17.0 Mineral Resource 43-101 PDF

17.
0 MINERAL RESOURCE
17.1 Resource Model
The mineral resource estimate was prepared for the Nkamouna area using a three-dimensional block
model to estimate cobalt, nickel, and manganese grade for individual 10 by 10 meters horizontal by 1
meter vertical blocks. In addition, lithology codes and resource classification codes were defined for each
block. This estimate updated the prefeasibility model with additional data, including: 162 deepened pits,
five additional pits, and revised topography data. The 2007 assay database contains 4 percent greater
assay intervals than the 2005 database. The updated resource estimation was done with Datamine
Studio 3.0 geologic modeling software, although the methodology remains essentially the same.
Because the deposit is very thin (averaging 13.5 meters including ore and overburden) compared to the
horizontal extent (over 4,000 meters), a 10X to 30X vertical exaggeration is required to view the entire
deposit in cross-section. With greater than 10X vertical exaggeration, however, cross-sections become
unacceptably tall, so basic interpretation and modeling were done using a flattened coordinate system.
Thus, in the flattened coordinate system, an elevation of zero is the topographic surface and an elevation
of minus 10 is ten meters below topography.
The general procedure used for resource estimation was as follows:
1. In the prefeasibility estimate, the depth to the bottom of Upper Laterite (granular), breccias, and
the Lower Limonite (ferrilite) were extracted from the geologic logs of pits and drill holes and
edited to correct for partial-depth pits and holes. The prefeasibility model depths were used as
the starting point for this estimate.
2. A triangulated DTM model was created to represent the depth from surface to the bottom of
each geologic unit. The depths to the bottom of each surface were edited interactively in
Datamine to add data for the new pits and to adjust for deepened pits. In addition, estimated
depths below pits and drill holes that did not penetrate the bottom of some horizons were
entered as needed. An improvement to the prefeasibility model is that extrapolation outside the
area of pits/drill holes was limited to 150 meters using a 3-dimensional polygon that also
controlled the limiting depth of the surface.
3. Based on cross-section plots of cobalt grade in the flattened model, it was observed that cobalt
grade could be correlated parallel to the top of mineralization. The depth to the top of
mineralized cobalt from the prefeasibility estimate was used as the starting point for the current
model.
4. A top-of-mineralization, or TOMI, model was created such that the top of mineralization in each
drill hole was at a constant elevation. The advantage of this model is that the optimum
correlation between the metal grades is horizontal and the shape and continuity of the
Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.1

80530 January 18, 2008
mineralization can be viewed directly on plan maps. This model also went through several
iterations of editing and remodeling to remove inconsistencies in the data from shallow holes that
did not penetrate the top of mineralization and from multiple pits and drill holes within a few
meters of each other.
5. Basic statistics, using the TOMI coordinate system, showed that there are three cobalt grade
populations, including low-grade (poorly mineralized), mid-grade (mineralized), and high-grade
(strongly mineralized). Manganese was found to have grade distributions similar in shape, but
higher grade than cobalt, consistent with the strong correlation between cobalt, manganese, and
asbolane. Nickel appears to be much more evenly distributed than cobalt and manganese and
was found to only have two grade zones, mid-grade, and high-grade.
6. Grade zones were defined for each metal as closed shapes in plan maps in the TOMI model
coordinate system.
7. Basic statistics were run within the grade zones to confirm the grade distributions and variograms
were run to confirm continuity of grades within the zones.
8. Block grades were estimated for cobalt, nickel, and manganese using inverse-distance-power
(IDP) estimation with grade-zoning controls. IDP estimation parameters were adjusted so the
estimated block distributions adequately reflected mining selectivity.
9. A sample spacing model was prepared in TOMI model coordinates that measured the spacing of
samples around each block. This model was used to classify the resources into measured,
indicated, and inferred resource classes based on pit/drill hole spacing.
10. The individual 1-meter thick blocks from the flat model were composited into vertical stacks of
blocks using a cutoff grade and minimum thickness criteria. This process created a gridded-seam
model with 10x10m horizontal blocks. The gridded-seam model was then accumulated into
50x50m blocks for mine planning and scheduling with XPAC.
17.2 Modeling Coordinate System
The model was constructed using UTM Zone 33/WGS84 coordinates. The Datamine project used single
precision data files, which results in an XY coordinate precision of approximately 0.02 meters. Extended
precision is recommended for future models, however, to eliminate problems from the limited range of
the Datamine IJK parameter in future models.
17.3 Block-Model Location and Size Parameters
Three block models were used for resource estimation in the prefeasibility model, including the flat
model, the unfolded model, and a gridded-seam model with minable seams for pit design. The unfolded
model is referred to in this report as the top-of-mineralization-indexed, or TOMI model.

80530 January 18, 2008
The current model combines the flat model, the TOMI model, and a true elevation model into a single
Datamine block model by storing a Z-coordinate for each model, as a separate column in the Datamine
model file. It is very simple to convert the model from one type to the other by replacing the elevation of
the block center (ZC) with the Z-Coordinate from the desired coordinate system. Because of limitations
on the Datamine IJK parameter, each XY location in the model was implemented as a single block, and
the thickness of the block is equal to the thickness of the model. Individual blocks are created as 1-
meter high Datamine sub-blocks.
The true-elevation coordinate space is simply the true elevation of the block. The flat-model coordinate
space defines elevation zero (0) as the current topographic surface. Thus, an elevation of minus 12
meters (-12m) in this system is equivalent to 12 meters below surface. The size and location parameters
for this model are shown in Table 17-1. The TOMI model coordinate space defines zero elevation as the
top of mineralization. Thus, the top of mineralization, which is an irregular, undulating surface in flat and
true elevation coordinates is a flat, horizontal plane in the TOMI coordinates. The TOMI model may be
visualized as a seam model with sub-blocks running parallel to the top of mineralization.
The minable resource model is a composited model in which the vertical stacks of blocks have been
combined into a gridded-seam model that summarizes the thicknesses of overburden, interburden waste,
and ore based on cutoff and mining selectivity criteria. Model parameters for the minable resource model
are the same as those for the other models, except that the block height is variable.
The scheduling model consolidates the seam model into 50x50m wide blocks that summarize the average
thickness, tonnage and grade for the Runge XPAC scheduling software.
TABLE 17-1
Geovic Mining Corp.
Nkamouna Project, Cameroon
Block Model Size and Location Parameters
Block Minimum Maximum
Length
Number Blocks Size Value Value
(meters)
(meters) (meters) (meters)
Easting (Columns) 470 10 368,500 373,200 4,700

Northing (Rows) 450 10 359,500 364,000 4,500
500 (Sub-
Elevation(Levels) 1 500 1,000 500
blocks)
17.4 Pit and Drill-Hole Data
Pit and drill-hole data were provided by Geovic as three EXCEL files containing collar coordinates,
lithologic codes, and assay data. Each of these files was edited slightly for data checking and/or to
facilitate later use of the data. The resulting data were saved as comma delimited ASCII files importing
into Datamine (collar.csv, lithology.csv and assay.csv).

80530 January 18, 2008
17.4.1 Collar Data
Collar data included a unique database ID number, an area code (NKM, KON), sample type (Pit, UN Core
Hole, Core Hole, Reverse Circulation, SG sample, bulk sample), collar coordinates (Easting, Northing, and
Elevation). The Geovic collar data spreadsheet was edited to add a depth-of-hole field (extracted from
the assay data), and two fields indicating whether the hole should be used for the resource estimate and
the reason that it was not used.
None of the UN core holes were used for the resource estimated because they were considered
unreliable. In addition, pits were not used in the model if they were extremely shallow sample pits and if
information from adjacent holes indicated that the mineralized zone was much deeper.
Other holes were not used because several samples (pits or reverse circulation (RC) drill holes) were
present at approximately the same location. Some pits were re-sampled up to four times as part of
various sampling studies; in addition, some RC Air drill holes were twinned with a pit and some of the pit
twins had more than one sample. Only one of these twinned holes, was used at each location, because
the short range variability created severe anomalies in lithologic contact and the top of mineralization
surface models. The sample used for resource estimation was based on the following selection criteria: If
one of the drill holes or pit samples was deeper, or had more assayed intervals, that hole was used;
otherwise, the original hole or pit was used. Summaries of the number of holes used and holes excluded
are shown in Tables 17-2 and 17-3.
TABLE 17-2
Geovic Mining Corp.
Summary of Samples Used for Resource Estimation
Prefeasibility Current
Number Prefeasibility Number Current
Sample Type Pits/Holes Meters Pits/Holes Meters
Bulk 2 29.0 1 16
Core Drill Hole 23 600.5 23 601
Pit 1,043 13,457.2 1,047 14,162.46
Pit Original Pit of Twin 19 306.1 21 343.55
Pit East Side Twin 11 167.3 10 155.7
Pit North Side Twin 1 20.0 1 20.0
RC Air Hole 164 3,458.5 164 3,458.5
RC Air Hole Original RC of Twin 11 197.0 10 183.0
Total 1,272 18,235.5 1,277 18,940.31

