amur minerals corporation kun-manie nickel and …amur minerals corporation kun-manie nickel and...

Amur Minerals Corporation Kun-Manie Nickel and Copper Sulphide Prefeasibility Study

February 2019 .1

1.0 Executive Summary

1.1 Overview Amur Minerals Corporation (“AMC”), a Far East Russia focused mineral resource exploration and development company holds 100% of the production rights to the Kun-Manie nickel, copper sulphide project located in Amur Oblast, of the Russian Federation. It is the largest undeveloped nickel sulphide resource situated immediately adjacent the three largest nickel consuming nations in the world (China, Korea and Japan), by-product metals cobalt, platinum and palladium will also be recovered. AMC has compiled a Prefeasibility Study (“PFS”) evaluating the technical and economic potential of the Kun-Manie project that has been reviewed and evaluated by an independent and experienced mining specialist Mr. Kevin Wright (“Wrightech Engineering"), (CEng, CEnv, FIMMM). Two operational scenarios are presented and include the construction and operation of all facilities required to mine and process six million tonnes of ore per annum at the Kun-Manie mine site, a 338 kilometre (“km”) long access road linking the mine site to the Baikal Amur (“BAM”) rail line allowing resupply to and concentrate delivery from the mine site, the supporting rail station, the shipment of saleable product to the Port of Vladivostok and incumbent offtake agreement considerations. The Base Case represents the quickest and lowest initial capital cost investment pathway to revenue generation. This option consists of the sale of concentrate (FOB Port of Vladivostok) to a purchaser based on typical nickel industry offtake Net Smelter Return (“NSR”) schedules. This is the Toll Smelt (“TS”) Option. The second scenario utilises the same operational considerations used in the TS Option. However, it includes the addition of an AMC constructed and operated Electric Furnace / Flash Smelter (“FFS”) located at AMC’s BAM rail station. This owner operated facility is planned to treat the sulphide concentrate generating a Low Grade Matte (“LGM”) which would be shipped to the Port of Vladivostok. This FFS Option includes consideration of typical intermediate nickel product offtake terms. The FFS Option has a similar lead time to revenue generation, although its initial capital expenditure is higher than that of the TS Option. The LGM product is anticipated to produce substantially increased revenues derived from credits related to the recovery of by-product metals not available to the TS Option. The PFS establishes that Kun-Manie is technically and economically viable for the two production scenarios. Being a sulphide deposit, the technical risk related to the generation of a final nickel product in both cases is substantially reduced from that of lateritic nickel deposits. These Options utilise industry proven mining approaches, proven sulphide flotation methods in concentrate generation and the subsequent treatment of the concentrate based on proven metal extractive practices. Using a long term nickel price of US$ 8.00 per pound nickel ($17,637 per tonne), the economic potential of Kun-Manie has been determined using cash flow models for both production scenarios. Payable nickel for the TS Option is projected to be 24,306 tonnes per annum, whilst payable nickel (plus credits for copper, cobalt, platinum and palladium) for the FFS Option will average 29,155 nickel equivalent tonnes. Summarised in Table 1.1, robust economic results based on Net Present Values (“NPV”10%), exceeding the Initial Capital investment, the Internal Rate of Return (“IRR”) ranging from 29% to 35% and the Payback Period (“PP”) occurring in the second year of operations are determined. Sensitivity analyses of ±25% for the nickel price, operating costs and capital expenditures indicate the project is most sensitive to the nickel price.


February 2019 Page 1.2

Table 1.1

Economic Results

Production Option

NPV 10% $US (m)

IRR (%)

PP (Yrs)

Initial Capital $US (m)

Sustaining Capital $US (m)

Free Cash Flow $US (m)

TS $614.5 29.3% 3* $570.4 $494.3 $2,041

FFS $987.4 34.7% 3* $695.0 $495.2 $2,980 PP rounded up.

Alternative Performance Measures and Reconciliation (“APMR”) indices are summarised in Table 1.2. Life of Mine (“LOM”) C1 Cash Costs per payable nickel unit is indicated to be in the order of $3.87 per pound ($8,532 per tonne) for the TS Option and $2.45 per pound ($5,401 per tonne) for the FFS Option including credits for recovered by-product metal (copper, cobalt, platinum and palladium). C1 Cash Costs for both operating scenarios fall within the second lowest quartile of industry reported C1 Cash Cost. On a Capital Intensity basis (Initial Capital Expenditure / Average Annual Payable Nickel Production unit), the TS $10.64 per pound ($23,450 per tonne) and FFS $10.82 per pound ($23,838 per tonne) Options lie at the mid-range when compared to 16 selected nickel sulphide projects. Both Options are lower than the median CI cost project West Musgrave ($25,897).

Table 1.2 APMR Analytical Results

AMPR Cost Basis TS Option FFS Option

C1 Cash Cost1 $8,536 / t $3.87 / lb

$5,390 /t $2.45 / lb

All In Sustaining Cost2 $9,890 /t $4.49 / lb

$6,521/t $2.96 / lb

Fully Loaded All In Cost3 $10,473 /t $4.75 / lb

$7,252 / t $3.29 / lb

Capital Intensity Cost 24,306 t 29,155 t

Initial Capital Cost $570.4 m $695.0 m

Capital Intensity Cost $23,450 / t $10.64 / lb

$23,838 t $10.82

1 C1 = All Mine Site including G&A plus concentrate freight + All Concentrate Treatment Costs + Rail Freight + Royalties – Credits 2 AISC = C1 + Sustaining Capital Expenditures

3 AIC (Fully Loaded) = AISC + Income Tax

The PFS is based on information available in June 2018. Substantial upside opportunities have been identified within this study require further investigation. The successful 2018 drill programme results were completed after the June 2018 cutoff date for inclusion in the PFS. Some of the major factors include an increase in the Mineral Resource Estimate (“MRE”), expansion of the mine life based on Mining Ore Reserve increases, optimisation of a production schedule to move higher revenue material forward allowing for enhanced early cash flow during the first 10 years of production when reduced Metals Royalty (“MR”) and Net Profits Tax (“NPT”) are available, metallurgical test work to reduce the magnesium oxide content for which penalty fees are applied during smelting, the potential to generate a separate copper concentrate stream providing copper stream revenues, negotiate better off take agreement terms, and define Russian government low cost loan considerations for the access road.



