An Independent Technical Report on the Material Assets of Katanga ...
Transcript of An Independent Technical Report on the Material Assets of Katanga ...
An Independent Technical Report on theMaterial Assets of
Katanga Mining Limited,Katanga Province,
Democratic Republic of Congo (“DRC”)
Katanga Mining LimitedKatanga Mining Limited
15 Golding RoadLondon
EnglandWW159JG
United Kingdom
17 March 2009
Principal Author: Roger Dixon Partner Pr.Eng, BSc (Hons) Mining, FSAIMM
ContributingAuthors:
Victor Simposya Partner (SRK) Pr.Sci.Nat, MSc (Mining), BSc (Geology), MSAIMM
Ebrahim Takolia Principal Consultant (SRK) MBA, BEconSc, MSAIMM, MSI (UK)
Wally Waldeck Partner (SRK) Pr.Eng, MBA, BSc Eng, FSAIMM, AMAMMSA
Henrietta Salter Principal Scientist (SRK) Pr. Sci. Nat, MSc, EngD
Anton von Wielligh Engineer (A&B Global) Pr.Eng, BEng (Hons)
Alan Naismith Partner (SRK) PrSciNat, MSc, MBA, FSAIMM, FSAIRE
Petrus CilliersConsultant (BatemanEngineering)
Pr.Eng, BEng (Chem Eng), MBA
Rob McNeill Partner (SRK) Pr.Tech (Eng) MSAICE, MSAPMI, MIWM
An Independent Technical Report on theMaterial Assets of
Katanga Mining Limited,Katanga Province,
DRC
Katanga Mining LimitedKatanga Mining Limited
15 Golding RoadLondon
EnglandWW159JG
United Kingdom
SRK Project Number 389772
SRK Consulting265 Oxford Road
Illovo2196
South Africa
P O Box 55291Northlands
2116South Africa
Tel: +27 11 441-1111Fax: +27 11 880-8086
17 March 2009
Explanatory Note
This document has been written in accordance with the requirements of the International System of
Units (SI Units) as applied in South Africa. The SI is the only system of units that is universally
recognized, so that it has a distinct advantage in establishing a dialogue globally. Even so, some
readers will be unfamiliar with the conventions of SI Units. For example, in this document, the
comma is used as the decimal marker and the space is used for the thousands separator (for numbers
larger than 9999).
In other words, 10 148,32 denotes ten thousand one hundred and forty-eight point three two. The
word ‘ton’ denotes a metric ton (1000 kg), unless otherwise stated. More information is at the
website of the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, BIPM, at www.bipm.org. The website
offers a comprehensive, 88 page guide to SI Units in pdf format.
In some instances, non SI units are included. For instance, base-metal prices are commonly quoted in
US dollars a pound (USD/lb). In most such instances, the inclusion of the metric equivalent is
deemed unnecessary.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 1
Compliance Cross-Reference
NI 43-101 SectionOverall
ResponsibilityResponsibility by
Section
Item 1 – Title Page Roger Dixon
Item 2 – Table of Contents Roger Dixon
Item 3 – Summary Roger Dixon
Item 4 – Introduction Roger Dixon
Item 5 – Reliance on Other Experts Roger Dixon
Item 6 – Property Description and Location Roger Dixon
Item 7 – Accesibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography Roger Dixon
Item 8 – History Roger Dixon
Item 9 – Geological Setting Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 10 – Deposit Types Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 11- Mineralization Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 12 – Exploration Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 13 – Drilling Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 14 – Sampling Method and Approach Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 15 – Sample Preparation, Anlyses and Security Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 16 – Data Verification Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 17 – Adjacent Properties Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 18 – Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing Roger Dixon Petrus Cilliers
Item 19 – Mineral Resource Estimates Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 19 – KOV Mine Mineral Reserve Estimates Roger Dixon Wally Waldeck
Item 19 – T17, Kamoto and Mashamba East Mine Mineral Reserve Estimates Roger Dixon Anton von Wielligh
Item 20 – Other Relevant Data and Information Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 20.1 – KOV Oxide / Sulphide Content Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 20.2 – Dewatering Roger Dixon Henrietta Salter
Item 20.4 – Geotechnical Assessment Roger Dixon Allan Naismith
Item 20.5 – Tailings and Process Effluent Disposal Roger Dixon Rob McNeill
Item 21 – Interpretation and Conclusions Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 22 – Recommendations Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 23 – References Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 24 – Date and Signature Page Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 25 – Additional Requirements for Technical Reports on Development Properties andProduction Properties
Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
Item 25a3 – KOV Mine Mining Report Roger Dixon Wally Waldeck
Item 25a1,2&4 – T17, Kamoto and Mashamba East Mine Mining Reports Roger Dixon Anton von Wielligh
Item 25b – Recoverability Roger Dixon Petrus Cilliers
Item 25e – Environmental Considerations Roger Dixon Henrietta Salter
Item 25f,g,h,i&j – Mineral Economics Roger Dixon Ebrahim Takolia
Illustrations Roger Dixon Victor Simposya
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 2
Table of Contents3 Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 11
3.1 Property Description and Location............................................................................................................................... 11
3.2 Terms of Reference..................................................................................................................................................... 11
3.3 Ownership ................................................................................................................................................................... 12
3.4 Geology and Mineralization ......................................................................................................................................... 12
3.4.1 Geology ............................................................................................................................................................ 12
3.4.2 Mineralization.................................................................................................................................................... 13
3.5 Status of the Material Assets ....................................................................................................................................... 13
3.6 Mineral Resources and Reserves................................................................................................................................ 14
3.7 Interpretations and Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 15
3.8 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................... 15
3.9 Economic Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 17
4 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 18
4.1 Description of Assets................................................................................................................................................... 18
4.2 Company Structure...................................................................................................................................................... 19
4.3 ITR – structure and compliance................................................................................................................................... 21
4.3.1 Structure ........................................................................................................................................................... 21
4.3.2 Compliance....................................................................................................................................................... 21
4.4 Terms of Reference..................................................................................................................................................... 21
4.5 Scope of Information and Site Visits ............................................................................................................................ 21
5 Reliance on Other Experts................................................................................................................................................... 23
6 Property Description and Location ..................................................................................................................................... 24
6.1 The DRC ..................................................................................................................................................................... 24
6.2 Regulatory Environment .............................................................................................................................................. 25
6.2.1 DRC Law in respect of Mining Title ................................................................................................................... 25
6.2.2 Area and Location of the Property..................................................................................................................... 26
6.2.3 Description of Legal Tenure .............................................................................................................................. 26
6.2.4 Proposed Amendments..................................................................................................................................... 30
6.2.5 DRC Mining Review.......................................................................................................................................... 31
6.2.6 Property Boundaries ............................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
6.2.7 Royalties Duties and Other Fees....................................................................................................................... 32
6.3 Environmental Liabilities.............................................................................................................................................. 33
7 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography..................................................................... 37
7.1 Accessibility................................................................................................................................................................. 37
7.2 Climate........................................................................................................................................................................ 38
7.3 Local Resources.......................................................................................................................................................... 39
7.4 Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................................... 39
7.5 Physiography .............................................................................................................................................................. 39
8 History ......................................................................................................................................................................... 40
8.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 40
8.2 Prior Ownership of the Material Assets........................................................................................................................ 40
8.2.1 KCC Assets ...................................................................................................................................................... 40
8.2.2 DCP Assets ...................................................................................................................................................... 40
8.2.3 The Merger ....................................................................................................................................................... 40
8.3 Historical Development................................................................................................................................................ 40
8.4 Historical Exploration................................................................................................................................................... 41
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 3
8.5 Historical drilling .......................................................................................................................................................... 41
8.5.1 T17 Mine........................................................................................................................................................... 41
8.5.2 Tilwezembe Mine.............................................................................................................................................. 41
8.5.3 Kamoto Mine..................................................................................................................................................... 41
8.5.4 Kananga Mine................................................................................................................................................... 42
8.5.5 KOV Mine ......................................................................................................................................................... 42
8.5.6 Mashamba East Mine ....................................................................................................................................... 42
8.6 T17 Mine ..................................................................................................................................................................... 42
8.7 Tilwezembe Mine ........................................................................................................................................................ 43
8.8 Kamoto Mine ............................................................................................................................................................... 43
8.9 Kananga Mine ............................................................................................................................................................. 44
8.10 KOV Mine.................................................................................................................................................................... 44
8.11 Mashamba East Mine.................................................................................................................................................. 45
8.12 Kamoto Concentrator .................................................................................................................................................. 45
8.13 Luilu Metallurgical Plant............................................................................................................................................... 46
9 Geological Setting................................................................................................................................................................ 47
9.1 Regional Geology........................................................................................................................................................ 47
9.2 General Stratigraphy ................................................................................................................................................... 49
9.3 Project geology............................................................................................................................................................ 51
9.3.1 T17 Mine........................................................................................................................................................... 51
9.3.2 Tilwezembe Mine.............................................................................................................................................. 51
9.3.3 Kamoto Mine..................................................................................................................................................... 51
9.3.4 Kananga Mine................................................................................................................................................... 52
9.3.5 KOV Mine ......................................................................................................................................................... 52
9.3.6 Mashamba East Mine ....................................................................................................................................... 52
10 Deposit Types....................................................................................................................................................................... 53
11 Mineralization ....................................................................................................................................................................... 53
12 Exploration ......................................................................................................................................................................... 53
13 Drilling ......................................................................................................................................................................... 54
13.1 T17 Mine ..................................................................................................................................................................... 54
13.2 Tilwezembe Mine ........................................................................................................................................................ 54
13.3 Kamoto Mine ............................................................................................................................................................... 54
13.4 Kananga Mine ............................................................................................................................................................. 54
13.5 KOV Mine.................................................................................................................................................................... 54
13.6 Mashamba East Mine.................................................................................................................................................. 56
14 Sampling Method and Approach ......................................................................................................................................... 57
14.1 Historical Sampling...................................................................................................................................................... 57
14.2 T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine..................................................................................................... 58
14.3 Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine .......................................................................................................................... 58
14.4 KOV Mine.................................................................................................................................................................... 58
15 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security ...................................................................................................................... 59
15.1 T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine..................................................................................................... 59
15.2 Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine .......................................................................................................................... 60
15.3 KOV Mine.................................................................................................................................................................... 60
16 Data Verification ................................................................................................................................................................... 61
16.1 T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine..................................................................................................... 61
16.2 Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine .......................................................................................................................... 62
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 4
16.3 KOV Mine.................................................................................................................................................................... 62
17 Adjacent Properties.............................................................................................................................................................. 63
18 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing ................................................................................................................... 63
18.1 Kamoto Mine Testwork................................................................................................................................................ 63
18.2 Previous KOV Testwork .............................................................................................................................................. 64
18.2.1 Samples Tested................................................................................................................................................ 64
18.2.2 Milling Testwork ................................................................................................................................................ 64
18.2.3 Hydrometallurgical Testwork ............................................................................................................................. 64
18.2.4 Other Testwork ................................................................................................................................................. 65
18.3 Recent KOV Mine Testwork ........................................................................................................................................ 65
18.3.1 Milling Testwork ................................................................................................................................................ 65
18.3.2 Flotation Testwork............................................................................................................................................. 66
18.3.3 Slurry Pumping Testwork .................................................................................................................................. 66
18.4 Oxide / Sulphide Content............................................................................................................................................. 66
18.5 Risks and Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 66
19 Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Estimates............................................................................................................. 67
19.1 Mineral Resource Estimates........................................................................................................................................ 67
19.1.1 Mineral Resource Estimation Methodology ....................................................................................................... 67
19.1.2 Data quality and quantity................................................................................................................................... 68
19.1.3 Core Recovery.................................................................................................................................................. 71
19.1.4 Data manipulation ............................................................................................................................................. 74
19.1.5 Grade distributions............................................................................................................................................ 76
19.1.6 Statistics ........................................................................................................................................................... 83
19.1.7 Variography ...................................................................................................................................................... 89
19.1.8 Grade estimation............................................................................................................................................... 97
19.2 Density Determinations ............................................................................................................................................. 100
19.2.1 T17 Mine......................................................................................................................................................... 101
19.2.2 Tilwezembe Mine............................................................................................................................................ 102
19.2.3 Kamoto Mine................................................................................................................................................... 102
19.2.4 Kananga Mine................................................................................................................................................. 103
19.2.5 KOV Mine ....................................................................................................................................................... 103
19.2.6 Mashamba East Mine ..................................................................................................................................... 104
19.2.7 Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 105
19.3 Block model validation............................................................................................................................................... 105
19.4.1 T17 Mine......................................................................................................................................................... 106
19.4.2 Tilwezembe Mine............................................................................................................................................ 106
19.4.3 Kamoto Mine................................................................................................................................................... 108
19.4.4 Kananga Mine................................................................................................................................................. 109
19.4.5 KOV Mine ....................................................................................................................................................... 109
19.4.6 Mashamba East Mine ..................................................................................................................................... 111
19.5 Consolidated Mineral Resource Statement................................................................................................................ 112
19.6 Comparison of the 2008 and 2007 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................. 112
19.7 Consolidated Mineral Reserve Statement.................................................................................................................. 114
19.7.1 Comparison of the 2008 and 2007 Mineral Reserves...................................................................................... 114
20 Other Relevant Data and Information................................................................................................................................ 116
20.1 KOV Oxide / Sulphide Content .................................................................................................................................. 116
20.1.1 Description...................................................................................................................................................... 116
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 5
20.1.2 Assumptions ................................................................................................................................................... 117
20.2 Dewatering ................................................................................................................................................................ 117
20.2.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................................................... 117
20.2.2 Kamoto Underground...................................................................................................................................... 117
20.2.3 T17 ................................................................................................................................................................. 118
20.2.4 Mashamba East.............................................................................................................................................. 119
20.2.5 Dewatering of the KOV pit............................................................................................................................... 119
20.3 Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................................. 122
20.3.1 General Infrastructure ..................................................................................................................................... 122
20.3.2 Power ............................................................................................................................................................. 125
20.4 Geotechnical Assessment ......................................................................................................................................... 126
20.4.1 Kamoto Mine................................................................................................................................................... 127
20.4.2 Open Pits........................................................................................................................................................ 128
20.4.3 Recommendation............................................................................................................................................ 129
20.5 Tailings and Process Effluent Disposal...................................................................................................................... 129
20.5.1 Scope of Study ............................................................................................................................................... 130
20.5.2 Design Assumptions ....................................................................................................................................... 130
20.5.3 Selection of Preferred Tailings Dams .............................................................................................................. 130
20.5.4 Description of Proposed Tailings Dams........................................................................................................... 131
20.5.5 Phasing of Tailings Dams ............................................................................................................................... 135
20.5.6 Risk Assessments........................................................................................................................................... 137
20.5.7 Hazardous Effluent Ponds .............................................................................................................................. 137
20.5.8 Closure Considerations................................................................................................................................... 137
20.5.9 Further Study .................................................................................................................................................. 137
20.5.10 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................ 138
20.6 Risk Assessment....................................................................................................................................................... 139
20.6.1 Basis of the Risk Report.................................................................................................................................. 139
20.6.2 Risk Register .................................................................................................................................................. 139
20.6.3 Resources: Overstated Resource Estimate for T17 Mine ................................................................................ 139
20.6.4 Mining and Reserves: KOV Equipment ........................................................................................................... 139
20.6.5 Mining and Reserves: KOV Contract............................................................................................................... 139
20.6.6 Metallurgical Processing: Inability to Meet Schedule for Modules 1, 2 and 3 ................................................... 140
20.6.7 Metallurgical Processing: Unavailability and Quality of Key Reagents ............................................................. 140
20.6.8 Services: Poor Condition of Railway Line........................................................................................................ 140
20.6.9 Services: Availability of Rolling Stock.............................................................................................................. 141
20.6.10 Services: Under-developed in-country institutional infrastructure and capacity ............................................ 141
20.6.11 Services: Lack of Power Supply .................................................................................................................. 141
20.6.12 Environmental: Non-resolution of Liabilities ................................................................................................. 142
20.6.13 Environmental: Non-compliance with DRC Mining Code ............................................................................. 142
20.6.14 Human Resources: Senior Management and Technical Expertise............................................................... 142
20.6.15 Capital Costs: The Unpredictable Escalation of Costs ................................................................................. 142
20.6.16 Operating Costs: Deviation from Engineering Study Estimates.................................................................... 143
20.6.17 Risk Controls............................................................................................................................................... 143
21 Interpretations and Conclusions....................................................................................................................................... 144
22 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................................. 144
23 References ....................................................................................................................................................................... 145
24 Date and Signature Pages ................................................................................................................................................. 145
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 6
24.1 Roger Dixon .............................................................................................................................................................. 146
24.2 Victor Simposya ........................................................................................................................................................ 147
24.3 Ebrahim Takolia ........................................................................................................................................................ 148
24.4 Herbert Gerald Waldeck ............................................................................................................................................ 149
24.5 Henrietta Salter ......................................................................................................................................................... 150
24.6 Anton von Wielligh..................................................................................................................................................... 151
24.7 Alan Naismith ............................................................................................................................................................ 152
24.8 Petrus Cilliers ............................................................................................................................................................ 153
24.9 Rob McNeill............................................................................................................................................................... 154
25 Additional Requirements for Production Properties........................................................................................................ 155
25a Mining Operations ............................................................................................................................................................... 155
25a.1 T17 Mine .................................................................................................................................................................... 155
25a.1.1 LoM Plan ...................................................................................................................................................... 155
25a.1.2 Mining Operations......................................................................................................................................... 155
25a.1.3 Risks ............................................................................................................................................................ 156
25a.2 Kamoto Mine .............................................................................................................................................................. 156
25a.2.1 LoM Plan ...................................................................................................................................................... 156
25a.2.2 Mining Operations......................................................................................................................................... 156
25a.2.3 Backfill .......................................................................................................................................................... 158
25a.2.4 Ventilation..................................................................................................................................................... 158
25a.2.5 Survey .......................................................................................................................................................... 158
25a.2.6 Opportunities ................................................................................................................................................ 158
25a.3 KOV Mine ................................................................................................................................................................... 158
25a.3.1 LoM Plan ...................................................................................................................................................... 158
25a.3.2 Mining Operations......................................................................................................................................... 160
25a.4 Mashamba East Mine ................................................................................................................................................. 160
25a.4.1 LoM Plan ...................................................................................................................................................... 160
25a.4.2 Mining Operations......................................................................................................................................... 160
25a.4.3 Risks ............................................................................................................................................................ 160
25b Recoverability...................................................................................................................................................................... 162
25b.1 Source of Information ................................................................................................................................................. 162
25b.2 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................. 162
25b.3 Ore Sources ............................................................................................................................................................... 162
25b.3.1 Ore Type and Mineralogy ............................................................................................................................. 162
25b.3.2 KOV Mine ..................................................................................................................................................... 163
25b.3.3 Kamoto Mine ................................................................................................................................................ 163
25b.4 Metallurgy................................................................................................................................................................... 163
25b.5 Processing Facilities ................................................................................................................................................... 164
25b.5.1 Kolwezi Concentrator.................................................................................................................................... 164
25b.5.2 Luilu Electro-Refinery.................................................................................................................................... 164
25b.5.3 Kamoto Concentrator.................................................................................................................................... 164
25b.5.4 Luilu Metallurgical Plant ................................................................................................................................ 165
25b.5.5 WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project....................................................................................................................... 166
25b.5.6 Process Plant Capacity................................................................................................................................. 168
25b.6 Copper and Cobalt Recovery...................................................................................................................................... 169
25b.7 Processing Schedule .................................................................................................................................................. 170
25b.7.1 Ore from KOV Mine ...................................................................................................................................... 170
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 7
25b.7.2 Ore from Kamoto Mine.................................................................................................................................. 170
25b.7.3 Other Ore Sources........................................................................................................................................ 170
25c Marketing Study................................................................................................................................................................... 173
25c.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................. 173
25c.2 Copper Marketing ....................................................................................................................................................... 173
25c.3 CRU Copper Price Forecasts...................................................................................................................................... 173
25c.4 Cobalt Marketing......................................................................................................................................................... 174
25c.5 CRU Cobalt Price Forecasts ....................................................................................................................................... 175
25d Contracts ....................................................................................................................................................................... 178
25e Environmental Considerations........................................................................................................................................... 178
25e.1 Legislation and compliance......................................................................................................................................... 178
25e.2 Environmental and social issues................................................................................................................................. 181
25e.2.1 General......................................................................................................................................................... 181
25e.2.2 Outstanding information................................................................................................................................ 182
25e.2.3 Ground and surface water ............................................................................................................................ 183
25e.2.4 Relocation of residents of Musonoi Village.................................................................................................... 185
25e.2.5 Relocation of residents of Ngonzo Village and other villages affected by Far West Tailings Dam.................. 186
25e.2.6 Air pollution................................................................................................................................................... 186
25e.2.7 Social issues................................................................................................................................................. 187
25e.2.8 Radiation ...................................................................................................................................................... 187
25e.3 Closure....................................................................................................................................................................... 188
25e.3.1 Closure planning........................................................................................................................................... 188
25e.3.2 Allocation of Closure Costs ........................................................................................................................... 189
25e.4 Material risks and potential opportunities to reduce liabilities ...................................................................................... 190
25e.4.1 Risks ............................................................................................................................................................ 190
25e.4.2 Opportunities ................................................................................................................................................ 191
25f Taxes and Key Business Operating Parameters................................................................................................................ 192
25g Capital and Operating Cost Estimates............................................................................................................................... 193
25g.1 Capital Cost Estimates................................................................................................................................................ 193
25g.2 Operating Cost Estimates ........................................................................................................................................... 194
25h Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................. 195
25h Payback ....................................................................................................................................................................... 199
25i Mine Life ....................................................................................................................................................................... 199
Glossary of Terms, Abbreviations, Units and Chemical Elements ......................................................................................... 200
Glossary of Terms ................................................................................................................................................................ 200
Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................................................................... 205
Units ....................................................................................................................................................................... 210
Chemical Elements............................................................................................................................................................... 212
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 8
List of TablesTable 3.1: Summary Table of Material Mining Assets................................................................................................................... 13
Table 3.2: Summary Table of Material Processing Assets .............................................................................................................. 14
Table 3.3 KOL: Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2008 ........................................................................................................ 14
Table 3.4 KOL: Mineral Reserves as at 31 December 2008.......................................................................................................... 15
Table 3.5 KOL: Discount Rate Sensitivity ................................................................................................................................. 17
Table 3.6 Revenue and Grade Sensitivity................................................................................................................................... 17
Table 3.7 Revenue and Capital Cost Sensitivity.......................................................................................................................... 17
Table 3.8 Revenue and Operating Cost Sensitivity...................................................................................................................... 17
Table 4.1: Summary Table of Material Mining Assets................................................................................................................... 19
Table 4.2: Summary Table of Material Processing Assets .............................................................................................................. 19
Table 5.1: Reliance on Other Experts .......................................................................................................................................... 23
Table 6.1 Sequence of Key Socio-Political Events ...................................................................................................................... 24
Table 6.2: KCC: Mineral and Surface Rights ............................................................................................................................... 29
Table 6.3: DCP: Mineral and Surface Rights................................................................................................................................ 30
Table 6.4: Environmental Liabilities(1) ........................................................................................................................................ 34
Table 8.1: T17 Mine: Historical Production ................................................................................................................................. 42
Table 8.2: Tilwezembe Mine: Historical Production ..................................................................................................................... 43
Table 8.3: Kamoto Mine: Historical Production ........................................................................................................................... 44
Table 8.4: KOV: Historical Production ....................................................................................................................................... 45
Table 8.5: Kamoto Concentrator: Historical Production................................................................................................................. 45
Table 8.6: Luilu Metallurgical Plant: Historical Production............................................................................................................ 46
Table 19.1 T17 Mine: Core Recovery Data by Lithology............................................................................................................... 72
Table 19.2 Tilwezembe Mine: Recoveries within the Mineralized Zones ......................................................................................... 72
Table 19.3 Kamoto Mine: Core Recovery Data by Lithology ......................................................................................................... 72
Table 19.4 Kananga Mine: Recoveries within the Mineralized Zones.............................................................................................. 73
Table 19.5 KOV Mine: Recoveries within the Mineralized Zones................................................................................................... 73
Table 19.6 Mashamba East Mine: Core Recovery Data by Lithology .............................................................................................. 74
Table 19.7 T17 Mine: Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by Lithology Type ............................................................................... 83
Table 19.8 Tilwezembe Mine: Statistics from the 1 m Composites by Lithology Type ...................................................................... 84
Table 19.9 Kamoto Mine: Kamoto Principal – Statistics per Unit ................................................................................................... 84
Table 19.10 Kamoto Mine: Etang South – Statistics per Unit............................................................................................................ 85
Table 19.11 Kamoto Mine: Etang North - Statistics per Unit ............................................................................................................ 85
Table 19.12 Kananga Mine: Statistics from the 1 m Composites by Lithology Type ............................................................................ 86
Table 19.13 KOV Mine: Virgule – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by Lithology Type ................................................................ 86
Table 19.14 KOV Mine: Oliveira – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by Lithology Type ............................................................... 87
Table 19.15 KOV Mine: FNSR – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by Lithology Type .................................................................. 87
Table 19.16 KOV Mine: Kamoto East – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by Lithology Type........................................................ 87
Table 19.17 KOV Mine: Statistics from Limited mid-RSC Sampling ................................................................................................ 89
Table 19.18 Mashamba East: Statistics from the 2,5m Composites by Lithology Type......................................................................... 89
Table 19.19 T17 Mine: Omni-directional variogram parameters by lithology..................................................................................... 90
Table 19.20 Tilwezembe Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – Manganiferous Dolomites (Oxide and Sulphide).................... 91
Table 19.21 Tilwezembe Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – Breccia (Oxide and Sulphide).............................................. 91
Table 19.22 Tilwezembe Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – Tillites and Argillites (Oxide and Sulphide) .......................... 91
Table 19.23 Kamoto Mine: Copper variogram models ..................................................................................................................... 93
Table 19.24 Kamoto Mine: Cobalt variogram models ...................................................................................................................... 93
Table 19.25 Kananga Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – upper orebody (Oxide and Sulphide) ......................................... 95
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 9
Table 19.26 Kananga Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – internal/middle zone (Oxide and Sulphide) ................................ 95
Table 19.27 KOV Mine: Virgule- Omni-Directional Variogram Parameters by Lithology .................................................................... 96
Table 19.28 KOV Mine: Oliveira - Omni-Directional Variogram Parameters by Lithology ................................................................. 96
Table 19.29 Mashamba East Mine: Omni-directional Variogram Parameters by Lithology .................................................................. 97
Table 19.30 T17 Mine: Variogram parameters by lithology .............................................................................................................. 97
Table 19.31 Mashamba East Mine: Variogram parameters by lithology ........................................................................................... 100
Table 19.32 Gecamines criteria for assigning density values........................................................................................................... 101
Table 19.33 T17 Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies........................................................................................... 101
Table 19.34 Tilwezembe Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies ............................................................................... 102
Table 19.35 Kamoto Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies ..................................................................................... 103
Table 19.36 Kananga Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies .................................................................................... 103
Table 19.37 Mashamba East Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies .......................................................................... 104
Table 19.38 Density Determinations on Various Lithologies .......................................................................................................... 105
Table 19.39 T17 Mine: Mineral Resources at 0% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008).......................................................................... 106
Table 19.40 Tilwezembe Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0,5% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008)......................................................... 107
Table 19.41 Kamoto Mine: Mineral Resources by zone (31 December 2008) .................................................................................. 108
Table 19.42 Kananga Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0,5% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008).............................................................. 109
Table 19.43 KOV Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008) ..................................................................... 110
Table 19.44 Mashamba East Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008) ....................................................... 111
Table 19.45 KOL: Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2008 ...................................................................................................... 112
Table 19.46 KOL: Comparison of the 2008 and 2007 Mineral Resource statements.......................................................................... 113
Table 19.47 KOL: Mineral Reserves as at 31 December 2008........................................................................................................ 114
Table 20.1 Tailings Dams: Key Dates ........................................................................................................................................ 136
Table 23.1: References ............................................................................................................................................................. 145
Table 25a.1 T17 Mine: LoM Production Profile........................................................................................................................... 155
Table 25a.2 Kamoto Mine: Mining Methods ................................................................................................................................ 156
Table 25a.3 Kamoto Mine: LoM Production Profile (2009-2023) ................................................................................................... 157
Table 25a.4 Kamoto Mine: LoM Production Profile (2024-2038) ................................................................................................... 157
Table 25a.5 KOV Mine: LoM Production Profile (2009-2023) ....................................................................................................... 159
Table 25a.6 KOV Mine: LoM Production Profile (2024-2038) ....................................................................................................... 159
Table 25a.7 Mashamba East Mine: LoM Production Profile (Base Case 2009-2027) ......................................................................... 161
Table 25b.1 Gecamines Historical Recoveries .............................................................................................................................. 165
Table 25b.2 Capacity Expansion: Refurbishment Phases................................................................................................................ 168
Table 25b.3 WOL/SX/EW Refinery Modules: Timing and Capacities ............................................................................................. 169
Table 25b.4 Assumed Copper and Cobalt Recovery by Ore Type.................................................................................................... 169
Table 25b.5 KOV Mine Design Feed Tonnage and Grade .............................................................................................................. 170
Table 25b.6 Kamoto Mine Design Feed Tonnage and Grade .......................................................................................................... 170
Table 25c.1 Marketing Study: CRU Strategies Prices and Applied Prices (2009-2023) ...................................................................... 177
Table 25e.1 Summary of key legislation and relevant compliance ................................................................................................... 180
Table 25e.2 Summary of project information gaps ........................................................................................................................ 182
Table 25e.3 Environmental Closure Costs.................................................................................................................................... 189
Table 25e.4 Allocation of Closure Costs ...................................................................................................................................... 190
Table 25f.1 Economic Analysis: Key Business Operating Parameters ............................................................................................. 192
Table 25g.1 Summary of Processing Capital Expenditure .............................................................................................................. 193
Table 25g.2 LoM Investment Capital Expenditure (2009-2018) ...................................................................................................... 194
Table 25g.3 LoM Operating Costs (2009-2018) ............................................................................................................................ 195
Table 25h.1 Discounted Cash Flow Model (2009-2023)................................................................................................................. 196
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 10
Table 25h.2 Discounted Cash Flow Model (2024-2038)................................................................................................................. 197
Table 25h.3 Discount Rate Sensitivity ......................................................................................................................................... 198
Table 25h.4 Revenue and Grade Sensitivity ................................................................................................................................. 198
Table 25h.5 Revenue and Capital Cost Sensitivity......................................................................................................................... 198
Table 25h.6 Revenue and Operating Cost Sensitivity..................................................................................................................... 198
Table 25h.7 Revenue Sensitivity using 17 March 2009 LME Forecast Contract Pricing ..................................................................... 199
List of FiguresFigure 4.1: Company Structure.................................................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 6.1: Geographic Location Map of the Material Assets .......................................................................................................... 35
Figure 6.2: General Location Map of the Material Assets ............................................................................................................... 36
Figure 9.1: Regional Geology ..................................................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 9.2: General Stratigraphy of the Katangan System ............................................................................................................... 50
Figure 13.1 KOV Mine: Comparisons of the Twin Hole Intersections, Thickness and %TCu grade by Lithology - SDB.......................... 55
Figure 13.2 KOV Mine: Comparisons of the Twin Hole Intersections, Thickness and %TCu grade by Lithology - RSF .......................... 56
Figure 13.3 KOV Mine: Comparisons of the Twin Hole Intersections, Thickness and %TCu grade by Lithology - DSTRAT ................... 56
Figure 19.1 Mashamba East: Drill-hole Location Plan, Geology and Pit Outline................................................................................ 68
Figure 19.2 T17 Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan and Geology ......................................................................................................... 69
Figure 19.3 Kananga Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan ..................................................................................................................... 69
Figure 19.4 Tilwezembe Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan, Geology and Pit Outline ............................................................................ 70
Figure 19.5 KOV Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan and Surface Topography....................................................................................... 71
Figure 19.6 T17 Mine: %TCu grade distribution in DST, RSF and DB respectively (longitudinal view) ................................................ 76
Figure 19.7 Tilwezembe Mine: %TCu grade distribution in the Breccia ............................................................................................ 77
Figure 19.8 Kamoto Mine: %TCu grade distribution in the OBI and OBS (plan view) ........................................................................ 78
Figure 19.9 Kananga Mine: Longitudinal sections showing UOB (top figure) and LOB (bottom figure) intersections ............................. 79
Figure 19.10 KOV Mine: %TCu grade distribution plots for Kamoto east and Virgule, and Oliveira and FNSR respectively ..................... 81
Figure 19.11 Mashamba East Mine: %TCu grade distribution in RSF and SDB respectively (plan view) ................................................ 82
Figure 20.1 Tailings Disposal: Probable Tailings Dams Sites .................................................................................................. 132
Figure 25b.1: Metallurgical Processing: Final Block Diagram........................................................................................................... 171
Figure 25b.2: Metallurgical Processing: Distribution by Ore Type..................................................................................................... 172
1
2
SRK House265 Oxford Road, Illovo2196 Johannesburg
PO Box 55291Northlands2116 South Africa
e-Mail: [email protected]: http://www.srk.co.za
Tel: +27 (11) 441 1111Fax: +27 (11) 880 8086
3 Summary
3.1 Property Description and Location
SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Proprietary) Limited has been commissioned by Katanga Mining
Limited (“KML”) to compile an Independent Technical Report (“ITR”) which complies with the
National Instrument 43-101: Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Companies (“NI 43-101”) on the
following operations / projects and associated infrastructure (the “Material Assets”) located near
Kolwezi in the Katanga Province of the DRC:
Mining Assets (the “Mining Complex”);
o T17, an operating open pit mine (“T17 Mine”);
o Tilwezembe, a recently closed open pit mine (“Tilwezembe Mine”);
o Kamoto, an operating underground mine (“Kamoto Mine”);
o Kananga, a dormant open pit mine (“Kananga Mine”);
o KOV open pit mine, a development project (“KOV Mine”);
o Mashamba East mine, a development project (“Mashamba East Mine”);
Processing Assets (the “Processing Complex”);
o Kamoto, an operating concentrator (“Kamoto Concentrator”);
o Luilu, an operating metallurgical plant (“Luilu Metallurgical Plant”);
o Additional WOL/SX/EW Refinery (“WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project); and
Infrastructure necessary for the production of the saleable metals.
3.2 Terms of Reference
Technical data used in this ITR has been derived using the revised Life-of-Mine (“LoM”) plan based
on the work done in the 2008 Kamoto Operating Limited Engineering Study (“2008 Study”)
compiled by SRK and Bateman Engineering.
As a result of the financial crisis, the impact of which was felt in the last quarter of 2008, and the
subsequent steep decline in commodity prices including copper and cobalt, KML changed its
strategy for the development of the mines and process plants, which necessitated a revised LoM
plan. The emphasis was to constrain capital expenditure in the initial years and to limit the
processing capacity to 310 ktpa Copper from the previous 400 ktpa Copper. Work based on the
revised LoM plan, which was completed in a two month period, is not to the level and standard
consistent with the work completed in the 2008 Study.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 12
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The Bateman Engineering 2008 Study and the subsequent work has been prepared for the exclusive
benefit of KOL and exclusively for the Phase 3,4 and 5 project, and is subject to a separate
agreement entered into between Bateman Engineering and KOL. The processing plant capacities as
well as the capital and operating cost estimates have been factored using the work from the 2008
Study. The capital and operating cost estimates given in 2009 work were based on Bateman
Engineering’s internal database and updated for scope changes only.
3.3 Ownership
The exploitation rights for Kamoto, Mashamba East and T17 Mines together with the Kamoto
Concentrator, Luilu Metallurgical Plant and WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project are held in a joint
venture vehicle KCC SARL (Kamoto Copper Company, “KCC”). The exploitation rights for KOV,
Tilwezembe and Kananga mines are held in a joint venture vehicle DCP SARL (DRC Copper and
Cobalt Project, “DCP”). Katanga Mining Limited (“KML”) has a 75% interest in both KCC and
DCP, with the remaining 25% of each entity held by Gecamines (La Générale des Carrières et des
Mines).
3.4 Geology and Mineralization
3.4.1 Geology
The mineralized zones are at the western end of the Katangan Copperbelt, one of the great
metallogenic provinces of the world, and which contains some of the world’s richest copper, cobalt
and uranium deposits. These deposits are hosted mainly by metasedimentary rocks of the late
proterozoic Katangan system, a 7 km thick succession of sediments with minor volcanics,
volcanoclastics and intrusives. Geochronological data indicate an age of deposition of the Katangan
sediments of about 880 million years and deformation during the Katangan orogeny at less than
650 million years. This deformation resulted in the NS-SE trending Lufilian Arc, which extends
from Namibia on the west coast of Africa through to Zambia, lying to the south of the DRC. Within
the DRC, the zone extends for more than 300 km from Kolwezi in the north-west to Lubumbashi in
the south-east.
Stratigraphically, the rich copper and cobalt deposits found in Zambia and the DRC are localized in
the Roan Supergroup (“Roan”). The Roan occurs at the base of the Katanga succession,
unconformably overlying the basement rock of Kibaran age (mid-Proterozoic). The Roan is
separated from the overlying rocks of the Upper and Lower Kundelungu supergroups by a
conglomerate, the grand conglomerate. The Lower Kundelungu is composed of sandstones and
shales with a basal conglomerate, while the Upper Kundelungu consists essentially of sediments and
is separated from the Lower Kundelungu by a conglomerate, the (French) ‘Petit Conglomerat’.
Within the Lufilian Arc are large-scale E-W to NW-SE trending folds with wavelengths extending
for kilometres. The folds are faulted along the crests of the anticlines through which rocks of the
Roan have been diapirically injected into the fault zones, squeezed up fault planes and over-thrust to
lie above rocks of the younger Kundelungu. The over-thrust Roan lithologies occur as segments or
“fragments” on surface. The fragments are intact units that preserve the original geological
succession within each. A fragment could be of hundreds of metres aligned across the fault plane.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 13
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
In the Katangan Copperbelt, mining for copper and cobalt occurs in these outcropping to sub-
outcropping fragments.
3.4.2 Mineralization
Primary mineralization, in the form of sulphides, within the Lower Roan is associated with the D
Strat and RSF for the OBI and the SDB and SDS for the OBS and is thought to be syn-sedimentary
in origin. Typical primary copper sulphide minerals are bornite, chalcopyrite, chalcocite and
occasional native copper while cobalt is in the form of carrolite. The mineralization occurs as
disseminations or in association with hydrothermal carbonate alteration and silicification.
Supergene mineralization is generally associated with the levels of oxidation in the sub-surface
sometimes deeper than 100 m below surface. The most common secondary supergene minerals for
copper and cobalt are malachite and heterogenite. Malachite is the main mineral mined within the
confines of the current KOV Mine pit.
The RSC, a lithological unit stratigraphically intermediate between the OBS and OBI host rocks,
contains relatively less copper mineralization. The RSC contains appreciable copper mineralization
near the contacts with the overlying SDB formation and the underlying RSF formations. The middle
portion of the RSC, considered to be “sterile” by Gecamines, normally contains relatively less
copper mineralization and is sometimes not sampled. The mineral potential of the RSC is less well
known than that of other formations. The RSC has been observed to be well mineralized in
supergene cobalt hydroxide, heterogenite, which occurs as vug infillings, especially near the surface.
The mineralization at Tilwezembe Mine is atypical being hosted by the Mwashya or R4 Formation.
The mineralization generally occurs as infilling of fissures and open fractures associated with the
brecciation. The typical mineralization consists mainly of copper minerals (chalcopyrite, malachite
and pseudomalachite), cobalt minerals (heterogenite, carrolite and spherocobaltite) and manganese
minerals (psilomelane and manganite).
3.5 Status of the Material Assets
Tables 3.1 and 3.2 provide details on the staus of the assets.
Table 3.1: Summary Table of Material Mining Assets
Licence
Property Holder Type Status Expiry Date Area Comments
T17 Mine KCC op Operating 3 April 2024 3,40 km2 Mine operational
Tilwezembe Mine DCP op Dormant 3 April 2009 7,64 km2 Operations ceased in November 2008due to lower copper / cobalt prices
Kamoto Mine KCC ug Operating 3 April 2024 11,04 km2 Mine operational
Kananga Mine DCP op Dormant 3 April 2009 11,04 km2 Operations ceased due to pendingrelocation of rail line
KOV Mine DCP op Development 3 April 2009 8,49 km2 Pre-stripping and dewateringscheduled for 2009 / 2010
Mashamba EastMine
KCC op Development 3 April 2024 11,04* km2 Dewatering deferred to 2016
op = open pitug = underground* Part of the same mining licence
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 14
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 3.2: Summary Table of Material Processing Assets
Property Holder Status Comments
Kamoto Concentrator KCC Operating Oxide 2008: 437,7 kt, Sulphide 2008: 562,8 kt
Luilu Metallurgical Plant KCC Operating Copper cathode 2008: 749 t
WOL/SX/EW RefineryProject
KCC Development 160 ktpa Cu
3.6 Mineral Resources and Reserves
As at 31December 2008, KML has Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of 297,5 Mt of ore
with a grade of 4,02% Cu and 0,46% Co (Table 3.3 presents KML’s consolidated Mineral Resource
statement as of 31 December 2008), with Proved and Probable Mineral Reserves of 139,8 Mt of ore
with a grade of 4,50% Cu and 0,44% Co (Table 3.4 presents KML’s consolidated Mineral Reserve
statement as of 31 December 2008).
Table 3.3 KOL: Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2008
Resource Classification Project Area Mt %TCu %TCo
Measured Kamoto Mine 33,0 4,50% 0,58%
Subtotal 33,0 4,50% 0,58%
Kamoto Mine 35,7 4,69% 0,60%
Mashamba East Mine 75,0 1,80% 0,38%
Indicated T17 Mine 13,7 3,16% 0,64%
KOV Mine 126,9 5,33% 0,40%
Kananga Mine 4,1 1,61% 0,79%
Tilwezembe Mine 9,0 1,89% 0,60%
Subtotal 264,5 3,95% 0,45%
Kamoto Mine 68,7 4,60% 0,59%
Total Mashamba East Mine 75,0 1,80% 0,38%
Measured and T17 Mine 13,7 3,16% 0,64%
Indicated KOV Mine 126,9 5,33% 0,40%
Kananga Mine 4,1 1,61% 0,79%
Tilwezembe Mine 9,0 1,89% 0,60%
TOTAL 297,5 4,02% 0,46%
Kamoto Mine 10,6 5,22% 0,53%
Mashamba East Mine 65,3 0,76% 0,10%
Inferred T17 Mine 16,7 1,77% 0,57%
KOV Mine 71,2 3,56% 0,32%
Kananga Mine 4,0 2,00% 0,98%
Tilwezembe Mine 13,1 1,80% 0,62%
TOTAL 180,7 2,32% 0,31%
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(3) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 15
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 3.4 KOL: Mineral Reserves as at 31 December 2008
Classification Project Area Mt %TCu %TCo
Proved Kamoto Mine 17,0 3,52% 0,51%
Subtotal 17,0 3,52% 0,51%
Kamoto Mine 19,4 3,70% 0,53%
Mashamba East Mine 10,2 4,39% 0,52%
Probable T17 Mine 3,1 2,67% 0,70%
KOV Mine 90,1 4,93% 0,38%
Kananga Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Tilwezembe Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Subtotal 122,8 4,64% 0,43%
Kamoto Mine 36,4 3,62% 0,52%
Total Mashamba East Mine 10,2 4,39% 0,52%
Proved and T17 Mine 3,1 2,67% 0,70%
Probable KOV Mine 90,1 4,93% 0,38%
Kananga Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Tilwezembe Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Total 139,8 4,50% 0,44%
(1) Mineral Reserves have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.
3.7 Interpretations and Conclusions
The results and interpretations of exploration on the Material Assets are reported elsewhere in this
report and have been relied upon to compile the Mineral Resource statement included in Item 19.
3.8 Recommendations
Recommendations for future work required on the technical assets are included in other items in this
report. Specific action programs recommended are:
Dewatering;
o SRK believes that additional work is required to demonstrate correlation between
the model and field observations and data:
o A gap analysis should be undertaken to state clearly the information that is still
required and assumptions that have been used in the calibration of the model. For
example, how was the recharge value used in the model determined?
o It has been stated by AGES that there will now be a longer lead time for dewatering
to be effective for the southern part of the pit as cut 1 is now going to the north.
This scenario needs to be modelled to demonstrate that this is in fact the case.
o The aquifer parameters determined from pump testing and/or packer testing for
specific stratigraphical units should be built into the model on a more detailed level
and fed back into the detailed conceptual hydrogeological model.
o Using the more detailed conceptual hydrogeological model, the position of the
phreatic surface and potential heights of the seepage faces in the high walls should
be simulated within different geotechnical domains.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 16
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
o The position of the phreatic surface (hydraulic head) at quarterly intervals for the
first 24 months needs to be modelled, followed by its position annually for the life of
mine. The probability of achieving these phreatic surfaces must also be determined.
o Additional drilling and pump testing should be undertaken to establish that the RAT
does in fact form an impermeable barrier for regional groundwater flow as this is a
critical assumption in the model.
o The model should be updated with the data from drilling currently being undertaken
to demonstrate that the aquifer on the eastern side of the Musonoi River is in fact
being impacted by the dewatering of KOV. This data will be critical in resolving the
issue of the source of flow into KOV and should be used to refine the dewatering
strategy in the future.
o Additional scenarios should be run to assess the risks if in-pit boreholes prove not to
be possible or only partially possible and pumping from the bottom of the pit
becomes the primary dewatering method. An assessment of how long it will take to
draw down the phreatic surface around the pit is required, assuming only passive
dewatering i.e. pumping from the pit sump only.
o The real and measured losses from the Musonoi catchment into the Kakifuluwe
River should be incorporated into the model.
o An assessment of the expected impacts on groundwater users needs to be undertaken
if part of the inflow into KOV comes from the east side of the Musonoi River.
Geotechnical;
o Further studies should be carried out on the rock chracteristics associated with the
Material Assets.
Tailings
o Further studies should be carried out to; fully characterise the physical and chemical
properties of the tailings streams, investigate the possibility of open end deposition,
further investigate the geology and hydrogeology at Mupine Pit and to characterise
potential construction materials.
In undertaking the study, Bateman Engineering has been provided with and has relied upon
records, documents and other information supplied by the client and other third parties. Save
as expressly stated in this report, Bateman Engineering has assumed and did not attempt to
verify the accuracy, reliability, sufficieny or validity of such information, data or records and
documents. Bateman therefore recommends:
Repeat testwork for all mineral properties;
Additional work the on the sizing of the WOL/SX/EW plant and configuration, as well as
capital and operating costs; and
Additional work on the capital and operating cost estimates.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 17
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
3.9 Economic Analysis
This section presents a sensitivities for discount rates (Table 3.5) metal prices and grade
(Table 3.6); capital cost (Table 3.7) and operating costs (Table 3.8). The Net Present Values
(“NPVs”) should be considered only in relation to the risks mentioned in Item 20 of this report.
Table 3.5 KOL: Discount Rate Sensitivity
Discount Factor NPV
(%) (USDm)
8,00% 1027
10,00% 624
12,00% 324
14,00% 99
16,00% (70)
18,00% (197)
20,00% (292)
Table 3.6 Revenue and Grade Sensitivity
Sensitised Factor SensitivityRange (@14% discount rate)
Revenue / Commodity Price -15% -10% -5% 0% 10% 20% 30%
Grade (Cu %) 3,89% 4,12% 4,35% 4,50%* 5,03% 5,49% 5,95%
Grade (Co %) 0,37% 0,39% 0,41% 0,44%* 0,48% 0,52% 0,57%
(USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm)
Revenue / Grade (10) 27 63 99 171 242 312
* Reserve Grade
Table 3.7 Revenue and Capital Cost Sensitivity
NPV Revenue Sensitivity Range (@14% discount rate)
(USDm) -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30%
-15% 521 558 594 630 702 773 842
Total -10% 345 382 418 454 526 597 667
Capital -5% 168 205 241 278 350 421 490
Costs 0% (10) 27 63 99 171 242 312
Sensitivity 10% (370) (333) (297) (261) (189) (118) (48)
Range 20% (738) (701) (665) (629) (557) (487) (417)
30% (1135) (1087) (1047) (1009) (937) (867) (797)
Table 3.8 Revenue and Operating Cost Sensitivity
NPV Revenue Sensitivity Range (@14% discount rate)
(USDm) -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30%
-15% 248 284 321 357 429 499 569
Total -10% 162 199 235 271 343 414 484
Operating -5% 76 113 149 185 257 328 398
Costs 0% (10) 27 63 99 171 242 312
Sensitivity 10% (182) (145) (109) (72) (1) 70 140
Range 20% (353) (317) (280) (244) (173) (102) (32)
30% (525) (489) (452) (416) (344) (274) (204)
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 18
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
4 IntroductionSRK Consulting (South Africa) (Proprietary) Limited has been commissioned by Katanga Mining
Limited (“KML”) to compile an Independent Technical Report (“ITR”) which complies with the
National Instrument 43-101: Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Companies (“NI 43-101”) on the
following operations / projects and associated infrastructure (the “Material Assets”) located near
Kolwezi in the Katanga Province of the DRC:
Mining Assets (the “Mining Complex”);
o T17, an operating open pit mine (“T17 Mine”);
o Tilwezembe, a recently closed open pit mine (“Tilwezembe Mine”);
o Kamoto, an operating underground mine (“Kamoto Mine”);
o Kananga, a dormant open pit mine (“Kananga Mine”);
o KOV open pit mine, a development project (“KOV Mine”);
o Mashamba East mine, a development project (“Mashamba East Mine”);
Processing Assets (the “Processing Complex”);
o Kamoto, an operating concentrator (“Kamoto Concentrator”);
o Luilu, an operating metallurgical plant (“Luilu Metallurgical Plant”);
o Additional WOL/SX/EW Refinery (“WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project); and
Infrastructure necessary for the production of the saleable metals.
4.1 Description of Assets
The exploitation rights for Kamoto, Mashamba East and T17 Mines together with the Kamoto
Concentrator, Luilu Metallurgical Plant and WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project are held in a joint
venture vehicle KCC SARL (Kamoto Copper Company, “KCC”). The exploitation rights for KOV,
Tilwezembe and Kananga mines are held in a joint venture vehicle DCP SARL (DRC Copper and
Cobalt Project, “DCP”). Katanga Mining Limited (“KML”) has a 75% interest in both KCC and
DCP, with the remaining 25% of each entity held by Gecamines (La Générale des Carrières et des
Mines). Refer to Figure 4.1 for further details.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 19
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 4.1: Summary Table of Material Mining Assets
Licence
Property Holder Type Status Expiry Date Area Comments
T17 Mine KCC op Operating 3 April 2024 3,40 km2 Mine operational
Tilwezembe Mine DCP op Dormant 3 April 2009 7,64 km2 Operations ceased in November 2008due to lower copper / cobalt prices
Kamoto Mine KCC ug Operating 3 April 2024 11,04 km2 Mine operational
Kananga Mine DCP op Dormant 3 April 2009 11,04 km2 Operations ceased due to pendingrelocation of rail line
KOV Mine DCP op Development 3 April 2009 8,49 km2 Pre-stripping and dewateringscheduled for 2009 / 2010
Mashamba EastMine
KCC op Development 3 April 2024 11,04* km2 Dewatering deferred to 2016
op = open pitug = underground* Part of the Kamoto mining licence
Table 4.2: Summary Table of Material Processing Assets
Property Holder Status Comments
Kamoto Concentrator KCC Operating Oxide 2008: 437,7 kt, Sulphide 2008: 562,8 kt
Luilu Metallurgical Plant KCC Operating Copper cathode 2008: 749 t
WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project KCC Early Development 160 ktpa Cu
4.2 Company Structure
KML, a Bermuda-based company, holds a 75% stake in two joint ventures with Gecamines, a State-
owned mining company in the DRC. These joint ventures, KCC and DCP, hold and operate adjacent
mining concessions.
Following the merger of KML with Nikanor Plc in January 2008 through which KML acquired its
stake in DCP, KML plan to consolidate the joint ventures into a single entity. This will require
integrating provisions of the DCP joint venture agreement into the KCC joint venture agreement, and
having the DRC Government issue a revised mining and exploitation concession to the consolidated
KCC joint venture.
