Final Sedar Karma 275 Jan 27 345pm

TECHNICAL REPORT, UPDATED RESOURCE ESTIMATE
AND FEASIBILITY STUDY

ON THE
KARMA GOLD PROJECT
BURKINA FASO, WEST AFRICA
LATITUDE 13o 32 57 N LONGITUDE 2o 13 25 W
WGS84 UTM 30P 584,000m E 1,498,000m N
FOR
TRUE GOLD MINING INC.
Eugene Puritch, P.Eng.

Richard Sutcliffe, Ph.D., P. Geo.
Antoine Yassa, P.Geo.
Ismail Mahomed Pr. Sci. Nat.
Peter Terbrugge Pr. Sci. Nat.
Duncan John Grant-Stuart, Pr. Eng.
Martin Stapinsky, Ph.D., P. Geo.
Neil Senior, MSc Mech.Eng FSAIMM
P&E Mining Consultants Inc.,
Report 275
Effective Date: December 17, 2013
Signing Date: January 27, 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................1
1.1
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1
1.2
GEOLOGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES .........................................................1
1.3
MINING ...................................................................................................................9
1.3.1 Geomechanical ...........................................................................................11
1.3.2 Hydrological ..............................................................................................12
1.3.3 Mining Method ..........................................................................................13
1.3.4 Pit Optimization and Pit Design ................................................................13
1.3.5 Mineral Reserves .......................................................................................13
1.3.6 Production Schedule ..................................................................................14
1.4
METALLURGY AND MINERAL PROCESSING..............................................14
1.4.1 Metallurgical Testwork ..............................................................................14
1.4.2 Mineral Processing.....................................................................................15
1.5
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE ..........................................................................18
1.6
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS..................................................18
1.6.1 Community Relations ................................................................................18
1.6.2 Environmental ............................................................................................19
1.7
CAPITAL AND OPERATING COST ESTIMATES ...........................................19
1.7.1 Capital Cost Summary ...............................................................................19
1.8
OPERATING COSTS ...........................................................................................20
1.9
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS .....................................................................................22
1.10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................22
1.10.1 General .......................................................................................................23
1.10.2 Geology and Exploration ...........................................................................23
1.10.3 Processing ..................................................................................................23
1.10.3.1
Process Plant and Metallurgical Testing ....................................................23
1.10.3.2
Heap Leach Pad and Ponds ........................................................................24
1.10.4 Mining ........................................................................................................24
1.10.4.1
Pit Slopes (Geotechnical) ...........................................................................24
1.10.4.2
Drilling and Blasting ..................................................................................24
1.10.4.3
Haulage ......................................................................................................24
1.10.4.4
Hydrological ..............................................................................................24
1.10.5 Environmental and Social ..........................................................................25
1.10.5.1
Environmental ............................................................................................25
1.10.5.2
Social..........................................................................................................25
TERMS OF REFERENCE ................................................................................................27
2.1
SOURCES OF INFORMATION ..........................................................................28
2.2
UNITS AND CURRENCY ...................................................................................28
2.3
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATION OF TERMS .............................................28
RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS ................................................................................33
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION .............................................................34
4.1
PROPERTY LOCATION ......................................................................................34
4.2
TENURE ................................................................................................................34
4.2.1 Acquisition of Blue Gold Mining and Name Change to True Gold
Mining ........................................................................................................35
4.2.2 NSR Royalty on Karma Project .................................................................35
4.3
PERMITS AND PERMITTING PROCESS .........................................................35
4.3.1 Basis for Mineral Title ...............................................................................35
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
4.3.2 Exploration Permits ...................................................................................36

4.3.3 Project Exploration Permits .......................................................................36
4.3.4 Exploitation Permits...................................................................................38
4.4
ROYALTIES AND OTHER ENCUMBRANCES ...............................................40
4.5
ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES AND SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS ........40
ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, PHYSIOGRAPHY &
INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................................................................41
5.1
ACCESSIBILITY ..................................................................................................41
5.2
CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES AND PHYSIOGRAPHY .............................41
5.2.1 Climate .......................................................................................................41
5.2.2 Local Resources .........................................................................................41
5.2.3 Physiography..............................................................................................42
5.3
INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................................................................42
HISTORY ..........................................................................................................................43
6.1
KAO DEPOSIT .....................................................................................................43
6.2
GOULAGOU DEPOSITS .....................................................................................43
6.3
RAMBO MAIN DEPOSIT ....................................................................................44
6.4
NAMI DEPOSIT ...................................................................................................44
6.5
PREVIOUS RESOURCE ESTIMATES ...............................................................45
GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION ...................................................48
7.1
REGIONAL GEOLOGY .......................................................................................48
7.2
LOCAL GEOLOGY ..............................................................................................51
7.3
DEPOSIT GEOLOGY ...........................................................................................52
7.4
MINERALIZATION .............................................................................................54
DEPOSIT TYPES ..............................................................................................................55
EXPLORATION................................................................................................................57
9.1
ROTARY AIR BLAST DRILLING NORTH OF THE KARMA PROJECT ......57
9.2
KAO PERMIT AREA ...........................................................................................57
9.2.1 Soil Sampling Program ..............................................................................57
9.2.2 Geophysical Survey ...................................................................................58
9.2.3 Surveying ...................................................................................................59
9.3
GOULAGOU PERMIT AREA .............................................................................60
9.3.2 Surveying ...................................................................................................61
9.4
RAMBO PERMIT AREA .....................................................................................61
9.4.1 Rock Sampling Program ............................................................................61
9.4.2 Surveying ...................................................................................................62
9.5
YOUBA PERMIT AREA ......................................................................................62
9.5.1 Geological Mapping...................................................................................62
9.6
ROUNGA PERMIT AREA ...................................................................................66
9.6.1 Geological Mapping...................................................................................66
DRILLING .........................................................................................................................70
10.1 KAO DEPOSIT .....................................................................................................71
10.2 GOULAGOU DEPOSITS .....................................................................................74
10.2.1 Goulagou I Deposit ....................................................................................75
10.2.2 Goulagou II Deposit ...................................................................................75
10.3 RAMBO DEPOSIT ...............................................................................................76
10.4 NAMI DEPOSIT ...................................................................................................77
10.5
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
ROTARY AIR BLAST DRILLING NORTH OF THE KARMA PROJECT ......78

10.5.1 Watinoma Target .......................................................................................78
SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES AND SECURITY ..........................................81
DATA VERIFICATION ...................................................................................................82
12.1 SITE VISIT AND INDEPENDENT SAMPLING ................................................82
12.2 TRUE GOLD QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW ......83
12.2.1 Performance of Certified Reference Materials ..........................................84
12.2.2 Performance of Core, Coarse Reject and Lab Pulp Duplicates .............84
12.2.3 Performance of Blank Material ..................................................................84
MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING .................................85
13.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................85
13.2 REVIEW OF HISTORICAL TESTWORK ..........................................................85
13.3 FEASIBILITY STUDY TESTWORK ..................................................................87
13.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................87
13.3.2 Preg-Robbing .............................................................................................88
13.3.3 The Effect of Sulfide Sulfur .......................................................................88
13.3.4 Sample Composition ..................................................................................89
13.3.5 Sample Preparation ....................................................................................89
13.3.6 Comminution Testwork Results ................................................................93
13.3.7 Vendor Testwork .......................................................................................93
13.3.8 Bulk Solids Flow Testwork Results...........................................................94
13.3.9 Recovery Testwork Results .......................................................................95
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES ..........................................................................100
14.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................100
14.2 DATABASES ......................................................................................................100
14.3 DATA VERIFICATION .....................................................................................100
14.4 DOMAIN INTERPRETATION ..........................................................................101
14.4.1 Goulagou I, Goulagou II, Rambo and Nami Deposits .............................101
14.4.2 Kao Deposit .............................................................................................101
14.4.3 Weathering Zone Surfaces .......................................................................102
14.5 DOMAIN ROCK CODE DETERMINATION ...................................................103
14.6 GRADE CAPPING ..............................................................................................104
14.7 COMPOSITING ..................................................................................................106
14.8 VARIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................106
14.9 BULK DENSITY.................................................................................................106
14.10 BLOCK MODELING ..........................................................................................107
14.11 RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION .......................................................................112
14.12 RESOURCE ESTIMATE ....................................................................................112
14.13 PIT OPTIMIZATION PARAMETERS ..............................................................113
14.14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE REPORT ................................................113
14.15 CONFIRMATION OF ESTIMATE ....................................................................117
MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES..............................................................................119
MINING METHODS ......................................................................................................121
16.1 BASIS OF EVALUATION .................................................................................121
16.2 GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA ........................................................................121
16.2.1 Site Description ........................................................................................121
16.2.2 Geotechnical Parameters ..........................................................................121
16.2.2.1
Laboratory Testing ...................................................................................125
16.2.2.2
Kao ...........................................................................................................128
16.2.2.3
Rambo ......................................................................................................129
17.0
18.0
16.2.2.4
Nami .........................................................................................................131
16.2.3 Hydrological Considerations ...................................................................136
16.2.4 Economic Criteria ....................................................................................139
16.3 MINE DESIGN ....................................................................................................139
16.3.1 Mine Production Rate ..............................................................................139
16.3.2 Mining Method Overview........................................................................139
16.3.3 Pit Optimization and Pit Design ..............................................................139
16.3.4 Dilution Criteria .......................................................................................151
16.3.5 Mining Losses Criteria .............................................................................152
16.4 MINE DESIGNS .................................................................................................152
16.4.1 Goulagou I Pit ..........................................................................................152
16.4.2 Goulagou II Pit .........................................................................................155
16.4.3 Kao Pit .....................................................................................................156
16.4.4 Nami Pit ...................................................................................................158
16.4.5 Rambo Pit.................................................................................................159
16.5 MINE PRODUCTION SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE ...................................160
16.6 OPEN PIT MINING PRACTICES ......................................................................162
16.6.1 Drilling and Blasting ................................................................................162
16.6.2 Loading and Hauling................................................................................163
16.6.3 Hauling From Remote Pits.......................................................................165
16.6.4 Pit Dewatering .........................................................................................165
16.6.5 Auxiliary Pit Services and Support Equipment .......................................165
16.7 WASTE DUMPS .................................................................................................165
16.8 MINE EQUIPMENT ...........................................................................................165
16.9 SUPPORT FACILITIES ......................................................................................166
16.10 MINING LABOUR FORCE ...............................................................................167
RECOVERY METHODS................................................................................................169
17.1 PROCESS PLANT ..............................................................................................169
17.1.1 Ore Characteristics ...................................................................................172
17.1.2 Operating Schedule ..................................................................................173
17.1.3 Production ................................................................................................174
17.1.4 Crushing ...................................................................................................175
17.1.5 Agglomeration and Stacking....................................................................176
17.1.6 Heap Leach ..............................................................................................176
17.1.7 Adsorption................................................................................................176
17.1.8 Cyanide Detoxification and Storm Water Control...................................177
17.1.9 Scavenging Column .................................................................................177
17.1.10 Acid Wash ............................................................................................177
17.1.11 Elution ..................................................................................................178
17.1.12 Electrowinning .....................................................................................178
17.1.13 Regeneration.........................................................................................178
17.1.14 Gold Room ...........................................................................................178
17.1.15 Reagents ...............................................................................................178
17.1.16 Compressed Air Services .....................................................................180
17.1.17 Water Services......................................................................................180
17.2 HEAP LEACH DESIGN .....................................................................................181
17.2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................181
17.2.2 Heap Leach Pad .......................................................................................181
17.2.3 Ponds ........................................................................................................181
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE ....................................................................................183
19.0
20.0
MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS .....................................................................188

19.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................188
19.2 36-MONTH TRAILING AVERAGE GOLD PRICE .........................................188
19.3 CONSENSUS PRICE ..........................................................................................189
19.4 GOLD SALES .....................................................................................................189
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING AND SOCIAL OR COMMUNITY
IMPACT ..........................................................................................................................190
20.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE.......................................................................190
20.1.1 Environmental Studies .............................................................................190
20.1.2 Terrestrial Environment ...........................................................................190
20.1.2.1
Regional Setting .......................................................................................190
20.1.2.2
Local Setting ............................................................................................190
20.1.2.3
Deposit Geology ......................................................................................190
20.1.2.4
Mineralization ..........................................................................................191
20.1.2.5
Resource ...................................................................................................191
20.1.3 Geomorphology .......................................................................................191
20.1.3.1
Topography ..............................................................................................191
20.1.3.2
Soil ...........................................................................................................191
20.1.4 Hydrology ................................................................................................192
20.1.4.1
Surface Water...........................................................................................192
20.1.4.2
Groundwater ............................................................................................192
20.1.5 Atmospheric .............................................................................................193
20.1.5.1
Climate .....................................................................................................193
20.1.6 Biological .................................................................................................193
20.1.6.1
Vegetation ................................................................................................193
20.1.6.2
Wildlife ....................................................................................................194
20.2 SOCIOECONOMIC ............................................................................................194
20.2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................194
20.2.2 Population ................................................................................................195
20.2.3 Ethnicity ...................................................................................................195
20.2.4 Religion ....................................................................................................195
20.2.5 Health .......................................................................................................195
20.2.6 Education .................................................................................................196
20.2.7 Government..............................................................................................196
20.2.8 Land Tenure .............................................................................................196
20.2.9 Housing ....................................................................................................197
20.2.10 Water ....................................................................................................197
20.2.11 Infrastructure ........................................................................................197
20.2.12 Employment .........................................................................................197
20.2.12.1
Farming ....................................................................................................197
20.2.12.2
Livestock Breeding ..................................................................................197
20.2.12.3
Commerce ................................................................................................198
20.2.12.4
Gold Mining .............................................................................................198
20.3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT .............................................................198
20.3.1 Air Quality Management .........................................................................198
20.3.1.1
Introduction ..............................................................................................198
20.3.1.2
Dust ..........................................................................................................198
20.3.1.3
Emissions .................................................................................................199
20.3.1.4
Noise ........................................................................................................199
20.3.1.5
Monitoring ...............................................................................................200
21.0
22.0
20.3.2 Water Quality Management .....................................................................200

20.3.2.1
Water Supply ...........................................................................................200
20.3.2.2
Water Balance ..........................................................................................201
20.3.2.3
Solution Containment ..............................................................................201
20.3.2.4
Excess Water Management and Detoxification .......................................201
20.3.2.5
Monitoring ...............................................................................................202
20.3.3 Waste Management ..................................................................................202
20.3.3.1
Process Waste ..........................................................................................202
20.3.3.2
Mine Waste ..............................................................................................202
20.3.3.3
Overburden and Soil ................................................................................203
20.3.3.4
Domestic and Industrial Waste ................................................................203
20.3.4 Progressive Reclamation ..........................................................................203
20.3.5 Closure .....................................................................................................203
20.4 SOCIO-ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT .............................................................204
20.4.1 Stakeholder Engagement Plan .................................................................204
20.4.2 Relocation ................................................................................................205
20.4.3 Cultural Heritage ......................................................................................206
20.4.4 Health and Safety .....................................................................................207
20.4.5 Employment and Training .......................................................................208
20.4.6 Community Development ........................................................................209
20.5 PERMITTING .....................................................................................................210
CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS ..........................................................................213
21.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................213
21.2 RESPONSIBILITIES ..........................................................................................213
21.3 CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES ...................................................................213
21.4 COST ESTIMATE ACCURACY .......................................................................214
21.5 EXCLUSIONS .....................................................................................................214
21.6 ESCALATION ....................................................................................................214
21.7 CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE.............................................................................214
21.7.1 Capital Cost Summary .............................................................................214
21.7.2 Mining Capital Cost Estimate ..................................................................215
21.7.2.1
Mining Direct Cost ..................................................................................215
21.7.2.2
Mining Infrastructure ...............................................................................216
21.7.3 Process Plant and Infrastructure Capital Cost Estimate ...........................218
21.7.4 Indirect Costs ...........................................................................................224
21.8 OPERATING COSTS .........................................................................................228
21.8.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................228
21.8.2 Mining Operating Cost ............................................................................231
21.8.2.1
Mine Operating Cost Components...........................................................234
21.8.3 Processing Plant Operating Costs ............................................................237
21.8.4 General and Administration Operating Costs ..........................................238
21.8.5 Laboratory Assay Costs ...........................................................................240
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ...............................................................................................241
22.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................241
22.2 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ...................................................................................241
22.2.1 Evaluation Method ...................................................................................241
22.2.2 Assumptions.............................................................................................241
22.2.3 Capital Expenditure .................................................................................241
22.2.4 Sale of NSR Royalty on Karma Project ...................................................242
22.2.5 Project Exploitation Permits ....................................................................242
22.3
ROYALTIES .......................................................................................................242
22.3.1 Depreciation .............................................................................................243
22.3.2 Inflation ....................................................................................................243
22.3.3 Currency...................................................................................................243
22.3.4 Equipment Salvage Value ........................................................................244
22.3.5 Diesel Price ..............................................................................................244
22.3.6 Financial Analysis Results .......................................................................244
22.3.7 Sensitivity Analysis .................................................................................247
22.3.8 Discussion ................................................................................................251
23.0 ADJACENT PROPERTIES ............................................................................................252
24.0 OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION ...................................................253
25.0 INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................254
25.1 GEOLOGY ..........................................................................................................254
25.2 OPEN PIT MINING ............................................................................................254
25.3 MINERAL PROCESSING ..................................................................................254
25.4 FEASIBILITY STUDY RESULTS .....................................................................254
26.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................256
26.1 GENERAL ...........................................................................................................256
26.2 GEOLOGY AND EXPLORATION....................................................................256
26.3 PROCESSING .....................................................................................................256
26.3.1 Process Plant and Metallurgical Testing ..................................................256
26.3.2 Heap Leach Pad and Ponds ......................................................................257
26.4 MINING ...............................................................................................................257
26.4.1 Pit Slopes (Geotechnical) .........................................................................257
26.4.2 Drilling and Blasting ................................................................................257
26.4.3 Haulage ....................................................................................................257
26.4.4 Hydrological ............................................................................................258
26.5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ..................................................................258
26.5.1 Environmental ..........................................................................................258
26.5.2 Social........................................................................................................258
27.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................260
28.0 CERTIFICATES ..............................................................................................................262
APPENDIX I.
SURFACE DRILL HOLE PLANS .........................................................270
APPENDIX II.
3D DOMAINS .........................................................................................276
APPENDIX III.
LOG NORMAL HISTOGRAMS ............................................................282
APPENDIX IV.
VARIOGRAMS .......................................................................................303
APPENDIX V.
AU BLOCK MODEL CROSS SECTIONS AND PLANS .....................310
APPENDIX VI.
CLASSIFICATION BLOCK MODEL CROSS SECTIONS AND
PLANS .....................................................................................................331
APPENDIX VII.
OPTIMIZED PIT SHELLS .....................................................................352
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1
Table 1.2
Table 1.3
Table 1.4
Table 1.5
Table 1.6
Table 1.7
Table 1.8
Table 1.9
Table 1.10
Table 1.11
Table 1.12
Table 4.1
Table 4.2
Table 6.1
Table 6.2
Table 10.1
Table 10.2
Table 10.3
Table 10.4
Table 10.5
Table 10.6
Table 10.7
Table 13.1
Table 13.2
Table 13.3
Table 13.4
Table 13.5
Table 13.6
Table 13.7
Table 13.8
Table 13.9
Table 13.10
Table 13.11
Table 13.12
Table 13.13
Table 14.1
Table 14.2
Table 14.3
Table 14.4
Table 14.5
Table 14.6
Table 14.7
Table 14.8
Table 14.9
Table 14.10
Table 14.11
Table 14.12
Karma Deposits In-Pit Mineral Resource Estimate ................................................ 5

Global Sensitivity to the Mineral Resource Estimate ............................................. 8
Summary of Slope Limit Equilibrium Analyses ................................................... 11
Anticipated Average Monthly Pumping Rate ....................................................... 12
Karma Project Probable Mineral Reserves ........................................................... 14
Production Sequence Chart ................................................................................... 14
Initial Capital Cost Summary ................................................................................ 20
Sustaining Capital Cost Summary......................................................................... 20
Summary of Total Yearly Operating Costs ........................................................... 21
Summary of Total Yearly Operating Unit Costs ................................................... 21
Summary of Economic Analysis Results .............................................................. 22
Proposed Exploration Program ............................................................................. 23
Karma Project Exploration Permits....................................................................... 36
Coordinates For Karma Exploitation Permit ......................................................... 39
Resource Estimates 2007-2009 ............................................................................. 45
2011-2012 Resource Estimates ............................................................................. 45
Drill Holes by Permit/Target ................................................................................. 70
Significant Mineralized Intercepts for the Northern Area of the Kao Deposit ..... 71
Significant Mineralized Intercepts for Goulagou I Deposit .................................. 75
Significant Mineralized Intercepts for Goulagou II Deposit ................................. 76
Significant Mineralized Intercepts for Rambo Deposit......................................... 76
Significant Mineralized Intercepts for Nami Deposit ........................................... 78
Significant Mineralized Intercepts for the Watinoma Target ................................ 79
Summary of PEA Testwork Results...................................................................... 86
Oxide Mineralogical Fingerprint ........................................................................... 90
Transition and Sulphide Mineralogical Fingerprint .............................................. 91
Average UCS Testwork Values ............................................................................ 93
CWi Testwork Results .......................................................................................... 93
Ai Testwork Results .............................................................................................. 93
Summary of Specific Gravity Analysis ................................................................. 95
Oxide Column Leach Testwork Recovery & Cyanide Consumption ................... 97
Transition Column Leach Testwork Recovery & Cyanide Consumption ............ 98
Sulphide Column Leach Testwork Recovery & Cyanide Consumption ............... 98
Oxide Composites Cement Dosage ....................................................................... 98
Transition Composites Cement Dosage ................................................................ 98
Sulphide Composites Cement Dosage .................................................................. 99
Drill Hole Database and Vertical Section Summary ........................................... 100
Assay Data Verification Summary ...................................................................... 101
Au Grade Capping Summary .............................................................................. 105
Sample Length..................................................................................................... 106
Bulk Density Data Used for Resource Estimate by Lab and Deposit ................. 107
Average Bulk Density by Weathering Zone (t/m3) ............................................. 107
Block Model Parameters ..................................................................................... 107
Block Model Origin ............................................................................................ 108
Kao Sub-Domains Used for Grade Interpolation ................................................ 110
Au Block Model Interpolation Parameters.......................................................... 111
Kao Structures Search Ellipse Orientations ........................................................ 111
Karma Deposits In-Pit Mineral Resource Estimate ............................................ 114
Table 14.13
Table 14.14
Table 14.15
Table 15.1
Table 15.2
Table 16.1
Table 16.2
Table 16.3
Table 16.4
Table 16.5
Table 16.6
Table 16.7
Table 16.8
Table 16.9
Table 16.10
Table 16.11
Table 16.12
Table 16.13
Table 16.14
Table 16.15
Table 16.16
Table 16.17
Table 16.18
Table 16.19
Table 16.20
Table 16.21
Table 16.22
Table 16.23
Table 16.24
Table 16.25
Table 16.26
Table 16.27
Table 16.28
Table 16.29
Table 16.30
Table 16.31
Table 16.32
Table 16.33
Table 16.34
Table 16.35
Table 16.36
Table 16.37
Table 16.38
Table 16.39
Table 16.40
Table 16.41
Table 16.42
Table 16.43
Table 16.44
Global Sensitivity to the Mineral Resource Estimate ......................................... 116

Comparison of Average Grade of Constrained Capped Assays & Composites
with Total Block Model Average Grades ........................................................... 118
Comparison of Block Model Volume vs. Geometric Calculated Volume .......... 118
Karma Project Probable Mineral Reserves ......................................................... 119
Mineral Reserve Au Cut-Off Grades .................................................................. 120
Summary of Rock Mass Rating Adjustment Factors .......................................... 122
Summary of RMR and MRMR Values from the Goulagou I Site ...................... 122
Summary of RMR and MRMR Values from the Goulagou II Site .................... 123
Summary of RMR and MRMR Values from the Kao site .................................. 123
Summary of RMR and MRMR Values from the Rambo site ............................. 124
Summary of RMR and MRMR Values from the Nami Site ............................... 124
Summary of the Soil Geomechanical Testing ..................................................... 125
Summary of the UCS Laboratory Test Results ................................................... 126
Summary of the TCS Laboratory Test Results ................................................... 126
Summary of the UTB Geomechanical Testing ................................................... 126
Summary of UCS Geomechanical Testing ......................................................... 127
Summary of TCS Geomechanical Testing .......................................................... 128
Summary of UTB Geomechanical Testing ......................................................... 128
Summary of the soil Geomechanical Testing ..................................................... 128
Summary of the UCS Geomechanical Testing ................................................... 129
Summary of the TCS Geomechanical Testing .................................................... 129
Summary of the TCS Geomechanical Testing .................................................... 130
Summary of Dhawan Friction Angles ................................................................. 133
Summary of Saprolite Design Shear Strength Parameters .................................. 133
Summary of Rock Design Shear Strength Parameters ........................................ 134
Summary of Overall Slope Limit Equilibrium Analyses .................................... 134
Summary of Rock Design Shear Strength Parameters ........................................ 135
Summary of Slope Limit Equilibrium Analyses ................................................. 136
Summary of Slope Limit Equilibrium Analyses ................................................. 137
Simulated Peak Groundwater Flows ................................................................... 138
Anticipated Average Monthly Pumping Rate ..................................................... 138
Villages impacted by the Cone of Drawdown .................................................... 138
Pit Optimization Parameters................................................................................ 140
Mine Design Criteria ........................................................................................... 141
GGI Shell Tonnage vs Gold Price ....................................................................... 141
GGI Optimized Pit Shell Tonnage (Undiluted)................................................... 142
GGII Optimized Pit Shell Tonnage vs Gold Price .............................................. 143
GGII Optimized Pit Shell Tonnage (Undiluted) ................................................. 144
Kao Optimized Pit Shell Tonnage vs Gold Price ................................................ 145
Kao Optimized Pit Shell Tonnage (Undiluted) ................................................... 146
Rambo Shell Tonnage vs Gold Price .................................................................. 147
Rambo Optimized Pit Shell Tonnage (Undiluted) .............................................. 148
Table 16.45
Table 16.46
Table 16.47
Table 16.48
Table 16.49
Table 16.50
Table 16.51
Table 16.52
Table 16.53
Table 16.54
Table 16.55
Table 16.56
Table 16.57
Table 16.58
Table 16.59
Table 16.60
Table 16.61
Table 16.62
Table 16.63
Table 17.1
Table 17.2
Table 17.3
Table 17.4
Table 17.5
Table 17.6
Table 17.7
Table 20.1
Table 20.2
Table 21.1
Table 21.2
Table 21.3
Table 21.4
Table 21.5
Table 21.6
Table 21.7
Table 21.8
Table 21.9
Table 21.10
Table 21.11
Table 21.12
Table 21.13
Table 21.14
Table 21.15
Table 21.16
Table 21.17
Table 21.18
Table 21.19
Table 21.20
Table 21.21
Table 21.22
Nami Shell Tonnage vs Gold Price ..................................................................... 149

Nami Optimized Pit Shell Tonnage (Undiluted) ................................................. 150
Dilution Parameters ............................................................................................. 151
Ore Reserve ......................................................................................................... 152
Goulagou I Pit Reserve Tonnages ....................................................................... 153
Goulagou II Pit Phase Tonnages ......................................................................... 155
Kao Pit Phase Tonnages ...................................................................................... 156
Nami Pit Phase Tonnage ..................................................................................... 159
Rambo Pit Phase Tonnage................................................................................... 160
Production Ramp-Up Rate .................................................................................. 161
Production Sequence Chart ................................................................................. 161
Production Schedule (4.0 Mtpa).......................................................................... 162
Projected Blasthole Drill Patterns ....................................................................... 163
Haulage Destinations........................................................................................... 163
Projected Haul Truck Payloads and Loading Times ........................................... 164
Numbers of Loading Unit and Haul Trucks in the Mine Fleet in Each Year ..... 164
Waste Dump Volumes ........................................................................................ 165
Mine Equipment Procurement Schedule ............................................................. 166
Mine Operations Labour Force by Year ............................................................. 167
Oxide Ore Characteristics ................................................................................... 172
Transition Ore Characteristics ............................................................................. 172
Sulphide Ore Characteristics ............................................................................... 173
Operating Schedule ............................................................................................. 173
Proposed Oxide Production Schedule ................................................................. 175
Proposed Transition Production Schedule .......................................................... 175
Proposed Sulphide Production Schedule............................................................. 175
Estimated Project Employment ........................................................................... 208
Karma Project Permitting Schedule .................................................................... 211
Currency Exchange Rates ................................................................................... 213
Initial Capital Cost Summary .............................................................................. 215
Sustaining Capital Cost Summary....................................................................... 215
Mine Haul Roads ................................................................................................. 215
Initial Mining Infrastructure Costs ...................................................................... 216
Initial Mining Equipment Capital Cost ............................................................... 217
Sustaining Mobile Mining Equipment ................................................................ 218
Summary of Total Yearly Mine Equipment Sustaining Capital Costs ............... 218
Process Plant Direct Cost Breakdown Initial Capital.................................... 219
Process Plant Direct Cost Breakdown Sustaining Capital ............................ 219
Project Indirect Cost Breakdown Initial Capital .............................................. 225
Summary of Total Yearly Operating Costs ......................................................... 229
Summary of Total Yearly Operating Unit Costs ................................................. 230
Mine Operating Cost Summary........................................................................... 232
Mine Operating Cost Breakdown by Activity..................................................... 233
Mine Labour Force and Technical Staff ............................................................. 234
Overall Process Costs-Pre-Production and Year 1 .............................................. 237
Overall Processing LOM OPEX (Year 1 to 5) .................................................... 238
Overall Processing LOM OPEX (Year 6 to 9) .................................................... 238
LOM G&A Costs ................................................................................................ 239
LOM Assay Cost Summary (Year 1- 3).............................................................. 240
LOM Assay Cost Summary (Year 4 9) and LOM ........................................... 240
Table 22.1
Table 22.2
Table 22.3
Table 22.4
Table 22.5
Table 22.6
Table 22.7
Table 22.8
Table 22.9
Table 22.10
Table 22.11
Table 22.12
Table 22.13
Table 22.14
Table 26.1
Assumptions used in the Economic Evaluation .................................................. 241

Royalties .............................................................................................................. 242
Exchange Rates ................................................................................................... 244
LOM Project Cash Flow ..................................................................................... 245
Summary of Economic Analysis Results ............................................................ 246
Gold Price Sensitivity (000s) .............................................................................. 247
CAPEX Sensitivity (000s) .................................................................................. 248
OPEX Sensitivity (000s) ..................................................................................... 248
Fuel Price Sensitivity (000s) ............................................................................... 248
Recovery Sensitivity (000s) ................................................................................ 248
Cyanide Sensitivity (000s) .................................................................................. 248
Cement Consumption Sensitivity (000s) ............................................................. 249
Head Grade Sensitivity (000s) ............................................................................ 249
Power Cost Sensitivity (000s) ............................................................................. 249
Proposed Exploration Program ........................................................................... 256
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.4
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.3
Figure 5.1
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.3
Figure 9.1
Figure 9.2
Figure 9.3
Figure 9.4
Figure 9.5
Figure 9.6
Figure 9.7
Figure 9.8
Figure 9.9
Figure 9.10
Figure 9.11
Figure 9.12
Figure 9.13
Figure 9.14
Figure 9.15
Figure 9.16
Figure 9.17
Figure 9.18
Figure 12.1
Figure 13.1
Figure 14.1
Figure 14.2
Figure 14.3
Figure 16.1
Figure 16.2:
Figure 16.3:
Figure 16.4:
Figure 16.5
Figure 16.6:
Figure 16.7
Figure 16.8:
Figure 16.9:
Figure 16.10:
Figure 16.11
Figure 16.12:
Figure 16.13:
Karma Project Site Plan ........................................................................................ 10

Karma Comminution Overall Flowsheet .............................................................. 16
Karma Heap Leach & ADR Overall Flowsheet .................................................... 17
Location of Karma Project in Burkina Faso .......................................................... 34
Karma Project Exploration Permits....................................................................... 37
Karma Exploitation Permit Boundary ................................................................... 39
Physiographic Map of Burkina Faso ..................................................................... 42
Precambrian geology of West Africa, The West African Craton ......................... 48
Regional Geological Setting of Karma Project Area Showing the Location of
the Major Granitoid Intrusion and Ouahigouya Shear Zone Relative to the
Karma Permits ....................................................................................................... 50
Geology of the Karma Project Area ...................................................................... 52
Geochemical Results from the 2013 Kao Permit Soil Sampling Program ........... 58
North Kao Resistivity Survey ............................................................................... 59
North Kao IP/Chargeability Survey ...................................................................... 59
GGII-Rambo West - IP/Chargeability................................................................... 60
GGII-Rambo West - Resistivity ............................................................................ 60
2013 Bongui Waste Rock Sampling Nami East Trend ...................................... 61
2013 Litho-Structural Map of Rounga South ........................................................ 62
2013 Litho-Structural Map of Saima .................................................................... 63
2013 Saima IP/Chargeability Survey .................................................................... 64
2013 Saima Resistivity Survey ............................................................................. 64
2013 Rounga South IP/Chargeability Survey ....................................................... 65
2013 Rounga South Resistivity Survey ................................................................. 65
Litho-Structural Map of Watinoma ....................................................................... 66
Litho-Structural Map of Sobona ........................................................................... 67
Litho-Structural Map of Pogoro ............................................................................ 67
2013 Watinoma Total Field Magnetic Survey ...................................................... 68
2013 Watinoma IP/Chargeability Survey ............................................................. 68
2013 Watinoma Resistivity Survey ....................................................................... 69
Karma Project Deposits Site Visit Sample Results for Gold ................................ 83
Typical Sample Preparation Flowsheet ................................................................. 92
Structures of the Kao Deposit ............................................................................. 102
Correlation of Gold Grade with Distance to Structures for Kao Deposit ........... 109
Correlation of Au Grade with Distance to Structures for Kao Deposit .............. 110
GGI Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor) .................... 142
GGI Pit Design .................................................................................................... 143
GGII Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor) ...................... 144
GGII Pit Design ................................................................................................... 145
Kao Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor) ........................ 146
Kao Pit Design .................................................................................................... 147
Rambo Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor) ................... 148
Rambo Pit Design................................................................................................ 149
Nami Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor) ..................... 150
Nami Pit Design .................................................................................................. 151
Goulagou I Pit Design Phase 1 ............................................................................ 153
Figure 16.14:
Figure 16.15
Figure 16.16:
Figure 16.17:
Figure 16.18:
Figure 16.19:
Figure 17.1
Figure 17.2
Figure 18.1
Figure 18.2
Figure 19.1
Figure 19.2
Figure 22.1:
Figure 22.2:
Goulagou II Pit Design Phase 1 .......................................................................... 155

Goulagou II Pit Design Phase 2 .......................................................................... 156
Kao Pit Design Phase 1 ....................................................................................... 157
Kao Pit Design Phase 2 ....................................................................................... 158
Nami Pit Design Single Phase .......................................................................... 159
Rambo Pit Design Single Phase ....................................................................... 160
Karma Comminution Overall Flowsheet ............................................................ 170
Karma Heap Leach & ADR Overall Flowsheet .................................................. 171
Site General Layout ............................................................................................. 186
Detail Showing Leach Pad, Process Plant and Water Plants .............................. 187
Last 36 months of Gold Price Data ..................................................................... 188
36-Months of Historical Data, 36- Month Trailing Average and Study Gold
Price ..................................................................................................................... 189
NPV Sensitivity at 5% Discount Rate ................................................................. 250
IRR Sensitivity at 5% Discount Rate .................................................................. 251
1.0
SUMMARY
1.1
INTRODUCTION
The following report was prepared by P&E Mining Consultants Inc., SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd.,
Knight Pisold (Pty) Ltd., Roche Ltd. Consulting Group and SENET (Pty) Ltd., to provide an NI
43-101 compliant technical report, updated Mineral Resource Estimate and Feasibility Study on
the gold mineralization at the Karma Project, Burkina Faso, West Africa (the Property or the
Karma Project).
The Karma Project is comprised of five mineral deposits, namely the Goulagou I, Goulagou II,
Rambo, Kao and Nami which are located on three (Goulagou, Kao and Rambo) of the six
Exploration permits (Kao, Rambo, Goulagou, Youba, Rounga, and Tougou) that comprise the
Karma property. True Gold Mining Inc. (True Gold or the Company) has a 100% interest in
the permits which are subject to various royalty considerations including a 3% to 5% sliding
scale royalty to the government of Burkina Faso.
The Karma Project is located in north-central Burkina Faso, near the city of Ouahigouya,
approximately 185 km north-west of Ouagadougou, the capital city of Burkina Faso.
The project site lies 20 km east of the city of Ouahigouya (population 125,000) and is accessible
via a series of unpaved roads. Within the project area, access is via local tracks and paths which
are suitable for two wheel drive vehicles in the dry season and four-wheel drive vehicles in the
wet season. National Route 2 (N2) is a paved highway connecting Ouahigouya to the capital
Ouagadougou which is 185 km away and serviced by international air flights. Burkina Faso is
landlocked and relies on the ports of Tema in Ghana, Abidjan in Ivory Coast and Lome in Togo
for access to shipping.
1.2
GEOLOGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
True Golds Karma Project is located in the Paleoproterozoic Baol-Mossi domain of the West
African Craton. The Baol-Mossi domain contains the highly prospective Birimian supracrustal
rocks which were probably developed upon a juvenile Paleoproterozoic crust (ca. 2.40-2.20 Ga).
The Karma Project is situated in the regionally east-west trending Goren greenstone belt, one of
the larger Birimian greenstone belts in central north Burkina Faso. In the Karma Project area, the
geology consists of a folded sequence of greywacke, siltstone, shale and volcaniclastic rocks that
is draped over a granodiorite-tonalite batholith. The western margin of the batholith is defined by
a broad north-south lineament that is interpreted as a first-order, crustal scale, sinistral, shear
zone named the Ouahigouya Shear Zone (OSZ). The OSZ extends to the south into the Hounde
Greenstone Belt and branches into a series of north-east trending sub-shears that cross the Karma
Property.
Many of the significant gold deposits in the Birimian greenstone belts of Burkina Faso are
related to major N to NE trending shear zones that result from transcurrent deformation during
Eburnean D2 structural events. Regional gold metallogenesis is tightly constrained to the
Eburnean Orogeny between 2,130 and 1,980 Ma.
P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

True Gold Mining Inc. Karma Project
Page 1 of 357
Substantial areas of the Karma Project are covered by lateritic units, dominantly gravels and
cuirasse, which form a highly indurated upper part of the lateritic regolith. A number of
lateritization events have resulted in weathering to depths of up to 100 m. Laterites and sand
cover limit the extent of bedrock outcrop in the project area and have limited the geological
understanding of the region.
True Gold has defined five mineral deposits on the Karma Property. As estimated in this
technical report, from largest to smallest on the basis of ounces of gold, these include the Kao,
Goulagou II (GGII), Goulagou I (GGI), Nami and Rambo Deposits.
The Kao Deposit, as defined in this Feasibility Study, extends about 1,200 m along the NorthSouth strike direction, and extends approximately 1,000 m down-dip to the East. It is open along
strike and down dip. It consists of a structurally-controlled alteration and veining system, hosted
within a relatively uniform, single-phase, granodioritic intrusive. There are two principal sets of
structures: (i) a dominant shallow east-dipping structure that extends the full length of the deposit
in a north-south direction, which is transected by (ii) a more steep, northeast-dipping set of
structures that cross-cut the north-south structure. The bulk of the highest grades and thickest
intercepts occur along the northeast-dipping structures, and in particular, at their intersections
with the north-south structures. The structures are planar to tabular in form and can measure 35
metres in width. Additionally, the structures are moderately to intensely foliated, sericitecarbonate-silica altered and are host to multiple generations of quartz-carbonate-sericite-pyritearsenopyrite veining. Arsenopyrite and the presence of quartz veining generally correlate with
higher gold grades
More recent drilling at the northern area of the Kao deposit, has comprised 31 diamond drill
holes and 106 RC holes for a total length of 20,114.29 m. This drilling has extended
mineralization from the northern edge of the currently defined Kao deposit, expanding
mineralization to a total strike length of 3,400 m. It is currently planned to update the Kao
resource estimate based on this recent drilling which covers an area of approximately 1,500 m by
500 m.
The GGI Deposit has continuous lenses of gold mineralized rock over an East-West strike length
of 2,100 m. It consists of up to 10 separate continuous sheets, ranging from 5 to 40 m thick,
dipping near vertically. The deposit is open along strike and down dip below 200 m, the limit of
current drilling. The GGII Deposit is similar, with an East-West strike length of 2,400 m. There
are 3 to 5 steeply dipping sheets, with widths ranging from 5 to 30 m. The deposit is open along
strike and down dip. Higher grade shoots that plunge steeply are targets for deeper drilling. The
central portion of the deposit is thickened in a Z fold configuration.
The Rambo Main Deposit is a small mineralized lens containing a steeply plunging mineralized
shoot. The deposit has an East-West strike length of approximately 450 m and dips steeply to the
South, along with a down-dip length of 230 m, and a thickness of the mineralized zone ranging
from about 2.5 to 25 m. The shoot is open to the east and down dip, and within it the
mineralization exhibits good continuity.
The Nami Deposit is composed of 3 mineralized lenses with shallow dips of 20 to 25 toward the
west-south-west. The strike length of the Nami Deposit is about 550 m, with a down-plunge
extent of 300 m, and a thickness of the mineralized zone ranging from about 2.5 to 30 m. The
deposit, which exhibits good continuity is open to the west, north and south.
Page 2 of 357
Rock types that host gold mineralization in the deposits include fine-grained meta-sedimentary
rocks (GGI, GGII and Rambo) and medium-grained granitoid intrusive rocks (Kao and Nami),
although the identification is tentative in many cases since the deformation, metamorphism,
replacement and veining that have obscured the original textures. Dominant sulphide minerals
associated with gold mineralization are predominantly arsenopyrite and pyrite that occur both as
disseminated grains and on fractures, and trace amounts of chalcopyrite and covellite. Gold
occurs dominantly as small grains associated with silicates or sulphides. Gold also occurs in
quartz veins in core drilling.
The Karma Property deposits have characteristics of mesothermal, shear-hosted gold deposits
associated with orogenic activity. Elements of stratigraphic control may result from
mineralization/alteration being channelled along specific structural/lithological controls that have
affected porosity and fluid flow. The Karma deposits may be best described as structurally
controlled, orogenic, hydrothermal deposits.
A comprehensive Quality Assurance/Quality Control, (QA/QC or QC) program was
established for the Karma Project. Appropriate standards and coarse blanks are inserted into the
assay stream at regular intervals. Rig, reject and assay duplicate samples are submitted at regular
intervals. The results of the controls are monitored on a regular basis, before assays are entered
into the master assay databases. Samples for the Project were and continue to be prepared by
ALS in Ouagadougou and assayed for Au at their facility there, however significant numbers of
pulps were assayed in Johannesburg, South Africa or in North Vancouver, Canada. Assaying for
Au is by fire assay/atomic absorption (FA/AA), and for all samples grading in excess of
1 gram Au per tonne, by fire assay with gravimetric finish (FA/grav.). Gravimetric assay
values are used in preference to FA/AA numbers.
Mr. Antoine Yassa, P.Geo., a qualified person according to the definition as set out in NI 43-101
standards for mineral resource disclosure, visited the Karma Project from November 1 to 3, 2011
August 15 to 17, 2012, December 13 to 14, 2012 and October 16, 2013 for the purpose of
carrying out an independent verification sampling program. Fifty four diamond drill core
samples were collected from 18 diamond drill holes by taking a quarter split of the half core
remaining in the box. Eighteen RC samples were also collected from stored chip bags. Mr. Yassa
also reviewed the project data collection process in general, and was satisfied that the company
adhered to industry best practises.
P&E reviewed the performance of reference standard materials, core duplicates, coarse rejects
and lab pulp duplicates, and blank materials. In P&Es opinion, the procedures adopted by the
Company for sample handling and preparation, security and analyses are appropriate for the
Karma Project. P&E declared the data acquired and analyzed by True Gold to be satisfactory for
use in a resource estimate.
The drilling data provided by True Gold included a total of 1,634 drill holes of which 1,219
holes were inside the areas modelled for resource estimates. Surface drill hole plans are shown in
Appendix-I. Assay data verification was performed totalling 72,793 assay intervals for the five
Karma deposits. These verified assays were utilized in the resource calculations for the five
Karma deposits.

Page 3 of 357
The 3D geological model for the Kao Deposit has been revised since the last NI 43-101 technical
report dated October 24, 2012. Two grade shells with Au cut-off grades of 0.2 g/t and 1.0 g/t
respectively have been constructed using the Leapfrog 3D geological modeling software. Seven
structural surfaces were created and utilized for grade interpolation of the Kao Deposit. The
domain wireframes of the Goulagou I, Goulagou II, Rambo and Nami deposits remain the same
as the last resource estimate dated October 24, 2012. The deposit domain boundaries were
determined from lithology, structure and grade boundary interpretation from visual inspection of
drill hole sections. The domain outlines were influenced by the selection of mineralized material
above 0.2 g/t Au that demonstrated a lithological and structural zonal continuity along strike and
down dip. In some cases mineralization below 0.2 g/t Au was included for the purpose of
maintaining zonal continuity. The resulting solids (domains) were used for statistical analysis,
grade interpolation, rock coding and resource reporting purposes.
Three weathering zones were defined for all five deposits based on drill hole logging. The oxide
zone is defined as the weathered saprolite rock located near the surface of the deposits. The
transition zone is partially weathered rock, located between the oxide and sulphide zone and the
sulphide zone is fresh rock below the transition zone.
Grade capping was investigated on the raw assay values in the databases within the constraining
domains to ensure that the possible influence of erratic high values did not bias the database. The
analysis resulted in grade capping being used for some of the domains with various capping
values that were specific to the domains.
The sample lengths were two metres for 61.4% of the samples. In order to regularize the
sampling for grade interpolation, assay compositing to two metre lengths was carried out down
hole within the constraints of the above-mentioned domains. These composites were calculated
for Au over two metre lengths starting at the first point of intersection between the drillhole and
hanging wall contact of each mineralized domain and ending at the footwall of the domain.
Variography was attempted on the constrained composites of the five Karma deposits.
Reasonable directional variograms were attained for the Kao, Goulagou I and Goulagou II
deposits. The Rambo and Nami deposits yielded reasonable omnivariograms.
Bulk density samples were collected from all zones of the five deposits. Bulk densities varied
from 1.64 to 1.96 t/m3 for the oxide zones, 2.12 to 2.37 t/m3 for the transition zones, and 2.58 to
2.69 t/m3 for the sulphide zones.
The block model set up for four of the five deposits remained the same as the last resource
estimate from October 24, 2012, however, the entire block model was revised for the Kao
deposit due to the improvements in the geological interpretation. Four of the Karma project
resource models were constructed using 5 x 5 x 5 m blocks, with the exception being the Rambo
deposit where 2.5 x 2.5 x 2.5 m blocks were utilized. An inverse distance cubed (1/d3) model
was utilized for grade interpolation based on the Au composites that were extracted from drill
hole profiles into point profiles. Multiple grade interpolation passes were utilized for all deposits.
All resource classifications were determined from the Indicated and Inferred search ellipsoid
parameters indicated in the report. The Karma Project resource estimates were derived from
applying Au cut-off grades to the block model and reporting the resulting tonnage and grade for
potentially mineable areas. Based on estimated operating costs, gold recovery, and a trailing
average gold price of US$1,557/oz, a cut-off grade of 0.20 g/t Au was applied to oxide
Page 4 of 357
mineralization, 0.22 g/t Au was applied to transition mineralization, and 0.50g/t Au was applied
to the sulphide mineralization for Goulagou I, Goulagou II and Kao deposits. A 0.22 g/t Au cutoff grade was used for the sulphide mineralization for the Nami and Rambo deposits where the
sulphides are not refractory. The five Karma open pit resource models were further investigated
with pit optimizations to ensure a reasonable strip ratio was applied. The following parameters
were utilized in the pit optimizations:
Au Price
Oxide Au Recovery
Transition Au Recovery
Sulphide Au Recovery
Oxide & Trans Mining Cost
Transition Mining Cost
Sulphide Mining Cost
Oxide/Transition Process Cost
Sulphide Process Cost
General/Administration
Pit Slopes
US$1,557/oz. (36 month trailing average price Oct 31/13)

90%
80%
85%
$1.61/tonne mined
$1.94/tonne mined
$2.05/tonne mined
$7.25/tonne milled
$19.00/tonne milled
$1.35/tonne milled
50 degrees
The resulting In-pit resource estimate for the Karma deposits is tabulated in Table 1.1.
Deposit
TABLE 1.1
KARMA DEPOSITS IN-PIT MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE(16)
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.20
Oxide
6,264,000
0.63
0.22
Transition 5,225,000
0.65
Indicated
0.50
Sulphide 6,669,000
0.99
Subtotal 18,158,000
0.76
Au (oz)
126,100
108,900
211,600
446,600
Goulagou I
Inferred
Indicated
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
752,000
543,000
2,836,000
4,131,000
0.83
0.85
1.26
1.13
20,100
14,900
114,900
149,900
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
5,874,000
Sulphide 7,092,000
Subtotal 15,132,000
1.12
1.36
1.74
1.45
211,500
94,700
397,000
703,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
615,000
354,000
1,537,000
2,506,000
0.72
0.69
1.25
1.04
14,200
7,900
61,700
83,800
0.20
0.22
Oxide
13,361,000
0.74
0.91
319,200
120,300
Goulagou II
Inferred
Kao
Indicated

Page 5 of 357
Deposit
TABLE 1.1
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.50
Sulphide 19,955,000
1.37
Subtotal 37,410,000
1.09
Inferred
Indicated
Au (oz)
875,700
1,315,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
1,821,000
445,000
7,245,000
9,511,000
0.51
0.51
1.69
1.41
29,800
7,200
393,700
430,700
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
531,000
1,011,000
1,857,000
3,399,000
0.95
0.72
0.77
0.78
16,300
23,300
45,900
85,500
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
120,000
169,000
365,000
654,000
0.81
0.77
0.72
0.76
3,200
4,200
8,500
15,900
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
219,000
290,000
556,000
1,065,000
2.30
2.40
1.79
2.06
16,200
22,300
32,000
70,500
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
102,000
103,000
446,000
651,000
0.74
0.54
1.05
0.92
2,400
1,800
15,000
19,200
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
26,249,000
12,786,000
36,129,000
75,164,000
0.82
0.90
1.34
1.08
689,300
369,500
1,562,200
2,621,000
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
3,410,000
1,614,000
12,429,000
17,453,000
0.64
0.69
1.49
1.25
69,700
36,000
593,800
699,500
Nami
Inferred
Indicated
Rambo
Inferred
Indicated
Total
Inferred
(1)
Mineral Resource estimates were based on a gold price of US$1,557 per ounce, a 90%, 80% and 85%
respective process recoveries for oxide, transition and sulphide; oxide mining costs of US$1.61/tonne,
$US1.94 per tonne for transition and US$2.05 for sulphide ; process costs of US$7.25/tonne for oxide and
transition and US$19 per tonne for sulphide; and General & Administrative costs of US$1.35 per tonne were
used to determine the respective 0.20, 0.22 and 0.50 oxide, transition and sulphide open pit cut-off grades.

Page 6 of 357
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Au grades were estimated in a 5m x 5m x 5m block model (except Rambo at 2.5m x 2.5m x 2.5m blocks) from
capped 2.0m composites utilizing inverse distance cubed interpolation. Composites were capped up to 45 g/t
depending on the individual mineralized domain.
Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate
of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, sociopolitical, marketing, or other relevant issues.
The quantity and grade of reported Inferred mineral resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and
there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred mineral resources as an Indicated or
Measured mineral resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an
Indicated or Measured mineral resource category.
The mineral resources in this press release were estimated using the Canadian Institute of Mining,
Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and
Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council.
Material within optimized pit shells have engineering mining aspects applied to the global mineral inventory.
The Karma Project global sensitivity to the mineral resource estimate, within and outside of
optimized pit shells, is presented in Table 1.2.

Page 7 of 357
Deposit
TABLE 1.2
GLOBAL SENSITIVITY TO THE MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.20
Oxide
6,354,000
0.62
0.22
0.64
Indicated
0.50
Sulphide 8,555,000
0.92
Subtotal 20,315,000
0.75
Au (oz)
127,500
111,100
252,800
491,400
Goulagou I
Inferred
Indicated
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
799,000
771,000
6,080,000
7,650,000
0.81
0.74
0.95
0.91
20,800
18,300
185,100
224,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
5,944,000
Sulphide 7,254,000
Subtotal 15,375,000
1.12
1.36
1.73
1.44
213,100
94,800
402,300
710,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
630,000
410,000
2,413,000
3,453,000
0.71
0.65
1.14
1.00
14,400
8,600
88,100
111,100
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
13,542,000
Sulphide 23,997,000
Subtotal 41,941,000
0.74
0.88
1.25
1.04
321,700
124,100
962,900
1,408,700
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
2,009,000
Transition 671,000
Sulphide 12,508,000
Subtotal 15,188,000
0.49
0.46
1.31
1.16
31,900
10,000
526,400
568,300
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
532,000
1,018,000
2,352,000
3,902,000
0.95
0.71
0.72
0.75
16,300
23,400
54,400
94,100
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
122,000
183,000
1,017,000
1,322,000
0.80
0.75
0.54
0.59
3,200
4,400
17,600
25,200
0.20
0.22
Oxide
Transition
219,000
291,000
2.30
2.39
16,200
22,400
Goulagou II
Inferred
Indicated
Kao
Inferred
Indicated
Nami
Inferred
Rambo
Indicated

Page 8 of 357
Deposit
TABLE 1.2
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.22
Sulphide
589,000
1.73
Subtotal 1,099,000
2.02
Inferred
Indicated
Au (oz)
32,700
71,300
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
104,000
111,000
719,000
934,000
0.74
0.52
1.00
0.92
2,500
1,900
23,200
27,600
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
26,591,000
13,294,000
42,747,000
82,632,000
0.81
0.88
1.24
1.04
694,800
375,800
1,705,100
2,775,700
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
3,664,000
2,146,000
22,737,000
28,547,000
0.62
0.63
1.15
1.04
72,800
43,200
840,400
956,400
Total
Inferred
The block models were validated using a number of industry standard methods including visual
and statistical methods.
1.3
MINING
Five open pit areas will be developed in sequence to provide the ore feed for the heap leach
operations. These open pit mining operations will exploit the GGI, GGII, Kao, Rambo and Nami
mineral deposits. Target ore production during the life of the mine is 4.0 million tonnes per year,
with no more than two open pits producing concurrently. The site layout in Figure 1.1 shows an
overall view of the Project site.

Page 9 of 357
Figure 1.1
Karma Project Site Plan

Page 10 of 357
1.3.1
Geomechanical
Detailed Feasibility Study geotechnical investigations have been performed on the mineral
deposits to characterize the rock mass and structural fabric of the dominant wall rocks that will
make up the pits. As part of this investigation, a total of thirty-five geotechnical boreholes were
drilled. These included three boreholes for the Nami deposit and eight for each of the other
deposits.
A total of 231 tests were carried out on the samples of the bedrock:
93 uniaxial compressive strength tests

69 triaxial compressive strength tests
29 uniaxial indirect tensile strength tests (Brazilian method)
40 foundation indicator tests
To assess the effect of mining on the exposed rock mass, the rock mass rating (RMR) values
were empirically adjusted to account for the factors affecting the rock mass, namely: weathering,
mining-induced stress, joint orientation and blasting. These factors were weighted according to
their relative importance, with a maximum possible total rating of 100. The resultant adjusted
values form the basis of subsequent empirical slope stability analysis.
The results of the slope stability analyses are summarised in Table 1.3.
TABLE 1.3
SUMMARY OF SLOPE LIMIT EQUILIBRIUM ANALYSES
Overall Slope
Pit Name and Section
Lithology
Angle ()
Angle ()
Saprolite
42
1
41
Trans/Rock
47
2
Saprolite
41
41
Saprolite
48
GGI
3
40
Trans/Rock
63
4
Saprolite
45
45
North
Saprolite
46
46
5
South
Saprolite
52
52
1
Saprolite
45
45
2
Saprolite
42
42
Saprolite
42
3
37
Rock
29
Saprolite
55
GGII
4
Transition
54
27
Transition
48
5
Saprolite
44
44
Saprolite
47
6
29
Saprolite
51
1
Saprolite
38
32
Kao
Saprolite
38
2
North
32
Saprolite
41
Page 11 of 357
TABLE 1.3
Overall Slope
Lithology
Angle ()
Angle ()
South
Saprolite
42
42
Saprolite
45
1
45
Transition
48
Rambo
Saprolite
49
2
Transition
56
44
Rock
43
1
Saprolite
38
32
Saprolite
41
Nami
North
33
2
Saprolite
45
South
Saprolite
42
42
1.3.2
Hydrological
The groundwater flows from a central watershed ridge towards surface water courses to the south
and north-east of the proposed mine. Aquifer tests revealed low to moderate hydraulic
conductivity within the saprolite and fractured transition zone.
Groundwater inflow and direct rainfall into the pits will need to be directed to in-pit sumps from
where it will need to be pumped beyond the rim of the pit. This water can be used for dust
suppression and or other mining process needs.
The anticipated average monthly pumping rate from the sump for average, dry and wet years are
summarized in Table 1.4
TABLE 1.4
ANTICIPATED AVERAGE MONTHLY PUMPING RATE
Average
Wet Year
Dry Year
Pit
Year
3
(m /month) (m3/month)
(m3/month)
Goulagou I
55,060
57,963
53,383
Goulagou II
60,249
63,367
58,450
Kao
39,182
41,585
37,804
Nami
42,879
44,727
41,814
Rambo
28,758
30,001
28,043
A cone of drawdown will extend around each pit and the water levels in the nearby village water
supply boreholes could be affected.
Terminal lakes will form in each of the pits once mining stops, however, no decant from pits is
expected.

Page 12 of 357
1.3.3
Mining Method
The mining method utilized will be conventional open pit mining, similar to that used at many
other operations in Africa. Medium size mining equipment will be used (for example 90 tonne
capacity haul trucks) to meet the production requirements.
Three types of material will be mined in the open pits. These are oxides, transition, and sulfide
rock, with the oxides being the least competent rock and sulphides being the most competent.
The oxides and some of the transition materials will not require blasting during excavation.
However, as the pits deepen, harder rock will be encountered and some degree of drilling and
blasting will be required.
Up to two hydraulic backhoe type excavators will be used as the primary loading units for the
fleet of up to fourteen 90 tonne capacity haul trucks. A wheel loader will be available to be used
in some instances. Waste dumps will be developed adjacent to all the pits, however at GGI some
waste material may be placed in the mined-out sections.
In some of the pits, minor amounts of preg-robbing material may exist. Preg-robbing material
contains components that absorb some of the gold released in the leaching process. It is assumed
that this material will be stockpiled and processed at the end of the mine operational life to
minimize its impact on the heap leach process.
1.3.4
Pit Optimization and Pit Design
Pit optimizations for design purposes were conducted using the Lerches-Grossman algorithm in
CAE NPV Scheduler, This was based on a gold price of US$1,300/oz, process recoveries, as
well as pit slope criteria and estimated mining, processing, and G&A costs for the different pits
to create a series of nested pit shells for analysis. Inferred resources were considered as waste
material in the mining process.
These optimized pits were further developed into operational design open pits with hauls roads,
etc., that would form the basis for the mine production plan.
A mining loss factor of 3% was applied to the ore recovered by the designed pits. Dilution was
added according to estimated quantities and diluting grades for each ore type. This produced the
Mineral Reserves for the project.
1.3.5
Mineral Reserves
The Mineral Reserves form the basis for the Feasibility Study production plan.
Inferred Mineral Resources are not included in the estimation of the Mineral Reserve.
The Mineral Reserves for the Project, summarized in Table 1.5, all of which are all classified as
Probable Reserves, are comprised of oxide, transition and sulphide mineralization and will be
processed in a heap leach facility.

Page 13 of 357
1.3.6
TABLE 1.5
KARMA PROJECT PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
g/t K oz Mt g/t K oz Mt g/t K oz Mt
0.59 123 4.3 0.64 86
10.8
1.03 200 1.5 1.47 72
7.6
0.89 260 1.9 1.32 80
10.9
1.85 16 0.3 1.97 22 0.3 2.10 20
0.9
0.87 16 1.0 0.62 21 1.5 0.70 33
3.0
GGI
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Nami
Mt
6.5
6.1
9.0
0.3
0.5
Total
22.4 0.85
615
9.0 0.97
280
1.8 0.95
53
Total
g/t
0.61
1.12
0.96
1.98
0.71
K oz
209
272
340
58
70
33.2 0.89
949
Production Schedule
The production sequence for mining the various deposits is shown in Table 1.6.
Year
GGI
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Nami
-1
TABLE 1.6
PRODUCTION SEQUENCE CHART
2
3
4
5
6
The Karma mining operation will require a workforce ranging from about 158 people in Year -1
to a peak of about 228 people in Year 6. It is expected that the workforce will consist largely of
local personnel, and that the Mine Superintendent, Training Coordinator and Maintenance
General Supervisor roles will be assumed by expatriate personnel.
The Karma mine will also incorporate adequate support infrastructure, including mine offices,
safety offices, change house facilities, maintenance facilities, warehouse and laydown areas.
1.4
1.4.1
METALLURGY AND MINERAL PROCESSING

Metallurgical Testwork
In support of a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA), metallurgical test work was

conducted at Kappes Cassiday between 2010 and 2012 to initially assess the best gold processing
route to be used on the Karma deposit. The PEA concluded that heap leaching is the best process
method for recovering gold from the Karma mineral resources.
In support of this Feasibility Study, further test work was conducted at McClelland Laboratories
in 2012 and 2013 which focused on developing recoveries and reagent consumptions for each
ore type.

Page 14 of 357
1.4.2
Mineral Processing
The proposed Karma process plant design will be based on gold heap leach technology, which
will consist of two crushing circuits (for soft and hard ore respectively), agglomeration and
stacking, heap leaching with cyanide solution followed by adsorption of the pregnant solution,
elution and gold smelting. Services to the process plant will include reagent make-up, storage
and distribution, water and air supply.
The heap leach plant will process 4 Mtpa of oxide and transition ore for the recovery and
extraction of gold from five different pits; Goulagou I, Goulagou II, Kao, Rambo and Nami.
Only a minimal amount of sulphides extracted from Rambo and Nami pits, will be processed
through the heap leach plant. Gold cannot be recovered by heap leaching sulphide material from
GGI, GGII and Kao due to its refractory nature.
Recovery of gold will be accomplished via heap leaching whereby the heap is fed with a mixture
of ore and a dilute solution of cyanide. The gold in the ore is extracted by dissolving it with the
cyanide solution which is collected via under drains to a pregnant solution pond and
subsequently pumped to an adsorption column. Once sufficient gold has been adsorbed on to the
carbon, the loaded carbon will be acid washed prior to elution, followed by reactivation of the
eluted carbon. The solution from the elution circuit will be subjected to electrowinning, where
gold will be deposited onto cathodes as sludge. Periodically the sludge will be washed off the
cathodes and dried. The dried gold sludge will then be smelted to produce gold bullion which
will be shipped to a refinery.
The flow sheets of the Karma heap leach plant are shown in Figure 1.2 and Figure 1.3.

