Doubleview Gold Corp. Announces Positive Preliminary Economic Assessment for the Hat Project; Robust Base-Case Economics with Strategic Scandium Upside NPV:
NPV:
- After-tax NPV(5%) of C$6.73 billion and IRR of 23% at Consensus Metal
Prices
- After-tax NPV(5%) of C$13.53 billion and IRR of 39% at Spot Metal Prices.
NPV Including scandium and the associated processing circuit:
- After-tax NPV(5%) of C$6.94 billion an IRR of 19% at Consensus Metal
Prices
- After-tax NPV(5%) of C$14.52 billion and IRR of 32% at Spot Metal Prices.
Vancouver, British Columbia, March 02, 2026—Doubleview Gold Corp (TSX-V: DBG / OTCQB: DBLVF / GERMANY: 1D4) ("Doubleview" or the “Company”) is pleased to announce the results of its Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) of its 100%-owned polymetallic Hat porphyry project (“Hat” or “the Project”), in northwestern British Columbia. With major content of copper, gold, cobalt, silver, and scandium, Hat becomes an important source of critical minerals.
Three processing scenarios were evaluated—Scenario A1 (A1) a Cu–Au-Ag-Co flotation base case using current testwork recoveries1, Scenario A2 (A2), the same base case using expected recoveries1, and Scenario B (B), a Cu–Au-Ag-Co flowsheet with an added hydrometallurgical circuit and scandium recovery circuit—with results indicating the Project is financially attractive even without the scandium component.
Highlights:
- Robust Project Economics: The PEA demonstrates a high-margin operation with an After- Tax NPV(5%) of C$4.96 billion (A1), C$6.73 billion (A2), or C$6.94 billion (B), and an IRR of 19% (A1), 23% (A2), or 19% (B) at analyst consensus metal prices2. Using a spot-price scenario3, the Project delivers a compelling after-tax NPV(5%) of C$11.05 billion (A1), 13.53 billion (A2), or C$14.52 billion (B) and an IRR of 34% (A1), 39% (A2), or 32% (B).
- Sensitivity Highlight: Project economics show the greatest leverage to overall metal prices, with NPV (5%) ranging from C$3.2 billion to C$10.2 billion (IRR: 14%–32%) at ±20% on all metals; even under additional +20% CAPEX and +20% OPEX sensitivities, applied on top of a 25% contingency already embedded in the base case, all scenarios deliver IRRs of 16% or
better, and Scenario B provides additional scandium oxide upside with NPV(5%) of C$6.2 billion–C$7.7 billion (IRR: 18%–20%) at ±40% metal price.
- Tier 1 Scale and Longevity: The mine plan supports a multi-decade life of 25 years at a 120,000 tonnes-per-day processing rate, underpinned by a resource base of 609 Mt at 0.43% CuEq4 in the Measured and Indicated categories and 503 Mt at 0.41% CuEq4 in the Inferred category.
- High-Output Production Profile B: Envisioned as a conventional large-scale open-pit operation, the Project is expected to produce an average of over 74 kt of copper, 254 koz of gold, 376 koz of silver and 2.7 kt of cobalt annually during the first 10 years, with life-ofmine (LOM) average production of 67.6 kt Cu, 217 koz Au, 348 koz Ag, 2.5 kt Co, and 128 tonnes of scandium oxide per year. (NOTE: projected cobalt to be about 68% of North America’s cobalt production based on 2024 production)
- Strategic Importance for Critical Minerals: The Project is positioned as a primary North American source of copper, scandium, and cobalt. With approximately 2.42 billion pounds of copper, 80 million pounds of cobalt and 2,415 tonnes of scandium oxide contained5 in the Measured and Indicated categories, the Project represents an important discovery of critical minerals.
- Stable, Supportive Jurisdiction: Located in a premier mining district in British Columbia, the Project benefits from a stable regulatory environment. The Company is committed to engaging with local First Nations in a respectful manner and to working toward positive and constructive relationships as the Project advances.
- Catalyst for Development: The PEA serves as the technical foundation for an immediate transition into a Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS), providing a clear roadmap for early works and permitting activities in 2026 and 2027.
