update & review ni 43-101 technical report...

P a g e | i

UPDATE & REVIEW NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE DON

MARIO UPPER MINERALIZED ZONE, SANTA CRUZ

REGION OF BOLIVIA

Prepared for:

EMPRESA MINERA PAITITI S.A. Calle 6 este N° 7 Barrio Equipetrol

Santa Cruz Bolivia

Report Prepared by

Gino Zandonai, Mining Engineer MSc. Mining

Av. La Dehesa 1201 Oficina 408, Torre Norte Lo Barnechea, Santiago

Chile

Email: gino [email protected] Tel: +56 9 97915596

September 30, 2013

Page ii

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER Copyright (and any other applicable intellectual property rights) in this document and any accompanying data or models is reserved by DGCS S.A., Exploration and Mining Consultants ("DGCS") and is protected by international copyright and other laws. This document may not be utilized or relied upon for any purpose other than that for which it is stated within and DGCS shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused by such use or reliance. In the event that the recipient of this document wishes to use the content of this document in support of any purpose beyond or outside that which it is expressly stated or for the raising of any finance from a third party where the document is not being utilized in its full form for this purpose, the recipient shall, prior to such use, present a draft of any report or document produced by it that may incorporate any of the content of this document to DGCS for review so that DGCS may ensure that this is presented in a manner which accurately and reasonably reflects any results or conclusions produced by DGCS. The use of this document is strictly subject to terms licensed by DGCS to its client as the recipient of this document and unless otherwise agreed by DGCS, this does not grant rights to any third party. This document shall only be distributed to any third party in full as provided by DGCS and may not be reproduced or circulated in the public domain (in whole or in part) or in any edited, abridged or otherwise amended form unless expressly agreed in writing by DGCS. In the event that this document is disclosed or distributed to any third party, no such third party shall be entitled to place reliance upon any information, warranties or representations which may be contained within this document and the recipient of this document shall indemnify DGCS against all and any claims, losses and costs which may be incurred by DGCS relating to such third parties. DGCS SA 2013

Page iii

Table of Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction and Overview ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Location, Property Description, and Ownership .................................................................... 1 1.3 Geology and Mineralization ...................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Pit Optimization ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.5 Mine Planning and Design ........................................................................................................ 4

1.5.1 Mining Method .................................................................................................................... 5 1.5.2 Description of Cutbacks (Phases) ................................................................................... 6

1.6 Resource and Reserve Estimates ........................................................................................... 7 1.7 Mineral Processing ..................................................................................................................... 8 1.8 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 9 1.9 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 10

2 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 11

2.1 Qualified Person and Site Visits ............................................................................................. 11

3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS .............................................................................................. 11 4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION .......................................................................... 12

4.1 Location ..................................................................................................................................... 12 4.2 Mineral and Surface Rights .................................................................................................... 13

5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES AND INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PHYSIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................................................... 15

5.1 Accessibility ............................................................................................................................... 15 5.2 Climate ....................................................................................................................................... 16 5.3 Local Resources and Infrastructure ...................................................................................... 16

5.3.1 Workforce .......................................................................................................................... 16 5.3.2 Power ................................................................................................................................. 16 5.3.3 Land Uses ......................................................................................................................... 17 5.3.4 Water .................................................................................................................................. 17 5.3.5 Camp Infrastructure ......................................................................................................... 17

5.4 Physiography ............................................................................................................................ 17

6 HISTORY .......................................................................................................................................... 18

6.1 Don Mario LMZ History............................................................................................................ 18 6.2 Don Mario UMZ ........................................................................................................................ 19

7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION ................................................................... 21

7.1 Regional Geology ..................................................................................................................... 21 7.2 Property Geology ..................................................................................................................... 22 7.3 Regional Mineralization ........................................................................................................... 24 7.4 Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone ...................................................................................... 24

8 DEPOSIT TYPE ............................................................................................................................... 26 9 EXPLORATION ............................................................................................................................... 26

Page iv

9.1 UMZ Exploration ....................................................................................................................... 27

10 DRILLING ......................................................................................................................................... 28

10.1 Upper Mineralized Zone (UMZ).............................................................................................. 30

11 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS, AND SECURITY ........................................................ 31

11.1 Drill Core Sample Recovery ................................................................................................... 31

11.1.1 Drill Core Recovery for the UMZ .................................................................................... 31

11.2 Geotechnical Logging of Drill Core ........................................................................................ 33 11.3 Density Determinations at Drill Core ..................................................................................... 33 11.4 Geological Logging of Drill Core ............................................................................................ 33 11.5 Drill Core Sampling .................................................................................................................. 33 11.6 UMZ Sample Preparation and Analysis ................................................................................ 35 11.7 Sample Security ....................................................................................................................... 35

12 DATA VERIFICATION .................................................................................................................... 36

12.1 UMZ Data Verification ............................................................................................................. 36

13 MINERAL PROCESSING .............................................................................................................. 37

13.1 Copper Leach and Flotation Tests (Historical Data) ........................................................... 37 13.2 Copper Leach-Precipitation-Flotation (LPF) Testing (2009-2010) ................................... 38

13.2.1 Ore Characterization ........................................................................................................ 39 13.2.2 Bond Index ........................................................................................................................ 40 13.2.3 Flowsheet for the UMZ Ore ............................................................................................ 41

14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES ........................................................................................... 42

14.1 Mineral Resource Database ................................................................................................... 42 14.2 Geological Model ...................................................................................................................... 42 14.3 Mineral Resource Estimation.................................................................................................. 43

15 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES .............................................................................................. 44

15.1 Optimization Method ................................................................................................................ 44

15.1.1 Open-Pit Optimization for the UMZ ............................................................................... 44 15.1.2 Optimization Parameters ................................................................................................. 44 15.1.3 Pit Optimization ................................................................................................................. 45

16 MINING METHODS ........................................................................................................................ 47

16.1 Open Pit Mining ........................................................................................................................ 47

16.1.1 Mine Planning and Design .............................................................................................. 49 16.1.2 Description and Design of Pushbacks .......................................................................... 51 16.1.3 Mine Schedule .................................................................................................................. 52

17 RECOVERY METHODS ................................................................................................................ 53 18 PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................................... 53 19 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS ..................................................................................... 54 20 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND SOCIAL COMMUNITY IMPACT ........ 54

20.1 UMZ Permits ............................................................................................................................. 54

Page v

20.2 UMZ Environmental Liabilities ................................................................................................ 54 20.3 UMZ Mine Closure ................................................................................................................... 55

21 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS .......................................................................................... 55 22 Economic Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 56 23 ADJACENT PROPERTIES ............................................................................................................ 56 24 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION ..................................................................... 56 25 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................. 56 26 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................. 57 27 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 60

Page vi

FIGURES Figure 1-1 Regional Geological Map...................................................................................................... 2 Figure 1-2 UMZ Pushbacks 1, 2 3 and 4 respectivately in Plan View .............................................. 6 Figure 1-3 Flotation Flowsheet Diagram of the Don Mario Plant ....................................................... 8 Figure 5-1 Location Map ........................................................................................................................ 12 Figure 5-2 Location of the Don Mario Concession and Contiguous Concessions Controlled by Orvana ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 8-1 Average Grade Profile through the UMZ .......................................................................... 25 Figure 11-1 Plan Map of Cerro Don Mario Showing LMZ and UMZ Drill Hole Collar Locations and Hole Traces ....................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 12-1 Graph of Recovery with Depth for UMZ Drilling ............................................................ 32 Figure 14-5 UMZ Flotation Flowsheet .................................................................................................. 41 Figure 15-1 Geological Model ............................................................................................................... 42 Figure 16-1 Mine Design Parameters for UMZ .................................................................................. 48 Figure 16-2 End of September 2013 Pit Design Layout ................................................................... 49 Figure 18-2 UMZ Flotation Circuit ........................................................................................................ 53 Figure 19-1 Project Infrastructure ......................................................................................................... 54 Figure 20-1 UMZ Waste Dump Design................................................................................................ 55

Page vii

TABLES Table 1-1 Mineral Resources for the Don Mario UMZ Project as at September 30, 2013. ........... 3 Table 1-2 Mineral Resources in the stockpiles as at September 30, 2013 ...................................... 3 Table 1-3 Revised Total Mineable Inventory of Sulphides and Transitional Ores by phases ....... 4 Table 1-4 Life of Mine Plan ....................................................................................................................... 5 Table 1-5 Final Pit Ore Reserves September 30, 2012 ....................................................................... 7 Table 1-6 Stockpile Ore Reserves September 30, 2012 ..................................................................... 7 Table 5-1 EMIPA Mineral Concessions ............................................................................................... 14 Table 6-1 Road Segment Distances .................................................................................................... 15 Table 7-1 History of the Don Mario Property ...................................................................................... 18 Table 8-1 Generalized Geology of the Bolivian Shield and Lithologies on the Property (Curro, 1997) .......................................................................................................................................................... 22 Table 10-1 Exploration Work on the Don Mario Property ................................................................. 27 Table 10-2 Geochemical Samples from the Don Mario Property (from AMEC-2008 report) ...... 28 Table 11-1 Summary of Drilling by Project and By Type .................................................................. 29 Table 11-2 Drilling Not Directly for Mineral Exploration at Don Mario ............................................ 29 Table 11-3 Upper Mineralized Zone Drill Campaigns ....................................................................... 30 Table 12-1 Drill Core Recovery with Depth for the Orvana 2004 and 2007 UMZ Drill Campaigns .................................................................................................................................................................... 32 Table 12-2 Summary of Sample Preparation and Analysis for the Don Mario Property .............. 34 Table 14-1 Sulphide Locked-Cycle Test Projection of Concentrate Grades and Recoveries for Sulphide Ore ............................................................................................................................................. 38 Table 14-2 KCA UMZ Metallurgical Recovery Projections (Flotation Only) ................................... 38 Table 14-3 Element content by composite .......................................................................................... 39 Table 14-4 Mineral content by composite ........................................................................................... 39 Table 14-5 Copper Deportment ............................................................................................................ 40 Table 14-6 Bond Index of the Ore Types .......................................................................................... 400 Table 14-7 Grind Tests of Ore Types. 498 g Sample, 65% Solids, feed size – 10 mesh .......... 41 Table 15-1 UMZ Mineral Resource Estimates Insitu and Stockpiles. Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 16-1 Pit Optimization Parameters.............................................................................................. 45 Table 16-2 Ultimate Pit Shell at $21.29 NSR Cutoff September 30, 2013. ................................. 446 Table 16-3 Final Pit Ore Reserves September 30, 2012 ................................................................ 446 Table 16-4 Stockpile Ore Reserves September 30, 2012 ................................................................ 47 Table 17-1 Ore Tonnage for Designed Pushbacks ........................................................................... 50 Table 17-2 Production Schedule ........................................................................................................... 51

Page viii

GLOSSARY OF TERMS and ABBREVIATIONS – Units of Measure 3D three dimensional Ag silver Au gold AutoCAD Program of Computer Aided Design Bulk density tonnes per cubic metre of loose (broken) rock CAF cost adjustment factor (Whittle) Cu copper EMIPA Empresa Minera Paititi S.A. g gram g/t grams/tonne has hectares hr hour k thousand KCA Kappes Cassiday & Associates kg kilogram – unit of weight kg/t kilogram per tonne km kilometres – unit of distance kW-h kilowatt-hour lb pound LOM Life of Mine LPF Leaching-Precipitation-Flotation metallurgical recovery process m3 cubic metre – unit of volume M mega or million masl metres above sea level Mcf thousand cubic feet Mm3 million cubic metres m metre mm millimetres Mt million tonnes Mtpa million tonnes per annum No number NCL NCL Ingeniería y Construcción S.A. NPV net present value NSR Net Smelter Return oz troy ounce RL reference level (elevation) ROM run-of-mine (ore as mined, and sent for processing) sg specific gravity (weight per unit volume of in-situ rock - unbroken) SXEW Solution Extraction/Electro-Winning t tonne metric (1,000 kg) tpa tonnes per annum tpd tonnes per day tpm tonnes per month tpm3 tonnes per cubic metre USD United States Dollar – currency Gemcom-Whittle™ Whittle suite of mining software, for optimization

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Report comprises DGCS SA (DGCS)’s update and review of the NI 43-101 technical report on the Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone, (Don Mario or the Project) located in the Santa Cruz, Region of Bolivia, and specifically the revision of the latest NI 43-101 resource and reserve estimation report dated November 23, 2012 prepared by Kminante Consultores Ltda of Chile and the Production Scheduling report dated July 2013 prepared by Cube Consulting of USA. The Technical Report was prepared for Empresa Minera Paititi S.A. (“EMIPA”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Orvana Minerals Corp (“Orvana”), a Canadian company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“ORV”). Orvana owns the Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone Cu-Au-Ag deposit (“UMZ”) in eastern Bolivia.

1.1 Introduction and Overview The Don Mario district, located in the Santa Cruz Department, Bolivia, includes three deposits: 1) the Lower Mineralized Zone (“LMZ”) gold deposit, now depleted, 2) the Las Tojas (“LT”) gold deposit, now depleted, and 3) the Upper Mineralized Zone (“UMZ”) copper-gold-silver deposit, now being mined. Mr. Gino Zandonai of DGCS SA Mining Consultants from Santiago, Chile (“Consultant”) was retained by Empresa Minera Paititi S.A. (“EMIPA”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Orvana Minerals Corp, to prepare an independent competent person report (“CPR”) of The Mineral Resources and Reserves of The Don Mario Open Pit Mine. The CPR will review the latest NI 43-101 resource and reserve estimates dated December 18, 2012 prepared by Kminante Consultores of Chile and the Production Scheduling report dated July 2013 prepared by Cube Consulting of USA. The consultant is an independent qualified person for the purposes of National Instrument NI 43-101 (NI 43-101”). This report summarizes a revision of the current latest resource and reserve estimation carried out in 2012 and the mine plan developed in 2013. The Consultant reviewed in details the re categorization of the mineable ores for processing and key issues related to the changes of the mining and mineral processing strategy and redefined a new schedule for processing as ores the sulphides and transitional ores and stockpiling the oxide ores and the ores with high contents of talc were sent to the stockpile.

1.2 Location, Property Description, and Ownership The UMZ is located in the San Juan Canton, Chiquitos Province, Santa Cruz Department, eastern Bolivia approximately 380 km from the departmental capital of Santa Cruz de la Sierra and 76 km from the nearest town, San Juan de Chiquitos. Its coordinates are 17o45’S latitude and 59o47’W longitude. The property consists of 11 contiguous concessions covering 70,100 has. EMIPA retains the mineral rights to these concessions. EMIPA is a valid existing corporation under the laws of Bolivia and is duly qualified to carry out business, own property, and extract minerals in accordance with Bolivian laws and regulations. Bolivian law allows for up to 100% foreign ownership of all Bolivian corporations as well as up to 100% foreign ownership of interests in mining concessions.