This PFS is based on multiple independently compiled documents by industry recognised and certified organisations. The Company has compiled the PFS based on this information and the document has been audited and modified as necessary by Mr. Kevin Wright (“Wrightech Engineering"), a Qualified Person (“QP”) as set out in National Instrument 43-101 (“NI43-101”) and is also defined to be a Competent Person (“CP”) as set out in Section 11 of the JORC Code 2012 Edition. In addition, Alternative Investment Market (“AIM”) standards are met by the Mr. Wright (CEng, CEnv, FIMMM) which include being professionally qualified, in good standing within Professional Associations, has a minimum of five to 10 years of experience, the work is fee based (no success fee) and works in the interest of the investors and not the company.

1.2 Project Setting Figure 1.1 presents a schematic layout of available infrastructure in relation to the project location within the Russian Federation.

Figure 1.1 Russian Federation Infrastructure



Figure 1.2 provides detailed logistical information (including existing mining operations) within the Amur Oblast where the project is located.

Figure 1.2 Amur Oblast Infrastructure and Project Site

1.3 Geology Within the 36 km2 Detailed Exploration and Mining Licence (“DEMP”), four drill identified orebodies hosting economic values of sulphide nickel and copper are present. The long axis of the licence is centered along the Kurumkon Trend which hosts the mineralisation. The host rocks are Early Archaean meta-gabbros, crystalline schists, gneisses and granite-gneisses. A series of outcropping mafic and ultramafic sills dipping from a few degrees up to 60o to the northeast direction contain the sulphidic nickel, copper, cobalt and Platinum Group Metals (“PGM”) mineralisation. Tabular in shape, the sills range from a metre to more than 100 m in thickness. The primary minerals of economic interest are nickel bearing pyrrhotite and pentlandite. For copper, the dominant mineral is chalcopyrite. These sulphide minerals occur in both disseminated and veinlet form predominantly within the ultramafic sills, rarely in the mafic sills. The mineralised ultramafic sills are websterite by composition being pyroxenitic with near equal parts of orthopyroxene and clinopyroxene, including locally variable minor amounts of olivine, plagioclase feldspar, and amphibole. The surface geological map and locations of the four orebodies is provided in Figure 1.3.



Figure 1.3 Geological Map of the Kun-Manie Licence

1.4 Mineral Resource Estimate At Kun-Manie, a JORC Code 2012 Edition March 2018 MRE contains 155.1 million ore tonnes having a nickel equivalent grade of 1.02% (1.58 million nickel equivalent tonnes). For the MRE based nickel only cutoff grade of 0.40% nickel, the global average grade by commodity for nickel is 0.75%, copper is 0.21%, cobalt is 0.015%, platinum is 0.16 g/t and palladium is 0.17 g/t. Approximately 75% (118.2 million ore tonnes) of the global resource is categorised as Measured or Indicated. Table 1.3 presents the global inventory from four drill defined deposits estimated by RPM Global (“RPM”).

Table 1.3 Global Mineral Resource Estimate (March 2018)

Resource Classification

Ore Mt

Ni %

Cu %

Co %

Pt g/t

Pd g/t

Eq Ni* (%)

Measured (M) 11.2 0.71 0.18 0.011 0.23 0.26 0.99

Indicated (I) 107.0 0.74 0.20 0.015 0.15 0.15 1.00

M+I 118.2 0.73 0.20 0.015 0.16 0.17 1.00

Inferred 37.0 0.79 0.22 0.017 0.17 0.18 1.08

TOTAL 155.1 0.75 0.21 0.015 0.16 0.17 1.02

* Eq Ni = (($Ni/t * Ni t) + ($Cu/t * Cu t) + ($Co/t * Co t) + ($Pt/g * Pt g) + ($Pd/g * Pd g)) / ($Ni/t) $Ni/t = $13,450, $Cu/t = $6,835, $Co/t = $83,250, $Pt/g = $30.54, $Pd/g = $31.19



1.5 Mine Production and Schedule Based on RPM generated underground production designs for the MKF deposit and open pit optimisation results for all deposits, a 15 year LOM production schedule was compiled by AMC. Operationally and based on the JORC (December 2012) March 2018 Mineral Resource Estimate (“MRE”), the Kun-Manie project will produce approximately 90 million tonnes during its LOM. Production is planned to be mined from four open pit and one underground operation. Subsequent to a three year construction period, annual production of 6.0 million tonnes per year is planned covering a 15 year production life. During the first 12 years of mine production, all but approximately 1.0 million tonnes is derived from JORC (December 2012) Measured and Indicated resources (used to report Proven and Probable Reserves). All post 12 year production is to be derived from open pit recoverable higher grade Inferred resource. The LOM and production by source is summarised in Tables 1.4 and 1.5.

Table 1.4 LOM Production Summary – Losses and Dilution Included

Cutoff Grade – 0.4% Nickel

Mining Method

Waste (Mt)

Ore (Mt)

Total (Mt)

Strip Ratio

Ni (%)

Cu (%)

Co (%)

Pt (g/t)

Pd (g/t)

UG 5.6 32.4 38.0 NA 0.71 0.19 0.012 0.13 0.15

OP 218.1 57.0 275.1 3.82 0.73 0.19 0.013 0.16 0.17

Total 223.7 89.4 313.1

0.72 0.19 0.013 0.16 0.17

Metal 647 kt 171 kt 11.7 kt 13.9 t 15.0 t

Table 1.5

Mine Summary Production By Deposit and Mining Method

Deposit Waste

t Ore

t Total

t Ni (%)

Cu (%)

Co (%)

Pt (g/t)

Pd (g/t)

Open Pit Production

MKF 46,404,325 13,409,098 59,813,423 0.75 0.21 0.016 0.13 0.15

VOD 3,685,710 5,000,268 8,685,978 0.76 0.19 0.015 0.16 0.16

IKEN 29,812,560 15,971,940 45,784,500 0.66 0.15 0.009 0.18 0.22

IKEN Inferred 83,904,352 12,002,107 95,906,459 0.84 0.24 0.017 0.20 0.21

KUB 54,238,632 10,641,503 64,880,135 0.69 0.19 0.014 0.16 0.15

Total 218,045,579 57,024,916 275,070,495 0.73 0.19 0.014 0.17 0.18

Underground Production (Long Hole Open Stoping)

MKF 5,610,000 32,400,000 38,010,000 0.71 0.19 0.012 0.13 0.14

Combined Production

Total 223,655,579 89,424,916 313,080,495 0.72 0.19 0.013 0.16 0.17

MKF: Maly Kurumkon / Flangovy VOD: Vodorazdelny

IKEN: Ikenskoe / Sobolevsky KUB: Kubuk



Table 1.6 presents an annual mine production schedule. Stockpiling is included.