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-3
Geovic Mining Corp.
Summary of Drill Hole Data Not Used for Resource Estimation
Hole Type Reason Not Used Number of Holes
Pit No Collar 12
Pit Pit not dug 1
Pit Outside Model 3
Bulk Shallow 1
Pit Shallow 58
Bulk Twin 3
Pit Twin 79
Pit SG Twin 17
RC Air Hole Twin 2
UN Core Hole UN Core Hole 11
Total 188
17.4.2 Lithologic Data
Lithologic data was assigned a unique database ID number, an area code (NKM, KON), an alphanumeric
lithologic code, and intervals of down-hole depth for which the lithologic code applied. A numeric code
was assigned to each lithologic unit as shown in Table 17-4. The numeric codes were assigned so that
the lithologic units were ordered from surface downward.
The data for the formation DTM models were prepared for the prefeasibility model by scanning the drill
holes for the last or lowermost occurrence of GR (unit 1), which defined the bottom of the Upper Laterite
and top of the ferricrete breccia. The last occurrence of any of the ferricrete breccia codes (UB, FB, LB)
defined the bottom for the ferricrete breccia and the top of the ferralite. The last or lowermost
occurrence of FL or LFL was used to define the bottom of the ferralite unit. In addition to the formation
depths extracted from the lithology data, manual estimates of lithology depths were introduced where
drill holes were too shallow to intersect the formation or were otherwise inconsistent. The formation
depth data were further edited in Datamine to improve the depth picks for the current model. The
method for estimation of the manual picks is discussed in Section 17.7, Lithologic Surface Models.

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-4
Geovic Mining Corp.
Summary Lithologic Codes Used For Estimation
Numeric Geovic Number
Meters Geovic Description PAH Description
Code Code Intervals
1 GR 4,360 4,114.60 Granular Upper Laterite
2 UB 1,452 1,170.25 Upper Breccia Upper Ferricrete Breccia
3 FB 3,054 2,547.20 Ferricrete Breccia Hardpan Ferricrete Breccia
4 LB 4,135 3,412.05 Lower Breccia Lower Ferricrete Breccia
5 FL 7,356 6,802.56 Ferralite Lower Limonite
6 SP 298 257.25 Saprolite Saprolite
7 SE 45 18.30 Serpentine Serpentinite
8 QS 101 83.85 Quartz Sand Silcrete
9 SH 367 318.45 Schist Schist
10 QT 145 124.10 Quartz Silcrete
11 LFL 82 75.00 Lower Ferralite Ferralite
12 CB 12 5.25 Carbonate Alteration
13 Unknown 28 11.45
Total 21,435 18,940.31
17.4.3 Assay Data
The assay data file contained the same database ID and area codes as the collar and lithology files, plus
the date and report number for each assay. Assay data was entered as from, to interval depths, plus
assays for cobalt, nickel, and manganese. Additional data was contained in the data file for up to four
additional assays of cobalt, nickel and/or manganese, but the additional assays were not used for this
resource estimate. Intervals with no assay were coded with negative numbers that showed the reason
for the missing assay.
17.4.4 Conversion of Collar, Lithology, and Assay Data for Resource

Estimation
The assay data were processed for entry into the resource estimation model, as follows:
1. Added spaces and redundant alphanumeric codes such as SG-A, SG, -A, and -D were
removed from the database ID field. The Database ID and Area codes were combined to
create drill hole names for Datamine.

80530 January 18, 2008
2. The collar coordinates data were imported to Datamine, then updated with survey data for the
new pits and those pits that had been resurveyed since the previous estimate.
3. The lithology depth data was joined to the collar coordinates. The collar coordinate data were
updated for 152 pits and drill holes using the Datamine JOIN process.
4. The initial value for the depth of the top of mineralization was determined for the prefeasibility
based on the top of the first two consecutive assays above 0.06 percent cobalt. If two
consecutive intervals above 0.06% cobalt were not found, the top of the ferralite was used as the
top of mineralization. The depth to the top of mineralization, called ZINDEX in Datamine, was
joined to the collar file, then checked and updated interactively in Datamine.
5. Drill hole files were created using actual elevation, the depth to the top of mineralization and zero
(0) as the collar elevation.
6. Assays below detection limit and missing assays were modified as summarized in Table 17-5.
Where cobalt was assayed and manganese was not assayed, manganese was estimated using
the power-curve regression formulae that are summarized in Table 17-6 in Section 17.4.5,
Estimation of Missing Manganese Assays from Cobalt. (Manganese was usually only missing
where cobalt was less than 0.1% Co.).
TABLE 17-5
Geovic Mining Corp.
Modification of Assay Data
Original Assay after Modification
Value
Co Ni Mn
<0.010 0.0050 0.0050 0.0050 Detection Limit
<0.005 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 Detection Limit
-3 Missing Missing Missing Interval missing from assay report
-4 0.0251 0.1511 Equation Low grade material not assayed.
Enter average low-grade value.
-5 Missing Missing Missing Interval pending

-6 none Missing Equation No assay
No manganese assay, estimate from
-7 Missing Missing Equation
Co
-9 Missing Missing Missing Hole not dug
-11 Missing Missing Missing New hole not yet assayed
-12 Missing Missing Missing No assays for hole
-13 Missing Missing Missing Hole not assayed

80530 January 18, 2008
17.4.5 Estimation of Missing Manganese Assays From Cobalt
Approximately 10 percent (2,197) of the intervals in the assay data were not assayed for manganese.
These values, which were identified in the Geovic assay data by an Issue 7" flag were estimated by
Geovic using the cobalt grade and Mn:Co ratios for six cobalt-grade intervals.
Since there is a good general correlation between manganese and cobalt grade, with R2 = 0.9, it is
reasonable to estimate the missing manganese values from the cobalt grade. In addition, manganese
has little economic value and most of the unassayed manganese values have a relatively low cobalt grade
(averaging 0.1% Co). A regression study was done to determine the best method for estimating the
missing manganese assays, as follows:
1. A data set was assembled that contained all the samples with assays for both cobalt and
manganese.
2. Preliminary statistics were done which indicated that manganese and cobalt were best correlated
on log-log plots, which implies a power curve in the form:
Y=AxB
3. Based on the log-log correlation and assumption that relative sampling errors are the same for
cobalt and manganese, an intermediate variable, MnCo, was created that was equal to the
square root of manganese times cobalt (i.e., the geometric mean of cobalt and manganese).
4. Average manganese and cobalt grades were computed for each of the cobalt-bearing lithologic
units, using small grade ranges of the MnCo variable with about the same number of samples in
each cell. A total of 64 outlier pairs were identified at this stage. The outliers removed from the
data before computation of the regression equations and 14,147 assay pairs were used for
regression analysis.
5. The average manganese and cobalt grades were plotted on log-log graphs. Since the averages
were computed using the geometric mean of the two assays, the resulting curves are equivalent
to doing a lognormal major-axis regression.
6. The resulting graphs were very linear, but appeared to have different slopes for low and high
grade values. Lithology was confirmed to be a significant variable, and power curves were
derived for low and high cobalt values as shown in Table 17-6.
7. The regression equations were tested against the original data, as shown in Table 17-7, and
were found to be globally unbiased. Estimation error varied between 15 and 36 percent RSD
(relative standard deviation) in the cobalt-bearing zones. Outside the cobalt-bearing zones, the
correlation between Co and Mn is less reliable, and the relative standard error is only 44 percent
RSD.

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-6
Geovic Mining Corp.
Regression Coefficients for Estimating Manganese from Cobalt
Low Low Low-High High High

Lithology Code Power Constant Crossover Power Constant
Upper Laterite 1 0.8830 5.3799 0.6579 1.0000 5.6500
Upper FB 2 0.8873 4.8428 0.1408 0.9898 5.9212
Hardpan FB 3 0.9536 5.6337 0.3753 1.1002 6.5042
Lower FB 4 0.8733 4.6533 0.3736 1.0606 5.5956
Ferralite 5 0.7040 3.2144 0.1873 1.0401 5.6438
Other >5 0.8491 4.4092 0.1965 1.0020 5.6552
TABLE 17-7
Geovic Mining Corp.
Results From Applying Regression Equations to the Test Data Set
Average Average Average StdDev
Lith Average Average Mn Regress log(e) log(e) R
Code Count Co Mn Regress Error (RegErr) (RegErr) squared
1 750 0.0332 0.2591 0.2584 -0.0007 0.0027 0.1496 0.9319
2 630 0.0698 0.4460 0.4460 0.0001 -0.0026 0.2758 0.9090
3 2,151 0.1238 0.7801 0.7886 0.0085 -0.0077 0.3528 0.9266
4 3,273 0.1459 0.8419 0.8457 0.0039 -0.0024 0.3084 0.9295
5 6,664 0.1593 0.9197 0.9207 0.0010 -0.0060 0.2756 0.8128
>5 679 0.0934 0.5985 0.5954 -0.0031 -0.0865 0.4171 0.8444
17.5 Topographic Model
Topographic data were provided by Geovic as two AutoCAD drawing files. The first of these files,
Plan_5000.dwg, contains topographic contours at 3-meter contour intervals in the area of pit/drill hole
sampling, is dated July 2006, uses the UTM Zone 33/WGS84 coordinate system, and has a scale of
1:5000. The second drawing, Mada_Bible_2006, covers a much larger area with a scale of 1:10000
and contains 10-meter contours. The date of the second drawing is April 2006.
Data from the two source files were combined so that the 3-meter contours were the primary source of
data and the 10-meter contours were used to extend elevation data to the model area plus 500 meters
outside the model area. (Note-The Mada Bible contour data are internally 2-dimensional contours and
elevations were assigned interactively in Datamine.)
A triangulated digital terrain model (DTM) was created from the combined elevation model for use in
resource estimation and mine planning.