1.3 Geology and Mineralization The Don Mario district is located in the southwest portion of the Precambrian Brazilian shield (Figure 1-1). This shield is composed of a gneissic basement with well-developed belts of Mid- to Upper Proterozoic amphibolites-facies schistose rocks intruded by granitic intrusions. The Bolivian portion of the shield is also known as the Paragua craton; it is up to 270 km wide and bordered by two parallel orogenic belts of mid- to late Proterozoic age: 1) the Sunsas Mobile Belt along its western edge and 2) the Aguapei Mobile Belt along its eastern border. The LMZ and UMZ deposits are located within the Cristal Schist Belt, which is composed principally of quartz-muscovite and quartz-biotite schists surrounded by gneiss to the north, south, and east and by the Señoritas granite to the west. The Las Tojas gold deposit is located in the Eastern Schist Belt, which is located east of the Cristal Schist Belt. The UMZ mineralization is hosted by a package of calc-silicate schists, which are largely composed of tremolite, diopside, ophicalcite, dolomite and talc. The deposit may be a metamorphosed carbonate replacement deposit or skarn. The UMZ is oval in plan, strikes southeast-northwest, dips generally to the northeast at about 35o-60o, extends for about 500 m along strike, has a width of 100 to 150 m, and a thickness of 20 to 100 m. The rocks are located in the hanging wall of a shear zone, which shear zone hosted the LMZ gold mineralization. Gold production from the LMZ exceeded 420,000 ounces from 2003 to 2009. Four ore types have been defined: 1) Porous, 2) Oxide, 3) Transition, and 4) Sulphide (KCA-2008 Report). A large portion of the UMZ is oxidized to depths of up to 50 m and this is where the Porous and Oxide ore types are located; malachite, azurite, chrysocolla, and pitch limonite are the principal copper minerals. The oxidized zone is underlain by the Transition ore type, which is comprised of the aforementioned oxide minerals as well as the sulphide minerals cited below plus chalcocite. The Sulphide ore type underlies this zone and is principally comprised of chalcopyrite, pyrite, bornite, galena, and sphalerite with native gold. Overall, the copper mineralization tends to be more evenly distributed whereas gold and silver are more irregular throughout the deposit. Figure 1-1 Regional Geological Map

The mineral resources for the Don Mario Mine have been estimated using the latest block model generated in December 2012. Table 1-1 shows the latest mineral resource statement of the UMZ using the latest block model (Dec 2012) and topography dated September 30, 2013. Table 1-2 shows the stockpile resource estimate as of September 30, 2013.

The current mineral resources (measured and indicated) of the UMZ is 1.98Mtons grading 1.19% Cu, 1.14 Au g/t and 34.72 Ag g/t. Table 1-1 Mineral Resources for the Don Mario UMZ Project as at September 30, 2013.

Table 1-2 Mineral Resources in the stockpiles as at September 30, 2013

MINERALIZATION CLASSIFICATION TONNAGE (Ktonnes)

Cu [%]

Au [g/t]

Ag [g/t]

NSR [$/t]

Measured 564.24 1.25 1.22 32.31 80.36 Indicated 850.25 1.14 1.05 33.91 73.41 Inferred 10.91 0.77 0.89 19.41 51.86 Measured 202.55 1.23 1.21 37.99 55.74 Indicated 369.86 1.18 1.16 38.49 53.98 Inferred 51.62 1.04 0.93 49.67 50.55 Mea+Ind 1,986.90 1.19 1.14 34.72 69.97 Inf 62.53 0.99 0.92 44.39 50.78

2,049.42 1.18 1.13 35.02 69.38

Measured 0.26 1.41 1.17 75.59 72.08 Indicated 0.37 1.35 1.06 82.84 70.19 Inferred 5.10 1.61 1.33 50.81 73.90 Measured 49.78 1.34 0.75 46.64 56.01 Indicated 98.03 1.25 0.74 39.50 51.99 Inferred 21.75 1.29 0.93 40.42 56.66 Measured 0.32 1.04 1.16 20.03 50.30 Indicated 0.81 2.11 3.13 14.04 110.3 Mea+Ind 149.57 1.29 0.76 41.87 53.72 Inf 26.85 1.35 1.01 42.4 59.9

176.42 1.30 0.80 41.9 54.7

Transitional

Sulphide

Subtotal Oxides

Mineral Resources for the Don Mario UMZ Project (September 30, 2013)

Subtotal Sulphide + Transitional

TOTAL Oxides

TOTAL Sulphide + Transitional

Oxides (Talc)

Oxides (Tremolite)

Oxides (Diopside)

MINERALIZATION TONNAGE (Ktonnes)

Cu [%]

Au [g/t]

Ag [g/t] CLASSIFICATION

Open Pit UMZ ( Oxide ) 268.46 1.75 2.66 76.10 MEASURED

Stock 4 (Oxido Pre estriping) 267.78 1.96 1.89 21.62 MEASURED

Mini Pit (Dolomita) OXIDE 190.20 1.96 1.89 21.62 MEASUREDDeposito PlantaStock Planta Reserve (*) 245.00 1.78 1.79 75.49 MEASUREDStock Planta No Reserve (**) 198.56 1.74 1.56 57.35 MEASUREDStock Talco 434.43 1.78 2.21 32.50 MEASUREDStock Dolomita 182.32 1.66 1.84 50.63 MEASUREDStock Tremolita 94.12 1.78 1.57 31.60 MEASUREDTotal 1,880.87 1.81 2.01 45.49

1.4 Pit Optimization Cube Consulting Inc. carried out in July 2013 the LOM plan for the Don Mario Mine (the pit optimization and the subsequent mine design and mine schedule) using the valid resource block model generated in 2008 by AMEC Consultants and the updated topographic and geological solids data provided by EMIPA as of end of May 2013 topography.

DGCS reviewed the current inventory of the UMZ due to the re-classification of the ores by phases and table 1-3 shows the current mineral reserve inventory using the topography dated September 30, 2013. Only phases 2, 3 and 4 are the remaining phases of the UMZ. After examining the operational issues, the current designs and the resource inventory, there is no need to redesign the phases.

Table 1-3 Revised Total Mineable Inventory of Sulphides and Transitional Ores by Phases

The slight difference between the measured and indicated resources of the UMZ and the volumetrics of the phases is due to the rounding.

The phases from the 2011 NI 43-101 report were engineered in order to satisfy the new metallurgical flotation recovery process to process sulphides and transitional ores with low contents of talc.

1.5 Mine Planning and Design Cube Consulting used the existing pushback designs to produce the current monthly mine design and schedule. The final LOM schedule was produced based operating parameters provided by EMIPA the mine and a daily ore production of 2,700tpd. The new mine plan will process only Sulphides and Transition ores. The Oxides and Porous ores are stockpiled and the Talc ore is sent to the Oxide Talc stockpile.

EMIPA has modified the mineral processing layout of the plant in order to process only Sulphides and Transitional ores. As of September 30, 2013, only the flotation unit works and processes these ores.

Due to this change, the mineral reserves changed and as of September 30th, 2013 the new mineral reserves are 2.05 Mtons instead of 2.44Mtons that included Oxides and Porous ores in the previous NI 43-101. The difference remains as part of the mineral inventory of the Don Mario Mine with the exception of the Talc which has been classified as resource stock pile.

Table 1-4 summarizes the mine schedule by annual periods and months that feed the flotation plant with 720ktpa from in situ Transition and Sulphide ores.

In Appendix 1 are the mine production schedules for years 2014, 2015 and 2016 respectively broken by ore and waste (Cube, 2013).

Phases TONNAGE (Ktonnes)

Cu [%]

Au [g/t]

Ag [g/t]

PH2 649.07 1.27 1.00 50.85 PH3 1,395.38 1.12 1.17 26.86 PH4 19.88 1.21 1.02 35.30 Total 2,064.33 1.17 1.12 34.49

Table 1-4 Life of Mine Plan

1.5.1 Mining Method UMZ is an open-pit operation. The ore and waste are mined out in 5-m benches loaded and hauled using small mining equipment, including haulage trucks with a 20-25t capacity. The overall mining sequence was developed through a series of four mining phase.

1.5.2 Description of Cutbacks (Phases) The mining pushbacks are contained by the outline of the Whittle ultimate pit shell. The designs retain some 96% of the ore tonnage in the Whittle ultimate pit shell. The Pushbacks used are the same used by Cube Consulting since there is no room for changes or improvements due to the small tonnage involved. Figure 1-2 shows the Pushbacks 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively. As of September 30, 2013, Pushback 1 has been completely depleted.

Figure 1-2 UMZ Pushbacks 1, 2 3 and 4 respectively in Plan View

Cube Consulting stated that the phases were defined and designed focused on accessing the best NSR values at the beginning of the production plan base on the mining parameters provided by Orvana. This methodology is seen as the most appropriate rather than using the concept of copper solubility (CuS/CuT) since the LPF process has been discontinued.

1.6 Resource and Reserve Estimates The resource model has not been updated and the valid block model remains the one generated in 2012. Due to the changes on the recovery process, only the Oxides, Sulphides and Transitional ores will be processed and as such, they are eligible to be reported as proven and probable reserves. The NSR cut-off value use to define the proven and probable reserves was 21.49$/ton within the Measured and Indicated resources of the final pit. The September 30, 2013 in situ mineral reserves are shown in the Table 1-5. Table 1-6 shows the reserves of the stockpiles. Table 1-5 Final Pit Ore Reserves September 30, 2013

Table 1-6 Stockpile Ore Resources and Reserves September 30, 2013


Cu [%]

Au [g/t]


Open Pit UMZ ( Oxide ) Measured 268.5 1.75 2.66 76.10 MEASURED

Stock 4 (Oxido Pre estriping) Measured 267.8 1.98 1.90 17.94 MEASURED

Mini Pit (Dolomita) OXIDE Measured 190.2 1.96 1.89 21.62 MEASURED

Deposito PlantaStock oxides (tremolite-diopside) Measured 233.3 1.80 1.79 76.67 MEASURED

Stock oxide (Talco-Dolomita-Tremolite) Measured 198.6

1.74 1.56 57.35 MEASUREDStock Talco Measured 434.4 1.78 2.21 32.50 MEASUREDStock Dolomita Measured 182.3 1.66 1.84 50.63 MEASUREDStock Tremolita Measured 94.1 1.78 1.57 31.60 MEASURED

Total 1,869.1 1.81 2.01 45.49


Cu [%]

Au [g/t]

Ag [g/t] NSR [$/t]

Transition + Sulfides Proven 11.7 1.45 1.81 52.05 105.85

Mineral Reserves Of Stock Pile (September 30, 2013)

Mineral Resources of Stockpiles for the Don Mario UMZ Project (September 30, 2013)

1.7 Mineral Processing The current Don Mario grinding plant is based on a SAG-ball milling closed-circuit and the ore is its treatment capacity depends on the type of ore to be fed. Extensive mineral testing has been completed through the mine life of the Don Mario Mine (LMZ and UMZ projects) and the flotation skills are very high. The metallurgical treatment strategy for Don Mario Mine comprises the recovery of copper, gold and silver from both freshly mined ore. The flowsheet used for the recovery of copper, gold and silver from ore is based on that utilized for a number of years at the mine. Figure 1-3 Flotation Flowsheet Diagram of the Don Mario Plant

1.8 Conclusions

• EMIPA’s decision to discontinue the LPF processing operation due to the lower performance of the recovery and high costs has proven to be the right decision.

• The current flotation layout, the understanding of the flotation process and the knowledge of the quality of the ores by the plant operators are currently showing to be viable for the recovery of the copper, gold, and silver from the Sulphides and Transition ores.

• There is no need to adjust the current layout of the mine. The current phases engineered by Cube Consulting can be used to prepare the LOM plan of the Don Mario Mine. The rest of the LOM has to be dealt on a monthly basis in order to ensure the ore control process.

• EMIPA’s engineers and geologists have taken a strategic decision to return to the original mineralization model (Porous, Oxides, Transition and Sulphides) to mine the UMZ. All oxides ores and ores with high content of talc are sent to the stockpile.

• The current reserve model has been reduced to 1.97Mtons due to the recategorization of resources and reserves.

1.9 Recommendations The Don Mario Mine is currently in commercial production. It is recommended that:

• Based on the changes made in the plant, a new selective ore extraction plan has to be implemented in order to process selectively the Sulphide and Transition ores. The ore control will play a key role to increase the performance of the flotation plant.

• The remaining years of the mine life of the UMZ are mainly Phases or Pushbacks 2, 3 and 4. Phase 1 has been depleted.

• Phase 4 due to the its small size (25Ktons) that can be even postponed the mining in order to minimize costs for the time being.

• In order to increase the recovery and the grades of the concentrates produced by EMIPA, a strategic change will have to be made in the current LOM. The UMZ needs to expose Sulphide ores as soon as possible. The mine has to continue accelerating the development of Phase 3 where the Sulphide ore has the best copper, gold and silver grades with lower contents of Talc in parallel with Phase 2.

• Ore control geologists will need to work close to the surveyors to minimize the dilution with ores

with talc contents, especially on the contact zones. • The consultant recommends to implement a gravimetric circuit within the current plant layout to

increase the gold recovery.

• For the oxide ores, the consultant recommends to look other options such as flotation with reagents such as hydroxamatics with companies like Oxflo and AxisHouse from South Africa.

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Qualified Person and Site Visits The qualified person in charge of the elaboration of this document is Mr. Gino Zandonai and he is an Independent Consultant of EMIPA and Orvana. The Consultant visited the mine site on September 26, 2013 to acquire the data and review with EMIPA’s personnel the new operational aspects of the mine and the processing plant. This Technical Report is based on various documents, including previous Technical Reports NI 43-101 and the mine plan prepared by Cube Consulting Ltd. The Consultant is of the opinion, that the previous NI 43-101-compliant Technical Report prepared by Kminante Consultores Ltd is dated and the statement of the resources and reserves should be amended. At this point where the UMZ has less than two years of mine life, no new resource estimation is needed and it is advised to recategorize the mineral reserves accordingly. This Technical Report is a revision of the previous 2012 NI 43-101 Technical Report and the pit optimization, pit design and scheduling prepared by Cube Consulting in July 2013. The effective date of this Technical Report is October 30, 2013. The Consultant understands that this Technical Report will be used in support of Orvana’s disclosure of material information. 3 RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS The Consultant sourced information from the previous NI 43-101 technical and the LOM report prepared by Cube Consulting in July 2013.