Table 1.6 Annual Mine Production Schedule

Year Source Waste

(t) Ore (t)

Total (t)

Ni (%)

Cu (%)

Co (%)

Pt (g/t)

Pd (g/t)

-1

MKF 8,821,030 - 8,821,030 - - - - -

VOD Inferred 929,341 999,629 1,928,970 0.72 0.21 0.012 0.26 0.28

Total 9,750,371 999,629 10,750,000 0.72 0.21 0.012 0.26 0.28

1

VOD 2,756,369 4,000,639 6,757,008 0.76 0.19 0.015 0.14 0.13

MKF 13,681,525 1,061,467 14,742,992 0.80 0.22 0.017 0.16 0.18

Total 16,437,894 5,062,106 21,500,000 0.77 0.20 0.016 0.14 0.14

2 MKF 15,044,070 6,455,930 21,500,000 0.75 0.22 0.016 0.13 0.15

Total 15,044,070 6,455,930 21,500,000 0.75 0.22 0.016 0.13 0.15

3 MKF 8,857,700 5,891,701 14,749,401 0.74 0.20 0.015 0.12 0.14 IKEN 6,626,723 123,876 6,750,599 0.67 0.26 0.011 0.24 0.27

Total 15,484,423 6,015,577 21,500,000 0.74 0.20 0.015 0.13 0.14

4

IKEN 16,327,198 5,172,802 21,500,000 0.64 0.10 0.006 0.12 0.14

MKF UG 1,240,000 700,000 1,940,000 0.69 0.19 0.010 0.14 0.16

Total 17,567,198 5,872,802 23,440,000 0.65 0.11 0.007 0.12 0.14

5

IKEN 3,188,855 4,393,674 7,582,529 0.69 0.17 0.011 0.21 0.27

MKF UG 1,220,000 2,000,000 3,220,000 0.69 0.18 0.010 0.14 0.15

Total 4,408,855 6,393,674 10,802,529 0.69 0.17 0.011 0.19 0.23

6 MKF UG 1,080,000 6,000,000 7,080,000 0.68 0.18 0.010 0.13 0.14

Total 1,080,000 6,000,000 7,080,000 0.68 0.18 0.010 0.13 0.14

7

MKF UG 1,100,000 6,000,000 7,100,000 0.72 0.19 0.010 0.14 0.14

IKEN 13,698,094 - 13,698,094 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00

Total 14,798,094 6,000,000 20,798,094 0.72 0.19 0.010 0.14 0.14

8

MKF UG 880,000 6,000,000 6,880,000 0.80 0.21 0.020 0.14 0.14

IKEN 21,500,000 - 21,500,000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00

Total 22,380,000 6,000,000 28,380,000 0.80 0.21 0.020 0.14 0.14

9

IKEN 21,500,000 - 21,500,000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00

MKF UG 90,000 6,000,000 6,090,000 0.74 0.20 0.010 0.13 0.14 Total 21,590,000 6,000,000 27,590,000 0.74 0.20 0.010 0.13 0.14

10

KUB 21,500,000 - 21,500,000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00

MKF UG - 5,700,000 5,700,000 0.62 0.16 0.010 0.12 0.13

Total 21,500,000 5,700,000 27,200,000 0.62 0.16 0.010 0.12 0.13

11

IKEN 3,669,784 6,281,588 9,951,372 0.64 0.17 0.010 0.20 0.26

KUB 11,197,667 350,961 11,548,628 0.71 0.19 0.014 0.11 0.12

Total 14,867,451 6,632,549 21,500,000 0.64 0.17 0.010 0.20 0.25

12 KUB 16,115,600 5,384,400 21,500,000 0.69 0.19 0.014 0.14 0.15

Total 16,115,600 5,384,400 21,500,000 0.69 0.19 0.014 0.14 0.15

13

KUB 5,425,365 4,906,142 10,331,507 0.68 0.18 0.014 0.19 0.15

IKEN Inferred 9,297,226 1,871,267 11,168,493 0.92 0.27 0.019 0.17 0.17

Total 14,722,591 6,777,409 21,500,000 0.75 0.20 0.015 0.18 0.16

14 IKEN Inferred 15,449,075 5,364,617 20,813,692 0.75 0.24 0.016 0.15 0.16

Total 15,449,075 5,364,617 20,813,692 0.75 0.24 0.016 0.15 0.16

15 IKEN Inferred 2,459,957 4,766,223 7,226,180 0.92 0.24 0.017 0.28 0.28

Total 2,459,957 4,766,223 7,226,180 0.92 0.24 0.017 0.28 0.28

Total 223,655,579 89,424,916 313,080,495 0.72 0.19 0.013 0.19 0.22



Ore production highlighted in yellow is production from Inferred resource.

1.6 Processing Design and Production Ore will be processed using a conventional sulphide flotation plant as defined by Sibsvetmetniproect, SRK Consultants, SGS Minerals and Gipronickel is shown in Figure 1.4.

Figure 1.4 Process Flow Sheet

Annual mill feed schedule defined from the mine production schedule will be sourced from direct feed from the mine areas and stockpile inventories as summarised in Table 1.7.



Table 1.7 Mill Feed Tonnage and Head Grades

Stockpile Blending Included

Year Mill Feed Source Tonnes Ni (%) Cu (%) Co (%) Pt (g/t) Pd (g/t)