80530 January 18, 2008
17.6 Compositing
Compositing was done using simple, length-weighted compositing to combine the original sample
intervals into even 1-meter lengths starting from the top of the pit/drill hole. Missing assays were treated
as unknown values and they were not included in the weighted average. At least 0.5 meters of assayed
length was required before a composite value was saved. Lithologic codes were assigned to composites
according based on the assay lithology that covered the majority of the composite interval.
Since over 85 percent of the samples were collected using regular 1-meter lengths starting from the top
of the pit/drill hole, the effect of compositing on the data is minimal.
17.7 Lithologic Surface Models
Digital terrain (DTM) models for depth to the formation contacts (Topo, Bottom of Upper Laterite, Top of
Lower Limonite, and Bottom of Lower Limonite) were created in the flat model system using the
formation depth data and the Datamine SURTRI process. In the flat coordinate system, the elevation of
the topographic surface is set to zero elevation. The elevations of the formation contacts are negative
values equal to minus-formation-depth.
These models were constrained by an outer limit string that limited extrapolation to 150 meters beyond
the area sampled by pits/drill holes. The Z-coordinates for the outer limit points were assigned manually
to provide extrapolated depths that were consistent with depths on the outer edge of pits and drill holes.
The formation depth DTM models were checked in Datamine using north-looking and west-looking cross-
section views to ensure that the estimated depths for shallow holes were consistent with holes that
penetrated the bottom of the Lower Limonite zone.
17.8 Top of Mineralization Model and Indexed Formation Depth Models
The indexed formation models were created such that the sample data could be viewed as though the
top of mineralization was a flat surface. This was accomplished by creating a DTM model in which the
elevation of the topographic surface was set equal to the depth of the top of cobalt mineralization. The
depth to each of the formation contacts was then subtracted from the depth to the top of mineralization
and used to create the indexed formation depth DTM models. A 150-meter extrapolation limit was also
used to limit extrapolation for these models.
The depth to the top of mineralization was checked in Datamine using north-looking and west-looking
cross-section views to check the DTM models and to adjust the depth to top of mineralization for
inconsistencies.
The cross-section plot in Figure 17-1 shows pits and drill holes plotted in untransformed coordinates, flat
model coordinates and coordinates indexed parallel to the top of mineralization. Cobalt grades are
shown as color-coded histogram and the interpreted lithology contacts are shown as lines where the
lithology contacts intersect with the cross section.

80530 January 18, 2008
The section with untransformed coordinates, at the top of Figure 17-1, demonstrates the difficulty of
visualizing the deposit without a vertical exaggeration. Even though the maximum topographic relief is
only about 200 meters, any significant vertical exaggeration rapidly becomes unwieldy, and correlations
between pits/drill holes are distorted. (Vertical exaggerations between 10x and 30x were used for
interpretation and review of the model in the Datamine design window.)
Because the deposit is only a thin skin just below the surface and the surface topography is relatively flat,
the deposit is more easily viewed as though the surface topography is flat, as shown in the middle
section of Figure 17-1. This plot also demonstrates the variability in the thickness of the various lithologic
units and that the deposit is composed of a variable-thickness barren zone consisting of the Upper
Laterite (Granular Zone) and most of the breccia.
The difficulty of modeling the formation contact boundaries is shown in the flat-coordinates cross section,
since many pits were terminated before reaching the bottom of the Lower Limonite. (For example, pits
NKM-572.0 to NKM-575.0 at approximately 370600E.) In those cases the contact at the bottom of the
Lower Limonite is estimated based on nearby pits that do intersect the contact.
It may also be observed that the contact between the barren overburden and the mineralized horizon is
generally very sharp and is sub-parallel to the top of the Lower Limonite zone. In addition, higher grade
mineralization tends to be associated with the upper parts of the mineralized zone, so resource modeling
was done in an indexed coordinate system in which the top of mineralization was defined as Z equal to
zero (0) elevation. The bottom cross-section shows the pits and drill holes plotted in the indexed
coordinate system.
17.9 Basic Statistics by Lithologic Unit
Note The tables in this section have been updated to include those data used for the current estimate.
The figures have not been updated, however, because the quantity of additional data is small relative to
the resolution of the Figures.
Basic statistics were performed on each lithologic unit to evaluate the correlation between cobalt, nickel,
and manganese as a function of lithology. These statistics show that cobalt grade is strongly correlated
with lithology with the lowest cobalt grade in the uppermost unit, the Upper Laterite (Unit 1), and highest
grade in the bottom unit, the ferralite zone (Unit 5). Tables 17-8 to 17-10 show statistics for cobalt,
nickel and manganese, respectively. Figure 17-2 shows that there is a very strong linear correlation
between manganese grade and cobalt grade. This is consistent with the strong association between
cobalt and the manganese mineral asbolane. Nickel shows a weak correlation with cobalt in the Upper
Laterite and breccia units, but nickel grade doubles in the ferralite zone and is much higher-grade than
would be expected if nickel were correlated with cobalt.

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-8
Geovic Mining Corp.
Basic Statistics for 1-m Composited Cobalt Grade
Unit Code Missing Number Minimum Maximum Average Standard Coefficient
Assays Assays Grade Grade Grade Deviation of Variation
1 401 3,623 0.0025 0.831 0.0262 0.0178 0.679
2 74 1,110 0.0025 2.093 0.0424 0.1077 2.540
3 71 2,493 0.0025 2.73 0.0774 0.1921 2.482
4 91 3,328 0.0025 2.45 0.1149 0.2042 1.777
5 113 6,779 0.001 2.26 0.1565 0.1558 0.996
8 1 34 0.002 1.56 0.1273 0.3042 2.390
10 1 48 0.0251 0.331 0.0778 0.0511 0.657
11 2 72 0.0251 0.774 0.1025 0.0994 0.970
12 0 2 0.0251 0.0251 0.0251
ALL 754 17,489 0.001 2.73 0.1026 0.1622 1.581
TABLE 17-9
Geovic Mining Corp.
Basic Statistics for 1-m Composited Nickel Grade
Unit Code Missing Number Minimum Maximum Average Standard Coefficient of
Assays Assays Grade Grade Grade Deviation Variation
1 401 3621 0.025 0.68 0.1578 0.0359 0.228
2 74 1110 0.02 1.161 0.1651 0.0885 0.536
3 71 2493 0.01 2.84 0.2062 0.1773 0.860
4 91 3324 0.01 1.65 0.2829 0.195 0.689
5 113 6774 0.01 2.44 0.6395 0.244 0.382
8 1 34 0.02 0.7 0.1741 0.1548 0.889
10 1 48 0.1511 1.48 0.4506 0.2396 0.532
11 2 72 0.1511 1.64 0.5917 0.2816 0.476
12 0 2 0.1511 0.1511 0.1511
ALL 754 17478 0.01 2.84 0.3783 0.2859 0.756
TABLE 17-10
Geovic Mining Corp.
Basic Statistics for 1-m Composited Manganese1 Grade
Unit Code Missing Number Minimum Maximum Average Standard Coefficient of
Assays Assays Grade Grade Grade Deviation Variation
1 403 3623 0.0271 4.572 0.215 0.1107 0.515
2 74 1110 0.03 12.761 0.2872 0.6396 2.227
3 71 2493 0.0186 25.66 0.4871 1.2364 2.538
4 95 3328 0.02 17.6 0.6791 1.1727 1.727
5 118 6779 0.01 16.6999 0.9103 0.8724 0.958
8 1 34 0.05 5.964 0.622 1.2444 2.001
10 1 48 0.18 1.83 0.446 0.2788 0.625
11 2 72 0.17 4.34 0.6258 0.57 0.911
12 0 2 0.193 0.193 0.193 -
ALL 765 17489 0.01 25.66 0.6193 0.9405 1.519
1
Includes manganese assays estimated from cobalt grade

