of approximately 1.28 million recovered ounces.

March 2003 Page 6-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

7.0 GEOLOGICAL SETTING

After extensive discussions with the Musselwhite geological staff, an underground tour of active headings, and a review of diamond drill core, AMEC is satisfied that the level of understanding of the geology at Musselwhite is excellent. Highly skilled staff are using appropriate techniques to gather, store and utilize a large amount of detailed geological data.

7.1 Regional Geology

The Musselwhite deposit is situated near the northeastern margin of the northwest- trending North Caribou Greenstone Belt (Figure 7-1). This belt consists of a narrow elongate swath of metavolcanic and metasedimentary supracrustal assemblages that extend 160 km in an overall northwest direction. The belt is comprised of three linear segments, east-west, north-northwest, and west-northwest. Another branch of the greenstone belt extends to the southwest from the point where the west-northwest and north-northwest segments join. This triple junction forms complex geometries and is the locus of outcropping iron formation, known gold mineralization, and the Musselwhite Mine.

The Ontario Geological Survey (Breaks et al. 2001) has subdivided the belt into eight litho-tectonic, supracrustal assemblages based on spatial relations, assemblage bounding features, and age. Of these, the Opapimiskan Lake metavolcanic assemblage comprises the rocks in the vicinity of the Musselwhite Mine and hosts two principle suites of iron formation known as the Northern and Southern Iron Formation. Surrounding the Opapimiskan Lake assemblage to the southwest and northeast are the South Rim and North Rim metavolcanic assemblages, respectively. Stratigraphically above the Opapimiskan Lake metavolcanic assemblage is the Eyapamikama Lake metasedimentary assemblage. This group of rocks consists mainly of greywacke with minor conglomerate, possibly of the Timiskaming type. Younger multi-stage tonalite-granodiorite plutons bound portions of the greenstone belt (see Figure 7-2).

Based on current age dating information from the North Caribou and other greenstone belts in the province, the most prolific period of greenstone belt formation was in the 2.9 to 2.8 Ga period. Rock samples from the Musselwhite Mine area are currently being dated.

Much of the greenstone belt, including the mine area, is covered by water and glacial overburden with only rare outcrop exposures. For this reason, interpretation of the geology from the surface is difficult and heavily reliant upon geophysical techniques. One such aeromagnetic interpretation is presented as Figure 7-3. A regional stratigraphic section is presented as Figure 7-4.

March 2003 Page 7-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 7-1: North Caribou Greenstone Belt Assemblages

March 2003 Page 7-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 7-2: OGS Regional Mapping

Musselwhite Mine

March 2003 Page 7-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 7-3: Aeromagnetic Litho-Structural Interpretation

L E G E N D Granite / gneiss Clastic sediments

March 2003 Page 7-4 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 7-4: Regional Stratigraphic Column

7.2 Property-Scale Lithology and Stratigraphy

Hanging Wall Volcanic Rocks – The youngest Archean stratigraphic unit recognized on the property is referred to as the Hanging Wall Volcanic rocks. This unit comprises a sequence of thickly bedded felsic (dominantly rhyolitic in composition) volcaniclastic sediments, ranging in grain size from ash-tuffs to coarse polymictic volcaniclastics, with minor interbedded flows. Stratigraphic relationships are shown in Figure 7-5.

March 2003 Page 7-5 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 7-5: Schematic Section to Illustrate the Stratigraphic Relationship of the Felsic Volcanics

Northern Iron Formation – The Northern Iron Formation (NIF) is conformably below the Hanging Wall Volcanic rocks and constitutes a thick sequence of iron-rich chemical and clastic sedimentary rocks. The internal stratigraphy of the Northern Iron Formation grades from a hanging wall sequence of biotite-rich ±garnet schist (4F), through a garnet-amphibole-chert iron formation (4EA), and into a chert-magnetite iron formation (4B) at the base of the sequence. Contacts between individual units in the NIF are often gradational, with units in the upper portion interleaved, suggestive of contemporaneous clastic and chemical sedimentation.

Footwall Mafics/Ultramafics – Stratigraphically below the NIF are the footwall basaltic and ultramafic rocks, which are balsaltic komatiite in composition. A sub-marine origin is inferred from locally developed pillow structures. Spinifex textures have not been noted.

March 2003 Page 7-6 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Southern Iron Formation – The footwall mafic sequence is underlain by the Southern Iron Formation (SIF), a sequence of thinly-bedded chert-magnetite iron formation. Minor units of a more clastic origin containing garnet, amphibole, and biotite occur throughout.

Basement Basalts – The SIF is underlain by a thick sequence of tholeiitic basaltic rocks. The unit consists of massive, pillowed, and locally differentiated flows or sills.

Felsic Intrusives (Pegmatites) – Deep diamond drilling in 2000 beneath the T-Antiform intersected a number of narrow “felsic dykes” with fine- to coarse-grained textures that intrude and crosscut the entire volcano-sedimentary sequence. However, there is little evidence of their timing relative to gold mineralization, as they have not been noted proximal to, or in contact with, any of the known ore zones.

7.3 Mine Scale Lithological and Stratigraphic Relations

The stratigraphy of the mine area is relatively simple, consisting of basalt, an iron formation suite of lithologies, and a felsic volcanic unit. These rock types appear to maintain a consistent stratigraphic relationship and unit thickness (except for tectonic thickening and fault duplication) over a broad area beyond the limits of the mine area. The basic stratigraphic relations are indicated in Figure 7-6. Through time and changes in logging protocol, the nomenclature for various units has evolved. The list below describes the stratigraphy and its context within the mine area.

March 2003 Page 7-7 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 7-6: Schematic Mine Scale Stratigraphic Column

“Bvol” – All mafic and ultramafic rocks have been lumped into a single unit called Bvol (basic volcanic). No distinction has been made between basalt stratigraphically beneath, within, or above iron formation units (as has been attempted in the past). This is the country rock to the deposit, although it locally hosts ore-grade intercepts in drill holes.

There are high magnesium or komatiitic basalts within the sequence. Some of these units might be sufficiently continuous to serve as markers, but inconsistency in recognition of this rock type in drill logs precludes its use as a marker unit.

“Intraformational” – Intraformational BIF units occur within the basalt sequence at a unique stratigraphic position above the 4b-4ea-4f sequences. These units apparently lack the stratigraphic continuity of other BIFs and appear as irregular bands within the basalt sequence.

March 2003 Page 7-8 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

“Sheared Basalt” – Sheared basalt is locally altered and metamorphosed to biotite or amphibole-garnet schist. Where this occurs, it has been logged sometimes as 4e or 4f and displays a lack of continuity that is characteristic of a shear zone. This altered basalt is different from biotite- or amphibole-garnet schist that is a stratiform unit within the main iron formation suite.

“4b” – This is a chert-magnetite iron formation consisting of interlayered fine to coarse laminae of chert and magnetite (see frontispiece). Some sections of 4b also contain variable amounts of biotite, amphibole, garnet, and staurolite, and may grade locally to other rock types such as 4e, 4f, or 4ea. Individual bands within 4b are continuous over distances of more than several meters (the limit of exposure in underground faces). Elsewhere, folding, faulting, and tectonic attenuation limit the continuity of individual layers. Overall, the unit maintains lateral (strike and dip) continuity over a broad area of the greenstone belt.

“4ea” – This is an amphibole-garnet-chert-magnetite iron formation that hosts most of the ore of the Musselwhite deposit. It maintains a consistent stratigraphic thickness and position with respect to underlying 4b and overlying 4f. However, 4ea may locally be a metamorphosed or altered equivalent of 4b rather than a separate stratigraphic unit. Based on stratigraphic continuity of this and other units, however, it is improbable that more than a minor amount of 4ea can be considered to be an altered condition of 4b. This unit does not occur in association with all 4b units. Where it occurs as thin layers within the basalt sequence, the unit is referred to as “intraformational”.

“4f” – This biotite-garnet schist rock type occurs consistently between 4ea and the overlying basalt. Its local absence at this stratigraphic location is believed to be the result of faulting. It is also present as an “intraformational” unit within basalt. These irregular occurrences may be real stratigraphic units or may be altered and metamorphosed, sheared basalt.

“Avol” – This unit consists of felsic volcanic rock variously interpreted as intrusive, extrusive, and tuffaceous. Quartz crystal content is apparently variable but this may be a function of preservation under varying degrees of tectonism. Avol is the stratigraphically highest unit observed within the model and it is truncated on the west side by a shear zone. The east side may also be tectonized, but stratigraphic conformity with units to the east and extensive lateral continuity of that conformable contact suggests that the contact is stratigraphic and not tectonic. Structure

The lithologies exposed at Musselwhite have been subjected to several deformation events. Stewart et al. (1989) recognized at least three phases of deformation, while Hall and Riggs (1986) postulated there could be four. The three-phase interpretation is summarized below:

March 2003 Page 7-9 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

D1 is represented by an isoclinal folding event that is only locally preserved. Where observed, it is preserved within D2 fold hinges within chert-magnetite horizons. Riggs et al. (1984) reported that the D1 fold axis is oriented toward the northwest, parallel to the D2 fold axis with a plunge of 20° to 50°.

D2 is the dominant structural fabric on the property. Large-scale folding associated with this event includes the West Anticline antiform and Easy Bay synform. The fold axis trends northwest, and fold noses plunge 30° to 40° in the West Anticline, and 5° to 18° in the East Bay synform. Stewart et al. (1989) also noted that the superimposition of F2 folds on Fl folds produces Type 1 basin-and-dome interference patterns. These features are elongated parallel to S2, and as a result take the form of canoe-shaped structures.

D3 is variably interpreted as either a regional, broad wavelength warping of the F2 fold axial planes about a northeasterly F3 axis, or as a well-developed crenulation cleavage.

March 2003 Page 7-10 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

8.0 DEPOSIT TYPES

The mineralization at Musselwhite can be classified as an Iron Formation hosted gold deposit. Typically, gold in these deposits occurs in cross-cutting quartz veins and veinlets or as fine disseminations associated with pyrite, pyrrhotite, and arsenopyrite hosted in iron formations and adjacent rocks within volcanic or sedimentary sequences (McMillan 1996).

Mineralization is generally within, or near, favourable iron formations. Most deposits occur adjacent to prominent regional structural and stratigraphic features, and mineralization is often related to local structures. Contacts between ultramafic (commonly komatiitic) rocks and tholeiitic basalts or sedimentary rocks are important. All known deposits occur in Precambrian sequences; however, there are some potentially favourable chemical sediment horizons in Paleozoic rocks. Changes in pinch-outs and facies within geologically favourable units are important loci for ore deposition (McMillan 1996).

Other examples of this style of deposit in Canada are Lupin and Cullaton Lake (Northwest Territories), and in Detour Lake, Madsen Red Lake, Pickle Crow, and Dona Lake (Ontario). International examples are Homestake (South Dakota, USA); Mt. Morgans (Western Australia); Morro Vehlo and Raposos, Mineas Gerais (Brazil); Vubachikwe and Bar 20 (Zimbabwe); and Mallappakoda, Kolar District (India).

March 2003 Page 8-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

9.0 MINERALIZATION

9.1 Styles of Gold Mineralization

Anomalous gold concentrations occur property-wide and within all of the major lithologies. However, mineralization is best developed in the 4ea iron formation where structural permeability has been increased by folding, brittle/ductile deformation, or a combination of both. Figure 9-1 illustrates the location of the various mineralized zones of economic interest identified to date on the property.

Figure 9-1: Zones of Economic Mineralization

A positive correlation exists between gold and pyrrhotite mineralization within the T-Antiform. In general terms, this translates to 1 g/t Au for each percentage increase in pyrrhotite, up to approximately 15%.

Two broad mineralization styles have been documented based on contrasting mineralogical and structural characteristics. The first style, known as quartz-pyrrhotite veining/flooding, is dominant in competent lithologies and is locally crosscutting. The

March 2003 Page 9-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

second style, known as strata-bound sulphide replacement, occurs primarily as halos to the zones of quartz flooding.

9.1.1 Quartz-Pyrrhotite Veining/FIooding

Quartz-pyrrhotite veins/floods are composed of massive, glassy-blue to grey-blue quartz and up to 20% fine- to medium-grained pyrrhotite locally. Accessory minerals include albite, almandine garnet and calcite, minor arsenopyrite, pyrite, chalcopyrite, and native gold. Sulphide mineralization within the veins is strongly structurally controlled, occurring within small-scale boudins, along the margins of the veins, and as fine stringers within the vein itself. Visible native gold, usually the size of a pin tip, is commonly observed as isolated specks within quartz; however, the majority of the gold, along with chalcopyrite, occurs within pyrrhotite micro-fractures.

Quartz-pyrrhotite veins occur as anastomosing networks of multiple veinlets that pinch and swell along strike as well as up and down dip. Vein systems appear to have reasonable continuity, and have been mapped along strike over distances as long as 50 m with little variation. Individual veins typically range from <1 cm to 3 cm in width and rarely exceed 50 cm.

9.1.2 Sulphide Replacement

Sulphide replacement style mineralization is characterized by 2% to locally 15% fine- grained disseminated pyrrhotite, trace to locally 2% arsenopyrite, trace to 2% pyrite, and minor native gold and chalcopyrite occurring within garnet-rich, silicate domains. Gangue minerals consist of almandine garnet, quartz and/or chert, grunerite, actinolite, biotite, magnetite, calcite with accessory epidote, and zircon. Pyrrhotite occurs as disseminated xenoblastic grains and as late-stage fracture fillings concentrating within low-pressure domains. Fine-grained visible gold is commonly observed within poikiloblastic garnets and within garnet strain shadows (Stewart et al. 1989).

Strata-bound mineralized zones are intimately associated with the presence of quartz- pyrrhotite vein systems and appear to envelop them. As a result, the zones appear to be intensely silicified, although bulk chemical analysis suggests that no appreciable enrichment in silica content has occurred. Consequently, the width as well as the vertical and strike continuity of strata-bound mineralized zones is directly reflected by the continuity of quartz-pyrrhotite vein systems.

9.2 Geological Controls on Gold Mineralization

The concentration of sulphide and gold mineralization is very strongly controlled by structure, which in turn is intimately affected by lithology. Quartz-pyrrhotite veins occupy dilatant, S2 axial planar fracture cleavage surfaces. The cleavage is best

March 2003 Page 9-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

developed in the hinge areas of F2 minor antiformal closures, hence the incidence of veins increases dramatically within these structures. Along limb structures, where the cleavage is subparallel to the stratigraphy, small-scale deflection of the cleavage planes of continuous vein mineralization is impeded.

Strata-bound sulphide mineralization is also structurally controlled. On a microscopic scale, disseminated pyrrhotite favours low-pressure garnet strain shadows and is concentrated within orthogonal and conjugate fracture pairs within garnet- porphyroblasts. On a much larger scale, strata-bound mineralization appears to be concentrated in close proximity to steeply dipping longitudinal faults within major fold hinges and along steeply dipping limbs of these structures, subparallel to axial planes. In areas where the limbs of a fold dip at a shallow angle, strata-bound mineralization decreases rapidly away from the axial plane (see Figure 9-2)

Figure 9-2: Typical Orientation of Longitudinal Fault

The 55 fault in Figure 9-2 displays the general orientation of the longitudinal faults that both thicken the Northern Iron Formation and provide fluid pathways for mineralization. The blue arch represents the upper contact of the formation.

The role of the longitudinal faults in the genesis of the orebodies is still under investigation. The steep, east-dipping longitudinal faults strike 3° to 5° west of the strike of the T-Antiform axis. Mineralization appears to be directly related to the intersection of these faults with the 4ea iron formation, and where these fault systems are absent,

March 2003 Page 9-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

gold mineralization is either greatly reduced or missing altogether. This results in an apparent migration of grade from east to west as you move north through the T-Anticline.

Mineralization is also preferentially concentrated in antiformal fold closures and along attenuated limbs. Axial planar cleavage, developed as a result of F2 folds, also appears to play a significant role in the current distribution of gold mineralization. The best-developed axial planar cleavage occurs within a zone of ductile deformation. Archer (1994) feels the East Bay synform roughly defines this area. Structural interpretation from detailed magnetic data supports this hypothesis. In areas with more brittle deformation, such as the West Anticline, mineralization is less focused. Hall and Rigg (1986) have demonstrated that gold mineralization at Musselwhite was contemporaneous with peak metamorphism at about 530°C to 550°C and a pressure of 3 kb.

9.3 Detailed Mineralized Zone Descriptions

9.3.1 Deposits along the T-Antiform

The T-Antiform structure is host to the largest known gold deposit on the Musselwhite property. The structure has been evaluated and tested by diamond drilling from where it subcrops at 9150N to 12400N, a distance of 3,250 m. While the structure is well developed along this entire length, the gold mineralization decreases rapidly to the north of 11800N.