Farshad Shirvani, President and CEO of Doubleview Gold Corp., commented, “The results of this PEA confirm the scale, strength and long-term potential of the Hat Project. Delivering a post-tax NPV(5%) of up to C$6.94 billion and IRR of up to 23% at consensus prices, and even stronger metrics at spot prices, validates years of disciplined exploration and technical work by our team. Hat is demonstrating Tier 1 characteristics with a 25-year mine life, strong annual production profile and meaningful free cash flow generation. Importantly, the Project stands on its own without reliance on scandium, while still preserving significant upside from critical minerals as markets mature. We are excited to advance Hat to Pre-Feasibility and continue building a major Canadian critical metals project.”
Doubleview acknowledges that the Project is located on the traditional territories of the Tahltan Nation and the Taku River Tlingit First Nation, and recognizes their enduring relationship to and stewardship of the land and waters. Doubleview is committed to respectful, transparent, and ongoing engagement with First Nations and local communities whose territories overlap the Project area and access routes, with a focus on protecting water and the environment and advancing responsible development.
PEA OVERVIEW
The PEA contemplates a conventional open-pit mine and processing operation with a 25-year mine life at a 120,000 t/d (42 Mt/a) plant throughput. Two processing pathways were evaluated, A1 and its alternative, A2, and B: the first alternative, A, is a Cu–Au–Ag–Co flotation concentrator with two recovery cases based on current metallurgical testwork, and A2, reflecting expected performance (Figure 1); and B, a full circuit that retains the base flowsheet and adds a downstream hydrometallurgical scandium recovery circuit (Figure 2).
The tailings storage facility is a centreline-raised facility built with compacted cycloned sand from tailings underflow, and engineered drainage for stability, with site-contact waters (including seepage and pit dewatering) recycled to the process plant and final closure involving pond drainage and reclamation. The Project is expected to rely on grid power via an extended transmission line.
Tables 1 to 3 summarize the key results of the PEA, including production, operating costs, capital expenditures, and the principal financial metrics; the sections that follow provide additional detail on the underlying assumptions, project design, and study outcomes.
Table 1: PEA Study Summary—Production
| Metric | Unit | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mining Summary | ||||
| Strip ratio | t:t | 1.60 | ||
| Production Summary LOM | ||||
| Average Annual Throughput | Mt | 42 | ||
| CuEq Head Grade6, 7 | % | 0.42 | ||
| Cu Head Grade | % | 0.19 | ||
| Au Head Grade | g/t | 0.19 | ||
| Ag Head Grade | g/t | 0.51 | ||
| Co Head Grade | g/t | 0.78 | ||
| Sc Head Grade6 | g/t | 28.35 | ||
| Cu Recovery | % | 80 | 89 | 858 |
| Au Recovery | % | 66 | 75 | 898 |
| Ag Recovery | % | 53 | 53 | 688 |
| Co Recovery | % | 30 | 30 | 788 |
| Sc Recovery | % | N/A | 728 | |
| Overall Mass of Tailings to Process9 | % | N/A | 12.5 | |
| Year of Production Start of Sc O 8 2 3 | year | N/A | 4 | |
| Average Annual Cu Production | kt | 63.6 | 70.8 | 67.6 |
| Total Cu Production | kt | 1,590.5 | 1,769.4 | 1,689.9 |
| Average Annual Payable Cu | kt | 61.7 | 68.7 | 65.7 |