Page 15 of 357
Figure 1.2
Karma Comminution Overall Flowsheet
ROM
Hard Rock
ROM Bin
Vibrating
Grizzly
Primary
Jaw Crusher
Primary Sizing
Screen
Secondary
Crushing
Feed Bin
Seconadry Sizing
Screen
Secondary
Crusher
Tertiary
Crushing
Feed Bin
Tertiary
Crusher
Agglomeration
Feed Hopper
Belt
Feeder
Emergency
Stockpile
Stockpile Slew
Conveyor
ROM
Soft Rock
Vendor Supply
Belt Magnet
Primary
Breaker Feeder
Roller Screen
Primary Crusher
Discharge Conveyor
Secondary
Roll Crusher
Agglomeration Drum
Cement
Delivery
Cement Loading
Hoist
Cement Silo
Dust Filter
Cement Bag
Hopper
Cement Silo
Cement Silo
Rotary Feeder
Cement
Transfer Blower
Cement Silo
Dust Filter
Cement Bag
Hopper
Cement Silo
Cement Silo
Rotary Feeder
Rotary
Feeder
Cement
Transfer Blower
Rotary
Feeder
Agglomeration Feed Conveyor
Karma Heap
Leach Plant
OVERALL FLOWSHEET 1

Page 16 of 357
Figure 1.3
Karma Heap Leach & ADR Overall Flowsheet
Crushed Ore
Cyanide Solution
Agglomerating
Drum
Agglomeration
Water Tank
Moveable Head
Conveyor
Overland
Conveyor
Future
Tripper Conveyor
Wing Conveyor
Drip Irrigation
Heap
Grasshopper Conveyors
Transverse
Conveyor
Stacker Feed
Conveyor
Stacker/Stinger
Conveyor
OVERFLOW
M
CuSO4
HCl
Sieve
Bend
H2 O2
IBC
Bag
Pregnant
Solution Pond
Intermediate
Solution Pond
Barren Pond
Sieve Bend
Scavenging
Column
Sieve
Bend
Carbon
Basket
Storm Water Pond
Eluted Carbon
Holding Tank
Detox Pond
Regeneration
Kiln
Sieve
Bends
Adsorption
Column
Flush/Cell
Feed Tank
Kiln Screw
Feeder
Carbon
Basket
Carbon
Transfer
Vessel
Cathode Hoist
Reclaim Heat
Exchanger
Elution
Column
Acid Wash
Column
Eductor
M
Elution Pumps
Electrowinning
Cells 1/2/3
Cathode High
Pressure Wash Pump
Eluant Tank
Eluant Mixer
Cathode Wash
Tank
Main Heat
Exchanger
Acid Wash
Pumps
Acid Wash
Tank
Acid Drum
Pump
Elution Heaters
Carbon Transfer
Water Tank
Gold Sludge
Tank
Carbon Transfer
Water Pump
Karma Heap
Leach Plant
Bullion Bar
Moulds
Bucket
Calcining
Furnace

Smelting
Furnace
Gold Mould
Cascade Trolley
GOLD BARS
OVERALL FLOWSHEET 2
Page 17 of 357
1.5
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE
The selected Karma Project site is a green fields site without any existing infrastructure. An
existing gravel road currently passes to the south of the selected Karma Project site through
Kononga village. The proposed infrastructure will support the mining, plant and construction
operations. The main mine area will contain the mining workshop and operations to the north
with the processing plant and administration buildings to the south of the mine. The open pit
areas are located outside of the ring-fenced mine area and are controlled as separate operations.
In support of the mining operations, the project site will include haul roads, mining
administration facilities, a mine dry building, equipment maintenance workshops, refuelling
facilities and an explosives magazine.
Infrastructure related to the processing plant will include access roads, related office and
administration buildings, assay laboratory, warehouse, laydown areas and equipment
maintenance facilities.
In addition there will be storm water handling facilities, water supply network, site access road,
sewage treatment plant, medical facilities and a kitchen /canteen.
The entire site will be serviced by a power supply network and diesel generators.
An overall view of the Project site is provided in Figure 1.1.
1.6
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS
1.6.1
Community Relations
True Gold has developed a number of processes for ensuring that the project has a positive
impact on the local community. These include:
The Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Plan, which provides a

description of how True Gold will engage and communicate with project area
communities;
The Cultural Heritage Plan, which outlines the manner in which True Gold will
respect and preserve the cultural heritage of all local communities within the
project area;
The Community Development Plan, which is the primary vehicle for providing
added-value development initiatives to the project area communities;
The Community Health and Safety Plan which contains measures to ensure that
project-related health and safety risks are minimised at the community level;
The Local Employment and Training Plan by which True Gold will ensure that
people both local to the project area and within the country of Burkina Faso have
full opportunity to take advantage of the employment opportunities that will
become available through the development of the Karma Gold Project; and
The Resettlement Action Plan(s), in place to deal with relocation compensation
and livelihood restoration activities that are the result of involuntary resettlement
or economic displacement within the project area.

Page 18 of 357
There will be no camp facilities on site due to the proximity of the town Ouahigouya. Most
national employees will live at home in Ouahigouya or the surrounding villages.
1.6.2
Environmental
International good practices in project management include the preparation and implantation of
an environmental and social management plan (ESMP) in order to document environmental and
social impacts along the life of a project. An ESMP is based on the prevention, attenuation and
management of the environmental and social impacts identified into a project Environmental and
Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) study. It aims at the optimal management of significant
environmental, social and health and safety impacts, in order to reduce or control the effects on
local communities, workers and the environment.
The following environmental and social management plans were prepared and endorsed by True
Gold for the Karma Project:
1.7
Noise Management Plan;

Dust and Air Emissions Management Plan;
Water Resources Management Plan;
Environmental Best Practice;
Waste Management Plan;
Hazardous Material Management Plan;
Cyanide Management Plan;
Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Management Plan;
Transport Management Plan;
Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Plan;
Resettlement Action Plan;
Cultural Heritage Action Plan;
Local Employment and Training Plan;
Community Health and Safety Plan.
CAPITAL AND OPERATING COST ESTIMATES
The level of accuracy of the Karma Project capital cost estimate is within a -5%+15% range of
the overall project costs as of the 3rd Quarter 2013.
1.7.1
Capital Cost Summary
The total project initial capital cost (CAPEX) to bring the plant into production, is estimated at
US$132 Million. This initial capital cost is inclusive of US$9 Million contingency. With an
additional total sustaining capital cost of US$40 Million, the total life of mine (LOM) CAPEX is
US$171 Million.
Summaries of the initial and sustaining capital requirements are shown in Table 1.6 and Table
1.7 respectively.

Page 19 of 357
Cost Location
Mining Direct Costs
Plant Direct Costs
Project Indirect Costs
Initial Capital Cost Total
TABLE 1.7
INITIAL CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Installed Costs
Contingency
(US$000s)
%
37,189
3.9%
55,907
8.3%
29,827
8.4%
122,923
7.0%
Contingency Cost
(US$000s)
1,441
4,654
2,502
8,596
Initial Capital Costs Total (Including Contingency)
131,519
TABLE 1.8
SUSTAINING CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Installed Costs
Cost Location
(US$000s)
Mining Direct Costs
18,274
Plant Direct Costs
18,879
Plant Indirect Costs
2,849
Total Sustaining Capital Cost
1.8
40,002
OPERATING COSTS
The Karma Project annual operating costs for the life of the mine were estimated for mining,
processing, general and administration, royalties and refining charges and are summarized in
Table 1.8 and Table 1.9.

Page 20 of 357
TABLE 1.9
SUMMARY OF TOTAL YEARLY OPERATING COSTS
Combined Tonnage Processed
Combined Feed Grade
Combined Recovery
Gold Production
Total Mining Operating Cost
Total Process Plant Costs
Total G&A Costs
Units
kt
g/t Au
%
oz
US$000s
US$000s
US$000s
-1
400
1.79
90.23
20,740
0
2,523
1,148
1
3,800
1.28
87.50
134,302
18,862
28,225
6,358
2
4,000
1.02
81.84
107,510
24,332
30,822
6,358
3
4,000
0.87
90.73
101,428
21,438
32,834
6,358
4
4,000
0.97
93.47
116,187
24,988
33,782
5,826
5
4,000
1.12
92.06
132,570
27,112
32,102
5,826
Total Operating Costs
US$000s
3,670
53,445
61,513
60,631
64,595
65,040

Combined Feed Grade
Combined Recovery
Gold Production
Total Mining Operating Cost
Total G&A Costs
Units
kt
g/t Au
%
oz
US$000s
US$000s
US$000s
6
4,000
0.65
87.58
73,326
28,519
36,279
5,825
7
4,000
0.62
80.44
64,146
21,119
27,453
5,826
8
4,000
0.59
84.72
63,795
16,422
27,190
5,826
9
928
0.72
63.31
13,695
2,684
5,280
1,456
Total
33,128
0.89
87.3
827,699
185,476
256,491
50,807

US$000s 70,624 54,398
49,438
9,420
492,774
Note: Some values have been rounded. The totals are accurate summations of the columns of data.
TABLE 1.10
SUMMARY OF TOTAL YEARLY OPERATING UNIT COSTS
Units
-1

Combined Feed Grade
Combined Recovery
Gold Production
Mining Operating Costs
Total G&A Costs
kt
g/t Au
%
oz
US$/t
US$/t
US$/t
400
1.79
90.23
20,740
0.00
6.31
2.87
3,800
1.28
87.50
134,302
4.96
7.43
1.67
4,000
1.02
81.84
107,510
6.08
7.71
1.59
4,000
0.87
90.73
101,428
5.36
8.21
1.59
4,000
0.97
93.47
116,187
6.25
8.45
1.46
4,000
1.12
92.06
132,570
6.78
8.03
1.46

US$/t
US$/oz
9.18
176.97
14.06
397.95
15.38
572.15
15.16
597.78
16.15
555.96
16.26
490.61

Combined Feed Grade
Combined Recovery
Gold Production
Total G&A Costs
Units
kt
g/t Au
%
oz
US$/t
US$/t
US$/t
6
4,000
0.65
87.58
73,326
7.13
9.07
1.46
7
4,000
0.62
80.44
64,146
5.28
6.86
1.46
8
4,000
0.59
84.72
63,795
4.11
6.80
1.46
9
928
0.72
63.31
13,695
2.89
5.69
1.57
Total
33,128
0.89
87.3
827,699
5.60
7.74
1.53

US$/t
US$/oz
17.66
963.15
13.60
848.03
12.36
774.96
10.15
687.80
14.87
595.35

Page 21 of 357
1.9
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Based on a gold price of US$1,250 per troy ounce, the project has a post-tax internal rate of
return (IRR) of 43.1% and a 1.4 year payback of initial preproduction capital costs. The project
will realize a post-tax NPV of US$ 178 million at a discount rate of 5%.
Gold production will average 97,000 troy ounces per annum and total 827,000 troy ounces over
the 8.5 year life of the mine.
Economic analysis results are summarized in Table 1.11.
TABLE 1.11
SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RESULTS
Economic Summary
Units
Results
LOM Tonnage Ore Processed
kt
33,128
LOM Feed Grade Processed
g/t Au
0.89
LOM Gold Recovery
%
87.2
LOM Gold Production
k oz
827
Production Period
years
8.5
Gold Annual Production- LOM
k oz
97
LOM Fuel Costs
US$/oz
109
LOM Direct Operating Costs
US$/oz
595
LOM Total Cash Operating Costs
US$/oz
672
US$/t
16.80
Total Capital Costs
US$/oz
207
Post-Tax NPV @ 5% Discount
US$ million
178
IRR
%
43.1
Payback Period
years
1.4
The Project economics have been evaluated using the discounted cash flow method. This method
considered process recoveries, metal price (revenue), operating costs and refining charges,
royalties and capital expenditures (both initial and sustaining).
This Feasibility Study has been prepared using cost bids and estimates and production forecasts
provided by qualified engineering consulting groups who possess recent bidding and cost
structure experience relating to other similar projects under development.
A sensitivity analysis of potential variation in the financial parameters indicates that the Project
is most sensitive to gold price and feed grade. From a cost perspective, the Project is more
sensitive to operating expenditures than capital costs.
1.10
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
P&E concludes that this Feasibility Study demonstrates the viability of the Karma gold project as
proposed, and that further development is warranted. P&E specifically recommends proceeding
Page 22 of 357
with detailed engineering and permitting based on the positive economics predicted by the
designs and financial evaluations contained herein.
The Feasibility Study has also identified areas of opportunity and risk that would benefit from
ongoing engineering studies, metallurgical testwork and the review of the existing elements of
the project design.
1.10.1
General
P&E recommends that True Gold puts into place effective training programmes prior to project
implementation. Skilled labour could be sourced from West African French-speaking countries.
1.10.2
Geology and Exploration
Given the economic sensitivity to ore grade, exploration efforts should focus on finding and
defining higher grade mineralization in areas of potential low strip ratios.
P&E considers that the Karma Property has opportunity for resource expansion and merits
further exploration. P&Es exploration recommendations are largely based on step out and infill
diamond drilling, RC drilling, with supporting geology, geochemistry and ground IP/Mag
geophysics. A proposed $5,000,000 program is recommended in Table 1.12.
TABLE 1.12
PROPOSED EXPLORATION PROGRAM
Program
Units
Budget (000s)
RC Drilling Kao, North Kao 46 holes
8,000 m
$1,000
Core Drilling Kao, North Kao, Rambo - 26 holes
3,000 m
$600
Core Drilling Goulagou, Youba, Rounga 16 holes
2,000 m
$350
RAB/Aircore drilling 120 holes
3,600 m
$200
Geology, geochemistry, IP/Mag ground geophysics
200 line km
$200
Resource Estimation Kao, North Kao, Rambo West
1
$150
Management, support, G&A at 100% of unit cost
$2,500
Total
1.10.3
$5,000
Processing
1.10.3.1
Process Plant and Metallurgical Testing

P&E recommends that the input parameters of the current detailed design should
be updated once load permeability test work is finalized;
P&E recommends that ongoing site heap leach test work be performed on all ore
types, especially transition ore;
P&E recommends that onsite permeability test work be performed on saprolitic
ore prior to heap leach treatment.

Page 23 of 357
1.10.3.2
1.10.4
Heap Leach Pad and Ponds

Samples of ferricrete aggregate should be sent for testing for suitability as
drainage layer material, while at the same time, the current detailed design should
include further optimization of the drainage layer.
Further geomechanical test work on the various ore types at Karma is
recommended to better predict heap leach pad stability.
Mining
1.10.4.1
1.10.4.2
1.10.4.3
1.10.4.4
Pit Slopes (Geotechnical)

P&E recommends that the slope geometry should be optimised on those sections
which produced a Factor of Safety (FoS) <1.3, namely GGI Section 5 North,
GGI Section 5 South, GGII Section 1, GGII Section 2 and GGII Section 3.
Optimization to reach the acceptance criteria of an FoS of 1.3 may result in a
decrease in overall slope angle;
P&E recommends that the optimization of inter-ramp angles be examined for
those slopes where only transition material and fresh rock are exposed in the pit
wall. It appears that the potential to increase the inter-ramp angles on several of
the design sections may exist.
Drilling and Blasting
Contingency plans should be considered to address the possibility that there may
be more drilling and blasting required than currently planned.
Haulage
P&E recommends that True Gold review its haul truck tire requirements with the
local supplier and confirm that tires selected for overland haulage are suited to
ambient conditions;
P&E recommends that the ore haul from Rambo in the first two years of mining
should be used as a test case for the performance of the haul truck tires on
overland routes;
Overland tire performance could be potentially improved by considering
measures such as: lower speed limits, speed governors, hauling during cooler
evening hours and optimizing road conditions;
The use of 30 tonne highway-type trucks could be considered as an alternative to
90 tonne haul trucks if technical or economic conditions change.
Hydrological
P&E recommends that a robust water monitoring program is developed, in order
that appropriate sound water management measures can be implemented;
P&E recommends that the pit perimeter diversion ditches be constructed as
mining develops.

Page 24 of 357
1.10.5
Environmental and Social
1.10.5.1
1.10.5.2
Environmental
Develop and implement a re-vegetation trials program;
To reduce noise emission, make sure mitigation measures are applied and that the
equipment to be used is at the cutting edge of technology;
Control dusting and atmospheric emissions according to the management plan;
Adopt measures to reduce the risk of an environmental contamination by cyanides
including effective lining of heap leach pads and ponds and applying industry best
practices.
In the event of extreme rainfall events, ensure that contaminated water is treated
prior to release into the environment;
Ensure that plant bleeds resulting in volumes of water containing high arsenic
concentrations are fully utilized for the making of cement blocks and ensuring
that those blocks are buried at the bottom of the pits;
Special attention must be given to the surface of the heap to avoid solution
ponding which could attract birds or other wildlife;
The surface and groundwater monitoring programs should allow for a rapid
detection of any possible contamination and the implementation of corrective
measures.
Social
Focus on:
Consultative approaches to problem solving with the community to manage social

risk;
Train and review use of the established grievance mechanism with True Gold
personnel and community representatives;
Report and monitor the effectiveness of the Community Liaison Committee
Ensure that community development spending is aligned with company and
community goals;
Coordinate implementation of the various social management action plans into an
overall social management system;
Guide the implementation process of each social program or initiative in
compliance with best practices;
Establish metrics for monitoring the performance of social management plans;
Establish community-based health programs;
Address the need for employee and local resident access to healthcare;
Consider social and community impacts when making detailed design decisions;
Share site security plans with the local community in order that the activities and
purpose of site security is understood;
Develop and share with the community a detailed executable emergency response
plan
Conduct surveys to determine the need for pre-employment training in order to
hire local area residents;
Partner with local authorities and NGOs to implement the training of local area
residents;

Page 25 of 357
Ensure that the Culture and Heritage Management Plan is executed in order to
protect the cultural heritage of the project area;
Implement the Chance Find procedure in the Cultural Heritage Plan as required;
Review project development changes with the community during the detailed
engineering process;
Establish an inventory of physical and non-physical assets in each area affected
by re-settlement;
Conduct audits and reviews of compensation procedure to ensure that residents
affected by re-location are being treated as planned;
Ensure that social management activities comply with local laws and international
standards;
Perform due diligence to determine rightful ownership and entitlement to land,
tenure and occupancy prior to undertaking any agreements.

Page 26 of 357
2.0
TERMS OF REFERENCE
This report titled, Technical Report, Updated Resource Estimate and Feasibility Study on the
Karma Gold Project, Burkina Faso, West Africa (the Technical Report) with an effective date
of December 17, 2013, was prepared to provide a NI 43-101 compliant technical report, updated
resource estimate and Feasibility Study of the gold mineralization at the Karma Project, Burkina
Faso, West Africa (the Property or the Karma Project).
The Karma Gold Project is comprised of five named mineral deposits, namely the Goulagou I,
Goulagou II, Rambo, Kao and Nami which are held within three permits (Goulagou. Kao and
Rambo permits) of the six Exploration Permits (Kao, Rambo, Goulagou, Youba, Rounga, and
Tougou) that comprise the Karma property.
This Technical Report has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of Canadian
National Instrument (NI) 43-101 and in accordance with the guidelines of the Canadian
Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Standards on Mineral Resources and
Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve
Definitions and adopted by CIM Council and in force as of the effective date of this report.
This Technical Report has been prepared by P & E Mining Consultants Inc., (P&E) at the
request of Peter C. Carter, P. Eng., Chief Operating Officer and Vice President Engineering, of
True Gold. True Gold is a Vancouver based company trading on the TSX Venture Exchange
(TSXV) under the symbol of TGM, and the Frankfurt Stock Exchange under the symbol
3RV with its corporate office at:
Suite 1900, 1055 West Hastings Street
Vancouver, British Columbia, V6E 2E9
Tel: 604 801-5020
This report has an effective date of December 17, 2013.
Mr. Antoine Yassa, of P&E Mining Consultants Inc., a qualified person under the regulations of
NI 43-101, conducted a site visit to the Karma Property on November 1 to 3, 2011 August 15 to
17, 2012, December 13 to 14, 2012 and October 16, 2013. An independent verification sampling
program was conducted by Mr. Yassa at that time. Eugene Puritch, P.Eng., of P&E Mining
Consultants Inc., conducted a site visit to the Karma Property on April 11, 2012. Ismail
Mahomed Pr. Sci. Nat. of SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd., conducted a site visit to the Karma
property on December 12, 2012. Duncan Grant-Stuart, Pr. Eng., of Knight Pisold (Pty) Ltd.,
conducted a site visit to the Karma property on October 9-11, 2013.
In addition to the site visit, P&E held discussions with technical personnel from the Company
regarding all pertinent aspects of the project and carried out a review of all available literature
and documented results concerning the Property. The reader is referred to those data sources,
which are outlined in the References section of this report, for further detail.
The present Technical Report is prepared in accordance with the requirements of NI 43-101F1 of
the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) and the Canadian Securities Administrators
(CSA). The Mineral Resources and Reserves in the estimate are considered compliant with the
Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral
Page 27 of 357
Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee
on Reserve Definitions.
2.1
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
This report is based, in part, on internal Company technical reports, and maps, published
government reports, Company letters and memoranda, and public information as listed in the
References Section 27 at the conclusion of this Technical Report. Several sections from reports
authored by other consultants have been directly quoted in this Technical Report, and are so
indicated in the appropriate sections. P&E has not conducted detailed land status evaluations,
and has relied upon copies of public documents as well as statements and documents presented
by the Company regarding Property status and legal title to the Karma Project.
2.2
UNITS AND CURRENCY
Unless otherwise stated all units used in this report are metric. Gold assay values (Au) are
reported in grams per tonne gold (g/t Au) unless ounces per ton (oz/T Au) are specifically
stated. The US$ is used throughout this report unless another currency is stated.
2.3
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATION OF TERMS
In this document, in addition to the definitions contained heretofore and hereinafter, unless the
context otherwise requires, the following terms have the meanings set forth below.
Abbreviation
"(Ai)"
"m"
"AA"
"ACA"
"Ag"
"anfo"
"artisanal
mining"
"As"
"asl"
"Au"
"AUD"
"AusIMM"
"Azi"
"BBWi"
"bcm"
"BLK"
"BOQ"
"C$"
"CAPEX"
Meaning
means Bond Abrasion Work Index
means micrometre or micron
means Atomic Absorption, a technique used to measure metal content subsequent
to fire assay
means Acid Base Accounting
means silver
means ammonium nitrate-fuel oil mixture explosive
means a rudimentary method of collecting oxidized and near surface material
from which Au is extracted, (see orpailleur below)
means arsenic
means above sea level
means gold
means currency of Australia, in dollars
means Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
means azimuth
means Bond Ball Work Index
means Bond Ball Work Index
means bank cubic meter
means bill of quantities
means the currency of Canada, in dollars
means capital cost

Page 28 of 357
"CDP"
"CFAF"
"CHP"
"CHSP"
"CIL"
"CIM"
"COG"
CoV
"CSA"
"Cu"
"CWi"
"DDH"
"E"
"el"
"EPCM"
ESIA
"ESMP"
"est"
"Exploration
Permit"
"FA"
"Fe"
"FoS"
"FS"
"G&A "
"g/cm3"
"g/m3"
"g/t Au"
"g/t"
"Ga"
"GA"
"GBP"
"GDP"
"GNP"
"ha"
"HCl"
"HCN"
"HDPE"
"Hg"
"ICP"
"IFC"
"ILS"
"in"
means Community Development Plan

means currency of Burkino Faso, in West African CFA Francs
means Cultural Heritage Plan
means Community Health and Safety Plan
means carbon-in-leach mineral processing
means the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum
means cut-off grade
means coefficient of variation
means the Canadian Securities Administrators
means copper
means bond Crushability Work Index
means diamond drillhole
means east
means elevation level
means Engineering, procurement, and construction management
means Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
means environmental and social management plan
means estimated
means "Permis de recherch the government issued permit conferring exploration
rights on land in Burkina Faso.
means Fire Assay
means iron
means factor of safety
means Feasibility Study
means general and administration
means grams per cubic centimetre
means grams per cubic metre
means grams of gold per tonne of rock
means grams per tonne
means billions of years
means General Arrangement
means currency of Great Britain, in pounds
means Gross Domestic Product
means Gross National Product
means hectare
means hydrochloric acid
means hydrogen cyanide
means high density polyethylene
means mercury
means inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry
means World Bank/International Finance Corporation
means intermediate leach solution
means inches

Page 29 of 357
"IP"
"IRR"
"IT"
"JORC code"
"K" or k
"KCA"
"kg"
"kg/cm3"
"kg/t"
"km"
"kPa"
"kWh/t"
"LE"
"LETP"
"LL"
"LOM"
"m"
"M"
"Ma"
"max"
"MCC"
"mi"
"min"
"mm"
"mm/an"
"Mm3"
"Mod
AASHTO"
"MPa"
"MRMR"
"Mt"
"MTO"
"Mtpa"
"N"
"NaCN"
"NE"
"NGO's"
"NI 43-101"
"NN
NPI
"NPV"
"NSR"
"NW
means Induced Polarization

means Internal Rate of Return
means information technology
means Australian Joint Ore Reserve Committee
means thousand
means Kappes, Cassidy & Associates, Metallurgical Process Consultants.
means kilogram
means kilograms per cubic meter
means kilograms per tonne
means kilometre equal to 1,000 metres or approx. 0.62 statute miles
means kilopascals
means kilowatt hours per tonne
means Limit Equilibrium
means Local Employment & Training Plan
means Liquid Limit
means life-of-mine
means metric metre distance measurement equivalent to approximately 3.27 feet
means million
means millions of years
means maximum
means motor control centre
means miles
means minimum
means millimeter
means millimetres per annum
means million cubic meters
means American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
means megapascal
means mining rock mass rating (Laubscher)
means millions of tonnes
means material take-off
means million tonnes per year
means north
means sodium cyanide
means north-east
means non-governmental organizations
means Canadian Securities Administrators National Instrument 43-101
means Nearest Neighbour
means Net Profits Interest
means Net Present Value
means Net Smelter Return
means north-west

Page 30 of 357
"OPEX"
"orpaillage"
"orpailleur"
"OSH"
"oz"
"oz/T"
"P&E"
"P&ID"
"PEA"
"pfd"
"pH"
"PLS"
"ppb"
"PPE"
"ppm"
"Property"
"Q1"
"Q2"
"Q3"
"Q4"
"RAB"
"RAP"
"RC"
"RMR"
"ROM"
"S"
"S&S "
"Sb"
"SE"
"SECP"
"SEDAR"
"SENET"
"SG"
"SGS"
"SRK"
"Stdev"
"SW"
"t"
"T"
"t/a"
"TCS"
"tpd"
means operating cost

means the act of collecting surface/subsurface oxidized material from which Au
is extracted
means a traditional local miner using rudimentary means to collect oxidized
surface/sub-surface material from which Au is extracted
means Occupational Safety and Health
means troy ounce
means troy ounces per short ton
means P & E Mining Consultants Inc.
means piping and instrumentation diagram
means Preliminary Economic Assessment study
means process flow diagram
means measure of the acidity or basicity of an aqueous solution
means pregnant leach solution
means parts per billion
means personal protective equipment
means parts per million
means True Gold Minings property holdings in Burkina Faso
means first quarter of the year
means second quarter of the year
means third quarter of the year
means fourth quarter of the year
means reverse air blast
means Resettlement Action Plan
means reverse circulation
means rock mass rating (Bieniawski)
means run-of-mine
means south
means strength and stability
means antimony
means south-east
means Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Plan
means the System for Electronic Document Analysis and Retrieval
means SENET (Pty) Ltd
means specific gravity
means SGS Lakefield
means SRK Consulting UK Ltd.
means standard deviation
means south-west.
means metric tonne equivalent to 1,000 kilograms
means short ton (standard measurement), equivalent to 2,000 pounds
means tonnes per year
means triaxial compressive strength
means tonnes per day

Page 31 of 357
"TSS"
"UCS"
"UCS"
"UNDP"
"US$"
"USCS"
"UTB"
"W"
"WBS"
"WHO"
"XRD"
means total suspended solid

means unconfined compressive strength
means uniaxial compressive strength
means United Nations Development Program
means the currency of the United States of America, in dollars
means Unified Soil Classification System
means Brazilian Tensile Strength
means west
means work breakdown structure
means World Health Organization
means x-ray diffraction

Page 32 of 357
3.0
RELIANCE ON OTHER EXPERTS
P&E has relied on the assumption that all the information and existing technical documents listed
in the References section of this Technical Report are accurate and complete in all material
aspects. While we carefully reviewed all the available information presented to us, we cannot
guarantee its accuracy and completeness. We reserve the right, but will not be obligated to revise
this Technical Report and conclusions if additional information becomes known to us subsequent
to the date of this Report.
Although copies of the tenure documents, operating licenses, permits, and work contracts were
reviewed, an independent verification of land title and tenure was not performed. P&E has not
verified the legality of any underlying agreement(s) that may exist concerning the licenses or
other agreement(s) between third parties but has relied (as indicated in Section 4 of this report)
on True Golds Burkina Faso solicitor to have conducted the proper legal due diligence.
A draft copy of this Technical Report has been reviewed for factual errors by True Gold, and the
authors have relied on True Golds historical and current knowledge of the Property in this
regard. Any statements and opinions expressed in this document are given in good faith and in
the belief that such statements and opinions are not false and misleading at the date of this
Technical Report.

Page 33 of 357
4.0
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
4.1
PROPERTY LOCATION
The Karma Project area is located in West Africa, in north-central Burkina Faso, near the city of
Ouahigouya, approximately 185 km north-west of the capital city, Ouagadougou, (Figure 4.1).
For reference, the Kao Deposit in the southern part of the Karma Project area is located at 13 o
32 57 N, 2o 13 25 W (WGS 84 UTM 30P 584,000m E 1,498,000m N).
Figure 4.1
Location of Karma Project in Burkina Faso
Source: True Gold Mining Inc.
4.2
TENURE
The Karma Project began with the acquisition of the Rambo permit in 2003. This was True
Golds (formerly known as Riverstone) first project in Burkina Faso, and was acquired on the
basis of examination of data from earlier work on the Rambo Main deposit by Incanore Gold
Mines Ltd. (Incanore), including a substantial drilling program in 1997. Subsequently, the Kao
permit was acquired by the Company in 2004, and a regional exploration program was initiated.
Following this, the Goulagou, Youba and Rounga permits were optioned from Golden Star
Resources Ltd. (Golden Star) by way of an Option to Purchase agreement (the Goulagou
Page 34 of 357
Agreement) in 2007. At the time, the Goulagou II deposit had a NI 43-101 compliant resource
reported for it.
In 2008, the Goulagou permit was reduced by 25% according to provisions of the Burkina Faso
mining code. The shed portion was applied for as the Youba permit, and it came under the
provisions of the Goulagou Agreement. Finally, the Tougou permit was optioned from Golden
Star in 2010, by inclusion in the Goulagou Agreement. Subsequently, True Gold exercised its
option under the Goulagou Agreement and acquired 90% interest in the Goulagou, Youba and
Rounga permits and 100% interest in the Tougou permit in early 2012.
As of the effective date of this report, the Goulagou, Rounga, and Youba permits are 100%
owned by True Gold through it 100% wholly-owned indirect subsidiary, Yatenga Holdings
Limited SA. The Goulagou and Rounga permits are subject to a 5% NPI (True Gold December
6, 2013 press release).
4.2.1
Acquisition of Blue Gold Mining and Name Change to True Gold Mining
In December, 2012, True Gold, (at the time Riverstone) acquired all the outstanding common
shares of Blue Gold Mining Inc. On February 25, 2013, Riverstone received TSX Venture
Exchange approval for the Company to change its name to True Gold Mining Inc., which was
approved by a resolution of the directors of the Company in accordance with the Companys
articles. The Company commenced trading on the TSX Venture Exchange at the opening of
market on February 25, 2013, under the new symbol TGM.
4.2.2
NSR Royalty on Karma Project
On August 27, 2013, True Gold closed the sale of a 2% net smelter return royalty, (NSR) on
the Companys interest in the Karma Project to Liberty Metals & Mining Holdings, LLC
(LMM). The Royalty is subject to the following repurchase options retained by True Gold:
50% of the Royalty may be repurchased subsequent to the third anniversary of

commencement of commercial production at fair market value;
50% of the Royalty may be repurchased on March 31, 2014 for approximately
US$12.5 million.
The government of Burkina Faso retains additional royalties on all of the permits and certain
permits are subject to further royalties and interests.
4.3
4.3.1
PERMITS AND PERMITTING PROCESS

Basis for Mineral Title
The state owns title to all mineral resources in Burkina Faso. All permits conferring rights to
explore and extract mineral resources are granted by the Minister of Mines, Quarries and Energy,
(MoM) under the Burkina Faso 2003 Mining Code (Code Minire, loi no. 31-2003/ AN du mai
2003). The Mining Code serves as the legal framework governing mining in Burkina Faso.

Page 35 of 357
4.3.2
Exploration Permits
Rights and Obligations

In Burkina Faso, rights to conduct exploration are conferred by issue of a Permis de recherche
or Exploration permit (the term used in this report). Exploration permits are issued for a threeyear period, and they can be renewed twice for a total of nine years. After the second renewal the
permit area is reduced by 25%. At the end of the nine years, exploration permits must be
converted into exploitation (mining) permits or relinquished.
The surface area of an exploration permit cannot exceed 250 square kilometres. The minimum
annual exploration expenditure per permit is CFA 270,000 (approximately $550 USD) per
square kilometre.
4.3.3
Project Exploration Permits
The Karma Project is comprised of six exploration permits; the Kao, Rambo, Goulagou, Youba,
Rounga, and Tougou exploration permits, as presented in Table 4.1 and shown on Figure 4.2.
TABLE 4.1
KARMA PROJECT EXPLORATION PERMITS
Name
Arrete Number
Orig. Grant Expiry Date Sq. km
Rambo
2009-09-201/MCE/SG/DGMGC 24-Apr-03
24-Apr-12(1)
150
Kao
2010/10-159/MCE/SG/DGMGC
08-Sep-04
08-Sep-13
146.6
Goulagou 2011/11-331/MCE/SG/DGMGC 19-Nov-02 19-May-12(1)
190
(3)
Youba
2012/12-027/ MCE/SG/DGMGC 17-Oct-08
17-Oct-14
61.75
(2)
Rounga
2011/11-111/ MCE/SG/DGMGC 10-Sep-03 10-Sept-12
180
Tougou
2011/11-372/ MCE/SG/DGMGC 21-Aug-08 21-Aug-14(3)
128
(1)
(2)
(3)
It should be noted that, as of the date of this report, the Rambo and Goulagou exploitation permit
applications have been submitted to the MoM and are pending
A 3 year renewal application was accepted by the MoM and paid by True Gold for the Rounga permit.
Permit pending.
The current arretes on Youba and Tougou expire in 2014. Final expiry date is 2017.
It should be noted that the Rambo and Goulagou exploration permits covering the Goulagou I,
Goulagou II, Nami and Rambo deposits expired in April 2012 and May 2012 respectively. Prior
to their expiration, an application to convert parts of both exploration permits, covering the GGI,
GGII and Rambo deposits into a single exploitation permit was made. This application included
an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and a Burkina Feasibility Study (project
description). As a result of the changes to the project design resulting from completion of the
PEA, the ESIA and project description was updated and the revised documents submitted for
government review in July 2013.
The Corporation has applied for new exploration permits on the remaining area of the Rambo
and Goulagou exploration permits that do not form part of the exploitation permit application.
The Corporation continues to advance these exploration projects in the ordinary course pending
the approval of the exploitation permit applications. The Corporation has been advised by
Burkina Faso authorities and its Burkina Faso legal counsel that no person other than the
Corporation is entitled to carry out reconnaissance, exploration, development, mining or
Page 36 of 357
extraction activities on the areas covered by these exploration permits while the exploitation
permit approval process is in progress. The Corporation expects the exploitation and exploration
permits to be issued in the near future. Subsequent to the effective date of this report True Gold
received the Environmental Permit for the development of Kao Deposit (January 6, 2014 press
release) and received notice of approval of the Karma Mining Permit (December 19, 2013 press
release).
Once the new exploitation permit is issued, the remaining portions of each old exploration permit
may be applied for under new exploration permits. The reader is cautioned that until issued, there
can be no guarantee that such permits will be approved by the government, however the
permitting process has followed the normal course of events and there is every expectation that
the permits will be issued.
Figure 4.2
Karma Project Exploration Permits
The Kao exploration permit encompasses only the Kao deposit, which was a greenfield
discovery by True Gold. True Gold owns 100% of the Kao permit.

Page 37 of 357
4.3.4
Exploitation Permits
Rights and Obligations

In Burkina Faso, a mining permit is called an Exploitation permit. The exploitation permit
confers the right to undertake construction and bring the property into production. An
exploitation permit is issued for five years and is renewable on the same basis until mining is
completed. Once an exploitation permit is granted, the proponent can then apply to have the
remaining portion of the original exploration permit reinstated to permit further exploration.
Accepted practice is that the proponent will start mining or demonstrate good faith efforts to
bring the property into production within two years of issue of the exploitation permit or there is
a risk that the permit will be withdrawn.
Exploitation permits are defined by a boundary with no more than 14 corner points. An annual
fee is payable of CFA 7,500,000 (approximately $15,300 USD) per square kilometre within the
permit boundary. The area within the exploitation permit currently under review is 39 square
kilometres.
Project Area Exploitation Permits
The revised Karma (Goulagou I, Goulagou II, and Rambo) exploitation permit application was
submitted to regulatory authorities in Burkina Faso on July 18, 2013. This included the ESIA,
Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) and a description of the Karma Project. The RAP is subject to
a public review, which can take 30 to 45 days. Upon formal acceptance of the RAP, a technical
committee will be convened by the Ministry of Mines to review and validate the proposed
operating plan. This is expected to occur in Q3-2013. Successful validation of the operating plan
will potentially lead to grant of the exploitation permit shortly thereafter. True Gold received the
Karma Mining Permit on December 18, 2013 (True Gold news release December 19, 2013).
Upon grant of the exploitation permit, and in accordance with Mining Regulation, the
Government of Burkina Faso is entitled to retain a 10% free carried interest in the share capital
of the company that holds an exploitation permit, which interest may not be diluted even if there
is an increase in the share capital, and is entitled to collect a 3 to 5% royalty (calculated based on
the international market value of gold) on the revenues from gold production on the property
covered by the exploitation permit.
The Exploitation Permit coordinates are presented in Table 4.2 and shown on Figure 4.3.
The Kao exploitation permit application was submitted to regulatory authorities in Burkina Faso
on July 22, 2013. This included the ESIA, RAP, and a copy of the Karma project description,
which includes Kao. The application will be followed up with a Kao-specific project description
document as requested by the Director General of the Ministry of Mines. The Kao permit will be
subject to the same process as was the Karma application. Validation of the ESIA and RAP by
the Ministry of Environment will be followed by public review, formal acceptance of the RAP,
validation of the operating plan, and grant of the exploitation permit. Subsequent to the effective
date of the report, The Kao Environmental Permit was received on January 6, 2014 (True Gold
news release January 6, 2014).

Page 38 of 357
The ESIA for the Nami deposit (part of the Rambo Permit) commenced in August, and is
anticipated to be completed by Q4-2013.
TABLE 4.2
COORDINATES FOR KARMA EXPLOITATION PERMIT
Points
Easting
Northing
1
571,500.000
1,507,738.519
2
575,000.000
1,507,738.519
3
575,000.000
1,506,758.675
4
578,254.962
1,506,765.175
5
578,258.383
1,504,985.191
6
584,324.356
1,505,000.000
7
584,324.356
1,502,831.645
8
582,259.570
1,502,834.202
9
582,259.570
1,503,733.024
10
577,500.000
1,503,727.737
11
577,500.000
1,501,500.000
12
573,750.745
1,501,500.000
13
573,750.745
1,505,000.000
14
571,500.000
1,505,000.000
Figure 4.3
Karma Exploitation Permit Boundary

Page 39 of 357
4.4
ROYALTIES AND OTHER ENCUMBRANCES
The Government of Burkina Faso retains a 10% carried interest and a 3% to 5% sliding scale
royalty on the revenues from mineral production. The Government also collects various taxes
and duties on the importation of fuels, supplies, equipment and outside services as specified in
the Mining Code.
4.5
ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES AND SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Environmental liabilities and social considerations as a result of mine development and closure
are discussed in section 20.0 Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social or Community
Impact.

Page 40 of 357
5.0
ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, PHYSIOGRAPHY &

INFRASTRUCTURE
5.1
ACCESSIBILITY
Ouahigouya, with a population of 125,000, is the third largest city in Burkina Faso and the
nearest major centre to the project site. National Route 2 (N2) is a paved highway connecting
Ouahigouya to the capital Ouagadougou which is 185 km away and serviced by international air
flights. Burkina Faso is landlocked and relies on ports of Tema in Ghana, Abidjan in Ivory Coast
and Lome in Togo for access to shipping.
The project site itself lies 20 km east of Ouahigouya on a series of unpaved roads. Within the
project area, access is via local tracks and paths which are suitable for two wheel drive vehicles
in the dry season and four-wheel drive vehicles in the wet season.
5.2
5.2.1
CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES AND PHYSIOGRAPHY

Climate
Burkina Faso has a primarily tropical climate with two very distinct seasons. In the rainy season,
the country receives between 600 and 900 millimetres (23.6 and 35.4 inches) of rainfall; in the
dry season, there is a hot, dry wind from the Sahara, called the harmattan.
The rainy season lasts approximately four months, May/June to September, and is shorter in the
north of the country. Three climatic zones can be defined: the Sahel, the Sudan-Sahel, and the
Sudan-Guinea. The Sahel in the north typically receives less than 600 mm (23.6 in) of rainfall
per year and has high temperatures up to 47oC.
A relatively dry tropical savannah, the Sahel extends beyond the borders of Burkina Faso, from
the Horn of Africa to the Atlantic Ocean, and borders the Sahara to its north and the fertile
region of the Sudan to the South. Situated between 113' and 135' north latitude, the SudanSahel region is a transitional zone with regards to rainfall and temperature. Further to the south,
the Sudan-Guinea zone receives more than 900 mm (35.4 in) of rain each year and has cooler
average temperatures.
5.2.2
Local Resources
The city of Ouahigouya is the main regional centre, with basic supplies and infrastructure for
exploration and mining. Small villages are present in all the permit areas. The principal activity
near the villages is agrarian; herding livestock (goats, sheep and cattle) and growing millet. The
larger city of Ouagadougou has most of the services necessary for mining and exploration,
including certified analytical laboratories.
Burkina Faso's natural resources include copper-zinc massive sulphide deposits, manganese,
limestone, marble, phosphates, pumice, salt and Au.

Page 41 of 357
5.2.3
Physiography
The topography is dominated by very subdued terrain. Low rolling plateaus are cut by weakly
incised drainage channels. Major features are long ridges capped by hard iron-rich laterite
(cuirasse). Vegetation is scrub woodland and savannah grassland.
Water is in relatively short supply except during the rainy season, but for drilling purposes can
be obtained from seasonal reservoirs or from wells.
Figure 5.1
Physiographic Map of Burkina Faso
5.3
INFRASTRUCTURE
There is presently no infrastructure on the Property. Power will be sourced from diesel
generators and water will be supplied by the construction of a dam across a tributary of the
Nakambe (White Volta) River, which flows 4 km south of the plant site.
There is sufficient area on the Property for tailings storage areas, waste disposal areas heap leach
pad areas and potential processing plant sites.

Page 42 of 357
6.0
HISTORY
This account of the history of the Karma Project is based on True Golds MD&A for the period
ended September 30, 2013 and filed on SEDAR.
The Rambo permit was acquired by True Gold (formerly Riverstone) in 2003, and was the
Companys first permit in Burkina Faso. It was acquired from two individuals, subject to royalty
interests. The adjacent Kao permit was acquired in 2004 by application to the Burkina Faso
ministry of mines.
In late 2007, an Option to Purchase agreement for Goulagou and Rounga was signed with
Golden Star Resources Inc., (Golden Star). Goulagou and Rounga are contiguous to Rambo
and Kao. The Goulagou permit was reduced in size in 2008, according to provisions of the
Burkina Faso mining code, and the shed portion was reacquired as the Youba permit, which
became subject to the provisions of the Option to Purchase agreement. The Tougou permit
adjoining Rambo and Youba was granted to Golden Star in 2008, and it was included in the
original Option to Purchase agreement in 2011. Golden Star retains certain royalty interest on the
Goulagou, Rounga, Youba and Tougou permits.
6.1
KAO DEPOSIT
Parts of the Kao permit were held by Channel, Kinbauri and Ashanti Exploration (Burkina) in
the 1990s, who completed soil and rock geochemical surveys, before allowing the permits to
lapse. Since the acquisition of the property in 2004, True Gold has undertaken geological
mapping, soil and rock geochemical sampling, trenching, surface and airborne geophysics, and
RAB, RC and diamond drilling. The Kao deposit was discovered in 2006 during a RAB drill
program on a soil geochemical anomaly.
An initial NI 43-101 compliant resource estimate was reported on in the June 2009 Technical
Report and subsequently updated in the April 2011, February 2012 and October 2012 Technical
Reports. These resource estimates are presented in Section 6.5.
Recent core and RC drilling campaigns were completed in 2013 and are detailed in Section 10 of
this report.
6.2
GOULAGOU DEPOSITS
The Goulagou, Rounga and Youba permits in their entirety, plus portions of the remaining three
permits were explored by Channel Resources Ltd., (Channel) from 1994 to 2000, as part of a
much larger 2,300 km2 exploration permit under option from a local individual. The entire permit
area was covered by regional soil geochemistry, SPOT satellite imagery, and airborne
geophysical surveys. A number of artisanal sites; 14 on the present Goulagou permit, were
subject to soil and rock geochemistry, limited trenching, and RC (Reverse Circulation) drilling.
Encouraging results were obtained on several of these artisanal sites, and the Goulagou I and
Goulagou II areas became the main focus of interest due to RAB drilling of soil geochemical
anomalies. Placer Dome Inc. optioned the property from Channel in the late 1990s, and
subsequently RC drilled the Goulagou I and Goulagou II gold deposits.

Page 43 of 357
In 2000, the large Channel permit was allowed to lapse, and in 2002, the same local land owner
reacquired the smaller Goulagou and Rounga permits to cover the main known artisanal sites.
These permits were optioned by St. Jude Resources Ltd., (St. Jude) in 2002 and 2003, who
drilled Goulagou I and Goulagou II. St. Jude was in turn acquired by Golden Star in 2005.
Golden Star undertook several limited soil geochemistry and RAB drilling programs on a
number of artisanal zones until the Option to Purchase agreement was signed with True Gold
(Riverstone) in 2007. The purchase of these permits from Golden Star was completed in
February of 2012.
Since 2007, True Gold has completed geological mapping and sampling, airborne geophysics,
plus RAB, RC and diamond drilling concentrated in and around Goulagou I and Goulagou II.
In 2007, SRK Consulting UK Ltd., (SRK) prepared a NI 43-101 compliant resource estimate
for the combined GGI and GGII Deposits for Golden Star (Arthur, 2007). In 2009, Wardrop
Engineering Inc. (Wardrop) updated this Resource Estimate. In 2011 the resources were again
updated by Peatfield and Zbeetnoff and by P&E in February and October 2012. Results of these
resource estimates are presented in Table 6.1.
6.3
RAMBO MAIN DEPOSIT
The Rambo Permit hosts the Rambo and Nami deposits. The permit was acquired in 2003, partly
on the basis of earlier work by Incanore Gold Mines Ltd., (Incanore) including an RC drilling
program conducted in 1997. This early drilling was oriented to test a north-south target; however
the only gold intercepts were directly under the Rambo artisanal pit. In the late 1990s, the
Incanore permit was allowed to lapse. The current permit was acquired in 2003 by two
individuals and in turn by True Gold (Riverstone) in late 2003.
True Gold completed mapping, soil and rock geochemical sampling, and surface and airborne
geophysics, and defined an east-west trending target. Subsequent RC drilling delineated the
Rambo gold zone beneath the artisanal workings. True Gold has completed several subsequent
RAB, RC and diamond drilling programs to define the current resource.
An initial NI 43-101 compliant resource estimate was completed by Arseneau for Wardrop and
set out in a report titled, Technical Report on the Karma Property, dated June 30, 2009 (the
June 2009 Technical Report) and subsequently updated in the April 2011, February 2012 and
October 2012 Technical Reports. These resource estimates are presented in Table 6.1 and Table
6.2.
6.4
NAMI DEPOSIT
In 2009, artisanal miners became very active on the Rambo permit at a site referred to as
Namissiguima or Nami for short, that lies approximately 4 km north-east of the Rambo
zone. At the height of activity there were over 8,000 artisanal miners working at Nami. True
Gold (Riverstone) began RC and diamond drilling the deposit in 2010.
P&E estimated resources for the Nami Deposit, which are reported on in the February 2012 and
October 2012 reports, and are presented in Table 6.2.

Page 44 of 357
6.5
PREVIOUS RESOURCE ESTIMATES
From 2007 to late 2012 there were several NI 43-101 compliant Resource Estimates completed
for various deposits on the Karma Project. The Resource Estimates for 2007 and 2009 are
presented in Table 6.1. Table 6.2 presents the Resource Estimates from the April 2011, February
2012 and October 2012 Technical Reports.
TABLE 6.1
RESOURCE ESTIMATES 2007-2009
Deposit
Category
Tonnes
Au (g/t) Contained Au (oz) Prepared By
2009 Rambo Deposit Resources at a 2.0 g/t Au Cut-Off
Rambo
Inferred
245,000
5.82
46,000
Wardrop
2009 Kao Deposit Resources at a 0.3 g/t Au Cut-Off (oxide), 0.5 g/t Au (fresh rock)
Indicated
14,700,000
0.79
373,500
Wardrop
Kao
Inferred
3,600,000
0.54
62,500
Wardrop
2007 GGI & GGII Deposit Resources at a 0.71 g/t Au Cut-Off (oxide), 1.03 g/t Au (fresh rock)
Indicated oxide
2,648,000
1.61
139,000
SRK
Indicated trans/fresh
2,439,000
1.80
141,000
SRK
GGI & GGII
Inferred oxide
1,226,000
0.98
38,500
SRK
Inferred trans/fresh
4,423,000
1.61
229,000
SRK
2009 GGI & GGII Deposit Resources at a 0.3 g/t Au Cut-Off (oxide), 0.5 g/t Au (fresh rock)
Indicated
6,600,000
1.80
382,000
Wardrop
GGII
Inferred
1,400,000
1.07
48,000
Wardrop
GGI
Inferred
6,900,000
0.62
137,500
Wardrop
TABLE 6.2
2011-2012 RESOURCE ESTIMATES
Deposit
Category
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Contained Au (oz)
Prepared By
2011 Rambo Deposit Resources at a 0.5 g/t Au cut-off (oxide), 1.0 g/t Au (sulphide)
Indicated oxide
287,000
3.06
28,200
Indicated sulphide
424,000
3.02
41,200
Rambo
Peatfield & Zbeetnoff
Inferred oxide
145,000
1.06
4,920
Inferred sulphide
325,000
1.54
16,100
2011 Kao Deposit Resources at a 0.25 g/t Au cut-off (oxide), 0.40 g/t Au (sulphide)
Indicated oxide
9,060,000
0.75
219,400
Indicated sulphide
2,910,000
0.82
76,600
Kao
Inferred oxide
5,600,000
0.51
92,200
Inferred sulphide
10,100,000
0.80
262,000
2011 GGII Deposit Resources at a 0.25 g/t Au cut-off (oxide), 0.4 g/t Au (sulphide)
Indicated oxide
5,700,000
1.18
219,000
Indicated sulphide
4,390,000
1.41
200,000
GGII
Inferred oxide
2,580,000
0.69
57,300
Inferred sulphide
5,490,000
1.16
204,000
2011 GGI Deposit Resources at a 0.25 g/t Au cut-off (oxide), 0.4 g/t Au (sulphide)
Inferred oxide
7,900,000
0.59
150,000
GGI
Inferred sulphide
11,900,000
0.75
287,000
February 2012 GGI Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t, (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
4,345,079
0.682
95,274
Indicated Transition 1,567,103
0.715
36,024
GGI
P&E
Indicated sulphide
6,494,450
0.833
173,931
Subtotal
12,406,632
0.765
305,229
February 2012 GGI Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Page 45 of 357
TABLE 6.2
Deposit
Category
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Contained Au (oz)
Prepared By
Inferred Oxide
1,822,145
0.711
41,653
Inferred Transition
268,478
0.735
6,344
GGI
P&E
Inferred Sulphide
4,069,110
0.947
123,891
Subtotal
6,159,733
0.868
171,888
February 2012 GGII Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
6,175,041
1.184
235,062
1.499
84,797
GGII
P&E
Indicated Sulphide
7,715,536
1.459
361,919
Subtotal
15,650,083
1.355
681,778
February 2012 GGII Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Inferred Oxide
486,873
0.558
8,735
Inferred Transition
151,398
0.682
3,320
GGII
P&E
Inferred Sulphide
1,306,676
1.308
54,950
Subtotal
1,944,947
1.072
67,004
February 2012 Kao Au Resources at 30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
6,675,423
0.891
191,226
1.016
56,832
Kao
P&E
Indicated Sulphide
7,839,096
1.030
259,593
Subtotal
16,254,368
0.971
507,651
February 2012 Kao Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Inferred Oxide
2,503,639
0.801
64,475
Inferred Transition
384,970
0.850
10,520
Kao
P&E
Inferred Sulphide
7,375,503
0.984
233,333
Subtotal
10,264,112
0.934
308,329
February 2012 Nami Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
563,848
1.064
19,288
Indicated Transition
715,888
0.908
20,899
Nami
P&E
Indicated Sulphide
995,465
1.043
33,381
Subtotal
2,275,201
1.006
73,568
February 2012 Nami Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Inferred Oxide
103,256
0.965
3,204
Transition
132,865
0.865
3,695
Nami
P&E
Sulphide
144,275
0.900
4,175
Subtotal
380,396
0.905
11,073
February 2012 Rambo Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
188,275
2.306
13,959
244,970
2.997
23,604
Rambo
P&E
Indicated Sulphide
321,964
2.732
28,280
Subtotal
755,209
2.712
65,843
February 2012 Rambo Au Resources at 0.30 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.35 g/t (Transition), 0.40 g/t(sulphide)
Inferred Oxide
95,421
1.520
4,663
Transition
37,215
0.597
714
Rambo
P&E
Sulphide
47,087
1.608
2,434
Subtotal
179,723
1.352
7,812
October 2012 GGI Au Resources at 0.20 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.22 g/t, (Transition), 0.50 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
6,651,000
0.620
132,500
0.710
62,600
GGI
P&E
Indicated sulphide
5,739,000
1.070
197,100
Subtotal
15,147,000
0.810
392,200
Inferred Oxide
1,518,000
0.790
38,400
Inferred Transition
561,000
0.810
14,500
GGI
P&E
Inferred Sulphide
2,762,000
1.040
92,400
Subtotal
4,841,000
0.930
145,300
Page 46 of 357
TABLE 6.2
Deposit
Category
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Contained Au (oz)
Prepared By
October 2012 GGII Au Resources at 0.20 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.22 g/t, (Transition), 0.50 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
6,403,000
1.160
237,900
1.440
85,000
P&E
GGII
Indicated sulphide
4,744,000
1.670
255,500
Subtotal
12,982,000
1.390
578,400
Inferred Oxide
709,000
0.740
17,000
P&E
Inferred Transition
339,000
1.050
11,400
GGII
Inferred Sulphide
1,432,000
1.350
62,200
Subtotal
2,480,000
1.140
90,600
October 2012 Kao Au Resources at 0.20 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.22 g/t, (Transition), 0.50 g/t(sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
9,552,000
0.870
268,300
0.970
92,200
P&E
Kao
Indicated sulphide
4,744,000
1.670
255,500
Subtotal
24,248,000
1.050
820,400
Inferred Oxide
2,355,000
0.600
45,100
P&E
Inferred Transition
345,000
0.730
8,100
Kao
Inferred Sulphide
4,654,000
1.220
182,700
Subtotal
7,354,000
1.000
235,900
October 2012 Nami Au Resources at 0.20 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.22 g/t, (Transition), 0.22 g/t (sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
656,000
0.960
20,200
0.720
24,700
P&E
Nami
Indicated sulphide
1,561,000
0.820
40,900
Subtotal
3,280,000
0.810
85,800
Inferred Oxide
127,000
0.850
3,500
P&E
Inferred Transition
167,000
0.790
4,200
Nami
Inferred Sulphide
198,000
0.740
4,700
Subtotal
492,000
0.790
12,400
October 2012 Rambo Au Resources at 0.20 g/t cut-off (oxide), 0.22 g/t, (Transition), 0.22 g/t (sulphide)
Indicated Oxide
200,000
2.190
14,100
261,000
2.830
23,800
P&E
Rambo
Indicated sulphide
357,000
2.460
28,300
Subtotal
818,000
2.510
66,200
Inferred Oxide
115,000
1.330
4,900
P&E
Inferred Transition
51,000
0.530
900
Rambo
Inferred Sulphide
43,000
1.520
2,100
Subtotal
209,000
1.170
7,900
October 2012 TOTAL Au Resources
Cut-off Au (g/t)
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
Au (oz)
0.2
Oxide
23,462,000
0.890
672,900
Indicated
0.22
1.010
288,200
0.22 & 0.50
Sulphide
24,145,000
1.260
981,700
Total
56,476,000
1.070
1,942,800
0.2
Oxide
4,825,000
0.700
108,900
0.22
0.830
39,200
Inferred
0.22 & 0.50
Sulphide
9,090,000
1.180
344,100
Total
15,378,000
1.000
492,200

Page 47 of 357
7.0
GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND MINERALIZATION
7.1
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The geology of West and Central Africa, described by Wright et al. (1985), consists of
Precambrian shields of Archean (2.7 Ga) to Paleoproterozoic (2.2 to 2.0 Ga) age, Pan-African
mobile zones of Neoproterozoic to lower Paleozoic age (600 to 450 Ma), and intracratonic
sedimentary basins ranging from Proterozoic to Quaternary age.
The Precambrian geology of West Africa has resulted from the accretion of a series of
successively younger orogenic belts to older cratonic areas. The Man Craton, the oldest cratonic
nuclei, in Guinea and Sierra Leone, stabilized in the Archean at approximately 2.7 Ga and is a
remnant of a much larger Craton that included the present day Guyana Craton of South America.
The West African shield stabilized with the accretion of Paleoproterozic Birimian greenstone
belts to the Man Craton at the end of the Eburnean orogenic event at about 2.1 Ga.
Figure 7.1
Precambrian geology of West Africa, The West African Craton
Note: Modified from Milsi et al., (2004). The West African Craton is composed of an Archean nucleus in the
southwest bounded by series of Paleoproterozoic greenstone belts and granitoids.
The Karma group permits are situated in the Paleoproterozoic Baol-Mossi domain. In general
terms, the Baol-Mossi domain contains Birimian supracrustal rocks which were probably
developed upon a juvenile Paleoproterozoic crust (ca. 2.40-2.20 Ga) in an environment distal
from Archean crust (Thivierge 2008). The Birimian terranes encompass a vast area of
Page 48 of 357
approximately 350,000 km covering parts of Niger, Burkina Faso, Benin, Togo, Ghana, Ivory
Coast, Mali, Guinea, Liberia and Sngal. The Birimian greenstone belts are preserved as linear
terranes that are a few tens of kilometers wide and hundreds of kilometers long. The Birimian
rocks are generally metamorphosed to greenschist facies with areas of amphibolite facies
associated with intrusive stocks, granitic plutons or migmatitic zones that separate the belts.
The majority of mineralization in Burkina Faso is hosted by the Birimian supracrustal rocks. In
Burkina Faso, these belts consist of predominately northeast trending volcano-sedimentary
sequences associated with flanking granitoid intrusive rocks and magmatic gneisses. The
Birimian belts typically consist of basal, tholeiitic, mafic metavolcanic rocks, overlain by calcalkaline metavolcanic and inter-layered detrital sediments and limestone (Baratoux et al. 2011).
During the D1 structural event of the 2.2 to 2.0 Ga Eburnean orogeny, the volcanic and metasedimentary rocks were subjected to crustal shortening associated with greenschist facies
regional metamorphism, and locally amphibolite facies metamorphism resulting from contact
metamorphism. An overlying sequence of coarse clastic sedimentary rocks known as the
Tarkwaian Group is considered to have been deposited during the late D1 event (Baratoux et al.
2011).
Many of the significant gold deposits in the Birimian greenstone belts of Burkino Faso are
related to major NNE trending shear zones that result from transcurrent deformation during
Eburnean D2 structural events (Baratoux et al. 2011). Two major sinistral shear zones oriented
NNE, namely the Tibl-Dori-Markoye shear zone to the E and the Hound-Ouahigouya shear
zone to the W extend through Burkina Faso. The Markoye fault system and splays is in the
eastern part of the country and controls mineralization at a number of major deposits, noteably
IAMGOLD Corporations Essakane Deposit and Orezone Gold Corporations Bombore Deposit.
The western fault system and its splays is associated with True Golds Kama Property as well as
producing and past-producing gold mines such SEMAFOs Mana Deposit, Newmonts recently
acquired Poura Deposit, and Amara Minings Sega and Kalsaka Deposits.

Page 49 of 357
Figure 7.2
Regional Geological Setting of Karma Project Area Showing the Location of

the Major Granitoid Intrusion and Ouahigouya Shear Zone Relative to the
Karma Permits
Note:
Lithologies and structural features extracted from compiled geology and geophysics. The batholith (pink)
underlying the KPA extends from south of Yako to NE of Sguenga. The Ouahigouya Shear Zone (OSZ)
bounds the western margin of the batholith. Branching shears extend across the batholith to the east and
the overall displacement of OSZ is interpreted to be sinistral. Branching shears may exhibit sinistralreverse to reverse displacement.
Source: Hein (2008, unpublished report for True Gold)

Page 50 of 357
7.2
LOCAL GEOLOGY
True Golds Karma Project is located in the regionally east-west trending Goren greenstone belt.
This belt is considered a segment of the larger Boromo-Goren greenstone belt (Hein 2010) and is
one of the larger greenstone belts in central north Burkina Faso.
Substantial areas of the Karma Project are covered by lateritic units, dominantly gravels and
cuirasse, which forms a highly indurated upper facies of the lateritic regolith. A number of
lateritization events have resulted in weathering to depths of up to 100 m. The limited bedrock
exposure has hampered the development of detailed geologic models for the region.
Hein (2008) reported on a geological investigation of the Karma Project area for Riverstone
Resources Inc. In this report, Hein (2008) described the geology of the Karma Project as
consisting of a folded sequence of greywacke, siltstone, shale and volcaniclastic rocks that is
draped over a granodiorite-tonalite batholith. The western margin of the batholith is defined by a
broad north south linearment that is interpreted as a first-order, crustal scale, sinistral, shear zone
named by Hein (2008) as the Ouahigouya Shear Zone (OSZ). The OSZ extends to the south into
the Hound Greenstone Belt and branches into a series of north-east trending sub-shears that
cross the Karma Property.
The supracrustal sequences have been affected by at least three deformation events. The
deformation D1 forms a weak NW trending foliation and massive buck quartz veins that are
weakly prospective for gold mineralization. D2 corresponds to the main phase of the Eburnean
orogeny at 2,130 to 1,980 Ma and resulted in the progressive development of NE trending shear
zones, NE trending southerly plunging folds and a pervasive NE foliation. N to NNE trending
dextral shear faults formed during D2 and are associated with stockwork quartz veins and
significant gold mineralization. A late D3 deformation results in WNW trending dextral reverse
shears and crenulation of earlier fabrics.
Hein (2008) considered that regional gold metallogenesis is tightly constrained to the Eburnean
Orogeny between 2,130 and 1,980 Ma. The initial phase of the Eburnean between 2,130 and
2,105 Ma resulted in formation of a NE trending fold-thrust belt and was followed by
development of regional shear zones with sinistral to sinistral reverse strike slip displacement
and the major phase of gold deposition at 2,105-1,980 Ma.
The Birimian rocks of the Baol-Mossi domain are unconformably overlain to the N near the
Malian border by early clastic sequences of the Taoudni basin, of Neoproterozoic to Ordovician
age, and by coarse sandstones of the Terminal Continental series, of mid-Eocene to Pliocene age.
A network of magnetic doleritic dykes oriented NE-SW and WNW-ESE to NW-SE cut the
Paleoproterozoic rocks and the cover sequences of the Taoudni basin. Locally dykes of the
latter orientation cut dykes of the former with an apparent dextral sense of displacement. The age
of the dykes is poorly constrained between the Mesoproterozoic and the Mesozoic (Thivierge
2008).