The T-Antiform is an asymmetrical fold with the right limb being stretched and almost detached from the left limb. This division was used in 1989 to divide the antiform into two deposits: the “T” deposit and the “S” deposit. The T deposit can be further subdivided into three separate zones. From west to east they are the “WA”, “T” and “C” zones. Each zone is dominated by a second-order antiform. Areas containing weak mineralization between these zones are dominated by synforms. All three zones in the T deposit trend at 317°, are near-vertical dipping, and plunge 16° to 18° to the northwest. Based on gold grade distribution in diamond drill holes, there appears to be an en echelon movement from west to east going from the south to the north in the better-mineralized structure (i.e., the WA zone is better mineralized in the southwest portion of the T deposit and the C zone has the better mineralization in the northeast portion of the T deposit).

The relative positions of these zones within the T-Antiform are shown on Figure 9-3.

March 2003 Page 9-4 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 9-3: Schematic Section Showing Relative Positions of S, C, T & WA Zones

March 2003 Page 9-5 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

9.3.1.1 WA Zone

The WA zone is hosted within the first second-order antiform on the west side of the T-Antiform. A smaller structure to the west is also mineralized; however, it generally lies too far west to be considered part of the WA zone. The zone is axial planar, and locally, this axial plane appears to have a slight grid east-facing curve. The top of the WA zone is 50 m to 70 m below the crest of the T zone. Although there is no hard evidence, there could be a shear between the WA and T zones, with the right side being down dropped.

The WA zone is a tabular body that is wider at the base and tapers towards the top in the antiform fold closure. It has a maximum vertical height of approximately 100 m and an average width of 6 m, but it expands locally to 10 m at its base. Mineralization at the base appears to rapidly thin into two to three sulphide-quartz rich shoots 1 m or less in size. The top of the zone tapers to <2 m in a fold closure. The structure has been traced from 9200N to 10800N; however, the bulk of the zone is between 9400N and 10500N. North of 10500N there appears to be limited potential left in the WA structure. The west side of the WA zone is defined by a geological contact, usually biotite schist, while the east side is more gradational.

9.3.1.2 T Zone

The T zone is situated in the next two second-order antiformal closures. Again, the zone is subvertically dipping, and mineralization is oriented along axial planes. The height of the zone is generally 50 m to 75 m, but can reach about 100 m when quartz- sulphide rich axial planar tails are included. At certain locations, such as on 9550N, one of these tails appears to merge with the WA zone. The T zone is consistently the widest and often reaches a thickness in excess of 20 m. The top of the zone terminates in fold closures, while the bottom feathers out into several narrow axial planar stringers. The zone can be traced down-plunge from where it subcrops at 9200N to 10700N. The width of the T zone appears to decrease down-plunge. Partly due to the lack of drilling north of 10700N, there is a distinct possibility the T zone will not extend far beyond 10500N.

9.3.1.3 C Zone

The C zone (formerly S-Crest) occupies the eastern two second-order antiformal closures. The zone is subvertically dipping, and the gold mineralization is axial planar. In the southern portion, the C zone appears to consist of two separate zones, one with a vertical height of 25 m to 30 m, and the other with a height of 50 m to 60 m. By 9500N, the smaller zone disappears (possibly moved into the S zone) and the larger zone has increased in height to 90 m to 110 m. The width of the C zone varies from 3 m to 4 m and is locally greater than 10 m. The C zone can be traced along plunge from 9200N to 11200N and is open along plunge. The zone broadens around

March 2003 Page 9-6 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

9700N and remains strong until at least 10900N. Beyond 10900N, the zone appears weaker, but this may partly be due to the low density of drilling.

9.3.1.4 S Zone

The S zone is located on the attenuated, and partly detached, east limb of the T-Antiform structure. This fold structure extends beyond the limits of diamond drilling in both directions (i.e., it starts to the south of 9150N and extends north of 11200N). The plunge of the S zone is consistently shallower than that of the C, T, and WA zones. The S zone plunge averages 10° to 12°, while the other zones average 15° to 18°. The amplitude of the S limb increases in a northward direction from less than 50 m in the south to at least 200 m by 11200N. Starting about 10600N, the volume of gold mineralization associated with the S limb increases significantly and by 11,000N the S limb definitively becomes the dominant mineralized structure.

In the southern portion of the S zone (south of l0000N), there are usually two or three individual pods. These pods generally have a vertical height of 10 m to 40 m and a width of 3 m to >10 m. Because of their smaller size, the continuity down-plunge could be more dynamic. Between l0000N and 10175N, limited drilling in the S zone precludes any comment on the zone in this area. North of 10200N, drilling again intersects S limb mineralization. By 11100N, there are three principal mineralized zones in the S fold structure, which becomes a separate antiform in its own right. Mineralization occurs in the limbs and in the core between the limbs. Due to limited drilling, it is difficult to define the extent of each zone. The zones in the east and west limb have a vertical height of at least 75 m and a width of 4 m to 8 m. The core zone has a vertical height of 25 m to 40 m and a width of up to 15 m.

9.3.2 PQ Deposit

The PQ deposit is situated within the Northern Iron Formation horizon of the northeast limb of the East Bay synform. Results from diamond drilling conducted on 50 m centres indicate a tabular, strata-bound body dipping steeply at about 85° to the northeast and plunging gently at 5° to 10° to the northwest. The deposit has a plunge length of approximately 1,300 m, and averages 50 m vertically and 4 m in width.

Gold mineralization is spatially associated with 3% to locally 25% disseminated specks, wisps, and stringers of pyrrhotite. The sulphide distribution is structurally controlled by the orientation of the S2 fracture cleavage and is focused within tight F2 minor fold flexures. In a typical section, the footwall contact is generally well defined by a non-mineralized garnet-biotite schist horizon, except toward the top and bottom of the zone where mineralization tapers and tends to diverge from this position. The hanging wall contact is defined by an assay cutoff.

March 2003 Page 9-7 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

9.3.3 OP Deposit

The OP deposit is situated within the Northern Iron Formation horizon on the southeast limb of the East Bay synform. Except for different folding styles, the OP deposit mirrors the PQ deposit. Results from diamond drilling on 50 m centres indicate a tabular body with axial planar mineralization dipping at 70° to the northeast and plunging 7° to the northwest. The deposit subcrops at 8200N and can be traced to 8700N, beyond which it rapidly fades out. The zone is 5 m to 15 m in width and because it was tested for its open pit potential, it has not been delineated below a depth of 65 m. Indications are there is additional mineralization below 65 m, but it is probably not extensive.

Gold mineralization is associated with trace to 10% stringer and wispy pyrrhotite, trace arsenopyrite, and 5% to 15% quartz stringers and floods. The sulphide and quartz stringers are controlled by F2 axial planar structures. Well-mineralized iron formation is generally in the central portion of the unit and does not favour either the footwall or hanging wall contact. Gold mineralization contacts are often sharp and generally related to sulphide content; however, the lower overall sulphide content results in less precise visual cutoffs compared to other zones.

9.3.4 West Anticline Deposit

The West Anticline area is a structurally complex environment comprised of numerous second- and third-order F2 minor fold closures. These structures display curvilinear plunge axes with a regional trend of 30° to 40° to the northwest. The area has been further subdivided into four principal exploration areas, the West Anticline, Bay, Camp, and Canoe zones.

Within the West Anticline zone, quartz-pyrrhotite vein systems occur extensively throughout the middle iron formation, from the footwall to hanging wall contacts. Veining appears best developed in F2 antiformal closures. Throughout these favourable areas, the spacing of the veins is between 1.5 m and 2.5 m. The veins are well developed and display good lateral continuity.

Strata-bound mineralization is extensive throughout the area, with the best zones developed within a garnet-biotite-chert-magnetite unit directly beneath a well-bedded, grunerite-rich iron formation domain. There is also relatively extensive strata-bound mineralization, lower in the stratigraphy; however, it is of lower grade and is more erratic in nature.

9.3.5 Esker zone Deposit

Located within the PQ limb, in the vicinity of the esker dividing Opapimiskan Lake, three separately correlated gold zones named the Esker, Root, and Core zones have

March 2003 Page 9-8 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

been identified. These zones have been traced 900 m along strike, from section 11700N to 12600N in a dynamic fold system characterized by a northwesterly plunge of 5 m to 10 m.

Structurally controlled, gold-bearing axial planar quartz-pyrrhotite veins result in strata- bound gold zones found primarily within a garnet-actinolite-chert-grunerite (4ea) host. Additional work will be required to resolve the economic potential within this extremely complex geological setting.

9.3.6 W zone Deposit

The W zone is located on the eastern margin of the W antiform. This antiform is adjacent to the T-Antiform and is the second major F2 closure northwest of the East Bay synformal axial plane. Although only one diamond drill hole was drilled exclusively to test this environment, some 30 additional intersections have been reported in the W zone from drill holes directed at the T-Antiform. Further work is required to fully outline this zone.

9.3.7 Kenpat Vein Deposit

The Kenpat vein is located approximately 90 m from the north shore of Opapimiskan Lake. The vein occupies a northwesterly striking, subvertically dipping, fissile zone within iron-rich tholeiitic basalts. The vein system pinches and swells to a maximum true width of 9.1 m and has been traced along strike for 210 m. It is interesting to note that this vein occurs in the appropriate position and orientation to represent an axial plane to the T-Antiform, which would be found at depth if the structure persisted this far north.

Mineralogically, the vein is composed of quartz and quartz-carbonate veinlets interlayered with fine-grained, strongly foliated biotite and phyllite, containing 3% to 5% chlorite-amphibole seams, 1% to 2% pyrite and/or pyrrhotite, and native gold. A core of medium-grained, barren, milky white quartz rimmed by narrow, rusty contact zones characterizes the widest veins. Chip channel samples collected in two of the trenches in this vein system returned gold values of 5.32 g/t over 6.1 m and 4.68 g/t over 3.0 m. Drilling conducted by Kenpat Mines in 1963 revealed limited economic potential. However, the vein may have potential to provide supplementary mill feed in the future.

9.3.8 Cap Zone Deposit

The Cap zone is situated in the Bvol package and appears to be draped around the T-Antiform structure. The principal horizon is situated approximately 20 m to 30 m stratigraphically above the biotite-schist/ Bvol contact. This horizon and other similarly

March 2003 Page 9-9 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

stacked horizons in the Bvol were termed “intraformational” iron formations in the Feasibility Study by Stewart et al. (1989).

The Cap horizon is generally thin in the fold limbs (<1 m to 3 m) and is tectonically thickened to approximately 5 m to 10 m in fold noses. In fold limbs, the unit can be stretched to the point of discontinuity and not be intersected in a drill hole. Recent underground evidence has indicated the composition of the unit can change fairly dramatically over short distances.

This adds to the difficulty of correlating from drill hole to drill hole and from section to section. It is possible that this cap horizon will extend the entire length of the T-Antiform deposit, and where it is tectonically thickened, may be of economic interest.

The style and extent of mineralization, and why it occurs in the intraformational iron formations, is still under considerable debate. One scenario is that the gold-rich fluids followed axial planar structures, and mineralization was preferentially precipitated when the fluids came into contact with a suitable host. Gold mineralization with quartz and pyrrhotite became concentrated in the intraformational iron formation and rapidly decreased in adjacent volcanics.

9.3.9 Island zone Deposit

The Island zone is situated in the PQ limb of the East Bay synform. Hosted within the Northern Iron Formation, gold mineralization with quartz, pyrrhotite, and ± trace arsenopyrite occurs as stringers and in veinlets within variably altered chert-magnetite- amphibole-grunerite-garnet iron formation. Mineralized zones appear to be associated with second-order F2 antiformal fold closures in the PQ limb. Systematic drilling of this target has not been performed. All intersections in this zone were incidental as the drill target was the T-Antiform deposit. Mineralization has been intersected from 10300N to 11200N. The style of mineralization is expected to be similar to that in the Esker zone at 12000N.

9.3.10 Snoppy zone Deposit

The Snoppy zone is situated in the Southern Iron Formation from 8150N to 8400N and from 8650N to 8850N. The zone is located 100 m east of the PQ zone and approximately 1 km southeast of the shaft. Gold mineralization is associated with trace to 5% pyrrhotite and is hosted in fractures in quartz veins. Gold distribution appears to be associated with second-order F2 antiformal fold closures in the Southern Iron Formation.

Mineralization subcrops are 5 m to 20 m wide, shallowly plunging 5° to 7° to the northwest. Currently known gold grades are in the 1 to 3 g/t range. Further work is necessary to determine the open pit potential of this zone.

March 2003 Page 9-10 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

10.0 EXPLORATION

10.1 Recent Exploration

Recent exploration has been focused on defining the extent of mineralization down- plunge along the T-Antiform and in the nearby PQ Deeps zone with diamond drilling.

Drilling down plunge on the T-Antiform has demonstrated that the structure continues beyond the northernmost drill holes, but gold grades are uneconomic to the north of 11800N. Musselwhite staff believe that the reduction in grade in this area is due to the increasing distance away from the longitudinal fault zones that add to the permeability in the better mineralized portions of the T-Antiform. However, based on the persistence of the T-Antiform structure, and the presence of gold occurrences at the Kenpat zone (stratigraphically above the down-plunge projection of the T-Antiform), AMEC concurs that there is good potential for the discovery of additional mineralization further along the structure in the down plunge direction.

Mineralization in the PQ Deeps zone is currently being defined by deep surface drilling beneath the ice of Opapimiskan Lake. AMEC concurs that recent high-grade intersections in the zone are encouraging and warrant further diamond drilling.

Other recent exploration activities include the generation of new 3D models to help evaluate the structurally complex stratigraphy of the deposits, and the completion of a new high-definition airborne magnetic survey with a 40 m line spacing and 30m terrain clearance that has provided valuable information to aid in the structural interpretation.

10.2 Future Exploration

It is highly probable that the Mineral Resources defined at Musselwhite are part of a larger Archean system of mineralization, and as such there is a reasonable probability that they could grow significantly. The Musselwhite Mine has produced almost 1.3 million ounces of gold since 1997, and currently has a Reserve in excess of 2 million ounces. An exploration strategy is in place and it consists of three different approaches: (1) understanding and extending known mineralization trends, (2) identifying new areas through regional exploration, and (3) new business opportunities.

10.2.1 Known Mineralization

A major effort is underway to explore the strike and down plunge extensions of known mineralization with diamond drilling. It is intended that this exploration will provide sufficient encouragement to enable further underground development to be completed, from which infill drilling can be conducted to achieve Measured and Indicated Resource status. The nature of this exploration is such that deep (plus 1 000 m)

March 2003 Page 10-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

diamond drill holes are required. Detailed stratigraphic and structural information is gained from these holes, which is being used to update the 3 D model and understand the gross geological setting. There is also potential for this deep drilling to intersect blind folded stratigraphy (sheared portions of anticlines and synclines) that is currently unrecognized.

10.2.2 New Areas

The bulk of the remaining portion of the exploration budget is being directed toward regional reconnaissance-type exploration. Particular attention is being given to developing a regional scale understanding of the geology and tectonics of the area. The primary exploration activities will be:

• completion of regional mapping traverses to help understand the geology and control the regional aeromagnetics • chip sampling (geochemistry, petrology, and assay) • geophysical surveys, including reinterpretation and target generation.

10.2.3 New Business Opportunities

Competitor activity in the immediate vicinity of Musselwhite, and also in the greater northern Ontario area, is continually monitored to identify opportunities for ground acquisition through staking or purchase/option. This is evidenced by the recent acquisition through staking of the adjacent Karl Zeemel property along the southwest property boundary. Previous exploration on the Karl Zeemel property indicates the presence of a small, near-surface gold occurrence with geological characteristics similar to the Musselwhite deposits.

March 2003 Page 10-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

11.0 DRILLING

All exploration and definition drilling conducted on the property to date has been diamond drilling. By the end of 2002, a total of 3,261 diamond drill holes with an aggregate length of 495,033 m had been completed at Musselwhite (see Table 11-1). The majority of the core collected was NQ-sized. Many holes were collared with HQ- and PQ-sized equipment and then reduced to NQ (and sometimes BQ) with depth. A small number of early, underground holes were apparently drilled with AQ-sized equipment.

Table 11-1: Drilling Summary by Year

Year Holes Metres

1974 4 320 1975 12 691 1976 18 1,032 1978 36 3,013 1979 32 2,893 1980 17 2,701 1981 94 15,781 1982 61 9,508 1983 61 6,866 1984 64 1,756 1985 28 4,684 1986 122 23,351 1987 67 16,974 1988 44 12,300 1989 218 15,134 1992 12 2,055 1993 103 16,943 1994 330 50,780 1995 137 23,658 1996 146 26,916 1997 338 26,833 1998 303 44,456 1999 328 54,430 2000 328 57,640 2001 153 32,389 2002 205 41,929 Total 3,261 495,033

Drill hole collar positions are located using a total station surveying instrument. The local grid is rotated so the strike direction of the T-Antiform is oriented in the north- south direction. Downhole surveys were collected with a Sperry-sun single-shot

March 2003 Page 11-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

instrument or with acid etch dip tests for all holes drilled prior to March 2001 and for short holes (<200 m long) drilled since March 2001 (azimuth data from the Sperry-sun surveys were ignored due to the effects of abundant magnetite on compass measurements). In March 2001, a Maxibor light-tube downhole surveying instrument was purchased and has since been used since then to survey most of the holes longer than 200 m. AMEC has observed that at least some of the deep holes surveyed with the Maxibor equipment show a significant amount of azimuth deviation. Caution should be exercised when interpreting the geology and grade distribution of areas defined by pre-2001 drill holes greater than 200 m long, because their trajectories are not precisely surveyed.