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-2
Geovic Mining Corp.
Nickel and Manganese Correlation to Cobalt by Lithologic Unit.
1
Includes manganese assays estimated from cobalt grade
Lognormal cumulative frequency plots were prepared to further evaluate the metal distributions. The
lognormal cumulative frequency plot is a specialized plot in which the cumulative frequency above a
cutoff grade plots as a straight line if the distribution is lognormal. Cobalt, nickel and manganese grade
distributions are discussed in detail in Section 17.9.1.
17.9.1 Cobalt Grade Distributions
The lognormal probability plot for cobalt in the Upper Laterite Zone, shown in Figure 17-3, plots as a
straight line up to about 0.1 percent cobalt, which suggests that it is nearly a pure lognormal distribution.
The upward curve at the higher-grade end of this plot indicates 1 to 5 percent higher-grade outliers
compared to a simple lognormal curve that are caused by erratic higher-grade intersections in otherwise
weakly mineralized material.
The remaining curves have very complex shapes suggesting mixtures of several grade distributions. In
particular, the distribution for the Lower Limonite (ferralite) appears to contain a mixture of three
populations. The component grade distributions were explored for each zone by fitting a mixture of three
lognormal distributions to the distribution for each zone.

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-3
Geovic Mining Corp.
Cumulative Frequency Plots of Cobalt Grade (Raw Samples Excluding Trace Assays)
10
1
Cobalt Grade (%Co)
0.1
Legend
Upper Laterite
Upper Breccia
0.01 Ferricrete Breccia
Lower Breccia
LowerLimonite
0.001
0.9999
0.999
0.95
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.01
0.99
0.9
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.05
0.001
0.0001
Fraction Samples above Cutoff
This study indicated that each zone contained the same three distributions but with different
combinations of the component distributions. The three distributions include a low-grade population with
a median grade of 0.027 percent Co, a mid-grade distribution with a median grade of 0.125 percent Co,
and a high-grade distribution with a median grade of 0.41 percent Co. The overall distribution fit for the
breccia zones and ferralite zone is shown in Figure 17-4.
The cumulative frequency plots for nickel grade, shown in Figure 17-5 are still multimodal, but are very
different from cobalt. The Upper Laterite has the lowest grade of these distributions and is composed of
a low variability population with a few low-grade outliers. The nickel grade distributions in the breccia
zones are similar, but grade increases with depth. The lower breccia zone is slightly bimodal, possibly
because of the inclusion of a few samples from the higher-grade Lower Limonite (ferralite). The ferralite
has significantly higher-grade nickel content than the overlying zones and is composed of a relatively
high-grade, low variability population with a few low-grade outliers.
The manganese grade distributions, shown in Figure 17-6, are very similar to the cobalt distributions, but
are about 8 times higher grade.

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-4
Geovic Mining Corp.
Distributions Fitted for Cobalt Grade - Breccia Zones and Ferralite Zone
All Breccia Plus Lower Limonite

(Units 2-5) Cobalt
0.08
Legend
0.07 Actual
Model
0.06 Low Grade
Mineralized
High Grade
Frequency
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Cobalt Grade (%Co)
10
Cobalt Cutoff Grade (%Co)
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.9999
0.999
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.001
0.0001

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-5
Geovic Mining Corp.
Cumulative Frequency Plots of Nickel Grade (Raw Samples Excluding Trace Assays)
10
Nickel Grade (%Ni)
Legend
0.1 Upper Laterite
Upper Breccia
Ferricrete Breccia
Lower Breccia
Lower Limonite
0.01
0.9999
0.999
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.001
0.0001

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-6
Geovic Mining Corp.
Cumulative Frequency Plots of Manganese Grade (Raw Samples Excluding Trace Assays)
100
Legend
Upper Laterite
Upper Breccia
Manganese Grade (%Mn)
10 Ferricrete Breccia
Lower Breccia
Lower Limonite
0.1
0.01
0.999
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.9999
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.05
0.01
0.001
0.0001
17.10 Grade Zone Models
Based on the identification of three distinct populations of cobalt grade in the basic statistical analysis,
grade zoning was used to define the spatial distribution of each population. Grades zones were defined
in the TOMI model coordinate system as follows:
1. Nearest neighbor models were created for the metal that was being grade-zoned. The resulting
block grades were plotted on plan maps and color coded so that the grade zones were visually
distinctive.
2. Polygonal outlines were drawn on plans to define the boundaries of each zone. Since the grade
zones do not have distinct grade cutoffs, but instead have large grade ranges where a value could
be in either of two grade zones, grade zone boundaries were defined only where either lateral or
vertical continuity was present. These boundaries were used to assign grade-zone codes to blocks
and composites.

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-7
Geovic Mining Corp.
Grade Distributions by Grade Zone for Uncapped, Nearest-Neighbor Cobalt Grade
Cobalt Distributions by Grade Zone

Nearest-Neighbor Model - No Caps
0.3
0.29
0.28
0.06 Legend
Frequency
Low Grade
0.05 Mineralized
High Grade
0.04 Total
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Cobalt Grade (%Co)
10
Cobalt Cutoff Grade (%Co)
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.9999
0.999
0.99
0.95
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.001
0.0001
Grade distributions are shown in Figure 17-7 for the grade zones, using a nearest-neighbor model to
decluster the samples and to more accurately represent the area of the grade zones. The resulting

80530 January 18, 2008
distributions are generally similar to the theoretical distributions in Figure 17-4, although there are some
differences, as follows.
1. The low-grade distribution contains a large spike at 0.025 percent Co that is not present in Figure
17-4. This spike is related to the constant assay used for visually low-grade samples that were
not assayed (i.e., because the visual appearance of the samples indicated very low grade).
2. There are few samples above 0.10 percent Co in the low grade zone compared to the theoretical
population. These samples are erratic samples that were not included in the mineralized zone
because there was no horizontal or vertical continuity to other samples.
3. There are many samples below 0.10 percent Co and many high grade samples above 0.4 percent
Co in the mid grade (mineralized) zone compared to the theoretical population. Again these
samples are erratic samples with poor continuity.
4. The high-grade zone contains too many samples below 0.3 percent Co. This difference is caused
by the difficulty of defining the high-grade zone, which overlaps with the mid-grade zone over
more than 50 percent of its distribution.
Overall, the grade zones are believed to be sufficiently reliable for resource estimation, although the
overlapping nature and the difficulty of defining the grade zones strongly indicates that the grade zone
boundaries should not be treated as hard boundaries for grade estimation.
Grade zones were created for nickel and manganese using a similar method to that used for cobalt. The
only significant difference is that only two grade zones were used for nickel grade.
17.11 Variograms
Variograms were run on 1-meter composite assays using the log-transformed grades in the index model
to evaluate the continuity of cobalt, nickel, and manganese mineralization. The log-transformed
variograms were then converted to relative variograms using the standard covariance transformation
method. Directional variograms were computed parallel to the top of mineralization at azimuths of 0,
30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 to evaluate directional anisotropies. In addition, the average variogram
parallel to the top of mineralization and the vertical variogram were run to assess the average continuity
parallel and perpendicular to mineralization.
Note The variogram study and the plots can be found in Appendix A of the March 12, 2007 Technical
Report. These have not been updated since the prefeasibility study because the number of additional
samples does not affect the results for the feasibility update.
The variograms, which are shown graphically in Appendix A of the March 12, 2007 Technical Report,
have the following characteristics:

80530 January 18, 2008
17.11.1 Cobalt Low-Grade Zone Variograms
The directional variograms for low-grade cobalt indicate a slight directional trend at an azimuth of
approximately 45 degrees. The sill of the vertical variogram is 0.25, with a nugget effect of 0.035 and a
range of about 8 meters. The average horizontal variogram rises sharply from the nugget effect for
about 35 meters, then increases gradually for the next 275 meters, where it flattens out at about 80
percent of the population variance.
These variograms indicate a continuous long-range process combined with erratic short-range continuity
and a very strong vertical anisotropy.
17.11.2 Cobalt Mid-Grade Zone Variograms
The variograms for mid-grade cobalt are similar to those for the low-grade zone with a slight directional
trend at an azimuth of approximately 45 degrees. The sill of the vertical variogram is 0.20, with a nugget
effect of 0.05 and a range of 7.5 meters. The average horizontal variogram rises sharply from the
nugget effect within the first 35 meters, then increases gradually over the next 800 to 1,000 meters.
Again these variograms indicate a very continuous long-range process combined with erratic short-range
continuity and a very strong vertical anisotropy. In this case, however, the short-range component is
about 70 percent of the total variability and the long-range component is only about 14 percent of the
total variability.
A reasonable explanation for this variogram is that cobalt grade was initially very continuous over a range
of 800 to 1,000 meters. As the deposit weathered, the cobalt distribution became more erratic as cobalt
concentrated preferentially in the mineral absolane, and repeated collapse and brecciation in small
pockets created short-range discontinuities.
Although definition of the short-range variogram structure is extremely important for grade control and
assessment of dilution, it is impossible to define because there is not enough closely-spaced data (i.e.,
spacing between 2 and 15 meters).
17.11.3 Cobalt High-Grade Zone Variograms
Variograms in the cobalt high-grade zone are very similar to those in the mid-grade zone, although the
long range continuity is shorter with only about 250 meters of range. Short range continuity is once
again difficult to define. A possible hole effect component may be present, which is suggestive of small
pods of mineralization with sizes smaller than 25 meters.
17.11.4 Nickel Low-Grade Zone Variograms
Variograms in the nickel low-grade zone indicate very continuous mineralization with a nugget effect that
is only 3 percent of the total variability. A short-range component contributing 60 percent of the total

