14.

3 Resource Database
The database was closed as of March 31, 2017 for the Mineral Resources estimation dated June 2017. The databa
Table 14-3: Exploration Data considered for Mineral Resource estimation. Source: SRK
Sample Type # Drillholes Meters # Samples
DDH Samples 3,117 523,872.49 112,791
Channel Samples 17,127 97,104.81 60,094
Total Samples 620,977.3 172,885
All historical data were converted from Local datum to PSAD 56 datum using the conversion outlined below in Table 14-4.
Table 14-4: Grid Transformation Applied to Channel and Collar Data in Database. Source: SRK
Conversion over Elevation 770 Conversion below Elevation 770
EASTING = EASTING -362456.492 m EASTING = EASTING -362479.801 m
LOCAL PSAD 56 LOCAL PSAD 56
NORTHING = NORTHING -8823549.451 m NORTHING = NORTHING -8823666.379 m
LOCAL PSAD 56 LOCAL PSAD 56
VERTICAL = VERTICAL 35.88 m VERTICAL = VERTICAL 36.54 m
LOCAL PSAD 56 LOCAL PSAD 56
AZIMUTH = AZIMUTH -9.12° AZIMUTH = AZIMUTH -9.63°
LOCAL PSAD 56 LOCAL PSAD 56
14.4 Wireframing
The Mineral Resources estimation for El Porvenir mine is based on the geological interpretation for each mineralize
The interpretation of the boundaries of mineralization incorporated the minimum Net Smelter Return (“NSR”). The
Regarding the construction of the mineralized solids, the main levels, openings and pits provide information
Three types of mineralized bodies and mineralized veins can be identified in the El Porvenir deposit, these are:
 Skarn: forms mineralized bodies of irregular to structural controlled geometry, primarily contained
within the Pucará Group, comprising garnet with associated metallic mineralization of galena, sphal
 Replacement: mantos to irregular geometry bodies within the Pucará Group, comprising metallic mineralization of galena, s
 Structurally controlled material (i.e., veins): mineralization comprising galena, sphalerite, and silver-bearing sulfosalts
Based on their geological interpretation, Milpo has generated 8 lithological domains: skarn, intrusive, breccias, marble, sandst
Figure 14-1 shows an oblique 3D view of the lithology domains.
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-1: Oblique 3D view of the lithology domains.
Figure 14-2 shows the Milpo Stock in the central area with the skarn, marble and breccia domains around the intrusive.
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-2: Plan view of the El Porvenir mine lithological domains and an elevation of 3,700 masl.
Table 14-5 outlines all separate ore bodies that were used in the Mineral Resources estimate and their mineralization type.
Table 14-5: Ore Bodies Codes – Mineralization Type. Source: Milpo
Ore Body ID Minesight Mineralization Type
ID
Carmen 1 Vein 01_VC1 1 Replacement
Carmen 1 A Vein 02_VC1A 2 Replacement
Carmen 3 Vein 03_VC3 3 Replacement
Carmen 2 Vein 04_VC2 4 Replacement
Carmen 2 A Vein 05_VC2 A 5 Replacement
1204 Vein 07_V1204 7 Skarn
1204A Vein 08_V1204 8 Skarn
Ore Body ID Minesight Mineralization Type
ID
1204B Vein 09_V1204 9 Skarn
Carmen Norte 1-2 Vein 10_VCN1 10 Skarn
Carmen Norte 1-2 A Vein 11_VCN1 11 Skarn
Carmen Norte 1-2 B Vein 12_VCN1 12 Skarn
 Carmen Norte 3 Vein 13_VCN3 13 Skarn
Éxito Vein 14_EXITO 14 Skarn - Replacement
Socorro I Vein 15_SOCORRO II 15 Skarn - Replacement
5 Vein 16_V5_ 16 Skarn
Carmen Norte 4 Vein 17_VCN4 17 Skarn
Carmen Norte 4 A Vein 18_VCN4 A 18 Skarn
Carmen Norte 4 B Vein 19_VCN4 B 19 Skarn
3 Vein 20_V3 20 Skarn
33#2 Vein 21_V33#2 21 Skarn
33#2 A Vein 22_V33#2 A 22 Skarn
3 Norte Vein 23_V3N 23 Skarn
Kathleen Vein 24_VKATH 24 Skarn
Progreso Vein 25_Vprog 25 Skarn
Progreso A Vein 26_VProg A 26 Skarn
Progreso B Vein 27_VProg B 27 Skarn
Porvenir 9 Este Vein 28_PORV9E 28 structurally controlled
Porvenir 9 Este A Vein 29_PORV9E_A 29 structurally controlled
Porvenir 9 Vein 30_PORV9 30 structurally controlled
Porvenir 9 A Vein 31_PORV_9A 31 structurally controlled
Porvenir 9 W Vein 32_PORV 9W_ 32 structurally controlled
Porvenir 9W A Vein 34_PORV 33 structurally controlled
9WA_Porv2S
Porvenir 9W B Vein 34_PORV 34 structurally controlled
9WB_Porv2S
Porvenir 9W C Vein 35_PORV 9WC 35 structurally controlled
Table 14-6 shows the statistics of the density samples collected from mineralized bodies. The mineralized bodies with t
Table 14-6: Statistic of density samples, Source Milpo
Ore-body N° of samples Mean (t/m )
3
Minimum Maximum Variance
C2 54 4.01 2.56 4.99 0.39
C2-C3 7 3.67 2.72 4.25 0.24
C3 53 3.86 2.57 5.18 0.52
CARMEN 48 3.82 2.67 5.59 0.59
CN 1-2 47 3.86 2.78 4.65 0.14
CN3 256 3.70 2.21 5.69 0.37
CN4 105 3.57 2.70 4.66 0.21
CN5 1 3.62 - - -
Ore-body N° of samples Mean (t/m )
3
Minimum Maximum Variance
COLA CN4 33 2.84 2.44 4.11 0.16
DON ERNESTO 15 2.52 1.94 3.42 0.23
DON ERNESTO II 36 3.29 1.82 5.79 0.69
ÉXITO 89 3.40 2.39 4.74 0.37
KATHLEEN 43 3.68 2.69 4.66 0.15
MANUEL 5 6 3.78 2.76 4.65 0.47
PORVENIR 2N 86 2.94 2.37 4.21 0.11
PORVENIR 2S 143 2.83 2.06 3.83 0.08
PORVENIR 3N 1 2.73 - - -
PORVENIR 9 341 3.56 2.37 5.18 0.21
PROGRESO 94 3.56 2.19 5.46 0.32
SOCORRO 71 3.25 2.59 4.69 0.23
 SOCORRO I 28 3.67 2.77 4.77 0.35
SOCORRO II 70 3.21 2.49 4.54 0.27
SOCORRO IV 14 3.50 2.77 4.52 0.22
V. PORVENIR 2 2 2.54 2.47 2.60 0.01
V1204 124 3.46 2.11 6.00 0.34
V1204-V5 66 3.88 2.45 5.98 0.41
V3 42 3.57 2.80 4.46 0.17
V33#2 43 3.40 2.63 4.39 0.19
V3N 74 3.87 3.14 4.53 0.14
V4 2 4.09 3.79 4.38 0.17
V5 147 3.72 2.65 5.22 0.25
The current Mineral Resource estimation included a full review of the modelling of the mineralized bodies both in 3D plan view.
 Mineralized bodies were constructed using interpretation of sections and plans produced by the mine geologists. The strike
 Bodies were only extrapolated 40 m from the last mineralised intersect.
Reinterpretation of mineralization continuity has resulted in new modelled geometry of some mineralized bodies, see Fig
Figure 14-3 illustrates the revisions to the mineralization model in more detail.
N° 01

Interpretación Julio
2016 Interpretación
Diciembre 2016
Sección geológica

2
0
1
6

J
u
l
y
2
0
1
6

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

O
r
e

B
o
d
i
e
s
N° 02

N° 03

N° 04

Source: SRK
Figure 14-3: Revision to mineralized model.
Removed ore bodies
Legend Intrusive Skarn
Ore Body
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-4: Delimitation of mineralized structures using the geological modelling.
14.5 Compositing
The assay data used for the interpolation model (Ordinary Kriging and Inverse Distance) was composited to
The composite length was chosen as it is a submultiple of the block dimensions, ensuring that the interpolation use
Comparative statistics were recorded before and after the compositing was performed. No significant statistical cha
The assay data statistics graphs are included in Appendix B.
Table 14-7: Comparison between the initial data and the composited data. Source: Milpo
Element Elemento # Raw Data *# Raw Data # Raw Data *Raw Data Plus Composited
Samples Plus Composited Mean Detection Value Data Mean
Detection Data Mean
Value
Zn (%) ZNPCT 75,778 76,450 43,033 5.60 5.54 5.20
Pb (%) PBPCT 73,088 76,449 43,033 1.40 1.33 1.34
Ag (Oz/t) AGOZ 75,726 76,450 43,033 2.46 2.43 2.45
Cu (%) CUPCT 73,854 76,449 43,033 0.31 0.30 0.28
* Detection value assigment to drill hole section that was not sampled (Table 14-2 shows detection values per element).
14.6 Estimation Domains
Box plots were prepared for assays and composites to establish suitable estimation domains for Zn, Pb, Ag and Cu
Consider that the domains were created based on the geological ore bodies modelled, the strike of the mineralized
Table 14-8 presents the estimation domains and coding used, and from Figure 14-3 to Figure 14-6 show spatial dis
Table 14-8: Estimation Domain, determined for each interest element. Source: Milpo
Zn Ore Body Pb Ore Body Ag Ore Body Cu Ore Body
Doma in (MineSight ID) Doma (MineSight ID) Doma in (MineSight ID) Doma in (MineSight ID)
in
I 1,2 I 1 I 1 I 2, 5, 10, 12,
18, 19
II 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 18, I 2, 10, 11, 12, II 2,10,11,12,1 II 1, 11
19 I 18, 19 8,19
III 7, 9 I 3, 5, 15 III 3, 5, 15 III 3, 4, 13
IV 4, 13, 15 II 4, 13 IV 4, 13 IV 15
V 8, 16, 17 VI
V 8 V 8, 17 V 16, 17
VI 14, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, V 16, 17 VI 16 VI 8
25, 26, 27 I
VII 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 VII 9 VII 9 VII 7, 9
VIII 33, 34, 35 VIII 7 VIII 7 VIII 27, 22
IX I 14, 22, 24, IX 14, 22, 24, IX 26
X 27 27
X X 20, 21, 23, X 20, 21, 23, X 14, 20, 21,
25, 26 25, 26 23, 24, 25
XI X 32, 33, 34, XI 32, 33, 34, XI 28, 29, 30,
I 35 35 31, 32
XII XII 29, 30 XII 29, 30 XII 33, 34, 35
XIII XIII 31, 28 XIII 31, 28
 N