4 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION

4.1 Location The Don Mario district is located within the San Juan Canton, Chiquitos Province, Santa Cruz Department in Eastern Bolivia, about 380 km east of the departmental capital of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, at an approximate position of 59º47’ W and 17º15’ S (Figure 4-1). The district includes the LMZ, where about 420,000 ounces were produced by principally underground mining methods from 2003 to 2009, the LT gold deposit, located 12 km from the Don Mario mine infrastructure and mined by open-pit methods from 2009 to 2011, and the UMZ, located on the Cerro Pelado overlying the LMZ zone and which is currently being mined. Figure 4-1 Location Map

4.2 Mineral and Surface Rights The Don Mario district consists of 11 contiguous mineral concessions covering approximately 70,100 ha (“Property”) (Figure 4-2 and Table 4-1). The Bolivian Government grants concessions conferring the right to explore, exploit, refine, and sell all mineral substances within the concession’s borders for an indefinite period. The Superintendent of Mines for the Department of Santa Cruz has granted EMIPA a 100% interest in the Mineral Concessions listed in Table 4-1 and, as a result, EMIPA has all the required rights to develop, mine and market the minerals and metals within its boundaries. The cancellation of concessions occurs only if the required annual mining patent (approximately $24 per unit for the first five years and approximately $48 per unit each additional year) is not paid. At the effective date of this report, all mineral concession fees for the 11 concessions have been paid by EMIPA as evidenced by receipts provided by the Servicio Nacional de Geología y Técnica de Minas. Figure 4-2 Location of the Don Mario Concession and Contiguous Concessions Controlled by Orvana

The perimeters of the mineral concessions have not been surveyed or physically marked in the field with the exception of Point 1 of the Don Mario Mineral Concession, which was surveyed with reference to the nearest National Topographic System datum point. The UMZ deposit is located in the Don Mario concession. Table 4-1 EMIPA Mineral Concessions

All mineral substances in Bolivia belong to the State. A mineral concession conveys to the owner of the concession the exclusive rights to carry out any or all of the following mining activities: prospecting and exploration, exploitation (mining), beneficiation of ores, smelting and refining, and marketing of minerals and metals. The Bolivian government, through the Mining Code, Law No. 1777 of March 17, 1997, recognizes mining activities to be projects of national interest and of public utility. This recognition gives preference to mining rights over other surface rights or competing economic interests such as forestry or agriculture. If necessary, a mine operator can use arbitration and expropriation procedures to acquire use, surface easements, or water rights owned by third parties, if such rights or easements are required to operate a mine. In accordance with Articles 34 and 35 of the Mining Code, a concession owner is entitled to erect and construct within or outside his concession all the facilities and means of communication and transportation deemed necessary to carry out the activities permitted under the Mining Code. Within the perimeter of the concession, the concession owner may use the lands under public domain without charge, including extracting construction materials, timber and other materials from such lands. The sale and purchase of public lands is administered by the National Service of Agrarian Reform, in accordance with the provisions of the National Agrarian Reform Law. There is currently a nation-wide government moratorium on adjudicating any new land titles for agricultural property, effectively precluding EMIPA from the outright purchase of surface rights on the Property. Articles 36 and 37 of the Mining Code address the waters freely in the public domain as well as waters that flow out of or through the concession. These surface waters are subject to the Law on Waters, the Environmental Law and other dispositions governing water resources.

A referendum at the end of January, 2009 approved the revised Bolivian constitution. Changes to governmental regulations concerning mining activities, environmental compliance, foreign ownership of property, and export controls and repatriation of profits are included in the new Constitution and could affect the ownership of the Property if and when they are implemented. 5 ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES AND INFRASTRUCTURE, AND

PHYSIOGRAPHY

5.1 Accessibility The Don Mario mining camp is located within the Don Mario mineral concessions and is easily accessible either by air, a distance of 380 km, or by road, or a combination of rail and road, a distance of 458 km from Santa Cruz de la Sierra (Figure 4-1, Table 5-1). Santa Cruz de la Sierra is the Santa Cruz Department capital and has a population of approximately one million habitants and is serviced by an international airport, Viru Viru. The city of Santa Cruz de la Sierra can be reached by regularly scheduled international flights on American, Taca, LAN, Aerosur, and GOL airlines arriving at Viru Viru. A 1,200 long gravel airstrip, suitable for light, twin-engine, and short-takeoff-and-landing (STOL) aircraft, is located 6 km southwest of the Don Mario camp. The airstrip is well constructed, but can be subject to damage from severe rainfall. Several air charter companies serve the region from the Trompillo Military airport in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, and the journey to the camp takes approximately 90 minutes. Road travel from Santa Cruz de la Sierra is mainly along improved gravel roads and the 458 km journey takes 12 to 15 hours to complete. The access route can be classified into the four segments described in Table 5-1. Table 5-1 Road Segment Distances

5.2 Climate The climate is sub-humid tropical. Average monthly maximum temperatures range from 29ºC in July to 34ºC in October. Minimum average temperatures range from 16ºC in June to 25ºC in November. Annual rainfall is approximately 1,200 mm, mostly falling in sharp downpours during the rainy season between November and March. Access roads may become impassable in the rainy season. The annual evaporation is 1,600 mm, with daily rates ranging from 3.5 mm to 5.0 mm. A weather station was established at the Don Mario camp in September 1993. Climate data covering longer periods are available from airport weather stations at San José de Chiquitos, Robore and San Matias.

5.3 Local Resources and Infrastructure

5.3.1 Workforce No permanent settlements exist within the concessions’ perimeter. The nearest settlement is the village of San Juan (population 350), 76 km south. The largest settlement in the region is the local administrative centre of San José de Chiquitos (population 8,000–10,000). The local employees are hired from these and other nearby communities such as Robore. EMIPA’s labour force as of September 30, 2013 was 203, 19 of which are located in the Santa Cruz office. Over 123 contractors are on site and include workers related to camp catering services and other services related to the UMZ open-pit mine operation.

5.3.2 Power In March, 2003, the Don Mario mine was connected to the Cuiaba–Bolivia Natural Gas Pipeline via a 4-km long pipeline with a rated capacity of 660 Mcf/d of natural gas. A pressure-reducing valve at the junction with the main pipeline reduces the pressure from 1,200 psi to 300 psi in the line to the plant, where it is reduced again to 50 psi for operating purposes. Natural gas has two main uses on the property: 1) electrical power generation, and 2) for use in the process plant for processes such as making doré. Current power is generated by four 875 kVA, 3300 V, 50 Hz Waukesha generators; two additional 2,200 kVA, 3300 V, 50Hz generators were added for a total rated capacity of 7,900kVA. An 875 kVA, 2200 V generator provides backup power. Power is distributed at 3300 V in high-tension lines for major power consumption areas such as the SAG mill in the process plant, while it is stepped down through two 1,000 kVA, 3,300/440 V transformers at substations for the plant and the mine. For minor power consumers, such as the camp and fresh water pumps, power is distributed through medium-tension lines (10 kV). EMIPA recently signed a natural gas contract with a government-owned entity. This contract expires in 2016. EMIPA does not expect future contracts to have a material impact on costs.

5.3.3 Land Uses There are no permanent inhabitants on the property. The chief commercial activity of the area is logging, which is under concession to two companies with sawmills based in San Juan and Buenavista, located approximately 85 km south of the Property.

5.3.4 Water As there are no perennial streams, water is derived from two main sources: water wells and surface water collected in a pond created by a dam. Water is recycled from the tailings impoundment as well. Fresh water is used as make-up water for the mineral-processing operation and to supply drinking water to the camp. Fresh water is captured on surface by a small dam in a catchment area to the southwest of the tailings pond and is pumped to the site through a 2 km 6-line by a Goulds 3 x 4 x 16 pump capable of supplying 80 m3/hr to the fresh water tank at the mine. An alternate source of fresh water is from two boreholes drilled for this purpose. The boreholes are capable of supplying 50 m3/day for the camp after passing through a small water-treatment plant. The largest requirement for water on the site is the process plant. Approximately 80% of the plant requirements are supplied from recirculated water within the plant, with the remainder being made up from recirculated water from tailings and from the fresh-water tank in approximately equal proportions. The water recirculated from the tailings pond is pumped 1.5 km through a 6-inch line by a Goulds 3 x 4 x 11 pump and is stored for process purposes in a 1,200 m3 capacity tank beside the process plant.

5.3.5 Camp Infrastructure A modern 300-person camp facility houses all staff and general labour while on their rotation at the mine. Individual and shared rooms are provided for permanent mine staff whereas dormitory lodging is provided for contractors. Lodgings have independent bathrooms, shower facilities and electrical supply for personal devices. The camp is located to the southwest of the main mine facilities and at a slightly higher elevation than the main mine offices and plant. The offices are a short walk from the camp. Meals are served in a typical cookhouse fashion in two buildings adjacent to the dormitory buildings with kitchens serving main and secondary dining rooms. The site has a direct satellite, telephone, fax and television services. For entertainment, televisions are provided in the dining rooms, and there is a football pitch immediately adjacent to the camp facilities. Separate semi-permanent lodgings for about 200 contractors are part of the mine camp.

5.4 Physiography The Property is located near the central point of South America and at the northern limit of the Paragua Platte River drainage basin near the watershed divide with the Amazon River system to the north. The region is characterized by gently undulating terrain at an elevation range of 300 masl to 450 masl with a few local peaks, including Cerro Pelado. To the south and east, the relief is generally low, but with several peaks rising to over 500 masl. The peak of Cerro Pelado is at 424 masl and approximately 120 m above the Don Mario camp. There are no perennial streams within 20 km of the Don Mario camp. With the exception of Cerro Pelado, the area is thickly forested with deciduous trees, including timber varieties such as morado, tajibo and verdolaga. In contrast, Cerro Pelado is essentially bare of trees and vegetated with only scattered scrub and copper-tolerant grasses. The region is part of the Chiquitano dry forest. Local fauna includes tapirs, monkeys, wild pigs, and a variety of birds.

6 HISTORY Cerro Pelado, the hill on which the Don Mario UMZ deposit comprises, is known to be an ancient site of mining for oxidized copper mineralization. Following the discovery of gold at the site in 1991, the area was subsequently explored by four companies (Table 6-1). This resulted in the discovery and/or delineation of the LMZ, the UMZ, LT, and several other prospects within 20 km of the mine site. Table 6-1 History of the Don Mario Property

6.1 Don Mario LMZ History The Don Mario District has been evaluated by a series of studies carried out internally by Orvana and by independent consultants, e.g., AMEC-2003 Report, PAH-2005 Report, AMEC-2008 Report, 2010 Report and 2011 Report. A resource estimate, block model and NI 43-101-compliant Technical Report, which incorporated results from diamond drill holes DM-01 to DM-197, for the LMZ is discussed in the AMEC-2008 report. Construction of the LMZ mine was carried out throughout 2002 and commercial production was achieved in June 2003 by processing ore from a small pit and crosscuts in the upper part of the underground mine. Mine planning was guided by rock-chip sampling on development faces. Production reconciliation was achieved by comparing the number of ounces produced by the mill against the estimated ounces in the stopes mined during the period. In 2005, the mineral resource estimates for the LMZ were documented in an NI 43-101-compliant Technical Report by Orvana (Hodgson, 2005). The updated mineral resource estimate included 193 diamond drill holes and 5,843 channel samples from cross cuts on developed levels in the mine and reflected the depletion of resources by production from the mini-pit and underground mining since 2003.

Period Operator Phase Colonial, Republican Pre-industrial copper mining on Cerro Don Mario by

local peoples and Jesuit missionaries 1988 British Mission geological survey carries out mapping in

the Bolivian shield but does not reach Don Mario 1991–1993 La Rosa Early exploration of the UMZ

1993–1995 Billiton Billiton operates and funds a JV with La Rosa to explore the UMZ. Early drill holes discover the LMZ and exploration focus turns to the LMZ

1996 Orvana Billiton JV is terminated and La Rosa sells Don Mario to Orvana, a TSE-listed junior exploration company. Orvana advances exploration of the LMZ

2002–2004 Comsur Orvana attracts investment to develop the LMZ.

2005–2006 Orvana Management assumed by Orvana. LMZ in full operation, exploration programs carried out on the UMZ

2007–present Orvana Exploration and initial investments are made to advance the Las Tojas and UMZ projects to production as the LMZ reserves are depleted

Between August, 2007 and February, 2008, Orvana drilled 21 underground exploration drill holes (DM-244 to DM-264) testing the down-plunge limits of the LMZ ore body. Holes intersected the structure hosting the LMZ mineralization, but the widths and gold grades were not sufficient to warrant further work. In August, 2008, cross-cut development was completed, allowing access to all remaining ore in the LMZ, including stopes in the deepest part of the mine, sill pillars, and other remnants in a crown pillar below the mini-pit. An audit of quality assurance data from sampling and the mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates are documented in the AMEC-2008 report. The LMZ ore body was depleted in July 2009 after yielding over 420,000 ounces of gold.

6.2 Don Mario UMZ The Don Mario UMZ was probably worked by the Jesuits as early as the 1700s. No historical production records exist, but a series of small excavations on the top portions of the hill indicate that probably a few thousand tonnes of oxide mineralization were extracted from outcrops of green copper oxides and carbonates. This mineralization is the surface expression of the Don Mario UMZ. There is evidence of rudimentary, colonial-age copper smelting, but no evidence of gold extraction either from rocks or soils. Compañía Minera La Rosa (“La Rosa”) commenced modern exploration of the Don Mario UMZ in 1991 when gold was detected in samples of copper-oxide material brought to La Rosa by loggers for assaying. EMIPA was established by the owners of La Rosa as the legal entity holding the Don Mario mineral concessions. Cerro Pelado was then renamed Cerro Don Mario in honour of Don French and Mario Mercado, the business partners involved in the initial discovery of gold. La Rosa formed a joint venture (“JV”) with Compañía Minera La Barca S.A. (“La Barca”), a Bolivian subsidiary of the USA company, Battle Mountain Gold. The JV drilled 6 RC holes and 4 core holes (DM 01 to DM 10) along the crest of Cerro Don Mario. Limited trenching, surface sampling and preliminary metallurgical work were also conducted. Based on the limited drilling, La Barca defined a small mineral resource. La Barca withdrew from the project in July, 1992. La Rosa continued exploration and drilled 10 core holes (DM 11 to DM 20), including 7 holes on Cerro Don Mario. High grade gold mineralization at the south end of Cerro Don Mario, now known as the LMZ, was discovered. In July, 1993, La Rosa completed an updated mineral resource estimate. In July, 1993, La Rosa and Billiton Exploration and Mining (“Billiton”) formed a JV. The JV conducted significant systematic prospecting and exploration in the area including grid establishment, soil sampling, air and ground geophysics, detailed geologic mapping, 46 core holes (DM 21 to DM 67) at Don Mario and 8 core holes at the Cerro Felix prospect, as well as mineralogical, petrographic, and structural studies. The initial mineral resource estimates for the UMZ and LMZ projects conducted in 1994 were completed using cross sections for the UMZ and longitudinal polygons for the LMZ. An updated mineral resource estimate for the UMZ was completed by Billiton in 1995. In April, 1995, Orvana acquired 100% of the property by acquiring EMIPA and 3 additional subsidiaries from the JV partners. In late 1995, Orvana conducted a comprehensive review of Billiton’s mineral resource estimates and proposed work to advance the project into production. While the efforts of the previous owners had concentrated on the outcropping UMZ deposit, Orvana decided to focus on the higher grade and less metallurgically complex LMZ deposit.