Figure 4.1 illustrates the inter-corporate relationships between KML and its subsidiaries, including
the jurisdiction of incorporation.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI 43-101) Page 20
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 4.1: Company Structure
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 21
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
4.3 ITR – structure and compliance
4.3.1 Structure
This Independent Technical Report has been structured according to the Form 43-101F1 Technical
Report requirements.
4.3.2 Compliance
This report has been prepared under the direction of the Qualified Person (the “QP”) who assumes
overall professional responsibility for the document. The report, however, is published by SRK, the
commissioned entity, and accordingly SRK assumes responsibility for the views expressed herein.
Consequently all references to SRK mean the QP and vice-versa.
This technical report has been prepared in accordance with the National Instrument 43-101:
Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Companies.
4.4 Terms of Reference
The effective date (the “Effective Date”) of this ITR is deemed to be 1 January 2009, and is co-
incident with the valuation date and cash-flow projections as incorporated herein. The valuation of
the Material Assets is dependent upon the following:
Technical information as generated by KML at the Base Technical Information Date
(“BID”), which is 1 January 2009; and
Appropriate adjustments made by SRK to technical information which inter alia includes
depletion, historical performance and any additional material information provided by KML
to the Effective Date.
Technical data used in this ITR has been derived using the revised LoM plan given in the work done
in the 2008 Kamoto Operating Limited Engineering Study (“2008 Study”) compiled by SRK and
Bateman Engineering.
As a result of the financial crisis, the impact of which was felt in the last quarter of 2008, and the
subsequent steep decline in commodity prices including copper and cobalt, KML changed its
strategy for the development of the mines and process plant, which necessitated a revised LoM plan.
The emphasis was to constrain capital expenditure in the initial years and to limit the processing
capacity to 310 ktpa Copper from the previous 400 ktpa Copper. Work based on the revised LoM
plan, which was completed in a two month period, is not to the level and standard consistent with the
work completed in the 2008 Study.
The processing plant capacities as well as the capital and operating cost estimates have been factored
using the work from the 2008 Study. The capital and operating cost estimates based on the 2009
work were based on Bateman Engineering’s internal database and updated for scope changes only.
4.5 Scope of Information and Site Visits
This technical report is dependent upon technical, financial and legal input. The technical
information as provided to and taken in good faith by SRK has not been independently verified by
means of re-calculation. SRK has, however, conducted a review and assessment of all material
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 22
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
technical issues likely to influence the future performance of the Material Assets; the review and
assessment included the following:
Inspection visits to the Material Assets’ processing facilities, surface structures and
associated infrastructure undertaken between March and September 2008;
Discussion and enquiry following access to key on-mine and head office personnel between
March and September 2008;
A review and where considered appropriate by SRK, modification of the Material Assets
estimates and their classification of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves to reflect the
position as at 1 January 2009;
A review and where considered appropriate by SRK, modification of the Material Assets
production forecasts contained in the Life-of-Mine (“LoM”) plans;
Obtained independent forecasts for certain macro-economic parameters and commodity
prices and relied on these as inputs into the derivation of the cash flow projections of the
Material Assets;
Satisfied itself that such information is both appropriate and valid for valuation as reported
herein. SRK considers that with respect to all material technical-economic matters it has
undertaken all necessary investigations to ensure SAMREC compliance, in terms of the level
of disclosure; and
The Mineral Resources for all mines were estimated and are reported in accordance with the
classification criteria of the SAMREC Code. The disclosure of “Measured Mineral
Resources, “Indicated Mineral Resources” and “Inferred Mineral Resources” classifications
based on the SAMREC Code reconcile without variation to the “Measured Mineral
Resources”, “Indicated Mineral Resources” and “Inferred Mineral Resources” classifications
established by the Canadian Institute for Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum as the CIM
Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves and referred to
NI 43-101..
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 23
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
5 Reliance on Other ExpertsTable 5.1 provides details of companies that provided specific information which SRK utilised in the
compilation of this technical report.
Table 5.1: Reliance on Other Experts
Organisation Area of Work Report/sNI 43-101
Section
A&B Global Mining
Mineral Reserves andMining: T17 Mine;Kamoto UndergroundMine; and Mashamba EastMine.
Mining Report on T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba EastMine, A&B Global Limited – 2009 Update.
19, 25a
Africon-MMCTraffic and transportationimpact study
Africon, September 2008. Draft Report: Katanga Miningoperations Kolwezi Traffic management and Road Safety plan.MMC Engineers, January 2008. Specialist Traffic andTransportation Study for proposed Copper and Cobalt MineOperations at KOV, Kananaga, Tilwezembe and Kanfukuma inKolwezi, Katanga Province DRC Final Draft Report.
25e
AGES South AfricaDewatering model andhydrogeological study
AGES, 2008. Technical Reports AS-R-2008-09-05 and AGES-R-08-01-28, AG-R-2008-11-24 KOL Geohydrology ReportVersion 3 DRAFT and AG-R-2008-10-02 KOV DewateringDFS V2 Final.
20.2
Bateman EngineeringMineral processing,metallurgical testing andon-mine infrastructure
Bateman Engineering Study November 2008 and EngineeringStudy Addendum February 2009.
18, 25b
CRU StrategiesCopper and Cobalt priceforecasts
Update of copper and cobalt price forecasts - January 23rd,2009.
25c
FM AcousticConsulting
Noise impact specialist
F le R Malherbe, March 2008. Noise Impact Study for theKamoto Project near Kolwezi in the DRC, Report no 07/1/2/Rev 2.F le R Malherbe, January 2007. Noise Impact Study for theNikanor DCP project near Kolwezi in the DRC, Revisions 1Report No 07/9/4.
25e
Foxfire Scientific Radiological assessmentFoxfire Scientific, January 2009, Katanga Mining Limited DRCCopper Mining Projects Phase 1 Radiation Survey and Samplingof Kolwezi and Tilwezembe Mining Concessions.
25e
Golder AssociatesAfrica
Aquatic ecology impactassessment
Golder Associates, March 2007. Kamoto joint Venture projectAquatic Ecology Report. Report No 10440-6031-2Golder Associates, May 2008. Baseline Assessment of AquaticEcosystems Associated with Nikanor Kolwezi Report no10473/08/2Golder Associates, March 2008, Baseline Assessment of AquaticEcosystems associated with Nikanor, Kolwezi Report No 10473-6028-1.
25e
Norton RoseLegal opinion – miningand minerals rights,permits
Legal opinion as indicated in Section 6.2 (6.2.1 to 6.2.7).Received by e-mail on 13 March 2009.
6.2
Snowden GroupMineral Resources:Kananga Mine andTilwezembe Mine
Katanga Mining Limited: Tilwezembe and Kananga Project –Mineral Reserve Estimate, July 2008.
19
Trans-Africa Projects(“TAP”)
Power requirementsSupply to Kamoto Installations in Kolwezi: Load Flows andCost Estimates – September 2008, including 2009 Addendum.
20.3.2
University ofGembloux
Ecology surveys
Nature Plus, April 2004, Ecological report on sites around thetown of Kolwezi, Gembloux Belgium.Nature Plus, April 2006, Ecological Report concerningTilwezembe copper hill, Gembloux, Belgium.Nature Plus, February 2007. Ecological Report concerningTailings dam at yenge and the Proposed Process Plant Site.
25e
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 24
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
6 Property Description and Location
6.1 The DRC
The Democratic Republic of the Congo (French: République démocratique du Congo), often referred
to as the DRC, and formerly known or referred to as Congo Free State, Belgian Congo, Congo-
Léopoldville, Congo-Kinshasa, and Zaire (or Zaïre in French), is the third largest country by area on
the African continent. Though it is located in the Central African UN sub-region, the nation is
economically and regionally affiliated with Southern Africa as a member of the Southern African
Development Community (SADC). It borders the Central African Republic and Sudan to the north,
Uganda, Rwanda, and Burundi to the east, Zambia and Angola to the south, and the Republic of the
Congo to the west, and it is separated from Tanzania by Lake Tanganyika to the east.
Kolwezi is the main administrative centre of the mineral-rich Kolwezi District. It is about 240 km
west of Lubumbashi, the capital of Katanga Province. The town is on one of the most significant
watersheds in Southern Africa: rivers flowing northward join the great Congo River system, and
those flowing south feed the Zambezi.
Since independence in 1960, the Democratic Republic of the Congo has endured a series of
disruptive political events, including several outbreaks of civil war. Since 2001, however, the overall
socio-political and economic climate has improved. In Katanga Province, the sequence of key socio-
political events is provided in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1 Sequence of Key Socio-Political Events
1960-1962 Secessionist war in Katanga in the aftermath of independence from Belgium
1966 Nationalization of Union Minière du Haut Katanga and the formation of Gecamines
1971 Katanga renamed Shaba
1977-1978 Civil war in Shaba. Pillage of Kolwezi in May 1978, and flooding of the mines
1990 Withdrawal of US economic aid
1991 Pillage of Kolwezi by disaffected armed forces
1996Tribal tensions in Katanga (and Kolwezi) and forced eviction of residents of Kasai
Province origin
1996 Rebel movement against the rule of President Mobutu. Little or no foreign investment
1997 End of Mobutu’s rule
1999 Civil war in the eastern DRC with ongoing impacts on international development
2002 Withdrawal of foreign troops
2002 onwards Economic reforms in cooperation with the World Bank and IMF
2002 Introduction of a new Mining Code
2003 Formation of a transitional unity government
Against this background, the local economy of Kolwezi has moved through phases of boom and
bust. The most serious downturn occurred from 1997 onwards, when Gecamines’ management and
financial problems led to drastic cuts in production (around 90%), and to widespread delays in the
payment of salaries. The decline of Gecamines precipitated a serious and ongoing economic
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 25
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
recession in Kolwezi. The World Bank is currently supporting efforts to restructure and recapitalize
Gecamines.
6.2 Regulatory Environment
6.2.1 DRC Law in respect of Mining Title
The DRC introduced the current Mining Code (Law No. 007/2002) (the “Code”), on 11 July 2002.
The Code was supplemented by the Mining Regulations (Decree No. 038/2003 of 26 March 2003)
(“MR”).
The right of ownership of the deposits of mineral substances constitutes in principle a right that is
separate and distinct from the rights resulting from the surface area. However, subject to any rights
of third parties over the surface, the holder of an exploitation licence has the right, pursuant to
Articles 64 and 283 of the Code, to use the land surface necessary for his activities and in particular
to build installations and infrastructures required for its mining exploitation, and to establish inside
or outside his demarcated perimeter means of communication and transport of any type. The
exploitation licence also entails the right to exploit artificial deposits (i.e. stockpiles and tailings)
located within the mining perimeter covered by the licence.
The period of validity of new exploitation permits granted under the Code (French: permis
d’exploitation) (“PE”) is 30 years. The term of validity of a PE that derives from a Concession issued
pursuant to the legal regime applicable prior to the enactment of the Code, however, expires on the
original expiry date (Articles 336 of the Code and 580(c) of the MR). However, it is renewable
several times for durations of fifteen years.
In terms of DRC property law (Law No. 73/020 of July 20, 1973), the soil and sub-soil are the
exclusive and inalienable property of the State. Rights to use the land can be obtained pursuant to a
grant of concession (French: concession ordinaire ou perpétuelle) by the State under the general
principles of property law; pursuant to a lease from the holder of a concession or pursuant to a grant
of rights to the minerals or timber located on the land.
In terms of the Code, any occupation of land depriving the rightful occupants of enjoyment of the
surface rights, any modification rendering the land unfit for cultivation, will cause the holder of the
mining rights, at the request of the rightful holders of the surface rights, to pay fair compensation,
corresponding to either the rent or the value of the land at the time of its occupation, plus 50%. Land
means the ground on which the individuals have always carried out or are effectively carrying out
any activity. However, the usual occupants of the land may, in agreement with the holder, continue
to exercise their right to cultivate the land provided that the work in the fields does not hinder the
mining activities. The owner of the surface rights may then no longer continue to construct buildings
on it. Simply passing through the land by the holder does not entitle the owner to any compensation
if no damage results there from (the Code, Article 281).
The PE entitles the holder to use the underground water and water courses within the permit area for
the requirements of the mining exploitation in compliance with the requirements set forth in the
environment plan to be submitted for the Project and approved by the Direction chargée de la
Protection de l’Environnement Minier (“DPEM”) and subject to the authorization of the Governor of
the province (Articles 64 and 283 of the Code).
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 26
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The MR require the holder of a PE that is obtained pursuant to the transformation of a pre-existing
mining right to submit an Environmental Adjustment Plan (“EAP”) for approval (Article 408 of the
MR). Since the MR require that all exploitation activities should be undertaken in compliance with
the relevant approved plan for the protection of the environment (Article 404 of the MR), failure to
deliver the EAP may lead to suspension of works decided by the Minister in accordance with
Articles 292 of the Code and 570 of the MR.
Once an EAP is approved, the holder of the PE will be required to put in place a financial guarantee
as security for the performance of the rehabilitation obligations as determined in the EAP, which
must be acceptable to the DPEM. This security must be maintained until certification of satisfaction
of the obligations has been obtained. The amount of the security as well as any other sums that may
be provisioned by the titleholder for rehabilitation of the site are deductible in determining taxable
income up to 0,5% of the turnover for the tax year during which the provision is made.
In terms of the Code, a legal entity incorporated pursuant to Congolese law and that has its registered
administrative office in the DRC and whose corporate purpose is mining activity is eligible for
mining rights irrespective of the percentage equity interest held by an individual of foreign
nationality or a legal entity incorporated pursuant to foreign law (Code, Article 23).
The holder of a mining exploitation title will be subject to the mining royalties due to the Treasury
(at a rate of 2% for non-ferrous metals) on the amount of sales minus the costs of transport, analysis
concerning the quality control of the commercial product for sale, insurance, and costs relating to the
sale transaction (Code, Articles 240 and 241). Liability for mining royalties starts upon
commencement of exploitation. Such royalties are due upon sale of the product.
The transfer of a PE does not relieve the initial holder from its obligations regarding rehabilitation of
the environment (Article 186 of the Code). Liability for damages deriving from works prior to the
transfer is joint and several for both the former and the new title holder. The former holder is
required, however, to inform the new holder of any significant dangers or disadvantages resulting
from exploitation, insofar as it is aware of them. Failing which, in case of any environmental liability
arising prior to the transfer of the PE, the new holder will have the option to cancel or terminate the
transfer or to recoup a portion of the transfer price. The new holder can also request, at the expense
of the former title holder, the former title holder to eliminate the dangers or to suppress the
inconveniences that may be caused to third parties (Article 280 of the Code).
6.2.2 Area and Location of the Property
The KCC and DCP concession areas are located in the south-eastern part of the DRC near the
international border with Zambia (refer to Figure 6.1). The exact location of the KCC and DCP joint
venture concession areas is shown in Figure 6.2.
6.2.3 Description of Legal Tenure
SRK relied on the legal advisor to KML, Norton Rose LLC, for the legal tenure and mining rights
status of KML as it applies to all the Material Assets mentioned in this report.
KCC Rights
The mining rights from which KCC is currently benefiting originate from a Concession No. C23
granted by the DRC State to Gécamines.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 27
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Prior to the promulgation of the Mining Code, Gécamines’ mining rights for the exploration and
exploitation of copper, cobalt and associated mineral substances under Concession No. C23 were
granted under the regime of Order-Law No. 67/231 of May 11, 1967 relating to general legislation
for mines and hydrocarbons and renewed under the regime of Order-Law No. 81-013 of April 2,
1981 relating to general legislation for mines and hydrocarbons.
Following the entry into force of the Mining Code in 2002, Ministerial Order No.195/CAB/MINES-
HYDRO/01/2002 dated August 26, 2002 recognised Concession No. C23 as currently valid mining
rights belonging to Gécamines and transformed such rights into mining titles under the Mining Code.
As part of the transformation process, the areas covered by the Concessions under the former regime
were divided into exploitation permits and PE525, originally comprising 400 carrés was issued
having an expiration date of April 3, 2009, being the expiration date of Concession No. C23.
Exploitation permits are under the Mining Code renewable in accordance with the terms of the
Mining Code for periods of 15 years.
PE 525 covers copper, cobalt and associated mineral substances. PE525 was subsequently reduced to
297 carrés, on 30 December 2005. The land under this exploitation permit covers the area on which
the Kamoto Mine, the Kamoto, Dikuluwe, Mashamba East and West and T17 deposits are located,
as well as the facilities of the Kamoto Mine, the Kamoto concentrator, the DIMA concentrator and
the Luilu Hydro-metallurgical plants.
Exploitation permits grant to its holder the exclusive right to carry out exploration and exploitation
works of mineral matters for which it has been granted. This right covers the construction of
necessary facilities for mining exploration, the use of water and wood resources, and the free
commercialisation of products for sale, in compliance with corresponding legislation.
Pursuant to the joint venture agreement No. 632/6711/SG/GC/2004 made on 4 February 2004
between Gécamines and KFL and ratified by Presidential Decree No 05/070 of 4 August 2005 (the
KCC Joint Venture Agreement) and a lease contract (“contrat d’amodiation”) No.
716/10518/SG/GC/05 dated 18 October 2005 (the KCC Lease Agreement), KCC has been granted
by Gécamines a lease authorising KCC to exercise the mining rights held by Gécamines under the
part of the PE525 covered by the KCC Lease Agreement (subject to the Mining Code and the KCC
Joint Venture Agreement). The KCC Lease Agreement is made for a term of 30 years renewable by
mutual agreement in accordance with the terms of the KCC Joint Venture Agreement.
By Minsterial Order No. 1020 dated 17 February 2006, the area covered by PE525 was reduced to
176 carrés and the balance of PE 525 converted into multiple PEs. The area covering the T17 deposit
is now situated on two carrés within PE4958.
By Ministerial Decree No.3187/CAB.MIN.MINES/01/2007 of 19 September 2007, PE525 was
further split at the request of Gécamines into two different permits, namely PE525 consisting of 20
carrés and PE8841containing most of the balance.
Gécamines has taken the view that the only areas to be leased to KCC were the mining zones of the
Kamoto, Dikuluwe, Mashamba East and West, and T17 deposits. In consequence of this, by
Ministerial Decree No. 3308/CAB.MIN.MINES/01/2007 of 28 December 2007, Gécamines has had
the area of PE525 further reduced, without KCC’s prior approval, to 13 carrés. Although the
perimeter of PE525, as reduced to 13 carrés, together with two carres in PE4958, covers the Kamoto,
Mashamba East and T17 deposits and mining zones, additional areas are required for dumps, storage
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 28
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
and tailings. This is a matter which has been the subject of discussion with Gécamines for some time
and has been agreed in principle to be resolved as set out below under “Proposed Amendments”.
Although it is clear under article 6.9 of the KCC Joint Venture Agreement that Gécamines is not
entitled to grant to a third party rights in the concession area granted to KCC without having
obtained KCC’s prior consent, KCC is aware that Gécamines has granted certain third parties rights
over areas which KCC maintains are covered by the KCC Lease Agreement but none of these grants
has to date interfered with KCC’s operations. Gécamines has now agreed in principle that the
exploitation permits covering the deposits be transferred to KCC. In addition it is proposed that the
Necessary Surfaces (as defined below) and installations and equipment rented from Gécamines by
KCC, following the merger with DCP, will be provided to KCC free from third party rights.
Given the changes made by Gécamines to PE525, and the disagreement with KCC which resulted
therefrom, the perimeter corresponding to the area covered by KCC Lease Agreement has not been
registered with the CAMI.
Pursuant to an agreement dated 7 February 2008, between Gécamines and KFL (the Release
Agreement), Gécamines and KFL agreed that KCC would release the Dikuluwe and Mashamba
West deposits covering an area of 7 carres contained in PE9681, which had been removed from
PE525 pursuant to the above mentioned Ministerial Decree No. 3308/CAB.MIN.MINES/01/2007 of
28 December 2007. Following this release, PE525, as reduced to 13 carrés, only covers the deposits
of Kamoto and Mashamba East.
As part of the Release Agreement, Gécamines agreed (i) to transfer to KCC the PEs covering the
areas leased under the KCC Lease Agreement and (ii) that KCC would receive an area sufficient for
the good functioning of its operations, including space for dams and the sites for tailings. The parties
also agreed that an amount shall be paid for this transfer, which amount is now agreed in principle to
be covered by the amount of the pas de porte payment.
PE525 has been renewed until 29 August 2022, pursuant to Ministerial Decree N°.
3180/CAB.MIN.MINES/01/2007 of 30 August 2007 and PE4958 has been renewed until 3 April
2024 pursuant to Ministerial Decree No. 3215/CAB.MIN.MINES/01/2007 of 21 September 2007.
Gécamines has a tailings exploitation permit No. PER 9683 covering the 13 carrés now covered by
the PE525 although there are no old tailings on this specific area which would interfere with
production from this area.
In addition to the KCC Lease Agreement, Gécamines has, pursuant to the KCC Joint Venture
Agreement, leased to KCC exclusive rights to use all processing facilities existing on the KCC–
concession areas (including the Kamoto and Dima concentrators, and Luilu plant facilities, together
with all their infrastructure and surface), and all mobile equipment. It has been agreed with
Gécamines in principle that all installations and infrastructures within the perimeter of the KCC-
concession areas, to the extent required, shall be rented by Gécamines to KCC (following its merger
with DCP) with rental being covered by the royalties agreed between Gécamines and KCC.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 29
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 6.2: KCC: Mineral and Surface Rights
PropertyExploitationPermitNumber
Rights Granted Location Held ByArea ofTitle
Valid Until
T17 Mine PE4958
Cu, Co and associated
minerals
+ Use of Surface
10°42'S,
25°25'EKCC
4 blocks,
1,70km2
03/04/2024;
renewable
Kamoto Mine and
Mashamba East MinePE525
Cu, Co and associated
minerals
+ Use of Surface
10°43'S,
25°24'EKCC
13 blocks,
11,04km2
03/04/2024;
renewable
DCP Rights
Pursuant to a joint venture agreement n° 656/6755/SG/GC/2004 made on 9 September 2004 between
Gécamines and Global Enterprises Corporate Ltd and ratified by Presidential Decree No. 05/070 of
13 October 2005 (the DCP Joint Venture Agreement), Gécamines agreed to transfer certain
exploitation permits to DCP and to grant DCP a lease and certain contractual rights over certain
facilities. These exploitation permits cover copper, cobalt and associated mineral substances. The
land under these exploitation permits comprised, at the time of execution, 32 carrés and covered the
copper and cobalt deposits of KOV, Kananga and Tilwezembe.
The ownership of the following exploitation permits have been assigned by Gécamines to DCP:
Exploitation Permit No. 4961 was assigned by Gécamines to DCP pursuant to a deed of
assignment dated 13 January 2006, registered with the CAMI on 2 March 2006. This
Exploitation Permit consists of 10 carrés, which comprise the KOV area;
Exploitation Permit No. 4960 was assigned by Gécamines to DCP pursuant to a deed of
assignment dated 13 January 2006, registered with the CAMI on 2 March 2006. This
Exploitation Permit consists of 13 carrés, which comprise the Kananga area;
Exploitation Permit No. 4963, was assigned by Gécamines to DCP pursuant a deed of
assignment dated 13 January 2006, registered with the CAMI on 2 March 2006. This
Exploitation Permit consists of 9 carrés, which comprise the Tilwezembe area;
(together the DCP Exploitation Permits).
All the DCP Exploitation Permits expire on 3 April 2009. Application has been made for their
renewal until 2024 and this is in progress. .
The application for renewal of a PE may only be refused for a limited number of reasons expressly
set out in the Code, including in particular:
Failure to pay surface charges,
Failure to demonstrate adequate remaining resource;
Insufficient financial capability of the titleholder; and
Failure to update environmental documentation.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 30
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The principal relevant ground for which the Exploitation Permits may be forfeited is due to failure
by the titleholder to pay the surface area fees per carré due pursuant to the Code. A mining
titleholder is liable to pay annual surface fees per carré.
Gécamines has, pursuant to the DCP Joint Venture Agreement, granted to DCP exclusive rights to
the rights attached to sites ancillary to the DCP Exploitation Permits, together with the processing
facilities existing on the DCP concession areas, as well as the Group West concentrator treatment
plant, the electro-refining plant known as “Luilu extension P2”, the installations known as “Siege” in
Group West, the waste sites and the Luilu hydro-metallic treatment plant, the KOV conveyor, the
other equipment at KZC, together with all their infrastructure and surface, and all mobile equipment.
It has been agreed with Gécamines in principle that all other installations currently used by DCP
within the DCP Exploitation permits or the Necessary Surfaces (as defined below), to the extent
required, shall be rented by Gécamines to KCC (following its merger with DCP) with rental being
covered by the royalties agreed between Gécamines, KCC and DCP. It has been agreed that the
Kolwezi Concentrator will be released for the benefit of Gécamines, and that Gécamines will re-
engage its former employees.
Table 6.3: DCP: Mineral and Surface Rights
PropertyExploitationPermitNumber
Rights Granted Location Held ByArea ofTitle
Valid Until
Tilwezembe Mine PE4963
Cu, Co and associated
minerals
+ Use of Surface
10°47'S,
25°42'EDCP
9 blocks,
7,64km2
03/04/2009;
renewable
Kananga Mine PE4960
Cu, Co and associated
minerals
+ Use of Surface
10°40'S,
25°28'EDCP
13 blocks,
11,04km2
03/04/2009;
renewable
KOV Mine PE4961
Cu, Co and associated
minerals
+ Use of Surface
10°42'S,
25°25'EDCP
10 blocks,
8,49km2
03/04/2009;
renewable
The Exploration Permits for DCP reflects the understanding from the due diligence carried out at the time of the merger between Katanga
and Nikanor.
6.2.4 Proposed Amendments
In connection with the DRC Commission Review as referred to below and in consequence of the
merger of Katanga and Nikanor PLC, Gécamines, KFL Limited, KCC, DCP and GEC are currently
finalizing the negotiations for an agreement (the Amended Joint Venture Agreement) to reflect the
proposed merger of DCP into KCC which will result in the amendment to the KCC Joint Venture
Agreement and termination of the DCP Joint Venture Agreement. As part of these discussions, it has
been agreed between Gécamines, KFL Limited and GEC (subject to final agreement in the Amended
Joint Venture Agreement) that:
(a) The whole of PE 525 (comprising 13 carrés) and part of PE 4958 (comprising 2 carrés
containing the T17 deposit) shall be transferred to KCC following completion of the merger
with DCP. The Kamoto, Mashemba East and T17 deposits and any extensions of these
deposits which are within the perimeter of PE 525 and the 2 carrés of PE 4958 to be
transferred, shall be for the sole benefit of KCC.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 31
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
(b) The DCP Exploitation Permits shall be transferred to KCC following completion of the
merger with DCP. In addition, one carré of PE 7044 (being an extension of the Kananga
deposit) shall be transferred by Gécamines to KCC (following such merger) once the holder
of PE 652 has released the carré to be transferred from its tailings, or earlier if KCC has
agreed to grant an easement to the holder of PE 652.
(c) The perimeter of the merged KCC/DCP concession area will contain the surface
necessary for the proper operation of the current activities of KCC, including the spaces for
the dams, the future tailings produced by the current activities of KCC, the plants and other
necessary premises, as well as the storage areas (the Necessary Surfaces).
It has been agreed that the Necessary Surfaces will be sourced from PE 8841 held by Gecamines and
from one carré close to the T17 deposit. Easements shall be granted to enable KCC to establish and
maintain operating facilities for the KOV belt. An ad hoc commission, comprising technical
representations from Gécamines and KCC/DCP, shall consider and determine the source of the
Necessary Surfaces and easements. Once they have been determined, KCC shall fund an
independent contractor to determine whether the surfaces identified contain any mineral reserves.
Provided no reserves are discovered, the relevant surfaces shall be converted into multiple
exploitation permits (where required) and shall be transferred (or, in the case of the carré close to
T17, leased) to KCC, following its merger with DCP. Should any reserves be discovered in the
identified surfaces, the reserves shall be transferred to KCC and shall count as replacement reserves
under the terms of the Concession Release Agreement.
As part of the proposed amendment it has been agreed that upon the winding up or liquidation of
KCC the mining rights and titles of KCC shall revert to Gécamines without further consideration.
6.2.5 DRC Mining Review
In April 2007, a commission (the Commission) was formed by the DRC Government to review
approximately sixty (60) mining agreements entered into by para-statal companies of the Congolese
government. The KCC Joint Venture Agreement and the DCP Joint Venture Agreement were
included in the mining agreements to be reviewed.
The Commission provided its conclusions in its report made public in November 2007.
KCC and DCP were notified on 11 February 2008 by the DRC Ministry of Mines of the objections
and requirements regarding their partnerships with Gécamines further to the above-mentioned
November 2007 report.
In July 2008, Gécamines and KFL entered into a memorandum of understanding under which certain
amendments were agreed to be reflected in an amended joint venture agreement and the parties
agreed to the merger of KCC and DCP.
In August 2008, the DRC Ministry of Mines issued terms of reference for the renegotiations and/or
termination of the mining contracts entered into by KCC and DCP.
Following a number of meetings during the course of the last quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of
2009, the parties are currently negotiating the final terms of the Amended Joint Venture Agreement.
Until the Amended Joint Venture Agreement is finalised and becomes effective, the parties are
operating under the existing joint venture agreements.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 32
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
6.2.6 Property Boundaries
The proposed property boundaries of the exploitation permits to be transferred to KCC and DCP are
as described in Figure 6.1 and 6.2.
The boundaries of the Necessary Surfaces will principally come from within PE8841, the boundaries
of which are shown in Figure 6.1 and 6.2. The precise areas from within PE8841 which are to be
included in Necessary Surfaces are to be agreed.
The boundaries have been taken from the maps at the CAMI relating to the boundaries of DCP’s
Exploitation Permits. Katanga has not separately surveyed the area. There are certain limited areas
outside land currently held by Gecamines where KCC will need to make application for licences to
operate infrastructure and tailings.
6.2.7 Royalties Duties and Other Fees
Royalties Payable to the State
The holder of a mining exploitation title is subject to mining royalties which are calculated on the
basis of the amount of sales minus the costs of transport, analysis concerning the quality control of
the commercial product for sale, insurance and costs relating to the sale transaction. The royalties
are due upon the sale of the product. The mining royalties are 2% for non-ferrous metals.
Surface rights payable to the State
Under Article 198 of the Mining Code, KCC and DCP are required to pay surface rights fees of
USD5 per hectare per year or USD424,78 per carré for exploitation permits.
Additional surface fees are payable by KCC and DCP as holder of an exploitation mining right to the
central government of the DRC pursuant to Article 238 of the Mining Code at the rate of USD0,08
per hectare.
Royalties Payable to Gecamines
Under the KCC Joint Venture Agreement, KCC shall pay Gécamines for the use of the equipment
and facilities a sum equal to two percent (2%) of the net sales proceeds realized during the first three
(3) annual periods and one and a half percent (1.5%) of the net sales proceeds thereafter.
Under the DCP Joint Venture Agreement, DCP shall pay Gécamines for the transfer of the
Exploitation Permits and the use of the ancillary sites and processing installations a sum equal to two
percent (2%) of the net sales proceeds realized during the first four (4) years and one and a half
percent (1,5%) of the net sales proceeds thereafter.
Under the July MOU it was agreed that the royalty rate for equipment and facilities provided by
Gécamines as well as for ore reserve depletion will increase from 1,5% to 2,5% of net revenues. It
has been agreed in principle that these royalties will cover all use of the equipment and facilities and
the consumption and depletion of the deposits. “Net revenues” have been agreed to be defined as the
same basis as calculation of royalties under the DRC Mining Code, namely sales less transportation
costs, quality control costs, insurance costs and the marketing costs.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 33
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Pas de porte payable to Gecamines
A “pas de porte” (“entry premium”) payment shall be payable by KFL/GEC to Gécamines for the
access to the project. The total amount shall be USD140 million, the payment of which will be
completed as follows:
(i) USD5 million previously paid by GEC to Gecamines as a loan, being converted into a pas
de porte and therefore non-refundable;
(ii) USD135 million to be paid by KFL. This will comprise (a) USD24,5 million to be paid
by way of set-off against the amount of the advance to be granted by KFL to Gecamines for
payment of the subscription price (as described above); (b) USD5 million to be paid within
ten days of entry into the amended and restated joint venture agreement; and (c) USD10
million on an annual basis between 2009 and 2011 and USD15 million on an annual basis
between 2012 and 2015 , with a final payment in 2016 of USD15,5 million. The parties
have agreed that these amounts shall be paid without any deductions or set off.
No further pas de porte will be payable in respect of the replacement reserves to compensate for the
release of Dikuluwe and Mashamba West; however, any additional tonnage brought by Gécamines
to the Merged JV after the released deposits have been fully compensated will incur a new pas de
porte payment of USD35/t copper.
Customs and Duties Payable
In addition there is a requirement to pay customs duties and taxes in accordance with the law.
6.3 Environmental Liabilities
A preliminary liabilities assessment and closure costing exercise was undertaken in August 2008.
The methodology is described in the draft ESIA (SRK Report 390781/1). The project inherited a
number of existing environmental liabilities, and in addition the refurbishments, expansions and
operations have resulted in further liabilities and closure obligations. Contractually however,
Kamoto Copper Company (KCC) and Nikanor are indemnified from pre-existing liabilities provided
these have been quantified and apportioned. In light of the fact that this quantification and
apportionment did not take place prior to the commencement of refurbishments and operations,
liabilities have been split into three categories as follows:
Historic liabilities accruing to Gecamines. Historic liabilities that resulted from the
Gecamines operations will accrue to Gecamines. Where KML is not going to operate on
these areas, these liabilities can be clearly defined and would not be assumed by KML on the
basis of the joint venture agreement between KML and Gecamines. These include, but are
not limited to the Potopoto Tailings Dam and breach, the Kamoto Tailings Dam, uranium
stockpiles and demolition of existing buildings, plant and workshops.
Historic liabilities that will be assumed by KML. In certain areas, KML has commenced
with operations in areas already impacted by historic activities resulting in contributions
towards these historic liabilities. Examples in this category include the operation of the
Luilu Metallurgical Plant, Kolwezi Concentrator and Tilwezembe Mine, which while not
included in this project, have been worked by KOL and cannot be separated from historic
operations.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 34
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
KOL’s current and future liabilities. The expansion and refurbishment of the project will
result in the operation of existing infrastructure and processes as well as the construction and
operation of new infrastructure that will result in impacts over the life of the mine, and
where these are not addressed through operational management will result in management at
closure, and therefore are allocated as closure obligations. These will include specifically,
but not exclusively, the Far West Tailings Dam, the Kamoto Interim Tailings Dam, new
waste rock dumps, new pipelines, and the expanded KOV Mine footprint area.
Table 6.4: Environmental Liabilities(1)
Area Unit Total KML GecaminesLuilu Metallurgical Plant (USDm) 16,7 1,5 15,2
Kolwezi Concentrator (USDm) 3,8 1,6 2,3
Kamoto Concentrator (USDm) 8,5 7,5 1,0
SKM (USDm) 0,1 0,1 0,0
Kamoto Underground Mine (USDm) 1,1 1,1 0,0
KOV Mine (USDm) 19,1 0,4 18,7
Tilwezembe Mine (USDm) 1,5 1,5 0,0
Mupine Pit (USDm) 16,8 0,0 16,8
T17 Mine (USDm) 5,1 5,1 0,0
Kamoto East (USDm) 6,8 0,0 6,8
Kamoto Tailings dam (USDm) 23,4 0,0 23,4
Poto-Poto Tailings dam (USDm) 137,7 0,0 137,7
Mashamba East Mine (USDm) 6,3 0,0 6,3
Subtotal (USDm) 246,9 18,7 228,1
Contingency @ 25% (USDm) 61,7 4,7 57,0
EPCM @ 10% (USDm) 24,7 1,9 22,8
Owners Cost @ 5% (USDm) 12,3 0,9 11,4
Subtotal (USDm) 98,7 7,5 91,2
Total (USDm) 345,6 26,2 319,4
(1) This assessment and the resultant liabilities are subject to negotiations with Gecamines.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 35
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 6.1: Geographic Location Map of the Material Assets
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 36
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 6.2: General Location Map of the Material Assets
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 37
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
7 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources,Infrastructure and Physiography
7.1 Accessibility
Ground transport in the DRC has always been difficult. The terrain and climate of the Congo
Basin present serious barriers to road and rail construction, and the distances are enormous
across this vast country. Furthermore, chronic economic mismanagement and internal conflict
have led to serious under-investment over many years. On the other hand, the DRC has
thousands of kilometres of navigable waterways, and water transport has been the traditional,
dominant means of moving around approximately two-thirds of the country. The two civil
wars saw great destruction of transport infrastructure, from which the country has not yet
recovered. Many vehicles were destroyed or commandeered by militias, especially in the
north and east of the country, and the fuel-supply system was also badly affected.
Consequently, outside of Kinshasa, Matadi and Lubumbashi, private and commercial road
transport is almost non-existent, and traffic is scarce even where roads are in good condition.
The few vehicles in use outside these cities are run by the United Nations, aid agencies, the
DRC government, and a few larger companies such as those in the mining and energy sectors.
Air transport is the only effective means of moving between many places within the country.
The government, the United Nations, aid organizations and large companies use air rather
than ground transport to move personnel and freight. Compared to other African countries the
DRC has a large number of small domestic airlines and air charter companies.
Specific transportation relevant to the operations:
Rail Systems
The rail route between Likasi and Kolwezi is electrified (25 kV AC traction); the non-
electrified rail section from Likasi to the Zambian border is generally serviced by
diesel electric locomotives. The rail system operates at very low capacity as the
condition of the railway network is extremely poor.
There are restrictions on this line with the maximum speed limited to about 40 km/h
while the load is limited to 800 t or the train length is restricted to 14 wagons. There
are also width and load constraints where the railway line crosses the Lualaba river
(width approximately 3,0 m and load capacity of 65 t). Delivery time for rail transport
from Durban to Kolwezi is typically three weeks.
The Luilu railway station is equipped with sidings that will assist in the logistics of
the large volumes of imported reagents as well as the export of product.
Road Transport
Road access for equipment and material to be imported into the DRC from the south
is via Zimbabwe and Zambia, crossing the border into the DRC at the Kasumbalesa
border post. The road between Zambia and Likasi is in a fair condition. The 196 km
road between Likasi and Kolwezi is in exceptionally poor condition apart from the
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 38
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
final 30 km outside (east) of Kolwezi itself. Travel time for this distance averages
between four to five hours. There are three restrictions on the route, single lane
bridges at distances of 70 and 80 km from Likasi (these are not considered to be a
problem as there are bypass facilities at the bridge sites) and a bridge with a 20 t load
restriction where the road crosses the Nzilo lake approximately 30 km outside of
Kolwezi. Loads in excess of 20 t are rerouted to a pontoon to cross this section.
Air Transport
Lubumbashi
Lubumbashi is the main airport for the Katanga province and caters for international
flights. The airport has refuelling facilities, but there are occasional problems
obtaining fuel supplies. Maintenance facilities are available. If charter flights are
proceeding to other destinations in the province, customs and immigration must be
cleared at Lubumbashi.
Kolwezi
The air field at Kolwezi is an asphalt topped air strip 1750 m long. Site altitude is
1500 m above sea level. The condition of the strip is good, and the airfield is suitable
for medium sized aircraft. KOL has arrangements with a charter company that flies
on Wednesdays and Saturdays from Lanseria in Gauteng Province, South Africa, to
Kolwezi. Customs and immigration are cleared at Kolwezi.
7.2 Climate
Two broad climatic areas can be distinguished in the DRC. The Congo River basin, which lies
on the equator and forms around one-half of the country’s area, consists of low-lying rain
forest, which receives rainfall all year round. Temperatures are not as high as might be
expected at the equator, but humidity is generally high. The remainder of the country,
comprising the area around Kinshasa, and Kivu, Kasai and Katanga provinces, experiences
distinct rainy and dry seasons. Katanga province, lying largely at an elevation of 1000 m or
greater, experiences a climate with cooler, drier air than the majority of the country.
At only 10° latitude, daylight and night hours are almost equal, daylight lasting broadly from
06:00 to 18:00. Rapid temperature drops occur after sunset during the dry season as a result of
lack of cloud cover.
Five distinct seasons can be readily distinguished, namely:
1 Cool dry season May – July;
2 Hot dry season August – September;
3 Early rainy season October – November;
4 Full rainy season December – February; and
5 Late rainy season March - April.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 39
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
7.3 Local Resources
The DRC has considerable hydroelectric power generating capacity, which is controlled and
distributed by the national power utility, Societe Nationale de Electricite (“SNEL”). Kolwezi
lies along the transcontinental railroad system and has access to both east and west coast ports
of Tanzania and Angola, as well as South Africa. Lubumbashi, some 300 km south east of
Kolwezi, is the commercial and industrial centre of the Katanga Province and hosts an
international airport.
The existing infrastructure around Kolwezi (e.g. buildings, water lines, workshops and roads)
is in a very bad state of repair. Cellular phones work in the area, although coverage is patchy.
7.4 Infrastructure
As a result of the mining activities (mainly under the control of the state-owned mining
company Gecamines) the area around Kolwezi has numerous open pits, waste rock, ore and
slag dumps, tailings dams, concentrators and other mining-related infrastructure. A substantial
urban infrastructure has also developed, including housing, roads, water supply and social
facilities. The processing plant sites are well established. Further details are provided in
Section 25b.
7.5 Physiography
Poor living conditions and civil war have endangered much of the biodiversity of the DRC.
The rising population has forced many people to become dependent on wild animals for either
their livelihood or their food. Extensive logging throughout the country by corporate loggers
and land clearing by farmers for agriculture or charcoal burners have caused destruction of the
forests throughout the country and resulted in significant degradation of habitat. Miombo
woodland is the predominant vegetation type in the Katanga Province. Such woodlands
extend over about 2,8 million km2 of the southern sub-humid tropical zone from Tanzania and
DRC in the north, through Zambia, Malawi and eastern Angola to Zimbabwe and
Mozambique in the south. Their distribution largely coincides with the flat to gently
undulating African (early Tertiary) and post African I (Miocene) planation surfaces that form
the Central African plateau. These woodlands constitute the largest more-or-less contiguous
block of deciduous tropical woodlands and dry forests in the world.
Miombo woodlands supply many goods and services that are essential to the well-being of
rural communities; some products acting as subsidies to agriculture while others provide for
basic needs, such as food, shelter and health (Clarke et al., 1996). Cavendish (2002) records
over one hundred different types of resource utilizations in a single miombo study area, with
many types having multiple species (e.g. 47 wild fruits, over 40 medicinal species, 40 wild
vegetables). Wood alone provides subsistence farmers and households with numerous
products, including poles and construction products, timber, materials for tool handles and
household utensils, foods, medicines, leaf litter, grazing and browse (Clarke et al., 1996). In
the Katanga Province, the population is heavily dependent on their supply of wood as a source
of energy through wood-fuel and charcoal production.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 40
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
8 History
8.1 Introduction
This section gives a historical overview of the Material Assets including historical
development, infrastructure and operating results.
8.2 Prior Ownership of the Material Assets
From commencement of operations until 1967, all mining activities on the Property were
operated by Union Miniere du Haut Katanga (“UMHK”). However, following independence
in 1967, the mines were nationalized and incorporated as Gecamines.
8.2.1 KCC Assets
The joint venture is governed by the Kamoto Joint Venture Agreement. The parties to the
agreement are Gecamines, a DRC public enterprise incorporated under the laws of the DRC
and Kinross Forrest Limited (“KFL”), a private company incorporated under the laws of the
British Virgin Islands. Negotiations between Gecamines and KFL started in June 2001. The
Joint Venture Agreement between Gecamines and KFL was approved by Presidential Decree
dated August 2005 after all regulatory approvals were obtained.
8.2.2 DCP Assets
The joint venture is governed by the DCP SARL Joint Venture Agreement. The parties to the
agreement are Gecamines and Global Enterprises Corporate Limited (“GECL”), a private
company incorporated under the laws of the British Virgin Islands. Negotiations between
Gecamines and GECL started in May 2004. The Joint Venture Agreement between
Gecamines and GECL was approved by Presidential Decree in October 2005 after all
regulatory approvals were obtained.
8.2.3 The Merger
On 11 January 2008 KML announced that its shareholders approved the merger with Nikanor.
The merger brought together KCC and DCP assets to create a single operation.
8.3 Historical Development
Corporate mining activity in the province of Katanga began in 1906 with the formation of the
UMHK. In 1967, following national independence, the operations of UMHK were
nationalized and incorporated as Gecamines. At its peak in the late 1980s Gecamines
produced about 7% of the world’s copper and 62% of its cobalt. In 1986, Gecamines
produced 476 kt of copper and 14,5 kt of cobalt, 63,9 kt of zinc, 34,3 t of silver, and cadmium
and other minor metals (Source: Gecamines data).
The majority of this production came from the Kolwezi district. In 1995, production fell to
32,5 kt of copper 4 kt of cobalt, and 4,5 kt of zinc. The decline in metal production continued
to the point that primary production in the Kolwezi area virtually stopped.
Gecamines overall decline was due to a number of factors including:
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 41
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The political isolation of the DRC (then Zaire) in 1991;
The loss of financial credit lines;
The lack of sustaining capital and maintenance improvements;
The social and political environment within the country during this period; and
The collapse of the Plateure in the central underground portion of the Kamoto Mine.
The Dikuluwe-Mashamba (“DIMA”) pit group operated from 1975 through 1998 during
which time a total of 57,7 Mt of ore grading 4,96% copper and 0,16% cobalt was mined
(Source: Gecamines). No significant production has come from T17.
8.4 Historical Exploration
Exploration work was undertaken by UMHK and Gecamines. The oldest hole on record still
retained by Gecamines is KTO2 (dated 13/07/1942), one of the original deep holes drilled for
the evaluation of the geology underlying the Kamoto Nord open pit. Numerous exploration
holes were drilled in the 1950s and 1960s for the underground operations of the Kamoto
Mine, with development beginning in the mid 1960s.
Prior to the exploitation of the DIMA pits, the surface area was drilled on a systematic grid
(usually 100 x 100 m or 100 x 50 m).
8.5 Historical drilling
8.5.1 T17 Mine
CCIC indicate that the T17 West deposit has been the subject of two diamond drilling
programs by Gecamines, with 3287,6 m drilled between 1938 and 1954, and 8011,3 m from
1986 to January 1988. The holes were drilled generally to a nominal 100 m x 100 m grid,
with certain areas being on 50 m x 50 m spacing.
8.5.2 Tilwezembe Mine
The historical drilling was undertaken by Gecamines, and the information was the basis for
the first Mineral Resources estimates for Tilwezembe Mine undertaken by SRK. The drilling
information included drill holes on a 25 m spacing within the operational Tilwezembe pit and
100 m x 50 m on Tilwezembe East.
8.5.3 Kamoto Mine
Gecamines carried out both extensive surface and underground drilling to delineate the
Kamoto ore bodies. A total of 83 surface boreholes have been identified – drilled between
1952 and 1991. Underground holes were generally drilled as fans of 3 or more holes from
especially mined cubbies. A total of 569 holes have been identified, drilled between 1972 and
2002. The upper parts of the Etang – above 400 Level – are covered only by surface drilling.
Borehole surveys appear to have been carried at regular intervals for surface boreholes, but
deviations are rarely more than a few degrees. Underground collared boreholes have not been
surveyed.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 42
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
8.5.4 Kananga Mine
The historical drilling at Kananga was limited to about eight holes drilled by Gecamines.
Details of the drilling, sample collection and sample analyses for the holes are not available.
8.5.5 KOV Mine
The drill-hole logs indicate that exploration drilling commenced in the early 1940s on the
Kamoto East ore body, and initial holes were prefixed as KTO. Although the target was the
Kamoto East ore body, a substantial number of KTO holes were later drilled into the present-
day KOV Mine pit.
In the 1980s, another drilling campaign was aimed at defining the KOV mineralized zones,
and this campaign continued into the early 1990s. The drilling was carried out along section
lines spaced about 100 m apart. Where feasible, drill holes were spaced about 100 m along
these section lines. The holes were prefixed KOV.
Most of the drill holes within the Kamoto East and the KOV Mine pit areas were drilled
vertically, with only a few being inclined. Kamoto East drilling was problematic due to the
steepness in the dip of the strata. As a result, the majority of the holes intersect the near
surface expression of the Kamoto East ore body, and only the inclined holes provide
intersections at depth.
In general, the majority of the drill hole intersections in Kamoto East were within the areas
that have been subsequently mined out, and there are very few orebody intersections below
the current pit bottom.
8.5.6 Mashamba East Mine
For the Mashamba East pit, drilling was undertaken from surface on a 100 m x 100 m spaced
grid on a local co-ordinate system parallel to the strike of the mineralized zone.
8.6 T17 Mine
T17 Mine is a new site, with no significant production history to date. Pre-stripping began in
May 2007 and the first blast was at the end of September 2007.
Table 8.1: T17 Mine: Historical Production
Production Units 2005 2006 2007 2008
Ore Mined (kt) - - 97,7 479,5
Cu Grade (%) - - 1,18% 1,72%
Co Grade (%) - - 0,47% 0,89%
Waste (kt) - - 4018,2 5405,8
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 43
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
8.7 Tilwezembe Mine
Mining has taken place intermittently since 1999. A rail siding and contractors yard were
established close to the site.
Predominant copper minerals are malachite and pseudo-malachite associated with the cobalt
mineral, heterogenite. The host rock is both dolomitic and siliceous. Copper and cobalt head
grades are reasonably well defined using both current and historical records from the
Gecamines geology database and from head grades of ore processed in the KZC concentrator.
The resulting oxide concentrate was leached and refined at the ‘Old’ Luilu and Shituru
refineries, located at Kolwezi and Likasi respectively, producing a “B” grade copper cathode
and cobalt metal. The mineralised zones in Tilwezembe also contain a high proportion of
manganese (which requires an adjustment to the processing for this ore).
Gecamines conducted open pit mining at Tilwezembe using contract mining on and off for a
period of about 7 years. Latterly, organised mining by Gecamines was replaced by artesinal
mining within the existing pit and along strike, until DCP recommenced mining in 2007. The
existing open pit is located at the western extremity of the ore body.
Table 8.2: Tilwezembe Mine: Historical Production
Production Units 2005 2006 2007 2008*
Ore Mined (kt) 52,0 109,5 480,3 609,8
Cu Grade (%) 3,90% 1,91% 1,72% 1,39%
Co Grade (%) 0,66% 0,81% 1,07% 1,17%
* Mining was discontinued during November 2008
8.8 Kamoto Mine
The official opening of the Kamoto Mine is given by Gecamines as 1942, with the beginning
of exploitation of the opencast resource in 1948 and the opening of the Kamoto underground
mineshaft in 1959.
Underground operations at the Kamoto Mine are accessed by twin declines, two primary
shafts and three secondary shafts. Primary access is through the declines and ore handling is
through the primary shafts from where crushed ore is transferred directly onto a conveyor to
the Kamoto concentrator.
Underground production, which began in 1969, used a variety of large-scale techniques
including cut and fill, room-and-pillar and sub-level caving. Production steadily increased to
reach the rate of 3 Mt/a by mid-1970. Production reached a peak in 1989, when the mine
produced 3,3 Mt of ore. In 1990, a major collapse in the central portion (the Plateure) of the
underground deposit resulted in the loss of approximately 15 Mt of Mineral Resource. Since
that time production from Kamoto Mine has steadily decreased to the point that primary
production essentially stopped. From 1969 throgh 2005 a total of 59,4 Mt of ore grading
4,21% Cu and 0,37% Co have been mined from Kamoto Mine.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 44
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 8.3: Kamoto Mine: Historical Production
Production Units 2005 2006 2007 2008
Ore Hoisted (kt) 43,9 0 189,0 551,3
Cu Grade (%) 3,14% 0,00% 3,41% 3,93%
Co Grade (%) 0,30% 0,00% 0,44% 0,43%
8.9 Kananga Mine
The historical exploration by diamond drilling defined over a strike length of about 600 m
mineralized zones within the Kananga Hill. The ore is mainly oxide in nature with very little
sulphide material in the mineralogy. Predominant copper minerals are malachite and pseudo-
malachite associated with the cobalt mineral, heterogenite. The host rock is both dolomitic
and siliceous. Copper and cobalt head grades are reasonably well defined by current and
historical records from the Gecamines geology database and from head grades of ore
processed in the KZC concentrator. The resulting oxide concentrate was leached and refined
at the ‘Old’ Luilu and Shituru refineries, at Kolwezi and Likasi respectively, producing a “B”
grade copper cathode and cobalt metal.