LEGEND
ZN Domain
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-5: Distribution of the Zn domains – El Porvenir Mine.
The Figure 14-5 to Figure 14-8 show spatial distribution of the modelled domains. Milpo has generated more than 10 domains
demonstrates the best continuity of mineralization, defines only 8 domains for resource estimation.
Table 14-9 shows the statistics of the 8 zinc domains based on their composites. The domains with the greatest average grade
Table 14-9: Zinc domain statistics, Source Milpo
Statistics - Zinc Domains
Zinc Domains Composite Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Devn. Co. of Variation

I 1,916 0.01 51.59 9.88 8.06 0.82

II 5,684 0.01 36.83 6.81 6.22 0.91
III 3,144 0.01 38.07 6.51 5.79 0.89
 IV 5,022 0.01 38.19 4.00 4.45 1.11
V 10,145 0.01 46.70 4.88 5.13 1.05
VI 7,600 0.01 41.30 5.22 5.63 1.08
VII 3,950 0.01 34.21 2.44 3.11 1.27
VIII 43,033 0.01 51.59 5.15 5.53 1.07
Table 14-10 shows the statistics of the 13 lead domains based on their composites. The domains with the greatest average gra
Table 14-10: Lead domain statitics Source Milpo
Statistics - Lead Domains
Lead Domains Composite Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Devn. Co. of
Variation
I 1,479 0.01 33.10 6.20 6.12 0.99
II 3,472 0.01 34.13 0.91 2.40 2.64
III 4,159 0.01 53.20 2.38 3.44 1.45
IV 3,512 0.01 31.57 0.79 2.17 2.74
V 2,408 0.01 24.88 2.07 2.50 1.21
VI 7,737 0.01 62.83 1.05 2.60 2.47
VII 164 0.01 0.80 0.04 0.10 2.50
VIII 2,980 0.01 24.43 0.53 1.57 2.95
IX 2,800 0.01 39.20 1.84 3.59 1.95
X 4,800 0.01 36.87 0.65 2.13 3.27
XI 4,157 0.01 21.71 1.36 1.84 1.35
XII 4,849 0.00 19.93 0.22 0.90 4.14
XIII 516 0.01 15.76 0.70 1.87 2.68
 N

LEGEND
PB Domain
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-6: Distribution of the Pb domains – El Porvenir Mine.
 N

LEGEND
AG Domain
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-7: Distribution of the Ag domains – El Porvenir Mine.
Table 14-11 shows the statistics of the 12 silver domains based on their composites. The domains with the greatest average gr
Table 14-11: Silver domains statitics Source Milpo
Statistics - Silver Domains
Copper Domains Composite Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Devn. Co. of
Variation
 I 4,676 0.01 17.00 0.33 0.57 1.70
II 1,543 0.01 6.47 0.24 0.34 1.41
III 4,893 0.01 7.92 0.21 0.29 1.36
IV 1,510 0.01 1.18 0.05 0.06 1.42
V 7,737 0.01 6.00 0.30 0.34 1.16
VI 2,408 0.01 2.94 0.12 0.18 1.50
VII 3,144 0.01 7.50 0.31 0.46 1.51
VIII 424 0.01 10.88 0.16 0.49 3.14
IX 542 0.01 4.76 0.76 0.60 0.80
X 6,634 0.01 8.70 0.41 0.46 1.12
XI 5,572 0.01 16.45 0.35 0.45 1.27
XII 3,950 0.00 4.27 0.07 0.14 2.02
Table 14-12 shows the statistics of the 13 copper domains based on their composites. The domains with the greatest average g
Table 14-12: Copper domain statitics Source Milpo
Statistics - Copper Domains
Silver Domains Composite Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Devn. Co. of
Variation
I 1,479 0.01 41.77 6.95 6.34 0.91
II 3,472 0.01 38.49 1.76 2.89 1.64
III 4,159 0.01 146.60 4.22 5.20 1.23
IV 3,512 0.01 37.18 1.52 2.74 1.80
V 5,129 0.01 119.00 3.43 4.69 1.37
VI 5,016 0.01 45.93 1.72 2.63 1.53
VII 164 0.02 5.58 0.91 0.92 1.00
VIII 2,980 0.01 44.35 1.63 2.24 1.37
IX 2,800 0.01 60.29 3.17 4.89 1.54
X 4,800 0.01 34.70 1.47 2.16 1.47
XI 4,157 0.01 39.57 2.67 3.24 1.21
XII 4,849 0.01 17.98 0.70 1.11 1.59
XIII 516 0.01 30.86 1.62 2.37 1.46
 N

LEGEND
CU Domain
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-8: Distribution of the Cu Domains – El Porvenir Mine.
14.7 Evaluation of Outliers
Top cuts were performed across the data to ensure that isolated high grades did not influence the resultant Mineral
SRK considers that the top cuts utilized by Milpo have been defined accurately in the bodies evaluated.
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-9: Composite Probability Plot of Zn (%) for Carmen Norte 4B Vein
Table 14-13 shows values of outliers per element that were used.
Table 14-13: Values of the outliers for each element. Source: Milpo
Minesight ID Ore Body Zn Outliers Pb Outliers Ag Outliers Cu Outliers
(%) Distance (%) Distance (Oz/t) Distance (%) Distance

1 Carmen 1 Vein 23 -6 - - 21 6 1 -6
2 Carmen 1 A Vein 30 -6 4 -6 7 6 - -
3 Carmen 3 Vein 20 -6 14 -6 15 6 - -
4 Carmen 2 Vein 22 -6 7 -6 5 6 - -
5 Carmen 2 A Vein 23 -6 20 -6 18 6 5 -6
6 Real Vein - - - - - - - -
7 1204 Vein 21 -6 13 -6 9 6 4 -6
8 1204A Vein 18 -6 14 -6 17 6 1 -6
9 1204B Vein 12 -6 - - 4 6 2 -6
10 Carmen Norte 1-2 Vein 24 -6 14 -6 23 -6 2 -6
11 Carmen Norte 1-2 A Vein 18 -6 2.5 6 1 6 - -
12 Carmen Norte 1-2 B Vein 13 6 1 6 0.8 6 1 6
13 Carmen Norte 3 Vein 17 -6 17 -6 16 6 2 -6
14 Éxito Vein 15 -6 15 -6 9 6 3 -6
15 Socorro I Vein 16 -6 22 -6 22 6 1 -6
16 5 Vein 23 -6 17 -6 12 6 3 -6
17 Carmen Norte 4 Vein 20 -6 20 -6 23 -6 2 -6
18 Carmen Norte 4 A Vein 13.5 6 2.5 -6 2 6 1 6
Minesight ID Ore Body Zn Outliers Pb Outliers Ag Outliers Cu Outliers
(%) Distance (%) Distance (Oz/t) Distance (%) Distance

19 Carmen Norte 4 B Vein 22 -6 4 -6 6 6 2 -6

20 3 Vein 16 -6 8 -6 8 6 2 -6
21 33#2 Vein 17 -6 3 6 7 6 2 -6
22 33#2 A Vein 10 -6 - - - - - -
23 3 Norte Vein 24 -6 12 6 10 6 3 -6
24 Kathleen Vein 18 -6 18 -6 18 6 2 -6
25 Progreso Vein 16 6 7 -6 7 6 3 -6
26 Progreso A Vein 9 -6 - - 3 6 3 -6
27 Progreso B Vein 16 -6 14 -6 17 -6 1 -6
28 Porvenir 9 Este Vein 18 -6 3.5 6 7 6 1.2 -6
29 Porvenir 9 Este A Vein - - - - - - - -
30 Porvenir 9 Vein 18 -6 7 -6 9 6 3 -6
31 Porvenir 9 A Vein 17 6 6 -6 8 6 1 -6
32 Porvenir 9 W Vein 14 -6 8 -6 - - 1 6
33 Porvenir 9W A Vein 10 6 8 -6 14 6 - -
34 Porvenir 9W B Vein 14 6 10 -6 18 6 - -
35 Porvenir 9W C Vein 8 -6 4 -6 5 6 - -
36 Don Ernesto I 6 6 9.18 -6 20 6 0.4 -6
37 Don Ernesto II - - 17.9 -6 28 -6 - -
39 Porvenir 2 Vein - - - - 9.2 6 0.2 6
40 Porvenir 3 Vein ### -6 - - 7 -6 1.2 -6
41 Corredor Bx Vein - - 5 -6 - - 0.5 6

14.8 Statistical Analysis and Variography

Table 14-14 shows results of basic statistical analysis of composited assay data across all domains.
Table 14-14: Basic Statistics of Composited Data in the Mineralized Structures. Source: Milpo
Composited Data Statistics
Element ID # Samples Minimum Maximum Mean SD Variance CV

Zn (%) ZNC 43,033 0.01 51.59 5.20 5.58 31.12 1.07

Pb (%) PBC 43,033 0.00 62.83 1.34 2.98 8.89 2.23
Ag (Oz/t) AGC 43,033 0.01 146.60 2.45 4.03 16.21 1.64
Cu (%) CUC 43,033 0.00 17.00 0.28 0.42 0.18 1.52
Experimental variograms were developed to quantify the correlation of the samples in a geospatial manner. Variograms were
The composited assay data statistics graphs and variograms graphs are included in Appendix B.
Source: SRK
Figure 14-10: Normal Score Variograms Modelled for Domain III of Zn (%)
In the zinc domains, the range in the major anisotropy axis varies between 50 y 353 meters, domains V and IV, respectively.
SRK reviewed the Milpo variographic analysis and considers that the definition of the major, semi- major, and minor anisotropy
Table 14-15: Variographic Parameters for Zn Domain. Source: Milpo
Zn Domain Nugget Structure Minesight Rotation Search Ellipse
Ore Body Effect Type Sil
Structure
l AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vertical
I 1,2 1 Sph 0.4 81.7 -64.5 10.59 20 14 20
0.3
2 Sph 0.33 81.7 -64.5 10.59 110 100 35
II 3,5,10,11,12,1 1 Sph 0.46 132 18.75 68.83 17 24 15
8,19 0.2
2 Sph 0.32 132 18.75 68.83 81 54 35
III 6,7,9 1 Sph 0.61 96.7 -78.8 26.3 15 31 15
0.1
2 Sph 0.25 96.7 -78.8 26.3 130 90 75
IV 4,13,15 1 Sph 0.55 60.7 -69.4 -13.47 25 12 25
0.2
2 Sph 0.27 60.7 -69.4 -13.47 353 69 49
0.2 1 Sph 0.6 70 0 80 17 12 15
Zn Domain Nugget Structure Minesight Rotation Search Ellipse
Ore Body Effect Type Sil
Structure
l AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vertical
V 8,16,17 2 Sph 0.17 70 0 80 50 35 35