In April, 1999, Orvana re-evaluated the gold resources of the UMZ and concluded that the mineral malachite is widespread and therefore the recovery of gold without first removing copper-oxide minerals was highly improbable. Between June and September 2004, Orvana completed an underground diamond-drill program consisting of 44 holes (DM 200 to DM 243) totalling 2,819 m. The exploration program also included several trenches and channels across the slopes of the Cerro Don Mario UMZ outcrops. Orvana compiled, updated, and re-evaluated all the data relevant to the UMZ mineralization and prepared an internal resource estimate using cross-sectional polygons for the Porous, Oxide, Transition (mixed), and Sulphide zones. The study included a brief review of previous metallurgical test work, but no mining, capital, or operating cost estimates were provided. A process flow sheet involving the recovery of copper, gold and silver by flotation of sulphide and transitional mineralization, and heap leaching of oxide and porous mineralization was contemplated in this report. In 2006, Orvana performed a resampling campaign for UMZ drill holes without assays for soluble copper and updated the UMZ mineral resource database to include the new assays. The NCL-2006 Report includes an estimated mineral resource for the UMZ using the updated database, a 3D wireframe model for the Sulphide, Transition, Oxide and Porous ore types, and a block model with grades for Au, Ag, Cu and soluble copper (“CuS”) using ordinary kriging. The NCL-2006 Report included a review of process work, an open-pit optimization study, and basic capital and operating cost estimates for an open-pit mine, flotation circuit to treat Sulphide and Transition mineralization, and a heap-leach circuit to treat Oxide and Porous mineralization. The pit shell was modified to a more practical operational shape. After applying 2.5% dilution, the mineral resources were converted to mineral reserves. A mine plan, with four phases or push backs, was developed. The mine plan was based on a throughput rate of 2,500 tpd. Mineral reserves were declared for Sulphide, Transition, Oxide and Porous ore types on the basis of the study. In September 2007, due to the rapid change in metal prices, Orvana commissioned Strategic Mining Consultants (“SMC”) to follow up the NCL-2006 Report (Zandonai and Urbaez, E, 2008). Whittle 4X pit optimization software was used to create mining phases, a production schedule, and a strategic analysis for the project based on the block model developed in 2006. In addition, SMC performed several sensitivity analyses. An unpublished mining and process study of the UMZ was carried out during 2007 and updated in 2008 by KCA to include process flow sheets for a conceptual 640 ktpa flotation plant and a 360 ktpa heap-leach operation to treat Oxide and Porous ore types. The study was based on the mineral resource estimate pit optimization and mine design developed by NCL and did not include diamond drilling completed on the UMZ in 2008. KCA concluded that the capital expense for an acid heap-leach circuit to treat Oxide and Porous ore types was not justified. In December 2008, Orvana updated the geological model and mineral resource estimate for the UMZ to include diamond drilling completed in 2007. AMEC reviewed the mineral resource database and mineral resource estimation procedures used by Orvana, and considered that the processes were reasonable in light of best practices for mineral resource estimation recommended by the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM, 2003), and reported their findings in the AMEC-2008 Report. At the same time, KCA completed a detailed operational study that demonstrated the economic viability of processing UMZ mineralization by CFF based on the reserve estimates discussed in the NCL-2006 Report. In May 2009, KCA updated that analysis by inputting a preliminary mine plan developed on the resource estimate summarized in the AMEC-2008 Report. After further metallurgical testing justified the application of the LPF process to Porous, Oxide and Transition ores and the CFF processing of Sulphide ores, the 2010 Report summarized a reserve estimate and mine plan. On April 2011, the UMZ mine started up and since that period up to the effective date of this Technical Report over 1,000,000tonnes of ore have been mined and processed by both LPF and the flotation methods.

In July 2012, due to the talc-rich ores, the LPF processing unit was unable to process the oxides resulting in very high costs, lower recoveries, high sulphur acid consumptions and technical failures in the PPF process unit as well as the flotation unit. Due to the poor performance of the LPF circuit in 2011 and 2012, the LPF process was stopped completely and only the flotation unit continued processing Sulphides and Transitional ores. 7 GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION

7.1 Regional Geology The following summary of the regional geology of the Don Mario Property is modified from the AMEC-2003 Report and was the basis for both the 2010 and 2011 Reports. There is no reason to dispute the descriptions and conclusions found therein. The concessions are located within one of approximately twenty Lower to Middle Proterozoic schist belts in the Bolivian Shield (Litherland et al., 1986, Annels et al., 1986). The Bolivian Shield forms the southwestern edge of the Brazilian Precambrian Shield and has been subdivided into a Middle Proterozoic Paragua Craton, which is up to 270 km wide and is bordered by 2 parallel Middle to Upper Proterozoic orogenic belts: the Sunsas Mobile Belt along its western edge and the Aguapei Mobile Belt along its eastern margin. The entire Bolivian Shield was mapped by the British Mission in 1976-1983 with the results published as a series of 16 maps at 1:250,000; however because of the reconnaissance nature of the project, Cerro Don Mario was not investigated at that time. Remapping by the Bolivian Geological Survey, SERGEOMIN, in the 1990’s provided more details of the region surrounding Don Mario (Curro, 1997). As shown in Table 7-1, the oldest rocks underlying the Paragua Craton are two metamorphic Lower Proterozoic Superunits: the Lomas Manechas Granulite Complex and the Aventura Complex. Recent mapping has indicated that the Cristal Belt Sequence that hosts the Don Mario mineralization forms part of the Aventura Complex and is not one of the schist belts of the San Ignacio Supergroup to which it has been assigned in the past. The San Ignacio Supergroup outcrops in the form of discrete belts composed of quartzites, feldspathic psammites and micaceous schists or phyllites, with subordinate ferruginous, calc-silicate, metavolcanic and graphitic-rich units. In the south, many of the belts contain metamorphosed mafic igneous rocks. These belts are not regarded as true analogues of the classic Archean greenstone belts, which are predominantly multicycle, metavolcanic sequences cored by granite intrusions with subordinate metasedimentary rocks. The Bolivian schist belts are certainly younger and mainly sedimentary; however, like the greenstone belts that have been subjected to multiple periods of deformation, are generally surrounded by gneisses and granitoids, and appear to be favourable sites for precious-metal mineralization (Litherland et al., 1986). While most of the 20 aforementioned schist belts had all been grouped into the San Ignacio Supergroup, recent mapping by SERGEOMIN has indicated that an older group of schist belts, which are part of the Aventura Complex, had been included. One of these older schist belts is the Cristal Schist Belt, which includes rocks from the Cristal Sequence.

Table 7-1 Generalized Geology of the Bolivian Shield and Lithologies on the Property (Curro, 1997)

7.2 Property Geology The property geology is shown in Figure 4-1. The following is a description from the AMEC-2008 Report as modified in the 2010 and 2011 Reports. The property lies within the southeast margin of the Sunsas Mobile Belt of the Bolivian Shield, in a region characterized by highly deformed and metamorphosed Lower Proterozoic rocks of the Aventura Complex. The Property covers a series of northwest-trending schist belts (Cristal Sequence), orthognesis (Patuju Domain) and a granite intrusive body within an area of approximately 25 km east-west by 25 km north-south (Figure 4-1).

~500 MaBrasilianoOrogenic Cycle

Late to post tectonic intrusions Las Señoritas Granite(994-1020 Ma.)

Chaquipoc Complex gabbro and dioriteunconformity

~1000 Ma Late to Post tectonicVibosi Group

Sunsas Sunsas Group Guanaco Fm.Orogenic Peñasco Fm.Cycle Tacuaral Fm.

Guapama Fm.

~1300 Ma El tigre Alkaline ComplexLate to post kinematic granitoids

unconformity~1600 -1280 Ma Syn-to late tectonic intrusions Amphibolite Dykes/Sills

San Ignacio San IgnacioOrogenic Cycle Schist ~15 - 20 Schist Belt

Supergrouphiatus

~1800 Ma Meta-sandstone withBahia Las Tojas Sequenquartzite and meta-arkose

Trans Amazonian Muscovite schistOrogenic Cycle Aventura

Complex Cristal Sequence Biotite SchistSillimanite Schist + LMZQuartzite + LMZCal-Silicate gneiss + UMZ

Patuju Domain Banded orthogneissParagneiss

Los ManechesGranulite Complex Granulites

~2000 Ma

The schist belts are part of the Cristal Sequence, which is characterized by a mixture of highly metamorphic assemblages of phyllites, psammites and quartzites with relatively minor calc-silicate and ferruginous units. All are inferred to be metasediments that were folded and regionally metamorphosed to medium- to high-grade at about 1,350 Ma during the San Ignacio Orogeny. A large block, or mega-boudin, of resistant calc-silicate formed Cerro Don Mario. The most common lithologies are varieties of biotite schist, sillimanite schist, quartzite and calc-silicate gneiss. The Cristal Sequence may be distinguished from the enclosing Patuju Domain biotite-plagioclase gneisses by a characteristic air-photo texture and the presence of mica schists and pegmatitic textures. Four schist belts were mapped on or near the Property. The 2 northern schist belts, the Eastern Schist Belt, also known as the Las Tojas Schist Belt, and the Cristal Schist Belt, are approximately 5 km apart and bounded by Patuju Domain orthogenesis. Both of these belts are part of the Aventura Complex. The 2 southern schist belts are south of the property. They are unnamed and are bounded by paragneiss of the Patuju Domain. The dominant structural trend is northwest. As shown on Figure 4-1, the northwest-trending Cristal Schist Belt is approximately 25 km in length and up to 4 km in width. It is composed of steeply-dipping metamorphic strata, and hosts the LMZ and UMZ, as well as the Cerro Felix, Don Mario North and Don Mario South gold prospects. The Eastern Schist Belt, which hosts the LT deposit, is narrower, generally less than 1 km in width, but more than 40 km long. The most detailed mapping of Patuju Domain orthogneiss has been in the area that separates the Cristal Schist Belt from the Las Tojas Schist Belt. These rocks are described as dominantly coarse-grained K-feldspar-quartz-muscovite-biotite gneiss. Mineralogical banding is typified by segregation of phylosilicate minerals into bands of fine-grained quartz and feldspar that alternate with coarse-grained quartz and feldspar-rich layers. K-feldspar-quartz-muscovite-biotite gneiss alternates with intervals of muscovite-quartz-K-feldspar-biotite schist. An anomalously high airborne radiometric signature of the gneiss is considered to be evidence of an intrusive protolith. Separating the two southern schist belts and emplaced along the orthogneiss-paragneiss contact is the Las Señoritas Granite (Table 7-1). The 994-1,020 Ma intrusive is a medium-grained leucocratic mass and is 10-15 km in diameter. In contrast to the enclosing rocks, it commonly exhibits weakly developed schistosity. According to the project geologists, it is predominantly composed of quartz, plagioclase, muscovite and biotite. Potassic feldspar is far less abundant than in true granite indicating classification should be in the range of tonalite to granodiorite. Although outcrops have been mapped within 300-400 m of the Cristal Schist Belt, Las Senoritas Granite has not been positively identified in drill core from the Property. No evidence of metallic mineralization has been found in the granite. The property has been extensively intruded by amphibolite dykes and sills. Not shown in Figure 4-1 are a series of intermittent outcrops of Cretaceous silica breccia dykes that follow a well-defined east-west trend coincident with the northern termination of the granite. These breccia bodies tend to form small hills rising above the plain. Also missing from Figure 4-1 are a series of narrow, subvertical amphibolite dykes which crosscut the schist. The British Mission mapped the San Diablo Structure, a major regional shear that reaches up to 5 km in width and parallels the Cristal Schist Belt approximately 20 km to the north (Litherland et al., 1986). More recent mapping appears to have renamed a segment of this feature locally as the Sunsas Shear Zone. In the area of the property, the regional structure appears to subdivide into multiple subparallel shear zones and strike-slip faults, one of which passes along the length of the Cristal Schist Belt and is known as the Don Mario Shear Zone. In the vicinity of the Don Mario Deposits, the Don Mario Shear Zone is approximately 700 m wide, strikes northwest, and dips near vertical to 80º to the northeast. Based on stratigraphic relationships, the EMIPA staff interprets the age of the mineralization in the Don Mario District to be no older than the San Ignacio Orogeny and no younger than the Las Señoritas granite.

7.3 Regional Mineralization

There are three principal mineralized bodies and several prospects on the property that are hosted in the Cristal and Eastern Schist Belts of the Cristal Sequence as follows (Figure 4-1):

• Don Mario Shear Zone (Cristal Schist Belt)

o LMZ gold deposit - mined out in 2009 o UMZ copper-gold-silver deposit – overlies LMZ o Cerro Felix gold occurrence – 1.5 km north of LMZ and UMZ; small occurrence

• Unnamed Shear Zone (Eastern Schist Belt)

o LT gold deposit – mined out in 2011 o Oscar gold prospect – northwest of LT o Geophysical and geochemical drill targets along the 40 km length of schist belt

The UMZ is hosted in a package of calc-silicate rocks that have not been found elsewhere on the property; the other mineralized zones all share similar host strata, which are known as the LMZ rock package. The ensuing discussion will focus on the nature of the UMZ.

7.4 Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone The UMZ forms a prominent, oval-shaped, treeless hill that is oriented at approximately 315º, parallel to the regional fabric of the Cristal Schist Belt, plunging approximately 15º to the northwest. Reports of mining activities date back to Jesuit settlers in the 18th century, and trenches, shallow shafts, and pits indicate that a few thousand tonnes of material were mined by them. The UMZ has been divided into 9 main rock types dominated by diopside-tremolite rock and massive tremolite rock. Other important rock types are dolomite/ophicalcite and talc schist. The logging codes and rock types described in the UMZ are: (51) Chlorite-serpentine-talc schist (62) Dolomite/ophicalcite rock (64) Diopside-tremolite rock (65) Massive tremolite rock (67) Talc schist (71) Amphibolite (91) Quartz vein/pervasively silicified zone (44) Tremolite-magnetite rock (LMZ) (16) Quartz-muscovite-biotite schist (Don Mario intrusive). The calc-silicate zone is approximately 500 m long and forms the Cerro Don Mario, which is a ridge approximately 120 m high. The package has a maximum horizontal width of approximately 150 m and ranges from 5 m to 100 m thick. Part of the magnesio-silicate alteration and UMZ mineralization is weathered and is divided into four mineralization zones based on mineralogy:

• The Porous zone is characterized by vuggy cavities left by the dissolution of calcite and locally abundant masses of white and orange-brown amorphous zinc carbonates and hydroxides including smithsonite.