| Total Payable Cu | kt | 1,542.8 | 1,716.3 | 1,642.2 |
| Average Annual Au Production | koz | 161.1 | 183.1 | 217.3 |
| Total Au Production | koz | 4,028.2 | 4,577.5 | 5,432.0 |
| Metric | Unit | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average Annual Payable Au | koz | 153.1 | 173.9 | 207.5 |
| Total Payable Au | koz | 3,826.8 | 4,348.7 | 5,188.6 |
| Average Annual Ag Production | koz | 271.3 | 271.3 | 348.0 |
| Total Ag Production | koz | 6781.6 | 6,781.6 | 8,700.9 |
| Average Annual Payable Ag | koz | 244.1 | 244.1 | 318.6 |
| Total Payable Ag | koz | 6,103.4 | 6,103.4 | 7,965.3 |
| Average Annual Co Production | kt | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.5 |
| Total Co Production | kt | 23.9 | 23.9 | 62.2 |
| Average Annual Payable Co | kt | 0.8 | 0.8 | 2.3 |
| Total Payable Co | kt | 19.1 | 19.1 | 56.3 |
| Average Annual Sc O Production 2 3 | t | N/A | 128.4 | |
| Total Sc O Production 2 3 | t | N/A | 3,209.5 | |
| Total Sc O Payable 2 3 | t | N/A | 3,049.0 |
Table 2: PEA Study Summary—Operating Cost
| Metric | Unit | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cost | ||||
| Average Mine Operating Costs | C$/t-moved | 2.32 | ||
| Average Mine Operating Costs | C$/t-milled | 6.03 | ||
| Processing Operating Cost10 | C$/t-milled | 7.93 | 7.93 | 10.84 |
| Sc O Processing Cost11 2 3 | C$/kg Sc O 2 3 | N/A | 939.55 | |
| General & Administrative | C$/t-milled | 2.56 | 2.56 | 2.56 |
| Total Operating Costs | C$/t-milled | 16.22 | 16.22 | 22.96 |
Table 3: PEA Study Summary—Capital Expenditure and Financial Metrics
| Metric | Unit | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capital Expenditure | ||||
| Initial Capital Costs | C$M | 3,552 | 3,601 | 3,828 |
| Sustaining Capital Costs | C$M | 2,755 | 2,755 | 4,006 |
| Closure and Reclamation Cost | C$M | 503 | ||
| Financial Metrics | ||||
| Exchange Rate | CAD/USD | 1.37 | ||
| Long Term Copper Price | US$/lb | 4.88 | ||
| Long Term Gold Price | US$/oz | 3,272.60 | ||
| Long Term Silver Price | US$/oz | 50.22 | ||
| Long Term Cobalt Price | US$/lb | 19.57 | ||
| Long Term Scandium Oxide Price | US$/kg | N/A | 1,500 | |
| Average Annual EBITDA | C$M | 886 | 1,071 | 1,242 |
| Total EBITDA | C$M | 22,162 | 26,770 | 31,041 |
| Metric | Unit | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average Annual Free Cash Flow (Pre- tax) | C$M | 756 | 940 | 1,061 |
| Free Cash Flow (Pre-tax)12 | C$M | 18,904 | 23,511 | 26,532 |
| Total Provincial Tax (inc. BC Mineral Tax) | C$M | (4,029) | (5,090) | (5,772) |
| Total Federal Tax | C$M | (1,274) | (1,859) | (2,170) |
| Total Taxes | C$M | (5,303) | (6,949) | (7,942) |
| Average Annual Free Cash Flow (Post- tax) | C$M | 544 | 662 | 744 |
| Free Cash Flow (Post-tax)12 | C$M | 13,601 | 16,562 | 18,591 |
| Total Free Cash Flow (Pre-tax)13 | C$M | 15,352 | 19,910 | 22,704 |
| Total Free Cash Flow (Post-tax)12 | C$M | 10,050 | 12,961 | 14,763 |
| NPV 5% (Pre-tax) | C$M | 7,883 | 10,576 | 11,043 |
| NPV 5% (Pre-tax) | US$M | 5,754 | 7,720 | 8,061 |
| IRR (Pre-tax) | % | 24 | 29 | 23 |
| Payback (Pre-tax) | years | Year 5 | Year 4 | Year 6 |
| NPV 5% (Post-tax) | C$M | 4,963 | 6,727 | 6,937 |
| NPV 5% (Post-tax) | US$M | 3,623 | 4,911 | 5,064 |
| IRR (Post-tax) | % | 19 | 23 | 19 |
| Payback (Post-tax) | Years | Year 6 | Year 5 | Year 7 |
Table 4 shows the Sensitivity analysis using after-tax NPV(5%) and after-tax IRR.