80530 January 18, 2008
variability is present with a range of 120 meters, followed by a long-range component with 37 percent of
the total variability and a range of 1,000 meters.
17.11.5 Nickel High-Grade Zone Variograms
Variograms in the nickel high-grade zone are similar to those in the cobalt high-grade variograms with a
predominate spike of very high variability for short distances, which disappears after about 75-meters
and turns into a long-range structure with a range of 1,000 meters. Further investigation is required to
define the source of the poor short-range continuity.
17.11.6 Manganese Variograms
Manganese variograms are very similar to cobalt variograms except for the manganese high-grade zone
variograms, which are completely chaotic and do not show any continuity.
17.12 Grade Estimation
Block grades were estimated for cobalt, nickel, and manganese using inverse-distance-power (IDP)
estimation with grade-zoning controls. The primary function of the grade zones was to control selection
of composites so that the selected composites were representative of the block that was estimated.
Since the grade zones were created using composite grade as the primary basis for drawing the zone
boundaries and there was considerable overlap among the grade-zone populations, the grade estimation
composite selection procedure must treat the grade-zone boundaries like fuzzy boundaries rather than
exact lines that divide the populations. This was accomplished as follows:
1. All composites from the low-grade zone plus the lower-grade composites from mid-grade zones were
used to estimate the low-grade zone. Only a few low-grade outliers from the high-grade zone were
used to estimate the low-grade zone except for nickel, which did not have a mid-grade zone.
2. The mid-grade zone was estimated using all mid-grade zone composites plus the higher-grade
composites from the low-grade zone and the lower-grade samples from the high-grade zone.
3. The high-grade zone was estimated using all high-grade zone composites plus the higher-grade
composites from the mid-grade zone. None of the composites from the low-grade zone were used to
estimate the high-grade zone except for nickel, which did not have a mid-grade zone.
In addition to the grade-range selection parameters for each grade zone, capping grades were
established for each grade zone based on the composite grade distributions. These parameters are
summarized in Tables 17-11 through 17-13.

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-11
Geovic Mining Corp.
Grade Range Parameters and Capping Grades for Cobalt
Composite Zone Grade Ranges (%Co)
Low-Grade Mid-Grade High-Grade Capping

Grade
Estimated Zone Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. (%Co)
Low-Grade 0.00 100 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.10
Mid-Grade 0.08 100 0.00 100 0.00 0.40 0.60
High-Grade 0.30 100 0.30 100 0.00 100 2.00
TABLE 17-12
Geovic Mining Corp.
Grade Range Parameters and Capping Grades for Nickel
Composite Zone Grade Ranges (%Ni)

Grade
Estimated Zone Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. (%Ni)
Low-Grade 0.00 100 NA NA 0.00 0.40 1.00
High-Grade 0.30 100 NA NA 0.00 100 2.00
TABLE 17-13
Geovic Mining Corp.
Grade Range Parameters and Capping Grades for Manganese
Composite Zone Grade Ranges (%Mn)

Grade
Estimated Zone Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. (%Mn)
Low-Grade 0.00 100 0.00 0.50 None None 0.70
Mid-Grade 0.50 100 0.00 100 0.00 1.25 2.50
High-Grade None None 1.00 100 0.00 100 12.0

80530 January 18, 2008
An elliptical search was used to select data for estimation with maximum ranges adjusted to provide
continuous selection of data. All sample selection was done using no more than one composite from any
individual pit/drill hole. At least one sample was required for estimation.
The IDP power and number of total points used for estimation were set for each zone to provide the
appropriate level of variance reduction, or smoothing, as estimated from the variogram. IDP weighting
anisotropies and direction were used depending on the variograms for the metal and grade zone that was
estimated. The final search and IDP parameters are listed in Table 17-14 and Table 17-15. The IDP
model summary statistics are compared to the nearest-neighbor model statistics as summarized in Table
17-16.
TABLE 17-14
Geovic Mining Corp.
Composite Selection Parameters
Search Ellipse
Azimuth Primary Secondary Vertical Max.

Zone Primary Radius Radius Radius Compos
Cobalt - Low Grade 45 500 400 2.5 9
Cobalt - Mid Grade 45 500 300 5.0 8
Cobalt - High Grade 45 500 300 2.5 8
Nickel - Low Grade 0 400 400 1.5 9
Nickel - High Grade 0 400 400 1.5 9
Manganese - Low Grade 0 400 400 1.5 9
Manganese - Mid Grade 0 400 400 1.5 9
Manganese - High Grade 0 400 400 1.5 9

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-15
Geovic Mining Corp.
Inverse Distance Weighting Parameters
IDP Weighting Anisotropies
Azimuth Primary Secondary Vertical Exponent

Zone Primary Radius, m Radius, m Radius Power
Cobalt - Low Grade 45 500 300 3.0 2.40
Cobalt - Mid Grade 45 250 125 10.0 3.50
Cobalt - High Grade 45 200 150 5.0 3.00
Nickel - Low Grade 0 200 200 15.0 2.50
Nickel - High Grade 0 200 200 10.0 3.00
nganese - Low Grade 0 200 200 15.0 1.70
Manganese - Mid Grade 0 200 200 10.0 2.45
Manganese - High Grade 0 200 200 10.0 2.15
TABLE 17-16
Geovic Mining Corp.
Inverse Distance Modeling Statistics and Smoothing Factors
Zone Number Average Relative Average Relative Bias Smoothing

Blocks IDP Variance NN Variance Ratio Factor
IDP NN
Cobalt - Low Grade 1,354,236 0.0238 0.190946967 0.0237 0.314924603 1.004 0.606
Cobalt - Mid Grade 790,114 0.1389 0.13218381 0.1371 0.20516737 1.013 0.644
Cobalt - High Grade 139,903 0.4137 0.341336129 0.4205 0.522655069 0.984 0.653
Nickel - Low Grade 1,381,473 0.1599 0.190552178 0.1591 0.316450445 1.005 0.602
Nickel - High Grade 892,871 0.6356 0.086744892 0.637 0.121130224 0.998 0.716
Manganese - Low Grade 1,437,750 0.2109 0.189053844 0.2102 0.335209048 1.003 0.564
Manganese - Mid Grade 687,926 0.852 0.074916573 0.849 0.131780117 1.004 0.568
Manganese - High Grade 147,469 2.343 0.363748504 2.405 0.636877 0.974 0.571
Typical plan maps showing the various grade models are included in Appendix A of the March 12, 2007
Technical Report.
17.13 Sample Grid-Spacing Model
Sample grid spacing was measured using the estimation variance from point kriging with a zero-nugget,
linear variogram that had a slope of 0.5. This particular linear variogram and point kriging is used
because it provides a simple, direct index to the drill hole spacing. With these parameters, the kriging
variance for a block that is estimated from a single, isolated drill hole is equal to the distance from the
drill hole to the block center. The kriging variance for a block in the center of a square grid of drill holes is
equal to approximately 28 percent of the size of the grid compared to 71 percent actual distance from
any hole to the center of the grid. The kriging variance for blocks outside of the drill grade is just slightly
less than the distance to the side of the square formed by the drill holes. Thus, a grid spacing of 100

