Diavik Diamond Mines Property Archaeological Overview Assessment - Summer 2020 Drilling Program

REPORT Diavik Diamond Mines Property Archaeological Overview Assessment - Summer 2020 Drilling Program

Submitted to: Rio Tinto Exploration Canada Inc. 1300 Walsh St. W. Thunder Bay, ON P7E 4X4

Attention: Eileen Lyon, Principal I Geoscientist, Growth & Innovation

Submitted by: Golder Associates Ltd. 1721 8th Street East, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, S7H 0T4, Canada

+1 306 665 7989

Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000 Diavik Work Plan No. 655 Rev. 0 Rio Tinto PO No. 3104083428

23 July 2020

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

Distribution List Electronic Copy - Rio Tinto Exploration Canada Inc.

Electronic Copy - Golder Associates Ltd.

Electronic Copy - Culture and Heritage Division, Department of Education, Culture, and Employment, GNWT

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

Study Limitations

Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has prepared this document in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and science professions currently practising under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided, subject to the time limits and physical constraints applicable to this document. No warranty, express or implied, is made.

This document, including all text, data, tables, plans, figures, drawings, and other documents contained herein, has been prepared by Golder for the sole benefit of Rio Tinto Exploration Canada (Rio Tinto). It represents Golder’s professional judgement based on the knowledge and information available at the time of completion. Golder is not responsible for any unauthorized use or modification of this document. All third parties relying on this document do so at their own risk.

The factual data, interpretations, suggestions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this document pertain to the specific project, site conditions, design objective, development and purpose described to Golder by Rio Tinto, and are not applicable to any other project or site location. In order to properly understand the factual data, interpretations, suggestions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this document, reference must be made to the entire document.

This document, including all text, data, tables, plans, figures, drawings and other documents contained herein, as well as all electronic media prepared by Golder are considered its professional work product and shall remain the copyright property of Golder. Rio Tinto may make copies of the document in such quantities as are reasonably necessary for those parties conducting business specifically related to the subject of this document or in support of or in response to regulatory inquiries and proceedings. Electronic media is susceptible to unauthorized modification, deterioration and incompatibility and therefore no party can rely solely on the electronic media versions of this document.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

Table of Contents

STUDY LIMITATIONS ...... ii

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

1.1 Overview Objectives ...... 1

2.0 STUDY AREA AND DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION ...... 3

2.1 Project Location and Environment ...... 3

2.2 Proposed Developments ...... 3

3.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ...... 4

4.0 METHODS ...... 5

5.0 RESULTS ...... 6

5.1 Existing and Historic Development Disturbance ...... 6

5.2 Previous Archaeological Research ...... 6

5.3 Archaeological Potential Criteria ...... 7

5.4 Archaeological Potential of Proposed Drill Areas ...... 8

6.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 10

7.0 CLOSURE ...... 11

REFERENCES ...... 12

TABLES Table 1: Proposed Drill Areas ...... 3 Table 2: Known Archaeological Sites in Proximity to Proposed Drill Locations ...... 7 Table 3: Summary of Proposed Drilling Areas and Associated Archaeological Potential within Project Property ...... 9

iii

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

FIGURES Figure 1: Project Overview ...... 14 Figure 2a: Areas of High Archaeological Potential ...... 15 Figure 2b: Areas of High Archaeological Potential ...... 16 Figure 2c: Areas of High Archaeological Potential ...... 17 Figure 2d: Areas of High Archaeological Potential ...... 18 Figure 2e: Areas of High Archaeological Potential ...... 19

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

1.0 INTRODUCTION Rio Tinto Exploration Canada (Rio Tinto) has identified eight areas of interest for their proposed summer 2020 exploration drilling program (the Project) within the Diavik Diamond Mines Property boundaries. In support of this program, Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) was contacted by Rio Tinto to conduct an Archaeological Overview Assessment (AOA) of the proposed drilling areas. The AOA will provide Rio Tinto information on the locational data of known archaeological sites in the project area and the archaeological potential of landforms within proposed drilling areas. This will inform planning decisions related to drill hole placement to ensure proper avoidance of archaeological resources during the exploration program.

This document was prepared to inform the Culture and Heritage Division, Department of Education, Culture, and Employment, Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT), the Wek´èezhi Land and Water Board, and communities that the current lease holders are aware of the significance of the archaeological resources within their lease and that Rio Tinto will adopt the necessary management plans to ensure these archaeological resources are protected. This document can be used as a planning tool and will help Rio Tinto meet the requirements of their land use permit.

1.1 Overview Objectives Archaeological resources are important for the understanding of the cultural history of the Northwest Territories (NWT) and are valued by local community members. As a result, they are protected by legislation, regulation, and policy in the NT. This includes the NWT Archaeological Sites Act (2020) and the NWT Archaeological Sites Regulations (2020), the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act (2020) and the Mackenzie Valley Land Use Regulations (2020).