VI 14,20,21,22,23 0.2 1 Sph 0.5 20 15 -8 20 16 19

,24,25,26,27

2 Sph 0.32 20 15 -8 150 150 33

VII 28,29,30,31,32 1 Sph 0.64 28.2 -62 -43.22 20 20 11
0.2
2 Sph 0.2 28.2 -62 -43.22 140 140 30
VIII 1 Sph 0.52 133 9.85 -79.85 23 10 13
33,34,35 0.2
2 Sph 0.31 133 9.85 -79.85 85 77 55
Table 14-16: Variographic Parameters for Pb Domain. Source: Milpo
Pb Domain Nugge t Structure Minesight Rotation Search Ellipse
Ore Body Effect Structure Type Sill
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vertical
I1 0.14 1 Sph 0.69 47.353 -63.19 -20.43 57 40 10
2 Sph 0.17 47.353 -63.19 -20.43 156 66 20
II 2,10,11,12,18,1 0.26 1 Sph 0.45 42.273 -67.73 25.51 37 20 19
9
2 Sph 0.28 42.273 -67.73 25.51 274 90 45
III 3,5,15 0.28 1 Sph 0.48 82.647 -63.19 20.43 25 10 25
2 Sph 0.24 82.647 -63.19 20.43 66 50 40
IV 4,13 0.19 1 Sph 0.52 52.353 -63.19 -20.43 16 35 19
2 Sph 0.3 52.353 -63.19 -20.43 287 150 50
V8 0.15 1 Sph 0.49 40 -60.00 -90.00 27 15 10
2 Sph 0.36 40 -60.00 -90.00 95 55 28
VI 16,17 0.24 1 Sph 0.41 40.439 -74.89 44.56 20 12 20
2 Sph 0.35 40.439 -74.89 44.56 200 61 50
VII 9 0.35 1 Sph 0.42 175 -60.00 0.00 59 16 20
2 Sph 0.22 175 -60.00 0.00 111 45 30
VIII 7 0.29 1 Sph 0.40 66.74 -78.83 26.30 28 20 25
2 Sph 0.32 66.74 -78.83 26.30 210 40 40
IX 0.15 1 Sph 0.46 46.302 -78.83 -63.29 76 24 16
14,22,24,27
2 Sph 0.39 46.302 -78.83 -63.29 217 95 49
X 20,21,23,25,26 0.27 1 Sph 0.49 165.109 -82.93 44.89 57 33 23
2 Sph 0.24 165.109 -82.93 44.89 119 102 41
XI 0.24 1 Sph 0.43 139.07 49.74 -82.25 16 10 15
32,33,34,35
2 Sph 0.33 139.07 49.74 -82.25 124 94 57
XII 29,30 0.35 1 Sph 0.43 165 0.00 70.00 15 21 15
2 Sph 0.22 165 0.00 70.00 102 62 40
XIII 31. 28 0.18 1 Sph 0.53 29.891 -82.93 -44.89 40 10 14
2 Sph 0.3 29.891 -82.93 -44.89 54 45 33
Table 14-17: Variographic Parameters for Ag Domain. Source: Milpo
Ag Domain Nugge Structure Minesight Rotation Search Ellipse
Ore Body t Structure Type Sill
Effect AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert
I1 0.17 1 Sph 0.65 70 -65.00 0.00 48 30 12
2 Sph 0.18 70 -65.00 0.00 75 40 15
II 2,10,11,12,18,19 0.23 1 Sph 0.52 24.34 -69.41 13.47 31 11 22
2 Sph 0.26 24.34 -69.41 13.47 196 40 40
III 3,5,15 0.4 1 Sph 0.39 56.696 -64.54 10.59 38 13 11
2 Sph 0.211 56.696 -64.54 10.59 69 54 25
IV 4,13 0.29 1 Sph 0.45 33.219 -62.01 -43.22 56 38 28
2 Sph 0.27 33.219 -62.01 -43.22 188 142 45
V 8,17 0.34 1 Sph 0.31 38.698 -78.83 63.29 124 12 10
2 Sph 0.411 38.698 -78.83 63.29 275 71 62
 VI 16 0.22 1 Sph 0.58 42.054 -32.04 55.73 20 20 15
2 Sph 0.2 42.054 -32.04 55.73 100 100 45
VII 9 0.37 1 Sph 0.32 32.398 50.33 -26.03 30 10 10
2 Sph 0.31 32.398 50.33 -26.03 60 15 15
VIII 7 0.21 1 Sph 0.44 68.677 -74.21 18.02 20 18 10
2 Sph 0.34 68.677 -74.21 18.02 250 140 35
IX 0.21 1 Sph 0.50 46.302 -78.83 -63.26 15 10 14
14,22,24,27
2 Sph 0.28 46.302 -78.83 -63.26 152 46 40
X 20,21,23,25,26 0.2 1 Sph 0.60 25.93 -49.74 -82.25 31 44 38
2 Sph 0.2 25.93 -49.74 -82.25 173 106 60
XI 0.14 1 Sph 0.51 140 25.00 -90.00 10 10 10
32,33,34,35
2 Sph 0.35 140 25.00 -90.00 100 65 65
XII 29,30 0.23 1 Sph 0.57 75 -80.00 0.00 27 15 10
2 Sph 0.2 75 -80.00 0.00 55 55 30
XIII 31. 28 0.22 1 Sph 0.49 159.183 39.82 83.49 37 20 7
2 Sph 0.28 159.183 39.82 83.49 101 40 40
SRK evaluated the Milpo variographic model and is in agreement with the variographic parameters
defined in the previous tables.
Table 14-18: Variographic Parameters for Cu Domain. Source: Milpo
Cu Domain Nugget Structure Minesight Rotation Search Ellipse
Ore Body Effect Structure Type Sill
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert
I 2,5,10,12,18, 0.35 1 Sph 0.52 30.734 -72.04 -32.95 49 29 12
19
2 Sph 0.12 30.734 -72.04 -32.95 68 61 33
II 1,11 0.4 1 Sph 0.47 70 -65.00 0.00 24 8 13
2 Sph 0.13 70 -65.00 0.00 152 40 29
III 3,4,13 0.32 1 Sph 0.42 70 -60.00 0.00 29 14 28
2 Sph 0.27 70 -60.00 0.00 130 86 39
IV 15 0.31 1 Sph 0.48 65 -80.00 0.00 10 10 6
2 Sph 0.22 65 -80.00 0.00 45 45 20
V 16,17 0.24 1 Sph 0.50 30.439 -75.89 44.56 14 22 16
2 Sph 0.26 30.439 -75.89 44.56 118 80 37
VI 8 0.18 1 Sph 0.29 0 90.00 -40.00 10 12 10
2 Sph 0.53 0 90.00 -40.00 149 84 52
VII 7,9 0.18 1 Sph 0.59 35.734 -72.04 -32.95 36 15 18
2 Sph 0.23 35.734 -72.04 -32.95 191 70 30
VIII 22,27 0.17 1 Sph 0.55 0 90.00 -45.00 36 10 8
2 Sph 0.28 0 90.00 -45.00 85 24 20
IX 26 0.11 1 Sph 0.34 0 90.00 -70.00 33 28 12
2 Sph 0.55 0 90.00 -70.00 88 85 21
X 14,20,21,23, 0.18 1 Sph 0.40 11.982 74.21 -71.32 16 13 14
24,25
2 Sph 0.42 11.982 74.21 -71.32 143 98 58
XI 28,29,30,31, 0.25 1 Sph 0.45 170 0.00 80.00 10 34 15
32
2 Sph 0.3 170 0.00 80.00 148 120 45
XII 0.39 1 Sph 0.43 135 0.00 -80.00 35 15 15
33,34,35
2 Sph 0.18 135 0.00 -80.00 84 45 45

14.9 Block Model and Grade Estimation

 The estimation was performed using MineSight (version 12.0-3) resource estimation software. The El Porvenir Mine
Table 14-19: Block Model Parameters Atacocha Underground. Source: Milpo
Parameter East North Elevation

Minimum 366,100 8,826,000 2,200

Cordinate
Maximum 370,900 8,830,500 4,300
Cordinate
Block size (m) 6 6 5
A Quantitative Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis (“QKNA”) was performed by Milpo to identify optimum
parameters to be used for the interpolation process. Based on the QKNA results, three possible
scenarios were established for estimation of each element (OK1, OK2 and OK3), using Ordinary Kriging and Inverse
A comparison of Nearest Neighbor vs Ordinary Kriging was performed with to determine the most appropriate parameters for
Grade interpolation was performed using Ordinary Kriging with anomalous value restriction to report the Zn, Ag and Cu elemen
The interpolation strategy incorporated two estimation runs for Ordinary Kriging and IDW . The estimation was performe
3