Page 51 of 357
Figure 7.3
Geology of the Karma Project Area
Note: Sedimentary and volcanic rocks are part of the Birimian supracrustal assemblages.
Source: True Gold (2013).
7.3
DEPOSIT GEOLOGY
True Gold has defined five mineral deposits on the Karma Property. As estimated in this
technical report, from largest to smallest on the basis of ounces of gold, these include the Kao,
Goulagou II (GGII), Goulagou I (GGI), Nami and Rambo Deposits. The following descriptions
are summarized from Ewert et al. (2012).
Kao Deposit - The Kao Deposit consists of a structurally-controlled, alteration and veining
system, hosted within a relatively uniform, single-phase, granodioritic intrusive. True Gold
reports that there are two principal sets of structures: (i) a dominant shallow east-dipping
structure that extends the full length of the deposit in a north-south direction and is transected by
(ii) a more steep, northeast-dipping, set of structures that cross-cut the north-south structure. The
bulk of the highest grades and thickest intercepts occur along the northeast-dipping structures,
and in particular, at their intersections with the north-south structures. The structures are planar
to tabular in form and can measure 35 metres in width. Additionally, the structures are
moderately to intensely foliated, sericite-carbonate-silica altered and are host to multiple
generations of quartz-carbonate-sericite-pyrite-arsenopyrite veining. Arsenopyrite and the
presence of quartz veining generally correlate with higher gold grades.
Page 52 of 357
Local laterite cover is typically less than three or four metres thick. Immediately north of the
Deposit is an area of deep surficial sediments, which precludes the use of surface geochemistry.
The Kao Deposit is open along strike to the north and south, and down the shallow dip to the
east.
Goulagou I and Goulagou II Deposits - The GGI Deposit has multiple, anastomosing and
continuous lenses of mineralized rock over a presently defined strike length of 2,100 m. It
consists of up to 10 separate continuous sheets, ranging from 5 to 40 m thick, dipping near
vertically. The deposit is open along strike and down dip below 200 m, the level of present
drilling. The GGII Deposit is similar in nature, with a strike length of 2,400 m. There are 3 to 5
steeply dipping sheets, with widths ranging from 5 to 30 m. The deposit is open along strike and
down dip. Higher grade shoots that plunge steeply are targets for deeper drilling. The central
portion of the deposit is thickened in a Z fold configuration. It is currently not clear whether
this feature is an actual fold, or an en echelon step-over in the shear system, but it forms the
largest concentration of higher grades and thickness in the deposit.
The GGI and GGII deposits lie within steeply oriented shear zones of mixed clastic sedimentary
rocks, generally argillic siltstone and argillite with local intercalations of graphitic and chloritic
schist and small irregular intrusive units, generally diorite to granodiorite. Alteration minerals
include silica, hematite, sericite, carbonate and pyrite-arsenopyrite.
Rambo Deposit - The Rambo Main Deposit as presently defined as a small mineralized lens
containing a steeply plunging mineralized shoot. The deposit has a length of approximately 450
m along the East-West strike and dips steeply south, with a down-dip length of 230 m, and a
thickness of the mineralized zone ranging from about 2.5 to 25 m. The shoot is open to the east
and down dip, and within it the mineralization exhibits good continuity. The mineralization is
truncated by a late NNE-SSW trending fault. The fault, itself, contains local high grade
intercepts, probably from pre-existing mineralization entrained within the fault breccia.
Westward extensions beyond this fault have proven elusive but the full lateral extent of the
Rambo Main Deposit has yet to be delineated. Smaller Hanging wall and Footwall zones are
present and account for approximately half the volume of the total modeled mineralization.
The Rambo Main Deposit lies in a steeply oriented shear zone, near the contact of mixed
volcano-sedimentary rocks and granitoid intrusive rocks. The mineralized body locally
transgresses this contact. Alteration minerals include silica, hematite, sericite, carbonate and
pyrite-arsenopyrite. The Rambo Deposit contains distinct breccia zones, in which the grade
increases. Quartz veining and silicification are common within the zone of Au mineralization,
and the zone is well defined, with relatively sharp boundaries. The upper 75 to 100 m of the
deposit has been oxidized.
Nami Deposit The Nami Deposit is presently composed of three mineralized lenses with
shallow dips of 20 to 25 toward the west-south-west. The strike length of the Nami Deposit is
about 550 m, with a down-plunge extension of 300 m. Mineralized zones exhibit good continuity
of grade and range from about 2.5 to 30 m in thickness. The deposit is open to the west, north
and south.
The Nami deposit is located entirely within a granodiorite intrusive, and is composed of three
shallow-dipping (20 to 25), stacked zones of mineralization. These zones are folded around a
Page 53 of 357
northeast-trending axis and strike north-south to east-west. The NE axis is also the locus of high
grade gold structures, which appear to have been emplaced late in the deposit paragenesis.
Mineralized zones at Nami are commonly silicified and brecciated, with variable hematite and
carbonate alteration. The zone has not been fully delineated, and appears to have been truncated
to the northwest by the younger northeast-trending structures. It remains open to the west, south
and southwest. The upper 50 m has been oxidized.
In February 2011, SRK conducted a site visit to the Karma Property with the specific mandate to
review the oriented drill core at the Nami Deposit. SRK concluded that Au mineralization at the
Nami Deposit is associated with a shallow southwest-dipping D1b zone of brecciation and
silicification. Further, gold mineralization is spatially located within the cross-cutting, southweststriking D2 brittle-ductile shear zones and associated breccias. Three dimensional wireframe
geometries were constructed to aid with drill targeting. The Nami Deposit is still considered
open, and possible drill target areas were suggested in the report that could increase the extent of
known gold mineralization.
7.4
MINERALIZATION
Gold mineralization on the Karma property is universally controlled by shear-related veining and
alteration, developed in two dominant geological environments: sediment-hosted and intrusivehosted. The sediment-hosted deposits, GGI, GGII and Rambo, tend to consist of networks of
anastomosing and steeply-dipping shear zones, exhibiting multiple, superimposed, phases of
veining, alteration and deformation. The intrusive-hosted deposits, Kao and Nami, also exhibit
multiple phases of veining, alteration and deformation, but tend to develop more shallow-dipping
and broader shear zones.
Rambo and many other known sediment-hosted showings across the property are concentrated at
intrusive contacts. Some workers have attributed this to some kind of thermal aureole effect;
however, it may also be controlled by competence contrasts and its effect on structural dilation
during deformation and the consequent enhancement of permeability at these sites.
Gold is strongly associated with silica-sericite-carbonate alteration and veining. Sulphide
minerals associated with mineralization consist predominantly of pyrite and arsenopyrite. A
petrographic report by KCA (2011b) also identified minor amounts of chalcopyrite and covellite
along with traces of bornite, chalcocite and sphalerite; however, these are rarely seen in hand
specimen. Gold grains are generally less than 35 microns in size, with a low (about 1.5 weight
percent) silver content, but may be as large as 300 microns and contain up to 20% silver (e.g.
Rambo). Visible gold is known from all deposits but is not common. Gangue minerals of interest
include clay, feldspar, quartz, dolomite, and hematite and goethite in the oxide and transition
material. There is some carbon, at least a portion of which is organic

Page 54 of 357
8.0
DEPOSIT TYPES
The West African Lower Proterozoic greenstone belts have produced a number of world-class
gold deposits, such as the Obuasi mines of Anglo-Ashanti Corp. (Ghana) that have been in
continuous production since 1897.
As summarized by Thivierge (2008), much of the gold mineralization in the Ouahigouya district
is either hosted by metasedimentary rocks associated with granodioritic to dioritic plutonic rocks
or by the plutonic rocks themselves. The gold mineralization is associated with the presence of
disseminated Fe-sulphide phases (mainly pyrite and/or arsenopyrite), quartz veining and
hematitic alteration to epidotitic alteration. The evolution of the Goulagou, Rambo and Kao
deposits appears to commonly involve the participation of syn-orogenic granodioritic plutonic
masses. The Kao and Nami deposits occur within a plutonic body, the Rambo deposit embraces a
plutonic contact zone, and the Goulagou I and II deposits occur peripheral to known or suspected
plutonic masses. Smaller plutonic masses and dykes (diorite, quartz diorite and/or granodiorite)
are present in the meta-sedimentary rocks and within the margins of the plutonic masses, and
may represent structurally-controlled dyke networks associated with the carapace of the plutonic
bodies. The development of progressive and retrogressive metamorphic minerals may be in part
related to orogenic plutonism.
Hein (2008) considered that regional gold metallogenesis on the Karma Property is tightly
constrained to the Eburnean Orogeny between 2,130 and 1,980 Ma and that the major phase of
gold deposition occurs during the latter part of the Eburnean event between 2,105-1,980 Ma.
The Karma Property deposits have characteristics of mesothermal, shear-hosted gold deposits
associated with orogenic activity. Elements of stratigraphic control may result from
mineralization/alteration being channeled along specific structural/lithological controls that have
affected porosity and fluid flow. The Karma deposits may be best described as structurally
controlled, orogenic, hydrothermal deposits.
Robert et al.s (2007) classification of orogenic gold deposits is restricted to deposits composed
of quartz-carbonate veins and associated wall rock replacement, associated with compressional
or transpressional geological structures such as reverse faults and folds. Orogenic deposits
consist of variably complex arrays of quartz-carbonate veins that display significant vertical
continuity, commonly in excess of 1 km, without any significant vertical zoning. The ores are
enriched in Ag-As+/-W, with Au:Ag ratios >5. Other commonly enriched elements include B,
Te, Bi, and Mo. The dominant sulphide mineral is pyrite at greenschist grade and pyrrhotite at
amphibolite grade. Arsenopyrite is the dominant sulphide in many clastic-sediment-hosted ores
at greenschist grade and loellingite (FeAs2) is also present at amphibolite grade. Mineralized
zones are surrounded by carbonate-sericite-pyrite alteration halos that are variably developed
depending on host rock composition. At the regional scale a majority of deposits are spatially
associated with regional shear zones and occur in greenschist-grade rocks, consistent with the
overall brittle-ductile nature of their host structures.
Three main types of orogenic deposits are distinguished based on their host-rock environment
and include greenstone, turbidite, and BIF-hosted deposits. Greenstone-hosted orogenic deposits
are the most important of the clan and the best represented type among the >10 M oz deposits.
The quartz-carbonate veins in these deposits typically combine laminated veins in moderately to
steeply dipping reverse shear zones with arrays of shallow-dipping extensional veins in adjacent
Page 55 of 357
competent and lower strain rocks. The reverse character of the shear-zone hosted veins and
shallow-dips of extensional veins attest to their formation during crustal shortening (Sibson et
al., 1988; Robert and Poulsen 2001).
In greenstone belts the significant vein deposits are typically distributed along specific regional
compressional to transpressional structures. By virtue of their association with regional
structures, these camps are also located at the boundaries between contrasted lithologic or age
domains within the belt. Along these structures, the deposits commonly cluster in specific camps,
localized at bends or major splay intersections, and where deposits typically occur in associated
higher-order structures (Robert et al., 2005). The larger camps and deposits are commonly
spatially associated with conglomeratic sequences as exemplified by the Timiskaming polymict
conglomerates in the Abitibi greenstone belt and the Tarkwaian quartz pebble conglomerates in
the Birimian shield.

Page 56 of 357
9.0
EXPLORATION
True Gold has completed various exploration activities the; Kao, Goulagou, Rambo, Youba and
Rounga permit areas. All exploration activities have been described below, except for diamond
drilling and reverse circulation (RC) drilling activities which are described in Section 10.
9.1
ROTARY AIR BLAST DRILLING NORTH OF THE KARMA PROJECT
The Company carried out a Rotary Air Blast (RAB) drilling program over a 180 km 2 area
north of the Karma Project. Drilling intersected extensive near-surface oxide gold mineralization
in six different areas. The program consisted of 11,039 m of RAB drilling in 449 vertical holes
(drilled to an average depth of 30 m) at sites selected based on historical workings and
anomalous geochemical sampling (Riverstone News Release dated January 29, 2013).
Follow up drilling was carried out at one of the new target areas in 2013. This area has been
termed the Watinoma target.
9.2
9.2.1
KAO PERMIT AREA

Soil Sampling Program
True Gold completed a soil sampling program approximately 2 km northwest of the Kao Deposit
area, employing 2.5 km x 5.0 km area in February 2013. A total of 1,489 samples, including 153
controls, were collected along 200 m spaced lines at 50 m intervals over a large wind-panning
area near Nogo Village between the Kao and Rambo Deposits. At each sample station, a hole of
50 cm depth was dug and a bulk sample was collected from the bottom of the hole.
Samples were analyzed for Au only, by atomic absorption method at the BIGS GLOBAL
Burkina Faso (BIGS) laboratory in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
All results have been returned and show scattered gold anomalies coincident with 500 m x 500 m
regional soil geochemical anomalies and also known gold workings. Figure 9.1 illustrates the
results from the Companys 2013 soil sampling program at the Kao Permit.

Page 57 of 357
Figure 9.1
Geochemical Results from the 2013 Kao Permit Soil Sampling Program
9.2.2
Geophysical Survey
A 19.5 line-kilometre pole-dipole (PDP) Induced Polarization (IP)/Resistivity electrical

geophysical grid was undertaken over the Kao-North area by SAGAX AFRIQUE S.A.
(Exploration Geophysics Services) of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso (SAGAX) in August 2013.
A 4.0 line-kilometre Pole-Dipole Orientation IP/Resistivity survey was also completed over the
main Kao deposit. The grid was established on 100 m spaced lines with Pole-Dipole array (a =
50 m, n = 1 to 10).
Results from the ground geophysical survey indicate that the Kao deposit north extension is
associated with a strong resistivity anomaly (Figure 9.2).
The survey also shows that the North Kao area is outlined by a weak north trending chargeability
anomaly that becomes stronger at the northern limit of the infill drilling area (Figure 9.3). A
strong chargeable body occurs in the northeast corner of the grid and coincides with significant
drilled gold intersections (0.4 g Au/t over 42 m).

Page 58 of 357
Figure 9.2
North Kao Resistivity Survey
Figure 9.3
North Kao IP/Chargeability Survey
9.2.3
Surveying
During the 2013 exploration season, The Company surveyed historical boreholes and trenches
within the Kao permit area. In total, the location of 200 diamond drill holes, 458 RC drill holes
and 24 trenches were surveyed with a differential GPS.

Page 59 of 357
9.3
GOULAGOU PERMIT AREA
9.3.1
Geophysical Survey
An 82.2 line-kilometre Gradient Array Induced Polarization (IP)/Resistivity electrical

geophysical survey was undertaken over the 3.0 km corridor between the GGII and Rambo
deposits by SAGAX in September 2013 (Figures 9.4 and 9.5). The grid was done on a 200 m x
50 m gradient array.
The results show that resistivity is a very effective method for mapping the limits of the footwall
granodiorite North of Rambo and also the larger intrusive body south of Goulagou. The shear
zone between GGII and Rambo is also quite evident in the IP/Chargeability data with numerous
strong conductors that are locally offset.
Figure 9.4
GGII-Rambo West - IP/Chargeability
Figure 9.5
GGII-Rambo West - Resistivity

Page 60 of 357
9.3.2
Surveying
The Company also surveyed a number of historical boreholes within the Goulagou Permit area.
The location of 357 diamond drill holes and 399 RC drill holes were surveyed with the aid of a
differential GPS.
9.4
RAMBO PERMIT AREA
9.4.1
Rock Sampling Program
The Company collected a total of 290 rock samples from artisanal workings waste piles along
the Bongui trend (east of Nami) in the Rambo permit area in March 2013. The samples were
analyzed for Au only by atomic absorption method at the Abilab Burkina SARL (ALS
Chemex) laboratory in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Samples returning Au results greater than
1.0 g/t were further analyzed by gravimetric method.
Figure 9.6 shows the sample locations and some higher grade results from the program.
Highlights from the rock sampling program include results ranging from 1.1 g/t to 29.4 g/t Au,
with an average grade of 0.46 g/t Au.
The 2013 RC drilling program at Nami was initiated as follow up to the rock sampling program.
Figure 9.6
2013 Bongui Waste Rock Sampling Nami East Trend

Page 61 of 357
9.4.2
Surveying
The Company carried out surveys on the historical boreholes and trenches of the Rambo Permit
area and a total of 121 diamond drill holes, 107 RC drill holes and 72 trenches were surveyed
using a differential GPS.
9.5
YOUBA PERMIT AREA
9.5.1
Geological Mapping
Bureau dEtudes des Gosciences des Energies et de lEnvironnement of Ouagadougou,

Burkina Faso (BEGE) carried out geological mapping over two different targets areas (Rounga
South and Saima) totalling 6.25 km2 area within the Youba permit area during 2013.
Figures 9.7 and 9.8 show the resultant litho-structural maps from the Rounga South and Saima
areas.
Figure 9.7
2013 Litho-Structural Map of Rounga South

Page 62 of 357
Figure 9.8
2013 Litho-Structural Map of Saima
9.5.2
Geophysical Survey
A 26.4 line-kilometre Gradient Array Induced Polarization (IP)/Resistivity electrical geophysical

survey was also undertaken at Saima, within the Youba permit, by SAGAX. Surveying was
carried out on a 100 m x 25 m grid. A 3.6 line-kilometre Pole-Dipole IP/Resistivity orientation
survey was also completed (a = 50m, n = 1 to 10).
Results from the ground geophysical survey over the Saima grid indicate an excellent correlation
between the gold workings and a strong conductive anomaly extending north-easterly and
following the main litho-strucural direction (Figures 9.9 to 9.10).

Page 63 of 357
Figure 9.9
2013 Saima IP/Chargeability Survey
Figure 9.10
2013 Saima Resistivity Survey
SAGAX also undertook an 11.2 line-kilometre Gradient Array IP/Resistivity electrical

geophysical grid over the Rounga South area in August 2013. Surveying was undertaken over a
100 m x 25 m array.
Results from the ground geophysical survey show that the main gold workings zone correlates
with a northwesterly trending resistivity anomaly associated with a discontinuous chargeability
Page 64 of 357
anomaly (Figures 9.11 and 9.12). However, the historic RAB drilling results combined with the
IP results suggest a second controlling direction of the gold mineralization possibly NorthSouth.
Figure 9.11
2013 Rounga South IP/Chargeability Survey
Figure 9.12
2013 Rounga South Resistivity Survey

Page 65 of 357
9.6
9.6.1
ROUNGA PERMIT AREA

Geological Mapping
BEGE also completed geological mapping over three different target areas (Watinoma, Sobona,
Pogro) totalling an 11.43 km2 zone within the Rounga permit area in June 2013.
Figures 9.13 to 9.15 show the resultant litho-structural maps from the Rounga South and Saima
areas.
Figure 9.13
Litho-Structural Map of Watinoma

Page 66 of 357
Figure 9.14
Litho-Structural Map of Sobona
Figure 9.15
Litho-Structural Map of Pogoro

Page 67 of 357
9.6.2
Geophysical Survey
Ground magnetics, Pole-Dipole IP/Resistivity and pole-dipole surveys (Mag: 16.5 km;
IP/Resistivity: 20.5 km and Pole-Dipole: 5.0 km) were also undertaken over the Watinoma
prospect within the Rounga permit by SAGAX in June 2013. Surveys were done at 25 m stations
on 100 m spaced lines.
Results from the ground geophysical surveys (Figures 9.16 to 9.18) indicate that the most
prominent structure outlined by the magnetics is a mafic dike trending NE-SW, locally cut by EW structures (faults). The dike is displaced to the west in the North part of the grid area. Best
zones of gold mineralization previously intersected are closely spatially associated to this dyke
and to a NE trending chargeable anomaly. A number of similar magnetic anomalies cut by an EW discontinuity appear to concentrate in the SE quadrant of the grid area and are covered by
gold workings.
Figure 9.16
2013 Watinoma Total Field Magnetic Survey
Figure 9.17
2013 Watinoma IP/Chargeability Survey

Page 68 of 357
Figure 9.18
2013 Watinoma Resistivity Survey

Page 69 of 357
10.0
DRILLING
The October 2012 P&E technical report detailed all drilling undertaken on the Karma project up
to and including June 2012. Since that time, True Gold has continued its ongoing drilling at the
Property and this section of the report summarizes drilling carried out at the Property including
up to and including results in True Golds November 3, 2013 press release.
The Company completed a total of 334 diamond drill holes and reverse circulation (RC) holes
totalling 40,063.25 m. This includes drilling for engineering purposes (metallurgy, geotechnical,
hydrology), condemnation of proposed infrastructure sites, exploration drilling adjacent to
known deposits (North Kao and Rambo West), and drilling at new exploration sites (Konvoudy
Iri, Bongui/Nami East, Watinoma).
The breakdown of the latest 2012-2013 drilling by permit and target is presented in Table 10.1.
Permit
Rambo
Rambo
Kao
Kao
Rounga
Tougou
Goulagou
Rambo
Nami
Kao
Goulagou
Target
Rambo West
Bongui/Nami E
Konvoudy Iri
North Kao
Watinoma
Tougou Reg.
Condemnation
Rambo Eng.
Nami Eng.
Kao Eng.
Goulagou Eng.
TABLE 10.1
DRILL HOLES BY PERMIT/TARGET
# RAB Holes
#RC Holes
#DD Holes
4
27
8
2
106
31
9
9
50
6
4
19
7
4
14
12
22
Total
50
155
129
Total Metres
4,345.30
1,051.00
373.00
20,114.29
2,781.62
2,063.00
603.00
3,690.00
586.00
1,439.84
3,016.20
40,063.25
Falcon Drilling Ltd., performed all core drilling at the Property and exploration-drilling
companies, Hall Core Drilling, Boart Longyear and Major Drilling Burkina Faso S.A. completed
the RC drilling. All rotary air blast (RAB) drilling was carried out by Forages TechnicEau/Burkina S.A.R.L.
Predetermined collar locations were surveyed utilizing a handheld GPS. Surface elevations were
determined by using a satellite digital elevation model (DEM). Certain DEM elevations are not
included in the drill hole data as they are outside the area that has DEM data available. Drill
holes that fall within the areas that do not have DEM coverage, were assigned collar elevations
estimated from either hand held GPS or proximity to known survey elevations.
Down hole survey readings, measuring azimuth and inclination, were taken at regular intervals
(5 m and 25 m) depending on survey type, using a gyroscopic or magnetic (reflex) down hole
survey instrument.

Page 70 of 357
Core recovery was typically between 90% and 100% for the Rambo deposit, 80% and 100% for
the Kao deposit, Goulagou deposit and Watinoma target and between 64% and 100% (and as low
as 32% for some intervals) for the Nami deposit.
10.1
KAO DEPOSIT
Drilling consisted of six HQ-sized diamond drill holes totalling 472 m (KAO-DD-13-184 to
KAO-DD-13-189), as well as 69 RC drill holes totalling 10,064 m.
The six HQ-sized drill holes were drilled as part of a column leach sampling program in which a
total of 14 holes were completed at the Kao deposit over a distance of 822 m. These holes were
designed to capture oxide, transition and sulphide material on representative cross sections
throughout the deposit. The holes were drilled at 270 and 360 degree azimuths within the central
portion of the deposit, with dips ranging from -55 to -75 degrees, and a maximum depth of 83 m
(Riverstone News Release dated March 13, 2013).
The Company also completed 10,064 m of RC drilling in 69 holes in the first half of 2013
around the periphery of the Kao deposit to test for additional gold mineralization along north and
west-northwest trending structural corridors. The drill program was planned using data obtained
from IP and magnetic geophysical datasets, along with knowledge of the structural geology of
the area.
The first 20 step-out holes were drilling on an east-west cross-section at 150 m spaced intervals,
approximately 600 m north of the main Kao resource area and, considering the positive results
returned from these first holes, an additional four widely spaced fences of RC holes were
undertaken. Drilling now extends to Anomaly B, located 2,400 m north of Kao (True Gold
News Release dated June 3, 2013).
The additional holes were drilled on 150-metre centres, on east-west oriented fences
approximately 400 to 500 m apart, and at dips of -60 degrees at 090 or 270 degrees azimuth, to
an average depth of 150 m. Mineralization remains open to the northwest, north, and northeast of
the Kao deposit (True Gold News Release dated August 6, 2013).
More recent drilling at the northern area of the Kao deposit, has comprised 31 diamond drill
holes (KAO-DD-13-198A to KAO-13-DD-226) and 106 RC holes (KAO-RC-13-456 to KAORC-13-487) over a total distance of 20,114.29 m. This drilling has extended mineralization from
the northern edge of the currently defined Kao deposit, expanding mineralization to a total strike
length of 3,400 m. It is currently planned to update the Kao resource estimate based on this
recent drilling which covers an area of approximately 1,500 m by 500 m.
Table 10.2 lists some of the highlights from True Golds ongoing drilling at the Kao deposit.
TABLE 10.2
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR THE NORTHERN AREA OF THE
KAO DEPOSIT
Hole #
From (m)
To (m)
Width (m)
Au (g/t)
KAO-DD-13-184
62.0
68.0
6.0
0.54
KAO-DD-13-185
44.0
54.0
10.0
0.43
and
54.0
72.0
18.0
0.77
Page 71 of 357
TABLE 10.2
KAO DEPOSIT
Hole #
From (m)
To (m)
Width (m)
Au (g/t)
KAO-DD-13-186
40.0
54.0
14.0
0.96
and
54.0
66.0
12.0
0.50
and
72.0
80.0
8.0
1.59
and
80.0
81.5
1.5
1.69
KAO-DD-13-187
58.0
68.0
10.0
53.66
including
60.0
62.0
2.0
263.00
KAO-DD-13-188
8.0
42.0
34.0
1.31
and
54.0
68.0
14.0
1.65
and
68.0
76.0
8.0
0.48
and
76.0
81.5
5.5
0.61
KAO-DD-13-189
44.0
62.0
18.0
2.28
KAO-13-RC-390
NSV
KAO-13-RC-391
20.0
24.0
4.0
0.41
and
28.0
30.0
2.0
0.26
and
102.0
104.0
2.0
0.54
and
120.0
122.0
2.0
0.31
KAO-13-RC-392
68.0
70.0
2.0
0.53
KAO-13-RC-393
NSV
KAO-13-RC-394
58.0
60.0
2.0
0.61
and
80.0
84.0
4.0
1.20
KAO-13-RC-395
86.0
110.0
24.0
0.76
incl.
98.0
100.0
2.0
4.35
and incl.
106.0
110.0
4.0
1.48
KAO-13-RC-396
20.0
22.0
2.0
0.28
KAO-13-RC-397
0.0
10.0
10.0
0.25
and
30.0
38.0
8.0
0.61
and
100.0
116.0
16.0
0.60
incl.
100.0
106.0
6.0
1.01
and incl.
114.0
116.0
2.0
1.18
KAO-13-RC-398
92.0
98.0
6.0
0.48
KAO-13-RC-399
NSV
KAO-13-RC-400
124.0
126.0
2.0
0.44
and
136.0
138.0
2.0
0.52
KAO-13-RC-401
78.0
80.0
2.0
0.38
and
88.0
92.0
4.0
0.46
and
102.0
104.0
2.0
0.42
and
120.0
122.0
2.0
2.60
KAO-13-RC-402
4.0
18.0
14.0
0.37
and
48.0
50.0
2.0
1.27
and
84.0
88.0
4.0
0.53
and
92.0
94.0
2.0
34.20
KAO-13-RC-403
Abandoned due to drilling conditions
KAO-13-RC-403B
18.0
20.0
2.0
0.71
Page 72 of 357
TABLE 10.2
KAO DEPOSIT
Hole #
From (m)
To (m)
Width (m)
Au (g/t)
and
38.0
42.0
4.0
0.92
and
56.0
60.0
4.0
0.55
and
102.0
104.0
2.0
0.56
and
130.0
134.0
4.0
0.74
KAO-13-RC-404
26.0
30.0
4.0
1.51
and
78.0
84.0
6.0
0.26
and
98.0
112.0
14.0
0.36
KAO-13-RC-405
40.0
44.0
4.0
0.34
and
76.0
106.0
30.0
0.38
incl.
76.0
82.0
6.0
0.86
and incl.
104.0
106.0
2.0
0.84
KAO-13-RC-406
88.0
150.0
62.0
1.01
incl.
112.0
150.0
38.0
1.39
incl.
116.0
128.0
12.0
2.04
KAO-13-RC-407
80.0
94.0
14.0
0.82
and
104.0
106.0
2.0
0.34
KAO-13-RC-408
144.0
148.0
4.0
0.63
KAO-13-RC-409
28.0
30.0
2.0
0.34
and
88.0
90.0
2.0
1.38
KAO-13-RC-410
74.0
80.0
6.0
0.63
and
100.0
150.0
50.0
1.08
incl.
100.0
116.0
16.0
2.21
KAO-13-RC-411
32.0
46.0
14.0
0.78
and
58.0
78.0
20.0
0.66
KAO-13-RC-412
46.0
54.0
8.0
0.32
and
74.0
80.0
6.0
1.18
KAO-13-RC-413A
NSV
KAO-13-RC-413B
NSV
KAO-13-RC-414
78.0
82.0
4.0
0.38
and
148.0
158.0
10.0
1.09
KAO-13-RC-415
38.0
56.0
18.0
0.32
and
84.0
94.0
10.0
0.92
and
130.0
132.0
2.0
1.16
and
138.0
146.0
8.0
0.36
KAO-13-RC-416
20.0
22.0
2.0
0.51
and
32.0
34.0
2.0
0.57
and
90.0
94.0
4.0
0.72
KAO-13-RC-417
96.0
100.0
4.0
2.15
and
106.0
108.0
2.0
0.87
and
128.0
134.0
6.0
1.43
and
138.0
140.0
2.0
0.50
KAO-13-RC-418
4.0
8.0
4.0
0.29
and
40.0
44.0
4.0
0.37
Page 73 of 357
TABLE 10.2
KAO DEPOSIT
Hole #
From (m)
To (m)
Width (m)
Au (g/t)
KAO-13-RC-419
82.0
86.0
4.0
5.22
and
146.0
172.0
26.0
1.56
KAO-13-RC-420
24.0
32.0
8.0
0.47
and
82.0
86.0
4.0
0.46
and
100.0
104.0
4.0
1.05
and
110.0
116.0
6.0
1.34
and
130.0
132.0
2.0
0.63
and
142.0
148.0
6.0
0.91
KAO-13-RC-421
14.0
16.0
2.0
0.81
and
36.0
41.0
5.0
0.55
KAO-13-RC-422
42.0
46.0
4.0
0.99
KAO-13-RC-423
128.0
158.0
30.0
0.75
incl.
128.0
140.0
12.0
1.18
and incl.
140.0
158.0
18.0
0.46
KAO-13-RC-424
116.0
118.0
2.0
4.79
KAO-13-RC-425
20.0
26.0
6.0
2.05
and
34.0
40.0
6.0
0.78
KAO-13-RC-427
NSV
KAO-13-RC-429
20.0
26.0
6.0
1.72
and
38.0
44.0
6.0
1.56
and
136.0
140.0
4.0
2.68
KAO-13-RC-435
56.0
64.0
8.0
0.49
KAO-13-RC-438
26.0
46.0
20.0
1.15
and
76.0
78.0
2.0
0.71
KAO-13-RC-439
54.0
56.0
2.0
0.44
and
78.0
80.0
2.0
3.83
KAO-13-RC-441
NSV
KAO-13-RC-442
NSV
KAO-13-RC-443
42.0
44.0
2.0
0.92
KAO-13-RC-445
NSV
KAO-13-RC-447
30.0
32.0
2.0
0.43
KAO-13-RC-448
NSV
KAO-13-RC-450
NSV
Notes:
(1)
Drill holes commencing with KAO-DD denote diamond drill holes and drill holes commencing with
KAO-13-RC denote reverse circulation (RC) drill holes.
(2)
True widths are estimated to be 50 to 90% of the intersected widths
10.2
GOULAGOU DEPOSITS
A total of 16 HQ-sized metallurgical diamond drill holes were drilled in 1,371 m were drilled at
the Goulagou deposits. These holes were drilled at 180 and 360 degree azimuths on north-south
oriented cross-sections in the western, central, and eastern portions of each deposit, with dips

Page 74 of 357
ranging from -45 to -60 degrees, and a maximum depth of 150.0 m (True Gold News Release
dated March 6, 2013).
10.2.1
Goulagou I Deposit
Drilling consisted of five HQ-sized diamond drill holes totalling 423 m (GLG-DD-12-114 to
GLG-DD-12-118).
Table 10.3 lists some of the highlights from True Golds ongoing drilling at the Goulagou I
deposit.
TABLE 10.3
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Width
Hole #
From (m)
To (m)
Au (g/t)
(m)
GLG-DD-12-114
64.0
86.0
22.0
2.22
and
86.0
110.0
24.0
0.99
GLG-DD-12-115
24.0
36.0
12.0
0.42
and
42.0
60.0
18.0
0.43
GLG-DD-12-116
16.0
28.0
12.0
1.49
and
56.0
70.0
14.0
0.89
GLG-DD-12-117
44.0
46.0
2.0
0.64
and
90.0
93.0
3.0
0.44
GLG-DD-12-118
24.0
26.0
2.0
1.91
and
38.0
48.0
10.0
0.94
and
52.0
62.0
10.0
1.06
and
66.0
82.0
16.0
1.18
Notes:
(1)
(2)
10.2.2
Drill holes commencing with GLG-DD denote diamond drill holes.

True widths are estimated to be 50 to 90% of the intersected widths.
Goulagou II Deposit
Drilling consisted of 11 HQ-sized diamond drill holes totalling 948 m (GLG-DD-12-105 to

GLG-DD-12-113).
Table 10.4 lists some of the highlights from True Golds ongoing drilling at the Goulagou II
deposit.

Page 75 of 357
TABLE 10.4
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Hole #
GLG-DD-12-105
and
GLG-DD-12-106
GLG-DD-12-107
and
GLG-DD-12-108A/B/C
GLG-DD-12-109
and
GLG-DD-12-110
and
GLG-DD-12-111
GLG-DD-12-112
GLG-DD-12-113
Notes:
(1)
(2)
10.3
From (m)
30.0
66.0
56.0
28.0
50.0
62.0
78.0
82.0
116.0
64.0
76.0
42.0
To (m)
Width (m)
Au (g/t)
42.0
12.0
1.00
80.0
14.0
1.99
70.0
14.0
0.68
50.0
22.0
2.53
70.0
20.0
0.60
Abandoned due to drilling conditions
78.0
16.0
1.61
102.0
24.0
4.43
96.0
14.0
2.65
120.0
4.0
3.42
77.9
13.9
0.86
132.0
56.0
3.75
70.0
28.0
0.96
Drill holes commencing with GLG-DD denote diamond drill holes.

RAMBO DEPOSIT
Drilling consisted of eight HQ-sized diamond drill holes totalling 824 m (RMB-DD-13-084 to
RMB-DD-13-091), as well as four RC drill holes (RMB-13-RC-096 to RMB-13-RC-098)
totalling 461 m.
The RC drilling performed at the Rambo deposit was carried out on the Rambo West target,
located 300 m along strike to the west from the Rambo deposit (True Gold News Release dated
June 10, 2013).
A total of eight diamond drill holes were drilled at the Rambo West target, 175 m along strike to
the northwest of the main Rambo deposit as follow up to the RC drilling previously mentioned.
Drilling was carried out over a 160 m by 125 m area and all eight drill holes intersected oxide
gold mineralization (True Gold News Release dated June 10, 2013).
Table 10.5 lists some of the highlights from True Golds ongoing drilling at the Rambo deposit.
TABLE 10.5
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR RAMBO DEPOSIT
From
Width
Hole #
To (m)
Au (g/t)
(m)
(m)
RMB-13-RC-096
0.0
16.0
16.0
0.15
and
16.0
44.0
28.0
1.39
incl.
16.0
26.0
10.0
1.82
and incl.
26.0
44.0
18.0
1.15
and
44.0
50.0
6.0
0.11
RMB-13-RC-096B
6.0
8.0
2.0
1.09
and
18.0
50.0
32.0
1.02
incl.
18.0
32.0
14.0
0.79
Page 76 of 357
TABLE 10.5
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR RAMBO DEPOSIT
From
Width
Hole #
To (m)
Au (g/t)
(m)
(m)
and incl.
32.0
40.0
8.0
2.26
and incl.
40.0
50.0
10.0
0.35
and
76.0
78.0
2.0
0.81
RMB-13-RC-097
58.0
60.0
2.0
0.55
and
76.0
88.0
12.0
0.22
RMB-13-RC-098
0.0
4.0
4.0
0.96
and
18.0
42.0
24.0
1.02
incl.
18.0
20.0
2.0
1.64
and incl.
26.0
36.0
10.0
1.93
and
40.0
42.0
2.0
0.55
and
64.0
74.0
10.0
0.38
and
84.0
86.0
2.0
0.56
RMB-DD-13-084
NSV
RMB-DD-13-085
NSV
RMB-DD-13-086
3.5
5.0
1.5
0.52
and
17.0
53.0
36.0
0.96
incl.
17.0
42.5
25.5
1.18
incl.
17.0
35.0
18.0
1.39
incl.
26.0
32.0
6.0
2.21
and incl.
39.5
42.5
3.0
1.65
and
50.0
53.0
3.0
1.02
RMB-DD-13-087
25.2
31.2
6.0
1.31
and
52.2
53.7
1.5
1.40
and
75.2
76.2
1.0
1.07
RMB-DD-13-088
6.0
10.6
4.6
0.39
and
31.5
34.5
3.0
0.56
and
62.8
69.0
6.2
0.43
RMB-DD-13-089
43.5
45.0
1.5
1.22
RMB-DD-13-090
23.6
29.5
5.9
0.50
and
44.6
47.6
3.0
0.35
RMB-DD-13-091
24.0
39.0
15.0
1.15
incl.
27.0
37.5
10.5
1.42
63.0
66.0
3.0
0.97
incl.
Notes:
(1)
Drill holes commencing with RMB-DD denote diamond drill holes and drill holes commencing
with RMB-13-RC denote reverse circulation (RC) drill holes.
(2)
10.4
NAMI DEPOSIT
Drilling consisted of four HQ-sized diamond drill holes totalling 360 m (RMB-DD-13-065 to
RMB-DD-13-068).

Page 77 of 357
The four HQ-sized drill holes were drilled as part of a column leach sampling program and holes
were designed to capture oxide, transition and sulphide material on representative cross sections
throughout the deposit. The holes were drilled at 270 and 360 degree azimuths within the central
portion of the deposit, with dips ranging from -55 to -75 degrees, and a maximum depth of
100 m (Riverstone News Release dated March 13, 2013).
Table 10.6 lists some of the highlights from True Golds ongoing drilling at the Nami deposit.
TABLE 10.6
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR NAMI DEPOSIT
From
Width
Hole #
To (m)
Au (g/t)
(m)
(m)
RMB-DD-13-065
4.0
6.0
2.0
22.50
and
58.0
68.0
10.0
1.04
and
92.0
99.5
7.5
0.77
RMB-DD-13-066
62.0
78.0
16.0
0.67
RMB-DD-13-067
14.5
48.0
33.5
0.93
including
14.5
16.0
1.5
3.56
and including
38.5
46.0
7.5
2.46
RMB-DD-13-068
28.0
39.5
11.5
0.80
and
50.0
56.0
6.0
1.92
Notes:
(1)
(2)
10.5
Drill holes commencing with RMB-DD denote diamond drill holes.

ROTARY AIR BLAST DRILLING NORTH OF THE KARMA PROJECT
The Company carried out a Rotary Air Blast (RAB) drilling program over a 180 km 2 area
north of the Karma Project. Drilling intersected extensive near-surface oxide gold mineralization
in six different areas. The program consisted of 11,039 m of RAB drilling in 449 vertical holes
(drilled to an average depth of 30 m) at sites selected based on historical workings and
anomalous geochemical sampling (Riverstone News Release dated January 29, 2013).
Follow up drilling was carried out at one of the new target areas in 2013. This area has been
termed the Watinoma target.
10.5.1
Watinoma Target
Drilling undertaken at the Watinoma target consisted of nine HQ-sized diamond drill holes
totalling 1,375 m (RNG-DD-13-001 to RNG-DD-13-009), as well as nine RC drill holes (RNG13-RC-001 to RNG-13-RC-009) totalling 1,407 m.
The Company undertook exploratory RC drilling to test an area of near surface gold
mineralization in the north of the Project area. Results from the target area include one of the
longest intersections of gold mineralization yet recorded for the Project (see hole RNG-13-RC001 in Table 10.7) and drilling intersected mineralization in six of the nine holes.

Page 78 of 357
Holes were drilled at azimuths of 210 to 300 degrees, with dips ranging from -50 to -75 degrees,
and to depths of 98 to 200 m. True widths have not yet been determined (True Gold News
Release dated May 28, 2013).
A total of nine diamond drill holes were completed at the Watinoma target as follow up to the
RC drilling. Two of these holes were near twins of previously drilled RC holes and significant
mineralization was intersected in six of the nine drill holes, confirming the presence of
widespread near-surface gold mineralization over a distance of 600 m (True Gold News Release
dated August 20, 2013).
TABLE 10.7
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR THE WATINOMA TARGET
From
Width
Hole #
To (m)
Au (g/t)
(m)
(m)
RNG-13-RC-001
16.0
149.0
133.0
0.96
incl.
32.0
142.0
110.0
1.07
incl.
70.0
142.0
72.0
1.31
incl.
70.0
102.0
32.0
2.06
incl.
70.0
80.0
10.0
2.45
and incl.
80.0
86.0
6.0
1.00
and incl.
86.0
102.0
16.0
2.22
RNG-13-RC-002
46.0
48.0
2.0
1.71
and
54.0
58.0
4.0
0.39
RNG-13-RC-003
36.0
38.0
2.0
10.00
RNG-13-RC-004
0.0
2.0
2.0
0.48
and
36.0
38.0
2.0
0.39
and
118.0
120.0
2.0
0.35
and
138.0
140.0
2.0
0.31
and
148.0
150.0
2.0
0.64
RNG-13-RC-005
8.0
18.0
10.0
0.39
and
18.0
54.0
36.0
1.23
and
62.0
64.0
2.0
0.51
RNG-13-RC-006
80.0
82.0
2.0
1.07
and
92.0
100.0
8.0
2.63
RNG-13-RC-007
4.0
8.0
4.0
1.32
and
8.0
20.0
12.0
0.47
and
40.0
48.0
8.0
0.64
and
82.0
84.0
2.0
0.61
RNG-13-RC-008
30.0
38.0
8.0
0.27
and
124.0
126.0
2.0
0.63
RNG-13-RC-009
0.0
6.0
6.0
1.73
and
28.0
34.0
6.0
0.64
and
50.0
54.0
4.0
0.79
and
132.0
138.0
6.0
0.25
RNG-DD-13-001
18.0
39.0
21.0
0.78
incl.
19.5
27.0
7.5
1.30
and
49.4
58.3
8.8
0.26
Page 79 of 357
TABLE 10.7
SIGNIFICANT MINERALIZED INTERCEPTS FOR THE WATINOMA TARGET
From
Width
Hole #
To (m)
Au (g/t)
(m)
(m)
and
58.3
128.8
70.5
1.91
and incl.
98.8
103.3
4.5
8.66
and incl.
125.8
128.8
3.0
7.10
and
164.9
178.4
13.5
0.72
incl.
164.9
170.9
6.0
1.10
RNG-DD-13-002
21.0
25.5
4.5
0.63
and
37.0
48.1
11.1
1.92
incl.
38.5
40.0
1.5
10.10
and
58.6
60.1
1.5
1.58
and
76.6
79.6
3.0
0.77
RNG-DD-13-003
7.5
50.0
42.5
0.89
incl.
27.5
33.9
6.4
1.41
and incl.
45.5
50.0
4.5
1.53
RNG-DD-13-004
41.0
47.0
6.0
1.01
and
53.4
54.5
1.1
0.98
and
59.0
67.0
8.0
3.27
and
73.0
79.0
6.0
1.11
and
86.5
106.5
20.0
1.05
and
116.0
117.5
1.5
0.99
RNG-DD-13-005
27.7
29.2
1.5
0.48
and
148.2
158.4
10.2
0.45
RNG-DD-13-006
NSV
RNG-DD-13-007
68.0
69.5
1.5
1.39
and
101.8 104.1
2.4
0.90
and
131.4 135.9
4.5
1.79
RNG-DD-13-008
NSV
NSV
RNG-DD-13-009

Page 80 of 357
11.0
SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES AND SECURITY
The following procedures have largely been taken from P&Es 2012 technical report on the
Karma Project.
Sampling on the Karma Project involves either RC chips or diamond drill core. The following
sections detail the Companys drilling procedures, which were implemented in 2009 and
continued throughout the latest round of drilling in 2013.
For the RC drilling, the drilling was and continues to be dominantly dry, although some holes do
reach the water table. Samples are collected at the drill stem, using a splitter device, directly into
numbered sample bags for shipment to the laboratory. A small representative sample of coarser
chips is collected, washed, logged and archived in a plastic chip tray with a receptacle for each
two metre interval. Rig duplicate samples are collected at regular intervals. All samples are
analysed. Rig reject samples are collected for each one metre interval and archived for further
sampling or other test work.
In the case of diamond drilling, core recovered is HQ size (63.5 millimetres nominal diameter) in
the upper saprolitic material, reducing to NQ size (47.6 millimetres nominal diameter) in the
harder rock at depth. Core is placed in metal boxes and transported to the logging facility. Once
there, it is photographed, logged for rock quality (RQD) and various structural parameters, and
for lithologies and evidence of mineralization, and marked for sampling. It is then cut with a
diamond saw. At regular intervals (generally every 80 regular samples) a core duplicate is
collected by taking a split of the second half of the core. Holes are surveyed on completion
using an electronic down-hole surveying device. All drill core is routinely sampled and assayed.
All in-field sample handling and treatment is by local individuals employed by True Gold.
Following splitting (or sawing), bagging and numbering, samples are delivered to the ALS
Minerals, (ALS) laboratory in Ouagadougou by Company personnel.
A comprehensive Quality Assurance/Quality Control, (QA/QC or QC) program was
established for the Karma Project. The program was designed and has been overseen by G. R.
Peatfield, P.Eng. Appropriate standards (purchased from CDN Resource Laboratories) and
coarse blanks are inserted into the assay stream at regular intervals. Rig, reject and assay
duplicate samples are submitted at regular intervals. The results of the controls are monitored by
Peatfield on a regular basis, before assays are entered into the master assay databases.
Samples for the Project were and continue to be prepared by ALS in Ouagadougou and assayed
for Au at their facility there, however significant numbers of pulps were assayed in
Johannesburg, South Africa or in North Vancouver, Canada. ALS is an international firm, and
most ALS Geochemistry laboratories are registered or are pending registration to ISO
9001:2008. A number of analytical facilities have received ISO 17025 accreditations for specific
laboratory procedures.
Assaying for Au is by fire assay/atomic absorption (FA/AA), and for all samples grading in
excess of 1 gram Au per tonne, by fire assay with gravimetric finish (FA/grav.) Gravimetric
assay values are used in preference to FA/AA numbers. In P&Es opinion, the procedures
adopted by the Company for sample handling and preparation, security and analyses are
appropriate for the Karma Project.
Page 81 of 357
12.0
DATA VERIFICATION
12.1
SITE VISIT AND INDEPENDENT SAMPLING
Mr. Antoine Yassa, P.Geo., a qualified person according to the definition as set out in NI 43-101
standards for mineral resource disclosure, visited the Karma Project from November 1 to 3, 2011
August 15 to 17, 2012, December 13 to 14, 2012 and October 16, 2013 for the purpose of doing
the site visit and completing an independent verification sampling program. Fifty four diamond
drill core samples were collected from 18 diamond drill holes by taking a quarter split of the half
core remaining in the box. Eighteen RC samples were also collected from stored chip bags. Mr.
Yassa also reviewed the project data collection process in general, and was satisfied that the
company adhered to industry best practises.
At no time were any employees of True Gold advised as to the identification of the samples to be
chosen during the visit.
The samples were selected by Mr. Yassa, packed in plastic barrels and delivered by Mr. Yassa to
a commercial courier service in Ouagadougou (S.D.V. Logistique Intl).
A change in Burkina Faso law forces all companies to obtain permission to export any rock by
means of a visual inspection by a representative of Mines and Mineral Resources in order to limit
illegal export of valuable ore.
The shipment of samples by the courier was delayed until inspection and then shipped directly to
the P&E office in Brampton, ON, Canada, and from there the samples were delivered directly to
AGAT labs in Mississauga, ON.
AGAT has developed and implemented at each of its locations a Quality Management System
(QMS) designed to ensure the production of consistently reliable data. The system covers all
laboratory activities and takes into consideration the requirements of ISO standards.
AGAT maintains ISO registrations and accreditations. ISO registration and accreditation provide
independent verification that a QMS is in operation at the location in question. Most AGAT
laboratories are registered or are pending registration to ISO 9001:2000.
Samples were analysed for gold using lead-collection fire assay with an AAS finish.
A comparison of the results is presented in Figure 12.1.

Page 82 of 357
Figure 12.1
Karma Project Deposits Site Visit Sample Results for Gold

Kao and Goulagou Site Visit Results for Gold
8
7
6
5
Au (g/t) 4
3
2
True Gold Au
P&E Au
GLG-DD-12-077
GLG-DD-12-077
GLG-DD-12-077
GLG-DD-12-058
GLG-DD-12-058
GLG-DD-12-058
GLG-DD-12-049
GLG-DD-12-049
GLG-DD-12-073
GLG-DD-12-073
GLG-DD-12-073
KAO-DD-11-062
KAO-DD-11-062
KAO-DD-11-062
KAO-DD-12-073
KAO-DD-12-073
KAO-DD-12-073
KAO-DD-11-059
KAO-DD-11-059
KAO-DD-11-059
GLG-DD-12-060
GLG-DD-12-060
GLG-DD-12-060
GLG-DD-12-075
GLG-DD-12-075
GLG-DD-12-062
GLG-DD-12-049
Drill Hole
Mr. Yassa also reviewed the project data collection process in general, and was satisfied that the
company adhered to industry best practises.
12.2
TRUE GOLD QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
The QC program was set up and monitored on a real-time basis by G. R. Peatfield, P.Eng. This
section details the results for the QC program for all drilling in 2013.
Quality control monitoring during 2013 continued from the program that was implemented in
2009 and carried out through 2012. The QC program involved routine insertion of standard and
blank samples, as well as assaying of regularly selected core (or RC rig) and preparation
duplicates. Every eleventh sample position represented a control sample of some type, in a
regular rotation. Details of this rotation have varied over time, but in essence this is the protocol
followed.
No effort was made to randomize the insertion of controls, on the dual argument that this is
likely to lead to confusion in the sampling procedure, and that the chosen insertion technique is
in fact random relative to the sampled population. P&E agrees with this philosophy.
Standard samples were purchased from CDN Resource Laboratories and inserted by True Gold
personnel in the field. Several standards of varying expected grades were employed in the course
of the program. In general, standards included those with several grades, including one near or
slightly above a possible cut-off grade, one at the expected resource grade, and two at higher
grades to check the performance of the laboratory on outliers.
Page 83 of 357
Standards assays by FA/AA were plotted on charts as the assay reports were received, and any
values that fell outside the accepted values were flagged for further examination. In the case of
assays in excess of 1,000 ppb (or previously 5,000 ppb), the FA/gravimetric results are plotted on
a second chart. These are then compared to the FA/AA results.
12.2.1
Performance of Certified Reference Materials
P&E reviewed the results of the diamond drilling and RC drilling for the Kao, Rambo and
Goulagou deposits. The reference materials generally performed very well; some standards
performed better than others. In the case of the relatively few standard assays falling outside the
accepted limits, they were examined on a case by case basis. Nothing was deemed to have any
impact on the resource estimates.
12.2.2
Performance of Core, Coarse Reject and Lab Pulp Duplicates
Duplicate assays were plotted on X-Y correlation plots by the Company as reports were
received. There are three kinds of duplicates; rig duplicates and preparation duplicates are
inserted by the Company; assay duplicates are performed by the laboratory on a random basis.
For the most recent core drilling (August 2013), rig duplicates were taken as core original, and
core duplicate.
In general, the results of this work are good, with the precision increasing as one would expect
throughout the process. At the oxide cut-off grade of 0.20 g/t Au, the precision on the lab pulp
duplicates is excellent. There is no evidence of bias, and the correlation coefficients are generally
high in the case of assay duplicates often reaching in excess of 99%. Rig duplicates
demonstrate less precision, which is expected, and completely normal due to the inherent
geologic variability and relatively large grain size (i.e. inhomogeneity).
12.2.3
Performance of Blank Material
Coarse blank material is inserted into the sample stream on a regular basis. Results were
examined for the two types of drilling for all deposits. Apart from the occasional high value
generally between 8 and 15 ppb Au, results were at or below detection limit. None of the values
exceeding the detection limit has any impact on the resource database.
P&E declared the data acquired and analyzed by True Gold to be satisfactory for use in a
resource estimate.

Page 84 of 357
13.0
MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING
13.1
INTRODUCTION
Metallurgical testwork in support of the Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) was

conducted at Kappes, Cassiday and Associates (KCA) between 2010 and 2012, in order to
provide an initial assessment of gold processing options to be used on the Karma deposit. This
testwork (the PEA Testwork) concluded that heap leaching would be the preferred method for
treating the mine production.
Further feasibility level metallurgical testwork (the Feasibility Study Testwork) was conducted
at McClelland Laboratories in 2012 and 2013, which focused on determining recoveries and
reagent consumptions for all ore types that would be mined from the deposits.
13.2
REVIEW OF HISTORICAL TESTWORK
PEA Testwork
Three successive test programs were carried out as part of the PEA Testwork
conducted by KCA. Samples from all three material types (oxide, transition &
sulphide) in the five deposits (GGI, GGII, Kao, and Rambo & Nami) were tested.
These programs are described below.
Program 1 (2010)
Mineralogical analysis of oxide, transition and sulphide samples from GGII and
Rambo;
Initial metallurgical testing of oxide, transition and sulphide samples from GGII
and Rambo deposits.
Program 2 (2011)
Initial metallurgical testing of oxide, transition and sulphide samples from GGI
and Kao deposits;
Follow-up metallurgical testing of oxide, transition and sulphide samples from
GGII.
Program 3 (2012)
Initial metallurgical testing of Nami deposit;

Follow-up metallurgical testing of sulphide samples from GGI, GGII and Kao
deposits;
Column leach testing of oxide composite samples from GGI, GGII and Kao
deposits.
The samples that were analysed were taken from reverse circulation drill cuttings and core
intervals from each of the three mineralized material types in each deposit. These were then
subjected to the following specific testwork:

Page 85 of 357
Head analysis;
Mineralogical analysis;
Whole material cyanidation;
Combined gravity concentration and cyanidation;
Carbon-in-leach (CIL);
Ore hardness;
Column leach and agglomeration;
Flotation followed by CIL with and without pressure oxidation pre-treatment on
refractory sulphides.
A summary of the PEA testwork results is shown in Table 13.1.

TABLE 13.1
SUMMARY OF PEA TESTWORK RESULTS
Head Analysis
Kao
GGI
GGII
Au
g/t
1.581 0.935 1.872
Ag
g/t
0.51 0.51 0.51
Total carbon
%
0.05 0.18 0.18
2
S
%
0.01 0.02 0.02
Hg
ppm <0.05 0.07 <0.05
Total Cu
ppm
37
82
102
cyanide soluble copper
ppm
1.88 2.14 9.97
As
ppm
728 1145 776
Fe
%
6.25 5.87 5.73
Sb
ppm
5
11
36
Comminution Testwork (BBWi)
Oxide
kWh/t
8.2
Transition
kWh/t 10.4
10.0
Sulphide
kWh/t
15.3 13.6
Cyanide Shake Test
Est. Au extraction
%
96
96
82
Est. Ag extraction
%
45
47
51
Bottle Roll at 80%-75 m
Au dissolution
%
99
96
93
Ag dissolution
%
41
50
46
Column Testwork
Crush size
mm
25
25
25
Calculated head grade -Au
g/t
1.47 1.189 1.708
Au extraction
%
95
93
90
Ag extraction
%
51
31
63
Days of leach
62
62
62
Cyanide consumption
kg/t
0.45 0.40 0.76
Cement addition
kg/t 22.96 7.79 9.31

Page 86 of 357
Results of the PEA testwork are listed below:
Mineralogy testwork indicated that the mineralized zones can be categorized into
non-refractory and refractory where:
Oxide material is leachable via conventional leaching processes for all deposits;
Transition material is leachable via conventional leaching for all deposits;
Sulphide material is leachable via conventional leaching in Rambo and Nami
deposits;
Sulphide material is not recoverable via conventional leaching processes in GGI,
GGII, and Kao deposits.
13.3
Bond Ball Work Index testwork indicated that the oxide material was soft while
the transition and sulphide material was slightly harder.
Bottle roll testwork performed on Kao, GGI and GGII showed gold dissolution of
99%, 96% and 93% respectively.
Column leach testwork on the Kao, GGI and GGII showed gold dissolution of
95%, 93% and 90% respectively. This was over a leach period of 62 days and a
crush size of P100-25mm. Cyanide consumption for the Kao, GGI and GGII was
0.45, 0.40 and 0.76 kg/t NaCN, respectively.
Preliminary agglomeration testwork results show that the GGI & GGII ore
composites pass at a cement addition of 4 kg/t and the Kao composite passed at a
cement addition of 8 kg/t. The Kao composite showed a higher degree of
degradation than the other composites.
Compacted permeability test work was completed on the composite samples to
examine the permeability of the bulk material under compaction loading,
equivalent to heap heights of 20 m and 40 m. The results indicated that additional
cement was required by the Kao and GGII for heights exceeding 10 m.
FEASIBILITY STUDY TESTWORK
The conclusion from the PEA was that heap leaching was the optimal processing method. Based
on the positive results contained in the PEA, a Feasibility Study was initiated, with heap leach
processing as the selected gold recovery method. In support of this, the Feasibility Study
Testwork program was initiated and carried out.
13.3.1
Introduction
The majority of the testwork conducted prior to the Feasibility Study was performed on three of
the twelve Karma ore types, namely GGI, GGII and Kao oxides. Heap leach testwork on the
remaining ore types were undertaken as part of the Feasibility Study Testwork program.
The effect of lithology and geochemistry, including cyanide solubility analysis, carbon
speciation, sulphur speciation, ICP Scan and clay swelling tests were investigated during the
Feasibility Study Testwork program so that these aspects could be related to the ore metallurgy
and its influence on the process.

Page 87 of 357
Geo-mechanical testwork, including tests related to abrasion index, unconfined compressive

strength, crushing index and bulk solids flow, were also investigated as part of the Feasibility
Study Testwork program.
The Feasibility Study Testwork focused on the metallurgical variability of the material in the
deposits and included the following testwork:
Head analysis
Mineralogical analysis
Comminution testwork
Bulk solids testwork
Column leach and agglomeration
Metallurgical Variability Testwork
A large number of samples were selected from the different ore types in the deposits, to provide
a representative basis to assess the metallurgical variability. This sample base was selected by
Garry Simons, True Golds Metallurgical Consultant, in conjunction with True Gold Geologists
by reviewing the orientation of typical sections through the deposits.
New samples were acquired from historical assay pulps for every assay interval and on every
hole on the typical sections.
This examination of the sections led to the following conclusions:
13.3.2
Graphite occurs in structurally distinct lenses or pods;

Graphite occurs predominantly in the lower transition and sulfide mineral
domains;
There is a high correlation between the presence of organic carbon and the
potential for a sample to preg rob;
The nature of the graphite is nuggety and thus more data points than present in the
current data set would be needed to model the presence of graphite;
The transition zone is mostly oxidized to just above the oxide/transition boundary.
In some of the pits, minor amounts of preg-robbing ore may be encountered. It is
assumed that this material will be stockpiled and processed at the end of the mine
operational life, to minimize its impact on the heap leach process.
Preg-Robbing
Of the 276 oxide samples analyzed, only 14 samples exhibited any sign of preg-robbing. Of
these, twelve exhibited only very mild preg-robbing characteristics (i.e. Preg-rob factor 5-10%)
while two exhibited only mild preg-robbing characteristics (10-20%).
13.3.3
The Effect of Sulfide Sulfur
Previous test work programs have established that the GGI, GGII and Kao sulfide samples were
not amenable to gold recovery by cyanide. It is likely that gold, when associated with sulfides in
these deposits, is refractory in nature.
All samples were analyzed for total sulfur content and for sulfur present as sulfides and sulfates.
Page 88 of 357
Correlation of Fire Assay Head Grade to Au (CN Sol).