The NWT Archaeological Site Regulations state that “No person shall excavate, alter or otherwise disturb an archaeological site, or remove an archaeological artifact from an archaeological site, without a Class 2 permit”. The Mackenzie Valley Land Use Regulations (MVLUR) further state that: “Unless expressly authorized by a permit or in writing by an inspector, no permittee shall conduct a land use operation within 30 m of a known monument or a known or suspected historical, archaeological site or burial ground”. The Wek´èezhi Land and Water Board (WLWB) is the regional regulatory authority that is guided by the MVLUR, and has jurisdiction over lands where the Project is located. The WLWB has indicated that a 150 m setback distance is required from known or suspected sites unless expressly authorized by a permit or in writing by an inspector.

The objective of the AOA is to assist Rio Tinto in complying with Land Use Permit requirements by conducting a desktop archaeological evaluation of their proposed drilling areas of interest. The specific objectives are to:  summarize previous archaeological research conducted in the region  obtain and analyse data for previously recorded archaeological sites  identify areas of high archaeological potential based on landform attributes and archaeology potential criteria

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

To meet these objectives Golder consulted the following data:  the Northwest Territories Archaeological Sites Database containing information on previously recorded archaeological resources  Territorial and federal web sites that contain information on existing human landscape disturbance and contamination/remediation projects in the Project area (i.e., historic mine sites)  relevant published and unpublished literature and reports pertaining to previous archaeological, historical and cultural studies completed in the project area  NTS topographic maps, satellite imagery and LiDAR (hill shade) data to evaluate landscape potential

The results of the AOA will provide specific direction for the protection and management of known and potential archaeological resources within the Project area. Development in areas identified as having high archaeological potential should be avoided until an Archaeological Impact Assessment (AIA) can be conducted. An AIA requires field work and a permit obtained by a qualified archaeologist from the GNWT.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

2.0 STUDY AREA AND DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Location and Environment The proposed drilling areas are located within the Diavik lease boundaries, located approximately 310 km northeast of Yellowknife. The boundaries extend from Lac de Gras 65 km to the east, and from Thonokied Lake 30 km to the northeast of Lac du Sauvage. (Figure 1). Eight proposed drill areas are dispersed across the lease area, one east of Lac du Sauvage, six east of Lac de Gras and one near the south shore of Lac de Gras.

More broadly, the Project occurs in the Southern Arctic Ecozone of Canada (commonly referred to as the barrenlands), within the Takijua Lake Upland Ecoregion (Ecological Framework of Canada 2020). This ecoregion encompasses an area that extends from the Coronation Gulf on the arctic coast south to Courageous and Aylmer lakes in the south. It includes the headwaters of the Coppermine River which flows northwest from Lac de Gras through Point Lake and eventually on to the Arctic Ocean. Other notable lakes include Lac du Sauvage, Yamba, Hardy, Pellatt, and Contwoyto, in addition to enumerable small unnamed lakes that fill the many lowlands. Vegetation cover is characterized by shrub tundra, consisting of dwarf birch, willow, and northern Labrador tea. Low areas are dominated by willow, sphagnum moss, and sedge tussocks. Much of the upland surface is composed of unvegetated bedrock outcrops that are common on the Canadian Shield. Soils form on thin discontinuous sandy morainal and fluvioglacial materials, and in association with rock outcrops. Esker features are common throughout the landscape. Scattered stands of spruce occur along the southern boundary of the ecoregion. Characteristic wildlife includes caribou, muskox, grizzly bear, hare, fox, wolf, raptors, shorebirds, seabirds, and waterfowl.

2.2 Proposed Developments Specific drill locations are not presently known for the summer program. The drilling areas have been defined based on areas of exploration interest to allow flexibility when planning the program (Figure 1, Table 2). They range in size from approximately 20 ha to 56 ha. When making decisions regarding drill placement the aim will be to avoid high archaeology potential areas and focus on low potential areas.

Diamond drill rigs are low impact in nature with a drill hole diameter no larger than 6 inches (15 cm). The rigs are approximately 10 m by 10 m in size and placed on a cribbed timber platform to not touch the ground. They are designed to be moved by helicopter to further minimize impact to terrain during drilling activities.

Table 1: Proposed Drill Areas Size Proposed Drill Area Location (ha) 1 49.0 650 m northeast of Lac du Sauvage 2 20.8 1.7 km southeast of Lac de Gras 3 54.7 5 km southeast of Lac de Gras and 6 km west of Thononkied Lake 4 26.5 6.8 km west of Thononkied Lake 5 56.8 4.6 km east of Lac de Gras 6 22.6 6 km southeast of Lac de Gras and 4.7 km west of Thononkied Lake 7 54.4 6 km east of Lac de Gras 8 20.6 360 m south of Lac de Gras

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

3.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS An archaeological site is defined in the Archaeological Site Regulations (2020) as “a site where an archaeological artifact is found”. An archaeological artifact is defined as “any tangible evidence of human activity that is more than 50 years old and in respect of which an unbroken chain of possession or regular pattern of usage cannot be demonstrated.” The Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act (2020) further defines “heritage resources” as “archaeological or historic sites, burial sites, artifacts and other objects of historical, cultural or religious significance, and historical or cultural records.”