The parameters used for the interpolation are presented in Table 14-20 to Table 14-31; the column
“Est. Met.” referes to the estimation method used, “OK” signifies Ordinary Kriging.
Milpo defined the direction of the search volumens based on the variogram anisotropy axes and the geometry of the ore bodies
Table 14-20: Estimation Parameters for Zn Domain (a). Source: Milpo
Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps
Rotation
Mine Max Comp Max per
Sigth ID Az Di Dip Major Minor Vert Min Max per Drillhole Oct
Est. N p E Oct/
Pass Met. N Quad
1 2 OK 65 -70 0 300 300 90 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 65 -70 0 40 40 25 3 6 2
2 2 OK 65 -75 0 300 300 90 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 65 -75 0 40 40 25 3 6 2
3 2 OK 65 -70 0 200 210 70 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 65 -70 0 30 25 25 3 9 2
4 2 OK 70 -70 0 270 120 70 2 24 2 ### 3
1 OK 70 -70 0 50 30 25 3 20 2
5 2 OK 60 -70 0 200 210 70 2 16 2 ### 4
1 OK 60 -70 0 30 25 25 3 7 2
6 2 OK 75 -90 0 350 280 130 2 12 2 ### 3
1 OK 75 -90 0 50 30 25 3 8 2
7 2 OK 40 -80 0 300 150 150 2 20 2 ### 3
1 OK 40 -80 0 70 50 45 3 14 2
8 2 OK 130 -90 0 200 70 200 2 20 2 ### 3
1 OK 130 -90 0 50 20 50 3 15 2
9 2 OK 60 -90 0 300 150 150 2 20 2 ### 3
1 OK 60 -90 0 70 50 45 3 16 2
10 2 OK 45 -80 0 400 370 120 2 20 2 ### 3
1 OK 45 -80 0 30 25 25 3 7 2
11 2 OK 45 -85 0 300 300 85 2 26 2 ### 4
1 OK 45 -85 0 30 25 25 3 9 2
12 2 OK 50 -85 0 400 370 120 2 30 2 ### 4
1 OK 50 -85 0 30 25 25 3 20 2
13 2 OK 75 -70 0 350 280 130 2 24 2 ### 3
 13
1 OK 75 -70 0 50 30 25 3 18 2
14 2 OK 150 -85 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 150 -85 0 45 23 22 3 10 2
14 2 OK 105 -85 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 105 -85 0 45 23 22 3 10 2
15 2 OK 60 -85 0 350 280 130 2 24 2 ### 3
1 OK 60 -85 0 50 30 25 3 20 2
Table 14-21: Estimation Parameters for Zn Domain (b). Source: Milpo
Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Comp
Rotation per Drillhole
Mine Oct/ Max per
Sigth ID AzN Di Di Major Minor Vert Min Max Quad Oct
Pass Est. Met. p p
N E
16 2 OK 5 -90 0 200 70 ### 2 24 2 ### 3
1 OK 5 -90 0 50 20 50 3 13 2
16 2 OK 340 -80 0 200 70 ### 2 24 2 ### 3
1 OK 340 -80 0 50 20 50 3 13 2
16 2 OK 80 -85 0 200 70 ### 2 24 2 ### 3
1 OK 80 -85 0 50 20 50 3 13 2
17 2 OK 330 -90 0 200 70 ### 2 24 2 ### 3
1 OK 330 -90 0 50 20 50 3 13 2
18 2 OK 40 -90 0 200 210 70 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 40 -90 0 30 25 25 3 6 2
19 2 OK 15 -70 0 200 210 70 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 15 -70 0 30 25 25 3 9 2
20 2 OK 110 -90 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 110 -90 0 45 23 22 3 8 2
21 2 OK 65 -70 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 65 -70 0 45 23 22 3 8 2
22 2 OK 122 -90 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 122 -90 0 45 23 22 3 10 2
23 2 OK 100 -90 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 100 -90 0 45 23 22 3 8 2
24 2 OK 110 -88 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 110 -88 0 45 23 22 3 8 2
25 2 OK 110 -90 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 110 -90 0 45 23 22 3 10 2
26 2 OK 115 80 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 115 80 0 45 23 22 3 10 2
27 2 OK 147 -90 0 349 224 83 2 16 2 ### 3
1 OK 147 -90 0 45 23 22 3 10 2
28 2 OK 80 -85 0 350 350 70 2 30 2 ### 4
1 OK 80 -85 0 70 60 20 3 16 2
29 2 OK 92 -85 0 350 350 70 2 30 2 ### 4
1 OK 92 -85 0 70 60 20 3 16 2
Table 14-22: Estimation Parameters for Zn Domain (c). Source: Milpo
Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Comp Max
MineSigth Est. Rotation per Drillhole Oct/ per
Pass Oct
ID Met. Quad
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max