The distribution of all diamond drill hole collars is shown on Figure 11-1 and on a large plan map in Appendix B. The surface and underground drill hole collars are colour coded by hole length in Figures 11-2 and 11-3, respectively.

March 2003 Page 11-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 11-1: Distribution of All Drill Hole Collars at Musselwhite

1500015000 mNmN N

1000010000 mNmN

50005000 mNmN

Placer Dome North America (Musselwhite M

Date:15/3/2003 Drill Collars - Musselwhite Gary Snow

Office: Mine Site

Drawing:

1:20000 Projection: Musselwhite Mine Grid 15000 mE 15000 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 mE 15000 0 mE 0 mE 0 mE mE 5000 mE 5000 mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 15000 mE 15000 0 mE mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 0 mE 0 mE mE 5000 mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 mE 15000 mE 15000 0 mE 0 mE 0 mE mE 5000 mE 5000 mE 5000

March 2003 Page 11-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 11-2: Surface Drill Hole Collar Locations at Musselwhite

1500015000 mNmN N

1000010000 mNmN

50005000 mNmN

Query3 by Depth

500 to 900 (61) 200 to 500 (446) 150 to 200 (283) 100 to 150 (309) 50 to 100 (262) 0 to 50 (97)

Placer Dome North America (Musselwhite M

Date:15/3/2003 Drill Collars - Musselwhite Gary Snow

Office: Mine Site

Drawing:

1:20000 Projection: Musselwhite Mine Grid 15000 mE 15000 10000 mE mE 10000 mE 10000 10000 mE mE 15000 15000 0 mE 0 mE 0 mE mE mE 5000 5000 mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 15000 mE 15000 0 mE mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 0 mE 0 mE mE 5000 mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 mE mE 15000 15000 0 mE 0 mE 0 mE mE mE 5000 5000 mE 5000

March 2003 Page 11-4 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 11-3: Underground Drill Hole Collar Locations at Musselwhite

1500015000 mNmN N

1000010000 mNmN

50005000 mNmN

Query4 by Depth

500 to 900 (9) 200 to 500 (192) 150 to 200 (281) 100 to 150 (541) 50 to 100 (479) 0 to 50 (294)

Placer Dome North America (Musselwhite M

Date:15/3/2003 Drill Collars - Musselwhite Gary Snow

Office: Mine Site

Drawing:

1:20000 Projection: Musselwhite Mine Grid 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 mE 15000 0 mE 0 mE 0 mE mE 5000 mE 5000 mE 5000 15000 mE 15000 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 0 mE 0 mE mE 5000 mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 15000 mE 15000 0 mE mE 5000 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 10000 mE 15000 mE 15000 mE 15000 0 mE 0 mE 0 mE mE 5000 mE 5000 mE 5000

March 2003 Page 11-5 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

12.0 SAMPLING METHOD AND APPROACH

Diamond drill core is sampled by rotating the core perpendicular to the foliation and halving it longitudinally with a diamond saw into intervals selected by the geologist during core logging. One half of the core is collected in sample bags for analysis, and the other half is retained for a permanent record.

Sample intervals are constrained by geology to aid the interpretation of gold distribution within and between lithological units. Within geologically consistent intervals, the sample lengths are generally 0.5 m to 1.0 m. Only the potentially mineralized portions of the holes are sampled. Generally, 5 m of wall rock material is sampled on either side of the main mineralized BIF zones. Two metres of wallrock material is sampled on either side of Intraformational BIF or other mineralized intervals.

March 2003 Page 12-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

13.0 SAMPLING PREPARATION, ANALYSIS, AND SECURITY

Diamond drill core samples at Musselwhite have been prepared and analyzed at a number of laboratories since exploration drilling began in 1974. Currently, the samples are being prepared and analyzed at three different laboratories: the mine lab at Musselwhite, ALS Chemex in Thunder Bay, and Accurassay in Thunder Bay. The maximum capacity of the mine assay lab is approximately 400 samples per day (including 100 production samples per day from the mine and mill, and 70 quality control samples).

The sample preparation protocols, especially for the pre-2002 drilling campaigns, have not been reviewed in detail. Current protocols at all three of the labs are generally similar, with jaw crushers being used to crush the core, followed by pulverizing with ring and puck style equipment. Since 29 August 2002, all of the samples analyzed at Musselwhite’s laboratory have been prepared with an automated preparation system manufactured by Rocklabs.

According to Musselwhite staff, all of the assays completed on drill core have utilized a fire assay (FA) pre-concentration method followed by an atomic absorption (AA) or gravimetric finish on a one assay ton aliquot (~30 g). The gravimetric finish is employed if the AA results are greater than 20 g/t gold. In AMEC’s opinion the sample preparation and assaying methods are industry-standard practices.

A large number of specific gravity (SG) determinations have been completed on core samples at Musselwhite. The latest campaign involved 945 measurements of the mineralized 4ea unit, completed in October 2000 using a mass air/mass water method. The method involves weighing a sample in air, and dividing this value by the difference between the mass in air and the mass in water.

The mean SG from this campaign was 3.30, a value that compares very well with the results of 3,027 historical determinations, from which an average SG of 3.29 was obtained. For current Mineral Resource and Reserve tonnage estimates, an average SG of 3.29 is applied to all modelled volumes. In AMEC’s opinion the SG used in tonnage estimates is appropriate.

The Musselwhite laboratory has participated in the Geostat round-robin assay accuracy program since the lab opened in 1997. Additionally, the Musselwhite geology department has employed a set of quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) protocols to monitor the performance of the commercial and mine labs. Analytical accuracy is monitored with the insertion of commercially prepared standard reference materials purchased from Gannet. In 2002, two different standards (02-STD900 and 02-STD999) were inserted at a rate of approximately one standard per 80 samples. The results are presented in chronological order in Figures 13-1 and 13-2.

March 2003 Page 13-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 13-1: 2002 Analytical Results for Standard 900

3.73

3.6

3.47

3.34

3.21

3.08 Avg of S-value 2.95 Certified Mean 2.82 3 SD Lower Limit 2 SD Lower Limit 2.69 Au PPM Au 2 SD Upper Limit 2.56 3 SD Upper Limit 5 per. Mov. Avg. (Avg of S-value) 2.43

2.3

2.17

2.04

1.91

1.78 4/4 8/7 9/1 1/19 2/13 3/10 4/29 5/24 6/18 7/13 9/26 12/25 10/21 Date (Month/Day)

Figure 13-2: 2002 Analytical Results for Standard 999

8.42

8.11

7.8

7.49

7.18 Avg of S-Value Certified Mean 6.87 2 SD Lower Limit 3 SD Lower Limit

AU PPM 6.56 2 SD Upper Limit 3 SD Upper Limit 6.25 5 per. Mov. Avg. (Avg of S-Value)

5.94

5.63

5.32

5.01 4/4 9/1 2/13 5/24 7/13 12/25 10/21 Date (Month/Day)

March 2003 Page 13-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 13-1 demonstrates that Standard 900 often returned assay values that were below the three standard deviation tolerance limits. The performance of Standard 999 was somewhat better; however, the results were commonly within the lower portion of the range of acceptability. As well, the moving average trend line is almost always less than the mean certified value. Failures beyond the tolerance limits were much less frequent with Standard 999 than with Standard 900.

Based on the results of the standard analyses, it is possible that those portions of the Mineral Resource/Reserve model dominated by samples assayed in 2002 will be slightly understated. However, it is Musselwhite’s opinion that the certified mean value for Standard 900 may not have been correct due to the difference in performance levels of the two standards. AMEC recommends splitting the data sets into Musselwhite and ALS Chemex portions to test the theory. If the separated results are both similarly low, then Musselwhite’s argument for an incorrect standard value would be supported. Musselwhite should then review the existing data and establish a new value for the standard in question.

Sample contamination was monitored by inserting blank samples (see Figure 13-3 for the results). Several samples returned values greater than 0.1 g/t Au. The results for the period 17 September to 15 October are particularly noteworthy, with blank assay results as high as 0.48 g/t Au being returned. This period coincides with the commissioning of the automatic sample preparation equipment in the Musselwhite Mine lab. Some contamination issues were recognized during the equipment start-up phase and remedial action was taken. The sample preparation protocols were altered and the core intervals that may have been contaminated during this period were re- sampled. AMEC believes that the remedial measures being undertaken are proper and that the current blank sample program is performing as intended.

Pulp and reject duplicate samples were inserted to monitor analytical precision. Figures 13-4 and 13-5 show the results of the duplicate analyses on rejects and pulps, respectively.

March 2003 Page 13-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 13-3: 2002 Blank Sample Analyses

0.5

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25 Avg of S-value Au PPM

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0 12/25 2/13 4/4 5/24 7/13 9/1 10/21 12/10 Date (Month/Day)

Figure 13-4: 2002 Reject Duplicate Analyses

22 y = 1.2078x - 0.652 2 20 R = 0.8385

Series1 12 Linear (Series1)

Re-Assays 10

0 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00 24.00 Old Assays

March 2003 Page 13-4 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 13-5: 2002 Pulp Duplicate Analyses

24.00

22.00 y = 0.9056x + 0.2729 2 20.00 R = 0.7124

18.00

16.00

14.00

Assay vs Re-assay 12.00 Linear (Assay vs Re-assay)

Re-assays 10.00

8.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00 24.00 Old Assays

The above graphs demonstrate a moderately good correlation between the original and re-assay results. However, further statistical studies such as relative difference plots and percentile rank relative difference plots would be required to fully assess the level of analytical precision.

Musselwhite’s QA/QC program, in concert with the reconciliation results discussed in Section 18, ensures an acceptable level of confidence in the quality of the data used to estimate Mineral Resources and Reserves on the property.

March 2003 Page 13-5 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

14.0 DATA VERIFICATION

ASCII format files containing all of the drill hole header, survey, lithology, and assay data were obtained from Musselwhite’s Vulcan drill hole database. The database consists of 3,261 drill hole records containing 260,085 assay records. AMEC imported the files into a Microsoft Access database to conduct validation exercises on the header, survey, and assay data.

The assay database was initially checked by sorting all of the records according to gold grade. The highest value in the database was 761.83 g/t Au in hole #0325. This value agreed with the assay entered into the drill log (original assay certificates were not available for corroboration). The lowest value in the database was –1, which has been assigned to a total of 555 records. To flag missing samples, no negative values were used to estimate the resource.

The assay database was further checked by comparing the dumped assays for 17 randomly selected holes (0.5% of the database) against the “source data.” The source data consists of Musselwhite’s Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) for holes drilled since 1996. For drill holes completed before 1997, the values entered into the drill logs were used as the source data, as the original assay certificates were not available for validation purposes. No errors were found in this validation exercise.

The dumped collar location data and downhole survey data for the same 17 holes were also checked against the source data in the drill logs. Once again, no original records were available for validation purposes, other than the values entered into the drill logs. All of the downhole surveys for these holes were completed with a Sperry-sun instrument. As with the assay validation, no errors were discovered in this exercise.

AMEC concludes that the assay and survey database used for the Musselwhite Mineral Resource estimation is sufficiently free of error to be adequate for Resource estimation.

March 2003 Page 14-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

15.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES

This section is not applicable.

March 2003 Page 15-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

16.0 MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING

16.1 Mill Flowsheet

AMEC has reviewed the mill process flowsheet prepared by Musselwhite Mine personnel (see Appendix C). Although dated June 2001, the version provided is assumed to be current because it shows the underground crushing chamber, which was completed in May 2002.

The circuits reflect a fairly standard gold milling approach, using conventional crushing/rod milling/ball milling for size reduction and incorporating a gravity recovery step in the ball mill circuit. The ground slurry is thickened ahead of cyanidation and carbon-in-pulp (CIP) processing. Gold from the carbon handling circuit is sludged in four electrowinning (EW) cells. Separate doré bars are produced from the EW sludge and from the gravity-recovered gold.

Two thickeners arranged with counter-current cycling of overflows (CCD) thicken the tailings to reduce dissolved gold losses in the tailings slurry. The thickened slurry is fed

into a treatment plant where the patented Inco SO2/air process is used to destroy residual cyanide before the tailings are discharged into the tailings pond.

16.2 Planned Flowsheet Developments

Capital projects were completed in 2002 to enable a process throughput rate of 4,000 t/d. The capital program for the mill involved increasing the capacity of the primary crusher with a new underground installation, increasing the rod mill rotational speed by 6.7%, installing a larger motor, and increasing the rod charge. These changes were required to maintain the target grind required for 95% recovery.

To offset the reduction in leach time caused by the incremental throughput, the leach slurry density was increased from the design criterion of 50% at 3,300 t/d for 32 hours to 54% at 4,000 t/d, equivalent to a retention time of 29.6 hours. AMEC has not assessed the potential impact on leach recovery resulting from this shorter residence time or the adequacy of the installed power base for the leach and CIP agitators to accommodate the higher slurry densities.

Actual plant throughput in 2001 averaged 3,535 t/d, corresponding to a mill utilization rate of 93.6%. Projected utilization for 2003 is 93.5%, based on monthly rates of 95% except every fifth month, when major ball mill re-lining work is planned. The Strategic Business Plan (SBP) for 2004 and beyond is based on higher throughput capability and an implied mill utilization of 95%. AMEC has not been provided with monthly mill performance figures since the mill upgrade was completed.

March 2003 Page 16-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

It has been recognized that maintenance systems must be improved if 95% utilization is to be consistently achieved. Based on the programs currently planned, Musselwhite expects utilization to reach 95.4% in 2004 and to stabilize at 96% thereafter. Although feasible in theory for this type of circuit, AMEC cannot assess the probability of reaching this level.

Musselwhite plans to install an Acacia intensive leaching reactor in March 2003 to process the gravity gold concentrate. Its purpose is to reduce losses of native gold from the shaking tables and gold that cannot be dissolved in the leaching circuit because of the short retention time. Gold recovery is budgeted to increase by 0.2%, to 95.2%, as a result of this installation. These types of intensive leaching reactors are gaining acceptance for this service. A more detailed gold balance would be required to determine how much gold is actually retained in the leach circuit to warrant the projected 0.2% recovery increment. Current leach recovery would have to be in the order of 71% to 72%, but no laboratory-scale testwork has been provided as backup to confirm this. Overall recovery of the leach circuit feed is 93.5% to 94.0%.

Within the leach circuit, the addition of oxygen instead of air in the first two leach tanks is credited with increasing leach recovery by 1% in the summer, when slurry temperatures are higher. The gradual increase in slurry density to compensate for higher throughput over the years has probably increased the minimum oxygen requirements for optimum cyanidation. The leach tanks are installed outside (CIP tanks are inside). If not already done, the tanks should be insulated and fitted with a top closure to minimize slurry heat loss and enhance leaching kinetics in the wintertime.

16.3 Water Treatment

The thickened tailings are treated through the SO2/air system. The target level of weak-acid dissociable cyanide (CNwad) in the treated solution is 1.5 ppb. Additional degradation that occurs naturally in the tailings pond and subsequent polishing ponds and wetlands reduces residual cyanide levels to well below the permissible limit of 0.2 ppb. Copper, the other mill tailings constituent of concern, is also kept to levels well below the required 0.4 ppm by the water treatment and management systems.

In addition to tailings, mine water and site sewerage are discharged into the tailings pond. Ammonia levels, which arise primarily from residual mine explosives in the mine water, are also tracked to maintain nitrogen released from ammonia to less than 10 ppm. The wetlands provide a cushion against release of this nutrient into receiving waters.

The treatment plant efficiency has been hampered at times, generally in the winter when warm process water is displaced by cold reclaim water in the CCD thickeners that precede the treatment plant. Musselwhite plans to introduce oxygen instead of air to the water treatment plant this winter to try to speed the reaction time and limit

March 2003 Page 16-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

incremental SO2 consumption. In AMEC’s opinion this is a good approach to improve the reaction kinetics and maximize treatment capacity.

16.4 Tailings Disposal

The tailings pond has an ultimate design capacity of 13 Mt following one remaining dam raising program. At the end of 2002, the accumulated tailings volume was expected to reach 7.1 Mt, with another 11.9 Mt projected in the life-of-mine (LOM) plan. Several options have been studied to provide the additional storage space required while ensuring that all acid-generating tailings remain submerged under water. The main options are as follows:

• establish a second tailings deposition site and maintain an adequate water cover over all tailings at both sites. To permit this, the site selection process for the second site would have to be completed in 2003. Final raising of the dams for the existing pond would then occur in 2005, as currently planned.

• use the full tailings stream to produce a paste fill product and divert the volume in excess of the existing pond capacity back to the underground workings. This material would replace the cemented and uncemented rockfill currently being used in the mine.