• The Oxide zone is characterized by abundant malachite with lesser chrysocolla, azurite,

native copper, cuprite, pitch limonite, and silver sulfosalts

• The Transition zone features traces of pyrite, bornite, sphalerite, and galena with

weathered limonite and chalcocite coatings as well as minor copper oxides

• The Sulphide zone consists of dark-green tremolite with bornite, chalcopyrite, and sphalerite. Gold and silver grades are associated with chalcopyrite and bornite mineralization.

Hereinafter, the Porous zone, if not expressly cited, will be included in any general discussions of the Oxide zone thus limiting the mineralization, and ore, zones to 3 categories: Oxide, Transition, and Sulphide. Average grade profiles downward through the UMZ are shown in Figure 7-1. A strong enrichment trend with weathering is shown for total copper and zinc grades as well as acid-soluble copper and zinc grades. Gold and silver also show strong enrichment from the primary Sulphide zone through the Oxide zone, but show weak depletion in the porous zone due to secondary remobilization and leaching. The copper mineralization tends to be more evenly distributed whereas gold and silver are more irregular. Figure 7-1 Average Grade Profile through the UMZ

8 DEPOSIT TYPE The following discussion is adapted from the 2011 Report as there is no additional information to dispute the descriptions and interpretations therein. The LMZ, LT, and Cerro Felix gold mineralization is spatially associated with shear zones. On a regional scale, these gold deposits occur in the central parts of regional faults, or shears. They are characterized by silicification of the host rocks and a calc-silicate mineral assemblage. The LMZ and Cerro Felix deposits are proximal to a granitic intrusion, but no such spatial relationship is noted at LT. Shear-hosted gold deposits are generally found in greenstone terrains that have greenschist-grade metamorphism. Despite the higher metamorphic grade characteristic of the host rocks in the Don Mario district, it is not unreasonable to classify the subject deposits as shear-hosted gold deposits that are common in Archean greenstones belts throughout the world (Roberts, 1988). Given its tabular nature, the EMIPA geological staff has applied the shear-hosted model to the LMZ and LT for the purposes of exploitation. The copper-gold-silver UMZ deposit occurs in the hanging wall of the shear zone that hosts the LMZ. It is characterized by a calc-silicate mineral assemblage that includes tremolite, talc (serpentine) and magnetite, which, along with the occurrence of a dolomite unit in the rock package, suggests a metamorphosed carbonate replacement or skarn deposit with chalcopyrite and native gold as the economic minerals. The causative intrusive could be the amphibolite dykes. For purposes of modelling and mining, the EMIPA staff considers the UMZ deposit to be a massive sulphide. No academic studies have been completed to better ascertain the genesis of these deposits. Focus has been and will be on the distribution of the mineralization for economic extraction. Thus, the genesis of these deposits will remain a geologic curiosity. 9 EXPLORATION There are no substantial changes from the discussion in the AMEC-2008, 2010, and 2011 Reports and therefore this section is adapted from those sources. Exploration throughout the Don Mario concessions included:

• Regional airborne geophysics • Prospecting with line cutting and mapping • Soil, stream-sediment, rock-chip and trench sampling • Ground geophysical surveys of induced polarization (IP) and magnetometer surveys • Exploration reverse-circulation (“RC”) diamond drilling.

Orvana has systematically expanded the coverage of prospecting, geochemical and geophysical surveying, trenching, and diamond drilling outward from the core of the Don Mario property to include the LT project, Don Mario North and Don Mario South, Cerro Felix and the La Aventura areas (Table 9-1 and Table 9-2). Work was focused on the northern and southern extensions of the Cristal Schist Belt that has been defined by the regional airborne magnetometer survey. In 2009, over 200 km of dipole-dipole Induced Polarization data were collected at approximate 250-m line spacing along the length of the Eastern Schist Belt. Drill targets have been identified and are planned to be drilled over the next few years. In 2012, EMIPA drilled 2 holes that targeted geophysical anomalies in the LMZ and UMZ. Only one hole, DM 302, intercepted significant mineralization in the upward projection of the LMZ. This body is included in the UMZ mineralized envelope with 90% of that mineralization now considered in the reserve estimate.

Table 9-1 Exploration Work on the Don Mario Property

In new fiscal year (2014), EMIPA has allocated an exploration program and budget for adjacent areas of Don Mario, covering two schist belts, Eastern schist Belt and Cristal schist Belt. The program includes 4.000 metres diamond drilling.

9.1 UMZ Exploration Outcropping copper-oxide mineralization attracted early miners to Cerro Don Mario. Pits manifest the prospecting and modest mining activity that occurred on the hill. In addition, it is covered by sparse low-lying shrubs and is treeless due to the copper content of the rock. A total of 2,157 grab, chip, and channel samples of rock from outcrops and trenches have been used to define targets within the Don Mario concessions. Over 2,000 rock-chip samples, including 772 samples from the UMZ and LMZ, helped orient drilling. Weathered outcrops tend to yield reduced and more erratic gold grades than samples from diamond drilling.

Table 9-2 Geochemical Samples from the Don Mario Property (from AMEC-2008 report)

10 DRILLING The following summary is an excerpt from the AMEC-2008 report, wherein the sampling methods and assaying were verified and validated. Beginning with La Barca JV in 1991, drilling on the Don Mario property was by both RC and core drilling, including drilling from underground drill headings in the LMZ. Not including service-hole drilling in the mine and well drilling for hydrogeological purposes, 475 exploration and delineation holes for over 63,000 m have been drilled on the property (Table 10-1).

Table 10-1 Summary of Drilling by Project and By Type

Billiton used Boytec, a Peruvian drill contractor during its drill campaigns from 1993 to 1994. Orvana contracted drilling services from Seetex (Servicios Técnicos Exploraciones) and continued with the firm when it became Maldonado Exploraciones in 2002. Orvana has exclusively used Maldonado for surface and underground drilling services since 2002. Beginning in 1996 Orvana completed several RC and diamond-drill campaigns for piezometer installation, water wells, plant and tailings site condemnation, and geotechnical purposes (Table 10-2). Table 10-2 Drilling Not Directly for Mineral Exploration at Don Mario

10.1 Upper Mineralized Zone (UMZ) The UMZ has been drilled in seven campaigns since 1991 (Table 10-3). Drilling was NQ diameter diamond drill core with the exception of six RC holes drilled by La Barca JV in 1991 and La Rosa in 1992 (Table 10-1 and Figure 10-1 Plan Map of Cerro Don Mario Showing LMZ and UMZ Drill Hole Collar Locations and Hole Traces). The 123 diamond drill holes have an average length of 78 m and are drilled on section lines oriented 135º and spaced approximately 25 m apart. Approximately 40% of holes are vertical and remaining holes are drilled to the northwest and dip from -80 to -45º. The inclined holes provide high-core angle intercepts with the mineralized body when viewed in section. Table 10-3 Upper Mineralized Zone Drill Campaigns

Thirty-three holes drilled in campaigns targeting the LMZ also intersected UMZ mineralization. These holes are not considered in the table above, but have been used for the UMZ mineral resource and reserve estimations. All information related to drilling has been verified, validated, and discussed in the AMEC-2008 report. Figure 10-1 Plan Map of Cerro Don Mario Showing LMZ and UMZ Drill Hole Collar Locations and Hole Traces

11 SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSIS, AND SECURITY This section includes excerpts from the AMEC-2008 report wherein the audit and validation of operations, sampling, and handling protocols, based on site visits, is discussed. Documentation of core logging and sampling procedures are in most cases incomplete. The best indication of sampling procedures before 2003 is found in the TWC-1999 report, AMEC-2003 report, and the NCL-2006 report. The report by TWC states that Billiton established detailed core logging, sample collection and sample preparation protocols, and implemented procedures for the collection of geotechnical data. Orvana continued and improved several areas of the data collection procedures established by Billiton. The AMEC-2008 report states that AMEC representatives were on site in 2007 and 2008 and observed the current core handling and sampling procedures for the LMZ, UMZ, LT, and Cerro Felix projects. It was concluded that these procedures were acceptable and within industry standards. Drill core intersections sampled are listed in Table 11-1.

11.1 Drill Core Sample Recovery Drill core recovery has been measured for all core holes drilled on the property since the drilling by Billiton. During geotechnical logging, core is reconstructed and the recovered length for each drill run interval is measured.

11.1.1 Drill Core Recovery for the UMZ The fractured, oxidized and weathered upper portion of the UMZ suffers from relatively low drill core recoveries (Table 11-1). Drill recovery in the sulphide and transitional zone are generally acceptable and range from 80% to 100% (Figure 11-1). The AMEC-2008 report states that although recovery shows moderate correlation with depth (Pearson coefficient of correlation or r = 0.3223), it shows very little correlation with copper (r = 0.001) and weak negative correlation with gold (r = -0.113) in the UMZ. The poor correlation between grade and recovery indicate that there is little to no sampling bias as a result of the lower core recoveries in the upper portion of the UMZ.

Table 11-1 Drill Core Recovery with Depth for the Orvana 2004 and 2007 UMZ Drill Campaigns

Figure 11-1 Graph of Recovery with Depth for UMZ Drilling

11.2 Geotechnical Logging of Drill Core

As discussed in the AMEC-2008 report, core boxes are brought to an open core logging and storage area and laid out on benches at waist height. Core is washed with water from a gallon paint can and an 8'' brush and marked at metre intervals on the core and on the core box divider. Geotechnical logging for recovery, rock quality (RQD), fracture spacing (AS), fracture frequency (FF), nature of fracture surface (FS), fracture filling (FF), and degree of weathering (DW) is carried out on a metre by metre basis using well-defined parameters and standardized scales and entered on a standardized paper template. Measurements of magnetic susceptibility are taken for each metre of core and recorded in the geotechnical log. Geology staff and helpers log approximately 20 m to 30 m of core per day.

11.3 Density Determinations at Drill Core Density determinations have been taken since the initial Billiton drill programs for each metre of core having sufficient recovery to permit collection of a 250-500 g sample. For each metre of coherent core, weights are taken for density determination. A 250 g to 500 g piece of core is collected utilizing pre-existing core breaks where possible. The sample is marked with its depth, and delivered to the balance shack in the core area for weighing. The balance shack is a 1.5 m x 2 m x 3 m area covered with plastic sheeting and with a cardboard door to keep out wind. Samples are weighed on a steel table with a 10 cm x 20 cm hole over an open nominal 50-gallon tank filled with water. A 500 g mechanical, three-row balance with 0.01 g precision is used. For each sample lot comprising 15 to 20 samples, the scale is manually equilibrated with a hanging, dry balance tray and then with a hanging, wet balance basket. The baskets hang from the balance through a hole in the table and immersed in water. Small pieces of wire are hung from the basket to equilibrate it with the dry tray. Samples are weighed and recorded one-by-one in the geotechnical log using the dry sample tray. The tray is switched with the basket, and the 15 to 20 samples are weighed suspended in water, and weights recorded one by one in the geotechnical log. Core samples are returned to the core boxes. EMIPA reported that the procedure for density determinations has not changed over time. However, in the NCL-2006 report, it was reported that the above method did not accurately reflect the density for the porous zone mineralization. Therefore, samples from this zone were sent to ALS Laboratory for wax-sealed density determinations.

11.4 Geological Logging of Drill Core Geological logging is recorded on a standardized paper logging form with fields for basic drilling information, e.g., hole number, depth, diameter, azimuth, dip, logging geologist, logging dates and logging data for rock codes, alteration, mineralization type and intensity, and general comments. A graphic column is used to capture fracture, joint and contact angles. Logging is to scale with approximately 20 m on a page.

11.5 Drill Core Sampling Mineralized core was sampled at the EMIPA core shed at the Don Mario mine. The original core facility was located 100 m north of the mine engineering offices immediately below the LMZ hoist. The core processing facility was not built with the intention to process and store the amount of core being handled by EMIPA in recent years, and in early 2008, EMIPA had established a new core processing facility that included covered racks to better store core and reject materials. Sample intervals were marked by an EMIPA project geologist during geotechnical and geological logging. Intervals were marked at nominal 1.5 m lengths respecting changes in lithology and alteration intensity through the mineralized zone. One to two additional samples were taken above the upper and below the lower margins of the mineralized zone.

Samples were cut following a line marked with a wax pencil such that the dominant foliation is perpendicular to the core axis on the cut surface. One-half of the cut core is stored in core boxes now in the new core processing facility at the Don Mario mine; the other half was tagged, put in heavy polyethylene sample bags with two-part waterproof sample tags and shipped to the preparation laboratory. The AMEC-2003 report provides a detailed overview of sample preparation, analysis and security throughout the history of the activity to that point. The summary of the historic and current procedures discussed herein is an excerpt from the AMEC-2008 report. The NCL-2006 report relied on the PAH-2005 report for information about sample preparation and analysis for the 2005 UMZ drill campaign. The foregoing section provides a summary of the AMEC-2003 report, the NCL-2006 report, and the AMEC-2008 report, the lattermost of which directly audited the 2008 UMZ drill campaign. Table 11-2 provides a summary of sample preparation and analysis facilities and methods used for sampling campaigns on the UMZ and exploration areas. Table 11-2 Summary of Sample Preparation and Analysis for the Don Mario Property

NOTE: Abbreviations are FA (fire assay), SFA (screen fire assay), CFA (common fire assay), AA (atomic absorption)

11.6 UMZ Sample Preparation and Analysis The TWC-1999 report states that samples from the La Rosa – La Barca and La Rosa campaigns were analyzed using a 30-g fire assay for Au and Ag-Cu-Pb-Zn-Ag determined by atomic absorption spectroscopy by the Inti Raymi Mine laboratory in Bolivia. There are no records of QA/QC work for this campaign; however it is reported that the Inti Raymi laboratory carried out routine internal QA/QC with standards, blanks and duplicates. Details of the sampling procedure, sample security, and preparation are not known for the initial campaigns carried out by La Rosa and La Barca. Samples from initial drilling by Billiton were prepared and analyzed by Bondar Clegg in Santa Cruz. The final hole drilled in the Billiton campaign was prepared at the Don Mario Mine laboratory. Sample preparation methodology used in the Bondar-Clegg laboratory was brought to the Don Mario laboratory, which was initially operated Billiton personnel. Sample preparation involved:

• Primary crushing in a 5-inch by 6-inch jaw crusher re-crushing any material not passing a 10 mm screen.