Table 4: Sensitivity Analysis
| Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | NPV (5%) | IRR | NPV (5%) | IRR | NPV (5%) | IRR | ||
| Variable | (%) | Metal Price | C$M | (%) | C$M | (%) | C$M | (%) |
| Base Case | Consensus forecast | 4,963 | 19 | 6,727 | 23 | 6,937 | 19 | |
| Copper Price | -20 | US$3.90/lb Cu | 3,218 | 15 | 4,807 | 19 | 5,094 | 15 |
| Copper Price | +20 | US$5.86/lb Cu | 6,688 | 23 | 8,632 | 28 | 8,764 | 22 |
| Gold Price | -20 | US$2,618.08/oz | 3,625 | 16 | 5,223 | 19 | 5,201 | 16 |
| Gold Price | +20 | US$3,927.12/oz | 6,289 | 22 | 8,222 | 27 | 8,661 | 22 |
| Metal Prices | -20 | All metal prices | 1,708 | 10 | 3,165 | 14 | 2,650 | 11 |
| Metal Prices | +20 | All metal prices | 8,118 | 27 | 10,233 | 32 | 11,110 | 26 |
| Initial CAPEX | +20 | Variable per Scenario | 4,448 | 16 | 6,222 | 19 | 6,394 | 16 |
| OPEX | +20 | Variable per Scenario | 3,660 | 16 | 5,438 | 20 | 5,185 | 16 |
| Scandium Oxide Price | -40 | US$900/kg Sc O 2 3 | 6,159 | 18 | ||||
| Scandium Oxide Price | +40 | US$2,100/kg Sc O 2 3 | 7,714 | 20 |
MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE
Doubleview Gold Corp announced an update of the Mineral Resource estimate (MRE). This estimate followed the Micon International Ltd. (Micon) Mineral Resource estimate with an effective date of July 17, 2024. This MRE incorporates significant new data from the 2024 and 2025 exploration campaigns, with an effective date of February 4, 2026, and superseded the 2024 Micon estimate.
Table 5: Hat MRE at a 0.2% CuEq Cut‑Off Effective February 4, 2026
| Average Grade | Metal Content | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mineral | |||||||||||
| Resource | Tonnage | CuEq | Cu | Au | Co | Ag | CuEq | Cu | Au | Co | Ag |
| Classification | (Mt) | (%) | (%) | (g/t) | (g/t) | (g/t) | (Blb) | (Blb) | (Moz) | (Mlb) | (Moz) |
| Measured | 272 | 0.44 | 0.22 | 0.18 | 76.26 | 0.37 | 2.61 | 1.11 | 1.41 | 35.6 | 2.17 |
| Indicated | 337 | 0.43 | 0.21 | 0.19 | 76.81 | 0.39 | 3.21 | 1.31 | 1.81 | 44.5 | 2.88 |
| Total M+I | 609 | 0.43 | 0.21 | 0.18 | 76.57 | 0.38 | 5.82 | 2.42 | 3.22 | 80.1 | 5.05 |
| Inferred | 503 | 0.41 | 0.18 | 0.19 | 76.62 | 0.38 | 4.57 | 1.72 | 2.77 | 66.2 | 4.19 |
Table 6: Hat MRE at a 0.2% CuEq Cut-Off as of February 4, 2026, Scandium Oxide Resources
| Mineral Resource | Tonnage | Sc Tonnage1 | Average Grade | Metal Content |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Classification | (Mt) | (Mt) | Sc (g/t) | ScO 2 (t) 2 3 |
| Measured | 272 | 34 | 28.79 | 1,081 |
| Indicated | 337 | 42 | 28.76 | 1,334 |
| Total M+I | 609 | 76 | 28.77 | 2,415 |
| Inferred | 503 | 63 | 28.69 | 1,996 |
Notes:
1 Scandium tonnages represent 12.5% of the mineralized material by category, reflecting the proportion of tailings expected to be processed through a dedicated scandium leach circuit under current metallurgical design constraints. 2 Scandium oxide metal content have been calculated using the metallurgical recovery of 72% and conversion factor from Sc to Sc2O3 of 1.534.
- Mineit’s Qualified Person, Tomasz Wawruch, FAusIMM, completed the MRE, and has reviewed and approved the technical disclosure related to the MRE contained in this news release. Mr. Wawruch is a senior geology and mineral resource consultant independent of Doubleview. Mr. Gilles Arseneau, PhD., P.Geo., of ARSENEAU Consulting Services Inc., provided an independent review of this MRE.