Archaeological sites are non-renewable resources that are located on or near ground surface or deeply buried depending on the depositional environment. They include precontact and historic sites that may contain stone features, artifacts, building remains, burials and in some jurisdictions, palaeontological sites. The potential impacts to archaeological resources within a project area are dependent upon their proximity to the activities associated with exploration and other possible future developments.

Alteration or impacts to the landscape can result in the damage or complete destruction of all or portions of archaeological sites. These alterations can involve the displacement of artifacts resulting in the loss of valuable contextual information, or the destruction of the artifacts and features themselves resulting in complete information loss. These losses are permanent and irreversible.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

4.0 METHODS The AOA is based on data from several sources, both published and unpublished. Archaeological site data were obtained from the Northwest Territories Archaeological Sites Database housed by the PWNHC. The data requested encompassed the Diavik lease boundary to help establish site types and distributions for the region. Archaeological site data includes the location of currently recorded sites along with details such as site type, artifacts/features present, and cultural affiliation.

Government web sites accessed included the Inventory of Landscape Change (2020). This website helped identify the extent to which the project area was previously disturbed by existing development. This aids in determining the potential to identify significant, intact archaeological sites in a given area. The Northwest Territories Contaminants and Remediation Directorate (2020) was also accessed to obtain information on historic infrastructure and abandoned mine sites in the region. This aids in identifying potential historic era archaeological sites specifically relating to mining history.

National Topographic Series (NTS) maps were also reviewed and provide base information regarding landforms such as elevation and proximity to water sources, which are critical for assessing the potential for archaeological resources. Satellite images widely available via the internet as well as DEM data provided supplementary environmental and topographic data.

Canadian Geoscience Maps (Natural Resources Canada 2014) were consulted to determine the surficial geology of the Lac de Gras area and assist in the identification of bedrock versus glacial deposits throughout the landscape. Glacial sediments encountered in the proposed drill areas included the following:  Till Veneer: Unsorted glacial debris (silty sand matrix with pebbles, cobbles and boulders) less than 2 m thick, rock structure is generally visible on airphotos and includes patches of bedrock and till blanket.  Till Blanket: Unsorted glacial debris from 2 to 10 m thick, occurs as till plains mimicking bedrock topography or as drumlinoids.  Hummocky Till: Unsorted glacial debris from 5 to 30 m thick, forms irregular to rolling terrain with relief up to 15 m; some areas have abundant small meltwater channels and lag concentrations of boulders in depressions.  Organic Deposits: Peat and muck up to 2 m thick; formed predominantly by the accumulation of vegetative material in bogs, occurs in depressions and along valley bottoms.  Metamorphic Bedrock: Precambrian metasedimentary and metavolcanics rocks.

Available literature relevant to the project area were also reviewed. This included unpublished archaeological permit reports obtained from the PWNHC, as well as published journal articles, manuscripts, books and research documents pertaining to previous archaeological, historical and cultural studies completed in the project area.

The collected data from all of these sources were reviewed and based on professional training and field experience, assessments were made regarding the archaeological resource potential within the project area.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

5.0 RESULTS 5.1 Existing and Historic Development Disturbance The Inventory of Landscape Change (2020) website was consulted to identify human development footprint areas within the lease boundaries. The results indicate that development disturbance is related primarily to the Diavik Diamond Mine property, which covers the eastern half of East Island on Lac de Gras. The mine property is comprised of three kimberlite pipes, processing plants and associated facilities, access roads, and an airstrip. On the eastern shores of Lac de Gras immediately east of East Island, modifications to the shoreline were also made by Diavik in March 2011. These modifications were completed to improve outlets to regulate lake levels and improve stream connectivity (MVLWB 2020a). Additional disturbances include overland portions of the Tibbitt to Contwoyto Winter Road south of Lac de Gras that was first built in the 1980’s, and localized exploratory drilling for a geological research project by the Northwest Territories Geoscience Office, Industry Tourism and Investment at numerous locations surrounding Lac de Gras (MVLWB 2020b).

The proposed drilling areas do not overlap with any of these previous developments and occur in undisturbed terrain.

The NT Contaminated Sites (2020) website housed by Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada was also consulted. No historic infrastructure or abandoned mine sites are identified within the lease boundaries. This indicates that aside from the recent mineral exploration and mine development indicated above, there has been limited historic prospecting in the region. The likelihood of documenting historic sites related to early Northwest Territories mining history is not anticipated.