There is a clear correlation between the head grade obtained by fire assay (FA) methods and
the assays for gold using cyanide shake tests (Au CN Sol). The relationship was shown to be
similar for all deposits with a low spread of data and low number of outliers. This is a good
indication of low variability within each or body.
13.3.4
Sample Composition
For oxide material, a study of sample variability indicated that the predominant parameter that
affected gold solubility by cyanide was the gold grade. No other distinguishing trends or
characteristics could be distinguished based on chemical composition or location within each
deposit. Oxide samples were therefore composited by grade.
In order to ensure that the samples were representative of the deposit, the metallurgical
variability sample statistics were used. The following parameters/assays were selected to be a
mineralogical or lithological finger print for each sample:
Au (FA)
Au (CN Sol)
Org C
Preg Rob factor
Sulfide Content
Al
As
Ca
Fe
K
Na
If the series of values fell within two standard deviations of the mean, the parameter was deemed
to belong within the deposit set. Values outside of the two standard deviation range were
identified and noted. Based on these criteria, the only sample that may not be representative of
the deposit from which it was extracted is the Rambo Oxide 2 sample. All other samples show a
high degree of correlation between matching parameters. Most of these were close to the deposit
mean value.
For transition and sulfide minerals, samples were acquired based on a drill plan that maximized
the sample availability. However these samples were also checked to ensure that the samples
were representative of the deposits that they were extracted from. Table 13.2 and Table 13.3
summarize the mineralogical finger prints for each of the deposits as well as the analysis of
each composite used for column testing.
13.3.5
Sample Preparation
Drill core intervals were shipped from the Karma project to the McClelland lab in Reno, Nevada
for testing. Selected samples were combined to create interval composites. Samples for bulk
density determinations were handpicked from of the interval composites. Sample preparation
flowsheets for each testwork composite were developed. An example is shown in Figure 13.1.
Page 89 of 357
TABLE 13.2
OXIDE MINERALOGICAL FINGERPRINT
GGI Metallurgical Variability (Mean)

GGI Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
GGI Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
GG I LG
GG I MG
GG I HG
GGII Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
GGII Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
GGII Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
GG II LG
GG II MG
GG II HG
Kao Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Kao Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Kao I Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Kao LG
Kao MG
Kao HG
Rambo Oxide Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Rambo Oxide Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Rambo Oxide Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Rambo Oxide 1
Rambo Oxide 2
Nami Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Nami Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Nami I Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Nami Oxide 1
Nami Oxide 2
Nami Oxide 3

Au
(FA)
g/t
0.50
1.39
0.00
0.39
0.67
1.11
1.62
4.86
0.00
0.33
0.85
1.42
0.85
2.75
0.00
0.33
0.78
1.59
1.04
3.47
0.00
0.70
1.29
0.41
1.12
0.00
0.73
1.30
0.81
Au
(CN Sol)
g/t
0.43
1.19
0.00
0.33
0.58
1.01
1.14
3.79
0.00
0.27
0.74
1.26
0.74
2.42
0.00
0.27
0.68
1.45
0.79
2.59
0.00
0.91
1.73
0.28
0.83
0.00
0.66
0.82
0.62
Org C
%
0.12
0.38
0.00
0.07
0.17
0.14
0.11
0.32
0.00
0.10
0.07
0.05
0.03
0.09
0.00
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.10
0.00
0.05
0.18
0.03
0.07
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.01
Preg
Rob
%
-3.58
3.02
-10.17
-2.30
-2.60
-0.90
-1.64
5.42
-8.70
0.00
-1.20
1.50
-1.24
5.94
-8.41
-1.20
0.60
0.00
-0.30
9.59
-10.19
-2.00
-0.90
-2.84
3.52
-9.20
0.60
-7.90
-0.30
Sulfid
e
%
0.03
0.07
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.06
0.00
0.02
0.03
0.01
Al
As
Ca
Fe
Na
%
8.41
17.75
6.57
9.88
9.72
8.96
8.30
18.99
3.53
8.59
7.90
8.40
9.92
21.18
7.23
10.60
11.05
10.70
7.92
17.32
4.97
7.95
7.04
8.85
19.31
5.63
6.03
6.65
8.72
mg/kg
993
2508
0
1230
1180
1370
460
1683
0
648
1300
498
712
1669
224
986
794
771
662
2228
0
882
2590
359
1007
0
1280
867
568
%
0.14
0.43
0.00
0.05
0.11
0.07
0.07
0.21
0.00
0.20
0.50
0.21
0.03
0.09
0.00
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.18
0.58
0.00
0.15
1.38
0.07
0.22
0.00
0.15
0.09
0.11
%
5.32
12.05
2.48
9.07
6.75
5.78
4.54
13.39
0.00
5.88
4.75
4.86
3.87
8.59
2.17
8.15
4.58
3.80
5.00
11.55
1.91
5.07
4.85
3.31
10.07
0.00
2.29
2.84
2.17
%
1.59
3.67
0.61
1.51
1.64
1.89
1.04
2.63
0.00
1.85
1.79
1.36
2.09
4.69
1.06
1.65
2.48
2.74
1.51
3.51
0.55
1.48
1.44
1.94
4.53
0.64
1.76
1.85
2.20
%
0.11
0.30
0.00
0.07
0.11
0.09
0.47
1.36
0.00
0.24
0.27
0.50
0.04
0.16
0.00
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.22
0.71
0.00
0.15
0.60
0.41
1.43
0.00
0.37
0.28
0.58
Page 90 of 357
TABLE 13.3
TRANSITION AND SULPHIDE MINERALOGICAL FINGERPRINT
Description
GG I Transition Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
GG I Transition Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
GG I Transition Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
GG I Transition
GG II Transition Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
GG II Transition Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
GG II Transition Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
GG II Transition
Kao Transition Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Kao Transition Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Kao Transition Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Kao Transition
Rambo Transition Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Rambo Transition Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Rambo Transition Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Rambo Transition 1
Rambo Transition 2
Nami Transition Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Nami Transition Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Nami Transition Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Nami Transition
Rambo Sulfide Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Rambo Sulfide Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Rambo Sulfide Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Rambo Sulfide
Nami Sulfide Metallurgical Variability (Mean)
Nami Sulfide Metallurgical Variability (Upper Bound)
Nami Sulfide Metallurgical Variability (Lower Bound)
Nami Sulfide

Au (FA)
g/t
0.84
2.61
0.00
0.85
2.58
8.11
0.00
2.22
0.48
1.40
0.00
0.81
2.87
14.66
0.00
2.61
0.36
0.55
1.55
0.00
0.61
4.72
19.58
0.00
0.55
0.74
3.08
0.00
0.59
Au (CN Sol)
g/t
0.53
1.70
0.00
0.50
1.94
6.61
0.00
1.57
0.54
1.66
0.00
0.73
1.03
4.08
0.00
1.89
0.25
0.36
1.06
0.00
0.42
1.43
5.91
0.00
1.66
0.44
1.96
0.00
0.38
Org C
%
0.26
0.88
0.00
0.18
0.25
0.79
0.00
0.27
0.03
0.05
0.03
0.04
0.19
0.66
0.00
0.17
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.49
1.43
0.00
0.67
0.03
0.07
0.01
0.04
Preg Rob
%
11.65
69.75
-46.46
2.00
22.47
87.23
-42.29
9.00
-1.68
2.46
-5.83
0.00
12.09
58.59
-34.42
-2.30
0.60
-3.28
3.51
-10.07
-2.00
10.64
70.24
-48.96
0.00
-2.62
4.52
-9.76
3.80
Sulfide
%
0.13
0.70
0.00
0.04
0.02
0.08
0.00
0.04
0.07
0.28
0.00
0.05
0.03
0.15
0.00
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.07
0.00
0.05
0.37
1.17
0.00
0.52
0.12
0.33
0.00
0.27
Al
%
7.35
15.78
5.18
7.59
7.74
16.47
5.75
7.79
8.10
17.29
5.94
8.22
7.26
15.43
5.43
7.00
7.33
7.74
16.02
6.65
7.56
6.89
14.53
5.38
6.80
6.78
14.02
5.84
6.24
As
mg/kg
1233
3693
0
1260
1560
5315
0
1595
1155
3090
0
1215
1146
4264
0
2540
222
531
1803
0
1605
3270
10704
0
5810
1308
4316
0
2300
Ca
%
0.75
2.48
0.00
0.58
0.69
2.26
0.00
0.75
0.58
1.75
0.00
0.58
0.83
2.62
0.00
1.40
0.52
0.54
1.55
0.00
0.60
1.60
3.95
0.08
2.00
1.58
3.74
0.41
2.37
Fe
%
4.80
10.73
2.51
5.08
5.23
12.10
1.93
5.34
2.99
6.50
1.97
2.95
4.59
10.41
2.13
4.81
1.90
2.07
4.65
1.06
2.18
3.68
9.98
0.00
3.79
1.72
3.73
1.16
1.95
K
%
1.78
4.36
0.18
1.76
1.49
3.48
0.49
1.57
2.24
4.90
1.38
2.40
1.50
3.55
0.42
1.44
2.03
1.83
3.95
1.25
2.04
1.46
3.48
0.34
1.71
1.68
3.62
1.15
1.83
Na
%
0.46
1.45
0.00
0.42
0.46
1.39
0.00
0.48
1.81
4.73
0.00
2.15
0.41
1.28
0.00
0.61
2.42
2.71
6.28
1.01
2.48
2.22
5.60
0.00
1.97
2.99
6.36
2.25
2.84
Page 91 of 357
Figure 13.1
Typical Sample Preparation Flowsheet
36 kg
GGI Central split

for master
compositing
36 kg
108 kg
35 kg
Column leach
test
Sample to be
saved
15 kg
12 kg
Head screen
split
3 x 10
kg
4 kg
2.8 kg
930 g
Head assay split A

Metallic screen
assay
930 g
Rotary split into

triplicates
1 kg
Head assay split B

930 g
Fire assay
ICP scan
Classical whole rock
Carbon and sulfur
Speciation
Cyanide soluble gold
and preg-rob
analysis

75m bottle roll

test
GGI East split for

master
compositing
36 kg
GGI West split for

master
compositing
Stage crush to 80%-19mm (100%-25mm) feed

size.
Cone and quarter/riffle split
Un-leached
agglomerated
load perm. test
splits
10 kg
Agglomerate
strength and
stability testing
split
5 kg
Stage crush/
pulverize to just
passing 850m
Rotary split
Split for further

crushing
Crush to an
80%
-1.7mm
Rotary split
1 kg
100 g
Clay swelling test
100 g
1 kg
150m screen
split
1.7mm bottle roll

test
Clay mineralogy
Head assay split C

XRD with clay size
separation
KARMA
Testwork Diagram GGI Master Composite
Rev A
Page 92 of 357
13.3.6
Comminution Testwork Results
Comminution testwork was conducted by SGS Lakefield in Johannesburg. The results are
discussed in detail in this section.
Unconfined Compressive Strength
Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) tests were conducted on the eight composite
samples. The UCS results represent very low failure loads. The UCS failure loads correspond to
the very low numbers obtained from the Bond Crushability Work Index (CWi) tests. The
Rambo, Nami and Kao samples revealed extremely low failure loads (<1 MPa on average). A
summary of the results is shown in Table 13.4.
TABLE 13.4
AVERAGE UCS TESTWORK VALUES
Units
MPa
Rambo Oxide
Comp Comp
1
2
0.40
0.24
Nami Oxide
Comp Comp
1
2
-
Kao Oxide
Comp
Comp
1
2
1.01
0.28
GGI Oxide
Comp
Comp
1
2
2.43
3.63
GGII Oxide
Comp
Comp
1
2
2.37
3.10
Bond Crushability Work Index

The results of the CWi tests performed on the eight composited ore samples are provided in
Table 13.5. All CWi results are low, suggestive of a very soft ore. The results are shown in Table
13.5.
TABLE 13.5
CWI TESTWORK RESULTS
Units
kWh/t
Rambo Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
2.1 0.7
-
Nami Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
1.6 0.6
-
Kao Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
3.0 0.7 2.2 0.7
GGI Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
5.6 1.1 5.9 1.3
GGII Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
4.6 1.4 6.4 1.4
Bond Abrasion Work Index (Ai)

A total of twelve Abrasion Work Index (Ai) tests were performed on composited samples.
From the Ai results, it can be concluded that the samples are all very soft and not abrasive. The
results are shown in Table 13.6.
TABLE 13.6
AI TESTWORK RESULTS
Units
g
13.3.7
Rambo Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
0.00465 0.0057
Nami Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
0.0049
-
Kao Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
0.0004
0.0057
GGI Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
0.03865 0.0041
GGII Oxide
Comp 1 Comp 2
0.0161
0.00225
Vendor Testwork
Vendor testwork was carried out on four samples (T1, T2, T3 and T4) to determine the physical
properties of the gold ore being crushed and the efficiency of double roll crushers and impact
Page 93 of 357
crushers in reducing the particle size of the ore. The efficiency of the methods to reduce the
particle size of the gold ore was evaluated by assessing the following:
The reduction ratio of the ore;

The minimum speed of the rollers at which ideal reduction ratios can be achieved;
The gap required to crush the specific ore.
The results indicate that the size distribution for the double roll crusher compares closely with
impact crusher results from T2 and T4. Size distribution for T1 was finer than for all other tests
including the double roll crusher while size distribution for T3 was coarser compared to all other
tests.
From the results, the impact crusher application produced better results in terms of reduction,
generation of -1 mm material and the throughput capacity for the gold ore tested. The vendor
believes that by using one stage impact crushing, a -50mm product could be achieved with a
single crushing stage, whereas more than one crushing stage would be required for the double
roll crusher.
Based on the test results, it was considered possible to process the Karma oxide ore with either
double roll crusher technology, impact crushing technology or feeder breaker technology.
Wear rates need to be considered when impact crushers are evaluated. Based on the test results it
was clear that the wear will not be a determining factor when using impact crushing technology.
13.3.8
Bulk Solids Flow Testwork Results
A 40 kg oxide sample of each GGI, GGII, Kao & Rambo was crushed to -4 mm and subjected to
the following bulk solids flow testwork:
Instantaneous and time related tests;

Density/compressibility tests;
Chute angle tests.
This testwork was conducted on each oxide sample at a moisture content of 5%, 8%, and 11%,
measured by weight.
Mass Flow Results
The flow pattern was identified by: 1) a first in, first out flow pattern; 2) minimized levels of
segregation; and 3) all material was in motion while discharging.
Funnel Flow Results
The flow pattern was identified by 1) a first in, last out flow pattern; 2) maximum levels of
segregation; and 3) material above the opening was in motion while the surrounding material
was stationery while discharging.

Page 94 of 357
Chute Angle Results

The chute angles were measured, after impact pressure (ranging from 2.1 kPa to 5.5 kPa), for: 1)
direct sliding; and 2) sliding starting in a different direction than that of the impact direction.
13.3.9
Recovery Testwork Results
Recovery testwork was conducted at the McClelland lab in Reno, Nevada. The head analysis, SG
determination, bottle roll tests, agglomerate strength and stability tests, column leach tests and
load permeability testwork was performed on oxide, transition and sulphide composites.
Head Analysis
Head analysis testwork included the following:
Au (FA) and Au (CN sol);

ICP multi-element scan;
Metallic screen;
Classical whole rock analysis.
The head analysis results were as follows:
Silver levels were below 5 ppm in all cases and thus will not negatively impact
leach kinetics;
Mercury levels were low and thus no precautionary measures need be
implemented in the gold room;
Antimony levels were low, less than 50 ppm throughout. Antimony reduces gold
dissolution, thus making the gold refractory. Therefore gold dissolution will not
be affected by antimony;
Arsenic levels were low less than 0.58% As in all cases. Arsenic reduces gold
dissolution, thus making the gold refractory. Therefore gold dissolution will not
be affected by arsenic.
Specific Gravity Analysis

Table 13.7 is a summary of the Specific Gravity (SG) analysis for the various ore types.
TABLE 13.7
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY ANALYSIS
Specific Gravity
Zone
GGI GGII Kao Rambo Nami
Oxide
1.94 1.96 1.64
1.78
1.75
Transition 2.3
2.25 2.12
2.37
2.21
Sulphide
2.68 2.62 2.66
2.58
2.69
The SG for each ore type was determined by taking an average across the entire mineralised
zone.

Page 95 of 357
Mineralogy Including Clay Swelling Tests

X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis on the GGI, GGII and Kao oxide composites, and the Nami
sulphide composite, was performed to investigate the presence of clay minerals. From the results,
the following can be concluded:
The Nami sulphide composite contained sulphides that were overprinted by

hematic oxidation;
All oxide samples were oxidized with hematite and apparent clay minerals;
Quartz content ranged from 16% to 34% for all composites;
The Nami sulphide composite was the only composite that contained carbonates
(dolomite and calcite).
The absence of carbonates and plagioclase, along with the presence of hematite in the oxide
samples, indicated that the clay minerals (kaolinite and smectite) were formed by the oxidation
of sulphides. The sulphide oxidation generated an acidic solution that dissolved the carbonates
and altered the plagioclase and mica in the original host rock.
Clay swelling tests were performed on all composites and no swelling was observed.
Bottle Roll Tests
Bottle roll tests were conducted on all composites at a P80 of 75 m and 1.7 mm. It is clear that
there is a correlation between the bottle roll tests and the column leach tests with regards to
recovery. Once this correlation is understood, relatively quick bottle roll tests can be used to
predict column recoveries without having to leach for an excessive period. In general the column
recoveries fall between the bottle roll recoveries at 75 m and 1.7 mm.
Agglomerate Strength and Stability Tests
Agglomerate strength and stability tests were performed, to determine the initial cement
additions required by the load permeability testwork. These values are as follows:
Oxides: 7.0 12.5 kg/t

Transition: 4.0 11.0 kg/t
Sulphide: No cement addition required
Column Leach Tests

A portion of the column leach tests are still in progress at McClelland, The column leach
testwork will give an indication of the expected commercial recovery and cyanide consumption.
McClelland indicated that the column leach recoveries closely resemble the actual commercial
recoveries that can be expected. These column recoveries were used for the Feasibility Study
design with a small discount factor applied.
Recoveries for the completed columns were calculated using a triplicate tails fire assay as well as
a screened tails fire assay. The recoveries calculated on each of these tails assays were averaged
to calculate the design recovery.
Page 96 of 357
Where possible, cyanide consumptions were obtained from the columns after rinsing and
washing of the columns were completed. Where columns were still leaching, the current cyanide
consumptions were used. This seems to be a conservative approach as the cyanide consumption
will reduce when the columns are rinsed and washed. The only cyanide consumptions not taken
into account for design was on the coarse (P80 = 19mm for Rambo & P80 = 6.3 for Nami)
sulphide composites as the results on the fine (P80 = 1.7 mm for Rambo and Nami) composite
column leach tests is believed to be more representative. As the Rambo sulphide composite is
currently still in the early phase of leaching, the Nami Sulphide cyanide consumption was
applied to the Rambo sulphide composite for design.
As some of the columns were not done leaching, recoveries were obtained as follows:
Oxide Composites
GGI, GGII, Kao, Rambo & Nami Columns were complete and the actual
average recoveries were used for design
GGI, GGII, Kao, Rambo & Nami - Calculated head grade was used to
determine recoveries
Transition Composites
GGII & Nami Columns are still leaching
GGII - Capped recovery at max 67.7% due to column not done leaching
and current recovery value is at 67.7%
Nami - The transition recovery should not be lower than the sulphide
recovery, it should be noted that the Nami transition ore will have to be
crushed finer in practice (in line with the Nami Sulphide ore). As a
conservative estimate the testwork recovery at the coarse grind was used.
Sulphide Composites
Rambo & Nami Columns still leaching
Rambo Sulphide - Used the Nami Sulphide Column Leach vs BRT

recovery relationships to interpolate the Rambo Sulphide CLT recovery
Nami Capped recovery at max 85.7% due to column not done leaching
and current recovery value is at 85.7% based on the head analysis
The recovery and cyanide consumptions used to complete the design are shown in Table 13.8,
Table 13.9 and Table 13.10, for oxide, transition and sulphide composites, respectively.
TABLE 13.8
OXIDE COLUMN LEACH TESTWORK RECOVERY & CYANIDE CONSUMPTION
Oxide Composite
Description
Units
GGI
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Column Leach Au Recovery Tail
%
94.3
91.1
95.5
95.5
Assay
Column Leach Au Recovery Tail
%
92.0
89.7
95.5
93.7
Screened Assay
Column Leach Au Recovery - Design
%
93.2
90.4
95.5
94.6
Cyanide Consumption (Testwork)
kg/t
0.70
0.65
0.44
0.72
Cyanide Consumption (Design)
kg/t
0.35
0.33
0.22
0.36

Nami
91.5
93.1
92.3
0.5
0.25
Page 97 of 357
TABLE 13.9
TRANSITION COLUMN LEACH TESTWORK RECOVERY & CYANIDE CONSUMPTION
Description
Units
Column Leach Au Recovery Tail Assay

Column Leach Au Recovery Tail Screened Assay
Cyanide Consumption (Model)
%
%
%
kg/t
kg/t
Transition Composite
70.5 67.7 88.5
83.1
79.6
68.1 67.7 86.3
80.3
79.6
69.3 67.7 87.4
81.7
79.6
1.88 1.72 1.04
1.14
1.04
0.94 0.86 0.52
0.57
0.52
TABLE 13.10
SULPHIDE COLUMN LEACH TESTWORK RECOVERY & CYANIDE CONSUMPTION
Sulphide Composite
Description
Units
Rambo
Nami
Column Leach Au Recovery Tail Assay
%
77.9
85.7
Column Leach Au Recovery Tail Screened Assay
%
77.9
85.7
%
77.9
85.7
kg/t
5.76
5.76
Cyanide Consumption (Model)
kg/t
2.88
2.88
Load Permeability Tests
The load permeability testwork is still in progress and as a result, the agglomerate strength and
stability tests were used as a basis for determining cement additions to each composite. A factor
of 1.5 was applied to all the composite agglomerate strength and stability test cement dosages to
derive a conservative and suitable cement dosage. The results are shown in Table 13.11, Table
13.12 and Table 13.13 for oxide, transition and sulphide composites respectively.
TABLE 13.11
OXIDE COMPOSITES CEMENT DOSAGE
Description
Units
Cement Addition (Agglomerate S&S test)

Cement Addition (Design)
kg/t
kg/t
Oxides
9.0
9.7 15.7
10.0
12.2
13.5 14.5 23.5
15.0
18.3
TABLE 13.12
TRANSITION COMPOSITES CEMENT DOSAGE
Transition
Description
Units
Cement Addition (Agglomerate S&S test) kg/t
4.0
7.0
7.4
4.8
9.0
kg/t
6.0
10.5 11.1
7.1
13.5

Page 98 of 357
TABLE 13.13
SULPHIDE COMPOSITES CEMENT DOSAGE
Description
Cement Addition (Agglomerate S&S test)
Units
kg/t
kg/t
Sulphides
Rambo
Nami
4.0
4.0
For the sulphide material, no cement was required during the agglomerate strength and stability
tests, but as a precaution a dosage of 4kg/t was allowed for both Rambo and Nami.

Page 99 of 357
14.0
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATES
14.1
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report section is to summarize the Mineral Resources Estimate updates for
the five deposits of the Karma Project. During the course of this study, the class model of
Goulagou II was adjusted, the density models for Goulagou I, Goulagou II, Rambo and Nami
deposits were revised while their grade, percent and rock type models remain the same as the last
Resource Estimate, dated October 24, 2012, and the entire model for the Kao deposit has been
updated with a refined geological interpretation.
This resource estimate is in compliance with NI 43-101 and CIM. The resource estimate was
undertaken by Yungang Wu, P.Geo., Antoine Yassa, P.Geo. and Eugene Puritch, P.Eng., of P&E
Mining Consultants Inc. of Brampton Ontario. The effective date of this resource estimate is
November 1, 2013.
14.2
DATABASES
All drilling data were provided by True Gold Mining Inc. (formerly Riverstone Resources Inc.)
in the form of Excel or text file databases. Table 14.1 summarizes the data of the drill holes and
vertical cross-sections utilized for the resource estimates.
TABLE 14.1
DRILL HOLE DATABASE AND VERTICAL SECTION SUMMARY
Deposit
Kao
Goulagou I
Goulagou II
Rambo
Nami
Cross
Cross
Drillholes
No. of
Total
Constrained
Section
Section
inside
Cross
Section Names
Drillholes
Assays
Orientation Spacing
Wireframes
Sections
(looking)
(m)
1,497,200N
587
526
11,253
31
0
50
1,498,700N
572,100E
421
298
6,936
44
90
50
574,250 E
574,550E
457
255
6,739
47
90
50
576,850 E
583,440E
85
66
767
18
90
25
583,865 E
1,507,500N
84
74
1,234
9
0
50
1,507,900N
All remaining drill hole data outside the resource model wireframes have been excluded from the
resource database. All data are expressed in metric units and grid coordinates refer to the
ADINDAN (ADI-E) datum, Zone 30. Surface drill hole plans are shown in Appendix I.
14.3
DATA VERIFICATION
Verification of the assay data was performed on Au assay intervals for all five Karma deposits. A
few minor data entry errors were observed and corrected. Table 14.2 provides a data verification
summary.

Page 100 of 357
Deposit
Rambo
Nami
Kao
Goulagou I
Goulagou II
14.4
14.4.1
TABLE 14.2
ASSAY DATA VERIFICATION SUMMARY
Number of
% of Total
% of Total
Assays
Constrained
Assay
Assay Laboratories
Verified
Assays
Database
3,035
61
44
ALS CHEMEX Ouagadougou,
5,568
91
90
Jhb, Vancouver & Historical
37,372
72
81
Holes at Goulagou assayed at
Intertek - BF
26,818
85
84
DOMAIN INTERPRETATION
Goulagou I, Goulagou II, Rambo and Nami Deposits
The domain wireframes of the Goulagou I, Goulagou II, Rambo and Nami Deposit remain the
same as the last resource estimate dated October 24, 2012. The deposit domain boundaries were
determined from lithology, structure and grade boundary interpretation from visual inspection of
drill hole sections. These domains were created with computer screen digitizing on drill hole
sections in Gemcom by Antoine Yassa, P.Geo. The domain outlines were influenced by the
selection of mineralized material above 0.2 g/t Au that demonstrated a lithological and structural
zonal continuity along strike and down dip. In some cases mineralization below 0.2 g/t Au was
included for the purpose of maintaining zonal continuity. Smoothing was utilized to remove
obvious jogs and dips in the domains and incorporated a minor addition of Inferred
mineralization. This exercise allowed for easier domain creation without triangulation errors
from solids validation.
On each section, polyline interpretations were digitized from drill hole to drill hole but not
typically extended more than 50 meters into untested territory. The minimum constrained true
width for inclusion in model was approximately 2 metres. The interpreted polylines from each
section were then wireframed in Gemcom into 3-dimensional domains. The wireframes were
subsequently validated in Gemcom and were error free. See Appendix II.
14.4.2
Kao Deposit
The 3D geological model for the Kao deposit has been revised from the last NI 43-101 technical
report dated October 24, 2012, based on a refined geological interpretation by Christopher Lee,
P.Geo., of True Gold. The new geologic model captures additional structural controls that were
not incorporated into the previous model. These additional structures consist of a set of relatively
steep, sub-parallel, NNE-dipping structures that transect and offset the primary shallow eastdipping structure that formed the basis of the former interpretation (figure 14.1).

Page 101 of 357
Figure 14.1
Structures of the Kao Deposit
Note: NNE-dipping structures in red, E-dipping structures in green

These structures were defined by True Gold based on:(i) structural observations and
interpretations made in drill core, (ii) the strong continuity of high grade intercepts evident in the
drill hole data, and (iii) coincident disruptions in chargeability anomalies delineated by a recent
IP survey. Antoine Yassa, P.Geo. of P&E has reviewed and accepted the geologic model.
The structural interpretation formed the control for the Structural Trend tool in Leapfrog
Mining software. The Structural Trend tool allows the operator to impose various anisotropies
on the interpolation function to better honour the local grade distribution within the deposit. A
Structural Trend includes location, orientation, strength and range parameters, which can be
independently modified to produce the most accurately constrained isosurface interpolations
desired. Additional controls on the interpolation process, including variogram parameters, such
as nugget value, model type and range, as well as, various grade transformation tools, may all be
employed to help refine the continuity and shape of the final isosurfaces.
Two grade shells were produced in Leapfrog to create a low grade domain (0.2-1.0 g/t Au) and a
high grade domain (>1.0 g/t Au). The cut-off grade for the low grade domain was chosen as a
lower economic threshold for the deposit, while still capturing adequate continuity of
mineralization throughout the deposit. The cut-off for the high grade domain was identified by a
subtle inflection in the grade distribution on a cumulative probability plot and was designed to
restrict the influence of high grade intercepts in the block grade estimation process described
below.
The resulting wireframes (domains) were used for statistical analysis, grade interpolation, rock
coding and resource reporting purposes. All domains of the deposits are illustrated in Appendix
II.
14.4.3
Weathering Zone Surfaces
Three weathering zones were defined for all five deposits based on drill hole logging. The oxide
zone is defined as Saprolite, weathered rock located on the top of the deposits. The Transition
Page 102 of 357
Zone is partially weathered rock, located between the Oxide and Sulphide zone. The Sulphide
Zone is fresh rock below the Transition Zone. The contact surfaces of the Oxide and Transition
Zones, and the Transition and Sulphide Zones were created using drill hole logging.
Some discrepancies in the location of the weathering zone contacts exist between drill hole
types. For example, the fresh rock contact as identified in core is commonly deeper than the
same contact logged in RC chips. Similarly, the top of the transition zone commonly appears at a
shallower depth in core, relative to RC logs. These differences are attributed to the different
criteria used in the logging process for each drill hole type.
The diamond drill holes are expected to be more accurate at logging these contacts, since the
more subtle differences between zones are far better preserved in the core, and the probability of
differentiation of material is lower in RC drilling, as chips are abraded and washed out of the
hole during the drilling process. Therefore, core holes were primarily used when determining the
location of the weathering contacts. In the absence of a core hole, RC logs were used. If an RC
hole did not report a similar weathering contact elevation to a core hole within a radius of 50m,
the contact elevation in the core hole was used. If two RC holes reported the hard rock surface at
different elevations, within a reasonably close horizontal distance, then the lower of the two was
utilized.
14.5
DOMAIN ROCK CODE DETERMINATION
The rock code and name of each mineralized domain, used for the five resource models were
defined in the sections following.
Kao Rock Code Description
100
200
Au > 0.2ppm
Au > 1.0ppm
Goulagou I Rock Code Description

110
111
113
114
116
117
112
GGI_A
GGI_B
GGI_C
GGI_D
GGI_F
GGI_G
GGI_J
115
131
133
134
135
136
GGI_K
GGIE_A
GGIE_C
GGIE_D
GGIE_E
GGIE_F
Goulagou II Rock Code Description

210
220
230
240
250
260
GGII_E
GGII_F
GGII_G
GGII_H
GGII_I
GGII_J
270
265
275
280
290
GGII_K
GGII_KFW
GGII_KHW
GGII_L
GGII_M

Page 103 of 357
Rambo Rock Code Description

10
20
30
40
50
Main
C1
C2
FW1
FW2
60
70
80
90
HW1
HW2
HW3
HW4
Nami Rock Code Description

110
120
Main
A
130
140
B
C
All Deposits
0
10
20
Air
Oxide Zone
Transition Zone
30
Sulphide Zone
14.6
997
998
999
Oxide Zone Waste

Transition Zone Waste
Sulphide Zone Waste
GRADE CAPPING
Grade capping was investigated on the raw assay values in the databases to ensure that the
possible influence of erratic high values did not bias the grade interpolations. Extraction files
were created for the Au data constrained within the modeled mineralized domains. The extracted
data were plotted on log-normal histograms and examined to evaluate the presence of outliers,
and determine appropriate capping levels for each domain. In the high grade zone at Kao, a
number of higher grade values appeared to stand out from a statistical point of view, but when
examined spatially, they all occurred along structural intersections within the structural model.
Due to this observed relationship between high grades and structural intersections, the high
grades were deemed to be a significant component of the grade population, allowing a much
higher top cut than in other deposits. See histograms in Appendix III. Table 14.3 details all grade
capping values.

Page 104 of 357
TABLE 14.3
AU GRADE CAPPING SUMMARY
Deposit
Rambo
Nami
Kao
Goulagou I
Domain
Main
C1
C2
FW1
FW2
HW1
HW2
HW3
HW4
Main
A
B
C
Au0.2ppm
Au1.0ppm
GGI_A
GGI_B
GGI_C
GGI_D
GGIE_E
GGI_F
GGI_G
GGI_J
GGI_K
GGIE_A
GGIE_C
GGIE_D
GGIE_F
GGII_E
GGII_F
GGII_G
GGII_H
GGII_I
GGII_J
GGII_K
GGII_KFW
GGII_KHW
GGII_L
GGII_M
Capping Value No. of Assays

Au g/t
Capped
45
2
No Cap
5
No Cap
8
3
No Cap
No Cap
15
4.5
2
No Cap
3
40
4.5
4.5
4.5
6.0
4.0
No Cap
No Cap
4.5
No Cap
No Cap
4.5
5.0
5.5
No Cap
No Cap
No Cap
20.0
No Cap
15.0
15.0
5.0
No Cap
No Cap
4.5

4
1
0
6
0
1
3
0
0
5
7
2
0
6
7
3
5
3
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
5
1
5
0
0
0
2
0
2
2
2
0
0
2
Cumulative
Capped
Raw Coefficient
% for
Coefficient
of Variation
Capping
of Variation
98.9
2.40
2.08
96.7
1.30
0.78
100.0
1.47
1.47
95.1
2.26
1.41
100.0
1.40
1.40
98.7
2.91
1.90
94.8
2.32
1.24
100.0
1.24
1.24
100.0
0.82
0.82
99.3
3.84
2.06
98.0
1.83
1.62
98.5
1.22
1.09
100.0
1.42
1.42
99.9
0.87
0.87
99.6
4.12
1.51
99.8
1.05
1.04
99.0
0.93
0.84
99.5
1.53
0.97
99.9
0.98
0.97
99.7
0.87
0.85
100
0.99
0.99
100
0.69
0.69
99.8
1.01
0.99
100
0.88
0.88
100
0.70
0.70
99.47
0.98
0.86
99.81
1.38
0.97
99.51
1.09
1.04
100
1.08
1.08
100
1.21
1.21
100
1.42
1.42
99.9
1.58
1.52
100
1.14
1.14
99.8
1.37
1.26
99.9
1.41
1.35
97.1
1.75
1.43
100
1.21
1.21
100
1.13
1.13
98.5
1.30
1.28
Page 105 of 357
14.7
COMPOSITING
61.4% of all the sample lengths were 2.0 m. In order to regularize the sampling for grade
interpolation, assay compositing to 2.0 m lengths was carried out down hole within the
constraints of the above-mentioned domains. These composites were calculated for Au over
2.0 m lengths starting at the first point of intersection between the drill hole and the hanging wall
contact of each mineralized domain, and ending at the footwall of the domain. Un-assayed
intervals were set to 0.001 g/t. Any composites that were less than 0.50 m in length were
discarded, so as not to introduce any short sample bias in the interpolation process. The
constrained composite data were extracted into point profiles for the grade interpolation. Sample
lengths are shown in Table 14.4.
Deposit
Kao
Goulagou I
Goulagou II
Nami
Rambo
14.8
TABLE 14.4
SAMPLE LENGTH
Mean Length
% of 1 m Length
2.00
0.1
1.82
17.8
1.31
70.6
1.88
7.6
1.67
15.1
% of 2 m Length
99.6
81.9
27.0
82.2
38.0
VARIOGRAPHY
Variography was attempted on the constrained composites of the five Karma deposits with
variable success. Reasonable directional variograms were attained for the Kao, Goulagou I and
Goulagou II. The Rambo and Nami deposits yielded reasonable omni-variograms. The selected
variograms are exhibited in Appendix-IV.
14.9
BULK DENSITY
The bulk density samples were collected from all zones of the deposits. The densities used for
the creation of density block models were derived from 5 sets of data:
Kappes, Cassiday & Associated (KCA) data contained 639 samples taken
between 2010 and 2012. The density samples were measured using wax
immersion testing in Reno.
McLelland Laboratories (McL) tested 128 samples using wax immersion. The
density samples were part of the metallurgical testing done in 2013.
RockLab (RL) did geotechnical test work for SRK Consulting on behalf of True
Gold in 2013. The density samples were measured using the calculated volumes
of prepared core samples. The data set consisted of 94 samples.
P&E collected 119 density samples from core in December, 2012 and the samples
were tested using wax immersion at ACT Labs, in Ancaster, Ontario.
Golden Star (GS) data includes 1,083 historical data points with limited
documentation, but it was noted that the samples were done using wax immersion.
Table 14.5 summarizes the bulk density data used for this study. Some bulk
density data gathered from Laterite (Ferricrete/duricrust, typically near surface)
were excluded.

Page 106 of 357
TABLE 14.5
BULK DENSITY DATA USED FOR RESOURCE ESTIMATE BY LAB AND DEPOSIT
Number of Bulk Density Samples by Deposit
Lab
Goulagou
Goulagou I
Kao
Nami
Rambo
II
GS
293
790
KCA
238
195
89
112
5
P&E (ACT Labs)
31
36
26
15
11
RL
22
21
20
8
23
McL
39
40
32
17
Total
623
1,082
167
152
39
The average bulk densities of each weathering zone for the deposits are tabulated in Table 14.6.
TABLE 14.6
AVERAGE BULK DENSITY BY WEATHERING ZONE (T/M3)
Zone
Goulagou I Goulagou II
Kao
Nami
Rambo
Oxide
1.94
1.96
1.64
1.75
1.78
Transition
2.30
2.25
2.12
2.21
2.37
Sulphide
2.68
2.62
2.66
2.69
2.58
14.10 BLOCK MODELING
The block model set-up of the five deposits remained the same as the last resource estimate
October 24, 2012, while the entire block model was revised for the Kao deposit due to the new
geological interpretation and model improvements. The resource models of the Karma project
were constructed separately with the following parameters (presented in Table 14.7 and Table
14.8.)
Deposit
Rambo
Nami
Kao
Goulagou I
Goulagou II
TABLE 14.7
BLOCK MODEL PARAMETERS
Block Size
No. of Blocks
(X,Y,Z) m
7,983,360
2.5 x 2.5 x 2.5
1,374,100
5x5x5
13,368,576
5x5x5
4,939,200
5x5x5
7,429,760
5x5x5

Columns, Rows &

Levels
336-216-110
151-175-52
412-416-78
490-180-56
520-188-76
Page 107 of 357
TABLE 14.8
BLOCK MODEL ORIGIN
Deposit
Rambo
Nami
Kao
Goulagou I
Goulagou II
583,237.5
585,645
583,500
572,002.5
574,397.5
1,503,990
1,507,272.5
1,497,005
1,506,500
1,504,875
400
400
400
400
400
Model Rotation
(degrees)
0
0
0
0
0
Separate block models were created for rock type, density, percent, class and gold grade.
All blocks in the rock type block model were initially assigned a waste rock code of 99,
corresponding to country rocks. Blocks in the rock type block model were coded by their
corresponding domain (listed in Section 14.5), as long as the domain captured at least 1% of the
block, by volume. The topographic surface provided by the client was subsequently utilized to
assign rock code 0, corresponding to air, to all blocks 50 % or greater above the surface. The
rock type models were also coded for Oxide, Transition and Sulphide zone, respectively, using
the interpreted weathering surfaces in each of the deposits.
The percent block model was set up to accurately represent the partial volume of each block
inside the constraining mineralized domain. The percentage values of the blocks within the
artisanal mining areas were reduced by 25% to account for the gold mined out by the local
orpailleurs (illegal miners).
The bulk density models for the Oxide and Transition zones of each deposit were interpolated
using the nearest neighbour method. The bulk density model for the Sulphide zone of each
deposit was initialized with an average density of the zone as presented in Table 14.6.
Kao Grade Interpolation
The high grade domain isosurface produced by the Leapfrog interpolation follows the defined
structures very closely, as it was designed to do. However, in order to constrain its widths and
extensions along the structures, many restrictive parameters were imposed on the interpolation.
As a result, the high grade domain solid is more discontinuous than would be expected from a
geological point of view. In other words, in areas where there are larger than average gaps in the
data along a particular structure, the Leapfrog model is closed off; whereas, these same areas
would naturally be interpreted as continuously mineralized in a manually digitized model. Such
an interpretation is well supported by the strong link between grade and distance from a
particular structure (figure 14.2).
Au assay statistics for the Kao Deposit depict that the higher grades are mostly distributed along
the structures within a range of 15 m to 20 m of the structures (figure 14.2). Beyond this
distance, the average grades drop to a, more or less, consistent background level. Using this
relationship, coupled with the geological evidence, it was determined that the continuity of the
high grade domain produced in Leapfrog inadequately represented the grade distribution in the
deposit. This was addressed by developing a Connector domain in the block model to
effectively stitch the gaps in the high grade domain (figure 14.3). Blocks within these gaps were
Page 108 of 357
re-coded as connector blocks, if they fell within a prescribed orthogonal distance of the nearest
structure. The distance of influence ranges by structure from 10 to 15 metres, based on individual
plots similar to Figure 14.2.
Figure 14.2
Correlation of Gold Grade with Distance to Structures for Kao Deposit

Page 109 of 357
Figure 14.3
Correlation of Au Grade with Distance to Structures for Kao Deposit*
During grade interpolation, blocks within the high grade and low grade domains were hardbounded to their respective domain data i.e. their grades could only be informed by one or the
other dataset. Blocks within the connector zone, on the other hand, were soft-bounded i.e. their
grades could be informed by both high and low grade domains. In this way, all blocks adjacent to
the structures would be allowed to receive higher grades, but due to the reduced sampling in
these areas, the high grades were dampened by the inclusion of lower grades nearby.
With 7 separate structures in the structural trend model, 2 grade shells, and a Connector zone, the
Kao block model comprises a total of 21 sub-domains (table 14.9). Each sub-domain controls its
own search parameters in the interpolation, including: orientation, ranges, and data selection.
Domain
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au1.0ppm
Au1.0ppm
Au1.0ppm
Au1.0ppm
TABLE 14.9
KAO SUB-DOMAINS USED FOR GRADE INTERPOLATION
Distance to Structure
Rock Code Used for
Structure Sub-Domain
(m)
Grade Interpolation
Nflat
101
>15
100
NFlatHW
102
>10
100
NW1
103
>15
100
NW2
104
>15
100
NW_FW
105
>15
100
Cflat
106
>10
100
Sflat
107
>10
100
Nflat
201
200
NFlatHW
202
200
NW1
203
200
NW2
204
200

Page 110 of 357
Domain
Au1.0ppm
Au1.0ppm
Au1.0ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
Au0.2ppm
TABLE 14.9
KAO SUB-DOMAINS USED FOR GRADE INTERPOLATION
Distance to Structure
Rock Code Used for
Structure Sub-Domain
(m)
Grade Interpolation
NW_FW
205
200
Cflat
206
200
Sflat
207
200
Nflat
301
=15
100 and 200
NFlatHW
302
=10
100 and 200
NW3
303
=15
100 and 200
NW4
304
=15
100 and 200
NW_FW
305
=15
100 and 200
Cflat
306
=10
100 and 200
Sflat
307
=10
100 and 200
Inverse distance cubed (1/d3) was utilized for grade interpolation based on the Au composites
which were extracted from drill hole profiles into point profiles. Multiple grade interpolation
passes were utilized for all deposits. Grade blocks were interpolated applying the following
parameters in Table 14.10 below. The resulting block grades are illustrated in cross-sections for
each deposit in Appendix V.
TABLE 14.10
AU BLOCK MODEL INTERPOLATION PARAMETERS
Domain
Dip
Strike
Max#
Dip Dir.
Dip
Across Dip
Min # Max #
Deposit Classification
Strike (o)
Range Range
per
o
()
(degrees)
Range (m)
Sample Sample
Search
(m)
(m)
Hole
Indicated
180
90
-60
35
35
10
2
3
20
Rambo
Inferred
180
90
-60
100
100
50
2
1
20
Indicated
270
0
-30
50
50
15
2
3
20
Nami
Inferred
270
0
-30
150
150
75
2
1
20
Indicated
50/70* 50/70*
10
2
3
12
Kao
See Table 14.11
Inferred
200
200
30
2
1
12
Indicated
0
90
-90
40
45
15
2
3
20
GGI
Inferred
0
90
-90
100
120
40
2
1
20
Indicated
12
102
-80
45
45
15
2
3
20
GGII
Inferred
12
102
-80
120
120
40
2
1
20
*50 m for blocks influenced by NW structures; 70m for blocks influenced by Flat structures (dip angle less than
30o).
TABLE 14.11
KAO STRUCTURES SEARCH ELLIPSE ORIENTATIONS
Structure
Strike
Dip
Dip Direction
N Flat
0
25
90
N Flat-HW
350
30
80
NW1
295
40
25
NW2
290
55
20
NW-FW
295
55
25
C Flat
0
25
90
S Flat
0
25
90
Page 111 of 357
14.11 RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION

All resource classifications were determined from the Indicated and Inferred search ellipsoid
parameters indicated in Table 14.10. The block model classifications of Goulagou II have been
adjusted from the last NI43-101 report of October 24, 2012 to represent the resource
classification more reasonably. The resulting classification blocks can be seen on the selected
block model cross-sections in Appendix-VI.
14.12 RESOURCE ESTIMATE
The Karma resource estimate was derived from applying Au cut-off grades to the block model
and reporting the resulting tonnage and grade for potentially mineable areas. The Au cut-off
grade calculations for resource reporting of the open pit potentially economic portions of the
mineralization were founded on operating costs for projects similar to Karma as follows:
Oxide Cut-Off Grade Calculation US$
Au Price
Au Refining
Au Recovery
Royalty
Process Cost
General & Administration

US$4.60/oz
90%
4%
$7.25/tonne milled
$1.35/tonne mined
Process and G&A costs per ore tonne = ($7.25 + $1.35) = $8.60/tonne
Oxide cut-off = ($8.60)/[(($1,557-$4.60)/oz/31.1035 x 96% x 90% Recovery)] = 0.20 g/t
Transition Cut-Off Grade Calculation US$
Au Price
Au Refining
Au Recovery
Royalty
Process Cost

US$4.60/oz
80%
4%
$7.25/tonne milled
$1.35/tonne mined
Transition cut-off = ($8.60)/[(($1,557-$4.60)/oz/31.1035 x 96% x 80% Recovery)] = 0.22 g/t

Page 112 of 357
Sulphide Cut-Off Grade Calculation US$

Au Price
Au Refining
Au Recovery
Royalty
Process Cost

US$4.60/oz
85%
4%
$19.00/tonne milled
$1.35/tonne mined
Sulphide cut-off = ($20.35)/[(($1,557-$4.60)/oz/31.1035 x 96% x 85% Recovery)] = 0.50 g/t
A 0.50 g/t Au cut-off was applied as the Sulphide cut-off grade for Goulagou I, Goulagou II and
Kao deposits, while 0.22 g/t was used for the Sulphide cut-off grade for the Nami and Rambo
deposits where the sulphides are amenable to heap leaching.
14.13 PIT OPTIMIZATION PARAMETERS
The five Karma open pit resource models were further investigated with pit optimizations to
ensure a reasonable stripping ratio was applied and a reasonable assumption of potential
economic extraction could be made (See Appendix VII). The following parameters were utilized
in the pit optimizations:
Au Price
Au Refining
Au Royalty
Oxide Au Recovery
Transition Au Recovery
Sulphide Au Recovery
Oxide Mining Cost
Transition Mining Cost
Sulphide Mining Cost
Oxide/Transition Process Cost
Sulphide Process Cost
General/Administration
Pit Slopes

US$4.60/oz.
4%
90%
80%
85%
$1.61/tonne mined
$1.94/tonne mined
$2.05/tonne mined
$7.25/tonne milled
$19.00/tonne milled
$1.35/tonne milled
50 degrees
14.14 MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE REPORT

The mineral resource estimate of Karma Project was conducted by Antoine Yassa, P.Geo.,
Eugene Puritch, P.Eng. and Yungang Wu, P.Geo.. The resulting In-pit resource estimate for the
Karma deposits is shown in Table 14.12.

Page 113 of 357
Deposit
TABLE 14.12
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.20
Oxide
6,264,000
0.63
0.22
0.65
Indicated
0.50
Sulphide 6,669,000
0.99
Subtotal 18,158,000
0.76
Au (oz)
126,100
108,900
211,600
446,600
Goulagou I
Inferred
Indicated
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
752,000
543,000
2,836,000
4,131,000
0.83
0.85
1.26
1.13
20,100
14,900
114,900
149,900
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
5,874,000
Sulphide 7,092,000
Subtotal 15,132,000
1.12
1.36
1.74
1.45
211,500
94,700
397,000
703,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transitio
Sulphide
Subtotal
615,000
354,000
1,537,000
2,506,000
0.72
0.69
1.25
1.04
14,200
7,900
61,700
83,800
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
13,361,000
Sulphide 19,955,000
Subtotal 37,410,000
0.74
0.91
1.37
1.09
319,200
120,300
875,700
1,315,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
1,821,000
445,000
7,245,000
9,511,000
0.51
0.51
1.69
1.41
29,800
7,200
393,700
430,700
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
531,000
1,011,000
1,857,000
3,399,000
0.95
0.72
0.77
0.78
16,300
23,300
45,900
85,500
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
120,000
169,000
365,000
654,000
0.81
0.77
0.72
0.76
3,200
4,200
8,500
15,900
0.20
0.22
Oxide
Transition
219,000
290,000
2.30
2.40
16,200
22,300
Goulagou II
Inferred
Indicated
Kao
Inferred
Indicated
Nami
Inferred
Rambo
Indicated

Page 114 of 357
Deposit
TABLE 14.12
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.22
Sulphide
556,000
1.79
Subtotal 1,065,000
2.06
Inferred
Indicated
Au (oz)
32,000
70,500
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
102,000
103,000
446,000
651,000
0.74
0.54
1.05
0.92
2,400
1,800
15,000
19,200
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
26,249,000
12,786,000
36,129,000
75,164,000
0.82
0.90
1.34
1.08
689,300
369,500
1,562,200
2,621,000
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
3,410,000
1,614,000
12,429,000
17,453,000
0.64
0.69
1.49
1.25
69,700
36,000
593,800
699,500
Total
Inferred
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Mineral Resource estimates were based on a gold price of US$1,557 per ounce, a 90%, 80% and 85%
respective process recoveries for oxide, transition and sulphide; oxide mining costs of US$1.61/tonne,
$US1.94 per tonne for transition and US$2.05 for sulphide ; process costs of US$7.25/tonne for oxide and
transition and US$19 per tonne for sulphide; and General & Administrative costs of US$1.35 per tonne were
used to determine the respective 0.20, 0.22 and 0.50 oxide, transition and sulphide open pit cut-off grades.
Au grades were estimated in a 5m x 5m x 5m block model (except Rambo at 2.5m x 2.5m x 2.5m blocks) from
capped 2.0m composites utilizing inverse distance cubed interpolation. Composites were capped up to 45 g/t
depending on the individual mineralized domain.
Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate
of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, sociopolitical, marketing, or other relevant issues.
The quantity and grade of reported Inferred mineral resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and
there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred mineral resources as an Indicated or
Measured mineral resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an
Indicated or Measured mineral resource category.
The mineral resources in this press release were estimated using the Canadian Institute of Mining,
Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and
Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council.
Material within optimized pit shells have engineering mining aspects applied to the global mineral inventory.
The Karma Project global sensitivity to the mineral resource estimate, within and outside of
optimizes pit shells, is presented in Table 14.13.

Page 115 of 357
Deposit
TABLE 14.13
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.20
Oxide
6,354,000
0.62
0.22
0.64
Indicated
0.50
Sulphide 8,555,000
0.92
Subtotal 20,315,000
0.75
Au (oz)
127,500
111,100
252,800
491,400
Goulagou I
Inferred
Indicated
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
799,000
771,000
6,080,000
7,650,000
0.81
0.74
0.95
0.91
20,800
18,300
185,100
224,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
5,944,000
Sulphide 7,254,000
Subtotal 15,375,000
1.12
1.36
1.73
1.44
213,100
94,800
402,300
710,200
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
630,000
410,000
2,413,000
3,453,000
0.71
0.65
1.14
1.00
14,400
8,600
88,100
111,100
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
13,542,000
Sulphide 23,997,000
Subtotal 41,941,000
0.74
0.88
1.25
1.04
321,700
124,100
962,900
1,408,700
0.20
0.22
0.50
Oxide
2,009,000
Transition 671,000
Sulphide 12,508,000
Subtotal 15,188,000
0.49
0.46
1.31
1.16
31,900
10,000
526,400
568,300
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
532,000
1,018,000
2,352,000
3,902,000
0.95
0.71
0.72
0.75
16,300
23,400
54,400
94,100
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
122,000
183,000
1,017,000
1,322,000
0.80
0.75
0.54
0.59
3,200
4,400
17,600
25,200
0.20
0.22
Oxide
Transition
219,000
291,000
2.30
2.39
16,200
22,400
Goulagou II
Inferred
Indicated
Kao
Inferred
Indicated
Nami
Inferred
Rambo
Indicated

Page 116 of 357
Deposit
TABLE 14.13
Cut-Off Au
Category
Zone
Tonnes
Au (g/t)
(g/t)
0.22
Sulphide
589,000
1.73
Subtotal 1,099,000
2.02
Inferred
Indicated
Au (oz)
32,700
71,300
0.20
0.22
0.22
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Subtotal
104,000
111,000
719,000
934,000
0.74
0.52
1.00
0.92
2,500
1,900
23,200
27,600
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
26,591,000
13,294,000
42,747,000
82,632,000
0.81
0.88
1.24
1.04
694,800
375,800
1,705,100
2,775,700
0.20
0.22
0.22 & 0.50
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Total
3,664,000
2,146,000
22,737,000
28,547,000
0.62
0.63
1.15
1.04
72,800
43,200
840,400
956,400
Total
Inferred
14.15 CONFIRMATION OF ESTIMATE

The block models were validated using a number of industry standard methods, including visual
and statistical methods. Visual examination of composite and block grades on plans and sections
on-screen and review of estimation parameters including:
Number of composites used for estimation

Number of holes used for estimation
Distance to the nearest composite
Number of passes used to estimate grade
As a test of the reasonableness of the resource estimates, the average interpolated grades for the
block models were compared to the average capped assay grades and average grade of
composites of all samples within the constrained domains. As shown in Table 14.14, the four
deposits of the Karma Project (except Nami), the average grades of all the Au blocks are lower
than the composites in the constraining domains which were used for grade estimation, due to
localized clustering. As a result, P&E believes the reported block model grades are more
spatially representative.

Page 117 of 357
TABLE 14.14
COMPARISON OF AVERAGE GRADE OF CONSTRAINED CAPPED ASSAYS & COMPOSITES WITH
TOTAL BLOCK MODEL AVERAGE GRADES
Capped Assays Au
Deposit
Composites Au (g/t)
Block Model Au (g/t)
(g/t)
Rambo
1.85
1.84
1.35
Nami
0.66
0.64
0.67
Kao
0.73
0.70
0.69
Goulagou I
0.70
0.69
0.63
Goulagou II
1.30
1.30
1.02
In addition, a volumetric comparison was performed with the block model volumes of each
model versus the geometric calculated volume of the domains. The difference between the block
model and the geometric volume of each deposit is minor, as shown in Table 14.15.
TABLE 14.15
COMPARISON OF BLOCK MODEL VOLUME VS. GEOMETRIC CALCULATED VOLUME
Block Model Volume
Geometric Volume
Deposit
Relative Difference
3
(m )
(m3)
Rambo
907,882
910,923
0.33%
Nami
2,859,298
2,868,970
0.34%
Kao
50,626,238
50,627,029
0.00%
Goulagou I
16,388,212
16,399,510
0.07%
Goulagou II
9,584,446
9,587,982
0.04%

Page 118 of 357
15.0
MINERAL RESERVE ESTIMATES
The Mineral Reserve is that portion of the mineral resource that has been identified as mineable
within a design pit and incorporates criteria such as mining recoveries and waste dilution. The
Mineral Reserves form the basis for the Feasibility Study production plan.
The Karma mining operation will entail only open-pit mining. No underground mining
component is planned; hence, all of the Mineral Reserves are deemed to be open pit Mineral
Reserves.
No Inferred mineral resources are used in the estimation of the Mineral Reserve.
The Mineral Reserves are developed in a three-step process that is detailed in Section 16 of this
report:
For each deposit, the optimized open-pit shells to be used were selected as the
basis for the pit designs;
Operational pit designs that incorporate benches, detailed pit slope criteria, and
truck haulage ramps were then developed;
Estimates of the in-pit tonnage contained within the operational pit that meets or
exceeds the cut-off criteria were developed;
Mining losses and dilution were applied to the in-pit tonnage. The resulting
tonnage is deemed the Mineral reserve.
The Mineral Reserves for the Project are comprised of three different mineralization types to be
mined and processed in the heap leach facility. These are:
Oxide mineralization
Transition mineralization
Sulphide mineralization
The mining and processing characteristics of each are different and therefore cost
and recovery parameters are different between them.
The Mineral Reserves for the Project are summarised in Table 15.1. There are no Proven
Reserves and 100% of the Mineral Reserves are in the Probable Reserve category.
TABLE 15.1
KARMA PROJECT PROBABLE MINERAL RESERVES
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
g/t K oz Mt g/t K oz Mt g/t K oz Mt
0.59 123 4.3 0.64 86
10.8
1.03 200 1.5 1.47 72
7.6
0.89 260 1.9 1.32 80
10.9
1.85 16 0.3 1.97 22 0.3 2.10 20
0.9
0.87 16 1.0 0.62 21 1.5 0.70 33
3.0
GGI
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Nami
Mt
6.5
6.1
9.0
0.3
0.5
Total
22.4 0.85
615
9.0 0.97

280
1.8 0.95
53
Total
g/t
0.61
1.12
0.96
1.98
0.71
33.2 0.89
K oz
209
272
340
58
70
949
Page 119 of 357
The Au cut off grades used to report ore tonnage vary amongst the pits and are summarised in
Table 15.2. The gold prices used as the basis is $1,300/oz.
TABLE 15.2
MINERAL RESERVE AU CUT-OFF GRADES
GGI GGII Kao Rambo
Oxide
Au g/t 0.19 0.23 0.32 0.20
Transition Au g/t 0.21 0.26 0.36 0.21
Sulphide Au g/t 0.22
Nami
0.20
0.21
0.23
The basis for the pit designs and mining loss and dilution criteria are described in Section 16 of
this report.

Page 120 of 357
16.0
MINING METHODS
16.1
BASIS OF EVALUATION
The mine plan and mining cost estimate developed in this study is based on the geological block
model, as of the effective the date of this report. As part of this Feasibility Study, updated
resource models were prepared in Section 14.
16.2
16.2.1
GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA

Site Description
Five open pit areas will be developed in sequence to provide the ore feed for the heap leach
operations. The topography over the area is generally level, with gently rolling relief. The
conditions are well suited for open mining and no major physical obstacles are apparent. There
are no major rivers in the area, although seasonal creeks and streams may occur during the wet
season. There are some villages in the area and the mine facilities have been sited to minimize
impacts on these.
16.2.2
Geotechnical Parameters
A total of thirty-five (35) geotechnical boreholes were drilled in order to gain an appreciation of
the nature of the sub-surface profile and to gain representative sample material for
geomechanical purposes. A breakdown of the thirty-five boreholes drilled, is as follows:
Goulagou I
Goulagou II
Kao
Rambo
Nami
8 boreholes
8 boreholes
8 boreholes
8 boreholes
3 boreholes
Rock Mass Classification

Laubschers (1990) Mining Rock Mass Rating Classification System was used to characterise the
quality of the in-situ rock mass in order to provide a comprehensive assessment of the in-situ
rock mass for design purposes.
Joint Orientation, macro-joint condition, micro-joint condition, joint infill and joint alteration
were recorded and described in detail.
To facilitate the effect of mining on the exposed rock mass, the rock mass rating (RMR) value
was empirically adjusted to account for the factors affecting the rock mass, namely: weathering,
mining-induced stress, joint orientation and blasting. These factors are weighted according to
their relative importance, with a maximum possible total rating of 100. The resultant adjusted
value (MRMR) forms the basis of subsequent empirical slope stability analysis. The
adjustment factors applied to the RMR values derived for the five mineralised areas are
summarized in Table 16.1.

Page 121 of 357
In deriving and reporting the rock mass rating values, the individual material descriptions were
not grouped into the three main lithological units modelled, i.e. saprolite, transition material and
rock, in order to retain the continuity between the report text and the geotechnical logs.
TABLE 16.1
SUMMARY OF ROCK MASS RATING ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
Induced
Weathering Joint Orientation
Blasting
Total Adjustment
Stress
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.94
0.89
Goulagou I (GGI)
A summary of the RMR and MRMR values for the respective lithological units intersected in the
eight geotechnical boreholes drilled on the site is presented in Table 16.2.
TABLE 16.2
SUMMARY OF RMR AND MRMR VALUES FROM THE GOULAGOU I SITE
RMR Values
MRMR Values
Lithology
Min Max Mean Stdev Min Max
Mean
Stdev
Laterite
<20 <20
<20
<18 <18
<18
Saprolite
35
48
42
6.3
31
43
37
6.3
Saprolite/Sedimentary
33
33
33
30
30
30
Saprolite/Siltstone
20
53
39
11.2
18
47
37
8.8
Saprock
44
45
44
0.9
39
40
40
0.8
Sedimentary/Fresh
48
61
55
5.2
39
40
40
0.8
Saprock/Volcanic
39
67
53
12.2
35
60
47
10.9
Volcanic and Sedimentary
41
45
43
2.6
37
40
38
2.3
Siltstone
44
51
47
3.7
39
46
42
3.3
Brecciated Siltstone
47
73
55
9.4
42
65
49
8.4
Greywacke/Siltstone
43
50
46
5.3
38
45
41
4.7
Based on the mean RMR values, the in-situ lithological units typically classify as Fair
material, the exceptions being the lithological units in the transition zone which classify as
Poor material.
The application of adjustment factors typically downgrades the quality of the majority of the
lithological units to Poor material. The exceptions include the saprock/volcanic rock, siltstone,
brecciated siltstone and greywacke/siltstone units respectively, which remain classified as Fair
material.
Goulagou II (GGII)
eight geotechnical boreholes drilled on the site is presented in Table 16.3 below.

Page 122 of 357
TABLE 16.3
SUMMARY OF RMR AND MRMR VALUES FROM THE GOULAGOU II SITE
RMR Values
MRMR Values
Lithology
Min
Max Mean Stdev Min
Max
Mean
Laterite
<20
<20
<20
<18
<18
<18
Saprolite
20
52
29
14.3
18
47
26
Saprock
35
79
49
10.4
31
70
44
Saprolite/Siltstone
55
55
55
49
49
49
Saprock/Sedimentary
49
61
55
8.4
44
54
49
Saprock/Granodiorite
42
46
44
1.7
37
41
39
Greywacke/Siltstone
20
96
45
16.6
27
86
41
Sedimentary
29
56
43
8.4
25
50
38
Granodiorite
41
41
41
36
36
36
Volcanic and
51
51
51
46
46
46
Sedimentary
Siltstone
36
80
49
20.7
33
71
44
Stdev
12.7
9.3
7.5
1.5
14.3
7.5
18.5
Based on the mean RMR values, the in-situ lithological units typically classify as Fair
material, the exception being the saprolite lithological unit which classifies as Poor material.
The application of adjustment factors only downgrades the saprolite, saprock/granodiorite,
sedimentary and granodiorite lithological units to Poor material.
Kao
A summary of the RMR and MRMR values, for the respective lithological units intersected in
the eight geotechnical boreholes drilled on the site, is presented in Table 16.4.
TABLE 16.4
SUMMARY OF RMR AND MRMR VALUES FROM THE KAO SITE
RMR Values
MRMR Values
Lithology
Min Max Mean Stdev Min Max Mean
Laterite
<20
<20
<20
<18
<18
<18
Saprolite
<20
<20
<20
<18
<18
<18
Saprock/Siltstone
66
66
66
59
59
59
Saprolite/Granodiorite
62
65
63
2.4
55
58
57
Saprock
64
74
68
4.0
57
66
60
Granodiorite
57
64
61
2.4
51
57
54
Siltstone
61
61
61
54
54
54
Stdev
2.4
4.0
2.4
-
Based on the mean RMR values, the in-situ lithological units typically classify as Good
material.
The application of adjustment factors grades the lithological units as Fair material.

Page 123 of 357
Rambo
eight geotechnical boreholes drilled on the site is presented in Table 16.5.
TABLE 16.5
SUMMARY OF RMR AND MRMR VALUES FROM THE RAMBO SITE
RMR Values
MRMR Values
Lithology
Min Max Mean Stdev Min Max Mean
Laterite
<20 <20
<20
<18 <18
<18
51
53
53
1.1
46
48
47
Saprolite/Siltstone
<20 <20
<20
<18 <18
<18
Saprock
37
64
52
10.0
33
57
46
53
66
60
9.1
48
59
53
Siltstone
50
82
61
12.5
45
74
54
67
67
67
60
60
60
Granodiorite
42
42
42
37
37
37
Stdev
1.0
9.0
8.1
11.1
-
Based on the mean RMR values, the in-situ lithological units the saprolite/granodiorite, saprock
and saprock/granodiorite classify as Fair material. Siltstone and brecciated siltstone classify as
Good material, while the granodiorite classifies as Poor material. The low quality of the
granodiorite would be a function of the rock strength and the degree of fracturing of the material.
The application of adjustment factors typically downgrades the quality of all the lithological
units to Fair material, however with the exception of the granodiorite which classifies as
Poor material.
Nami
A summary of the RMR and MRMR values, for the respective lithological units intersected in
the three geotechnical boreholes drilled on the site, is presented in Table 16.6.
TABLE 16.6
SUMMARY OF RMR AND MRMR VALUES FROM THE NAMI SITE
RMR Values
MRMR Values
Lithology
Min Max Mean Stdev Min Max Mean Stdev
Laterite/Mottled Zone
<20
<20
<20
<18
<18
<18
26
26
26
23
23
23
Saprock
36
51
42
7.9
32
45
37
7.1
33
52
44
7.6
29
47
40
6.6
Granodiorite
66
66
66
58
58
58
Based on the mean RMR values, the in-situ lithological units the saprolite/granodiorite classifies
as Poor material. The saprock and saprock/granodiorite classify as Fair material, while the
granodiorite classifies as Good material.

Page 124 of 357
The application of adjustment factors typically downgrades the quality of all the lithological
units to Poor material however with the exception of the granodiorite which classifies as Fair
material.
16.2.2.1
Laboratory Testing
A total of 231 tests were carried out on representative samples:
93 uniaxial compressive strength tests;

69 triaxial compressive strength tests;
29 uniaxial indirect tensile strength tests (Brazilian method);
40 foundation indicator tests.
Goulagou I
The results of the soil and rock geomechanical testing are summarised in Table 16.7 to Table
16.10.
TABLE 16.7
SUMMARY OF THE SOIL GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
Geostrada
Sample
No.
3/4173
Borehole ID
GLG-DD-13-126
3/4174
3/4181
3/4178
3/4179
3/4180
3/4175
3/4177
(1)
Depth (m)
GLG-DD-13-127
GLG-DD-13-130
GLG-DD-13-131
GLG-DD-13-131
GLG-DD-13-133
GLG-DD-13-132
From
To
10.35
10.60
68.33
37.74
38.31
28.63
80.56
15.24
25.10
68.69
38.00
38.62
28.81
80.95
15.45
25.45
Lithology
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
USCS
SM
LL
(%)
28
SC
ML/OL
ML/OL
ML/OL
SM
CL
SC
37
37
38
34
30
45
40
Atterberg Limits
PL
PI
LS
(%)
(%)
(%)
25
3
1.5
23
31
31
30
24
26
25
14
6
7
4
6
19
15
7.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.5
8.5
6.5
GM
10.7
1.18
0.49
0.67
0.71
1.68
0.45
1.53
See Table 16.25
From the foundation indicator laboratory test results, the following is noted:
Of the eight specimens tested, three classify as inorganic silt, silty/clayey fine
sand with slight plasticity or organic silt and silty clays of low plasticity
(ML/OL);
Two specimens tested classify as silty sand (SM);
Two specimens tested classify as clayey sand (SC);
One specimen tested classifies as an inorganic clay or silty/sandy clay of low
plasticity (CL).