The Kananga pit is close to the Dilala River and wetland and is also within 20 m of the
Lubumbashi-Lobito railway line.
Gecamines conducted open pit mining at Kananga using contract mining from around mid-
2004. Mining by Gecamines has been replaced by predominantly artisanal mining within the
existing pit and along strike. The existing open pit is at the western extremity of the ore body
and had been mined to a depth of approximately 20 m.
8.10 KOV Mine
KOV Mine comprises the four orebodies namely, Kamoto-East, Oliviera and Virgule (hence
the name KOV) and FNSR.
From the aerial photo of the KOV and Kamoto East pits (Figure 6.2), it can be seen that the
existing opencast mine workings are filled with water. A program to dewater the pits and the
surrounding slopes is under way. The KOV pit is in an area that is highly disturbed by past
mining activities. The old Musonoi pit, immediately east of KOV, has been partly back-filled.
Extensive accumulations of waste materials are present to the north and south of KOV.
Mining at the Musonoi pit commenced in 1943 and ceased production by 1984. The Kamoto
East pit started in 1959 and continued operations to 1985. Metallurgical records indicate that
the ore from the Kamoto East ore body was delivered to the plant from 1960 to 1985, while
ore production from the KOV pit commenced in early 1985 and carried on, at declining
production rates, through to 2000. During that time, some 38 Mt of ore was delivered to the
plant at an average grade of 5,8 % copper and 0,5 % cobalt.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 45
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 8.4: KOV: Historical Production
Period Source Plant Feed Head Grade (%) Contained Metal (kt)
(Mt) Cu Co Cu Co
1960-1985 Kamoto East 20 5,97 0,53 1194 106
1983-2000 KOV 18 5,56 0,48 1001 86
38 5,78 0,51 2195 192
8.11 Mashamba East Mine
Mashamba East Mine operated from 1985 through 1988 and the pit produced a total of 9,8 Mt
of ore at an average grade of 4,96% copper and 0,35% cobalt.
Production ceased in 1988 and by 1998, due to the lack of funds and increasing costs, the pit
was allowed to flood. A program to dewater the pits and the surrounding slopes is in place,
details of which are provided elsewhere in this report.
8.12 Kamoto Concentrator
The Kamoto concentrator consists of four sections: Kamoto 1 and 2 built in 1968 and 1972
respectively, and DIMA 1 and 2 built in 1981 and 1982. The Kamoto 1 and DIMA circuits
were designed to process mixed ore types, and Kamoto 2 was designed for sulphide ore. From
1969 through 2000, the Kamoto Concentrator processed over 126 Mt of ore at an average
grade of 4,33% copper and 0,28% cobalt. In its current configuration, the Kamoto
concentrator is capable of processing 7,5 Mt/a of ore. This throughput was exceeded from
1983 through 1987, with the production peaking at 7,6 Mt in 1985.
Table 8.5: Kamoto Concentrator: Historical Production
Production Units 2005 2006 2007 2008
Oxide
Concentrate (t) (t) - - 1069 55 323
Cu Grade (%) - - 15,26% 16,90%
Co Grade (%) - - 0,64% 3,30%
Sulphide
Concentrate (t) (t) 4306 312 11 749 48 909
Cu Grade (%) 33,25% 32,26% 40,28% 40,80%
Co Grade (%) 2,22% 2,19% 5,86% 4,4%
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 46
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
8.13 Luilu Metallurgical Plant
The Luilu metallurgical plant is approximately 6 km north of the Kamoto Concentrator. It was
constructed in 1960. In 1972, it was expanded to an annual capacity of 175 kt of copper and
8 kt of cobalt. The plant has three roasters, a leaching circuit and electrolytic cells for copper
and cobalt production. From 1984 through 1989, annual production at Luilu averaged 173 kt
of copper and 5,9 kt of cobalt. Production peaked in 1986 at 177,5 kt of copper and 7,8 kt of
cobalt. By 1996, production had fallen to an estimated 27 kt of copper and 1,2 kt of cobalt.
Table 8.6: Luilu Metallurgical Plant: Historical Production
Production Units 2005 2006 2007 2008
Cu Cathode (t) 12 229 6224 340 22 161
Co Cathode (t) - - - 749
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 47
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
9 Geological Setting
9.1 Regional Geology
The mineralized zones are at the western end of the Katangan Copperbelt, one of the great
metallogenic provinces of the world, and which contains some of the world’s richest copper,
cobalt and uranium deposits (Figure 9.1).
These deposits are hosted mainly by metasedimentary rocks of the late proterozoic Katangan
system, a 7 km thick succession of sediments with minor volcanics, volcanoclastics and
intrusives. Geochronological data indicate an age of deposition of the Katangan sediments of
about 880 million years and deformation during the Katangan orogeny at less than
650 million years. This deformation resulted in the NS-SE trending Lufilian Arc, which
extends from Namibia on the west coast of Africa through to Zambia, lying to the south of the
DRC. Within the DRC, the zone extends for more than 300 km from Kolwezi in the north-
west to Lubumbashi in the south-east.
Stratigraphically, the rich copper and cobalt deposits found in Zambia and the DRC are
localized in the Roan Supergroup (“Roan”). The Roan occurs at the base of the Katanga
succession, unconformably overlying the basement rock of Kibaran age (mid-Proterozoic).
The Roan is separated from the overlying rocks of the Upper and Lower Kundelungu
supergroups by a conglomerate, the grand conglomerate. The Lower Kundelungu is
composed of sandstones and shales with a basal conglomerate, while the Upper Kundelungu
consists essentially of sediments and is separated from the Lower Kundelungu by a
conglomerate, the (French) ‘Petit Conglomerat’.
Within the Lufilian Arc are large-scale E-W to NW-SE trending folds with wavelengths
extending for kilometres. The folds are faulted along the crests of the anticlines through
which rocks of the Roan have been diapirically injected into the fault zones, squeezed up fault
planes and over-thrust to lie above rocks of the younger Kundelungu. The over-thrust Roan
lithologies occur as segments or “fragments” on surface. The fragments are intact units that
preserve the original geological succession within each. A fragment could be of hundreds of
metres aligned across the fault plane.
In the Katangan Copperbelt, mining for copper and cobalt occurs in these outcropping to sub-
outcropping fragments.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 48
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 9.1: Regional Geology
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 49
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
9.2 General Stratigraphy
The generalized stratigraphy of the Katangan System is shown in Figure 9.2. The Roan has
been correlated across the Katangan Copperbelt into four main formations or groupings, R1 to
R4. The divisions between each of the R series are often marked by an unconformity. The
main ore-body lithologies belong to the R2 Formation, but R3 and R4 Formations are also
known to contain mineralization. Within each of the R series are sub-divisions identifying the
different lithological units. Rocks belonging to the Roan Supergroup are described briefly
below from the oldest to the youngest:
Breche heterogene or heterogeneous breccia (BH): This breccia is composed of angular
and sometimes well rounded fragments of all the various rock types of the Roan. The
fragments vary in size from a few millimetres to several tens of millimetres in diameter, while
the matrix is made up of finer-grained sandy particles of the same material as the fragments.
Breche RAT or brecciated RAT (B RAT): A reddish-pink brecciated rock with calcite and
silica veinlets and is at times well mineralized with specular haematite, occurring as veinlets.
Roches Argilleuses Talceuse (RAT): The RAT is considered the boundary between the R2
and R1 units and consists of an upper RAT Grises (R2) and a lower RAT Lilas (R1). Both are
massive but sheared in places, silty or sandy, dolomitic rocks. Mineralization in the form of
malachite and black oxides occurs associated with the upper RAT.
Dolomie Stratifie or Stratified Dolomite (D Strat): This is a well-bedded to laminated,
argillaceous dolomite, which forms the base of the traditional “Lower Ore Zone” in
Gecamines’ nomenclature. The mineralization consists of copper and cobalt oxides.
Roches Siliceuses Feuilletées Foliated (Laminated) and Silicified Rocks (RSF): These are
grey to light-brown, thinly bedded laminated and highly silicified dolomites. The unit is
generally well mineralized with copper and cobalt oxides. Together with the D Strat, the RSF
comprise the Ore body Inferior (“OBI”).
Roches Silicieuses Cellulaires or Siliceous Rocks with Cavities (RSC): Vuggy and infilled
massive to stromatolitic silicified dolomites. Copper mineralization is almost absent in these
rocks, which were therefore regarded as barren. However, the infillings are enriched in wad
(manganese oxide) and heterogenite (cobalt oxide), and RSC is the target of artisanal activity.
Schistes De Base or Basal Schists (SDB): Reddish-brown to grey silty and nodular dolomite
to siltstone. This unit is well mineralized with copper and cobalt in varying amounts and
forms the Ore-body Superior (“OBS”).
Shales Dolomitiques Superieurs or Upper Dolomitic Shales (SDS): Yellowish, cream-to-
red, bedded laminated dolomitic siltstones and fine-grained sandstones. The rock is sparsely
mineralized with malachite.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 50
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 9.2: General Stratigraphy of the Katangan System
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 51
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Calcaire a Minerais Noirs or Calcareous Unit with Black Minerals (CMN): A slightly
banded and laminated light-grey to grey, silicified dolomite mineralized with black oxide of
iron, manganese and cobalt. The unit bears some similarities with the RSC.
Dipeta (R3): Greyish to dark red or brown stratified shales and micaceous schist.
Mwashya (R4): altered stratified greyish siliceous dolomitic rock with oolitic horizons and a
few bands of light-yellow, talcose schist. Nodules of haematite often occur.
9.3 Project geology
With the exception of Tilwezembe Mine, all of the mineralized properties of KOL are
localized within the Kolwezi Nappe, a northeast striking synclinal basin with major and minor
axes of approximately 20 km and 10 km respectively. Tilwezembe Mine is located about
20 km to the east of Kolwezi. Figure 9.1 shows the location of the deposits.
Within the Kolwezi Nappe, each of the project areas, T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine, KOV Mine
and Mashamba East Mine contain fragments with intact successions of Series Des Mines
lithologies, which host the copper and cobalt mineralization. The fragments are often
structurally complex, being tightly folded and exhibiting variable strikes and dips both within
individual rafts and between neighbouring rafts.
9.3.1 T17 Mine
The T17 West is described as dismembered structurally complex packages, which belong to
the southern flank of a synclinal fold that extends 2,6 km and is overturned towards the north.
Faulting is assumed to be the predominant process in the deformation and dismemberment of
the deposit.
9.3.2 Tilwezembe Mine
The mineralized zone of Tilwezembe is located in an NE-SW anticlinal structural lineament,
which extends further to the east where known copper and cobalt deposits (Kisanfu, Myunga,
Kalumbwe and Deziwa). Strongly brecciated siliceous dolomites and shales of the Mwashya
Formation (or R4) dominate with interstitial bands of haematite and oolites. The strata strike
almost east-west and dips at about 45° to the south.
9.3.3 Kamoto Mine
The Kamoto underground operations extract mineralized copper ores from the Kamoto
Principal fragment, which is differentiated from the Kamoto East, mined in the KOV pit, but
contains the same lithologies. The morphology of the ore body is described as flat to gently
dipping in the central parts, becoming steeper towards the flanks. Dips in the central parts
vary between 0° and 20° increasing to about 45° towards the flanks. Dips in the flank regions
are between 45° to 85°. The ore body is subdivided into four regions as follows:
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 52
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The main central region, comprising Zones 1 to 8 and division 5. Commonly referred
to as the Principal;
Etang South;
Etang Nord; and
Ecaille Renverse.
9.3.4 Kananga Mine
The Kananga ore body outcrops and forms a ridge with a NNE strike. The ridge falls quite
rapidly towards the south and has been cut to form part of the embankment for the Lobito
railway line, which runs parallel to the ridge and 10 m to 20 m away from it for most of the
strike length of the ore body. Gecamines’ interpretations indicate that Kananga is the northern
limb of the Kananga-Dilala syncline, which plunges to the south.
9.3.5 KOV Mine
There are three main individual fragments hosting mineralized Lower Roan lithologies within
the KOV pit area. These are Kamoto East, Oliveira and Virgule, from which the name KOV
is derived. A fourth and smaller fragment, the FNSR, is a remnant of the Musonoi West
fragment mined to the east of KOV pit. The FNSR lies below and is sub-parallel to the
Virgule ore body.
Other fragments within the area are OEUF and Variante. The OEUF consists mostly of
hanging-wall lithologies occurring above the Virgule fragment, and the Variante lies below
the Virgule and Oliveira fragments but outcrops towards the east in the Musonoi West area.
Lower Roan lithologies have been identified in the Variante, but investigations indicate poor
copper and cobalt mineralization within these lithologies. Within each of the mineralized
fragments, the succession of lithologies is intact, although in the FNSR fragment the Lower
Roan lithologies occur overturned.
The fragments that make up the KOV ore body occur in an east-west-striking synclinal
structure consisting of a steeply dipping southern limb and a shallow dipping northern limb,
respectively named the Kamoto East and Virgule ore bodies, while the Oliveira fragment is a
shallower-dipping ore body in faulted contact with and below the Virgule ore body.
9.3.6 Mashamba East Mine
There is limited information on the geology of Mashamba East, except in the context of the
regional setting. Structurally, the lithologies of the Mashamba East strike to the north-east and
dip gently to the north in the west and wraps around to strike almost north-south and dip to
the east in the eastern portion of the property.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 53
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
10 Deposit TypesThe deposits fit in with the general description of stratiform with supergene enrichment
within the upper surface layers.
11 Mineralization
Primary mineralization, in the form of sulphides, within the Lower Roan is associated with
the D Strat and RSF for the OBI and the SDB and SDS for the OBS and is thought to be syn-
sedimentary in origin. Typical primary copper sulphide minerals are bornite, chalcopyrite,
chalcocite and occasional native copper while cobalt is in the form of carrolite. The
mineralization occurs as disseminations or in association with hydrothermal carbonate
alteration and silicification.
Supergene mineralization is generally associated with the levels of oxidation in the sub-
surface sometimes deeper than 100 m below surface. The most common secondary supergene
minerals for copper and cobalt are malachite and heterogenite. Malachite is the main mineral
mined within the confines of the current KOV Mine pit.
The RSC, a lithological unit stratigraphically intermediate between the OBS and OBI host
rocks, contains relatively less copper mineralization. The RSC contains appreciable copper
mineralization near the contacts with the overlying SDB formation and the underlying RSF
formations. The middle portion of the RSC, considered to be “sterile” by Gecamines,
normally contains relatively less copper mineralization and was sometimes not sampled. The
mineral potential of the RSC is less well known than that of other formations.
The RSC has been observed to be well mineralized in supergene cobalt hydroxide,
heterogenite, which occurs as vug infillings, especially near the surface.
The mineralization at Tilwezembe Mine is atypical being hosted by the Mwashya or R4
Formation. The mineralization generally occurs as infilling of fissures and open fractures
associated with the brecciation. The typical mineralization consists mainly of copper minerals
(chalcopyrite, malachite and pseudomalachite), cobalt minerals (heterogenite, carrolite and
spherocobaltite) and manganese minerals (psilomelane and manganite).
12 ExplorationNo exploration has been undertaken on behalf of the issuer other than in-fill drilling at
Tilwezembe Mine, Kananga Mine and KOV Mine.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 54
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
13 Drilling
The project area contains mostly historical information from diamond drilling by the previous
owners, Gecamines. There has been limited drilling within the project area for the issuer and
only within Tilwezembe Mine, Kananga Mine and KOV Mine.
13.1 T17 Mine
There has been no recent drilling in T17 Mine.
13.2 Tilwezembe Mine
Snowden indicate that 152 diamond drill holes have been drilled since April 2006 on
Tilwezembe Mine. The drilling was undertaken by Remote Drilling Services (“RDS”) using
the wireline method with core sizes from PQ, HQ to NQ. A geologist from DCP monitored
the drilling daily.
The drill-hole spacing was about 50 m in the west and by 100 m in the east along strike and
along dip about 30 m the near the surface and 100 m at depth.
Only a portion of drill holes deeper than 100 m were down-hole surveyed by RDS, who used
an Eastman multi-shot down-the-hole camera. Snowden indicate that deviations were not
substantial and have little effect on the Mineral Resource estimation.
13.3 Kamoto Mine
There has been no recent drilling in Kamoto Mine.
13.4 Kananga Mine
At Kananga, 51 holes were drilled since April 2006, totalling 10 300 m. The drilling was
undertaken by RODIO (a South African drilling company) and supervised by Snowden. The
drill holes cover a strike length of about 550 m at a nominal spacing of about 50 m.
13.5 KOV Mine
There have been three phases of drilling within the KOV Mine pit, the first commencing in
late 2005 and the most recent being in 2007.
The 2005 drilling program was primarily to collect samples for metallurgical test work and
also confirm the general ore body intersections and grade. A program of 8 metallurgical and
15 confirmatory holes was initiated. The drilling program ran into difficulty; access was
difficult and the geotechnical conditions in the near surface rocks was poor. Only 8 holes
were completed, and they were used for metallurgical scoping test work.
The 2007 program was to provide information for geotechnical purposes both inside and to
the west and north-west of the KOV Mine pit. The program consisted of 25 vertical holes
penetrating the Virgule and Oliveira mineralized zones. The samples of the core from all rock
types were sent for geotechnical testing while the mineralized intersections were sent off to
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 55
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Alfred H Knight Laboratory (accredited to SANAS, Facility Accreditation Number: T0141)
for analyses.
A third program of 15 holes was laid out to provide material for quality assurance and quality
control (“QA/QC”). The holes were planned to twin the Gecamines holes and thereby verify
the historical drilling information. However, due to problems of access, the holes were not
drilled at their intended positions.
A few holes were twinned, and the data available for the comparisons show good
correspondence in the thickness and %TCu grade in the SDB and less so for the RSF and
DSTRAT intersections. The differences in the latter could be ascribed to the geological
identification of the lithologies on which the selection is based for the comparisons. Figures
13.1 to 13.3 provide further details.
Figure 13.1 KOV Mine: Comparisons of the Twin Hole Intersections, Thickness and%TCu grade by Lithology - SDB
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
KOV461 KOV474 KOV475 KOV479 KOV484 KOV547 KOV558
THIC
KN
ESS,
m
%Tc
u
TWIN DDH
SDB
ORIGINAL TWIN THICK-ORIG THICK-TWIN
TH
ICK
NE
SS
,m
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 56
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 13.2 KOV Mine: Comparisons of the Twin Hole Intersections, Thickness and%TCu grade by Lithology - RSF
Figure 13.3 KOV Mine: Comparisons of the Twin Hole Intersections, Thickness and%TCu grade by Lithology - DSTRAT
13.6 Mashamba East Mine
There has been no recent drilling in Mashamba East Mine.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
KOV461 KOV474 KOV475 KOV479 KOV484 KOV547
THIC
KN
ESS,
m
%Tc
u
TWIN DDH
RSF
ORIGINAL TWIN THICK-ORIG THICK-TWIN
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
KV 461 KV 474 KV 475 KV 479 KV 484
THIO
CK
NES
S,m
%Tc
u
TWIN DDH
DSTRAT
ORIGINAL TWIN THICK-ORIG THICK-TWIN
TH
ICK
NE
SS
,m
TH
ICK
NE
SS
,m
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 57
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
14 Sampling Method and Approach
14.1 Historical Sampling
Details of the historical sampling undertaken within each of the project areas are scant and
based on personal communications with the respective consultant in each of the project areas.
Inferences have been drawn from the observations from the sample database.
SRK has described the observations on the historical sampling for KOV Mine, and the review
of the individual projects reports has indicated that the process described for KOV Mine was
applicable to the other projects. SRK’s review of the historical sampling for KOV Mine is
summarized below.
Cores from the ore body intersections were sampled for chemical analysis. The lengths of
core sampled varied, and it is SRK’s understanding that this was a consequence of the sample
recovered within each run. In the Gecamines logging sheet, there is a column for percentage
recovery where values ranging from 1% to 100% are entered to describe the amount of core
recovered in the sample length. Core recoveries are recorded only for cores that were
sampled.
The lithologies sampled were the Upper Ore-body host rocks (lower SDS and SDB) and the
Lower Ore-body rocks (RSF, DSTRAT and the RATGR) and portions of the RSC deemed to
be mineralized. SRK understands that the visibility of copper mineralization in the core was
used as the criterion for sampling the core. Core lengths deemed to be barren of copper were
not sampled, and an entry was made in the sample log for that interval with the comment
“sterile” or barren. It is possible, in SRK’s view, that the unsampled cores could contain
finely disseminated copper mineralization not visible to the naked eye. There is a further
possibility, especially in the RSC, that the “sterile” zones contain cobalt mineralization. In
drill holes KOV 426 and KOV 427, the entire RSC is mineralized and returned good copper
mineralization (2-3%) within the mid-RSC. In drill hole KOV 428, the mid-portion of the
RSC was sampled. Partial or selective sampling, although common in the RSC, was also
evident in the other Roan lithologies.
Due to this pre-selection during sampling, the assay database is incomplete, and this affects
the accuracy of the Mineral Resource estimation.
The assay database describes the sample in terms of the length, depths (From and To) of
intersection and the amount of core recovered in that sample length. The sample database
contains assay data for the following:
%TCu: the percentage total copper content of the sample;
%CuO: the percentage of the copper present as oxide. In the modelling, this is reported as
%ASCu. Fewer than half of the samples were analyzed for %ASCu;
%Cu mal: the percentage of the copper as malachite. Only a few samples contain values
on this column;
%TCo: the percentage total cobalt content of the sample; and
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 58
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
%CaO soluble: the relative proportion of soluble calcium oxide in the sample. Less than
30% of the total database was assayed for calcium oxide.
14.2 T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine
CCIC undertook a re-sampling of the existing cores for the T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and
Mashamba East Mine. CCIC reported that 26 historical holes were re-sampled, and these
included the following:
DIK 171 (Mashamba East)
F2418 (Kamoto Principal OBS )
F2471 (Kamoto Principal OBI)
F2391 (Kamoto Etang)
MU321 (Musonoi-T17).
CCIC’s approach was to try as much as possible to replicate Gecamines sampling and assay
results on cores from each of the project resource areas to gain confidence in the reported
assay values. Details of the original Gecamines sampling protocol and methodology were
unavailable but, by inference, CCIC contend that samples were taken for assay based mainly
on lithology, and as such were of irregular lengths. CCIC studied the sample lengths and
found that the most popular sample length was between 1,5 and 2,0 m, although sample
lengths ranged from 0,02 m to 10,0 m.
CCIC replicated the sampling intervals of the original log sheets by quartering the existing
half-cores. The remaining quarter core of the sample was put back in the sample box and
remarked with the original sample number.
The quarter core samples were marked, cut and bagged under CCIC’s supervision at the
Kamoto Geological Department. Samples were cut by CCIC or Gecamines personnel on a
Wendt L18A B61936 saw with a 340 mm diamond blade.
A total of 654 samples were generated and dispatched to SGS Lakefield Research Africa (Pty)
Ltd (“SGS Lakefield”) (accredited to SANAS, Facility Accreditation Number: T0169) for
analysis.
14.3 Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine
The procedures adopted during the sampling of the cores from Kananga and Tilwezembe are
similar and are described in Section 15.2.
After the drill-hole core was photographed and logged, the core was split with a diamond saw
and sampled at 1 m intervals within the mineralized units, honouring geological contacts.
14.4 KOV Mine
There have been three phases of drilling in the KOV pit since 2005. The initial drilling of 8
holes was undertaken over 6 months commencing in November 2005 to collect material for
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 59
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
metallurgical test work. A second phase of drilling was undertaken for geotechnical purposes
during 2006/07, and a third phase of confirmatory holes was drilled in 2007.
The phase 1 drilling was supervised by SRK. At the start of the drilling program, SRK
devised a core-sampling protocol. The protocol outlined the procedures to be followed, and
they included a review of the core to determine the contacts, which were to be used as a guide
during the sampling program. The protocol ensured that samples were taken at regular
intervals of approximately 1 m within the lithology as dictated by the core and the core
recovered. It also ensured that samples did not to straddle lithological contacts. Additional
samples were taken well outside the zones of visible mineralization.
The core from phase 2, phase 3, geotechnical, and confirmatory drilling was sampled under
DCP’s supervision.
15 Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security
15.1 T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine
CCIC indicate that the existing half samples were quartered using a diamond core-cutting
blade, washed, flagged with a unique sample number, and bagged. The samples were collated
into larger bags, per drill-hole, locked in a metal trunk and shipped to SGS Lakefield in South
Africa.
In all, 58 samples were taken from various boreholes for independent verification of the
Gecamines copper and cobalt assay figures for T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East
Mine. These samples were sent to SGS Lakefield for preparation and analysis, with
renumbered pulps resubmitted to both SGS Lakefield and Set Point Laboratories (“Set Point”)
(accredited to SANAS, Facility Accreditation Number: T0223) as checks. The cut samples
were placed in metal containers and sealed under lock and key under the supervision of CCIC
personnel. The samples were then trucked to the client’s Lubumbashi offices before being
sent to SGS Lakefield.
CCIC indicate that SGS Lakefield staff entered each of the samples into their LIMS system,
which includes the client’s details, the list of samples and the analyses required. Each of the
quartered core samples was crushed to <2 mm, and the crushed sample was split, where
necessary, to produce a portion of about 250 g. The split (or entire crushed sample if less than
250g) was milled, bagged, labelled and stored in a box(es), logged in Lakefield’s sample-
tracking system and stored on a shelf.
The analytical method used for the determination of total copper and total cobalt was X-ray
fractionation. Acid-soluble copper and cobalt were determined by acid digestion (sulphuric
acid) and analysis of the solution by AAS.
The methods are described as:
For analysis of copper oxides each sample was weighed and mixed with an aliquot of
dilute sulphuric acid enriched with sulphur dioxide. This mixture was agitated at
room temperature for a set period and the sample residue filtered out of the solution.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 60
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The solution was made up to volume and analyzed for copper and cobalt by AAS.
This yielded acid-soluble results.
For analysis of copper sulphides the residue of the copper oxide preparation was
placed in a beaker and mixed with multiple acids, with the residue being digested in
the acid mixture. The solution was made up to volume and analyzed for copper and
cobalt by AAS. This yielded an assay of acid-insoluble copper(“AICu”) and acid-
insoluble cobalt (“AICo”) present as sulphides.
Appropriate QC checks were undertaken by CCIC on Kamoto Mine.
15.2 Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine
The samples from Kananga and Tilwezembe were sent to two laboratories, Alfred H. Knight
(Alfred Knight) in Kitwe and SGS in Ndola, for preparation and analysis. Preparation
activities consisted of:
Drying of sample;
Primary jaw and roll crushing of sample;
Splitting a sub sample of 250 g using a riffle splitter; and
Pulverizing of the sub-sample to 75 micrometres and homogenizing.
The samples were analyzed for %TCu, %TCo, %Mn, %AsCu and %AsCo.
Both Alfred H Knight and SGS determined %TCu, %TCo, %Mn assays by multi-acid
digestion (using hydrofluoric, nitric and perchloric acids) followed by dissolution in
hydrochloric acid and AAS.
For %AsCu and %AsCo, both laboratories used cold leaching with 5% sulphuric acid.
However, Alfred H Knight saturated with sulphur dioxide while SGS saturated with
potassium sulphite before finishing with AAS. The laboratories may also have used different
temperatures and digestion times.
Appropriate QC checks were undertaken by CCIC on Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine.
15.3 KOV Mine
All historical sampling, sample preparation, analysis and security were undertaken by
Gecamines over more than 50 years. SRK are unable to comment on the quality of such work.
The core sample was cut along the longitudinal axis with one half of the core sent for
laboratory analysis and the other retained in the boxes.
There was no systematic approach to sample lengths as indicated by the variations in the
sample lengths in the database. The minimum sample taken was 0,5 m and the maximum
sample was 2,5 m. The sample lengths were also a consequence of the sample recovered
within the run.
Analysis and QC were undertaken in-house by Gecamines.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 61
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Historical production from KOV was 38 Mt delivered to the plant at an average grade of 5,8%
copper and 0,5% cobalt. This compares favourably with the current Mineral Reserve grade of
4,93% Cu and 0,38% Co.
The phase 1 drilling was supervised by SRK, detailes of which are provided in Section 14.4.
The core from phase 2, phase 3, geotechnical, and confirmatory drilling was sampled under
DCP’s supervision.
16 Data Verification
16.1 T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine
CCIC captured the drill hole data from the hard-copy log sheets into Microsoft Excel
spreadsheets. A parallel entry system was set up by Maxwell GeoServices (“Maxwell”), using
a data-management system that allowed for the standardization of data capture and storage in
a database. The electronic copies were verified and validated by comparing with the original
hard-copy logs.
In all, 363 logs were supplied as scanned images of the original paper logs. These logs were
captured into the existing Excel database created during the Engineering Study. The
verification process involved comparisons of the electronic logs against the paper logs. Every
collar and survey data point was verified. The stratigraphic and sample logs were routinely
verified. During the validation process, however, any dubious or erroneous holes were
thoroughly verified. The validation process undertaken by CCIC involved the following:
Checking for any zero lengths, gaps, overlaps and duplicate entries in the Excel database
and verifying data against the hard-copy original logs;
3D visual validation, using Datamine™ Studio to validate collar and survey information;
Visual flagging of the lithology using surrounding drill hole to ensure consistency in the
logged stratigraphic succession across sections; and
Histograms plots of the copper and cobalt values were generated to identify and verify
any outliers.
During sampling for the 26 historically drilled holes, 654 samples were generated and
dispatched to SGS Lakefield for analysis. The analytical method used for the determination of
total copper and cobalt was X-ray fractionation. Copper and cobalt oxides were determined by
acid digestion (sulphuric acid) and analysis of the solution by AAS.
The core QC audit program consisted of diamond-drill core samples selected from each
resource area and stratigraphic interval. The program was designed to check the accuracy of
the recorded Gecamines copper and cobalt grades. Samples were prepared from the half core
remaining after preparation of the original samples assayed by Gecamines. Initial check
samples were run at SGS Lakefield with additional splits and checks completed by SGS
Lakefield and Set Point Laboratories. The work was carried out in accordance with
compliance procedures that addressed sample preparation, security, laboratory qualification,
and procedures.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 62
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The assay laboratories at Luilu were visited and copies of the procedures and protocols were
requested; however, they were not provided. It is therefore not clear if the replicate samples
exactly duplicated the methods by which most of the historical assaying was completed.
16.2 Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine
Snowden describe similar process for the validation of the database for Kananga and
Tilwezembe. The drill-hole data were stored in Excel spreadsheets, and Snowden imported
the data into a GEMS Access database where the following validation checks were
conducted:
Missing collar coordinates;
Interval errors (missing intervals, overlaps etc.) within drill-hole sample data;
Duplicate sample records;
Zero values within the sample data; and
Collar elevation errors.
Data validation included checking for cases where the %AsCu and %AsCo were greater than
the %TCu and %TCo values. At Tilwezembe Mine, cases were found where the %AsCu
values were greater than the %TCu and 30 cases for the %AsCo values being greater than the
%TCo out of a total database of 3000 samples. At Kananga Mine, the numbers were 20
samples and 14 samples respectively out of a total database of 2370.
Snowden indicate that difference in value between the acid soluble and the total grade were
small with about 18% of the copper and 17% of the cobalt datasets reporting differences
higher than 0,1% at Tilwezembe and at Kananga the number was 6% and 0% for the copper
and cobalt respectively reporting differences higher than 0,1%.
For the purpose of estimation, soluble assays greater than total assays were set equal to the
total assay.
16.3 KOV Mine
SRK has reviewed the database and the following issues with data quality are highlighted:
Poor core recovery within the ore body varying between 65 and 75%, the worst recovery
being in the RSC lithology;
The cutting of the total copper grade to 12%, if above 12%. However, not all the samples
with total copper grades above 12% in the database have been cut;
The RSC formation in contact with the SDB and the RSF was sampled, but near the
middle of the formation selectively sampling was on the basis of visible copper
mineralization;
The ore-body zones were sampled for total copper and total cobalt, but assays for acid
soluble copper and cobalt and for calcium oxide were limited; and
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 63
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Samples with zero core recovery, mostly from the earlier drilling in Kamoto East, are
shown with high total copper values; presumably from the analyses of the sand collected
in the absence of core.
SRK examined selected drill-hole core but did not resample the core in any way. The KOV
pit was in production for over 20 years, and head grades during that period reflected the
grades in the database.
17 Adjacent Properties
There has been significant exploration and mining activity in the Kolwezi area. Copper
mining has been undertaken in the region for many decades.
Regional copper mining companies in the DRC include:
First Quantum Minerals Limited: Based on the Annual Information Form at 31
December 2008 using a 0,5% copper cut-off grade First Quantum Minerals Limited had
Measured Mineral Resources of 69,1 Mt at 1,39% Copper and Indicated Mineral
Resources of 175,1 Mt at 0,99 % Copper; and
Anvil Mining Limited: Based on the Annual Information Form at 31 December 2007
using a 0,5% copper cut-off grade Anvil Mining Limited had:
o Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of 1,1 Mt at 7,01 % Copper at the
Dikulushi deposit;
o Indicated Mineral Resources of 8,0 Mt at 1,90 % Copper and 0,11% Cobalt at the
Kulu deposit; and
o Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources of 33,3 Mt at 3,68 % Copper at the
Kinsevere deposit.
18 Mineral Processing and MetallurgicalTesting
18.1 Kamoto Mine Testwork
The process design criteria assume that the ore from Kamoto underground will be the same as
that mined previously in terms of its milling, flotation, leach and other metallurgical
characteristics. Being a brownfield refurbishment this is not an unreasonable assumption
given the availability of 39 years’ historical records. However, in SRK’s view, it would have
been preferable to independently confirm the metallurgical characteristics of future ore (as
opposed to previously mined) in a programme of testwork. Prior to this study, some work
was done by Hatch to this end.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 64
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
18.2 Previous KOV Testwork
18.2.1 Samples Tested
The process design criteria mostly assume that the ore mined from KOV Mine will be the
same as the sample used for the DCP testwork at Mintek in 2006, in terms of its milling,
flotation, leach and other metallurgical characteristics but different in terms of sulphide
copper content. The DCP testwork utilised bulk ore samples of the following five lithological
units identified at KOV Mine taken from a stockpiles of ore mined just before the mine closed
in 1999.
SDB surface material consisting mainly of oxidised material referred to as SDB Ox
but also a sulphide fraction called SDB Sulph;
RSC;
RSF;
D Strat; and
Rat Grise, the deepest material.
Such samples would presumably have been representative of the material being mined at the
time but, in the light of the anticipated change in the proportion of sulphides, such samples
are unlikely to be fully representative of future ore to be mined. In addition it is uncertain to
what extent the metallurgical characteristics of the stockpiled ore had changed since being
mined. In SRK’s view it would have been preferable to have conducted testwork on fresh
samples of ore to be mined over the life of project. At the time the difficulty of obtaining such
representative samples, due to the pit being flooded, precluded this.
18.2.2 Milling Testwork
JKTech (Pty) Ltd (“JKTech”) were commissioned to conduct drop weight testing of the five
ore types and to simulate single-stage SAG milling versus primary SAG mill and secondary
Ball milling. Generally all material types were characterised as being “soft to very soft” in
terms of resistance to impact breakage and abrasion breakage. Rat Grise however showed
evidence of bimodality in its relative density distribution, which strongly suggests that a
dense component could concentrate in the mill load and compromise mill performance. It will
therefore be important to ensure a good blend of feed materials to minimise such effects.
JKTech simulation results concluded that a two-stage SAG and ball mill circuit was more
efficient than a single stage SAG circuit. The two-stage circuit was accordingly incorporated
into the Nikanor flowsheet.
18.2.3 Hydrometallurgical Testwork
Mintek undertook a programme of testwork including mineralogy and copper and cobalt
hydrometallurgical processing. The test programme was conducted on a composite sample of
the five identified lithologies blended pro rata to the depth of the lithological units. Copper
and cobalt leaching, copper solvent extraction (“SX”) and copper electrowinning (“EW”)
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 65
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
were conducted at bench and pilot scale whilst cobalt purification and precipitation
investigations were conducted at bench scale on pilot-generated and synthetic solutions.
The leach was conducted in two steps, with pH being maintained with sulphuric acid addition
in the first part and the redox potential being controlled in the second part by introducing
sulphur dioxide gas. The pilot plant achieved fairly consistent copper and cobalt leaching
efficiencies up to 92% and 91% respectively. During pilot testing, the SX circuit was
simplified to comprise 2 extraction, 1 wash and 1 strip stages. Cathode produced in the pilot
plant achieved the desired LME Grade ‘A’ quality of >99.95% copper, although attention will
have to be given to certain impurities during full-scale operation.
Investigations into the purification and precipitation of cobalt bleed solution included the
following steps:
Fe/Mn removal with air/SO2;
Removal of aluminium and copper via precipitation with lime;
Calcination testwork on the final Co(OH)2 product with lime, and
Precipitation of Co(OH)2 salt using MgO.
The testwork identified optimum conditions for the removal of iron, manganese, aluminium
and copper. Properly controlled, cobalt losses should not exceed 1% in Fe/Mn precipitation
and 2% in Al/Cu precipitation.
Initial tests were conducted with an industry recognised MgO, whilst optimisation tests were
conducted with an alternate MgO that was preferred for the project. Complete cobalt
precipitation was achieved with MgO. Unfortunately MgO as a precipitant provided no
selectivity for cobalt over nickel, zinc and copper present in the feed, underlining the need to
remove these effectively during the purification steps. Furthermore it was not possible to
prepare solids with the desired composition of approximately 40% cobalt with <2% co-
precipitated magnesium. It is suspected that this was due to very slow kinetics displayed by
the alternate MgO and further tests using the industry recognised MgO were recommended.
Such tests have since been successfully completed.
18.2.4 Other Testwork
For all stages of precipitation, liquid/solid separation testwork was done on fresh
solutions/slurries to enable sizing specification of filters and thickeners. Mintek also
performed various corrosion tests under selected process conditions which allowed the
optimum material for the fabrication of vessels and equipment to be identified.
18.3 Recent KOV Mine Testwork
18.3.1 Milling Testwork
Mintek was commissioned to further investigate the amenability of the KOV Mine ore to
autogenous milling, with a view to using the two existing DIMA AG mills at the Kamoto
Concentrator rather than the new SAG and ball mills ordered by Nikanor. Testwork was
carried out on drill core samples from 4 ore zones, namely RSC, OBI, OBS-SDB and OBS-
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 66
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
SDS in the KOV Mine pit. Based on the ratio of Bond Rod Mill Work Index to Bond Ball
Mill Work Index, it was again concluded that the ore is not amenable to fully autogenous
milling. This was in line with the earlier JKTech investigations. However, it was also
concluded that the DIMA mills could achieve the required KOV ore throughput if converted
to SAG milling in series with the existing ball mills.
18.3.2 Flotation Testwork
Flotation testwork for the DCP/Nikanor project was originally done at Mintek on a leach
residue sample of a largely oxidised ore. It is now anticipated that future KOV Mine ore will
be increasingly sulphidic and a further programme of testwork has recently been carried out at
Mintek in order to finalise process design criteria for the new sulphide float ahead of whole
ore leach. This work has confirmed the preliminary flotation plant design used by Bateman
Engineering in the study and also confirmed the preliminary reagent suite.
18.3.3 Slurry Pumping Testwork
Paterson & Cooke, slurry pumping consultants, were commissioned to investigate the
pumping of KOV Mine milled oxide ore from the Kamoto Concentrator to the Luilu
Metallurgical Plant. They conducted testwork on a sample of ore extracted from the same
bulk material tested at Mintek. In addition they reviewed the tailings pumping system. A
system comprising running/standby pumps and two lines (running/standby) for the full flow
was identified as being the optimal system and was included in the 2008 Study.
18.4 Oxide / Sulphide Content
Oxides and sulphides require different processing routes. It has been assumed that the
oxide:sulphide ratio for the ore mine from KOV Mine is 60%:40%. Should this ratio be
significantly different to this assumption, it will affect the capacity of each process route and
may restrict production, which will affect sulphur consumption and costs.
18.5 Risks and Recommendations
The primary risk relates to the use of limited and old (1999) samples, which may influence
the reliability of the testwork.
It is recommended that further testing is undertaken, which should include samples from all
the mining properties in the appropriate ratios.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 67
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19 Mineral Resource and Mineral ReserveEstimates
19.1 Mineral Resource Estimates
19.1.1 Mineral Resource Estimation Methodology
Mineral Resource models from which Mineral Resources are quoted in this report were
generated by the following independent consultants:
T17 Mine CCIC
Tilwezembe Mine Snowden
Kamoto Mine CCIC
Kananga Mine Snowden
KOV Mine SRK
Mashamba East Mine CCIC.
T17 Mine and Mashamba East Mine were re-estimated by SRK as part of this study.
SRK has the overall responsibility for the sign-off on the Mineral Resources and Reserves
and as part of that process has reviewed the methods adopted in the generation of the Mineral
Resource models from the respective consultants. SRK’s review of the methods indicates
similarities of approach between the various consultants, and the processes are summarized
below:
Collate all the Gecamines geological information in the form of plans and sections
and drill-hole logs in hard-copy format;
Digitize the plans and sections for the generation of wireframe lithological models
and capture drill-hole data;
Define the envelopes outlining the limits of the zones of mineralization within each
fragment in the project. Generally, this is a lithological cut-off (or a 0%TCu cut-off)
defining the OBI as mineralization in the RATGR, DSRAT and RSF and the OBS
within the SDB, BOMZ and to a lesser extent, the SD1a. The RSC, which is
intermediate between the OBI and OBS, is defined separately and split into a top, mid
and bottom RSC. An exception was the work undertaken by Snowden on Kananga
and Tilwezembe, where a 0,5%TCu cut-off was used;
Undertake statistical and geostatistical analyses of the sample data within the defined
envelopes of mineralization and derive variogram parameters;
Estimate grades into the zones of mineralization using kriging techniques with
attendant geostatistical parameters, search neighbourhood and input composite data;
and
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 68
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Classify the Mineral Resources into the various categories defined by the SAMREC
Code.
19.1.2 Data quality and quantity
Mashamba East Mine and T17 Mine
The mineralized zones of the T17 Mine and the Mashamba East Mine have been drilled on a
nominal spacing of 100 m x 100 m. Additional holes in the T17 deposit in selected areas
reduced the spacing to a 50 m x 100 m grid. Refer to Figure 19.1 and 19.2 for drill-hole data.
Figure 19.1 Mashamba East: Drill-hole Location Plan, Geology and Pit Outline
432
400
E
432
400
E
432
600
E
432
600
E
432
800
E
432
800
E
433
000
E
433
000
E
433
200
E
433
200
E
433
400
E
433
400
E
433
600
E
433
600
E
433
800
E
433
800
E
434
000
E
434
000
E
434
200
E
434
200
E
434
400
E
434
400
E
434
600
E
434
600
E
307000 N307000 N
307200 N307200 N
307400 N307400 N
307600 N307600 N
307800 N307800 N
308000 N308000 N
308200 N308200 N
308400 N308400 N
DIK 133
DIK 140
DIK 141
DIK 142
DIK 143DIK 144
DIK 145
DIK 146
DIK 147
DIK 148
DIK 150
DIK 151
DIK 153
DIK 154
DIK 161
DIK 162
DIK 163DIK 164
DIK 165
DIK 166
DIK 167
DIK 168
DIK 172
DIK 631
DIK 632
DIK 639
DIK 640
DIK 645
DIK 646
DIK 647
DIK 649
DIK 650
DIK 652
DIK 654
DIK 656
DIK 658
DIK 660
DIK 662
DIK 663
DIK 664
DIK 665
DIK 667 DIK 681
DIK 708
DIK 709
DIK 713
DIK 716
DIK 717DIK 721
DIK 722 DIK 726
DIK 728
DIK 731
DIK 732
DIK 733
DIK 735
DIK 736
DIK 737
DIK 740
DIK 741
DIK 742
DIK 743
DIK 744
DIK 747
DIK 748
DIK 749
DIK 753
DIK 754
DIK 757
DIK 758
DIK 759
DIK 761
DIK 765
DIK 766
DIK 768
DIK 769 DIK 770
DIK 772
DIK 774
DIK 775
DIK 776
DIK 781
DIK 788
DIK 789
DIK 790
DIK 791
DIK 794
DIK 795
DIK 796
DIK 797
DIK 798
DIK 799
DIK 800
DIK 802
DIK 804
DIK 805
DIK 811
DIK 813
DIK 815
DIK 822
DIK 823
DIK 826
DIK 829
DIK 830
DIK 831
DIK 832
DIK 833
DIK 835
DIK 836
DIK 837 DIK 838
DIK 839
DIK 840
DIK 841
DIK 842
DIK 843
DIK 844
DIK 845
DIK 846
DIK 847
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 69
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 19.2 T17 Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan and Geology
Kananga Mine and Tilwezembe Mine
The drill-hole spacing intersecting the Kananga and Tilwezembe mineralized zones is on an
average spacing of 100 m along strike. Refer to Figure 19.3 and 19.4 for drill-hole data.
Figure 19.3 Kananga Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan
-1100
E
-110
0E
-1000
E
-100
0E
-900
E
-900
E
-800
E
-800
E
-700
E
-700
E
-600
E
-600
E
-500
E
-500
E
-400
E
-400
E
-300
E
-300
E
-200
E
-200
E
-100
E
-100
E
0E
0E
100
E
100
E
-1200 N-1200 N
-1100 N-1100 N
-1000 N-1000 N
-900 N-900 N
-800 N-800 N
-700 N-700 N
-600 N-600 N
-500 N-500 N
MU
28
4
MU
28
5
MU
28
6
MU
29
0M
U29
1
MU
29
2
MU
29
3
MU
29
4
MU
295
MU
29
6
MU
29
7
MU
29
8
MU
29
9
MU
30
1M
U3
02
MU
30
3
MU
30
5
MU
30
6M
U30
7M
U30
8
MU
30
9
MU
31
0
MU
31
2
MU
31
3
MU
31
4
MU
31
5
MU
31
6M
U31
7
MU
31
8
MU
31
9
MU
32
0
MU
32
1
MU
32
4
MU
32
5
MU
32
6
MU
32
7
331
000
E
331
000
E
331
100
E
331
100
E
331
200
E
331
200
E
331
300
E
331
300
E
331
400
E
331
400
E
331
500
E
331
500
E
331
600
E
331
600
E
331
700
E
331
700
E
331
800
E
331
800
E
331
900
E
331
900
E
332
000
E
332
000
E
8817500 N8817500 N
8817600 N8817600 N
8817700 N8817700 N
8817800 N8817800 N
8817900 N8817900 N
8818000 N8818000 N
8818100 N8818100 N
KNGW01KNGW02
KNGW03
KNGW04KNGW05
KNGW06
KNGW07
KNGW08
KNGW09
KNGW10
KNGW11
KNGW12
KNGW13KNGW14
KNGW15
KNGW16
KNGW17KNGW18
KNGW19
KNGW20
KNGW20B
KNGW21
KNGW22 KNGW23
KNGW24
KNGW25
KNGW26
KNGW27KNGW28
KNGW29KNGW30
KNGW31
KNGW32
KNGW33
KNGW34
KNGW35
KNGW36
KNGW37
KNGW38
KNGW39
KNGW40
KNGW41 KNGW42
KNGW43
KNGW44
KNGW45
KNGW46
KNGW47
KNGW48
KNGW49
KNGW50
KNGW51
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 70
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 19.4 Tilwezembe Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan, Geology and Pit Outline
KOV Mine
The KOV drill-hole database contains a total of 214 drill-holes spaced on average about
100 m x 100 m. There are 100 intersections of the Virgule fragment, 75 for the Oliveira, 33
for Kamoto East and 19 for the FNSR. The demarcation between Virgule and Kamoto East is
based on a boundary string file obtained from the Gecamines sections. However, for the
modelling and grade estimation, certain drill holes overlap into the Virgule and Kamoto East
and are therefore counted twice. Similarly, there are holes intersecting Virgule that also
intersect FNSR and these are also counted twice.
There is adequate drill-hole coverage for the Virgule and Oliveira while the FNSR and
Kamoto East intersections are limited. The extent of the FNSR is limited as it is a remnant of
the fragment mined in the Musonoi Pit, to the east of the KOV pit, and the data distribution is
therefore relatively adequate. The data distribution compared to the extent and volume of the
Kamoto East fragment is inadequate, especially considering that the bulk of the data are well
above the current pit bottom and there are limited drilling intersections in this steeply dipping
limb.
356400 356600 356800 357000 357200 357400 357600 357800 358000 358200 358400 358600 358800 359000 359200 359400
Eastings
8805600
8805800
8806000
8806200
8806400
No
rth
ing
s
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 71
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 19.5 KOV Mine: Drill-hole Location Plan and Surface Topography
19.1.3 Core Recovery
Where possible and based on the data as captured for the various projects, the drill-hole data
include a column in which is recorded the sample length or percentage core recovery in
relation to the sampled interval. Core recovery describes the quality of the sample data being
used in the Mineral Resource estimates and has an effect on the quality of the Mineral
Resources reported. Low core recoveries can be due to a cavity or a consequence of bad
ground conditions or drilling practices. For the data to be representative, a core recovery in
the mineralized zones of at least 90% is often considered necessary.
Core recoveries within each of the project areas are indicated by project.
325800 326000 326200 326400 326600 326800 327000 327200 327400 327600 327800 328000 328200
Easting
8814200
8814400
8814600
8814800
8815000
8815200
8815400
8815600
8815800
8816000
8816200
8816400N
ort
hin
g
Gecamines
2006 Met holes
2007 Evaluation
2007 Geotech
Drilling Campaigns
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 72
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
T17 Mine
Core recovery data by lithology for T17 Mine is contained in Table 19.1.
Table 19.1 T17 Mine: Core Recovery Data by Lithology
Variable RSF RSC SDB BOMZ
Minimum 1,25 12,16 10,81 18,18
Maximum 100,00 100,00 100,00 100,00
Average 56,92 61,66 62,69 69,22
Standard Deviation 24,07 27,23 27,71 26,66
Coefficient of Deviation 0,42 0,44 0,44 0,39
Tilwezembe Mine
Snowden report the recoveries in Table 19.2 in the mineralized zones at Tilwezembe.
Table 19.2 Tilwezembe Mine: Recoveries within the Mineralized Zones
Rock type Length Recovered Length Recovery
(m) (m) (%)
Manganiferous Dolomites (Oxides) 1435 910 63
Brecciated Material (Oxides) 639 536 84
Tillites and Argillites (Oxides) 867 754 87
Manganiferous Dolomites (Sulphides) 553 488 88
Brecciated Material (Sulphides) 360 343 95
Tillites and Argillites (Sulphides 428 412 96
Kamoto Mine
There are limited sample entries within the mineralized zones, with core-recovery data in the
Kamoto Mine database file presented to SRK. SRK extracted core-recovery data by region,
and the proportions of sample data with core recovery entries are indicated below:
Principal Region: 0,3% of sample data have core recovery captured;
Etang Nord: 11% of sample data have core recovery captured; and
Etang South: 64% of sample data have core recovery captured.
The Principal and Etang Nord regions were not studied, as the data density was low.
Approximately two thirds of the Etang South data contain core-recovery figures, and a study
of this region was made. Sample entries with core recovery within the mineralized zones were
extracted and analyzed statistically. The statistics are shown in Table 19.3. The CCIC reports
reviewed do not state whether core recovery was taken into account during the estimating and
classification of the Etang South Mineral Resource.
Table 19.3 Kamoto Mine: Core Recovery Data by Lithology
Minimum Maximum Average Standard Deviation
0 108,4 65,06 29,85
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 73
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Kananga Mine
Snowden report the recoveries in Table 19.4 in the mineralized zones at Kananga.
Table 19.4 Kananga Mine: Recoveries within the Mineralized Zones
Rock type Length Recovered Length Recovery
(m) (m) (%)
Upper ore body oxides (UOB_OX) 363 312 86
Middle low-grade oxides (MID_OX) 679 492 73
Lower ore body oxides (LOB_OX) 380 318 84
Upper ore body sulphides (UOB_SL) 149 148 100
Middle low-grade sulphides (MID_SL) 287 286 100
Lower ore body sulphides (LOB_SL) 279 277 99
Total 2136 1834 86
KOV Mine
Core recovery data for KOV in each of the fragments are shown in Table 19.5.