• Secondary crushing in a 6-inch cone crusher, re-crushing any material not passing a 1 mm screen.

The crushed sample was passed through a ¼ inch Jones splitter until either a nominal 800-g sample was obtained for further preparation for screened (metallic) fire assay (SFA), employed on samples with suspected coarse gold, or a 500-g sample split was made for analysis by conventional fire assay (CFA). The remaining fraction of the crushed material was saved as a coarse reject and stored. Samples from the beginning of the Orvana drill campaign in 1996 were prepared at the Don Mario preparation facility and sent to the Bondar-Clegg laboratory in Oruro for assay; by the end of the 1996 drill campaign, the Orvana Don Mario laboratory was carrying out fire assays. Assay for acid-soluble copper on selected samples was initiated during the Orvana 1998 drill campaign. During the 2004 campaign, samples were cut with a rotary diamond carbide saw and prepared and analyzed at the Don Mario laboratory. Splits of pulps of 30% of the samples were sent to the Alex Stewart laboratory in Mendoza, Argentina for referee analyses. Core samples from the 2007 campaign were cut and sampled at the Don Mario mine site and sent to the Alex Stewart laboratory in Mendoza for preparation and analysis. Preparation and analysis processes were similar to those used for the 2004 campaign with the addition of analyses for acid-soluble Zn. A quality control program including the analysis of blanks, a high- and low-grade standard for Au, and pulp duplicates was carried out by Orvana.

11.7 Sample Security The following discussion is an excerpt from the AMEC-2003 and AMEC-2008 reports and is based on site visits. The perimeter of the mine is patrolled by G System, a security contractor. Office security in Santa Cruz is also provided by G System. Drilling is supervised by Orvana staff during daytime hours. Access to the drills is limited to contract drill and Orvana staff. Drill core is transported from the drill to the core shed on the Don Mario property by Orvana and contract drill staff. Drill core is logged, cut, and sampled and bagged by Orvana staff. Samples are delivered to the Orvana Santa Cruz office in a company truck with staff or contract driver. Samples are shipped from the office in Santa Cruz to Oruro by Castillo, a private, contracted, trucking firm. ALS and Alex Stewart sent an electronic confirmation of receipt to Orvana staff upon arrival of the samples at the preparation facility.

The relatively small size of the mine and its remote location in a relatively unpopulated region of Bolivia ensure that mine operations maintain a low profile with little public interaction. The mine receives few visitors and security is relatively easy to maintain. The use of reputable contractors and of EMIPA staff for supervision ensures reasonable control over sample security. It was stated in the AMEC-2008 report that Orvana took reasonable security measures to prevent outside tampering of samples. Confirmatory samples taken from the UMZ zone taken by AMEC, and analyzed by an independent laboratory compared well with assays reported by Orvana. Based on the limited periods of observation and limited confirmatory sampling, the AMEC-2008 report concluded that sample tampering during drilling and sampling carried out during campaigns in 2003, 2007 and 2008 was unlikely. 12 DATA VERIFICATION In the previous NI-43-101 report, the consultants reviewed and analyzed technical information in the form of publicly-filed reports and internal reports and data provided by EMIPA, and have discussed technical aspects of the property and operations with EMIPA during visits to the Don Mario mine site. They concluded that the verification methods and procedures are valid. All previous Technical Reports prepared, including the AMEC-2003 report, NCL-2006 report, and AMEC-2008 report, provide detailed discussions of data verification prior to 2003 as well as for the 2005 and 2007 UMZ drill campaigns. The following sections summarize the previously published work.

12.1 UMZ Data Verification The two most important drill campaigns that support the UMZ mineral resource estimation are the Orvana 2004 and 2007 drill campaigns. A review of QA/QC work for UMZ drill campaigns up to 2005, including the 2004 campaign, is provided in the PAH-2005 report and AMEC-2008 report. The PAH-2005 report states that Orvana initially prepared and assayed core from the 2004 drill campaign at the Don Mario Mine laboratory and sent approximately 1,800 pulps, or 30%, of the total to Alex Stewart laboratory in Argentina for check assays. Results showed poor precision and a high positive bias for Au and Ag for the Don Mario Mine laboratory assays. As a result, Orvana resampled all intervals for the campaign and sent the samples to ALS Chemex for preparation in Bolivia and analysis in Vancouver, Canada. The PAH-2005 report concluded that the Alex Stewart and ALS assays had good correlation and reproducibility. The assays from ALS Chemex were used for the 2005 mineral resource estimate (Hodgson, 2005). The results of the routine analysis of high- and low-grade standards during analysis of samples taken during the 2007 UMZ drill campaign show that the Au results from the Alex Stewart laboratory are slightly low at high grades, and slightly high at low grades, but errors are within 2% for both standards, which is reasonable for analyses to be used in mineral-resource estimation. Precision, including sampling variance, sub-sampling variance, and analytical precision for Au, Ag, Cu, and Zn analyses have been determined from field duplicates analyzed during the Orvana 2007 campaign. Precision for samples with grades 3 to 10 times above detection limits, in the range of economic significance for the UMZ, is around +30% for Au, Ag, Cu, and Zn.

13 MINERAL PROCESSING Don Mario metallurgical processing facilities include a concentrator consisting of a separate grinding and flotation plant to process the Transition and Sulphide ores. The LPF stage has been discontinued due to the high costs and lower performances to process Oxides ores with high contents of impurities like talc. As the date of this report, Don Mario produces only copper and lead concentrates. UMZ ore is processed in a closed-circuit SAG and ball mill at a throughput capacity of over 3,000 tpd. The SAG mill (Fuller 18’x9´) operates at a variable speed between 14 and 17 RPM and the discharge is classified in one trommel (¼"opening), separating the pellets to recirculate in the same SAG mill. The trommel discharges the pulp and feeds 4 Krebs hydrocyclones of 15" (3 operating + 1 stand-by) for classifying the pulp into two fractions: 10 the coarse fraction or underflow is fed into a ball mill (6 m x 3.6 m) and 2) the overflow, between 60% to 75% -200 mesh, is then pumped to the flotation circuit. In 2009, MSRDI recommended to apply the LPF process to the UMZ Porous, Oxide and Transition ores. However, the LPF circuit has been discontinued in 2012 due to higher costs and poor performance of the process when recovering Oxides ores. The Transition and Sulphide ores are now being processed in the Flotation circuit. The flotation circuit (2,800 tpd capacity) also produces a sulphide copper concentrate as well as a lead concentrate. Operational data from year 2012 indicates a copper recovery of 40% to 60% of the flotation circuit. The copper recovery is expected to incrementally increase over time as more copper sulphides in the Transition ore are being processed and should exceed 80% for Sulphide ore (2010 Report).

13.1 Copper Leach and Flotation Tests (Historical Data) In 2006, NCL Consultores Ltda from Chile summarizes in a report all the comprehensive test work carried out in Chile between 1994 and 2005. The final process selected for the treatment of the UMZ mineralization by NCL included: acid heap leaching of Oxide and Transition ores only to recover acid-soluble copper, cyanidation of the spent oxide mineralization, flotation of both the Transition and Sulphide ores, followed by cyanidation of the flotation tails from both these ores. The main results were presented in the 2011 Report. Later, the KCA-2008 Report summarized a detailed operational study based on the conclusions reached in the NCL-2006 Report. This report defined three different ore types: Oxide & Porous, Transition and Sulphide. This report suggested the incorporation of a 360,000 tpa acid heap-leach operation with solvent extraction and electrowinning of metallic copper and a 684,000 tpa (1,900 tpd) flotation plant to produce concentrates from all ore types and operation of a CIL circuit for further recovery of gold and silver from the tailings. KCA also investigated a simplified project to treat only the Sulphide and Transition ores via flotation and cyanidation of a partial concentrate from the Transition ore. The oxide heap leaching was not economic and due to the actual configuration of the plant, only the main results relevant to Sulphide and Transition ore flotation are shown.

Table 13-1 Sulphide Locked-Cycle Test Projection of Concentrate Grades and Recoveries for Sulphide Ore

Copper grades from this test work were relatively low. The serpentine (talc) and tremolite content in the gangue could be entrained during flotation thus affecting metal recoveries. A column flotation cleaning was proposed in order to resolve this issue and improve the copper grade in the concentrate. Based on the foregoing test work results, KCA developed the metallurgical recovery projections for Sulphide ore shown in Table 13-2. Finally, a pre-float step is recommended in the study for the successful flotation of oxide mineralization. Table 13-2 KCA UMZ Metallurgical Recovery Projections (Flotation Only)

13.2 Copper Leach-Precipitation-Flotation (LPF) Testing (2009-2010) MSRDI suggested applying the LPF process (2010 Report). Testing started in 2009 and the overall results of LPF process testing for a blend of Oxide and Transition ores resulted in a copper recovery of 85% and a copper concentrate with 64% copper. Operational data through September 2012 has shown that the copper recovery and copper concentrate grade was significantly lower than predicted, reaching values below 50%% and 20%, respectively. These tests also showed that the recovery of gold would be 59% and of silver about 40% after passing through the flotation circuit. Operational data show a gold recovery from 35% to 41% and silver recovery from 23% to 27%, which recoveries can be higher when including the pre-float, talc-rich, precious-metals concentrate. The LPF process was discontinued early in 2013. In the flotation process, a collector and other reagents are chosen to activate the flotation of the precipitated metallic copper along with any gold and silver. MSRDI testing produced a copper metallic concentrate assaying 64.3 % Cu, 3.8% Fe, 1.8% Pb, 0.35% Zn, 45 g/t Au and 1,983 g/t Ag. Nearly all copper cement made through September 30, 2012 contained <60% copper and <30 g/t gold.

Ore Type Cu Recovery, % Gold Recovery, % Silver Recovery, %Oxide 0 74 65

Transition 54 75 84Sulphide 86 66 82

13.2.1 Ore Characterization In addition to the previous characterization work where the ore was classified into Oxides, Transition and Sulphide ores, ALS carried out chemical assays that included a full characterization of the host rock. Five composites from UMZ were provided by EMIPA for mineralogical and metallurgical analysis and testing. The composites were identified as: Tremolite, Talc, Mixed, Dolomite and Dolomite Plant. The resulting elemental and mineral content data are summarized in Table 13-3 and Table 13-4 Table 13-3 Element content by composite

Table 13-4 Mineral content by composite

Element Symbol Unit Tremolite Talc Mixed Dolomite Dolomite PlantCopper Cu % 2.35 2.67 2.46 2.71 2.26

Copper Oxide CuOx % 1.81 2.06 2.31 2.51 2.13Lead Pb % 0.83 0.28 0.61 1.49 0.94

Lead Oxide PbOx % 0.4 0.09 0.21 0.63 0.32Zinc Zn % 0.53 0.22 0.41 1.27 1.43

Zinc Oxide ZnOx % 0.095 <0.001 0.065 0.42 0.545Iron Fe % 4.6 4.9 3.4 4.1 3.3Gold Au g/t 1.44 2.1 1.49 1.68 0.76Silver Ag g/t 97 22 11 141 55

Arsenic As % 0.004 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Sulfur S % 0.31 0.32 0.01 0.03 0.02

Carbon C % 0.7 0.1 0.13 0.44 0.3Fluorine F g/t 2751 3991 3193 1726 2412

Magnesium Mg % 11 12.3 13.5 13.2 13.4

Chemical Content – Percent

Element Unit Tremolite Talc Mixed Dolomite Dolomite PlantSilver Minerals % <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Copper Sulphides % 0.9 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.1Malachite/Azurite % 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.7

Cuprite % 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.1Brochantite % 0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1Chrysocolla % 3.7 3.5 4.2 3.7 2.3

CuPbZn Silicates % 1.4 1 2.7 6.3 5Galena % <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Pb Oxides % 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.9 0.4Sphalerite % <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Willemite/Smithsonite % 0.3 0.1 0.2 1.1 1.8Pyrite % 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1

Iron Oxides % 7.5 8.9 5.4 5.1 3.4Amphibole % 32.6 23.4 39.6 32 46.4Serpentine % 13.6 19.1 19.3 24.4 23.2

Quartz % 5.1 5.9 4.5 3.7 4.6Pyroxene % 3.3 0.8 3.7 7.3 0.9Chlorite % 10.4 8.6 3.8 5.8 3.3

Talc % 8.2 20.8 11 1.1 2.4Feldspars % 0.5 0.3 0.4 1.1 0.6Dolomite % 3.6 0.1 <0.1 2.1 1.4

Others % 6.9 4.4 3.6 4.1 3.2Total % 100 100 100 100 100

Chemical Content – Percent

Although the samples contained between about 2.3% to 2.7% of copper, most of the copper was soluble in weak acid that normally represents copper oxides and carbonates, which are difficult to recover via flotation processes. Lead in the samples ranged from 0.28% to 1.4%. Between one third and one half of this lead was found to be soluble in weak acid and likely not retrievable through flotation. Zinc in the ore ranged from 0.2% to 1.3% and it was found primarily as zinc silicates and carbonates, likely not recoverable via flotation. Silver and gold may be of economic significance in the samples at between 11 g/t and 141 g/t silver and 0.8 g/t and 2.1 g/t gold, respectively. Several composites had high talc levels, which could result in contamination of the concentrates. Fluorine levels were also high, ranging from about 1,700 to 4,000 g/t and would result in high penalties if not removed before sale. Based on operational results, it is believed that the majority of the fluorine is contained in talc. Copper was present in several forms within the ore. The copper deportment is shown in Table 13-5. Table 13-5 Copper Deportment

Copper Bearing Mineral

Percent of total copper Tremolite Talc Mixed Dolomite Dolomite Plant

Copper Sulphides

22.5 20.7 1.1 1.4 1.9

Malachite/Azurite 12.4 20.3 23.3 23.9 30.8 Cuprite 11.1 12.5 11.7 7.1 4.8

Brochantite 3.4 5.1 0.4 0.3 0.1 Chrysocolla 29.8 22.0 40.6 37.6 31.5 Plumangite 0.5 0.2 0.6 1.2 1.0

CuPbZn Silicates 3.8 1.7 8.8 15.3 19.9 Cu-Fe Oxides 16.5 17.6 13.4 13.2 10.0

Total 100 100 100 100 100 Chrysocolla, which does not respond to conventional flotation, was the most dominant copper mineral form. Cuprite, silicates and oxides also will not respond to conventional flotation. On the other hand, copper sulphides should be recovered whereas malachite, azurite and brochantite may be recovered by using sulphidizing reagents. Considering the five composites respectively, about 38%, 45%, 25%, 25% and 33% of copper was present in likely recoverable mineral forms. In terms of liberation, copper sulphides along with malachite and azurite showed satisfactory liberation levels. These levels were higher than what is typically required for successful flotation, but the volume of these minerals in the Oxide ores renders this process uneconomic for copper.