- Mineral Resources that 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, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.
- Inferred Mineral Resources are considered too speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves.
- The Mineral Resource Estimate was prepared in accordance with the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (2014), and CIM MRMR Best Practice Guidelines (2019).
- The effective date of the MRE is February 4, 2026.
- Metal contents have been calculated using the following metallurgical recovery factors: Cu = 85%, Au = 89%, Co = 78%, and Ag = 68%.
- Economic assumptions used include US4.80/lb Cu, US20.00/lb Co, US3,200/oz Au, US46/oz Ag, and a 2% NSR royalty.
- Mineral Resources are reported within optimized open pit constraints and 0.2% CuEq cut-off grade, based on a C7.93/t milled processing cost and C2.90/t milled general and administrative cost, with a mining cost of C3.01/t plus incremental mining cost increasing by C0.015/t for every bench below the reference level of 1,125 mRL.
- CuEq calculations do not include scandium. The formula used to calculate CuEq is:
CuEq = [(((Ag × 46.0 × 0.68)/31.1035) + ((Au × 3200 × 0.89)/31.1035) + 0.0001 × (Co × 20.0 × 0.78 × 22.0462) + 0.0 001 × (Cu × 4.8 × 22.0462 × 0.85))/(4.8 × 22.0462 × 0.85)], where all input variables are expressed in (ppm) and CuEq is expressed in percent (%).
- Rounding may result in minor variations between individual values and totals; such differences are not considered material to the MRE.
- Mineral Resource classification reflects the level of geological confidence and satisfies the uncertainty criteria appropriate for exploration and resource development. Additional drilling will be required to reduce uncertainty to the level expected for production planning.
- The MRE reflects the geological interpretation, drill-hole spacing, and estimation parameters available at the time of modelling. Any additional drilling is expected to influence the current outcome by improving confidence in the estimates and refining the geometry of the mineralized domains.
- The Mineral Resource results are presented in situ within the optimized pit. Mineralized material outside the pit has not been considered as a part of the current MRE tabulation. Calculations used metric units (metres, tonnes, g/t).
- A total of 97 diamond drill holes, comprising 49,548 m of core, were incorporated into the Mineral Resource Estimate. All drilling data used in the MRE were subject to standard QA/QC validation prior to inclusion.
PROCESSING SCENARIOS
The PEA evaluates two processing scenarios: (A) a conventional Cu–Au–Ag–Co flotation concentrator at 120,000 t/d (42 Mt/a) with two recovery cases—A1 based on metallurgical testwork completed by Sepro Laboratories (Langley, BC) and A2 reflecting target/expected performance— and (B) a full circuit that retains the base flowsheet and adds a downstream hydrometallurgical scandium recovery circuit.
The concentrator consists of crushing, grinding, flotation, concentrate handling, and tailings management, producing both a saleable approximately 25% Cu concentrate with co-product gold and by-product silver-cobalt credits and a pyrite concentrate enriched in cobalt; in the full-circuit case, the pyrite concentrate is roasted to generate sulphuric acid and a calcine that is then processed to recover cobalt, gold, silver, and copper; after stripping it will be precipitated as a sulphide to be admixed to the copper concentrate to improve grade, with the acid used to leach flotation tailings for scandium recovery, noting that the scandium circuit is a newer chemical process compared with the otherwise industry-standard flowsheet.
Under A1 or A2 (Figure 1), the flowsheet produces a single saleable product—a copper concentrate with payable gold credits; the pyrite concentrate is not treated or marketed in this case and is only processed in B where the hydrometallurgical circuit enables recovery of cobalt (and additional Au– Ag) and supports the scandium circuit (Figure 2), which is planned to be constructed in a phased approach commencing in Year 3 of operations.
