Updated PFS Confirms KSM Reserves
Economic at Current Metal Prices
Seabridge Gold Inc. (TSX:SEA) (NYSE:SA) announced today that it has
filed a NI 43-101 Technical Report at www.sedar.com for its
100%-owned KSM project located in northern British Columbia,
Canada. The Technical Report includes previously announced results
from an updated Preliminary Feasibility Study (the “PFS”) and a new
Preliminary Economic Assessment (the “PEA”). The 2016 PFS was
prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. and the PEA was prepared by Amec
Foster Wheeler Americas Limited. Both studies estimate operating
and total costs for KSM that are well below industry averages for
producing mines.
The 2016 PFS incorporates KSM’s Measured and
Indicated Mineral Resources into mine plans generating Proven and
Probable Mineral Reserves of 2.2 billion tonnes grading 0.55 grams
per tonne gold, 0.21% copper and 2.6 grams per tonne silver (38.8
million ounces of gold, 10.2 billion pounds of copper and 183
million ounces of silver). (For details see
http://seabridgegold.net/News/Article/626/) The 2016 PFS does not
include the higher grade resources delineated at Deep Kerr and the
Iron Cap Lower Zone as they are in the Inferred Mineral Resources
category which cannot be considered as Mineral Reserves required
for inclusion in a PFS.
The project design in the PEA includes the
higher grade resources from Deep Kerr and the Iron Cap Lower Zone,
enabling the mining method to shift from predominantly open pit in
the PFS to primarily low cost block cave mining. This design
significantly reduces the number and size of the open pits and the
project’s environmental impact. The net result is a substantial
improvement in estimated economic returns. (For details see
http://seabridgegold.net/News/Article/630/). Note that Inferred
Mineral Resources are considered too speculative geologically to
have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable
them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves, and there is no
certainty that the results of the PEA will be realized. Mineral
Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated
economic viability.
Seabridge Chairman and CEO Rudi Fronk commented
that “the PFS remains a viable option for developing the KSM
Project. However, the PEA is a creative response to our recent
higher-grade discoveries and the industry’s successful development
of more efficient and cost-effective underground mining
technologies. Although the PEA is more conceptual in nature than
the PFS and includes Inferred Mineral Resources, we believe its
approach is an important step forward for KSM, offering greater
rewards both economically and environmentally.”
To compare the economic projections of the 2016
PFS and the PEA, three cases were presented. A Base Case economic
evaluation was undertaken incorporating historical three-year
trailing averages for metal prices as of July 31, 2016. This
approach adheres to United States Securities and Exchange
Commission policy and is consistent with industry practice. Two
alternate cases were constructed: (i) a Recent Spot Case
incorporating recent spot prices for gold, copper, silver and the
US$/Cdn$ exchange rate; and (ii) an Alternate Case that
incorporates higher metal prices to demonstrate the project’s
sensitivity to rising prices.
The pre-tax and post-tax estimated economic
results in U.S. dollars for all three cases are as follows:
Projected Economic Results
(US$)
|
Base Case |
Recent Spot |
Alternate |
2016 PEA |
2016 PFS |
2016 PEA |
2016 PFS |
2016 PEA |
2016 PFS |
Metal Prices: |
|
|
|
Gold ($/ounce) |
|
1,230 |
|
|
1,350 |
|
|
1,500 |
|
Copper ($/pound) |
|
2.75 |
|
|
2.20 |
|
|
3.00 |
|
Silver ($/ounce) |
|
17.75 |
|
|
20.00 |
|
|
25.00 |
|
US$/Cdn$ Exchange Rate: |
|
0.80 |
|
|
0.77 |
|
|
0.80 |
|
Cost Summary: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Costs Per Oz of Gold (life of mine) |
-$ |
179 |
|
$ |
277 |
|
$ |
32 |
|
$ |
404 |
|
-$ |
319 |
|
$ |
183 |
|
Total Cost Per Ounce of Gold Produced |
$ |
358 |
|
$ |
673 |
|
$ |
553 |
|
$ |
787 |
|
$ |
218 |
|
$ |
580 |
|
Copper Credits Per Oz Gold Included in Costs |
-$ |
1,328 |
|
-$ |
795 |
|
-$ |
1,104 |
|
-$ |
636 |
|
-$ |
1,449 |
|
-$ |
868 |
|
Silver Credits per Oz Gold Included in Costs |
-$ |
83 |
|
-$ |
71 |
|
-$ |
97 |
|
-$ |
80 |
|
-$ |
117 |
|
-$ |
100 |
|
Initial Capital (includes pre-production mining) |
$5.5 billion |
$5.0 billion |
$5.3 billion |
$4.8 billion |
$5.5 billion |
$5.0 billion |
Sustaining Capital |
$10.0 billion |
$5.5 billion |
$9.7 billion |
$5.3 billion |
$10.0 billion |
$5.5 billion |
Unit Operating Cost On-site (US$/tonne) |
$ |
11.61 |
|
$ |
12.36 |
|
$ |
11.17 |
|
$ |
12.09 |
|
$ |
11.61 |
|
$ |
12.36 |
|
Pre-Tax Results: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flow |
$26.3 billion |
$15.9 billion |
$24.1 billion |
$16.1 billion |
$38.7 billion |
$26.3 billion |
NPV @ 5% Discount Rate |
$6.1 billion |
$3.3 billion |
$5.7 billion |
$3.5 billion |
$10.2 billion |
$6.5 billion |
Internal Rate of Return |
|
12.7 |
% |
|
10.4 |
% |
|
12.9 |
% |
|
11.1 |
% |
|
16.9 |
% |
|
14.6 |
% |
Payback Period (years) |