1

VOD 4,000,639 0.76 0.19 0.015 0.14 0.13

MKF 1,061,467 0.80 0.22 0.017 0.16 0.18

VOD Stockpile 937,894 0.72 0.21 0.012 0.26 0.28

Total 6,000,000 0.76 0.20 0.015 0.16 0.16

2 MKF 6,000,000 0.75 0.22 0.016 0.13 0.15

Total 6,000,000 0.75 0.22 0.016 0.13 0.15

3

MKF 5,891,701 0.74 0.20 0.015 0.12 0.14

MKF Stockpile 108,299 0.75 0.22 0.016 0.13 0.15

Total 6,000,000 0.74 0.20 0.015 0.13 0.14

4

MKF Stockpile 347,631 0.75 0.22 0.016 0.13 0.15

VOD Stockpile 61,735 0.72 0.21 0.015 0.26 0.28

IKEN 5,172,802 0.64 0.10 0.006 0.12 0.14

MKF UG 417,832 0.69 0.19 0.010 0.14 0.16

Total 6,000,000 0.65 0.11 0.007 0.12 0.14

5 MKF UG 2,000,000 0.69 0.18 0.010 0.14 0.15

IKEN 4,000,000 0.69 0.17 0.011 0.21 0.27

Total 6,000,000 0.69 0.17 0.011 0.19 0.23

6 MKF UG 6,000,000 0.68 0.18 0.010 0.13 0.14

Total 6,000,000 0.68 0.18 0.010 0.13 0.14

7 MKF UG 6,000,000 0.72 0.19 0.010 0.14 0.14

Total 6,000,000 0.72 0.19 0.010 0.14 0.14

8 MKF UG 6,000,000 0.80 0.21 0.020 0.14 0.14

Total 6,000,000 0.80 0.21 0.020 0.14 0.14

9 MKF UG 6,000,000 0.74 0.20 0.010 0.13 0.14

Total 6,000,000 0.74 0.20 0.010 0.13 0.14

10

MKF UG 5,606,326 0.62 0.16 0.010 0.12 0.13

IKEN Stockpile 393,674 0.67 0.26 0.010 0.24 0.27

Total 6,000,000 0.62 0.17 0.010 0.13 0.14

11 IKEN 6,000,000 0.64 0.17 0.010 0.20 0.26

Total 6,000,000 0.64 0.17 0.010 0.20 0.26

12

IKEN Stockpile 264,639 0.64 0.20 0.010 0.20 0.26

KUB Stockpile 227,085 0.67 0.26 0.011 0.24 0.27

KUB 5,508,276 0.69 0.19 0.014 0.14 0.15

Total 6,000,000 0.69 0.19 0.014 0.15 0.16

13

KUB 4,128,733 0.68 0.18 0.014 0.19 0.15

IKEN Inferred 1,871,267 0.92 0.27 0.019 0.17 0.17

Total 6,000,000 0.75 0.21 0.016 0.18 0.16

14

IKEN Inferred 5,364,617 0.75 0.24 0.016 0.15 0.16

MKF UG Stockpile 375,842 0.62 0.16 0.010 0.12 0.13

IKEN Stockpile 140,825 0.64 0.02 0.010 0.20 0.26

KUB Stockpile 118,716 0.68 0.18 0.014 0.19 0.15

Total 6,000,000 0.74 0.23 0.015 0.15 0.16

15

IKEN Inferred 4,766,223 0.92 0.24 0.017 0.28 0.28

KUB Stockpile 658,693 0.68 0.18 0.014 0.19 0.15

Total 5,424,916 0.89 0.23 0.017 0.27 0.26

Total LOM Total 89,424,916 0.73 0.19 0.013 0.16 0.17



A total of approximately 5.37 million dry tonnes of concentrate will be generated. Adjusting for a moisture content of 7.0%, a total of 5.74 million wet tonnes of concentrate will be shipped 338 km from the mine site to the BAM rail station. Table 1.8 provides the processing plant LOM production.

Table 1.8 15 Year LOM Process Plant Output

Parameters Ni Cu Co Pt Pd

Mill Feed Tonnes 647 kt 171 kt 11.7 kt 13.9 t 15.0 t

Grade 0.73% 0.19% 0.013% 0.16 g/t 0.17 g/t

Metal Recovery

% 80.2% 79.9% 61.2% 59.6% 82.2%

Content of Concentrate

Dry Tonnes 518.7 kt 137.0 kt 7.1 kt 8.3 t 12.4 t

Grade 9.7% 2.6% 0.13% 1.6 g/t 2.3 g/t

Concentrate (Range of % Distribution)

S Fe

SiO2 Al2O3 MgO

As Zn Pb

14.8 18.9 26.0 3.35 14.3

<0.01 0.009 0.001

17.4 22.0 32.4 4.86 16.6

<0.01 0.014 0.003

1.7 Concentrate Transport - Mine To BAM The mill generated concentrate will be transported 338 km from the mine site to an AMC constructed BAM rail station (Figure 1.5). Containing 7.0% moisture, the LOM wet concentrate tonnage will be in the order of 5.74 million tonnes averaging 382.7k tonnes per annum. The return trip by the concentrate haul fleet will be used to resupply the mining operation. Figure 1.5 presents a schematic of the proposed Access Road.



Figure 1.5 Mine Site to BAM Access Road

1.8 BAM Rail Station The BAM station will serve a dual purpose. It will off load all materials and supplies required to keep the mine site fully stocked and operational. The concentrate haulage fleet will be used to backhaul the supplies to site. Secondly, the saleable product will be loaded onto rail cars from shipment by Russian Rail to the Port of Vladivostok. In the TS scenario, the wet concentrate will be loaded for shipment to a purchaser(s). For the FFS Option, the electric furnace / flash smelter will be constructed at the station and the concentrate will be treated to generate the LGM. Treatment using the FFS Option will substantially reduce the total saleable product tonnage whilst increasing the contained metal per tonne. This intermediate product will be reduced to approximately 2.76 million tonnes LOM (averaging approximately 184k tonnes per year containing an average grade of 18.8% nickel, 5.0% copper, 0.26% cobalt, 3 g/t platinum and 4 g/t palladium).

1.9 Offtake Schedules and Payable Metal Balances The payable metal content related to the Options will vary. The typical nickel industry offtake agreement terms for the two products differ with regard to treatment cost, penalties and the determination of the amount of payable metal. The offtake terms specific to each of the two Options are provided in Table 1.9.



Table 1.9 Offtake Schedules

Parameters

Operating Option

Base Case Contract Smelter

(TS)

AMC Owned Furnace Electric Furnace / Flash Smelter

(FFS)

Rail Transport - FOB Vladivostok Included Included

Processing Fee (Per Tonne Concentrate) No Charge Included

Operating Cost at FFS

Penalty Fees MgO

($8 per % in excess of 4%) None

Metal Recovery from Concentrate 99% All Metals 99.8% All Metals

% Payable of Recovered Metal Nickel Copper Cobalt Platinum Palladium

Purchaser Payable Average 71% Not Payable Not Payable Not Payable Not Payable

Purchaser Payable 75%

75% (Less 0.5% of Cu Grade) 75%

75% (LGM > 0.1 oz/t) 75% (LGM > 0.1 oz/t)

Refining Fees – Payable Metal Only Nickel Copper Cobalt Platinum Palladium

No Fees

Purchaser Deductions No Fee

$0.25 per payable pound $4.00 per payable pound $25.00 per payable ounce $25.00 per payable ounce

Based on the differing terms of the offtake agreements, the payable metal balance derived from the mine generated concentrate is reported in Table 1.10.