5.2 Previous Archaeological Research In the region, archaeological investigations have been conducted related to exploration and development of the Diavik Diamond Mine, as well as the Ekati Diamond Mines to the north. These began in the 1990s and continued through to 2019 (Bussey 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008; Fedirchuk 1996, 1997; Fedirchuk McCullough & Associates 1999, 2000; Golder 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, Unfreed 1997).

None of these studies overlap with the current Project. Those that occur nearest to the proposed drill areas within the lease boundary were conducted under permits 1995-814 (Fedirchuk 1995) and 1996-835 (Unfreed 1997). Over the 1995 and 1996 field seasons 195 sites were documented in the island complex (East and West Island) where the main Diavik mine development occurred, as well as the adjacent mainland east of Lac de Gras. Initial surveys in 1995 focused on esker landforms and shorelines. In 1996, the assessment was expanded into broader areas of proposed development that included landforms of both high and low archaeological potential (e.g., high valley edges to low tundra wetlands; Unfreed 1997).

The documented sites included lithic scatters (n=133), lithic quarries (n=45), isolated finds (n=9), sites with features including hearth, cache, tent ring, or a depression (n=5), scatters with a hearth feature (n=2), and a site consisting of cut wood poles (n=1). Three additional sites (ZAVR-123, ZAVR-124 and ZAVR-139) were identified as a result of avocational reporting or fortuitous observations by helicopter pilots. The nature of these sites is currently unknown and have not been verified by archaeologists. According to the limited information in the PWNHC archaeological site database they are referred to respectively as Tool Site 1 and Tool Site 2, and as a potential tent ring or hunting blind.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

Patterns regarding site distribution in the area were noted (Unfreed 1997). Isolated finds were rare and encountered in a variety of intermediate and high spots on the island complex and east mainland, often in association with the margins of small lakes. Lithic scatters were observed associated with eskers, inland lakes, the central valley of East Island, and dispersed throughout the West Island at high elevations surrounding low central wetlands and peripheral eskers. Quarry sites were observed predominantly in the central and southern portions of the East Island along unbroken outcrops of bedrock on valley edges and knolls. This contrasted with the West Island, which was typified by broken, boulder strewn outcrops and fewer quarry sites. Campsites were observed to occur within sheltered shoreline areas and often adjacent to esker landforms.

None of these documented sites are in conflict with the currently proposed drilling areas (Table 2), the nearest of which occur between 2 km and 5 km to the east of known sites. This likely reflects a lack of archaeological survey of interior lands further east of Lac de Gras.

Table 2: Known Archaeological Sites in Proximity to Proposed Drill Locations Proposed Drill Area Sites within Proposed Drilling Area Sites within 150 m 1 None None 2 None None 3 None None 4 None None 5 None None 6 None None 7 None None 8 None None

5.3 Archaeological Potential Criteria Criteria for determining the precontact archaeological potential of landscape varies from region to region, but typically includes proximity to water, topographic landforms, as well as a consideration of known site locations, traditional land use areas, and traditional trail systems. Consideration is also given to extent of existing disturbance or development in an area.

Within the Project area and the broader region, much of the precontact land use was dictated by migrating caribou herds, although other resources were exploited. As a result, site distribution largely correlates with this subsistence base. Archaeological sites have been documented in the region on the following landforms:  Eskers: These landforms were used as natural human and caribou travel corridors, they provided unique wildlife habitat (e.g., fox, grizzly bear dens), served as lookouts for game, provided cobbles for stone tool manufacture, and were likely used to exploit the breeze to fend off swarming insects during summer months.  Base, lower terrace and lee side of eskers: These areas were well drained and suitable for encampments, provided shelter from wind during fall/winter months, as well as concealment while hunting.  Lake and stream shorelines: Well-drained, elevated landforms adjacent to these waterbodies were suitable for camping, providing access to freshwater, fish, travel and caribou migration routes and occasionally wood for fuel and building materials.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

 Isthmus, narrows or portage separating lakes: These landforms influence migration behaviour and often correspond with caribou crossings and hunting/lookout sites.  Bedrock outcrops: These landforms often contain quartz veins that were quarried as a lithic resource and are elevated to serve as lookouts and/or suitable locations for marker (cairn) placement.  Smaller esker remnants, knolls and deflated patches of gravel: These landforms often occur as small, well drained “island” features in low-lying tundra that could support temporary camps, provide a source of lithic material, or serve as lookout areas.

In contrast to the above, areas not amenable to human occupation or use are considered to have low archaeological potential. This includes low, poorly-drained areas such as bogs and fens, dense boulder or cobble fields, and steeply sloped landforms. Areas that have been previously disturbed through development activities are also considered to have low archaeological potential to contain intact sites.