Table 19.5 KOV Mine: Recoveries within the Mineralized Zones
Zone Lithology Minimum Maximum Average Standard Deviation
BOMZ 7,20 65,00 46,24 20,21
SDB 0,00 73,00 26,02 28,81
KMT RSC 0,00 73,00 14,96 22,62
RSF 0,00 100,00 19,06 25,49
DSTRAT 0,00 100,00 19,40 27,17
RATGR 0,00 95,56 19,46 26,75
BOMZ 0,00 105,00 29,40 39,21
SDB 0,00 115,00 47,07 40,37
VRG RSC 0,00 116,20 37,21 37,77
RSF 0,00 109,80 40,59 38,63
DSTRAT 0,00 105,00 45,07 38,56
RATGR 0,00 103,60 26,47 37,63
BOMZ 0,00 100,00 66,60 37,76
SDB 0,00 115,03 66,95 31,33
OLV RSC 0,00 108,44 31,24 35,84
RSF 0,00 103,00 53,80 32,60
DSTRAT 0,00 100,00 41,42 34,04
RATGR 0,00 95,00 27,78 29,85
BOMZ 52,00 112,50 83,52 19,22
SDB 0,00 129,52 47,73 36,84
FNSR RSC - - - -
RSF 0,00 108,40 56,57 40,20
DSTRAT 14,00 103,13 67,18 31,67
RATGR 83,00 94,12 88,56 5,56
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 74
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Mashamba East Mine
Core recovery data by lithology for Mashamba East Mine are shown in Table 19.6.
Table 19.6 Mashamba East Mine: Core Recovery Data by Lithology
Variable RSF RSC SDB BOMZ
Minimum 13,33 29,79 29,17 19,15
Maximum 100,00 100,00 100,00 100,00
Average 67,43 69,63 72,81 73,58
Standard Deviation 19,90 21,75 20,46 22,67
Coefficient of Deviation 0,30 0,31 0,28 0,31
Summary
The bulk of the data within the project areas is historical, with the exception of Kananga Mine
and Tilwezembe Mine where drilling was undertaken recently and the historical data have not
been used.
The historical data are from the early 1940s at the earliest and the late 1980s at the latest.
SRK reviewed selected cores on site for KOV, Kananga and Tilwezembe and found that
sample recoveries within the mineralized zones were generally low and the core conditions
were variable.
SRK consider that there are two options to account for core loss:
Adjustment of the assay grades to account for core loss and regard the adjusted data as
representative; and
Assume the assay grades of the recovered core represent the sample length, but account
for the core loss in the classification on the premise of quality of data used in the
estimation.
Adjustment of grade is considered preferable for recently acquired drill-hole information. As
the bulk of the drilling information is historical for the project areas, SRK has considered the
option of accounting for core loss in the classification.
19.1.4 Data manipulation
T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine
CCIC adopted the following criteria for the manipulation of the data at T17 Mine, Kamoto
Mine and Mashamba East Mine:
Drill-holes not sampled were removed from the database; and
Unsampled sections of the drill hole sandwiched between adjacent samples were assigned
a threshold value of 0,05%TCu and 0,01%TCo. This was more common in the RSC.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 75
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
KOV Mine
The sample database contains sample intervals for which there are no sample values. These
intervals were not sampled by Gecamines as there was no visible copper mineralization and
the majority refer to the mid-portion of the RSC, which was considered barren. There are also
smaller intervals in between sampled intervals that were not sampled either because of core
loss or because they were considered to be not mineralized.
The non-sampled interval between two sampled intervals was assigned the weighted average
grade of the two samples adjacent to it. The criteria for this manipulation were the presence of
sampled intervals on either side and the fact that the non-sampled interval was less than 3 m
in length. Intervals greater than 3 m were not manipulated using the above criteria.
In the RSC, the mid-portion, which occupies about 10 to 15 m of its 25 m thickness, was
sampled only in very few instances. This was probably because of the absence of visible
copper mineralization.
The mid-RSC is differentiated from the rest of the RSC by a wireframe model defining the
extent of the unsampled section within each fragment. Where the drill hole was sampled
through the entire RSC lithology, the position of the mid-RSC wireframe was defined from
the surrounding holes with unsampled intervals. The mid-RSC wireframe was used to extract
the partial and complete sampled intervals within each of the drill holes inside the wireframe.
The drill-holes with complete sampling information in the mid-RSC were selected, and
weighted average grades for %TCu and %TCo were obtained for each fragment. These
weighted average values were assigned to the mid-RSC portion.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 76
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.1.5 Grade distributions
T17 Mine
Figure 19.6 shows details of grade distributions at T17 Mine.
Figure 19.6 T17 Mine: %TCu grade distribution in DST, RSF and DB respectively(longitudinal view)
-1000 -950 -900 -850 -800 -750 -700 -650 -600 -550 -500 -450 -400 -350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50
X-Coordinate
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
1250
1300
1350
1400
1450
1500
Z-C
oo
rdin
ate
%TCu
0.00 to 0.50
0.50 to 1.00
1.00 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.00
3.00 to 4.00
4.00 to 5.00
5.00 to 7.50
7.50 to 20.00T17 PIT AT END MARCH 2008
SURFACE TOPO
LEGEND
-1000 -950 -900 -850 -800 -750 -700 -650 -600 -550 -500 -450 -400 -350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50
X-Coordinate
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
1250
1300
1350
1400
1450
1500
Z-C
oo
rdin
ate
%TCu
0.00 to 0.50
0.50 to 1.00
1.00 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.00
3.00 to 4.00
4.00 to 5.00
5.00 to 7.50
7.50 to 20.00T17 PIT AT END MARCH 2008
SURFACE TOPO
LEGEND
-1000 -950 -900 -850 -800 -750 -700 -650 -600 -550 -500 -450 -400 -350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50
X-Coordinate
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
1250
1300
1350
1400
1450
1500
Z-C
oo
rdin
ate
%TCu
0.00 to 0.50
0.50 to 1.00
1.00 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.00
3.00 to 4.00
4.00 to 5.00
5.00 to 7.50
7.50 to 20.00T17 PIT AT END MARCH 2008
SURFACE TOPO
LEGEND
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 77
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Tilwezembe Mine
Figure 19.7 depicts a longitudinal section along the axis of the Tilwezembe Mine ridge and
shows the positions of the drill-hole intersections and the relative %TCu grade distribution.
The mined-out portion of Tilwezembe is to the west of 35600m easting.
The drill-hole database indicates a quasi-25 to 30 m spacing near the surface to about 50 m to
elevations of about 1050 m above mean sea level (“mamsl”). Further to the east of 357200m
easting, the drill-hole spacing becomes much wider.
In terms of grade distribution, the intersections in the breccia indicate variability in the %TCu
grade within shorter distances.
Figure 19.7 Tilwezembe Mine: %TCu grade distribution in the Breccia
Kamoto Mine
Kamoto mine has been largely investigated by diamond drilling from underground mining
development, and the drill-hole distribution shows how the intensity of the development
varied from one area to another.
Overall, the %TCu grade distributions in either of the OBI and OBS mineralized zones
indicate minor variability where data exist, with the exception of the Etang, where the grades
are relatively lower. Refer to Figure 19.8 for details.
356850 356900 356950 357000 357050 357100 357150 357200 357250 357300 357350 357400 357450 357500 357550 357600
Easting
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
1250
1300
Ele
vatio
n
%TCu
0.00 to 1.00
1.00 to 1.50
1.50 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.50
3.50 to 4.50
4.50 to 4.00
6.00 to 9.00
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 78
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 19.8 Kamoto Mine: %TCu grade distribution in the OBI and OBS (plan view)
-1400 -1200 -1000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
X-Coordinate
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000Y
-Co
ord
ina
te
%TCu
0.2 to 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 3.0
3.0 to 4.0
4.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 6.0
6.0 to 25.0
-1400 -1200 -1000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
X-Coordinate
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Y-C
oord
inate
%TCu
0.2 to 1.0
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 3.0
3.0 to 4.0
4.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 6.0
6.0 to 25.0
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 79
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Kananga Mine
Figure 19.9 Kananga Mine: Longitudinal sections showing UOB (top figure) and LOB(bottom figure) intersections
331250 331300 331350 331400 331450 331500 331550 331600 331650 331700 331750
Easting
1050
1100
1150
1200
1250
1300
1350
1400
Ele
vati
on
%TCu
0.00 to 1.00
1.00 to 1.50
1.50 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.50
3.50 to 4.50
4.50 to 4.00
6.00 to 9.00
331250 331300 331350 331400 331450 331500 331550 331600 331650 331700 331750
Easting
1050
1100
1150
1200
1250
1300
1350
1400
Ele
va
tio
n
%TCu
0.00 to 1.00
1.00 to 1.50
1.50 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.50
3.50 to 4.50
4.50 to 4.00
6.00 to 9.00
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 80
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Kananga Mine
Kananga Mine is intersected by drill-holes on an average spacing of 50 m along strike and
less than 50 m across strike. There are more intersections in the LOB than the UOB,
especially further to the east.
The average grade of the intersections in Kananga are generally within the 2-to-3%TCu
bracket, with better %TCu intersections in the LOB compared with the UOB. The near-
surface intersections of the UOB appear to be depleted in copper. Refer to Figure 19.9 for
details.
KOV Mine
For KOV mine, plan-view plots have been generated showing the Virgule and Kamoto East
data and, in the second plot, the FNSR and Oliveira data. The drilling in KOV is on a nominal
spacing of 100 m along strike and is closer than 100 m across strike.
The %TCu grade distribution in Virgule indicates relatively high grades on the east, which
decrease with depth to the west. The drill-hole coverage for Kamoto east is very limited due
to its steep to near-vertical dip and the problems associated with surface drilling of vertical
zones of mineralization. The majority of the intersections in Kamoto East are above the
current surface topography and represent mined-out areas. There is a general consistency in
the %TCu grade distribution with lower grades to the west.
The drill-holes intersecting Oliveira show generally higher grades in the east and lower grades
to the north, the up-dip portion, and to the west. Figure 19.10 shows grade distributions at
KOV Mine.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 81
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 19.10 KOV Mine: %TCu grade distribution plots for Kamoto east andVirgule, and Oliveira and FNSR respectively
325800 326000 326200 326400 326600 326800 327000 327200 327400 327600 327800 328000 328200 328400
Easting
8814200
8814400
8814600
8814800
8815000
8815200
8815400
8815600
8815800
8816000
8816200
8816400
Nort
hin
g
%TCu
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 3.0
3.0 to 4.0
4.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 6.0
6.0 to 8.0
8.0 to 12.0
VIRGULE
KAMOTO EAST
325800 326000 326200 326400 326600 326800 327000 327200 327400 327600 327800 328000 328200 328400
Easting
8814200
8814400
8814600
8814800
8815000
8815200
8815400
8815600
8815800
8816000
8816200
8816400
Nort
hin
g
%TCu
1.0 to 2.0
2.0 to 3.0
3.0 to 4.0
4.0 to 5.0
5.0 to 6.0
6.0 to 8.0
8.0 to 12.0
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 82
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Mashamba East Mine
Figure 19.11 shows grade distributions at Mashamba East Mine.
Figure 19.11 Mashamba East Mine: %TCu grade distribution in RSF and SDBrespectively (plan view)
432400 432600 432800 433000 433200 433400 433600 433800 434000 434200 434400 434600
Easting
306800
307000
307200
307400
307600
307800
308000
308200
308400
Nort
hin
g
%TCu
0.01 to 0.50
0.50 to 1.00
1.00 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.00
3.00 to 4.00
4.00 to 5.00
5.00 to 7.50
7.50 to 20.00No assays
432400 432600 432800 433000 433200 433400 433600 433800 434000 434200 434400 434600
Easting
306800
307000
307200
307400
307600
307800
308000
308200
308400
Nort
hin
g
%TCu
0.01 to 0.50
0.50 to 1.00
1.00 to 2.00
2.00 to 3.00
3.00 to 4.00
4.00 to 5.00
5.00 to 7.50
7.50 to 20.00No assays
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 83
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
In Mashamba East, the drill-hole spacing is on average 100 m, but in the SDB the drill-hole
the spacing varies when considering the drill-holes with assays rather than the physical drill
position. From the point of view of the %TCu grade distribution, there are two main zones of
high-grade mineralization in the RSF, one in the west and the other in the turn-around in the
east. Otherwise, the RSF is of relatively lower grade. The SDB is generally low grade with
spotty high grade intersections.
19.1.6 Statistics
T17 Mine
The lithological wireframes were used to extract the sample data, and the data was
composited to 2,5 m lengths. Statistics from the composite files are given in Table 19.7.
Table 19.7 T17 Mine: Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by Lithology Type
Lithology Variable No. Samples Minimum Maximum Mean Std. dev CoV
BOMZ %TCu 386 0,10 15,87 4,18 3,36 0,80
BOMZ %TCo 386 0,00 7,40 0,51 0,87 1,73
BOMZ %TCu 57 0,20 10,10 2,55 2,60 1,02
BOMZ %TCo 57 0,07 1,63 0,48 0,46 0,95
SDB %TCu 202 0,10 15,87 5,14 4,04 0,79
SDB %TCo 202 0,00 7,40 0,78 1,07 1,38
RSC %TCu 202 0,00 19,20 1,65 2,84 1,72
RSC %TCo 202 0,00 4,70 0,44 0,81 1,84
RSF %TCu 135 0,15 10,72 2,94 2,47 0,84
RSF %TCo 135 0,08 7,60 0,99 1,18 1,20
DSTRAT %TCu 101 0,27 9,85 3,93 2,60 0,66
DSTRAT %TCo 101 0,07 4,06 0,39 0,48 1,24
Tilwezembe Mine
The summary statistics of the declustered 1 m composite data of the various rock types are
presented in Tables 19.8. The composite data was declustered using a cell size of 25 mE by
25 mN by 1 mRL that approximates the drill-hole spacing in the closer spaced areas.
Generally, coefficients of variation (CV = standard deviation/mean) for copper and cobalt
(total and soluble) in the manganiferous dolomite zones are high (>1,5) and those in the other
zones are lower (<1,5). For manganese, CVs in the oxidized zones were generally high (<1,5)
and low in the sulphide zones (<1,5). All specific-gravity CVs were low and displayed low
variability.
Log histograms of the declustered 1 m composite data show that the distributions approached
log normality, although evidence of multiple populations was seen in some histograms.
Histograms are negatively skewed due to the inclusion of internal waste, and positive skew
reflects the large number of very high grade samples with a small number of relatively low-
grade samples.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 84
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Positively skewed histograms with high CVs are generally affected by small numbers of high
grade samples (outliers). Grade estimates made from positively skewed data are needed for
the control of these outliers and reduce the CVs to prevent them from overly influencing the
estimate and biasing the results.
Statistics from the composite files are indicated in Table 19.8.
Table 19.8 Tilwezembe Mine: Statistics from the 1 m Composites by Lithology Type
Domain Variable Samples Minimum Maximum Mean CV
OX_MNDOL %TCu 1054 0,01 26,5 1,27 1,91
OX_BREC %TCu 485 0,10 19,84 3,78 0,89
OX_TILAR %TCu 674 0,05 4,92 0,56 1,05
SL_MNDOL %TCu 511 0,03 37,00 1,19 2,42
SL_BREC %TCu 339 0,02 21,38 3,29 0,97
SL_TILAR %TCu 406 0,01 6,27 0,53 1,28
OX_MNDOL %AsCu 1054 0,01 14,12 0,91 1,85
OX_BREC %AsCu 485 0,05 14,28 3,16 0,96
OX_TILAR %AsCu 674 0,01 4,90 0,44 1,17
SL_MNDOL %AsCu 511 0,01 6,88 0,24 2,97
SL_BREC %AsCu 339 0,01 3,52 0,33 1,19
SL_TILAR %AsCu 406 0,01 1,09 0,13 1,21
OX_MNDOL %TCo 1054 0,01 11,15 0,5 1,47
OX_BREC %TCo 485 0,01 13,47 0,96 1,58
OX_TILAR %TCo 674 0,01 3,61 0,29 1,02
SL_MNDOL %TCo 511 0,01 7,94 0,38 1,52
SL_BREC %TCo 339 0,03 4,98 1,19 1,01
SL_TILAR %TCo 406 0,02 4,00 0,34 1,15
Kamoto Mine
Tables 19.9 to 19.11 present statistics for Region Principal, Etang North and Etang South.
Table 19.9 Kamoto Mine: Kamoto Principal – Statistics per Unit
%TCu %TCo
No.Samples
Minimum Maximum MeanStd.dev
No.Samples
Minimum Maximum MeanStd.dev
Dstart 427 0,11 9,56 4,08 1,40 393 0,01 8,24 0,36 0,44
RSF 404 0,14 22,00 4,79 1,66 378 0,01 3,15 0,30 0,26
RSC_B 241 0,10 27,40 7,59 3,87 224 0,03 5,99 0,51 0,68
RSC_T 165 0,24 18,30 5,97 3,53 159 0,01 4,39 0,73 0,65
SD1A 326 0,40 22,40 5,87 2,19 307 0,01 6,40 0,63 0,51
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 85
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.10 Kamoto Mine: Etang South – Statistics per Unit
%TCu %TCo
No.Samples
Minimum Maximum MeanStd.dev
No.Samples
Minimum Maximum MeanStd.dev
Dstart 89 0,30 7,62 2,89 1,33 91 0,08 17,61 0,75 1,84
RSF 103 0,20 16,16 3,44 1,44 104 0,10 2,55 0,60 0,42
RSC_B 50 0,18 12,05 2,98 2,35 49 0,22 5,94 1,22 1,06
RSC_T 39 0,25 12,00 2,46 1,87 40 0,17 2,96 0,96 0,61
SD1A 155 0,15 13,20 5,92 2,97 154 0,07 3,96 1,04 0,74
Table 19.11 Kamoto Mine: Etang North - Statistics per Unit
%TCu %TCo
No.Samples
Minimum Maximum MeanStd.dev
No.Samples
Minimum Maximum MeanStd.dev
Dstart 28 0,50 3,37 2,03 0,67 23 0,12 0,84 0,42 0,17
RSF 23 0,59 5,15 3,02 1,15 17 0,09 0,99 0,42 0,26
RSC_B 16 0,88 12,00 3,58 2,8 12 0,31 2,32 1,14 0,65
RSC_T 9 0,67 7,30 3,54 2,54 7 0,58 2,52 1,24 0,59
SD1A 45 0,22 8,07 3,36 1,47 31 0,32 2,39 0,82 0,54
Kananga Mine
The summary statistics of the declustered 1 m composite data of the various rock types are
presented in Table 19.12. The composite data was declustered using a cell size of 25 mE by
25 mN by 1 mRL that approximates the drill-hole spacing in the closer spaced areas.
The following have been observed from the statistical analysis:
The mean values of the internal or middle (MID) zone are lower in comparison with
those of the upper and lower orebodies (UOB and LOB) and the grades are generally
below 0,5% total copper. Consequently, mining most of the internal material may not
be economically viable.
The majority of the histograms approach log normality. Some are negatively skewed
due to the inclusion of small amounts of waste (low grades) and some are positively
skewed due the large number of low-grade samples with a small number of relatively
higher grade samples.
The coefficients of variation (CV = standard deviation/mean) are generally low (<1).
There are some exceptions, most notably for the UOB_OX domain, for which CV’s
were higher and between 1,1 and 1,9. The histograms with high CV’s are generally
affected by small numbers of outlier values. Grade estimates made from skewed data
need to control these outlier values and reduce the CVs to prevent them from overly
influencing the estimate and biasing the results.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 86
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.12 Kananga Mine: Statistics from the 1 m Composites by Lithology Type
Domain VariableNo.
SamplesMinimum Maximum Mean CV
UOB_OX %TCu 250 0,08 10,05 1,13 1,1
MID_OX %TCu 528 0,02 0,64 0,16 0,6
LOB_OX %TCu 297 0,03 9,28 1,93 0,8
UOB_SL %TCu 122 0,01 6,10 1,83 0,6
MID_SL %TCu 269 0,02 1,00 0,26 0,6
LOB_SL %TCu 234 0,13 6,75 2,18 0,6
UOB_OX %AsCu 250 0,02 9,05 0,85 1,2
MID_OX %AsCu 528 0,01 0,62 0,12 0,8
LOB_OX %AsCu 297 0,01 9,26 1,26 1,1
UOB_SL %AsCu 122 0,01 1,61 0,15 1,2
MID_SL %AsCu 269 0,01 0,39 0,07 1,2
LOB_SL %AsCu 234 0,01 2,99 0,22 1,6
UOB_OX %TCo 250 0,06 4,51 0,64 1,2
MID_OX %TCo 528 0,02 2,73 0,27 0,8
LOB_OX %TCo 297 0,02 3,37 0,70 0,8
UOB_SL %TCo 122 0,01 4,79 0,94 1,1
MID_SL %TCo 269 0,06 2,03 0,53 0,6
LOB_SL %TCo 234 0,02 3,49 1,05 0,7
KOV Mine
Assay data for each lithology were extracted from the database using the lithological
wireframes. The lithological sample data were then composited separately at intervals of
2,5 m. The RSC was composited across the entire lithology unit, and the statistics reflect the
sample intervals.
Statistics from the lithological composites within each of the four fragments are presented in
Tables 19.13 to 19.16.
Table 19.13 KOV Mine: Virgule – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by LithologyType
Lithology Variable No. Samples Minimum Maximum Mean Std dev
BOMZ %TCu 77 0,10 12,00 3,54 3,10
%TCo 112 0,00 3,62 0,46 0,67
SDB %TCu 296 0,02 12,92 5,97 3,60
%TCo 371 0,00 11,50 0,46 0.84
RSC %TCu 384 0,08 23,14 4,39 3,47
%TCo 587 0,00 5,00 0,21 0,40
RSF %TCu 171 0,14 12,00 6,20 3,03
%TCo 244 0,00 2,25 0,19 0,32
DSTRAT %TCu 103 0,50 12,00 6,43 2,41
%TCo 128 0,00 1,52 0,22 0,31
RATGR %TCu 49 0,80 14,35 6,36 3,42
%TCo 103 0,00 0,99 0,09 0,16
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 87
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.14 KOV Mine: Oliveira – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by LithologyType
Lithology Variable No. Samples Minimum Maximum Mean Std dev
BOMZ %TCu 72 0,15 7,88 2,05 1,99
%TCo 80 0,00 2,25 0,41 0,42
SDB %TCu 250 0,10 13,68 5,59 2,48
%TCo 239 0,00 3,66 0,93 0,70
RSC %TCu 266 0,10 16,59 4,72 3,71
%TCo 512 0,00 4,58 0,29 0,55
RSF %TCu 120 0,40 14,99 5,40 3,16
%TCo 111 0,00 2,90 0,38 0,48
DSTRAT %TCu 73 0,91 12,00 4,92 2,31
%TCo 71 0,00 1,61 0,32 0,33
RATGR %TCu 43 0,60 16,41 4,80 2,78
%TCo 60 0,00 1,24 0,23 0,33
Table 19.15 KOV Mine: FNSR – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites by LithologyType
Lithology Variable No. Samples Minimum Maximum Mean Std dev
BOMZ %TCu 9 0,53 12,00 5,24 3,41
%TCo 11 0,00 2,85 0,67 0,89
SDB %TCu 71 1,11 12,00 7,93 3,16
%TCo 79 0,00 6,15 0,42 0,88
RSC %TCu 69 0,15 12,00 5,27 4,28
%TCo 110 0,00 1,96 0,18 0,29
RSF %TCu 25 1,66 12,47 5,76 2,40
%TCo 25 0,02 0,47 0,18 0,13
DSTRAT %TCu 7 4,30 8,98 7,17 1,48
%TCo 9 0,00 0,16 0,04 0,05
RATGR %TCu 2 4,06 8,02 6,04 1,98
%TCo 2 0,02 0,07 0,04 0,02
Table 19.16 KOV Mine: Kamoto East – Statistics from the 2,5 m Composites byLithology Type
Lithology Variable No. Samples Minimum Maximum Mean Std dev
BOMZ %TCu 27 0,17 13,22 6,16 3,31
%TCo 43 0,00 4,96 0,71 0,97
SDB %TCu 133 0,08 14,38 6,32 3,34
%TCo 173 0,00 4,63 0,41 0,59
RSC %TCu 206 0,11 16,07 4,20 3,72
%TCo 288 0,00 2,52 0,22 0,29
RSF %TCu 76 0,21 10,84 5,09 3,11
%TCu 96 0,00 1,50 0,26 0,30
DSTRAT %TCo 43 0,21 11,55 5,53 2,89
%TCu 70 0,00 1,40 0,21 0,28
RATGR %TCo 15 3,02 9,02 6,37 1,71
%TCu 25 0,00 0,86 0,13 0,19
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 88
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The statistics show that, in general, relatively high copper grades are associated with all the
lithologies from the BOMZ to the RATGR and within each fragment. The cobalt grades are
higher in the BOMZ and the SDB, which make up the upper mineralized zone, and lower in
the lower mineralized zone; RSF, DSTRAT and RATGR lithologies.
The RSC statistics reflect the grades associated with the upper RSC and lower RSC, which
occur near the contact with the well mineralized SDB and RSF respectively. Sampling of the
mid-RSC is limited, and these intervals are therefore not included in the statistics.
The mid-RSC, which occupies about 10 m to 15 m of the 25 m RSC thickness, was sampled
only in very few instances. This was probably because there was no visible copper
mineralization.
The mid-RSC is differentiated from the rest of the RSC by a wireframe model defining the
extent of the unsampled section within each fragment. Where the drill hole was sampled
through the entire RSC lithology, the position of the mid-RSC wireframe was defined from
the surrounding holes with unsampled intervals. The mid-RSC wireframe was used to extract
the partial and complete sampled intervals in each of the drill holes inside the wireframe.
The drillholes with complete sampling information in the mid-RSC were selected, and
weighted average grades for %TCu and %TCo were obtained for each fragment. These
weighted average values were assigned to the mid-RSC portion.
Statistics from the sampled intervals in the mid-RSC and respective fragments are shown in
Table 19.17.
Geological models of the lithology were based on the broad Gecamines’ lithological
interpretations presented on the 1:1000 sections and entries of lithologies in the drill-hole data
file. SRK refined the sectional lithological interpretations by snapping the strings onto the
drill-hole lithological contacts.
Three dimensional lithological wireframe models were generated for each of the four resource
areas: Kamoto East, Virgule, Oliveira and FNSR fragments.
The mineralized zones were defined on the basis of a 1.0%TCu cut-off grade. However, the
mineralization within each fragment extends from the BOMZ to RATGR and is well above
the cut-off grades.
Blocks of fundamental size 20 m x 20 m x 5m in the X, Y and Z directions have been used for
the modelling with sub-celling to 1/8th the block size in the X and Y directions and allowing
for the maximum sub-celling in the Z direction to allow for the reasonably accurate definition
of any lithological contact.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 89
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.17 KOV Mine: Statistics from Limited mid-RSC Sampling
Project Area Variable Minimum Maximum Average Weighted averageStd.dev
CV Count
Virgule
Virgule
%TCu 0,21 18,70 2,91 2,80 4,07 1,40 65
%TCo 0,03 9,15 0,53 0,22 1,46 2,75 65
Oliveira
Oliveira
%TCu 0,06 2,94 0,85 0,94 0,68 0,80 42
%TCo 0,06 0,96 0,42 0,45 0,26 0,61 42
FNSR
FNSR
%TCu 0,03 11,15 1,30 1,13 2,95 2,27 24
%TCo 0,00 0,27 0,08 0,08 0,06 0,67 25
Kamoto East
Kamoto East
%TCu 0,27 12,00 2,25 2,21 3,24 1,44 19
%TCo 0,00 1,04 1,04 0,23 0,23 0,22 19
The weighted average values for %TCu and %TCo have been assigned to the respective mid-
RSC volumes.
Mashamba East Mine
The lithological wireframes were used to extract the sample data, and the data were
composited to 2,5 m lengths. Statistics from the composite files are shown in Table 19.18.
Table 19.18 Mashamba East: Statistics from the 2,5m Composites by Lithology Type
Lithology Geozone VariableNo.
SamplesMinimum Maximum Mean Std. dev CoV
BOMZ WEST %TCu 125 0,01 10,60 0,48 1,40 2,94
BOMZ WEST %TCo 125 0,01 0,44 0,09 0,11 1,20
BOMZ EAST %TCu 66 0,01 12,00 0,70 1,78 2,53
BOMZ EAST %TCo 66 0,01 1,08 0,14 0,23 1,65
SDB WEST %TCu 237 0,01 19,26 1,19 2,46 2,06
SDB WEST %TCo 237 0,01 4,14 0,36 0,61 1,69
SDB EAST %TCu 64 0,01 9,15 1,82 2,51 1,38
SDB EAST %TCo 64 0,01 2,63 0,33 0,48 1,42
RSC WEST %TCu 248 0,01 12,00 0,60 2,00 3,34
RSC WEST %TCo 248 0,00 2,01 0,07 0,23 3,24
RSC EAST %TCu 112 0,01 12,00 0,69 2,06 2,98
RSC EAST %TCo 112 0,01 0,66 0,04 0,08 2,31
RSF WEST %TCu 440 0,01 12,00 2,28 2,85 1,25
RSF WEST %TCo 440 0,00 2,80 0,37 0,54 1,46
RSF EAST %TCu 119 0,01 11,37 3,83 2,96 0,77
RSF EAST %TCo 119 0,00 1,28 0,14 0,22 1,56
19.1.7 Variography
T17 Mine
For T17 Mine omni-directional variograms were generated in each of the lithologies. There
are limited sample data for the generation of directional variograms. The variogram
parameters are indicated in Table 19.19.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 90
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.19 T17 Mine: Omni-directional variogram parameters by lithology
Zone VariableNugget
Variance, C0C1 Variance Range C2 Variance Range2
DSTRAT %TCu 0,5135 1,775 232,79
%TCo 0,03565 0,04481 397,72
RSF %TCu 1,589 2,356 126,01 3,421 565,56
%TCo 0,08955 0,1464 321,98
RSC %TCu 0,1042 1,87 178,33
%TCo 0,006679 0,2475 180,73
SDB %TCu 0,3691 0,8281 256,58
%TCo 0,01728 0,05536 194,02
BOMZ %TCu 1,984 3,257 283,48
%TCo 0,03098 0,02172 283,32
Tilwezembe Mine
Traditional semi-variograms were calculated from the selected composite data using
Supervisor software. To improve the variogram structures, a normal scores transform was
performed on the composites before semi-variogram calculation.
Semi-variograms for the individual rock types were often not very robust, especially in the
sulphide zones that were not as extensively drilled as the oxide zones. The combination of the
oxide and sulphide zones resulted in an adequate amount of data to calculate reasonable and
robust variograms. As a result, variograms were modelled for the entire brecciated zone, the
entire manganiferous dolomite zone and the entire low-grade argillite/tillite zone.
Where two elements were highly correlated (correlation coefficient >0,7), the variogram
model of the most significant grade variable was applied direct to the second variable. As the
semi-variograms were predominantly calculated from data from the oxide zone that was more
extensively drilled than the sulphide zone, the oxide correlation matrices were considered.
High correlations existed between total copper and soluble copper and between total cobalt
and soluble cobalt. As a result, the total semi-variograms were directly applied to the soluble
elements to preserve the correlations. Therefore, semi-variograms were modelled only for
total copper, cobalt and manganese.
The directions of continuity for these elements were evaluated by making use of semi-
variogram contours on the horizontal, across-strike and dip planes. This allowed for the
determination of the strike, dip and plunge continuity. The calculated experimental semi-
variograms for each of the attributes were modelled using spherical models with two or three
structures. All variograms were standardized to a sill of one, representing all of the sample
variance. The nugget effect was determined by extrapolating the first two points of the down-
hole variogram to the Y-axis.
The variogram parameters are summarized in Tables 19.20 to 19.22.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 91
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.20 Tilwezembe Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – Manganiferous Dolomites (Oxide and Sulphide)
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Attribute
(%)
Nugget
effectSill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range Dir2
(m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range Dir2
(m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3 (m)
Total Cu 0,05 0,52 40 20 7 0,43 160 60 14 - - - -
Total Co 0,04 0,59 40 15 12 0,37 130 70 12 - - - -
Total Mn 0,05 0,63 30 10 8 0,32 160 70 12 - - - -
Table 19.21 Tilwezembe Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – Breccia (Oxide and Sulphide)
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Attribute
(%)
Nugget
effectSill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range Dir2
(m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range Dir2
(m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3 (m)
Total Cu 0,12 0,13 20 70 10 0,75 160 70 10 - - - -
Total Co 0,11 0,22 40 10 3 0,19 40 100 12 0,48 330 100 12
Total Mn 0,22 0,48 30 50 7 0,3 180 50 7 - - - -
Table 19.22 Tilwezembe Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – Tillites and Argillites (Oxide and Sulphide)
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Attribute
(%)
Nugget
effectSill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range Dir2
(m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range Dir2
(m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3 (m)
Total Cu 0,15 0,4 110 80 15 0,44 125 110 15 - - - -
Total Co 0,09 0,18 180 50 2 0,73 180 50 20 - - - -
Total Mn 0,12 0,53 35 90 12 0,36 160 90 12 - - - -
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 92
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Kamoto Mine
Variogram calculation, analysis and modelling were done using Datamine™ Studio, on the
composited samples, within the Principal region only. The reason for excluding the other
regions from the variogram analysis was that each region is fault bounded, with the
magnitude of displacement unknown. Variogram parameters of the Principal region were
applied to the other regions due to the relatively small dataset of each region.
Due to the folded/warped and undulating nature of the orebody, the dataset was “unfolded”
prior to any variography. The objective of the “unfolding” exercise was to improve the
planarity of the dataset and hence improve the variogram structures. The method of unfolding
involved the generation of perimeters radiating from the centre, outwards. This was to ensure
that the central point became the “origin’ or pivot point.
All variograms were modelled in the “unfolded” space. Each unit was analysed individually
and the analysis was undertaken on %TCu and %TCo.
Variogram contours and spidergrams yielded no evidence of anisotropy in the dataset, hence
isotropic variogram models were used. The dataset of each unit was analysed using
histograms, cumulative histograms and probability plots to aid in identifying outliers.
Potential outliers were excluded from the variography and also used as a guideline for the
application of top-cut limits during grade estimation.
Up to six lag distances were used in the calculation of the experimental variograms. This was
done to assess the stability of the theoretical variogram models against fluctuating lags
distances because of the irregular sample/drilling spacing.
The following images summarise the variography of Cu and Co values per Unit, starting with
the DStrat, up to the SD1a.
The variogram parameters are summarized in Tables 19.23 and 19.24.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 93
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.23 Kamoto Mine: Copper variogram models
VARIABLE CO C1Range1 X-
dirRange1 Y-
dirRange1 Z-
dirC2
Range2 X-dir
Range2 Y-dir
Range2 Z-dir
C3Range3 X-
dirRange3 Y-
dirRange3 Z-
dir
DSTRAT 0,01 1,26 9,96 9,96 5,4 1,83 30,98 30,98 24,1 1,44 324,96 324,96 24,1
RSF 0,031 1,97 3,92 3,92 3,92 2,82 30,17 30,17 8,5 1,82 296,61 296,61 20,3
RSC 0,043 2,29 7,83 7,83 6,7 5,08 52,19 52,19 27,4 - - - -
SDB 0,124 3,26 6,98 6,98 6,98 5,31 74,36 74,36 8,3 2,43 189,72 189,72 27,4
BOMZ 0,042 1,83 7,93 7,93 7,8 1,39 272,1 272,1 20,3 - - - -
Table 19.24 Kamoto Mine: Cobalt variogram models
VARIABLE CO C1Range1 X-
dirRange1 Y-
dirRange1 Z-
dirC2
Range2 X-dir
Range2 Y-dir
Range2 Z-dir
DSTRAT 0 0,07 11,87 11,87 8,4 0,03 147,85 147,85 18,2
RSF 0,003 0,12 3,05 3,05 8,5 0,12 184,05 184,05 15,3
RSC 0,004 0,11 7,52 7,52 7,2 0,11 70,59 70,59 7,2
SDB 0,005 0,17 10,96 23,97 4,96 0,27 31,98 324,92 11,3
BOMZ 0,021 0,18 56,65 170 11,68 - - - -
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 94
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Kananga Mine
Traditional semi-variograms were calculated from the selected composite data using
Supervisor software. To improve the variogram structures, normal scores transform was
performed on the composites before semi-variogram calculation.
Semi-variograms for the individual rock types were often not very robust, especially in the
sulphide zones that were not as extensively drilled as the oxide zones. The combination of the
oxide and sulphide zones resulted in an adequate amount of data to calculate reasonable and
robust variograms.
Where two elements were highly correlated (correlation coefficient >0,7), the variogram
model of the most significant grade variable was applied direct to the second variable. As the
semi-variograms were predominantly calculated from data from the oxide zone that was more
extensively drilled than the sulphide zone, the oxide correlation matrices were considered.
Strong correlations existed between total copper and soluble copper and between total cobalt
and soluble cobalt. As a result, the total semi-variograms were directly applied to the soluble
elements to preserve the correlations. Therefore, semi-variograms were only modelled for
total copper, cobalt and manganese.
The directions of continuity for these elements were evaluated by making use of semi-
variogram contours on the horizontal, across-strike and dip planes. This allowed for the
determination of the strike, dip and plunge continuity. The calculated experimental semi-
variograms for each of the attributes were modelled using spherical models with two or three
structures. All variograms were standardized to a sill of one, representing all of the sample
variance. The nugget effect was determined by extrapolating the first two points of the down-
hole variogram to the Y-axis. The variogram parameters are summarized in Table 19.25 and
19.26.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 95
SRK G:\389772\ reports\KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.25 Kananga Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – upper orebody (Oxide and Sulphide)
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Attribute Nugget SillRange
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3
(m)
Directions
(ZXZ axes
rotation)*
Total Cu (%) 0,01 0,62 60 90 11 0,36 300 90 11 - - - - (-30,115,0)
Total Co (%) 0,06 0,61 50 20 9 0,33 300 70 9 - - - - (-20,115,0)
Total Mn (%) 0,23 0,29 60 10 9 0,2 60 140 9 0,29 180 140 9 (-30,125,0)
* Rotations in a clockwise direction are positive, whilst those in an anti-clockwise direction are negative
Table 19.26 Kananga Mine: Back transformed variogram parameters – internal/middle zone (Oxide and Sulphide)
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Attribute Nugget SillRange
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3 (m)Sill
Range
Dir1 (m)
Range
Dir2 (m)
Range
Dir3
(m)
Directions
(ZXZ axes
rotation)*
Total Cu (%) 0,12 0,41 50 20 10 0,10 50 230 25 0.37 460 230 25 (-25,130,0)
Total Co (%) 0,02 0,47 70 50 11 0,51 340 290 27 - - - - (-35,125,0)
Total Mn (%) 0,05 0,53 50 130 13 0,41 360 130 13 - - - - (-40,140,0)
* Rotations in a clockwise direction are positive, whilst those in an anti-clockwise direction are negative
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 96
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
KOV Mine
Omni-directional variograms were generated for each of the lithologies, with the exception of
RATGR, in the Virgule and Oliveira fragments. There were insufficient composite data for the
generation of omni-directional variograms for the RATGR in both of these fragments.
Because of inadequate composite data, omni-directional variograms were not generated for the
lithologies in the Kamoto East and FNSR fragments.
The fitted omni-directional variograms for %TCu and %TCo within the various lithologies in the
Virgule and Oliveira fragments are shown in Tables 19.27and 19.28.
Table 19.27 KOV Mine: Virgule- Omni-Directional Variogram Parameters by Lithology
Lithology Variable Nugget C1 Range
BOMZ TCu 1,65 3,38 309,38
BOMZ TCo 0,03 0,07 204,17
SDB TCu 8,74 3,78 380,12
SDB TCo 0,05 0,13 204,08
RSC TCu 8,59 3,44 209,69
RSC TCo 0,08 0,07 266,89
RSF TCu 2,44 0,68 245,78
RSF TCo 0,00 0,01 217,35
DSTRAT TCu 3,06 2,51 243,89
DSTRAT TCo 0,01 0,01 317,03
Table 19.28 KOV Mine: Oliveira - Omni-Directional Variogram Parameters by Lithology
Lithology Variable Nugget C1 Range
BOMZ TCu 2,68 289,22
BOMZ TCo 0,04 0,06 284,57
SDB TCu 3,15 1,17 303,40
SDB TCo 0,01 0,03 192,65
RSC TCu 3,19 1,56 261,88
RSC TCo 0,03 0,01 221,57
RSF TCu 1,01 2,90 265,60
RSF TCo 0,00 0,02 178,66
DSTRAT TCu 0,28 1,12 350,92
DSTRAT TCo 0,02 0,09 253,91
Mashamba East Mine
For Mashamba East Mine, omni-directional variograms were generated for each of the lithologies.
There are limited sample data for the generation of directional variograms. The variogram
parameters are indicated in Table 19.29.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 97
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.29 Mashamba East Mine: Omni-directional Variogram Parameters by Lithology
Zone Variable Nugget Variance, C0 C1 Variance Range
RSF %TCu 1,943 1,425 157,67
%TCo 0,04157 0,08539 332,59
RSC %TCu 1,006 0,6158 210,88
%TCo 0,07737 0,03845 256,14
SDB %TCu 1,235 1,564 216,8
%TCo 0,05093 0,1141 291,64
BOMZ %TCu 0,1709 2,731 353,88
%TCo 0,02193 0,03127 467,49
19.1.8 Grade estimation
T17 Mine
SRK re-estimated the %TCu and %TCo grades into the T17 Mine block model as generated by
CCIC. SRK accepted the CCIC lithological model and used that for the selection of the samples to
use for the estimation.
Composites for the estimation were selected within each lithology to estimate the respective
lithology. The criterion adopted by CCIC to account for absent data, where 0,01%TCu was assigned
for unsampled sections in the drill-hole, was also applied
SRK estimated grades into the T17 Mine block model using the three-pass method as described
above with slight modification as to the parameters used for the search and orientation of the
ellipsoid. The first search neighbourhood was set equivalent to the variogram range. The variogram
parameters for the lithologies within T17 Mine are shown in Table 19.30.
For T17, “geozones” were defined to demarcate zones where there were changes in the strike and dip
of the strata. The search ellipsoid was oriented using the strike/dip parameters within these
“geozones”. The same lithological variogram parameters were used for the defined geozones.
Table 19.30 T17 Mine: Variogram parameters by lithology
Zone Variable Nugget Variance, C0 C1 Variance Range 1 (x,y) C2 Variance Range 2 (x,y)
DSTRAT %TCu 0,5135 1,775 232,79
%TCo 0,03565 0,04481 397,72
RSF %TCu 1,589 2,356 126,01 3,421 565,56
%TCo 0,08955 0,1464 321,98
BOMZ %TCu 0,1042 1,87 178,33
%TCo 0,006679 0,2475 180,73
SDS %TCu 0,3691 0,8281 256,58
%TCo 0,01728 0,05536 194,02
SDB %TCu 1,984 3,257 283,48
%TCo 0,03098 0,02172 283,32
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 98
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Tilwezembe Mine
During the grade estimation process, Snowden applied various topcuts to the data to limit the
influence of high grades in he estimation into the various lithological domains and for the various
grade fields, %TCu, %AsCu %TCo, %AsCo and %Mn.
Ordinary kriging was used in the estimation process. The defined mineralized zones were subdivided
into two structural domains based on the strike. Samples used to estimate the respective blocks were
sourced within an ellipsoidal search oriented according to the structural domain in which a
mineralization block occurred.
Composites used in the estimation process were sourced within search criteria of
130 m x 60 m x 12 m in the strike, across strike and perpendicular to strike directions equivalent to
the variogram ranges.
Where blocks remained unestimated after the first pass, the search neighbourhood was doubled or
tripled.
Kamoto Mine
CCIC estimated the various geozones within Kamoto Mine using ordinary kriging and input
variogram and search neighbourhood parameters. The variogram parameters used are indicated in
Tables 19.23 and 19.24 and the same variogram range was used in all the directions.
Samples used in the estimation were sourced from search neighbourhoods equivalent to the second
variogram ranges for each of the variables and in each lithology, except for one case, where the only
first variogram range was modelled and this was used as the search criterion.
A second search, equivalent to either 1.25 or 1.5 times the first search was used to estimate blocks
that remained un-estimated after the first run. For bocks still not estimated after the two passes, a
third global search of 1000 x 1000 x 1000m was used.
The minimum number of samples used to interpolate into a block was set to 4 and the maximum 40.
Zonal control was applied per stratigraphic unit. Block model was coded using the stratigraphic
wireframes into the various stratigraphic units. Only samples having the same codes where used in
the interpolation of the various units.
The Kamoto Mine model was updated in 2008 by CCIC to address the concerns raised by SRK in
the review and also to deplete the model based on the findings of the project team on site with
respect to the previous mining areas which were not accounted for in the 2007 model. This affected
Zone 8 and 9.
CCIC indicate that the modelling and estimation methodology and used in the 2007 update was
applied in the 2008 update using the same estimation parameters.
The following key changes were made to the models in the 2008 updates:
Zone 8 and 9: The geological wireframes for Zones 8 and 9 were updated to account for
underground mapping information of the historical mining areas undertaken by Katanga
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 99
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Mining under the supervision of the Chief Geologist during 2008. The updated underground
stope sheets were digitised by Katanga as 2-dimensional strings and presented to CCIC to
update the 3D stratigraphic and structural wireframes models. Assumptions were made
defining the extent of the stopes in the Z-direction to ensure that the mineralised zones were
depleted in the locations within the areas of the strings. This updated wireframe was then re-
estimated using the same estimation parameters as in the 2007 update, but with modified
search criteria to prevent the smearing of high grade samples from the well informed areas
into the poorly informed areas. An octant search criteria was applied, which allowed for at
least two octants to be filled for estimation.
Zone 9 above 415 level: based on the advice of Katanga personnel the wireframe models for
Zone 9 were restricted to below 415 level. Katanga personnel reviewed the historical mining
above 415 level and indicated that historical mining had depleted the mineralised zones
above this level. This restriction has resulted in a reduction of 637kt classified as Measured
in the 2007 update, 5,7Mt of Indicated and 1,59Mt of Inferred Mineral Resources.
Division 5 above the 415 level: Katanga personnel also reviewed the historical mining
above the 415 level in Division 5 and updated the stope outlines. Their investigations
indicated extensive mining above the 415 level in the Division 5 area with mineralised zones
only in remnant pillars, which were difficult to quantify. On the advice of Katanga
personnel, the Division 5 above 415 level was removed from the Mineral Resources,
amounting to 2.9Mt of Indicated Mineral Resources.
Kananga Mine
Similar procedures to those adopted for Tilwezembe Mine were applied for Kananga Mine.
Top cutting was applied;
The mineralized zones were split into two structural domains;
Composites used in the estimation process were sourced within search criteria of 180m x
60m x 10m in the strike, across strike and perpendicular to strike directions equivalent to the
variogram ranges;
Where blocks remained unestimated after the first pass, the search neighbourhood was
doubled or tripled; and
Ordinary kriging was used in the estimation process.
KOV Mine
Grades were estimated into the fundamental block size of 100 m x 100 m x 5 m in the X, Y and Z
directions respectively. The geological model remained on the 20m x 20m x 5m block size, but the
blocks were reorganized to fit into a larger block size for the estimation.
Grade estimation was by ordinary kriging for %TCu and %TCo using the omni-directional
variogram parameters and the composite data. Each lithology type was estimated separately using the
respective composite data and parameters. Samples estimating any given block were sourced from
the data set using a search ellipsoid oriented along the dip of the mineralized zone with the maximum
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 100
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
search radius being in the planar of the deposit. Maximum search radii for copper and cobalt were
400 m and 300 m respectively, while the search in the Z direction was limited to 20 m.
Estimation was undertaken in three passes: in the first pass, the minimum and maximum number of
samples to estimate a block were set at 10 and 20. In the second pass, the search neighbourhood was
expanded to twice the original search of 400 m and 300 m respectively for %TCu and %TCo, and the
minimum and maximum numbers of samples to estimate a block were reduced to 5 and 10. Blocks
that remained unestimated after the second pass were now estimated within a search neighbourhood
of 5 times the original search, and the minimum and maximum numbers of samples reduced to 3 and
5 respectively.
For the estimation of the RATGR lithology, the variogram parameters for the DSTRAT were used.
For the FNSR, variogram parameters for the respective lithologies from the Virgule were used in the
estimation process and under similar sample-search criteria. For Kamoto East, the inverse-distance-
squared method was used for the estimation of the grades into the lithologies. This is mainly due to
the insufficient sample coverage within each of the lithologies. After the estimation into the full RSC
model, the block model for the mid-RSC containing the assigned weighted average grade values was
then added to the full RSC model overprinting the estimated block values within the mid-RSC. This
was applicable to all the fragments.
Mashamba East Mine
The estimation procedure as described under T17 was also applied to Mashamba East. The
variogram parameters for the lithologies within Mashamba East Mine are shown in Table 19.31. The
first search neighbourhood was set equivalent to the variogram range.
Table 19.31 Mashamba East Mine: Variogram parameters by lithology
Zone Variable Nugget Variance, C0 C1 Variance Range (x,y) Range z Variable
RSF %TCu 1,943 1,425 157,67 33,33 %TCu
%TCo 0,04157 0,08539 332,59 28,03 %TCo
RSC %TCu 1,006 0,6158 210,88 33,33 %TCu
%TCo 0,07737 0,03845 256,14 28,03 %TCo
SDB %TCu 1,235 1,564 216,8 33,33 %TCu
%TCo 0,05093 0,1141 291,64 28,03 %TCo
BOMZ %TCu 0,1709 2,731 353,88 33,33 %TCu
%TCo 0,02193 0,03127 467,49 33,33 %TCo
19.2 Density Determinations
Historically, Gecamines assigned density values based on the categorization of the ore type into
dolomitic or non-dolomitic (siliceous) and its copper grade and based on an exhaustive dataset
available from all Gecamines operations within the Katangan Copperbelt. A sample was considered
dolomitic when the %TCu divided by the %CaO in the sample was less than or equal to 15 and non-
dolomitic (siliceous) when it was greater than 15. Gecamines generalized empirical criterion defined
three main categories of densities as shown in Table 19.32 below.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 101
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.32 Gecamines criteria for assigning density values
Definition and Criterion Density, t/m3
Siliceous= (%TCu/%CaO) >=15
TCu>1<2% 2,0
TCu>2,0%, with <0,5% Cu sulphite content 2,2
TCu>1<2%, with >1% TCo content 2,2
TCu >2,0%, with >0,5% Cu sulphite content 2,4
Dolomitic = (%TCu/%CaO) <15
TCu >1<2% 2,4
TCu >2,0%, with <0,5% Cu sulphite content 2,4
TCu >2,0%, with >0,5% Cu sulphite content, >=0,5%CuOx 2,4
TCu >2,0%, with >0,5% Cu sulphite content, <=0,5%CuOx 2,6
According to the Gecamines criterion, waste rock was generally assigned a density of 2,0 t/m3 if it
was siliceous and 2,4 t/ m3 if the rock was considered dolomitic.
SRK reviewed the historical assayed dataset for all the projects in the application of these criteria
and found that there were proportionately fewer assays for %CaO than the %TCu assays available
for these criteria to be applied. However, SRK consider these values as guidelines for the possible
ranges of density within the respective mineralized zones.
19.2.1 T17 Mine
CCIC undertook limited density determinations of the various stratigraphic units to verify
Gecamines empirical densities. The determinations were undertaken on selected lithological cores
using the Archimedes’ Principle by which a sample is weighed in air and then in water using a
Clover Scale. The measured masses then are entered into a simple formula to calculate the density.
CCIC limited density determinations for T17 Mine are presented in Table 19.33 by stratigraphic unit.