Table 1.10 Payable Metal Balance

Commodity

Metal Balance by Operating Configuration


Metal Tonnes

AMC Owned Furnace Furnace / Flash Smelter

Metal Tonnes

Metal Delivered to Purchaser Nickel Copper Cobalt Platinum Palladium

513,506 167,132

7,066 8.3 (264,535 oz)

12.4 (393,252 oz)

518,372 136,939

7,133 8.3 (266,672 oz)

12.3 (396,430 oz)

Payable Metal From Purchaser Nickel Copper Cobalt Platinum Palladium

Smelter Derived 364,590

0 0 0 0

LGM Smelter and Refiner 388,779 98,082 5,349

0.481 t (15,465 oz) 0.396 t (12,746 oz)



1.10 Operating Costs RPM audited operating costs to produce a tonne of payable nickel are comprised of three components. These are costs at the mine (including concentrate transport to the BAM), the treatment costs based on offtake considerations and the combined payments for Metals Royalties and Net Profits Taxes. The LOM costs are presented in Table 1.11, Table 1.12 and Table 1.13.

Table 1.11 Mine Site and Concentrate Haulage Operating Costs

Cost Center $US Per Tonne

Open Pit Ore $1.64

Open Pit Waste $1.29

Underground Ore (Development Costs are Capitalised)

$7.44

Ore Transport Mine to Mill $1.65

Processing $10.15

Tailings Handling $0.16

General and Administrative* $1.98

Concentrate Transport (Mine To BAM)

$1.66

Average Cost / Ore Tonne (Including Open Pit Waste)

$23.04

LOM Operating Cost Total $2,060 million

Table 1.12

Treatment and Handling Cost Per Tonne of Concentrate

Cost Centre

Operating Option


(TS)


(FFS)

Tonnes of Product For Rail Shipment 5.74 (Wet) M t 2.76 (Dry) M t

Rail Transport - FOB Vladivostok 90.00 (Wet Tonne) / t 90.00 (Dry Tonne)/ t

Processing Fee 0.00 /t 90.00 /t

Penalty Fees 49.60 / t 0.00 /t

Refining, Marketing and Sales Fees 0.00 / t 18.99 / t

LOM Concentrate Treatment Operating Cost $782.8 m $833.2 m

The Metals Royalties and Net Profits Tax are derived from cash flow models and include consideration of the Russian Far East reduced investment incentive rates.



Table 1.13 LOM Metals Royalty and Net Profits Tax

$US

Operating Option

Cost Centre Base Case

Contract Smelter (TS)


(FFS)

Metals Royalty Tax Net Profits Tax

$268.8 m $212.3 m

$328.7 m $319.6m

LOM Total $481.1 m $648.3 m

1.11 Capital Costs The projected distribution of the Initial and Sustaining Capital expenditures for the TS and FFS Options are the same with the exception of the electric furnace / flash smelter required for the FFS Option. Table 1.14 summarises the LOM capital cost expenditures.

Table 1.14 Distribution of Project LOM Initial and Sustaining Capital Costs

Capital Cost Expenditures

$US (million) Base Case (TS Option) FFS Option

LOM Initial Sustaining LOM Initial Sustaining Off Mine Site Capital Expenditures

Studies 5.0 5.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 0.0

BAM Rail Station 22.0 22.0 0.0 22.0 22.0 0.0

BAM Situated Furnace / Flash Smelter Not Required 119.5 115.0 4.5*

Access Road - 338 km* 139.6 135.6 4.0 139.6 135.6 4.0

Total Off Site 166.6 162.6 4.0 286.1 277.6 8.5

Mine Site Fixed Capital Expenditures

Power Generation 118.8 117.8 1.0 118.8 117.8 1.0

Ancillary Facilities 9.5 9.5 0.0 9.5 9.5 0.0

Processing Plant 142.5 133.3 9.2 142.5 133.3 9.2

Tailings Storage Facility 35.0 12.7 22.3 35.0 12.7 22.3

EPCM (Road, Power, Facilities) 16.4 14.8 1.6 22.4 20.5 1.8

Site Roads 29.6 15.4 14.2 29.6 15.4 14.2

Underground Development 322.8 0.0 322.8 322.8 0.0 322.8

Total Mine Site Fixed 674.6 303.5 371.1 680.6 309.2 371.4

Mine Site Mobile Equipment Capital Expenditures

Mining Equipment 188.0 57.4 130.5 188.0 57.4 130.5

Concentrate Transport (Mine to BAM) 39.4 7.6 31.7 39.4 7.6 31.7 Total Mobile Equipment 227.3 65.1 162.3 227.3 65.1 162.3

Miscellaneous Project Capital Expenditures

Working Capital Allowance 0.0 39.3 -39.3 0.0 43.1 -43.1

Salvage Value Recapture -5.8 0.0 -5.8 -5.8 0.0 -5.8

Closure Costs 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0

Total Miscellaneous -3.8 39.3 -43.1 -3.8 43.1 -46.9

LOM Total Capital Expenditures 1064.7 570.4 494.3 1190.2 695.0 495.2

* Assumes Flash Smelter configuration requiring lower sustaining capital costs.



1.12 Commodity Pricing Determination of the revenue is based on a long term $8.00 per pound nickel ($17,637 per tonne) price with all other metals based on near current (early February 2019) market prices. AMC and its financial advisors consider that use of this nickel price is reasonable as long term prices reported by Wood MacKenzie and CRU (Q4 2018) are projected to be a minimum of $9.00 per nickel pound ($19,841 per tonne) due to the anticipated growth in nickel demand related to the Electric Vehicle (“EV”) market. The prices utilised in the PFS evaluation are presented in Table 1.15.