• remove the sulphide-bearing portion of the tailings stream through flotation of the CIP rejects and dispose of the two tailings products separately. This approach has been the subject of laboratory testwork since 2001, but it has not yet been demonstrated how the non-acid-generating tailings would be affected.

Testwork and study for the production of paste backfill from both the sulphide-bearing fraction of the tailings and the whole tailings stream continued in 2003. Various scenarios for paste deposition, tailings pond configuration, and product segregation are being investigated. Evaluation of the technical and financial implications associated with these schemes has not been completed, although production of paste fill, starting in 2004, has been integrated in the SBP, supplementing the mine’s current cemented rockfill requirements.

16.5 Gold Recovery

For budgeting purposes, gold recovery is fixed at 95% in the SBP, including a set leach solution loss assay of 0.027 g/t Au. This compares to an average recovery of 95.8% in 2000, when the solution assay was much lower, at 0.009 g/t Au. Musselwhite expects the leach/CIP recovery to be linked to the feed grade by the following equation:

Leach Recovery (%) = 95.56 - (3.2 + 100*Leach tails (g/t Au)) {1} Head grade (g/t Au)

March 2003 Page 16-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

From calculations based on the actual plant results in 2000, AMEC concludes that “head grade” in the above quotation is the leach circuit feed grade. For 2000, the formula predicts recoveries of 95.8% to 96.0% at a solution loss assay of 0.027 Au/t and of 96.0% to 96.3% with the actual solution loss assay of 0.009 g/t Au.

The LOM plan also carries a fixed recovery of 95%. However, declining feed grade, as documented in the SBP, and the application of equation {1} may lead to slightly lower recovery expectations, in the range of 0.1%, in the years after 2005.

According to AMEC’s geological assessment of the current mine Reserves, the metallurgical behaviour of the ore can be expected to remain much the same as in the past. This is despite the various ore sources to be used in the future, including eight zones representing one-third of the remaining Reserves, the remainder of the T-Antiform mineralization, which has provided almost all the mill feed to date, and the open pit mining scheduled to provide mill feed in 2009-2010.

16.6 Ore Processing Capital and Operating Cost Estimates

The monthly operating cost (OPEX) breakdown in the 2003 budget has been reviewed. The 2003 budget illustrates the first full year of operation at the increased throughput capacity of 4,000 t/d. It should be noted that the projected costs for the gravity and refinery circuits may not fully reflect the impact of the Acacia reactor. While the gravity costs may properly account for the decrease in labour effort resulting from the removal of tabling activities, additional costs will be incurred for incremental cyanide consumption (and tailings treatment costs for additional contaminants introduced into solution). The net variation is likely to be fairly limited, however. Refining costs can be expected to decrease as a result of processing one type of less-contaminated EW sludge, rather than the current sludge product and a gravity concentrate as well.

The use of oxygen instead of air in the water treatment plant, as tested this winter, may result in lower water treatment costs if efficiency is improved while treating colder water.

A reclamation fund is being financed on a yearly basis and is not included in the CAPEX requirements per se. As such, no reclamation costs are budgeted for the last years of operation. AMEC did not review the adequacy of the funding set aside for this purpose.

AMEC concludes that the plant operation currently meets industry standards and that the proposed improvements should provide a net benefit to overall metallurgy.

March 2003 Page 16-4 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

17.0 MINERAL RESOURCE AND MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES

The 2002 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve was estimated by Musselwhite staff (Musselwhite, 2003) using a combination of in-house (Placer Dome’s OP) and commercial (Vulcan) mine planning software. The estimate was completed under the supervision of Qualified Persons Andrew Cheatle, P.Geo. (Chief Geologist, Musselwhite) and Rob Usher, P.Eng. (Mining Manager, Musselwhite).

17.1 Mineral Resource and Reserve Statement

The estimated total Measured and Indicated Resource (excluding Mineral Reserves) as of 31 December 2002 is 5.688 Mt with a grade of 6.31 g/t Au. This Resource is reported above a cutoff grade of 3.00 g/t Au, reflecting a gold price of US$325/oz. An additional Resource of 3.517 Mt with a grade of 7.35 g/t Au (also reported at a cutoff grade of 3.00 g/t Au) has been classified as Inferred. Table 17-1 summarizes the Mineral Resource by classification category at two different cutoff grades and two gold prices, US$300/oz and US$325/oz. Approximately 68% of the total Measured and Indicated Resource is within the T-Antiform zone. The remaining 32% is divided among nine other zones on the property.

Table 17-1: Summary of Mineral Resource* by Classification Category

Cutoff Grade 3.00 g/t Au Tonnes Au Grade Class (000) (g/t)

Measured 3,278 6.24 Indicated 2,410 6.41 Subtotal M&I 5,688 6.31 Inferred 3,517 7.35 *Note: excluding the Mineral Reserve.

The estimated total Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve as of 31 December 2002 is 11.914 Mt with a grade of 5.440 g/t Au. The reserve is reported above a cutoff grade of 3.25 g/t Au, reflecting a gold price of US$300/oz. Table 17-2 summarizes the Mineral Reserve by classification category. Approximately 67% of the total Proven and Probable Mineral Reserve is within the T-Antiform zone. The remaining 33% is divided among eight other zones.

March 2003 Page 17-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Table 17-2: Summary of Mineral Reserve by Classification Category

Cutoff Grade 3.25 g/t Au Tonnes Au Grade Class (000) (g/t)

Proven 8,764 5.67 Probable 3,150 4.81 Total 11,914 5.44

17.2 Mineral Resource Estimation Methods

The 2002 Resource estimate incorporates three significant changes from previous estimation efforts:

• A new block model was constructed for the north part of the S zone on the T-Antiform. The new grade blocks for this area were incorporated into the T-Antiform model. • New Indicated and Inferred Resources were modelled in “Intraformational” domains and added to the north part of the T-Antiform model as thin units of mineralized BIF in the hanging wall of the S zone. • An Inferred Resource was modelled for the PQ Deeps zone near the north end of the T-Antiform.

None of the other blocks in the model were updated in 2002. The re-estimation of the S zone was prompted by a new interpretation of the geology. All of the other mineralized zones were last modelled in 2000.

17.2.1 Geological Model

The new S zone estimate incorporates a better understanding of the importance of structural controls on the T-Antiform mineralization, based largely on observations from underground exposures. Juxtaposition and discontinuity of the stratigraphy is now thought to be due primarily to displacement along a series of near-vertical fault structures that intersect the axial plane of the T-Antiform at an acute angle (5° to 10° along strike). Previous interpretations placed greater emphasis on the role of complicated parasitic fold patterns in the discontinuity of the stratigraphy.

A geological model was constructed by first plotting drill holes and the results of underground mapping on vertical cross-sections through the T-Antiform. Geological interpretations of the faults and stratigraphy were drawn by hand on paper, and the resulting lines and polygons were digitized into Vulcan. The geological interpretations

March 2003 Page 17-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

were then re-plotted along with the drill hole and underground data, and a set of geologically constrained >1 g/t grade shells was interpreted and drawn by hand on the new plots. These mineralized zones were digitized into Vulcan, snapped to drill hole intersection points, and used as domain boundaries after solid triangulation. The S zone was divided into a total of 33 lithological/structural domains, 16 of which are from the Intraformational BIF zones. The 33 domains can be organized into the following six geological groups

• S zone west – the well-mineralized BIF in the west limb of the T-Antiform • S zone east – the well-mineralized BIF in the east limb of the T-Antiform • 4b – the poorly mineralized footwall BIF unit • 4f – the poorly mineralized hanging wall BIF unit • Intraformational BIF – the narrow, sporadically mineralized BIF in the hanging wall mafic volcanic sequence • Waste – dominantly mafic volcanics in the hanging wall that are modelled for dilution grades.

The geological models for the other areas of the T-Antiform (WA, T, and C zones), and for the satellite deposits beyond the T-Antiform, were constructed in 2000 or earlier using methods similar to those employed for the S zone in 2002. Mineralized zones were constructed as geologically constrained grade shells that were interpreted on section and then digitized into geological modelling software.

17.2.2 Compositing and Capping

In 2002, the S zone drill hole assays were composited to 1 m lengths within the mineralized zone wireframes. Residual composites less than 0.2 m long at the lower end of the intersections were discarded. This approach differs from the one used for all previous modelling, where drill hole assays were composited to 1 m lengths from collar to toe. AMEC supports the current practice.

Capping levels were set on a domain-by-domain basis, although domains were grouped where necessary to achieve a statistically relevant population size. Several statistical exercises were completed on the composites to evaluate appropriate capping levels. These tests included the following comparisions:

• the coefficient of variation (CV) with the capping value • the percentage of contained metal with the capping value • the correlation coefficients of adjacent indicators with the indicator threshold (cutoff).

March 2003 Page 17-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

The capping levels selected from these exercises are summarized in Table 17-3. Capping levels for the other zones were investigated in previous studies utilizing similar methodologies. AMEC believes that the cap grade levels are appropriate for this type of deposit.

Table 17-3: 2002 Capping Levels

Domain Cut (g/t Au)

South zone West limb 30 South zone East limb 20 4b 20 4f 12 Intraformational 30 Waste (Dilution) 5

17.2.3 Statistics and Geostatistics

With relatively low coefficients of variation and only moderately skewed distributions, the composite populations for the main zones of mineralization at Musselwhite can be described as being statistically well behaved—for a gold deposit. For example, the mean uncapped gold grade of the combined West limb domains of the S zone is 5.9 g/t Au and the coefficient of variation is 1.20. For the East limb domains, the mean uncapped gold grade is 3.72 g/t Au and the coefficient of variation is 1.07. Appendix E contains normal and log transformed histograms and cumulative distribution plots for the major domain groups modelled in 2002; Table 17-4 summarizes the statistical properties of these groups.

Table 17-4: Summary of Statistical Properties of Assay Composites

SZ East SZ West 4b 4f IF East IF West Waste

Number 1,439 3,975 94 76 701 607 44,847 Mean 3.72 5.90 6.00 6.98 3.88 6.06 0.77 Std Dev 4.47 6.18 5.91 7.39 5.36 9.63 2.28 CV 1.20 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.38 1.59 2.95 Maximum 47.54 53.23 26.81 39.21 50.33 97.17 84.62 Median 2.35 3.98 3.71 10.35 1.99 2.37 0.14 Minimum 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01

For the 2002 Resource estimate, Musselwhite completed an analysis of the spatial continuity of the composites after a coordinate transformation to “unfold” domains that were combined by rock type. For the S zone domains, correlograms oriented in the along-strike and down-dip directions were fitted with nested exponential functions to

March 2003 Page 17-4 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

model the variography along those axes. Down-hole correlograms were used to model the across-strike range and to interpret the nugget effect and sills for all directions of the S zone domains. Insufficient data points were available in the other domains to model spatial continuity. The variogram model parameters are presented in Table 17-5. Appendix F contains variogram models for the down-hole, along-strike, and down-dip directions. The ranges were modelled as 140 m, 50 m, and 15 m for the along-strike, down-dip and across-strike directions, respectively. The nugget effect was modelled as 10% of the total variance. It is AMEC’s opinion that the orientation and relative magnitude of the variogram ranges correlate well with the observed geology.

Table 17-5: 2002 S Zone Variogram Model Parameters

Variogram Parameters S zone

Nugget Effect, c0 0.10 1st Structure, cc1 0.74 2nd Structure, cc2 0.16 Principal (azim,dip) 0,0 Major Range, aa1 19 Major Range, aa2 140 Vertical (azim,dip) 0,90 Minor Range, aa1 x hm1 5.70 Minor Range, aa2 x hm2 50 Cross Strike (azim,dip) 90,0 Vertical Range, aa1 x vr1 2.63 Vertical Range, aa2 x vr2 15

17.2.4 Interpolation Methods

Interpolation methodology has remained relatively consistent since start-up at Musselwhite because of continual input and guidance from Placer Dome’s corporate Resource estimation group. All of the mineralization modelled on the property has been interpolated with ordinary kriging (OK) or inverse-distance (ID) weighting of capped composites, depending on the zone and domain. Domains with sufficiently large populations of composites for modelling spatial continuity have been estimated with OK interpolations; the rest have been estimated with ID methods. In the 2002 model, the S zone proper was kriged, while the 4b, 4f, Intraformational, and PQ Deep domains were interpolated with ID to the second power. The waste material (estimated for dilution purposes only) was estimated with an ID to the 0.5 power interpolation.

OK interpolations are generally carried out on a minimum of 4 and maximum of 14 composites, with anisotropic search radii equal to the range of the variogram for that domain. The ID interpolations generally incorporate anisotropic search ellipses that

March 2003 Page 17-5 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

capture between 1 and 14 composites, depending on the zone and domain. AMEC considers that the interpolation parameters are appropriate.

17.3 Mineral Resource and Reserve Validation

In its model validation exercises, AMEC focused on the T-Antiform area because the majority of the Mineral Resource and Reserve is located there.

AMEC used four methods to check the T-Antiform Mineral Resource and Reserve model:

• Block model grades and composite grades were reviewed on paper plots of cross- sections through the deposit. • Mean cut composite gold grades were compared to the mean block grades on a series of cross-section and level-plan slices through the deposit. • Global mean cut composite grades were compared to the global mean block grades. • Musselwhite reconciliation data were reviewed on an annual and stope-by-stope basis.

Drill hole sample gold grades and block model gold grades were reviewed on a series of vertical cross-sections through the T-Antiform deposits. Drill hole traces, underground excavations, and wireframe domain boundaries were also visible on the plots. No irregularities were noted between the distribution of block grades and sample grades, and there was generally good agreement between the two sets of values. Representative cross-sections showing block grades, sample grades, and wireframe outlines are provided in Appendix G.

AMEC prepared three graphs comparing the mean cut composite grades with the mean block grades on a series of parallel, 10 m thick slices through the deposit (Figures 17-1 to 17-3).

March 2003 Page 17-6 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 17-1: Grade by Easting Validation Plot

March 2003 Page 17-7 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Figure 17-2: Grade by Northing Validation Plot

Figure 17-3: Grade by Level Validation Plot

March 2003 Page 17-8 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

March 2003 Page 17-9 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

The grade model validation graphs demonstrate that the trends of the mean block grades generally honour the trends of the mean cut composite grades when sliced in vertical cross-sections and level plans. Discrepancies between the block and composite grades are rare and are due to a low number of composite points within that slice (i.e., Section 9780N on Figure 17-2).

The global mean block grades are compared to the global mean composite grades on a domain-by-domain basis in Table 17-6. The data show that the difference between the mean block and capped composite grades varies between 0.5% and 7.7%, depending on the domain. AMEC considers these differences to be acceptable, and expects that they would drop further upon declustering of the composites.

Table 17-6: Global Mean Grade Comparison

% Difference Zone Type Number Mean CV Max Median Min Cut Comps vs Blocks

S zone Comps 1,439 3.72 1.20 47.54 2.35 0.01 East limb Cut 1,439 3.62 1.07 20.00 2.35 0.01 Blocks 19,408 3.86 0.56 17.50 3.38 0.36 6.2% S zone Comps 3,975 5.90 1.05 53.23 3.98 0.01 West limb Cut 3,975 5.84 1.00 30.00 3.98 0.01 Blocks 71,852 5.87 0.48 23.07 5.33 0.15 0.5% 4b Comps 94 5.60 1.05 26.81 3.71 0.07 Cut 94 5.41 0.98 20.00 3.71 0.07 Blocks 1,079 5.52 0.36 17.16 5.21 1.24 2.0% 4f Comps 76 6.98 1.06 39.21 4.14 0.03 Cut 76 5.54 0.79 12.00 4.14 0.03 Blocks 783 5.82 0.27 11.19 5.81 0.67 4.8% IF Comps 701 3.88 1.38 50.33 1.99 0.01 East limb Cut 701 3.82 1.30 30.00 1.99 0.01 Blocks 10,247 4.12 0.66 28.52 3.63 0.03 7.3% IF Comps 607 6.06 1.59 97.17 2.37 0.01 West limb Cut 607 5.59 1.35 30.00 2.37 0.01 Blocks 18,692 5.19 0.85 29.79 4.02 0.04 -7.7% Waste Comps 44,847 0.77 2.95 84.62 0.14 0.01 Cut 44,847 0.61 1.85 5.00 0.14 0.01 Blocks 1,329,809 0.58 0.74 4.08 0.47 0.01 -5.2%

The model was further validated by comparing it to known volumes from mill production data. This is discussed in detail in Section 18. The results indicate good agreement between modelled and realized tonnages and grades.

17.4 Classification

Musselwhite employs a simple Resource classification scheme based on drill hole spacing. Mineralized areas defined by drill holes spaced less than 25 m apart are classified as Measured. Where drill hole spacing is between 25 m and 50 m, the

March 2003 Page 17-10 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Resource is classified as Indicated. Inferred Resources defined by drill holes spaced between 50 m and 100 m. One exception is the PQ Deeps area, where mineralization has been classified as Inferred despite the presence of only two drill hole intersections spaced 225 m apart. All of the mineralization classified as Measured, Indicated, or Inferred is also assessed to ensure that it is potentially mineable. Mineralization that does not meet minimum grade x width criteria, or is inaccessible, is excluded from the Resource.