Page 125 of 357
TABLE 16.8
SUMMARY OF THE UCS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
UCS Strength
Density (kg/cm3)
(MPa)
Lithology
Min Max Mean Min Max Mean
No. of
Tests
1
9
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
Laterite
Saprolite
Saprolite/Siltstone
Saprolite/Sediment
Saprock
Saprock/Volcanic
Sedimentary Rock
Volcanic & Sedimentary Rock
Greywacke/Siltstone
Fresh Rock
No. of
Tests
2
4
1
21.4
16.3
23.1
21.4
16.8
22.1
24.2
27.2
26.3
26.9
27.5
21.4
23.4
23.1
21.4
21.8
23.4
27.5
27.2
26.3
26.9
27.5
21.4
19.2
23.1
21.4
19.3
22.9
25.9
27.2
26.3
26.9
27.5
3.5
0.8
23.6
11.0
0.4
9.1
29.3
87.4
21.4
40.5
97.2
3.5
17.5
23.6
11.0
6.8
16.9
65.2
87.4
21.4
40.5
97.2
3.5
6.1
23.6
11.0
3.6
13.4
47.3
87.4
21.4
40.5
97.2
TABLE 16.9
SUMMARY OF THE TCS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Confining Pressure
TCS Strength
Lithology
(MPa)
(MPa)
5.0
45.0
Siltstone
20.0
309.0
0.0
96.7
5.0
71.2
Volcanic
12.5
208.5
20.0
102.7
Greywacke/Siltstone
10.0
71.3
TABLE 16.10
SUMMARY OF THE UTB GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
No. of
Tests
3
3
Note:
Density (kg/cm3)
Tensile Strength (MPa)
Lithology
Saprock
Siltstone
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max
Mean
23.1
22.0
23.8
23.2
23.5
22.7
2.8
0.21
3.6
0.44
3.3
0.30
UTB is an abbreviation for Brazilian Tensile Strength, an indirect measure the uniaxial tensile strength of a
rock specimen
Goulagou II
The results of the soil and rock geomechanical testing are summarized in Table 16.11 to Table
16.14.

Page 126 of 357
TABLE 16.11
Geostrada
Sample No.
Depth (m)
Borehole ID
From
To
3/4172
GLG-DD-13-121
41.42
41.46
3/4166
3/4167
3/4168
3/4170
3/4169
3/4176
3/4171
3/4163
3/4164
3/4165
GLG-DD-13-122
GLG-DD-13-123
GLG-DD-13-123
GLG-DD-13-124
GLG-DD-13-125
GLG-DD-13-134
GLG-DD-13-136
GLG-DD-13-138
GLG-DD-13-138
GLG-DD-13-138
24.99
7.59
15.78
11.59
27.88
3.62
12.18
15.17
56.24
77.47
25.34
7.77
15.97
11.76
28.26
3.95
12.45
15.48
56.58
77.80
(1)
Lithology
Greywacke/
Siltstone
Saprolite
Saprock
Saprock
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprock
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Siltstone
LL
(%)
Atterberg Limits
PL
PI
LS
(%) (%)
(%)
SM
30
24
2.5
1.23
CL
CL
CL/ML
ML/OL
MH/OH
ML/OL
ML/OL
ML/OL
SM/SC
ML/OL
42
36
31
33
54
47
34
41
42
33
21
21
24
27
39
30
29
27
29
26
21
15
7
6
15
17
5
14
13
7
9.5
7.0
2.0
3.5
7.0
7.0
2.5
6.0
6.0
2.5
0.42
0.60
0.68
0.19
0.08
0.24
0.55
0.29
0.99
0.96
USCS
GM
See Table 16.25
No. of
Tests
1
6
1
1
6
1
2
2
Of the six specimens tested, four classify as inorganic silt, silty or clayey fine
sand with slight plasticity or an organic silt/silty clay of low plasticity (ML/OL);
One specimens tested classifies as an inorganic silt of high plasticity or organic
clay of high plasticity (MH/OH);
One specimen tested classifies as silty/clayey sand (SM/SC).
TABLE 16.12
SUMMARY OF UCS GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
Density (kg/cm3)
UCS Strength (MPa)
Lithology
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max
Mean
Laterite
21.4
21.4
21.4
1.7
1.7
1.7
Saprolite
16.9
20.5
18.0
0.6
8.7
25.3
Saprolite/Siltstone
24.6
24.6
24.6
5.8
5.8
5.8
21.2
21.2
21.2
11.0
11.0
11.0
Saprock
19.1
28.2
22.4
0.2
81.0
18.2
Saprock/Sedimentary
24.3
24.3
24.3
20.4
20.4
20.4
Siltstone
22.2
22.5
22.4
6.8
8.2
7.5
Greywacke/Siltstone
21.4
22.5
22.0
1.1
1.6
1.4

Page 127 of 357
TABLE 16.13
SUMMARY OF TCS GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
No. of
Tests
Lithology
Saprock
Siltstone
No. of
Tests
3
2
TCS Strength
(MPa)
160.2
178.7
46.3
49.4
146.5
24.3
22.4
235.3
338.0
259.2
Confining Pressure (MPa)

5.0
10.0
5.0
10.0
30.0
2.5
5.0
10
20
30
TABLE 16.14
SUMMARY OF UTB GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
Density (kg/cm3)
Lithology
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max
Mean
Saprolite/Siltstone
Saprock
24.9
23.6
25.3
26.4
25.1
24.8
3.3
4.1
3.6
8.4
3.5
6.1
Note: UTB is an abbreviation for Brazilian Tensile Strength, an indirect measure the uniaxial tensile strength of a
rock specimen
16.2.2.2
Kao
16.18.
TABLE 16.15
Geostrada
Sample
Depth (m)
Borehole ID
From
To
3/4182
3/4183
KAO-DD-13-190
KAO-DD-13-191
26.12
39.63
26.38
40.11
3/4184
KAO-DD-13-192
59.06
59.39
3/4189
3/4190
3/4187
3/4188
KAO-DD-13-193
KAO-DD-13-193
KAO-DD-13-196
KAO-DD-13-196
36.71
32.18
39.61
41.45
37.01
32.43
39.89
41.78
3/4185
KAO-DD-13-197
29.19
29.44
3/4186
KAO-DD-13-197
58.05
58.40
(1)
ML/OL
ML/OL
LL
(%)
39
37
Atterberg Limits
PL
PI
LS
(%)
(%)
(%)
32
7
2.0
34
3
1.5
0.47
0.52
ML/OL
36
28
2.5
0.60
CL
ML/OL
ML/OL
ML/OL
0
46
43
43
0
33
39
31
NP
13
4
12
0.0
6.0
2.5
4.5
0.49
0.03
0.51
0.55
ML/OL
34
30
2.5
0.49
ML/OL
36
28
2.0
0.53
Lithology
USCS
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite/
Granodiorite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite
Saprolite/
Granodiorite
Saprolite/
Granodiorite
See Table 16.25

Page 128 of 357
GM
Eight of the nine specimens classify as inorganic silt or silty/clayey fine sand with
slight plasticity or organic silt and silty clay of low plasticity (ML/OL);
A single specimen classifies as inorganic clay, silty clay or sandy clay of low
plasticity (CL).
TABLE 16.16
SUMMARY OF THE UCS GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
No. of
Tests
Density (kg/cm3)
UCS Strength (MPa)
Lithology
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max
Mean
16.0
15.5
16.7
17.3
18.8
24.7
26.2
16.0
17.3
18.0
22.5
18.8
24.7
27.5
16.0
16.4
17.4
20.0
18.8
24.7
27.0
0.6
0.2
0.1
4.6
4.3
23.1
40.5
0.6
0.6
1.6
6.6
4.3
23.1
108.0
0.6
0.5
0.7
5.3
4.3
23.1
84.9
1
6
4
3
1
1
3
Laterite
Saprolite
Saprock
Saprock/Siltstone
Siltstone
Granodiorite
No. of
Tests
3
3
2
3
3
TABLE 16.17
SUMMARY OF THE TCS GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
TCS Strength (MPa)
Confining Pressure
Lithology
(MPa)
Min
Max
Mean
5.0
25.6
219.3
134.6
10.0
160.1
280.3
225.5
Granodiorite
15.0
317.4
320.2
318.8
20.0
218.4
389.7
275.5
30.0
238.8
351.6
285.0
No. of
Tests
8
TABLE 16.18
Density (kg/cm3)
Lithology
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max
Mean
Saprock/Siltstone
23.0
27.1
24.9
1.69
22.06
9.33
rock specimen
16.2.2.3
Rambo
16.22.

Page 129 of 357
TABLE 16.19
Geostrada
Sample
No.
3/4198
Depth (m)
Borehole ID
From
To
RMB-DD-13-069
20.74
20.91
3/4194
RMB-DD-13-070
26.64
26.83
3/4193
RMB-DD-13-071
11.35
11.59
3/4192
RMB-DD-13-072
27.82
28.09
3/4191
RMB-DD-13-073
51.50
51.77
3/4197
3/4195
3/4196
3/4199
(1)
RMB-DD-13-074
14.00
12.50
29.46
12.90
14.29
12.79
29.87
13.22
RMB-DD-13-075
RMB-DD-13-076
See Table 16.25
Atterberg Limits
PL
PI
LS
(%)
(%)
(%)
27
8
3.5
Lithology
USCS
Saprolite
Siltstone/
Breccia
Saprolite/
Siltstone
Saprolite
Saprolite/
Siltstone
Saprolite
Saprolite/
Granodiorite
Saprolite
ML/OL
LL
(%)
35
ML/OL
38
33
2.0
0.73
SM
33
27
2.5
1.01
ML/OL
39
32
3.0
0.53
ML/OL
33
26
3.5
0.29
CL
ML/OL
CL
ML/OL
36
34
32
40
24
28
21
31
12
6
11
9
5.5
2.0
5.0
5.0
0.65
0.70
0.58
0.14
GM
0.83
Of the nine specimens tested, six classify as inorganic silt, silty or clayey fine
sand with slight plasticity or an organic silt/silty clay of low plasticity (ML/OL);
A single saprolite/siltstone specimen classifies as silty sand (SM);
Two specimens, one saprolite and one saprolite/granodiorite, tested classify as
inorganic clay, silty clay or sandy clay of low plasticity (CL).
No of
Tests
2
TABLE 16.20
SUMMARY OF THE TCS GEOMECHANICAL TESTING
Confining Pressure
TCS Strength
Lithology
(MPa)
(MPa)
5.0
235.5
10.0
293.2
10.0
59.6
12.5
80.3
15.0
134.7
Siltstone
15.0
102.5
20.0
120.8
20.0
110.6
30.0
166.4
10.0
56.0
12.5
95.6
20.0
107.2
Granodiorite
20.0
397.8
20.0
287.3
30.0
191.4
30.0
365.5

Page 130 of 357
TABLE 16.21
UCS Strength (MPa)
Density (kg/cm3)
Lithology
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max Mean
No. of
Tests
1
4
1
5
4
1
1
3
3
Laterite
Saprolite
Saprolite/Siltstone
Saprock
Saprock/Siltstone
Siltstone
Siltstone Breccia
Granodiorite
No. of
Tests
3
3
3
16.0
16.8
16.9
17.6
19.0
19.0
26.0
19.1
26.5
16.0
19.0
16.9
26.3
26.3
19.0
26.0
23.9
27.2
16.0
17.4
16.9
22.3
22.8
19.0
26.0
21.9
26.9
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.1
6.6
6.6
7.6
0.4
48.2
0.2
0.9
0.6
43.7
13.9
6.6
7.6
17.2
170.4
0.2
0.6
0.6
17.1
11.2
6.6
7.6
10.8
79.9
TABLE 16.22
Density (kg/cm3)
Lithology
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max
Mean
Siltstone
23.4
24.4
23.8
2.7
3.8
3.4
Saprock
24.4
24.8
24.7
4.8
7.2
5.8
Siltstone
24.8
25.1
25.0
4.5
7.6
5.9
rock specimen
16.2.2.4
Nami
16.24.
TABLE 16.23
Geostrada
Sample
Borehole ID
Depth (m)
From
To
3/4200
RMB-DD-13-077
33.75
34.00
3/4201
RMB-DD-13-077
17.48
17.68
3/4202
RMB-DD-13-078
36.05
36.37
(1)
Lithology
Saprolite/
Granodiorite
Saprolite/
Granodiorite
Saprolite/
Granodiorite
USCS
Atterberg Limits
PL
PI
LS
LL
GM
CL
NP
0.0
0.59
ML/OL
43
31
12
6.5
0.73
CL
40
24
16
7.0
0.69
See Table 16.25
The three specimens tested are typically fine grained;

Two of the saprolite/granodiorite specimens tested classify as inorganic
clays/silty/sandy clays of low plasticity (CL);

Page 131 of 357
No. of
Tests
6
2
The third specimen classifies as an inorganic silt or silty or clayey fine sand with
slight plasticity/ organic silt or silty clay of low plasticity (ML/OL).
TABLE 16.24
Density (kg/cm3)
UCS Strength (MPa)
Lithology
Min
Max
Mean
Min
Max
Mean
17.1
26.9
18.6
0.2
0.9
0.6
Saprock
24.1
26.2
25.2
7.3
48.8
28.1
It should be noted that in the majority of cases, the Karma test specimens failed along existing
discontinuities. Therefore, the uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) and triaxial compressive
strength (TCS) values may generally be considered to be lower bound strength values
Slope Analyses
The kinematic analyses for Kao and Rambo indicate that both sites have a low probability of
direct toppling failure occurring (5% and 11% respectively). There is a nominal (<1%)
probability of flexural toppling occurring at both sites. There is a nominal (<1%) probability of
planar sliding and wedge failure occurring at Kao and a nominal probability of planar sliding and
a low probability of wedge failure occurring (2%) at Rambo.
Cognisance is to be taken of the fact that the limit equilibrium analyses are based on mine
designs provided by P&E. Representative geotechnical design sections were constructed by SRK
from the electronic .dxf format files provided by P&E, with the representative lithological units,
also provided by P&E, being incorporated into the resultant geotechnical model.
In determining the design shear strength parameters of the saprolitic material for the limit
equilibrium analyses, the following methodology was applied:
The grading data from the Foundation Indicator test results were plotted as per the
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) Classification data.
The Liquid Limit (LL) data was grouped as per the USCS Classification data.
The % <0.002mm, % 0.002 to 0.01, % 0.01 to 0.2 and % >0.2 passing data was
input into an excel spreadsheet to facilitate the calculation of the Dhawan Friction
Angle, where the Dhawan Friction Angle is defined by the following equation:
%<0.002mm/7+%0.002 to %0.01mm/5+%0.01 to %0.2mm/3+>%0.2mm/2.5
A summary of the resulting Dhawan Friction Angles for the respective soil classifications is
presented in Table 16.25.

Page 132 of 357
TABLE 16.25
SUMMARY OF DHAWAN FRICTION ANGLES
USCS
Soil Type
Inorganic Clay, silty clays,

silty clays of low plasticity
Inorganic silt, silty or clayey
fine stand with, with slight
ML or
plasticity or organic silt and
OL
organic silty clay of low
plasticity
Inorganic clay, silty clays,
CLsilty clays of low plasticity or
ML
Inorganic silt, silty or clayey
fine sand, with slight plasticty
SM
Silty
SC
Clayey sand
SMSilty sand or clayey sand
SC
Inorganic
silt
of high
MHplasticity or organic clay of
OH
high plasticty
CL
Mean Median Maximum Minimum
Standard
Deviation
31
32
33
25
1.5
31
31
33
25
1.9
29
29
29
29
0.0
35
34
34
34
36
34
34
33
1.0
0.8
33
33
33
33
0.0
27
27
27
27
0.0
The lack of available undisturbed samples prevented any triaxial testing of the saprolitic
material. As a result, any determination of a cohesion values (from Mohr Circles constructed
from the triaxial tests) and subsequent plotting of the laboratory friction angles for the respective
soil classifications and development of cohesion values, was not possible. Consequently, the
cohesion values used for the limit equilibrium analyses are based on both extrapolated data from
other the similar West African projects and the professional judgement of the author. A summary
of the design input parameters is provided in Table 16.26.
TABLE 16.26
SUMMARY OF SAPROLITE DESIGN SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS
Mohr-Coulomb
Rock Type UCS (Kpa) Unit Weight (KN/m) Cohesion (kPa) Phi ()
Saprolite
2,750
18
40
31
The input parameters for the competent material were based on the Hoek - Brown failure
criterion, which includes the following:
mi: a dimensionless constant for broken rock;

D: a disturbance factor that represents the degree of disturbance to which the
rock mass has been subjected by blast damage and stress relaxation;
GSI: the Geological Strength Index introduced to complement the Hoek Brown failure criterion and also a method to estimate the parameters s, a and
mb.

Page 133 of 357
A summary of the design input parameters is presented in Table 16.27.

TABLE 16.27
SUMMARY OF ROCK DESIGN SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS
Generalised Hoek-Brown
Rock Type
USC (Mpa) Unit Weight (KN/m) GSI MI D
Transition/Siltstone
24
25
65
7 1
Rock/Granodiorite
95
27
65 29 1
The resultant design sections analysed by SRK were deemed to be an accurate representation of
the respective pit designs provided by P&E. In carrying out the limit equilibrium analyses, the
design sections remained unchanged in terms of the lithological units, the design slope angles
and the pit geometry data provided to SRK. The results of the limit equilibrium analyses, for the
overall slopes and the saprolitic stacks and rock stacks, are summarised in Table 16.28 and Table
16.29.
TABLE 16.28
SUMMARY OF OVERALL SLOPE LIMIT EQUILIBRIUM
ANALYSES
Overall Shape
Pit Name Section
FoS
Angle ()
1
41
1.2
2
35
1.4
GGI
3
37
3.0
4
42
1.7
1
40
1.2
2
37
1.3
3
34
3.0
GGII
4
27
4.1
5
37
3.0
6
32
1.8
1
39
1.6
Kao
2
4238
1.61.6
1
36
2.4
Rambo
2
35
4.3
1
41
2.9
Nami
2
36
4.0

Page 134 of 357
TABLE 16.29
SUMMARY OF ROCK DESIGN SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS
Lithology
Saprolite and Transition
Rock
Pit
Stack Height Stack Angle
Stack Height Stack Angle
Section
FoS
FoS
Name
(m)
()
(m)
()
1
2
3
86
35
1.3
15
27
GGII
4
97
27
4.0
5
6
69
32
1.6
1
100
35
2.4
17
48
24.6
Rambo
2
53
37
1.7
66
35
6.6
1
Kao
2
1
75
38
2.6
48
46
6.5
Nami
2
91
33
5.0
24
54
10.4
1
2
GGI
3
44
2.2
4
52
44
1.1
5
40
33
4.4
Slope Re-configuration and Pit Design Review
The outcome of the Limit Equilibrium (LE) analyses showed that the acceptance criteria of a
Factor of Safety (FoS) of 1.3 was achieved and exceeded in most instances.
Using RocSciences SLIDE software, these slopes were re-configured and analysed so as to
optimise the slope geometry and achieve a Factor of Safety (FoS) values closer to 1.3. The
results of the re-configuration analyses are summarised in Table 16.30. The acceptance criteria
of a FoS =1.3 was achieved in GGI section 2, GGII section 3, GGII section 6 and Kao sections
1 and 2.
Where slopes exceeded an FoS of 1.3, the geometry of the slope was reconfigured to the limits of
the design constraints described in the paragraphs above, and still exceeded the acceptance
criteria due to the geotechnical parameters of the dominant materials of the slopes.

Page 135 of 357
Pit Name
Section
GGI
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Nami
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
1
2
1
2
TABLE 16.30
Previously reported Limit
Re-configuration Limit
Equilibrium Results
Equilibrium Results
Slope
Height
Overall Slope
Overall Slope
FoS
FoS
Angle ()
Angle ()
48
41
1.2
n/a
n/a
46
35
1.4
39
1.3
53
37
3.0
37
1.6*
64
42
1.7
45
1.3
40
33
39
4.6
1.2
36
n/a
1.6
n/a
65
40
1.2
n/a
n/a
67
37
1.3
n/a
n/a
101
34
3.0
35
1.3
97
27
4.1
34
3.0
74
37
2.5
45
2.1
69
32
1.8
37
1.3
65
39
1.6
41
1.3
52
42
38
1.6
1.6
48
1.3
47
1.3
117
36
2.4
43
1.9*
113
35
4.3
36
1.7*
123
41
2.9
45
2.1*
115
36
4.0
40
1.5*
*Note: FoS analysis does not take into consideration the existence of ramps.
A review process of the pit design along the re-configured slopes provided by P&E indicated that
the cross sectional areas of GGI Section 5 South, GGII Section 1 and Section 2 have an
FoS of 1.2. In these instances where the acceptance criteria were not met, the FoS values are still
deemed to be acceptable as these values are still within the acceptable norms for mine rock
slopes. However these values are at the boundary level and would have an increased level of risk.
The results of the review process are summarised in Table 16.31.
16.2.3
Hydrological Considerations
Groundwater flows from the central watershed ridge towards surface water courses in the south
and north-east. Aquifer tests revealed low to moderate hydraulic conductivity within the saprolite
and fractured transition zone.
Samples collected from boreholes and shallow wells showed a slightly acidic to alkaline pH and
low electrical conductivity values. Elevated concentrations of Mg and As are probably due to the
mafic mineralogy and arsenopyrite within the metavolcanics.
Groundwater inflows into the pits will be from the saprolite and along discontinuities (in the
transition zone) exposed in the pit highwall. Significant amounts of the groundwater entering the
pit along the seepage face will be evaporated.
Simulated peak groundwater flows into the proposed pits are summarised in Table 16.32.
Page 136 of 357
TABLE 16.31
InterInterInter-Stack
Stack
Stack
FoS
Lithology
Number
Angle()
1
Saprolite
42
1.5
1
2
Trans/Rock
47
7.1
2
1
Saprolite
41
1.3
1
Saprolite
48
1.3
GGI
3
2
Trans/Rock
63
4.7
4
1
Saprolite
45
1.4
North
1
Saprolite
46
1.1
5
South
1
Saprolite
52
1.2
1
1
Saprolite
45
1.2
2
1
Saprolite
42
1.2
1
Saprolite
42
1.1
3
2
Rock
29
14.5
1
Saprolite
55
2.3
GGII
4
2
Transition
54
5.9
3
Transition
48
7.2
5
1
Saprolite
44
1.3
1
Saprolite
47
1.7
6
2
Saprolite
51
1.4
1
1
Saprolite
38
1.5
1
Saprolite
38
1.5
Kao
North
2
2
Saprolite
41
1.7
South
2
Saprolite
45
7.5
1
Saprolite
45
1.2
1
2
Transition
48
3.8
Rambo
1
Saprolite
49
1.4
2
2
Transition
56
4.7
3
Rock
43
6.1
1
1
Saprolite
38
1.5
1
Saprolite
41
1.7
Nami
North
2
2
Saprolite
45
7.5
South
2
Saprolite
42
1.5

Overall
Slope
Angle ()
41
41
40
45
46
52
45
42
37
27
44
29
32
32
34
45
44
32
33
42
Page 137 of 357
TABLE 16.32
SIMULATED PEAK GROUNDWATER FLOWS
Pit
Mining Years Final Pit Depth (m) Peak Simulated Inflows (m3/d)
Rambo
-1 to 1
120
1,000
Goulagou II
-1 to 2
107
2,400
Kao
2 to 5
89
1,100
Nami
4 to 6
126
1,800
Goulagou I
6 to 7
91
2,300
The groundwater inflow volumes can be dealt with in-pit and do not require interception. The
direct rainfall into the pits and the groundwater inflow will need to be directed to an in-pit sump
from where it will be pumped to the rim of the pit. This water can be used for dust suppression
and/or other mining and process requirements.
The anticipated average monthly pumping rate from the sump for average, dry and wet years are
summarised in Table 16.33.
TABLE 16.33
ANTICIPATED AVERAGE MONTHLY PUMPING RATE
Average
Wet Year
Dry Year
Pit
Year
3
3
(m
/month)
(m
/month)
(m3/month)
Rambo
28,758
30,001
28,043
Goulagou II
60,249
63,367
58,450
Kao
39,182
41,585
37,804
Nami
42,879
44,727
41,814
Goulagou I
55,060
57,963
53,383
A drawdown cone will extend around each pit and the water levels in the village water supply
boreholes could be affected. Villages which may be negatively impacted by the cone of
drawdown are shown in Table 16.34.
Pit
Rambo
Goulagou II
Kao
Nami
Goulagou I
TABLE 16.34
VILLAGES IMPACTED BY THE CONE OF DRAWDOWN
Maximum
No. of
Village name
Drawdown [m] villages
92
1
Ramatoulaye
74
1
Barellgo
Moussa-Yiri, Inoussi-Yiri,Dandagre,
61
11
Boulonga,Guiro-Yergo, Baoguin, Yobrand-Yiri,
Yargo, Wall-Yiri, Boulonga School, Baoguin
111
2
Namisgma, Namisgma
72
0
Terminal lakes will form in each of the pits once mining stops, as no decant from pits is
expected.
Page 138 of 357
16.2.4
Economic Criteria
The optimization of the pits and the application of cut-off grade criteria are based on a gold price
of US$1,300/oz. Since each of the gold deposits may have unique metallurgical characteristics
and specific operating costs associated with them, the cut-off grades applied to each deposit may
vary.
16.3
16.3.1
MINE DESIGN
Mine Production Rate
The target mine ore production rate is four million tonnes per year (Mtpa) of ore feed to the
heap leach facility.
16.3.2
Mining Method Overview
The mining method utilized will be conventional open pit mining, similar to that used at many
other operations in Africa. Moderately size mining equipment will be used (truck sizes of a
nominal 90 tonne capacity) to meet the production requirements.
Some of the materials encountered in the open pits will be less competent and will allow free
digging. As the pits deepen, harder rock will be encountered and some degree of drilling and
blasting will be required. Hydraulic backhoe type excavators will load the haul trucks.
Waste dumps will be developed adjacent to all the pits. At GGI, some waste rock backfilling
may be carried out in a mined out portion of the pit.
In some of the pits, minor amounts of preg-robbing ore may be encountered. It is assumed that
this material will be stockpiled and processed at the end of the mine operational life, to minimize
its impact on the heap leach process.
16.3.3
Pit Optimization and Pit Design
In order to determine the size of the Karma open-pits, each have been optimized using industry
standard methods based on the criteria described in this section.
The pit optimization process uses the Lerches-Grossman algorithm in CAE NPV Scheduler. The
procedure is applied to the resource blocks using a gold price, mining, processing, and G&A
costs, process recovery and pit slope criteria. Inferred resources are considered as waste material
in the optimization process.
The parameters applied in the pit optimization analysis are shown Table 16.35. The operating
costs are preliminary and used for optimization purposes only. More detailed operating costs are
developed later, based on the production plan.
A series of pit optimization analyses were undertaken using variable revenue factors. Varying
the gold price adjusts the revenue factors, thereby changing the profit margin per block. An

Page 139 of 357
optimized pit shell is defined for each revenue factor during this process. The pits will get larger
at higher revenue factors. The revenue factor of 100% corresponds to a gold price of $1,300/oz.
TABLE 16.35
PIT OPTIMIZATION PARAMETERS
GGI
Gold Price
Payable Gold
Refining Charge:
Royalty
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Mining
Cost
(Oxide):
Mining
Cost
(Transition):
Mining
Cost
(Sulphide):
Overland
Haulage Cost:
Processing Cost:
G&A Cost:
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
Oxide
Transition
Sulphide
$/oz
%
$/oz
%
%
%
%
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Nami
Ranged from $1,000/oz to $1,400/oz

100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
$4.60
$4.60
$4.60
$4.60
$4.60
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
Process Recovery
90%
90%
95%
90%
95%
80%
80%
85%
85%
90%
80%
85%
Operating Costs
$/t
$1.61
$1.61
$1.61
$1.61
$1.61
$/t
$1.94
$1.94
$1.94
$1.94
$1.94
$/t
$2.05
$2.05
$2.05
$2.05
$2.05
$1.35
$0.81
$1.35
$/t
$5.25
$6.60
$9.05
$/t
$1.35
$1.35
$1.35
Cut-off Grade ($1,300/oz Au)
g/t
0.19
0.23
0.32
g/t
0.21
0.26
0.36
g/t
Pit Slopes
degrees 31-46 36-43 36-43
degrees 48-53 38-43
58
degrees 48-53 38-43
58
$4.75
$1.35
$4.75
$1.35
0.20
0.21
0.22
0.20
0.21
0.23
41
48
48
41-46
46-51
46-51
$/t
The cut-off grades used to distinguish between ore and waste vary between the pits and between
mineralization types. The cut-off values used are considered internal cut-off grades and as such
do not incorporate the mining cost. Processing and G&A are included.
For each deposit, the optimization analysis provides profitability, grade, ore and waste and
tonnage data for the varying gold prices. The 100% shell for the $1,300/oz gold price was
eventually selected to develop the final pit design. Higher gold prices will tend to define larger
pit shells with lower ore grades.
The next step after optimization was to design an operational open pit that would form the basis
for the mine production plan. This pit may be subdivided into mining phases for production
Page 140 of 357
scheduling, however, these internal phases collectively do not affect the ore reserves contained
within the ultimate pit.
The mine planning criteria used to design the operational pit are shown in Table 16.36. The truck
size will have a capacity of 91 tonnes and an approximate operating width of 6.1 metres.
TABLE 16.36
MINE DESIGN CRITERIA
Haul road width (double lane, long term)
25 m
Haul road width (single lane, short term)
12 m
Haul road gradient (maximum)
10%
Minimum mining width
20 m
(sinking cuts can be designed at narrower widths)
Golougou I (GGI)
Optimization results for GGI at different gold prices are shown in Table 16.37. Ultimately, the
$1,300/oz Au price shell was used for the mine design. Images of the GGI shell and pit design
are shown in Figure 16.1 and Figure 16.2, respectively.
Au Price
(US$/oz)
$1,000
$1,100
$1,200
$1,250
$1,300
$1,400
TABLE 16.37
GGI SHELL TONNAGE VS GOLD PRICE
Total Ore Au Grade
Waste
Au (oz)
(Mt)
(g/t)
(Mt)
8.21
0.69
183,522
14.29
9.07
0.67
196,720
16.60
9.76
0.66
208,088
19.29
9.95
0.66
210,815
19.94
10.09
0.66
212,619
20.34
10.50
0.65
218,173
21.85
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
1.74
1.83
1.98
2.00
2.02
2.08
The ore and waste tonnages in the design pit are shown in Table 16.38. This tonnage is undiluted
and therefore does not yet represent an ore reserve.

Page 141 of 357
TABLE 16.38
GGI OPTIMIZED PIT SHELL TONNAGE (UNDILUTED)
Cut-off Grade
Tonnes
Au g/t Au oz
Oxide Ore
> 0.19 g/t
5,733,110
0.64 118,150
Transition Ore
>0.21 g/t
3,731,946
0.67
80,269
Sulphide Ore
n/a
Total Ore
Oxide Waste
Transition Waste
Sulphide Waste
Figure 16.1
9,465,056
<0.19 g/t
<0.21 g/t
n/a
0.65
198,418
18,235,660
3,334,855
296,944
Total Waste
21,867,458
Total Material
31,332,514
GGI Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor)

Page 142 of 357
Figure 16.2: GGI Pit Design
Golougou II (GGII)
Optimization results for GGII at different gold prices are shown in Table 16.39. Ultimately, the
$1,300/oz Au price shell was used for the mine design.
TABLE 16.39
GGII OPTIMIZED PIT SHELL TONNAGE VS GOLD PRICE
Au Price (US$/oz) Total Ore (Mt) Au Grade (g/t) Au (oz) Waste (Mt)
$1,000
$1,100
$1,200
$1,250
$1,300
$1,400
6.39
6.69
6.99
7.06
7.16
7.25
1.34
1.31
1.28
1.27
1.26
1.25
275,178
282,157
287,755
288,866
290,532
291,829
17.45
19.23
20.68
20.95
21.46
21.80
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
2.73
2.87
2.96
2.97
3.00
3.00
Figures 16.3 and 16.4 show the GGII optimized pit shell and pit design respectively.
The ore and waste tonnages in the pit are shown in Table 16.40. This tonnage is undiluted and
therefore does not represent the ore reserve.

Page 143 of 357
TABLE 16.40
GGII OPTIMIZED PIT SHELL TONNAGE (UNDILUTED)
Cut-off
Tonnes
Au g/t
Au oz
Grade
Oxide Ore
> 0.23 g/t
5,398,275
1.17
202,886
Transition Ore
>0.26 g/t
1,353,311
1.67
72,486
Sulphide Ore
n/a
0.00
Total Ore
Oxide Waste
Transition Waste
Sulphide Waste
6,751,586
<0.23 g/t
<0.26 g/t
n/a
1.27
275,372
19,850,734
1,917,515
22,989
Total Waste
21,791,239
Total Material
28,542,825
Figure 16.3: GGII Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor)

Page 144 of 357
Figure 16.4: GGII Pit Design
Kao
Optimization results for different gold prices are shown in Table 16.41. Ultimately, the
The ore and waste tonnages in the Kao pit are shown in Table 16.42. This tonnage is undiluted
and therefore does not represent a mineral reserve. Figure 16.5 and Figure 16.6 show an image of
the Kao pit shell and design respectively.
Gold Price
(US$/oz)
$1,000
$1,100
$1,200
$1,250
$1,300
$1,400
TABLE 16.41
KAO OPTIMIZED PIT SHELL TONNAGE VS GOLD PRICE
Total Ore
Au Grade
Gold (oz)
Waste (Mt)
(Mt)
(g/t)
6.70
1.39
299,982
13.96
8.09
1.24
322,415
15.19
9.39
1.13
340,269
15.67
10.05
1.08
349,288
16.23
10.66
1.04
357,348
16.73
12.14
0.97
377,168
19.01

Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
2.08
1.88
1.67
1.62
1.57
1.57
Page 145 of 357
TABLE 16.42
KAO OPTIMIZED PIT SHELL TONNAGE (UNDILUTED)
COG
Tonnes
Au g/t
Au oz
Oxide Ore
> 0.32 g/t 8,452,120
0.97 263,245.54
Transition Ore
>0.36 g/t 1,757,917
1.43
81,045.94
Sulphide Ore
n/a
0.00
Total Ore
Oxide Waste
Transition Waste
Sulphide Waste
<0.32 g/t
<0.36 g/t
n/a
Total Waste
Total Material
Figure 16.5
10,210,037
18,172,595
1,272,467
63,181
1.05
344,291.48
19,508,243
29,718,280
Kao Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor)

Page 146 of 357
Figure 16.6: Kao Pit Design
Rambo
Optimization results for different gold prices are shown in Table 16.43. Ultimately the $1,300/oz
gold price shell was used for the mine design.
Au Price
(US$/oz)
$1,000
$1,100
$1,200
$1,250
$1,300
$1,400
TABLE 16.43
RAMBO SHELL TONNAGE VS GOLD PRICE
Total Ore
Au Grade
Au (oz)
Waste (Mt)
(Mt)
(g/t)
0.66
2.69
56,921
4.97
0.69
2.60
57,745
5.18
0.70
2.57
58,134
5.31
0.74
2.49
58,888
5.55
0.75
2.47
59,175
5.66
0.78
2.40
60,419
6.20
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
7.55
7.48
7.54
7.55
7.60
7.91
Figure 16.7 and Figure 16.8 respectively show the optimized pit shell and pit design
The ore and waste tonnages inside the optimized pit are shown in Table 16.44. This tonnage is
undiluted and therefore does not represent the ore reserve.

Page 147 of 357
TABLE 16.44
RAMBO OPTIMIZED PIT SHELL TONNAGE (UNDILUTED)
COG
Tonnes Au g/t Au oz
Oxide Ore
> 0.20 g/t 202,406
2.44 15,885
Transition Ore
> 0.21 g/t 257,166
2.61 21,538
Sulphide Ore
> 0.22 g/t 233,553
2.65 19,921
Total Ore
Oxide Waste
Transition Waste
Sulphide Waste
Total Waste
Total Material
Figure 16.7
<0.20 g/t
<0.21 g/t
<0.22 g/t
693,125
4,506,176
1,511,016
245,918
2.57
57,343
6,263,109
6,956,234
Rambo Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor)

Page 148 of 357
Figure 16.8: Rambo Pit Design
Nami
Optimization results for different gold prices are shown in Table 16.45. Ultimately, the
Au Price
(US$/oz)
$1,000
$1,100
$1,200
$1,250
$1,300
$1,400
TABLE 16.45
NAMI SHELL TONNAGE VS GOLD PRICE
Total Ore
Au Grade
Waste
Au (oz)
(Mt)
(g/t)
(Mt)
2.10
0.92
61,952
9.72
2.36
0.87
66,080
10.36
2.82
0.83
75,547
13.05
2.88
0.82
76,143
13.09
2.95
0.81
77,125
13.30
3.07
0.80
78,462
13.52
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
4.62
4.38
4.62
4.55
4.52
4.41
Figure 16.9 and Figure 16.10 respectively show the Nami optimized pit shell and pit design.
The ore and waste tonnages in the pit are shown in Table 16.46. This tonnage is undiluted and
therefore does not represent the ore reserve.

Page 149 of 357
TABLE 16.46
NAMI OPTIMIZED PIT SHELL TONNAGE (UNDILUTED)
COG
Tonnes
Au g/t Au oz
Oxide Ore
> 0.20 g/t
486,344
0.98 15,276
Transition Ore
> 0.21 g/t
895,547
0.71 20,385
Sulphide Ore
> 0.23 g/t 1,251,907
0.81 32,521
Total Ore
Oxide Waste
Transition Waste
Sulphide Waste
<0.20 g/t
<0.21 g/t
<0.23 g/t
Total Waste
Total Material
2,633,798
8,162,964
4,227,259
2,127,006
0.81
68,182
14,517,229
17,151,027
Figure 16.9: Nami Optimized Pit Shell ($1,300/oz Au 100% Revenue Factor)

Page 150 of 357
Figure 16.10: Nami Pit Design
16.3.4
Dilution Criteria
In order to estimate the ore reserves, waste dilution of the mineral resource must be added to the
tonnages contained within the operational design pit.
In order to estimate the amount of dilution, it is assumed that some waste surrounding the ore
zones would be mixed with the ore when mined, thereby diluting it. In order to estimate the
amount of dilution, a 1.5 metre wide halo is assumed around the outside perimeter of the ore
zone and this was modelled on several benches in the pit. The volume of this halo relative to the
volume of the adjacent ore zone subsequently determines the amount of dilution, which is weight
averaged over several benches in the pit in order to derive the overall average dilution
percentage.
A 3D solid is created for the 1.5 m waste halo outside the ore zone and the diluting grades
estimated within that 3D solid. These waste grades will be the diluting grades, summarized in
Table 16.47.
Oxide Dilution
Oxide Diluting Grade
Transition Dilution
Transition Diluting Grade
Sulphide Dilution
Sulphide Diluting Grade
Ore Loss Factor
TABLE 16.47
DILUTION PARAMETERS
GGI
GGII
%
16.2% 15.7%
Au g/t
0.24
0.15
%
16.2% 15.7%
Au g/t
0.46
0.25
%
Au g/t
%
3%
3%

Kao
10.8%
0.20
10.8%
0.25
3%
Rambo
35.0%
0.15
35.0%
0.13
35%
0.53
3%
Nami
19.3%
0.30
19.3%
0.16
19%
0.24
3%
Page 151 of 357
In most cases shown in Table 16.47 the diluting grade is somewhat higher than the cut-off grades
shown in Table 16.52 due to higher grade fringe Inferred diluting blocks. A more conservative
approach for future considerations would be to apply a zero diluting grade. A sensitivity analysis
of the diluting grades indicates a minimal impact to the cashflow model.
After applying the dilution and ore loss criteria, the reserve estimate is completed. Table 16.48
presents a summary of the ore reserves for each deposit.
Oxide
g/t
0.59
1.03
0.89
1.85
0.87
GGI
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Nami
Mt
6.5
6.1
9.0
0.3
0.5
Total
22.4 0.85
16.3.5
TABLE 16.48
ORE RESERVE
Transition
Sulphide
Total
K oz Mt g/t K oz Mt g/t K oz Mt
g/t
123 4.3 0.64 86
10.8 0.61
200 1.5 1.47 72
7.6 1.12
260 1.9 1.32 80
10.9 0.96
16 0.3 1.97 22 0.3 2.10 20
0.9 1.98
16 1.0 0.62 21 1.5 0.70 33
3.0 0.71
K oz
209
272
340
58
70
615
949
9.0 0.97
280
1.8 0.95
53
33.2 0.89
Mining Losses Criteria
In order to estimate the ore reserves, mining losses must be incorporated into the tonnages
contained within the operational design pit. Based on P&Es mining experience, a mining loss
factor of 3% was applied to each ore type.
16.4
MINE DESIGNS
This section provides details related to the pit designs and internal phases or push-backs used to
assist with production sequencing.
16.4.1
Goulagou I Pit
The GGI pit was subdivided into three phases, as shown in Figure 16.11, Figure 16.12 and
Figure 16.13, respectively. The reserve tonnage for each phase is shown in Table 16.49.
Ore mined from this deposit will be hauled directly to the primary crusher.
Waste rock will be placed into a nearby waste dump, with a haul distance of approximately
500 metres from the Phase 1.

Page 152 of 357
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
TABLE 16.49
GOULAGOU I PIT RESERVE TONNAGES
Total
Total Ore
Waste
Material
Mt
Au g/t
Mt
Mt
1.3
0.70
5.0
6.3
4.1
0.61
7.1
11.2
5.3
0.58
8.6
13.8
Total
10.7
0.61
20.7
31.3
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
3.8
1.7
1.7
1.9
Figure 16.11 Goulagou I Pit Design Phase 1

Page 153 of 357
Figure 16.12: Goulagou I Pit Design Phase 2
Figure 16.13: Goulagou I Pit Design Phase 3

Page 154 of 357
16.4.2
Goulagou II Pit
The GGII pit was subdivided into two phases, as shown Figure 16.14 and Figure 16.15.
The reserve tonnage for each phase is shown in Table 16.50.
Phase 1
Phase 2
TABLE 16.50
GOULAGOU II PIT PHASE TONNAGES
Total
Total Ore
Waste
Material
Mt
Au g/t
Mt
Mt
4.4
1.29
11.0
15.4
3.2
0.88
10.0
13.1
Total
7.6
1.12
21.0
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
28.5
2.5
3.2
2.8
Ore mined from this deposit will be hauled directly to the primary crusher.
700 m from the Phase 1.
Figure 16.14: Goulagou II Pit Design Phase 1

Page 155 of 357
Figure 16.15 Goulagou II Pit Design Phase 2
16.4.3
Kao Pit
The Kao pit was subdivided into two phases, as shown Figure 16.16 and Figure 16.17. The
reserve tonnage for each phase is shown in Table 16.51.
Ore mined from this deposit will be hauled to the primary crusher over a distance of about
11.3 km.
Waste rock will be placed into two nearby waste dumps, with haul distance of approximately
600 m.
TABLE 16.51
KAO PIT PHASE TONNAGES
Phase 1
Phase 2
Mt
3.9
7.1
Au g/t
0.88
1.01
Mt
11.4
7.3
Total
Material
Mt
15.3
14.4
Total
11.0
0.97
18.7
29.7
Total Ore

Waste
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
2.9
1.0
1.7
Page 156 of 357
Figure 16.16: Kao Pit Design Phase 1

Page 157 of 357
Figure 16.17: Kao Pit Design Phase 2
16.4.4
Nami Pit
The Nami pit is to be mined in a single phase, as shown Figure 16.18. The reserve tonnage for
the single pit phase is shown in Table 16.52.
Ore mined from this deposit will be hauled to an ore stockpile for re-handling into smaller trucks
later. From there, ore will be transported to the primary crusher a distance of approximately
10.8 km.
500 m from the pit.

Page 158 of 357
TABLE 16.52
NAMI PIT PHASE TONNAGE
Mt
Au g/t
Mt
Total
Material
Mt
3.1
0.71
14.1
17.2
Total Ore
Total
Waste
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
4.6
Figure 16.18: Nami Pit Design Single Phase
16.4.5
Rambo Pit
The Rambo pit is to be mined as a single phase, as shown in Figure 16.19. The reserve tonnage
for the pit phase is shown in Table 16.53.

Page 159 of 357
Ore mined from this deposit will be hauled to an ore stockpile for re-handling into smaller trucks
later. From there, ore will be transported to the primary crusher over a distance of approximately
7.4 km.
600 m from the pit.
TABLE 16.53
RAMBO PIT PHASE TONNAGE
Total
Total Ore
Waste
Material
Mt
Au g/t
Mt
Mt
Total
0.9
1.98
6.1
Strip Ratio
(Waste/Ore)
7.0
6.7
Figure 16.19: Rambo Pit Design Single Phase
16.5
MINE PRODUCTION SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE
A production schedule has been developed based on the following constraints:
Target ore production during commercial production to be 4.0 million tonnes per
year;
Minimization of pre-strip quantities;
Mining operations occurring in no more than two deposits at any given time;
A production ramp-up rate as shown in Table 16.54.

Page 160 of 357
Year -1
Year -1
Year -1
Year -1
Year 1
Year 1
Year 1
Year 1
Year 2+
TABLE 16.54
PRODUCTION RAMP-UP RATE
Ore (kt)
Capacity (%)
Q1
Q2
Q3
100
10%
Q4
300
30%
Q1
800
80%
Q2
1,000
100%
Q3
1,000
100%
Q4
1,000
100%
Q1-Q4
4,000
100%
The production sequence for mining in the various deposits is shown in Table 16.55 while the
details for the production schedule are shown in Table 16.56.
TABLE 16.55
PRODUCTION SEQUENCE CHART
Year -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
GGI
GGII
Kao
Rambo
Nami

Page 161 of 357
TABLE 16.56
PRODUCTION SCHEDULE (4.0 MTPA)
Total
Goulagou 1
Waste
Ore
Au
Gold contained
PR Material
Au
Strip Ratio
Goulagou 2
Waste
Ore
Au
Gold contained
PR Material
Au
Strip Ratio
Kao
Waste
Ore
Au
Gold contained
PR Material
Au
Strip Ratio
Rambo
Waste
Ore
Au
Gold contained
PR Material
Au
Strip Ratio
Nami
Waste
Ore
Au
Gold contained
PR Material
Au
Strip Ratio
Total
Waste
Ore
Au
Gold contained
PR Material
Au
Gold contained
Total Material
Strip Ratio
Note:
16.6
-1
2
-
kt
kt
g/t
oz
kt
g/t
w:o
20,666.7
10,649.1
0.61
207,666
16.7
0.78
1.94
kt
kt
g/t
oz
kt
g/t
w:o
20,967.5
7,575.3
1.12
272,683
2.77
2,268.2
294.9
1.00
9,478
7.69
kt
kt
g/t
oz
kt
g/t
w:o
18,738.7
10,969.0
0.97
341,149
1.71
kt
kt
g/t
oz
kt
g/t
w:o
6,050.2
836.0
1.97
52,933
70.0
2.07
7.32
5,401.4
451.3
1.80
26,145
34.3
1.77
12.04
648.7
384.7
2.17
26,788
35.7
2.36
1.78
kt
kt
g/t
oz
kt
g/t
w:o
14,103.2
3,047.9
0.71
69,665
4.63
kt
kt
g/t
oz
kt
g/t
oz
kt
w:o
80,526.2
33,077.3
0.89
944,096
86.70
1.82
5,081
113,690.2
2.44
7,669.6
746.2
1.48
35,623
34.3
1.77
1,950
8,450.1
10.32
9,971.2
3,069.0
1.16
114,057
3.25
10,619.9
3,453.8
1.27
140,845
35.7
2.36
2,711
14,109.4
3.09
7,035.4
1,771.8
0.62
35,329
3.97
7,792.4
4,000.0
0.62
79,787
16.7
0.78
1.95
6,723.9
2,896.7
1.16
107,639
2.32
2,004.3
1,314.7
1.0
41,509
1.52
6,275.4
1,103.3
0.67
23,722
5.69
5,633.6
2,685.3
0.81
70,287
2.10
3,398.7
78.4
0.64
1,623
43.34
6,561.8
741.3
0.82
19,537
8.85
4,142.7
2,228.2
0.68
48,505
1.86
8,337.4
4,000.0
0.97
124,302
12,337.4
2.08
8,452.8
4,000.0
1.12
143,998
12,452.8
2.11
11,178.1
4,000.0
0.65
83,834
15,178.1
2.79
12,999.3
4,000.0
1.02
131,361
16,999.3
3.25
7,637.8
4,000.0
0.87
111,796
11,637.8
1.91
4,938.7
3,921.6
0.97
122,679
1.26
1,891.1
3,258.7
1.19
124,460
0.58
7,792.4
4,000.0
0.62
79,787
16.7
0.78
420
11,809.1
1.95
5,489.6
4,000.0
0.59
75,269
1.37
5,489.6
4,000.0
0.59
75,269
9,489.6
1.37
349.3
877.3
0.61
17,280
0.40
349.3
877.3
0.61
17,280
1,226.6
0.40
PR: Preg-robbing
OPEN PIT MINING PRACTICES
The five Karma pits will function as a single operating unit, employing common conventional
mining practices and equipment at all the pits.
16.6.1
There are three different competencies of rock that must be mined and they will comprise both
ore and waste. The three rock types are oxide, transition, and sulfide rock, with oxide being the
least competent rock and sulphide being the most competent.
It is assumed that the weaker oxide rock is free digging so no drilling or blasting is required. The
transition and sulphide rocks are harder and it is projected that 25% of the transition rock and all
Page 162 of 357
of the sulphide rock will need to be drilled and blasted. The blastholes will be drilled using a top
hammer drill such as a track-diesel-powered, track-mounted Sandvik model DP1500i drill.
Blasting will be carried out using an ammonium nitrate fuel oil (ANFO) mixture, which will
be loaded by a bulk explosives truck directly into the drill holes. Blast initiation will be carried
out using non-electric detonators and booster charges. The projected typical drill patterns are
shown in Table 16.57.
TABLE 16.57
PROJECTED BLASTHOLE DRILL PATTERNS
Item
Transition Material
Sulphide
Bench height
10 m
10 m
Blasthole diameter
102 mm
102 mm
Burden
5m
3m
Spacing
5m
5m
Subdrill
1.2 m
1m
Collar
3m
2m
Explosive density
0.85 g/cc
0.85 g/cc
Projected powder factor 0.23 kg/bcm or 0.09 kg/t 0.41 kg/bcm or 0.15 kg/t
The proposed grade control procedure is based on collecting trench samples and drill cuttings
and assayed for gold, sulphide sulphur, and total and organic carbon. The assay data will be
plotted with geology from in-pit mapping and used to generate the daily excavation plans.
16.6.2
Loading and Hauling
It is envisaged that two Komatsu PC2000 diesel powered hydraulic backhoe excavators and a
Komatsu WA800 wheel loader will be used to load 90 tonne capacity Komatsu HD785 haul
trucks. The haulage truck destinations are summarized in Table 16.58.
TABLE 16.58
HAULAGE DESTINATIONS
Material
Waste Oxide
Waste Transition
Waste Sulphide
Oxide ore
Transition Ore
Sulphide Ore
(if encountered)
Preg-Robbing
oxide
Preg-Robbing
transition
Preg-Robbing
sulphide
Pit
Rambo
GGII
Kao
Nami
GGI
Haul to
waste dump
Haul to
waste dump
Haul to
waste dump
Haul to
waste dump
Haul to waste dump in Yrs 6

&7. Dump in pit in Yrs 8 & 9.
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
Haul to Plant
The number of haul trucks was estimated from first principles taking the mine schedule, pit
designs, haulage destinations, haulage distances and profiles, projected payloads, equipment
Page 163 of 357
performance, climate and anticipated ambient and workplace conditions into account. The
haulage speeds and truck loading will need to be controlled on the extended overland ore hauls in
the hot climate to avoid exceeding the tonne kilometre per hour (tkph) rating (e.g. 702) of the
heat resistant compound truck tires that True Gold will select in collaboration with its tire
supplier and the selected tire manufacturer. The projected truck payloads and estimated loading
times are shown in Table 16.59. Truck payloads are based on projected 40% swell factor, and
4.8%, 4.7% and 2.5% moisture content in oxide, transition and sulphide materials respectively.
The present study is based on the use of Komatsu equipment and other stated models. It is
expected that True Gold will review and assess similar demonstrated equipment available from
other reputable manufacturers prior to purchase as part of its vendor assessment and equipment
procurement procedure.
TABLE 16.59
PROJECTED HAUL TRUCK PAYLOADS AND LOADING TIMES
WA800 Wheel
PC2000 Backhoe
Loader
Projected
Truck
Pit
Material haul truck
Bucket
Truck
Bucket
loading
payload (t)
Capacity
loading
Capacity
time
3
3
(m )
time (sec)
(m )
(sec)
Oxide
75.5
13.7
155
10
265
Rambo Transition
87.4
10
180
10
265
Sulphide
87.4
10
180
10
265
Oxide
78.3
13.7
155
10
265
GGII
Transition
87.4
10
180
10
265
Sulphide
87.4
10
180
10
265
Oxide
70.1
13.7
155
10
265
Kao
Transition
87.4
10
180
10
265
Sulphide
87.4
10
180
10
265
Oxide
75.5
13.7
155
10
265
Nami
Transition
87.4
10
180
10
265
Sulphide
87.4
10
180
10
265
Oxide
78.3
13.7
155
10
265
GGI
Transition
87.4
10
205
10
310
Sulphide
87.4
10
180
10
265
The haul cycle time estimates were based on 90 second dump times and 16.8 effective working
hours per truck-day. The numbers of loading units and haul trucks in the mine fleet in each year
is shown in Table 16.60.
TABLE 16.60
NUMBERS OF LOADING UNIT AND HAUL TRUCKS IN THE MINE FLEET IN EACH YEAR
Years
-1 1 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Komatsu PC2000 backhoes
1 2 2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Komatsu WA800 wheel loaders
1 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Komatsu HD785 haul trucks
6 8 12 12 13 14 14 14 14 14
Page 164 of 357
16.6.3
Hauling From Remote Pits
As indicated in Table 16.58, ore from the three remote deposits (Kao, Rambo and Nami) will be
trucked directly to the heap leach facility using the Komatsu HD785 haul trucks. The one way
haul distances to the plant are approximately 11.3 km from Kao, 7.4 km from Rambo, and 10.8
km from Nami. The extended overland ore hauls require that the overland ore haulage speeds
and truck loading be controlled and that the trucks be fitted with appropriate heat resistant, high
tkph rated tires. True Gold will review and confirm its haul truck tire requirements in detail with
the tire supplier and selected tire manufacturer prior to placing purchase orders.
16.6.4
Pit Dewatering
An allowance has been included in the operating and capital costs for a pit dewatering system to
pump water from pit sumps to the storm water pond based on the anticipated pumping rate
requirements.
Staged skid or trailer mounted centrifugal pumps will be used to remove water from the pit sump
during pit development.
16.6.5
Auxiliary Pit Services and Support Equipment
The primary mining operations will be supported by an ancillary equipment fleet including
bulldozers equipped with ripper attachments, road graders, water trucks, maintenance trucks and
other service vehicles.
16.7
WASTE DUMPS
Each of the open pits will require the development of one or more external waste rock dumps.
The waste dump size requirements for the different open pits are listed in Table 16.61. A swell
factor of 30% was used and side slopes of 3:1 were employed in the assessment.
TABLE 16.61
WASTE DUMP VOLUMES
Waste Tonnage (Mt) Dump Volume (Mm3)
GGI
20.7
14.0
GGII
20.9
14.1
Kao
18.7
14.2
Rambo
6.1
4.1
Nami
14.1
8.8
Total
16.8
80.5
55.2
MINE EQUIPMENT
The mine operations at Karma will employ open pit mining methods and technologies similar to
those used at other locations in Africa with comparable rock and climatic conditions. Table 16.62
shows the mining equipment procurement schedule.
Page 165 of 357
TABLE 16.62
MINE EQUIPMENT PROCUREMENT SCHEDULE
16.9
Sandvik DP1500i drill

Lowbed & tractor
Explosive truck (1t)
Explosive truck (5t)
Hydraulic rock breaker
-1 1
1
1
1
1
1
Komatsu PC2000 diesel backhoe

Spare bucket for PC2000
Komatsu WA800 wheel loader
1
1
1
1
1
Komatsu HD785 truck (91 t)
Komatsu D275A-5R bulldozer

Komatsu GD825A-2 grader
4
2
Water truck
Komatsu WA380 utility loader
Foton dump truck
1
1
2
Mechanic service trucks (LD)

Mechanic service trucks (HD)
Fuel truck (basic)
Fuel/lube truck
Flat deck with hiab crane
Welding truck
Tire manipulator
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Toyota pick-up trucks

Mine bus (20 seat)
Pit pumps
9
2
2
Portable light plants

Pit radios purchased in lots.
LOM
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
14
4
2
2
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
22
2
4
6
SUPPORT FACILITIES
The Karma mine will require mine offices, safety offices, change house facilities, maintenance
facilities, warehousing and cold storage areas. The mine office will provide for mine
management, engineering, geology, mine maintenance services.
A maintenance shop which will provide open-pit support services which will be located near the
plant site. The mine maintenance facility will consist of a four bay shop which will include a
wash facility, welding equipment and a dedicated preventive maintenance bay. The facility will
have adjoining indoor parts storage and tool crib. A fuel and lube station will be located near the
maintenance facility and main haul road. A mobile truck mounted fuel and lube system will be
used to service equipment in the field.
Page 166 of 357
Three separate storage areas will be provided for bulk ANFO and blasting accessories and a
detonator magazine.
16.10 MINING LABOUR FORCE
The Karma mining operation will require a workforce ranging about 158 people in Year -1 to a
peak of about 228 people in Year 6, shown in Table 16.63. The mining operations labour force
includes:
Mine and maintenance supervision

Office technical staff, engineering, geology, surveying, sampling
Clerical, maintenance planning, training
Mine operations crews
Mine maintenance crews
Mine support crews
It is expected that the workforce will largely consist of local personnel. The Mine
Superintendent, Training Coordinator, Maintenance General Supervisor roles will be assumed by
expatriate personnel.
TABLE 16.63
MINE OPERATIONS LABOUR FORCE BY YEAR
Year
Mine Department
-1
1
2
3
4
5
Mine Management
Mine Superintendent
1
1
1
1
1
1
Training Coordinator
1
1
1
1
1
1
Equipment Trainer
1
1
1
1
1
1
Clerk
1
1
1
1
1
1
Total Mine Management
4
4
4
4
4
4
Mine Operations
Mine General Supervisor
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mine Supervisor
8
8
8
8
8
8
Mine Clerk
4
4
4
4
4
4
Drillers
2
2
2
2
2
2
Drill helpers
2
2
2
2
2
2
Blast technician
2
2
2
2
2
2
Blast records clerk
2
2
2
2
2
2
Blast leader
2
2
2
2
2
2
Blaster
2
4
4
4
4
4
Blast crew worker
2
4
4
4
4
6
Blast crew labourer
2
Shovel operator
4
6
8
6
6
6
Wheel loader operator
4
4
4
4
4
4
Truck driver
22 32 46 42 52 52
Ancillary equipment operator
28 28 32 32 32 34
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
3
1
2
1
2
2
8
4
4
4
2
2
2
4
10
2
6
4
48
34
2
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
2
6
4
32
34
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
4
2
28
26
4
2
28
26
Page 167 of 357
TABLE 16.63
MINE OPERATIONS LABOUR FORCE BY YEAR
Year
Mine Department
-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Total Mine Operations
86 102 122 116 126 132 136 106
Mine Maintenance
Maintenance General Supervisor
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Supervisor
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Planner
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
Lead hand
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Heavy duty mechanic
27 34 45 42 48 49 47 39
Welder
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Gas Mechanic
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Tire technician
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Parts technician
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Crane Operator
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Labourer
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Total Mine Maintenance
54 61 72 69 75 76 74 65
Maintenance Ratio (%m:o)
63 60 59 59 60 58 54 61
Technical Services
Chief Engineer
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Mine Engineer
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Geologist
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Surveyor
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Survey Tech
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Mine Tech
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Ore Control Tech
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Total Technical Services
14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14
8
84
9
84
2
1
6
26
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
6
26
1
1
1
2
1
41
49
41
49
1
2
2
2
2
2
11
1
2
2
2
2
2
11
Total Mine Department Personnel 158 181 212 203 219 226 228 188 138 138

Page 168 of 357
17.0
RECOVERY METHODS
17.1
PROCESS PLANT
will consist of two crushing circuits (for soft and hard ore respectively), agglomeration and
stacking, heap leaching with cyanide solution followed by adsorption of the pregnant solution,
elution and gold smelting. Services to the process plant will include reagent make-up, storage
and distribution, water and air supply.
The heap leach plant is required to process 4 Mtpa of oxide and transition ore for the recovery
and extraction of gold, delivered from five separate open pit mines, namely: GGI, GGII, Kao,
Rambo and Nami. Only a minimal amount of sulphides, extracted from Rambo and Nami pits,
will be processed through the heap leach plant. Sulphide material from GGI, GGII and Kao
cannot be treated through heap leaching due to its refractory nature.
Gold will be recovered through heap leaching where the stacked ore is permeated with a dilute
solution of cyanide. The gold in the ore dissolves into the cyanide solution and is collected and
pumped to a carbon adsorption column. Once sufficient gold has been adsorbed on to the carbon,
the loaded carbon will be acid washed prior to elution, followed by reactivation of the eluted
carbon. The solution from the elution circuit will be subjected to electrowinning, where gold will
be deposited onto cathodes as sludge. Periodically the sludge will be washed off the cathodes and
dried. The dried gold sludge will then be smelted to produce gold bullion which will be shipped
to a refinery.
The overall flow sheets of the Karma heap leach plant are shown in Figure 17.1 and Figure 17.2
below.