Table 19.33 T17 Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies
Stratigraphic Unit Number of samples Minimum Maximum Average
SDB 7 2,10 2,76 2,38
BOMZ 1 2,09 2,09 2,09
SDB 7 2,10 2,76 2,38
RSC 5 2,21 2,63 2,34
RSF 6 2,06 2,51 2,32
DSTRAT 5 1,88 2,40 2,13
As a cross check and by way of a second method, CCIC also submitted samples for density checks to
Set Point Laboratories where density determinations were undertaken using a multivolume gas
pycnometer 1305 for helium displacement.
Two samples were also tested by the Mintek laboratory in Johannesburg and these provided figures
of 2,84 for the siliceous material from T17 West, and 2,74 for the dolomitic material from the same
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 102
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Resource Area. The method of density determination undertaken by Mintek has not been specified in
the CCIC report.
On the basis of the limited density determinations, CCIC indicated that Gecamines approach was
conservative and upside potential existed with regard to the calculated resource tonnages. However,
CCIC recommended that in-situ bulk-density determinations should be undertaken before higher
density values can be used in the Resource Model.
For the conversion of volume to tonnage in the T17 model, CCIC applied density values of
2,2 t/m3 and 2,4 t/m3 consistent with the Gecamines categories of oxide and mixed ore types.
19.2.2 Tilwezembe Mine
Snowden undertook density determinations on selected core samples using Archimedes’ Principle.
The sample core pieces of approximately 100 mm to 200 mm length were wrapped in cling-film
(Saran wrap) to prevent oxidation and weighed first in air and then when submerged in water. The
difference in the weights is the weight of the water displaced. No work has been done to determine
the free moisture content of the samples. Resultantly, wet bulk densities were used during
estimation.
Snowden indicate that no relationship exists between grade and density and therefore, bulk density
factors were determined for each geological unit from the means of the specific gravity
measurements after outliers were cut from the dataset. The de-clustered means were used and a
maximum of 5% of the composites were cut from the dataset. The composite data was declustered
using a cell size of 25 mE by 25 mN by 1 mRL that approximates the drill-hole spacing. The bulk
densities are presented in Table 19.34.
Table 19.34 Tilwezembe Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies
Domain Bottom Cut Top Cut Percentage cut Declustered mean Declustered mean
(before cut) (after cuts)
Ox_MnDol 1,1 3 5 2,04 1,96
Ox_Brec - 2,7 4 1,90 1,81
Ox_TillArg - 3 5 2,09 1,98
Sl_MnDol - 2,6 3 2,28 2,26
Sl_Brec 1,5 2,7 3 2,23 2,24
Sl_TillArg 1,8 2,5 3 2,18 2,18
19.2.3 Kamoto Mine
CCIC undertook limited density determinations of the various stratigraphic units to verify
Gecamines empirical density values. The determinations were undertaken on selected lithological
cores using Archimedes’ Principle, by which a sample is weighed in air and then in water using a
Clover Scale. The measured masses then are entered into a simple formula to calculate the density.
CCIC limited density determinations for Kamoto U/G are presented in Table 19.35 by stratigraphic
unit.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 103
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.35 Kamoto Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies
Stratigraphic Unit Number of samples Minimum Maximum Average Stratigraphic Unit
SD1a 9 2,69 2,90 2,80 SD1a
BOMZ 8 2,74 2,92 2,86 BOMZ
RSC 8 2,51 2,96 2,69 RSC
RSF 6 2,57 3,03 2,81 RSF
DSTRAT 5 2,66 3,02 2,81 DSTRAT
Grey RAT 3 2,64 2,77 2,70 Grey RAT
Red RAT 3 2,63 2,75 2,67 Red RAT
On the basis of the limited density determinations, CCIC concluded that Gecamines approach was
conservative and that upside potential existed with regard to the calculated resource tonnages, but
recommended that in situ bulk density determinations should be undertaken before higher density
values can be used in the Resource Model.
CCIC used the average density values of 2,7 t/m3 from the Gecamines table for the conversion of
volume to tons for the for the Kamoto Mine model.
19.2.4 Kananga Mine
The procedures adopted for the density determinations at Kananga are the same as described for
Tilwezembe and the values are listed in Table 19.36.
Table 19.36 Kananga Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies
Domain Declustered mean
Upper ore body oxides (UOB_OX) 1,8
Middle low-grade oxides (MID_OX) 1,8
Lower ore body oxides (LOB_OX) 2,0
Upper ore body sulphides (UOB_SL) 2,1
Middle low-grade sulphides (MID_SL) 2,0
Lower ore body sulphides (LOB_SL) 2,1
19.2.5 KOV Mine
In the models generated for KOV, SRK used a density of 2,2 t/m3. This is based on the visual
inspection of the mineralization in the cores and observations in the field, where the predominant
copper mineral is malachite.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 104
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Intersections of mineralization from the drilling at KOV Mine confirm that the predominant
mineralization is malachite, considered as an oxide, with minor sulphides at depth. There are limited
density determinations from selected cores of the recent drilling. Although considered statistically
inadequate to represent the sample dataset, indications from these determinations are that the density
applied is appropriate.
19.2.6 Mashamba East Mine
CCIC undertook limited density determinations of the various stratigraphic units to verify
Gecamines’ empirical density values in the Mashamba East Mine. The method is as described above
under Kamoto Mine. CCIC’s limited density determinations for Mashamba East are presented in
Table 19.37, by stratigraphic unit.
Table 19.37 Mashamba East Mine: Density Determinations on Various Lithologies
Stratigraphic Unit Number of samples Minimum Maximum Average
SDB 17 2,34 2,76 2,52
RSC 10 2,40 2,61 2,51
RSF 5 2,28 2,50 2,39
CCIC used the average density values of 2,2 t/m3 and 2,4 t/m3 from the Gecamines table for the
conversion of volume to tons in siliceous and dolomitic mineralized zones respectively for the
Mashamba Mine model.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 105
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.2.7 Summary
Table 19.38 indicates the densities that have been used in the conversion of volume to tons within
the various project areas.
Table 19.38 Density Determinations on Various Lithologies
Project Area Mineralized Zone Density, t/m3
T17 Mine Oxide mineralized zones 2,2
Tilwezembe Mine Ox_MnDol 1,96
Ox_Brec 1,81
Ox_TillArg 1,98
Sl_MnDol 2,26
Sl_Brec 2,24
Sl_TillArg 2,18
Kamoto Mine 2,7
Kananga Mine Upper ore body oxides (UOB_OX) 1,8
Middle low-grade oxides (MID_OX) 1,8
Lower ore body oxides (LOB_OX) 2
Upper ore body sulphides (UOB_SL) 2,1
Middle low-grade sulphides (MID_SL) 2,0
Lower ore body sulphides (LOB_SL) 2,1
KOV 2,2
Mashamba East Mine Oxide mineralized zones 2,2
Mixed mineralized zones 2,4
19.3 Block model validation
The block models from the respective projects were validated by comparing the mean values of the
data against the mean values of the estimates within a given search distance. The validation is mostly
specified along an easting, and composites and block model data are selected within search limits on
either side of the easting for the comparisons.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 106
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.4 Mineral Resources and Classification
The Mineral Resources for all mines were estimated in accordance with the 2007 SAMREC Code.
Should the Mineral Resources be stated in accordance with the CIM standards on Mineral Resources
and Mineral Reserves, there would be no significant difference.
19.4.1 T17 MineMineral Resources for T17 Mine were estimated and reported by lithology. In classifying the
Mineral Resources, SRK considered the following:
The quantity and quality of the data used in the generation of the mineral resources, of
particular importance is the core recovery;
The unavailability of assays in portions of the package due to selective sampling on the basis
of visible copper mineralization;
The inconsistent cutting of the copper grades;
The relatively incomplete assays for %ASCu and %CaO compared to the %TCu data; and
Limited density determinations undertaken on the various lithologies.
SRK classified the mineralized zones of T17 Mine as Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources. The
mineralized zones with limited drill-hole intersections were classified as Inferred Mineral Resource.
The Mineral Resources within the RSC lithology were also classified as Inferred.
Table 19.39 T17 Mine: Mineral Resources at 0% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008)
Indicated Inferred
Zone Mt %TCu %TCo Mt %TCu %TCo
OBI DSTRAT 2,8 3,67 0,33 1,1 4,09 0,76
RSF 3,3 2,64 1,04 1,5 3,57 1,84
OBS SDB 4,5 4,20 0,75 1,8 5,32 1,10
BOMZ 1,4 2,78 0,59 0,5 1,52 0,43
SD 1,7 0,92 0,14 0,6 0,78 0,09
RSC 11,2 0,80 0,32
13,7 3,16 0,64 16,7 1,77 0,57
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(3) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
19.4.2 Tilwezembe Mine
The Mineral Resource for Tilwezembe Mine was estimated at 30 Mt at a total copper grade of 1,5%
and a total cobalt grade of 0,5%.
The following criteria were assessed in the classification as stated in the Snowden report:
The risk in the data informing the Mineral Resource estimate;
The robustness of the geological model; and
The risk in the grade estimates.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 107
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Snowden classified portions of the Tilwezembe Mineral Resources as: Indicated where the estimates
were within first search, equivalent to the variogram range; and Inferred for the remainder.
West of an easting of 357 300 mE, blocks above an elevation of 1200 mRL were classified as
Indicated. Between eastings of 357 300 mE and 357 525 mE, blocks above an elevation of 1245
mRL were classified as Indicated. All remaining blocks were classified as Inferred. The confidence
in manganese and soluble copper and cobalt assays was low, and these elements were therefore not
included in the resource statement. The Mineral Resource for Tilwezembe is reported above a %TCu
cut-off grade of 0,5%.
Table 19.40 Tilwezembe Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0,5% TCu cut-off (31 December2008)
Classification Mt %TCu %TCo
Total Indicated 9,0 1,89 0,60
Total Inferred 13,1 1,80 0,62
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(3) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 108
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.4.3 Kamoto Mine
Table 19.41 Kamoto Mine: Mineral Resources by zone (31 December 2008)
Classification Zone Mt %TCu %TCo
Measured 1 7,0 4,63 0,61
2 0,9 4,32 0,31
3 3,0 4,91 0,46
4 0,5 5,02 0,24
5 3,3 5,14 0,39
6 1,8 5,74 0,36
7 0,1 5,65 0,16
8 1,1 5,44 0,44
9 1,1 5,85 0,31
11 0,1 4,84 0,66
Etang N 2,6 2,85 0,61
Etang S 11,5 4,05 0,76
Sub-total 33,0 4,50 0,58
Indicated 1 3,9 5,35 0,82
2 1,9 4,79 0,59
3 2,4 5,62 0,5
4 1,6 5,27 0,35
5 1,8 6,03 0,45
6 2,1 6,02 0,27
7 7,2 5,65 0,31
8 0,5 4,16 0,39
9 0,5 5,64 0,3
11 0,8 5,14 0,69
Etang N 4,4 3,21 0,7
Etang S 8,7 3,28 0,89
Sub-total 35,7 4,69 0,60
Total Measured 1 10,9 4,89 0,69
and 2 2,8 4,64 0,5
Indicated 3 5,4 5,22 0,48
4 2,1 5,21 0,32
5 5,1 5,45 0,41
6 4,0 5,89 0,31
7 7,2 5,65 0,31
8 1,6 5,05 0,42
9 1,6 5,78 0,31
11 0,9 5,11 0,69
Etang N 7,0 3,08 0,67
Etang S 20,2 3,72 0,82
Total 68,7 4,60 0,59
Inferred 1 1,8 4,52 0,83
2 1,0 4,44 0,69
3 0,1 5,76 0,52
4 1,3 4,74 0,41
8 0,0 5,71 0,7
11 6,5 5,45 0,55
Sub-total 10,6 5,22 0,53
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(3) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 109
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.4.4 Kananga Mine
The Mineral Resource for Kananga Mine was estimated at 15,2 Mt at a total copper grade of 1% and
a total cobalt grade of 0,7%. The following criteria were assessed in the classification as stated in the
Snowden report:
The risk in the data informing the Mineral Resource estimate;
The robustness of the geological model; and
The risk in the grade estimates.
After consideration of all other items such as geological continuity and data quality, areas
predominantly estimated during the first search, equivalent to the variogram range, were classified as
Indicated and those estimated during the second search as Inferred.
Snowden classified portions of the Kananga Mineral Resources as Indicated where the estimates
where within first search, equivalent to the variogram range and the remainder as Inferred Mineral
Resource. West of 331 600 mE, blocks above an elevation of 1160 mRL were classified as Indicated.
Table 19.42 Kananga Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0,5% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008)
Type Classification Mt %TCu %TCo
Oxide Indicated 2,9 1,54 0,70
Sulphide Indicated 1,2 1,77 1,02
Total Indicated 4,1 1,61 0,79
Oxide Inferred 0,4 1,25 0,53
Sulphide Inferred 3,6 2,08 1,03
Total Inferred 4,0 2,00 0,98
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(3) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
19.4.5 KOV Mine
The bases for the classification include:
The quantity and quality of the data used in the generation of the Mineral Resource
estimates;
The unavailability of assays in portions of the package due to selective sampling on the basis
of visible copper mineralization;
The inconsistent cutting of the copper grades;
The relatively incomplete assays for %ASCu and %CaO compared with the %TCu data;
The unavailability of density determinations for any of the lithologies within each of the
fragments;
That there was a history of mining within each of the pits; and
The unavailability of historical production records for reconciliation.
The Mineral Resources for KOV have been classified as Indicated and Inferred.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 110
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The Mineral Resources for Virgule and Oliveira have been classified as Indicated on the basis of the
continuity of the geology and mineralization and the adequate drill-hole coverage.
The Mineral Resource for the Kamoto East has been classified as Inferred due to the paucity of data
intersecting the fragment.
Similarly, the mid-RSC in all the fragments has been classified as Inferred for the same reason, viz.
paucity of data.
Table 19.43 KOV Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0% TCu cut-off (31 December 2008)
Classification Indicated Inferred
Fragment Lithology Mt %TCu %TCo Mt %TCu %TCo
Virgule
BOMZ 6,1 3,92 0,59
SDB 17,8 6,13 0,52
RSC 14,5 4,43 0,22
RSF 11,4 5,91 0,21
DSTRAT 9,1 6,03 0,24
RATGR 6,9 5,84 0,11
RSC-MID 10,8 2,8 0,22
Sub-total 66 5,47 0,32 11 2,8 0,22
Oliveira
BOMZ 4,8 2,07 0,41
SDB 14,4 5,63 0,94
RSC 11,6 4,57 0,27
RSF 7,4 5,16 0,36
DSTRAT 5,3 5,13 0,3
RATGR 3,6 4,89 0,26
RSC-MID 16,5 0,94 0,47
Sub-total 47 4,82 0,51 16 0,94 0,47
FNSR
BOMZ 2,1 5,98 0,78
SDB 5,5 7,27 0,55
RSC 4,1 5,55 0,18
RSF 1,4 5,99 0,19
DSTRAT 0,8 6,96 0,04
RATGR 0,2 6,04 0,04
RSC-MID 3,6 1,13 0,08
Sub-total 14 6,41 0,41 4 1,13 0,08
Kamoto East
BOMZ 2,8 6,65 0,77
SDB 9,2 6,31 0,47
RSC 8,7 3,53 0,29
RSF 7,8 6,58 0,17
DSTRAT 4,4 4,85 0,13
RATGR 2 5,9 0,08
RSC-MID 5,6 2,2 0,23
Sub-total 40 5,04 0,31
TOTAL 126,9 5,33 0,40 71,2 3,56 0,32
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(3) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 111
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.4.6 Mashamba East MineThe Mineral Resources for Mashamba East Mine were estimated and reported by lithology. In
classifying the Mineral Resources, SRK considered the following:
The quantity and quality of the data used in the generation of the Mineral Resource
estimates; of particular importance is the core recovery;
The unavailability of assays in portions of the package due to selective sampling on the basis
of visible copper mineralization;
The inconsistent cutting of the copper grades;
The relatively incomplete assays for %ASCu compared with the %TCu data;
Limited density determinations undertaken on the various lithologies; and
That there was a history of mining Mashamba East, but historical reconciliation production
records are unavailable.
SRK classified the mineralized zones of Mashamba East (with the exception of the RSC)as Indicated
Mineral Resource.
Table 19.44 Mashamba East Mine: Mineral Resources at a 0% TCu cut-off (31 December2008)
Zone Mt %TCu %TCo
Indicated RSF 9 31,0 2,77 0,49
SDB 25 24,5 1,46 0,44
BOMZ 21 19,5 0,68 0,13
Total 75,0 1,80 0,38
Inferred RSC 43 65,3 0,76 0,10
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(3) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 112
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.5 Consolidated Mineral Resource Statement
Table 19.45 presents KOL’s consolidated Mineral Resource statement as of 31 December 2008.
Table 19.45 KOL: Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2008
Classification Project Area Mt %TCu %TCo
Measured Kamoto Mine 33,0 4,50% 0,58%
Subtotal 33,0 4,50% 0,58%
Kamoto Mine 35,7 4,69% 0,60%
Mashamba East Mine 75,0 1,80% 0,38%
Indicated T17 Mine 13,7 3,16% 0,64%
KOV Mine 126,9 5,33% 0,40%
Kananga Mine 4,1 1,61% 0,79%
Tilwezembe Mine 9,0 1,89% 0,60%
Subtotal 264,5 3,95% 0,45%
Kamoto Mine 68,7 4,60% 0,59%
Total Mashamba East Mine 75,0 1,80% 0,38%
Measured and T17 Mine 13,7 3,16% 0,64%
Indicated KOV Mine 126,9 5,33% 0,40%
Kananga Mine 4,1 1,61% 0,79%
Tilwezembe Mine 9,0 1,89% 0,60%
TOTAL 297,5 4,02% 0,46%
Kamoto Mine 10,6 5,22% 0,53%
Mashamba East Mine 65,3 0,76% 0,10%
Inferred T17 Mine 16,7 1,77% 0,57%
KOV Mine 71,2 3,56% 0,32%
Kananga Mine 4,0 2,00% 0,98%
Tilwezembe Mine 13,1 1,80% 0,62%
Total 180,7 2,32% 0,31%
(2) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(3) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.(4) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
19.6 Comparison of the 2008 and 2007 Mineral Resources
In Table 19.46, the 2008 Mineral Resources for the KOL assets are compared with those declared in
2007 with notes attached to explain the difference. In most cases the difference is due to the change
in the reporting adopted for 2008, where the Mineral Resources are declared inclusive of Mineral
Reserves. In 2008, an optimistic pit model has not been run to determine the declared Mineral
Resources as this method excludes any material below the optimistic pit from the Mineral Resource
base.
The Mashamba West and Dikuluwe properties were returned to Gecamines and therefore do not
form part of the 2008 Mineral Resource and Reserve Statement.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 113
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 19.46 KOL: Comparison of the 2008 and 2007 Mineral Resource statements
2008 2007
Classification Project Area Mt %TCu %TCo Mt %TCu %TCo
Kamoto Mine(1) 33,0 4,50% 0,58% 35,3 4,56% 0,58%
Measured Mashamba East Mine(2), (4) - - - 29,1 2,30% 0,47%
T17 Mine(2), (4) - - - 8,7 3,69% 0,73%
Mashamba West (4), (5) - - - 13,6 2,97% 0,18%
Dikuluwe (4), (5) - - - 24,1 3,89% 0,10%
Sub-total 33,0 4,50% 0,58% 110,9 3,56% 0,41%
Kamoto Mine(1) 35,7 4,69% 0,60% 48,9 5,03% 0,58%
Mashamba East Mine(2), (4) 75,0 1,80% 0,38% 11,0 1,89% 0,43%
Indicated T17 Mine(2), (4) 13,7 3,16% 0,64% 2,9 3,55% 0,82%
KOV Mine 126,9 5,33% 0,40% 126,9 5,33% 0,40%
Kananga Mine(3) 4,1 1,61% 0,79% 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Tilwezembe Mine(3) 9,0 1,89% 0,60% 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Mashamba West (4), (5) - - - 3,1 2,87% 0,13%
Dikuluwe (4), (5) - - - 8,8 4,19% 0,09%
Sub-total 264,5 3,95% 0,45% 201,7 4,96% 0,43%
Kamoto Mine(1) 68,7 4,60% 0,59% 84,3 4,83% 0,58%
Total Mashamba East Mine(2), (4) 75,0 1,80% 0,38% 40,1 2,19% 0,46%
Measured and T17 Mine(2), (4) 13,7 3,16% 0,64% 11,6 3,65% 0,75%
Indicated KOV Mine 126,9 5,33% 0,40% 126,9 5,33% 0,40%
Kananga Mine(3) 4,1 1,61% 0,79% 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Tilwezembe Mine(3) 9,0 1,89% 0,60% 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Mashamba West (4), (5) - - - 16,7 2,95% 0,17%
Dikuluwe (4), (5) - - - 32,9 3,97% 0,09%
TOTAL 297,5 4,02% 0,46% 312,6 4,46% 0,42%
Kamoto Mine(1) 10,6 5,22% 0,53% 12,2 5,30% 0,57%
Mashamba East Mine(2), (4) 65,3 0,76% 0,10% 5,3 2,14% 0,58%
Inferred T17 Mine(2), (4) 16,7 1,77% 0,57% 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
KOV Mine 71,2 3,56% 0,32% 71,2 3,56% 0,32%
Kananga Mine(3) 4,0 2,00% 0,98% 4,0 1,44% 0,74%
Tilwezembe Mine(3) 13,1 1,80% 0,62% 13,1 1,59% 0,65%
Mashamba West (4), (5) - - - 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Dikuluwe (4), (5) - - - 9,8 4,29% 0,08%
Total 180,7 2,32% 0,31% 115,7 3,44% 0,39%
2008 Mineral Resources are quoted inclusive of Mineral Reserves
(1) Re-modelling and depletions by CCIC.
(2) Original CCIC model incomplete, SRK re-estimated and re-classified.
(3) Additional drilling and re-modelling.
(4) 2007 Resources constrained by optimistic pit outline.
(5) Properties returned to Gecamines.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 114
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
19.7 Consolidated Mineral Reserve Statement
Table 19.47 presents KOL’s consolidated Mineral Reserve statement as at 31 December 2008. A
discussion on the LoM plans and mining assumptions in support of the Mineral Reserves is included
in Section 25a.
Table 19.47 KOL: Mineral Reserves as at 31 December 2008
Classification Project Area Mt %TCu %TCo
Proved Kamoto Mine 17,0 3,52% 0,51%
Subtotal 17,0 3,52% 0,51%
Kamoto Mine 19,4 3,70% 0,53%
Mashamba East Mine 10,2 4,39% 0,52%
Probable T17 Mine 3,1 2,67% 0,70%
KOV Mine 90,1 4,93% 0,38%
Kananga Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Tilwezembe Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Subtotal 122,8 4,64% 0,43%
Kamoto Mine 36,4 3,62% 0,52%
Total Mashamba East Mine 10,2 4,39% 0,52%
Proved and T17 Mine 3,1 2,67% 0,70%
Probable KOV Mine 90,1 4,93% 0,38%
Kananga Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Tilwezembe Mine 0,0 0,00% 0,00%
Total 139,8 4,50% 0,44%
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.
19.7.1 Comparison of the 2008 and 2007 Mineral Reserves
Table 19.48 indicates the reconciliation between the Reserve Statement for 31 December 2008 as
presented in this document to the Reserve Statement issued by KOL during February 2007. Notes
on reconciliation between 2008 and 2007 Reserve Statements:
Kamoto Mine
o The Resource model had been updated and had an effect on the Reserve Statement
per zone. This comment is applicable to all the grade values per mining area;
o All geological losses were reduced from a 10% loss to 5%. The reduction is
considered to be valid, since the nature of the resource is consistent and no major
discontinuities are expected;
o Three areas had been redesigned, where the previously proposed mining method
(cut-and-fill) would not be practical. The zones were redesigned for PPCF;
o Zone 9 had been depleted significantly (by about 1,8 Mt);
o Zone 10 and Division 5 had been removed in totality from the resource
(approximately 6 Mt);
o Zone 8 Reserves had been reduced by 53% due to a change in the geological model
(Zones 8 and 9 were split); and
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 115
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
o Probable Reserves all increased by 5% due to the change in the geological loss
value.
T17 Mine
o New geological model changed the Mineral Resource classification and thus
changed the Mineral Reserves; and
o RSC was classified as Inferred in the 31 December 2008 Statement.
Mashamba East Mine
o New geological model changed the Mineral Resource classification and thus
changed the Mineral Reserves; and
o RSC was classified as Inferred Resources in the 2008 Statement.
Table 19.48 KOL: Comparison of the 31 December 2008 and 2007 Mineral Reservestatements
2008 2007
Classification Project Area Mt %TCu %TCo Mt %TCu %TCo
Kamoto Mine 17,2 3,53 0,51 17,1 3,63 0,41
Proved Mashamba East Mine - - - 15,6 2,82 0,46
T17 Mine - - - 1,1 3,38 0,36
Mashamba West(2) - - - 4,6 3,31% 0,12%
Dikuluwe(2) - - - 15,9 3,59% 0,10%
Sub-total 17,2 3,53 0,51 54,3 3,35% 0,31%
Kamoto Mine 19,4 3,70% 0,53% 28,4 3,99% 0,52%
Mashamba East Mine 10,2 4,39% 0,52% 3,7 2,64% 0,54%
Probable T17 Mine 3,1 2,67% 0,70% 0,5 2,96% 0,39%
KOV Mine 90,1 4,93% 0,38% - - -
Kananga Mine - - - - - -
Tilwezembe Mine - - - - - -
Mashamba West(2) - - - 1,3 3,00% 0,09%
Dikuluwe(2) - - - 4,9 3,46% 0,10%
Sub-total 122,8 4,64% 0,43% 38,8 3,75% 0,45%
Kamoto Mine 36,4 3,62% 0,52% 45,5 3,85% 0,48%
Total Mashamba East Mine 10,2 4,39% 0,52% 19,3 2,79% 0,48%
Proved and T17 Mine 3,1 2,67% 0,70% 1,6 3,24% 0,37%
Probable KOV Mine 90,1 4,93% 0,38% - - -
Kananga Mine - - - - - -
Tilwezembe Mine - - - - - -
Mashamba West(2) - - - 5,9 3,24% 0,11%
Dikuluwe(2) - - - 20,8 3,56% 0,10%
TOTAL 139,8 4,50% 0,44% 93,1 3,52% 0,37%
(1) Mineral Resources have been reported in accordance with the classification criteria of the South African Code for the Reporting ofMineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (the SAMREC Code).
(2) Properties returned to Gecamines.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 116
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20 Other Relevant Data and Information
20.1 KOV Oxide / Sulphide Content
20.1.1 Description
The KOV database contains a total of 275 holes, of which about 215 were drilled during the
Gecamines era, spanning 40 years from 1940s to the 1980s. During the Gecamines era, not every
sample analyzed for %TCu, was analyzed for %AsCu: the combined KOV assay database contains a
total of 7180 samples analyzed for %TCu, out of which 3737 or 52% were analyzed for %AsCu.
Several reasons have been put forward by various workers in the DRC for the inconsistent sampling
practice of which the most common is that the sampling was based on visual inspection of the
minerals, implying oxide mineralization in the samples not analyzed for %AsCu. There is no
consistency in the distribution of the %AsCu assays compared with those for %TCu. In some cases
there is only one sample in the entire drill-hole analyzed for %AsCu. This has made it difficult to use
the assay database to determine the proportions of oxide or sulphides or both in the mineralized
zones.
SRK selected samples that have assays for both %TCu and %AsCu (the AsCu database) and used
these for the determination of the proportions of oxide or sulphide or both, expressing this as a ratio
of %AsCu to %TCu. Four main fragments have been identified in the KOV project area: Kamoto
East, Virgule, Oliveira and FNSR. This oxide/sulphide study was based on the distribution of the
ratios in each of the four individual fragments.
Samples falling within a 15 m bench slice were extracted from the AsCu database in each of the four
project areas. The bench centre was consistent with the block model centres, and the sample
selection criterion was 7,5 m on either side of the centre. Statistics were computed for the samples
falling within a particular bench and within a particular fragment for %TCu, %AsCu and Ratio.
Comparative statistics were also computed on the entire KOV database for %TCu.
The initial study of splitting the samples by ore type into OBS, RSC and OBI for each of the
fragments indicated insufficient OBS and RSC sample counts for any meaningful conclusions to be
drawn. Higher sample counts were observed in the OBI, which contributes immensely to the study.
For the final study, no sub-selections were done. Instead, samples were selected across the entire
stratigraphic succession from the BOMZ to the RATGRIS, disregarding the ore-type boundaries
completely.
Ratio distribution plots by bench inclusive of %AsCu and %TCu grades and number of samples
within the bench slice were generated. A fourth-order polynomial was fitted to the ratio data for each
fragment to describe the best-fit equation.
The polynomial best-fit equations have been applied to the each block in the model to provide an
estimate of the ratio. SRK caution against using the ratio as absolute indication of the proportions of
oxide or sulphides or both in the mineralized zones because the quantity and quality of the data used
to derive these expectations were low.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 117
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
KML have indicated that they will devise a drilling and evaluation plan to improve the
understanding of the oxide/sulphide ratios.
20.1.2 Assumptions
Oxides and sulphides require different processing routes. It has been assumed that the oxide:sulphide
ratio for the ore mine from KOV Mine is 60%:40%, based on the study outlined in Section 20.1.1.
Should this ratio be significantly different to this assumption, it will affect the capacity of each
process route and may restrict production, which will affect sulphur consumption and costs.
20.2 Dewatering
20.2.1 Introduction
This section is based on information provided to SRK in AGES Technical Reports AS-R-2008-09-05
and AGES-R-08-01-28, AG-R-2008-11-24 KOL Geohydrology Report Version 3 DRAFT and AG-
R-2008-10-02 KOV Dewatering DFS V2 Final.
AGES and AfriCon were appointed by KML to conduct a study for the dewatering of the KOV pit.
AGES was responsible for the mine dewatering concept and pit slope dewatering borehole layout,
while AfriCon undertook the pit lake dewatering design and implementation and engineering layout.
It is understood that the purpose of the investigation was to determine the geohydrological and
engineering requirements and options for the pre-operational and life of mine dewatering of KOV.
Based on hydrogeological data generated through a programme of drilling and sampling, AGES
constructed a hydrogeological model which was used to develop the dewatering strategy.
20.2.2 Kamoto Underground
The hydrogeological characteristics of the water-bearing mine series formations (CMN, RAC and
SD) are variable depending on the degree of alteration. Current water inflows into the underground
workings have been estimated by KOL to be 2 350 m3/hr. KOL is making provision to increase the
volume pumped to 6 900 m3/hr based on historic pumping capacity.
A geophysical survey in the area between the mine workings and the Mupine pit has indicated a zone
of high conductivity that could potentially be intercepted. A number of preferential flow paths are
believed to exist, which could connect Mupine to the underground workings. With the deposition of
tailings into the Mupine pit, it is estimated that the head of water in the pit will rise by approximately
40m. AGES has estimated an additional 500-800 m3/hr will flow into Kamoto from the Mupine Pit
due to the increased head. However, in the longer term, the deposition of the fine tailings material is
expected to reduce the permeability of the base of the pit, reducing the potential for seepage, with
predicted inflows decreasing to 300 m3/hr. It is recommended that the borehole MUP05 proposed by
AGES be drilled and pump tested and additional isotope samples be taken from inflows into the
underground workings and from the new boreholes MUP1, MUP2, MUP3 so that a more detailed
understanding of the consequence of tailings disposal in the Mupine pit can be gained.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 118
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.2.3 T17
The mine plan put forward for the 2008 Study has been changed significantly in the Addendum
study to allow for greater tonnages to be mined over the first two years. With regard to the
geotechnical validation of the new design put forward by KOL, a number of parameters have
changed, based on the drawings presented in December 2008 (SRK has been provided with a mining
plan, but more detail is required for geotechnical analysis). The changes include:
The floor elevation of the pit has dropped from approximately 1340m to approximately
1 300 m. This means that the pit walls will be higher than those analysed in the 2008 Study
and there is a greater chance that the lower portion of the pit will intersect the water table.
The access ramp positions at the end of 2010 will lie predominantly in the hanging wall and
not in the footwall as with the design assessed in the 2008 Study. This means that the overall
angle of the footwall slope in RAT will be greater than that analysed previously and the
hanging wall will be flatter.
The northern wall of the pit will intersect the (possibly saturated) backfill in the Musonoi pit,
possibly to a greater depth than envisaged in the 2008 study. The overall slope angle in this
portion of the pit should be less than in intact hanging wall strata. No details of the slope
design adjacent to the Musonoi pit have been provided yet for review.
The pit appears to extend further to the west than in the previous design. There appears to be
a more complex geological structure towards the west with significant faulting being shown
on geological sections X +850 and X +950. No detailed geological plans of this area have
been provided. Should this faulting be adversely orientated, the security of the access ramp
for Cut 4 could be in question.
The potential for water pressure development in both footwall and hanging wall slopes has
not been established. Limited water level information has been presented by AGES. A
provision for dewatering using horizontal drains has also been suggested by AGES but no
technical basis for the dewatering design has been provided for review by SRK. It is SRK’s
opinion that horizontal drain holes will not effectively address operational problems such as
wet working areas and water in blastholes.
The pit bottom is already below the water level in the Musonoi River. As a result, there is
the risk that if there is any failure on the south-eastern high wall the Musonoi River could
inundate the pit.
To validate the design SRK would require the following work to be carried out, based on the
assumption that the geotechnical parameters determined for KOV will also be applicable to T17 as
no geotechnical information is available for T17:
It is understood that a pit design is available Although the 2008 design indicated that the
slopes carried safety factors in the order of 2, because of the changes in pit geometry these
slopes must be re-analysed and the risks re-quantified for the new design.
The water pressures prevailing in both hanging wall (including Musonoi backfill) and, in
particular, the footwall RAT must be established as a matter of urgency. Should water at a
pressure that could impact on slope stability be identified, the permeability of the associated
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 119
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
strata must be established as a basis for designing a depressurisation system. The alternative
of implementing a system of vertical pumping holes should be investigated. As the pit
appears to be relatively dry to an elevation of approximately 1345m, a system of vertical
holes need not necessarily be implemented from surface but could be established on a lower,
in-pit elevation to reduce implementation time and cost.
A definitive structural geological model for the western portion of the pit must be created
and reviewed to assess the risk of structurally bound instability occurring in the Cut 4 access
ramp and consequent risk to 2010 and 2011 production profiles.
In view of the current uncertainty regarding geotechnical design parameters and water pressures,
SRK has recommended that a geotechnical monitoring programme is implemented immediately,
incorporating regular (weekly) pit rim and bench inspections, establishment of a network of
monitoring points that are surveyed monthly and installation of a network of piezometers that are
monitored weekly. Although this will not prevent a failure, early recognition may allow a redesign
to reduce the impact of failure and will also reduce the risk of injury to personnel and the loss of
equipment.
20.2.4 Mashamba East
This is located on the southern edge of the Roan Basin outcrop and is characterised by several
southwest to northeast trending synclinal/anticlinal structures and southeast to northwest trending
faults which reportedly have a compartmentalising effect on the groundwater in the area. As mining
is not scheduled to commence until 2018, a discussion of the dewatering of this pit is not included as
the dewatering design will need to be updated based on the findings of the KOV dewatering exercise
discussed in detail below.
20.2.5 Dewatering of the KOV pit
AGES has stated that the dewatering design has been based on the 2006 mine plan, although the
costing has been updated using the information made available for this study in July 2008. It is
AGES opinion that the original dewatering design will be appropriate for the 2008 mine plan.
It is understood that the AGES dewatering strategy is to reduce the groundwater head and capture
most of the water before it flows into the open pit using both in-pit and ex-pit boreholes, i.e. it is
aimed at intercepting the maximum volume of water prior to entering the pit but not necessarily
drawing down the phreatic surface on the high walls uniformly around the pit void.
SRK believes that the objective of mine dewatering must be to depressurize the pit slopes and ensure
that the flows into the pits are manageable to enable safe mining as cost effectively and efficiently as
possible. However, the strategy proposed by AGES is focused on maximising dewatering volumes
and if this does not result in the lowering of the phreatic surface as envisaged, the pit slopes may not
be sufficiently depressurised.
The key potential risks that are therefore associated with the proposed dewatering strategy are:
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 120
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
As some of the assumptions in the hydrogeological model have not yet been validated, the
dewatering strategy could potentially prove to be inefficient as the boreholes may not be
correctly located and/or an insufficient number planned.
If the dewatering strategy proves to be inappropriate, the assumption used in the mine
planning that dry slope conditions will prevail could be incorrect, which could potentially
impact on both the economics of the pit and pit stability, and thus on the production
schedule.
There are other potential risks that could impact on the pit dewatering, such as the availability of
electricity, site security and changes in mine plan. Although important, the significance of these
risks is considered to be lower than the key potential risks cited above and thus they are not
discussed further in this section.
A detailed list of recommendations for additional work that must be undertaken to resolve the
areas of uncertainty has been compiled and is presented below. Based on the outcomes of this
additional work, suitable mitigation measures to adequately manage the risks can be developed.
Dewatering Strategy
The implications for the mine plan if the drilling method/equipment does not achieve the
anticipated timeframes for borehole installation need to be assessed and an alternative
dewatering strategy proposed.
The geohydrological characteristics of the individual strata making up the KOV rock mass
must be identified using both laboratory and field test work. Packer testing and falling head
tests must be done to identify the characteristics of specific horizons that may require
depressurization.
Based on the outcome of the packer testing, point piezometers and stand pipes in open
boreholes should be installed to understand the pore pressures and phreatic surface acting in
the different stratigraphical horizons on the pit high walls, both during pre-operational and
operational stages. This will allow assessment of the degree of success of the dewatering
strategy in lowering the hydraulic head.
A more detailed conceptual hydrogeological model should then be developed showing cross
sections north-south and east-west showing the simulated hydraulic head within the range of
possible hydraulic conductivities.
Based on the above information, an assessment should be made on the adequacy of the
number and location of the vertical dewatering boreholes. This information can also be used
to optimise the placement of in-pit horizontal boreholes.
In terms of the timeframes for dewatering, sensitivity analyses should be undertaken for
specific parameters such as recharge, hydraulic conductivities (both vertical and horizontal)
for different predictive simulations (i.e. varying the number of boreholes, pumps, passive
drainage to underground ring tunnel, drainholes etc) with the numerical flow model. This
will enable a more accurate assessment of the risks related to the proposed dewatering
strategy.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 121
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The timing of the KOV and Kamoto East dewatering needs to be presented in more detail as
the management of the water levels in the pits relative to each other is critical in maintaining
pit stability along the south wall of KOV.
Estimates of drain spacing must be undertaken on the south wall of the pit to ensure that this
formation is depressurised and, once constructed, shut in pressure tests should be used to
measure the head and hydraulic conductivity to optimise the planned drain spacing.
Additional drilling and pump testing is required to demonstrate the efficacy for dewatering
of the pit of pumping more than 1 km from KOV in the Variante, as well as to establish if
the water to be pumped from dewatering boreholes DCP04 and DCP05 are linked to seepage
water from the Kingamyambo tailings toe dam rather than intercepting water from the
Musonoi River.
Verification of the appropriateness of the location of the boreholes between KOV and the
Musonoi Pit should be undertaken.
Different options should be assessed and recommendations presented should it be found that
the condition of the benches for in-pit boreholes is unsuitable, taking into consideration that
although additional pumps will drain the pit lake, they will not lower the surrounding
phreatic surface as effectively as in-pit boreholes.
Alternative strategies should be investigated for dewatering if it is found not to be possible
to achieve the desired drawdown once the current strategy is implemented. For example, an
assessment of whether dewatering galleries or boreholes drilled from the Kamoto
Underground into KOV may be more effective in dewatering than the planned borehole
dewatering scheme should be evaluated in more detail as it may well prove to be the better
option technically/financially/environmentally.
The investigation proposed by AGES into suitable methods for controlling the assumed flow
from the Musonoi River towards KOV during the operational phase should be carried out to
establish if any of the options will be possible and how cost effective they are likely to be.
Groundwater Model
SRK believes that additional work is required to demonstrate correlation between the model and
field observations and data.
A gap analysis should be undertaken to state clearly the information that is still required and
assumptions that have been used in the calibration of the model. For example, how was the
recharge value used in the model determined?
It has been stated by AGES that there will now be a longer lead time for dewatering to be
effective for the southern part of the pit as cut 1 is now going to the north. This scenario
needs to be modelled to demonstrate that this is in fact the case.
The aquifer parameters determined from pump testing and/or packer testing for specific
stratigraphical units should be built into the model on a more detailed level and fed back into
the detailed conceptual hydrogeological model.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 122
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Using the more detailed conceptual hydrogeological model, the position of the phreatic
surface and potential heights of the seepage faces in the high walls should be simulated
within different geotechnical domains.
The position of the phreatic surface (hydraulic head) at quarterly intervals for the first 24
months needs to be modelled, followed by its position annually for the life of mine. The
probability of achieving these phreatic surfaces must also be determined.
Additional drilling and pump testing should be undertaken to establish that the RAT does in
fact form an impermeable barrier for regional groundwater flow as this is a critical
assumption in the model.
The model should be updated with the data from drilling currently being undertaken to
demonstrate that the aquifer on the eastern side of the Musonoi River is in fact being
impacted by the dewatering of KOV. This data will be critical in resolving the issue of the
source of flow into KOV and should be used to refine the dewatering strategy in the future.
Additional scenarios should be run to assess the risks if in-pit boreholes prove not to be
possible or only partially possible and pumping from the bottom of the pit becomes the
primary dewatering method. An assessment of how long it will take to draw down the
phreatic surface around the pit is required, assuming only passive dewatering i.e. pumping
from the pit sump only.
The real and measured losses from the Musonoi catchment into the Kakifuluwe River should
be incorporated into the model.
An assessment of the expected impacts on groundwater users needs to be undertaken if part
of the inflow into KOV comes from the east side of the Musonoi River.
20.3 Infrastructure
This section is separated into two parts: general infrastructure and power.
20.3.1 General Infrastructure
This section summarises new infrastructure proposed as part of the Bateman Engineering 2008 Study
to support the merged process facility and particularly the new WOL/SX/EW plant. Bateman,
following agreement with KML, considered the following proposed new infrastructure as part of its
scope of work. The revised work based on the 2008 Study contains many new assumptions and
reductions in scope for general infrastructure to reflect the reduced capacities. These areas require
further detailed assessment, especially where existing buildings may be intended for use:
Plant Laboratory: The plant laboratory footprint is 94,5 x 19,4 m. Space has been allocated
for future expansion. An external bulk store with a footprint of 12,2 x 11,1 m has been
included to cater for all geological coarse reject samples. The area will be terraced and
surrounded by a security fence and associated gates. All necessary benches, basins with
splash backs, fume hoods, shelves and cupboards, glass ware, utensils, consumables, acids,
buffer solutions, reagents and reagent standards, spares, laboratory furniture, trolleys, office
furniture and stationery have been included. The building will be brick clad with steel rafters
and sheeting. Ceilings are included at 2,6m elevation over general areas and concrete slabs
over fire risk areas.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 123
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Environmental Laboratory: The following is included: A brick clad building with steel
rafters and IBR sheeting with a footprint of 20,55 x 13,0 m. The area will be made up of a
main entrance with air lock, including a reception area; an office; a sample receipt area with
air lock; an effluent preparation room; a water preparation room; an environmental
instrument room; an ICP instrument room; a balance room with air lock; a wash up room; a
store room and a change room /ablutions. The selection of additional equipment subject to
options selection is yet to be finalised.
Workshop: Provision of sheeted structural steelwork frame covering a footprint of 900 m2
with the eaves height set at 5 m from final floor level. An allowance has been made for a
10 t overhead electric travelling crane. Roller shutter doors will all be chain operated.
Stores: Provision of sheeted structural steelwork frame covering a footprint of 1150 m2
with the eaves height set at 5 m from final floor level. Roller shutter doors will all be chain
operated.
Offices: Provision for a single storey prefab type building with a footprint of 2000 m2. No
allowance has been made for the refurbishment of the existing administration office. No
allowance has been made for general furniture and fittings as all these will be supplied by
KOL.
Workshop/Stores Offices: The existing administration office will be used and thus no
allowance has been made.
Change House: The provision for a single storey prefab type building with an approximate
footprint of 600 m2. This footprint includes the changing facilities for male and females,
ablutions, showers and laundry services. Provision of associated 400 no. off lockers, benches
and laundry equipment is included.
Production Control Room: Provision for a single storey prefab type building with an
approximate footprint of 600 m2. This footprint includes the offices, meeting room,
ablutions, kitchen, store and main control room.
Fencing and Security: A provision to build a new 2300 m long masonry boundary wall
(3 m high) has been made on the new proposed boundary line around the lime, limestone
plant, the collection pods, SX / EW and HV yard on the northern side. A provision for
internal fencing of a 3,6 km long, 2,4 m high, welded mesh fence and associated gates have
been made.
Earthworks and Terracing: Provision of all site clearance, bulk earthworks, terracing and
earthworks. The limits of clearing will be the toe-line of the terrace required for the
construction of the plant (approximately 28 ha footprint in total). Included are storm water
ponds, fire water pond, SX ponds and SX tank farm, excavations and slope formations.
Bitumen Surfaced Roads: An allowance has been made to patch and reseal the existing
sealed roads and construct new sealed roads for construction vehicles.
Wearing Coarse Treated Roads: An allowance has been made to construct new gravel
roads.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 124
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Storm water Channels and Berms: An allowance has been made to construct and line
open channels with grouted stone pitch and concrete.
Storm Water Pipes: Included is approximately 635 m of 600 mm diameter storm water
pipes for the divergence of existing storm water drainage within the Luilu plant.
Ponds: An allowance has been made for excavations to receive HDPE linings, excavations
for trench anchorage, (supply and installation of HDPE linings is allowed for under Sub
Area K21), spillways, scour pipes, valves and overflows.
Landfill Site: An allowance has been made for landscaping.
Sewerage Reticulation: Provision of sewerage reticulation and manholes for the change
house only. Note that the sewerage treatment plant will be provided and operated by KOL.
All reticulation is limited to within the process plant boundary on the plant site.
Construction Services, Offices, Store and Vehicles: A provision for a 24 x 48 m
construction store including an office, toilets and associated services to be erected in the
laydown area. The provision for an office and ablutions with a set footprint of approximately
80 m2.
Sulphur Storage and Cathode Loading: The track condition is such that the 740 m of
track on existing alignment can be refurbished through fettling. A further 1440 m of new
track, including 3 turnouts must be constructed. This is for the separate acid loading facility
as well as repositioning the existing crossover towards the operational plant. The latter is
required to provide continued access to the operational plant. All of the above have been
allowed for. For electrowinning, the condition of the track infrastructure over the entire
length is such that all track components will have to be scrapped and replaced. A total of
3360 m of new track and 10 turnouts must be constructed. All of the above have been
allowed for including scrapping and diesel off loading.
In-motion Weighbridge: A provision has been made for a high accuracy in-motion train
weighing system complete with lightning protection. Included is a 6 m air-conditioner
insulated container type trackside hut. The calibration of the weighbridge is included.
Storm water Collection Ponds: These are included with anchor trenches and associated
concrete.
Laydown Area: A provision has been made for a hard stand laydown area with a set
footprint of 404 m long x 280 m wide. The laydown area will be fenced off with a main gate
and provision for a security kiosk at the entrance.
Construction Camp: Accommodation units for 124 people (total of 1346 m2) have been
allowed for. Provisions for internal water and sewer reticulation of the ENFI camp have
been allowed for.
Accommodation units: 65 Accommodation units (total of 30 745 m2) and associated
services have been allowed for. Each unit comprises of 8 rooms.
Recreation: Three recreation buildings (total of 1242 m2) have been allowed for.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 125
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Kitchen, Dinning Rooms and Stores: Two pre fabricated kitchens and dinning rooms (total
of 2528 m2) have been allowed for.
Offices for Camp Management: Provision of 112 m2 for offices. The reception, clinic,
store and security office are 56 m2 each. Provision for a gatehouse with a footprint of 30 m2.
Screened Area for Kitchens: Provision for 78 m long x 1,8 m high court yard walls and a
100 mm thick concrete slab set at 380 m2 with a sump and grid.
Sewer Reticulation: A provision for all sewerage reticulation and manholes has been made
with a sewer line which is 3,2km long with a total of 73 manholes.
Water Reticulation: The water line is 4,7km long with a total of 21 valves and 10 hydrants.
Drainage for Storm Water: 5250 m2 of concrete lined V-drains and channels have been
included.
Roads: 25 300 m2 of gravel roads and associated walkways located within the plant have
been included.
Fencing: Provision of a 5 km long, 2,4 m high, 4 strand welded mesh fence has been made.
Bateman Village: This includes accommodation units for 150 staff and 30 guests (total of
2636 m2) have been allowed for. Each unit comprises of a 1 bedroom with en-suite bathroom
complete with shower, wash hand basin, toilet and associated services. Transportation to site
is included. Also included are recreation facilities; a kitchen; dinning rooms and stores; a
laundry room; offices for camp management and catering; a screened area for kitchens;
sewer and water reticulation; drainage for storm water; roads; fencing; and camp
management.
20.3.2 Power
The consumption of electricity by the various facilities of KOL in Kolwezi required to produce up to
310 ktpa of saleable copper peaks at 245 MW from Repartiteur Ouest (“RO”) substation from 2012
onwards.
At present the current operations are supplied at 120 kV. The bulk of the additional load requirement
will be from the WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project (136 MW) and it is proposed to supply that load at
220 kV from the “Station de Conversion de Kolwezi” (“SCK”) at 220 kV. For this part of the study,
KOL contracted the services of Trans-Africa Projects (“TAP”), an independent consultant who are
currently involved as EPCM Consultants in several projects for mining companies in Katanga
Province. Their area of expertise is high voltage transmission (up to 765 kV), mostly gained in
South Africa.
This section is based on a report prepared by TAP for KOL and on an assessment of LoM power
requirements by Bernie Cyr, an electrical engineer employed by KOL. The reliability of the SNEL
network for the supply of electricity to the facilities of KOL situated west of Kolwezi in the DRC is
investigated. TAP is also contracted to provide the design services for the high voltage infrastructure
for the mine.
The loads will consist of:
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 126
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The Luilu Metallurgical Plant, which will take up to 74 MW through 2013, reducing to 60
MW after 2013;
The Kamoto Mine, Kamoto Concentrator and Mashamba East Mine dewatering supplied
from Kadi substation which will require 49 MW from 2014 onwards;
The KOV mine which will take initially require 30 MW and stabilise at 32 MW; and
The WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project, where the load will progressively increase from 61 MW
in 2014 to 105 MW in 2015 and stabilise at that level afterwards.
These loads could be adjusted at a later stage to guarantee a production of 310 ktpa of copper per
year. It is also assumed that demand side management will maintain the combined load of KOL to
approximately 85% of the sum of the individual peaks.
The HV Katanga network of SNEL is made of 220 kV and 120 kV lines and a number of
substations. Most of the Katanga power stations are situated in the vicinity of Kolwezi and export
their output either to SCK or RO. The electricity will be provided by SNEL at 220 kV from SCK or
at 120 kV from the RO which is connected to SCK via a single 100 MVA transformer.
A 10 year load forecast was prepared for the whole of the DRC and for the Katanga Province, based
on information provided by SNEL and the mine operators. Compared to early 2008, the total
demand has increased as new loads have emerged, but SNEL warned that most mine operators are
exaggerating their requirements and have advised KOL to use a ‘certainty factor’ of 85%.
In Kinshasa, some 100 MW of load cannot be supplied at present because of transmission limitations
but will materialize as soon as new lines are commissioned between Inga and Kinshasa. The events
of November 2008 caused many projects in the DRC to be put on hold for an indefinite period or to
reduce production capacity. This has resulted in a much reduced demand for the Kolwezi area. The
TAP Report has been adjusted accordingly.
20.4 Geotechnical Assessment
The geotechnical aspects of the following Material Assets have been evaluated:
T17 Mine;
Tilwezembe Mine (included in the 2008 Study, excluded from the current plan);
Kamoto Mine;
KOV Mine; and
Mashamba East Mine.
Mupine Pit is not intended for further production, but a preliminary geotechnical assessment of the
pit walls (with a view to assessing their capability for supporting tailings-disposal infrastructure) has
been conducted.
Kananga Pit also lies within the Katanga Mining lease area but is not incorporated in the current ore
resource and has not been investigated in this study.