30 2 OK 65 -80 0 350 350 70 2 16 2 2 3

1 OK 65 -80 0 70 60 20 3 7 2
31 2 OK 52 -80 0 350 350 70 2 16 2 2 3
1 OK 52 -80 0 70 60 20 3 7 2
 32 2 OK 70 -90 0 350 350 70 2 16 2 2 3
1 OK 70 -90 0 70 60 20 3 7 2
33 2 OK 53 -90 0 160 140 100 2 16 2 2 3
1 OK 53 -90 0 50 50 40 3 9 2
34 2 OK 50 -90 0 160 140 100 2 16 2 2 3
1 OK 50 -90 0 50 50 40 3 11 2
35 2 OK 160 -90 0 160 140 100 2 16 2 2 3
1 OK 160 -90 0 50 50 40 3 13 2
36 2 OK 100 53 0 160 140 100 2 12 2 2 3
1 OK 100 53 0 50 50 40 3 8 2
37 2 OK 100 -90 0 160 140 100 2 12 2 2 3
1 OK 100 -90 0 50 50 40 3 8 2
39 2 OK 100 86 0 160 140 100 2 12 2 2 3
1 OK 100 86 0 50 50 40 3 8 2
40 2 OK 80 -90 0 300 150 150 2 12 2 2 3
1 OK 80 -90 0 70 50 45 3 8 2
41 2 OK 0 -90 0 350 280 130 2 12 2 2 3
1 OK 0 -90 0 50 30 25 3 8 2
Table 14-23: Estimation Parameters for Pb Domain (a). Source: Milpo
Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Comp Max
MineSigth Rotation per Oct/ per
Pass Est. Met. Drillhole Quad Oct
ID
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Mi Max
n
2 OK 65 -70 0 250 150 100 2 20 2 2 3
1
1 OK 65 -70 0 80 30 30 3 12 2
2 OK 65 -75 0 300 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
2
1 OK 65 -75 0 50 25 30 3 16 2
2 OK 65 -70 0 350 250 100 2 30 2 3 4
3
1 OK 65 -70 0 70 90 25 3 20 2
2 OK 70 -70 0 350 250 100 2 18 2 3 4
4
1 OK 70 -70 0 70 90 25 3 12 2
2 OK 60 -70 0 200 210 70 2 24 2 2 3
5
1 OK 60 -70 0 50 25 30 3 16 2
2 OK 75 -90 0 350 280 130 2 12 2 2 3
6
1 OK 75 -90 0 40 25 25 3 8 2
2 OK 40 -80 0 300 150 150 2 20 2 2 3
7
1 OK 40 -80 0 70 40 30 3 14 2
2 OK 130 -90 0 250 140 140 2 20 2 2 3
8
1 OK 130 -90 0 45 35 35 3 8 2
2 OK 60 -90 0 300 150 150 2 20 2 2 3
9
1 OK 60 -90 0 70 40 30 3 10 2
2 OK 45 -80 0 400 200 200 2 24 2 2 3
10
1 OK 45 -80 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 45 -85 0 400 200 200 2 20 2 2 3
11
 11
1 OK 45 -85 0 80 30 30 3 14 2
2 OK 50 -85 0 450 300 300 2 24 2 3 4
12
1 OK 50 -85 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 75 -70 0 400 400 150 2 30 2 3 4
13
1 OK 75 -70 0 70 90 25 3 20 2
2 OK 150 -85 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
14
1 OK 150 -85 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 105 -85 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
14
1 OK 105 -85 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 60 -85 0 350 280 130 2 30 2 2 3
15
1 OK 60 -85 0 40 25 25 3 18 2
Table 14-24: Estimation Parameters for Pb Domain (b). Source: Milpo
Pass Est. Met. Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Comp Max
MineSigth Rotation per Oct/ per
ID Drillhole Quad Oct
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max
16 2 OK 5 -90 0 300 100 100 2 20 2 2 3
1 OK 5 -90 0 90 45 45 3 15 2
2 OK 340 -80 0 300 100 100 2 20 2 2 3
16
1 OK 340 -80 0 90 45 45 3 15 2
2 OK 80 -85 0 300 100 100 2 20 2 2 3
16
1 OK 80 -85 0 90 45 45 3 15 2
2 OK 330 -90 0 350 150 150 2 20 2 3 4
17
1 OK 330 -90 0 90 45 45 3 12 2
2 OK 40 -90 0 250 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
18
1 OK 40 -90 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 15 -70 0 250 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
19
1 OK 15 -70 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 110 -90 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
20
1 OK 110 -90 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 65 -70 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
21
1 OK 65 -70 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 122 -90 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
22
1 OK 122 -90 0 50 20 20 3 18 2
2 OK 100 -90 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
23
1 OK 100 -90 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 110 -88 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
24
1 OK 110 -88 0 70 80 40 3 9 2
2 OK 110 -90 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
25
1 OK 110 -90 0 70 80 40 3 9 2
2 OK 115 80 0 350 220 80 2 20 2 2 3
26
1 OK 115 80 0 100 80 20 3 10 2
2 OK 147 -90 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
27
 27
1 OK 147 -90 0 50 20 20 3 14 2
2 OK 80 -85 0 350 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
28
1 OK 80 -85 0 70 80 35 3 6 2
2 OK 92 -85 0 350 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
29 1 OK 92 -85 0 70 80 35 3 12 2
Table 14-25: Estimation Parameters for Pb Domain (c). Source: Milpo
Pass Est. Met. Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Max
MineSigth Rotation Comp per Oct/ per
ID Drillhole Quad Oct
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max
2 OK 65 -80 0 420 350 150 2 20 2 2 3
30
1 OK 65 -80 0 70 50 35 3 16 2
2 OK 52 -80 0 420 200 150 2 30 2 3 4
31
1 OK 52 -80 0 70 40 50 3 16 2
2 OK 70 -90 0 420 300 200 2 24 2 2 3
32
1 OK 70 -90 0 50 50 40 3 18 2
2 OK 53 -90 0 350 250 200 2 24 2 2 3
33
1 OK 53 -90 0 50 50 40 3 14 2
2 OK 50 -90 0 350 250 200 2 24 2 2 3
34
1 OK 50 -90 0 50 50 40 3 18 2
2 OK 160 -90 0 350 250 200 2 24 2 2 3
35
1 OK 160 -90 0 50 50 40 3 14 2
2 OK 100 53 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
36
1 OK 100 53 0 50 50 40 3 8 2
2 OK 100 -90 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
37
1 OK 100 -90 0 50 50 40 3 8 2
2 OK 100 86 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
39
1 OK 100 86 0 50 50 40 3 8 2
2 OK 80 -90 0 350 350 150 2 12 2 3 4
40
1 OK 80 -90 0 50 50 25 3 8 2
2 OK 0 -90 0 400 250 139 2 12 2 2 3
41
1 OK 0 -90 0 80 70 50 3 8 2
Table 14-26: Estimation Parameters for Ag Domain (a). Source: Milpo
Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Comp Max
MineSigth Rotation per Oct/ per
Pass Est. Met. Drillhole Quad Oct
ID
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max
2 OK 65 -70 0 250 150 100 2 20 2 2 3
1
1 OK 65 -70 0 50 40 35 3 12 2
2 OK 65 -75 0 300 150 100 2 20 2 2 3
2
1 OK 65 -75 0 80 30 20 3 16 2
2 OK 65 -70 0 200 210 70 2 30 2 3 4
3
1 OK 65 -70 0 75 60 25 3 18 2
2 OK 70 -70 0 361 232 139 2 30 2 3 4
4
1 OK 70 -70 0 140 100 50 3 20 2
 2 OK 60 -70 0 200 210 70 2 30 2 3 4
5
1 OK 60 -70 0 75 60 25 3 24 2
2 OK 75 -90 0 350 280 130 2 12 2 2 3
6
1 OK 75 -90 0 75 60 25 3 8 2
2 OK 40 -80 0 300 150 150 2 20 2 2 3
7
1 OK 40 -80 0 70 50 20 3 10 2
2 OK 130 -90 0 200 200 70 2 30 2 3 4
8
1 OK 130 -90 0 60 40 20 3 24 2
2 OK 60 -90 0 250 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
9
1 OK 60 -90 0 45 45 20 3 12 2
2 OK 45 -80 0 400 200 200 2 20 2 2 3
10
1 OK 45 -80 0 80 30 20 3 16 2
2 OK 45 -85 0 400 200 200 2 20 2 2 3
11
1 OK 45 -85 0 80 30 20 3 14 2
2 OK 50 -85 0 450 270 250 2 20 2 3 4
12
1 OK 50 -85 0 80 30 20 3 14 2
2 OK 75 -70 0 400 250 220 2 30 2 3 4
13
1 OK 75 -70 0 140 100 50 3 20 2
2 OK 95 -85 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
14
1 OK 95 -85 0 80 35 25 3 16 2
2 OK 130 -85 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
14
1 OK 130 -85 0 80 35 25 3 16 2
2 OK 60 -85 0 350 280 130 2 30 2 2 3
15
1 OK 60 -85 0 75 60 25 3 18 2
Table 14-27: Estimation Parameters for Ag Domain (b). Source: Milpo
Pass Est. Met. Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Comp Max
MineSigth Rotation per Oct/ per
ID Drillhole Quad Oct
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max
16 2 OK 60 -80 0 350 200 100 2 24 2 3 4
1 OK 60 -80 0 60 50 30 3 18 2
2 OK 175 83 0 350 200 100 2 24 2 3 4
16
1 OK 175 83 0 60 50 30 3 18 2
2 OK 155 85 0 350 200 100 2 24 2 3 4
16
1 OK 155 85 0 60 50 30 3 18 2
2 OK 135 -90 0 2 30 2 3 4
17
1 OK 135 -90 0 3 20 2
2 OK 40 -90 0 250 150 100 2 20 2 2 3
18
1 OK 40 -90 0 80 30 20 3 16 2
2 OK 15 -70 0 250 150 100 2 20 2 2 3
19
1 OK 15 -70 0 80 30 20 3 14 2
2 OK 110 -90 0 350 220 80 2 20 2 2 3
20
1 OK 110 -90 0 100 90 60 3 12 2
2 OK 65 -70 0 350 220 80 2 20 2 2 3
21
1 OK 65 -70 0 100 90 60 3 12 2
 2 OK 122 -90 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
22
1 OK 122 -90 0 80 35 25 3 14 2
2 OK 100 -90 0 350 220 80 2 20 2 2 3
23
1 OK 100 -90 0 100 90 60 3 14 2
2 OK 110 -88 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
24
1 OK 110 -88 0 80 35 25 3 16 2
2 OK 110 -90 0 350 220 80 2 20 2 2 3
25
1 OK 110 -90 0 100 90 60 3 14 2
2 OK 115 80 0 350 220 80 2 20 2 2 3
26
1 OK 115 80 0 100 90 60 3 12 2
2 OK 147 -90 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
27
1 OK 147 -90 0 80 35 25 3 16 2
2 OK 80 -85 0 350 150 150 2 30 2 3 4
28
1 OK 80 -85 0 90 40 40 3 24 2
2 OK 92 -85 0 350 150 300 2 20 2 2 3
29 1 OK 92 -85 0 50 25 40 3 12 2
Table 14-28: Estimation Parameters for Ag Domain (c). Source: Milpo
Pass Est. Met. Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Max
Rotation Comp per Oct/ per
Minesigth ID Drillhole Quad Oct
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max
30 2 OK 65 -80 0 350 150 300 2 20 2 2 3
1 OK 65 -80 0 50 25 40 3 14 2
2 OK 52 -80 0 350 150 150 2 30 2 3 4
31
1 OK 52 -80 0 90 40 40 3 24 2
2 OK 70 -90 0 350 250 200 2 20 2 2 3
32
1 OK 70 -90 0 50 40 40 3 12 2
2 OK 53 -90 0 350 250 200 2 20 2 2 3
33
1 OK 53 -90 0 50 40 40 3 12 2
2 OK 50 -90 0 350 250 200 2 20 2 2 3
34
1 OK 50 -90 0 50 40 40 3 12 2
2 OK 160 -90 0 350 250 200 2 20 2 2 3
35
1 OK 160 -90 0 50 40 40 3 16 2
2 OK 100 53 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
36
1 OK 100 53 0 50 40 40 3 8 2
2 OK 100 -90 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
37
1 OK 100 -90 0 50 40 40 3 8 2
2 OK 100 86 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
39
1 OK 100 86 0 50 40 40 3 8 2
2 OK 80 -90 0 250 250 150 2 12 2 2 3
40
1 OK 80 -90 0 45 45 20 3 8 2
2 OK 0 -90 0 400 250 220 2 12 2 3 4
41
 41
1 OK 0 -90 0 140 100 50 3 8 2
Table 14-29: Estimation Parameters for Cu Domain (a). Source: Milpo
Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Max
MineSigth Rotation Comp Oct/ per
Pass Est. Met. per Quadt Oct
ID
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max Drillhole
2 OK 65 -70 0 250 150 ### 2 20 2 2 3
1
1 OK 65 -70 0 80 30 30 3 12 2
2 OK 65 -75 0 300 150 ### 2 24 2 2 3
2
1 OK 65 -75 0 50 25 30 3 16 2
2 OK 65 -70 0 350 250 ### 2 30 2 3 4
3
1 OK 65 -70 0 70 90 25 3 20 2
2 OK 70 -70 0 350 250 ### 2 18 2 3 4
4
1 OK 70 -70 0 70 90 25 3 12 2
2 OK 60 -70 0 200 210 70 2 24 2 2 3
5
1 OK 60 -70 0 50 25 30 3 16 2
2 OK 75 -90 0 350 280 ### 2 12 2 2 3
6
1 OK 75 -90 0 40 25 25 3 8 2
2 OK 40 -80 0 300 150 ### 2 20 2 2 3
7
1 OK 40 -80 0 70 40 30 3 14 2
2 OK 130 -90 0 250 140 ### 2 20 2 2 3
8
1 OK 130 -90 0 45 35 35 3 8 2
2 OK 60 -90 0 300 150 ### 2 20 2 2 3
9
1 OK 60 -90 0 70 40 30 3 10 2
2 OK 45 -80 0 400 200 ### 2 24 2 2 3
10
1 OK 45 -80 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 45 -85 0 400 200 ### 2 20 2 2 3
11
1 OK 45 -85 0 80 30 30 3 14 2
2 OK 50 -85 0 450 300 ### 2 24 2 3 4
12
1 OK 50 -85 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 75 -70 0 400 400 ### 2 30 2 3 4
13
1 OK 75 -70 0 70 90 25 3 20 2
2 OK 150 -85 0 349 250 ### 2 20 2 2 3
14
1 OK 150 -85 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 105 -85 0 349 250 ### 2 20 2 2 3
14
1 OK 105 -85 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 60 -85 0 350 280 ### 2 30 2 2 3
15
1 OK 60 -85 0 40 25 25 3 18 2
Table 14-30: Estimation Parameters for Cu Domain (b). Source: Milpo
Pass Est. Met. Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Max
Rotation Comp per Oct/ per
Minesigth ID Drillhole Quad Oct
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max
16 2 OK 5 -90 0 300 100 100 2 20 2 2 3
1 OK 5 -90 0 90 45 45 3 15 2
2 OK 340 -80 0 300 100 100 2 20 2 2 3
16
1 OK 340 -80 0 90 45 45 3 15 2
 2 OK 80 -85 0 300 100 100 2 20 2 2 3
16
1 OK 80 -85 0 90 45 45 3 15 2
2 OK 330 -90 0 350 150 150 2 20 2 3 4
17
1 OK 330 -90 0 90 45 45 3 12 2
2 OK 40 -90 0 250 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
18
1 OK 40 -90 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 15 -70 0 250 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
19
1 OK 15 -70 0 50 25 30 3 18 2
2 OK 110 -90 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
20
1 OK 110 -90 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 65 -70 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
21
1 OK 65 -70 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 122 -90 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
22
1 OK 122 -90 0 50 20 20 3 18 2
2 OK 100 -90 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
23
1 OK 100 -90 0 70 80 40 3 6 2
2 OK 110 -88 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
24
1 OK 110 -88 0 70 80 40 3 9 2
2 OK 110 -90 0 349 250 100 2 20 2 2 3
25
1 OK 110 -90 0 70 80 40 3 9 2
2 OK 115 80 0 350 220 80 2 20 2 2 3
26
1 OK 115 80 0 100 80 20 3 10 2
2 OK 147 -90 0 349 150 100 2 24 2 2 3
27
1 OK 147 -90 0 50 20 20 3 14 2
2 OK 80 -85 0 350 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
28
1 OK 80 -85 0 70 80 35 3 6 2
2 OK 92 -85 0 350 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
29 1 OK 92 -85 0 70 80 35 3 12 2
Table 14-31: Estimation Parameters for Cu Domain (c). Source: Milpo
Pass Est. Met. Minesight Search Ellipse # Comps Max Max
Rotation Comp per Oct/ per
Minesigth ID Drillhole Quad Oct
AzN DipN DipE Major Minor Vert Min Max
30 2 OK 65 -80 0 350 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
1 OK 65 -80 0 70 80 35 3 6 2
2 OK 52 -80 0 350 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
31
1 OK 52 -80 0 70 80 35 3 9 2
2 OK 70 -90 0 350 250 150 2 20 2 2 3
32
1 OK 70 -90 0 70 80 35 3 9 2
2 OK 53 -90 0 350 250 200 2 20 2 2 3
33
1 OK 53 -90 0 50 35 20 3 10 2
2 OK 50 -90 0 350 250 200 2 16 2 2 3
34
1 OK 50 -90 0 50 35 20 3 12 2
 2 OK 160 -90 0 350 250 200 2 20 2 2 3
35
1 OK 160 -90 0 50 35 20 3 10 2
2 OK 100 53 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
36
1 OK 100 53 0 50 35 20 3 8 2
2 OK 100 -90 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
37
1 OK 100 -90 0 50 35 20 3 8 2
2 OK 100 86 0 350 250 200 2 12 2 2 3
39
1 OK 100 86 0 50 35 20 3 8 2
2 OK 80 -90 0 300 150 150 2 12 2 2 3
40
1 OK 80 -90 0 70 40 30 3 8 2
2 OK 0 -90 0 400 400 150 2 12 2 3 4
41
1 OK 0 -90 0 70 90 25 3 8 2