13.2.2 Bond Index Previously, the KCA-2008 Report showed the Bond Index for each ore type (Table 13-6) Table 13-6 Bond Index of the Ore Types

Also, the results of MSRDI’s grind tests established the optimum time to achieve 60% <200 mesh (Table 13-7). Table 13-7 Grind Tests of Ore Types. 498 g Sample, 65% Solids, feed size – 10 mesh

13.2.3 Flowsheet for the UMZ Ore Currently, the Transition and Sulphide ores are treated in a flotation circuit as shown in Figure 13-1. Oxides ores are not processed and are stockpiled. . Figure 13-1 UMZ Flotation Flowsheet

14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES The mineral resources of the Don Mario mine have been estimated in 2008 by Amec Consultants and updated in 2012 by Kminante Consultores Ltda.

14.1 Mineral Resource Database The UMZ mineral resource database consists of a topographic surface, data for 129 drill holes, and a geologic model comprising solids enclosing Porous, Oxide, Transition, and Sulphide ore types. The Porous ore is occasionally classified with the Oxide ore. The drill hole database contains 6,867 Au assays, 6,851 Ag assays 6,852 Cu assays, 2,656 acid soluble copper (“CuS”) assays, 5,205 Zn assays and 957 acid-soluble zinc (“ZnS”) assays. The database has 6,607 intervals coded for mineralization type: Sulphide (1), Transitional (2), Oxide (3) and Porous (4). A downhole survey file includes 1,361 records with at least one record per drill hole. Only the La Rosa/La Barca and earlier Orvana drill holes, which targeted LMZ mineralization, have downhole surveys as holes were generally longer than those targeting only the UMZ mineralization.

14.2 Geological Model The UMZ geological model consists of solid wireframes generated by Orvana in Gemcom GEMS 6.1 software. The model consists of four wireframe solids corresponding to Sulphide, Transitional, Oxide and Porous ore types. The model was developed on cross sections spaced at 25 m intervals with section lines striking 045º, looking along azimuth 315º. The model were reconciled in long section and plan to provide final balanced polygons in cross section which are linked to form a final wireframe. Figure 14-1 Geological Model

14.3 Mineral Resource Estimation The estimates of mineral resources have been derived from a resource block model incorporating data from diamond drilling and underground historical exploration. The cumulative experience of reconciling few years of the open pit exploitation with the reserve estimates for underground areas mined out has resulted in a high degree of confidence of the current resource model. Amec’s 2008 block model was used to generate the current mineral resources statement. Table 15-1 summarizes the Mineral Resources of the Don Mario Mine as of September 30, 2013. Table 14-1 UMZ Mineral Resource Estimates In situ and Stockpiles


Cu [%]

Au [g/t]

Ag [g/t]

NSR [$/t]

Measured 564.24 1.25 1.22 32.31 80.36 Indicated 850.25 1.14 1.05 33.91 73.41 Inferred 10.91 0.77 0.89 19.41 51.86 Measured 202.55 1.23 1.21 37.99 55.74 Indicated 369.86 1.18 1.16 38.49 53.98 Inferred 51.62 1.04 0.93 49.67 50.55 Mea+Ind 1,986.90 1.19 1.14 34.72 69.97 Inf 62.53 0.99 0.92 44.39 50.78

2,049.42 1.18 1.13 35.02 69.38

Measured 0.26 1.41 1.17 75.59 72.08 Indicated 0.37 1.35 1.06 82.84 70.19 Inferred 5.10 1.61 1.33 50.81 73.90 Measured 49.78 1.34 0.75 46.64 56.01 Indicated 98.03 1.25 0.74 39.50 51.99 Inferred 21.75 1.29 0.93 40.42 56.66 Measured 0.32 1.04 1.16 20.03 50.30 Indicated 0.81 2.11 3.13 14.04 110.3 Mea+Ind 149.57 1.29 0.76 41.87 53.72 Inf 26.85 1.35 1.01 42.4 59.9

176.42 1.30 0.80 41.9 54.7

Transitional

Sulphide

Subtotal Oxides

Mineral Resources for the Don Mario UMZ Project (September 30, 2013)


TOTAL Oxides

TOTAL Sulphide + Transitional

Oxides (Talc)

Oxides (Tremolite)

Oxides (Diopside)


Cu [%]

Au [g/t]





Mineral Resources of Stockpiles for the Don Mario UMZ Project (September 30, 2013)

15 MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES This section of the report summarizes the revision and comments of the pit optimizations, pit designs, mine plan and a life of mine production schedule for the Don Mario District Upper Mineralized Zone (UMZ) developed by Cube Consulting and gives DGCS’s opinions on the reasonableness of these plans.

15.1 Optimization Method

15.1.1 Open-Pit Optimization for the UMZ The UMZ open-pit optimization was carried out by Cube Consulting Inc. using the resource block model and current topographic data provided by EMIPA. Gemcom-Whittle™ software was used for pit optimization and scheduling by Cube Consultants. The phases used for the optimization were slightly engineered by Cube Consultants from the ones designed and presented in the NI 43-101 2010 report. These phases were used to generate the mine plan in July 2013 and there is no need to change them. Since there have been a recategorization of the resource model, where only the Sulphides and Transitional ores are being processed and Oxides ores sent to stockpile, Cube’s LOM monthly plan remains valid and minor adjustments will have to be done to the short term plan using the scheduler tool in GEMS software called Cut Evaluation. The definitive parameters and results used by Cube Consulting are described in the following sub-sections:

15.1.2 Optimization Parameters Table 16-1 summarizes the parameters used for the Gemcom-Whittle™ economic shell analysis and mine design. Overall slope angle is estimated to be 33 degrees. This is based on the pit design parameters provided by EMIPA, which are shown in the next section. Mining cost is obtained directly from the mine operation during 2013 and includes Engineering and Planning as well as Maintenance and Mine services. Metal prices, processing costs and recoveries, refining costs, and marketing (selling) costs were provided by EMIPA.

Table 15-1 Pit Optimization Parameters

15.1.3 Pit Optimization The open-pit optimization was completed by Cube Consulting Inc. in July 2013. For this purpose, the Lerchs & Grossmann algorithm in the Gemcom-Whittle™ software package was used. Gemcom-Whittle™ calculates the block values in order to find the optimum set of blocks that maximizes profit. In this study, the ore block value is calculated considering the revenue (and selling charges) from Copper, Gold and Silver, which is represented by the NSR model and both mining and processing charges. Ore blocks are those that have an NSR value greater than the corresponding processing cost (marginal cut-off grade). Waste block value is given by the cost of dumping it. Preliminary cut-off optimization was found to provide a reduced improvement in the economics. For this reason, marginal cut-off values are being used for ore-waste discrimination. Only Measured and Indicated resources were used to complete the pit optimization. The NSR cut-off value for Flotation is $ 21.49/ton and was provided by EMIPA. Table 15-2 shows the mineable ore resources within the Whittle ultimate pit. Mineral reserves are presented in Table 15-3. The proven and probable reserves of the UMZ are 1.97Mtons grading 1.19%, 1.14 Au g/t and 34.72 Ag g/t.

Table 15-2 Ultimate Pit Shell at $21.29 NSR Cutoff September 30, 2013

Table 15-3 Final Pit Ore Reserves September 30, 2013

In addition to in situ reserves, EMIPA provided the following data that describes the existing stockpiles, most of which can be treated by the LPF process as determined by EMIPA mine personnel (Table 15-4).


Cu [%]

Au [g/t]

Ag [g/t]

NSR [$/t]

Proven 564.24 1.25 1.22 32.31 80.36 Probable 850.25 1.14 1.05 33.91 73.41 Proven 202.55 1.23 1.21 37.99 55.74 Probable 369.86 1.18 1.16 38.49 53.98

Proven+Probable 1,986.90 1.19 1.14 34.72 69.97

Transitional

Sulphide

Mineral Reserves for the Don Mario UMZ Project (September 30, 2013)


Table 15-4 Stockpile Ore Reserves September 30, 2013

16 MINING METHODS

16.1 Open Pit Mining Open-pit mining is planned for the UMZ deposit, which forms the Cerro Don Mario. The ore and waste will be mined in 5-m benches. The overall mining sequence was developed through a series of four mining phases or pushbacks (The pit design assumes the mine is operated with small equipment (20-25 tonnes capacity) and all the design parameters have been provided by EMIPA. Standard haul-road design width for a double-lane system is then 10 m. This complies with that specified by EMIPA and it includes the drainage ditch and the safety berm. Design parameters as specified by EMIPA are:

• Inter-ramp angle: 35degrees. • Bench face angle: 65 degrees. • Berm width: 5 metres. • Haul roads width: 10 metres. • Bench height: 5 metres.

The estimated overall angle for this configuration is equal to 32 degrees. The overall geometry of the pit is designed on 5-m benches with a batter angle of 65° and inter-ramp angles of 35°, berm width of 5 m and haul roads of 10 m. These assumptions should be confirmed by a geotechnical study regarding the rock properties of the Sulphide zone. Figure 16-2). The Don Mario mine is an operating open pit mine. Access to the existing workings areas is through two main ramps; one located in Phase 1 providing good access to the plant and the second one in Phase 2 to waste dumps and stockpiles. One of these ramps is used for transport of people, materials and equipment to the open pit workings as well as for hauling ore to the plant and stockpiles and waste. The ramp located in phase one is closed for safety reasons and due to mining works in the upper levels of the mine this ramp is closed.


Cu [%]

Au [g/t]





In order to maximise the ore exposed, several criteria need to be satisfied. These include minimum width of cutbacks, including access for mining for every bench, identification of high grade areas, and minimum number of working faces per period of time, among others. It is consider that applying a truck and excavator mining method for the operation will satisfy these requirements and prepared each cutback plan for this mining method and operation. See figure 16-1. Figure 16-1 Mine Design Parameters for UMZ

The pit design assumes the mine is operated with small equipment (20-25 tonnes capacity) and all the design parameters have been provided by EMIPA. Standard haul-road design width for a double-lane system is then 10 m. This complies with that specified by EMIPA and it includes the drainage ditch and the safety berm. Design parameters as specified by EMIPA are:

• Inter-ramp angle: 35degrees. • Bench face angle: 65 degrees. • Berm width: 5 metres. • Haul roads width: 10 metres. • Bench height: 5 metres.

The estimated overall angle for this configuration is equal to 32 degrees. The overall geometry of the pit is designed on 5-m benches with a batter angle of 65° and inter-ramp angles of 35°, berm width of 5 m and haul roads of 10 m. These assumptions should be confirmed by a geotechnical study regarding the rock properties of the Sulphide zone.

Figure 16-2 Pushbacks of UMZ – Plan View

16.1.1 Mine Planning and Design

The UMZ mine design and planning were carried out using the resource block model and the nested pit shells (phases and end-of-year maps) obtained in Gemcom-Whittle™. The review of the current mine plan was developed using the current LOM developed by Cube Consulting and comparing this information with the total volume of the final pit, using the existing AMEC’s 2008 block model and the current phases developed by Cube consulting. Figure 16-2 shows the Whittle pit shell the projection of end of September 2013 (green surface) and the designed pushbacks.

Figure 16-2 End of September 2013 Pit Design Layout

The current volume of mineral into Phase 2 provides enough exposed ore to continue with the current mine extraction plan. Analyzing in details the monthly mine sequence for Phase 2, it could be some issues between interaction of mining equipment (working area) related with the safety distance in the operation of loading - hauling and drilling. Another issue that may occur at the bottom of Phase 2 could be some underground geotechnical effects due to the blasting operation. This issue was addressed in the past and may need a revision. The phases defined and designed are focused on accessing the best NSR values at the beginning of the production plan.

16.1.2 Description and Design of Pushbacks The mining pushbacks are contained by the outline of the Whittle ultimate pit shell. The designs retain more than 96% of the ore tonnage in the Whittle ultimate pit shell. The ore contained by each pushback is reported in the Table 17-1, based on NSR cut-off value of $21.49/tonne for the flotation to process Sulphide and Transitional ores. Table 17-1 Ore Tonnage for Designed Pushbacks

Phase 1 it is almost depleted and was designed to continue with the existing development, which is based on the initial pushback design presented in the 2011 Report. The bottom elevation of Pushback 1 is 335 masl, and the design is shown in Figure 16-2. Pushback 2 started mining from the southern area of the mine. The bottom elevation of Phase 2 is 325 masl. At bench 350m, an access ramp also intersects an external mine road. Figure 16-2 shows the design of Phase 2. Later access to the top benches of pushback 3 is allowed by a ramp located at the South. Phase 3 continues both towards the South and underneath Pushback 2. The top benches can be accessed by the south ramp in pushback 2. Benches 380 and lower are accessed by a ramp that connects to an existing road at 380 masl. The bottom elevation of Pushback 3 is 325 masl and is reached through the same ramp that runs from level 380. Figure 16-2 illustrates Pushback 3. Pushback 4 has been expanded (horizontally) to reach the new ore contained by the current ultimate Whittle shell. The bottom elevation of Pushback 4 is 305 masl. Pushback 4 goes underneath, north and south of pushback 1 and underneath of the northern part of pushback 2. Pushback 4 design is shown in Figure 16-2.

PHASE MINERALIZATION TONNAGE (Ktonnes)

Cu [%]

Au [g/t]

Ag [g/t]

NSR [$/t]

OXIDE 0.03 1.12 0.66 25.66 44.16 SULPHIDE 31.38 0.59 0.35 20.77 35.36 TRANSITIONAL 19.17 0.84 0.63 46.14 40.71 SUBTOTAL PH1 50.58 0.69 0.46 30.39 37.39 OXIDE 72.80 1.33 1.01 53.38 62.06 POROUS 0.31 1.29 1.32 30.90 61.76 SULPHIDE 446.24 1.35 1.05 48.37 86.17 TRANSITIONAL 236.88 1.13 0.97 53.11 54.06 WASTE 0.31 1.65 0.59 44.92 59.93 SUBTOTAL PH2 756.54 1.28 1.02 50.33 73.77 OXIDE 182.82 1.30 0.78 32.38 52.22 POROUS 22.44 0.94 0.34 39.81 37.26 SULPHIDE 1,051.61 1.11 1.19 25.72 72.30 TRANSITIONAL 443.44 1.20 1.38 27.46 54.92 WASTE 8.31 2.12 0.90 30.51 91.18 SUBTOTAL PH3 1,708.61 1.16 1.18 27.09 65.27 OXIDE 5.15 1.16 0.69 21.53 44.87 TRANSITIONAL 19.88 1.21 1.02 35.30 51.35 SUBTOTAL PH4 25.03 1.20 0.95 32.47 50.01

TOTAL 2,540.76 1.19 1.12 34.13 67.10

PH1

PH2

PH3

PH4

16.1.3 Mine Schedule

Cube Consulting produced the latest LOM in July 2013 and it remains valid. Cube used the Scheduler Optimizer by MineSight which claims to maximize the Net Present Value. The main constraints were the daily mill throughput rate of 2,700tpd and the maximum material movement of 150,000tonnes per month. The Life of Mine production schedule starts at the end of the current budget plan, which goes through September 2013. The budget plan completely mines Phase 1, mines Phase 2 to the 365 bench toe and mines Phase 3 to the 385 bench toe. A Summary of the Life of Mine monthly production schedule is shown in Table 16-2. Table 16-2 Production Schedule

17 RECOVERY METHODS Since March 2013, Sulphide and Transition ores have been processed in the flotation circuit. In the chapter 13 Mineral Processing the details of the flotation principles are explained. The flotation circuit includes a rougher, scavenger, and cleaner stages. The final product is a concentrate with a copper grade that has been greater than 40% but less than 60%; gold and silver grades have been about 25 g/t and 700 g/t, respectively.