Information presented in this section has been obtained from Gecamines plans, sections and reports,
SRK reports, and three on-site investigations in November 2007 and April and May 2008.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 127
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Geological descriptions of key rock types present on the site have been obtained from previous
Gecamines reports and a previous investigation by SRK.
The conclusions outlined in this section are based on the 2008 Study. The objective of this study was
to provide design criteria for use in mine design. For underground mining at Kamoto Mine, this
involved generating acceptable stope and pillar geometries. For surface mining at T17, Tilwezembe,
KOV and Mashamba East Mines slope angles for individual stacks and overall slopes were
recommended.
20.4.1 Kamoto Mine
The stratigraphy of the mining area is comprised essentially of dolomitic strata interbedded with
shales. Two ore bodies are encountered: the upper ore body (OBS) is between 8 m and 13 m in
thickness and is hosted in the lower SDS series of dolomitic shales. The lower ore body (OBI) is
between 10 m and 15 m in thickness and is hosted mainly in the RSF series of siliceous dolomites.
The ore bodies are separated by a siliceous dolomitic parting, the RSC, between 8 m and 15 m in
thickness. The ore body is bowl shaped with a flat central area, the Plateure, and surrounding areas
gradually increasing in dip, locally becoming almost vertical.
With the exception of information obtained for the KOV Mine design in 2006, geotechnical
information has been obtained from Gecamines reports produced between 1982 and 1991. Site visits
were conducted between 2006 and 2008 during which the overall rock mass quality in both surface
and underground environments was assessed and used in conjunction with laboratory test
information presented in the Gecamines reports to generate rock mass strength parameters for use in
design. The design rock mass strength allocated to OBS is 48 MPa and to the OBI is 56 MPa. These
values are considered to be acceptable for this level of study. It is recommended that further
sampling and testing is conducted to provide specific information for detailed design of mining
areas, particularly Etang where effects of weathering may become evident at higher elevations and
rock mass strength may deteriorate.
Mining method selection has been strongly influenced by a combination of ore body dip and ore
body width. In general, multi cut methods incorporating backfill as a working platform have been
recommended. At dips of less than 12º the room and pillar method used by Gecamines is
recommended. This involves development, sliping and benching phases of extraction to create a
slender pillar which is supported by backfill. It is noted that a pillar collapse occurred in September
1990 which resulted in partial closure of the underground mine. Documentation relating to the cause
of the collapse has not been reviewed but it is surmised that a combination of over mining, non-
superimposition of pillars and non-placement of backfill were contributing factors. The design
recommended is considered appropriate for the Kamoto environment and the need for adherence to
design during implementation is emphasized. Detailed design work should take account of un-mined
areas when estimating pillar loading.
The effect of the Plateure collapse on stress distribution in surrounding areas is unknown. The effects
of stress concentration have not been explicitly considered in this study and the major stress
component is assumed to act vertically. It is recommended that in-situ stresses are measured and
their effect on the stability of adjacent areas is assessed during detailed mine design.
The long hole retreat stoping method recommended in a previous study requires placement of
cemented fill in primary panels to allow complete extraction of secondary panels. It is considered
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 128
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
that this method is experimental in the Kamoto Mine environment and should not be incorporated
into this study.
Open stoping methods are subject to restricted hanging wall spans to maintain stability and minimize
dilution. Consequently, the overall extraction achievable is relatively low. Design spans are based on
a combination of those achieved in existing operations and rock mass quality considerations. Narrow
(10 m wide) crown pillars are likely to be unstable and will not provide the required protection to
stoping operations. The operational practicality of this method requires further investigation,
particularly if single drive access is planned. Incorporation of this method into the study is not
recommended.
At dips of between 13º and 55º, longitudinal cut and fill mining methods are preferred. Where stopes
are wide and at the lower range of dip, post pillar cut and fill mining can be employed with slender
post pillars acting as span breakers. Either waste rock or tailings backfill can be utilized as fill.
Incorporation of regional support pillars at centres of approximately 140 m has been recommended
where mining can become laterally and vertically extensive. It is recommended that pillar stresses
are monitored during mining to determine the precise location of regional support.
In specific areas with dips exceeding 55º the possibility of using cave mining exists. Detailed design
of a caving layout for Zone 9 has been prepared by Kamoto personnel. The method has been
reviewed and risks arising from remnant pillars and waste rock fill have been identified but are not
considered insurmountable. Due to the limited amount of ore that will be extracted, it is not expected
that caving effects will be experienced on surface.
Backfill is an essential element of the mining systems to provide both a working platform for multi
lift mining methods and long term confinement to enhance the support capability of pillars. Although
backfill will not exert sufficient resistance to prevent hanging wall deformation, it is recommended
that stopes are filled as tightly as practicable to minimize deformation and consequent load transfer
to pillars.
In the short term, waste rock from development or surface dumps is considered acceptable as a
source of fill material. In view of potential cost savings it is recommended that tailings based fill
systems are investigated to replace some, or most of the waste rock fill.
A schematic modularized backfill system design has been presented that will deliver 100 m³ per
module of either cyclone classified tailings or thickened tailings. Illustrative capital and operating
costs have been provided. It is recommended that a detailed backfill reticulation system is designed
taking cognizance of routing logistics and mining schedules.
The mining methods recommended are “entry” methods and therefore stope hanging walls will
require short term support. Current support systems are based on 2,4 m long mechanical roof bolts,
fully grouted rebars or Swellex installed in a closely spaced pattern. Additional cable anchor support
has been recommended for multiple lift methods. Support systems have not been optimized in this
study and there remains the potential to do so.
20.4.2 Open Pits
Information from a geotechnical investigation programme conducted in 2006-2007 was used to
generate Mohr Coulomb parameters for KOV Mine. No geotechnical information relevant to the
other surface operations was available and slopes were based on geometries previously achieved in
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 129
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
the open pits. It is noted that there is a considerable amount of variability in the KOV Mine data due
to the nature of the rock mass and it is recommended that further sampling and testing is conducted
to increase the level of confidence in the values used.
Slope angles on Mashamba East and T17 Mines have been based on geometric information derived
from previous open pit mining in the DIMA pits. It is recognised that these are not optimum slopes
and there is the potential for increasing slope angles if further geotechnical investigations are carried
out. Analyses of designed final slopes using rock mass parameters derived for KOV as surrogate
parameters have generated safety factors in the range between 1,6 and 2,1 assuming that slope
drainage is poor. These values are considered to be high and there is the potential for increasing
slope angles if further geotechnical investigations are carried out.
Should Mashamba East be mined to its planned limit, there is the possibility that the high wall will
intersect the Kamoto Interim Tailings Dam. Notwithstanding the risk of mudrush if tailings are not
fully drained, the safety factor is reduced significantly (assuming that the slope is subject to a water
surcharge). It is recommended that further detailed design work is carried out to fully evaluate this
scenario.
Tilwezembe is located in a different geological environment to the other pits with the footwall and
ore body rock mass comprising highly fractured argillite and the hanging wall comprising tillite. In
the absence of any other information except a previously mined slope approximately 50 m high, an
overall slope angle of 45º was used for design. Although safety factors were estimated to lie in the
range of 1,7 to 1,9, the confidence in these results is low. It is strongly recommended that a
comprehensive geotechnical investigation is carried out to confirm acceptability of designed slope
angles.
A comprehensive geotechnical study was conducted in 2006 and 2007 to generate design parameters
for KOV Mine that were applied to the Cut 3 and Cut 7 mining layouts. Overall slope angles of 25º
and 22º were recommended for the northern slopes of Cut 3 and Cut 7 respectively. These angles are
considered to be low but reflect the uncertainty associated with adversely dipping shear structures
that may exist in those slopes. Angles of 40º and 30º are recommended for all other slopes.
A preliminary survey of slopes surrounding the flooded Mupine pit was carried out to establish the
possibility of siting tailings disposal infrastructure around its perimeter. Southern and western slopes
were observed to have undergone extensive collapse presumably associated with major faulting. The
northern slopes located in RAT appear to be stable although localized collapse has occurred
generally in association with artisanal workings. Access to the current water level is possible along a
stable ramp located on the northern wall.
20.4.3 Recommendation
Further studies should be carried out on the rock chracteristics associated with the Material Assets.
20.5 Tailings and Process Effluent Disposal
This section of the report documents the feasibility design and costing of new tailings disposal dams
and related infrastructure.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 130
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.5.1 Scope of Study
A tailings dam site selection study was carried out for which nine sites were considered. The sites
were subsequently ranked and the preferred sites considered for further study. Due to the anticipated
high tailings volume discharge over the life of the mine, it was necessary to consider more than one
dam to accommodate the expected quantity.
The study for the individual dams was limited to the assessment and design of the dams, return water
dams, drainage and access infrastructure inside the perimeter fence. The slurry delivery to the dams
and return water pipelines from the return water dams has been excluded, as has the mechanical and
electrical design, which have been covered by others in this report..
In addition to the tailings dams, consideration has also been given to the provision of lined ponds to
accommodate any hazardous process effluents discharging from the Luilu Plant.
20.5.2 Design Assumptions
The tailings dams were designed to accommodate the life of mine production plan, dated 2nd
February 2009 running from 2009 to 2032, which indicates a total tailings capacity of 155 Mt is
required, increasing from around 215 ktpm in 2009 to 738 ktpm in 2022, then decreasing towards the
end of the mine life. It has been assumed that the tailings will be produced by two plants, namely the
Luilu and Kamoto Concentrator Plants. As the Kamoto Concentrator Plant is already operating,
limited test work has been carried out on the physical tailings characteristics currently emanating
from the plant, however, no information is currently available for the Luilu Plant. Based on available
information, it is anticipated that the tailings will be too fine to be used for the building of the outer
walls of the dam during operation.
The preliminary test work (TCLP and acid base accounting) indicates that the tailings currently
being generated at Kamoto Concentrator exceed the Low Risk limits for lead and copper in terms of
the DRC regulations. However, the regulations do not set out limits for High Risk tailings for
copper and lead. The geochemical test work carried out by SRK on the copper tailings from the
Luilu Metallurgical Plant currently classifies the material as High Risk due to its acid generation
potential. This tailings stream also contains significant concentrations of Cu (and Co), which
currently exceed the DRC effluent discharge limit. However, it is anticipated that an appropriate
alkaline pH will be maintained in the tailings stream and that process improvements will reduce the
concentrations of Cu and Co in the Luilu Plant tailings, therefore SRK has recommended that it will
not be necessary to synthetically line the tailings dams and that excess decant water from the dams
may be allowed to spill into the environment at times of high rainfall. The maintenance of alkaline
pH will require effective monitoring and management by KOL.
20.5.3 Selection of Preferred Tailings Dams
The nine sites considered are shown on Figure 20.1 and comprise the following:
a) Kamoto Interim Tailings Dam;
b) Far West Tailings Dam;
c) Mupiné Super Pit;
d) South West Tailings Dam;
e) Mashamba East Pit;
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 131
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
f) Potopoto Super Dam;
g) Luilu River Super Dam;
h) Potopoto Interim Dam;
i) Kamoto Tailings Dam.
The sites were each assessed in terms of various environmental, public acceptance, engineering and
economic criteria. The criteria assessments were combined to produce an aggregate ranking for each
site. Based on this selection process three sites were chosen as the preferred sites, namely; the
Kamoto Interim, Mupine Super Pit and Far West tailings dam sites.
20.5.4 Description of Proposed Tailings Dams
Kamoto Interim Tailings Dam
The location is a brownfield site situated approximately 300 m south of the existing Kamoto
Concentrator Plant and 200 m north of the northern rim of the Mashamba East Pit.
The site is currently partly occupied by a newly built tailings dam which was commissioned in
November 2008. The planned site covers approximately 88 ha. Prior to construction of the existing
dam the site was largely covered by previously deposited tailings. The site is bounded by high
ground to the north. The area is underlain by natural colluvial and residual clayey and silty sands,
passing into Roan dolomitic series rocks in the southern part and the Roan Dipeta sandstones in the
northern part. Available borehole information in the area indicates that the groundwater is present at
approximately 14 to 19 m below ground level. Prior to commissioning of the dam in November
2008, analyses of groundwater samples indicated concentrations of iron and selenium above the
World Health Organisation drinking water guidelines. This is common in the Kolwezi area and is
likely to be due to the mineralogy as these elevated levels are seen across the region. The existing
impoundment wall is approximately 2,3 km long and varies from 1,5 to. 3,5 m in height, constructed
from compacted soil. It will be raised and extended, using nearby overburden and development
waste, to attain the desired capacity, with the final wall height increasing to a total height of between
1,5 and 11 m and with a length of 2,4 km. No wall has been provided on the northern side of the
dam, where the natural ground rises.
Additional features of the final dam will include:
Toe catchment paddocks, to contain tailings spills and eroded slope runoff from the wall;
Underdrainage, to drain water from inside the wall of the dam;
A penstock to drain process and stormwater from the surface of the dam;
A solution trench to drain water discharging from the underdrains and penstock, and direct it
to the return water dam;
A return water dam to contain water discharge from the dam prior to pumping to the plant;
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 132
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 20.1 Tailings Disposal: Probable Tailings Dams Sites
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 133
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
A diversion bund will be constructed down stream of the dam, to deflect a tailings flow slide
away from the settlement downstream of the dam, in the unlikely event of a dam wall
failure; and
A tailings deposition pipeline to distribute tailings around the inner wall of the dam, with
deposition carried out via the spigotting method.
Tests carried out on the soils below the site indicate that they have a low permeability. The
hydrogeological information available for the area, together with the information from geochemical
tests carried out on tailings from the Kamoto Concentrator Plant indicate that contamination of the
groundwater due to seepage of leachate from the tailings is likely to be of low significance. This
assessment includes the understanding that an appropriate alkaline pH will be maintained in the
tailings stream and that process improvements will reduce the concentrations of Cu and Co in the
Luilu Plant tailings.
It should be noted that at times of high rainfall it is expected that the return water dam will spill into
the environment. This is deemed to be acceptable based on the pH balance and plant improvement
anticipated.
The envisaged maximum capacity is 5,8 Million m3 or 7 Mt at an assumed in-situ dry density of
1,2 t/m3.
Mupine Super Pit
The location is a brownfield site situated approximately 1km southeast of the existing Luilu Plant
and 3 km northeast of the Kamoto Concentrator Plant.
Part of the site is currently occupied by the Mupine Pit, a previously mined pit approximately 1km
long on a east-northeast/west-southwest axis (1,5km including an access ramp on the eastern end)
and approximately 500 m wide. The pit is approximately 135 m deep at its deepest point, but it is
believed that the pit is partially infilled, reducing its current depth to approximately 80 m at the
location of the highest elevation on the pit walls to 65 m below the lowest wall elevation. The pit is
partially infilled with water, which is at a depth of 60 m at the location of the highest elevation on
the pit walls to 45 m below the lowest wall elevation.
A number of drainage channels are incised into the natural ground and waste dumps in the area,
including a number which drain into the pit.
No residential development is present in the vicinity of the site.
The geological sections indicate a steeply dipping strata with a number of thrust faults, including the
Roan RAT, CMN and RGS formations. The whole known orebody has been mined out and further
mining is not envisaged.
The site encloses an approximate maximum surface area of 176 hectares. The envisaged maximum
capacity is 47 Million m3 or 52 Mt at an assumed in-situ dry density of 1,1 t/m3.
The dam will comprise two main phases. Initially the tailings will be deposited into the existing
Mupine pit via a ring main tailings distribution pipe laid on the surface around the perimeter of the
dam, with deposition carried out using the open-ending method. When the pit approaches capacity a
wall will be constructed around the perimeter of the dam, to create what has been named the Mupine
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 134
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Super Pit. The wall will only surround the west, north and east sides of the dam as a waste rock
dump forms an existing barrier to the south. The proposed wall will be approximately 4 km long and
will be of variable height due to the irregularity of the existing ground, however, the maximum
height will be approximately 30 m.
Water will be decanted from the super dam and sent to a return water transfer station and ponds
located to the east of the pit. Some water will be returned to the plant, but during periods of high
rainfall, some water will be discharged into the environment.
An allowance has been made in the design and costing to relocate services, including a pipeline,
railway trucks and roads, located to the west of the pit.
Rock formations comprising some dolomitic material are anticipated between the Mupine Pit and the
underground workings. Dolomitic formations have the potential for dissolution and the formation of
high permeability groundwater flow paths when exposed to acidic groundwater. The water currently
in the pit is slightly alkaline, as is the tailings slurry that has been tested from the Kamoto
Concentrator. Based on information made available, the tailings slurry that will be deposited in the
pit will have the same, or higher, pH than the existing water in the pit.
Far West Tailings Dam
The location is a greenfield site approximately 4 km southwest of the existing Luilu Plant and 5 km
northwest of the existing Kamoto Concentrator Plant. The site is bordered by the Luilu River to the
east. The site has a gently sloping profile towards the Poto Poto and Luilu Rivers.
The Far West site is located off the Roan Basin, on the Kundelungu tillite, to the west of the Luilu
River. The underlying geology comprises mainly shale and dolomite formations. The rocks are
overlain by an average of more than 5 m of fine residual soils.
The groundwater levels range between 1 m below surface close to the Luilu River, down to
approximately 5 m below surface on the western side of the dam. Analyses of groundwater samples
has indicated that the area has relatively low concentrations of total dissolved solids, with some
elevated lead, selenium and iron, as expected from the natural mineralogy of the area. Groundwater
flow, based on the deep boreholes, is predominantly from west to east, towards the Luilu River.
A number of small villages are located in the vicinity of the site, which it will be necessary to
relocate prior to construction.
The site encloses an approximate maximum surface area of 420 ha. The envisaged maximum
capacity is 83 Million m3 or 99 Mt at an assumed in-situ dry density of 1,2 t/m3. However, based on
the existing mine plan only 79 Million m3 or 95 Mt will be required.
The proposed impoundment wall is approximately 9,8 km long and will reach a height of
approximately 50 m at its highest point. No wall has been provided on the western side of the dam,
where the natural ground rises. The wall will mainly be constructed using poorly sorted waste taken
from the overburden and development waste dumps situated around 3 to 7 km from the site, across
the Luilu River to the east.
It is proposed that an initial starter impoundment wall (Phase 1) be constructed prior to the
commencement of deposition, and thereafter the wall height will be gradually raised in advance of
the deposited tailings throughout the operational life of the dam.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 135
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Additional features of the final dam will include:
Toe catchment paddocks, to contain tailings spills and eroded slope runoff from the wall;
Underdrainage, to drain water from inside the wall of the dam;
A penstock to drain process and stormwater from the surface of the dam;
A solution trench to drain water discharging from the underdrains and penstock, and direct it
to the return water dam;
A return water dam to contain water discharging from the dam, prior to pumping back to the
plant;
A clean water dam, to store clean water up stream of the dam for the use of the local
inhabitants; and
A tailings deposition pipeline to distribute tailings around the inner wall of the dam, with
deposition carried out via the spigotting method.
Tests carried out on the soils below the site indicate that they have a low permeability. The
hydrogeological information available for the area, together with the information from geochemical
tests carried out on tailings from the Kamoto Concentrator Plant indicate that contamination of the
groundwater, and the river via the groundwater, due to seepage of leachate from the tailings is likely
to be of low significance.
It should be noted that at times of high rainfall it is expected that the return water dam will spill into
the environment. This is deemed to be acceptable based on the pH balance and plant improvement
anticipated.
Part of the dam site falls outside of KOL’s current concession area.
20.5.5 Phasing of Tailings DamsThe Kamoto Interim dam has already been constructed. Consequently it is proposed to use this dam,
and to raise and extend the wall to accommodate the initial tailings from the life of mine plan.
Subsequently the Mupine pit will be commissioned, when the Kamoto Interim Dam is nearing
capacity, followed by the Far West Dam. The key dates have been summarised below in Table 20.1.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 136
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 20.1 Tailings Dams: Key Dates
Date (ending)Existing Kamoto Interim
Tailings DamKamoto Interim Dam Extension Mupine Pit (Pit only) Mupine Super Pit (with new Wall
around pit)Far West Dam
2009 - Mar Start Construction
2009 - May End Deposition Start Deposition
2010 - May Start Construction
2011 - Aug End Deposition Start Deposition
2012 - Apr Start Construction (Phase 1 only)
2014 - Mar Start Deposition (including wallextensions)
2014 - May Start Construction
2016 - Apr End Deposition Start Deposition
2022 - Mar End Deposition
2032 - Dec End Deposition (including wallextensions)
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 137
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.5.6 Risk Assessments
A risk assessment was carried out to determine the risk to life and property in the event of a
catastrophic failure of the dams. The results indicate that the risks associated with failure of the dams
are lower than published acceptable norms for the Far West and Kamoto Interim tailings dams.
Before the risk assessment can be completed for the Mupine Super Pit, additional investigation is
required.
20.5.7 Hazardous Effluent Ponds
It is anticipated that hazardous process effluent, unsuitable for deposition in the tailings dams, will
be generated by the Luilu Plant. To accommodate this effluent an allowance has been made in the
design and costings to construct twenty two lined ponds to the west of the Luilu Plant. The location
of the ponds is shown on Figure 20.1. It should be noted that one pond has previously been
constructed at the site and is currently unused.
20.5.8 Closure Considerations
The overall closure approach in relation to the tailings dams and ponds will be to ensure physical and
chemical stability of the dams as far as is practicable at the time of closure and to minimise the post
closure maintenance required.
20.5.9 Further Study
Tailings Characteristics
Based on available information, it is understood that the tailings will be too fine to allow them to be
used for wall building. Consequently, the design allowed for herein consists of the tailings behind
walls constructed from mine overburden and development waste to the full closure height. This
decision has significant implications for the cost of the dam as the material required to build the
walls will need to be excavated and transported to the site.
It is recommended that additional studies be carried out to fully characterise the physical
characteristics of the tailings, particularly the Luilu Plant tailings when samples become available, to
determine if a portion can be used for wall building.
Further chemical testing should be carried out on the tailings slurry to establish the potential
contamination risk to the environment. SRK will than be able to form a better understanding of
whether or not some effluent streams will need to be handled separately.
Overburden and Development Waste Dumps
It has been assumed that the majority of the material used to construct the impoundment walls will
be taken from the overburden and development waste dumps in the area.
It is recommended that a geotechnical fieldwork and laboratory testing programme be carried out to
more fully characterise the material within the dumps. This will assist in the optimisation of the wall
construction and allow haulage distances for suitable material to be minimised.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 138
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Tailings Deposition
Should the tailings prove to have a particularly fine grading it may be possible to dispense with
spigotting for the Far West and Kamoto Interim dams. As an alternative, open ended pipe deposition
could be considered, using pipe off-takes along the perimeter tailings distribution pipeline. The open
ending approach would result in savings in the cost of spigot piping.
Mupine Pit and Super Pit
It is recommended that the borehole MUP05 proposed by AGES be drilled and pump tested and
additional isotope samples be taken from inflows into the underground workings and from the new
boreholes MUP1, MUP2, MUP3 so that a more detailed understanding of the risk of tailings disposal
in the Mupine pit can be gained.
20.5.10 Conclusions
The main conclusions are as follows:
A site selection study was carried out and the three top ranked sites chosen to accommodate
the anticipated tailings quantities, namely the Kamoto Interim Dam, Far West Dam and
Mupine Super Pit;
The three dams can accommodate the 155 Mt of tailings anticipated over the LoM;
Currently available information indicates that the tailings will not be sufficiently coarse to be
used for wall building, consequently it has been planned for walls to be constructed from
waste dump material;
It is understood that an appropriate alkaline pH will be maintained in the tailings stream and
that process improvements will reduce the concentrations of Cu and Co in the Luilu tailings.
Based on this, no tailings dam liners have been allowed for in the design, the risk of
preferential pathways due to dissolution of dolomite between the Mupine Pit and Kamoto
Mine underground workings is deemed acceptable, and excess decant and overflow water
from the dams is deemed acceptable for release to the environment;
The total capital cost for the tailings dams is estimated to be USD196,7 million and the
operating cost USD324,5 million, with a combined total of USD521,2 million; and
An allowance has been made for 22 additional hazardous effluent ponds. The total capital
cost for the ponds is estimated to be USD137,4 million.
Further studies should be carried out to; fully characterise the physical and chemical properties of the
tailings streams, investigate the possibility of open end deposition, further investigate the geology
and hydrogeology at Mupine Pit and to characterise potential construction materials.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 139
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.6 Risk Assessment
To assess the Project risk, the 2008 Engineering Study was subject to a high level risk assessment
facilitated by CorProfit Systems Africa (“CorProfit”), which complies with the AS/NZS 4360
Standard used to identify risks and their controls measures.
20.6.1 Basis of the Risk Report
This report presents the outcome of risk assessments undertaken at two workshops on 28 August and
5 September 2008 involving members from all the disciplines in the Engineering Study.
20.6.2 Risk Register
20.6.3 Resources: Overstated Resource Estimate for T17 Mine
The risk: The grade estimated for the current workings of the T17 Mine may
be overstated as current grade differs significantly from estimates
based on the block model.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Reduced production of copper and cobalt.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: No risk mitigation measures identified.
20.6.4 Mining and Reserves: KOV Equipment
The risk: Late delivery of equipment. The late delivery of equipment, as
experienced by the mining industry world-wide due to the shortages
and long lead times for equipment will negatively impact
production.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Reduced production of copper and cobalt.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Expedite delivery schedules.
20.6.5 Mining and Reserves: KOV Contract
The risk: Higher cash mining costs. At the time of publication of the
Engineering Study, the KOV mining contract had not been signed.
As a result, SRK has estimated the cash mining costs, which may
deviate from the costs that will eventually be realised as a result of
the mining contract.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Reduced production of copper and cobalt.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Finalize contract.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 140
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.6.6 Metallurgical Processing: Inability to Meet Schedule for Modules 1, 2 and 3
The risk: The inability to meet the development schedules for the production
of Modules 1,2 and 3. Delays may occur as a result of many factors
including the delivery of equipment, the availability of manpower,
and other infrastructure and in-country issues which may be beyond
the control of management.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Reduced production of copper and cobalt.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Realistic scheduling and budget.
20.6.7 Metallurgical Processing: Unavailability and Quality of Key Reagents
The risk: The unavailability and quality of key reagents (like sulphur and
lime) that are required in large quantities and are critical to the
metallurgical process.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Reduced production of copper and cobalt.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Detailed supply management plan.
20.6.8 Services: Poor Condition of Railway Line
The risk: The poor condition of the railway line will impede efficient
production by not allowing the efficient, on-time delivery of
finished products or the supply of key input materials on time.
Residual Risk Rating: Very High
The Consequence: (i) Reduced production of copper and cobalt; and
(ii) Higher logistics costs.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: (i) Reschedule plans to match rail capacity;
(ii) Engage with governments and railway operators; and
(iii) Engage with other potential rail users.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 141
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.6.9 Services: Availability of Rolling Stock
The risk: Rolling stock (locomotives and wagons) will not be available on
time to transport the scheduled increases in production of finished
products and key input materials.
Residual Risk Rating: Very High
The Consequence: (i) Reduced production of copper and cobalt; and
(ii) Higher logistics costs.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: (i) Establish capacity; and
(ii) Negotiate with SNCC (the rail operator) and other railway
groups.
20.6.10 Services: Under-developed in-country institutional infrastructure andcapacity
The risk: The DRC national and local governments and their agencies will not
have the ability to deliver on the infrastructure requirements of the
Project.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: (i) Project viability (NPV and IRR); and
(ii) Project delay.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: (i) Develop relationships with other stakeholders, governments and
agencies; and
(ii) Support capacity development initiatives.
20.6.11 Services: Lack of Power Supply
The risk: Power generation will not meet the requirements of the Project as
power requirements beyond 2011 require large-scale investment by
the DRC government and SNEL.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Project viability (NPV and IRR).
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Invest with SNEL in additional power generation.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 142
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.6.12 Environmental: Non-resolution of Liabilities
The risk: KOL may be liable for previous liabilities incurred before
operations commenced under current management.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: KOL will inherit the liabilities.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Quantify current liabilities and negotiate.
20.6.13 Environmental: Non-compliance with DRC Mining Code
The risk: The risk that the mining and/or environmental licences will be
revoked as a result of non-compliance with the DRC mining code.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Loss of licence.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Expedite and adhere to environmental-management plan.
20.6.14 Human Resources: Senior Management and Technical Expertise
The risk: The inability to recruit and retain senior management and operation-
critical technical expertise to manage and operate the mines and
processing plants.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: (i) Project viability (NPV and IRR); and
(ii) Ability to comply with legislation necessary to ensure the
optimal operation of the business.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: (i) Review the company’s strategy;
(ii) Review the recruitment and retention plan; and
(iii) Facilitate the provision of services with Government and other
service providers.
20.6.15 Capital Costs: The Unpredictable Escalation of Costs
The risk: Recent projects in the mining industry world-wide have experienced
unpredictable capital cost overruns due to various macroeconomic
and microeconomic factors that cannot be predicted with any degree
of confidence.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Inaccurate capital cost estimate.
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Regular review of estimates.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 143
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
20.6.16 Operating Costs: Deviation from Engineering Study Estimates
The risk: Recent projects in the mining industry world-wide have experienced
unpredictable operating cost overruns due to various
macroeconomic and microeconomic factors which cannot be
predicted with any degree of confidence.
Residual Risk Rating: High
The Consequence: Project viability (NPV and IRR).
Risk Mitigation Measure/s: Include adequate contingency and run sensitivity models.
20.6.17 Risk Controls
As indicated previously, this report presents the outcome of risk assessments undertaken at two
workshops on 28 August and 5 September 2008. KML had indicated that the following risk control
measures will be implemented, and since these mitigation measures were based on the 2008 Study,
some of these may no longer apply:
KML has recently hired some experienced environmental professionals with technical
expertise in mine operations. In addition, KML employs some 100 expatriates and has made,
and will continue to make, significant progress on infrastructure development and
expansion, which will greatly assist with the recruitment and retention of skilled staff;
Medical facilities have been expanded and upgraded with further activities in the process of
being implemented. A formal malaria-control initiative has been launched and so has a
community inoculation program. KML recently hired a Director of Medical Services, and he
is now coordinating the healthcare program for employees and their dependents. A
community health coordinator has also been recruited as has a small team led to implement
the malaria-control initiative. Crusader Health have been contracted to provide health care
insurance cover for both occupational health and the primary healthcare of employees and
their dependents. This will result in the construction and running of three community clinics
and a new containerized hospital in town. The Director of Medical Services is engaging
local stakeholders on this aspect;
Multiple potable water wells and lines have been installed or rehabilitated and rebuilding of
the community road network is under way. Donations to local schools will continue, and the
construction of an expatriate’s school is planned for 2009.
A dedicated senior manager of KML’s health and safety program is now in place at the
corporate level. An ongoing audit has elevated health-and-safety awareness and made
significant progress in improving working conditions at site. An ISO-based management
system is under development and is being progressively introduced to site operations; and a
major incident/crisis response plan has been developed under the guidance of recognized
experts;
KML has developed systems and procedures to liaise effectively with the community and
stakeholders. In the past year KML has consulted with local stakeholders, invested in social
programs and rehabilitated local infrastructure. The Governor of Katanga region has been
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 144
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
supportive of KML’s activities. The opening of community liaison offices is planned over
the next 6 months and will further strengthen links to local communities.
Management information systems have been upgraded. To this end, microwave capacity has
been upgraded and is now reliable; the reinstallation of an expanded fibre-optic network is
about to begin and the construction of a secure and stable IT facility (Phoenix) is nearing
completion; Mincom (software) implementation is progressing and being rapidly debugged;
power-source issues have been stabilized; professional IT staff has been hired and is being
progressively expanded; working relationships with contractors knowledgeable of and
experienced in the Congo are rapidly improving; and DR (management information system)
planning and implementation is to begin in the last quarter of 2008.
21 Interpretations and ConclusionsThe results and interpretations of exploration on the Material Assets are reported elsewhere in this
report and have been relied upon to compile the Mineral Resource statement included in Item 19.
22 Recommendations
Recommendations by SRK for future work required on the technical assets are included in other
items in this report. Specific action programs recommended are:
Dewatering Item 20.2;
Geotechnical Item 20.4; and
Tailings Item 20.5.
In undertaking the study, Bateman Engineering has been provided with and has relied upon records,
documents and other information supplied by the client and other third parties. Save as expressly
stated in this report, Bateman Engineering has assumed and did not attempt to verify the accuracy,
reliability, sufficiency or validity of such information, data or records and documents. Bateman
therefore recommends:
Repeat testwork for all mineral properties –Item 18;
Additional work the on the sizing of the WOL/SX/EW plant and configuration, as well as
capital and operating costs – Item 25b; and
Additional work on the capital and operating cost estimates.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 145
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
23 ReferencesTable 23.1 provides details of companies that provided specific information which SRK utilised in
the compilation of this technical report.
Table 23.1: References
Organisation Report/sNI 43-101
Section
A&B Global MiningMining Report on T17 Mine, Kamoto Mine and Mashamba East Mine, A&B Global Limited –2009 Update.
19, 25a
Africon-MMC
Africon, September 2008. Draft Report: Katanga Mining operations Kolwezi Trafficmanagement and Road Safety plan.MMC Engineers, January 2008. Specialist Traffic and Transportation Study for proposedCopper and Cobalt Mine Operations at KOV, Kananaga, Tilwezembe and Kanfukuma inKolwezi, Katanga Province DRC Final Draft Report.
25e
AGES South AfricaAGES, 2008. Technical Reports AS-R-2008-09-05 and AGES-R-08-01-28, AG-R-2008-11-24KOL Geohydrology Report Version 3 DRAFT and AG-R-2008-10-02 KOV Dewatering DFSV2 Final.
20.2
Bateman Engineering Bateman Engineering Study November 2008 and Engineering Study Addendum February 2009. 18, 25b
CRU Strategies Update of copper and cobalt price forecasts - January 23rd, 2009. 25c
FM AcousticConsulting
F le R Malherbe, March 2008. Noise Impact Study for the Kamoto Project near Kolwezi in theDRC, Report no 07/1/2/ Rev 2.F le R Malherbe, January 2007. Noise Impact Study for the Nikanor DCP project near Kolweziin the DRC, Revisions 1 Report No 07/9/4.
25e
Foxfire ScientificFoxfire Scientific, January 2009, Katanga Mining Limited DRC Copper Mining Projects Phase1 Radiation Survey and Sampling of Kolwezi and Tilwezembe Mining Concessions.
25e
Golder AssociatesAfrica
Golder Associates, March 2007. Kamoto joint Venture project Aquatic Ecology Report. ReportNo 10440-6031-2Golder Associates, May 2008. Baseline Assessment of Aquatic Ecosystems Associated withNikanor Kolwezi Report no 10473/08/2Golder Associates, March 2008, Baseline Assessment of Aquatic Ecosystems associated withNikanor, Kolwezi Report No 10473-6028-1.
25e
Norton RoseLegal opinion as indicated in Section 6.2 (6.2.1 to 6.2.7). Received by e-mail on 13 March2009.
6.2
Snowden GroupKatanga Mining Limited: Tilwezembe and Kananga Project – Mineral Reserve Estimate, July2008.
19
Trans-Africa Projects(“TAP”)
Supply to Kamoto Installations in Kolwezi: Load Flows and Cost Estimates – September 2008,including 2009 Addendum.
20.3.2
University ofGembloux
Nature Plus, April 2004, Ecological report on sites around the town of Kolwezi, GemblouxBelgium.Nature Plus, April 2006, Ecological Report concerning Tilwezembe copper hill, Gembloux,Belgium.Nature Plus, February 2007. Ecological Report concerning Tailings dam at yenge and theProposed Process Plant Site.
25e
24 Date and Signature Pages
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 146
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.1 Roger Dixon
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Roger Dixon, hereby certify that:
i. I am a Partner and Director with the firm SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Limited
(SRK) with an office at SRK House, 265 Oxford Road, Illovo, Johannesburg 2196, South
Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the Royal School of Mines, Imperial College London with a BSc (Hons) in
Mining Engineering in 1971. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1972;
iii. I am registered as a Professional Engineer with the Engineering Council of South Africa since
2000. I am a Honorary Fellow of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy;
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I am responsible for the preparation of the overall report;
ix. I have visited the properties of the Material Assets and my last visit was in from 4-8 August
2008;
x. SRK was retained by KML to prepare an Independent Technical Report on the Material
Assets in accordance with National Instrument 43-101. The preceding report is based on my
review of project files and information provided by KML and other relevant professional
consultants.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Roger Dixon, Pr.Eng, BSc (Hons) Mining, FSAIMM
17 March 2009 Partner and Director
SRK Consulting
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 147
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.2 Victor Simposya
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Victor Simposya, hereby certify that:
i. I am a Principal Geologist and Partner with the firm SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty)
Limited with an office at SRK House, 265 Oxford Road, Illovo, Johannesburg 2196, South
Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the University of Zambia with a BSc Sci (Geology) in 1979. I obtained an
MSc (Mining) at Montana Tech, USA in 1990. I have practiced my profession continuously
since 1980;
iii. I am registered as a Professional Natural Scientist with the Engineering Council of South
Africa since 2003. I am a member of the Southern African Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I am responsible for the preparation of the geology section and mineral resource estimates in
the technical report for all the assets included in Items 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 19;
ix. I have visited the properties of the Material Assets and my last visit was in from 4-8
December 2006;
x. I have prior experience at the properties and acted as the Qualified Person with overall
responsibility for the reporting of Mineral Resources for the “Independent Competent
Persons’ Report on the Material Properties of Global Enterprise Corporate Limited”
published on 26 June 2006.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Victor Simposya, Pr.Sci.Nat, MSc (Mining), BSc (Geology),
MSAIMM
17 March 2009 Principal Geologist and Partner
SRK Consulting
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 148
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.3 Ebrahim Takolia
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Ebrahim Takolia, hereby certify that:
i. I am a Principal Consultant with the firm SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Limited with
an office at SRK House, 265 Oxford Road, Illovo, Johannesburg 2196, South Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the University of the Witwatersrand with a BEconSc in 1995. I obtained a
MBA from Henley Management College (UK) in 2005. I have practised my profession
continuously since 1994;
iii. I am a member of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and the UK
Securities and Investment Institute;
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I have not visited the properties of the Material Assets;
ix. I am responsible for the preparation of the assessment of the mineral economics in Items 25f,
25g, 25h, 25i and 25j of the technical report.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Ebrahim Takolia, MBA, BEconSc, MSAIMM, MSI (UK)
17 March 2009 Principal Consultant
SRK Consulting
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 149
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.4 Herbert Gerald Waldeck
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, HG Waldeck, hereby certify that:
i. I am a Partner with the firm SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Limited (“SRK’) with an
office at SRK House, 265 Oxford Road, Illovo, Johannesburg 2196, South Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the University of Pretoria with a BSc in Mining Engineering obtained in
1971. I obtained a MBA from the University of Potchefstroom in 1975. I have practised my
profession continuously since 1972.
iii. I was awarded a Mine Manager's Certificate of Competency (Metalliferous) in 1974 and have
been registered as a Professional Engineer with the Engineering Council of South Africa
(Registration No 910077) since 1991. I am a Fellow in good standing of the Southern
African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and an Associate Member of the Association of
Mine Managers of South Africa.
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I am responsible for the preparation of the mining schedules and reserve statements in respect
of KOV Mine included in items 19 and 25a3 of the technical report;
ix. I have visited the properties of the Material Assets and my last visit was from 1-5 May 2006;
x. I have prior experience at the properties and acted as the Qualified Person with overall
responsibility for the CPR and the reporting of Mineral Reserve for the “Independent
Competent Persons’ Report on the Material Properties of Global Enterprise Corporate
Limited” published on 26 June 2006.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Herbert Gerald Waldeck, Pr.Eng, MBA, BSc Eng, FSAIMM,
AMAMMSA
17 March 2009 Partner and Principal Mining Engineer
SRK Consulting
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 150
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.5 Henrietta Salter
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Henrietta Salter, hereby certify that:
i. I am a Principal Scientist with the firm SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Limited
(“SRK’) with an office at SRK House, 265 Oxford Road, Illovo, Johannesburg 2196, South
Africa;
ii. I graduated from the University of Surrey with a BSc (Hons) in Chemistry in 1992. I
obtained an MSc in Water Management from the University of Surrey. In 1999, I was
awarded EngD in Environmental Technology from the University of Surrey. I have practiced
my profession continuously since 1993;
iii. I am registered as a Professional Natural Scientist with the South African Council for Natural
Scientific Professions (Registration No 400131/05);
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I am responsible for the preparation of the Dewatering and Environment assessment as
described in items 20.2 and 25 (e) of the report;
ix. I have not visited the properties of the Material Assets;
x. I have visited the properties of the Material Assets and my last visit was in 2-6 July 2007.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Henrietta Salter, Pr. Sci. Nat, MSc, EngD
17 March 2009 Principal Scientist
SRK Consulting
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 151
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.6 Anton von Wielligh
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Anton von Wielligh, hereby certify that:
i. I am a mining engineer with the firm A&B Global Mining Consultants with an office at Eco
Fusion 6, Block B, Witch Hazel Ave, Highveld Techno Park, Centurion, which are sub-
contracted to SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Limited (“SRK”) with an office at SRK
House, 265 Oxford Road, Illovo, Johannesburg, 2196, South Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the University of Pretoria with a BEng in Mining in 2000. I obtained BEng
(Hons) from the University of Pretoria in 2003. I have practiced my profession continuously
since 2000 (ECSA registration no. 20080084);
iii. I have not received, nor do I respect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
iv. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
v. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vi. I, as a Qualified Person, am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National
Instrument 43-101;
vii. I am responsible for the preparation of Reserve Estimates of T17 Mine, Mashamba East Mine
and Kamoto Mine described in Items 19, 25a1, 25a2 and 25a4.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Anton von Wielligh, Pr.Eng, BEng (Hons)
17 March 2009 Mining Engineer
A&B Global Mining Consultants
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 152
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.7 Alan Naismith
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Alan Naismith, hereby certify that:
i. I am a partner with the firm SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Limited (SRK) with an
office at SRK House, 265 Oxford Road, Illovo, Johannesburg 2196, South Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the Portsmouth Polytechnic UK with a BSc (Hons) Engineering Geology. I
obtained an MSC in Rock Mechanics and Excavation Engineering from the University of
Newcastle UK and an MBA from the University of Witwatersrand;
iii. I am registered as a Professional Natural Scientist with the South African Council for Natural
Scientific Professions. I am a registered fellow member of the South African Institute of
Mining an Metallurgy, and fellow member of the South African Institute of Rock Engineers;
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I am responsible for the preparation of the Geotechnical report described in item 20.4 of this
report;
ix. I have visited the properties of the Material Assets and my last visit was from May 12th to
16th, 2008;
x. I have prior experience at the properties having visited surface and underground mining
operations in November 2007 and March 2008.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Alan Naismith, PrSciNat, MSc, MBA, FSAIMM, FSAIRE
17 March 2009 Associate Mining Consultant
SRK Consulting
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 153
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.8 Petrus Cilliers
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Petrus Cilliers, hereby certify that:
i. I am a Process Manager with the firm Bateman Engineering with an office at Bartlett Road,
Boksburg, P O Box 25937, East Rand 1462, South Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the University of Pretoria with BEng (Chemical Eng) 1988, and an MBA
(University of Pretoria) 1995. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1989;
iii. I am registered as a Professional Engineer with the Engineering Council of South Africa since
1993.
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I am responsible for the preparation of the sections describing the Mineral Processing and
Metallurgical testing described in items 18 and 25 (b) of the technical report;
ix. I have visited the properties of the Material Assets and my last visit was from 17-21
November 2008;
x. I have prior experience at the properties, including the period August 2006 to March 2008
when I worked for Hatch, which acted as the engineering contactor for Katanga Mining.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Petrus Cilliers, Pr.Eng, BEng (Chem Eng), MBA
17 March 2009 Process Manager
Bateman Engineering
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 154
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
24.9 Rob McNeill
To accompany the report dated 17 March 2009 and entitled “An Independent Technical Report on
the Material Assets of Katanga Mining Limited, Katanga Province, DRC.”
I, Rob McNeill, hereby certify that:
i. I am a Structural and Civil Engineer with the firm SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty)
Limited (SRK) with an office at SRK Pietermaritzburg, Suite 201, Sinodale Centre, 245
Burger Street 3201 Pietermaritzburg, South Africa;
ii. I am a graduate of the Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) Polytechnic with an Intermediate Diploma in
Civil Engineering T3 in 1977 and a National Diploma Civil Engineering T4 in 1978. I have
practiced my profession continuously since 1979;
iii. I am an associate member of the South African Institute of Civil Engineers, member of the
South African Project Management Institute and a member of the Institute of Waste
Management;
iv. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any interest, directly or indirectly, in KML;
v. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this
technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be
disclosed to make the technical report not misleading;
vi. I have read National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and by reason of my education
and past relevant work experience, I fulfil the requirements to be a “Qualified Person” for the
purposes of National Instrument 43-101. This technical report has been prepared in
compliance with National Instrument 43-101 and Form 43-101F1;
vii. I am independent of the issuer as defined in Section 1.4 of National Instrument 43-101;
viii. I have visited the properties of the Material Assets and my last visit was on 13 and 14
November 2008;
ix. I am responsible for the preparation of the Tailings and Process Effluent Disposal report
described in item 20.5 of this report.
___________________________________
Johannesburg, South Africa Rob McNeill, Pr.Tech (Eng) MSAICE, MSAPMI, MIWM
17 March 2009 Structural/Civil Engineer
SRK Consulting
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 155
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25 Additional Requirements for ProductionProperties
25a Mining Operations
25a.1 T17 Mine
25a.1.1 LoM PlanTables 25a.1 provides details of the LoM production schedule.
Table 25a.1 T17 Mine: LoM Production Profile
Unit Total 2009 2010 2011
1 2 3
Waste (kt) 22 433 18 248 3774 410
Strip Ratio (kt) 7,3 12,4 3,0 1,1
RoM Ore (kt) 3085 1476 1245 363
Cu (%) 2,67 1,71 3,35 4,27
(kt) 82 25 42 16
Co (%) 0,70 0,82 0,57 0,67
(kt) 22 12 7 2
25a.1.2 Mining Operations
The mining operations will be undertaken by contractors, Enterprise Generale Malta Forrest
(EGMF), which will be responsible for mining the pit as scheduled in the optimal (practical) design.
Pre-stripping will not be a separate phase of the schedule as stripping of overburden is planned to
coincide with the ore production.
The operation will be a conventional truck and shovel operation with drill and blast. The material is
loaded in-pit by 6 m3 hydraulic face shovels and transported by Terex TR45 t dump trucks to the
respective stockpile (ore to the run-of-mine pad and waste to the waste dump). The material will be
loaded by the face shovel from 5 m benches.
The work will be organized into 3 shifts of 8 hours each, 25 days a month (Sundays and public
holidays being days of rest). The performance of the maintenance and the organization of the mining
operations will ensure an availability factor of 80% for mining equipment and a utilization factor of
83% to 85%. The utilization factor includes the loss of time associated with the general organization
of the mine, in other words the operations associated with shift changes, blasting operations, and the
transfer of machinery and equipment. Production is therefore guaranteed by an absolute equipment
utilization rate of 68%. Sundays constitute a safety margin for maintenance as well as mining.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 156
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25a.1.3 Risks
The following risks were identified by SRK:
There is a risk that the grade in the upper levels of T17 Mine pit has been overstated, as the
actual grade mined from the current operations is not reconciling with the block model; and
A dewatering plan exists; however, no borehole studies have been made on the hydrology
around the pit and stability of the pit slopes below the water table.
Action plans to mitigate these risks have been developed by site management.
25a.2 Kamoto Mine
25a.2.1 LoM PlanTables 25a.3 and 25a.4 provides details of the LoM production schedule.
25a.2.2 Mining Operations
Kamoto Mine is an underground mine and various mining methods will be applied to the different
areas in the mine:
Room-and-Pillar: This method was proposed for the OBS in zones; 3, 4, 5 and 8 and for the
OBI on Zones 5 and 8;
Cut and Fill (“CAF”): This method was proposed for zones 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, Etang North
and South and Division 5. Following a review of the flatter areas within these zones, it was
found that this particular method would not suit areas that are flatter than 55º, since the
blasted rock would not flow naturally to the level below (dip of mineralization is lower than
the natural angle of repose). These zones included Zone 1 Top and Etang North and South;
and
Long-hole retreat stoping (“LHRS”): This was proposed for areas on the OBI in Zones 3
and 4.
Table 25a.2 Kamoto Mine: Mining Methods
Zone 2008 Study
Zone 1 PPCF
Zone 2 CAF
Zone 3 OBS Room & Pillar
Zone 3 OBI LHRS
Zone 4 OBS Room & Pillar
Zone 4 OBI LHRS
Zone 5 OBS Room & Pillar
Zone 5 OBI Room & Pillar
Zone 6 CAF
Zone 7 CAF
Zone 8 OBS Room & Pillar
Zone 8 OBI Room & Pillar
Zone 9 Sub-level caving
Etang South PPCF
Etang North PPCF
Zone 10 Depleted
Division 5 Excluded
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 157
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25a.3 Kamoto Mine: LoM Production Profile (2009-2023)
Unit Total 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Development (m) 19 402 4502 4044 3154 2518 1276 407 406 407 406 407 406 407 406 407 250
Ore tons (kt) 36 424 1177 1753 2102 2108 2169 2193 2121 2176 2094 2106 2088 2068 1964 1646 1453
Cu (%) 3,63 3,54 3,94 3,11 3,34 3,48 3,54 3,85 3,74 3,64 3,69 3,85 3,74 3,72 3,73 3,63
(kt) 1321 42 69 65 70 76 78 82 81 76 78 80 77 73 61 53
Co (%) 0,52 0,47 0,44 0,43 0,49 0,57 0,61 0,63 0,61 0,60 0,54 0,52 0,53 0,49 0,51 0,47
(kt) 190 6 8 9 10 12 13 13 13 13 11 11 11 10 8 7
Table 25a.4 Kamoto Mine: LoM Production Profile (2024-2038)
Unit 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Development (m) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ore tons (kt) 1349 1093 984 928 926 782 507 443 195 - - - - - -
Cu (%) 3,60 3,69 3,76 3,77 3,64 3,48 3,63 3,17 2,89 - - - - - -
(kt) 49 40 37 35 34 27 18 14 6 - - - - - -
Co (%) 0,50 0,48 0,47 0,48 0,45 0,44 0,40 0,48 0,51 - - - - - -
(kt) 7 5 5 4 4 3 2 2 1 - - - - - -
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 158
25a.2.3 Backfill
The type of fill used will be rockfill, which will be trucked from surface for the first five years of the
LoM plan. During this five year period backfill from tailings will be investigated. Provision has been
made in capital estimates for a backfill plant and distribution system.
25a.2.4 Ventilation
Ventilation is a constraining factor in the build-up phase of the project. The intake airways provide
sufficient quantities of fresh air, but the unavailability of return airways is a risk. The applied design
and sequence mitigates this risk, and each area has a ventilation system returning air from the
workings to a return air way that exhausts out of the mine.
25a.2.5 Survey
This design and schedule are highly dependent on the survey information used to generate the digital
data required by Mine 2-4D. Inaccurate survey information could result in a flawed Mineral Reserve
Statement. It is suggested that a survey audit is carried out to verify the validity of the information
and reconcile it with the digital data.
25a.2.6 Opportunities
The following opportunities were identified:
Backfill from tailings could be introduced at a later stage, and there may be an opportunity
to increase the extraction percentage of Mineral Resources by optimizing pillar sizes; and
Exploration drilling to increase confidence in the Inferred resources and their reclassification
as Indicated or Measured Resources. This would allow for conversion to Reserves and
inclusion in the LoM plan.