5.4 Archaeological Potential of Proposed Drill Areas The broader Diavik lease area covers a large area and contains many of the above noted landscape features, including esker/esker remnants, large named lakes and many smaller unnamed lakes with associated drainages. Although no esker features were identified in the currently proposed drill areas, high potential landforms were noted such as knolls, ridges and bedrock outcrops adjacent to water sources and drainages. These are identified in Figures 2a to 2e (green polygon) and detailed in Table 3. High archaeology potential areas were identified in five of the drill areas (Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6). It is recommended these areas be avoided or AIA studies carried out in advance of drilling activity to determine the presence of archaeological resources. The remaining three drill areas (Numbers 5, 7, and 8) were considered to have low potential and were located in generally low, featureless terrain and/or adjacent to minor water bodies. No field assessments are recommended in these areas in advance of drilling.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

Table 3: Summary of Proposed Drilling Areas and Associated Archaeological Potential within Project Property Proposed Drilling Figure Geographic Description # of High Potential Areas # of known sites Evaluation Recommendation Location 650 m northeast of Lac du Sauvage  High potential area includes:  occurs in largely hummocky till terrain (Natural Resources Canada 2014) Avoidance of high potential landform or 1 2a 1 0  small knoll near head of drainage feature that AIA recommended in advance of drilling;  contains a SW-NE seasonal drainage into Lac de Gras flows into Lac de Gras remaining areas no concern.  small knoll northwest of a small pond, surrounded by featureless terrain 1.7 km southeast of Lac de Gras  High potential area includes:  occurs in hummocky till and organic terrain (Natural Resources Canada 2014) Avoidance of high potential landform or 2 2c 1 0  small knoll on shore of 1 km long lake and AIA recommended in advance of drilling;  immediately southeast of pond in generally low-lying terrain near drainage feature remaining areas no concern.  drainage feature flows through southwest corner of drill area to Lac de Gras 5 km southeast of Lac de Gras and 6 km west of Thononkied Lake  High potential area includes:  occurs in till veneer terrain (Natural Resources Canada 2014)  portion of bedrock ridge in northwest corner of Avoidance of high potential landform or 3 2d  contains portions of two small ponds and adjacent to two larger lakes 1 0 drill area located on 3km long lake to the AIA recommended in advance of drilling; remaining areas no concern.  portion of a bedrock ridge in the northwest corner north  remaining areas low-lying  6.8 km west of Thononkied Lake High potential area includes:  occurs in combination of metamorphic bedrock, till veneer and till blanket terrain Avoidance of high potential landform or 4 2d (Natural Resources Canada 2014) 2 0  Two bedrock ridges towards NE corner of drill AIA recommended in advance of drilling; area remaining areas no concern.  minor seasonal drainage between two small ponds in southwest corner of drill area  bedrock outcrops towards NE corner  4.6 km east of Lac de Gras  occurs in hummocky till terrain (Natural Resources Canada 2014) No known sites in proximity, no high potential AIA not recommended; area is considered 5 2b 0 0  contains a small pond and immediately south of a larger pond landforms identified. to have low potential.  indistinct terrain with minor water features  large esker approximately 2.5 km to NE likely better potential 6 km southeast of Lac de Gras and 4.7 km west of Thononkied Lake  High potential area includes:  occurs in till veneer terrain (Natural Resources Canada 2014) Avoidance of high potential landform or 6 2d 1 0  portion of bedrock ridge along north shore of AIA recommended in advance of drilling;  located immediately north of a small lake almost 2 km long 2 km long lake remaining areas no concern.  appears to be a bedrock ridge along shore  6 km east of Lac de Gras  occurs in hummocky till terrain (Natural Resources Canada 2014) No known sites in proximity, no high potential AIA not recommended; area is considered 7 2b contains a small pond and adjacent to two larger ponds 0 0  landforms identified. to have low potential.  indistinct terrain with minor water features  large esker approximately 1.5 km to NE likely better potential  360 m south of Lac de Gras occurs in organic vegetated terrain (Natural Resources Canada 2014) No known sites in proximity, no high potential AIA not recommended; area is considered 8 2e  0 0 landforms identified. to have low potential.  although near Lac de Gras shore, drill area is in generally low, wet and featureless terrain

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

6.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS A search of the GNWT archaeological sites database combined with information obtained from previous studies in the region indicate there are over 195 known archaeological sites documented within the Diavik lease boundaries. None of these sites are in conflict with the currently proposed drill areas. However, their presence indicates the potential to identify additional archaeological sites in the region.

A review of landscape potential indicates that five proposed drill areas (Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6) contain landforms considered to have high archaeological potential. These areas are recommended for avoidance or AIA studies in advance of drilling activities. The remaining areas within these drill areas are considered to have low potential and have no further concerns. The remaining three drill areas (Numbers 5, 7, and 8) are considered to have low archaeological potential and have no further concerns in advance of drilling.

These recommendations are subject to the approval of the Culture and Heritage Division, Department of Education, Culture, and Employment, GNWT. Any archaeological field assessment would need to be carried out under snow and frost-free conditions.