17.5 Reserve Methodology

AMEC reviewed the general methodology the mine uses to convert Measured and Indicated Resources to Proven and Probable Reserves and found it to be similar to generally accepted industry practices. The 2002 Mineral Resource and Reserve statement was completed under the supervision of the Qualified Persons designated for the mine by Placer Dome. The Musselwhite mining department is planning to carry out a full mine Reserve audit in the fourth quarter of 2003.

In general, Mineral Reserves are calculated using the following procedure:

• The Geology department creates a geological block model, a 3D Resource model, and a 3D lithological model using Vulcan software. • The Engineering department creates a mining plan for the area of concern, also in Vulcan. • Historic and/or budgeted operating costs for the mine are compiled. • Historic dilution, mining recovery, and milling recovery values for the mine are compiled. • Cutoff grades are calculated for the various mining areas, with input from Placer Dome’s corporate office with regard to metal value and exchange rates. • Measured and Indicated Resources are used to calculate the Reserve after applying varying dilution and recovery parameters in the model. • Inferred Mineral Resources are not used in the calculation of Mineral Reserves.

17.5.1 Key Assumptions and Parameters

The mine Reserve is calculated based on four mining methods that have been or will be utilized depending on the nature of the deposits. Most of the Reserves are hosted in the T-Antiform and esker areas of the mine and consist of wide mining blocks suitable for sublevel, longhole mechanized mining methods. In other underground areas, narrow-vein versions of this method are required in narrower ore zones, while room- and-pillar mining is appropriate for flat lying areas such as the West-Anticline. Open-pit methods are used to mine the surface expressions of the OP and Snoppy zones.

March 2003 Page 17-11 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Cutoff grades and mining parameters for each zone are shown in Table 17-7 and the parameters used to calculate the cutoff grade in Table 17-8.

Table 17-7: Cutoff Grades and Mining Parameters by Zone Zone Width (m) Mining Method Cutoff Grade (g/t) T-Antiform 5.0 – 20.0 Sublevel LH 3.25 Esker 9.0 Sublevel LH 3.25 PQ 2.5 NV Sublevel LH 4.00 PG (interformational) 1.5 NV Sublevel LH 4.00 West-Anticline 5.0 Room and Pillar 3.25 West 2.5 NV Sublevel LH 4.00 Snoppy Pit N/A Open Pit 2.00 OP (remaining sill) 20.0 Sill Recovery LH 3.25

Table 17-8: Cutoff Grade Parameters Gold Price Exchange Metallurgical Total Operating Zone (US$/oz) Rate (C$/US$) Recovery (%) Cost (C$/t) T-Antiform* 300 1.50 95 45.14 Esker* 300 1.50 95 43.18 PQ 300 1.50 95 53.15 PG (interformational) 300 1.50 95 53.15 West-Anticline** 350 1.33 95 51.43 West 300 1.50 95 53.15 Snoppy Pit*** 375 1.33 95 40.61 OP (remaining sill) 300 1.50 95 43.18 Note: *Operating costs used for these Reserves reflect forecast improvements in the 2003 Strategic Business Plan (SBP) for the mine. **This information reflects work from the 1998 Feasibility Study, but currently represents a small proportion of the Reserve to be extracted at the end of the mine life. ***This information reflects work from the 1997 Feasibility Study, but currently represents a small proportion of the Reserve to be extracted at the end of the mine life. Together, the West-Anticline and Snoppy Pit account for less than 1% of the Reserve ounces.

Although the mine receives a small credit for silver, silver production is insignificant compared to gold, and so there is no requirement for a silver price parameter. All the same, the silver revenue is enough to cover the refining costs, as was observed in the 2003 mine budget.

The Reserve is relatively insensitive to cutoff grade, due in part to the relatively well- defined contact observed underground; as such, the cutoffs shown in Table 17-7 above are appropriate for this operation.

17.5.2 Future Reserve Calculations

Several factors could influence the calculation of future Reserves at the mine. These include the following:

March 2003 Page 17-12 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

• Gold Price – Gold prices are currently higher than the value used to establish the 2002 Reserves. This could be a net benefit in the short term. • Mining Costs – At present, costs are projected to decrease slightly through planned improvements such as optimization of the new ore handling system and purchase of major replacement equipment. If the mine throughput does not fill the mill capacity, however, the fixed cost increase will negate production efficiencies. • Resource Development – Development to move Inferred Resources to Proven and Probable categories will be critical to replace depleting Reserves. An aggressive program is planned for areas such as the PQ Deeps. Success here will be a net positive impact as the T-Antiform winds down. • Cutoff Grade – If the current study finds that mine production is the main operating constraint, it may be possible to decrease cutoff grades. This would have a net positive effect by reducing fixed costs and perhaps leading to a Reserve increase.

A set of longitudinal sections showing the Reserve was supplied by the mining department and is included in Appendix H.

March 2003 Page 17-13 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

18.0 OTHER DATA AND INFORMATION

18.1 Reconciliation

Block model Mineral Resource and Reserve estimates at producing mines benefit from the opportunity to compare predicted grades and tonnages to realized grades and tonnages from known volumes. Commonly, the comparison is done on a monthly basis, but at Musselwhite monthly Reserve model depletion data have only been compiled since January 2003. Therefore, AMEC has reviewed comparisons between block model estimates and reconciled mill production data on an annual and stope-by- stope basis for 2001 and 2002; the results are shown on an annual basis in Table 18-1. A table of results on a stope-by-stope basis for 2002 is provided in Appendix I.

Table 18-1: Annual Reconciliation Data for 2001 and 2002

% Difference Reserve Model Realized – Mill Adjusted (Real.-Res.)/Res. Grade Au Grade Tonnes Grade Metal Year Tonnes (g/t Au) (g) Tonnes (g/t Au) Au (g) (%) (%) (%)

2002 1,342,611 6.11 8,203,353 1,157,066 5.91 6,838,260 -13.8 -3.3 -16.6 2001 1,316,218 6.13 8,068,416 1,290,266 5.91 7,625,472 -2.0 -3.6 -5.5 Total 2,658,829 6.12 16,271,770 2,447,332 5.91 14,463,732 -8.0 -3.4 -11.1

The 2002 results include depletions from the Mineral Reserve that were not actually milled due to ground control and access issues. If this material is excluded from the comparison, the difference in tonnage between the Reserve model and realized value decreases to -4%, and the difference in grade between the Reserve model and realized figure decreases to -3%, for a total metal loss of -7% in 2002. It is AMEC’s opinion that the 2002 losses from the Reserve model are isolated occurrences and should be less significant in the future. With the exception of the ground control losses, the 2002 results are consistent with those from 2001 and indicate that the Reserve model has achieved an acceptable level of predictability that supports the Proven and Probable Reserve designation.

March 2003 Page 18-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

19.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR TECHNICAL REPORTS ON PRODUCTION PROPERTIES

The Musselwhite Mine has been in commercial production since 1997. Most of the ore production has and will continue to come from underground sources, with some production from open pits at the beginning and end of the mine life. The mine currently plans to produce approximately 232,000 ounces of gold per year.

The rated treatment capacity of the mill plant is 4,000 t/d. It is expected that this level will be achieved on a sustainable basis as the capital updates completed in 2002 are optimized. In the short term, it appears that the mine will be challenged to supply ore at this rate until planned capital equipment replacements and operational improvements are completed in the latter half of this year.

19.1 Mine Infrastructure

Access to the underground operation is through a twin decline system. The main decline is the primary method of access for personnel and materials and has been driven at 12.5% grade, accessing levels on nominal 25 m intervals. Secondary egress and alternative emergency access is provided by the conveyor ramp, driven at 20% grade. The primary function of the conveyor ramp is to provide an ore delivery system from the 460 level underground crusher to the mill plant ore storage on surface.

Ventilation is provided to the underground by twin Howden Model AF-42-13 variable- speed and -pitch 375 kW fans on surface. The fans can deliver between 300 and 425 m3/s, depending on the speed, pitch, and ambient temperature of the intake air. Air is introduced through a fresh air raise and crosses over to the conveyor ramp at the 240 level, where most of the fresh air goes down and a nominal amount goes up. Exhaust air leaves the mine through the main ramp, and the top portion of the conveyor ramp, and the old exploration shaft. In winter, the mine air is heated to +2°C with a propane system.

This ventilation system creates fog at the portal, but to prevent accidents, reduced speeds, a light system, and radio alerts upon entry and exit are strictly enforced. Although the design appears to be problematic, it was found that for practical purposes and to achieve the desired volumes at depth, the air had to travel down the conveyor ramp. Dust is minimized with water sprays, and PLC controls constantly monitor the conveyor operation to ensure that ventilation would be reversed and the conveyor ramp completely exhausted in case of a conveyor fire.

Power is supplied from Ontario Hydro via dedicated line from Pickle Lake. Diesel- powered generators provide backup power capacity on site. All supplies are either flown or trucked in from Thunder Bay.

March 2003 Page 19-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Mine water is handled by two underground pumping facilities on the 220 and 500 levels. The system on 220 uses a collection cone/raise and pumps dirty water from the mine. The 500 level system utilizes three large sump excavations, the first two designated as dirty water for settling, and the final one connected by a horizontal borehole for clean water overflow. The lower system is designed to pump clean water to surface through multi-stage pumps, but is currently staged through the 200 level system until an ongoing capacity and optimization study is finished.

19.2 Mining Methods

The mining method predominantly in use at Musselwhite is sublevel blasthole stoping with backfill. This could be described as a modified Avoca method, where the stope mining face retreats away from rock fill being dumped and advancing from the other side of the stope.

The mine sublevel interval is nominally 25 m, and there are usually four ore zones on each level, named the S2, S, C, and WA from east to west. This sublevel spacing provides a vertical ore block of approximately 20 m.

The typical mining cycle is as follows:

• Development – The ore horizons are accessed from the main decline (in the footwall to the east of the ore) via a 5 m wide x 5.5 m high cross-cut. Ore lenses are silled out (5 m wide x 5 m high) to their full extents to the north and south. Development ore is hauled to the underground crusher, while development waste is typically dumped into open stopes.

• Production Drilling – The ore lenses are drilled off with either 3" or 4" diameter production holes, typically using a drop raise to create void space as necessary.

• Production Blasting – Blasting begins in the westernmost ore lens at the north and south ends, and progresses north, south, and east toward the main level access.

• Stoping – The typical stope is a longitudinal retreat along strike, but primary/secondary sequences and tranverse stoping have also been used in wider areas. Bulk and packaged emulsion explosive products are used for blasting.

• Production Mucking – Mucking is done by a fleet of diesel LHDs (8, 9, and 11 yd3) and 40 tonne capacity haulage trucks. Ore from the 200 level and above is hauled directly to surface. Ore from below this horizon is hauled to the 400 level grizzly/rock breaker, which discharges into a coarse ore bin, which in turn feeds the underground jaw crusher. The crusher then delivers crushed product onto the conveyor system for transport to surface as mill feed.

March 2003 Page 19-2 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

• Backfilling – Completed stopes are backfilled with a combination of uncemented rockfill (URF) and/or cemented rockfill (CRF). URF is produced in waste development headings and from a seasonal crushing/screening plant on surface. Surface waste is delivered to underground through a backfill raise that extends from surface to the 200 level. A cement batch plant on surface produces a cement/fly ash slurry, which is fed to the underground through boreholes. The cement slurry is sprayed onto loads of URF before subsequent placement as CRF in the required stopes. The mine has recently been testing the use of a Rammer- Jammer to pack rockfill barricades. This might reduce cement costs and aid in placing fill in areas that are hard to access conventionally. Paste backfill is currently being studied for future use.

The mining methods in use are appropriate for the orebody.

19.3 Mobile Equipment

The current mining fleet is essentially the original mine equipment in approximately its sixth year of use, generally considered the limit of underground equipment life. The mine capital budget includes significant equipment replacements, which should help reduce costs and improve productivity. Commissioning of the new conveyor system in 2002 has reduced the long haul to surface for most of the mine as it moves deeper and farther under the lake. However, the truck fleet will have to be maintained at approximately current levels to allow for longer backfill hauls in addition to ore haulage to the 400 level. This could change, depending on the outcome of an ongoing paste backfill study.

The mine is also re-examining its production drilling requirements. There is a plan to make less use of the older Tamrock Solo drills and perhaps replace them with Boart drills. Boart contractors are currently working in the mine to test the productive capacity of their drills; these drills will be used for the majority of production drilling this year.

The major mobile equipment in the mine is shown in Table 19-1. As indicated previously this fleet may evolve or be replaced with similar equipment over the course of the next few years.

The proposed capital replacement program is supported by AMEC’s review.

March 2003 Page 19-3 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Table 19-1: Mobile Equipment List Type of Equipment Make/Model Number of Units Drilling Equipment Production drills Tamrock Solo 1000 Sixty 2 Development drills Tamrock Minimatic H205D 3 Bolters Tamrock Robolt H320-30C 3 Miscellaneous drills MacLean Blockholer 1 Boart BCI-2 1 Production Scoops 3 yd3 Tamrock EJC-130 1 8 yd3 Tamrock Toro T500D 3 9 yd3 Tamrock Toro T650D 5 11 yd3 Tamrock Toro 0011 1

Production Trucks 30 tonne Tamrock EJC 430 1 40 tonne Tamrock Toro 40D 9

Ancillary Equipment Explosives loader Tamrock ALB45 2 Scissor lift Teledyne SL6-812 3 Boom truck Teledyne 1 Grader Caterpillar M-120 1 Personnel vehicle Toyota Landcruiser 17 Bulk explosives truck ICI U-101-1 1

19.4 Mine Production

The 2003 budget and Strategic Business Plan (SBP) call for the mine to achieve and sustain a production rate of 4,000 t/d for the mine life. The operation is currently working its way through a list of projects to optimize throughput capacity. The mill is slightly ahead of the mine in achieving this goal, but once the projects are completed, the mine will likely be the determining factor in achieving the throughput goal.

The budget and SBP are considered to be confidential documents and are only briefly summarized in this report. An abridged life-of-mine production plan based on these documents is shown in Table 9-2. AMEC has reviewed both documents and finds them to meet industry standards.

March 2003 Page 19-4 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

Table 19-2: LOM Production Plan

Year and Operating Days 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Treatment Plant Unit (365) (366) (365) (365) (365) (366) (365) (365) (365)

Treatment rate t/d 3,934 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 Mill capacity t/a 1,436,000 1,464,000 1,460,000 1,460,000 1,460,000 1,464,000 1,460,000 1,460,000 1,460,000 Total treated t/a 1,436,000 1,464,000 1,460,000 1,460,000 1,460,000 1,464,000 1,460,000 1,460,000 167,649 Mill head grade g/t Au 5.38 5.49 5.52 5.39 5.21 5.15 5.11 4.92 5.43 Mill recovery % 95.20 95.00 95.00 95.00 95.00 95.00 95.00 95.00 95.00 Gold recovered oz 236,454 245,596 246,317 240,388 232,427 230,096 227,900 219,404 27,809

March 2003 Page 19-5 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

19.5 Processing and Recoverability

The processing operation is discussed in detail in Section 16. The mill is a typical CIP/CIL operation that produces separate doré bars for each of the gravity and leach circuit products. Recovery has historically been approximately 95% and is expected to remain at this level.

The share of production attributed to each joint venture partner for the 2003 budget and the life of mine, based on the December 2002 Reserve, is summarized in Table 19-3.

Table 19-3: Distribution of Gold Production

2003 Budget Forecast LOM Forecast JV Partner Ownership % (oz) 2003 to 2011 (oz)

Placer Dome 68.07 160,954 1,347,421 Kinross 31.93 75,500 632,043 Total 100.00 236,454 1,979,464

19.6 Markets and Contracts

Gold is a globally traded metal with prices set daily on the London Metal Exchange (LME) and in New York for dealer purposes. It is traded on various exchanges 24 hours a day during the business week. Gold is used in various forms for jewelry, electronics, and as an investment vehicle.

The doré bars produced at the mine are shipped under contract to Johnson Matthey for refining.

19.7 Environmental Considerations

The Musselwhite Mine operates under Placer Dome’s sustainability policy, which commits the operation to a high standard of environmental stewardship. Sustainability is an important issue for every department. This involves protecting human health, reducing the impact of mining on the ecosystem, and returning the site to a state compatible with a healthy environment. Musselwhite has implemented a series of management systems for maintenance, environmental activities and occupational health and safety. Currently, operations at Musselwhite appear to be in compliance with applicable corporate standards and environmental regulations.

The closure plan involves progressive rehabilitation through an ongoing program of grass seeding. Planning is also underway to conduct annual satellite Ikonos imagery of

March 2003 Page 19-6 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

the property to characterize the condition of the vegetation to indicate the presence or lack of stress factors. This information will be a useful start in compiling a chronological record of reclamation for use in the closure plan to be presented to stakeholders at the end of the mine life.