25a.3 KOV Mine
25a.3.1 LoM PlanTables 25a.5 and 25a.6 provides details of the LoM production schedule.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 159
Table 25a.5 KOV Mine: LoM Production Profile (2009-2023)
Unit Total 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Waste (kt) 982 368 5 910 25 343 25 886 27 127 51 942 53 969 53 149 53 817 53 601 53 819 54 130 54 407 54 617 54 484 52 674
Strip Ratio (kt) 10,8 - 49,6 25,3 13,5 20,0 15,4 11,7 11,2 11,2 11,2 11,3 11,3 11,4 11,3 11,0
RoM Ore (kt) 90,149 - 511 1022 2013 2591 3504 4526 4817 4803 4803 4803 4817 4803 4803 4803
Cu (%) 4,93 - 1,83 2,66 3,95 5,16 6,05 5,20 5,74 6,29 5,00 4,58 5,32 3,73 4,71 5,26
(kt) 4449 - 9 27 79 134 212 235 276 302 240 220 256 179 226 253
Co (%) 0,38 - 0,19 0,16 0,29 0,45 0,40 0,26 0,45 0,38 0,34 0,54 0,63 0,55 0,61 0,35
(kt) 346 - 1 2 6 12 14 12 22 18 16 26 30 26 29 17
Table 25a.6 KOV Mine: LoM Production Profile (2024-2038)
Unit 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Waste (kt) 51 085 52 407 49 672 49 674 44 998 37 764 17 547 4345 - - - - - - -
Strip Ratio (kt) 10,6 10,9 10,3 10,3 9,3 7,9 3,7 1,1 - - - - - - -
RoM Ore (kt) 4817 4803 4803 4803 4817 4803 4803 3878 - - - - - - -
Cu (%) 4,98 5,35 4,23 4,12 4,59 4,88 5,03 5,24 - - - - - - -
(kt) 240 257 203 198 221 234 242 203 - - - - - - -
Co (%) 0,37 0,31 0,42 0,35 0,32 0,24 0,26 0,17 - - - - - - -
(kt) 18 15 20 17 16 11 12 7 - - - - - - -
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 160
25a.3.2 Mining OperationsThe operation will be a conventional truck and shovel operation with drill and blast. The activities
considered include; pre-stripping of free-dig rock, blast-hole and smooth blasting drilling, load and
haul to and from stockpile, load and haul to the ore and waste crushers and to the waste dumps.
Allowance for mining equipment was made by others for the rehabilitation of the waste dumps, pit
dewatering, crushing and conveying of waste rock, workshop facilities, and electricity supply and
distribution.
The currently purchased equipment that was considered is as follows:
RH 340 Face shovel;
CAT 994 Front-end loader;
CAT 793 Dump truck;
PV-271 Drill rigs;
CAT D10 Trackdozers;
CAT 834 Wheeldozers;
CAT 16 Grader;
Cat 777 Watercart and construction truck; and
CAT 992 construction loader.
25a.4 Mashamba East Mine
25a.4.1 LoM PlanTables 25a.7 provides details of the LoM production schedule.
25a.4.2 Mining Operations
The operation will be a conventional truck and shovel operation with drill and blast. The material
will be loaded in-pit with hydraulic face shovels with 21 m3 buckets and transported by haul trucks
to the respective stockpile (ore to the RoM pad and waste to the dump). The broken material will be
loaded by the face shovel from 10 m benches.
25a.4.3 Risks
Slimes in the bottom of Mashamba East pit could be underestimated. This could influence the
production schedule in a manner that the start and build-up could not be achieved, since additional
time would be required to clean the pit bottom. There are currently no preventive measures available
to minimize this risk. Volume estimations can be done using sonar techniques in the mean time.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 161
Table 25a.7 Mashamba East Mine: LoM Production Profile (Base Case 2009-2027)
Unit Total 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Waste (kt) 138 270 - - - - - - - - - 9021 9021 9295 9295 19 057 19 029 18 700 25 350 18 541 960
Strip Ratio (kt) 13,6 - - - - - - - - - 14,1 14,1 17,5 17,5 18,7 15,3 15,3 14,6 10,4 1,1
RoM Ore (kt) 10 190 - - - - - - - - - 638 638 532 532 1021 1241 1220 1738 1789 839
Cu (%) 4,39 - - - - - - - - - 4,53 4,53 4,77 4,77 4,35 4,92 4,50 4,37 4,07 3,50
(kt) 447 - - - - - - - - - 29 29 25 25 44 61 55 76 73 29
Co (%) 0,52 - - - - - - - - - 0,45 0,45 0,55 0,55 0,54 0,50 0,59 0,57 0,52 0,41
(kt) 53 - - - - - - - - - 3 3 3 3 6 6 7 10 9 3
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 162
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25b Recoverability
25b.1 Source of Information
The data contained in this section pertaining to the Kamoto Concentrator and Luilu Metallurgical
Plant has been sourced from KML and that for the WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project has been
compiled using data sourced from the Bateman Engineering study.
25b.2 Introduction
As mentioned in Section 5, prior to January 2008, Nikanor and KML pursued separate projects on
adjacent concessions.
Processing assets awarded to Nikanor included the Kolwezi Concentrator and Luilu Electro-refinery.
Following a review of these facilities in 2005, it was concluded that it was not viable to rehabilitate
them. In June 2006, Global Enterprises Corporate Ltd (“GEC”) completed a Definitive Feasibility
Study (“DFS”) on the DRC Copper/ Cobalt Project SARL (“DCP”) on behalf of Nikanor. Processing
aspects of the study were sub-contracted to Bateman. The DFS proposed a new hydrometallurgical
facility with a capacity of 250 ktpa annum of LME Grade ‘A’ copper cathode and 30 ktpa of cobalt
as a hydroxide salt. Bateman subsequently continued with front-end engineering services for the
DCP project including the placement of orders on long-delivery items such as mills, thickeners and
an acid plant.
Processing assets awarded to Katanga included the Kamoto Concentrator with a historical capacity
of 7,5 Mtpa ore and the Luilu Metallurgical Plant with a nameplate capacity of 175 ktpa copper and
8 ktpa cobalt cathode. In July 2006, Katanga embarked on Phase 1 of a four-phase rehabilitation
programme to return the Kamoto Concentrator and the Luilu Metallurgical Plant to close to the
nameplate capacity. Hatch was commissioned to undertake the engineering design and Phase 1 (the
phases are explained in detail later in the Section) was commissioned in December 2007.
In January 2008, Katanga merged with Nikanor and Katanga assumed management responsibility of
the combined mining assets through KOL. Bateman Engineering was appointed to undertake an
Engineering Study, including the rationalisation of the processing projects for the merged assets
where synergies existed. This was completed initially in October 2008 but revised in January 2009
due to adverse developments in the world financial markets and is the subject of this report.
25b.3 Ore Sources
Ore will principally be derived from the KOV and Kamoto Mines. Other minor sources of ore will
include the T17 Mine in the near term and the Mashamba East Mine in later years, which will
primarily provide oxide ores.
25b.3.1 Ore Type and Mineralogy
The most important ore types that make up the bulk of the KOL ore resources are sedimentary or
stratiform copper-cobalt type. The copper-cobalt deposits comprise both oxide and sulphide ores.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 163
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The principal copper and cobalt sulphide minerals are chalcocite [Cu2S] and carrolite [(Co,Cu)2S4]
respectively. Subordinate sulphide minerals of importance include bornite [Cu5FeS4], covellite [CuS]
and chalcopyrite [CuFeS2], which is generally present in small quantities.
Supergene mineralisation is generally associated with the levels of subsurface oxidation, sometimes
more than 100 m below surface, where the sulphide minerals have been altered to carbonates,
silicates and phosphates. The most common secondary copper mineral is malachite [Cu2CO3(OH)2]
with lesser minerals including cuprite [Cu2O], cornetite [Cu3(PO4)(OH)3], liberthenite [Cu2
(OH)PO4] and pseudomalachite [Cu5(PO4)2(OH)4.H2O]. Small quantities of copper silicates such as
chrysocolla [CuSiO3.nH2O] and copper carbonates such as azurite [Cu3(OH)2(CO3)2] also exist.
Heterogenite [(Co,Cu,Mn,Fe)O(OH)] and kolwezite [(Cu,Co)2(CO3)(OH)2] are the principal
secondary cobalt minerals, with some goethite[(Fe,Co)O(OH)].
The predominant gangue mineral is quartz [SiO2], but dolomite [Ca,Mg(CO3)2] is present in varying
and very significant amounts. Other notable gangue components are mica [KMg3Si3AlO10(F,OH)2],
clay [K-Al-Mg-Fe silicate hydroxides] and chlorite [(Mg,Fe)5Al(Si3Al)O10(OH)8].
25b.3.2 KOV Mine
Historically, KOV Mine has been treated as an oxide deposit. However, the latest information
suggests there is 30-50% sulphide in the remaining ore.
Typical primary copper sulphide minerals are bornite, chalcocite and minor chalcopyrite, while
cobalt is in the form of carrolite. The mineralization occurs as disseminations or in association with
hydrothermal carbonate alteration and silicification.
The most common secondary supergene minerals for copper and cobalt are malachite and
heterogenite. Quartz, mica and dolomite are the predominant gangue minerals. KOV Mine ore is
best treated by sulphide flotation followed by sulphuric acid leaching of flotation tails.
25b.3.3 Kamoto Mine
Kamoto Mine’s mineralization is primarily sulphidic. Chalcocite and bornite are the major copper
containing minerals occurring roughly in the ratio 1.5:1 predominantly as liberated grains. Trace
amounts of covellite and chalcopyrite are also present.
Kamoto Mine ore is amenable to sulphide flotation.
25b.4 Metallurgy
The oxide and sulphide ores are typically treated by flotation to recover a higher grade concentrate
that is then further treated in the refinery to recover a proportion of the copper and cobalt contained
in the flotation concentrate. However, the oxide ores are very weathered and display poorer flotation
response, which results in lower metal recoveries, generally lower copper and cobalt grades in
concentrates and higher operating costs in comparison to sulphide ores. Acid consumption in
leaching the oxide concentrate is also higher and a mix of oxide and sulphide concentrates is
considered optimal feed.
A key distinction between the KOV Mine ore and the Kamoto Mine ore is that, whilst the latter is
almost entirely sulphidic, the former contains approximately 60% oxide ore underlain by sulphide
ore. In terms of processing, early KOV Mine ores will be net consumers of sulphuric acid in
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 164
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
leaching, whilst the Kamoto Mine ore will generate sulphuric acid via roasting ahead of leaching.
The merger thus presents significant synergies by interlinking the two process facilities.
25b.5 Processing Facilities
25b.5.1 Kolwezi Concentrator
The Kolwezi Concentrator was originally commissioned in 1940. After years of neglect and the
onset of war, production through this concentrator steadily declined. The plant was recently
refurbished by DCP to the extent that would allow ongoing treatment of ore from Tilwezembe mine
(which has recently been stopped). Generally however, the condition of the Kolwezi Concentrator is
very poor and following the merger it was considered preferable to refurbish the Kamoto
Concentrator due to its better condition and more appropriate sulphide processing facilities.
Operations at Kolwezi Concentrator were discontinued in November 2008.
25b.5.2 Luilu Electro-Refinery
In a refurbishment programme initiated by UMHK in 1987 an electro-refining circuit consisting of a
copper melting and anode casting facility and a 100 ktpa electro-refining cell house was constructed
at Luilu. The melting and casting facility was apparently only operated for a few weeks before a
runaway halted production and only one of the three sections of the cell house were ever operated.
The apparently obvious option of converting the electro-refining cell house to an electro-winning
cell house was considered but was shown not to be viable when compared to constructing a new 250
ktpa electro-winning plant. This could possibly be reconsidered since the new plant capacity has
recently been reduced to 160 ktpa.
25b.5.3 Kamoto Concentrator
The original Kamoto concentrator consists of Kamoto 1 and 2 sections built in 1968 and 1972
respectively and DIMA 1 and 2 sections built in 1981 and 1982 respectively.
Kamoto 1 treated mixed ore and oxides. The circuit comprised the following unit processes:
Autogenous milling operating in closed circuit with hydrocyclones;
Sulphide flotation including roughing, cleaning and middlings regrind to produce a sulphide
concentrate;
Sulphidisation with NaHS; and
Oxide flotation including roughing and cleaning to produce an oxide concentrate.
Kamoto 2 primarily treated sulphide ore from Kamoto Mine. The circuit comprised the following
unit processes:
Autogenous milling operating in closed circuit with hydrocyclones; and
Sulphide flotation including roughing, cleaning and middlings regrind.
The DIMA 1 circuit primarily treated oxides and mixed banded oxide / sulphide ore feeds. The
circuit comprised the following unit processes:
Primary autogenous milling and secondary ball milling operating in closed circuit with
hydrocyclones;
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 165
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Sulphide flotation including roughing, cleaning, re-cleaning and middlings re-grind to
produce a sulphide concentrate;
Sulphidisation with NaHS; and
Oxide flotation including roughing and cleaning to produce an oxide concentrate.
The DIMA 2 circuit treated oxide ore. The circuit comprised the following unit processes:
Primary autogenous milling and secondary ball milling operating in closed circuit with
hydrocyclones;
Sulphidisation with NaHS; and
Oxide flotation including roughing and cleaning to produce an oxide concentrate.
The Bateman Engineering Study for Phase 5 reports that, from 1969 to 2000, over 126 Mt of ore at
an average grade of 4,33% copper and 0,28% cobalt was processed through Kamoto Concentrator.
Typical flotation recoveries achieved by Gecamines for oxides and sulphides in this period are
summarised in Table 25b.1 below.
Table 25b.1 Gecamines Historical Recoveries
Ore Type Copper Recovery Cobalt Recovery
Sulphides 85% 75%
Oxides 75% 45%
It is reasonable to expect that recoveries in excess of these historical figures can be achieved, given
the use of new improved equipment (e.g. larger flotation cells), improved reagents and improved
plant control. Higher values have been assumed in the study report and in KOL forecasts. Prior to
being taken over by KCC, the condition of the Kamoto Concentrator had been allowed to deteriorate
badly and only the portion of the plant processing sulphides was operating. Significant progress has
been made recently by KOL in refurbishing sections of the plant as required for the phased ramp-up
of the plant.
Based on the mining schedule assumed in the study, the refurbishment will continue during Phases 3
and 4, including much of the DIMA section, primarily to process KOV ore.
25b.5.4 Luilu Metallurgical Plant
Production at the Luilu Metallurgical Plant, located approximately 6 km north of the Kamoto
Concentrator, commenced in 1960. The process route employed was roast-leach-electro-winning
typical of other contemporary DRC and Zambian copperbelt operations. The circuit comprised the
following unit processes:
Sulphide and Oxide concentrate receipt, dewatering and storage;
Sulphide concentrate roasting;
Sulphuric acid copper leach of roaster calcine and oxide concentrate (oxidising leach
assisted by air injection);
Secondary leach using high acid-consuming (dolomitic) concentrates;
Counter-current decantation and clarification;
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 166
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Leach tailings filtration and residual sulphide flotation;
Tailings neutralisation and disposal;
Selenium removal via up-flow reactor containing copper granules;
Copper electro-winning (“EW”) onto copper starter sheets (being converted to stainless steel
blanks);
De-copperising of cobalt bleed solution – two-stage EW;
Cobalt bleed solution purification including the following steps;
o Iron removal by controlled pH precipitation using milk of lime;
o Copper removal by two-stage controlled pH precipitation using milk of lime;
o Nickel removal via precipitation with sodium hydrogen sulphide (NaHS) and cobalt
chips under controlled pH;
o Zinc removal by the addition of hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and neutralisation with
sodium carbonate solution;
o Controlled pH precipitation of cobalt with milk of lime;
o Cobalt re-leaching with spent electrolyte and sulphuric acid under controlled pH;
Cobalt EW; and
Cobalt vacuum degassing and burnishing.
The Luilu Metallurgical Plant was designed to process sulphide and oxide concentrates with an
initial capacity of 80 ktpa copper cathode. During the 1970s capacity was expanded to 175 ktpa
copper cathode and 8 ktpa cobalt cathode. The grade of cathode copper produced in the first EW
stage never met LME Grade ‘A’ quality, while most of the cathode and copper sponge produced in
the secondary EW was not of commercial quality and was recycled to the Shituru smelter at Likasi.
Cobalt recovery across the plant was only 45 to 60%, with the majority of the cobalt losses occurring
at nickel and zinc sulphide precipitation with some also at iron removal and cobalt precipitation. By
means of improved pH control throughout the circuit and elimination of sulphide precipitation, it
should be possible to improve cobalt recovery up to 85%. The Nikanor testwork confirms this.
The condition of the plant in 2006, when taken over by KCC, was extremely poor and almost totally
run down. For this project, a progressive renewal programme was planned, to match the increasing
throughput. Considerable progress has been made to-date by KOL in their phased rehabilitation
exercise. Completion of Phase 1 was December 2007, with the bulk of Phase 2 planned to be
completed by March 2009. A new roaster is being built as part of Phase 2 with completion expected
in Q2 2009.
25b.5.5 WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project
The proposed new circuit will be installed in phased “modules” (see below) and will ultimately
comprise the following unit processes:
Primary crushing;
Milling in closed circuit with hydrocyclones;
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 167
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Sulphide flotation comprising roughing, scavenging, cleaning and re-cleaning stages;
Pre-leach dewatering (thickeners);
Sulphuric acid copper leach of flotation tailings;
Sulphuric acid cobalt leach of flotation tailings (reducing leach assisted by addition of SO2);
Post-leach thickening and counter-current decantation;
Leach residue disposal;
Clarification of High-Grade and Low-Grade pregnant leach solutions;
HG and LG copper solvent extraction (“SX”);
Electrolyte filtration;
Copper EW;
Cobalt bleed solution purification including the following steps;
o Iron removal by controlled pH precipitation using milled limestone slurry;
o Manganese precipitation via contact with an air/ SO2 mixture;
o Aluminium and copper removal by two-stage controlled pH precipitation using milk
of lime;
o Cobalt hydroxide precipitation with milk of magnesia slurry;
Cobalt hydroxide filtration, drying and packaging; and
Effluent treatment by precipitation with milk of lime at pH 10.3.
The new and old circuits will be linked by means of transferring the old leach residue and a spent
electrolyte bleed to the new WOL section, with a corresponding volume bleed of SX raffinate back
to the old leach. This will eliminate the need for the old secondary leach and secondary EW.
In the early years (up to 2014) tailings and leach residue will be pumped to an interim dam; then to
the old Mupine Pit (in years 2015 to 2019). Thereafter they will be disposed of in a new,
conventional, unlined tailings dam with the slurry being distributed around the perimeter by a system
of moveable pipes. Surplus clear water will be allowed to overflow a penstock pipe into a return
water dam ahead of recycle to the process. Surplus water, if any, will overflow to the Luilu River,
after being appropriately treated. A sulphur-burning acid plant will be constructed to support the
whole ore leach and a sulphur dioxide liquefaction plant will also be installed to provide
concentrated SO2 gas to the following consumers:
Reductive leach; and
Fe/Mn removal in the Cobalt section.
Crushed limestone (CaCO3) and burnt lime (CaO) will be sourced from the DRC supplier, the CCC
Lime Plant at Likasi or from sources outside the DRC, which may include Turkey, and transported
200 km by rail to site. The crushed limestone will be milled to produce a finely ground limestone
slurry. Burnt lime will be slaked in a slowly rotating ball mill to produce a fine milk of lime slurry.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 168
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The process design criteria assume that all reagents, including particularly lime, limestone, sulphur,
magnesia, flocculants, SX extractant and SX diluent, will be available in the amounts and qualities
specified in the design. In SRK’s view, the supply of key reagents such as lime, magnesia and
sulphur need to be further reviewed and confirmed contractually as soon as practical.
Utilities will include the generation of steam with electrode boilers, compressed air generation,
production of demineralised water with reverse osmosis and a fire water system. Raw water for the
plant will be sourced from the KOV Mine pit dewatering operation. Chlorinated potable water will
be produced on site utilizing filtered raw water.
25b.5.6 Process Plant Capacity
Copper Capacity
The target capacity of the merged facility is 310 ktpa cathode copper, which will be produced in both
the Luilu Metallurgical Plant and the proposed WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project. In November 2008,
the capacity of the new copper circuit was reduced from its original design capacity of 250 ktpa
cathode to 160 ktpa, with the balance of up to 150 ktpa to be produced in the refurbished old refinery
section. It is important to note that only the new copper circuit will produce LME grade ‘A’ cathode.
It is also important to note that appropriate redesign work has not been possible in the time available
since the decision to reduce capacity.
Cobalt Capacity
The target capacity of the merged facility will be 27 ktpa cobalt. It was initially intended that all
cobalt would be produced as cobalt hydroxide in the new cobalt circuit and that the old cobalt plant
would be closed down. However, it is now intended to continue with the production of cobalt
cathode in the refurbished old plant, increasing to the original nameplate capacity of 8 ktpa. This will
require further study.
Phased Capacity Expansion
The capacity expansion of processing facilities has been planned using a phased approach. The
capacities and timing of the phased refurbishment of the old Luilu Metallurgical Plant and the
development of the proposed new SX/EW Refinery project are included in Tables 25b.2 and 25b.3.
Table 25b.2 Capacity Expansion: Refurbishment Phases
Capacity Capacity Timing Comment
Cu (ktpa) Co (ktpa)
Phase 1 35 2.0 End 2007 Complete
Phase 2 +35 +4,0 March 2009 In progress - Incl. 1st roaster
Phase 3 +40 +3,0 1st Quarter 2012 110 ktpa total Cu capacity
Phase 4 +40 +1,0 1st Quarter 2013 Incl. 2nd roaster
Total 150 10,0 * 8ktpa metal plus 2 ktpa hydroxide
The original DCP WOL/SX/EW Refinery design was modified so that construction could be
scheduled in three separate modules, at approximately yearly intervals consistent with the mining
plans. However, recent changes to the mining plans to better balance mine production and operating
capacity have resulted in only two distinct new plant modules now being required. The timing and
capacities of the new modules as finally proposed are summarised in Table 25b.3.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 169
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25b.3 WOL/SX/EW Refinery Modules: Timing and Capacities
Capacity Capacity Timing Comment
Cu (ktpa) Co (ktpa)
Modules 1& 2 80 10 1st Quarter 2014 Modules 1 & 2 combined, only 1 EW
Module 3 80 9 1st Quarter 2015 Extra Leach, SX & EW
Total 160 19
The phased refurbishment of old plant will be complete by year 2013, with two new plant modules
coming on line in 2014 and 2015. Careful planning will be required to achieve this as outlined
elsewhere in this study.
The majority of the process flow sheet outlined will be installed in combined Module 1/2, including:
Whole ore leach (1 train);
High-grade SX (1 train);
Low-grade SX (1 train); and
Copper EW (one 80 ktpa cell house).
Module 3 will double copper capacity by means of:
Second whole ore leach train;
Second high-grade SX train; and
Second 80 ktpa cell house module.
25b.6 Copper and Cobalt Recovery
Mined ore will be directed to specific processing routes on the basis of the five ore types as shown
schematically in Figure 25b.2. The recovery of copper and cobalt attributable to each ore type has
been based on historical performance in the case of Kamoto Mine ore and test results in the case of
KOV Mine ore. No account has been taken of recovery dependence on head grade. Overall
recoveries, including refining losses, that were assumed for planning purposes in the Engineering
Study and operating model are summarised in Table 25b.4 below.
Table 25b.4 Assumed Copper and Cobalt Recovery by Ore Type
Ore Type Proportion Copper Cobalt
In Feed (%) Recovery (%Cu) Recovery (%Co)
A - Sulphide 30% 79,9% 68,4%
B – Mixed Oxide/Sulphide* 60% 87,1% 78,4%
C – High acid-consuming mixed* 5% 75,6% 49,4%
D – Oxide only (low-grade) 5% 72,8% 36,6%
E – Oxide only (high-grade) 0% 92,0% 85,0%
* These recoveries are based on 40% sulphides in mixed ore and should be better defined. It is recommended that further work be
conducted to ascertain the accuracy of these ratios.
NOTE: Recoveries actually being achieved and budgeted currently differ from the above due to a number of reasons including the
incomplete status of the plant and non-standard operating conditions.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 170
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25b.7 Processing Schedule
25b.7.1 Ore from KOV Mine
RoM ore will be delivered from the KOV pit to B3 primary crusher by haul trucks, from where the
crushed ore will be conveyed to the Kamoto Concentrator. Planned design ore feed tonnages and
grades once all modules are completed are included in Table 25b.5 based on the current mine plan.
Table 25b.5 KOV Mine Design Feed Tonnage and Grade
Description Unit Value
Mean feed capacity ktpa 4 800
Mean copper grade %Cu 4,93
Mean cobalt grade %Co 0,38
KOV ore will initially be processed through an oxide flotation line at the Kamoto Concentrator to
generate an oxide concentrate that will be pumped overland to the Phase 2, 3 and 4 plant. Thereafter,
from Module 1 and 2 onwards, the ore will be sulphide floated in a new section at KTC. The
sulphide concentrate will join the Kamoto sulphide concentrate stream and the flotation tails (oxides)
will not be floated but will be pumped direct to the new whole ore leach to recover acid-soluble
oxide copper and cobalt.
25b.7.2 Ore from Kamoto Mine
RoM from the Kamoto Mine is crushed underground and conveyed to the Kamoto Concentrator.
Planned design ore feed tonnages and grades are summarised in Table 25b.6. Kamoto Mine ore will
be processed through the Kamoto Concentrator sulphide flotation and the sulphide concentrate will
be pumped to Luilu Metallurgical Plant (roasters). It will be important to control mass pulls to
achieve a concentrate grade greater than 12,5% sulphur, to ensure autothermal operation of the
roasters. Historically, Hatch did limited testwork on the current concentrate samples to design the
roaster currently being constructed. Further testwork is recommended to comfirm 12,5% sulphur in
concentrate can be achieved from all mixed ore types, as well as to assess the impact a variation on
this specification will have. The leach receovery of copper and cobalt post roaster was based on
historical data, obtained and evaluated by Hatch.
Table 25b.6 Kamoto Mine Design Feed Tonnage and Grade
Description Unit Value
Mean feed capacity ktpa 2100
Mean copper grade %Cu 3,59
Mean cobalt grade %Co 0,53
25b.7.3 Other Ore Sources
In addition to the KOV Mine and Kamoto Mine ores, the following oxide and mixed oxide/sulphide
ores are available: T17 Mine, which is a source of oxide ore (type ‘D’ in Figure 25b.2) to be utilised
during years 2009 - 2011; and Mashamba East Mine, which is a source of mixed ore (80% oxide -
type ‘B’ in Figure 25b2) to be utilised from year 2018 on.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 171
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 25b.1: Metallurgical Processing: Final Block Diagram
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 172
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Figure 25b.2: Metallurgical Processing: Distribution by Ore Type
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 173
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25c Marketing Study
25c.1 Introduction
The Luilu Metallurgical Plant will produce copper cathode and cobalt in the form of cobalt cathode
plus some hydroxide salt. The WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project will produce LME grade ‘A’
electrowinning cathode and cobalt hydroxide. The old refinery will produce a lower grade
“commercial” copper cathode and cobalt cathode approximately 99,3% pure. This section has been
prepared from information supplied to KML by LN Metals Advisory Services and CRU Strategies,
part of the CRU Group.
25c.2 Copper Marketing
It is anticipated that the marketing will follow the same structure as that employed for Luilu copper
cathodes. KOL will therefore be a producer of copper and cobalt from two different plants, the
refurbished Luilu Metallurgical Plant and the new WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project.
Being new production from a new refinery, the WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project copper will have
none of the quality issues associated with the original Luilu Metallurgical Plant cathodes. The
marketing, however, will follow the same structure as that employed for Luilu Metallurgical Plant
cathodes. The marketing will include:
Marketing the initial production during the start-up phase;
Producing and supplying Grade A quality material to the international market place.; and
LME registration and long-term marketing.
The marketing of the initial production will be governed by the same criteria as those for the Luilu
cathodes regarding quality standards. The objective of KOL is to produce a cathode suitable for rod
mills and registration as LME Grade A copper. Impurity levels must be kept well below even the
maximum levels specified in the LME contract.
25c.3 CRU Copper Price Forecasts
Over the second half of 2008, the copper price fell from a high in early July of almost USD9000/t to
a low in December of USD2902/t – a decline of more than 60%. Even the recent rebalancing of
commodity indices has had little effect, lifting copper prices to the USD3000-3400/t range in early
January. The LME 3-month copper price averaged USD6893/t in 2008, down 2,9% on the 2007
average price.
World copper demand is expected to fall by 4,0%, or more than 700 kt in 2009, to reach 17,4 Mt.
The contraction will be particularly pronounced in the developed regions of North America, Japan
and Western Europe. The supply-side response from the copper industry (in contrast to other
commodities) is expected to be modest, with production set to fall by just 0,3% year-on-year.
Significant volumes of refined production capacity are expected to come on stream, particularly in
China and Chile, which will offset cutbacks at existing smelters. As a result, a market surplus of
572 kt is forecast for 2009, and prices are expected to average just USD2800/t, down 59% on the
2008 average. Another surplus, of 463 kt is forecast for 2010, despite some recovery in demand.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 174
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Prices will continue to slide, to a low of USD2694/t in 2010, as a result of a cumulative surplus of
just over 1Mt building up over this two year period.
The struggle for financing is likely to go on for some time, which will limit the entry of new supply
to the market in the medium term. Potential lenders are becoming increasingly risk averse and
companies and projects are coming under heightened scrutiny, especially in light of the current low
prices. With prices forecast to fall further, additional output cuts are likely, as some producers will
be unable to cover even their cash costs.
However, stocks will have built up considerably, and renewed consumption growth will be a
prerequisite for higher prices to emerge. CRU expect that supply disruptions will continue, so some
short term price rallies cannot be ruled out. However, without the support of robust demand growth,
these will be unsustainable. CRU do not anticipate an economic recovery in 2009, although demand
growth in the last quarter will be positive when compared to a weak Q4 2008. In 2010, CRU
anticipate that demand growth will pick up, and will strengthen in 2011 as the effects of
infrastructure packages start to boost copper demand and the world economy revives.
Demand growth thereafter will be more moderate, returning to trend by 2013. Also, the period of
lower copper prices will take the heat out of substitution pressures which may otherwise have
permanently dented growth prospects.
As the effects of the above flow through, CRU Strategies forecasts that the copper market will be in
balance by 2011, returning to deficit in both 2012 and 2013; as a result prices will rise to reach an
average of USD3280/t in 2013.
On the production side, the financing delays will limit refined production growth over the medium
term, with a risk that low prices and tight credit availability will result in more production cutbacks
than CRU have forecast. However, in the period 2014 to 2020, CRU expect the impact of the
financial crisis and economic downturn to have abated, and a recovery to be underway.
China will continue to account for the majority of copper demand growth to 2020, while India will
also become a significant player, and other developing regions, such as Africa, the Middle East and
South East Asia will see strong growth over the period. In contrast, the industralised countries of
North America and Western Europe and Japan will experience very moderate growth or a
contraction as their economies mature and their manufacturing base shifts towards the emerging
countries.
On the supply side, the effects of medium term project delays will be felt, as the market emerges
from the shadow of the financial crisis. As a result, copper prices are expected to move higher over
the 2014 to 2020 period, moving above USD4000/t, in nominal terms, in 2014, USD5000/t in 2015
and then finally USD6000/t in 2020.
25c.4 Cobalt Marketing
The planned production levels of cobalt are bound to have an effect on the market and subsequently
on the price. Since it is the metal price that sets the price base for the whole market, an expansion in
cathode output largely would have a much greater effect on the price than an increase in cobalt
carbonate or hydroxide would.
In a metal market of about 37 kt, an increase of 8 kt in 2009 is very significant. As with copper, the
quality of cobalt metal is important and, in the early years of production, is unlikely to be high
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 175
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
enough to achieve sales to the super-alloy industry. It will be more suitable for the chemical industry,
in which the Chinese and Umicore are the largest participants. This automatically excludes a
significant annual quantity of metal from a very important sector of the market.
Therefore, it is recommended that KOL should produce a range of products from metal through to
carbonate and hydroxide with at least 50% in the latter two forms. The effect on the metal market
and price will thus be reduced. Even so, the price in 2009 could fall to around USD 15/lb.
25c.5 CRU Cobalt Price Forecasts
In 2008, the High Grade (99,8%) cobalt price averaged USD39/lb, an increase of 39% year-on-year.
During late Q1 and early Q2, prices above USD50/lb were sustained, and at the time of CRUs
previous report, in August 2008, the cobalt price stood at approximately USD30/lb. However,
deteriorating macroeconomic conditions, and a collapse in cobalt demand, led prices to plummet
during the latter months of 2008. The cobalt price dropped below USD20/lb in mid-November, and
reached a low of USD13/lb in December. In January 2009, the price has stabilised in the
USD16-19/lb range, though trading volumes have remained low.
All the major demand sectors have seen a considerable slump in business, and this has resulted in a
decline in world cobalt consumption of 4% in 2008, to approximately 57 kt. The US auto industry is
still reeling from the impact of the global crisis, and Boeing has recently announced a sharp drop in
2008 orders (as well as deliveries which were impacted by a long-running strike at the company’s
main production facility). Furthermore, key electronics manufacturers, such as Nokia and Motorola,
have announced downwardly revised earnings and market forecasts. This is further evidence of a
demand slowdown, and will put additional pressure on battery manufacturers. Cobalt consumption is
expected to fall by a further 6% in 2009, to less than 54 kt. As a result, the cobalt price is forecast to
average USD19/lb in 2009, a fall of more than 50% from 2008.
CRU Strategies expects that a recovery in cobalt consumption will begin in 2010, with global
demand expected to increase by 10%, to more than 59 kt – or approximately the level of
consumption in 2007. Cobalt demand growth is expected to average 4,6% per year between 2008
and 2015, notwithstanding the forecast contraction in 2009.
The supply-side has responded rapidly to the recent collapse in cobalt demand and prices. In 2008,
cobalt production fell by 2,4% year-on-year, to less than 55,2 kt. Further falls in production are
expected in 2009. Little or no new supply will come on stream, as a result of the decreased
availability of finance, as well as the weak market fundamentals. Sharp production cuts have also
been implemented by existing producers. The DRC has forecast that cobalt production will be halved
during Q1 2009, due to factory closures and decreasing demand. CMSK, which was expected to
produce 3500 t in 2008, announced that it stopped operating on 20 December 2008, citing low prices
and a lack of demand. Other suspended operations include Anvil Mining’s Dikilushi facility, while
Luanshya Copper Mine (LCM), Zambia’s largest cobalt producer, has suspended its Chambesi
operations. 2009 could still see a small market surplus, but there is considerable uncertainty
surrounding the magnitude and duration of the industry’s production cuts.
As a result of production cutbacks, and the expected delays to a raft of new projects, which will limit
any market surplus, the current slump in cobalt prices is forecast to be less prolonged than for other
metals. CRU Strategies expects prices to increase to USD24/lb, on average, in 2010, as a result of a
recovery in demand, coupled with the limited availability of material as a result of supply cuts.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 176
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Cobalt prices are not expected to return to levels seen in 2007 and the first half of 2008, unless the
cutbacks in supply and concerns about future production volumes are able to offset falling demand,
which is unlikely. Beyond 2010, market surpluses are expected to build up, as current production
cutbacks are reversed and new supply begins to come on stream, which will result in a decline in
prices, to USD18/lb in 2011 and USD14/lb in 2012.
In the longer term, CRU Strategies still expects the cobalt market to be significantly over-supplied,
which will lead the cobalt price to bottom out at USD9/lb in nominal terms in 2015. Beyond the
medium term, the cobalt price is expected to converge towards the long run marginal cost of
USD10/lb, in real USD2008 terms.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 177
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25c.1 Marketing Study: CRU Strategies Prices and Applied Prices (2009-2023)
2009 2010) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January 2009 MoneyTerms Prices
LME PayFactor
Unit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 LOM
CRU Strategies Base CasePrices
Copper (USD/lb) 1,24 1,17 1,24 1,31 1,36 1,65 2,05 2,07 2,10 2,11 2,12 2,14 2,14 1,84 1,84
Cobalt (USD/lb) 18,00 23,00 17,00 13,00 9,00 9,00 8,00 9,00 9,00 11,00 10,00 10,00 10,00 10,00 10,00
Applied Prices
Luilu Metallurgical Plant-copper cathode
(USD/lb) 1,19 1,12 1,20 1,26 1,32 1,61 2,01 2,03 2,04 2,06 2,08 2,09 2,09 1,82 1,82
Luilu Metallurgical Plant-cobalt metal
(USD/lb) 18,00 23,00 17,00 13,00 9,00 9,00 8,00 9,00 9,00 11,00 10,00 10,00 10,00 10,00 10,00
WOL/SX/EW RefineryProject - copper cathode
(USD/lb) 1,24 1,17 1,24 1,31 1,36 1,65 2,05 2,07 2,10 2,11 2,12 2,14 2,14 1,84 1,84
WOL/SX/EW RefineryProject - cobalt salt
(USD/lb) 14,40 18,40 13,60 10,40 7,20 7,20 6,40 7,20 7,20 8,80 8,00 8,00 8,00 8,00 8,00
Kolwezi concentrate - copperin concentrate
(USD/lb) 0,78 0,74 0,78 0,83 0,86 1,04 1,29 1,30 1,32 1,33 1,34 1,35 1,35 1,16 1,16
Kolwezi concentrate - cobaltin concentrate
(USD/lb) 9,00 11,50 8,50 6,50 4,50 4,50 4,00 4,50 4,50 5,50 5,00 5,00 5,00 5,00 5,00
Pay Factors reflect terms of off-take agreements with Glencore, a Swiss-based commodity trading company.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 178
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25d ContractsSRK reviewed the following contracts, which are within industry norms:
The contract with the mining contractor for the T17 Mine. The terms of this contract are
typical of mining contractors operating in central Africa;
The transportation agreement for the transport of finished product from Kolwezi to the port
at Durban, South Africa; and
The SNEL power agreement for the repair of the Zongo, Mwandingusha and Koni Groups,
the repair of the associated transmission networks and the compensation of reactive energy
at Kimwenza (relates to the joint upgrade of power infrastructure).
SRK relied on the legal advisor to KML, Norton Rose LLC, for the legal tenure and mining rights
status of KML as it applies to all the Material Assets mentioned in this report.
25e Environmental ConsiderationsThe following section includes discussion and comment on the environmental management aspects
of the Mine. Comment is included on the status of environmental legislation applicable to the mine,
compliance with legislation, key liabilities and risks, and opportunities to overcome several of these
liabilities and risks.
This section of the report has been prepared on the basis of:
The Draft Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the KOL Mine project,
completed and submitted to Katanga Mining Limited (KML) in December 2008;
The Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) completed for KOL1 and DRC Copper and
Cobalt project (DCP);
SRK’s experience in the Kolwezi area - SRK is approved as a consultant (by the Ministry of
Mines in the DRC) to carry out environmental studies and to submit environmental reports
locally (Ministerial Order No. 334 / CAB.MIN / MINES / 01 / 2004) and has been involved
in the key mining projects in Kolwezi since 2002.
For the purpose of this section liability and risk are defined as follows: a liability can be assigned a
monetary value to be included in the financial model, while a risk involves too much uncertainty to
enable cost predictions to be made. Liabilities are further split into historic liabilities accruing to
Gecamines, historic liabilities that will be assumed by KML and KML’s current and future
liabilities, and these are defined later in this section.
25e.1 Legislation and compliance
The following comments should not be interpreted as an exhaustive legal review by legal specialists
but rather the identification of significant legislation affecting the environmental planning. Reference
1 It is noted that the SRK-prepared EIS for KOL is not the report which supports the licence.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 179
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
should be made to Chapter 2 of the draft ESIA which presents a summary of DRC laws pertaining to
the management of the environment.
The primary piece of legislation governing mining environmental issues in the Democratic Republic
of the Congo (DRC) is the Mining (Code) Act 007/2002 of 11 July 2002. The Mining Code is
supported by the Mining Regulations (Decree No 038/2003 of 26 March 2003), which implement the
provisions of the Code including the environmental and social obligations relating to mining
projects. The Regulations contain a number of Annexures, with those pertinent to the environment
listed below:
Annex II: Financial surety for rehabilitation of the environment;
Annex III: Environmental Code of Conduct for Prospectors;
Annex VII: Mitigation and Rehabilitation Plan (MRP);
Annex VIII: Guidelines for preparing an MRP;
Annex IX: Guidelines for preparing an environmental impact study (EIS) and environmental
management plan for a project (EMPP);
Annex X: Closure measures;
Annex XI: Classification of mining wastes and their characteristics (standards for effluents);
Annex XII: Sensitive environments; and
Annex XIII: Method for the measurement of noise.
In addition to compliance with the in-country legislation, KML seeks to comply with the
requirements of the Equator Principles which are a set of guidelines adopted by Equator Principles
Finance Institutions (EPFI) including the International Finance Corporation (IFC). As a Category A
project the Mine is required to:
Produce a comprehensive Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and
Environmental and Social management Plan (ESMP) to a standard that meets the EPFI’s
satisfaction,
Ensure compliance with the IFC’s Performance Standards;
Ensure compliance with the in-country legislation, standards and regulations;
Undertake consultation in a structured and culturally appropriate manner; and
Establish a grievance mechanism.
Table 25e1 summaries key legislation and actions that have been taken to comply with this
legislation.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 180
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25e.1 Summary of key legislation and relevant compliance
Legislation Compliance
Exploitation (mining) permit
In terms of Title V of Decree no 038/2003, the
company must apply for an Exploitation
(mining) Permit. In order to apply for such a
permit the company must be the title holder of
a valid Exploration Permit(s)
DCP holds exploitation permits as follows:
PE4960 – Kananga Mine
PE4961 – KOV Mine
PE4963 - Tilwezembe Mine
KCC holds exploitation permits as follows:
PE4948 - T17 Mine
PE525 – Kamoto Underground Mine
PE525 – Mashamba East Mine
Environmental Impact Study (EIS) and Environmental Management Plan (EMP)
The environmental obligations are set out in
Title XVIII of decree no 038/2003. With the
exception of temporary quarrying, any mining
operation requires an approved Environmental
Impact Study (EIS) and an Environmental
Management Plan (EMP).
Schedule IX (Contents of EIA and EMP) sets
out the contents of the EIS and the EMP and
provides detail regarding specific management
measures and standards that are required.
Environmental impact assessments have been undertaken for previous project
descriptions associated with this mine complex namely KOL and DCP. DCP has
been granted an environmental license by the Directorate for the Protection of the
Mining Environment (DPEM) in terms of the DCP EIS and EMP submitted in 2006.
KOL prepared and submitted an EIS to DPEM in 2006. Thereafter it was confirmed
that Gecamines as the titleholder had been granted an environmental license which
KOL is obliged to uphold.
In 2008 an ESIA was undertaken for the combined project description. A draft ESIA
report has been prepared but has not yet been released for public comment. In
addition the following management plans have been prepared by KML:
Framework Resettlement Action Plan
Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Social Development Plan
Community Health and Safety Plan
Occupational Health and Safety Plan
Labour and Human Resources Plan
Security Plan
Influx Management Strategy
Artisanal and Small Scale Miners Plan
Integrated Waste Management Plan
Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan
Rehabilitation and Closure Plan
Transportation and Traffic Management Plan
The ESMP and public disclosure meetings are to be completed in the first half of
2009.
Financial security obligation
Articles 410 to 414 set out the obligations in
respect of a financial security which must be
provided in terms of Article 294 of the Mining
Code. The financial security must provide for
the rehabilitation of the environment. The
funds of the financial security shall be made
available to the State and managed for the
purpose of rehabilitating the site.
The environmental costs as well as liabilities and closure costs for the project are
outlined in the relevant section of this report. It is understood that KML plans to set
aside the base percentage required by the Code on a yearly basis, starting in 2009.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 181
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Legislation Compliance
Schedule II (Financial security)
This Schedule deals with the financial security
required in respect of rehabilitation of the
environment. The amount of the financial
security shall be determined in accordance
with the approved Environmental Plan. The
financial security shall be maintained until the
Titleholder has been issued with an
Environmental Clearance Certificate. There are
a number of alternative means by which such
security can be provided. The total amount of
the financial security shall be paid in
accordance with a timetable taking into
consideration the duration of the mining
activities capped at 15 years. The first
instalment is only required in year 4 and the
quantum of the instalment increases with time
such that the major part is only required in the
last five years of the 15 year period.
The environmental costs as well as liabilities and closure costs for the project are
outlined in the relevant section of this report. It is understood that KML plan to set
aside the base percentage required by the Code on a yearly basis, starting in 2009.
25e.2 Environmental and social issues
25e.2.1 General
Following almost a century of mining and metallurgical activities, predominantly for copper and
cobalt minerals, the area around Kolwezi has numerous open pits, waste rock dumps, tailings dams,
concentrators and other mining-related infrastructure. This has led to extensive environmental
impacts. Rivers in the area, the Luilu and Musonoi, are contaminated by tailings disposed directly
into them. The failure of a large upstream tailings dam, the Poto-poto dam has also caused
significant contamination of the Luilu River. The worked areas remain largely unvegetated and in
combination with the numerous tailings dams and entrainment of dust from the unpaved roads,
contribute to high levels of dust in the area.
The Kolwezi area is characterised by wide spread poverty and a legacy of social challenges
including high unemployment, low levels of skills, dilapidated social infrastructure and services, and
low levels of functionality and delivery within all levels of government. The refurbishment and
operation of KOL, has already resulted in positive impacts on the socio-economic environment
although the impact of reducing the scale and/or cancelling these initiatives is as yet unidentified.
Reference should be made to the Draft ESIA (SRK Report 390781/1, November 2008) which
outlines in detail, the environmental and social baseline for the project area and describes the
anticipated impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the project.
As a refurbishment and expansion project, operations, and construction, and the environmental and
social impact assessments thereof have been virtually concurrent. In some cases operational
decisions have been made before the appropriate environmental and social assessments have been
undertaken and the management of the impacts implemented. The refurbishment has however, in
some instances, led to visible improvements to the site as well as implementation of social
programmes and environmental efficiencies. During the course of 2008, organisational capacity was
ramped up and the development of various company directives, policies and management plans
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 182
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
ensued. The downscaling of operations in the last months of 2008 have however resulted in reduced
management capacity and concomitant reductions in the implementation of social and environmental
programmes.
25e.2.2 Outstanding information
There are significant gaps in the information that has been provided to SRK and a summary of
outstanding information is supplied in Table 25e.2, together with the assumptions that have been
made, based on available information, to allow the impact assessment to be completed. The
implication is that the assessment of the environmental impact of these items will still be required in
future.
Table 25e.2 Summary of project information gaps
Subject Project information gaps Approach in ESIA
Land rights DRC government approval of proposed concession boundaries It is assumed that proposed boundaries
will be approved
Waste rock
dumps
Waste rock dump designs for T17 Mine, Tilwezembe Mine, KOV
northern waste rock dump, Mashamba East Mine
Waste rock dump positions have been
assumed
Waste rock
analyses
Samples of some waste rock lithologies not available for
geochemical test work
Assess when the samples and analyses
are available
KOV dewatering
sludge
Chemical composition of pit water and sludge Assess when the samples and analyses
are available
KOV pit sludge Method of removal and disposal Assess when information is available
Processing Chemical balance
Mass balance
Water balance
Assess when information is available
Processing Composition of the solid residues and liquid fractions of all waste
streams (Kolwezi and Kamoto concentrators and Old and New
Luilu Refineries) and to where these will report
Assess qualitatively
Processing The reagents balance for the process Assess qualitatively
Processing Composition and volumes of return water from the tailings dam to
be used in the process
Assess qualitatively
Processing Composition (and metal speciation) of the sludge arising from the
metal precipitation process in the cobalt circuit
Assume that the sludge reports to the
Luilu Effluent Ponds and assess
qualitatively
Processing Composition, volumes and disposal route of the “crud” from the
solvent extraction
Assume that the Crud reports to the
Luilu Effluent Ponds and assess
qualitatively
Processing Process streams that are likely to require blowdown or bleed during
operations and where the blowdown or bleed will be disposed of
and at what rate/frequency
Assess qualitatively
Energy Heavy fuel oil plant design Assess when information is available
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 183
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Subject Project information gaps Approach in ESIA
Route of all linear infrastructure and sub-stations for power
Associated
infrastructure
Infrastructure associated with subcontractors during construction:
sewage, water supply, water treatment, accommodation, solid
waste disposal
Assess when information is available
Associated
infrastructure
Infrastructure associated with operations: sewage, water supply,
water treatment, accommodation, solid waste disposal, medical
waste disposal
Assess when information is available
Transportation Off-site transportation during construction and operations: modes,
routes, volumes, frequency
Assess when information is available
Associated
infrastructure
Aggregate quarries Assess when information is available
Associated
infrastructure
Fuel storage Assess when information is available
Associated
infrastructure
Pipelines between the Luilu Metallurgical Plant, Kamoto
Concentrator and the Far West Tailings dam
Assess when information is available
Employment Number of people and contractors to be employed during
construction
Assess when information is available
Alternatives Alternatives as they relate to processing, mining, waste rock
management, associated infrastructure, energy use, water
Describe alternatives considered
Overall project Changes to the project as described in the ESIA document which
have resulted from KML’s November 2008 review of the project
and operational realities
Assess when changes are finalised
25e.2.3 Ground and surface water
Surface and groundwater specialist studies were undertaken for the Draft ESIA compiled by SRK
(SRK Report No. 390781/1, November 2008) to understand the hydrological and geohydrological
environment in the project area.
The Luilu and Musonoi rivers are already heavily impacted on by the historic mining activities in the
area. As a result of the numerous discharges, the quality of the rivers is not suitable for domestic or
agricultural use. However, groundwater quality in the area is surprisingly good and is the source
generally used by local communities. It is thought possible that the high rainfall provides sufficient
groundwater recharge to dilute the seepage from the numerous tailings dams. Discharge and seepage
from the project activities are likely to impact further on ground and surface water quality.
Water management in the Kolwezi area is complicated by the fact that it is a net water positive
environment, with significant seasonal fluctuations. It is thus envisaged that there will be significant
discharges from project infrastructure during the wet season, predominantly into the Luilu River.
The KOV dewatering system will also discharge into the Luilu throughout the life of the project.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 184
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
The design of the Far West and Kamoto Interim tailings dams has allowed for settlement of
suspended solids. The details of the management measures for other aspects of the project have not
yet been provided to SRK.
KOV pit-lake dewatering
The descriptions of the sludge removal process were reviewed in the Africon report “Preliminary
functional design of decanting dams to support dewatering of KOV and Kamoto East pits, Kolwezi:
DRC (Africon Project No. 102996, October 2007) and in AGES AG-R-2008-11-24 KOL
Geohydrology Report Version 3 DRAFT and AGES AG-R-2008-10-02 KOV Dewatering DFS V2
Final.
Based on the current information available, it is understood from the description that the silty water
will be pumped from the pit at approximately 5 percent solids by mass. In ppm or mg/l terms a
concentration of 5 percent TSS is 50 000 mg/l (ppm). This water will be settled in the decant dams
where Africon has estimated that 70 percent of the solids will be removed, leaving 30 percent to
decant to the Musonoi River, i.e. 15 000 mg/l. However, the concentration of TSS in the discharge
is likely to be slightly higher than 15 000 mg/l, since some of the water sent to the decant dam will
be used to slurry the 70 percent of the solids that did settle successfully to the silt dam.
The DRC discharge limit for suspended solids is 100 mg/l and the IFC guideline value is 50 mg/l.
Clearly the proposed discharge is far in excess of either of these values. At the concentrations
currently envisaged, the impact on both water quality and flow in the Musonoi River is expected to
be highly significant.
The alternatives to the management measures currently planned for dewatering and desludging of the
KOV pit-lake must be reassessed to ensure compliance with DRC law.
Geochemical characterisation and management of tailings effluent
Samples of the current tailings streams at Kamoto Concentrator and the Luilu Refinery were
analysed and assessed as required by the DRC Mining Code. Test work was conducted on simulated
tailings from the oxide ore from KOV produced by Mintek in 2007. The test work on these samples
is unlikely to be fully representative of future ore to be mined at KOV, as the process simulation was
carried out on material obtained from stockpiles dating back to 1999, and thus it is uncertain to what
extent the metallurgical characteristics of the stockpiled ore had changed since being mined.
On the basis of the preliminary test work (TCLP and acid base accounting) the tailings currently
being generated at Kamoto Concentrator exceed the Low Risk limits for lead and copper in terms of
the DRC regulations. However, the regulations do not set out limits for High Risk tailings for
copper and lead.