Page 169 of 357
Figure 17.1
Karma Comminution Overall Flowsheet
ROM
Hard Rock
ROM Bin
Vibrating
Grizzly
Primary
Jaw Crusher
Primary Sizing
Screen
Secondary
Crushing
Feed Bin
Seconadry Sizing
Screen
Secondary
Crusher
Tertiary
Crushing
Feed Bin
Tertiary
Crusher
Agglomeration
Feed Hopper
Belt
Feeder
Emergency
Stockpile
Stockpile Slew
Conveyor
ROM
Soft Rock
Vendor Supply
Belt Magnet
Primary
Breaker Feeder
Roller Screen
Primary Crusher
Discharge Conveyor
Secondary
Roll Crusher
Agglomeration Drum
Cement
Delivery
Cement Loading
Hoist
Cement Silo
Dust Filter
Cement Bag
Hopper
Cement Silo
Cement Silo
Rotary Feeder
Cement
Transfer Blower
Cement Silo
Dust Filter
Cement Bag
Hopper
Cement Silo
Cement Silo
Rotary Feeder
Rotary
Feeder
Cement
Transfer Blower
Rotary
Feeder
Agglomeration Feed Conveyor
Karma Heap
Leach Plant
OVERALL FLOWSHEET 1

Page 170 of 357
Figure 17.2
Karma Heap Leach & ADR Overall Flowsheet
Crushed Ore
Cyanide Solution
Agglomerating
Drum
Agglomeration
Water Tank
Moveable Head
Conveyor
Overland
Conveyor
Future
Tripper Conveyor
Wing Conveyor
Drip Irrigation
Heap
Grasshopper Conveyors
Transverse
Conveyor
Stacker Feed
Conveyor
Stacker/Stinger
Conveyor
OVERFLOW
M
CuSO4
HCl
Sieve
Bend
H2 O2
IBC
Bag
Pregnant
Solution Pond
Intermediate
Solution Pond
Barren Pond
Sieve Bend
Scavenging
Column
Sieve
Bend
Carbon
Basket
Storm Water Pond
Eluted Carbon
Holding Tank
Detox Pond
Regeneration
Kiln
Sieve
Bends
Adsorption
Column
Flush/Cell
Feed Tank
Kiln Screw
Feeder
Carbon
Basket
Carbon
Transfer
Vessel
Cathode Hoist
Reclaim Heat
Exchanger
Elution
Column
Acid Wash
Column
Eductor
M
Elution Pumps
Electrowinning
Cells 1/2/3
Cathode High
Pressure Wash Pump
Eluant Tank
Eluant Mixer
Cathode Wash
Tank
Main Heat
Exchanger
Acid Wash
Pumps
Acid Wash
Tank
Acid Drum
Pump
Elution Heaters
Carbon Transfer
Water Tank
Gold Sludge
Tank
Carbon Transfer
Water Pump
Karma Heap
Leach Plant
Bullion Bar
Moulds
Bucket
Calcining
Furnace

Smelting
Furnace
Gold Mould
Cascade Trolley
GOLD BARS
OVERALL FLOWSHEET 2
Page 171 of 357
17.1.1
Ore Characteristics
Results from the following tests were used to characterise the ore.
Selected comminution test results

Comminution circuit simulations
Head analyses
Moisture content
The resulting ore characteristics are tabulated in Table 17.1 through Table 17.3.
TABLE 17.1
OXIDE ORE CHARACTERISTICS
Units
Ore Source
Nominal Max Size
Max Lump Size
Ore Head Grade (Au)
Moisture Content
Specific Gravity
Bulk Density of Crushed Ore
Uniaxial Compressive Strength
Bond Crushability Index
Ball Mill Work Index
Abrasion Index
mm
mm
g/t
%
t/m3
Mpa
kWh/t
kWh/t
GGI
Open Pit
600
849
0.95
15%
1.94
1.20
3.09
5.9
0.021
GGII
Open Pit
600
849
0.63
15%
1.96
1.20
2.77
6.4
8.15
0.007
Oxides
Kao
Open Pit
600
849
1.30
15%
1.64
1.20
0.68
3.0
0.003
Rambo
Open Pit
600
849
3.87
15%
1.78
1.20
0.31
2.1
0.005
Nami
Open Pit
600
849
0.73
15%
1.75
1.20
1.6
0.005
Transition
Kao
Rambo
Open Pit Open Pit
600
600
849
849
0.69
2.98
10%
10%
2.12
2.37
1.66
1.66
10.41
-
Nami
Open Pit
600
849
0.64
10%
2.21
1.66
11.8
-
Source
Client
Client
Calculated
PEA
SENET
Client
PEA
Testwork
Testwork
Testwork
Testwork
TABLE 17.2
TRANSITION ORE CHARACTERISTICS
Units
Ore Source
Nominal Max Size
Max Lump Size
Ore Head Grade (Au)
Moisture Content
Specific Gravity
Uniaxial Compressive Strength
Rod Mill Work Index
Abrasion Index
mm
mm
g/t
%
t/m3
Mpa
kWh/t
kWh/t
kWh/t
GGI
Open Pit
600
849
0.60
10%
2.30
1.66
0.025

GGII
Open Pit
600
849
0.88
10%
2.25
1.66
9.99
0.014
Source
Client
Client
Calculated
PEA
SENET
Client
PEA
Testwork
Testwork
Testwork
Testwork
Testwork
Page 172 of 357
TABLE 17.3
SULPHIDE ORE CHARACTERISTICS
SulphideS
Units
Source
Rambo
Nami
Ore Source
Open Pit Open Pit
Client
Nominal Max Size
mm
600
600
Client
Max Lump Size
mm
849
849
Calculated
Ore Head Grade (Au)
g/t
2.94
0.83
PEA
Moisture Content
%
5%
5%
SENET
Specific Gravity
2.58
2.69
Client
t/m3
1.66
1.66
PEA
Uniaxial Compressive Strength Mpa
Testwork
kWh/t
Testwork
Rod Mill Work Index
kWh/t
Testwork
kWh/t
16.16
Testwork
Abrasion Index:
Testwork
17.1.2
Operating Schedule
The majority of the run-of-mine (ROM) feed will be oxide and transition ore with minimal
amounts of sulphide ore. The soft rock crushing circuit equipment availability was aligned to the
availability of the agglomeration and stacking systems and included the downtime for planned
maintenance and crusher re-lines. The operating schedule is described in Table 17.4.
TABLE 17.4
OPERATING SCHEDULE
Units
Soft Rock Crushing
Days per Year
days
Hours per day
hrs
Possible hours per annum
hrs/a
Scheduled Maintenance per week
hrs
Scheduled Maintenance per annum
hrs
Availability
%
Available hours per annum
hrs
Productivity
Operating hours per annum
Crushed Tonnes per annum
Crushing tonnes per hour
Selected Crushing Throughput
%
hrs
t
tph
tph
Hard Rock Crushing

Days per Year
days
Hours per Day
hrs
Possible Hours per Annum
hrs
hrs
Design
Source
365
24
8,760
42.12
2,190
75
6,570
Client
Client
Calculated
Calculated
Calculated
PEA
Calculated
71
6,242
4,000,000
641
650
Calculated
Calculated
Client
Calculated
Calculated
365
24
8,760
42
Client
Client
Calculated
Calculated
Page 173 of 357
TABLE 17.4
OPERATING SCHEDULE
Units Design
hrs
2,190
Availability
%
75%
Available Hours per Annum
hrs
6,570
Utilisation
%
95%
Operating Hours per Annum
hrs
6,242
Crushed Tonnes per Annum
t
1,200,000
Crushing Tonnes per Hour
tph
192
Selected Crushing Throughput
tph
200
Source
Calculated
PEA
Calculated
SENET
Calculated
Client
Calculated
Calculated
Agglomeration and Stacking

Days per year
days
365
Hours per Day
hrs
24
hrs
8,760
hrs
42
hrs
2,190
Availability
%
75%
hrs
6,570
Utilisation
%
95%
hrs
6,242
Agglomerated Tonnes per Annum
t
4,000,000
Agglomerated Tonnes per Hour
tph
641
Selected Agglomeration Throughput tph
650
Client
Client
Calculated
Calculated
Calculated
PEA
Calculated
SENET
Calculated
Client
Calculated
Calculated
Heap Leach & ADR

Days per year
days
365
Client
Hours per Day
hrs
24
Client
hrs
8,760
Calculated
hrs
42
Calculated
hrs
2 190
Calculated
Availability
%
75%
PEA
hrs
6,570
Calculated
Utilisation
%
95%
SENET
Productivity
%
71%
Calculated
hrs
6,242
Calculated
Leached Tonnes per Annum
t
4,000,000
Client
Leached Tonnes per Hour
tph
641
Calculated
Selected Leached Throughput
tph
650
Calculated
17.1.3
Production
The projected mine processing plant production schedule over the LOM is shown in Table 17.5
to Table 17.7.

Page 174 of 357
TABLE 17.5
PROPOSED OXIDE PRODUCTION SCHEDULE
Gold Production
GGI
0.95
GGII
0.63
Oxides
Kao
1.30
92%
90%
96%
95%
95%
Testwork
90%
88%
94%
93%
93%
Calculated
0.06
2,142
68,864
0.13
3,675
118,152
0.05
2,982
95,870
0.10
5,480
176,188
0.06
3,319
106,704
Calculated
Calculated
Calculated
Units
Head Grade
g/t
% of HL
Feed Grade
% of HL
Feed Grade
g/t
kg
oz
Lab Leach Dissolution

Plant Leach Dissolution
Heap Leach Residue
Annual Gold
Annual Gold
Rambo
3.87
Nami
0.73
Source
PEA
TABLE 17.6
PROPOSED TRANSITION PRODUCTION SCHEDULE
Gold Production
Units
Head Grade
Lab Leach
Dissolution
Plant Leach
Dissolution
Heap Leach Residue
Annual Gold
Annual Gold
Transition
Kao
Rambo
0.69
2.98
Nami
0.64
g/t
GGII
0.88
% of HL Feed Grade
75%
75%
85%
85%
88%
Testwork
% of HL Feed Grade
73%
73%
83%
83%
86%
Calculated
g/t
kg
oz
0.17
1,809
58,156
0.39
4,206
135,236
0.16
3,123
100,402
0.34
6,659
214,102
0.12
3,036
97,616
Calculated
Calculated
Calculated
TABLE 17.7
PROPOSED SULPHIDE PRODUCTION SCHEDULE
Sulphides
Gold Production
Units
Rambo Nami
Head Grade
g/t
2.94
0.83
Lab Leach Dissolution
% of HL Feed Grade
70%
85%
Lab Leach Dissolution Discount
%
2%
2%
Plant Leach Dissolution
% of HL Feed Grade
68%
83%
Heap Leach Residue
g/t
1.30
0.46
Annual Gold
kg
11,041
8,940
Annual Gold
oz
354,981 287,424
17.1.4
Source
GGI
0.60
PEA
Source
PEA
Testwork
Testwork
Calculated
Calculated
Calculated
Calculated
Crushing
There will be two separate crushing stations to treat the soft and hard ore. The soft rock circuit
will be partially skid-mounted and moveable and will be supplied as a complete package from a
vendor. The hard rock crushing plant will only be required intermittently when the more
competent ore is delivered from the pit. The quantity of more competent ore will be minimal
compared to the softer material that will be fed to the plant and as a result, the hard rock crushing
plant will be moveable.
The soft rock circuit will produce a final product with a top size of 50 mm. This product will be
achieved in a two stage crushing circuit employing a feeder-breaker and a double roll crusher.
The feeder-breaker will size the ROM material which will then be discharged onto the primary
Page 175 of 357
product discharge conveyor. The crushed material will be conveyed to the roller screen which
will separate the oversize from the undersize. The oversize material from the screen will be
discharge into a double roll crusher using a conveyor. The screen undersize and roll crusher
product will both discharge directly onto the agglomeration feed conveyor.
The mobile hard rock crushing circuit will produce a final product of 80% passing 1.70 mm. This
product will be achieved in a three stage crushing circuit which will be supplied as a complete
package from a vendor. A jaw crusher will primarily crush the ROM material, followed by a
secondary cone crusher and tertiary hammer mill both in closed circuit with dedicated triple deck
screens. The hard rock crushing circuit product will be transferred to the agglomeration feed
conveyor via a feed hopper and belt feeder.
17.1.5
Agglomeration and Stacking
An agglomeration drum will be used to eliminate fines in the ore prior to stacking on the heap
leach pad. Cement will be used to bind the fine particles in the ore to produce competent
agglomerates. Solution will be added into the rotating drum to maintain the critical ore moisture
required for optimum agglomeration.
Agglomerated ore will be discharged onto the overland conveyor. The overland conveyor will
transfer the ore onto a conveyor system which will deliver the ore onto the heap leach pad.
Provision for a stack height of 20 m has been made in the heap leach pad design. The cells have
been designed with a lift height of 10 m.
17.1.6
Heap Leach
A leach period of 120 days has been allowed for normal solution flow. Barren solution will be
sprayed across the stacked cell via the irrigation system and will dissolve the gold in the
agglomerated ore as it percolates through the heap to the pad floor. The gold enriched solution
will be collected and gravitate to either the intermediate leach solution (ILS) pond or pregnant
leach solution (PLS) pond. Excess solution will overflow to the storm water pond.
While the first cell is being irrigated, the second cell will be stacked. The gold enriched solution
from the intermediate leach solution pond will be pumped to the second cell to irrigate the
agglomerated ore. The solution will be further enriched in order to achieve the desired gold
content in the final pregnant solution. The pregnant solution will be pumped from the pregnant
pond to the adsorption column.
17.1.7
Adsorption
Pregnant solution will be pumped into the bottom of the adsorption column where it will come
into contact with activated carbon in each of the six stages in the column. The solution will then
discharge at the top of the column as barren solution and will gravitate through sieve bends to
remove any carbon before gravitating to the barren pond to be reused for irrigation on the heaps.
A batch of carbon, loaded with gold, will be extracted from the first stage of the column and will
be hydraulically transferred via an eductor to the elution circuit. Carbon will be transferred
between the column stages using eductors. The carbon from stage 2 will be transferred to stage 1

Page 176 of 357
(bottom of column) after which carbon from stage 3 will be transferred to stage 2. This will be
repeated until stage 6 carbon has been transferred to stage 5.
Fresh or reactivated carbon from regeneration will be added to stage 6 of the column via the
dewatering sieve bend installed above the adsorption column to remove the carbon transfer
water. The transfer water will gravitate back to the carbon transfer water tank for reuse.
17.1.8
Cyanide Detoxification and Storm Water Control
In cases of high rainfall, run-off from the pads and overflow from the ponds will gravitate to the
storm water pond. Any excess solution from the storm water pond will overflow into the detox
pond. Detox reagents will be pumped to the detox pond to destroy any residual cyanide. Cyanide
destruction will be effected via hydrogen peroxide and copper. Hydrochloric acid (HCl) will be
used to neutralize the alkaline solution prior to pumping into the environment.
During times of high rainfall, excess barren solution will be pumped to the scavenging column
prior to being discharged into the storm water pond. The solution discharging from the top of the
scavenging column will be directed to the storm water pond, via a sieve bend screen which will
catch any fugitive carbon, and collect in a basket. Overflow solution from the storm water will
gravitate into the detox pond from where it can either be pumped to the environment or back to
the storm water pond for reuse.
17.1.9
Scavenging Column
Barren solution will be pumped into the bottom of the scavenging column where it will come
into contact with activated carbon in each of the two stages in the column. The solution will then
discharge at the top of the column and will gravitate through a sieve bend to remove any carbon
before gravitating to the barren pond. The carbon from the sieve bend oversize will be collected
in a carbon basket.
The batch of gold loaded carbon will be removed from the first stage of the column and will be
hydraulically transferred via the eductor to the acid wash circuit. Carbon will be transferred
between the column stages using eductors whereby the carbon from stage 2 will be transferred to
stage 1 (bottom of column). Fresh or reactivated carbon from regeneration will then be added to
stage 2 via the dewatering sieve bend installed above the scavenging column to remove the
carbon transfer water. The transfer water will gravitate back to the carbon transfer water tank to
be reused.
17.1.10
Acid Wash
A cold acid wash circuit capable of taking the full 6 t batch will be included to remove any
carbonates that might otherwise foul carbon. The circuit will be designed to acid wash every
batch of loaded carbon, before it is eluted, by circulating 3% HCl through the carbon in the acid
wash column.
Loaded carbon will be discharged from the adsorption column eductor at the bottom of the
column straight into the acid wash column. The carbon batch will be back-washed with raw
water to remove any light trash such as slimes, plastic and organic trash captured in the bed. The
trash will removed through strainers, and the solution will flow to the barren pond via a gravity
Page 177 of 357
pipeline. The carbon will then be acid washed with dilute hydrochloric acid. The acid wash
solution will be emptied to the acid wash tank at the end of the operation.
Once the process of acid wash has been completed and the carbon bed has been neutralized, the
pre-treated carbon batch will be hydraulically transferred into the elution column.
17.1.11
Elution
Pressurized Zadra will be used as the elution method. A cyanide-caustic solution will be pumped
through the elution column whilst being heated up via the heat exchangers. The pregnant
solution will be directed to the electrowinning cells once the temperature exiting the column
outlet reaches 130C. The spent electrolyte from electrowinning will flow back to the elution
area. This cycle will continue until the level of contamination becomes unacceptable.
At the end of the elution cycle the stripped carbon will be hydraulically transferred to the
regeneration section and the system will be made available to treat the next batch of loaded
carbon.
17.1.12
Electrowinning
The eluate from the elution column will be directed to the electrowinning flash/cell feed tank
where it will be distributed to the electrowinning cells. Gold will be plated onto stainless steel
cathodes as sludge and the barren solution will be circulated back to the elution area.
The loaded cathodes are removed periodically and the sludge will be washed off and collected in
the gold sludge tank where it will be manually tapped off into a bucket and taken to the drying
oven in the gold room for drying.
17.1.13
Regeneration
Eluted carbon will be transferred hydraulically to the eluted carbon holding tank. Carbon will be
withdrawn from the eluted carbon holding tank by a screw feeder, which will discharge the
carbon to a diesel-fired rotary kiln for thermal regeneration. Regenerated carbon will be
quenched in the quench pan and will pass over a screen to remove fine carbon before gravitating
to the eductor tank.
17.1.14
Gold Room
The gold sludge that has been tapped into the bucket will be loaded onto stainless steel trays. The
tray will be placed into the drying oven, equipped with a mercury retort for removing mercury
from the sludge. The dried sludge, once cooled, will be mixed with fluxes and smelted. The
molten charge will be poured into bullion moulds and allowed to cool. The slag phase will be
broken away leaving a relatively pure gold bar.
17.1.15
Reagents
Facilities to mix, store and distribute reagents and other consumables will be allowed for in the
design. These reagents and consumables will include cyanide, caustic, cement, copper sulphate,
hydrogen peroxide, diesel (for plant use only), hydrochloric acid and smelting fluxes. The
Page 178 of 357
reagent consumptions obtained during bench scale laboratory tests were used to estimate the size
of the equipment associated with mixing, storage and distribution of the reagents. As reagents are
generally classified as a safety risk, safety showers will be incorporated into the design and
where there is cyanide usage in high concentrations, hydrogen cyanide detectors will be put in
place to give an early warning in the event of formation of detectable HCN gas.
Cyanide
A cyanide make-up and dosing facility will be designed by taking into account total cyanide
usage (heap leach and elution), and will allow for two make-ups a day. The storage capacities of
cyanide were based on the oxide and transition ores. The sulphide tonnage is minimal over the
LOM, compared to the oxide and transition ore.
Caustic
The make-up tank will perform dual purpose as both a mixing and dosing tank. Total caustic
usage in the plant (elution and acid neutralisation) was used to determine the size of the tank
assuming that a batch is made up every 3 days.
Cement
Due to high consumption required for some of the ore deposits, the cement will preferentially be
delivered in bulk and pumped directly from delivery trucks into the storage silos. Provision has
been made for a bag hopper feed installation. The cement loading and distribution system will be
supplied as a complete package from a vendor. Cement will be added directly onto the
agglomeration feed conveyor.
Hydrochloric Acid
The design assumes that hydrochloric acid will be delivered in drums at a concentration of 33%
HCl. This will used to acid wash the loaded carbon and in the neutralisation process during
detoxification.
Copper Sulphate
The design of copper sulphate make-up and storage facilities for the cyanide detoxification of the
plant solution will be based on reducing the residual cyanide level to 1 ppm WAD. The facility
will be located close to the detox pond. It will be used in the emergency detox facility should the
storm water pond overflow.
Hydrogen Peroxide
Hydrogen peroxide will be delivered to site in iso-bulk containers (IBC) at a concentration of
60%. The facility will also be located close to the detox pond. It will be used for emergency
detoxification should the storm water pond overflow.

Page 179 of 357
Activated Carbon
Coconut shell (8 X 16 mesh) activated carbon with high gold adsorption activity and high
abrasion resistance properties will be used for the adsorption of gold during leach. The carbon
will be delivered in 500 kg bags. A consumption rate of 25 g/t has been assumed. An attritioning
tank will be used to treat fresh activated carbon.
Smelting Fluxes
Smelting fluxes; borax, sodium carbonate, and sodium nitrate and silica consumptions will be
allowed for in the design.
Diesel
A facility to store diesel in the plant will be designed by taking into account diesel consumed by
thermic oil heaters, regeneration kiln and the smelting furnace.
Diesel will be delivered into a diesel storage tank on the plant which will supply the elution and
regeneration areas. Diesel will also be supplied to two diesel tanks which will feed the laboratory
and the gold room respectively.
17.1.16
Compressed Air Services
Two compressors will be employed in a duty/standby arrangement to provide the required

general plant and the instrument air. The air will pass through a filter before being discharged as
per demand into the compressed air receiver or into the instrument air dryer. From the
compressed air receiver, the general plant air will be distributed where required in the plant. The
instrument air will pass through further filtering after drying before it is stored in the air receiver
that will distribute to the plant.
17.1.17
Water Services
Raw Water
Raw water will be supplied from the barrage, currently under construction on the Nkambe River
and will be pumped via a diesel-driven pump to the storm water pond or the raw water pond. The
reagent make-up and top-up water requirement will be transferred into the process water
distribution tank. Water for dust suppression and the water treatment plant will be drawn directly
from the raw water pond via dedicated pumps. The fire water system will also consist of
dedicated pumps and will be drawn directly from the raw water pond.
Potable Water Circuit
Raw water will be treated in the potable water treatment plant where it will be pumped to the
potable water storage tank. Potable water will be distributed using a pump and hydrosphere to
maintain the required pressure in the potable water header. The safety shower hydrosphere will
ensure that the required safety shower water will be available during a power failure.

Page 180 of 357
17.2
HEAP LEACH DESIGN
17.2.1
Introduction
All ore mined from the open pit will be delivered to the ROM pad from where it will be crushed,
agglomerated and conveyed to a single, centrally located heap leach pad situated 250 m south of
the GGII pit. The pad is located on flat terrain with a low ridge running from east to west across
the north western corner of the pad. The pad has been designed to have a slope of 1.0% draining
from north to south and 0.5% draining from west to east.
17.2.2
Heap Leach Pad
The final Heap Leach Pad will measure 1,620 m long by 810 m wide and will consist of 42 cells
each measuring 75 m wide by 405 m long at the base of the first lift, with the exception of the
two easternmost cells which are 110 m wide by 405 m long. The pad will be stacked to a height
of 20 m in two lifts of 10 m each. It is anticipated that the Heap Leach Operation will have a life
of 8.5 years. The pad will be constructed in three phases as follows:
The first phase will comprise 9 cells in the south east corner of the pad, and the
PLS, ILS, barren, storm and raw water ponds. The first (easternmost) cell will
measure 405 m x 110 m at the base, and the rest will be 405 m x 75 m.
The second phase will be construction of the 9 north-eastern cells (Cells 10 to 18).
The cells will have similar dimensions to those adjacent to them in Phase 1.
The third phase will be construction of the remaining 24 cells (Cells 19 to 42).
These cells will all measure 405 m x 75 m.
Layerworks under the pad will consist of a sub-base of locally sourced or in-situ material
compacted to 95% Mod AASHTO with a 600 mm layer of selected low permeability material
forming the base. The geotechnical investigation has shown that the in-situ ferricrete has a
sufficiently low permeability to provide the base if compacted to 95% Mod AASHTO. The
overall surface elevation of the pad has been raised above ground level to minimise excavation in
the cut/fill operation needed to create the base of the pad. Fill material for the pad layerworks
will be sourced from pond excavation and from open pit overburden.
A 1.5 mm thick HDPE liner will be laid directly onto the base to form a composite liner, with a
protective layer of needle-punched geofabric placed over it. A 550 mm thick drainage layer of
crushed aggregate with a network of slotted pipes will be placed over the liner to provide a stable
base for the stacked ore. The drainage system will discharge leachate from each cell into double
lined leachate collection channels delivering to either the PLS, ILS or Barren ponds.
17.2.3
Ponds
The PLS, ILS, barren, storm water, raw water and detox ponds are located south-eastern corner
of the pad. All except the raw water pond are excavated into natural ground, to enable the pad to
drain into them. The raw water pond will contain water pumped from the barrage currently under
construction on the Nkambe River and is located above ground.
The ponds have been designed to enable solution to spill from the PLS pond to the ILS pond to
the Barren Pond and eventually into the storm water pond.
Page 181 of 357
The required capacity of the PLS, ILS and Barren ponds is 29,600 m3 each. The ponds will be
double lined with 1.5 mm HDPE. A synthetic seepage interception layer will be placed between
the two liners
The storm water pond has been designed to contain the runoff from the entire pad plus 8 months
process water consumption during the dry season. Allowance has also been made for evaporation
losses from the pond. The capacity of the storm water pond is 1.25 million m3.
The raw water pond has a capacity of 340,000 m3 and will be constructed above natural ground
level. This will provide storage of uncontaminated river water pumped from the barrage on the
Nkambe River during the wet season. Allowance has been made for evaporation losses from the
pond.
The detox pond is designed to contain spillage or rundown from the plant and has a capacity of
15,000 m3.
The storm water, raw water and detox ponds will be lined with single 1.5 mm thick HDPE liners.

Page 182 of 357
18.0
PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE
The location of the Karma Project is currently a green fields site without any existing
infrastructure. A gravel road currently passes to the south of the Project through the Kononga
village.
The proposed infrastructure for the mining and ore processing operations includes several open
pits, waste rock stockpiles, a heap leach pad and related facilities; and maintenance buildings for
mobile open pit equipment. Facilities will include office space, change house facilities, an
explosives storage area, power supply and distribution networks, fuel storage tanks, a warehouse
and laydown area,. The infrastructure on site will be designed to accommodate and support an
efficient mining and ore processing operation. A plan of the Project site is provided in Figure
18.1.
The ore processing area of the Project will be located just south of the GGII open pit. Nearby
will be the mine maintenance facilities, fresh water storage pond and Project administration
facilities. The GGI, Rambo, Nami, and Kao open pits areas will be operated as separate,
effectively remote pits.
There will be no camp facilities on site due to the proximity of the town Ouahigouya. Most
national employees will live at home in Ouahigouya or the other surrounding villages. During
construction, a contractor workforce will be temporarily accommodated in Ouahigouya. During
operations, expatriate and senior management staff will also be based in approximately 20 30
rented houses in Ouahigouya.
Provision has been made in the mining facilities for the following:
Approximately 27 kilometres of haul roads;

Prefabricated mine administration buildings, change house and ablution buildings;
Mine equipment maintenance facility with six maintenance bays, suitable for the
selected mobile mining equipment fleet;
Fuel storage and refuelling facility, which will be provided by the fuel vender;
Remotely located explosives storage magazine, designed and constructed in
accordance with local regulations.
The heap leach facility and related process plant infrastructure required for the development of
the Project includes the following:
Approximately 1,200 m of plant site roads with a gravel wearing course finish;
Plant and administration buildings, including control facilities, maintenance
facilities, assay laboratories, medical facilities, change house and security.
Other infrastructure required for the development of the Project will include the following:
A 1.7 km long, 8 m wide site access road;

Power generation and distribution facilities, which would include a 3.6 MVA
connected load diesel generating plant, power distribution transformer substations
and above ground cables;

Page 183 of 357
Storm water drainage, including appropriately placed ditches and culverts. Storm
drainage from the leach pad site will be captured and directed to the contaminated
water pond;
A sewage treatment plant, sized to accommodate effluent discharge for a 175
person facility;
Water supply and distribution network, including a water supply pond, which
would take water from the existing barrage, a potable water treatment plant and a
fire water distribution system;
Communications;
Security;
Fuel storage
The open pits will be connected to the process area by a series of dedicated haul roads, wide
enough to accommodate the width of two nominal 90 t dump trucks. Mining administration,
change house and ablution buildings will consist of pre-fabricated buildings to accommodate
mining and engineering labour and provide change house and ablution facilities. The mining
equipment workshop will consist of a steel-framed and sheet-clad building. Diesel fuel storage
for the site will be accommodated within a tank storage facility with a capacity of 560,000 L.
Explosives and detonators will be stored separately in secured explosive magazines located
adjacent to the mining facilities and at a safe distance from buildings, structures and pits.
The administration building will be a single-storey prefabricated panel construction. The
building will include areas for engineering, administration personnel and offices for the general
manager, plant superintendent, administration superintendent, plant maintenance superintendent
environmental officers and finance staff.
The process plant building will be a single-storey prefabricated building. It will include facilities
for the process plant personnel.
The plant maintenance facility will be located beside the process facilities and will include a
workshop and offices for maintenance personnel.
A prefabricated change house building will provide male and female change rooms fitted with
lockers, showers and ablution facilities.
General plant warehousing will be established adjacent to the administration offices. The plant
warehouse building and the reagents and cement warehouse will be steel-framed buildings. The
cyanide storage area will comprise a concrete floor, and will be fenced and gated in a locked
security area. The cyanide will be stored in the shipping containers supplied with cyanide
delivery.
Water for the project will be provided from a barrage (dam) constructed on a tributary to the
Nkambe River, 4 km south of the proposed plant site. The barrage on the river will be built in
two phases with the first phase providing 50,000 m3 of water for the community and construction
activities. The second phase will have a capacity of 1.2 M m3, to support operations.
Water will be drawn from the existing barrage during the rainy season and pumped to the process
plant raw and storm water ponds. One diesel-powered, skid-mounted pump will be located next
to the barrage and will be utilized to recover water during and shortly after the rainy season. This
Page 184 of 357
pump was sized to cater for the three-month wet season, and will be used to fill the raw and
storm water ponds to capacity for use throughout the dry season.
A water balance was developed and was used as the basis for sizing the storm and raw water
storage ponds. The storm (contaminated) and raw (uncontaminated) water ponds were designed
to cater for the entire plant and mining requirements throughout the wet and dry seasons. Water
stored in the storm water pond will be pumped to the process plant for heap leach irrigation and
plant processing water as required. Water stored in the raw water pond will be used and
circulated for dust suppression and for potable water make up as required.
The site layout in Figure 18.1 shows an overall view of the Project site, while Figure 18.2 shows
detail of the leach pad, process plant and water storage ponds.

Page 185 of 357
Figure 18.1
Site General Layout

Page 186 of 357
Figure 18.2
Detail Showing Leach Pad, Process Plant and Water Plants

Page 187 of 357
19.0
MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS
19.1
INTRODUCTION
There were no market studies completed or contracts in place in support of this Technical
Report. With gold, like other precious metals, all production can generally be sold to any of a
number of refineries located around the world. As such, market studies are not required.
Metallurgical process studies confirm that the Project will produce dor gold of a specification
comparable with that produced at currently operating mines.
Dor gold produced at the Karma project would be sold to a refinery and the settlement price
would be based on the then-current spot price for gold on public markets. There would be no
direct marketing of the metal. For the purpose of this study, trailing averages and consensus
pricing models were investigated as possible price indicators.
The base case financial model for the Karma Project utilizes a gold price of US$1,250/oz, which
is conservative, considering that the 36-month trailing average price for gold that existed on the
effective date of this Technical Report was somewhat higher.
19.2
36-MONTH TRAILING AVERAGE GOLD PRICE
Figure 19.1 shows the 36 month historical trailing average prices of gold, leading up to the
effective date of this Technical Report. The data is taken from the published London afternoon
spot fix. The graph also shows the 36-month trailing average of these values.
Figure 19.1
Last 36 months of Gold Price Data
These data points represent the monthly averages of the LBMA afternoon spot fix.

Page 188 of 357
The monthly average ranged from a low of US$1,286.72/oz in July 2013 to a high of
US$1,771.88/oz in September 2011. The 36-month trailing average has steadily increased from
US$991.18/oz to US$1,557.40/oz over that 36-month period. The 36-month trailing average is
peaking and will decline in the coming months.
19.3
CONSENSUS PRICE
Consensus Economics forecasts were obtained and used for the purpose of obtaining consensus
pricing. Consensus Economics is one of the world's leading international economic survey
organizations and polls more than 700 economists each month to obtain their forecasts and
views. The Energy & Metals Consensus Forecasts, (for gold) a quarterly publication used for this
study, is the result of a survey of twenty five international banks and financial organizations.
Eight of the twenty five institutions have provided long term forecasts. The October 2013 edition
was used for this study. The spot price on the day of the survey was US$1,316/oz. Figure 19.2
shows a plot of the 36-months of historical data with 36-month trailing averages as well as a plot
of consensus prices from the October 2013. The project gold price is also shown.
Figure 19.2
19.4
36-Months of Historical Data, 36- Month Trailing Average and Study Gold
Price
GOLD SALES
Based on the evaluation of 36-month trailing averages and of consensus forecasts, the price
which the True Gold Management team has selected for the base line economics of the project is
US$1,250/oz. This price is considered to be conservative in nature. For the purposes of this study
it has been assumed that the gold produced from the project would be shipped to the Rand
Refinery in South Africa. Quotations have been obtained for transporting the bullion (with fully
insured contractors) from the Karma site to Ouagadougou. The gold would subsequently be
shipped on a commercial airliner to Johannesburg, where it will be transferred to the Rand
Refinery.
Page 189 of 357
20.0
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PERMITTING AND SOCIAL OR COMMUNITY

IMPACT
20.1
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
20.1.1
Environmental Studies
A number of environmental and socio-economic studies have been performed on the project area
and several more are in preparation. The environmental and socio-economic baseline for the
project is documented in the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) performed by
BEGE Consulting in 2011 and 2012. This document was submitted to the Ministry of
Environment in April 2012 and approved. The BEGE ESIA was subsequently updated by Roche
Consulting Ltd (environment) and MacCormick IMC (social) to reflect the revised project design
described in the current DFS.
The approved ESIA for the Karma Project covers an area which encompass the Goulagou I,
Goulagou II, and Rambo deposits. A separate ESIA exists for the Kao deposit for which an
Environmental Permit was received January 7, 2014. A third ESIA for the Nami deposit was
submitted to the Ministry of Environment on January 15, 2014 and is currently under review.
In 2013, ANTEA Burkina Faso prepared a Notice of Environmental Impact (NIE) for the then
proposed barrage development on the tributary to the Nkambe River which flows along the south
border of the project area. The NIE was approved by the Ministry of Environment in March
2013. This approval and ascent from the Ministry of Mines to build a barrage and water holding
pond has led to the construction of the first phase of a barrage which will be the source of water
for future mine operations.
20.1.2
20.1.2.1
Terrestrial Environment
Regional Setting
Regionally, the Karma property lies within the Birimian Greenstone Belt, a group of altered
sedimentary and intrusive rocks recognized to host numerous gold deposits in Mali, Ghana,
Burkina Faso, and Niger.
20.1.2.2
Local Setting
The landscape in the project area is characterized by alternating areas covered with hard laterite
and transported wind and water-borne sediments. The host rocks are subject to varying degrees
of weathering. To a depth of 60-80 m from surface, the host rock is completely weathered to a
low-clay saprolite. From 80-110 m weathering decreases until the fresh rock contact is reached
below 100 m. The transition from saprolite is generally quite abrupt often taking place over 10 m
or less.
20.1.2.3
Deposit Geology
The resource occurs in five separate deposits. Two deposits are hosted in altered volcanosedimentary rocks, two in altered intrusive rocks, and the last in a mixture of both rock types. In
the Goulagou and Rambo deposits, gold is deposited in a series of shear-hosted, sub-vertical
Page 190 of 357
quartz veins surrounded by a halo of lower grade, disseminated mineralization. In the Kao and
Nami deposits, the mineralized zones generally occur as a number of stacked, flat-lying sheets
arranged in a series of imbricate thrust-faults.
20.1.2.4
Mineralization
Gold is typically fine in nature with individual particles ranging in size from 10-200 um. Most of
the gold above the fresh rock contact is free. In the Goulagou and Kao deposits the gold
mineralization in the fresh rock is locked inside the associated sulphide mineral matrix. In the
Rambo and Nami deposits, the gold in the non-weathered rock remains free.
20.1.2.5
Resource
The potentially economic resource defined in the Preliminary Economic Assessment of

September 2012 identified mineralized material of 29.3 Mt grading 0.88 g/t containing 828,000
oz (25.8 t) of gold. This material was associated with 72.7 Mt of non-mineralized material
resulting in a possible strip ratio of 2.5:1.
This potentially mineable resource has been replaced by mineral reserves as defined in this
document and the DFS at 33.2 Mt ore grading 0.89 g/t containing 949,000 oz (29.5 t) of gold.
This material is associated with 80.6 Mt of waste resulting in a strip ratio of 2.4:1 and total
material of 113.8 Mt.
20.1.3
20.1.3.1
Geomorphology
Topography
The project area lies at an elevation of 300-350 m ASL. The terrain is generally flat with total
relief across the property of about 15-20 m. The highest feature on the property is about 50 m in
height and lies between Goulagou I and II. The land surface undulates gently, broken
intermittently by small laterite hills and shallow drainages. The general slope of the land is to the
south at 2-3% where a broad, dry river valley defines the southern margin of the project area.
20.1.3.2
Soil
Much of the property is covered by shallow soils from which soluble salts and minerals have
been leached. When found to overlie hard or cemented gravel and rocks these soils are known as
lithosols and leptosols. Other soils present are products of erosion and/or intense tropical
weathering. These soils exhibit significant subsurface accumulations of clay and are classified as
Cambisols and Lixisols. Most of the soils in the area are iron-rich due to the widespread presence
of cuirasse or hard laterite on the property. In river valleys and drainages saturated, clay-rich
soils known as Gleysols can be found but account for only a small proportion of all soils present.
Surveys indicate that much of the project area is unsuited to agriculture. About 25% of the land
has no agricultural value while another 35% has limited value for farming. The remaining 40%
of the land has is marginally to moderately suited to the cultivation of rain-fed cereals and
legumes. Less than 1% of the land in the project area is suited to growing high-value crops such
as rice and vegetables. The factors limiting the value of the land for agricultural purposes are
shallow soil depth, soil erosion, water availability, and low organic content.
Page 191 of 357
In general, soils in the project area which have not been exposed to artisanal mining activities
show no pollution in the form of mercury, cyanide, or heavy metals while soils located where
artisanal mining has been conducted are often found to possess contaminant levels higher than
established guidelines.
20.1.4
20.1.4.1
Hydrology
Surface Water
The main surface water flow in the project area is a tributary to the Nkambe (White Volta) River
which runs roughly west to east about 4 km south of the plant site during the rainy season, June
to September. Due to the low topographic relief of the area the river is extremely shallow,
typically no more than 1-2 m in depth, but may reach a width of 200-300 m during the height of
flow each year.
At the location of the barrage site, the average annual flow is 22 M m3. This can vary from 7 M
m3 during the 1/10 year low flow year to as much as 40 M m3 in the 1/10 year high flow year. In
a typical year, the river valley is dry by the end of December while man-made and natural pools
or reservoirs generally persist until March. Based on the operating requirements of the mine, 1.2
M m3 annually, there is sufficient flow to support operations without unduly impacting
downstream water users.
Chemical analyses of water samples taken from major drainages running south and east of the
project area during the rainy season indicate that surface waters have been contaminated due to
artisanal mining activities. Contamination occurs in the form of mercury, iron, manganese, and
ammonium. Pollution is a result of (1) illegal, crude, small-scale gold processing operations, (2)
mobilization of naturally occurring contaminants due to unmanaged excavation, and (3)
uncontrolled use of fertilizers.
Concentrations of iron and manganese generally run 5-20x the allowable limit set for
international drinking water standards. Mercury and ammonium concentrations can typically be
found at levels 3-5x and 2-3x the allowable limits, respectively.
20.1.4.2
Groundwater
Groundwater conditions were investigated by drilling ten test wells, two in each open pit.
Despite being sited to intersect prospective water-bearing structures only two of the ten bores
encountered water and neither of those produced sufficient quantity to conduct pump tests. Most
water appears to be concentrated near the fresh rock contact.
Water does exist in the saprolite at depths of 10 m or more below surface but the transmissivity
of the material is so low (1 x 10-8 m/s) that subsurface flow is nominal and outflows are
extremely limited. Evaporation is expected to match or exceed the amount of water released
from the surrounding rock as the result of mining eliminating groundwater-related risk to the
design of pit slopes and eliminating the need for continuous dewatering of excavations.
In the river valley bottom to the south of the plant site geotechnical test pits encountered water a
depth of 5 m at the height of the dry season. Once exposed, however, this entrapped water
Page 192 of 357
evaporated quickly with no recharge. Test bores in the valley bottom returned flows of 0.5-4.0
m3/hr, 1 km up and downstream from the proposed barrage site.
Baseline monitoring of groundwater in the project area is conducted monthly from a series of ten
monitoring wells located near the future location of the open pits and process facilities. The wells
were drilled 60-100 m in depth through the fresh rock contact. Only six of the ten wells have
measurable water levels. Generally, yields resulting from pump tests range from 0.5-2 m3/hr.
Measurement of borehole water levels and chemical analyses are performed on a regular basis.
Chemically, groundwater in the project area generally meets local drinking water standards.
Exceptions include naturally occurring contamination from manganese, lead, and arsenic. In the
southeastern part of property, naturally occurring arsenic at concentrations of 2-10x the threshold
set by international standards for drinking water has rendered water from some wells
undrinkable. The health effects on the local population who have no alternate sources of drinking
water are evident.
20.1.5
20.1.5.1
Atmospheric
Climate
The climate in the project area is classified as Sahelian. It is characterized by a short wet season,
June to September, and a long dry season, October to May. Precipitation ranges from 300-750
mm annually with a recent average of about 600 mm.
Temperatures range from minimum of about 10oC to maximums over 50oC. The hottest months
are March to May when average temperatures are between 30oC and 40oC. The coolest months
are from December to February when temperatures can average 15oC-25oC.
The Harmattan wind blows south from the Sahara across Burkina Faso from December to June.
From December to February the Cool Harmattan blows followed by the Hot Harmattan in
March until June.
The average annual wind speed is 2.3 m/s. November is the least windy month with an average
wind speed of 1.6 m/s. June is the windiest month with an average wind speed of 3.2 m/s,
however, as the rainy season approaches severe storms with winds up to 120 km/hr can occur.
The project area receives, on average, nine hours of sunshine daily. Evaporation is significant,
roughly 3000 mm or 5x annual precipitation. Relative humidity is highest in July and August
during the rainy season and lowest from February to March during the Hot Harmattan.
20.1.6
20.1.6.1
Biological
Vegetation
There are a number of vegetation zones in the project area. Their presence is strongly related to
proximity to water and human activities. Barren land, shrub-steppe, grassland, forest, and
riparian zones all occur naturally and generally correspond to the increasing presence of water.
Irrigation of cultivated land may enrich naturally occurring vegetation located nearby.

Page 193 of 357
The most common vegetation in the project area is desert scrub. These plants a number of
species from the family Combretacae including Saba and Acacia as well numerous other hardy
shrubs and grasses. Human activities in the form of agriculture, pastoralism, artisanal mining,
and destruction of wooded areas to generate firewood have had a distinct impact on the
vegetation in the project area.
Naturally occurring wooded and shrub-steppe areas feature Combretacae-type shrubs as well as
Acacia, Shea, Zanga, and Baobab trees. Reforestation programs have introduced Rasinier and
Nere trees to augment indigenous species. Plantations located near cultivated land and drainages
where water is more plentiful contain Eucalyptus, Mango, and Neem trees.
Users of forest products in the project area include herders, tree-cutters, healers, and artisans. It
is notable that women and children depend on trees and plants in order to perform many of these
roles. Degradation of plants due to climate change and human activities has caused some species
to disappear. Efforts have been made to reverse this trend by the introduction of drought-resistant
varieties but the trend is a general decline in the health of natural vegetation.
True grasslands exist for only a short time each year after the rains. Pastoralism is practiced
widely with cattle, sheep, and goats foraging in the woods and steppe as they are able, however,
the quality of feed is poor. The potential for damage to an already fragile ecosystem from
overgrazing is high.
20.1.6.2
Wildlife
There are few large animals in the project area due to habitat destruction resulting from
increasing human population and activity. Warthogs, porcupines, monkeys, and hares are all
disappearing. Avian fauna is more diverse given the presence of scattered woodlands and forest.
Guinea fowl, francolin, parrots, hornbills, weavers, doves, crows, hawks, and vultures can all be
found on the property. The dry, desert-like environment supports numerous varieties of snakes,
lizards, arthropods, and insects.
The aquatic environment, although seasonal in nature, supports a diverse collection of species.
Tilapia and catfish can be found in the tributaries to the Nkambe River during the rainy season.
Stocks in the Bagyalgo barrage are sufficient to support subsistence fishing. The small barrage at
Barelgo is home to 10-20 crocodiles between June and November. Aquatic birds in the area
include herons, ducks, teal, kingfisher, and egrets.
20.2
20.2.1
SOCIOECONOMIC
Introduction
The Karma Gold Project lies almost entirely within the Department of Namissiguima. A very
small part of the land affected by the development of the barrage falls inside the boundaries of
the Department of Oula. Both of these areas are characterized by large undeveloped tracts of
land, poor infrastructure, and a largely rural population.
In the Department of Namissiguima there are two towns and five villages in the immediate
project area. The towns are Ramatoulaye and Namissiguima located at the east end of the project
area. The villages are Kononga and Barelgo located near Goulagou I and II, Nogo and Koswende
Page 194 of 357
located south of the Goulagous, and Boulonga situated on the northern edge of Kao. In the
Department of Oula, the principal village affected by the development is Lougouri-Weogo
located in the river valley about 3 km south of Nogo.
20.2.2
Population
In 2013 the total population of the Department of Namissiguima was approximately 40,000. The
population in the project area itself numbers about 12,000. About 7,000 people reside in the
combined towns of Ramatoulaye and Namissiguima with the remainder distributed throughout
the rural villages. The largest of the villages is Kononga with a population of about 1,500.
Lougouri-Weogo in the Department of Oula has a population of approximately 85.
It is notable that among the residents of the project area, 75% are under the age of 35 and more
than 50% have an age less than 20. There are slightly more men than women. This demographic
is amplified in the dry season when lack of water makes it impossible to farm and young men of
working age travel to the cities in search of employment.
20.2.3
Ethnicity
Most of the residents in the project area belong to the Mossi tribe. The ancestry of many area
residents stretches back to other parts of Burkina Faso and Mali over the last few hundred years.
As people settled in the region they inter-married with the indigenous Mossi and adopted their
customs and language. The local language spoken in the project area is Moore. This process of
assimilation and integration continues today with the Fulani, migrants who settled in the region
recently and have become part of the existing villages.
20.2.4
Religion
Nation-wide, Burkina Faso is about 50/50 Muslim and Christian. In the project area, the
proportion is about 80/20 Muslim and Christian. Despite the disparity, followers of the two faiths
coexist in the region in harmony. Most of the people in the rural areas maintain some connection
to their animist roots. Regardless of the modern religions they have adopted, traditional beliefs
present a unifying force that binds the local society together.
The Mosque at Ramatoulaye is considered to be one of the most sacred sites in West Africa for
Muslims. It is the destination for pilgrims in the region who do not have the resources to go to
Mecca. The Chiek who presides over the mosque has a following of over four million in Burkina
Faso.
20.2.5
Health
The most prevalent disease in the project area is malaria. Over 50% of all sickness treated in the
region is malaria which is followed in prevalence by acute respiratory illness, diarrhea, and
HIV/AIDS. Life expectancy in Namissiguima Department has increased over the last ten years
from 46 to 56 years of age but this figure is still far less than that expected in more developed
countries.

Page 195 of 357
Malnutrition is a serious concern but fluctuates depending on climate and the annual harvest. In
2010, in Namissiguima Department, a poor harvest resulted in moderate to acute malnutrition in
35,000 of 80,000 children up to the age of five.
Namissiguima has a clinic staffed by six nurses which serves residents of the project area. It is
poorly equipped and supplied. The local authorities struggle to find doctors willing to live and
work in rural areas. A new hospital exists in Ouahugouya. It is well equipped but the staff needs
training to ensure that community gets the full benefit of the facility.
20.2.6
Education
There are 24 public schools in the Department of Namissiguima which serve 4,700 students.
There are also 12 Islamic schools. There is only one high school in the region. In 2010, 3,500
students applied for enrollment but only 1,200 could be accepted due to lack of capacity. Class
sizes are large ranging from 50-100 students each which diminishes the quality of education.
A large portion of the population in the project area is functionally illiterate. The biggest issues
facing education are insufficient housing for teachers, poor classroom conditions, lack of water
and latrines in some schools, and poverty among the population at large which makes it difficult
for people to recognize the value of education.
20.2.7
Government
The Department of Namissiguima lies in Yatenga province. The province is administered by the
governor. Under the governor are the High Commissioner and the Secretary General. The High
Commissioner exercises government policy and law in the departments through the department
Prefet. The Secretary General provides administration and services to the various departments
through the Mayor.
A parallel tribal system exists which organizes and manages affairs in the province in a
traditional manner. The king of Yatenga Province, the Naba Kiba, rules over all the village chiefs
in the province. The chiefs administer affairs in their own villages with the assistance of their
advisors. Among these is the CVD, whose role is to manage the land and land-related activities
controlled by each chief. It is through the CVD that the traditional and state-sponsored
administrations connect.
The populace of Yatenga province is strong supporter of the ruling political party in the country,
the CDP. In the last state elections, the CDP garnered 71% of the vote in Yatenga province. The
next federal election is scheduled for January 2015.
20.2.8
Land Tenure
Land ownership is of two types: traditional and legal. Traditional land ownership is a function of
ancestry or conferred by the village chiefs who, in the traditional system, own all the land and
portion it out to members of the tribe. Some residents also have legal title to their land. Legal
title is granted by the state and administered by the provincial and municipal authorities.

Page 196 of 357
20.2.9
Housing
Three types of housing exist in the project area. In rural villages, construction is dominated by
traditional mud huts with straw roofs. More affluent residents may have metal-roofed mud
homes. In the towns building are more frequently constructed of concrete but mud-built
structures are still common.
20.2.10
Water
The only river in the project area is a tributary to the Nkambe (White Volta) which runs
seasonally about 4 km south of the proposed plant site. There are three main barrages in
Namissiguima Department at Tougon, Namissiguima, and Bagyalgo. Throughout the department
most villages are supplied by boreholes fitted with pumps or wells which number seventy-three
and twelve respectively. The standard ratio in Burkina Faso of boreholes to people is 1/300 but
in the project area it is 1/477.
20.2.11
Infrastructure
The project area is served by two unimproved dirt roads which run along the north and south
margins of the property from Ouahigouya to Namissiguima. One trucking company with two
trucks and buses provide transport for goods and people. Private vehicles are generally confined
to bicycles, motos, and a few private cars.
A low voltage power line runs along the northern road from Ouahigouya to Ramatoulaye. There
are few fixed telephone lines. Residents rely on cellular telephone coverage for communication
which is good. Two national radio stations broadcast in the area. A number of newspapers are
available but news is published on a payment basis and so is not objective or reliable.
20.2.12
20.2.12.1
Employment
Farming
Agriculture is by far the most prevalent form of employment in the project area. More than 95%
of the residents are engaged in subsistence farming. Crops most commonly grown are sorghum,
millet, and maize. Where sufficient water is available rice and vegetables are also grown both for
personal consumption and as cash crops. Issues affecting the success of farming in the project
area include lack of water, poor soil, and lack of equipment. Lack of knowledge results in poor
agricultural practices such as overgrazing and lack of crop rotation.
20.2.12.2
Livestock Breeding
Raising, herding, and breeding livestock is a common activity in the project area. Namissiguima
Department accounts for 9% of the livestock in Yatenga province. Cattle, goats, sheep, pigs, and
chickens are the most common domestic animals raised in the area. Overgrazing is a common
occurrence. Theft, a lack of pasture and veterinarians, and poor knowledge of sound livestock
management practices all present challenges to animal breeders.

Page 197 of 357
20.2.12.3
Commerce
Trade and commerce are an important activity. Town and village markets are held weekly in
established centres. The manufacture and sale of handicrafts has potential to help stimulate the
local economy but poor access to markets has the industry in decline in the project area. In
general trade and commerce are severely hampered by poor roads, limited transport, illiteracy,
and a lack of investment.
20.2.12.4
Gold Mining
Artisanal mining or orpaillage is an important and growing source of income in the project area.
Miners are of two types: residents and migrants. Residents are local people, mostly women and
children, who work local deposits by hand during the dry season when agriculture is limited or
not possible. Migrants may be individuals who drift through the area hoping to find a likely spot
to work or more often, bands of workers, organized, equipped, and financed by gold buyers.
Artisanal mining is difficult, usually dangerous, work that can involve the use of child labour,
mercury, and cyanide. Organized migrant mining is often associated with organized crime and
brings with it various social and legal issues that make it undesirable. It is the objective of
modern industrial developments to provide the local residents with alternatives to this sort of
labour.
20.3
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
20.3.1
20.3.1.1
Air Quality Management

Introduction
The three primary sources of airborne impact on the project area environment are dust,
emissions, and noise. Air quality in the project area is generally good as there is presently little
industrial activity to generate impacts. The greatest current source of made-made dust in the
project area is from vehicles. The limited amount of traffic at present results in this having little
impact.
20.3.1.2
Dust
Dust can affect the health of plants and trees, that of workers, the neighbouring population, and
general aesthetics of the project area. Dust occurs naturally or through various project activities.
Wind-blown dust is most prevalent from December to May when the Harmattan wind blows
from the north off the Sahara. Monitoring carried out since the end of October 2013 has shown
that background dust concentration regularly exceeds IFC/World Bank guidelines for PM2.5 and
PM10.
During the pre-production and construction phases of the project, earthmoving and heavy and
light vehicle traffic will generate dust. During production, mining, blasting, crushing and
conveying operations will also be potential dust producers.
The effects of dust will be mitigated through prevention and implementation of controls.
Prevention seeks to keep dust from being generated. Examples of dust prevention to be used are
Page 198 of 357
organic-based binders like molasses and pine-tar that can spread on the surface of roads. These
agents are effective for a period of months before reapplication is required and, unlike
magnesium and calcium chloride, are environmentally benign.
Dust controls include water sprays in the ROM bin and at transfer points on conveyors between
the crushing/sizing circuits and the leach pad. Transfer points will be enclosed where ever
possible and equipment will be designed and laid-out to facilitate clean-up minimizing the buildup of fine, dust-generating material. Employees in the plant area will wash equipment down with
water to ensure that clean-up itself does not expose personnel to inhaled dust hazards. Dust
masks and respirators will be mandatory when working in areas where dust hazards exist.
Mining operations will employ two 30,000 L capacity water trucks to suppress dust generated by
mobile mining equipment, particularly haul trucks. It is estimated that the mine will consume
about 35,000 m3 of water per month for dust suppression. Adherence to the prescribed traffic
plan, following designated routes, and observing maximum speed limits of 50 kph will enhance
dust suppression efforts while limiting dust generation.
Wind-blown dust from waste rock stockpiles will be addressed through progressive reclamation.
As each 20 m lift of a stockpile is completed it will be re-sloped and re-vegetated to fix the soil
in place. The soft nature of the rock will allow blasting to be minimized which will contribute to
less dust and fewer emissions.
20.3.1.3
Emissions
The primary source of emissions from project activities will be vehicle and engine exhaust. The
mining fleet and the diesel-powered generators which will generate electricity for the site are the
two major contributors to CO2 and NOx emissions. Reducing the projects carbon footprint
assists in limiting global warming and its effects on climate change. A No-Idle policy and
regular preventative maintenance of vehicles and equipment will minimize harmful emissions.
Other minor sources of emissions include gases generated during blasting, emissions from the
gold furnace and carbon regeneration kiln, and emissions from the burning of solid waste. None
of these will have a significant impact on project area air quality due to the small quantities of
gas generated. Generally, contaminants from these activities will be rapidly diluted to nonmeasurable levels as they enter the atmosphere.
Greenhouse gas emissions for the fleet, the generators and the explosives have been estimated to
less than 20,000 tons of CO2 equivalent per year.
20.3.1.4
Noise
Noise from construction and production activities can cause health effects and annoyance for
both workers and the community. The two largest sources of noise will be the crushing/sizing
circuit and the mining fleet. To attenuate noise from operations to reasonable background levels
(55 dB during daytime and 45 dB during night-time as per IFC/World Bank guidelines), the
project has been designed so that no community or home is closer than 250 m to mine
infrastructure.

Page 199 of 357
The Rambo Pit, in particular, is close (1000 m) to the towns of Ramatoulaye and Namissiguima.
The Rambo Pit, however, is the smallest of all five open pits. For this reason, the pit can be
mined less intensely with less equipment generating less noise than if the entire fleet was
working there. Blasting when required will only be conducted once the pit gets deeper thus the
sound will be blocked to a large degree by the walls of the pit. If necessary, measures may be
implemented to muffle blasts using rubber mats similar to those employed by quarries located in
the midst of towns and villages in Europe and North America.
The other area most subject to the noise of operations will be Barelgo which is located near the
plant site. The soft nature of the material will reduce the noise generated during crushing and
sizing. As the bulk of the village is over 300 m distant from the work site noise generated by
equipment will not exceed permissible limits. Modelling has been carried out for the estimation
of noise levels at Barelgo during the operation phase. The 45 dB night-time IFC/World Bank
guideline will be respected following the establishment of a 10 m berm along the access road to
the ore treatment area.
A notable feature of the development is that mining will move sequentially from one pit to next.
For this reason, no single area except that near the plant site will be subjected to noise from
operations for more than 2-3 years over the entire mine life.
20.3.1.5
Monitoring
Noise levels and air quality parameters in the project area have been measured as part of baseline
monitoring so that a comparison can be made to those experienced during construction and
operations. Monitoring will be done monthly and the results of monitoring reported to the
Community Liaison Committee (CLC) and discussed at regular meetings.
20.3.2
20.3.2.1
Water Quality Management

Water Supply
Water to sustain operations will be captured during the rainy season in a barrage constructed on
the river which flows seasonally, 4 km south of the proposed plant site. A 2.5 m high, armored,
compacted-earth dam will be built across the river in two phases with the second phase
completed before the rainy season preceding the start of operations. The dam will be submersible
in nature eliminating the need for a spillway and minimizing the potential for flooding during
high flow years.
During the rainy season, water will be pumped from the barrage to a Raw Water Storage Pond at
the plant site with a capacity of approximately 300,000 m3. The Raw Water Storage Pond will
overflow to a Storm Water Holding Pond with a capacity of 1.2 M m3. At the end of each rainy
season, both the Raw Water and Storm Water ponds will be full to capacity as a result of
pumping from the barrage, direct precipitation, and collection of runoff from the site. This water
will be used to support operations until the next rainy season.
Similarly, at the end of the rainy season, the barrage will be full. This water will be available for
the free use of the local community. Given the low relief at the dam site, water in the barrage is
expected to last until March when it will go dry until it is refilled by the rains starting again in

Page 200 of 357
June. Options are under consideration to keep the barrage full year-round and include raising the
dam height or excavating the barrage basin.
20.3.2.2
Water Balance
Total annual water usage by operations is approximately 1.65 M m3 including 1.2 M m3 for heap
leach operations, 400,000 m3 for dust suppression, and 50,000 m3 of potable water for drinking,
ablutions, and safety showers. A further 300,000 m3 is expected to evaporate over the course of
year from storage ponds. Offsetting this is about 750,000 m3 of water added to the system
through direct precipitation and collection of runoff from the open pits and excess water from the
leach pad. As a result, the total amount of raw water required to meet operational needs each
year is 1.2 M m3. Figure 14.1 provides details of water usage for the project on an annual basis.
20.3.2.3
Solution Containment
Water used in processing will contain dissolved sodium cyanide which is toxic to most biological
life-forms. Effective containment of the heap leach solution will be achieved through the use of a
multiple-liner containment system.
The pad is founded on a widespread area of naturally occurring ferricrete, iron-rich lateritic soil
hardened to the consistency of concrete by the effects of heat and oxygen. This material exists in
a layer 5-15 m thick and has extremely low transmissivity on the order of 1 x 10-10 m/s. The
ferricrete overlies the host saprolite, a clay-like decomposed rock with a transmissivity almost as
low as the ferricrete at 1 x 10-8 m/s.
Above the ferricrete is a filter sand leak detection layer and on top of that is an impermeable 1.5
mil HDPE plastic liner. Numerical groundwater modeling shows that if the plastic liner were
accidentally punctured, then the impervious material beneath would allow a contaminant plume
to spread only 50 m from the site of the puncture over a period of 50 years.
20.3.2.4
Excess Water Management and Detoxification
The Storm Water Storage Pond is designed with enough capacity to contain the inflow from the
1/100 year storm event in addition to its normal operating volume. There may still, however, be
circumstances where it is necessary to release excess water to the environment. In this event,
water will be transferred to a 30,000 m3 Detoxification Pond where it will be treated with
hydrogen peroxide and copper sulphate to destroy any dissolved cyanide before release. The
separate treatment pond ensures that water quality can be confirmed through testing prior to
release.
On a more routine basis, the heap leach design includes an Intermediate solution pond which will
allow excess water from precipitation during the rainy season to be circulated through leached
out portions of the heap. This practice stores the excess water in the system until volumes
return to normal while providing the opportunity to recover a minor amount of residual gold still
contained in the heap.
Kinetic leaching tests (humidity cell) indicate that the concentration of arsenic, naturally
occurring in the host rock, could build up in the leach solution over time. For this reason, water
in the heap leach system will periodically be removed and allowed to evaporate. The resulting
Page 201 of 357
residue will be collected and mixed with cement to form bricks that will physically and
chemically immobilize the contaminants. The bricks will then be buried in a designated location
to complete disposal.
20.3.2.5
Monitoring
Monitoring of surface and ground water will include monthly measurements of flow rate, water
levels, and chemical analyses by specialists working in the companys Environment Department.
Departures from background will be subjected to more frequent monitoring. Regular audits and
checks will be employed to ensure the validity of results. The results of monitoring will be
shared on a regular basis with the Community Liaison Committee and the local water authority.
20.3.3
20.3.3.1
Waste Management
Process Waste
Process waste from heap leaching is presents in the form of the leached-out material stacked on
the leach pad. Throughout the mine life and in perpetuity thereafter, this material remains
stacked on the lined leach pad preventing leach solution or precipitation seeping from the heap
into the ground.
Acid-Base Accounting (ABA) test work indicates that the process waste remaining on the heap
has little potential for acid generation. Most of the material is naturally basic in nature and
cannot generate acid. For the small portion of the material which has the potential to generate
acid due to the minor presence of sulphide mineralization, the surrounding host rock and the
cement in the heap provide enough buffering capacity to maintain a neutral pH.
When the mine is closed the heap will be rinsed with fresh water to remove all residual cyanide.
This process may take up to one year. Meteoric Water Metals Transport (MWMT) testing
indicates that once the heap is rinsed, precipitation falling on the surface of the heap will not
mobilize naturally occurring metals present in the leached-out material.
At closure, the heap will be re-sloped to 3:1 (h:v) and re-vegetated. The heap and underlying pad
will be designed so that once the final heap configuration is achieved all material will still be on
top of the liner.
20.3.3.2
Mine Waste
Waste rock will be stored near each pit in Waste Rock Stockpiles. Stockpiles will be constructed
in 10 m lifts. At the completion of each lift the slope will be dozed from 2:1 to 3:1 (h:v) to
facilitate reclamation. A distance of 20 m will be left between the crest and toe of consecutive
lifts to serve as a barrier to prevent erosion. Soil will be spread on the face of the re-sloped
stockpile to promote growth.
Acid-Base Accounting (ABA) test work indicates that the stockpiled waste rock has little
potential for acid generation. Most of the material is naturally basic in nature (absence or low
sulphide content) and cannot generate acid. For the small portion of the material which has the
potential to generate acid the surrounding host rock provides enough buffering capacity to

Page 202 of 357
maintain a neutral pH. Kinetic leaching tests indicate that precipitation falling on the surface of
the stockpiles will not mobilize naturally occurring metals present in the material.
20.3.3.3
Overburden and Soil
Some soil and overburden may have been contaminated by artisanal mining activity. In these
instances, contaminated soil will be identified by testing, excavated, and hauled to a designated
Contaminated Soil Stockpile (CSSP). Each CSSP will have a compacted clay based to prevent
the further spread of contaminants and at closure will be capped with clay to ensure that
encapsulation is effective.
More typically, soils will not be contaminated. Where the depth of the soil permits, material will
be stripped prior to mining and stockpiled to be used to provide a growth medium for progressive
and final reclamation.
20.3.3.4
Domestic and Industrial Waste
A designated waste disposal site will be established to accept and store domestic waste generated
at the mine site. The facility will be fenced, constructed, and operated in compliance with all
applicable regulations.
Burnable waste will be burned in an incinerator at the waste disposal site. Wood from packing
crates and reagent packaging would be the most common types of burnable waste generated by
the mine. Waste oil will be hauled away by the fuel and lubricant supplier as part of the supply
contract.
20.3.4
Progressive Reclamation
The mine will practice progressive reclamation. As mining moves from one operating area to
another throughout the mine life completed, pits and waste dumps will be decommissioned and
reclaimed. In particular, waste rock stockpiles will be constructed in 10 m lifts. As each lift is
completed, that portion of the stockpile will be re-sloped to 3:1 (h:v), coated with a suitable
growth medium, and re-vegetated. Test plots will be conducted during the initial years of
operation to determine the species most suited to thrive under project area conditions.
20.3.5
Closure
At closure all buildings will be removed. Concrete foundations will be destroyed and the land
returned to its pre-development state. Any power lines will be decommissioned and removed.
Haul roads between the pits, leach pads, and facilities will be left in place for public use.
Open pits not backfilled will be fenced to prevent animals and people from inadvertently
entering while the pits are filling with water which is expected to be non-toxic. Waste rock
stockpiles located at each open pit will be re-sloped and re-vegetated.
The material stacked on the leach pad will be rinsed with fresh water for a period of one year or
until such time as residual contaminant levels in the runoff meet allowable limits. The heap will
then be re-sloped to 3:1 (h:v) and re-vegetated.

