NI 43-101

Trends in the Mining Industry Garth D. Kirkham, P.Geo., P.Geoph. Kirkham Geosystems Ltd.

Mintec User Conference 2007 Tucson, AZ April 17, 2007

What is NI 43-101? Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects .

NI 43-101 Fundamentals • • • • NI 43-101 Standards for Disclosure Form 43-101 F1 Detailed Contents of the Technical Report Companion Policy 43-101CP TSX and TSX-V Exchange – – – – – Appendix A Appendix B Policy 3.ca .bc.3 Appendix 3E Appendix 3F Summary of Changes (December 2005) Disclosure Policy Timely Disclosure News Release Guidelines Mining Standards Guidelines • CIM Best Practices for: – – – Mineral Resource and Reserve Estimation Mineral Exploration Reporting of Diamond Exploration Results • GSC Paper 88-21 for Coal www.bcsc.

3.NI 43-101 Fundamentals 1. 5. 2. 4. Qualified Person Standards and Definitions Allow disclosure that is not misleading Prohibited Disclosure Technical Report .

• Experience relevant to the subject matter of the mineral project and the technical report. . • Is a member in good standing of a recognized professional association. mine development or project assessment or combination thereof.Qualified Person • Scientific and technical disclosure must be prepared by a QP. • At least 5 years experience in mineral exploration.

Competing Property. Revenue . Determined by the QP.>50% over 3 years. Director or Officer. • No bright line test.Independent QP Tests • • • • Ownership. .

Naming QP – Where is it Required? • All written technical disclosure on material properties must identify QP and relationship to company. • Written disclosure includes: – – – – – News release Annual information form MD&A Website Investor relations material . • Applies to producing issuers as well as juniors.

Technical Reports • File within 45 days of disclosure • Item 5 .Reliance on Other Experts • Item 8 .History .

Reliance on Other Experts • Reliance on an expert who is not a QP • Should not include scientific or technical information normally prepared by a QP • No disclaimers • May rely on historical data and the work of other QP’s if reasonable to do so • Conduct appropriate due diligence • May not disclaim responsibility .Item 5 .

Relying on Previous Resource Estimates • Mineral resources/reserves by another QP from a previously filed technical report-one of the current QP’s must take responsibility • Make whatever investigation necessary to reasonably rely on that data • Alternatives: – Include new certificate of QP from previous technical report – Take responsibility for the mineral resources/reserves .

Item 8 .History • Must make careful statements about the reliability • Must be careful comparing categories .

Common Deficiencies • Technical report no longer current .

Common Misconceptions • All authors must be independent • All technical reports filed have been reviewed and accepted • It is OK to disclaim responsibility for sections of a technical report if you state that you are relying on another report • It is OK to omit sections of a technical report if adequately covered in previously filed technical report .

Consents • Be careful • Be very specific • There are significant differences between Certificates and Consents and their respective purposes • Be aware .

Civil Liability It has always existed! QP’s are only liable for their expert report. opinion or statement if they have provided written consent hence the importance of consent .

public oral statements • Must have obtained written consent from expert • Avoid blanket consents! . news releases.Civil Liability in the Secondary Market • Extends statutory liability to all public disclosure by the company • Annual information forms. company websites.

Good Disclosure Practices • • • • Use consistent units of measure Include metal price assumptions Avoid zero cut-off grade estimates Avoid gross metal values .

Disclosure Red Flags • • • • • • • No QP named Overly promotional language Non-compliant resource/reserve modifiers Adding inferred resources to other categories Lack of required / cautionary language Reporting gross metal value or in-situ value Implying economic viability without tech report .

Discussion .

Related Interests