80530 January 18, 2008
meters may be implemented by selecting blocks with a kriging variance of 28. In addition, extrapolation
will be limited to a conservative 28 meters outside the 100-meter grid.
An elliptical search ellipse with lateral radii of 300 meters and vertical radius of 2.0 meters was used to
define the sample grid spacing model. A maximum of 15 composites were used for this model with no
more than one composite from any pit/drill hole. All samples were used with no limits on grade zone.
The value kriged was a dummy value that was set to one (1.0) for all composites with a cobalt grade
greater than or equal to zero (0.00). Composites with undefined cobalt values were not used.
17.14 Resource Classification Model
Resource classification was done for each block based on the sample grid spacing model. Determination
of the appropriate grid size for each resource class was done based on the continuity of cobalt grade
above a cutoff grade of 0.10 percent cobalt. The sample grid spacing and extrapolation limits for each
resource category are as follows:
Measured resources - maximum 100 meter grid spacing or 28 meters extrapolation and at least 4
samples in the search ellipse.
Indicated resources - maximum 200 meter grid spacing or 56 meters extrapolation.
Inferred resource - grid spacing more than 200 meters within the laterate envelope or geologic
boundary, which generally was 400 meters or less, or extrapolation more than 56 meters.
The criteria for measured resources did not previously include the minimum four samples condition, thus
the current classification is slightly more conservative than the prefeasibility study.
17.14.1 Comparison of Inverse Distance and Nearest Neighbor Models
The effect of the grade caps, grade zones and composite selection parameters is evaluated by comparing
an NN model with the same caps and grade zones as the IDP model to a raw NN model that does not
have any caps or grade zones. These comparisons are done using only measured and indicated
resources to ensure that the conclusions are applicable to reserves as well as resources. The results of
the comparison are summarized in Table 17-17 for a range of cutoff grades.
At all cutoff grades, the grade-zoned, capped NN model has about 1 to 2 percent lower cobalt grade than
the raw NN model. This reduction in grade is primarily caused by the grade caps in the high-grade cobalt
zones. Tonnage in the capped NN model is 1 to 3 percent lower than tonnage in the raw NN model for
cutoffs up to 0.25 percent Co. Above 0.25 percent Co capped NN tonnage is about 4 percent lower than
raw NN. This indicates that the cobalt grade zones are slightly conservative compared to the raw NN
model, which project high grades one-half the distance between pits/drill holes.

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-17
Geovic Mining Corp.
Comparison of IDP Model and Nearest Neighbor Models (Measured and Indicated Resources)
Base Case IDP Nearest Neighbor Raw NN Ratio IDP to NN Ratio NN to Raw NN
Cutoff
%Co Tonnes Grade Tonnes Grade Tonnes Grade Cobalt Cobalt Cobalt Cobalt
(1000's) (%Co) (1000's) (%Co) (1000's) (%Co) Tonnes Grade Metal Tonnes Grade Metal
0.5 4,298 0.764 4,723 0.839 4,907 0.848 91.00% 91.00% 82.81% 96.26% 98.88% 95.18%
0.45 5,509 0.700 5,730 0.775 5,942 0.783 96.14% 90.35% 86.86% 96.43% 98.93% 95.39%
0.4 7,172 0.636 7,110 0.706 7,401 0.712 100.87% 89.98% 90.77% 96.07% 99.20% 95.30%
0.35 9,557 0.570 9,190 0.631 9,575 0.636 104.00% 90.31% 93.93% 95.97% 99.35% 95.35%
0.3 12,825 0.508 12,012 0.559 12,558 0.562 106.77% 90.75% 96.89% 95.65% 99.58% 95.25%
0.25 17,333 0.447 16,579 0.480 17,289 0.482 104.55% 93.04% 97.27% 95.89% 99.54% 95.45%
0.2 25,407 0.375 26,613 0.383 27,382 0.386 95.47% 98.04% 93.59% 97.19% 99.07% 96.28%
0.19 28,024 0.358 29,304 0.365 30,127 0.369 95.63% 98.06% 93.78% 97.27% 99.07% 96.37%
0.18 31,435 0.339 32,848 0.346 33,607 0.350 95.70% 98.14% 93.92% 97.74% 98.90% 96.67%
0.17 35,632 0.320 36,978 0.327 37,850 0.330 96.36% 97.94% 94.38% 97.70% 98.99% 96.71%
0.16 40,783 0.300 41,259 0.310 42,274 0.313 98.85% 96.92% 95.80% 97.60% 99.09% 96.71%
0.15 46,551 0.282 46,216 0.293 47,073 0.297 100.72% 96.27% 96.96% 98.18% 98.86% 97.06%
0.14 53,254 0.265 51,931 0.277 52,681 0.281 102.55% 95.69% 98.13% 98.58% 98.73% 97.32%
0.13 60,259 0.250 57,550 0.263 58,124 0.267 104.71% 94.99% 99.46% 99.01% 98.58% 97.60%
0.12 67,614 0.236 63,057 0.251 63,573 0.255 107.23% 94.14% 100.95% 99.19% 98.55% 97.75%
0.11 74,872 0.225 68,920 0.239 69,394 0.243 108.64% 93.79% 101.89% 99.32% 98.54% 97.87%
0.1 82,393 0.214 75,485 0.228 75,745 0.231 109.15% 93.82% 102.41% 99.66% 98.41% 98.07%
0.06 100,983 0.190 101,270 0.190 100,869 0.194 99.72% 99.83% 99.54% 100.40% 98.15% 98.54%
TOTAL 226,715 0.098 226,744 0.099 226,751 0.100 99.99% 99.87% 99.86% 100.00% 98.68% 98.68%

80530 January 18, 2008
The effect of IDP smoothing on the resource model is evaluated by comparing the IDP model to the
grade-zoned NN model, which has the same grade caps, grade zones, and composite selection
parameters as the IDP model. This comparison shows the typical smoothing effects that are expected for
an IDP model compared to an NN model. In general, tonnage is higher and grade is lower in the IDP
model than in the NN model, which reflects dilution and ore losses that are introduced by the smoothing
from the IDP estimation. Using a cutoff grade of 0.12 percent Co, the apparent dilution is equivalent to 7
percent dilution of tonnage at a grade of 0.033 percent Co.
17.15 Resource Summary
The mineral resource is summarized by resource category and lithologic unit in Table 17-18. The cutoff
grades in this table are different for each lithology and are approximate economic cutoffs based on the
different processing characteristics of each lithology. Resources are also shown graphically for other
cobalt cutoff grades in Figures 17-8 to 17-10.
TABLE 17-18
Geovic Mining Corp.
Summary of Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Resource
Resource Cutoff Tonnes Average Average Average

Lithology Category (%Co) (1000's) %Co %Ni %Mn
Upper Laterite Measured 0.12 42 0.301 0.318 1.569
Upper Breccia Measured 0.23 229 0.468 0.490 2.190
Ferricrete Breccia Measured 0.23 1,447 0.527 0.550 2.689
Lower Breccia Measured 0.23 2,905 0.448 0.545 2.228
Ferralite Measured 0.12 26,839 0.226 0.689 1.178
Total Measured 31,462 0.263 0.667 1.352
Upper Laterite Indicated 0.12 44 0.272 0.291 1.371
Upper Breccia Indicated 0.23 157 0.326 0.401 1.812
Ferricrete Breccia Indicated 0.23 604 0.461 0.474 2.242
Lower Breccia Indicated 0.23 1,588 0.426 0.480 2.059
Ferralite Indicated 0.12 27,475 0.207 0.673 1.087
Total Indicated 29,869 0.224 0.657 1.166
Total M+I 61,331 0.244 0.662 1.262
Upper Laterite Inferred 0.12 67 0.158 0.207 1.091
Upper Breccia Inferred 0.23 4 0.286 0.426 1.817
Ferricrete Breccia Inferred 0.23 10 0.459 0.497 2.486
Lower Breccia Inferred 0.23 215 0.393 0.445 1.423
Ferralite Inferred 0.12 17,117 0.177 0.556 1.057
Total Inferred 17,412 0.180 0.553 1.063

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-8
Geovic Mining Corp.
Resource Tonnage by Cobalt Cutoff Grade, Resource Class, and Lithology

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-9
Geovic Mining Corp.
Resource Cobalt Grade by Cobalt Cutoff Grade, Resource Class, and Lithology

80530 January 18, 2008
FIGURE 17-10
Geovic Mining Corp.
Resource Nickel Grade by Cobalt Cutoff Grade, Resource Class, and Lithology

80530 January 18, 2008
17.16 Estimation of Mining Dilution and Cutoff Grade
Because the resource model is based on 1-meter thick blocks and the deposit will be mined as seams, the
individual blocks must be combined into mineable seam thicknesses. The following assumptions were
used to combine the blocks into seams:
1. The top of ore will be identified during mining by a combination of preliminary grade-control
drilling, in-pit sampling, and visual definition by the grade-control geologist and will be well
defined.
2. Since the 1-meter pit/drill hole samples are randomly positioned relative to the top of mineral,
the original samples contain an average of 0.5-meters dilution. Thus, the top of mineralization
already contains sufficient mining dilution and no dilution was taken at the top of ore.
3. A minimum mining thickness of 2 meters was used for ore. Ore seams less than 2-meters thick
were expanded to meet the minimum thickness.
4. Included waste seams less than 2-meters thick were added to the ore seams as internal dilution.
5. Definition of ore and waste blocks is based on ferrilite-equivalent cobalt grade. The equivalent
grade is based one two equivalencies: First, nickel grade is converted to an equivalent cobalt
grade based on the prices and recoveries for cobalt and nickels. Different factors are used for
breccia and ferrilite because of the different PUG recoveries the two material types. Second, the
breccia equivalent cobalt grade is converted to the ferrilite-equivalent cobalt grade that has the
same value per ton processed as the original breccia grade. The equivalent grade formulae are:
Equivalent cobalt grade from nickel:
EqCO ( Ni ) = % Ni RevenueNi RevenueCo