Scenario B only
Figure 1: Grinding and Flotation Flowsheet; Scenarios A1/A2 Report Copper Concentrate Only, while the Cobalt–Pyrite Flotation Stream Shown Is Included Only in Scenario B
Figure 2: Scenario B Hydrometallurgical Plant Block Flow Diagram, Showing Downstream Treatment of the Cobalt–Pyrite Stream and Flotation of Tailings to Recover Cobalt (and Au–Ag) and Scandium, Including Sulphuric Acid Generation to Support the Scandium Circuit
Table 7 summarizes the head grades, concentrate grades, and overall metallurgical recoveries from early testwork for the full circuit; A1 assumes only the reported recoveries to the Cu–Au concentrate, while the cobalt-pyrite concentrate and downstream recoveries are considered only in B.
Table 7: Attainable Recovery from Testwork
| Grade | Recovery | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Copper | Cobalt | Gold | Silver | Copper | Cobalt | Gold | Silver | |
| Product | (%) | (ppm) | (g/t) | (g/t) | (%) | (%) | (%) | (%) |
| Head Grade | 0.21 | 132 | 0.34 | 2.9 | - | - | - | - |
| Copper-Gold Concentrate | 25 | 1160 | 12 | 68 | 80 | 30 | 66 | 53 |
| Cobalt-Pyrite Concentrate | 0.30 | 1605 | 2 | 8 | 5 | 48 | 23 | 15 |
| Combined Concentrates | - | - | - | - | 85 | 78 | 89 | 68 |
| Tailings | 0.05 | 40 | 0.05 | 1.0 | 15 | 22 | 11 | 32 |
Early metallurgical testwork comprised metallurgical characterization studies under standard laboratory conditions to demonstrate metals recoverability for inclusion in the estimate of CuEq. No attempt was made to optimize flotation conditions, and more advanced flotation testwork was not undertaken. Consequently, the reported metallurgical recoveries are considered conservative, and it is reasonable to expect improvement with further testwork.
A2, assumes improved copper and gold recoveries of 89% and 75%, respectively, reflecting expected performance from comparable Cu–Au porphyry flotation circuits following further optimization and testwork.
Table 8 summarizes the recoveries assumption on each scenario.
Table 8: Net Recovery for Each Scenario
| Net Recovery | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cu Recovery | 80% | 89% | 85% |
| Au Recovery | 66% | 75% | 89% |
| Ag Recovery | 53% | 53% | 68% |
| Co Recovery | 30% | 30% | 78% |
CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Table 9 presents the estimated capital cost breakdown for the three evaluated scenarios, separating initial CAPEX from sustaining CAPEX and reporting costs in C$M by major cost area (processing plant, mining, pre-stripping, infrastructure, tailings and water management, Indirects/EPCM, and contingency).
Total initial CAPEX is estimated at C$3,552 million (A1), C$3,601 million (A2), and C$3,828 million (B), reflecting the higher processing plant scope and associated indirects/contingency in Scenario B.
Total sustaining CAPEX is estimated at C$2,755 million (A1/A2) and C$4,006 million (B), with the increase in B driven primarily by the inclusion of the hydrometallurgical plant and scandium recovery circuit within sustaining capital, while mining, infrastructure, and tailings sustaining components remain broadly consistent across scenarios
Table 9: Capital Cost Summary
| Capital Cost Summary | Unit | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Capex | ||||
| Processing Plant (Excl. Hydrometallurgical Plant) | C$M | 1,609 | 1,645 | 1,810 |
| Mining CAPEX | C$M | 394 | 394 | 394 |
| Mining Pre-Stripping | C$M | 97 | 97 | 97 |
| Infrastructure (Power/Water/Roads/Camp)14 | C$M | 326 | 326 | 326 |
| Tailings And Water Management | C$M | 157 | 157 | 157 |
| Indirects + EPCM | C$M | 258 | 262 | 278 |
| Contingency (25%) | C$M | 710 | 720 | 766 |
| Capital Cost Summary | Unit | Scenario A1 | Scenario A2 | Scenario B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total initial CAPEX | C$M | 3,552 | 3,601 | 3,828 |
| Sustaining CAPEX | ||||
| Processing Plant (Inc. Hydrometallurgical Plant) | C$M | 285 | 285 | 1,194 |
| Mining CAPEX | C$M | 811 | 811 | 811 |
| Infrastructure (Power/Water/Roads/Camp) | C$M | 63 | 63 | 63 |
| Tailings and Water Management | C$M | 1,065 | 1,065 | 1,065 |
| Indirects + EPCM | C$M | 142 | 142 | 233 |
| Contingency (25%) | C$M | 390 | 390 | 640 |
| Total Sustaining CAPEX | C$M | 2,755 | 2,755 | 4,006 |
| Closure and Reclamation | C$M | 503 | 503 | 503 |
OPERATING COST SUMMARY
Table 10 summarizes the key operating cost and selling terms used in the PEA, reporting unit costs in C$/t moved, C$/t milled, and (where applicable) C$/kg of scandium oxide, together with concentrate transport and selling costs, TC/RC, and payability assumptions.