Page 203 of 357
The lined solution ponds will be used to dispose of soil contaminated with reagents or
hydrocarbons from the plant and maintenance workshop areas. Contaminated soil will be buried
in saprolitic clay, covered with a sand filter layer, and then encapsulated in another layer of
saprolite.
The Barrage, pumps, Raw Water Pipeline, Raw Water and Storm Water Ponds will remain in
place and functional. A solar-powered pumping system will be installed when operations cease
to eliminate the need for diesel-fuel to keep the system running. Former employees, resident in
the project area, will operate and maintain the system for the community.
In a typical year, it is expected that 200-300,000 m3 of water would be collected for use by the
communities of Barelgo, Kononga, and Nogo each rainy season. Meanwhile, the barrage will
continue to provide Lougouri-Weogo and Sambtinga with a 1.2 M m3 water resource annually.
Monitoring of the site will continue for a period of five years after the end of production. Water,
air, and soil quality will be measured to confirm that any contaminants present return to predevelopment levels. Reclamation and re-vegetation will be monitored to ensure that new growth
becomes self-sustaining.
20.4
20.4.1
SOCIO-ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT
Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Stakeholders are all parties who have a direct or indirect interest in the project. The Stakeholder
Engagement and Communication Plan describes how True Gold will interact with stakeholders
to facilitate operations and ensure that the interests of all parties are respected. The legal
frameworks governing stakeholder engagement are Burkina Faso legislation, World Bank
guidelines, and IFC Performance Standards, in particular PS1.
A registry of all project stakeholders has been compiled. Of the fifty primary stakeholders, a risk
analysis indicates that those with the greatest influence and interest in the project are the Naba
Kiba, Chiek of Ramatoulaye, Mayor of Namissiguima, and the village chiefs in the project area.
It is essential that an emphasis is placed on keeping these persons informed about project
activities so that they can continue to support the development.
Consultation and dialogue are the primary means True Gold will employ to engage with the
community. During project development community engagement will be led by the True Gold
Community Relations team composed of a manager, specialist, clerk, and four community
relations officers. This group is supported by the Country Manager and Environment, Health and
Safety Department. When operations commence the role of the Country Manager will be
replaced by the Karma General Manager.
To facilitate dialogue with the company, the community formed a committee out of project area
stakeholders called the Comite de Suivi et de Liaison (Committee of Monitoring and Liaison)
abbreviated in English as Community Liaison Committee (CLC). The committee is chaired by
the Mayor of Namissiguima and is composed of approximately 80 members who represent the
civic authorities and various segments of the population in the project area.

Page 204 of 357
Two other groups also monitor project development. These are the Cadre de Concertation
Technique Provincial (CCTP) chaired by the local High Commissioner and the Comite de
Concertation Regional (CCR) chaired by the Governor of Yatenga province. Dialogue with
these organizations keeps provincial and regional authorities apprised of project issues.
True Gold meets every 1-2 months with the CLC to discuss issues relating to company activities
and project development. The issues of greatest importance to the community in general are
health care, water, education, and the local economy. With regard to the project itself, the
communitys interest focuses on jobs, the barrage, community development, and the
environment. It is notable that True Gold has incorporated input from the CLC in the
development of its social management action plans.
A number of tools are employed by True Gold to manage relations with stakeholders. These
include a meeting schedule, a stakeholder registry which updated periodically, and a stakeholder
engagement record which documents each meeting with text and photographs.
A key element of True Golds stakeholder engagement plan is the Grievance Management
Mechanism. This mechanism provides a process that enables the company to formally address
issues of concern regarding the companys activities that cannot be resolved by direct
engagement between the True Gold Community Relations team and project area stakeholders. It
directs all qualifying issues through the CLC to True Gold so that all parties are made aware of
issues of importance and the company does not have to deal with potentially thousands of
individuals directly.
20.4.2
Relocation
The original ESIA submitted in 2012 suggested that as many as 5,000 people would need to be
resettled due to the mine development. This was, in part, due to the establishment of a tailings
impoundment where the villages of Kononga, Nogo, and Koswende are located.
With the adoption of heap leaching in the PEA plan the need for a tailings facility was eliminated
and the figure dropped to less than 3,000. This number was further reduced as engineering
studies determined that mining could be conducted largely without blasting. This allowed the
buffer zone between operating areas and local residents to be safely reduced from 500 m to 250
m and dropped the number of people needed to move to less than 2,000.
Finally, a revised water supply plan that employed a small barrage (1.2 M m3) compared to that
originally envisioned (8.0 M m3) brought the number of people needed to resettle over the course
of the mine life to less than 1,000. This evolution in the project design highlights one of the
projects guiding principles, which is to develop the mine in a manner that minimizes the impact
on the local community.
The Feasibility Study development plan calls for the relocation of approximately 836 people. Of
these, 36 people of the settlement Tang-Zougou, a part of the village of Konanga, must be
relocated from their present location which falls within the limits of the leach pad. This
relocation must occur before the start of operations in 2015. These people will be moved back to
the main area of Kononga, west of the leach pad.

Page 205 of 357
The other 800 people who need to resettle are in the village of Boulonga. Boulonga is located on
the northern edge of the Kao pit. The Kao pit is not mined until the fourth year of operations,
2019. For this reason the residents of Boulonga will be relocated in 2018. The new site for the
village has yet to be determined but will be done so in consultation with the residents of
Boulonga.
True Gold and the Community Liaison Committee (CLC) have agreed on the terms of reference
for all resettlement required over the life of the project. This agreement is based on the contents
of the Relocation Action Plan (RAP) which was agreed to by both parties in January 2013. In the
document, the principles, process, and basis for compensation are defined. The details regarding
the relocation of each village or household are agreed with each family individually based on the
guidelines established in the RAP.
The RAP also considers compensation paid for economic relocation. In these instances,
although a resident is not physically moved he is impacted such that he can no longer pursue his
previous livelihood. In the project area, a typical example of economic relocation is
compensation paid for fields disrupted by the development.
Compensation is paid for agricultural land in the project area at a rate of CFA 200,000/ha based
on typical crops grown, crop yield, and market prices. Compensation is adjusted for the presence
of trees which enhance the value of the land. Compensation is paid annually for a period of three
years or until replacement land can be provided and made productive. The CLC acknowledges
its responsibility to provide replacement land as soon as possible. True Gold has committed to
assist in making replacement productive through the drilling of wells.
A land compensation agreement has been concluded with the residents of Lougouri-Weogo for
the 20 ha of land affected by the first phase of the barrage. A land compensation agreement has
also been concluded with various owners of a total 220 ha of land impacted by the development
of the Goulagou and Rambo open pits. Most of the owners of the affected land in the pit areas
are from Kononga and Barelgo.
20.4.3
Cultural Heritage
In the original ESIA there were 117 sites of cultural significance in the project area that would be
impacted by development. These sites included graves, cemeteries, mosques, and historical or
natural places of importance to the local community. Since that time, the project was redesigned
with the plan to avoid, protect, or relocate cultural sites before a site was destroyed and
compensation paid.
As a result of this approach, there are only 33 cultural sites in the project area now. Of these,
only three fall inside the 250 m buffer zone established around the site infrastructure. Two of
these need only to be protected to ensure that they remain undisturbed by operations. The third is
the small Goulagou-Barelgo barrage, the home of crocodiles which the local people consider
sacred.
The barrage itself which is not sacred will be removed when Goulagou II Pit is mined as it lies
within the pit limits. The crocodiles, which number 20-30 according to the BEGE survey in
2010, will be relocated to the new barrage constructed on the river to supply water to the mine.

Page 206 of 357
This relocation will occur prior to disturbing the existing barrage and will be planned and
supervised by internationally recognized and local experts.
20.4.4
Health and Safety
A program to manage community health and safety will be established using Burkina law, World
Bank, and IFC standards as a framework. The objectives are to (1) mitigate health and safety
impacts from mine development on the community, (2) ensure a healthy workforce is available
to support development activities, and (3) improve the general well-being of the community.
Health challenges in the project area a function of endemic disease, social conditions, and
diseases arising from those conditions. Malaria accounts for more than half of all medical
conditions treated in Namissiguima Department. Acute respiratory disease, diarrhea, and
sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) are the other most common health conditions facing the
local population.
Living conditions and climate also contribute to health issues among the project area
communities. Poor sanitation can contribute to the contamination of drinking water while
naturally occurring arsenic in groundwater can cause health-related issues. Low rainfall can
result in poor harvest and threaten food security. In 2010, a poor harvest resulted in acute
malnutrition among almost half of the young children in Namissiguima Department.
The mine development itself will also bring with it the potential for health impacts. Noise, dust,
and vibration can have adverse effects if not effectively managed. Open excavations, industrial
chemicals, the activity of heavy equipment, blasting, and increased motor vehicle traffic all
present health and safety issues for people who live in the project area.
The area is served by a new hospital, old hospital, and private clinic in Ouahigouya, a dispensary
in Kononga, and a clinic in Namissiguima. The facilities in the rural areas are poorly supplied
and staffed. The hospitals in the city are well equipped but staff needs training. Getting qualified
medical personnel to live in rural areas is an ongoing challenge.
The mine will have its own clinic and ambulance to provide first aid and evacuation capability
for mine workers. These resources may be leveraged to assist the local community as long their
ability to serve the mine workforce is not diminished. The improvement of local health
infrastructure and services is a goal of the True Gold Community Development Plan and will be
undertaken in cooperation with local authorities.
True Gold will establish a number of disease control programs in the project area with a focus on
malaria, STDs, water-borne diseases, and HIV/AIDS. The programs will involve both education
as well as direct control measures and will be delivered through employee health and safety
programs and the Community Liaison Committee (CLC).
True Gold will monitor water quality, dust, and noise levels during construction and operations
to ensure that impacts are minimized. Fencing of active operating areas will prevent inadvertent
entry into active mining areas and prevent exposure of the community to industrial hazards.
Securitys role at the mine site will be to protect both True Gold assets and the local community.

Page 207 of 357
An Emergency Response Plan (ERP) will be developed to define actions to be taken in the event
of an accident, fire, or controlled release of a harmful substance. Information sessions for the
community will be organized through the CLC to make local residents aware of mining-related
hazards and the measures in place to manage them and keep the public safe.
The success of programs to address community health issues and ensure the safety of area
residents will be monitored by the True Gold Community Relations and Health and Safety staff.
Key performance indicators will be established to measure program effectiveness. These will
include direct measures of water and air quality and noise levels and indirect measures such as
accident and incident frequency. Programs will emphasize hazard recognition, avoidance, and
prevention to eliminate or minimize impacts before they occur.
20.4.5
Employment and Training
Prior to the start of construction, screening will be conducted to establish the skills available and
employability of people in the project area. Pre-employment training will be offered to qualified
applicants to increase the number of locally employable people. Pre-employment training will
focus on basic literacy, math skills, and industrial safety.
No one under the age of sixteen will hired on a fulltime basis and preference will be given to
persons who have completed secondary or tertiary education. Unskilled positions will be
reserved for people from the project area recognizing the lower levels of literacy there and the
need to hire locally. Both men and women will be eligible for work at the mine site. Hiring will
be on the basis of qualifications, experience, and aptitude. While True Gold hiring practices will
respect social and cultural norms in the community, the company will consider the employment
of women in non-traditional roles to enable them to contribute equally to the success of the
project.
The phased development of the project will offer the opportunity to screen potential future
employees before offering fulltime work. A casual labour pool will be established where project
area residents will be able to register for part-time work. Causal workers who prove themselves
to be good employees may be offered fulltime employment when openings become available.
The phased development of the barrage and water holding ponds will create casual employment
opportunities before the start of general site construction.
During construction, employment will be approximately 500 as shown in the Table 20.1.
Fulltime employment is estimated at 375. Employees will work a 4 x 4, 12-hour continuous shift
schedule where workers will work two dayshifts and two night shifts before having four days off.
The schedule results in average annual work hours of about 2,160 hours. Employees will be paid
a premium for time they work in excess of the standard 2,000 hours per year.
TABLE 20.1
ESTIMATED PROJECT EMPLOYMENT

Phase
Mining Processing Administration Construction Total
Construction
200
0
100
200
500
Production
200
75
100
0
375
Expatriate staff and management will be employed to oversee operations and train and mentor
national employees. Expatriate employees will be drawn from western countries as well as
Page 208 of 357
neighbouring West African nations. Employees from neighbouring countries are termed Thirdcountry Nationals (3CN). It is important to note that the use of 3CN employees will not replace
the need to train Burkinabe nationals.
A national succession plan will be implemented from the start of the production period. It is
expected that expats will compose up to 10% of the workforce in the first year of operations.
This percentage will be reduced 2.5% each year over the subsequent four years to achieve a
steady state for the remainder of the project life. It is essential to the long-term viability of the
project that Burkinabe be hired and trained to operate and manage the mine.
Local contractors will be identified to execute construction and provide specialist services to
support operations during the production period. An emphasis will be placed, however, on
transfer of knowledge so that national True Gold personnel can perform as many of the required
job functions on site as is reasonably practical. The operating philosophy is that it is better to
spend more money in the short-term to train True Gold employees to do a job than to pay a
contractor a premium in perpetuity to do the work on a contract basis. The knowledge transfer
process will take time, however, and it is recognized that there may always be some tasks that
are better performed by a contract rather than owner workforce.
Hiring will recognize that the mine development will not replace agriculture as a mainstay of the
local economy and the primary source of subsistence for project area residents. Work schedules
will be adopted that enable employees to report to work as scheduled while addressing the needs
to tend crops and animals. Options for job-sharing will be explored that could result in lower
wages than at other existing mines in Burkina Faso but which may offer the benefits of
employment to a larger number of people, particularly those from the local area.
20.4.6
Community Development
True Gold has developed a framework to serve as a foundation for a program of ongoing
community development throughout the mine life. The legislative and institutional bases for
community development initiatives are (1) Burkina law, (2) Burkina Millennium Development
goals, and (3) World Bank and IFC performance standards.
A review of baseline conditions indicates agriculture is the primary occupation for 95% of the
project area population. Subsistence farming of sorghum and millet as well as animal husbandry
are the principal activities. Capacity and productivity are both limited due to a lack of investment
and knowledge. Artisanal mining plays a less significant but important role, particularly during
the dry season.
Malaria and HIV present chronic health issues which the community struggles to face given
limited funding for health services, poor infrastructure, and a lack of health professionals.
Illiteracy and a lack of skills training make the local population less employable while limited
investment reduces the opportunities for jobs. Social problems related to organized orpaillage
also present a number of community challenges.
Current community development programs focus on the provision of water, schools,
improvement to existing agricultural and animal breeding practices, and reforestation. These
programs are pursued through local community-based organizations and NGOs. The Community

Page 209 of 357
Liaison Committee (CLC) will be the primary vehicle for implementation of community
development programs sponsored by True Gold.
The goals of community development for True Gold are to mitigate the impact of the project
development on the community and leverage that development to bring benefit to the persons
affected and the general population. Inherent in the mine development plan are benefits to the
community from jobs, improvements to infrastructure (barrage and roads), and relocation
(improved housing and services).
Specific community development activities will focus on (1) agriculture, (2) education, (3) health
care, and (4) local economy. Agricultural programs will be about increasing crop yields,
improving local knowledge of good farming practice, and provision of water for irrigation.
Educational programs will look at raising the general level of literacy in the project area,
bolstering the resources which exist for primary and secondary education, and skills training and
apprenticeship programs related to activities at the mine.
Health care programs will address disease control for malaria and HIV/AIDS, training for project
area health professionals, and improvements to community health infrastructure as is possible
through cooperation with local health authorities. Programs related to the local economy will
include to improvements to roads and water infrastructure and micro-finance to support the
growth of local businesses.
The implementation of these programs will occur following a thorough needs assessment and
consultation with the CLC to identify the most appropriate and effective ways to proceed.
Following implementation, community development programs will be monitored to determine
their effectiveness and opportunities for improvement.
The principles underlying the implementation of community development programs are that they
be realistic, customized to communities they serve, respectful of local culture and traditions,
needs-based, and sustainable.
20.5
PERMITTING
The timeline for receiving the required permitting for the mining operations is provided in Table
20.2.

Page 210 of 357
TABLE 20.2
KARMA PROJECT PERMITTING SCHEDULE
YEAR
MONTH
2013
J
F
2014
J
F
FS
BARRAGE
MoM Authorization
NIE Approval
PERMITTING
KARMA
ESIA Approval
Social Mgmt Plans
Enviro Mgmt Plans
Project Description
Review
Permit Grant
KAO
ESIA
Review
Permit Grant
NAMI
ESIA
Review
Permit Grant
In April 2012, an application was made for an exploitation permit for the Karma Gold Project.
The permit area encompassed three of the now five deposits that have been identified on the
property. These three deposits are Goulagou I, Goulagou II, and Rambo. The exploitation permit
was composed of portions of two existing exploration permits, Goulagou and Rambo.
An Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) and a national-standard Feasibility
Study were submitted to support the application. The operating plan was based on an inferred 11
Mt resource containing 12.4 t of gold using Carbon-in-Leach (CIL) processing. The ESIA was
accepted by the Ministry of Environment but the issue of an exploitation permit was withheld
pending completion of a Relocation Action Plan (RAP).
During the period while the application was under review, June to September 2012, a PEA was
completed for the project. The PEA delivered a vastly improved plan with enhanced economics
based on a 29 Mt resource containing 25.8 t of gold using heap leach technology. Also of
particular note was that the PEA plan resulted in far less environmental and social impact than
the previous scheme.
Page 211 of 357
Given the positive results of the PEA, True Gold decided to resubmit the exploitation permit
application based on a new project description, an updated ESIA, and a RAP that reflected
significantly less resettlement. The revised ESIA and RAP were submitted in July 2013 and the
presidential decree officially acknowledging the grant of an exploitation permit to True Gold for
the Karma permit was signed in January 2014.
Meanwhile, in March 2013, an ESIA was undertaken on the Kao property, 10 km to the
southeast of Goulagou II. That document along with a national-standard Feasibility Study and a
relocation action plan has been submitted to the Ministry of Environment in July 2013. The
environmental permit for the Kao deposit was granted to True Gold January 7, 2014. The
Technical Committee review meeting to validate the Kao operating plan is expected to be
scheduled in February 2014.
The last deposit to be permitted will be Nami. The ESIA was completed in December 2013 and
submitted for review by the Ministry of Environment in January 2014. No resettlement is
necessary at the Nami deposit therefore no RAP is required. Following environmental approval,
the Nami permit application will be subject to a technical review prior to the grant of an
exploitation permit. The grant of an exploitation permit for Nami is expected by the end of Q1
2014.Once exploitation permits are received for the various mining areas then True Gold will
proceed with the negotiation of a Mining Convention with the government. The Mining
Convention is a stability agreement that establishes the terms under which the project will
operate (legislation, royalties and taxes) over the initially defined project life.
The other aspect of the project requiring permitting is the barrage. An application for a 2.5 m
high dam with a capacity of 1.2 M m3 of water was submitted to the Ministry of Environment in
January 2013. Due to the height of the dam, no ESIA was required, only a Notice of
Environmental Impact (NIE). In March 2013, True Gold received approval of the NIE from the
Ministry of Environment and permission from the Ministry of Mines to construct mine
infrastructure in the form of a dam and a water holding pond.
Construction of the first (1 m) phase of the dam was started in April 2013 and was completed in
September. The second phase of the dam will be built in H1 2014. Preparations for the dam raise
were started in December 2013 and site works commenced in the last week of January 2014. No
additional permissions are required for this second phase of work.

Page 212 of 357
21.0
CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS
21.1
INTRODUCTION
Capital and operating costs have been estimated for the proposed Karma Project. These costs
were developed in support of a projected cash flow for the operation, which would assess the
financial viability of the project. The capital cost estimates are based on the Feasibility Study and
address the engineering, procurement, construction and start-up of the mine and processing
facilities, as well as the ongoing sustaining capital costs. The operating costs estimate includes
the cost of mining, processing, waste management and related G&A services.
The capital and operating cost estimates were developed for a conventional open pit mine, heap
leach process plant and supporting infrastructure for an operation capable of treating 4 million
tonnes of ore per annum.
21.2
RESPONSIBILITIES
Several consulting groups were engaged by True Gold to provide cost estimates for the portions
of the project that fall within their specialized scope of work. The responsible parties and specific
scope relating to their input for the estimates are listed below:
21.3
Process Plant and Infrastructure SENET

Mining Infrastructure - SENET
Mining P&E Mining Consultants
Heap Leach Pad & Ponds Knight Pisold & SENET
Raw Water Storage facility Knight Pisold & SENET
CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES
The currency exchange rates used in this analysis were fixed at the end of the Q3 2013.
The CFA Franc / Euro rate was set at an agreed value.
The currency exchange rates used are shown in Table 21.1.
TABLE 21.1
CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES
Description
Currency Code Currency Symbol
Rate
South African Rand / United States Dollar
ZAR / US$
R/$
9.87
United States Dollar / Euro
US$ / EUR
$/
1.30
United States Dollar / Great British Pound
US$ / GBP
$/
1.52
United States Dollar / Australian Dollar
US$ / AUD
$/$
0.91
United States Dollar / Canadian Dollar
US$ / C$
$/$
0.95
CFA Franc / Euro
CFAF / EUR
CFAF /
655.957
CFA Franc / United States Dollar
CFAF / US$
CFAF / $
504.58

Page 213 of 357
21.4
COST ESTIMATE ACCURACY
The potential variance of the actual costs compared to the cost estimates developed in this
analysis (the Cost Estimate Accuracy) is dependent upon the level of engineering, the estimating
methodology and the degree to which the project implementation activities have been estimated.
The Cost Estimate Accuracy of the Karma Project capital cost estimate is within a -5% to +15%
range of the overall project costs, as of the Q3 2013.
21.5
EXCLUSIONS
The following were not included in this estimate:
21.6
Scope changes
Escalation beyond the Q3 of 2013
Financing costs
Schedule delays such as those caused by:
Scope changes
Unidentified ground conditions
Labour disputes
Environmental permitting activities
Permits
Sunk costs
ESCALATION
No provision has been made in the estimate for escalation after Quarter 3, 2013.
21.7
21.7.1
CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE

Capital Cost Summary
The total initial capital cost (CAPEX) to bring the plant into production, is estimated at US$132
Million. This initial capital cost is inclusive of US$9 Million contingency. With an additional
total sustaining capital cost of US$40 Million, the total life of mine (LOM) CAPEX is US$171
Million.
A summary of the initial and sustaining capital requirements are shown in Table 21.2 and Table
21.3 respectively.

Page 214 of 357
TABLE 21.2
INITIAL CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Installed Costs
(US$000s)
37,189
55,907
29,827
Cost Location
Mining Direct Costs
Plant Direct Costs
Project Indirect Costs
Initial Capital Cost Total

122,923
Initial Capital Costs Total (Including Contingency)
Contingency
%
3.9%
8.3%
8.4%
Contingency Cost
(US$000s)
1,441
4,654
2,502
7.0%
8,596
131,519
TABLE 21.3
SUSTAINING CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Cost Location
Mining Direct Costs
Plant Direct Costs
Plant Indirect Costs
Total Sustaining Capital Cost
21.7.2
21.7.2.1
Installed Costs
(US$000s)
18,274
18,879
2,849
40,002
Mining Capital Cost Estimate

Mining Direct Cost
Mine Haul Roads

The mine haul roads costs included initial and sustaining capital and are summarized in Table
21.4.
TABLE 21.4
MINE HAUL ROADS
Cost Location
Installed Costs (US$000s)
Mining Haul Roads Initial Capital
2,120
Mining Haul Roads Sustaining Capital
1,839
Grand Total
3,959
The following basis was used in deriving the mine haul roads costs:
A bill of quantity (BOQ) was drawn up based on long sections and a plan layout which includes
26.8 km of mine haul road. The BOQ was applied to a set of rates which were built up from first
principles based on the utilization of the mining fleet and rental plant as necessary (Refer to
Section 2.1.4 for detailed Earthworks costing philosophy).

Page 215 of 357
The cost of the various haul road sections, in Figure 18.1, A, B, C, F, H, J, L & N, is included in
the Initial capital cost estimate and cost summary. The balance of the cost of roads K, M and P
were included as sustaining capital.
21.7.2.2
Mining Infrastructure
The Mining infrastructure costs are summarized in Table 21.5.

TABLE 21.5
INITIAL MINING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS
Cost Location
Earthworks
17
Civils
220
Buildings & Other Facilities
567
Grand Total
804
The following basis was used in deriving the mining infrastructure costs:
Earthworks & Civil
Earthworks and civil costs were determined by preparing a BOQ based on material take-offs
(MTO) from general arrangement drawings and applied to a set of rates. Earthworks rates were
derived from first principles and for civil costs the rates were based on an adjudicated
contractors proposal.
Mining Buildings
Prefabricated buildings for mining will consist of the following:
Mining and engineering office
Mine dry
Steel building for mining will consist of:
Mining workshop & Offices
The costs for the mining buildings were based on General Arrangement drawings which make
provision for 24 expatriate and national staff. Costs were based on selected quotations based on
technical and commercial adjudications.
Other Mining Facilities
Explosives Magazine
The cost for the explosive magazine was based on a vendor specified storage facility and
quotation.

Page 216 of 357
Mining Pre-Strip
The mine pre-production development cost is based on mining 8.45 Mt of material in Year -1.
A mining pre-strip cost of US$12,224,000 includes the following cost items:
Drilling and blasting

In-pit loading
Pit and overland ore haulage
Pit ancillary equipment operating costs
Mine indirect operating costs, including:
Indirect labour
Mine pickup trucks
Technical services materials
Pumping allowance
Maintenance equipment operation and maintenance
Assay operating costs
Mining Equipment
It is assumed that the initial set of Owner operated mining equipment would be purchased
outright at the start of Year -1. The initial mobile mining equipment lists and costs are
summarized in Table 21.6.
TABLE 21.6
INITIAL MINING EQUIPMENT CAPITAL COST
Description
Quantity Total Costs (US$000s)
Sandvik DP1500i Top Hammer Drill
1
924
Low bed and Tractor
1
550
Explosive Truck (1T)
1
84
Explosive Truck (5T)
1
167
Hydraulic Breaker
1
62
Diesel Excavator Komatsu PC2000-8 BH
1
2,506
Spare Bucket for PC2000
1
145
Wheel Loader Komatsu WA800
1
1,562
Utility Loader Komatsu WA380-5
1
330
Komatsu HD785 Truck With Tires
6
8,191
Komatsu D275A-5R Bulldozer
4
2,662
Komatsu GD825A-2 Grader
2
1,275
Tire Manipulator
1
515
Water Truck
1
529
Mechanic Service Trucks Light Duty
1
72
Mechanic Service Trucks Heavy Duty
1
245
Fuel Truck
1
100
Fuel / Lube Truck
1
446
Flat Deck Truck with Hiab Crane
1
167
Welding Truck
1
84
FOTON Dump Truck
2
147
Mine Bus 20 Seat
2
106
Page 217 of 357
TABLE 21.6
INITIAL MINING EQUIPMENT CAPITAL COST
Description
Quantity Total Costs (US$000s)
Pit Pumps
2
103
Pick Up Trucks Toyota
9
396
Portable Light Plants
4
61
Mine Communications
40
180
Total Initial Capital
21,609
The sustaining mobile mining equipment costs are listed in Table 21.7.
TABLE 21.7
SUSTAINING MOBILE MINING EQUIPMENT
Installed Costs
Cost Location
Quantity
(US$000s)
Diesel Excavator Komatsu PC2000-8 BH
1
2,506
Spare Bucket for PC2000
1
145
Komatsu HD785 Truck With Tires
8
10,922
Water Truck
1
529
Mechanic Service Trucks Light Duty
2
144
Fuel / Lube Truck
1
446
Welding Truck
1
84
Pit Pumps
2
103
Pick Up Trucks
13
572
Portable Light Plants
2
30
Mine Communications
30
135
Total Initial Capital
15,616
A schedule of the mine equipment sustaining capital cost purchases throughout the production
period is provided in Table 21.8.
TABLE 21.8
SUMMARY OF TOTAL YEARLY MINE EQUIPMENT SUSTAINING CAPITAL COSTS
Year
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Total Cost (US$000s)
$6,648 $5,530 $49
$1,563 $1,729 $97
$15,616
21.7.3
Process Plant and Infrastructure Capital Cost Estimate
Summary
A breakdown of the initial and sustaining capital cost estimate generated for the process plant
and infrastructure is provided in Table 21.9 and Table 21.10 respectively.

Page 218 of 357
TABLE 21.9
PROCESS PLANT DIRECT COST BREAKDOWN INITIAL CAPITAL
Installed Costs
Contingency Cost
Description
Contingency %
(US$000s)
(US$000s)
Plant Earthworks
1,256
15.0%
188
Plant Civil
3,038
14.4%
452
Structural Steel
2,032
10.0%
203
Machinery and Equipment
14,390
5.0%
719
Platework (Tanks)
412
10.0%
41
Electrical
3,365
10.0%
337
Piping
3,141
10.0%
314
Controls and Instrumentation
1,043
10.0%
104
Infrastructure
2,269
5.0%
113
Vendor Services
259
5.0%
13
Spares Commissioning
615
5.0%
31
Transport
6,063
10.0%
606
Heap Leach Pad (PH1)
5,487
13.3%
470
Process Ponds
945
11.7%
39
Storm, Raw and Detox Ponds
4,302
14.5%
469
Communications
1,111
5.0%
56
Plant First Fills
152
5.0%
8
Power Plant
1,234
10.0%
123
Construction Equipment
2,477
7.5%
186
Water Supply
1,024
5.0%
51
Fuel Storage facility
1,292
10.0%
129
Total
55,907
8.3%
4,654
TABLE 21.10
PROCESS PLANT DIRECT COST BREAKDOWN SUSTAINING CAPITAL
Description
Structural Steel
379
Transport
375
4,404
13,111
Sub Total
18,879
Basis of Estimate and Assumptions

Once the process plant design was suitably advanced and the plant operational requirements
defined. The capital cost estimate was prepared, based on the following technical documents
which were produced as part of the Feasibility Study:
General arrangement layouts of the process plant;

Geotechnical reports;
Process flow diagrams;

Page 219 of 357
Process plant equipment lists;

Piping and Instrument diagrams;
Line lists;
Valve lists;
Instrument lists;
Material take-offs (Structural, Electrical , Piping & Instrumentation) ;
Process Plant Earthworks Bill of Quantities (BOQ);
Heap Leach Pads & Ponds Earthworks Bill of Quantities (BOQ);
Civil Bill of Quantities (BOQ);
Electrical single line diagrams;
Quotations from vendors on major mechanical, electrical, instrumentation &
piping process equipment;
Quotations from Civil Contractors;
Quotations from Earthwork Equipment Rental Suppliers;
EPCM schedule.
The following assumptions were made in the preparation of this estimate:
Executing the work as a single EPCM contract;

Detail engineering will be handled prior to the execution phase of the project, i.e.
these costs are not included in this capital cost estimate;
Site work being continuous and not constrained by the Company, war, riots,
terrorism or political interference;
The construction schedule running approximately 18 months;
The chosen site being suitable for free-dig foundations and that there are no
specific problems arising from excessive precipitation or ground water, dramatic
changes in site geology across the plant area and excessive settlement;
The area does not fall within a seismic zone.
Earthworks
Earthworks costs have been determined by preparing a bill of quantities based on general
arrangement drawings. Rates for the various bill activities have been calculated from first
principles, by way of summing the costs of the relevant resources required per unit of each bill
item. The basis for the resource costs used is as follows:
Various items of the mine fleet must be sourced sufficiently early and made
available for these works. Only running costs are allowed for as these purchase
costs are allowed for under mining;
Rates have been sourced from a local plant hire company for the remainder of the
equipment;
P&G costs that are in line with industry norms have been allowed for.
Civil
A bill of quantities has been generated based on the general arrangement drawings. Tenders have
been received from local contractors in Burkina Faso. Following adjudication the selected
vendors rates and P&G costs have been applied.

Page 220 of 357
Steel reinforcement, mesh, holding down bolts, grout, PVC sheeting, jointing materials, rails,
conduit sleeves, sewer piping, manhole covers and fencing material are to be free issued to the
civil works contractor. All other materials have been allowed for within tendered rates.
Structural Steel
The structural steel capital costs were derived from MTOs which were obtained from General
Arrangement Drawings. Quantities from similar project detailed structures were also used as a
further benchmark. Unit rates for structural steel were obtained from the quotes of three
fabricators and were adjudicated on the technical and commercial aspects.
Machinery and Equipment
Duty sheets of the required equipment have been derived from detailed equipment lists generated
using a work breakdown structure (WBS) and process flow diagrams. Three competitive quotes
have been obtained for the majority of the equipment and these have been adjudicated on
relevant technical and commercial aspects.
Platework
The platework capital costs were derived from MTOs which were obtained from GA Drawings.
Unit rates for platework and tanks were obtained in the form of quotes from three fabricators and
were adjudicated on the technical and commercial aspects.
Electrical
Electrical equipment quantities were calculated based on the following:
PFDs
P&IDs
Equipment lists
Plant layout drawings
Single line diagrams
Quotes were obtained for the supply, manufacture, testing and factory acceptance of the motor
control centres (MCCs), transformers, cable racking, cabling, and lighting. Additionally,
provision has been made for a suitably rated low-voltage cable feeder to all infrastructure
buildings.
Piping and Valves
Piping and valve MTOs have been calculated using P&IDs and available GAs. Quotations have
been received for the supply of all listed components from which the most appropriate has been
chosen following technical and commercial adjudication.
Control and Instrumentation
Instrumentation and actuated valve lists have been established based on the P&IDs which specify
the sizes, types, materials of construction, quantities and other relevant requirements.
Page 221 of 357
Racking and cable quantities as well as I/O panel requirements have been determined by the
location and cable routing drawings created.
Control system and fibre-optic backbone requirements have been determined from networks
superimposed on the overall plant layout.
Plant Infrastructure
These costs allow for materials, transport, construction, fittings and furniture associated with the
relevant buildings and items.
Quotations, based on GA drawings, have been received for structural steel, prefabricated and
containerized buildings. The most appropriate quotation has been selected following technical
and commercial adjudication. A similar process was followed for all furniture, equipment and
fittings.
Vendor Services
The cost for vendor services includes items where the equipment is of sufficient complexity to
require the presence of the vendor in order for equipment to be installed. Very often the warranty
on the equipment will only be honoured should a vendor representative be on site during
commissioning. The costs are based on quotes obtained from the respective adjudicated vendors.
Spares
The estimate for spares costs has been derived from quotations provided by the equipment
suppliers. Quantities and items quoted are recommendations based on the relevant suppliers
experience in supplying similar equipment to sites of similar isolation. Where specific quotes
have not been made available a percentage allowance has been made based on the capital cost of
the relevant equipment.
Transportation
Transportation costs were estimated based on mass and volumes of all equipment and
construction materials. Break bulk and container shipping costs for 6 m and 12 m containers
were based on a quote obtained from a freight forwarder. Quotes were also obtained from
contractors in Burkina Faso.
Heap Leach Pad and Process Ponds
BOQs have been prepared for each phase of the heap leach pad and the process ponds. Phase 1
allows for the initial capital requirements and phases 2 and 3 determine the sustaining capital
requirements.

Page 222 of 357
It has been assumed that:
Suitable overburden material from the pits will be used as imported fill for the
heap leach pad. This material will be free issued from the mine and will include
tipping the material in position on the heap leach pad;
Blasted material from the storm water pond excavation will be crushed by the
process plant hard rock crusher and screened so that it can be used as the 25 mm
granular drainage layer which will be placed above the HDPE lining;
The hired equipment will be utilized to do the detailed earthworks i.e. 30 t
excavators and TLBs to excavate the trenches; 35 t haul trucks to load the
drainage layer aggregate onto the pad;
The balance of 25 mm granular drainage material required for Phase 2 and 3 heap
leach pad will be provided by crushing hard rock from mine overburden.
Quotes were obtained for the following free-issued items; HDPE Lining, geotextile, HDPE
piping & fittings and fencing materials.
Rates that were used for earthworks in Section 0 were applied to the BOQs to develop the heap
leach pads and ponds cost estimate.
Storm Water, Raw Water and Detox Ponds
BOQs for the storm water, raw water and detox ponds have been established to which quoted
rates consistent with the remainder of the estimate have been applied. Rates for drilling and
blasting have been provided by True Gold.
Quotes were obtained for the following free-issued items; HDPE Lining, fencing material and
safety equipment.
Communications
The satellite communication cost has been determined by using the satellite network topology
drawing.
The site communication cost has been determined by using the telecommunications and IT
network topology drawing and makes provision for:
Telecommunications utilising the IT network fibre optic backbone complete with

server and various telephone handsets;
Computers and printers;
Copier/Scanner/Printer/Fax Units;
Mobile Radio communications including
Hand held mobile radios
Vehicle radios
Base stations and consoles complete with all necessary equipment.
Included in the communications estimate is the costs for the overall site security and access
control system.

Page 223 of 357
Plant First Fills

The first fill costs were developed from first principles. These were defined as those costs
incurred prior to commissioning in preparing the circuit to accept ore. These costs included the
following:
Addition of carbon to the 6-stage adsorption circuit based on a 6 t elution column;

Filling the elution heating thermic oil system with oil;
Oil in other areas of the plant.
Power Plant
Detailed power requirements have been forwarded to multiple vendors for pricing. Quotations
have been adjudicated based on commercial & technical compliance.
Construction Equipment
The construction equipment costs were based on the construction manpower requirements and
adjudicated vendor quotations. The costs make provision for the following equipment:
Hand Tools;
Toolboxes;
Welding Machines & Plastic Welders;
Belt Splicing Tools;
Construction Fuel and Gas;
PPE;
Construction Vehicles;
Lifting Equipment & Cranes;
Construction Power;
Consumables;
Water Supply
Provision was made for one diesel powered pump mounted on a skid, and the 4.9 km pipeline to
the plant. Competitive quotes were obtained for the equipment and these were adjudicated on the
technical and commercial aspects.
Fuel Storage Facility
The fuel storage facility costs are based on a firm quotation from Vivo Energy the West African
regional agent for Shell. Their cost makes provision for design, supply and construction of a
560 m horizontal tank storage facility, including all civil, mechanical, structural, piping,
electrical and instrumentation disciplines.
21.7.4
Indirect Costs
A breakdown of the preproduction project indirect costs is provided in Table 21.11.

Page 224 of 357
TABLE 21.11
PROJECT INDIRECT COST BREAKDOWN INITIAL CAPITAL
Installed Costs
Contingency Contingency Cost
Description
(US$000s)
%
(US$000s)
EPCM
9,186
10.0%
919
Working Capital
3,709
10.0%
371
Owners Preproduction
9,657
10.0%
966
Spares Strategic / Insurance
830
5.0%
42
Spares (Two Years)
1,454
5.0%
73
Vehicles
941
5.0%
47
Mobile Equipment
872
5.0%
44
Construction Accommodation
832
5.0%
42
Relocation Costs
1,480
0.0%
0
Insurance
866
0.0%
0
Total
29,827
8.4%
2,502
The sustaining capital requirements for the project indirect costs are made up of relocation costs
only which total US$2.85 Million.
EPCM
The EPCM costs were generated through the development of a detailed EPCM estimate based on
expected EPCM contractor rates dated Q3 2013. This total makes provision for procurement,
project management, construction management and disbursement costs. Design costs are
excluded from the EPCM capital estimate as this work is being handled independently to the
project execution.
Working Capital
Working capital costs were developed to cater for costs incurred by the mine from
commissioning until gold sales can pay for the mines operating costs.
Assumptions made for the calculation of the required working capital were:
Process plant ramp up of 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% during the first 80 days of
commissioning
Stockholding of imported reagents for six months consumption, calculated using
testwork, first principle calculation or industry practice
Gold lock-up is the amount of gold in the solution ponds and adsorption stages.

Page 225 of 357
Owners Pre-Production
Owners pre-production costs are the costs incurred by True Gold from project commencement
to commissioning with the following costs excluded:
Exploration costs;
Design;
Engineering.
Labour Costs
The Owners labour cost of US$5.0 M includes the costs for the construction owners team,
G&A labour and process plant and general maintenance labour that will be required prior to
commencement of production. Sufficient training time for operators has been allowed for prior to
the commencement of production. The following was used to determine this cost:
The total project construction duration was assumed at 18 months;

Labour recruitment schedule;
Recruitment cost for expatriates;
Food, travel and transit costs for the expatriates;
Food for nationals;
Accommodation costs for the expatriates;
Vehicle allocations.
Assay Laboratory
To enable analysis of samples during the initial mining and stockpiling phase, it was assumed
that the assay laboratory facility will be operating six months ahead of plant commissioning. A
monthly cost of US$52,000 was used, as specified in the proposal submitted by Independent
Laboratory Supplies Pty Ltd.
Offices
The monthly office expenses incurred from month -18 to month -1 are US$6,500.
Communications
The monthly communications cost for satellite services incurred from month -18 to month -1 are
US$5,600.
Consultants
A consulting services cost of US$14,000 per month was used from month -18 and was ramped
up to US$27,000 per month from month -12 onwards.
Couriers and Postage
An allowance of US$2,000 per month from month -18 to month -1 was made for courier
services.
Page 226 of 357
Plant Pre-Production Operating Costs

Stacking of ore occurs before production commences. Therefore, expenses associated with
treating the ore for stacking are incurred. These costs exclude all labour components, which are
captured in pre-production costs.
Strategic and Operating Spares
The estimate for spares costs has been derived from quotations provided by the equipment
suppliers, quantities and items quoted are recommendations based on the relevant suppliers
experience in supplying similar equipment to sites of similar isolation. Where specific quotes
have not been made available a percentage allowance has been made based on the capital cost of
the relevant equipment.
Vehicles and Mobile Equipment
The vehicle and mobile equipment requirements were based on the needs of the project during
construction and operations. Quotations for all vehicles and mobile equipment were obtained
from suitable vendors.
Construction Accommodation
Construction accommodation costs were based on determining the expatriate labour force
required to execute the construction of the project. This was applied to Q3 2013 local
accommodation costs for housing in Ouahigouya. An adequate availability of local housing has
been identified within Ouahigouya to accommodate the construction expatriate labour. It is
anticipated that general labour will be sourced from the local town and no provision has been
made for this accommodation, although a cost allowance for feeding during working hours has
been included in the labour costs
Relocation Costs
An allowance for relocation costs was estimated with Relocation costs are based on the
estimates contained in the Karma and Kao Relocation Action Plans, both of which have been
validated and approved by the Burkina Faso Ministry of Environment. No resettlement is
required for the development of the Nami open pit.
Insurance
The Insurance costs were based on vendor quotation.
Contingency
Contingency is defined as additional capital costs allowed for over and above the base estimate,
to account for unexpected items and unforeseen activities and requirements not anticipated in the
cost estimate.

Page 227 of 357
The capital cost estimate was reviewed by discipline and work breakdown structures and
contingencies allocated to each line item, culminating in an overall Project contingency. These
relevant contingencies can be seen in each of the initial capital summaries. A Monte Carlo
Analysis was run and the result was in line with the contingency that was used in the study
estimate.
The resulting overall project contingency is consequently calculated as US$8.6 Million which is
equivalent to 7.0% of the total pre-production capital cost.
Sustaining capital does not include a contingency.
21.8
21.8.1
OPERATING COSTS
Introduction
The Karma Project annual operating costs for the life of the mine were estimated for mining,
processing, general and administration, royalties and refining charges and are summarized in
Table 21.12 and Table 21.13.

Page 228 of 357
TABLE 21.12
SUMMARY OF TOTAL YEARLY OPERATING COSTS
Units
-1
1
2
3
4
5
Kt
400
3,800
4,000
4,000
4,000
4,000
Combined Feed Grade
g/t Au
1.79
1.28
1.02
0.87
0.97
1.12
Combined Recovery
%
90.23
87.50
81.84
90.73
93.47
92.06
Gold Production
oz
20,740 134,302 107,510 101,428 116,187 132,570
Total Mining Operating Cost US$000s
0
18,862 24,332 21,438 24,988 27,112
US$000s 2,523 28,225 30,822 32,834 33,782 32,102
Total G&A Costs
US$000s 1,148
6,358
6,358
6,358
5,826
5,826
US$000s
3,670
53,445
61,513
60,631
64,595
Units
6
kt
4,000
Combined Feed Grade
g/t Au
0.65
Combined Recovery
%
87.58
Gold Production
oz
73,326
Total Mining Operating Cost US$000s 28,519
US$000s 36,279
Total G&A Costs
US$000s 5,825
7
4,000
0.62
80.44
64,146
21,119
27,453
5,826
8
4,000
0.59
84.72
63,795
16,422
27,190
5,826
9
928
0.72
63.31
13,695
2,684
5,280
1,456
Total
33,128
0.89
87.3
827,699
185,476
256,491
50,807
US$000s 70,624
54,398
49,438
9,420
492,774

Note:
65,040
Some values have been rounded. The totals are accurate summations of the columns of data.

Page 229 of 357
TABLE 21.13
SUMMARY OF TOTAL YEARLY OPERATING UNIT COSTS
Units
-1
1
2
3
Kt
400
3,800
4,000
4,000
Combined Feed Grade
g/t Au
1.79
1.28
1.02
0.87
Combined Recovery
%
90.23
87.50
81.84
90.73
Gold Production
oz
20,740
134,302
107,510
101,428
US$/t
0.00
4.96
6.08
5.36
US$/t
6.31
7.43
7.71
8.21
Total G&A Costs
US$/t
2.87
1.67
1.59
1.59
4
4,000
0.97
93.47
116,187
6.25
8.45
1.46
5
4,000
1.12
92.06
132,570
6.78
8.03
1.46

US$/t
US$/oz
9.18
176.97
14.06
397.95
15.38
572.15
15.16
597.78
16.15
555.96
16.26
490.61

Combined Feed Grade
Combined Recovery
Gold Production
Total G&A Costs
Units
Kt
g/t Au
%
oz
US$/t
US$/t
US$/t
6
4,000
0.65
87.58
73,326
7.13
9.07
1.46
7
4,000
0.62
80.44
64,146
5.28
6.86
1.46
8
4,000
0.59
84.72
63,795
4.11
6.80
1.46
9
928
0.72
63.31
13,695
2.89
5.69
1.57
Total
33,128
0.89
87.3
827,699
5.60
7.74
1.53

US$/t
US$/oz
17.66
963.15
13.60
848.03
12.36
774.96
10.15
687.80
14.87
595.35

Page 230 of 357
21.8.2
Mining Operating Cost
The open pit mining operating costs were estimated from first principles taking into
consideration:
The mining schedule;

Pit designs;
Climate;
Anticipated ambient and workplace conditions;
Shift durations and crew rotations;
Unit cost information;
Equipment requirements;
Environmental protection and health and safety;
Various other factors.
It is anticipated that True Gold would operate the mine and maintain the equipment using its own
labour force. The mine would operate on a 12 hour shift basis with two shifts per day and four
rotating crews.
The LOM average and annual mine operating costs are shown in Table 21.14. The unit costs per
tonne of material moved are also shown in the table and average about $1.74/tonne. The annual
mine operating cost breakdown by activity is shown in Table 21.15.
The mine operating costs are based on a diesel fuel cost of $1.38/litre in years 1 to 9 and
$1.13/litre in Year -1.

Page 231 of 357
TABLE 21.14
MINE OPERATING COST SUMMARY
Operating Cost
Component
Projected Mine Operating Cost (US$000s)
LOM
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Total
Drill And Blast

In-Pit Loading
Pit & Overland Ore Haulage
Subtotal
$786
$3,616
$9,040
$13,442
$587
$4,670
$13,073
$18,330
$529
$3,512
$11,661
$15,702
$545
$3,798
$14,838
$19,181
$865
$4,172
$16,155
$21,192
$2,796
$4,717
$15,086
$22,599
$936
$3,791
$10,802
$15,529
$619
$2,886
$9,029
$12,533
$297
$346
$1,573
$2,217
$8,434
$33,497
$106,847
$148,778
$/t
mined
$0.07
$0.30
$0.94
$1.31
Ancillary Equipment
Subtotal
$3,395
$16,837
$3,976
$22,306
$3,710
$19,413
$3,781
$22,962
$3,894
$25,086
$3,894
$26,494
$3,894
$19,423
$2,824
$15,357
$339
$2,556
$31,932
$180,710
$0.28
$1.59
Mine Indirect Costs

Pit Opex
$2,026
$18,862
$2,026
$24,332
$2,026
$21,438
$2,026
$24,988
$2,026
$27,112
$2,026
$28,519
$1,696
$21,119
$1,065
$16,422
$128
$2,684
$16,991
$197,701
$0.15
$1.74
Total Mined (Kt)

Average Annual Mining Cost ($/t)
14,109
$1.34
16,999
$1.43
11,638
$1.84
12,337
$2.03
12,453
$2.18
15,092
$1.89
11,750
$1.80
9,483
$1.73
1,175
$2.28
113,487
$1.74

Page 232 of 357
TABLE 21.15
MINE OPERATING COST BREAKDOWN BY ACTIVITY
Item
Drilling Labour
Drill Mechanic
Drill Consumables Transition
Drill Consumables Sulphide
Drill Low bed And
Tractor
Blasting Labour
Blast Consumables Transition
Blast Consumables
Sulphide
Blast Indirect Costs
Subtotal Drill And
Blast
Mine Operating Costs (US$000s)

Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
$36
$36
$36
$72
$36
$17
$17
$17
$34
$17
Year 1
Year 2
Year 8
Year 9
$36
$17
$36
$17
$36
$17
$17
$8
$54
$75
$57
$52
$146
$91
$158
$77
$36
$117
$6
$1
$13
$33
$949
$53
$16
$7
$43
$28
$28
$28
$28
$57
$28
$28
$13
$171
$171
$171
$171
$193
$224
$193
$187
$90
$68
$96
$73
$66
$185
$115
$200
$98
$48
$128
$7
$2
$14
$36
$1,034
$58
$17
$9
$152
$151
$144
$148
$191
$220
$193
$143
$69
$786
$587
$529
$545
$865
$2,796
$936
$619
$297
Loading
PC2000 Backhoe
Operators
WA800 Loader
Operators
Mechanics
Direct Supplies
PC2000
Direct Supplies
WA800
Subtotal Loading
$76
$101
$76
$76
$76
$76
$76
$50
$6
$50
$50
$50
$50
$50
$50
$50
$25
$3
$94
$111
$94
$94
$94
$94
$28
$61
$7
$2,541
$3,361
$2,330
$2,787
$2,594
$3,223
$2,876
$2,310
$277
$855
$1,047
$962
$791
$1,358
$1,274
$661
$440
$53
$3,616
$4,670
$3,512
$4,717
$3,791
$2,886
$346
Haul truck drivers

Haul Truck Mechanics
Diesel Fuel
Lubricants
Parts
Body
Tires
Other Consumables
Subtotal Haulage
$252
$358
$3,691
$185
$2,468
$58
$1,937
$91
$9,040
$363
$493
$5,349
$268
$3,577
$84
$2,807
$132
$13,073
$378
$510
$5,599
$280
$5,155
$87
$2,938
$139
$15,086
$252
$358
$3,829
$191
$4,008
$60
$2,009
$95
$10,802
$221
$307
$3,194
$160
$3,343
$50
$1,676
$78
$9,029
$47
$87
$535
$27
$576
$8
$280
$13
$1,573
Equipment Operators
Maintenance Labour
Diesel Fuel
Lubes
Parts
Tires
Ground Engagement
Tools
Subtotal Ancillary
$294
$237
$1,753
$88
$938
$37
$336
$271
$2,054
$103
$1,107
$54
$3,798
$4,172
Haulage
$331
$410
$410
$459
$561
$561
$4,760
$6,072
$6,140
$238
$304
$307
$3,183
$4,060
$5,267
$74
$95
$96
$2,498
$3,186
$3,222
$118
$150
$152
$11,661
$14,838
$16,155
Ancillary Equipment
$336
$336
$357
$271
$271
$288
$1,869
$1,922
$1,922
$93
$96
$96
$1,048
$1,063
$1,138
$48
$48
$48
$357
$288
$1,922
$96
$1,138
$48
$357
$288
$1,922
$96
$1,138
$48
$273
$220
$1,391
$70
$800
$32
$33
$26
$167
$8
$96
$4
$48
$51
$45
$45
$38
$5
$3,395
$3,976
$3,894
$3,894
$2,824
$339
Mine Indirect Labour

Mine Pick-Up Trucks
Tech Services Materials
Pumping Allowance
Maintenance Equipment
Assays
Subtotal Indirects
Total
$1,587
$154
$20
$51
$39
$175
$2,026
$18,862
$1,587
$154
$20
$51
$39
$175
$2,026
$28,519
$1,285
$126
$20
$51
$39
$175
$1,696
$21,119
$687
$112
$20
$32
$39
$175
$1,065
$16,422
$82
$14
$2
$4
$5
$21
$128
$2,684
Note:
$45
$45
$45
$3,710
$3,781
$3,894
Mine Indirect Operating Costs
$1,587
$1,587
$1,587
$1,587
$154
$154
$154
$154
$20
$20
$20
$20
$51
$51
$51
$51
$39
$39
$39
$39
$175
$175
$175
$175
$2,026
$2,026
$2,026
$2,026
$24,332
$21,438
$24,988
$27,112
Totals may not sum exactly due to rounding.

Page 233 of 357
21.8.2.1
Mine Operating Cost Components
The mining operating cost components are described in the following section.
Mine Labour Force
The mine labour force, including staff and operations personnel, is shown in Table 21.16, where:
The total number of mine personnel on the payroll peaks at 228 people in year 6.
It is expected that the Mine Superintendent, Training Coordinator, Maintenance
General Supervisor roles will be assumed by expatriate personnel.
The maintenance to operations personnel ratio is typically in the range of 60%
and ~50% at the end of the mine life.
The labour costs have been escalated (3%/a) to Q4 2013 USD. Salaries and wages
are shown in Table 21.16.
TABLE 21.16
MINE LABOUR FORCE AND TECHNICAL STAFF
Mine Department
Mine Management
Mine Superintendent
Training Coordinator
Equipment Trainer
Clerk
Year
$/personyr (000s)
266
184
15
5
Subtotal
-1
No. of people on mine payroll

1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
3
1
2
1
2
Mine Operations
Mine General
Supervisor
Mine Supervisor
Mine Clerk
Drillers
Drill Helpers
Blast Technician
Blast Records Clerk
Blast Leader
Blaster
Blast Crew Worker
Blast Crew Labourer
Shovel Operator
Wheel Loader Operator
Truck Driver
Ancillary Equipment
Operator
General Supervisor
Supervisor
Planner
Lead Hand
46
22
5
13
5
22
5
22
11
8
3
13
13
8
8
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
4
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
8
4
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
8
4
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
8
4
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
8
4
46
6
4
42
6
4
52
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
2
6
4
32
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
6
4
32
8
4
4
4
2
2
2
4
10
2
6
4
48
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
4
4
22
8
4
2
2
2
2
2
4
6
2
6
4
52
4
2
28
4
2
28
11
28
28
32
32
32
34
34
34
26
26
Subtotal
86
102
122
116
126
132
136
106
84
84
225
22
19
22
1
4
2
6
1
4
2
6
1
4
2
6
1
4
2
6
1
4
1
6
2
1
6
2
1
6

Mine Maintenance
1
1
1
4
4
4
2
2
2
6
6
6
Page 234 of 357
TABLE 21.16
MINE LABOUR FORCE AND TECHNICAL STAFF
Mine Department
Mine Management
Heavy Duty Mechanic
Welder
Gas Mechanic
Tire Technician
Parts Technician
Crane Operator
Labourer
Year
$/personyr (000s)
17
17
17
17
11
13
3
Subtotal
Maintenance Ratio (MTCE:

Operations)
Technical Services
Chief Engineer
58
Senior Mine Engineer
46
Geologist
22
Surveyor
17
Survey Technician
15
Mine Technician
15
Ore Control Technician
15
Subtotal
Total
-1
No. of people on mine payroll

27
2
2
2
4
2
2
54
34
2
2
2
4
2
2
61
45
2
2
2
4
2
2
72
42
2
2
2
4
2
2
69
48
2
2
2
4
2
2
75
49
2
2
2
4
2
2
76
47
2
2
2
4
2
2
74
39
2
2
2
4
2
2
65
26
1
1
1
2
1
26
1
1
1
2
1
41
41
63%
60%
59%
59%
60%
58%
54%
61%
49%
49%
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
14
1
2
2
2
2
2
11
1
2
2
2
2
2
11
158
181
212
203
219
226
228
188
138
138

It is expected that the oxide materials will not require drilling and blasting, however, 25% of the
transition rock tonnage and all of the sulphide rock will need to be drilled and blasted. The
drilling operating costs are based on the use of a Sandvik D1500i type top hammer drill that
would be shuttled between pits using a tractor and low bed trailer.
The drilling costs include the driller and driller helper labour costs, maintenance labour costs,
and drill consumables including fuel, lubricants, drill rig parts, drill string and bit costs, and
tractor and lowboy trailer operating and maintenance costs.
The blasting costs include the blasting crew labour costs, explosive and blasting accessory costs,
a blast hole dewatering allowance, a secondary breakage allowance, and blast crew equipment
operating costs. It is assumed that the blast holes would be loading using ANFO and initiated
using a conventional non-electric detonation system.
Loading of Ore and Waste
Two Komatsu PC2000 backhoe excavators and a Komatsu WA800 wheel loader will be used to
load the Komatsu HD785 haul trucks. The loading cost includes the loading equipment operator
labour cost, maintenance labour costs, fuel, lubricant, parts, tire and ground engagement tool
costs.

Page 235 of 357
Haulage
The Komatsu HD785 trucks will be used to haul materials from the pit to their designated
destinations including the delivery of ore to the plant stockpile at the primary crusher. The truck
operating cost is based on the projected number of truck operating hours and includes truck
driver labour, maintenance labour, fuel, lubricants, parts, tire and truck body operating costs.
A technical assessment completed as part of this Feasibility Study indicates that the Komatsu
HD785 trucks can be used for the longer ore overland hauls if heat resistant / high rated TKPH
tires, such as Bridgestone 702 TKPH-rated, 27.00R49 VMTS E-4 3A 2* type tires are used. It is
assumed that the truck loads are controlled, overland haul speeds do not exceed 40 kmph to and
from the plant, and other measures are taken to avoid exceeding haul tire TKPH rating. The
specific haul truck tire to be used and its TKPH rating will need to be selected in advance by
True Gold in consultation with the haul truck manufacturer, the tire supplier and the mining tire
manufacturer - see related recommendation. The projected tire cost ($42/ truck-hour) is based on
an assumed 3,000 hour tire life.
Ancillary Equipment
The ancillary mine equipment fleet includes the mobile equipment required to support the
mining operation and includes but is not limited to bulldozers, graders, water trucks, fuel/lube
trucks, and mechanical service vehicles. The ancillary equipment operating costs include fuel,
lubricants, parts, tire, ground engagement tool and operating and maintenance labour costs.
Indirect Costs
The indirect mine operating costs include:
Mine operations support and maintenance management personnel;

Technical personnel;
Pick-up trucks and other service vehicle costs;
Technical services consumables and grade control assay costs;
A pit pumping cost allowance of $393k estimated over the mine life.

Page 236 of 357
21.8.3
Processing Plant Operating Costs
Processing Plant Operating Cost Summary

Operating costs for individual ores, oxides, transition and sulphides, were determined by looking
at two options:
Labour requirements with expats and job shadowing using national labour, when
ore is treated from Year 1-3;
Labour requirements with reduced expats, when ore is treated from year 4
onwards.
This approach was taken to reduce operating costs from Year 4 onwards. Using this information
weighted mean costs were generated taking into account the ratios in which the ores will be
treated as provided by the mining and production schedule.
Escalation, depreciation and taxation were not taken into account in compiling the operating
costs. In addition, no contingencies were allowed for in the estimate of operating costs as there is
confidence in the reagent consumptions determined during testwork and the subsequent
quotations from the suppliers. Refer to Table 21.17 and Table 21.18 for the overall process LOM
costs.
TABLE 21.17
OVERALL PROCESS COSTS-PRE-PRODUCTION AND YEAR 1
Units Pre-Production 1 Q1
1 Q2
1 Q3
1 Q4
kt
400
800
1,000 1,000 1,000
Combined Feed Grade
g/t Au
1.79
1.33
1.27
1.20
1.24
Combined Recovery
%
90.2
85.8
86.2
90.2
87.7
Gold Production
kg
645
910
1 095 1 082 1 090
Gold Production
oz
20,740
29,273 35,202 34,795 35,033
Process Plant Operating Costs
Plant and Maintenance Labour US$ /t
0.00
0.65
0.52
0.52
0.52
Consumables and Reagents
US$ /t
5.08
5.51
6.09
5.08
5.16
Maintenance Supplies
US$ /t
0.14
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
Power
US$ /t
1.08
1.08
1.09
1.11
1.10
Assay Costs
US$ /t
0.00
0.22
0.17
0.17
0.17
US$ /t

6.31
7.61
8.02
7.03
7.10
Page 237 of 357
TABLE 21.18
OVERALL PROCESSING LOM OPEX (YEAR 1 TO 5)
Units
1
2
3
4
5
kt
3,800
4,000
4,000
4,000
4,000
Combined Feed Grade
g/t Au
1.28
1.02
0.87
0.97
1.12
Combined Recovery
%
87.5
81.8
90.7
93.5
92.1
Gold Production
kg
4 177
3 344
3 155
3 614
4 123
Gold Production
oz
134,302 107,510 101,428 116,187 132,570
0.55
0.52
0.52
0.52
0.52
US$ /t
5.46
5.78
6.27
6.53
6.12
US$ /t
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
Power
US$ /t
1.10
1.09
1.10
1.09
1.08
Assay Costs
US$ /t
0.18
0.17
0.17
0.16
0.16
US$/t
7.43
7.71
8.21
8.45
8.03
TABLE 21.19
OVERALL PROCESSING LOM OPEX (YEAR 6 TO 9)
Units
6
7
kt
4,000 4,000
Combined Feed Grade
g/t Au
0.65
0.62
Combined Recovery
%
87.6
80.4
Gold Production
kg
2,281 1,995
Gold Production
oz
73,326 64,146
0.52
0.52
US$ /t
7.18
4.97
US$ /t
0.14
0.14
Power
US$ /t
1.07
1.07
Assay Costs
US$ /t
0.16
0.16
US$ /t
9.07
6.86
8
9
Total
4,000 4,000 33,128
0.59
0.72
0.89
84.7
63.3
87.3
1,984
426
25,745
63,795 13,695 827,699
0.52
4.89
0.15
1.08
0.16
0.56
3.79
0.14
1.04
0.16
0.52
5.83
0.15
1.08
0.16
6.80
5.69
7.74
For the sulphide material, no cement was required during the agglomeration strength and
stability tests. However, as a precaution a dosage of 4 g/t was included for both Rambo and
Nami. This may not be required, in which case, it would reduce the total cement requirement in
the operating costs.
21.8.4
General and Administration Operating Costs
General and administration (G&A) costs were determined by using information provided by
True Gold and SENET in-house databases. The annual G&A operating costs are summarised in
Table 21.20.