Musselwhite is currently looking at various options for its tailings management practices to mitigate the risks associated with tailings and waste rock. One option is a paste backfill/tailings disposal system; another is to produce a sulphide flotation product that would reduce the amount of potential acid generating material. The potential for acid rock drainage from the tailings is taken into account in the closure plan. Stockpiled open-pit waste rock has low potential for acid drainage and will be transported underground for use as rockfill.

At present, all tailings pass through a water treatment plant for destruction of cyanide before discharge to the tailings pond. Additional remediation occurs naturally in the tailings pond, polishing ponds, and wetlands.

Local First Nations communities monitor environmental issues through an environmental working committee. First Nations issues are listened to, documented, and addressed in this forum, and mine closure plans are periodically reviewed and analyzed.

19.8 Taxes

The Musselwhite Mine operates in Ontario, Canada, as a joint-venture. As such, the mine does not pay income taxes directly, but both Kinross and Placer must pay taxes on a corporate level based on their prorated shares of revenue.

In Ontario, profits are taxed at the federal and provincial levels. Federal taxes are levied on each partner’s share of the mine operations taxable income, which is net of direct operating expenses, appropriate share of depreciation of capital and Resource allowances, and deductions for exploration and pre-production development. The net federal tax rate is currently 29.12%. Ontario uses the federal taxable income, with some minor adjustments to deductions and allowances, and taxes this at rate of 11%. In addition, Ontario levies a small capital tax on the paid-up capital of the mine above $5 million. Ontario also levies a mining tax after deductions, including processing allowances, at a 2002 rate of about 14%; this is scheduled to reduce to 10% by 2004.

March 2003 Page 19-7 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

19.9 Capital and Operating Costs

19.9.1 Capital Costs

The Musselwhite Mine is an ongoing operation, and capital expenditures are largely associated with system improvements and replacing aging equipment.

The 2003 budget includes capital expenditures in the range of $15.2 M to cover mobile equipment replacement in the mine, mine development, mill projects, and minor site expenditures. Although the budget allows approximately $1.1 M for the first phase of a pastefill plant study and engineering, the SBP does not appear to explicitly budget for the remaining plant construction capital. A pastefill plant could cost in the range of $10 M depending on specifications and capacities.

The issue of partial use of paste for backfill is currently under study. When a decision is made, a detailed budget should be developed for the plant and incorporated in the next SBP. Otherwise, the plan must reflect earlier-than-scheduled work to raise the existing tailings dam and costs for alternate storage to accommodate the anticipated tailings production for the rest of the mine life.

19.9.2 Operating Costs

The mine operating cost budget for each year is compiled in detail from first principles for each department, then aggregated for the budget summary. The long-term projections in the SBP are based on historical costs, projected improvements, and information from feasibility studies in areas that are not fully developed in the mine plan. In general the estimates have been done to industry-acceptable standards and appear to be reasonable. Some of the projected costs are based on yet-to-be implemented improvements and a successful increase in mine capacity to 4,000 t/d. While progress is being made, the mine has yet to achieve this threshold. As such, unit costs per tonne could increase slightly from those indicated, with possible minor impacts on cutoff grade calculations. Actual and budgeted unit operating costs from 1998 to 2003 are summarized in Table 19-4.

Table 19-4: Average Unit Operating Costs – 1998 to 2003 ($/t)

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget

Mine 18.74 20.78 23.54 24.02 31.15 23.06 Mill 9.76 9.54 9.45 10.58 10.74 9.97 Plant 0.36 3.59 3.80 4.41 4.23 2.10 Admin 11.89 11.07 11.20 13.67 19.04 13.95

Total 40.75 44.98 47.99 52.68 65.16 49.08

March 2003 Page 19-8 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

19.10 Economic Analysis

The SBP financial model has been reviewed and is considered to accurately reflect the current state of the operation. The model is not a public document and is not included in this report. Overall, the operation shows a positive cash flow and therefore supports the classification of a Mineral Reserve.

19.11 Mine Life

The Proven and Probable Reserves as of 31 December 2002 contain approximately 2.1 M oz of gold in 11.9 Mt, resulting in a projected mine life of 9 years at a mining rate of 4,000 t/d.

March 2003 Page 19-9 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

20.0 INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

AMEC reviewed pertinent data from the Musselwhite Mine to obtain a sufficient level of understanding to assess the existing Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve statement. AMEC’s general conclusions from this review are as follows:

• The geology of the Musselwhite Mine is well understood and sound geological interpretations have been applied to the Mineral Resource and Reserve estimate. • The database that forms the basis for the Mineral Resource and Reserve estimate consists of over 260,000 assays from 3,261 drill holes. AMEC’s validation exercises found no errors in the data. The database is further supported by a QA/QC program involving standard reference materials, blanks, and duplicate samples. • Geologically constrained grade block models have been used to estimate the Mineral Resource and Reserve. The methods used are accepted practices. AMEC has performed several validation exercises, including a review of reconciliation results, on the T-Antiform models and found that they provide reasonably accurate predictions of mined tonnage and grade. • The cutoff grade strategy is reasonable and is generally similar to industry standard practices. • Ongoing development programs are being carried out to identify potential improvements to mill throughput, availability, and operating costs. The addition of the Acacia reactor to the gravity circuit is expected to increase recovery by 0.2% or more. • AMEC has found the operating cost estimates to be reasonable based on assumptions regarding equipment replacement and completion of the capital optimization program. In the short-term, it appears that supplying 4,000 tpd of ore to the mill will be a challenge until planned capital equipment replacements and operational improvements are completed in the latter half of this year. A concerted effort should also be made to exploit additional mining areas as quickly as possible to reduce production risk. • If the results of the paste study indicate that paste backfill is economically sensible and viable on a total property basis, the current mining method will need to be revised. This may have cost and scheduling impacts that will have to be considered in future Mineral Reserve calculations. • The basic assumptions used in the economic forecasts are acceptable and within reasonable market parameters.

This independent review by AMEC supports the 2002 Musselwhite Mineral Resource and Reserve statement.

March 2003 Page 20-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

21.0 REFERENCES

Andrews, A.J., Sharpe, D.R., and Janffi, D.A., 1981: A Preliminary Reconnaissance of the Weagamow-North Caribou Lake Metavolcanic-Metasedimentary Belt, Including the Opapimiskan Lake (Musselwhite) Gold Occurrence, in Summary of Field Work, 1981, by the Ontario Geological Survey, Edited by John Wood, O.L. White, R.B. Barlow, and A.C. Colvine, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 100, 255p.

Archer, R.A., May 1994 report on the 1994 compilation of the Musselwhite Property Nand S 533/9 Patricia Mining District, Northwestern Ontario. PDC Files. Musselwhite Project.

Breaks, F.W., Bartlett, J.R., Dekemp, E.A., Finamore, P.R., Jo~, G.R., Macdonald, A.J., Shields, H.N. and Wallace, H., 1984: Opapimiskan Lake Project: Precambrian Geology, Quaternary Geology, and Mineral Deposits Of The North Caribou Lake Area, District of Kenora, Patricia Portion, p. 258-273, in Summary of Field Work, 1984, Ontario Geological Survey, edited by John Wood, Owen L. White, R.B. Barlow, and A.C. Colvine, Ontario Geological Survey, miscellaneous Paper 199, 309p.

Breaks, F.W., Bartlett, I.R., Osmani, I.A., Finamore, P.F., and Wallace, H., 1985: Opapimiskan Lake Project: Precambrian and Quaternary Geology of the North Caribou Lake Area, District of Kenora, patricia Portion, p. 268-276, in Summary of Field Work and Other activities, 1985, Ontario Geological Survey, edited by John Wood, Owen L. White, R.B. Barlow, and A.C. Colvine, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous paper 126, 351p.

Breaks, F.W., Osmani, I.A., and Dekemp, E.A., 1986: Opapimiskan Lake Project: Precambrian Geology of the Opapimiskan-Forester Lakes Area, District of Kenora, Patricia Portion, p.368-378, in Summary of Field Work and Other Activities, 1986, Ontario Geological Survey, edited by P.C. Thurston, Owen L. White, R.B. Barlow, M.E. Cherry and A.C. Colvine, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Paper 132, 435p. Accompanied by 1 Chart.

Emslie, R.F., 1962; Wunnimmun Lake (NTS 53A), Ontario; Geological Survey of Canada, Map 1-1962, scale 1:253,440 or 1 inch to 4 miles. Geology 1962.

Hall, R.S. and Rigg, D.M., 1986: Geology of the West Anticline zone, Musselwhite prospect, Opapimiskan Lake, Ontario, Canada, in MacDonald, A.J. ed., Proceedings of Gold '86, and International i ' Symposium on the Geology of Gold: Toronto, 1986, pp.124-136.

McMillan, R.H., 1996. Iron formation-hosted Au, in Selected British Columbia Mineral Deposit Profiles, Volume 2 - Metallic Deposits, Lefebure, D.V. and Hõy, T, Editors,

March 2003 Page 21-1 Technical Report M USSELWHITE M INE

British Columbia Ministry of Employment and Investment, Open File 1996-13, pages 63-66.

Musselwhite, 2003. Musselwhite Mine 2002 Mineral Resource/Ore Reserve Statement. Internal Company Document, compiled January 2003.

Ontario Geological Survey, 1985: Airborne Electromagnetic and Total Intensity Magnetic Survey, Opapimiskan Lake ~ Area District of Kenora, Patricia Portion, for the Ontario Geological Survey. Published 1 :20,000 scale maps 80716 – 80753

Owens, D., Et Al Canmet report 1994: Mineralogical Characterization of Gold Ore, Musselwhite Project for Placer Dome Canada Limited. PDC Files. Musselwhite Project.

Piroshco, D. and Shields, H.N., 1985: Geology and Gold Mineralization of the Eyapamikama Lake Area of the North Caribou Lake Greenstone Belt, District of Kenora (patricia Portion), p. 277-286 in Summary, of Field Work and Other Activities, 1985, Ontario Geological Survey, edited by John Wood; Owen L. White, R.B. Barlow, and A.C. Colvine, Ontario Geological Survey, Miscellaneous i: paper 126, 351p.

Satterly, J. 1941: Geology of the Windigo-North Caribou Lakes Area; Ontario Department of Mines, Annual Report Vol. 48, Part 9, p32. Accompanied by Map 48h, Scale 1:63,360 or 1” to 1 mile; and Map 48j, Scale 1: 126,720 or 1 inch to 2 miles.

Stewart, R.W., Beckett, M.F., Gertzbein, P.M., Deutsch, C.V., and Meleske, J.J., 1989: Musselwhite Joint Venture (1973) Feasibility Study, Volume One - Geology: Placer Dome Inc. company report.

Thurston, P.C., Sage, R.P., and Siragusa, G.M., 1975: Operation Winisk lake, District of Kenora (Patricia Portion); Division of Mines OFR5119, 297p., 11 Figures, 18 tables, 53 photos (xerox copies).

Thurston, P.C., Sage, R.P., and Siragusa, G.M., 1979: Geology of the Winisk Lake Area, District of Kenora, patricia Portion; Ontario, Geological Survey, Report 193, 169p. (With appendix by R.A. Riley). Accompanied by II Maps 2287 and 2292, scale 1:253,440 or 1 inch to 4 miles and coloured charts A and B.

March 2003 Page 21-2 Appendix A

Claims List and Claims Map MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 369754 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 8.03 PA 369763 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.91 PA 369768 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 8.19 PA 369769 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.05 PA 369770 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 24.62 PA 370866 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.37 PA 370867 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.46 PA 370876 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.10 PA 436842 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 15.04 PA 436843 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 15.88 PA 449144 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.48 PA 449145 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.09 PA 449146 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.09 PA 449147 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 24.62 PA 449148 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.09 PA 449149 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.09 PA 449150 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 18.12 PA 449151 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 15.56 PA 449152 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.83 PA 449153 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.12 PA 449154 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.79 PA 449155 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.79 PA 449156 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.79 PA 449157 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.79 PA 449158 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.79 PA 486396 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 11.47 PA 502221 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 22.60 PA 502224 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.03 PA 508456 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 15.56 PA 508457 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.22 PA 508458 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.25 PA 508459 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 15.23 PA 508460 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 15.03 PA 529432 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.76 PA 529434 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 18.37 PA 529435 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 10.67 PA 529438 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.13 PA 529439 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.12 PA 529440 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 18.00 PA 529441 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.79 PA 529442 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.30 PA 529451 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.21 PA 529452 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.55 PA 529453 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.76 PA 529454 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.76 PA 529455 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.76 PA 529456 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 4.86 PA 529457 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 10.19 PA 529458 01-May-08 Lease MR 19.85 PA 529459 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.85

1 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529460 01-May-08 Lease MR 19.85 PA 529461 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.85 PA 529462 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 22.07 PA 529463 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 20.63 PA 529472 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.21 PA 529473 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 6.77 PA 529474 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 7.62 PA 529475 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 7.62 PA 529476 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 7.62 PA 529477 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 8.3 PA 529478 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.91 PA 529497 01-May-08 Lease MR 11.69 PA 529498 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 4.98 PA 529500 01-May-08 Lease MR 11.13 PA 529502 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 15.28 PA 529505 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 22.04 PA 529726 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.35 PA 529727 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 7.04 PA 529733 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 25.63 PA 529741 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.40 PA 529742 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 4.21 PA 529743 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 24.54 PA 529744 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 18.91 PA 529751 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 7.69 PA 529752 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 12.53 PA 529754 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 10.19 PA 529755 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 13.33 PA 529764 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 24.54 PA 529765 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 18.15 PA 529767 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.20 PA 529768 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 20.07 PA 529769 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.03 PA 529771 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.92 PA 529776 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 17.30 PA 529777 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 18.31 PA 529778 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 13.43 PA 529779 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 19.18 PA 529780 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.37 PA 529785 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 21.30 PA 529789 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 6.58 PA 550130 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.22 PA 550131 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 4.91 PA 550132 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.91 PA 550133 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 14.91 PA 550134 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 9.77 PA 550138 01-Jun-04 Lease MR 16.63

96 Sub-Total: 1475.13

2 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 369744 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 11.06 PA 369745 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 6.83 PA 369746 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 11.23 PA 369747 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.8 PA 369748 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.33 PA 369749 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 27.27 PA 369750 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.52 PA 369751 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.79 PA 369752 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.52 PA 369753 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 9.30 PA 369755 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.23 PA 369756 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.39 PA 369757 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.89 PA 369758 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 17.95 PA 369764 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.91 PA 369765 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.00 PA 369766 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.34 PA 369767 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.75 PA 369771 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 23.58 PA 369772 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 16.05 PA 369773 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.10 PA 370868 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.95 PA 370869 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 17.04 PA 370870 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.80 PA 370871 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.08 PA 370872 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 8.96 PA 370873 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 8.63 PA 370874 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 9.15 PA 370875 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.49 PA 370877 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 21.09 PA 370878 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.34 PA 370879 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 6.76 PA 370880 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 9.55 PA 436844 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.20 PA 477786 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.58 PA 477787 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 17.22 PA 477788 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.27 PA 477789 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.12 PA 477790 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 21.59 PA 477791 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 24.15 PA 477792 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.25 PA 502219 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 19.04 PA 502220 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.53 PA 502222 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 16.97 PA 502223 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.50 PA 529401 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.25 PA 529402 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 16.84 PA 529403 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 13.04 PA 529404 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 3.43 PA 529405 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 4.40

3 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529413 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 29.13 PA 529414 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 20.14 PA 529415 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 14.38 PA 529416 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 18.62 PA 529417 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 11.26 PA 529418 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 20.53 PA 529419 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 21.89 PA 529420 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 20.03 PA 529421 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 18.20 PA 529422 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 20.02 PA 529423 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 14.97 PA 529424 01-Feb-11 Lease MR & SR 19.87 PA 529430 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.05 PA 529431 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.45 PA 529433 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 11.53 PA 529436 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 10.61 PA 529437 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.63 PA 529443 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.61 PA 529450 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.48 PA 529487 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.33 PA 529493 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 11.36 PA 529494 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.22 PA 529495 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 17.13 PA 529496 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.78 PA 529499 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 10.53 PA 529503 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 21.34 PA 529504 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.94 PA 529519 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 9.28 PA 529520 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 25.67 PA 529523 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 17.91 PA 529524 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 8.60 PA 529531 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 7.01 PA 529532 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 33.68 PA 529535 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 28.19 PA 529536 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 14.09 PA 529543 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 7.71 PA 529544 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 27.30 PA 529549 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 27.30 PA 529550 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 30.43 PA 529562 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 5.80 PA 529563 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.11 PA 529564 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.87 PA 529565 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 17.33 PA 529732 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.04 PA 529734 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 16.26 PA 529735 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.90 PA 529740 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.52 PA 529745 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 10.82 PA 529750 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 3.55 PA 529756 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 5.77