Average site operating costs are estimated at C$16.22/t milled for Scenario A (concentrate-only) and C$22.96/t milled for B, with the increase in B driven by the addition of hydrometallurgical processing and acid generation (C$3.09/t milled) and scandium oxide processing costs (C$939.55/kg Sc₂O₃).
On a payable metal basis, the study reports C1 cash costs of C$2.4/lb CuEq (A1), C$2.39/lb CuEq (A2), and C$2.89/lb CuEq (B) and AISC of C$2.79/lb CuEq (A1), C$2.78/lb CuEq (A2), and C$3.39/lb CuEq (B), reflecting the combined effects of recoveries, co-product/by-product credits, and the additional operating requirements of the full circuit.
Table 10: Operating Cost Summary15
| Operating Cost Summary | Units | Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average Mining Cost | C$/t-moved | 2.32 | |||
| Processing Cost - Up to Concentrate production (Scenario A) | C$/t-milled | 7.93 | |||
| Hydrometallurgical + Acid Generation (Scenario B) | C$/t-milled | 3.08 | |||
| Scandium Oxide processing (Scenario B) | C$/Kg Sc O 2 3 | 939.55 | |||
| G&A | C$/t-milled | 2.56 | |||
| Total Operating Cost | C$/t-milled | 22.96 | |||
| Cu-Au concentrate product | |||||
| Transport and selling | C$/DMT | 95.90 | |||
| TC Cu-Au Concentrate | C$/DMT | 77.00 | |||
| Refining Cost- Cu | C$/lb | 0.11 | |||
| Refining Cost- Au | C$/oz | 6.85 | |||
| Refining Cost- Ag | C$/oz | 0.48 | |||
| Refining Cost- Co | C$/lb | 0.16 | |||
| Payable - Cu | % | 97 | |||
| Payable - Au | % | 95 | |||
| Payable - Ag | % | 90 | |||
| Payable - Co | % | 80 | |||
| Metal Production on-site (Scenario B) | |||||
| Payable - Au | % | 97 | |||
| Payable - Ag | % | 97 | |||
| Payable - Co | % | 97 | |||
| C1 / cash cost (Scenario A1/A2/B) | US$/lb CuEq payable | 1.75 / 1.74 / 2.11 | |||
| AISC (Scenario A1/A2/B) | US$/lb CuEq payable | 2.04 / 2.03 / 2.47 |
ECONOMIC RESULTS
Table 11 summarizes the key economic assumptions and resulting financial metrics for Scenarios A1, A2, B, including the long-term price deck, cash flow generation, taxation, and discounted valuation at a 5% discount rate. Using an exchange rate of 1.37 CAD: 1.00 USD and long-term prices of US$4.88/lb Cu, US$3,272.60/oz Au, US$50.22/oz Ag, and US$19.57/lb Co (and US$1,500/kg Sc₂O₃ for B), the Project generates average annual EBITDA of C$886 million (A1), C$1,071 million (A2), and C$1,242 million (B). On a post-tax basis, NPV(5%) is estimated at C$4,963 million (A1), C$6,727 million (A2), and C$6,937 million (B) with corresponding post-tax IRRs of 19%, 23%, and 19%, and post-tax payback in Year 6 (A1), Year 5 (A2), and Year 7 (B). Total post-tax free cash flow is estimated at C$10,050 million (A1), C$12,961 million (A2), and C$14,763 million (B), reflecting the higher cash generation under the improved recovery case (A2) and the additional revenue streams