Page 238 of 357
TABLE 21.20
LOM G&A COSTS
Year 1-3
Monthly
Annual
Salaries & Wages
General & Administration Salaries
US$ /a
147,000
1,768,000
Salaries & Wages Sub-Total
US$ /a
147,000
1,768,000
Living Costs
Accommodation Costs
US$ /a
7,503
90,033
Food Costs
US$ /a
47,911
574,935
Power Costs
US$ /a
2,800
33,600
Water Costs
US$ /a
2,500
30,000
Sub-Total Living Costs
61,000
729,000
Maintenance
Ouagadougou
US$ /a
1, 000
12,000
Ouahigouya
US$ /a
1, 000
12,000
Admin and Finance
US$ /a
1, 000
12,000
Human Resource
US$ /a
1, 000
12,000
Vehicle and Transport Cost
US$ /a
29,254
351,048
Sub-Total Maintenance
US$ /a
33,000
399,000
Offsite Offices & Travel
Office Costs
US$ /a
6,500
78,000
Expat Travel Cost
US$ /a
14,081
168,969
Expat Transit Cost
US$ /a
2,004
24,050
Sub-Total Offsite Offices, Travel & Accommodation
US$ /a
23,000
271,000
Supplies & Spare Parts
Safety Supplies
US$ /a
11,005
132,055
Ouahigouya
US$ /a
2,000
24,000
Site
US$ /a
2,000
24,000
Buildings
US$ /a
2,500
30,000
Purchasing & Warehouse
US$ /a
500
6,000
Human Relations
US$ /a
500
6,000
Environment
US$ /a
500
6,000
Training
US$ /a
500
6,000
Medical
US$ /a
500
6,000
Security
US$ /a
500
6,000
Sub-Total Supplies and Spare Parts
US$ /a
21,000
246,000
Environmental Costs
Reclamation
US$ /a
16,667
200,000
Analytical Services
US$ /a
7,500
90,000
Permits and Licences
US$ /a
2,500
30,000
Nursery
US$ /a
1,500
18,000
Waste Disposal
US$ /a
2,000
24,000
Sub-Total Environmental Costs
US$ /a
30,000
362,000
Other Admin Costs
Communication & IT
US$ /a
5,600
67,200
Couriers
US$ /a
45,000
540,000
Insurances
US$ /a
54,167
650,000
Programmes
US$ /a
32,500
390,000
Consultant Fees
US$ /a
27,333
328,000
Contractors (Building and Medical)
US$ /a
24,167
290,000
Accounting Tax Audit & Legal
US$ /a
10,000
120,000
Training
US$ /a
5,000
60,000
Recruiting
US$ /a
3,083
37,000
Miscellaneous
US$ /a
8,500
102,000
Sub-Total Other Admin Costs
US$/a
215,000
2,584,000
Total G&A Cost
US$ /a
530,000
6,358,000
Tonnes per Annum
tpa
4,000,000
Rate per Annum
US$ /t
1.59

Year 4-9
Monthly
Annual
130,000
130,000
1,564,000
1,564,000
811
40,936
2,800
2,500
47,000
9,733
491,235
33,600
30,000
565,000
1, 000
1, 000
1, 000
1, 000
29,254
33,000
12,000
12,000
12,000
12,000
351,048
399,000
6,500
5,537
217
12,000
78,000
66,443
2,600
147,000
10,309
2,000
2,000
2,500
500
500
500
500
500
500
20,000
123,706
24,000
24,000
30,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
238,000
16,667
7,500
2,500
1,500
2,000
30,000
200,000
90,000
30,000
18,000
24,000
362,000
5,600
45,000
54,167
32,500
27,333
24,167
10,000
5,000
333
8,500
213,000
446,000
67,200
540,000
650,000
390,000
328,000
290,000
120,000
60,000
4,000
102,000
2,551,000
5 826,000
4 000,000
1.46
Page 239 of 357
21.8.5
Laboratory Assay Costs
The laboratory operating philosophy will be the following:
Variable costs will cover sample preparation and lab consumables/chemicals for
assaying;
Samples taken from the plant for gold assay will be analyzed by fire assay only;
Fire assay, cyanide shake tests will be done on grade control samples to determine
gold content;
Total carbon and total sulphur tests (Leco) will also be done on all grade control
samples.
The LOM assay costs for Karma are summarised in Table 21.21 and Table 21.22.
TABLE 21.21
LOM ASSAY COST SUMMARY (YEAR 1- 3)
Lab Summary Costs Unit Years 1 - 3
Labour Costs
US$
185,300
Flights
US$
2,500
Safety
US$
6,000
Training
US$
9,200
Consultants
US$
12,000
Spares
US$
59,200
Other
US$
4,500
Variable Costs
US$
414,000
Total Lab Costs
Total Lab Costs
US$
US$ /t
693,000
0.17
TABLE 21.22
LOM ASSAY COST SUMMARY (YEAR 4 9) AND LOM
Lab Summary
Unit
Years 4 - 9
LOM
Costs
Labour Costs
US$
123,300
1,295,700
Flights
US$
0
7,600
Safety
US$
5,800
52,600
Training
US$
6,200
64,800
Consultants
US$
12,000
108,000
Spares
US$
59,200
532,900
Other
US$
4,300
39,500
Variable Costs
US$
414,000
3,726,500
Total Lab Costs
Total Lab Costs
US$
US$ /t
624,800
0.16
5,827,600
0.16
Page 240 of 357
22.0
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
22.1
INTRODUCTION
The Project economic analysis has been prepared with input from True Gold, P&E (mining),
Knight Pisold (leach pad & ponds) and SENET (processing plant, general administration and
infrastructure). SENET also undertook the financial evaluation.
22.2
22.2.1
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Evaluation Method
The Project economics have been evaluated using the discounted cash flow method, by taking
into account quarterly (up to the end of the first production year) and annual processed tonnages
and grades for the ore. The associated process recoveries, metal prices, operating costs and
refining charges, royalties and capital expenditures (both initial and sustaining) were also taken
into account.
22.2.2
Assumptions
The assumptions used in the economic analysis were provided by True Gold and are summarized
in Table 22.1 below.
TABLE 22.1
ASSUMPTIONS USED IN THE ECONOMIC EVALUATION
Economic Assumptions
Unit
Plant Throughput
Mtpa
Gold Price
(US$/oz)
Discount Rate
(%)
Diesel Fuel Prices
US$/l
Tax Rate Year 0 -5
(%)
Tax Rate > 5 years
(%)
Depreciation
(%)
Government Participation on Project
(%)
Minority Share Holders Participation on Project
(%)
Refining Charges, Dore Transport and Insurance US$/oz
Refining Gold Losses
%
Salvage Value
%
22.2.3
Value
4.0
1,250
5.0
1.37
17.5
17.5
25.0
10.0
5
3.03
0.08
10.0
Capital Expenditure
Capital expenditures for the Project have been scheduled according to the execution schedule
with the bulk of the expenditure happening within the 18 months prior to production. Sustaining
capital for the mining fleet, relocation and land compensation, leach pad expansion and future
haul roads have also been included in the capital expenditure.

Page 241 of 357
22.2.4
Sale of NSR Royalty on Karma Project
On August 27, 2013, True Gold closed the sale of a 2% net smelter return royalty, (NSR) on
the Companys interest in the Karma Project to Liberty Metals & Mining Holdings, LLC
(LMM). The Royalty payment represents the second and final tranche of a $23.5-million
strategic investment agreement that True Gold and LMM initially announced on July 18, 2013.
LMM, a subsidiary of Boston-based Liberty Mutual Insurance, purchased the Royalty for
approximately US$6.04 million. The Royalty is subject to the following repurchase options
retained by True Gold:
22.2.5
50% of the Royalty may be repurchased subsequent to the third anniversary of

commencement of commercial production at fair market value;
50% of the Royalty may be repurchased on March 31, 2014 for approximately
US$12.5 million.
Project Exploitation Permits
Upon grant of the exploitation permit, and in accordance with Mining Regulation, the
Government of Burkina Faso is entitled to retain a 10% free carried interest in the share capital
of the company that holds an exploitation permit, which interest may not be diluted even if there
is an increase in the share capital, and is entitled to collect a 3 to 5% royalty (calculated based on
the international market value of gold) on the revenues from gold production on the property
covered by the exploitation permit. The Government also collects various taxes and duties on the
importation of fuels, supplies, equipment and outside services as specified in the Mining Code.
22.3
ROYALTIES
The Karma property is subject to the royalties summarized in Table 22.2 below.
TABLE 22.2
ROYALTIES
Royalty
Vendor
NSR
Golden Star
Resources Ltd.
NSR
Isabelle Guirma &
Applicable
Permits
Terms
NSR:
0-199.9K oz Au 0% NSR
on next 200K 500K oz Au 1% NSR
on >500K oz Au 2% NSR
Goulagou
NSR based upon True Golds owned interest
(I&II), Rounga, in product produced
Youba, Tougou NSR applied to True Gold "Owned Interest"
in permits only (ie. exclude government
10%)
Golden Star maintains a ROFO on applicable
permits
Rambo

3% NSR
Page 242 of 357
TABLE 22.2
ROYALTIES
Royalty
Vendor
Applicable
Permits
James Matlock
Terms
True Gold can purchase 2/3 of the Royalty
from the option or at any time for USD$1.5M
+ accrued (unpaid) royalties to the date of
purchase
3% NSR on gold <= US$1,000 / oz
NSR
Government of
Burkina Faso
All
4% NSR >US$1,000 / oz and < US$1,300 /

oz
5% NSR >= US$1,300 / oz
NSR
Liberty
NPI
Ouedraogo family
2% NSR on Grantors Interest (90%) of

NSR
1st repurchase option 50% of the NSR on
March 31, 2014 for $USD 12.5M
All
2nd repurchase option 50% of the NSR on
any date subsequent to the 3rd anniversary of
commercial production commencement for
the fair market value of the NSR Royalty at
the time of the 2nd repurchase option notice
5% NPI which can be purchased by True
Goulagou
Gold for USD$0.5M. NPI effective post pay(I&II), Rounga,
back and on net profits related to Goulagou
Youba
(I&II), Rounga, Youba
Source: True Gold, January 2014
22.3.1
Depreciation
Depreciation is considered at a rate of 25% and it accumulates in the CAPEX tax pool if its not
utilized. The remaining capital asset tax pool is fully deductible in final year of production.
22.3.2
Inflation
In line with the practice in the mineral industry, no inflation was applied to the cash flow
analysis.
22.3.3
Currency
Cash flow analysis is reported in United States Dollars (US$) and where applicable the exchange
rates shown in Table 22.3 were used.

Page 243 of 357
TABLE 22.3
EXCHANGE RATES
Description
Exchange Rate
Rand/US$
9.87
US$/
1.30
US$/
1.52
US$/A$
0.91
US$/C$
0.95
CFA/
655.957
CFA/US$
504.58
22.3.4
Equipment Salvage Value
The plant equipment salvage value has been assumed at 10% of the following costs:
22.3.5
Mining fleet (including sustaining costs);

Plant mechanical equipment;
Electrical;
Power plant;
Fuel storage facility;
Plant vehicles and mobile equipment.
Diesel Price
A diesel price of US$1.37 per litre was used in the economic evaluation. The diesel price was
based on a quotation received from a local supplier.
22.3.6
Financial Analysis Results
The technical parameters, production forecasts and estimates described elsewhere in this report
are reflected in the LOM Project cash flow model in Table 22.4.

Page 244 of 357
TABLE 22.4
LOM PROJECT CASH FLOW
Revenue
Units
LOM Total
Preproduction
400
1.79
1 Q1
1 Q2
1Q3
Tonnes treated
kt
33,128
800
1,000
1,000
Grade
g/t
0.89
1.33
1.27
1.20
Gold Recovery
%
87.2
71.5
107.0*
112.3*
Gold Production
oz
827,043
24,398
43,699
43,292
Gold Price
US$/oz
1,250
1250
1,250
1,250
Revenue
US$ 000
1,033,804
30,498
54,624
54,115
Operating Costs
Mining
US$ 000
185,476
4,716
4,716
4,716
Plant
US$ 000
248,620
5,911
7,846
6,852
G & A and
US$ 000
55,007
1,763
1,763
1,763
Assaying
Total OPEX
US$ 000
489,104
12,389
14,324
13,331
(Direct)
Royalties &
Refining Charges
Government
US$ 000
41,385
1,221
2,187
2,166
Royalties
Refining Charges
US$/oz
3.03
3.03
3.03
3.03
3.03
Refining Charges
US$ 000
2,506
74
132
131
Total Cash Costs
US$ 000
555,521
15,490
18,035
16,601
Total Cash Costs
US$/oz
672
635
413
383
Post Tax Cash
flow
Operating Benefit
US$ 000
478,283
0
15,007
36,588
37,514
Initial Capital
US$ 000
131,519
131,519
`
Expenditure
Sustaining Capital
US$ 000
40,002
1,662
1,662
4,241
Working Capital
US$ 000
3,709
Return on WC
US$ 000
1,479
0
Profit pre Tax
US$ 000
305,534
(132,260)
13,160
34,741
33,088
Depreciation
US$ 000
(164,895)
(9,285)
(7,965)
(7,965)
(7,965)
Taxable Income
US$ 000
320,798
(9,285)
7,042.36
28,623.25
29,549.40
Tax Rate
%
17.5%
17.5%
17.5%
17.5%
Tax
US$ 000
56,140
(1,625)
1,232.41
5,009.07
5,171.14
Post Tax Profit
US$ 000
242,332
(132,260)
13,160
34,741
33,088
Undiscounted
Cumulative Cash
(US$'000)
(132,260)
(119,100)
(84,359)
(51,271)
flow Post Tax
Discount Rate
%
5%
Discounted Cash
178,180
(128,384)
26,421
26,102
25,783
flow post Tax
Cumulative
Discounted Cash
(128,384)
(101,963)
(75,861)
(50,079)
flow post Tax
Discount Rate
%
5%
Post Tax NPV
(US$'000)
178,180
Post Tax IRR
(%)
43.1%
Post Tax
Undiscounted
years
1.4
Payback Period
*The gold recovery reported in 1Q2, 1Q3 and 1Q4 represent a lag in recovered gold production from 1Q1.

1Q4
1,000
1.24
109.0*
43,530
1,250
54,413
4,000
1.02
81.8
107,425
1,250
134,282
4,000
0.87
90.7
101,348
1,250
126,684
4,000
0.97
93.4
116,095
1,250
145,118
4,000
1.12
92.0
132,465
1,250
165,581
4,000
0.65
87.5
73,268
1,250
91,585
4,000
0.62
80.4
64,095
1,250
80,119
4,000
0.59
84.7
63,744
1,250
79,680
928
0.72
63.3
13,685
1,250
17,106
4,716
6,923
24,332
30,130
21,438
32,142
24,988
33,157
27,112
31,478
28,519
35,654
21,119
26,828
16,422
26,566
2,684
5,135
1,763
7,051
7,051
6,450
6,450
6,450
6,450
6,450
1,601
13,401
61,513
60,631
64,596
65,040
70,624
54,398
49,438
9,420
2,178
5,376
5,071
5,809
6,629
3,666
3,207
3,190
685
3.03
132
16,689
383
3.03
325
69,627
648
3.03
307
68,625
677
3.03
352
73,365
632
3.03
401
75,045
567
3.03
222
76,532
1 045
3.03
194
59,959
935
3.03
193
54,969
862
3.03
41
10,584
773
37,723
64,655
58,060
71,754
90,536
15,053
20,160
24,711
6,521
4,811
32,727
(7,965)
29,758.41
17.5%
5,207.72
32,727
6,450
57,464
(34,954)
29,701
17.5%
5,198
49,677
1,538
55,781
(36,566)
21,493
17.5%
3,761
46,842
6,503
64,509
(27,665)
44,088
17.5%
7,715
50,298
7,238
82,309
(6,717)
83,819
17.5%
14,668
62,760
4,467
9,598
(5,432)
9,620
17.5%
1,684
8,442
19,172
(4,937)
15,223
17.5%
2,664
15,072
23,723
(4,552)
20,159
17.5%
3,528
17,859
1,424
1,479
11,520
(2,926)
11,006
17.5%
1,926
9,927
(18,544)
31,133
77,975
128,273
191,033
199,474
214,547
232,405
242,332
25,467
43,174
38,772
39,650
47,112
6,035
10,262
11,580
6,206
(24,611)
18,563
57,335
96,985
144,096
150,131
160,394
171,974
178,180
Page 245 of 357
Economic analysis results are summarized in Table 22.5.

TABLE 22.5
SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS RESULTS
Economic Summary
Units
Results
LOM Tonnage Ore Processed
kt
33,128
LOM Feed Grade Processed
g/t
0.89
LOM Gold Recovery
%
87.2
LOM Gold Production
k oz
827
Production Period
years
8.5
Gold Annual Production- LOM
k oz
97
LOM Fuel Costs
US$/oz
109
LOM Direct Operating Costs
US$/oz
591
US$/oz
672
US$/t
16.80
Total Capital Costs
US$/oz
207
Post Tax NPV
US$ million
178
IRR
%
43.1
Payback Period
years
1.4
The major highlights of the economic analysis are as follows:
Gold Production
The Life of Mine (LOM) gold production will be as follows:
Gold: LOM average annual production of 97,000 troy ounces per annum
Gold: LOM production of 827,000 troy ounces
Direct Operating Costs

LOM average cash operating costs of US$591 per troy ounce gold is inclusive of mining,
processing, assay and general and administration costs.
Total Cash Operating Costs
LOM cash operating costs of US$672 per troy ounce of gold is inclusive of direct operating cost,
transport, refining and royalty charges.
Total Capital Costs
LOM capital of US$207 per troy ounce of gold is inclusive of construction capital, sustaining
capital and closure costs.

Page 246 of 357
Total Project Costs

LOM total project cost of US$876 per troy of ounce of gold is inclusive of construction capital,
operating costs, sustaining capital and closure costs. The variable government royalty was also
taken into account. This cost represents the break even gold price.
Net Present Value (NPV) post Tax
The project will realize an NPV of US$ 178 million on a discount rate of 5% at a gold price of
US$1,250 per troy ounce.
Net Cash flow Post-Tax
Net cash flow of US$242 million will be realised at a gold price of US$1,250 per troy ounce.
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) & Payback Period post Tax
Project IRR of 43.1 % with a 1.4 year payback period will be realized for the assumed
production and capital expenditure.
22.3.7
Sensitivity Analysis
A sensitivity analysis was performed on the post-tax profits by varying the major key variables
(gold price, CAPEX, OPEX, fuel price, recovery, cyanide consumption, cement consumption,
head grade and power cost) to 15 % of the base case cash flow and each sensitivity was
performed independent of the other.
The results of the sensitivities are summarized in Table 22.6 to Table 22.14.
Figure 22.1 and Figure 22.2 show the detailed sensitivity analysis of changing the key variables
to 15%.
TABLE 22.6
GOLD PRICE SENSITIVITY (000S)
Gold Price $1,063
$1,125
$1,250
$1,375
$1,438
NPV
-15%
-10%
0%
10%
15%
0%
$136,380 $165,315 $242,332 $309,187 $335,088
Discount Rate (%)
5%
$93,556 $116,557 $178,180 $231,722 $251,771
10%
$61,881 $80,623 $131,028 $174,862 $190,241
5% Discount Rate
IRR
27.1%
31.6%
43.1%
52.4%
55.1%

Page 247 of 357
Discount Rate (%)

5% Discount Rate
Discount Rate (%)

5% Discount Rate
TABLE 22.7
CAPEX SENSITIVITY (000S)
NPV
-15%
-10%
0%
10%
15%
0% $259,697 $256,949 $242,332 $227,488 $220,066
5% $195,135 $192,257 $178,180 $163,940 $156,820
10% $147,611 $144,625 $131,028 $117,313 $110,455
IRR
53.0%
52.7%
50.2%
43.1%
37.2%
TABLE 22.8
OPEX SENSITIVITY (000S)
NPV
-15%
-10%
0%
10%
15%
0% $297,874 $279,363 $242,332 $204,224 $185,056
5% $221,423 $207,011 $178,180 $148,579 $133,684
10% $165,503 $154,013 $131,028 $107,484 $95,632
IRR
49.5%
47.4%
43.1%
38.5%
36.0%
NPV
0%
Discount Rate (%) 5%
10%
5% Discount Rate IRR
TABLE 22.9
FUEL PRICE SENSITIVITY (000S)
-15%
-10%
0%
$249,441
$247,321
$242,332
$183,734
$182,077
$178,180
$135,468
$134,143
$131,028
43.9%
43.7%
43.1%
10%
$236,198
$173,398
$127,214
42.3%
15%
$232,752
$170,711
$125,070
41.9%
$NPV
0%
Discount Rate (%)
5%
10%
5% Discount Rate
IRR
TABLE 22.10
RECOVERY SENSITIVITY (000S)
-15%
-10%
0%
$137,140
$165,799
$242,332
$94,135
$116,929
$178,180
$62,337
$80,916
$131,028
27.2%
31.7%
43.1%
10%
$317,576
$238,455
$180,384
53.6%
15%
$343,098
$258,151
$195,933
56.1%
TABLE 22.11
CYANIDE SENSITIVITY (000S)
-15%
-10%
0%
$249,054
$246,817
$242,332
$183,270
$181,576
$178,180
$134,988
$133,670
$131,028
43.8%
43.5%
43.1%
10%
$237,595
$174,603
$128,255
42.6%
15%
$235,227
$172,815
$126,869
42.3%
NPV
0%
10%

Page 248 of 357
TABLE 22.12
CEMENT CONSUMPTION SENSITIVITY (000S)
NPV
-15%
-10%
0%
0%
$255,487
$251,105
$242,332
$188,557
$185,101
$178,180
10%
$139,392
$136,606
$131,028
44.7%
44.2%
43.1%
10%
$233,422
$171,161
$125,380
41.9%
15%
$228,967
$167,652
$122,555
41.4%
NPV
0%
10%
TABLE 22.13
HEAD GRADE SENSITIVITY (000S)
-15%
-10%
0%
$137,140
$165,799
$242,332
$94,135
$116,929
$178,180
$62,337
$80,916
$131,028
27.2%
31.7%
43.1%
10%
$317,576
$238,455
$180,384
53.6%
15%
$343,098
$258,151
$195,933
56.1%
NPV
0%
10%
TABLE 22.14
POWER COST SENSITIVITY (000S)
-15%
-10%
0%
$246,382
$245,035
$242,332
$181,324
$180,279
$178,180
$133,531
$132,699
$131,028
43.5%
43.4%
43.1%
10%
$239,573
$176,042
$129,329
42.7%
15%
$238,194
$174,972
$128,479
42.6%

Page 249 of 357
Figure 22.1: NPV Sensitivity at 5% Discount Rate

Page 250 of 357
Figure 22.2: IRR Sensitivity at 5% Discount Rate
22.3.8
Discussion
When ranked, the sensitivity analysis indicates that the Project is most sensitive to gold price and
feed grade. From a cost perspective the Project is more sensitive to operating expenditure than
capital costs.
P&E concludes that this study demonstrates the viability of the project as proposed, and that
further development is warranted.

Page 251 of 357
23.0
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
The past two decades have seen a rapid expansion of West African mineral exploration and
development as a consequence of improvements in political and fiscal regimes combined with an
improved understanding of geology and exploration approaches. There are several producing
mines in Burkina Faso, including: Essakane (Iamgold), Mana (Semafo), Inata (Avocet Mining),
Youga (Endeavour Mining), Taparko-Bourom (High River Gold Mines), and Kalsaka (Amara
Mining), with as well as many advanced stage exploration projects. Gold production in the
country is estimated to be in the order of 1 million ounces in 2011 (The Northern Miner,
February 2012).
Amara Minings 78% owned Kalsaka mine and Sega deposits is the nearest operating mine to
Karma and is located 50 km SE of the Karma Project and within the same Greenstone belt. The
Kalsaka Mine produced 53,000 ounces of gold in 2012 and with the neighbouring Sega deposit
(which is due to begin production in Q3 2013), is expected to produce 50-60,000 ounces of gold
in 2013. As at December 31, 2012, Kalsaka had an estimated 38,000 ounces of proven and
probable reserves, at an average grade of 1.4g/t. Inclusive of the mineral reserves, it hosted
269,000 ounces of gold in the measured and indicated categories, at an average grade of 1.3 g/t,
with an additional 178,000 ounces of gold in the inferred category at 1.3 g/t, in the current mine
area (Amara Mining website, www.amaramining.com, Sept 2013).
The Kalsaka and Sega project areas are located in the Boromo Greenstone Belt of central
Burkina Faso and are underlain by deeply weathered sedimentary and mafic volcanic formations
which have been affected by multiphase folding, shearing and metamorphism and intruded by
mafic and felsic intrusives. Kalsaka is positioned near to an inflection point where the northsouth trending Boromo Greenstone Belt curves into the northeast-southwest to east-west trending
Central Burkina Greenstone Belt. Gold mineralization is hosted in narrow shear zones that are
orientated parallel to the regional structural grain and contain thick quartz veins whose
brecciated margins host the highest grades. Structural mapping has indicated that the
stratigraphic succession at Kalsaka has been isoclinally folded into a shallow west-southwest
plunging syncline. The most prominent orebodies are located within, or associated with, shears
located near the fold axis (Amara Minings website, www.amaramining.com,September 2013).
Avocet Minings 90% owned Inata Gold Mine is located approximately 130 km northeast of the
Karma Project. At the Inata Deposit, mineralization occurs within a well-defined shear zone
marking the boundary between the granitic and volcanic rocks of the Damba-Inata Domain in the
west and the Sona Sedimentary Basin in the east. Gold mineralisation occurs within a subvertical shear zone that cuts along folded carbonaceous shales. Quartz-feldspar porphyry dykes
intrude along the shear zone and are contemporaneous with the later stages of gold
mineralization. Gold mineralization is linked to quartz veins or disseminated in hematitic
alteration haloes around quartz-carbonate-albite veins. The Inata gold deposit is deeply
weathered with the base of complete oxidation extending down to depths of 60 m. A transitional
zone of moderate oxidation extends down to more than 150m depth. The Inata deposit presently
comprises mineral resources of 4.69 million ounces and an ore reserve of 0.92 million ounces.
The average grade of the mineral Reserves is 2.07 grams per tonne. (Avocet Minings website,
www.avocet.co.uk, September 2013). P&E has reported on these mines and projects in Burkina
Faso for information purposes only. The reader is cautioned that P&E has not verified the Inata
and Kalsaka reserve and resource estimates and that the tonnage and grade at these deposits is
not necessarily indicative of mineralization on the Karma Property
Page 252 of 357
24.0
OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION
P&E is not aware of any other data or information that is relevant to the conclusions developed
in this Feasibility Study Technical report.

Page 253 of 357
25.0
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS
25.1
GEOLOGY
Exploration work is professionally managed and field procedures generally meet accepted
industry best practices. P&E is of the opinion that the exploration data are sufficiently reliable to
interpret with confidence the boundaries of the gold mineralization and support evaluation and
classification of mineral resources in accordance with generally accepted CIM Estimation of
Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve Best Practices and CIM Definition Standards for
Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves guidelines.
P&E considers that the mineral resource model documented herein is sufficiently reliable to
support engineering and design studies to evaluate the viability of a mining project at a
feasibility level;
The Karma gold-bearing deposits contain a significant mineral resource estimated at 2.6 million
ounces of gold in the Indicated categories, with an additional 0.7 million ounces of gold in the
Inferred category.
25.2
OPEN PIT MINING
The mineralization at the Karma Project that is included in this analysis comes from five separate
and in some cases, remotely located deposits. This mineralization is amenable to conventional
open pit, loader/truck mining methods.
The mineralization exists as oxides, sulphides and transition materials. Mineable ore includes
oxides and transition materials from all deposits, as well as sulphides from two of the deposits.
Sulphides in the other deposits will be treated as waste rock.
25.3
MINERAL PROCESSING
Testwork carried out on representative samples of the deposits indicate that the Karma deposit
mineralization can be treated with heap leach methods. The heap leach pad is designed to process
oxide and transition ore from the five open pits, with a small amount of leachable sulphide ore
extracted from two pits.
It is anticipated that the Karma Project would employ approximately 500 people during
construction, and create approximately 300 permanent local jobs during operations along with
significant economics in the surrounding communities and Burkino Faso in general.
Proper logistics planning will play a key role in supporting construction and operation of the
Project.
25.4
FEASIBILITY STUDY RESULTS
Financial modeling of the Karma Project operations has determined that the Project will be
economically viable and profitable.

Page 254 of 357
The Feasibility Study is based on the proposed successive open-pit mining of the GGI, GGII,
Kao, Rambo and Nami deposits. The target ore production rate during the life of the mine is 4.0
million tonnes per year with no more than two open pits producing concurrently.
will consist of crushing, agglomeration, stacking and heap leaching with cyanide solution,
adsorption of the pregnant solution, elution and gold smelting.
The results of the Feasibility Study comprise the following:
Based on a gold price of US$1,250 per troy ounce, the project has an internal rate
of return (IRR) of 43.1% and a net present value (NPV) of US$178 million,
at a 5% discount rate.
Gold production will average 97,000 troy ounces per annum and 827,000 troy
ounces over the 8.5-year mine life.

Page 255 of 357
26.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
P&E concludes that this Feasibility Study demonstrates the viability of the Karma gold project as
proposed, and that further development is warranted. P&E specifically recommends proceeding
with detailed engineering and permitting based on the positive economics predicted by the
designs and financial evaluations contained herein.
The Feasibility Study has also identified areas of opportunity and risk that would benefit from
ongoing engineering studies, metallurgical testwork and the review of the existing elements of
the project design.
26.1
GENERAL
P&E recommends that True Gold puts into place effective training programmes prior to project
implementation. Skilled labour could be sourced from West African French-speaking countries.
26.2
GEOLOGY AND EXPLORATION
Given the economic sensitivity to ore grade, exploration efforts should focus on finding and
defining higher grade mineralization in areas of potential low strip ratios.
P&E considers that the Karma Property has opportunity for resource expansion and merits
further exploration. In particular, there is a significant opportunity to expand the resources at
North Kao that has been demonstrated with recent drilling results. P&Es exploration
recommendations are largely based on step out and infill diamond drilling, RC drilling, with
supporting geology, geochemistry and ground IP/Mag geophysics. A proposed $5,000,000
program is recommended in Table 26.1.
TABLE 26.1
PROPOSED EXPLORATION PROGRAM
Program
Units
Budget (000s)
RC Drilling Kao, North Kao 46 holes
8,000 m
$1,000
Core Drilling Kao, North Kao, Rambo - 26 holes
3,000 m
$600
Core Drilling Goulagou, Youba, Rounga 16 holes
2,000 m
$350
RAB/Aircore drilling 120 holes
3,600 m
$200
Geology, geochemistry, IP/Mag ground geophysics
200 line km
$200
Resource Estimation Kao, North Kao, Rambo West
1
$150
Management, support, G&A at 100% of unit cost
$2,500
Total
26.3
$5,000
PROCESSING
26.3.1
Process Plant and Metallurgical Testing
P&E recommends that the input parameters of the current detailed design should
be updated once load permeability test work is finalized;

Page 256 of 357
26.3.2
Heap Leach Pad and Ponds
26.4
P&E recommends that ongoing site heap leach test work be performed on all ore
types, especially transition ore;
P&E recommends that onsite permeability test work be performed on saprolitic
ore prior to heap leach treatment.
Samples of ferricrete aggregate should be sent for testing for suitability as

drainage layer material, while at the same time, the current detailed design should
include further optimization of the drainage layer.
Further geomechanical test work on the various ore types at Karma is
recommended to better predict heap leach pad stability.
MINING
26.4.1
Pit Slopes (Geotechnical)
26.4.2
P&E recommends that the slope geometry should be optimised on those sections
which produced a FoS <1.3, namely GGI Section 5 North, GGI Section 5 South,
GGII Section 1, GGII Section 2 and GGII Section 3. Optimization to reach the
acceptance criteria of an FoS of 1.3 may result in a decrease in overall slope
angle;
P&E recommends that the optimization of inter-ramp angles be examined for
those slopes where only transition material and fresh rock are exposed in the pit
wall. It appears that the potential to increase the inter-ramp angles on several of
the design sections may exist.
26.4.3
Contingency plans should be considered to address the possibility that there may
be more drilling and blasting required than currently planned.
Haulage
P&E recommends that True Gold review its haul truck tire requirements with the
local supplier and confirm that tires selected for overland haulage are suited to
ambient conditions;
P&E recommends that the ore haul from Rambo in the first two years of mining
should be used as a test case for the performance of the haul truck tires on
overland routes;
Overland tire performance could be potentially improved by considering
measures such as: lower speed limits, speed governors, hauling during cooler
evening hours and optimizing road conditions;
The use of 30 tonne highway-type trucks could be considered as an alternative to
90 tonne haul trucks if technical or economic conditions change.

Page 257 of 357
26.4.4
Hydrological
26.5
P&E recommends that a robust water monitoring program is developed, in order

that appropriate sound water management measures can be implemented;
P&E recommends that the pit perimeter diversion ditches be constructed as
mining develops.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL
26.5.1
Environmental
26.5.2
Develop and implement a re-vegetation trials program;

To reduce noise emission, make sure mitigation measures are applied and that the
equipment to be used is at the cutting edge of technology;
Control dusting and atmospheric emissions according to the management plan;
Adopt measures to reduce the risk of an environmental contamination by cyanides
including effective lining of heap leach pads and ponds and applying industry best
practices.
In the event of extreme rainfall events, ensure that contaminated water is treated
prior to release into the environment;
Ensure that plant bleeds resulting in volumes of water containing high arsenic
concentrations are fully utilized for the making of cement blocks and ensuring
that those blocks are buried at the bottom of the pits;
Special attention must be given to the surface of the heap to avoid solution
ponding which could attract birds or other wildlife;
The surface and groundwater monitoring programs should allow for a rapid
detection of any possible contamination and the implementation of corrective
measures.
Social
Focus on:
Consultative approaches to problem solving with the community to manage social

risk;
Train and review use of the established grievance mechanism with True Gold
personnel and community representatives;
Report and monitor the effectiveness of the Community Liaison Committee
Ensure that community development spending is aligned with company and
community goals;
Coordinate implementation of the various social management action plans into an
overall social management system;
Guide the implementation process of each social program or initiative in
compliance with best practices;
Establish metrics for monitoring the performance of social management plans;
Establish community-based health programs;
Address the need for employee and local resident access to healthcare;
Consider social and community impacts when making detailed design decisions;

Page 258 of 357
Share site security plans with the local community in order that the activities and
purpose of site security is understood;
Develop and share with the community a detailed executable emergency response
plan
Conduct surveys to determine the need for pre-employment training in order to
hire local area residents;
Partner with local authorities and NGOs to implement the training of local area
residents;
Ensure that the Culture and Heritage Management Plan is executed in order to
protect the cultural heritage of the project area;
Implement the Chance Find procedure in the Cultural Heritage Plan as required;
Review project development changes with the community during the detailed
engineering process;
Establish an inventory of physical and non-physical assets in each area affected
by re-settlement;
Conduct audits and reviews of compensation procedure to ensure that residents
affected by re-location are being treated as planned;
Ensure that social management activities comply with local laws and international
standards;
Perform due diligence to determine rightful ownership and entitlement to land,
tenure and occupancy prior to undertaking any agreements.

Page 259 of 357
27.0
REFERENCES
Arseneau, Gilles 2009. Technical Report on the Karma Property. Wardrop Engineering Inc.,
Report prepared for Riverstone Resources Inc., 71 pp., Appendices.
Arthur, John 2007. Mineral Resource Estimation at the Goulagou Project, Burkina Faso. SRK
Consulting (UK) Ltd., Report prepared for Golden Star Resources, 20 pp., Appendix.
Baratoux, L., Metelka, V., Naba, S., Jessell, M., Ganne, J., 2011, Juvenile Paleoproterozoic
crustal evolution during the Eburnean orogeny (~2.2 2.0 Ga), western Burkina Faso,
Precambrian Research, v. 191, p. 18-45.
Ewert, W., Puritch, E., Armstrong, T., Wu, Y., Hayden, A., Yassa, A., Kuchling, K., Corso, W.,
Sheykholeslami, A., Matter, R., The, H., Stapinsky, M., 2012, NI43-101 Technical Report and
Updated Resource Estimate on the Karma Project, Burkina Faso, West Africa, for Riverstone
Resources Inc., October 24, 2012
Hein, K.A.A., 2010, Succession of structural events in the Goren greenstone belt (Burkina Faso):
Implications for west African tectonics, Journal of African Earth Sciences, v. 56, p. 83-94.
Hein, K.A.A., 2008, The Karma project (KPA), Yatenga District, Burkina Faso,
CONFIDENTIAL REPORT to RIVERSTONE RESOURCES INC., November 2008
Kappes, Cassiday & Associates 2011a. Karma Project, Rambo Pit Composite Samples, Report of
Metallurgical Test Work, January 2011. Internal report (Project No. 467C, File: 8369) prepared
for Mr. Ali Sheykh of JDS Energy and Mining Inc. on behalf of Riverstone Resources Inc. Text,
appendices and addendum.
Kappes, Cassiday & Associates 2011b. Karma Project, GGII Pit Composite Samples, Report of
Metallurgical Test Work, March 2011. Internal report (Project No. 467C, File: 8369) prepared
for Mr. Ali Sheykh of JDS Energy and Mining Inc. on behalf of Riverstone Resources Inc. Text,
appendices and addendum.
Kappes, Cassiday & Associates June 2011. Karma Project Report of Metallurgical Test Work.
File 8369. Project No. 467 C.
Le Couteur, P.C. 2011. Petrographic Report on Fifteen Drill Core Samples from Burkina Faso.
For Riverstone Resources. Micron Geological Ltd.
McClelland, Gene E. 2005. Heap Leach Amenability Evaluation Goulagou Core Composites
for Evaluation in 2004 and 2005. MLI Job No. 2980 and 2980, C.O. #1. McClelland
Laboratories Inc., Report prepared for St. Jude Resources, 49 pp., Appendix.
Milsi, J.P., Feybesse, J.L., Pinna, P., Deschamps, Y., Kampunzu, H., Muhongo, S., Lescuyer,
J.L., Le Goff, E., Delor, C., Billa, M., Ralay, F., Heinry, C., 2004. Geological map of Africa 1:10
000 000. SIGAfrique Project. <http://www.sigafrique.net>.
Northern Miner, February 6-12 2012. Burkinas Gold Hunt Heats Up. Written by Salma Tarikh.

Page 260 of 357
Peatfield, Giles R., Zbeetnoff, John.A. 2011. Technical Report on the Karma Project, Burkina
Faso, West Africa. For Riverstone Resources.
Robert, F., Brommecker, R., Bourne, B.T., Dobak, P.J., McEwan, C.J., Rowe, R.R., Zhou, X.
2007. Models and Exploration Methods for Major Gold Deposit Types. In Proceedings of
Exploration 07: Fifth Decennial International Conference on Mineral Exploration edited by B.
Milkereit, 2007, p. 691-711.
SRK Consulting, 2011. Nami Structural Controls on Mineralization, Burkina Faso, West Africa.
For Riverstone Resources Inc. Project Number: 2CR015.000.
Thiverge, R.H., 2008, Geology of the Karma group research permits, Report for Riverstone
Resources Inc., August 24, 2008

Page 261 of 357
28.0
CERTIFICATES
CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFIED PERSON

EUGENE J. PURITCH, P. ENG.
I, Eugene J. Puritch, P. Eng., residing at 44 Turtlecreek Blvd., Brampton, Ontario, L6W 3X7, do hereby certify that:
1.
I am an independent mining consultant and President of P & E Mining Consultants Inc.
2.
This certificate applies to the technical report titled Technical Report, Updated Resource Estimate and
Feasibility Study on the Karma Gold Project Burkina Faso, West Africa (the Technical Report), with an
effective date of December 17, 2013.
3.
I am a graduate of The Haileybury School of Mines, with a Technologist Diploma in Mining, as well as
obtaining an additional year of undergraduate education in Mine Engineering at Queens University. In addition
I have also met the Professional Engineers of Ontario Academic Requirement Committees Examination
requirement for Bachelors Degree in Engineering Equivalency. I am a mining consultant currently licensed by
the Professional Engineers of Ontario (License No. 100014010) and registered with the Ontario Association of
Certified Engineering Technicians and Technologists as a Senior Engineering Technologist. I am also a
member of the National and Toronto Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.
I have read the definition of qualified person set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) and certify
that, by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined in NI 43-101) and past
relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a qualified person for the purposes of NI 43-101.
I have practiced my profession continuously since 1978. My summarized career experience is as follows:
Mining Technologist - H.B.M.& S. and Inco Ltd.,..................................................................... 1978-1980
Open Pit Mine Engineer Cassiar Asbestos/Brinco Ltd., .......................................................... 1981-1983
Pit Engineer/Drill & Blast Supervisor Detour Lake Mine, ...................................................... 1984-1986
Self-Employed Mining Consultant Timmins Area, ................................................................. 1987-1988
Mine Designer/Resource Estimator Dynatec/CMD/Bharti, .................................................... 1989-1995
Self-Employed Mining Consultant/Resource-Reserve Estimator,.............................................. 1995-2004
President P & E Mining Consultants Inc, ............................................................................ 2004-Present
4.
I have visited the Property that is the subject of this report on April 11, 2012.
5.
I am responsible for authoring Sections 15, 19 and 24 and co-authoring of Sections 2, 3, 14, 16, 18, 21, 25, 26
of the Technical Report along with those sections of the Summary pertaining thereto.
6.
I am independent of the Issuer applying the test in Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.
7.
I have had prior involvement with the project that is the subject of this Technical Report. The nature of my
involvement is as a co-author of a Technical Report titled Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on
the Karma Project, Burkina Faso, West Africa with an effective date of October 1, 2012, a Technical Report
titled Preliminary Economic Assessment Report for the Karma Project, Burkina Faso, West Africa with an
effective date of August 2, 2012 and a Technical Report titled Technical Report and Resource Estimate on the
Karma Project, Burkina Faso, West Africa with an effective date of January 1, 2012.
8.
I have read NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1. This Technical Report has been prepared in compliance therewith.
9.
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.

{SIGNED AND SEALED}

[Eugene Puritch]
Eugene J. Puritch, P. Eng.
Page 262 of 357

RICHARD SUTCLIFFE, Ph.D., P. GEO.
I, Richard Sutcliffe, Ph.D., P. Geo., residing at 100 Broadleaf Crescent, Ancaster, Ontario, do hereby certify that:
1.
2.
3.
I am an independent geological consultant and Vice President Geology, P&E Mining Consultants Inc.
I am a graduate of the University of Toronto with a Bachelor of Science degree in Geology (1977). In addition,
I have a Master of Science in Geology (1980) from University of Toronto and a Ph.D. in Geology (1986) from
the University of Western Ontario. I have worked as a geologist for a total of 32 years since obtaining my M.Sc.
degree. I am a geological consultant currently licensed by the Association of Professional Geoscientists of
Ontario (License No 852).
My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is:
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Precambrian Geologist, Ontario Geological Survey .................................................................. 1980-1989

Senior Research Geologist, Ontario Geological Survey ............................................................ 1989-1991
Associate Professor of Geology, University of Western Ontario. .............................................. 1990-1992
President and CEO, URSA Major Minerals Inc.. ....................................................................... 1992-2012
President and CEO, Patricia Mining Corp.................................................................................. 1998-2008
President and CEO, Auriga Gold Corp. ..................................................................................... 2010-2012
Consulting Geologist .............................................................................................................. 1992-Present
I have not visited the Property that is the subject of this report.
I am responsible for authoring Sections 4-11, and 23 and co-authoring Sections 2, 3, 12, 25 and 26 of the
Technical Report along with those sections of the Summary pertaining thereto.
I have had no prior involvement with the Property that is the subject of this Technical Report.
I have read NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and this Technical Report has been prepared in compliance
therewith.
not misleading.

{SIGNED AND SEALED}

[Richard Sutcliffe]
Dr. Richard H. Sutcliffe, P.Geo.

Page 263 of 357

ANTOINE R. YASSA, P. GEO.
I, Antoine R. Yassa, P. Geo., residing at 3602 Rang des Cavaliers, Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec, J0Z 1Y2, do hereby
certify that:
1.
I am an independent geological consultant contracted by P&E Mining Consultants Inc.
2.
3.
I am a graduate of Ottawa University at Ottawa, Ontario with a B.Sc (HONS) in Geological Sciences (1977). I
have worked as a geologist for 30 years since obtaining my B.Sc. degree. I am a geological consultant currently
licensed by the Order of Geologists of Qubec (License No 224) and a practising member of the APGO
(Registration Number 1890).
Minex Geologist (Val dOr), 3D Modeling (Timmins), Placer Dome ....................................... 1993-1995
Database Manager, Senior Geologist, West Africa, PDX .......................................................... 1996-1998
Senior Geologist, Database Manager, McWatters Mine ........................................................... 1998-2000
Database Manager, Gemcom modeling and Resources Evaluation (Kiena Mine) QAQC
Manager (Sigma Open pit), McWatters Mines........................................................................... 2001-2003
Database Manager and Resources Evaluation at Julietta Mine, Far-East Russia, Bema Gold
Corporation ................................................................................................................................ 2003-2006
Consulting Geologist ................................................................................................................. since 2006
4.
I have visited the Property that is the subject of this Technical Report on November 1 to 3, 2011, August 15 to
17, 2012, December 13 to 14, 2012 and October 16, 2013.
5.
I am responsible for co-authoring Sections 12, 14, 25 and 26 of the Technical Report along with those sections
of the Summary pertaining thereto.
6.
7.
I have had prior involvement with the project that is the subject of this Technical Report. The nature of my
effective date of August 2, 2012 and a Technical Report titled Technical Report and Resource Estimate on the
Karma Project, Burkina Faso, West Africa with an effective date of January 1, 2012.
8.
I have read NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and this Technical Report has been prepared in compliance
therewith.
9.
not misleading.

{SIGNED AND SEALED}
[Antoine Yassa]
Antoine R. Yassa, P. Geo.

Page 264 of 357

ISMAIL MAHOMED, Pr. Sci. Nat.
I, Ismail Mahomed, Pr. Sci. Nat., residing at 12 Koester Ave., Johannesburg, Gauteng, do hereby certify that:
1. I am a principal hydrogeologist with SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd. located at 265 Oxford Road, Johannesburg,
South Africa.
2.
3.
I graduated with a Bachelor degree in Geology from University of the Witwatersrand in 1995. I have worked as
a hydrogeologist for a total of 15 years since my graduation from university. My relevant work experience for
the purpose of the Technical Report is 13 years as an independent consultant in commodities such as gold,
copper, diamonds, nickel, titanium, and iron. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1998. I am a
registered as a professional natural scientist in South Africa.
that by reason of my education, affiliation with a professional association (as defined in NI 43-101) and past
Hydrogeologist, SRK Consulting (Pty) Ltd., .......................................................................2002 Present

Hydrogeologist, KLM Consulting Services cc., ..................................................................... 1999 2002
Hydrogeologist, Molisiwa Bruin and Associates., ................................................................. 1989 1999
4.
I have visited the Property that is the subject of this Technical Report on December 10, 2012.
5.
I am responsible for co-authoring Sections 16, 25 and 26 of the Technical Report along with those sections of
the Summary pertaining thereto.
6.
I am independent of the Issuer applying all of the tests in section 1.5 of National Instrument 43-101.
7.
I have had no prior involvement with the project that is the subject of this Technical Report.
8.
I have read NI 43-101 and Form 43-101F1 and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliance
therewith.
9.
not misleading.

{SIGNED AND SEALED}

[Ismail Mahomed]
________________________________
Ismail Mahomed Pr. Sci. Nat.

Page 265 of 357

PETER JOHN TERBRUGGE, Pr. Sci. Nat.
I, Peter John Terbrugge Pr. Sci. Nat. residing at 103 10 th Street, Parkmore, 2196, Johannesburg, South Africa, do
hereby certify that:
1. I am a Corporate Consultant (Engineering Geology) with SRK Consulting, located at 265 Oxford Road Illovo,
2116, Johannesburg.
2.
3.
I graduated with a Bachelor degree in Geology in 1968 from Natal University, Durban, South Africa, an
Honours degree in Exploration Geology in 1970 from the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South
Africa and an MSc in Engineering Geology from Imperial College, London University in 1974. I have worked
as an Engineering Geolgist for a total of 38 years since my graduation from university. My relevant work
experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is 34 years as an Engineering Geology Consultant in open
pit slope design and pit slope management in commodities such as gold, copper, diamonds, uranium and iron
ore. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1979 and am a member of the Professional Natural
Scientists of South Africa.
Engineering Geologist involved with pit slope design work in South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, the DRC,
Angola, Mali, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Tanzania. Pit slope design work has also been carried out in
Australia, Indonesia, Russia, Chile and Peru. My career with SRK Consulting commenced with an
Engineering Geology appointment in open pit slope design and pit slope management, progressing through
the years to my current position as a Corporate Consultant with SRK Consulting.
4.
I have not visited the Property that is the subject of this Technical Report.
5.
I am responsible for co-authoring Section 16, 25 and 26 of the Technical Report along with those sections of the
Summary pertaining thereto.
6.
7.
8.
therewith.
9.
not misleading.

{SIGNED AND SEALED}

[Peter Terbrugge]
________________________________
Peter Terbrugge Pr. Sci. Nat.

Page 266 of 357

DUNCAN GRANT-STUART, Pr. ENG.
I, Duncan John Grant-Stuart, Pr.Eng, residing at 2 Constable Street, Petervale, Sandton, 2151, Republic of South
Africa do hereby certify that:
1. I am a Technical Consultant with Knight Pisold (Pty) Ltd. located at 4 De la Rey Road, Rivonia, 2128, South
Africa.
2.
3.
I graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering from the University of the Witwatersrand in
1976. I have worked as a civil engineer for a total of 37 years since my graduation from university. My relevant
work experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is 22 years as an independent consultant in the mining
sector. I have experience in commodities such as gold, copper, phosphates, chromite, platinum and diamonds. I
have practiced my profession continuously since 1976. I am registered as a Professional Engineer with the
Engineering Council of South Africa and as a Chartered Engineer with the Engineering Council (UK).
Technical Consultant, Knight Pisold (Pty) Ltd, .................................................................... 2012 - Present

Director, Knight Pisold (Pty) Ltd, ............................................................................................. 1997 - 2012
Regional Manager, Knight Pisold (Pty) Ltd, ............................................................................ 1994 - 1997
Principal Engineer, Knight Pisold (Pty) Ltd ............................................................................. 1990 - 1994
Contracts Manager, Country Building Contractors, (Pty) Ltd. .................................................... 1987 - 1989
Site Agent, Wade Adams (Pty) Ltd.. ............. .1985-1987
Civil Engineer, Watermeyer, Legge, Pisold and Uhlmann (now Knight Pisold).. ................... 1981 - 1985
Engineer, Ministry of Water Development (Zimbabwe) ............. 1976 - 1981
4.
I have visited the Property that is the subject of this Technical Report from October 9-11, 2013.
5.
I am responsible for co-authoring Sections 17, 21, 25 and 26 of the Technical Report along with those sections
of the Summary pertaining thereto.
6.
7.
8.
therewith.
9.
not misleading.

{SIGNED AND SEALED}

[Duncan Grant-Stuart]
________________________________
Duncan Grant-Stuart, Pr. Eng.

Page 267 of 357
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHOR
MARTIN STAPINSKY, MSC., PhD, P.GEO.
I, Martin Stapinsky do hereby certify that:
1.
I am a currently employed as Project Manager with the Environmental Department of Roche Ltd., with an
office at 630 Rene-Levesque Blvd West, Suite 1500, Montreal (Quebec), Canada.
2.
This certificate applies to the Technical Report entitled Technical Report, Updated Resource Estimate and
3.
I am a graduate of University of Ottawa with a Ph.D. in Earth Sciences (2001), of Laval University with a
M.Sc. in Geology (1991), of University of Montreal with a B.Sc. in Geology (1989), and I have practiced my
profession in consulting and research, continuously since April, 1991.
I have read the definition of "qualified person" set out in National Instrument 43-101 (NI 43-101) and certify
relevant work experience, I fulfill the requirements to be a "qualified person" for the purposes of NI 43-101. I
am independent of the Issuer and related companies applying all of the tests in Section 1.5 of the National
Instrument 43-101. I am a Professional Geologist (#794) with the Ordre des Gologues due Quebec (Quebecs
Professional Geologist Association).
4.
5.
I am responsible for authoring Section 20 and co-authoring Sections 25 and 26 of the Technical Report, along
with those sections of the Summary pertaining thereto.
6.
7.
I have had prior involvement with the property that is the subject of the Technical Report. The nature of my
effective date of August 2, 2012.
8.
As of the date of this certificate, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, this technical report
contains all scientific and technical information that is required to be disclosed to make the technical report not
misleading.
9.
I have read NI 43-101, and the Technical Report has been prepared in compliance with NI 43-101 and Form
43-101F1.

{SIGNED AND SEALED}

[Martin Stapinsky]
Dr. Martin Stapinsky, P.Geo.

Page 268 of 357

NEIL SENIOR, MSc Mech.Eng FSAIMM.
I, Neil Senior, MSc Mech.Eng FSAIMM., residing at Building 12, Greenstone Hill Office Park, Emerald Boulevard,
Greenstone, Modderfontein, Gauteng, 1609, RSA, do hereby certify that:
1.
I am a Deputy Chairman with SENET (Pty) Ltd Building 12, Greenstone Hill Office Park, Emerald Boulevard,
Greenstone, Modderfontein, Gauteng, 1609, RSA.
2.
3.
I am a fellow of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (SAIMM) and a registered Professional
Engineer (registration number 800284). I graduated from Cranfield University, United Kingdom with an MSc.
Engineering (mechanical) in 1972.
I have practiced my profession for 35 years. As a result of my experience and qualifications, I am a Qualified
Person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure of Mineral Projects (NI 43-101).My
relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is:
My relevant experience for the purpose of the Technical Report is as follows:
Specifically 42 years in the mining and mining project business dealing with multiple commodities.
In depth involvement as an Engineer, Project Engineer, Project Manager and Managing Director of
SENET (Pty) Ltd
Engineering qualifications up to Mechanical Engineering (MSc) as well as my status as a Professional

Engineer (PrEng) and as a member of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (FSAIMM).
4.
5.
6.
I am responsible for authoring Section 13 and 22 a nd co-authoring Sections 2, 3, 17, 18, 21, 25 and 26 of the
Technical Report along with those sections of the Summary pertaining thereto.
7.
8.
therewith.
9.
not misleading.
Effective Date: Dec 17, 2013

Signed Date: January 27, 2014
{SIGNED AND SEALED}

[Neil Senior]
________________________________
Neil Senior, MSc Mech.Eng FSAIMM

Page 269 of 357
APPENDIX I. SURFACE DRILL HOLE PLANS

Page 270 of 357
574,000 E
573,500 E
573,000 E
572,500 E
572,000 E
1,507,500 N
1,507,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
1,506,500 N
100
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO SURFACE
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
300
400
500
METRES
P&E Mining Consultants Inc.

GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
SURFACE DRILL PLAN
Scale 1:9,000

200
September 2013
Page 271 of 357
576,500 E
576,000 E
575,500 E
575,000 E
1,506,000 N
1,505,500 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,000 N
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO SURFACE
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
100
300
400
500
METRES

GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
SURFACE DRILL PLAN
Scale 1:9,000

200
September 2013
Page 272 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
100
200
300
400
500
METRES

KAO DEPOSIT
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
SURFACE DRILL PLAN

Scale 1:10,000

September 2013
Page 273 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
25
50
75
100
METRES
P & E Mining Consultants Inc.

MAIN
C1
C2
FW1
FW2
HW1
HW2
HW3
HW4
RAMBO DEPOSIT
SURFACE DRILL PLAN
Scale 1:2,000

September 2013
Page 274 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
50
100
150
METRES

MAIN
A
B
D
NAMI DEPOSIT
SURFACE DRILL PLAN
Scale 1:3,500

September 2013
Page 275 of 357
APPENDIX II. 3D DOMAINS

Page 276 of 357

Page 277 of 357

Page 278 of 357

Page 279 of 357

Page 280 of 357

Page 281 of 357
APPENDIX III. LOG NORMAL HISTOGRAMS

Page 282 of 357

Page 283 of 357

Page 284 of 357

Page 285 of 357

Page 286 of 357

Page 287 of 357

Page 288 of 357

Page 289 of 357

Page 290 of 357

Page 291 of 357

Page 292 of 357

Page 293 of 357

Page 294 of 357

Page 295 of 357

Page 296 of 357

Page 297 of 357

Page 298 of 357

Page 299 of 357

Page 300 of 357

Page 301 of 357

Page 302 of 357
APPENDIX IV. VARIOGRAMS

Page 303 of 357

Page 304 of 357

Page 305 of 357

Page 306 of 357

Page 307 of 357

Page 308 of 357

Page 309 of 357
APPENDIX V. AU BLOCK MODEL CROSS SECTIONS AND PLANS

Page 310 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO SECTION
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
25
50
75
100
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Au BLOCK MODEL SECTION 572,400 E
Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 311 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
25
50
75
100
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 312 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
25
50
75
100
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 313 of 357
574,000 E
573,500 E
573,000 E
572,500 E
572,000 E
1,507,500 N
1,507,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
1,506,500 N
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
100
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
200
300
400
500
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Au BLOCK MODEL PLAN 350 EL
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 314 of 357
574,000 E
573,500 E
573,000 E
572,500 E
572,000 E
1,507,500 N
1,507,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,506,500 N
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
100
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
200
300
400
500
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 315 of 357
574,000 E
573,500 E
573,000 E
572,500 E
572,000 E
1,507,500 N
1,507,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,506,500 N
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
100
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
200
300
400
500
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 316 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
25
50
75
100
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 317 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
25
50
75
100
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 318 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
25
50
75
100
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 319 of 357
576,500 E
576,000 E
575,500 E
575,000 E
1,506,000 N
1,505,500 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,000 N
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
100
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
200
300
400
500
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 320 of 357
576,500 E
576,000 E
575,500 E
575,000 E
1,506,000 N
1,505,500 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
100
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
200
300
400
500
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 321 of 357
576,500 E
576,000 E
575,500 E
575,000 E
1,506,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,500 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,000 N
Au g/t
+ 2.0
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
100
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
200
300
400
500
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
0.20 - 0.22
0.01 - 0.20
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 322 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
0
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
50
100
150
200
250
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
0.20 - 0.22
KAO DEPOSIT
0.01 - 0.20
Au BLOCK MODEL SECTION 1,497,500 N

Scale 1:5,000

September 2013
Page 323 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
0
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
50
100
150
200
250
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
0.20 - 0.22
KAO DEPOSIT
0.01 - 0.20

Scale 1:5,000

September 2013
Page 324 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
0
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
50
100
150
200
250
METRES
0.22 - 0.50
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
0.20 - 0.22
KAO DEPOSIT
0.01 - 0.20

Scale 1:5,000

September 2013
Page 325 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
0
100
200
300
400
500
+ 2.0
METRES
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
0.22 - 0.50
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
0.20 - 0.22
KAO DEPOSIT
0.01 - 0.20

Scale 1:10,000

September 2013
Page 326 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
0
100
200
300
400
500
+ 2.0
METRES
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
0.22 - 0.50
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
0.20 - 0.22
KAO DEPOSIT
0.01 - 0.20

Scale 1:10,000

September 2013
Page 327 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
Au g/t
+ 2.0
PIT OUTLINE
100
200
300
400
500
METRES
1.0 - 2.0
0.50 - 1.0
0.22 - 0.50
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
0.20 - 0.22
KAO DEPOSIT
0.01 - 0.20

Scale 1:10,000

September 2013
Page 328 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
SULPHIDE
BOUNDARY
Au g/t
MAIN
C1
C2
FW1
FW2
HW1
HW2
HW3
HW4
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.5 - 1.0
0.3 - 0.5
0.01 - 0.3
20
30
40
50
METRES

RAMBO DEPOSIT
Scale 1:1,500

10
September 2013
Page 329 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
SULPHIDE
BOUNDARY
Au g/t
25
50
75
100
METRES
MAIN
A
B
D
+ 2.0
1.0 - 2.0
0.5 - 1.0
0.3 - 0.5
0.01 - 0.3

NAMI DEPOSIT
Scale 1:2,000

September 2013
Page 330 of 357
APPENDIX VI. CLASSIFICATION BLOCK MODEL CROSS SECTIONS AND

PLANS

Page 331 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
25
50
75
100
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
INFERRED
CLASS BLOCK MODEL SECTION 572,400 E

Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 332 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
25
50
75
100
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 333 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
25
50
75
100
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 334 of 357
574,000 E
573,500 E
573,000 E
572,500 E
572,000 E
1,507,500 N
1,507,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
1,506,500 N
100
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
200
300
400
500
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
INFERRED
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
CLASS BLOCK MODEL PLAN 350 EL
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 335 of 357
574,000 E
573,500 E
573,000 E
572,500 E
572,000 E
1,507,500 N
1,507,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,506,500 N
100
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
200
300
400
500
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
INFERRED
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 336 of 357
574,000 E
573,500 E
573,000 E
572,500 E
572,000 E
1,507,500 N
1,507,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,506,500 N
100
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GGI-A
GGI-B
GGI-C
GGI-D
GGI-F
GGI-G
GGI-J
GGI-K
GGIE-A
GGIE-C
GGIE-D
GGIE-E
GGIE-F
200
300
400
500
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
INFERRED
GOULAGOU I DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 337 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
25
50
75
100
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 338 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
25
50
75
100
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 339 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
25
50
75
100
METRES

CLASS
INDICATED
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:2,500

September 2013
Page 340 of 357
576,500 E
576,000 E
575,500 E
575,000 E
1,506,000 N
1,505,500 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,000 N
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
100
200
300
400
500
METRES
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN

CLASS
INDICATED
INFERRED
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 341 of 357
576,500 E
576,000 E
575,500 E
575,000 E
1,506,000 N
1,505,500 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
200
300
400
500
METRES
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
100

CLASS
INDICATED
INFERRED
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 342 of 357
576,500 E
576,000 E
575,500 E
575,000 E
1,506,000 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,500 N
PIT OUTLINE
1,505,000 N
GG2-KFW
GG2-K
GG2-KHW
GG2-L
GG2-M
200
300
400
500
METRES
MINERALIZED DOMAINS
PROJECTED TO PLAN
GG2-E
GG2-F
GG2-G
GG2-H
GG2-I
GG2-J
100

CLASS
INDICATED
INFERRED
GOULAGOU II DEPOSIT
Scale 1:9,000

September 2013
Page 343 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
50
100
150
200
250
METRES

CLASS
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
KAO DEPOSIT
INDICATED
INFERRED
CLASS BLOCK MODEL SECTION 1,497,500 N

Scale 1:5,000

September 2013
Page 344 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
50
100
150
200
250
METRES

CLASS
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
KAO DEPOSIT
INDICATED
INFERRED


Scale 1:5,000
September 2013
Page 345 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
50
100
150
200
250
METRES

CLASS
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
KAO DEPOSIT
INDICATED
INFERRED

Scale 1:5,000

September 2013
Page 346 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
100
200
300
400
500
METRES

CLASS
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
INDICATED
KAO DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:10,000

September 2013
Page 347 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
100
200
300
400
500
METRES

CLASS
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
KAO DEPOSIT
INDICATED
INFERRED

Scale 1:10,000

September 2013
Page 348 of 357
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
PIT OUTLINE
100
200
300
400
500
METRES

CLASS
Au 0.2 ppm
Au 1.0 ppm
INDICATED
KAO DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:10,000

September 2013
Page 349 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
SULPHIDE
BOUNDARY
10
20
30
40
50
METRES
MAIN
C1
C2
FW1
FW2
HW1
HW2
HW3
HW4

CLASS
INDICATED
RAMBO DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:1,500

September 2013
Page 350 of 357
SURFACE
PIT OUTLINE
SULPHIDE
BOUNDARY
25
50
75
100
METRES

MAIN
A
B
D
CLASS
INDICATED
NAMI DEPOSIT
INFERRED

Scale 1:2,000

September 2013
Page 351 of 357
APPENDIX VII. OPTIMIZED PIT SHELLS

Page 352 of 357

Page 353 of 357

Page 354 of 357

Page 355 of 357

Page 356 of 357

Page 357 of 357

Final Sedar Karma 275 Jan 27 345pm

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Sedar Karma 275 Jan 27 345pm

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TECHNICAL REPORT, UPDATED RESOURCE ESTIMATE

AND FEASIBILITY STUDY

Eugene Puritch, P.Eng.

4.3.2 Exploration Permits ...................................................................................36

ROTARY AIR BLAST DRILLING NORTH OF THE KARMA PROJECT ......78

MARKET STUDIES AND CONTRACTS .....................................................................188

20.3.2 Water Quality Management .....................................................................200

Karma Deposits In-Pit Mineral Resource Estimate ................................................ 5

Global Sensitivity to the Mineral Resource Estimate ......................................... 116

Nami Shell Tonnage vs Gold Price ..................................................................... 149

Assumptions used in the Economic Evaluation .................................................. 241

Karma Project Site Plan ........................................................................................ 10

Goulagou II Pit Design Phase 1 .......................................................................... 155

GEOLOGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

US$1,557/oz. (36 month trailing average price Oct 31/13)

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Karma Project Site Plan

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

93 uniaxial compressive strength tests

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Pit Optimization and Pit Design

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

METALLURGY AND MINERAL PROCESSING

In support of a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA), metallurgical test work was

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Karma Comminution Overall Flowsheet

Agglomeration Feed Conveyor

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Karma Heap Leach & ADR Overall Flowsheet

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS

The Stakeholder Engagement and Communication Plan, which provides a

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Noise Management Plan;

CAPITAL AND OPERATING COST ESTIMATES

Capital Cost Summary

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Initial Capital Costs Total (Including Contingency)

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Total Operating Costs

Combined Tonnage Processed

Total Operating Costs

Combined Tonnage Processed

Total Operating Costs

Combined Tonnage Processed

Total Operating Costs

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Geology and Exploration

Process Plant and Metallurgical Testing

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Heap Leach Pad and Ponds

Pit Slopes (Geotechnical)

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275

Environmental and Social

Consultative approaches to problem solving with the community to manage social

P&E Mining Consultants Inc. Report No. 275