4 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529757 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 8.55 PA 529762 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.72 PA 529763 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.58 PA 529766 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 16.76 PA 529770 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 19.70 PA 529783 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 16.41 PA 529784 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.45 PA 529786 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 24.22 PA 529787 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 11.04 PA 529788 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 12.04 PA 529790 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 28.80 PA 529795 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.83 PA 529796 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 2.81 PA 529797 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.55 PA 529798 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 27.44 PA 529799 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 3.93 PA 529800 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 3.38 PA 529801 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 6.66 PA 529802 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 10.91 PA 529803 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 26.90 PA 529804 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 28.55 PA 529805 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 2.97 PA 529806 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 29.21 PA 529811 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 24.21 PA 529812 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 27.11 PA 529813 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 13.89 PA 529814 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 12.21 PA 529815 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 7.78 PA 529816 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 13.78 PA 529817 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 27.88 PA 529818 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 25.83 PA 529822 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 21.67 PA 529823 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 20.53 PA 529824 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 9.66 PA 529825 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 4.27 PA 529826 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 18.38 PA 529827 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 18.11 PA 529828 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 13.44 PA 529829 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.50 PA 529830 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 23.03 PA 529831 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 19.20 PA 529832 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 20.13 PA 529833 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 18.11 PA 529834 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 19.12 PA 529835 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 10.88 PA 529836 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 7.51 PA 529837 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 14.77 PA 529838 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 14.79 PA 529839 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 18.15 PA 529840 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 19.47

5 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529841 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 22.52 PA 529842 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 7.19 PA 529843 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 6.17 PA 529844 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 11.85 PA 529845 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 12.72 PA 529846 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 8.68 PA 529847 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 22.04 PA 529848 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 17.31 PA 529849 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 15.52 PA 529850 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 17.10 PA 529851 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 12.30 PA 529852 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 14.45 PA 529853 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 19.36 PA 529854 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 40.78 PA 529855 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 9.94 PA 529856 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 25.42 PA 529857 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 23.35 PA 529858 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 19.14 PA 529859 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.92 PA 529860 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 20.24 PA 529861 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.37 PA 529862 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 18.83 PA 529863 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.66 PA 529864 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 9.54 PA 529865 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.03 PA 529866 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 13.41 PA 529867 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 12.85 PA 529868 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 12.83 PA 529869 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 3.31 PA 529870 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 15.13 PA 529871 01-Apr-08 Lease MR & SR 13.60 PA 529872 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 12.12 PA 529873 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 13.08 PA 529874 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 21.91 PA 529875 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 18.66 PA 529876 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 18.11 PA 529877 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 25.67 PA 529878 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 12.01 PA 529879 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 14.32 PA 529880 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.84 PA 529881 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 27.35 PA 529882 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.70 PA 529883 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 19.47 PA 529884 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 17.52

6 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529885 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.44 PA 529886 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 13.08 PA 529887 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 15.30 PA 529888 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 19.51 PA 529889 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 17.56 PA 529890 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.79 PA 529891 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.26 PA 529892 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 18.22 PA 529893 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.73 PA 529894 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.73 PA 529895 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 19.30 PA 529896 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 20.23 PA 529897 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 17.99 PA 529898 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.24 PA 529899 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 14.18 PA 529900 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 12.95 PA 529901 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 13.87 PA 529902 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.68 PA 529903 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 15.00 PA 529904 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 13.66 PA 529905 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 15.90 PA 529906 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 15.51 PA 529907 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 14.80 PA 529908 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 14.78 PA 529909 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 14.87 PA 529910 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 15.46 PA 529911 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 15.85 PA 529912 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 16.74 PA 529913 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 17.19 PA 529914 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 18.03 PA 529915 01-Jun-12 Lease MR & SR 17.37 PA 550135 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 26.15 PA 550136 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.86 PA 550137 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 23.12 PA 550139 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 33.85 PA 550140 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 42.02 PA 550145 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 16.58 PA 550146 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 14.97 PA 550147 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 30.70 PA 550148 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 11.36 PA 550149 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 11.60 PA 550150 01-Jun-04 Lease MR & SR 10.13 PA 550151 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 12.31 PA 550152 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 28.83 PA 550154 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 8.67 PA 550155 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 21.55 PA 550157 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 14.58 PA 550158 01-Mar-12 Lease MR & SR 23.84

242 Sub-Total: 3,968.71

7 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha)

PA 529385 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529386 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529387 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529388 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529389 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529390 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529391 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529392 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529393 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529394 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529395 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529396 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529406 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529407 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529408 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529409 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529410 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529411 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529412 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529425 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529426 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529427 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529428 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529429 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529444 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529445 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529446 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529447 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529448 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529449 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529464 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529465 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529466 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529467 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529468 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529469 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529470 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529471 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529479 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529480 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529481 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529482 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529483 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529484 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529485 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529486 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529488 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529489 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00

8 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529490 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529491 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529492 12-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529508 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529509 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529510 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529511 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529514 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529515 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529517 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529518 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529521 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529522 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529525 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529526 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529529 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529530 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529533 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529534 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529537 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529538 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529541 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529542 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529545 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529547 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529548 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529551 26-Sep-06 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529552 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529553 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529554 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529555 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529556 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529557 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529558 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529559 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529560 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529561 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529566 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529567 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529568 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529569 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529570 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529571 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529572 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529573 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529574 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529580 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529581 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529592 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529593 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00

9 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529604 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529605 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529616 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529617 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529628 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529629 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529640 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529641 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529642 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529654 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529655 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529656 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529657 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529658 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529667 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529668 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529669 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529670 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529671 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529672 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529673 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529674 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529675 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529676 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529677 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529684 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529685 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529686 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529687 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529688 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529689 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529691 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529692 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529693 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529694 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529695 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529696 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529699 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529700 06-Nov-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529728 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529729 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529730 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529731 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529736 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529737 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529738 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529739 09-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529746 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529747 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529748 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00

10 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 529749 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529758 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529759 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529760 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529761 10-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529772 11-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529773 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529774 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529775 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529781 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529782 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529791 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529792 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529793 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529794 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529807 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529808 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529809 11-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529810 12-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529819 12-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529820 12-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529821 12-Sep-07 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529916 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529917 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529918 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529919 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529920 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529921 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529922 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529923 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529924 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 529925 26-Sep-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599163 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599164 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599167 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599168 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599171 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599172 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599175 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599176 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599179 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 599180 11-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 850781 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 850782 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 850783 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851194 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851195 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851196 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851197 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851198 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00

11 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 851199 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851200 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851201 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851202 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851203 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851204 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851205 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851206 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851207 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851208 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851209 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851210 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851211 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851212 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851213 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851214 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851215 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851216 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851217 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851218 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851219 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851220 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851221 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851222 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851223 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851224 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851225 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851226 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851227 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 851228 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 1173215 05-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 1173216 05-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 1173217 05-Mar-05 Unpatented Claim 16.00 PA 1199736 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 32.00 PA 1199737 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 48.00 PA 1199738 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 32.00 PA 1199739 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1199740 11-Feb-05 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1216723 07-Oct-06 Unpatented Claim 48.00 PA 1216724 07-Oct-05 Unpatented Claim 24.00 PA 1216725 07-Oct-05 Unpatented Claim 64.00 PA 1216726 07-Oct-05 Unpatented Claim 64.00 PA 1218501 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1218502 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 160.00 PA 1218503 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 192.00 PA 1218504 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 128.00 PA 1218505 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 192.00 PA 1218506 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 192.00 PA 1218507 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 64.00 PA 1218508 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 32.00

12 MUSSSELWHITE JOINT VENTURE LAND HOLDINGS 20MARCH2003

Tenure Expiry Tenure Type Size (Ha) PA 1218509 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1218510 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1218511 12-Apr-03 Unpatented Claim 32.00 PA 1232099 14-May-05 Unpatented Claim 96.00 PA 1233065 15-Apr-04 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233130 15-Apr-04 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233527 28-Jan-05 Unpatented Claim 80.00 PA 1233528 28-Jan-05 Unpatented Claim 32.00 PA 1233529 28-Jan-05 Unpatented Claim 96.00 PA 1233530 28-Jan-05 Unpatented Claim 240.00 PA 1233531 28-Jan-04 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233532 28-Jan-04 Unpatented Claim 192.00 PA 1233533 28-Jan-08 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233534 28-Jan-04 Unpatented Claim 192.00 PA 1233535 28-Jan-08 Unpatented Claim 240.00 PA 1233546 28-Jan-08 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233547 28-Jan-08 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233548 28-Jan-08 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233549 28-Jan-08 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233550 28-Jan-07 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233991 07-Apr-04 Unpatented Claim 240.00 PA 1233992 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 240.00 PA 1233993 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 240.00 PA 1233994 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1233995 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 240.00 PA 1240007 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1240008 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1240009 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1240010 07-Apr-05 Unpatented Claim 256.00 PA 1240416 13-Jan-05 Unpatented Claim 64.00 PA 1240417 13-Jan-06 Unpatented Claim 48.00 279 Sub-Total: 12,104.00 Grand Total: 17547.87 Hectares 617 Tenures

Number Hectares 96 Lease MR 1,475 242 Lease MR & SR 3,969 279 Unpatented Claim 12,104 617 17,548

13 Appendix B

Diamond Drill Hole Location Plan

(Available as hard copy only) Appendix C

Process Plant Flowsheet #7 YOR NVE " CO 30 FINE ORE BIN

MAGNET

6 # LIME 4 R O #8 #9 2 Y ” E V C N O O N C " V 2 BELT SCALE E 4 OVERFLOW Y DELKOR O SCREEN UNDERFLOW R # 4

ORE FROM FINE ORE BIN CONCENTRATE CONC.TAILS TO REFINERY

SH TRA PROCESS WATER

CRUSHER BAGHOUSE

FLOCCULANT

CYANIDE LEACH AREA SUMP

CYANIDE #1 #2 #3 #4 OXYGEN CCD#2

4' X 8’ SCREEN COMPRESSED AIR

CARBON TRANSFER

#1 PUMP (SAFETY SCREEN) 5' x12' CCD#1 #2 VIBRATING SCREEN #3 BYPASS #4 #5 LIME

3' X 6’ SCREEN TWO REACTIVATED CARBON SCREEN

E/W BYPASS Appendix D

Histograms and Cumulative Distribution Plots Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Thu Nov 07 15:30:39 2002

East Limb Uncut S Zone Composites

Number of Data 1439 mean 3.7243 std. dev. 4.4697 coef. of var 1.2001 0.10 maximum 47.5400 upper quartile 4.7150 median 2.3500 lower quartile 1.0800 minimum 0.0100 frequency 0.05

0.00 02550 grade c:\op\comps Data File: eastuncut.txt East Limb S Zone Uncut Composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: eastuncut.txt

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Thu Nov 07 15:32:55 2002

West Limb Uncut S Zone Composites

Number of Data 3975 mean 5.9030 std. dev. 6.1818 0.075 coef. of var 1.0472 maximum 53.2300 upper quartile 7.9500 median 3.9800 lower quartile 1.6400 0.05 minimum 0.0100 frequency

0.025

0.00 02550 grade c:\op\comps Data File: westuncut.txt West Limb S Zone Uncut Composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: westuncut.txt

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Wed Oct 23 10:03:03 2002

4b Composites

0.250 Number of Data 102 mean 4.0845 std. dev. 5.2461 0.20 coef. of var 1.2844 maximum 25.1600 upper quartile 4.9875 median 1.9250 0.15 lower quartile 0.4575 minimum 0.0100 frequency 0.10

0.05

0.00 02550 grade c:\op\comps Data File: comps11.cmp 4b composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: comps11.cmp

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Wed Oct 23 10:02:08 2002

4f Composites

Number of Data 76 mean 6.9837 std. dev. 7.3867 0.10 coef. of var 1.0577 maximum 39.2100 upper quartile 10.3450 median 4.1350 lower quartile 1.4700 minimum 0.0300 frequency 0.05

0.00 02550 grade c:\op\comps Data File: comps12.cmp 4f composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: comps12.cmp

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Wed Oct 23 10:03:45 2002

Waste Composites

0.75

Number of Data 44860 mean 0.7728 std. dev. 2.2794 coef. of var 2.9498 maximum 84.6200 0.5 upper quartile 0.5400 median 0.1400 lower quartile 0.0600 minimum 0.0100 frequency

0.25

0.0 02550 grade c:\op\comps Data File: comps16.cmp Waste Composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: comps16.cmp

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Thu Nov 07 15:21:18 2002

East Limb Uncut S Zone Composites

Number of Data 1439 mean 3.7243 std. dev. 4.4697 coef. of var 1.2001 maximum 47.5400 0.025 upper quartile 4.7150 median 2.3500 lower quartile 1.0800 minimum 0.0100 Histogram has Logarithmic Scale frequency

0.00 0 2.5 grade c:\op\comps Data File: eastuncut.txt East Limb S Zone Uncut Composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: eastuncut.txt

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Thu Nov 07 15:22:34 2002

West Limb Uncut S Zone Composites

Number of Data 3975 mean 5.9030 std. dev. 6.1818 coef. of var 1.0472 0.025 maximum 53.2300 upper quartile 7.9500 median 3.9800 lower quartile 1.6400 minimum 0.0100 Histogram has Logarithmic Scale frequency

0.00 0 2.5 grade c:\op\comps Data File: westuncut.txt West Limb S Zone Uncut Composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: westuncut.txt

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Wed Oct 23 10:02:49 2002

4b Composites

0.05

Number of Data 102 mean 4.0845 std. dev. 5.2461 coef. of var 1.2844 maximum 25.1600 upper quartile 4.9875 median 1.9250 lower quartile 0.4575 minimum 0.0100 0.025 Histogram has Logarithmic Scale frequency

0.00 0 2.5 grade c:\op\comps Data File: comps11.cmp 4b composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: comps11.cmp

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Wed Oct 23 10:02:24 2002

4f Composites

Number of Data 76 mean 6.9837 std. dev. 7.3867 0.05 coef. of var 1.0577 maximum 39.2100 upper quartile 10.3450 median 4.1350 lower quartile 1.4700 minimum 0.0300 Histogram has Logarithmic Scale frequency 0.025

0.00 -1.0 0.0 1.0 grade c:\op\comps Data File: comps12.cmp 4f composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: comps12.cmp

Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Wed Oct 23 10:04:06 2002

Waste Composites

0.10 Number of Data 44860 mean 0.7728 std. dev. 2.2794 coef. of var 2.9498 maximum 84.6200 0.075 upper quartile 0.5400 median 0.1400 lower quartile 0.0600 minimum 0.0100 Histogram has Logarithmic Scale 0.05 frequency

0.025

0.00 0 2.5 grade c:\op\comps Data File: comps16.cmp Waste Composites

90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0

20.0

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0

2.0

grade 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2

0.1000 0.0900 0.0800 0.0700 0.0600 0.0500 0.0400 0.0300

0.0200

0.0100 99.99 99.9 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.01 probability of c:\op\comps exceeding grade Data File: comps16.cmp

Figure Appendix E

Variogram Models Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Thu Oct 24 09:12:45 2002

PROJECT: VARIOGRAM 1: DTH CORR au Zone Composites

LAGS: 30 of 1.0

Direction Number 1

Azimuth = 90.0 +/- 45.0 Plunge = 0.0 +/- 45.0

1.0 869 565 1262 1771 2426

3219 variogram 0.5

0.0 0510 distance Lags cut at 500 pairs DIRECTION Number 1 DTH CORR au Zone Composites Variogram Model: Nugget effect = 0.100 Directions: (NOTE PRACTICAL Exp. range) 1.5 1 EXP: c1 = 0.740 a1 = 2.63 1 EXP: c2 = 0.160 a2 = 15.0

1.0 869 565 1262 1771 2426 variogram 3219

0.5

0.0

0510 distance

Plot file: c:\op\varmodelling\szonedth.plot Figure Placer Dome Inc - Geostatistics Thu Oct 24 10:25:47 2002

PROJECT: VARIOGRAM 1: CORR au S Zone Composites

LAGS: 10 of 22.6

Direction Number 1 Direction Number 2 Direction Number 3

Azimuth = 360.0 +/- 20.0 Azimuth = 270.0 +/- 20.0 Azimuth = 270.0 +/- 20.0 Plunge = 0.0 +/- 20.0 Plunge = -89.0 +/- 20.0 Plunge = 0.0 +/- 20.0

1.0 1.0 1.0

0.75 0.75 0.75

0.5 0.5 0.5 variogram variogram variogram

0.25 0.25 0.25

0.0 0.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 distance distance distance Lags cut at 200 pairs DIRECTION Number 1 CORR au S Zone Composites Variogram Model: Nugget effect = 0.100 Directions: (NOTE PRACTICAL Exp. range) 1 EXP: c1 = 0.740 a1 = 19.0 1 EXP: c2 = 0.160 a2 = 140. 1.0 2 EXP: c1 = 0.740 a1 = 5.70 2 EXP: c2 = 0.160 a2 = 50.0 3 EXP: c1 = 0.740 a1 = 2.63 3 EXP: c2 = 0.160 a2 = 15.0

variogram 0.5

0.0

0 50 100 150 200 distance

Plot file: c:\op\varmodelling\szonedir.plot Figure Appendix F

Block Model Cross-Sections

(Available as hard copy only) Appendix G

Longitudinal Reserves Sections

(Available as hard copy only) Appendix H

2002 Reconciliation Results 2002 Ore Reserve - December 31, 2002 Cut-off @$300 Gold Diluted

Source Category Tonnes Grade (g/t) Content (g) Content (oz)