Based on the geochemical test work carried out by SRK, the copper tailings from the Luilu Refinery
currently classifies as High Risk due to its acid generation potential and significant concentrations of
copper and cobalt. Process monitoring information provided by KOL indicates that the discharge
from the current operation at Luilu contains up to 600 tonnes of copper and 200 – 300 tonnes of
cobalt per month. It should be noted that the DRC effluent discharge regulation limits copper to 1.5
mg/l and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) guideline to 0.3 mg/l. Unless an appropriate
alkaline pH is maintained, a significant proportion of these metals will be in solution, resulting in
significant contamination of ground and surface water. The maintenance of an alkaline pH will
require effective management by KOL. It is understood that plans are being put in place to improve
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 185
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
the copper and cobalt recovery at the Luilu Refinery, however, no information has been provided to
SRK.
With a DRC High Risk classification, the Luilu copper tailings would be expected to require dam
design and operation to minimize potential for the leachate to seep or spill to ground or surface
water, not just in terms of lining configuration, but also in terms of overall water management to
prevent excess contaminated water release from the tailings and/or process system.
It must be noted that all the geochemical test work described above has been carried out on only two
sets of the three tailings streams (of which two are from Kamoto Concentrator and one from the
Luilu copper tailings), and the results will need verification on further samples, as will the acid
generation potential of the composite tailings from Kamoto Concentrator.
Based on the current information available, it is understood that an appropriate alkaline pH will be
maintained in the tailings stream, and that process improvements will reduce the concentrations of
copper and cobalt, SRK has recommended that it will not be necessary to line the storage facilities.
The maintenance of alkaline pH will require effective monitoring and management by KOL.
Geochemical characterisation and management of process effluents
As part of the copper and cobalt processing, a number of impurities need to be removed. It is
currently understood that these could include iron, manganese, aluminium, zinc, nickel and
selenium. At the concentrations likely to be produced by the refinery, it is possible that this process
effluent will be a hazardous waste. It is also possible that the semi-solid “crud” formed in the
solvent extraction process will be a hazardous waste. Although it is understood that simulations of
the process have been undertaken, this information has not been provided to SRK.
Based on the information currently available to SRK and the February 2006 Nikanor Feasibility
Study (SRK Report 356391, February 2006) which identified and evaluated sites for the disposal of
tailings and solid wastes from the Kamoto Concentrator and existing Luilu Refinery, it has been
recommended that hazardous waste streams from the Luilu Refinery must be disposed of in a
hazardous waste facility involving the construction and operation of a number of engineered lined
ponds at a site to the south-west of the Luilu Refinery.
The design proposed by SRK includes the construction and operation of a number of ponds with a
composite HDPE liner, leak detection system and stormwater management systems. The overall
pond layout suitable for the expected life of the project has allowed for an initial four ponds,
assuming that two ponds would be built immediately and thereafter further ponds as the tonnage
build up dictated. KML have made a commitment to undertake this work. However, although the
first pond has been constructed, no pump or pipeline system has been installed so the main waste
stream is being discharged to the Kamoto Interim Tailings Dam at a pH corrected to 8.0, but others
currently spill into the Luilu River via drains/canals.
25e.2.4 Relocation of residents of Musonoi Village
The development and expansion of the KOV pit and associated activities and infrastructure will
result in a combination of impacts including elevated noise levels, increased risk of traffic related
accidents, blasting and vibrations and increased levels of dust. While mitigation of individual
impacts may be possible to some extent, the combination of impacts will more appropriately be
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 186
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
resolved through the resettlement of the entire Musonoi Village, which has an estimated population
of up to 30 000 people.
The resettlement process is outlined in KML’s Framework Resettlement Action Plan (“FRAP”). The
resettlement process is expected to take a minimum of five years to implement. While no
requirement to resettle the village has been communicated to residents, it is expected that the
villagers are already aware and/or expect to be resettled. Based on the current information available,
it is understood that KML is committed to following due process and entering into suitable
negotiations with the affected community well in advance of any impending move.
25e.2.5 Relocation of residents of Ngonzo Village and other villages affected by FarWest Tailings Dam
The hamlets of Machine, Nana and Yenge are located within the footprint of the Far West Tailings
Dam, with several other hamlets, Kampemba, Kyapamoka, Masikini, Dique Kalemba, Ferme Jina
and the village of Ngonzo on the periphery. The construction of the Far West Tailings Dam and the
associated activities would require the resettlement of at minimum the hamlets of Machine, Nana
and Yenge and would result in a combination of impacts to the remaining hamlets and villages
including increased noise levels, decreased safety, loss of access to land, increased dust, loss of
social cohesion and reduced water quality and access to water. Resettlement of these villages will be
required to effectively address the combination of impacts. A resettlement site has already been
identified and resettlement actions, which are expected to take at least five to eight months to
implement, have been outlined in the KML FRAP. There has been some interaction with the
households of the directly affected villages (including some compensation payments), and with
leaders in Ngonzo village. No negotiations have commenced with the other affected villagers. It is
understood that some of the villagers have been requested not to build any further structures or to
plant any further crops. As a result, there are expectations around resettlement, especially in Ngonzo
and the directly affected communities. To minimise uncertainty, to address any hardship related to
reduced farming activity, and to align all villages involved, the resettlement process should not be
delayed.
25e.2.6 Air pollution
According to dust fallout modelling the baseline dust fallout conditions are high with large parts of
the concession experiencing peak concentrations above the South African Industrial Guidelines2 and
areas along roads and close to tailings dams and waste rock dumps experiencing double this and
exceeding the South African Alert Guidelines. Modelling of operational conditions indicates that
vehicle-entrained dust and windblown dust from the tailings dams are overwhelmingly the
predominant sources of nuisance and respirable dust. Improvement of the roads, through dust
suppression and surfacing and progressive vegetation of the tailings dams will significantly improve
this situation. Provisions have been made for this in the environmental capital and operating costs.
2 Used in the absence of relevant DRC guidelines
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 187
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25e.2.7 Social issues
Extensive stakeholder engagement has taken place as part of the environmental and social
assessments, and further disclosure meetings are planned for early 2009. Social assessments have
also been conducted to support the identification and description of social impacts. Issues that have
been raised by the communities relate largely to the perceived benefits that the mine should bring to
the communities including job creation, improvements to social infrastructure and services.
A combination of positive and negative social changes is likely. In some cases these are already
occurring as a result of this refurbishment and expansion project. The key drivers of change and the
impacts that will result from these include: foreign investment in the Kolwezi District and the
associated stimulation of the local economy (through associated multiplier effects), the construction
and operations of the mine and associated infrastructure which will change the movement of people
and displace people in some instances, the creation of jobs as well as the expectation for local
employment and investment in community development, the disruptions to existing artisanal and
small scale mining operations and the consequent economic displacement, improvements to local
infrastructure such as roads and clinics as well as the increased pressure on infrastructure, capacity
building, the payment of taxes and royalties and the implementation of KML’s social policies and
programmes.
The following management plans which were prepared as part of the ESIA outline the actions that
KML would need to take to comply with IFC requirements:
Stakeholder engagement plan;
Social development plan;
Influx management plan;
Artisanal and small scale miners plan;
Community health and safety plan;
Framework resettlement action plan; and
Security plan.
While the Kolwezi Concentrator and Tilwezembe operations were expected to be short term
operations, their recent closure and the expected associated retrenchment of staff is likely to reduce
the anticipated positive impacts associated with job creation to some extent. In addition, the
temporary suspension of social programmes in the communities may have further negative impacts
with respect to development of trust and goodwill between the project and the community, and may
impact on the mine’s social licence to operate.
25e.2.8 Radiation
A preliminary radiological assessment was undertaken in 2008. This study was undertaken to
respond to a decree from the Department for the Protection of the Mining Environment (DPEM) and
investigate preliminary indications of extensive distribution of radioactive material across the project
site. The surveys and sampling performed during the radiological assessment were sufficient to
demonstrate that there is not a widespread hazard from radioactive materials, although there are
certain locations that merit the implementation of controls and mitigation measures. The areas
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 188
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
which have been identified where risk mitigation measures are deemed warranted are the disused
uranium ore storage locations adjacent to Kingamyambo Tailings Dam and north of the KOV Pit,
Katapula-Luilu tailings area, Kolwezi concentrator ore concentrate storage area, Sulphide Tailings
Dam, and the Luilu River. While the uranium storage locations are not a KML liability, they are
reported for purposes of transparency. Management measures, including the communication of the
results of the study to Gecamines and other mines, and the implementation of a radiation safety
programme are included in the capital and operating costs.
It must be noted that the radiological assessment did not evaluate ground water risks and only
conducted a limited sampling of surface water sources, nor has it evaluated sources of airborne
contamination.
25e.3 Closure
25e.3.1 Closure planning
A Rehabilitation and Closure Plan was prepared in 2008 to provide guidance and commitments with
respect to the environmental and social elements of decommissioning and closure. The plan
addresses the management of biophysical and social impacts at closure. It is understood that KML
has committed to implementing operational efficiencies throughout the operations phase to
progressively manage and reduce possible environmental impacts as far as practicable, thereby
reducing the liability at closure.
With respect to the socio-economic impacts of closure, management commitments have been
outlined with respect to management of direct impacts on mine employees and their families, loss of
economic benefits to local businesses and the economy, loss of support to the local government and
other government levels with respect to taxes and royalty incomes, increased pressure on
maintenance of infrastructure and services, loss of community benefits in the form of mine-funded
community development programmes, loss of access to environmental resources as a result of
residual impacts to groundwater, surface water and soils. KML will need to reschedule the
management measures contained within the Rehabilitation and Closure Plan with respect to the
closure of the Kolwezi Concentrator and Tilwezembe Mine once a decision has been taken on the
future of these facilities.
In terms of Article 100 of the DRC Mining Environmental Regulations, all buildings and surface
infrastructure will have to be demolished on closure unless a representative of the local communities
submits a written request to the Minister and demonstrates that such buildings and infrastructure are
necessary for the socio-economic development of the area.
The closure costs have been prepared on the basis that:
Land will be returned to its pre-mining state, or where this is not practicable or beneficial will be
made safe for humans and animals;
All infrastructure other than residue deposits and that infrastructure returned to Gecamines will
be demolished and appropriately removed, disposed of, buried or filled in;
Where it is inappropriate to leave roads, pipelines and boreholes intact for community use, these
will be ripped up and rehabilitated;
Waste rock dumps will be reprofiled using cut and fill techniques to a maximum slope angle of
18 degrees and revegetate;
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 189
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Tailings dams surfaces will be revegetated;
Engineered waste disposal sites will be capped;
Waste will either be removed to engineered waste facilities or covered to minimise
environmental exposure; and
Backfilling of pits is not practicable, however access control berms will be constructed from
waste rock to limit humans and livestock gaining entry.
25e.3.2 Allocation of Closure Costs
The closure costs provided for the Kolwezi Concentrator and Tilwezembe Mine, originally
scheduled for Year 5, remain relevant as these were based on operations in 2008 and will need to be
rescheduled to Year 1 to address the recent closure of these two facilities.
The assessment evaluated the environmental obligations in terms of current liabilities, which are
current liabilities that exist at 1 April 2008 and are estimated at USD 26,2 million, and closure costs,
which can be reasonably expected to be payable at the end of LoM. The closure costs are liabilities
which KOL are likely to incur during operations and includes new infrastructure that they will
construct to support their activities. Refer to Table 25.e3 for further details.
Table 25e.3 Environmental Closure Costs
Area Unit Total
Luilu Plant (USDm) 16,7
Kolwezi Concentrator (USDm) 3,8
Kamoto Concentrator (USDm) 8,5
SKM (USDm) 0,1
Kamoto Underground (USDm) 1,1
KOV Pit (USDm) 33,9
Tilwezembe (USDm) 1,5
Mupine Pit (USDm) -
Pit T17 (USDm) 5,1
Kamoto East (USDm) 6,9
Far West (USDm) 55,3
Subtotal (USDm) 132,9
Contingency @ 25% (USDm) 33,2
ECMP @ 10% (USDm) 13,3
Owners cost @ 5% (USDm) 6,6
Subtotal (USDm) 53,2
Total (USDm) 186,1
Based on DRC legislation annual expenditure for rehabilitation is planned with the aim of reducing
the final costs at the end of LoM (Annexure II from the DRC Mining Code indicates that full
payments must be made by year 15 of the operation). However, SRK’s experience is that a payment
schedule longer than 15 years is acceptable. Accordingly, the Tilwezembe Mine portion and the
Kolwezi Concentrator portion closure costs amounting to USD 5,3 million are allocated in year 2009
as mining operations stopped in November 2008 and the remainder of USD 180,1 million is
allocated as indicated in Table 25.e4.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 190
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25e.4 Allocation of Closure Costs
Allocation of Costs
Yr 1 to 18 (USD 2,1 million) Yr 19 to Yr 21 (USD 18,1 million) Yr 22 and Yr 23 (USD 46,7 million)
25e.4 Material risks and potential opportunities to reduce liabilities
25e.4.1 Risks
Non-compliance with commitments in the existing authorised EMPs. Non compliances relate to
water management and some social commitments. Clause 12.2 of the joint venture agreement
(JVA) between DCP and Gecamines also includes an undertaking to comply with the
requirements of the Mining Code and internationally acceptable standards – non-compliance
with the commitments made in the EMP would be viewed as non compliance with this clause.
Influx of job seekers into the Kolwezi area with associated negative risks where migrants are not
assimilated, placing stress on services and disrupting the status quo in communities. The Influx
Management Strategy addresses actions to address this risk to international standards.
Artisanal and small scale mining. At present KOL is cohabiting with artisanal and small scale
miners. This situation will change when small scale mining is displaced by commercial mining,
with possible social and economic risks. The Artisanal Mining Strategy and Social Development
Plan outline initiatives that would address this to the level of international standards.
Resettlement of villages could be a risk to the project if not undertaken to internationally
acceptable levels. The company’s resettlement practices are being reviewed and the Framework
Resettlement Action Plan outline actions that would meet international requirements.
Social licence to operate is influenced by the management of impacts, management of
community expectations, management of community, health and safety programmes, social
development programmes, transparency and communication. The recent abrupt suspension of
social programmes in the communities may contribute towards increasing this risk and it is
further understood that retrenchments are shortly to be announced which is likely to result in
further disruptions and social unrest. A communication strategy upholding internationally
accepted principles for stakeholder engagement is necessary as transparency will be required to
manage this risk.
Operational issues with respect to tailings management. The maintenance of an appropriately
alkaline pH will require careful management by KOL to ensure that potentially toxic metals
remain as precipitates and prevent generation of acidity and thus significant impacts on ground
and surface water quality.
Management of process effluents. Potentially hazardous waste streams will need to be disposed
of in a hazardous waste facility until it they have been adequately characterised. This is to
ensure impacts on ground and surface water can be adequately managed if the material is
disposed of to the unlined tailings facilities.
KOV pit-lake dewatering. The measures proposed to manage the dewatering of the KOV pit-
lake currently will result in non-compliance with the DRC effluent limit and IFC guideline value
for suspended solids and cause significant impacts in the Musonoi River. Alternative
management measures will need to be investigated to ensure compliance with DRC regulations
and prevent major contamination of the Musonoi River.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 191
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
It is understood that Gecamines has provided permission for the use of the GH pit for disposal of
tailings from the Kolwezi concentrator, however it is unclear if Gecamines has obtained
environmental permits from DPEM. SRK is also not aware that an environmental permit has yet
been sought or obtained for the disposal of tailings from the Kamoto Concentrator and Luilu
Refinery into the Mupine Pit.
Concession boundaries for the project have not been finalised with the DRC government and
part of the Far West Tailings Dam footprint is not included in the existing concession.
KML may be exposed to third party risks associated with other mining operations in the Kolwezi
area. Examples include:
o the potential for future dewatering of the DIMA Pits upstream of the concession
affecting the groundwater regime through impacts on water quality and/or aquifer
drawdown;
o social tensions that may escalate as a result of the combination of existing social
instability, recruitment of foreign skilled workers and limited increase in employment of
local labour or worse, the retrenchment of local labour;
o lack of uniformity by the various mines in delivery on social goals, environmental
management and pollution prevention measures;
o increased pressure on infrastructure and services specifically medical services, roads
infrastructure, sanitation and housing.
It is understood that recent reductions in professional staffing have taken place within the KML
organisation. SRK is concerned that this places KML at risk with respect to the necessary
organisational capacity to implement the social and environmental management programmes to
Equator Principle standards.
25e.4.2 Opportunities
It is understood that the First Quantum Minerals (FQM) project adjacent to the KOL operations
requires additional water supply. It may be possible to negotiate with FQM for it to pay part of
the costs of the pipeline and pumping of the dewatering water to the Luilu River in return for
access to the water.
The Far West Tailings Dam, Luilu Refinery and Kamoto Concentrator will generate a number of
effluent streams that are expected to cause deterioration in the quality of water in the Luilu. The
discharge of the expected high volumes of dewatering water could provide dilution of these
effluents and thus mitigate the impact of the discharges.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 192
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25f Taxes and Key Business OperatingParametersThe operating parameters, which govern the royalty, tax, rehabilitation, depreciation and import duty
rates applicable to the business, are provided in Table 25f.1:
Table 25f.1 Economic Analysis: Key Business Operating Parameters
Description Explanation Rate
DRC royalty (deduct from turnover) % of revenue, less selling expenses 2.0%
Gecamines royalty (deduct from turnover) % of revenue, less selling expenses and debt redemption 2.5 %
DRC corporate tax rate 30%
Depreciation (year 1) 60%
Depreciation (year 2 to 5) 10%
Import duties Charged on certain imported items 3%
A royalty of 2% will be payable to the DRC, while a royalty of 2,5% will be payable to Gecamines.
The DRC corporate tax rate of 30% has been applied. According to DRC legislation, Taxation can be
offset against capital and deferred. All capital expenditure has been depreciated at 60% in the first
year and 10% for each year thereafter. An import duty of 3% is applied to imported goods, if
applicable.
In addition, USD120,5 million has been budgeted and included in the cash flow model up to 2014
for payment to Gecamines for its Pas de porte payments.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 193
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
25g Capital and Operating Cost Estimates
25g.1 Capital Cost Estimates
The major capital cost items are provided in Table 25g.2. These include:
Kamoto Mine: capital expendure includes provisions for purchase of the mining fleet
requirement required by the LoM plan, development costs to access new mining areas and
USD10 million in 2009 and 2010 for ventilation infrastructure.
KOV Mine: capital expendure includes provisions for purchase of the mining fleet requirement
required by the LoM plan. There is no provision for equipment in the first five years as all of the
equipment required during this period had been purchased by 31 December 2008 The pre-
stripping required to access the ore body has been capitalised in 2009 and 2010.
Mashamba East Mine: capital expendure includes provisions for purchase of the mining fleet
required in the LoM plan.
Processing Capital Expenditure: the capital expendure includes provisions for the
development of the process plants as described in Item 25b and set out in details in Table 25g.1.
As noted elsewhere in this report, further study is recommended to improve the accuracy of the
cost estimates, as these have been factorised from the 2008 Study and care should be exercised
in their use.
Table 25g.1 Summary of Processing Capital Expenditure
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total
Unit 1 2 3 4 5 6
Phase 2 (USDm) 38,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 38,0
Phase 3 (USDm) 1,4 75,5 63,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 140,0
Phase 4 (USDm) 0,0 0,9 45,7 35,8 0,0 0,0 82,4
Phase 5- MergedModule1 and 2
(USDm) 0,0 38,5 435,9 455,8 60,7 0,0 990,8
Phase 5- Module 3 (USDm) 0,0 0,0 0,0 2,3 121,5 101,4 225,2
Total (USDm) 39,4 114,9 544,6 493,8 182,1 101,4 1476,3
Effluent Ponds and Tailings: this refers to the capital expenditure provisions for the
development of the ponds and tailings facilities described in Item 20.5.
Environmental: this includes Musonoi Village, Far West Tailings Dam and ad-hoc
resettlement; artisanal mining; stakeholder engagement; jobs and economic opportunities; tarring
of roads (to reduce dust and for risks associated with road safety); dust-monitoring
equipment;equipment for sulphur-dioxide-emission reductions / monitoring; surface-water
management (containment and management);general and hazardous waste (trenches and
building); ad-hoc equipment for groundwater (equipment);water settlement facilities (for
suspended solids); radiation monitoring and survey equipment;emergency response equipment;
and vehicles and equipment.
Dewatering: this refers to the costs associated with the dewatering of the KOV Mine amd
Mashamba East Mine, which includes dewatering boreholes, borehole pumps, monitoring,
design and control systems, software, geophysical surveys, water sampling and analysis, the
regular updating of the dewatering model and the purchase and operation of equipment.
Power: this refers to the capital expenditure for the provision of power as described in Item
20.3.2.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 194
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
General Infrastructure: this refers to unallocated infrastructure spending of a general nature
that is required to sustain mining operation in the DRC and cancellation costs (USD62 million)
arising out of the changes to the plant requirements and revised business strategy.
Table 25g.2 LoM Investment Capital Expenditure (2009-2018)
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Unit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Mining
Kamoto underground (USDm) 24,6 20,1 7,9 5,6 2,9 14,8 2,8 9,0 0,9 14,8
KOV mobile mining fleet (USDm) 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 168,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0
KOV pre-stripping (USDm) 10,1 54,9 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0
Mashamba East (USDm) 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 32,7
Subtotal (USDm) 34,7 75,0 7,9 5,6 2,9 182,8 2,8 9,0 0,9 47,5
Processing
All phases and modules (USDm) 39,4 114,9 544,6 493,8 182,1 101,4 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0
Subtotal (USDm) 39,4 114,9 544,6 493,8 182,1 101,4 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0
Other Cost Centres
Tailings (USDm) 18,5 30,9 5,7 37,1 37,1 24,9 24,9 24,9 24,9 24,9
Environmental and socialcosts
(USDm) 24,4 11,2 10,9 13,2 31,9 33,1 1,8 4,1 1,8 1,9
Dewatering (USDm) 33,2 7,9 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 38,7 3,0 0,0
Power (USDm) 3,2 0,3 0,0 8,2 52,7 16,3 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0
General capitalexpenditure
(USDm) 81,5 15,3 37,1 17,9 3,5 9,9 0,0 0,0 9,5 1,6
Subtotal (USDm) 160,8 65,6 53,7 76,4 125,2 84,2 26,7 67,6 39,2 28,5
Total capitalexpenditure
(USDm) 234,9 255,5 606,2 575,9 310,2 368,5 29,5 76,6 40,1 76,0
25g.2 Operating Cost Estimates
The major operating cost items are provided in Table 25g.3. These include:
Open Pit and Underground Mining: this includes the mining cash costs from:
o T17 Mine: the cost estimate is based on a mining contractor EGMF and is forecast at
USD8,50/bcm for mining and USD1,70/t ore mined for haulage.
o Kamoto Mine: the operating cost was estimated from first principles as an owner
operation. The cost estimate is based on the mining method employed at each zone as
decribed in Item 19. Cost data for the various mining methods was gathered from
various sources, including InfoMine USA and similar projects undertaken by SRK. The
InfoMine data were the most up-to-date (July 2008) but are related to North American
mines. The costs were compared to similar sized mines in Africa and South America and
adjusted to account for the higher fuel, steel, power and shipping costs. The weighted
average cost applied over the LoM is USD33,83/t ore mined.
o KOV Mine: the operating cost was estimated from first principles as an owner
operation. This was because the mining contract was under internal review and not
finalized in time for this study.
The mining consumables cost was estimated using the estimated costs for: operating the
mining and ancillary equipment using the hourly consumption rates for fuel and
lubricants; drilling and blasting based on the requirements of the mine plan; manning of
the mine operation together with the mine workshop and mine technical office; similar
sized equipment as that which would be required for KOV Mine; drilling using
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 195
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
assumptions on the drill steel life for drilling; explosives delivered to the mine and
provided by AEL. The weighted average cost applied over the LoM is USD2,35/t ore
mined and USD1,88/t waste mined.
o Mashamba East Mine: The operating cost was estimated from first principles as an
owner operation. The mining consumables estimates was carried out using the estimated
mining and ancillary equipment, hourly fuel consumption and provision for consumed
lubricants, and drilling and blasting requirement. Manning of the mine operation
together with the mine workshop and mine technical office was also estimated. Cost
information for similar size equipment was gathered from other projects and was used
for the mine operating cost estimation. The weighted average cost applied over the LoM
is USD5,06/t ore mined (estimate includes waste mining).
Kamoto Concentrator Costs: this includes plant costs for reagents, consumables and power
and is based on fixed costs of USD4 million per annum and a variable cost of USD3,03/t ore
feed for the oxide circuit and USD7,88/t ore feed for the sulphide circuit.
Luilu Metallurgical Plant: this includes plant costs for reagents, consumables and power and is
based on fixed costs of USD9 million per annum and a variable cost of USD0,46/lb Cu from
2009 to 2016) and USD0,41/lb Cu from 2016 onwards.
WOL/SX/EW Refinery Project: USD0,34/lb for the Cu circuit and USD3,40/lb for the Co
circuit.
General and Administrative Costs: this refers to head office and other centralised costs.
Freight, Insurance and Sales Costs: It is understood that all finished products (copper, cobalt)
will be transported through Durban (the FOB point) either to Europe or to the Far East. Finished
product CIF Rotterdam costs applied for Cu: USD675/t and Co: USD828/t.
Table 25g.3 LoM Operating Costs (2009-2018)
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Unit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
OPERATING COSTS
Open Pit andUnderground Mining
(USDm) (136) (93) (129) (145) (197) (185) (166) (174) (165) (221)
Old KTC and LuiluMetallurgical Plant
(USDm) (64) (82) (82) (162) (173) (141) (134) (141) (136) (132)
Kamoto ConcentratorCosts
(USDm) (19) (23) (20) (22) (25) (16) (17) (15) (16) (18)
SX/EW Refinery (USDm) - - - (45) (63) (205) (148) (258) (226) (197)
Tailings (USDm) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (16) (16) (17) (16) (16)
Total Operating Costs (USDm) (219) (199) (231) (375) (458) (563) (481) (604) (559) (583)
General andAdministrative Costs
(USDm) (150) (70) (80) (105) (105) (105) (90.5) (80) (80) (80)
25h Economic AnalysisThis section presents a cash flow model (Tables 25h.1 and 25h.2) and sensitivities for discount rates
(Table 25h.3) metal prices and grade (Table 25h.4); capital cost (Table 25h.5) and operating costs
(Table 25h.6). The Net Present Values (“NPVs”) should be considered only in relation to the risks
mentioned in Item 20 of this report.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 196
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25h.1 Discounted Cash Flow Model (2009-2023)
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
January 2009 Money Terms Prices Unit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Revenue (USDm) 424 484 444 754 735 1176 1270 1727 1720 1636 1909 2050 1635 1645 1607
Less: Freight, Insurance and Sales
Costs(USDm) (42) (53) (54) (113) (123) (179) (172) (221) (223) (199) (231) (250) (189) (216) (223)
Net Revenue (USDm) 383 431 390 641 612 996 1098 1506 1497 1436 1679 1800 1447 1429 1384
Expenses
Operating Costs (USDm) (219) (199) (231) (375) (458) (563) (481) (604) (559) (583) (674) (691) (605) (685) (647)
Other Costs (USDm) (175) (95) (112) (151) (149) (166) (162) (170) (170) (175) (188) (199) (177) (187) (176)
Net change in working capital (USDm) 14 (0) (0) (13) (2) (19) 0 (20) 2 2 (13) (4) 15 (3) 4
Total Expenses (USDm) (381) (293) (343) (539) (609) (748) (643) (794) (728) (756) (874) (894) (767) (875) (820)
Taxation (USDm) - - - - - - - - - - (137) (208) (216) (174) (148)
Capital Expenditure (USDm) (236) (259) (609) (579) (313) (370) (33) (80) (43) (79) (183) (264) (57) (20) (56)
Net Free Cash (USDm) (234) (121) (562) (477) (311) (122) 422 632 726 601 485 435 406 360 360
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 197
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25h.2 Discounted Cash Flow Model (2024-2038)
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
January 2009 Money Terms Prices Unit 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Revenue (USDm) 1584 1640 1522 1189 1119 1069 1038 840 - - - - - - -
Less: Freight, Insurance and Sales
Costs(USDm) (216) (229) (201) (162) (156) (155) (152) (126) - - - - - - -
Net Revenue (USDm) 1368 1411 1321 1027 963 914 886 714 - - - - - - -
Expenses
Operating Costs (USDm) (651) (689) (623) (439) (396) (335) (298) (226) - - - - - - -
Other Costs (USDm) (184) (177) (186) (176) (174) (171) (188) (209) - - - - - - -
Net change in working capital (USDm) 0 (3) 5 18 5 5 4 8 31 - - - - - -
Total Expenses (USDm) (835) (868) (803) (597) (565) (502) (483) (427) 31 - - - - - -
Taxation (USDm) (144) (111) (153) (144) (115) (110) (121) (119) (84) - - - - - -
Capital Expenditure (USDm) (214) (10) (10) (10) (9) (6) (6) - - - - - - - -
Net Free Cash (USDm) 176 421 354 275 274 296 276 168 (53) - - - - - -
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 198
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25h.3 Discount Rate Sensitivity
Discount Factor NPV
(%) (USDm)
8,00% 1027
10,00% 624
12,00% 324
14,00% 99
16,00% (70)
18,00% (197)
20,00% (292)
Table 25h.4 Revenue and Grade Sensitivity
SensitisedFactor SensitivityRange (@14% discount rate)
Revenue / Commodity Price -15% -10% -5% 0% 10% 20% 30%
Grade (Cu %) 3,89% 4,12% 4,35% 4,50%* 5,03% 5,49% 5,95%
Grade (Co %) 0,37% 0,39% 0,41% 0,44%* 0,48% 0,52% 0,57%
(USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm)
Revenue / Grade (10) 27 63 99 171 242 312
* Reserve Grade
Table 25h.5 Revenue and Capital Cost Sensitivity
NPV Revenue Sensitivity Range (@14% discount rate)
(USDm) -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30%
-15% 521 558 594 630 702 773 842
Total -10% 345 382 418 454 526 597 667
Capital -5% 168 205 241 278 350 421 490
Costs 0% (10) 27 63 99 171 242 312
Sensitivity 10% (370) (333) (297) (261) (189) (118) (48)
Range 20% (738) (701) (665) (629) (557) (487) (417)
30% (1135) (1087) (1047) (1009) (937) (867) (797)
Table 25h.6 Revenue and Operating Cost Sensitivity
NPV Revenue Sensitivity Range (@14% discount rate)
(USDm) -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30%
-15% 248 284 321 357 429 499 569
Total -10% 162 199 235 271 343 414 484
Operating -5% 76 113 149 185 257 328 398
Costs 0% (10) 27 63 99 171 242 312
Sensitivity 10% (182) (145) (109) (72) (1) 70 140
Range 20% (353) (317) (280) (244) (173) (102) (32)
30% (525) (489) (452) (416) (344) (274) (204)
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 199
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Table 25h.7 Revenue Sensitivity using 17 March 2009 LME Forecast Contract Pricing
SensitisedFactor SensitivityRange (@14% discount rate)
Revenue / Commodity Price -15% -10% -5% 0% 10% 20% 30%
(USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm) (USDm)
Revenue / Grade 143 179 215 251 322 392 461
Table 25h.7 reflects the NPVs using the LME 3-Month copper price data at 17 March 2009 with
applicable contract prices up to 2018.
25h PaybackThe payback for the initial six years of capital invested, USD2,35 billion, excluding interest is 10
years. The payback period for the invested capital of USD2,13 billion at an interest rate of 7,52%
(the sum of the US Federal Reserve five-year interest rate swap of 2,52% and a 5% risk premium) is
18 years.
25i Mine LifeBased on the assumptions at 31 December 2008, KML has Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves of
139,8 Mt of ore with a grade of 4,93% Cu and 0,38% Co, which support the LoM plans provided in
Item 25a.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 200
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Glossary of Terms, Abbreviations, Units andChemical Elements
Glossary of Terms
Aeolian erosion, transport, and deposition of material due to theaction of wind at or near the earth’s surface
Arenaceous term describing sedimentary rocks with a modal grain sizein the sand fraction
Argillaceous term describing sedimentary rocks with a modal grain sizein the silt fraction
Assay the chemical analysis of mineral samples to determine themetal content
Assaying the chemical analysis of mineral samples to determine themetal content
Basal conglomerate a conglomerate formed at the earliest portion of astratigraphical unit
Basement complex the widespread association of igneous and metamorphicrocks which are covered uncomfortably byunmetamorphosed sediments
Basinal a basin like depression that may be erosional or structuralin origin
Bateman or BatemanEngineering
means Bateman Projects Limited.
Biotite/titic trioctahedral
Breche Heterogene orHeterogeneous Breccia (BH
this breccia is composed of angular and sometimes wellrounded rock fragments of all the various rock types ofthe Roan Group
Breche RAT or BrecciatedRAT (B RAT
a reddish-pink brecciated rock with calcite and silicaveinlets and is at times well mineralised with specularhaematite, occurring as veinlets
Calcaire a Minerais Noirs orCalcareous Unit with BlackMinerals (CMN
a slightly banded and laminated light grey to greysilicified dolomite mineralised with black oxide of iron,manganese and cobalt
Capital expenditure all other expenditures not classified as operating costs
Concentrate a metal-rich product resulting from a mineral enrichmentprocess such as gravity concentration or flotation, inwhich most of the desired mineral has been separatedfrom the waste material in the ore.
Crushing initial process of reducing ore particle size to render itmore amenable for further processing
Cut-off grade the grade of mineralized rock which determines as towhether or not it is economic to
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 201
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Decline a surface or sub-surface excavation in the form of a tunnelwhich is developed from the uppermost point downwards
Detrital a term applied to any particles of minerals, or, morerarely, rocks, which have derived from pre-existing rockby processes of weathering and erosion
Dilution waste which is unavoidably mined with ore
Dilution waste which is unavoidably mined with ore
Dip angle of inclination of a geological feature/rock from thehorizontal
Dipeta (R3) greyish to dark red or brown stratified shales andmicaceous schist
Dolomie Stratifie orStratified Dolomite (D Strat)
this is a well bedded to laminated, argillaceous dolomite,which forms the base of the traditional “Lower Ore Zone”in Gecamines’ nomenclature
Dolomites the name of a sedimentary carbonate rock and a mineral,both composed of calcium magnesium carbonate
Drill-hole method of sampling rock that has not been exposed
Effective Date effective date of Engineering study
Fault the surface of a fracture along which movement hasoccurred
Feldspar/s the most important single group of rock forming silicateminerals
Ferricrete a conlgomerate consisting of surfical sand and gravelcemented into a hard mass by iron oxide derived fromoxidation of percolating solutions of iron salts
Ferruginised containing iron
Filtration process of separating solid material from a liquid
Flotation the process by which the surface chemistry of the desiredmineral particles is chemically modified such that theypreferentially attach themselves to bubbles and float to thepulp surface in specially designed machines. the gangueor waste minerals are chemically depressed and do notfloat, thus allowing the valuable minerals to beconcentrated and separated from the undesired material.
Footwall the underlying side of an ore body or stope
Geochronological the measurement of time intervals on a geological scale
Grade the measure of concentration of copper or cobalt withinmineralised rock
Hangingwall the overlying side of an ore body or slope
Haulage a horizontal underground excavation which is used totransport mined ore
Hydrogeology a science that deals with sub-surface water and withrelated geologic aspects of surface water
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 202
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Indicated Mineral Resource that part of a mineral resource for which tonnage,densities, shape, physical characteristics, grade andmineral content can be estimated with a reasonable levelof confidence. it is based on exploration, sampling andtesting information gathered through appropriatetechniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits,workings and drill holes. the locations are too widely orinappropriately spaced to confirm geological and/or gradecontinuity but are spaced closely enough for continuity tobe assumed
Inferred Mineral Resource that part of a mineral resource for which tonnage, gradeand mineral content can be estimated with a low level ofconfidence. it is inferred from geological evidence andassumed but not verified geological and/or gradecontinuity. it is based on information gathered throughappropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops,trenches, pits, workings and drill holes which may belimited or of uncertain quality and reliability
Intrusives a body of igneous rock which has forced itself onto pre-existing rocks, either along some definite structuralfeature or by defamation or cross-cutting of the invadedrocks
Kamoto Concentrator Kamoto, an operating concentrator
Kamoto Mine Kamoto Underground Mine
Kananga Mine Kananga Mine
Kolwezi Concentrator Kolwezi, an operating concentrator
KOV Mine KOV Mine
Laterite red residual soil developed in humid, tropical andsubtropical regions of good drainage
Lithology/ical geological description pertaining to different rock types
LoM plans life-of-mine plans
Luilu Metallurgical Plant Luilu, an operating metallurgical plant
Mashamba East Mine Mashamba East Mine
Material Assets operations/projects and associated infrastructure
Measured Mineral Resource that part of a mineral resource for which tonnage,densities, shape, physical characteristics, grade andmineral content can be estimated with a high level ofconfidence. it is based on detailed and reliableexploration, sampling and testing information gatheredthrough appropriate techniques from locations such asoutcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes. thelocations are spaced closely enough to confirm geologicaland grade continuity
Metasediments/tory metamorphosed sedimentary rock
Mica/micaceous layer-lattice minerals of the three-layer type, and may bedivided into the dioctahedral muscovite group and thetrioctahedral phlogopite-biotite group
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 203
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Milling a general term used to describe the process in which theore is crushed and ground and subjected to physical orchemical treatment to extract the valuable metals to aconcentrate or finished product.
Mineral / mining lease a lease area for which mineral rights are held
Mineral Reserve the economically mineable material derived from ameasured and/or indicated mineral resource. it is inclusiveof diluting materials and allows for losses that may occurwhen the material is mined. appropriate assessments,which may include feasibility studies, have been carriedout, including consideration of, and modification by,realistically assumed mining, metallurgical, economic,marketing, legal, environmental, social and governmentalfactors. these assessments demonstrate at the time ofreporting that extraction is reasonably justified. mineralreserves are sub-divided in order of increasing confidenceinto probable mineral reserves and proved mineral reserve
Mineral Resource a concentration [or occurrence] of material of economicinterest in or on the earth’s crust in such form, quality andquantity that there are reasonable and realistic prospectsfor eventual economic extraction. the location, quantity,grade, continuity and other geological characteristics of amineral resource are known, estimated from specificgeological evidence and knowledge, or interpreted from awell constrained and portrayed geological model. mineralresources are sub-divided in order of increasingconfidence, in respect of geoscientific evidence, intoinferred, indicated and measured categories
Mineral rights a right or any share therein acquired, in terms of theminerals act to any right to dig or mine
Mwashya (R4) altered stratified greyish siliceous dolomitic rock withoolitic horizons and a few bands of light yellow talcoseschist.
On-going capital capital estimates of a routine nature which are necessaryfor sustaining operations (also known as sustainingcapital)
Orogeny an orogeny is a period of mountain building leading to theintensely deformed belts which constitute mountainranges.
Probable Mineral Reserve the economically mineable material derived from ameasured and/or indicated mineral resource. It isestimated with a lower level of confidence than a provedmineral reserve. It is inclusive of diluting materials andallows for losses that may occur when the material ismined. Appropriate assessments, which may includefeasibility studies, have been carried out, and includingconsideration of, and modification by, realisticallyassumed mining, metallurgical, economic, marketing,legal, environmental, social and governmental factors.These assessments demonstrate at the time of reportingthat extraction is reasonably justified.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 204
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Processing Complex processing assets
Project capital capital expenditure which is associated with specificprojects of a non-routine nature
Proterozoic Era of geological time between 2,5x109 and 570x106 yearsago
Proved Mineral Reserve the economically mineable material derived from ameasured mineral resource. it is estimated with a highlevel of confidence. it is inclusive of diluting materialsand allows for losses that may occur when the material ismined. appropriate assessments, which may includefeasibility studies, have been carried out, includingconsideration of and modification by realistically assumedmining, metallurgical, economic, marketing, legal,environmental, social and governmental factors. theseassessments demonstrate at the time of reporting thatextraction is reasonably justified
Roches Argilleuses Talceuse(RAT
the RAT is considered the boundary between the R2 andR1 units and consists of an upper RAT Grises (R2) and alower RAT lilas (R1
Roches Siliceuses FeuilletéesFoliated (Laminated) andSilicified Rocks (RSF
this is a grey to light brown thinly bedded laminated andhighly silicified dolomites
Roches SilicieusesCellulaires or SiliceousRocks with Cavities (RSC
Vuggy and infilled massive to stromatolitic silicifieddolomites
SAMREC code South African code for reporting of Mineral Resourcesand Mineral Reserves
Saprolite a soft, earthy, typically clay-rich, thoroughly decomposedrock, formed in place by chemical weathering of igneous,sedimentary and metarmophic rocks
Schist/s a regionally metamorphasised rock characterised by aparallel arrangement of the bulk of the constituentminerals
Schistes De Base or BasalSchists (SDB
reddish-brown to grey silty and nodular dolomite tosiltstone
Sedimentary pertaining to rocks formed by the accumulation ofsediments, formed by the erosion of other rocks
Shaft an opening cut downwards from the surface fortransporting personnel, equipment, supplies, ore andwaste
Shales DolomitiquesSuperieurs or UpperDolomitic Shales (SDS
yellowish, cream to red bedded laminated dolomiticsiltstones and fine-grained sandstones.
Smelting a high temperature pyrometallurgical operation conductedin a furnace, in which the valuable metal is collected to amolten matte or doré phase and separated from the ganguecomponents that accumulate in a less dense molten slagphase.
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 205
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
SRK Group SRK Global limited
Stope underground void created by mining
Stope an excavation from which ore has been removed in aseries of steps. It is any excavation in a mine, other thandevelopment workings made for the purpose of extractingore
Stratigraphy study of stratified rocks in terms of time and space
Strike direction of line formed by the intersection of stratasurfaces with the horizontal plane, always perpendicularto the dip direction
Sub-vertical shaft an opening cut below the surface downwards from anestablished surface shaft
Sulphide sulphur bearing mineral
WOL/SX/EW RefineryProject
SX/EW Refinery
T17 Mine Musonoi – T17 Mine
Tailings finely ground waste rock from which valuable minerals ormetals have been extracted
The Code Mining Code (Law No. 007/2002)
Tilwezembe Mine Tilwezembe Mine
Volcanics one of three groups into which rocks have been divided.The vocanic assemblage includes all extrusive rocks andassociated intrusive ones
Volcanoclastics one of the three groups into which rocks have beendivided. The volcanic assemblage includes all extrusiverocks and associated intrusive ones
Abbreviations
3D Three dimensional
AAS Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy
ABA Acid Base Accounting
AEL African Explosive Limited
AGES Africa Geo-Environmental Services
AICo Acid Insoluble Co
AICu Acid Insoluble Cu
ANFO Ammonium nitrate and fuel oil
APELL Awareness and Preparedness for Emergencies at Local Level
ASCo Acid Soluble cobalt
ASCu acid Soluble Copper
BBR Beitbridge, Bulawayo Railway
BID Base Technical Information Date
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 206
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
CAT Caterpillar
CBO Community-based organisation
CCD Counter-Current Decantation
CCIC Caracle Creek International Consultancy
CCT Cyclone Classified Tailings
CDT Confederation Democratique du Traivailleurs
CAF cut and fill (longitudinal)
CGS Confederation Syndicale du Congo
CGTC Centrale Generale du Travail au Congo
CorProfit CorProfit Systems Africa
CSC Confederation Syndicale du Congo
CTP Conscience des Travailleurs & Paysans
CV coefficients of variation
DC Direct current
DCF Discounted cashflow
DCP DRC Copper and Cobalt Project
DCP SARL DRC Copper and Cobalt Project, “DCP”
DEM Developpements et Exploitations Minières
DIMA The Dikuluwe-Mashamba
DPEM Direction 206harge de la Protection de l’Environnement Minier
DPEM Department for the Protection of the Mining Environment
DRC Democratic Republic of Congo
DRMS Design Rock Mass Strength
DRO Diesel Range of Organics
E Young’s Modulus
EAP Environmental Adjustment Plan
EBIT Earnings Before Interest and Tax
EIS Environmental Impact Study
EIS Environmental Impact Statements
EMP Environmental Management Plan
EPCM Engineering Procurement Construction Management
ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan
Etang Nth Etang North
Etang Sth Etang South
EW Electro-winning
FEL Front End Loader
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 207
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
FNSR Rock fragment
FOB Free On Board
FOS factors of safety
FQM First Quantum Minerals
FRAP Framework Resettlement Action Plan
FS factors of safety
FSAIMM Fellow of SAIMM
FWTD Far West Tailings Dam
G&A General and Administrative
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GEC Global Enterprises Corporate Limited
GECL Gecamines and Global Enterprises Corporate Limited
GIIP Good international industry practice
GNI Gross National Income
GSI Geological Strength Index
H Horizontal
HG High Grade
HG SX high-grade copper solvent extraction
HR Human Resources
HSSE Health Safety Social and Environment
HV High voltage
HVDC High voltage Direct Curent
IAW Intake Airway
IFC International Finance Corporation
IMF International Monetary Fund
INPP Institut National de Préparation Professionnelle
INSS Institut National de Sécurité Sociale
IRR Internal Rate of Return
JKTech JKTech (Pty) Ltd
JVA Joint Venture Agreement
KCC Kamoto Copper Company
KCC SARL Kamoto Copper Company, “KCC”
KFL KFL Limited
KFL Kinross Forrest Limited
KITD Kamoto Interim Tailings Dam
KML Katanga Mining Limited
KMT Kinganyambo Musonoi Tailings
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 208
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
KOL Kamoto Operating Limited
KOV Kamoto Oliviera and Virgule
KZC Kolwezi concentrator
LCF Longitudinal Cut and fill
LEM limit equilibrium method
LG Low Grade
LG SX low-grade copper solvent extraction
LHD Load Haul and Dump
LHRS Long Hole Retreat Stoping
LME London Metal Exchange
LoM Life-of-Mine
LRMC Long Run Marginal Cost
MAR mean annual rainfall
Maxwell Maxwell GeoServices
MR Mining Regulations (Decree No. 038/2003 of 26 March 2003)
MRMR Mining Rock Mass Rating
MSI The UK Securities and Investment Institute
NGO Non-governmental organisations
NPA National Ports Authority
NPV Net Present Value
NPVS Mine Flow Optimiser
NRZ National Railway of Zimbabwe
OS open stoping
OTUC Organisation des Travailleurs Unis on Congo
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl
PE permis d’exploitation
PF probability of failure
PPCFpost pillar cut and fill (pillar may be eliminated under certainconditions)
PPE safety equipment
PPIA Primary Project Impacted Area
Pr. Eng Professional Engineer
PrSciNatProfessional Member of South African Council for NaturalScientists
QA/QC Quality Assurance and Quality Control
QC Quality control
RAP Room and Pillar
RAW Return Airway
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 209
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
RDS Remote Drilling Services
REGIDESO State parastatal
RO Repartiteur Ouest
RoM Run of Mine
ROP Roll-Over-Protection
RSZ Railway systems of Zambia
SACNASP South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions
SADC Southern African Development Community
SAG Semi-Autogenous Grinding
SAIMM The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
SAMREC South African Minerals and Resources Committee
SANS South African National Standards
SANAS South African National System
SCK Station de Conversion de Kolwezi
SD Standard Deviation
SDP Social Development Plan
SEIA Social and Economic Impact Assessment
SEP Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Set Point SGS Lakefield and Set Point Laboratories
SG specific gravity
SGS SGS Inspection Service Ltd
SGS Lakefield SGS Lakefield Research Africa (Pty) Ltd
SI International System of Units
SNCC Société Nationale des Chemins de Fer du Congo
SNEL Société National d’Electricité
SPIA Secondary Project Impacted Area
SRK SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Proprietary) Limited
SSL Soil Screening Levels
SX/EW Solvent Extraction/Electro-winning
TAP Trans-Africa Projects
TCLP Toxicity Characterization Leach Protocol
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
TEM Technical Economic Model
The SAMREC CodeSouth African Code for the Reporting of Mineral Resources andReserves
The SAMVAL Code South African Code for the Reporting of Mineral Asset Valuation
TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon
TT Thickened Tailings
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 210
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
UCS Uniaxial Compressive Strength
UG underground
UMHK Union Miniere du Haut Katanga
UN United Nations
UNTC Union Nationale des Travailleurs du Congo
USD United States Dollar
V Vertical
WACC weighted average cost of capital
WGS84 World Geodetic System of 1984
WHO World Health Organisation
XRF X-Ray Fluorescence
ZAR South African Rand
ZRL Zambian Railways
Units
% percentage
%ASCu percentage Acid Soluble copper
%CaO percentage calcium oxide
%Cu percentage copper
%CuO percentage copper as oxide
%TCo percentage total cobalt
%TCu percentage total copper
± plus or minus
bcm bank cubic meter
bn billion
c/lb cents per pond
dBA decibels
GPa Giga Pascal
ha hectare
ha/yr hectare per year
kg Kilogram
kg/t kilogram per tonne
km kilometre
km/h kilometres per hour
km/hr kilometres per hour
km2 square kilometres
kPa kilo Pascal
kt kilo tonne
ktpa kilo tonnes per annum
ktpm kilo tonnes per month
kV kilo Volt
kV AC kilo Volt Alternating Current
kWh Kilowatt-hour
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 211
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
kWh Kilowatt-hour
l litre
l/hr litres per hour
l/sec litres per second
lb pound
m metre
m/d metres per day
m/s metre per second
m² square metre
m2/day square metre per day
m³ cubic metres
m3/d cubic metres per day
m3/ha/d cubic metre per hectare per day
m3/hr cubic metres per hour
m³/s cubis metres per second
mamsl metres above mean sea level
mbgl metres below ground level
mg/l milligram per litre
mm milli metre
mm/year millimetre per year
Mm3 Million cubic metres
MPa Mega Pascal
Mt Million tonnes
Mt Million tonnes
Mtpa Million tonnes per annum
MVA Mega Volt Ampere
MW Mega Watt
MWh Mega Watt hour
º Degrees
pH Measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a solution
sec second
sq. km square kilometres
t tonne (1000 kg)
t/m3 tonnes per cubic metre
tpa tonnes per annum
tpd tonnes per day
tph tones per hour
tphr tones per hour
tpvm tonnes per vertical metre
USD/bcm United States Dollars per bank cubic metre
USD/h United States Dollars per hour
USD/t United States Dollars per tonne
USD/t/km United States Dollars per tonne per kilometre
USDm United States Dollar million
vmpa vertical meter per annum
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 212
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
Chemical Elements
(Co,Cu)2S4 carrolite
(Co,Cu,Mn,Fe)O(OH) heterogenite
(Cu,Co)2(CO3)(OH)2 kolwezite
(Fe,Co)O(OH) goethite
(Mg,Fe)5Al(Si3Al)O10(OH)8 chlorite
As arsenic
Ca,Mg(CO3)2 dolomite
CaCO3 limestone
CuO copper oxide
CaO lime
Co cobalt
Co(OH)2 cobalt hydroxide
Cr chrome
Cu copper
Cu2 (OH)PO4 liberthenite
Cu2CO3(OH)2 malachite
Cu2O cuprite
Cu2S chalcocite
Cu3(PO4)(OH)3 cornetite
Cu5(PO4)2(OH)4.H2O pseudomalachite
Cu5FeS4 bornite
CuS covellite
Fe iron
H2S hydrogen sulphide
H2SO4 sulphuric acid
K-Al-Mg-Fe silicate hydroxides clay
KMg3Si3AlO10(F,OH)2 mica
MgO magnesium oxide
Mn manganese
NaHS sodium hydrogen sulphide
Ni nickel
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
Pb lead
Se selenium
SiO2 Silica / quartz
SO2 sulphur dioxide
SRK ConsultingKML – Independent Technical Report (NI43-101) Page 213
KOL NI43-101 TSX SUBMISSION (JN389772) - 31 MARCH 2009 (v1) February 2009
SRK Consulting
REPORT DISTRIBUTION RECORD
REPORT
NO. :
kol ni43-101 draft (jn389772) - 2009 (v32)
COPY NO. :REV(0)
Name/Title Company Copy Date Authorized by
Roger Dixon
Ebrahim Takolia
Victor Simposya
Ally Burger
Henrietta Salter
Petrus Cilliers
APPROVAL
SIGNATURE :
COPYRIGHT
These technical reports (a) enjoy copyright protection and the copyright vests in SRK unless
otherwise agreed to in writing; (b) may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any
means whatsoever to any person without the written permission of the copyright holder.