% Ni = Nickel Grade
RevenueNi = Net Revenue from 1 mined tonne at 1% contained nickel
RevenueCo = Net Revenue from 1 mined tonne at 1% contained cobalt

80530 January 18, 2008
Equivalent ferrilite cobalt grade from breccia cobalt grade:
FeEqCo( BxCo) = BxCo * RevenueFactor + CostAdjustment

BxCo = Breccia cobalt grade to convert
RevenueCoBx
RevenueFactor =
RevenueCoFe
RevenueCoBx = Net Revenue for 1 mined tonne breccia at 1% contained cobalt
RevenueCoFe = Net Revenue for 1 mined tonne ferrilite at 1% contained cobalt
CostBx CostFe
CostAdjustment =
RevenuePlantCo
CostBx = Total cost (mine through leaching) per tonne of breccia leached
CostFl =Total cost (mine through leaching) per tonne of ferrilite leached
RevenuePlantCo = Net Revenue for 1 tonne ferrilite leach plant feed at 1% cobalt
The economic parameters for computing NetCobalt are summarized in Table 17-19.
6. Although the breakeven cutoff is calculated as 0.066 percent Co for ferrilite and 0.10 percent Co
for breccia, a cutoff of 0.175 percent ferrilite-equivalent cobalt was used for minable seam
definition. The higher cutoff was used to improve project cash flow.
The mineable seam boundaries were determined using the Datamine COMPSE process, which optimizes
the mining seams by maximizing ore, while at the same time minimizing dilution. The COMPSE process
was implemented by creating a pseudo-drill hole for each vertical stack of blocks in the model.
17.17 Scheduling Block Model
The seam block model was combined into 50x50-meter wide blocks to facilitate mine planning and
scheduling by accumulating all of the blocks for each seam in the seam model. The contents of each
scheduling block include:
a) Seam Number Seams are numbered from top to bottom in increments of 10. One is added to
the seam number for ore seams, thus 11, 21, 31, etc are ore seams and 10, 20, and 30 are
waste seams.
b) Block Coordinates X and Y are the centroid coordinates of the 50x50-meter block. Z is based on
the average elevation and thickness of the component seam blocks. Elevations are adjusted
based to prevent gaps and overlaps in the vertical stack of seams.
c) Block Size Always 50x50-meters horizontal dimension, average seam thickness vertically.

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-19
Geovic Mining Corp.
Economic Parameters for Calculation of the Net Value per Pound Cobalt
Value
Upper Hardpan Upper
Upper Ferricrete Ferricrete Ferricrete Lower
Parameter Laterite Breccia Breccia Breccia Limonite
Density t/m3 1.31 1.80 1.69 1.34 1.40
PUG tonnes recovery 17 45 45 45 17
PUG cobalt recovery 59 73 73 73 59
PUG nickel recovery 26 54 54 54 26
PUG manganese recovery 54 73 73 73 54
Cobalt Leach Recovery 67%
Nickel Leach Recovery 29%
Manganese Leach Recovery 65%
Cobalt Price $15.55 per lb sold
Nickel Price $3.75 per lb sold
Reclamation $0.15 per tonne mined
Ore Mining $1.30 per tonne ore mined
Waste Mining $1.00 per tonne waste mined
Ore Control $0.30 per tonne ore
Mine Technical $0.35 per tonne ore
PUG plant $1.50 per tonne of ore
Leach Plant $42.50 per tonne leached
General and Administrative $7.60 per tonne leached
Freight Cobalt $0.087 per pound cobalt sold
Freight Nickel $0.087 per pound nickel sold
Marketing 1.5% of sales price
d) Average density, average thickness, total tonnes, and total volume for the entire block
e) Average Grade including equivalent-ferrilite-cobalt, cobalt, nickel, and manganese.
f) Block Number identifying a vertical stack of seam blocks (equivalent to the Datamine IJK value).
g) Tonnes, Cobalt, Nickel, and Manganese for each combination of ore type (Breccia, Ferrilite) with
resource class (Measured, Indicated, Inferred).
h) Flag - An accumulator indicating the total number of 10x10-meter blocks were accumulated into
the scheduling block.
i) Pit A dummy value for XPAC software. Always set to one (1.0).

80530 January 18, 2008
17.18 Reserve Estimation
Mine design started with the completion of the resource model. The seam model was then diluted to
represent the thickness expected to be mined using reasonably selective equipment and methods. The
dilution is based on a minimum of one meter of ore so that less than one meter is considered waste and
if the interburden between ore layers is less than 2 meters, it is taken with the ore. There were many
areas where the interburden was 1 to 2 meters in thickness with some low grade values and it was
determined that it would be easier to mine this with the ore than try to segregate the waste, thereby
simplifying the mining method. The ore zones become much more uniform by allowing 2 meters of low
grade interburden to be mined as ore.
Economic evaluation criteria are based on supplying a fixed 2,000 tonnes ore per day of product from the
physical upgrade (PUG) plant to the process plant at an average of 1.87:1 Waste:Ore ratio. This yields
an average mine production rate of 23,000 tonnes per day with approximately 8,000 tonnes per day of
ore, and a maximum of 28,000 tonnes per day for equipment sizing and operating cost estimation.
After the estimated economic costs and recoveries were applied to the resource model, floating cones
were run in Whittle 4X to develop the final pit outline. The Whittle output was color coded to develop a
series of mining blocks. The blocks were then scheduled using Runges XPAC software to provide the
desired plant feed of 2,000 tonnes per day. Conditions were placed on the blocks to where the downhill
side had a flat slope to provide drainage, and all the blocks below the initial blocks were mined
sequentially.
17.18.1 Cobalt and Nickel Recoveries
Estimates of cobalt and nickel recovery were projected from the results of the physical upgrade test work
performed by Mountain States Research & Development and process test work performed by Hazen
Research. The final criteria for statement of ore reserves are:
Physical Upgrade (PUG) factors
Breccia ore upgrade factors
Cobalt = 1.72
Nickel = 1.17
Manganese = 1.71
PUG Concentrate = 41.7% of ore weight
Ferralite ore upgrade factors
Cobalt = 3.21
Nickel = 1.53
Manganese = 3.03

80530 January 18, 2008
PUG Concentrate = 19.2% of ore weight
Leach/SXEW Recoveries
Cobalt = 92%
Nickel = 52%
Manganese = 82%
Recoveries for the PUG plant can be calculated by multiplying the upgrade factor times the weight
percent of ore in the concentrate. For ferralite ore, the cobalt recovery is 19.2% * 3.21 = 61.6%. For
an average ore composition of 10 percent breccia and 90 percent ferralite, the concentrate would contain
21.5 percent of the run-of mine ore fed to the PUG plant. This concentrate is the feed to the process
plant from which 92 percent of the cobalt is recovered. Total recoverable metal value was assigned to
each block in the Whittle 4X evaluation.
17.18.2 Density and Specific Gravity
Specific gravity was assigned to the block model based on lithology. The block model and the mine
production schedule are in dry tonnes. Moisture and swell need to be added to calculate the correct
tonnages and volumes of material to be handled by the mining equipment. The following factors were
used for density:
Specific Gravity and Density
Waste overburden material, wet, in place = 1.86 tonnes/m3

Waste overburden material, dry, in place = 1.55 tonnes/ m3
Waste interburden material, wet, in place = 1.92 tonnes/ m3
Waste interburden material, dry, in place = 1.42 tonnes/ m3
Breccia ore material, wet, in place = 1.91 tonnes/ m3
Breccia ore material, dry, in place = 1.66 tonnes/ m3
Ferralite ore material, wet, in place = 1.89 tonnes/ m3
Ferralite ore material, dry, in place = 1.40 tonnes/ m3
Waste overburden material, wet, loose = 1.48 tonnes/ m3
Waste interburden material, wet, loose = 1.52 tonnes/ m3
Breccia ore material, wet, loose = 1.52 tonnes/ m3
Ferralite ore material, wet, loose = 1.50 tonnes/ m3
17.18.3 Pit Design
Mining will occur in five stages. The first stage will be excavating a nominal 4-meter bench of
overburden with a front-shovel. The second stage will be a similar depth cut of approximately 4 meters
to approach the top of the mineralized breccias, as defined by exploration and development drill holes
and test shafts. It too will be mined by the front-shovel. The third stage begins with rotary drilling of

80530 January 18, 2008
the remaining area, a nominal 8 meter depth. The drilling will be sampled on one meter intervals to
determine the location of ore and interburden. Waste remaining on top of the ore zone will be ripped
and dozed to minimize dilution. The remaining material will be mined in one or two passes (stages 4 and
5) with a backhoe excavator, segregating the ore and interburden. Ore thicknesses less than one meter
will be removed as interburden. Interburden thickness of less than 2 meters will be removed as ore.
Figure 17-11 shows the mine block outlines and the as-mined surface which averages 15 meters below
the original surface.
17.18.4 Mineral Reserve Statement
The Nkamouna mineral reserves presented in Table 17-20 are classified as a Proven plus Probable.
Individual reserves by block include ore tonnes, cobalt grade, nickel grade, manganese grade,
interburden and overburden tonnes. The mineral reserve is 54 million tonnes at a cobalt grade of 0.248
percent and a nickel grade of 0.688 percent.