The study detailed in this report is intended to examine areas of proposed development for archaeological potential in order to eliminate or minimize impacts to archaeological sites. However, it should be noted that since the archaeological potential evaluation is the result of a desktop review and not associated with field verification, there is potential for archaeological sites to be encountered in areas other than those identified. In the event that unanticipated archaeological sites are identified during any stage of exploration, all activity in the area should cease and the site avoided. Protocols as outlined in the Land Use Permit should be followed and the necessary authorities notified for further direction as required.

This document is a high-level desktop exercise to assist with the exploration stage only. Should the project proceed to advanced exploration or mining operations involving greater ground disturbance, project plans should be reviewed by a qualified archaeologist and the Culture and Heritage Division to determine further archaeological assessment requirements.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

7.0 CLOSURE The reader is referred to the Study Limitations section, which precedes the text and forms an integral part of this report.

We trust the above meets your present requirements. If you have any questions or requirements, please contact the undersigned.

Golder Associates Ltd.

Patrick Young, M.A. Brad Novecosky, M.A. Senior Archaeologist Principal, Senior Archaeologist

PY/BN/hg/et

Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation

https://golderassociates.sharepoint.com/sites/120632/project files/6 deliverables/issued/1969-r-rev0-5000-aoa_2020 drilling summer program/20136424-1969-r-rev0-5000-aoa_diavik_2020 drilling program 23jul_20.docx

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

REFERENCES Archaeological Sites Regulations, NT Reg 024-2014, retrieved on 2020-01-30.

Bussey J. 1994. 1994 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 1995. 1995 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 1997. 1996 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 1998. 1997 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 1999. 1998 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2000. 1999 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2001. 2000 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2002. 2001 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2003. 2002 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2004. 2003 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2005. 2004 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2006. 2005 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2007. 2006 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Bussey J. 2008. 2007 Archaeological Investigations at the Ekati Diamond Mine. Points West Heritage Consulting Ltd., Langley, BC, Canada.

Ecological Framework of Canada. 2020 Takijuq Lake Upland. Electronic resource, http://ecozones.ca/english/region/41.html. Accessed January 2020.

Fedirchuk, G.1995 Heritage Resources Impact Assessment, Kennecott Southwest Diavik Property. Permit 95- 814. Report on file with Culture and Heritage Division, Department of Education, Culture, and Employment, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife.

23 July 2020 Golder Reference No. 20136424-1969-R-Rev0-5000

Fedirchuk G. 1997 Continuing Heritage Resources Impact Assessment. Diavik Diamond Mines Inc. Diavik Property. Small Islands Situated off the East Island of Lac de Gras. Report submitted to Diavik Mines Inc., Yellowknife.

Fedirchuk G. 2000. 1999 Aber-Kennecott Lac de Gras Project Heritage Resource Overview. McCullough & Associates Ltd., Calgary, AB, Canada.

Fedirchuk McCullough & Associates Ltd. 1999. Diavik Diamonds Project. Environmental Effects Report, Heritage Resources. Report submitted to Diavik Mines Inc. Yellowknife.

Fedirchuk McCullough & Associates Ltd. 2000. Heritage Resource Studies. Diavik Diamond Mines Inc. Lac de Gras Potential Borrow Source. Report submitted to Diavik Diamond Mines Inc., Yellowknife.

Natural Resources Canada. 2014. Geological Survey of Canada. Surficial geology, Aylmer Lake, Northwest Territories-Nunavut, NTS 76-C. Electronic resource, http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.858852/publication.html. Accessed July 2020.

Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2014. Dominion Diamond Resource Corporation Lynx Project and Jay Cardinal Projects Archaeological Impact Assessment (NWT 2013-012). Consultant’s report on file with the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre, Yellowknife.

Golder. 2015. Dominion Diamond Resource Corporation Jay Project Archaeological Impact Assessment (NWT 2014-019). Consultant’s report on file with the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre, Yellowknife.

Golder. 2016. Dominion Diamond Resource Corporation Jay and Sable Projects Archaeological Impact Assessment (NWT 2015-013). Consultant’s report on file with the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre, Yellowknife.

Golder. 2019. Glowworm Lake Project and Lac de Gras Joint Venture Project Winter Roads (NWT 2019-014). Consultant’s report on file with the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre, Yellowknife.

Inventory of Landscape Change. 2020 http://apps.geomatics.gov.nt.ca/Html5_SDW/Index.html? configBase=http://apps.geomatics.gov.nt.ca/Geocortex/Essentials/REST/sites/CIMP_ILC_Webmap/viewe rs/ILC_Viewer/virtualdirectory/Resources/Config/Default. Accessed July 2020.

Mackenzie Valley Land Use Regulations, SOR/98-429, retrieved on 2020-01-30.