14.10Model Validation and Sensitivity

The estimated model was validated using the following processes:
 Visual inspection of grades with comparison between blocks and composites;
 Global statistical comparison of the model interpolated using Ordinary Kriging versus the results obtained by as
 Local comparison between the model interpolated using Ordinary Kriging and the Nearest Neighbor resu
 Impact of outlier capping analysis.
SRK completed a validation of the resource estimation, verifying that using the Ordinary Kriging method ge
Visual Validation
Visual inspection was performed using plan sections every 20 meters. The results observed in the blocks show good compar
are presented from Figure 14-11 to Figure 14-14.
Source: SRK
Figure 14-11: Visual Inspection for Zn Element, Body VCN3 Level 3520.
N

ZN (%) LEGEND
 N

PB (%) LEGEND

Source: SRK
Figure 14-12: Visual Inspection for Pb Element, Body VCN3 Level 3520.
 N

CU (%) LEGEND

Source: SRK
Figure 14-13: Visual Inspection for Cu Element, Body VCN3 Level 3520.

N
AG (Oz) LEGEND
Source: SRK
Figure 14-14: Visual Inspection for Ag Element, Body VCN3 Level 3520. Global Statistical Comparison
SRK generated Table 14-32 to Table 14-35, these tables show the comparison between global mean estimated by Ordinary Kr
The comparison shows that percentage error between the estimates is within ±5% in most of the domains for each eleme
Table 14-32: Comparison of OK and NN global grades for Zn domain. Source: SRK
Domain # Min. Max. Mean SD CV # Min. Max. Mean SD CV Relative
blocks OK OK OK blocks NN NN NN Difference
I 4,627 0.19 33.09 6.96 4.43 0.64 4,627 0.01 51.59 6.74 6.78 1.01 -3.34%
II 17,795 0.03 25.06 5.06 3.08 0.61 17,795 0.01 35.33 4.98 4.92 0.99 -1.57%
III 8,374 0.31 19.61 4.33 2.34 0.54 8,374 0.01 28.95 4.18 4.40 1.05 -3.71%
 IV 48,991 0.09 20.50 4.40 2.34 0.53 48,991 0.01 31.67 4.33 4.02 0.93 -1.71%
V 36,026 0.02 19.57 3.69 2.14 0.58 36,026 0.01 32.13 3.69 3.76 1.02 0.00%
VI 31,812 0.01 21.49 3.07 2.60 0.85 31,812 0.01 25.44 3.06 3.76 1.23 -0.33%
VII 51,806 0.05 20.50 4.18 2.41 0.58 51,806 0.01 35.08 4.15 4.12 0.99 -0.70%
VIII 12,867 0.11 17.97 2.08 1.57 0.76 12,867 0.01 34.21 1.98 2.40 1.21 -4.59%
Table 14-33: Comparison of OK and NN global grades for Pb domain. Source: SRK
Domain # Min. Max. Mean SD CV # Min. Max. Mean SD CV Relative
blocks OK OK OK blocks NN NN NN Difference
I 2,630 0.04 12.96 2.32 2.48 1.07 2,630 0.01 18.79 2.70 3.75 1.39 13.9%
II 8,733 0.01 12.79 1.06 1.84 1.74 8,733 0.01 24.41 1.09 2.46 2.27 2.5%
III 16,237 0.01 12.27 2.45 1.76 0.72 16,237 0.01 22.50 2.52 2.98 1.18 3.1%
IV 43,813 0.01 11.34 0.90 1.22 1.36 43,813 0.01 18.85 0.89 2.29 2.56 -0.7%
V 20,343 0.01 14.66 2.70 1.33 0.49 20,343 0.01 23.20 2.75 2.58 0.94 1.9%
VI 15,683 0.01 10.79 1.45 1.61 1.11 15,683 0.01 22.15 1.47 2.60 1.77 1.2%
VII 1,597 0.01 0.28 0.02 0.02 0.97 1,597 0.01 0.73 0.02 0.03 1.63 -5.3%
VIII 6,777 0.01 11.89 0.39 1.01 2.61 6,777 0.01 20.67 0.38 1.43 3.82 -3.5%
IX 15,686 0.01 21.01 1.09 1.64 1.50 15,686 0.01 25.80 1.12 2.30 2.06 2.4%
X 16,126 0.01 5.97 0.16 0.34 2.10 16,126 0.01 10.83 0.15 0.56 3.70 -5.9%
XI 17,634 0.01 14.69 1.03 0.95 0.93 17,634 0.01 21.71 0.99 1.63 1.64 -3.5%
XII 40,412 0.00 6.88 0.33 0.48 1.48 40,412 0.00 17.55 0.34 0.99 2.88 4.1%
XIII 6,627 0.01 9.34 0.70 0.80 1.14 6,627 0.01 15.76 0.75 1.46 1.93 6.1%
Table 14-34: Comparison of OK and NN global grades for Ag domain. Source: SRK
Domain # Min. Max. Mean SD CV # Min. Max. Mean SD C Relative
blocks OK OK OK blocks NN NN V Difference
N
I 2,630 0.15 16.91 3.56 2.72 0.77 2,630 0.01 20.69 3.69 4.10 1.11 3.7%
N
II 8,733 0.07 27.27 1.98 2.67 1.35 8,733 0.01 38.49 2.08 3.60 1.73 4.9%
III 16,237 0.12 26.73 4.68 2.40 0.51 16,237 0.01 54.09 4.74 4.33 0.91 1.3%
IV 43,813 0.04 23.88 1.61 1.59 0.99 43,813 0.01 26.17 1.60 2.62 1.64 -0.8%
V 27,130 0.26 51.09 4.35 2.55 0.59 27,130 0.01 119 4.56 4.51 0.99 4.6%
VI 8,896 0.04 20.10 1.65 1.43 0.87 8,896 0.01 29.50 1.69 2.19 1.30 2.3%
VII 1,597 0.12 2.49 0.60 0.32 0.52 1,597 0.02 5.58 0.63 0.52 0.83 3.5%
VIII 6,777 0.11 11.37 1.11 0.99 0.89 6,777 0.01 18.80 1.15 1.44 1.25 3.7%
IX 15,686 0.10 34.81 2.12 2.12 1.00 15,686 0.01 52.98 2.17 3.06 1.41 2.4%
X 16,126 0.01 6.04 0.79 0.55 0.69 16,126 0.01 11.13 0.79 0.82 1.04 -0.1%
XI 17,634 0.21 23.10 2.22 1.73 0.78 17,634 0.01 30.09 2.18 3.02 1.38 -1.5%
XII 40,412 0.05 7.77 0.87 0.69 0.79 40,412 0.01 17.98 0.91 1.16 1.28 3.4%
XIII 6,627 0.33 18.78 1.77 0.84 0.47 6,627 0.01 30.86 1.79 1.85 1.03 1.2%
Table 14-35: Comparison of OK and NN global grades for Cu domain. Source: SRK
Domain # Min. Max. Mean SD CV # Min. Max. Mean S CV NN Relative
blocks OK OK OK blocks NN D Difference
N
I 12,835 0.01 1.98 0.28 0.24 0.85
N
II 3,446 0.02 1.19 0.30 0.14 0.47 3,446 0.01 3.02 0.30 0.29 0.96 -0.3%
III 49,954 0.01 3.36 0.24 0.15 0.65 49,954 0.01 7.92 0.25 0.27 1.10 4.1%
IV 5,178 0.01 0.26 0.05 0.03 0.51 5,178 0.01 0.86 0.05 0.06 1.06 3.8%
V 15,683 0.01 2.02 0.25 0.22 0.86 15,683 0.01 4.20 0.25 0.33 1.30 0.8%
VI 20,343 0.01 1.20 0.15 0.11 0.73 20,343 0.01 2.44 0.15 0.16 1.05 1.3%
VII 8,374 0.04 3.09 0.64 0.48 0.76 8,374 0.01 5.08 0.65 0.70 1.07 2.3%
VIII 2,036 0.01 0.66 0.11 0.09 0.83 2,036 0.01 1.00 0.10 0.14 1.32 -3.9%
 IX 3,327 0.08 2.55 0.89 0.44 0.50 3,327 0.04 4.76 0.93 0.63 0.68 4.4%
X 26,449 0.01 2.93 0.56 0.39 0.70 26,449 0.01 7.06 0.56 0.54 0.96 0.2%
XI 51,806 0.01 5.55 0.36 0.27 0.74 51,806 0.01 16.45 0.36 0.40 1.09 1.1%
XII 12,867 0.01 0.61 0.06 0.06 1.01 12,867 0.00 1.52 0.06 0.09 1.54 0.0%
In the opinion of SRK, the comparison tables show that no significant bias exists between the Ag, Pb, Zn and Cu grades, based
Local Validation
Swath plots were generated to compare differences between the model estimated by Ordinary Kriging and the model estimated
good correlation for each domain.
Source: SRK
Figure 14-15: SwathPlot Validation (East, North, Elev.) and Probability Plot for ZN (%).
Source: SRK
Figure 14-16: SwathPlot Validation (East, North, Elev.) and Probability Plot for Pb (%).
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-17: SwathPlot Validation (East, North, Elev.) and Probability Plot for Ag (Oz/t).
Source: Milpo
Figure 14-18: SwathPlot Validation (East, North, Elev.) and Probability Plot for Cu (%). Outlier Capping Comparison
Table 14-36 presents analysis of the Ordinary Kriging estimate comparing the input assay data used with and without outlier gr
Table 14-36: Comparison of Model with and without Outlier Capping. Source: Milpo
With Outlier restriction Without Outlier restriction Relative Difference
Tonnes Zn Pb Cu Ag Zn Pb Cu Ag Diff Diff Diff Diff
(t) OK OK OK OK OKU OKU OKU OKU Zn Pb Cu Ag
Category
Measured 19,852,847 3.75 1.15 0.30 2.20 3.84 1.17 0.31 2.40 -2.40% -2.30% -2.60% -9.10%
Indicated 22,346,576 3.70 0.99 0.36 1.88 3.81 1.01 0.37 2.07 -3.00% -1.90% -2.70% -10.10%
Med + Ind 42,199,423 3.72 1.07 0.33 2.03 3.82 1.09 0.34 2.20 -2.70% -2.10% -2.70% -8.20%