80530 January 18, 2008
TABLE 17-20
Geovic Mining Corp.
Nkamouna Cobalt Project Feasibility Study
Proven & Probable Reserves by Block
Block ORE ORE ORE ORE INTRBRDN OVRBRDN TOTAL STRIP Proven Proven Proven Proven Probable Probable Probable Probable
Mine Tonnes Co Ni Mn Tonnes Tonnes Tonnes Waste:Ore Tonnes Co Ni Mn Tonnes Co Ni Mn
1 1,954,903 0.272 0.725 1.435 203,372 5,267,865 7,426,585 2.80 570,784 0.296 0.738 1.548 1,384,119 0.261 0.719 1.388
2 2,654,602 0.301 0.650 1.568 116,833 6,037,114 8,815,802 2.32 1,753,291 0.298 0.616 1.555 901,311 0.308 0.716 1.593
3 4,155,706 0.307 0.702 1.604 855,685 6,778,785 11,760,520 1.84 2,816,047 0.346 0.698 1.781 1,339,659 0.226 0.709 1.230
4 2,876,778 0.319 0.623 1.652 435,016 5,231,875 8,532,579 1.97 1,717,974 0.329 0.624 1.698 1,158,804 0.305 0.621 1.585
5 2,132,687 0.236 0.718 1.278 243,123 3,027,880 5,398,264 1.53 981,403 0.243 0.696 1.312 1,151,284 0.230 0.738 1.250
6 2,404,229 0.251 0.718 1.344 118,396 3,007,945 5,532,147 1.30 848,753 0.262 0.710 1.394 1,555,476 0.245 0.722 1.317
7 2,257,202 0.252 0.765 1.351 190,162 5,022,732 7,471,165 2.31 2,001,891 0.257 0.754 1.375 255,312 0.211 0.853 1.167
8 1,886,336 0.294 0.850 1.542 138,379 3,338,585 5,363,797 1.84 982,018 0.328 0.842 1.698 904,319 0.257 0.859 1.373
9 3,775,799 0.219 0.835 1.203 104,728 5,003,425 8,891,306 1.35 2,287,317 0.238 0.827 1.288 1,488,482 0.191 0.848 1.074
10 1,461,120 0.210 0.682 1.162 120,319 2,808,813 4,390,319 2.00 394,201 0.217 0.680 1.192 1,066,918 0.208 0.683 1.151
11 2,347,707 0.245 0.707 1.325 85,719 2,973,233 5,409,878 1.30 798,108 0.263 0.692 1.411 1,549,599 0.235 0.714 1.281
12 1,793,625 0.252 0.568 1.348 74,570 2,839,513 4,710,672 1.62 913,494 0.268 0.567 1.422 880,131 0.235 0.570 1.272
13 373,363 0.249 0.530 1.339 - 818,619 1,193,836 2.19 176,073 0.260 0.544 1.392 197,291 0.239 0.518 1.292
14 1,502,348 0.231 0.651 1.254 102,264 2,369,230 3,974,159 1.65 381,336 0.252 0.662 1.351 1,121,012 0.224 0.648 1.222
15 2,373,663 0.227 0.690 1.241 83,167 2,444,659 4,903,947 1.06 1,293,978 0.244 0.666 1.318 1,079,684 0.207 0.719 1.150
16 2,062,819 0.226 0.564 1.233 60,659 2,435,199 4,561,985 1.21 845,147 0.224 0.583 1.223 1,217,672 0.227 0.551 1.239
17 1,483,448 0.255 0.708 1.370 111,433 1,827,730 3,421,464 1.31 527,419 0.273 0.710 1.455 956,029 0.246 0.707 1.323
18 1,358,205 0.245 0.596 1.320 86,897 2,193,854 3,639,634 1.68 423,561 0.251 0.582 1.349 934,644 0.242 0.602 1.308
19 906,293 0.257 0.603 1.369 159,741 1,693,459 2,754,853 2.04 132,126 0.253 0.631 1.353 774,167 0.257 0.598 1.372
20 1,208,560 0.231 0.726 1.257 142,499 2,484,534 3,833,610 2.17 1,104,794 0.238 0.721 1.289 103,766 0.157 0.783 0.924
21 983,303 0.216 0.700 1.190 119,074 2,729,471 3,831,307 2.90 815,399 0.219 0.711 1.201 167,904 0.203 0.648 1.132
22 1,758,920 0.248 0.667 1.328 10,772 3,953,706 5,731,719 2.25 1,271,721 0.260 0.667 1.383 487,199 0.215 0.666 1.183
23 3,165,735 0.212 0.755 1.170 220,776 5,762,936 9,151,179 1.89 2,552,008 0.221 0.739 1.210 613,727 0.175 0.824 1.006
24 1,925,068 0.193 0.715 1.085 333,283 4,850,794 7,101,812 2.69 468,070 0.206 0.703 1.141 1,456,997 0.189 0.719 1.067
25 3,099,797 0.216 0.602 1.189 41,151 3,995,646 7,144,855 1.30 1,169,253 0.227 0.603 1.241 1,930,544 0.209 0.601 1.158
26 657,373 0.188 0.549 1.061 1,332 2,413,456 3,077,056 3.67 199,892 0.191 0.548 1.075 457,481 0.187 0.549 1.055
27 1,484,816 0.232 0.615 1.262 167,189 4,564,551 6,217,195 3.19 1,325,275 0.238 0.614 1.290 159,541 0.182 0.617 1.029
28 697,219 0.224 0.438 1.218 - 2,355,524 3,057,654 3.38 116,276 0.222 0.477 1.214 580,943 0.224 0.430 1.219
TOTAL 54,741,624 0.248 0.688 1.331 4,326,540 98,231,134 157,299,298 1.87 28,867,610 0.264 0.690 1.406 25,874,014 0.230 0.683 1.250

80530 January 18, 2008

17.0 Mineral Resource 43-101 PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

17.0 Mineral Resource 43-101 PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

17.

17.1 Resource Model

The general procedure used for resource estimation was as follows:

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.1

17.2 Modeling Coordinate System

17.3 Block-Model Location and Size Parameters

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.2

Easting (Columns) 470 10 368,500 373,200 4,700

17.4 Pit and Drill-Hole Data

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.3

Total 1,272 18,235.5 1,277 18,940.31

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.4

17.4.2 Lithologic Data

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.5

17.4.3 Assay Data

17.4.4 Conversion of Collar, Lithology, and Assay Data for Resource

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.6

-5 Missing Missing Missing Interval pending

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.7

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.8

Low Low Low-High High High

17.5 Topographic Model

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.9

17.7 Lithologic Surface Models

17.8 Top of Mineralization Model and Indexed Formation Depth Models

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.10

17.9 Basic Statistics by Lithologic Unit

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.11

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.13

17.9.1 Cobalt Grade Distributions

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.14

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.15

All Breccia Plus Lower Limonite

Cobalt Grade (%Co)

Fraction Samples above Cutoff

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.16

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.17

17.10 Grade Zone Models

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.18

Cobalt Distributions by Grade Zone

Cobalt Grade (%Co)

Fraction Samples above Cutoff

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.19

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.20

17.11.2 Cobalt Mid-Grade Zone Variograms

17.11.3 Cobalt High-Grade Zone Variograms

17.11.4 Nickel Low-Grade Zone Variograms

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.21

17.11.5 Nickel High-Grade Zone Variograms

17.11.6 Manganese Variograms

17.12 Grade Estimation

Pincock, Allen & Holt 17.22

Composite Zone Grade Ranges (%Co)

Low-Grade Mid-Grade High-Grade Capping

Low-Grade 0.00 100 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.10

Mid-Grade 0.08 100 0.00 100 0.00 0.40 0.60

High-Grade 0.30 100 0.30 100 0.00 100 2.00

Composite Zone Grade Ranges (%Ni)

Low-Grade Mid-Grade High-Grade Capping

Low-Grade 0.00 100 NA NA 0.00 0.40 1.00

High-Grade 0.30 100 NA NA 0.00 100 2.00

Composite Zone Grade Ranges (%Mn)

Low-Grade Mid-Grade High-Grade Capping