Table 1.15

Commodity Pricing

Commodity LME Commodity Price

February 2019 AMC Utilised

Nickel $5.83 / lb

$12,853 / t $8.00 / lb

$17,637 / t

Copper $2.81 / lb $6,195 / t

$3.00 / lb $6,614 / t

Cobalt $14.97 / lb $33,003 / t

$15.00 / lb $33,069 / t

Platinum $790.50 / oz

$25,42 / g $800.00 / oz

$25.72 / g

Palladium $1,381 / oz $44.40 / g

$1,400.00 / oz $45.01 / g

1.13 Economic Analysis Using a three year construction period and a mine life of 15 years production at a nominal capacity of 6.0 million mill feed tonnes per year, cash flow models to determine the NPV, IRR and PP have been compiled. C1 Cash Cost, All-In Sustaining Cost (“AISC”), Fully-Loaded All-In Cost (“AIC”) and Capital Intensity (“CI”) summaries have been reported and are referred to as Alternative Performance Measures and Reconciliations (“APMR”). The C1, AISC, AIC and CI values are Non-GAAP approved reporting terms but provide key information utilised by the mining industry enabling comparison of the Kun-Manie project with other nickel producing companies. Revenue from by-product sales varies significantly between the TS and FFS Options and is important in comparison of the two production options. No revenue will be recovered from the by-products metals contained in the TS Option smelted concentrate. Revenues will be derived from copper, cobalt, platinum and palladium contained in the FFS Option produced LGM. Payable Metal Balance (Table 1.10) and the Commodity Pricing (Table 1.15) based revenue credits of $856 million will be generated. At $8.00 per pound nickel price ($17,637 per tonne), the revenue credit equals approximately 48,549 tonnes of additional nickel. This increases the total LOM payable nickel from 388,779 tonnes of nickel to 437,327 total payable nickel equivalent tonnes significantly increasing the profit per tonne of mill feed. Based on GAAP preferred reporting parameters, Kun-Manie cash flow models indicate the NPV10% ranges from $614.5 million (TS Option) to $987.4 milllion (FFS Option). The IRR ranges from 29.3% (TS Option) to 34.7% (FFS Option) with both options reaching Payback during during year 2. Table 1.16 provides a summary of the results.



Table 1.16

Economic Results

Production Option

NPV 10% $US (m)

IRR (%)

PP (Yrs)

Initial Capital $US (m)

Sustaining Capital $US (m)

Free Cash Flow $US (m)

TS $614.5 29.3% 3* $570.4 $494.3 $2,041

FFS $987.4 34.7% 3* $695.0 $495.2 $2,980 PP rounded up to a full year.

Sensitivity analyses of ±25% have been applied to nickel price only, operating costs and both initial and sustain capital (Table 1.17). The sensitivity analyses allows determination of the breakeven nickel price per pound (NPV

10% = 0). The breakeven prices shown in red in the Sensitivity Analysis Table are presently higher than a February 2019 near market price of nickel ($5.50 per pound utilised). Results indicate that FFS Option provides the more robust project configuration with the NPV10% ranging from a low of $338 million (nickel price of $6.00 per pound) to $1,636 million (nickel price of $10.00 per pound). Operating and capital cost variations display a reduced impact on the NPV range for the same ±25% analysis.

Table 1.17 Sensitivity Analysis

TS Option – Concentrate Sale Only – Nickel Only Payable

Sensitivity NPV10%

Sensitivity

(%) Nickel Price

Breakeven Price

IRR PP

(%) (Yr)

Nickel Price

$614.50 Base Case $8.00 / lb $6.16 29.28% 3

$1,308.74 25% $10.00 / lb Not Applicable 47.40% 2

($49.13) -25% $6.00 / lb Not Applicable 8.60% 12

Operating Cost

$337.40 25% $8.00 / lb $6.90 21.08% 4

$891.28 -25% $8.00 / lb $5.22 36.95% 3

Capital Cost $470.43 25% $8.00 / lb $6.65 22.65% 3

$758.57 -25% $8.00 / lb $5.68 38.83% 3

FFS Option – LGM Sale – By-Product Credits at Fixed – Nickel Only Payable

Nickel Price

$987.32 Base Case $8.00 / lb $4.87 34.74% 3

$1,636.22 25% $10.00 / lb Not Applicable 48.25% 2

$338.42 -25% $6.00 / lb Not Applicable 19.34% 5

Operating Cost

$727.47 25% $8.00 / lb $5.76 28.84% 3

$1,247.18 -25% $8.00 / lb $4.16 40.38% 2

Capital Cost $819.83 25% $8.00 / lb $5.48 27.46% 3

$1,155.79 -25% $8.00 / lb $4.44 45.39% 2

The last three years of production has been derived from a high grade block of Inferred resource located at the IKEN deposit. During 2018, the area was infill drilled to a 100 m by 100 m spacing which is RPM’s consideration to define Indicated resource. This three year production source contains $150.3 million and $195.5 million of the reported NPV10% for the TS and FFS Options, respectively. The limits of this mineral block have also been substantially expanded and are not included in the PFS.



Figures 1.6 and 1.7 present the NPV10% results for the TS and FFS options.

Figure 1.6

-25.0% -12.5% $8.00 / lb 12.5% 25.0%

Nickel Price -$49.1 $310.2 $614.5 $918.8 $1,308.7

Operating Cost $891.3 $752.9 $614.5 $476.1 $337.4

Capital Cost $758.6 $686.5 $614.5 $542.5 $470.4

-$200

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

NP

V -

US$

(00

0)

% Change

TS NPV 10% Sensitivity



Figure 1.7

Kun-Manie is projected to produce a total Free Cash Flow (“FCF”) after tax of $2.041 billion over an 18 year period for the TS Option and $2.981 billion for the FFS Option. Figures 1.8 and 1.9 present the FCF charts for the two options.

-25.0% -12.5% $8.00 / lb 12.5% 25.0%

Nickel Price $338.4 $662.9 $987.3 $1,311.8 $1,636.2

Operating Cost $1,247.2 $1,117.3 $987.3 $857.4 $727.5

Capital Cost $1,155.8 $1,071.4 $987.3 $903.5 $819.8

-$200

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

$1,600

$1,800

NP

V -

US$

(000

)

% Change

FFS NPV10% Sensitivity



The APMR related C1, AISC, AIC and CI values provide key information utilised by the mining industry enabling comparison of the Kun-Manie project with other nickel producing companies. The costs are based on the average

$(1,000.00)

$(500.00)

$-

$500.00

$1,000.00

$1,500.00

$2,000.00

$2,500.00

-3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

US$

(m

)

Year

Figure 1.8 TS Free Cash Flow

$(1,000.00)

$(500.00)

$-

$500.00

$1,000.00

$1,500.00

$2,000.00

$2,500.00

$3,000.00

$3,500.00

-3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

US$

(m

)

Year

Figure 1.9 FFS Free Cash Flow



annual production of payable nickel plus credits (a 15 year LOM has been used). Table 1.18 presents a summary of the APMR results.