|
5.6 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
4.1 |
|
Post-Tax Results: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Flow |
$16.7 billion |
$10.0 billion |
$15.3 billion |
$10.1 billion |
$24.7 billion |
$16.7 billion |
NPV @ 5% Discount Rate |
$3.4 billion |
$1.5 billion |
$3.2 billion |
$1.7 billion |
$6.0 billion |
$3.7 billion |
Internal Rate of Return |
|
10.0 |
% |
|
8.0 |
% |
|
10.1 |
% |
|
8.5 |
% |
|
13.4 |
% |
|
11.4 |
% |
Payback Period (years) |
|
6.4 |
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
4.9 |
|
Note: Operating and total cost
per ounce of gold are after copper and silver credits. Total cost
per ounce includes all start-up capital, sustaining capital and
reclamation/closure costs. The post-tax results include the B.C.
Mineral Tax and corporate provincial and federal taxes. The
projected economic results do not give effect to a third party
option to acquire a 2% royalty on gold and silver production for a
payment to Seabridge of $160 million nor the expenses associated
with agreements which have been or in future may be concluded with
aboriginal groups in the vicinity of the Project.
The NI 43-101 Technical Report includes
sensitivity analyses illustrating the impact on project economics
from positive and negative changes to metal prices, capital costs
and operating costs.
National Instrument 43-101
Disclosure The KSM 2016 PFS update was prepared by Tetra
Tech, and the KSM 2016 PEA was prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler as
principal consultants for their respective studies. Both studies
incorporate the work of a number of industry-leading consulting
firms as identified in the news releases of September 19 and
October 6, 2016. This news release has been reviewed and approved
by Qualified Persons from the principal consultants. Qualified
Persons (as defined under National Instrument 43-101) are
independent of Seabridge. The principal consultants, and their
Qualified Persons are listed below:
- Tetra Tech, under the direction of Hassan Ghaffari P. Eng.
(PFS content)
- Amec Foster Wheeler, under the direction of Simon Allard P.Eng.
(PEA content)
Seabridge Gold holds a 100% interest in several
North American gold resource projects. The Company’s principal
assets are the KSM property located near Stewart, British Columbia,
Canada and the Courageous Lake gold project located in Canada’s
Northwest Territories. For a breakdown of Seabridge Gold’s mineral
reserves and resources by project and category please visit the
Company’s website at
http://www.seabridgegold.net/resources.php.
All Mineral Reserve and Mineral
Resources estimates reported by the Corporation were estimated in
accordance with the Canadian National Instrument 43-101 and the
Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy Definition Standards
for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves. These standards differ
significantly from the requirements of the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission. Mineral Resources which are not Mineral
Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
This document contains "forward-looking
information" within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation
and “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United
States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. This
information and these statements, referred to herein as
“forward-looking statements” are made as of the date of this
document. Forward-looking statements relate to future events or
future performance and reflect current estimates, predictions,
expectations or beliefs regarding future events and include, but
are not limited to, statements with respect to: (i) the estimated
amount and grade of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves; (ii)
both the PFS and the PEA representing viable development options
for the Project and the PEA being an important step forward for
KSM, offering greater rewards both economically and
environmentally; (iii) estimates of the capital costs of
constructing mine facilities and bringing a mine into production,
of sustaining capital and the duration of financing payback
periods; (iv) the estimated amount of future production, both
tonnes and grade produced and metal recovered; and (v) estimates of
operating costs and total costs, net cash flow, net present value
and economic returns from an operating mine; and (vi) estimated
operating and total costs for KSM being well below industry
averages for producing mines. Any statements that express or
involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations,
beliefs, plans, projections, objectives or future events or
performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as
“expects”, “anticipates”, “plans”, “projects”, “estimates”,
“envisages”, “assumes”, “intends”, “strategy”, “goals”,
“objectives” or variations thereof or stating that certain actions,
events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be
taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms
and similar expressions) are not statements of historical fact and
may be forward-looking statements.
