33 Figure 4 –Stages 1 & 2 of the decision-making framework for the IPM assessment Stage 1: Deposit and stakeholder decision criteria characterisation focused on assessing the fundamental geological and geometallurgical attributes of the ore body alongside the environmental, social, governance and regulatory (ESGR) feasibility of the deposit. Stage 2: Financial modelling for the desktop study involved conducting a preliminary economic screening using techno-financial models to evaluate the potential viability of the mining options. Stage 3 of the process involved the construction of a cost model in Excel. This model defined both OPEX and CAPEX across all applicable mining methods and processing streams, incorporating key variables such as recovery, dilution, mass rejection and adjustment factors for depth and processing complexity. It also introduced parameters for partial utilisation and opportunity cost, capturing underperformance risk. By applying cost adjustment factors the model dynamically calibrated costs across mining depths and scenarios, enabling more realistic financial forecasting for IPM deployments. This stage included four key components 1. Stope modelling - develop a block model and define stopes based on the minimum cutoff grade, with multiple stope scenarios and pillar configurations tested. Stopes were oriented, designed and optimised by level to generate mineable units that reflected the geometry and grade distribution of the orebody. These stopes were then concatenated into a stope model that formed the basis for subsequent scheduling and economic assessment. This component provided the physical mining units used to evaluate conventional mining and IPM alternatives. 2. Operational constraints definition - define sequencing and stoping constraints and infrastructure requirements. This component consisted of setting the technical input parameters required for scheduling the CM and ILR pathways. 3. Business value driver creation - estimate CAPEX and OPEX, set the upper and lower boundaries for technical parameters. These inputs included mining, processing and development assumptions, as well as recovery, dilution, mass rejection and other technical performance factors relevant to each alternative. Once defined, these parameters were used to generate preliminary schedules for the CM and ILR streams.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2