Content area
Abstract
--------------------------- Contained Metal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cu Eq Cu Eq Cutoff Tonnes Cu Eq Cu Au Ag Cu Lbs Au oz Lbs (%) (000) (%) (%) (g/t) (g/t) (000) (000) (000) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.5 1,627 6.19 4.33 3.10 11.10 155,420 162 221,968 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.6 1,597 6.30 4.41 3.15 11.25 155,205 162 221,747 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.72 1,581 6.35 4.45 3.17 11.30 155,090 161 221,267 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.8 1,581 6.35 4.45 3.17 11.30 155,090 161 221,267 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.9 1,579 6.36 4.46 3.18 11.31 155,112 161 221,335 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.0 1,556 6.44 4.51 3.21 11.41 154,811 161 220,855 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.1 1,554 6.45 4.52 3.22 11.42 154,806 161 220,914 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.2 1,515 6.58 4.63 3.26 11.58 154,491 159 219,710 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.3 1,463 6.77 4.78 3.33 11.72 154,052 157 218,295 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.4 1,431 6.90 4.88 3.36 11.80 154,045 154 217,621 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.5 1,430 6.90 4.89 3.36 11.80 154,011 154 217,469 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.6 1,406 6.99 4.96 3.38 11.82 153,731 153 216,608 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.7 1,386 7.07 5.03 3.40 11.80 153,509 152 215,970 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.8 1,345 7.23 5.15 3.46 11.92 152,794 150 214,325 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1.9 1,326 7.30 5.22 3.47 11.96 152,669 148 213,343 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.0 1,283 7.48 5.35 3.55 12.21 151,356 147 211,514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data obtained from the Atico diamond drill program were used to construct three-dimensional geometric wireframes representing the massive sulfide zones extending below the 2000 level in the El Roble mine. These zones (named Maximus, Goliath, Apolo, Andromeda, Orion, Transformador, Zeus, Aquiles, and Ares) were used to constrain the estimation of an NI 43-101 compliant inferred resource at El Roble mine. Copper, gold, silver, lead, zinc and cobalt grades were estimated for 5m x 5m x 5m blocks within the wireframes. Prior to estimation of the block grades, copper grades were capped at 20% Cu, gold was capped at 20g/t Au and silver was capped at 100g/t Ag. A three-pass inverse distance cubed (1/d3) method was used for the block grade estimates, along a trend plane having an azimuth of 320 degrees and a minus 75-degree dip to the north. The first pass used search distances along strike and down dip of 25m, and 5m perpendicular to the trend plane. The second pass used search distances along strike and down dip of 75m, and 10m perpendicular to the trend plane. The third pass used search distances along strike and down dip of 150m, and 20m perpendicular to the trend plane. The first pass required a minimum of one composite and allowed a maximum of three composites, with no more than one composite per drill hole. The second pass required a minimum of three composites and allowed a maximum of six composites, with a limit of two composites per drill hole, while the third pass required a minimum of three composites, a maximum of eight composites allowed and a limit of two composites per drill hole. The first pass resulted in grade estimates for 56 percent of the blocks. The second pass resulted in 26 percent of the blocks receiving grade estimates, while the third pass resulted in grade estimates for the remaining 18 percent of the blocks.