All forward-looking statements are based
on Seabridge's or its consultants' current beliefs as well as
various assumptions made by them and information currently
available to them. The most significant assumptions are set forth
above, but generally these assumptions include: (i) the presence of
and continuity of metals at the Project at estimated grades; (ii)
the geotechnical and metallurgical characteristics of rock
conforming to sampled results; (iii) the quantities of water and
the quality of the water that must be diverted or treated during
mining operations; (iv) the capacities, efficiencies and durability
of various machinery and equipment, including the rates at which
drawpoints can be established and mucked; (v) the availability of
personnel, machinery and equipment at estimated prices and within
the estimated delivery times; (vi) currency exchange rates; (vii)
metals sales prices and exchange rate assumed; (viii) appropriate
discount rates applied to the cash flows in the economic analysis;
(ix) tax rates and royalty rates applicable to the proposed mining
operation; (x) the availability of acceptable financing under
assumed structure and costs; (xi) anticipated mining losses and
dilution; (xii) metallurgical performance; (xiii) reasonable
contingency requirements; (xiv) success in realizing proposed
operations; (xv) receipt of permits and other regulatory approvals
on acceptable terms; and (xvi) the negotiation of satisfactory
terms with impacted Treaty and First Nations groups. Although
management considers these assumptions to be reasonable based on
information currently available to it, they may prove to be
incorrect. Many forward-looking statements are made assuming the
correctness of other forward looking statements, such as statements
of net present value and internal rates of return, which are based
on most of the other forward-looking statements and assumptions
herein. The cost information is also prepared using current values,
but the time for incurring the costs will be in the future and it
is assumed costs will remain stable over the relevant
period.
By their very nature, forward-looking
statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, both general
and specific, and risks exist that estimates, forecasts,
projections and other forward-looking statements will not be
achieved or that assumptions do not reflect future experience. We
caution readers not to place undue reliance on these
forward-looking statements as a number of important factors could
cause the actual outcomes to differ materially from the beliefs,
plans, objectives, expectations, anticipations, estimates
assumptions and intentions expressed in such forward-looking
statements. These risk factors may be generally stated as the risk
that the assumptions and estimates expressed above do not occur as
forecast, but specifically include, without limitation: risks
relating to variations in the mineral content within the material
identified as Mineral Resources from that predicted; variations in
rates of recovery and extraction; the geotechnical characteristics
of the rock mined or through which infrastructure is built
differing from that predicted, the quantity of water that will need
to be diverted or treated during mining operations being different
from what is expected to be encountered during mining operations or
post closure, or the rate of flow of the water being different;
developments in world metals markets; risks relating to
fluctuations in the Canadian dollar relative to the US dollar;
increases in the estimated capital and operating costs or
unanticipated costs; difficulties attracting the necessary work
force; increases in financing costs or adverse changes to the terms
of available financing, if any; tax rates or royalties being
greater than assumed; changes in development or mining plans due to
changes in logistical, technical or other factors; changes in
project parameters as plans continue to be refined; risks relating
to receipt of regulatory approvals or settlement of an agreement
with impacted First Nations groups; changes in regulations applying
to the development, operation, and closure of mining operations
from what currently exists; the effects of competition in the
markets in which Seabridge operates; operational and infrastructure
risks and the additional risks described in Seabridge's
Annual Information Form filed
with SEDAR in Canada (available at www.sedar.com) for the year
ended December 31, 2015 and in the Corporation’s Annual Report Form
40-F filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on
EDGAR (available at www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml).
Seabridge cautions that the foregoing list of factors that
may affect future results is not exhaustive.
When relying on our forward-looking
statements to make decisions with respect to Seabridge, investors
and others should carefully consider the foregoing factors and
other uncertainties and potential events. Seabridge does not
undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether written
or oral, that may be made from time to time by Seabridge or on our
behalf, except as required by law.
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD
"Rudi Fronk" Chairman and C.E.O.
For further information, please contact:
Rudi P. Fronk, Chairman and C.E.O.
Tel: (416) 367-9292 · Fax: (416) 367-2711
Email: info@seabridgegold.net
Seabridge Gold (TSX:SEA)
Historical Stock Chart
From Nov 2024 to Dec 2024
Seabridge Gold (TSX:SEA)
Historical Stock Chart
From Dec 2023 to Dec 2024