MVLWB (Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board). 2020a Diavik Diamond Mines (2012) Inc. – W2011T0002 https://mvlwb.com/registry/W2011T0002. 20 July 2020.

MVLWB. 2020b Northwest Territories Geological Survey – MV2014X0028 https://mvlwb.com/registry/MV2014X0028. Accessed 20 July 2020.

NT Contaminated Sites. 2019 https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100026218/1100100026222. Accessed 20 July 2020.

Unfreed, W. 1997 Continuing Inventory: Historical Resources Impact Assessment Diavik Diamond Mines Inc. Diavik Diamond Project, Lac de Gras, NT. Vol. 1 of 2. Permit 96-835. Report on file with Culture and Heritage Division, Department of Education, Culture, and Employment, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife.

520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000 590000 Sterlet ## ### # Lake # ## #

# # ### # ## Seal Lake # ###

7170000 # 7170000 # # #

Lac du Sauvage Glowworm Lake # # # ## # # # ## ## # # ##### # # ## # # ## # ## # ### ### 7160000 ### 7160000 ######## #

!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!# #!!!!!!!!# # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # # ### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lac de Gras !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!####### ## ## # # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## ### ##### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # ########### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!####### # # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## ### # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# #### ## # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ############# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## ### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!### ## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # # # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## # !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ## 7150000 # 7150000 !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# # #### !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## # ## # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!##### !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ## !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!## # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# ## ## # Thonokied Lake # # ### # 7140000 7140000 Afridi Lake

## # #

520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000 590000 LEGEND REFERENCE(S) 1. BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM GEOGRATIS, © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES WINTER ROAD # KNOWN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE CANADA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE DATA PROVIDED BY THE PRINCE OF WALES NORTHERN HERITAGE WATERCOURSE 2020 PROPOSED DRILL AREA CENTRE; © GOVERNMENT OF NORTHWEST TERRITORIES, EDUCATION, CULTURE AND !!!!!! 0 4 8 !!!!!! EMPLOYMENT. DIAVIK FOOTPRINT !!!!!! PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED AREA (APPROXIMATE) !!!!!! PROJECTION: UTM ZONE 12 DATUM: NAD 83 LEASE BOUNDARY 1:200,000 KILOMETRES WATERBODY

CLIENT PROJECT DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC. THISIF MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THESHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM:ANSI B 25mm

CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2020-07-21 TITLE

DESIGNED PY PROJECT OVERVIEW

PREPARED LMS

REVIEWED PY PROJECT NO. PHASE REV. FIGURE APPROVED BN 0

PATH: PATH: I:\CLIENTS\DIAVIK\20136424\Mapping\Products\Archaeology\AOA_July2020\Fig1_20136424-5100_Archy_Overview_RevA.mxdPRINTED ON: 2020-07-21 4:10:15AT: PM 20136424 5100 1 0 547000 548000 549000 550000 551000

LEGEND WATERCOURSE

WATERBODY

2020 PROPOSED DRILL AREA 7169000 7169000

HIGH ARCHAEOLOGY POTENTIAL AREA

KEY MAP 7168000 7168000

Lac du Sauvage

Lac de Gras

1 7167000 7167000

0 300 600

1:15,000 METRES

REFERENCE(S) 1. BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM GEOGRATIS, © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE DATA PROVIDED BY THE PRINCE OF WALES NORTHERN HERITAGE CENTRE; © GOVERNMENT OF NORTHWEST TERRITORIES, EDUCATION, CULTURE AND EMPLOYMENT. 3. MAIN HILLSHADE OBTAINED FROM DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC., 2020. BACKGROUND HILLSHADE DERIVED FROM ARCTICDEM DATA PROVIDED BY THE POLAR GEOSPATIAL CENTER UNDER NSF-OPP AWARDS 1043681, 1559691, AND 1542736. 4. EXISTING DISTURBANCE DATA OBTAINED FROM NWTCG, CIMP, AND CASLYS CONSULTING LTD. 2000-2018. PROJECTION: UTM ZONE 12 DATUM: NAD 83

CLIENT

PROJECT DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC. 7166000 7166000

TITLE AREAS OF HIGH ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL WITHIN PROPOSED DRILL AREAS IF THISIF MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THESHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM:ANSI B CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2020-07-21 25mm DESIGNED PY

PREPARED LMS

REVIEWED PY

APPROVED BN PROJECT NO. PHASE REV. FIGURE

547000 548000 549000 550000 551000 20136424 5100 0 PATH: PATH: I:\CLIENTS\DIAVIK\20136424\Mapping\Products\Archaeology\AOA_July2020\Fig2_20136424-5100_Archy_ZoomIns_RevA.mxd PRINTEDON: 2020-07-21 4:13:53AT: PM

2a 0 553000 554000 555000 556000 557000

LEGEND WATERCOURSE

WATERBODY

2020 PROPOSED DRILL AREA 7159000 7159000

KEY MAP

Lac du Sauvage 7

Lac de 7158000 7158000 Gras

5 0 300 600

1:15,000 METRES

7157000 7157000 PROJECTION: UTM ZONE 12 DATUM: NAD 83

CLIENT

PROJECT DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC.