T-Antiform Zone Proven 7,332,432 5.9 42,958,012 1,381,136 (Including Snoppy Pit) Probable 111,681 2.8 546,006 17,555

Dilution for T-Antiform Probable 521,088 0.5 260,544 8,377 Stoping 7% @ 0.5 g/t

Esker Zone Proven 791,524 4.4 3,491,605 112,258 Probable 770,001 4.5 3,451,451 110,967

Dilution for Esker Probable 109,307 0.5 54,653 1,757

PQ Zone Proven 0 - 0 0 Probable 1,026,032 6.7 6,922,638 222,569

PG (IF) Zone Proven 0 - 0 0 Probable 106,901 9.3 992,896 31,922

West-Anticline Zone Proven 0 - 0 0 Probable 308,312 5.6 1,736,105 55,817

West Zone Proven 0 - 0 0 Probable 122,661 5.3 656,114 21,095

Island Zone Proven 0 - 0 0 Probable 73,698 7.2 528,240 16,983

OP Underground Zone Proven 89,370 4.9 438,776 14,107

Snoppy Pit Proven 551,000 5.0 2,771,530 89,107

Total Proven 8,764,326 5.7 49,659,923 1,596,608 Probable 3,149,681 4.8 15,148,647 487,041

TOTAL RESERVE 11,914,007 5.44 64,808,571 2,083,649 p:/engineering/planning/orereserve/2002/2002reserves.xls December 31, 2002 December 31, 2002 Mined In 2002 Reserve Depletion

Reserve Reserve Reserve Reserve Reserve Reserve Recon Recon Recon Block Block Block Block Block Block Variance Variance Variance Stope Tonnes Grade Gold(g) Tonnes Grade Gold(g) Tonnes (%) Grade (%) Gold (g) (%) M125L510tz 26,692 5.61 149,779 10,145 4.56 46,279 16,547 163% 1.05 23% 103,500 224% M150L510sz 8,043 7.02 56,460 21,472 7.54 161,881 -13,429 -63% -0.52 -7% -105,421 -65% M150L880cz 5,116 5.52 28,234 34,177 3.66 125,186 -29,061 -85% 1.86 51% -96,952 -77% M175L610sz 10,905 7.11 77,482 8,617 7.25 62,508 2,288 27% -0.15 -2% 14,974 24% M175L850cz 4,429 5.67 25,108 44,672 8.63 385,508 -40,243 -90% -2.96 -34% -360,400 -93% M175L735ta 3,325 3.70 12,313 44,355 4.67 207,246 -41,030 -93% -0.97 -21% -194,933 -94% M175L940cz 17,722 5.93 105,176 17,722 5.93 105,176 0 0% 0.00 0% 0 0% M200L050cz 11,127 8.76 97,429 11,127 8.76 97,429 0 0% 0.00 0% 0 0% M225T040/075ta 44,149 4.88 215,657 61,066 5.52 337,084 -16,917 -28% -0.64 -12% -121,427 -36% M250T090ta 68,189 5.98 408,077 56,610 6.17 349,322 11,579 20% -0.19 -3% 58,755 17% M250T110ta 37,620 4.74 178,372 37,467 5.55 207,864 153 0% -0.81 -15% -29,492 -14% M250T130ta 14,466 4.14 59,840 24,662 4.85 119,671 -10,196 -41% -0.72 -15% -59,831 -50% M275L260cz 17,914 5.10 91,320 35,365 4.82 170,496 -17,451 -49% 0.28 6% -79,176 -46% M275L350cz 50,700 4.24 214,962 46,027 5.51 253,657 4,673 10% -1.27 -23% -38,695 -15% M275L440cz 17,238 4.60 79,329 21,873 6.14 134,258 -4,635 -21% -1.54 -25% -54,929 -41% M300T132ta 3,220 5.81 18,705 4,325 5.22 22,577 -1,105 -26% 0.59 11% -3,872 -17% M300T162tz 31,963 4.61 147,205 23,170 4.72 109,431 8,793 38% -0.12 -2% 37,774 35% M330L450cz 22,966 8.02 184,143 28,076 8.52 239,099 -5,110 -18% -0.50 -6% -54,956 -23% M330L550/650cz 36,813 9.08 334,269 52,260 9.26 484,109 -15,447 -30% -0.18 -2% -149,840 -31% M330L135wa 25,650 6.90 176,866 27,138 7.26 196,993 -1,488 -5% -0.36 -5% -20,127 -10% M375L175wa2 25,121 4.42 110,978 26,402 6.01 158,751 -1,281 -5% -1.60 -27% -47,773 -30% M375L235wa 70,553 5.39 380,259 62,166 5.64 350,367 8,387 13% -0.25 -4% 29,892 9% M375L320cz 20,319 4.51 91,701 8,260 6.28 51,843 12,059 146% -1.76 -28% 39,858 77% M400L340wa 14,403 4.44 63,989 5,505 3.88 21,386 8,898 162% 0.56 14% 42,603 199% J475L040sz 31,660 4.88 154,631 54,304 5.81 315,401 -22,644 -42% -0.92 -16% -160,770 -51% J475L140sz 48,708 5.77 281,189 36,423 5.81 211,551 12,285 34% -0.04 -1% 69,638 33% J475L285sz 54,229 6.60 357,917 47,855 6.90 330,431 6,374 13% -0.30 -4% 27,486 8% J500L370sz 22,501 8.58 193,013 48,293 8.03 387,891 -25,792 -53% 0.55 7% -194,878 -50% J500L255sz 32,870 7.45 244,902 27,895 7.33 204,386 4,975 18% 0.12 2% 40,516 20% J500L455sz 11,954 6.61 79,058 10,226 5.40 55,200 1,728 17% 1.22 23% 23,858 43% Remnants 4,655 4.52 21,036 4,655 4.52 21,036 0 0% 0.00 0% 0 0% Stope Production 795,220 5.83 4,639,399 942,310 6.29 5,924,015 -147,090 -16% -1,284,616 -22%

Development 150 Level 3,791 3.30 12,512 3,993 5.26 21,024 -202 -5% -1.96 -37% -8,512 -40% 175 Level 802 5.17 4,144 602 3.80 2,290 200 33% 1.36 36% 1,853 81% 200 Level 5,849 5.03 29,424 17,924 5.56 99,594 -12,075 -67% -0.53 -9% -70,170 -70% 225 Level 11,829 4.56 53,978 6,806 4.01 27,313 5,024 74% 0.55 14% 26,664 98% 250 Level 3,307 4.00 13,211 4,095 5.07 20,753 -788 -19% -1.07 -21% -7,542 -36% 300 Level 4,713 4.05 19,076 1,213 5.25 6,374 3,500 289% -1.21 -23% 12,703 199% 330 Level 4,585 4.87 22,328 8,575 6.06 51,968 -3,990 -47% -1.19 -20% -29,640 -57% 375 Level 4,846 3.95 19,160 3,831 4.28 16,384 1,015 26% -0.32 -8% 2,776 17% 425 Level 67,195 6.53 439,018 89,386 6.05 541,004 -22,192 -25% 0.48 8% -101,986 -19% 450 Level 97,346 6.31 614,534 121,378 6.04 733,126 -24,032 -20% 0.27 5% -118,592 -16% 475 Level 82,317 6.23 513,106 80,459 4.95 397,925 1,858 2% 1.29 26% 115,181 29% 500 Level 73,988 6.04 446,847 63,113 5.81 366,436 10,874 17% 0.23 4% 80,411 22% Development 360,566 6.07 2,187,338 401,376 5.69 2,284,190 -40,810 -10% -96,852 -4%

Stockpile Available Stockpile 1,280 5.29 6,771 (1,075) 5.35 (5,746)

2002 Grand Total 1,157,066 5.91 6,833,508 1,342,611 6.11 8,202,459 -185,545 -14% -0.20 -3% -1,368,951 -17% 2002 Total January February March April May June July August September October November December Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold Tonnes Grade Gold

150 ML 3,791 3.30 12,512 2,917 3.74 10,918 875 1.82 1,595 175 ML 802 5.17 4,144 802 5.17 4,144 200 ML 5,849 5.03 29,424 1,609 4.64 7,460 4,240 5.18 21,964 225 ML 11,829 4.56 53,978 2,484 5.17 12,838 871 3.74 3,259 326 1.82 593 1,349 3.56 4,803 5,042 4.64 23,374 1,758 5.18 9,110 250 ML 3,307 4.00 13,211 1,917 3.15 6,029 1,390 5.17 7,182 300 ML 4,713 4.05 19,076 1,405 4.06 5,697 1,052 3.56 3,744 1,770 4.20 7,441 486 4.51 2,194 330 ML 4,585 4.87 22,328 180 9.62 1,731 2,129 5.18 11,032 2,276 4.20 9,565 375 ML 4,846 3.95 19,160 3,857 4.06 15,640 989 3.56 3,520 425 ML 67,195 6.53 439,018 2,608 9.94 25,923 8,061 7.27 58,584 15,002 7.63 114,518 26,646 5.22 139,101 14,879 6.78 100,892 450 ML 97,346 6.31 614,534 3,235 4.89 15,815 10,915 7.30 79,725 11,313 6.98 78,975 6,701 7.82 52,366 15,162 5.79 87,854 8,026 8.51 68,318 9,644 6.19 59,737 11,723 5.91 69,334 2,268 5.82 13,190 1,815 6.81 12,355 4,837 6.75 32,656 11,709 3.78 44,209 475 ML 82,317 6.23 513,106 18,202 7.31 133,126 14,843 7.33 108,735 20,516 7.32 150,230 10,761 6.01 64,660 8,723 4.07 35,504 5,212 1.00 5,212 3,021 3.79 11,450 316 4.12 1,300 726 3.98 2,889 500 ML 73,988 6.04 446,847 1,436 1.11 1,590 4,009 3.10 12,416 13,955 5.66 78,953 8,465 8.68 73,485 5,958 8.24 49,082 9,177 6.45 59,198 9,004 3.86 34,744 8,535 4.74 40,464 6,789 6.01 40,805 6,659 8.43 56,110

Total 360,566 6.07 2,187,338 25,961 6.97 180,893 30,433 6.99 212,624 33,445 6.95 232,526 25,257 5.69 143,619 39,041 5.24 204,499 21,702 6.77 147,015 23,885 5.93 141,606 24,289 5.79 140,599 26,298 5.27 138,652 33,478 6.26 209,443 42,319 5.42 229,568 34,459 5.99 206,294

p:/engineering/planning/orereserve/2002/2002reserves.xls 2002 Mineral Resource - December 31, 2002 2002 Mineral Reserve - December 31, 2002 Multiple Cutoffs Multiple Cutoffs Full Cell 3.25 Full Cell 3.00 Full Cell 2.80 Partial Cell 3.25Reserve Factors Partial Cell 3.00 Partial Cell 2.80 Source Category Tonnes g/t Content - g Category Tonnes g/t Content - g Category Tonnes g/t Content - g Category Tonnes g/t Content - g Tonnes Content - g Category Tonnes g/t Content - g Category Tonnes g/t Content - g

T Antiform Measured 9,860,130 6.40 63,094,972 Measured 10,395,578 6.23 64,766,104 Measured 10,785,031 6.11 65,895,130 Proven 7,883,432 5.80 45,729,542 0.80 0.72 Proven 8,311,536 5.65 46,940,733 Proven 8,622,915 5.54 47,759,021 (Includes Snoppy Pit) Indicated 93,601 6.64 621,695 Indicated 96,891 6.52 631,884 Indicated 100,427 6.39 642,165 Probable 632,769 1.27 806,550 6.76 1.30 Probable 655,010 1.25 819,769 Probable 678,920 1.23 833,107 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0

UG Broken/Drilled Measured 6,999 7.90 55,292 Measured 6,999 7.90 55,292 Measured 6,999 7.90 55,292 6,999 7.90 55,292 1.00 1.00 6,999 7.90 55,292 6,999 7.90 55,292

TA IF's Nth 10650 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 (Cutoff 5.0g/t) Indicated 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Inferred 722,484 9.02 6,518,251 Inferred 722,484 9.02 6,518,251 Inferred 722,484 9.02 6,518,251

PQ Zone Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0 Proven 0 0 Indicated 1,268,789 6.80 8,626,493 Indicated 1,339,195 6.61 8,846,371 Indicated 1,388,874 6.47 8,990,440 Probable 1,026,032 6.70 6,922,638 0.81 0.80 Probable 1,082,967 6.56 7,099,087 Probable 1,123,141 6.42 7,214,700 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0

W Zone Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0 Proven 0 0 Indicated 325,628 5.53 1,801,698 Indicated 370,619 5.24 1,942,024 Indicated 408,042 5.02 2,050,142 Probable 122,661 5.30 656,114 0.38 0.36 Probable 139,609 5.07 707,216 Probable 153,706 4.86 746,588 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0

Island Zone Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0 Proven 0 0 Indicated 365,026 6.78 2,473,778 Indicated 376,705 6.66 2,510,230 Indicated 383,861 6.59 2,530,888 Probable 73,698 7.20 528,240 0.20 0.21 Probable 76,056 7.05 536,024 Probable 77,501 6.97 540,435 Inferred 19,000 4.62 87,722 Inferred 21,221 4.46 94,615 Inferred 22,537 4.37 98,408

West Anticline Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0 Proven 0 0 Indicated 669,400 5.94 3,975,566 Indicated 747,521 5.64 4,218,991 Indicated 810,113 5.43 4,400,070 Probable 308,312 5.60 1,736,105 0.46 0.44 Probable 344,293 5.35 1,842,407 Probable 373,122 5.15 1,921,484 Inferred 336,172 5.64 1,896,347 Inferred 383,515 5.33 2,043,726 Inferred 443,492 5.00 2,217,599

Intraformational Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0.00 0 Proven 0 0 Proven 0 0 Indicated 168,372 8.87 1,493,631 Indicated 174,870 8.66 1,513,949 Indicated 179,976 8.49 1,528,788 Probable 106,901 9.30 992,896 0.63 0.66 Probable 111,026 9.06 1,006,403 Probable 114,268 8.89 1,016,267 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0 Inferred 0 0.00 0

Esker Measured 946,615 4.90 4,641,255 Measured 1,063,904 4.71 5,008,133 Measured 1,152,734 4.57 5,265,740 Proven 791,524 4.40 3,491,605 0.84 0.75 Proven 889,596 4.24 3,767,607 Proven 963,873 4.11 3,961,404 Indicated 1,964,212 4.87 9,559,821 Indicated 2,218,200 4.67 10,353,534 Indicated 2,424,730 4.52 10,952,470 Probable 879,308 4.00 3,506,104 0.45 0.37 Probable 993,009 3.82 3,797,202 Probable 1,085,465 3.70 4,016,864 Inferred 723,965 4.34 3,144,178 Inferred 800,951 4.23 3,385,144 Inferred 840,184 4.16 3,498,881

Camp/Bay Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Inferred 635,381 6.11 3,883,450 Inferred 723,800 5.75 4,159,228 Inferred 807,448 5.45 4,401,641

PQD Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Indicated 0 0.00 0 Inferred 864,201 11.17 9,651,394 Inferred 865,106 11.16 9,654,148 Inferred 866,175 11.15 9,657,318

OP Insitu Indicated 181,113 3.00 543,339 Indicated 181,113 3.00 543,339 Indicated 181,113 3.00 543,339 Proven 89,370 4.90 438,776 0.49 0.81 Proven 89,370 4.91 438,776 Proven 89,370 4.91 438,776 OP Stockpile Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0 Measured 0 0.00 0

Total Measured 10,813,744 6.27 67,791,519 Measured 11,466,480 6.09 69,829,529 Measured 11,944,764 5.96 71,216,162 Proven 8,764,326 5.67 49,659,923 0.81 0.73 Proven 9,290,503 5.51 51,147,117 Proven 9,676,157 5.39 52,159,202 Indicated 5,036,140 5.78 29,096,020 Indicated 5,505,113 5.55 30,560,321 Indicated 5,877,136 5.38 31,638,302 Probable 3,149,681 4.81 15,148,647 0.63 0.52 Probable 3,401,971 4.65 15,808,107 Probable 3,606,123 4.52 16,289,445 Inferred 3,301,202 7.63 25,181,342 Inferred 3,517,076 7.35 25,855,112 Inferred 3,702,319 7.13 26,392,098

TOTAL RESOURCE 19,151,086 6.37 122,068,881 20,488,669 6.16 126,244,963 21,524,219 6.00 129,246,561 Total 11,914,007 5.44 64,808,571 0.75 0.67 Total 12,692,473 5.28 66,955,224 Total 13,282,280 5.15 68,448,647 3,924,615 4,058,880 4,155,384 2,083,544 2,152,557 2,200,569