14.11Mineral Resource Classification

Block model quantities and grade estimates for El Porvenir Project were classified according to CIM Definition Stan
Mineral Resource classification is typically a subjective concept, industry best practices suggest that resource clas
SRK is satisfied since the geological modelling honours the current geological information and knowledge. T
The classification parameters used for El Porvenir were obtained from neighborhood search calculations, wh
 Measured Resource: required a minimum of three composites within 33 x 33 x 16 m of average distances of th
 Indicated Resource: required a minimum of three composites within 65 x 65 x 32 m of average distances of th
 Inferred Resource: required a minimum of two composites within 100 x 100 x 60 m of average distances of th
The results obtained from this approach were smoothed to provide a geologically sensible classificati
14.11.1 Amended Classification due to Data Artifacts
SRK evaluated the information stored in the Porvenir Database as part of the quality control review procedure discu
1. Missing Sample numbers - A number of orginal assays lacks sample numbers and therefore can not be related ba
2. Missing Laboratory Certificates - 19,495 samples did not have any laboratory certificate.
These affected samples were coded and those blocks considered to be strongly influenced by these samples were labelled and
Figure 14-19 illustrates the final classification across El Porvenir.
 LEGEND
Measured
Indicated
Inferred
Source Milpo
Figure 14-19: Resource Classification across the El Porvenir block model.
14.12 Mineral Resource Statement
CIM Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (May 2014) defines a mineral resource as:
“a concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade
The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity and other geological characteristics of a Mineral Resource are known, estim
The Mineral Resources exclusive of the Mineral Reserves are summarized in Table 14-37
Table 14-37: Mineral Resource Statement for El Porvenir Mine, Pasco Department, Peru, SRK Consulting (Peru) S.A., J
Quantity Grade Contained Metal
Tonnes (Mt) Zn Pb Cu Ag NSR Zn Pb Cu (Kt) Ag
Category (%) (%) (%) (oz/t) US$/t (Kt) (Kt) (Koz)
Measured 3.84 3.87 1.36 0.26 2.54 123.86 148 52 10 9,743
Indicated 4.15 3.7 1.02 0.32 1.93 109.2 154 42 13 8,021
Measured & Indicated 7.99 3.78 1.18 0.29 2.22 116.24 302 94 23 17,764
 Inferred 14.67 4.24 0.95 0.33 1.98 119.76 622 139 49 29,020
Where:
1. The Mineral Resource estimates are prepared in accordance with the "CIM Definition Standards on Minera
2. Mineral Resources have an effective date of 30 June 2017. Fernando Saez, an SRK employee, is the Qualified P
3. Mineral Resources are Exclusive of Mineral Reserves.
4. Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
5. There is no certainty that all or any part of the Mineral Resources estimated will be converted into Mine
6. Mineral resources are reported to a 40.94 US$/t NSR cut-off.
7. NSR cut-off is calculated based on the LOM costs: Mining US$ 24.25 /t, Process US$ 6.37 /t and other costs US$
8. NSR for each block was calculated by multiplying one tonne of mass of each by block grade by its estimate
9. Metal prices considered were US$ 2,767/t Zn, US$ 2,235 /t Pb, US$ 6,794 /t Cu, US$ 21.78 /oz Ag
10. Metallurgical recoveries are based on a recovery versus head grade curve.
11. Metallurgically Recoveries for M&I average head grades: Zn 91.2 %, Pb 84.0%, Cu 32.8%, Ag 64.9%
12. Density was calculated based on each mineralized structure ranging from 2.77 t/m to 4.01 t/m
3 3

13. Mineral Resources, as reported, are undiluted.

14. Mineral Resource tonnage and contained metal have been rounded to reflect the accuracy of the estimat

15 Mineral Reserve Estimates

El Porvenir is an underground mine and has been in operation since 1949, the mine production rate currently range
As described in Section 14.4 and Table 14-5, there are 13 mineralized structures and 40 ore bodies (codified and d
exploitation.
 d June 2017. The database includes a total of 3,117 diamond drill holes with an accumulated length of 523,872.49 m, and 17,127 channel

below in Table 14-4.

tation for each mineralized body based on the results of the sampling analysis of channels and drill holes, considering the structu
er Return (“NSR”). The minimum NSR for the interpretation of the ore bodies is NSR >=$ 15. This value represents the average o
pits provide information about the shape of the mineralized structure that is extrapolated to the adjacent levels or pit. The results present
ir deposit, these are:

lization of galena, sphalerite, chalcopyrite, and silver-bearing sulfosalts (i.e., tetrahedrite);

mineralization of galena, sphalerite, chalcopyrite, and silver-bearing sulfosalts (i.e., tetrahedrite); and
silver-bearing sulfosalts (i.e., tetrahedrite) with quartz, rhodocrosite, and pyrite forms structurally controlled shoots, with dimensions up to 1
breccias, marble, sandstone, limestone, basalt, and quaternary sediments; however economic mineralization only occurs within three o

und the intrusive.

r mineralization type.
mineralized bodies with the greatest average density are C2, V4, V3N y V1204-V5, all have average values greater than 3.8 t/m ). Milpo as
3

Variance
0.39
0.24
0.52
0.59
0.14
0.37
0.21
-
Variance
0.16
0.23
0.69
0.37
0.15
0.47
0.11
0.08
-
0.21
0.32
0.23
 0.35
0.27
0.22
0.01
0.34
0.41
0.17
0.19
0.14
0.17
0.25
ies both in 3D plan view. The following actions were taken:
ine geologists. The strike of some mineralized bodies was changed.

neralized bodies, see Figure 14-1 and Figure 14-2. Furthermore, Figure 14-2 demonstrates that the lithological domains may partly limit the
ance) was composited to 3-m length.
that the interpolation uses the same sections in the block dimensions for each drill hole.
significant statistical changes to the raw data resulted from the compositing process. The comparison between the raw and composited da
 Composited
Data Mean

5.20
1.34
2.45
0.28
alues per element).

ns for Zn, Pb, Ag and Cu.

strike of the mineralized structures, the anisoptropy of the economic mineralization and the statistic behavior of the grades of zinc, lead, sil
ure 14-6 show spatial distribution of the modelled domains.
d more than 10 domains for resource estimation based on Pb, Ag and Cu; however zinc, which

e greatest average grades are: I, II, and III.

of Variation

0.82
0.91
0.89
 1.11
1.05
1.08
1.27
1.07
the greatest average grades are: I, II, and IX.

Co. of
Variation
0.99
2.64
1.45
2.74
1.21
2.47
2.50
2.95
1.95
3.27
1.35
4.14
2.68
h the greatest average grades are: IX and X.

Co. of
Variation
 1.70
1.41
1.36
1.42
1.16
1.50
1.51
3.14
0.80
1.12
1.27
2.02
ith the greatest average grades are: I, and III.

Co. of
Variation
0.91
1.64
1.23
1.80
1.37
1.53
1.00
1.37
1.54
1.47
1.21
1.59
1.46
nce the resultant Mineral Resources estimate. However, the final top cuts used where reviewed in the light of the compounded effect they h
es evaluated.
 Outliers
Distance

-6
-
-
-
-6
-
-6
-6
-6
-6
-
6
-6
-6
-6
-6
-6
6
Outliers
Distance

-6
-6
-6
-
-6
-6
-6
-6
-6
-6
-
-6
-6
6
-
-
-
-6
-
6
-6
6

nner. Variograms were developed for each domain and element. Figure 14-10 illustrates an example of a variogram used in the est
V and IV, respectively.
or, and minor anisotropy axes are related to the variographic contours.

arch Ellipse

Vertical
20
35
15

35
15
75
25
49
15
arch Ellipse

Vertical
35

19

33
 11

30
13
55

arch Ellipse
Vertical
10
20
19
45
25
40
19
50
10
28
20
50
20
30
25
40
16
49
23
41
15
57
15
40
14
33

ch Ellipse
Vert
12
15
22
40
11
25
28
45
10
62
 15
45
10
15
10
35
14
40
38
60
10
65
10
30
7
40

ch Ellipse
Vert
12
33
13
29
28
39
6
20
16
37
10
52
18
30
8
20
12
21
14
58
15
45
15
45
are. The El Porvenir Mineral Resource block size is 6-m east x 6 m-north x 5-m RL. The block model parameters are shown in Table 14-19

ary Kriging and Inverse Distance Weighting (IDW ), with outlier distances of +6 and -6 m. Also, for scenario OK1, a Nearest Neighb
3 3

propriate parameters for the estimation.

e Zn, Ag and Cu elements, and Inverse Distance with anomalous value restriction to report Pb.
e estimation was performed using MineSight (version 12.0-3) resource estimation software.

eometry of the ore bodies.

Max per
Oct

3
 3

Max per
Oct

4
Max
per
Oct

3
 3

Max
per
Oct

3
Max
per
Oct

4
he results obtained by assigning the grade of the Nearest Neighbor;
e Nearest Neighbor results using swath plots; and,

dinary Kriging method generated results better than the inverse distance power 3.

cks show good comparison with the grades of the composites. Given the interpolation radius assigned, there is greater representati
estimated by Ordinary Kriging and Nearest Neighbor methods for regions of the model classified as Measured and Indicated for each estim
domains for each element. Overall the comparison shows that the methods used are valid.