Table 1.18 APMR Summary Costs

Cost Centre TS FFS

Payable Nickel Tonnes 364,590 t 388,779 t

Payable Nickel Equivalent* From Credits 0 t 48,548 t*

Total LOM Payable Nickel for APMR Derivation 364,590 t 437,327 t

Average Annual Payable Nickel 24,306 t 29,155 t

C1 Cash Costs 1

All Mine Site Incurred and Concentrate Freight Cost (LOM) (Mine Site to BAM)

$2,060 m $2,060 m

All In Concentrate Treatment Costs (LOM) (Included Freight, Customs, Marketing and Sales)

$783 m $833 m

Royalties (LOM) $269 m $320 m

By-Product Credit (LOM) (Cu, Co, Pt and Pd)

$- $856 m

Adjusted LOM Cost (Costs Less Credit)

$3,112 m $2,357 m

C1 Cash Cost (Per Average Annual Payable Nickel Unit)

$8,536 / t $3.87 / lb

$5,390 /t $2.45 / lb

AISC 2

Sustaining Capital (LOM) $494 m $495 m

Adjusted LOM Cost (C1 Cash Cost + AISC)

$3,606 m $2,852 m

AISC Cash Cost (Per Average Annual Payable Nickel Unit)

$9,890 /t $4.49 / lb

$6,521/t $2.96 / lb

AIC (Fully Loaded) 3

Income Taxes (LOM) $212 m $320 m

Fully Loaded AIC (AISC Cash Cost + Above)

$3,818 m $3,172 m

AIC Cash Cost (Fully Loaded) (Per Average Annual Payable Nickel Unit)

$10,473 /t $4.75 / lb

$7,252 / t $3.29 / lb

Capital Intensity Cost (Average Annual Payable Nickel Production)

Average Annual Payable Nickel Including Credits 24,306 t 29,155 t

Initial Capital Cost $570 m $695 m

Capital Intensity Cost $23,450 $23,838 *Nickel Equivalent = ((Cu Revenue + Co Revenue + Pt Revenue + Pd Revenue) / ($Ni /t))

1 C1 = All Mine Site including G&A plus concentrate freight + All Concentrate Treatment Costs + Rail Freight + Royalties – Credits 2 AISC = C1 + Sustaining Capital Expenditures

3 AIC (Fully Loaded) = AISC + Income Tax



Figure 1.10 presents a comparison of the range of the projected C1 Cash Cost for Kun-Manie project. The Wood MacKenzie, HSBC cost curve depicts the TS Option C1 cost per payable nickel pound projected at $3.87 per payable pound of nickel with FFS Option being $2.45 per payable nickel pound. Both options are within the limits of the second lowest quartile cost per payable nickel producers.

Figure 1.10

Q4 2017 C1 Cost Curve Comparison

Figure 1.11 Annual C1 Cash Cost

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

TS Option $3.10 $3.14 $3.28 $3.88 $3.64 $4.17 $4.37 $4.06 $4.40 $5.10 $4.33 $4.38 $3.97 $3.56 $2.83

FFS Option $1.75 $1.74 $1.95 $2.76 $2.22 $2.73 $2.96 $2.64 $3.01 $3.46 $2.72 $2.80 $2.48 $2.10 $1.62

$-

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

US$

Per

Po

un

d

Year

Annual C1 Cash Cost



On the Capital Intensity basis (Initial Capital / Average Annual Payable Nickel Production), the TS ($23,450) and FFS ($23,838) Options, place Kun-Manie lies at the mid-range CI in comparison to 13 selected projects. Figure 1.12 presents a comparison of the CI with the selected projects.

Figure 1.12 Capital Intensity Comparison Chart

1.14 Cost Basis All operating costs are based on Russian quoted information and have been determined using first principles engineering practices. Russian derived costs were converted into USD using a foreign exchange rate of 60 RUR to the dollar. Originally derived in 1H 2017, the operating costs were reviewed externally by RPM Global (“RPM”) and most recently (Q4 2018 and Q1 2019) by Mr. Kevin Wright (the auditor and QP examiner of this document). Opinions by RPM (mid-year 2017) and Mr. Kevin Wright (most recently) were supportive in the use of the 1H 2017 costs. Inflation in Russia during 2017 and 2018 was 2.52% and 4.27%, respectively. The $23.04 total cost per tonne of ore based on inflation would be $24.63. Devaluation of the RUR against the US Dollar over the same period has

$1,325

$2,368

$6,020

$16,296

$16,493

$16,542

$17,173

$23,838

$23,450

$25,897

$29,049

$36,203

$44,811

$52,562

$136,165

$- $40,000 $80,000 $120,000 $160,000

Lake Johnston

Trident - Enterprise

North Kambalda

Cosmos

Tamarack

Ntaka Hill

Nickel Shaw

Kun-Manie (FFS Option)

Kun-Manie (TS Option)

West Musgrave

Dumont

Decar

Eagle's Nest

Makwa Mayville

Ferguson Lake

$US Per Annual Tonne of Produced Nickel

Capital Intensity (US$/t Ni) Select Mines



counterbalanced the impact of inflation. Presently at 65 RUR to the Dollar, the RUR has declined by 8.3%. On a combined inflation (increase to costs) and currency devaluation (decrease to costs) basis, the total operating cost per tonne is projected to be $22.58. It has been deemed use of the 1H 2017 operating costs is therefore considered to be reasonable for this PFS. A total of 51% of the Initial and Sustaining Capital costs are based on Russian costs. An additional 21% of the capital expenditures are allocated for mobile equipment and is based on Caterpillar and Sandvik mining equipment costs. The mobile equipment fleet cost can be reduced substantially through the purchase of lower cost Russian manufactured equivalent equipment. Approximately 72% of the total capital expenditure is impacted based on the inflation and devaluation of the RUR as noted above. A total of 25% of the capital expenditure is based on USD quoted equipment at the plant and power generation facility. Future updates to the study should include an update to the operating and US based capital cost components in future work.

1.15 Upside Potential The PFS is based on information available in June 2018. Substantial upside opportunities that have been identified within this study require further investigation. The successful 2018 drill programme results were completed after the June 2018 cutoff date for inclusion in the PFS. Some of the major factors include an increase in the Mineral Resource Estimate (“MRE”), expansion of the mine life based on Mining Ore Reserve increases, optimisation of a production schedule to move higher revenue material forward allowing for enhanced early cash flow during the first 10 years of production when reduced Metals Royalty (“MR”) and Net Profits Tax (“NPT”) are available, metallurgical test work to reduce the magnesium oxide content for which penalty fees are applied during smelting, the potential to generate a separate copper concentrate stream providing copper stream revenues, negotiate better off take agreement terms, and define Russian government low cost loan considerations for the access road.

1.16 Key Sources

REFERENCES

Amurgeology, 2005 and 2006, Report on Geo-environmental Survey of Kun Manie Site, B. H. Golik, A. B. Pininch,

(Russian Language)

ARGO, 2006, Hydrogeological, Geocryological and Engineering Geology at Kun Manie Site, L. H. Trutnev, A. I.