PREPARED LMS

REVIEWED PY

APPROVED BN

7156000 7156000 PROJECT NO. PHASE REV. FIGURE

553000 554000 555000 556000 557000 20136424 5100 0 PATH: PATH: I:\CLIENTS\DIAVIK\20136424\Mapping\Products\Archaeology\AOA_July2020\Fig2_20136424-5100_Archy_ZoomIns_RevA.mxd PRINTEDON: 2020-07-21 4:14:10AT: PM

2b 0 543000 544000 545000 546000 547000

LEGEND WATERCOURSE

WATERBODY

# KNOWN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE

2020 PROPOSED DRILL AREA

HIGH ARCHAEOLOGY POTENTIAL AREA

7153000 !!!!!7153000

!!!!! PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED AREA (APPROXIMATE)

!!!!! SITE AVOIDANCE BUFFER

KEY MAP

Lac du Sauvage 7152000 7152000

Lac de Gras

0 300 600

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7151000 7151000 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1:15,000 METRES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! REFERENCE(S) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1. BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM GEOGRATIS, © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CANADA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE DATA PROVIDED BY THE PRINCE OF WALES NORTHERN HERITAGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CENTRE; © GOVERNMENT OF NORTHWEST TERRITORIES, EDUCATION, CULTURE AND !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EMPLOYMENT. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3. MAIN HILLSHADE OBTAINED FROM DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC., 2020. BACKGROUND !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HILLSHADE DERIVED FROM ARCTICDEM DATA PROVIDED BY THE POLAR GEOSPATIAL CENTER

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! UNDER NSF-OPP AWARDS 1043681, 1559691, AND 1542736. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4. EXISTING DISTURBANCE DATA OBTAINED FROM NWTCG, CIMP, AND CASLYS CONSULTING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LTD. 2000-2018. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PROJECTION: UTM ZONE 12 DATUM: NAD 83

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CLIENT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PROJECT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TITLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7150000 7150000 AREAS OF HIGH ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL WITHIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!LcNs-126 PROPOSED DRILL AREAS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!LcNs-124 IF THISIF MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THESHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM:ANSI B !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2020-07-21 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 25mm !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DESIGNED PY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PREPARED LMS

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!LcNs-123 REVIEWED PY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! APPROVED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PROJECT NO. PHASE REV. FIGURE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 543000 544000 545000 546000 547000 20136424 5100 0 PATH: PATH: I:\CLIENTS\DIAVIK\20136424\Mapping\Products\Archaeology\AOA_July2020\Fig2_20136424-5100_Archy_ZoomIns_RevA.mxd PRINTEDON: 2020-07-21 4:14:27AT: PM

2c 0 548000 549000 550000 551000 552000

LEGEND 7150000 7150000 WATERCOURSE

WATERBODY

2020 PROPOSED DRILL AREA

HIGH ARCHAEOLOGY POTENTIAL AREA 6

3 7149000 7149000

KEY MAP

Lac du Sauvage

Lac de Gras 7148000 7148000

0 300 600

1:15,000 METRES

CLIENT 7147000 7147000

PROJECT DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC.

TITLE AREAS OF HIGH ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL WITHIN 4 PROPOSED DRILL AREAS IF THISIF MEASUREMENT DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS SHOWN, THESHEET SIZE HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM:ANSI B CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2020-07-21 25mm DESIGNED PY

PREPARED LMS

REVIEWED PY

APPROVED BN PROJECT NO. PHASE REV. FIGURE

548000 549000 550000 551000 552000 20136424 5100 0 PATH: PATH: I:\CLIENTS\DIAVIK\20136424\Mapping\Products\Archaeology\AOA_July2020\Fig2_20136424-5100_Archy_ZoomIns_RevA.mxd PRINTEDON: 2020-07-21 4:14:48AT: PM

2d 0 529000 530000 531000 532000

LEGEND WATERCOURSE

WATERBODY

2020 PROPOSED DRILL AREA 7143000 7143000

KEY MAP

Lac du Sauvage

7142000 7142000 Lac de Gras

0 300 600

1:15,000 METRES

CLIENT

PROJECT DIAVIK DIAMOND MINES INC.

PREPARED LMS

REVIEWED PY

APPROVED BN 7140000 7140000 PROJECT NO. PHASE REV. FIGURE

529000 530000 531000 532000 20136424 5100 0 PATH: PATH: I:\CLIENTS\DIAVIK\20136424\Mapping\Products\Archaeology\AOA_July2020\Fig2_20136424-5100_Archy_ZoomIns_RevA.mxd PRINTEDON: 2020-07-21 4:15:09AT: PM

2e 0

golder.com