Relative
Difference
-3.34%
-1.57%
-3.71%
 -1.71%
0.00%
-0.33%
-0.70%
-4.59%

Relative
Difference
13.9%
2.5%
3.1%
-0.7%
1.9%
1.2%
-5.3%
-3.5%
2.4%
-5.9%
-3.5%
4.1%
6.1%

Relative
Difference
3.7%
4.9%
1.3%
-0.8%
4.6%
2.3%
3.5%
3.7%
2.4%
-0.1%
-1.5%
3.4%
1.2%
Zn and Cu grades, based on the Ordinary Kriging and nearest neighbor methods.

and the model estimated using Nearest Neighbor method. These plots shown from Figure 14-15 to Figure 14-18 were performed using on

apping Comparison
with and without outlier grade capping. The results show that the differences between the estimations are not based on the material.

e Difference
Diff
Ag

-9.10%
-10.10%
-8.20%

ng to CIM Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (May 2014) by Fernando Saez Rivera, P.Geo. (MAIG 5
ggest that resource classification should consider both the confidence in the geological continuity of the mineralized structures, the
mation and knowledge. The location of the samples and the assay data are sufficiently reliable to support resource evaluation.
d search calculations, which determined the optimum sampling direction and distance to the center of blocks; this premise was used to defi
average distances of the block centroid (wireframe rotation parameters listed in Table 14-20 to Table 14-31).
average distances of the block centroid (wireframe rotation parameters listed in Table 14-20 to Table 14-30).
average distances of the block centroid (wireframe rotation parameters listed in Table 14-20 to Table 14-30).
cally sensible classification and to prevent a “spotted dog” effect. This smoothing was achieved by moving the centroid coordinate

ol review procedure discussed in previous sections. Following this a number of artifacts were used to amend the classification in certain are
e can not be related back to orginal assay certificates. A total of 4,132 samples within the database did not have any sample numb

amples were labelled and their classification reduced to the inferred category (approximately 10 Mt). In other areas of less influence, blocks
s a mineral resource as:
ust in such form, grade or quality and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.
source are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling”.

onsulting (Peru) S.A., June 30, 2017

ained Metal
Ag
(Koz)
9,743
8,021
17,764
 29,020

nition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves", adopted by the CIM Council on May 10, 2014, and the “CIM Estimation of Mineral Resou
employee, is the Qualified Person responsible for the review of Mineral Resource estimate.

will be converted into Mineral Reserves.

6.37 /t and other costs US$ 10.32 /t (metric tonne).

block grade by its estimated process recovery, commercial terms including payable, deduction, penalties and freight costs per each element (Commercial
21.78 /oz Ag

.8%, Ag 64.9%

he accuracy of the estimate and numbers may not add up.

ction rate currently ranges from 6,300 tpd to 6,500 tpd.

re bodies (codified and differentiated in Minesight software). From the 40 ore bodies included in the resource estimation, measured and ind
des a total of 3,117 diamond drill holes with an accumulated length of 523,872.49 m, and 17,127 channel samples with an accumulated leng

based on the results of the sampling analysis of channels and drill holes, considering the structural and lithological controls in 2
m NSR for the interpretation of the ore bodies is NSR >=$ 15. This value represents the average of the mine cost plus the plant cos
he shape of the mineralized structure that is extrapolated to the adjacent levels or pit. The results present an irregular geometry. The resultin

alcopyrite, and silver-bearing sulfosalts (i.e., tetrahedrite);

, chalcopyrite, and silver-bearing sulfosalts (i.e., tetrahedrite); and
ahedrite) with quartz, rhodocrosite, and pyrite forms structurally controlled shoots, with dimensions up to 150 m long, with a vertical extent o
estone, basalt, and quaternary sediments; however economic mineralization only occurs within three of these domains: skarn, breccia,
est average density are C2, V4, V3N y V1204-V5, all have average values greater than 3.8 t/m ). Milpo assigned the mean density value to
3
wing actions were taken:
mineralized bodies was changed.

and Figure 14-2. Furthermore, Figure 14-2 demonstrates that the lithological domains may partly limit the economically mineralized bodies
me sections in the block dimensions for each drill hole.
he raw data resulted from the compositing process. The comparison between the raw and composited data constrained by domains is show
s, the anisoptropy of the economic mineralization and the statistic behavior of the grades of zinc, lead, silver and copper for modelled body
of the modelled domains.
ource estimation based on Pb, Ag and Cu; however zinc, which
I, II, and IX.
re: I, and III.
es estimate. However, the final top cuts used where reviewed in the light of the compounded effect they had on the contained metal, this pr
ed for each domain and element. Figure 14-10 illustrates an example of a variogram used in the estimate and Table 14-15 and Table
related to the variographic contours.
urce block size is 6-m east x 6 m-north x 5-m RL. The block model parameters are shown in Table 14-19. The block size selected by Milpo

Weighting (IDW ), with outlier distances of +6 and -6 m. Also, for scenario OK1, a Nearest Neighbor estimation method was used fo
3 3

nverse Distance with anomalous value restriction to report Pb.

MineSight (version 12.0-3) resource estimation software.
he grade of the Nearest Neighbor;
swath plots; and,

esults better than the inverse distance power 3.

the grades of the composites. Given the interpolation radius assigned, there is greater representativeness in the proximity of the com
 Nearest Neighbor methods for regions of the model classified as Measured and Indicated for each estimation domain.
all the comparison shows that the methods used are valid.
Ordinary Kriging and nearest neighbor methods.

earest Neighbor method. These plots shown from Figure 14-15 to Figure 14-18 were performed using only regions in classified in Measure

ing. The results show that the differences between the estimations are not based on the material.

or Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (May 2014) by Fernando Saez Rivera, P.Geo. (MAIG 5786), an appropriate independent
should consider both the confidence in the geological continuity of the mineralized structures, the quality and quantity of exploration
on of the samples and the assay data are sufficiently reliable to support resource evaluation.
mined the optimum sampling direction and distance to the center of blocks; this premise was used to define the resource categories as follo
centroid (wireframe rotation parameters listed in Table 14-20 to Table 14-31).
centroid (wireframe rotation parameters listed in Table 14-20 to Table 14-30).
centroid (wireframe rotation parameters listed in Table 14-20 to Table 14-30).
o prevent a “spotted dog” effect. This smoothing was achieved by moving the centroid coordinates from the categorized blocks to

previous sections. Following this a number of artifacts were used to amend the classification in certain areas due to uncertainties in the data
ginal assay certificates. A total of 4,132 samples within the database did not have any sample number.

assification reduced to the inferred category (approximately 10 Mt). In other areas of less influence, blocks were downgraded by one resourc
y and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.
interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling”.
es and Mineral Reserves", adopted by the CIM Council on May 10, 2014, and the “CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best P
ponsible for the review of Mineral Resource estimate.

metric tonne).
recovery, commercial terms including payable, deduction, penalties and freight costs per each element (Commercial terms Table 15-4). If the NSR is high

mbers may not add up.

300 tpd to 6,500 tpd.

ted in Minesight software). From the 40 ore bodies included in the resource estimation, measured and indicated resources were estimated
127 channel samples with an accumulated length of 97,104.81 m, totaling 620,977.30 m. Table 14-3 summaries the data used in the Miner

g the structural and lithological controls in 2D and 3D using Leapfrog and Minesight software.
the average of the mine cost plus the plant cost.
sults present an irregular geometry. The resulting solids are modified with the information of the intermediate drill holes between each level.

nsions up to 150 m long, with a vertical extent of up to 350 m.

within three of these domains: skarn, breccia, and limestone. The modelling of these lithological domains was completed using the softwar
/m ). Milpo assigned the mean density value to their respective ore bodies.
3
partly limit the economically mineralized bodies as defined by the selected NSR value.
omposited data constrained by domains is shown in Table 14-7. The results of the basic statistics of the drill holes and composites data in a
zinc, lead, silver and copper for modelled body and an economic criterion of NSR cut- off of U.S$ 15.00.
d effect they had on the contained metal, this process was applied to the composites. The study was conducted for each element using Pro
sed in the estimate and Table 14-15 and Table 14-18 present the parameters selected from the variograms, which were used for the interpo
 Table 14-19. The block size selected by Milpo corresponds to the mining method (cut- and-fill) and the average thickness of the ore bodies

earest Neighbor estimation method was used for validation purposes.

r representativeness in the proximity of the composites, blocks located far away show a suitable degree of smoothing. Examples of the vis
or each estimation domain.
med using only regions in classified in Measured and Indicated categories, in the east, north and vertical directions. SRK considerates that

Geo. (MAIG 5786), an appropriate independent Qualified Person for the purpose of National Instrument 43-101.
ructures, the quality and quantity of exploration data supporting the estimates and the geostatistical confidence in the tonnage and grade es

s used to define the resource categories as follows:

id coordinates from the categorized blocks to the composites. These were then interpolated back into the block model using IDW for each

in certain areas due to uncertainties in the data. These artifacts included:

sample number.

uence, blocks were downgraded by one resource category (from measured to Indicated and from indicated to inferred) to reflect the underly
Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves Best Practice Guidelines", adopted by CIM Council on November 23, 2003.

nt (Commercial terms Table 15-4). If the NSR is higher that NSR cut-off, the block is included in the resource estimate.

sured and indicated resources were estimated for only 37 ore bodies. From these 37 ore bodies, 51.3% of the total measured and indicated
aries the data used in the Mineral Resources estimate.

drill holes between each level. Finally, the interpretation was verified and modified using plan views every 20 m.

as completed using the software Leapfrog Geo.

holes and composites data in all mineralized structures show that the difference in mean between the assay and composites for all element
ted for each element using Probability Plots such as that illustrated in Figure 14-9. The criteria for identifying outliers applied by Milpo
which were used for the interpolation process.
age thickness of the ore bodies (approximately 6 m).
moothing. Examples of the visual validation plans for each element
ections. SRK considerates that these results obtained generally show

ce in the tonnage and grade estimates. Appropriate classification criteria should aim at integrating these concepts to delineate regular area

lock model using IDW for each category to a distance slightly greater than the size of the blocks (6 m).

o inferred) to reflect the underlying uncertainty in the raw assay data (approximately 3 Mt). In the opinion of SRK, if no information exists to
e total measured and indicated resources are found in the following structures: 1204A Vein (Code Id 8), Carmen Norte 3 Vein (Code
and composites for all elements is less than 5% with the variation coefficient decrease in the composites due to the change of suppor
ng outliers applied by Milpo considered the following: identify a pronounced break in the probability curve that occurs above/greater th
cepts to delineate regular areas at similar resource classification.

RK, if no information exists to support the reported grades (i.e., laboratory certificates), which correspondes to all data prior to the year 201
Carmen Norte 3 Vein (Code Id 13) and Porvenir 9 Vein (Code Id 30). Structures included as part of reserve estimation present
ue to the change of support. These results show that the selected composite length is valid.
ve that occurs above/greater than 95% probability.
to all data prior to the year 2011, the classification of the resource has been down-grades to either indicated or inferred, located within curre
reserve estimation present sufficient continuity for an adequate
or inferred, located within current production or previously mined zones.