Andreev, (Russian Language)

IWEP, 2007, Flora and Fauna of the Kun Manie Site, B. A. Boranov, (Russian Language)

IWEP, 2011, Summary report on hydrochemical monitoring of water objects within CJSC Kun-Manie area of

responsibility for 2008 and 2011 years, S. E. Sirotskii

Hydrology Report of Surface Waters for Concentration Plant and Mining Water Supply, S. Perepechki - Licenced

Hydrologist - (Report Google Translated)

Sibsvetmetniiproject, 2007, TEO General Engineering and Evironmental Section Translation, V.G. Kozlov - Ch. Eng,

E.D. Karalyusov - metallurgy, Yu.V. Belyaev - design, O.Yu. Yakushina - construction

SRK Consulting, UK, 02-2007, Project U2897, Kun Manie Nickel Project: February 2007 Independent Resource

Estimate; Mike Armitage, Nick Fox

SRK Consulting, UK, 02-2013, Project UK5398; Independent Mineral Resource Estimate on the Kubuk Deposit, Kun

Manie Project, Amur, Russia; Mike Armitage, Nick Fox







RPM Global, Asia, 11-2016, Project ADV-MO-00031 Kun Manie Nickel-Copper Project Kubuk, Vodorazdelny and

Ikenskoe Deposits, Amur Oblast, Far Eastern Russia Mineral Resource Estimate, David Allmark

RPM Global, Asia, 11-2017, Project ADV-MO-00033, Kun Manie Nickel-Copper Project, Maly Kurumkon-Flangovy

Deposit, Amur Oblast, Far Eastern Russia, Mineral Resource Estimate; David Allmark

RPM Global, Asia, 06-2018, Project ADV-MO-00039, Kun Manie Nickel-Copper Project, Kubuk and Ikenskoe

Deposits, Amur Oblast, Far Eastern Russia, Mineral Resource Estimate; David Allmark

RPM Global, Asia, 05-2014, Conceptual Mine Plan Kun Manie: Pit Development Issues

RPM Globa, Asia, 10-2016, Project ADV-MO-00030 Conceptual Open Pit and Underground Trade-off Study, Phillipe

Baudry, Igor Bojanic Joe McDiarmid, Micheal Yelf, Ian Booth

RPM Global, Asia, 06-2017, Project ADV-MO-00035 Amur Projects Operating Cost Review, Phillipe Baudry, Igor

Bojanic Joe McDiarmid, Micheal Yelf, Ian Booth

RPM Global, Asia, 06-2017, Project ADV-MO-00035 MKF Study Update, Phillipe Baudry, Igor Bojanic Joe

McDiarmid, Micheal Yelf, Ian Booth

RPM Global, Asia, 10-2017, Project ADV-MO-00035 MKF Study Update, Phillipe Baudry, Igor Bojanic Joe

McDiarmid, Micheal Yelf, Ian Booth

SRK Consulting, Russia, 04-2008, Kun Manie Prefeasibility Study, David Pearce, Nick Fox, Alice Jack, Sean Cremin,

Kris Cjaweski, E. Vershinina

Sibsvetmetniiproject, 3-2007; Development of dressing technology for disseminated copper-nickel ores of various

technological grades from Kun Manie Deposit; A. A. Marchenko; 2007

SGS Chita, 04-2012, Project PBM11-0063; Metallurgical Ore Characteristics of the Maly Kurumkan, Cap, Triangle

and Sobolevskoe Deposits; Glotsova, E. V. PhD, Drobyshev, V. F.

SGS Chita, 02-2012, Project PBM11-0063; Metallurgical Ore Characteristics of the Maly Kurumkan Deposit;

Glotsova, E. V. PhD, Drobyshev, V. F.

SGS Chita, 12-2015, Project SA-1099-MIN-HT-15, Metallurgical Testwork on Ore Samples of the Kubuk Area of the

Kun Manie Deposit; Glotova, E. V. PhD, Livinteva, O. V. PhD

SGS Chita, 12-2015, Project SA-1099-MIN-HT-15, Metallurgical Testwork on Ore Samples of the Kubuk Area of the

Kun Manie Deposit; Glotova, E. V. PhD, Livinteva, O. V. PhD - APPENDIX

SGS Chita, 03-2016, Project SA-1099-MIN-HT-15, Metallurgical Testwork on the Kubuk and Maly Kurumkon

Flangovy Area Ore Samples of the Kun Manie Deposit. Glotva, E. V. PhD, Baranov, V.V., Litintseva

SGS Chita, 03-2016, Project SA-1099-MIN-HT-15, Metallurgical Testwork on the Kubuk and Maly Kurumkon

Flangovy Area Ore Samples of the Kun Manie Deposit. Glotva, E. V. PhD, Baranov, V.V., Litintseva - APPENDIX

SGS Chita, 01-2016 Project 13533-002, QEMData MI 5034-Jan 16; Flangovy and Kubuk Deposits

SGS Canada, Burnaby, BC, 03-2016, Project 13533-002, An Investigation by High Definition Mineralogy into Ten

Variability Samples from Flangovy and Kubuk Deposits

SGS Canada, Lakefield Ontario, 03-2016 Project 13533-002, Certificate of Analysis (Slag Forming Minerals)

SGS Canada, Lakefield Ontario, 03-216 Project 13533-002, XRD Analysis

SGS Vostok Chita, 01-2016, Project 13533-002 QEMSCAN Data Flangovy and Kubuk Deposits

Gipronickel Institute, 08-2016, Project 126548; The Study of Material Composition of Kun Manie Deposit Copper-

Nickel Ore, Maly Kurumkan Area; V. Maksimov.



Knight Piésold Ltd., Vancouver, BC, Canada, Tailings mobilization estimates for dam breach studies, Daniel

Fontaine, P.Eng, Violeta Martin, Ph.D., P.Eng,

Russian Academy of Sciences, 2012, Moscow, Russia, General Seismic Zoning of the Territory

of Russian Federation: GSZ, V. I. Ulomov

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5, Seismicity Map of Eastern Russia, 1960–2010, K. G. Mackey,

K. Fujita, etal 15 others

Wrightech Engineering, 2018, Amur Minerals Tailings Storage Facility Preliminary, Conceptual design Report. K. J.

Wright

Knight Piésold Ltd., Perth, AU, 2007, Selsing Tailings Storage Facility - Stage 1, Issued for Information Purposes only

amur minerals corporation kun-manie nickel and …amur minerals corporation kun-manie nickel and...

Documents