The “concentrate” made in the flotation circuit contains substantial amounts of gold and silver, but also contains high values of fluorine. Nonetheless, this product has been marketed and sold as a precious-metals concentrate with gold grade of about 90 g/t and silver grade of about 1,900 g/t. Figure 17-1 UMZ Flotation Circuit

Transition and Sulphide ores are sent directly to the flotation circuit. However, if the ore contains high Pb values, a lead concentrate with grades of about 15% Cu, >20% Pb, 30 g/t Au, and 1,900 g/t Ag is made prior to making a copper concentrate, which has typical values of about 30% Cu, 25 g/t Au, and 1,000 g/t Ag. Testing showed that gold and silver recoveries are high enough to preclude passing the tailings through the CIL circuit, but if sufficient gold and silver contents remain, the option to process them in the CIL circuit is available. 18 PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE Figure 18-1 shows the project infrastructure. The 100tpd sulphuric acid plant (currently in use), the tailings impoundment, the waste dumps and the mill and plant.

Figure 18-1 Project Infrastructure

19 MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS For concentrate, EMIPA has offtake agreements in force with CORMIN S.A. The concentrate is trucked to the port of Callao, Peru. The terms and conditions of the contracts are within the industry norms for TC/RCs. The consultant understands that the following contracts are in force: 1) copper cement, 2) precious-metals concentrate, 3) copper concentrate with Pb <13%, 4) copper concentrate with Pb >13%, and 5) lead concentrate. All of them are renewable based on the compliance with tonnage. . 20 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING, AND SOCIAL COMMUNITY IMPACT

20.1 UMZ Permits All the necessary permits to operate at the UMZ mine have been granted and the government approvals are stored at EMIPA’s premises.

20.2 UMZ Environmental Liabilities The Consultant did not audit or conduct a detailed review of environmental liabilities of the Don Mario site in the preparation of this report, but relied on EMIPA and a study of closure costs for the Don Mario district prepared and documented by AMEC E&E Services of Chile (Tingey, 2007) subsequently updated by Water Air Earth Consultants (A. Salle, 2009). A waste dump of 2.5 ha located south of the UMZ pit was considered for the project in the KCA-2008 report. EMIPA designed a dump with an area of approximately 200 m by 300 m and a final height of 30 to 40 m in a single bench with a face slope not exceeding 40 degrees (Figure 20-1). The waste dump and runoff water treatment facilities will be tied into the existing waste-dump pile used for the LMZ mine.

Figure 20-1 UMZ Waste Dump Design

20.3 UMZ Mine Closure The environmental laws covering mining activities in Bolivia (RAMM), Chapter 11, Article 11, mandate that expansions in operating capacity exceeding 33% require an updated environmental license and monitoring program. Such a plan was submitted and approved for the mill expansion. The current plan for the Don Mario district is to continue operating the UMZ project and exploring new opportunities, which will postpone mine-site reclamation until the UMZ mineral reserves are depleted. A study of the closure costs for the Don Mario mine based on LMZ, LT, and UMZ, mine process-plant operations and tailings disposal was completed by Water Air Earth Consulting SRL (A. Sallés, 2009; A. Sallés, 2010). The asset retirement obligations include waste-rock remediation, removal of mine-site buildings, mine closure, mine-water treatment, reforestation, tailings-dam rehabilitation, remediation of soil contamination and monitoring for 4 years. 21 CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS This item was not reviewed by DGCS consultants however, the consultant is aware of the availability of the information.

22 Economic Analysis

In addition to a 3% NSR on all metals sold, EMIPA pays the Bolivian government a royalty of 7% for gold, 6% for silver, and 5% for copper on gross value of each metal in the concentrate. In addition, Bolivia’s base tax rate is 37.5%. The purpose of this competent person report is not to carry out an economic analysis of the project. 23 ADJACENT PROPERTIES EMIPA controls the concessions adjacent to the Don Mario concession, within which the UMZ deposit is located. Geophysically-defined drill targets not only occur within the Don Mario concession, but in the adjacent concessions where the Eastern Schist Belt is located. No deposits in the areas adjacent to the periphery of the 11 contiguous claims controlled by EMIPA are at the same stage as the UMZ deposit. 24 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION All relevant data and information regarding the UMZ project is contained herein and within the 2011 Report, 2010 Report, AMEC-2008 Report, KCA-2008 Report, and NCL-2006 Report, all of which relied on previous NI 43-101-compliant reports for certain data and information, as discussed therein. 25 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS

• The UMZ operation is currently in commercial production. Late in 2012, due to the high costs, lower metallurgical recoveries and lower grades of the concentrate of the LPF process, EMIPA decided to stop and discontinue the process indefinitely. EMIPA’s decision to discontinue the LPF has proven to be the right decision.

• Since 2013, the plant is processing the In situ Transition and Sulphide ores by flotation and daily

improvements are being made in quality ores for processing.

• The current flotation layout, the understanding of the flotation process and knowledge of the quality of the ores by the plant operators are currently showing improvements resulting in better metallurgical recoveries of the Sulphides and Transition ores.

• The current LOM prepared by Cube Consulting Inc. fits exactly the needs of the Don Mario Mine and there is no reason to adjust or change the current mine layout nor the scheduling of the mine. The development of the mine has to be dealt on a monthly basis following the directions of Cube’s mine design and mine plan and complement it with strict ore control process.

• EMIPA’s engineers and geologists have taken a strategic decision to return to the original mineralization model (Porous, Oxides, Transition and Sulphides) to mine the UMZ. Oxides and Porous ores are sent to stock piles and the ores with high content of talc go to the waste dump.

• The current mineral reserve model has been reduced to 1.97Mtons due to the recategorization of resources and reserves. Proven and Probable ores from the Sulphides and Transitional ores were counted as reserves.

26 RECOMMENDATIONS

• The main recommendation is implement an ore control methodology and procedures to deliver the best Sulphides and Transition ores to the plant. In operational terms, mark on the bench and or the blasts the packets generated by the short term planner engineer and confirmed on the ground.

• The consultant recommends ignoring the final development of Phase 4. The tonnage is

insignificant and it does not have any influence on the current mine plan. The remaining ore is about 25Ktonnes and it may not be worth spending the money.

• It is recommended that EMIPA accelerates de exposure of in situ ore (Transition and Sulphides) as soon as possible from Phase 3. This means also to accelerate the extraction plan for Phase 2. It is necessary to bring more equipment for this increase temporary the production rate for the ore exposure. It will pay off processing the good Sulphides and Transitional ores.

CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON

This certificate applies to the technical report, with an effective date of September 30, 2013, entitled “Competent Person Report for The Don Mario Upper Mineralized Project, Eastern Bolivia” (the “CPR Technical Report”). I, Gino Zandonai hereby certify that: 1. I am a mine engineer serving as the Director of DGCS SA. whose address is Avenida La Deheza 1201, Torre

Norte office 408, Lo Barnechea, Santiago, Chile. 2. This certificate applies to the report entitled “An Independent Competent report on The Don Mario Copper

Mine, Eastern Bolivia” dated September 30, 2013. 3. I graduated in civil & mining engineering from the University of La Serena, Chile with degrees of Licenciado en

Ciencias de la Ingenieria (B.Sc) in 1989, and from the Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Co, USA with a M.Sc. in Mining Engineering in 1999. I am a Competent Person duly qualified in Estimation of Mineral Resources and Reserves (Record No. 0155) from the Examination Board of Competences in Mining Resources and Reserves of Chile, Law 20.235, subscribed to the Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (CRIRSCO). I am a “qualified person” for the purposes of NI 43-101 due to my experience and current affiliation with a professional organization as defined in NI 43-101. I am also a member in good standing of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) (Registered Professional, No. 302818) and the Society of Mining Engineers (SME #4101891) since 1998.

4. I have practiced my profession continuously for 22 years. Since 1989, I have continually been involved in minerals projects for precious and base metals and industrial minerals in Australia, Chile, Bolivia, Mali, Botswana, Mauritania, Greenland, Finland, Sweden, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Mexico. I have been involved directly in the preparation of feasibility studies and resource estimation of gold, copper and silver projects.

5. I have read the definition of “qualified person” set out in National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”) and certify that by reason of my education, past relevant work experience and affiliation with a professional association (as defined in NI 43-101), I fulfill the requirements to be a “qualified person” for the purposes of NI 43-101.

6. I visited the mine site on September 22-24, 2013 and several occasions in the last 5 years.

7. I am responsible for the preparation of all Sections of the Technical Report. 8. I am independent of Orvana Minerals Corp, as described in section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

9. I have had no prior involvement with the property that is the subject of the Technical Report.

10. I have read National Instrument 43 101 and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliance with that

instrument and form.

11. As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the technical report contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the technical report not misleading.

Dated at Santiago, Chile, December 17, 2012.

___________________________

Gino Zandonai

27 REFERENCES Ahlfeld, F. 1960. Geología de Bolivia, Instituto Boliviano del Petróleo, La Paz, Bolivia. ALS Metallurgy, 2012. Metallurgical Assessment of Future Samples from the Don Mario Mine AMEC, 2008. Diseño de Factibilidad de la Ampliación del Dique de Colas de la Mina Don Mario. Unpublished study prepared by AMEC (Peru) S.A. for Orvana (study to evaluate tailings-dam expansions for future tailings disposal requirements), 38 p. Addison, R. and Barrestero, R.H., 2005, Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone (UMZ) Gold Project, Chiquitos Province, Bolivia. Unpublished Technical Report prepared for Orvana by Pincock, Allen, & Holt, effective date 11 March 2005, 81 p. (“PAH-2005 report”). Brisbois, K., Berezowsky, M., and Kiernan, J., 2003. Technical Report on the Don Mario Gold Property Chiquitos Province, Bolivia. Unpublished Technical Report prepared by AMEC E&C Services Ltd for Orvana, effective date July 2003, 343 p. (“AMEC-2003 report”). Hodgson, M. J., 2005. Technical Report on Resource Estimation for the Don Mario Gold Mine, Lower Mineralized Zone, Chiquitos Province, Bolivia. Unpublished Technical Report prepared internally by Orvana, effective date 23 December, 2005,124 p. Isla, Luis, M.1996. Orvana descriptions of lithologies (summary compiled from various sources), 12 p. Isla, Luis. M. 2010. Permisos. A document listing the current operating permits for the Don Mario Mine prepared by Luis Isla, Orvana Project Geologist in May, 2010. Kappes, D., 2009, Don Mario UMZ Feasibility Study Updated Financial Summary – 684,000 tonne per year Flotation Plant. Unpublished non-43-101-compliant study prepared for Orvana by Kappes, Cassiday & Associates, 2 p. (“KCA-2009 report”). Kappes, D., 2008, Don Mario UMZ Flotation Only Feasibility Study – 684,000 tonne per year Flotation Plant. Unpublished non-43-101-compliant study prepared for Orvana by Kappes, Cassiday & Associates, 167 p. (“KCA-2008 report”). Kolin, K.M. and Bentzen, E.H., 2006, Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone (UMZ) Copper-Gold-Silver Project, Chiquitos Province, Bolivia. Unpublished Technical Report: NCL Ingeníera y Construcción S.A., 200 p. (“NCL-2006 report”). Litherland, M., et al., 1986. The geology and mineral resources of the Bolivian Precambrian Shield, Overseas Memory British Geological Survey, No.9, British Geological Survey, map 1:1,000,000. QE233G46, 153 p. Mitchell, W.I. 1983. Mapa geologico del area de Santo Corazon-Robore Quad. SE 1-9 Con. Parte En SE 21-9, Proyecto-Precambrico, Government of Bolivia and Government of U.K. Directorate of Overseas Surveys. Geological map at 1:250,000 scale. Roberts, R.G. 1988, Archean gold lode deposits, In: Ore deposit Models, Roberts, R.G. and P.A. Sheahan (eds.). Geoscience Canada Reprint Series 3, p. 1-20. Sallés, A., 2009, Cálculo de Costos de Cierre Ambiental de la Mina Don Mario para su Provisión Empresa Minera Paititi S.A. Unpublished study by Water Air Earth Consultants S.R.L. for EMIPA (closure costs for the Don Mario mine), 20 p.

Sallés, A., 2010, Estimación de los Costos de Cierre Ambiental para Provisión Mina Don Mario: Unpublished study prepared by Water Air Earth Consultants SRL for EMIPA (closure costs for Don Mario mine), 20 p. Tingey, D. 2007. Orvana Minerals Corp. Asset Retirement Obligations. Unpublished report prepared for Orvana by AMEC (Chile) S.A. summarizing the costs associated with mine closure. TWC, 1999. Orvana Don Mario Project, Detailed Base Case Estimate, Vol. 1. Unpublished resource estimate and mining study by The Winter Group for Orvana dated February 1999. (“TWC-1999 report) Wright, C., Podhorski-Thomas, M., and Colquhoun, W., 2008, Technical Report for the Don Mario Property, Chiquitos Province, Bolivia. Unpublished Technical Report by AMEC (Peru) S.A. for EMIPA, 207 p. (“AMEC-2008 report”). Zandonai, G and Urbaez, E, 2008. Open Pit Optimization Study of the Don Mario Gold Mine. Unpublished open-pit optimization study prepared by Strategic Mining Consultants Ltd (SMC) for Orvana in 2007. 48 p. Zandonai, G., Bhappu, R., and Williams, W.C., 2010, Technical Report on the Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone, Eastern Bolivia. Unpublished Technical Report, 107p. (2010 report) Zandonai, G. and Williams, W.C., 2012, Technical Report Updated Reserve Estimates for the Don Mario Upper Mineralized Zone, Eastern Bolivia. Published Technical Report, 97p. (2011 report)

update & review ni 43-101 technical report...

Documents